Every now and again I see Philip Mauro's name pop up in criticism of dispensationalism, Darby, Scofield etc. I also see him invoked by premillennial non-pretribulationists, simply because of his anti-dispensational stance. But consider that Mauro is one of the heroes of The Preterist Archive. So, why would futurist (premil) non-pretribbers haphazardly cite a preterist just because he wrote against Scofield and "the secret rapture?" That's a rhetorical question, by the way.
Philip Mauro’s “The Gospel of the Kingdom”
Pollock on 'The Patmos Visions"
A Brief Examination of Mr. Philip Mauro's Later Views on Dispensational Truth
Preterism and Prophetic Scripture
When Literal Interpretation Leads to Wholesale Spiritualization
-
This is an old post in which I respond to comments left for me in the
combox at this post about Sam Storms’s views on eschatology. I am
responding mainly ...
20 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment