Date: 16 Nov 2005
Time: 11:46:06
Comments:
Oh, it's perfect! The hot new spokesperson of the Titus Cult (AD 70
Preterism) is Anne Rice! She has REALLY studied end-time things, you
know! In no time at all she has become, from all accounts, the
world's leading theologian! She KNOWS that the Israelites were freed
from the terrible bondage of the law of Moses and that heaven's
gates were opened wide in AD 70 through earthly and natural means by
the wonderful TITUS, the pagan son of the pagan Roman emperor,
rather than in AD 30 through heavenly and spiritual means by CHRIST,
the Son of God! And Titus did it all without having to die and be
resurrected! What a guy! And what a fabulous new publicist for that
guy! United behind their new leader, the Titus adorers will crush
the dispensationalists! The dispy's popularity will become their
popularity! Maximum Leader Rice's outpouring of novels will
overwhelm the Scofield crowd's puny literary efforts! Oh, happy day!
Happy, happy day!
Date: 16 Nov 2005
Time: 16:23:21
Comments:
Really funny post! But can one be "freed from bondage" of
death prior to the second coming of Christ? Consider I
Corinthians 15:22-23 "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order:
Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his
coming." Do you believe that He has come again? If not, how were
you freed from the bondage of death and "made alive"? If you think
Paul is referring to physical resurrection (see v. 44), then do you
condone the idea of soul sleep until Christ returns?
btw, after learning about this, I purchased a copy
of the book.. and it is PRETTY DARN GOOD!
Date: 18 Nov 2005
Time: 13:13:24
Comments:
SO would you affirm that the " Christ the firstfruits" Paul
references is not a reference to Christ's physical Resurrection?
Was Christ ever spiritually dead, so that He could
be a precedent of co-heirs to a purely "spiritual" resurrection?
There are, I fear, some implications to your non-phiysical
understanding of this text you may not like.
Date:
18 Nov 2005
Time: 13:35:59
Comments:
I bet you never said the same thing about Lee Strobel. He tows the
line though. But of course, an athiest of this magnitude comes out
of her atheism through sincere historical and Biblical study and
because she grasps onto preterism you mock.
Funny though, an unbiased person digs into the reality of the times
in the first century, the climate, religion, culture...and studies
the scripture from a hemenutical purist perspective, and comes out
preterist. It validates our claim all along.
An ubiased, objective student, out to prove NOTHING concerning
eshcatology, but to study Christ and His claims, comes away a
preterist!! None of us are surprised at that, only that it was Anne
Rice.
GB,
Nate
Date: 19 Nov 2005
Time: 11:37:34
Comments:
After Christ's AD 30 resurrection as the true, spiritual and
eternal Israel, those human beings who, one by one, received him as
their Savior were, obviously, saved and, "through circumcision of
the heart, in the spirit" (Ro. 2:28,29), were also the true,
spiritual and eternal Israel. God "had delivered them from the power
of darkness and had translated them into the kingdom of his dear
Son" in whom "they had redemption through his blood, the forgiveness
of sins" (Col. 1:13,14). When they had, one by one, stood before the
judgment seat of God in the moment of their new birth (their
miraculous spiritual regeneration, not a mere mental assent), they
were justified in his sight, i.e., God had accepted the
righteousness of his Son in them, and from then on they shared in
the resurrection of "Christ the firstfruits" (1 Cor. 15:23). They
were IN Christ, the very BODY of Christ, and actually ONE with
Christ. Because they "were quickened together with Christ (by grace
ye are saved)"
Date: 20 Nov 2005
Time: 17:50:41
Comments:
Anne Rice fits in perfectly with the Bible scholars she criticizes.
Like them, she fails to understand that the first-century war
between the Roman Empire and God's people that really mattered was a
SPIRITUAL war that occurred AFTER AD 70 and was LOST by that
blasphemous empire. If the trash-writer-turned-theologian understood
that a war against usurpers in the land of one's father occurred
AFTER OT Israel's 40 years in the wilderness, and AFTER Christ's 40
days in the wilderness at the start of his ministry in Israel, and
AFTER the 40 days at the end of that ministry, then she might be
able to understand the first-century war against usurpers that
occurred AFTER the 40 years AD 30-70, the war in which spiritual
Israel, the young church, triumphed over spiritual Babylon, the
Roman Empire, as prophesied in Dan. 2 and 7.
Date: 21 Nov 2005
Time: 15:35:21
Comments:
Dispensationalists somehow see a victory for Christ in their
misguided belief that the military might of today's world superpower
(the American empire) is necessary to defeat those whom the dispys
view as Christ's sole, great, 21st-century enemy and thereby usher
in Christ's parousia. And preterists, unfortunately, somehow see a
victory for Christ in their equally misguided belief that the
military might of the first century's world superpower (the Roman
empire) was necessary to defeat those whom the prets view as
Christ's sole, great, first-century enemy and thereby usher in
Christ's parousia in AD 70. Thus, both groups hold the demeaning
belief that Christ's great past victory was, or his great future
victory will be, wholly dependent on the earthly and natural weapons
of the unregenerate world.
Date: 25 Nov 2005
Time: 21:16:49
Comments:
All the lady is saying is what the church has affirmed for centuries
(up until the rise of higher criticism), and that is the simple
understanding that the vast majority of NT writing occured before AD
70. When you read the texts themselves in the context of history,
this is the only answer that an honest seeker can reach.
As to the parousia debate, that's another tale for another time. I
don't see any opinion of Rice's one way or the other in this
article.
Date: 25 Nov 2005
Time: 08:02:01
Comments:
Wow! It is wonderful to read about yet another honest person who
confronts the evidence behind the Bible and finds it overwhelming in
favor of the integrity of the text. It is simply baffling why so
many so-called scholars insist on ravaging the text and message of
the New Testament by their late date theories and prejudiced
judgments against the integrity of the texts based on no evidence.
On the issue of the "preterist" doctrines, and the dating of the New
Testament books prior to 70 A.D. there is voluminous published
material. The fact of the matter is that dispensationalism, or
millenialism, in any of its forms has long been shown to be
unbiblical. One simply needs to read the text of Matthew 24 to see
that there are two questions being answered, one about the
destruction of the temple, and the other about the end of time (to
which Jesus answers, "But of that day and hour, no one knows...").
Revelation interprets itself with the commands not to seal the
prophecy for the time of its fulfillment was at hand (i.e. in the
First Century).
I plan to read Anne's work on the subject soon, and will give a more
detailed response when I do, but for now, I'll state the truth as I
understand it. There have been several "days of the Lord" in history
in which God executed his various judgments. The prophecy of Jesus
in Matt 24 refers first to the destruction of Jerusalem, and then,
abruptly, to the second coming of Christ on the last day which has
not yet occurred. I think Revelation was written after 70 A.D., but
before the 90s A.D. date that is very popular these days. Revelation
refers to the spiritual victory over the Roman Empire that God won
in the years following John's writing. All but the final words of
the Revelation were fulfilled many centuries ago. All of God's
prophecies are fulfilled, except for the second coming and final
judgment at the last day.
I plan to keep an eye on Anne's writings with much interest in the
future.
---J.P.
Date: 27 Nov 2005
Time: 18:46:31
Comments:
This is my first time at this site and I must say that I am sadly
disappointed by the tone and meanness of some of the comments. I
cannot say that Ms. Rice's conversion is authentic, whether she is
truly a member of the invisible church, but much of the sarcasm and
insults are most uncharitable and is not the language of one who has
truly embraced Jesus as Lord and Savior. If there is justifiable
criticism then stick to the evidence that she has presented and not
sink into personal attacks.
In Christ,
ABS
Date: 28 Nov 2005
Time: 13:30:34
Comments:
on pagan opening the gates of heaven? by normal earthly meanings?
give me a brake, guys u dont know what u are talking about, well all
of you are going to die one day and thats the last thing your are
going to see, if you dont straigthen your path to our father in
heaven. "I am the path to go to my father said Jesus". is not too
late to stop the madness and open your eyes. there's no reward in
all the garbage of the world. the treasure awaits on heaven with
God. I hope you will experience that in the future.
Date: 02 Dec 2005
Time: 11:11:41
Comments:
Thank you for posting this - The testimony of Anne Rice's personal
commitment starting in 1998 is a great story - the fact that she's
embraced the truth of the Preterist position is icing on the cake !
~ Steve Rollins, Downey, CA
Date: 07 Dec 2005
Time: 23:14:43
Comments:
That's awesome! What a wonderful thing that such a long time atheist
came to Christ through personal study and consideration of the
scriptures and Christianity as a whole.
Having previously been in the public eye, I'm sure she'll be able to
cope with the inevitable, personal attacks from a minority of
hate-filled "christians".
Date: 22 Dec 2005
Time: 09:04:47
Comments:
Well, the read is done, and she pulled it off. Anne was always best
at making one believe..."Yeah, that is how I would feel if I was a
vampire." So she applied her talents to "How would I feel if I was a
7 year old, and knew there was something different about me, began
to realize that I am a divine Son of the one God?"
Her research into the Jewish culture was perfect, her treatment of
the attitude the Christ child MAY have had was wonderfully genuine
and legitimate, and her story, bringing him to the realization and
knowledge of who he is, was compelling.
I cannot wait for book #2. She is presenting the Jesus of the Bible,
thus far.
God Bless
Nate
Date:
25 Dec 2005
Time: 18:55:33
Comments:
I am truly happy for this woman, that she has found a historical
anchor to ground her in her belief that Jesus Christ's claims
deserve her attention. Also, I am especially pleased that she takes
a broader view of the crisis in Judea, which lasted all the way up
to the tremendous Bar Kokhba Revolt, where Ezekiel 38 and 39 came to
pass and the Jewish State disappeared in antiquity.
~Markos Mountjoy
Denver, CO
Date: 14 Jan 2007
Time: 20:04:25
Comments:
I haven't read the book but from what information I could get
regarding Anne Rice's so called "conversion" it appears that she has
returned to Roman Catholicism along with all its unbiblical teaching
so I am somewhat skeptical of thinking of her as a real believer.
This doesn't mean that her eschatological belief is false but one's
eschatological belief doesn't automatically mean one is a believer,
does it?
