Exclusively Christian TheologyThis forum is exclusively for those who consider themselves Christian and consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God.
If I were in a court of law I would tell you, 'the burden of proof is on you. It is your issue, not the dispensationalists issue.'
First off I'm defending not prosecuting. I am defending the dispensationalist's claim that I don't know how to rightly divide. It is up to the prosecutor to come up with "the burden of proof"
Secondly, there are two types of court. In criminal court the burden of proof has to proved "Beyond a reasonable doubt", whereas in civil court only a "Preponderance of the evidence" is needed to show burden of proof.
Quote:
From my understanding of dispensationalism "the Millennium" has not been established yet, therefore, your point is mute, IMHO. You can huff and puff and scream and say whatever, it is still mute point. Stating that everything already happened in 70AD is not enough of an answer either.
My point is not mute (sic), and stating that events were fulfilled in 70AD is not a "moot" point.
It appears you are treating theology like criminal court, you seem to want evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ain't gonna happen. We all have to decide on our own as the Holy Spirit guides us and teaches us.
Name one teacher, who is a believer, before Tet., that ever taught that the Lord Jesus Christ came back in A.D. 70
Catholic testimony from the Apostles (e.g. Acts 6:14) to early Church Fathers, up through the middle ages strongly testifies that the Olivet Discourse pertains first and foremost to predicting the destruction of Jerusalem, and secondly as an allegorical parallel to the end of the world. This explains why Jesus wept over Jerusalem, as He described the judgment that would come for rejecting him (Luke 19:41-44). And the plain words of Olivet state, "while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, Jesus said, 'As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down'" (Luke 21:5). Among other important details, "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. ... They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." (Luke 21:20-24), and, "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all has taken place." (Luke 21:32). All the evidence converges on the same fact: Jerusalem would be sacked within that same generation, i.e. within 33 years or so, meaning approximately 66AD, the very year Rome invaded. All this is just as Our Lord predicted and the New Testament writings awaited to be fulfilled.
Slogan/motto:
Ecclesiastes 1:9 ---
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
There were still Jews alive in 70AD who were alive when Christ was alive in 30AD. These Jews saw what happened in 70AD
I do not believe anybody is disputing what you just said.
The disputation is in the fact that you say that EVERYTHING the Bible says already happened in 70AD.
And one more time I repeat myself, there is no hope in such a gospel. There is nothing to hope for. Everything the Bible says, per your observation, already happened, I missed it all. I am not included because I was not present in 70AD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
It's one or the other. You can't on one hand say I don't have an answer, then on the other hand say my answer isn't satisfying. 70AD is the answer, you don't like it because it means your false belief system is wrong.
We could go back and forth on this, but I won't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
The above passage is about legalism. Discussing eschatology and other topics of theology is not legalism. So what's it called when you point fingers of accusation toward others?
The principle is the same.
Your gospel that EVERYTHING already happened in 70AD takes away the faith of many people, makes many people not care about being prepared, makes people cavalier about Jesus Christ and what He did for them on the Cross.
Slogan/motto:
Ecclesiastes 1:9 ---
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
Here is what you said:
What belongs "only to Jews"?
Do the customs of the Jewish people belong to you?
Does the language of the Jewish people belong to you?
I mean, I can make a list but it is unnecessary.
There is no difference in the way of Salvation for Jews or Gentiles -- Jesus Christ and what He did on the Cross. However, there are things that only belong to Jews. We do not have to make everything spiritual.
Slogan/motto:
Ecclesiastes 1:9 ---
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
It appears you are treating theology like criminal court, you seem to want evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
I don't, however, you do.
You have already given all the evidence you had: EVERYTHING already happened in 70AD and you keep on asking for proof from those that keep saying that it didn't.
Slogan/motto:
Ecclesiastes 1:9 ---
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:43 AM
Tetelestai, have you ever read or heard the testimony of Dr. Daniel Sayesteh? You should. And everybody else also should.
If he had heard the Gospel that EVERYTHING already happened in 70AD, he would never have heard the good news and he would still be a Muslim. But now, he is saved --- not because he heard dispensationalism, or TULIP, or POTS, or MAD, or MADism, or Preterism, etc., etc., etc., but because of the preaching of the Gospel.
All these names men give to things Biblical, are just that, men-made 'isms' that saves no one. I never talk to people that have never heard the gospel about dispensationalism, or anything else, I tell them about Jesus Christ and what He did at the Cross for me and for them.
Slogan/motto:
1 Jo 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
1Jo 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by meshak
Because you have too many anti Christ teaching spreading.
What you have been spreading is all twisted to suit your own desire. Your teachings are not of Jesus. It is all out of context with what the Bible says.
Just because you say you love me does not make you right with Jesus.
My desire is to please the Lord. You can twist that anyway you want to. There is nothing 'antichrist' about what I believe.
Slogan/motto:
1 Jo 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
1Jo 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 09:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote
Chapter 2 says that the Gentiles are no longer strangers to the "commonwealth of Israel," Ephesians 2:12-13.
Slogan/motto:
1 Jo 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
1Jo 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai
First off I'm defending not prosecuting. I am defending the dispensationalist's claim that I don't know how to rightly divide. It is up to the prosecutor to come up with "the burden of proof"
Secondly, there are two types of court. In criminal court the burden of proof has to proved "Beyond a reasonable doubt", whereas in civil court only a "Preponderance of the evidence" is needed to show burden of proof.
My point is not mute (sic), and stating that events were fulfilled in 70AD is not a "moot" point.
It appears you are treating theology like criminal court, you seem to want evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ain't gonna happen. We all have to decide on our own as the Holy Spirit guides us and teaches us.
Exactly. When I post on 'escatology', I do not do so as a means to teach anyone. All I am doing is sharing how I, PERSONALLY see it. To me, things outside of the gospel should not be taken with such hostile issue.
Slogan/motto:
1 Jo 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
1Jo 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Reputation:
June 9th, 2012, 10:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeisgood
Do the customs of the Jewish people belong to you?
Does the language of the Jewish people belong to you?
I mean, I can make a list but it is unnecessary.
There is no difference in the way of Salvation for Jews or Gentiles -- Jesus Christ and what He did on the Cross. However, there are things that only belong to Jews. We do not have to make everything spiritual.
First thing you have to consider brother, is that the "Israel" that God made the promise to, was not Israel of the flesh. The promise was made to Abraham and his SEED. His seed was not a flesh race, and he did not DO the customs, under the law of moses, but by FAITH.
Faith is not jewish...sir. From the beginning, faith included the whole world, which is why God told Abraham from the beginning, he would be the father of many nations...(including the whole world).
Some like to throw 'replacement' theology charges, on us, when we do not even hold to that view.
Nothing has ever been replaced. God had a remnant in that day that looked forward to Christ, they were those of faith...that Abraham was the father of and we are ALL added to that remnant, NOT A JEWISH nation, or even the rest of Israel OUTSIDE OF FAITH....that the law was given to, to show ALL mankind condemned, which was the purpose of the law and fleshly Israel. Abraham was NOT FLESHLY ISRAEL. HE IS SPIRITUAL ISRAEL, AND WE ARE AMONG HIS SEED.
Linear Mode
