It is amazing how the more and more we converse the more and more you prove to me by your own words the Scriptures are truly alive.
Take for example:
Jerry- "And there are two reasons why the Lordīs arrival has been delayed."
Scripture- "M't:24:48: But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;"
Notice this example of saying the Lord's coming is "delayed" is not used with the faithful servant.
Where does Scripture tell us His coming has been "delayed"?
How can God, Ruler and King of the universe, Master of time and space be , um um .....delayed???
The Lord is right on time no matter what time He is there that is when He planned to be there.
And Jesus said 7 times over, "I come quickly"
You think He meant it?
Scoffers, you say. Well yes, that is true many scoffers out there put unbiblical notions into people's heads saying "OOPS the Lord was delayed" IMPOSSIBLE for Him to be delayed.
And Jerry, just like Jack said, what is so wrong with Zech 12 being about heavenly Jerusalem and heavenly Jerusalem being the church of faithful saints in Christ Jesus. You gotta problem with that? Then take it up with God, He said it.
Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!
Last edited by Revelation717; September 17th, 2002 at 12:54 PM.
How can God, Ruler and King of the universe, Master of time and space be , um um .....delayed???
This sounds like you believe that God is um Sovereign! That you believe Psalm 139 when it says God knows the words that are going to come out of your mouth before you say them.
No, no, no, Ev and Pa are the same person. You guys are getting it all wrong!
I have to admit that the "preterist posse" does come in second to the Christadelphian crew," which I have had my fair share (and Dee Dee's share, and Knight's share, and Bob B's share, and...) of run ins with.
As to the battle, I think Dee Dee won in a squeaker. I think she came out much stronger than Jerry and had some very solid posts (especially 2 and 3). She left some open spots that Jerry did not (predictably) capitolize on, since they were not areas he would think of attacking, so she slipped a few by. However, the tide turned against her later in the debate, as Jerry had some solid posts (I think 7-8 or 8-9, somewhere in there).
While I am a futurist, I think that Dee Dee's more solid base provided her with a wider argument, putting Jerry on the defensive for most of the debate. While Jerry pulled close at the end (not counting the mud-slinging either for or against either), I think Dee Dee pulled it out.
For Greek conversion, click here.
<opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily those of TOL or the TOL Holding Company, and are in fact probably either wrong or dangerous or something even worse. In the event of a world-wide catastrophe coming from one of these posts, all we can say is we did not do it and we warned you not to listen to this post, but NOOOOO, you knew what you were doing all along and yet you STILL managed to destroy part of a continent and yet missed Hollywood! Any resemblance to mathematicians dead or alive is strictly on purpose.>
According to the words of the Apostle Paul,we are to be expecting the Lord to arrive at any moment.Weare told to be expectantly looking toward heaven for His appearing (Phil.3:20,21).
At that time we will receive our glorified body.And to make sure that that we understand Him correctly,Paul added the following words just a few verses later:
"The Lord is at hand"(Phil.4:5).
The word translated "at hand" (eggus) means "concerning things imminent and soon to come to pass"("Thayerīs Greek English Lexicon").
Now most people mis-understand the meaning of the word "imminent".It can mean "likely to occur at any moment",but it can also mean "impending" which has less suggestion of immediateness ("THe American College Dictionary".
So His return has been impending for some time.
Also,I do not know whether or not the Church will ever be faithful in the future,but I do know that what He promised He will fulfill.The unfaithfulness of man may delay His promises,but what He promised He will deliver.
In regard to the prophecies of Zecharia,we can clearly see that the Jerusalem that is spoken of is the earthly Jerusalem:
"And His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives,which is before Jerusalem on the east..."(Zech.14:4).
That cannot possibly be in reference to the Church,because there is no Mount of Olives to the east of the Church.
"All the land shall be turned like the Arabah from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem..."(Zech.14:10).
That is not a description of the "heavenly Jerusalem" by any stretch of the imagination.
While I am a futurist, I think that Dee Dee's more solid base provided her with a wider argument, putting Jerry on the defensive for most of the debate. While Jerry pulled close at the end (not counting the mud-slinging either for or against either), I think Dee Dee pulled it out.
Now that took GUTS! Way ta go Jaltus.
You could almost qualify for a posse member!
Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!
Jerry,
Also,I do not know whether or not the Church will ever be faithful in the future,but I do know that what He promised He will fulfill.
Jerry, why are you preaching defeatism?
You don't know if the church will ever be faithful in the future?
Sounds as if you think it is not faithful now.
But the good Lord said:
M't:16:18: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Eph:1:1: Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Re:17:14: These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
Did Jesus take a whore to be his Bride?
Eph:5:27: That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Jerry,
Do you realize in the last two days you have told me, in a matter of words that Jesus is not everlasting righteousness, His bride is unfaithful, Scripture that comfirms with Scripture it's fulfillment has not been fulfilled, God does not defend heavenly Jerusalem.
Now tell me, Is this the faith once delivered to the saints?
Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!
The words of the Lord concerning His coming are conditional:
"Blessed is he that readeth,and they who hear the words of this prophecy,AND KEEP THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN IN IT;for the time is at hand"(Rev.1:3).
The early church saw Jerusalem destroyed in AD 130 and REASONED that God had cast away Israel,despite the many times in Scripture that the Lord said that Hewould not permanently cast away ethnic Israel.This error led to others.They then could see that there remained unfulfilled prophecies concerning Israel,and they incorrectly ASSUMED that these prophecies must refer to the church.And since they saw the Church in the prophecies concerning the end times,they ASSUMED that the Lord did not really mean that He would come quickly.Therefore,"we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief"(Heb.3:19).
They did not keep the things that are written in the Revelation.
Now back to my question.Do you believe that Revelation 1:7 has already been fulfilled?If so,when did "every eye" see Him coming with the clouds?
Also,do you not realize that some prophecies are fulfilled but they can also continue to be fulfilled.When the Lord was on the cross those who pierced the Lord looked on Him.But the same prophecy can still yet be fulfilled.
The same can be said of the Lordīs words that follow:
"And this is the Fatherīs will Who hath sent Me,that of all that He hath given Me I should lose nothing,but shall raise it up again at the last day"(Jn.6:39).
We see that these words were fulfilled in regard to His apostles:
"That this saying might be fulfilled,which He spoke,Of them whom Thou gavest Me I have lost none"(Jn.18:9).
That refers to the Apostles,but it will also be fulfilled after that time for all the Lord has given Him (Jn.10:28,29).
Shut up or put up -
September 17th, 2002, 03:21 PM
Revelation717,
It is you who is being unfaithful.The Holy Scriptures state that ethnic Israel will not be permanently cast away.But ALL of your theology concerning the prophecies of the Lord are based on the fact that God has indeed cast away ethnic Israel forever.
"For the Lord will not cast off His people,neither will He forsake His inheritance"(Ps.94:14).
And we know who He is referring to as His people--the nation of Israel,who was brought out of Egypt:
"For thou art an Holy people unto the Lord thy God;the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto Himself,above all people who are on the face of the earth...the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand,and redeemed you out of the house of bondage,from the hand of Pharaoh,king of Egypt"(Deut.7:6,8).
But you just cannot believe that,can you?No matter how many times you read it,you will not believe it:
"For Thou hast confirmed to Thyself Thy people,Israel,to be a people unto Thee FOREVER;and Thou,Lord,art become their God"(2Sam.7:24).
And I can see that you have no problem bearing false witness against another man.I never said the things you accuse me of saying.I challenge you to QUOTE my words,or apologize.I am sick and tired of those who cannot answer using Scripture to make false accusations against me.
Now it is time to shut up and apologize or QUOTE my words.
And I can see that you have no problem bearing false witness against another man.I never said the things you accuse me of saying.I challenge you to QUOTE my words,or apologize.I am sick and tired of those who cannot answer using Scripture to make false accusations against me.
Now it is time to shut up and apologize or QUOTE my words.
I said in a previous post:
Do you realize in the last two days you have told me, in a matter of words that - the things I say he said are in blue and the quotes prove he said them:
Enjoy
Jesus is not everlasting righteousness
Quote:
Are you under the impression that "everlasating righteousness" has come unto Jerusalem now,or anytime in the past?
Because if it came to Jerusalem in the past,then it wasnīt "everlasting" to begin with,because it is obvious that Jerusalem does not possesss "everlasting righteousness" today.
His bride is unfaithful
Quote:
Also,I do not know whether or not the Church will ever be faithful in the future,but I do know that what He promised He will fulfill.
Scripture that comfirms with Scripture it's fulfillment has not been fulfilled
I asked you if the reference in Zech 12: 10 was future or fulfilled to which you replied:
Quote:
Rev717,
Canīt you read?I said that that event remains in the future.
Scripture states:
Joh:19:35: And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
Joh:19:36: For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
Joh:19:37: And again another scripture(ZECHARIAH 12:10) saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.
God does not defend heavenly Jerusalem.
You say heavenly Jerusalem is not exsistant now, so how could God defend it? I can provide the quotes but I think you should be ashamed as it is.
Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!
Last edited by Revelation717; September 18th, 2002 at 12:32 AM.
You said:
According to the words of the Apostle Paul,we are to be expecting the Lord to arrive at any moment. We are told to be expectantly looking toward heaven for His appearing (Phil.3:20,21).
Jerry, Philippians(spelled) was not written to us! Paul was not writing to the church of the year 1,000 or 2,000 or 3,000! He was writing the church at Philippi. We are not told to look towards heaven, they were. If you were sitting in your house church in 65 AD and someone was reading this letter to you, how would you take it? I'd bet you'd think Paul was addressing you, the church in Philippi in 65 AD! Which he was!
While all these NT books are useful for teaching, rebuking and training in righteousness. They were not written to us. God has kept them for our edification, but again they were not written to us!
If the epistle to thePhillipians is not for us,which epistles are?
Were not ALL of Paulīs epistles written to the local congregations?
So if we are to believe you,none of the epistles are for us.They are only for those to whom they were directly addressed.Where are we to get our doctrine?
Next,are you saying,as Dee Dee says,that the Lord came in the first century?
Well,if that is true,why did not the first entury Christians receive their glorified bodies as Paul told them they would.
First,Paul told them:
"For our citizenship is in heaven,from which also we look for the Savior,Who shall change our lowly body,that it may be fashioned like His glorious body"(Phil.3:20,21).
So Paul is telling these Christians that when the Lord appeared that they would receive new,glorified bodies.And then just a few verses later,he tells that that His arrival is imminent:
"The Lord is at hand"(Phil.4:5).
So if the Lordīs appearance was imminent,and when He was to appear the Christianīs were to receive glorified bodies,why didnīt they receive their new bodies when the Lord appared as Dee Dee says He did?
Dee Dee says that the Lord Jesus came in the first century,and Paul said that when He came that the Christians would receive their glorified bodies.But they never recived those bodies.
There is only one conclusion.The Lord Jesus did not come in the first century.
You are misrepresenting my position once again.. or more accurately selectively "quoting" my position. Though you are certainly free to disagree I made it clear, and proved from Scripture, that there is a distinction between Christ's coming in judgment upon the apostate Jews in the first century and His coming in victory at the end of time. For you not to mention that I hold to that distinction is misleading. That is a habit with you on this issue. You repeat yourself endlessly and never fully interact with the opposing view. In other words, while theological disagreements usually start on "level one" defense sophistication on both sides, you continue to just deal with "level one" issues and never ever move on to deal with the more advanced arguments of your opponents. You make huge assumptions and then use your assumptions to prove your assumptions in one large circular morass. I will be glad to wrangle with you further in the Back Alley. I am taking a break right now from substantive posting.
If the epistle to thePhillipians is not for us,which epistles are?
I said:
While all these NT books are useful for teaching, rebuking and training in righteousness. They were not written to us.
So yes they were written for us, they were not written to us! So when the book of Herbrews says "in these last days". That was written to them, back then, is that so hard to understand. Is this not clear?
How can you misquote someone when the reply is the very next entry?
I never said that!Instead,I said that everlasting righteousness has not come unto Jerusalem.
And the Bride is not the church,so I never said that the Bride is unfaithful.The church is His Body,not the Bride.Canīt you tell the difference between the Body of Christ and the Bride?
And you say that the following verse has been fulfilled:
"Behold,He cometh with clouds,and EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM,and they also who pierced Him;and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him"(Rev.1:7).
When did every eye see Him coming in clouds?
I have asked you that question twice before,but you keep evading it.When did all the kindreds of the earth wail because of Him.
If this verse has already been fulfilled,then you should be able to tell me when it happened.
You know no shame.You false accuse another man of saying things that he never said.And then when you are caught,you refuse to repent and apologize.
Again,I never said that "Jesus is not everlasting righteousness".
That is a lie and you know it.You should be ashamed but instead you seem proud of the fact that you falsely accuse another man of making statements that he never said.
Linear Mode
