ECT The real crimes of John Nelson Darby
- Thread starter Totton Linnet
- Start date
Interplanner
Well-known member
D'ism dangles from just a few passages. Jiggle them at all and thing falls to pieces.
Never mind that one of the most revered men in ALL Preterism - who has been making a HUGE comeback - J.S. Russell - emphasized the following in his massive work on Preterism: The Parousia...
You assert MADs follow Darby and Bullinger.
Fact is that both E. W. Bullinger and J.S. Russell had referred to the book of Acts as "the Jewish Dispensation."
By your ILL-logic, either Bullinger was a "Russellite" or Russell was a "Bullingerite."
You also assert that "Dispensationalism was invented around the same time as the Jehovah's Witnesses' teachings."
Fact also is that Preterism's J.S. Russell held to a Rapture view similar to the Jehovah's Witnesses' Charles Taze Russell...
J.S. Russell's view being that only the cream of the crop of those 1st Century Believers were Raptured in 70AD; the rest not having made the grade.
You fools revere a "Russelite" lol.
And now there is a growing movement within Preterism to cover for the fact of a missing external witness in any written form as to the supposed validity of Preterism by any writer in the first 300 years after 70AD.
Their explanation as to why there is no written witness for Preterism in the first 300 years after 70AD?
Because ALL were Raptured in 70 AD...
That's their explanation as to why the so called ECF from 300 forward hold to Futurist views in their writings.
What a sloppy lord of gory - that's lord of gory - Preterism holds to.
In short, Tel-a-LIE...
:rotfl:
Interplanner
Well-known member
To see how Eph 2-3 looked to someone raised in Islam.
To see that the middle east is being inflamed for reasons that don't matter and were addressed in the NT but which D'ism skips.
One of the first teachers I heard who provided a complete and cogent alternative to D'ism also said this: 'Did we really think that the OT promised a competition to an Islamic paradise but more or less along the lines of a Damascus model?' Ie, that Judaism and Islam were basically offering the same thing, neither in step with the Christian gospel.
Those are just three reasons, and I don't think you know what the presupposition is.
The presupposition is obvious - you continue to lump MADS (Acts 9 Dispensationalism) into the above as to issues pertaining to what is going on in the Middle East.
Try - the sensationalists - within Acts 2 Dispensationalism - they are the ones promoting all that post 1948 Middle East Prophecy NOW foolishness.
But this has been pointed out to you before - more than several times.
Interplanner
Well-known member
...as though MAD has any credibility, when the change occurred in Christ, not in an Acts chapter.
Glad your embarrassed by that stuff, though.
Yes, I have heard you were trying to distance yourself from it, but the explanations didn't help and were unclear.
Glad your embarrassed by that stuff, though.
Yes, I have heard you were trying to distance yourself from it, but the explanations didn't help and were unclear.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I know of no clear statement by a MAD person that neutralizes the hostility that ensues from 2P2P and making Israel a privileged class.
Ephesians 2 is in light of Romans 1:18-3:30.
Further, what happened AT the Cross was for BOTH "the sins that are past" or the sins of those PRIOR TO the Cross, AND for those the Cross was NOW being "testified" of or "in DUE time" to.
This due time aspect was first applied began midway thru Acts - after the salvation of its due time testifier: the Apostle Paul, in Acts 9.
We disagree because you have had your head so buried in books "about" that you have remained completely clueless as to why Peter actually took issue IN ACTS 10 with the door being opened to the Gentiles.
YOU - the self styled Greek expert on Acts, have yet to see that is ours is ALSO Luke's understanding as to WHEN in Acts the door was FIRST oppened to the Gentiles.
Never mind any attempt on your part to properly understand why Peter was actually sent to a Gentile.
You are as confused on the actual sense of Gal. 3:17.
Interplanner
Well-known member
This communication is worthless because:
1, I don't know nor have ever heard the expression "due time."
2, you did your generalization about Eph 2 is in light of Rom 1-3 again. It sounds like you are saying something but you don't know what and it doesn't come across.
3, Don't blather me about Gal 3:17 when you don't say what MAD is doing with it.
You have more ways and techniques of non-communication than anyone I know.
Post to IP in specifics and he asserts the Dispy needs things nice and neat.
Post to IP in principles and said outlook goes right over his head.
Why? Because he is stuck in knowing "about" things from books "about" things.
Ever "learning" never coming to a filled "full" knowledge "of" the truth.
His is the long since completely diseased mind that Scholastic Mysticism results in.