6th Day 53%! Bob with Gary Demar Pt. 2

[Aethril]

If Israel would of rejected the messiah, then there would be not such thing as the church. It is obvious that Israel has not rejected the messiah. Saying that Israel rejected the messiah is a theological contradiction.



Well the nation of Japan never becam Christian (yet) either; so, what's your point.


THE NEW COVENANT WAS MADE WITH "ISRAEL", IF ISRAEL REJECTED THE MESSIAH, THEN THERE IS NO NEW COVENANT, AND IF THERE IS NO NEW COVENANT THEN YOU ARE ALL STILL IN YOUR SINS.

Well, Knight quoted it best:

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. - Billy Madison's principal.

 

[Christendom]

It took Gary a show and a half to finally acknowledge (kinda, sorta) that Bob agreed that "This generation" meant "this generation". :doh:

It was obvious that Bob was leading Gary on by agreeing with Gary that "this generation, meant this generation". But it was obvious to Gary, myself, and anyone else who paid enough attention that Bob really does not agree with Gary on "this generation".

Bob and Gary have different views on "this generation"...There was nothing that Gary needed to acknowledge.

It was Bob who needed to admit his differences (so that Gary could correct his faulty view) on "this generation", but Bob was trying to be "tricky" in his debating technique, and he played the part of agreeing with Gary for the purpose of establishing a common agreement or point with him and then lead him on to a different point (contrary to the first), but based on a supposed agreement.

This type of "trickery" is common in debates, but Gary was too wise to fall for it, for he knew up front that Bob did not really agree with him of "this generation".
Even I (far from a good debater) could see through Bob's tactic.

10 bucks say's that if the debate would of progressed and continued, after supposedly agreeing with Gary on "this generation", Bob would eventually of shown his true colors and then departed from the point Gary was making on "this generation shall not pass away".
Bob would of then twisted the original point that Gary made, and then Bob would of added something like:

This generation means the "Jews" as a race of people, Jesus said this "generation" or the "race" of the Jewish people would not pass away until all these things are fulfilled. Then Bob would of used that argument to support his dispensationalism. Or he would of just simply said that "this generation" was the one of the disciples time, but "all these things did not come to pass" on that generation because God changed is mind due to the "Jew's" behavior.

Bob agreed with Gary on "this generation" means "this generation", but Bob pours a totally different meaning behind those words then does Gary.


BOB....IF YOUR OUT THERE PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG IN THIS MATTER.

 

[Aethril]

10 bucks say's that if the debate would of progressed and continued, after supposedly agreeing with Gary on "this generation", Bob would eventually of shown his true colors and then departed from the point Gary was making on "this generation shall not pass away".

10 Bucks! You're on. I will accept your payment through paypal

 

[Christendom]

10 Bucks! You're on. I will accept your payment through paypal

How do we get a hold of Bob?

 

[Aethril]

If Israel would of rejected the messiah, then there would be not such thing as the church. It is obvious that Israel has not rejected the messiah. Saying that Israel rejected the messiah is a theological contradiction.

The Church is the Body of Christ. Israel is not the Body.

Who is the "they" in Romans 11:23?

Well the nation of Japan never becam Christian (yet) either; so, what's your point.

:hammer:

THE NEW COVENANT WAS MADE WITH "ISRAEL", IF ISRAEL REJECTED THE MESSIAH, THEN THERE IS NO NEW COVENANT, AND IF THERE IS NO NEW COVENANT THEN YOU ARE ALL STILL IN YOUR SINS.

:kookoo:

 

[Aethril]

How do we get a hold of Bob?

I went to kgov.com and found:

Call Bob Enyart live weekdays from 5-5:30pm ET at 1-800-8Enyart or 303-463-7789

 

[Christendom]

The Church is the Body of Christ. Israel is not the Body.

Prove this please.

What is your definition of Israel? A nation of people who call themselves Jew's?


I won't go to Romans 11 with you at this time because Matthew 24 is still yet to be dealt with.

 

[Aethril]

Prove this please.

Prove which part... that the church is the body of Christ or that Israel is not the body? IF Israel is the body of Christ, then at what point did the Gentiles join them? Please be specific.

Colossians 1:24 "...for the sake of His body, which is the church".

Romans 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.

and No, Romans 10:12 cannot be your answer.

What is your definition of Israel? A nation of people who call themselves Jew's?

Israel = God's chosen people whom have been cut off but will be grafted in again.

I won't go to Romans 11 with you at this time because Matthew 24 is still yet to be dealt with.

I was kind enough to answer your questions please answer mine. Besides, Matthew 24 shouldn't even be an issue for you. Jesus meant what he said:

24:34 "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place"

but

24:29 "...the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

never came to pass soooooooo what happened? Why didn't it come to pass?

I Know! I Know! Oh pick me!

Luke 13:6 “...A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. 7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, ‘Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?’ 8 But he answered and said to him, ‘Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. 9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that[a] you can cut it down.’”

 

[Christendom]

You have proven my previous point. You say Israel has been cut off. Well then there is no new covenant if Israel has been cut off (from the covenant). That is a denial of the gospel, (in your view) because the covenant (the gospel) was promised to Israel.

In my view Israel is not cut off. How could she be, the gospel was promised to her?
Israel is the covenant people of God, from Adam through to all future generations (jew or gentile, black, white, etc.) who come to faith in Christ.
It is a contradiction to say that Christ poured out his blood in covenant with Israel, and yet Israel is cut off from the covenant.

There is only one people of God, those in Christ.

Our differences come from our definitions of Israel. We both have different definitions. You are advocting a "racist" position, in separating out that "Jews" as a race of people are chosen by God. I am advocating the position that God shows no partiallity between persons, but that all who are Christ's are partakers of the covenant, and the partakers of the covenant are "Israel".


As for Matthew 24:29, that passage has been fulfilled. For Jesus said that "this generation will not pass away until ALL THESE THINGS TAKE PLACE"...verse 29 is part of "all these things".

Seeing the fulfillment of that passage is relatively simple if you have studied hermeneutics. Do you need me to explain it, or are you going to reject Jesus' words and say that he was a liar, and this never happened, Jesus was wrong?

 

[Bob Enyart]

Christendom, thanks for the heads up on your post...

Christendom, thanks for the heads up on your post...

No Christendom, you are wrong, I DO COMPLETELY AGREE WITH GARY on the meaning of "this generation." I'll explain:

Christendom: It was obvious that Bob was leading Gary on by agreeing with Gary that "this generation, meant this generation". But it was obvious to Gary, myself, and anyone else who paid enough attention that Bob really does not agree with Gary on "this generation". ... Bob would of added something like: This generation means the "Jews" as a race of people... [etc.]

No. I'm not sure how much more explicity I can get than I was on the show. Jesus was referring to the people alive when He was speaking. More explicit? At that time, the Lord was about 33 years old, and life expectancy was less than 60 years old, and by reason of strength some might live into their 90s, etc. So, as Jesus looked at His disciples and made that statement, He was referring to the individuals who were alive then, as "this generation," and He stated clearly "this generation" would not pass until all His end times prophecies were fulfilled. Thus, the Lord's meant what he said, a generation. That does NOT mean an ethnicity or a race, nor a religious sect. The word generation (in this kind of context) means a human generation, that is, a duration that typically implies the span in years of parent to child, but could be shortened or expanded by some small percentage due to the inexact nature of the phrase, i.e., somewhere around 20 years, 40 years, etc., but there would be boundaries such that the phrase would not refer to 5 days, or 2000 years. However, Jesus didn't say, "I will return in one generation," but rather, "this generation shall not pass" until His end times prophecies were fulfilled. So, that means, in a short time, a period of years, but NOT many decades. Is that explicit enough Christendom? So, the Lord said of the people who were alive at the time of His ministry, that before they died out, His end times prophecies would be fulfilled.

Whew. So, no Christendom, I was not leading Gary on or using some debate tactic. But some people have a hard time seeing outside of the box they've put themselves in, that they have a hard time understanding someone with a different position.

I'll leave it there since I have to get home to my family! (I'm still at the BEL Cabin.) If you want to take it to the next step with me (beleive me we have a TON of biblical material to bring to our position [but of course, that doesn't mean we are right, since we could be twisting that material]), you can either encourage Gary to debate me in a full Battle Royale on dispensationalism vs. covenant theology right here at TOL (that'd be fun!), or, you can read my manuscript The Plot, or listen to my album, The Last Days (on audio tape), or listen to our Book of Revelation series (on MP3 CDs).

Thanks for writing!

-Bob Enyart

 

[Aethril]

10 bucks say's that if the debate would of progressed and continued, after supposedly agreeing with Gary on "this generation", Bob would eventually of shown his true colors and then departed from the point Gary was making on "this generation shall not pass away".

10 Bucks! You're on. I will accept your payment through paypal

I just checked my paypal account... are you gonna pay up? :greedy:

 

[Tico]

Exegesis and Matthew 24:34

Exegesis and Matthew 24:34

>>>As a partial preterist and advocate of covenenat theology (anti dispensational) and a big fan of Gary Demar, I would like to go through Matthew 24.

I say all of Matthew 24 is fulfilled and am confident that this is the biblical and most sound exegetical position. <<<

Christendom,

Based on your first post, it seems that you are interested in a good exegetical discussion. Thus, let's go through Matt 24:34 (the crux of the Enyart/Demar debate) using sound exegesis and gramatical rules. The following is Matthew 24:34 in the Greek.

ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως ἂν πάντα ταῦτα γένηται.

The following is a literal translation:

Truly I say to you that by no means should this generation pass away until all these things should happen.

Notice the double use of the subjunctive here in this verse. The subjunctive mood speaks to future uncertainty. Without question, there is a future tense and an indicative mood in the Greek. If Jesus wanted to say that these things were not contingent, then He would have used the future tense and indicative mood to impart the certainty of these events. What were these events contingent upon?

Jeremiah 18:7The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

...Israel's obedience. Further on in the book of Acts, Peter gives Israel this conditional promise:

Acts 3:19Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

You might argue that some of the horrible events recounted in Matthew 24 were literally brought to pass against Israel relying sources such as Josephus or Eusebius. However, shouldn't we expect this due to Israel's unbelief if one reads the list of curses found in Deuteronomy 28:15-68?