Does Luke 19:44 disprove Preterism?

[tetelestai]

Do you know what the mark is/was?

The head represents what someone thinks, and the hand represents what someone does.

Do you know what a Phylactery is?

The Jews always carried their phylacteries on their left hand, the mark of the beast is said to be on the right hand.

It was about worshipping Caesar and God at the same time. Caesar was ok with people worshipping other gods, as long as they acknowledged Caesar as a godhead, they could worship any other gods they wanted.

Many Jews (including Josephus) wrote that it was ok to worship both Caesar and God.

The "mark" isn't literal.

 

[musterion]

It seems to me, he does not want to lean any theology. All he wants to do is have other people know what he believes.

If he believes that nonsense then he has his own made-up theology, which is tripe. Most of all, he does not want to lean theology!

What he really wants to do is disprove dispensationalism because that is preterism's main competition and - more importantly - single biggest threat. That's why he posts more about why dispensationalism is wrong instead of why preterism is correct. That's why when he gets nailed down on the various holes in preterism, he'll play word games, pretend he didn't hear you, counter with irrelevant questions or resort to Darby.

 

[whitestone]

The head represents what someone thinks, and the hand represents what someone does.

Do you know what a Phylactery is?

The Jews always carried their phylacteries on their left hand, the mark of the beast is said to be on the right hand.

It was about worshipping Caesar and God at the same time. Caesar was ok with people worshipping other gods, as long as they acknowledged Caesar as a godhead, they could worship any other gods they wanted.

Many Jews (including Josephus) wrote that it was ok to worship both Caesar and God.

The "mark" isn't literal.

So to you, Caesar is the image that they worshiped?

 

[whitestone]

Think it through,,if they have a bag with the commandments hanging on their sides to remind them to worship God. And they said that they only have one king Caesar. Then 33 or so years later had a change of heart and thought "no" were going to revolt and mint our own coins and we are not going to worship Caesar or buy and sell with his money Revelation 13:17 KJV ,,,

Then in your eschatology you have the beast that is "Caesar" being rejected by the Jews who are under a siege surrounded by Titus because they refused to use his money,printed their own,hemmed them selves up inside the walls of Jerusalem and are completely rejecting Rome and its money,rule ect.,,,

On the other hand in Pella,and in Asia and all the other places where those who followed Jesus dwelt they are following the advice of Paul and they are paying tribute to Caesar as the authority over them and buying and selling at will with his money. Notice that you have the wrong mark on the wrong foreheads,,,

 

[tetelestai]

So to you, Caesar is the image that they worshiped?

Josephus, Yohanan, and Philo of Alexandria all wrote about the Jews worshiping both God and Caesar in the first century.

 

[tetelestai]

the advice of Paul and they are paying tribute to Caesar as the authority over them and buying and selling at will with his money.

What makes you think the Christians who fled to Pella were worshipping Caesar?

 

[whitestone]

Josephus, Yohanan, and Philo of Alexandria all wrote about the Jews worshiping both God and Caesar in the first century.

In the first century covers a lot of ground. This does not negate the fact that in ad70 all of those who were under the siege in Jerusalem refused to buy and sell with Rome's money and printed their own. It,the revolt that began in ad66 proves,in it's self that they were not going to use their money to buy and sell nor see the Caesar of Rome as ruling over them as a God.

That is ,why would God slay all those people if they were not obeying Caesar and not buying and selling with his money when its plain to see they refused his mark? If Caesar is the "beast" they were refusing him and not worshiping him,,,

 

[whitestone]

What makes you think the Christians who fled to Pella were worshipping Caesar?

Oh I don't,,, reread that post I was saying that if you commit to a position, then down the road in eschatology another thing will need to either agree or be rearranged. The harlot is the key to the beast that ascends up out of the pit, where one confuses the final judgment with the wounding of an head,,,

 

[tetelestai]

all of those who were under the siege in Jerusalem refused to buy and sell with Rome's money and printed their own.

That's not true.

The Jews divided into three groups. One group wanted to go to war against Rome, one group did not and was pro-Rome, and the other group was mixed.

Josephus tells us the one group burned all the grain in the city, in order to force those who supported Rome to go to war against Rome.

Josephus also tells us that more Jews killed each other fighting amongst themselves during the siege, then the Jews who were killed by the Romans.

Josephus tells us it got so bad towards the end of the siege, that parents were roasting their children and eating them.

 

[tetelestai]

If Caesar is the "beast" they were refusing him and not worshiping him,,,

No, the majority were worshipping Caesar.

 

[john w]

Well, punk, Craigie-looks you've wimped again, and refuse to agree to my challenge-a thread-this will give you an opportunity to explain to all of us misguided,meanie dispies/MADists, and those of us who are not dispies, just what the second coming is/was. You can un-pack it for all of us. Oh, yes, you asserted it, below(and lied about it, as usual)..........


What's the problem, Craigie? All that tough guy" talk of yours, with cute, "Johnny," and you won't take me on, one on one, eh devil boy? You know that I will pick you apart, and you are just a big satanic windbag, and do not want to be exposed further, for the habitual liar that you are, right Wimpy?




"Tet: "The LORD Jesus Christ returned in the form of a Roman Army." "-STP

"Never said that."-Tet.


Lie-

"Tet is a preterist that believes Christ already returned in 70 AD via the Roman Army."-Tambora, on another TOL thread

"Correct, and thanks for making it clear that it was the Roman army that was His return."-stupid Craigie


"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.

Vs.

He lies, again:


"Jesus never physically returned, and never will physically return to planet earth after He ascended to Heaven"-Preterist deceiver Tet.


=satanic, also, as no scripture says that the Lord Jesus Chris would lose His "flesh and bone" glorified, resurrected body, with which He ascended to the third heaven, when He returned-NADA. Satanic Preterism, Craigie being a shill, makes this up.


The lie...according to this Preterist con job, in this "man made" AD 70-ism "belief system," he returned "un physically," but everyone saw Him, and signs are invisible.


“And that is what happened. The Lord came in a way that everyone could see Him. However, He never touched planet earth, and when this event was over, He then sat on the throne in Heaven NOT on planet earth.”-Tet.

Ascended up physically, never returned physically in AD 70, just as some disembodied spirit, everyone saw Him, even though he did not return physically in AD 70.

Wait....it was the Roman army.


You wicked deceiver.


Now for over the 160th time, Craigie, identify this "everyone" that allegedly saw this "Jesus" return in 70 AD, this "Jesus" who returned with no "flesh and bone," but merely a "disembodied spirit."
Gives us names, citations. _

Hebrews 9:28 KJV

so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.


Vs. Preterist Perverter Craigie Tellalie:

"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.


Shazam, Gomer Tellalie! The Roman army was looking for the Saviour, for their salvation/deliverance, and He appeared to them!!!!!! That is the second coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_____________


So, Craigie, since we "wrongly understand what Scripture means by His second coming," and you don't, this will give you the stage, to set us straight, so that we can understand, infallibly, as you assert that you do, since you, unlike us, do not "follow the teachings of fallible men."

Agreed, Craigie, on a thread?





Not a peep, from the Preteristr scammer.

 

[whitestone]

That's not true.

The Jews divided into three groups. One group wanted to go to war against Rome, one group did not and was pro-Rome, and the other group was mixed.

Josephus tells us the one group burned all the grain in the city, in order to force those who supported Rome to go to war against Rome.

Josephus also tells us that more Jews killed each other fighting amongst themselves during the siege, then the Jews who were killed by the Romans.

Josephus tells us it got so bad towards the end of the siege, that parents were roasting their children and eating them.

tet,lol if they were in the war's against Rome's rule known as the Jewish-Roman wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish–Roman_wars then they were not all lovey dovey with Caesar.

So Josephus was a man who was drafted as a general on the side of Israel. Then the Josephus math problem arose and then he became an interpreter/arbitrator/friend for Titus. Titus continually offered surrender terms to those inside Jerusalem's walls(via Josephus) but they refused. Josephus was a man who changed sides and religions and dressed in whichever one would save his skin.

Of the three apposing sides that were inside Jerusalem they were split on whether or not to surrender and come out. One of the leaders of the three sides thought that their only hope of victory would be if they attacked Titus instead of waiting for him to wait them out(food) so he burnt the food to so the others would agree to attack(no option left if they had no food).

You should consider the meaning of "JEWISH REVOLT" it does not mean Jews who worshiped Caesar as God and used his money(mark) it means that the people inside Jerusalem's walls in ad70 were REFUSING to worship,obey Ceasar and use his money ect.,,,

 

[whitestone]

No, the majority were worshipping Caesar.

And see if they worshiped Caesar why is Caesar killing them? Again the only ones who the wrath of God is poured out on are those who received the mark (or) the number of the name of the beast (or) worshiped his image. You cannot say that they worshiped Caesar as God and that they revolted against him at the same time. If they worshiped Caesar then when Titus offered surrender terms to them they would have said "yes, tell our God Caesar thank you",,,but all the proof shows different.

 

[musterion]

Did he ever identify what distinctives of dispism he thinks are true? Or did he lie about that too.

 

[tetelestai]

You cannot say that they worshiped Caesar as God and that they revolted against him at the same time.

Why not?

It was too late once the Great Revolt began.

 

[whitestone]

Why not?

It was too late once the Great Revolt began.

It was never too late,several times Titus offered terms of surrender but they refused(your source Josephus),,,

But you have had it pounded into you by the teachings of men that "CAESAR IS THE BEAST" ,,so you need to prove it so the ad70ism works all out by ad70 so lets look at it from the other direction.

From the time Christ was crucified up to the time the revolt began the apostles taught to the Christians what?,,,

Romans 13:1-2 KJV , 1 Peter 2:13-14 KJV , Ephesians 6:5-8 KJV , Colossians 3:22-25 KJV , 1 Timothy 6:1-2 KJV , 1 Peter 2:18-20 KJV , Titus 2:9-11 KJV ,,and many more

So now consider this,, you say that Caesar is the beast,and that all these prophecies written about him were fulfilled by ad70.

So those who are in the city of Jerusalem/revolt ad66-70 are not using his money to buy and sell with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish_Revolt_coinage and they are rejecting his authority,his rule ect. as their governing authority.

On the other hand the apostles are telling those who they are preaching to "to obey the authority of Caesar". Now if Caesar was the beast and the apostles knew it then connect the dots because the they are being told to bow down to the beast and that it's fine to use his money to buy and sell. Revelation 13:17 KJV ,,,

Now you need to somehow make Caesar/Rome the beast to make ad70ism complete even though if you do then all of the Christians were being told to "receive the mark" (use his money/see him as if set there by God) if you do ,,,,

I understand though that somehow or another you need to prove that the ones in the ad66 revolt had the mark of the beast but notice how it makes no difference how you try to force that puzzle piece into your eschatology "CAESAR JUST DON'T FIT".

 

[tetelestai]

It was never too late,several times Titus offered terms of surrender but they refused(your source Josephus),,,

Because the Revolt had begun.

But you have had it pounded into you by the teachings of men that "CAESAR IS THE BEAST" ,,so you need to prove it so the ad70ism works all out by ad70 so lets look at it from the other direction.

I said that the forehead represented thoughts, and the right hand actions. Whether it was Caesar, another man, other men, a country, or other gods, that's how I understand "the mark of the beast".

From the time Christ was crucified up to the time the revolt began the apostles taught to the Christians what?,,,

Romans 13:1-2 KJV , 1 Peter 2:13-14 KJV , Ephesians 6:5-8 KJV , collossians 3:22-25 KJV , 1 Timothy 6:1-2 KJV , 1 Peter 2:18-20 KJV , Titus 2:9-11 KJV ,,and many more

The Apostles didn't teach the early Christians to worship other men, or other gods.

So now consider this,, you say that Caesar is the beast,and that all these prophecies written about him were fulfilled by ad70.

The prophecies were fulfilled by 70AD.

You do know there was more than one Caesar?

Whether it was one of the Caesars (i.e. Nero), all of the Caesars, or Rome itself, I don't know.

So those who are in the city of Jerusalem/revolt ad66-70 are not using his money to buy and sell with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish_Revolt_coinage and they are rejecting his authority,his rule ect. as their governing authority.

You are ignoring the first 37 years after the cross

On the other hand the apostles are telling those who they are preaching to "to obey the authority of Caesar".

Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's. Paul and the other Apostles taught to obey those in authority.

However, worshipping them as a god was not taught by Jesus, Paul, or anyone else.

Now if Caesar was the beast and the apostles knew it then connect the dots because the they are being told to bow down to the beast and that it's fine to use his money to buy and sell. Revelation 13:18 KJV ,,,

There is nothing wrong with using the money to buy and sell. Taking the "mark of the beast" (meaning worshipping the beast) is completely different.

Just before the Great Revolt, the Caesars were becoming more and more evil. It got to the point that if you didn't worship the Caesar, you couldn't buy or sell anything. A lot of Jews started giving in and worshipping Caesar so they could buy and sell.

Now you need to somehow make Caesar/Rome the beast to make ad70ism complete even though if you do then all of the Christians were being told to "receive the mark" (use his money/see him as if set there by God) if you do ,,,,

Again, you are conflating using Roman currency with worshipping Caesar.

Paul and Peter never taught their audiences to worship Caesar.

I understand though that somehow or another you need to prove that the ones in the ad66 revolt had the mark of the beast but notice how it makes no difference how you try to force that puzzle piece into your eschatology "CAESAR JUST DON'T FIT".

I'm not forcing anything.

Caesar forcing the Jews to worship him led to the Great Revolt, which led to the Great Tribulation, which culminated with the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.

Everything played out exactly how it was prophesied by Jesus, and how it was written in Revelation.

 

[whitestone]

Because the Revolt had begun.


I said that the forehead represented thoughts, and the right hand actions. Whether it was Caesar, another man, other men, a country, or other gods, that's how I understand "the mark of the beast".




The Apostles didn't teach the early Christians to worship other men, or other gods.


The prophecies were fulfilled by 70AD.

You do know there was more than one Caesar?

Whether it was one of the Caesars (i.e. Nero), all of the Caesars, or Rome itself, I don't know.



You are ignoring the first 37 years after the cross


Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's. Paul and the other Apostles taught to obey those in authority.

However, worshipping them as a god was not taught by Jesus, Paul, or anyone else.



There is nothing wrong with using the money to buy and sell. Taking the "mark of the beast" (meaning worshipping the beast) is completely different.

Just before the Great Revolt, the Caesars were becoming more and more evil. It got to the point that if you didn't worship the Caesar, you couldn't buy or sell anything. A lot of Jews started giving in and worshipping Caesar so they could buy and sell.


Again, you are conflating using Roman currency with worshipping Caesar.

Paul and Peter never taught their audiences to worship Caesar.




I'm not forcing anything.

Caesar forcing the Jews to worship him led to the Great Revolt, which led to the Great Tribulation, which culminated with the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.

Everything played out exactly how it was prophesied by Jesus, and how it was written in Revelation.

No I'm not saying Caesar was the beast that he was wounded unto death and ascended out of the pit you are. I'm pointing out the many errors in your theory of it, and your amusing that I also think this was fulfilled by ad70 and that Caesar was the correct one(I don't).

So I (don't think) that the apostles were telling them to worship the beast. I'm pointing out that all these things are going to be incorrect if as you say Cesar in ad70 was the beast whose deadly wound was healed,image of the beast ect. I suggest you look for another Beast for your eschatology.

 

[tetelestai]

No I'm not saying Caesar was the beast that he was wounded unto death and ascended out of the pit you are.

I said he could be.

Which Caesar are you even talking about?

I'm pointing out the many errors in your theory of it, and your amusing that I also think this was fulfilled by ad70 and that Caesar was the correct one(I don't).

No errors, and I never said that you think it was fulfilled in 70AD

So I (don't think) that the apostles were telling them to worship the beast.

Neither do I.

I'm pointing out that all these things are going to be incorrect if as you say Cesar in ad70 was the beast whose deadly wound was healed,image of the beast ect.

Whoever the beast was, the prophecies were fulfilled by 70AD

Read Rev 1:1

(Rev 1:1) The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Why do ignore these clear and simple words?

And, if that's not enough, God told John the following about the Revelation:

(Rev 22:10) And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

How do make "the time is at hand" and "things which must shortly come to pass" = 2,000 years and counting?

I suggest you look for another Beast for your eschatology.

It doesn't matter to me who the beast was. It all took place almost 2,000 years ago. It's not a yet future event.

I suggest you look up the words "Near" and "Shortly"

 

[musterion]

Did he ever identify what distinctives of dispism he thinks are true? Or did he lie about that too.

Well, Spanky?