Nope
Um....."illiterate" means you can't read or write.
I did. It's "I couldn't care less", not "I could care less". If it makes you feel any better, Danoh has made the same error repeatedly.
ECT Israel's Prophetic Clock stopped in 70AD, not in Mid Acts
- Thread starter tetelestai
- Start date
Nope
Um....."illiterate" means you can't read or write.
I did. It's "I couldn't care less", not "I could care less". If it makes you feel any better, Danoh has made the same error repeatedly.
Regretabbly, I have had my own moments in the past where I'd've loved nothing more than to have had him say some of things he has said to our sisters on here, but in my actual presence, that I might punch him out.
But as my old ma instructor used to say, 'if you refuse another's gift; who's does it remain?'
In other words, Tet's kind are not worth allowing violence to arise in oneself; he is a first rate neurotic, and that is all he will ever be.
That's "has repeatedly made the same error" :chuckle:
It appears the topic of this thread has greatly angered the Darby Followers. So much so, that they want to punch me in the face if they could.
Because Danoh, and other Darby followers can't reconcile how Israel's prophetic clock was stopped in Mid-Acts (their claim) with Luke 19:44 being fulfilled in 70AD, they have resorted to downright hatred.
Because Danoh, and other Darby followers can't reconcile how Israel's prophetic clock was stopped in Mid-Acts (their claim) with Luke 19:44 being fulfilled in 70AD, they have resorted to downright hatred.
As Steko already mentioned, there are other promises to Abraham.
And one of those promises was about inheriting physical land promised to Abraham and his seed.
In this promise of land, "seed" is definitely a plural, and not referring to a single descendant.
So the land promise cannot be one of the promises that Paul mentions as referring to a single descendant (Christ).
For example, I will provide one of the many passages that show the land was for many, not a single individual.
Leviticus 25:2 KJV
(2) Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD.
You rely on history and yet you fail to understand the phrase "in the past."
And Darby had nothing to do with the way you insulted a sister or two on here, you word twisting weasel.
Look at how he twists his every post into his attempt to goad others into answering his question, when he in fact knows that he is already deadset against whatever answer is given him, should it not match his Preterist garbage.
Jerry all over again...
Danoh,
I once asked you why "near", "soon", "these last days", etc didn't happen, and your response was that Israel's prophetic clock was stopped in Mid-Acts.
I don't agree with that. So, I am asking you why Luke 19:44 was fulfilled in 70AD if Israel's prophetic clock was stopped in Mid-Acts.
Judging by all your responses, it appears to me you don't have an answer because you know you can't.
ClimateSanity
New member
If a person keeps asking questions with no intent of budging from his position or giving the answer serious consideration, then yes, rage is a normal response. Hey liar, you haven't proven a damn thing with your lame attempt to misuse Luke 19:44. You going around declaring victory because we don't take your weasel bait is enraging. Don't fool yourself into thinking you have hit upon some truth judging by the reaction. It's not what your claiming as fact that's enraging, it's your deceitful way of going about it.
Then prove me wrong Globalwarming boy.
Aletheiophile
New member
Yes, except that all promises are fulfilled in Christ. ALL. The physical land already was given to Israel. There is a physical and spiritual for every prophecy. The spiritual is always Christ. The physical promise was already fulfilled. The spiritual is manifest in Christ. He is the land of Israel. Man is of the dust of the ground, and Christ is the pure physical seed of Abraham. His body is the dust of the ground, and in Him we receive the glorified Israel.
Israel receives the fullness of its glory in the year of Jubilee. Christ is the Jubilee of Jubilees. Daniel's 70-7s is 10 Jubilee cycles. Christ is the end of the 70 weeks, and thus the ultimate Jubilee. He is the Glory of physical Israel. Thus He is the ultimate fulfillment of the land promise. "For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us." 2 Cor 1:20.
Amen !!!!!
(Matt 18:22) No, not seven times," Jesus replied, "but seventy times seven!
Aletheiophile
New member
The concept of the "prophetic clock" pausing Mid-Acts does not even make sense according to an ancient sense of time. The Hebrews viewed the past as before them and the future as behind them, and thus examples from the past and present were used to illumine the future. Why would a future be revealed that was not their own?
But further, it skews the proper understanding of prophecy. If you count all the times prophecy is used in the NT, it is 83% of the time used as forthtelling, not foretelling. The function of prophecy is primarily to call God's people to return to covenant and righteousness. And as the book of Revelation declares, "The Spirit of Prophecy is the Testimony of Christ." Rev 19:10. If prophetic interpretation is not focused in the gospel of Christ, then it does not abide by the spirit of prophecy.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Since the Son was manifest in the likeness of sinful flesh, which was authentic humanity of the literal dust of the ground, then He has fulfilled this covenant promise Himself AS Himself. There's nothing more literal than the tangible dust of the ground from which the humanity of Christ came (unless you deny the Virgin Birth and endorse Docetic Gnosticism).
Putting on Christ and being translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son, etc. are the rest of the ontology of our salvation; but of course Dispos prefer to deny Christ's Incarnation as being literal and tangible.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Amen! Preach! Jesus Christ is the all in all. The only holy righteous and ever-living God. The Son of the Most High. Theanthropos.
They deny His humanity, which denies His divinity. They prefer a parcel of real estate to the Incarnate Logos of God. It's racial bigotry, and it's superimposed upon God Himself by this false Eschatology that skews all valid hermeneutics.
And as for 2Cor 1:20, you seem to know that promises is an ANARTHROUS noun, not an ARTICULAR noun. Englishizers don't have a clue what the difference is, which is why Dispos have to insist on a parcel of dirt. They think it's an articular noun, and have no idea what scripture says or means because they despise the original language of inspiration, etc.
Aletheiophile
New member
That indeed seems to be the case!
Could you say more? What are the implication of promises being in the anarthrous form?
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Greek anarthrous nouns speak not of "the", but of the quality, character, and activiy (functionality) of the noun. There is no English equivalent, and the indefinite article (which is absent in Greek) has replaced the anarthrous. And that's the HUGE problem for the Englishizers.
So 2Cor 1:20 is not speaking of "the" promise, but of the quality, character, and activity OF "the" promise. Jesus Christ is, of course, that anarthrous for the articular promise.
This false doctrine (and most others) is because Englishizers don't understand the simple grammatical distinctions between donor and receptor languages in translation relative to noun forms. And since nouns do all the "verbing", and adjectives are modifying the nouns while adverbs are modifying the verbs that nouns are "doing"; it means understanding the comparative noun forms between languages is possibly the most vital aspect of translation and comprehension besides the word meanings themselves (which are also nebulous in English until examined carefully).
But you likely already knew all of that, looking at your posts.
Aletheiophile
New member
Greek anarthrous nouns speak not of "the", but of the quality, character, and activiy (functionality) of the noun. There is no English equivalent, and the indefinite article (which is absent in Greek) has replaced the anarthrous. And that's the HUGE problem for the Englishizers.
So 2Cor 1:20 is not speaking of "the" promise, but of the quality, character, and activity OF "the" promise. Jesus Christ is, of course, that anarthrous for the articular promise.
This false doctrine (and most others) is because Englishizers don't understand the simple grammatical distinctions between donor and receptor languages in translation relative to noun forms. And since nouns do all the "verbing", and adjective are modifying the nouns while adverbs are modifying the verbs that nouns are "doing"; it means understanding the comparative noun forms between languages is possibly the most vital aspect of translation and comprehension besides the word meanings themselves (which are also nebulous in English until examined carefully).
But you likely already knew all of that, looking at your posts.
Well that's pretty clear to understand. It also answers previous questions in this thread about translation issues.
So essentially...it's less about specific promises, and more about the promise-maker/keeper/fulfiller.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Yes, the Dispo Englishizers are utterly clueless about the far-reaching effects of their ignorance about translation. Erasmus and others weren't involved in a verbal plenary scenario for the translation. There was no Joseph Smith-esque angel-source golden tablets.
Yes, exactly. The physical parcel of real estate was "the" land as the articular noun. That was fulfilled. The "forever" promise has to be anarthrous, since it's adjectival OF the promise. That's the Greek anarthrous, and Christ IS that anarthrous... forever. (Even an everlasting physical land could not be the anarthrous, only the articular.)
Jesus Christ is the all in all. The High Priest (forever, after the order of Melchizedek). The final sacrifice. The law. The temple. The promised land. There is nothing God promised that is not fulfilled in Christ.
For ALL [anarthrous] the promises [anarthrous] of God in Him are yea, and in Him amen, to the glory of God by us.
To insist there is an extant physical land promise is to deny the anarthrous noun (promise) and its anarthrous adjective (all). This denies both the humanity and divinity of Christ.
Aletheiophile
New member
Amen and Amen!
Also, considering that the Hebrew term for "forever," either of them, have nothing to do with a modern concept of endless time. Only a distant future. They would not even comprehend our concept of endless time. It was irrelevant to them. The promises are the evidence of the covenant, and covenant is about relationship. YHWH is covenant maker...so the promises are all about Him. So "forever" is about YHWH, not about endless duration of a thing. Hm....