ECT MADists don't follow Paul

D

Danoh

New member
No need to continue to attempt to prove you wrong on any point, Tel-a-lie.

In your utter humiliation the link below so clearly makes obvious, despite your opponent's having been off in a very miniscule sense here and there (two of several being his assertion about those stones; another being his assertion he alone could prove you so wrong in so many areas) he did his job that well those five years ago; proving your very perspective itself is the problem. All you spew from it; par for the course.

Yet here you are, all these years later, still attempting to bait one and all into - your - proving them wrong :chuckle:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread...-Cannot-Answer
 
D

Danoh

New member
tetelestai said:
Go to the link, I answered questions.
Click to expand...

You think you did :chuckle:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...tai-Questions-the-Mid-Acts-View-Cannot-Answer

I'd throw you a bone but you'd either twist it or misuse it in some other way.

You will just have troll wherever I post so you can look in the window; salivating when I answer the clock thing in response to some one else's post :chuckle:

You really don't know the specific details of our, let alone my, understanding of the clock issue - what kind of an expert are you that you don't know the others side's debate unless it is spoonfed to you (to no avail, of course)?

No. That is not a question to you. You know you were proven completely incompetent several years ago, per the link below:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...tai-Questions-the-Mid-Acts-View-Cannot-Answer
 
Last edited:
tetelestai

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Danoh said:
You really don't know the specific details of our, let alone my, understanding of the clock issue
Click to expand...

I know that there is only one answer that can be given, and that is the Wailing Wall, or that three towers were left standing by the Romans, thus not every stone was left not standing upon another stone.

There has never been any other answer ever given by a Dispie on this site that reconciles the stopped clock with 70AD other than what I just told you.

You don't have another answer either, and you don't like the only answer you can give.

That's why you have been playing the games you have been playing, and not answering the question.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Danoh said:
You think you did :chuckle:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread...-Cannot-Answer

I'd throw you a bone but you'd either twist it or misuse it in some other way.

You will just have troll wherever I post so you can look in the window; salivating when I answer the clock thing in response to some one else's post :chuckle:

You really don't know the specific details of our, let alone my, understanding of the clock issue - what kind of an expert are you that you don't know the others side's debate unless it is spoonfed to you (to no avail, of course)?

No. That is not a question to you. You know you were proven completely incompetent several years ago, per the link below:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread...-Cannot-Answer
Click to expand...

Those links are no good Danoh :idunno:
 
D

Danoh

New member
tetelestai said:
I know that there is only one answer that can be given, and that is the Wailing Wall, or that three towers were left standing by the Romans, thus not every stone was left not standing upon another stone.

There has never been any other answer ever given by a Dispie on this site that reconciles the stopped clock with 70AD other than what I just told you.

You don't have another answer either, and you don't like the only answer you can give.

That's why you have been playing the games you have been playing, and not answering the question.
Click to expand...

Nope; there is better evidence than that stones theory.

Not that I am saying said theory is false or not, for either answer would put a smile on your baiting heart.

Can't have that, now; can we :chuckle:

Here, have some humble pie:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...tai-Questions-the-Mid-Acts-View-Cannot-Answer
 
tetelestai

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Danoh said:
Nope; there is better evidence than that stones theory.
Click to expand...

Nope.

If the clock stopped, it didn't turn back on again around 64AD, and then stop again in 70AD.

But who knows, you think "The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" means two different events, so it looks like you will say anything in trying to defend Darby's false teachings.

heir thinks Paul removed the Romans from the Olive Tree and into the BOC.

It's as if you guys make stuff up on the fly while your trying to defend Darby's false teachings.

Such is the life of a Darby follower.
 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
tetelestai said:
No mistakes.

All was fulfilled in Christ Jesus.
Click to expand...

His standard "answers any and all questions that stump me, which I cannot answer"-

"All was fulfilled in Christ Jesus.'

He employs this slight of hand on dozens of prophecies.


The Preterist punk can "prove" anything with this deceptive tactic.


Go ahead and ask Craigie when the land promises were fulfilled.


He will change the meaning of land, saying it was literal, at one point, but it is not literal anymore, as the land promises were "fulfilled in Christ Jesus."
 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Yes, Craigie. Tell us about how Hilston humiliated you, and you "scurried away like a cockroach, when the light was shone on you."
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
tetelestai said:
No mistakes.

All was fulfilled in Christ Jesus.
Click to expand...



OK...but we can also be more historically exact. If the Jews had largely followed the apostles, they would not have had the infammatory issues they had with Rome. They would have been 'delivered from enemies' and this is true of those believers who left the area as signaled.

I know why you think there might be a zealot type of deliverance from this one passage, but check Luke as a whole--there is nothing to ally the zealot movement with the Christians. Jesus picked a few of these Galileans to make them apostles, but, well, you know what happened to Judas, and that he did so because of all that money that could have been given to the poor. It is in Luke especially that we find no connection to the zealot movement, because the intro of both Luke and Acts is to an attorney who was going to represent Paul, and show that he had no connection to the general rebellion movement.
 
Tambora

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
tetelestai said:
That's pretty funny coming from the person who says the words don't really mean what they say.

Please tell us how all of the following passages from Revelation don't really mean what they say:

“The time is near.” (Rev. 1:3)

“I also will keep you from the hour of testing which is about to come upon the whole world.” (Rev. 3:10)

“I am coming quickly.” (Rev. 3:11)

“And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is about to rule all the nations with a rod of iron.” (Rev. 12:5)

“…to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place.” (Rev. 22:6)

"Behold, I am coming quickly. " (Rev. 22:7)

"Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near." (Rev. 22:10)

"Behold, I am coming quickly.” (Rev. 22:12)

"Yes, I am coming quickly." (Rev. 22:20)
Click to expand...
You do realize that He says that from the beginning of the book of Revelation to the end of the book.

But you claim some of Revelation is still future.
How do you explain your explanation of "quickly" being about when instead of how if it was all to happen soon (within a few years)?
 
tetelestai

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Tambora said:
You do realize that He says that from the beginning of the book of Revelation to the end of the book.

But you claim some of Revelation is still future.
How do you explain your explanation of "quickly" being about when instead of how if it was all to happen soon (within a few years)?
Click to expand...

The only parts that are yet future are the parts that come after he says: "when the thousand years are over....." in chp 20 verses 7-15

Everything else happened before, and up to 70AD.
 
Tambora

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
tetelestai said:
The only parts that are yet future are the parts that come after he says: "when the thousand years are over....." in chp 20 verses 7-15

Everything else happened before, and up to 70AD.
Click to expand...
The whole book is said to be prophesy.
And in the whole book, He said He's coming quickly.
You can't just take the "coming quickly" part out of the verses you want to just to satisfy your preconceived notions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top