Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I cannot quote myself saying what you said I wrote because I never wrote that!
You made a mistake and misrepresented what I wrote and now you refuse to acknowledge your mistake.
The Preterists and Matthew 24:34
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
I cannot quote myself saying what you said I wrote because I never wrote that!
You made a mistake and misrepresented what I wrote and now you refuse to acknowledge your mistake.
whitestone
Well-known member
lol,he got so excited that in post #774 he gives me the "thumbs up!",,,I wonder what he'll think when he calms down and it dawns on him,,,"wait,whitestone is a dispy.",,,
Aaron the Tall
Member
Christ could have rightly predicted all the judgments of Mt 24 would take place within the life of that generation, and still said he didn't know the day or hour they would come. Just as Christ could have prophesied to you that there would be a great trial coming to your life that you had better be ready for, but not tell you the exact day or hour it would come. This fits the parables Jesus told of the master who went away and expected his servants to be doing his will. They didn't know the hour he would return, but they certainly knew he would return within their lifetime.
Aaron the Tall
Member
Jesus rightly said destruction would come on those who rejected him. However, his followers listened to his instructions on how to recognize when destruction was about to come and get out of Jerusalem. This is why Jesus said that if they didn't repent they would perish.
From the very beginning John prophesied this judgment was coming. At the same time that John said they needed to prepare for the Kingdom - he said "the ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire." (Mt 3:10)
And he certainly didn't seem to be offering salvation and safety to the Pharisees "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?" (Mt 3:7)
If everyone repented before the cross, would Jesus have been crucified?
whitestone
Well-known member
And see all this time I thought that it was a complete waste of time for the dispy's to try to explain it over and over and over to you. But in this one post you gave me encouragement that their efforts were not wasted that is you in your efforts to disprove dispensation have devised a clever plan,that is,,,
I will break this all down by category<I will take all the things spoken to the Jews and put them in one group and all the things spoken to the B.O.C. and put them in their category and disprove the things they say. I will argue that this was written to these and this to them.,,,,,,,,,,,,(scratching my head,lol),,,,THE DISPY'S HAVE SAID TO PUT THEM IN THEIR CORRECT CATEGORY ALL ALONG.LOL
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
The events surrounding the rapture and the resurrection associated with it was a mystery truth not revealed in the OT. Paul wrote:
"Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1 Cor.15:51-53).
There were no prophecies which foretold of the rapture and the resurrection which will happen at that time. All of the OT prophecies will be searched in vain for any event where living saints will put on immortal bodies when meeting the Lord in the air.
In fact, James makes it known that the Lord Jesus' appearance at the rapture can happen at any moment:
"You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near" (James 5:8).
The Greek word translated "is near" at James 5:8 is eggizo and in this verse that word means "to be imminent" (A Greek English Lexicon, Liddell & Scott [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940], 467).
In an article found on the "Pre-Trib Research Center" web site Dr. Renald E. Showers writes:
"In light of James' statements C. Leslie Mitton wrote, 'James clearly believed, as others of his time did, that the coming of Christ was imminent.' On the basis of James' statements we can conclude that Christ's coming was imminent in New Testament times and continues to be so today, and that this fact should make a difference in the way Christians live" [emphasis added] (Showers, The Imminent Coming of Christ).
The return of the Lord Jesus to the earth cannot be described as being imminent because certain events must happen before that can occur:
"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains...And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" (Mt.24:15-16,30).
The rapture and the resurrection which is associated with it can happen at any time. On the other hand, the resurrection spoken of here cannot happen until the last day:
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day" (Jn.6:40).
So the Scriptures reveal two different resurrections of the just, one which is foretold in the OT and another which was a mystery truth, not found in the OT.
One can take place at any moment and another one which cannot happen until the last day which will precede the beginning of the kingdom age.
Besides that, there is a resurrection of damnation so that makes three resurrections!
Time for some more "comic relief," from Preterist Perverter, noTetosterone, Craigie the Clown....
Tell us Craigie, who this "everyone" is, that saw this invisible, fake "Jesus" of Preterism, return in 70 AD ?
“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.
Surely one of your infallible, as you claim, Preterist leaders has told you who this "everyone" was.
Name this "everyone," with specifics, wimpy Craigie. Do be a dear-names.
Why did you lie, about the above, here, Craigie?:
"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.
Why did you lie, here, sweetie?:
"Tet: "The LORD Jesus Christ returned in the form of a Roman Army." "-STP
"Never said that."-Tet.
Vs.
"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.
Honk that Bozo nose of yours, Craigie, and flap them big old clown shoes, habitual liar, Craigie.
Tell us Craigie, who this "everyone" is, that saw this invisible, fake "Jesus" of Preterism, return in 70 AD ?
“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.
Surely one of your infallible, as you claim, Preterist leaders has told you who this "everyone" was.
Name this "everyone," with specifics, wimpy Craigie. Do be a dear-names.
Why did you lie, about the above, here, Craigie?:
"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.
Why did you lie, here, sweetie?:
"Tet: "The LORD Jesus Christ returned in the form of a Roman Army." "-STP
"Never said that."-Tet.
Vs.
"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.
Honk that Bozo nose of yours, Craigie, and flap them big old clown shoes, habitual liar, Craigie.
The Bible only speaks of two resurrections. One for believers and one for unbelievers.
Since you claim there are three by claiming there are two for believers, which one your resurrections for believers comes first?
I don't know what your so excited about.
I said that Matt 24 was specific to Christian Jews living in and near Judaea in the first century. Genuineoriginal was claiming the Great Tribulation applied Christ rejecting Jews who were exterminated by Nazis.
That doesn't make me a Dispensationalist.
Those Christian Jews living in Judaea in the first century were part of the Body of Christ.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Of course you just IGNORED the evidence which I gave you which proves that there are two resurrections for the saved and another called the resurrection of the damned. That makes three!
Are you really this dense? The resurrection which is tied to the catching up of the saints and is described as being imminent will come first. in fact, Paul was expecting that he would still be alive when those in the BOC will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air:
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:17).
The Apostle John was also expecting to be made like the Lord Jesus when He appeared:
"Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is" (1 Jn.3:2).
You deny that the resurrection, which, by definition, is physical, not some sort of "mystical,'spiritual'," rising, standing up, as your satanic Preterism "teaches," is promised to OT saints, and deny that these passages apply to members of the boc, today:
Romans 8:23 KJV
And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
Philippians 3:21 KJV
who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself
That is satanic, and perverts the gospel of Christ, 1 Cor. 15 KJV ff.
Demon.
Go ahead-anyone-ask Craigie if Romans 8:23 KJV/ Philippians 3:21 KJV,applies today, to members of the boc.
And the punk, in deceit, spams, as one of his "arguments" of sophistry:
"Don't you believe the bible/Jesus/Paul?"
Here comes a "Darby" soon....Watch...
He is satanic.
whitestone
Well-known member
And I am pointing out that you said even in this post "was specific to christian Jews",,(so you agree that they are not meant for the Jews who denied Jesus) which is "DARBY 101",,,"RIGHTLY DIVIDE THE WORD AND APPLY THEM TO WHO THEY ARE SPOKEN",,,
Then you go even further you say that Genuineoriginal claimed the tribulation to the Jews who were killed before ww2 fulfilled this prophecy (so again you separate out the things spoken to the Jews that apply only to them) This is the only thing I agree with you on that is the Jews in ww2 did not go to their grave "for Jesus names sake"(Matthew 24:9 KJV) they went to the grave believing that Jesus was NOT the true Messiah,so hence they went to their grave "for the false Messiah's names sake",,,
So in everything you say you divide the words spoken to One(Jews) and say they only apply to them,and then you take the things spoken to the other(B.O.C.) and say they only apply the them.
Now you may have a great dislike for Darby,,,but is it by accident that you say the same things about dividing the the things spoken into the groups they are given and applying them to reason? That is you are in fact doing the very thing Darby suggested if you do,it's Darby 101. At first you see there were no chapters,verses ect. in the scriptures. As time went on to make it easier to discuss certain scriptures they were added.
Some didn't like adding the verses and chapters at first but today we ask for the verse and chapter and see it as a great help. Again in disp. we divide the things spoken into the groups to which they are spoken but we are scorned for it. You do it also by accident not catching yourself as you do it as if you are an neophyte, "Tet,the Neophyte of dispys",,,,
Interplanner
Well-known member
To all,
stick to reactions to propositions, not to people.
Darby's type of dividing was 2P2P which does not exist in the Bible. he thought there was unfinished business to be completed with Israel, which there is not. His movement was part of trying to reconcile hostilities between Protestants and Catholics over whether the Pope was AC. Commendable, but not if it shifts what the NT said, which did not say the Pope was AC.
stick to reactions to propositions, not to people.
Darby's type of dividing was 2P2P which does not exist in the Bible. he thought there was unfinished business to be completed with Israel, which there is not. His movement was part of trying to reconcile hostilities between Protestants and Catholics over whether the Pope was AC. Commendable, but not if it shifts what the NT said, which did not say the Pope was AC.
(Mark 13:30 KJV) Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Let's look at what John said in the Revelation:
(Rev 20:5-6) (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection....
Dispensationalism teaches that Revelation is not written to the BOC. Dispensationalism teaches that the alleged rapture isn't found in Revelation.
So, is what John calls "The First Resurrection" the same thing as what you call "the catching up of the saints" at your rapture, also what you call the first resurrection?
If not, then you need to tell us how "The First Resurrection" in Rev 20 is really the second resurrection.
Er, no.
The Christian Jews who lived in Judaea were part of the BOC.
If there were any Christians living in Judaea at the time who were not formerly Jews, the warnings by Jesus applied to them also. Likewise Christians (whether former Jews or not) were told not to go to Judaea.
Daniel's 70 weeks were specific to the Jews, no one else. That is not Dispensationalism.
That's correct.
Darby, and Darby followers, have to use OT prophecies to make their claim.
Most of the OT passages Darby used to make his claim were already fulfilled when the Jews were taken captive to Babylon, or when the Jews returned from Babylon.
You see that all the time here on TOL. Darby followers constantly post OT prophecies that were already fulfilled, and claim they are the yet future.
It's very seldom you will see a Darby follower quote prophecies from the NT to defend their claim that God is going to pick up his unfinished business with fleshly Israel.