ECT What makes Preterism so impossible

[john w]

Craigie Tellalie Berstein:You are all are in denial....No one taught dispensationalism, until Bam Bam dated Pebbles....Not one person, in the history of the universe, can answer my questions....Darby's roast beef is a false beef system/joint, eaten by fallable men....Don't you believe the bible/my assertions?....Josephus says.....You are all in denial....
___________________________________
"Jesus never physically returned, and never will physically return to planet earth after He ascended to Heaven"-Flavey Craigie Tellalie.

Vs.


“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.”-Tellalie "Mr. Rourke" Craigie, from "Preterist Fantasy Island"


Vs.

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

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

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

Vs.

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.
______________________

 

[Danoh]

Well, Jo, I hope you See the Phus your books "about" have been turned into by these book Flavius of the month Preterists.

You really have it bad, Jo - it's bad enough that bust of you on wiki is the spitting image of Seinfeld's "Kramer."

 

[john w]

Well, Jo, I hope you See the Phus your books "about" have been turned into by these book Flavius of the month Preterists.

You really have it bad, Jo - it's bad enough that bust of you on wiki is the spitting image of Seinfeld's "Kramer."

You are in denial, D.

 

[Danoh]

You are in denial, D.

Ahmuh little mean, but ah make up fer it bah bein real hell thee.

 

[john w]

Ahmuh little mean, but ah make up fer it bah bein real hell thee.

"Er, no..." Not one Danoh, in the history of the planets, that live(d) on the planet of the Klingon's, have answered Tellalie's questions. You/everyone that has ever existed, are in denial.

 

[musterion]

I still dno't know what these people do with Is 55. He swore in the days of Noah never to destroy the earth, and swore never to destroy Israel. And then he did in the DofJ. Therefore: literalism must be abandoned.

Yet you want everyone here to take whatever you say as literally true.

 

[Interplanner]

Yet you want everyone here to take whatever you say as literally true.

There seems to be some confusion. I am saying that the prophets cannot be literally true: what they said was true in and about Christ and what he would bring and his community.

Also I don't do any telling if you mean pontificating. I am demonstrating, through the specific example of Is 55 (among 100 others), that the truth in Christ cannot be the literal use of most OT prophets.

 

[musterion]

There seems to be some confusion. I am saying that the prophets cannot be literally true: what they said was true in and about Christ and what he would bring and his community.

Also I don't do any telling if you mean pontificating. I am demonstrating, through the specific example of Is 55 (among 100 others), that the truth in Christ cannot be the literal use of most OT prophets.

You're doing it again. Your mind is dark.

 

[Interplanner]

You're doing it again. Your mind is dark.

lol. Your turn on Isaiah 55 (my apologies for mixing threads, but it is a valid example regardless). Show me how Is 55 can be literal in any sense.

 

[Totton Linnet]

I still dno't know what these people do with Is 55. He swore in the days of Noah never to destroy the earth, and swore never to destroy Israel. And then he did in the DofJ. Therefore: literalism must be abandoned.

When did God destroy Israel? They are right there where they always were.

They were dispersed not destroyed and their blessing is yet to come, THAT my friend is the literal understanding

 

[Interplanner]

"Anyone who does not listen to this teacher will be extirpated from his people." Acts 3.

"This is the time of wrath in fulfillment of all that is written" Lk 21

"Your house will be desolate" Mt 23

"The wrath of God has come upon them completely" 2 Th 2.

The destruction of Israel in 66-70 is one of the most completely known events of its kind in antiquity--except by D'ists who flit here and there and pretty much don't know church history. The tribal lines are a mess. 90% of the people going back in the 20th century were atheist and communist.

If you haven't noticed already, when you take down a major worship site like the 2nd temple, it has a bit of effect on practicing the worship system. So did the exposed magma. So, yeah, destroyed.

If D'ists could just get over their inhibition about knowing what 1st century history was like...

 

[musterion]

Show me how Is 55 can be literal in any sense.

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
and your ways are not My ways.”
This is the Lord’s declaration.
“For as heaven is higher than earth,
so My ways are higher than your ways,
and My thoughts than your thoughts.

Do you deny that is literally true?

 

[Interplanner]

Do you deny that is literally true?

Well, I don't think you can measure God by a specific altitude, if that's what you mean. Strictly speaking that is what higher means.

Let's review. Is 55 opens with a declaration about the two mothers which Galatians picks to validate the believers and their Jerusalem above, not the one on earth. Clearly, it is not just about Sarah and Hagar.

Later, God says that the 7th century destruction of Jerusalem will never happen again, that it will be like the days of Noah, when he swore he would not destroy it. Yet there were harrowing moments in the Intertestament period and there is the mind-numbing total destruction of Jerusalem in 70. So something must give.

The prophetic vision is not about Israel as we know it. It is about a new people God is forming who are simply the believers. There is no literal way through Is 55, so we have to seek the things Christ taught both before and after the Resurrection (there was 40 days of teaching until Pentecost); we have to read the OT the way he taught. We should still try to read it in the most ordinary sense, but places like Is 55 cannot be done that way.

Back to "higher." We can now see that a whole worldwide community was intended; that is what is higher. When he swore divine protection, it was not to Israel as they knew it, it was to believers.

In ch 49 Isaiah even says that 'it is too small a thing to restore the fortunes of Israel; I will make you a light to the nations.' That is part of "higher" as well.

 

[Totton Linnet]

"Anyone who does not listen to this teacher will be extirpated from his people." Acts 3.

"This is the time of wrath in fulfillment of all that is written" Lk 21

"Your house will be desolate" Mt 23

"The wrath of God has come upon them completely" 2 Th 2.

The destruction of Israel in 66-70 is one of the most completely known events of its kind in antiquity--except by D'ists who flit here and there and pretty much don't know church history. The tribal lines are a mess. 90% of the people going back in the 20th century were atheist and communist.

If you haven't noticed already, when you take down a major worship site like the 2nd temple, it has a bit of effect on practicing the worship system. So did the exposed magma. So, yeah, destroyed.

If D'ists could just get over their inhibition about knowing what 1st century history was like...

The TEMPLE was destroyed and with it the religion and so the religious leaders, and they were the ruling class...and THEY are the only ones who were warned to flee from the wrath to come, those who opposed Christ and the apostles

Why don't you open your eyes and SEE?

The multitude flocked to Jesus, the common people heard Him gladly, after Pentecost they flocked to the apostles thousands being saved every day.

The Jews were not destroyed they were dispersed, they have been laid aside, but God is going to take them up again...that is why they are being gathered.

True theology doesn't have any jagged stickee out bits, no contradictions.

If you find contradictions it is because your theology is wrong.

 

[musterion]

Well, I don't think you can measure God by a specific altitude, if that's what you mean. Strictly speaking that is what higher means.

Let's review. Is 55 opens with a declaration about the two mothers which Galatians picks to validate the believers and their Jerusalem above, not the one on earth. Clearly, it is not just about Sarah and Hagar.

Later, God says that the 7th century destruction of Jerusalem will never happen again, that it will be like the days of Noah, when he swore he would not destroy it. Yet there were harrowing moments in the Intertestament period and there is the mind-numbing total destruction of Jerusalem in 70. So something must give.

The prophetic vision is not about Israel as we know it. It is about a new people God is forming who are simply the believers. There is no literal way through Is 55, so we have to seek the things Christ taught both before and after the Resurrection (there was 40 days of teaching until Pentecost); we have to read the OT the way he taught. We should still try to read it in the most ordinary sense, but places like Is 55 cannot be done that way.

Back to "higher." We can now see that a whole worldwide community was intended; that is what is higher. When he swore divine protection, it was not to Israel as they knew it, it was to believers.

In ch 49 Isaiah even says that 'it is too small a thing to restore the fortunes of Israel; I will make you a light to the nations.' That is part of "higher" as well.

I'll ask one more time.

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
and your ways are not My ways.”
This is the Lord’s declaration.
“For as heaven is higher than earth,
so My ways are higher than your ways,
and My thoughts than your thoughts.

Do you deny that this is literally true? Yes or no.

 

[tetelestai]

If "Jesus" came back invisibly, how did anyone at that time know He came back? Being invisible, why would anyone believe He came back at all? Serious question -- serious evidence only, please.

Who said Jesus came back invisibly?

 

[tetelestai]

Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

The Israelites only sang "blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" on the three pilgrimage feasts.

HINT: When was the next pilgrimage feast after Jesus said that?

 

[john w]

Who said Jesus came back invisibly?

You did, gayboy:

"Jesus never physically returned, and never will physically return to planet earth after He ascended to Heaven"-gayboy Craigie Berstein.

vs.


“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.”-Tellafib


So, little arms boy-identify this "everyone," as you've been asked for 3 years, that allegedly saw this "un-physical" Saviour return, in AD 70, which was the Roman army, according to your "man made invention.," taught to you by this "bunch of" infallible men, which you refuse to identify, also,according to you..

What's the problem, little weakling, weasel?

 

[tetelestai]

This is wrong on two counts, firstly the generation that Jesus was addressing had not witnessed the fig tree put forth her leaves therefore they could not be "this" generation

Wrong.

When Jesus told them: "When you see these things happen, keep your eyes open, because you'll know the time is near", they didn't think Jesus was talking about some Jews 2,000 (and still counting) years into the future who had made their way back into Palestine.

The Jews Jesus was speaking to, knew it meant THEM.

 

[Danoh]

Interplanner is clueless - what God promised was that He would never destroy man again via a flood.

Leave it to the incompetence of Preterism to see a contradiction in Scripture where there is none - that it then attempts to solve for by the same reasoning of men into a thing by which it read said non-existent contradiction into the Scriptures to begin with.

The Earth that then was is reference to the people that then were - Genesis is very clear on this.

I suppose that "God so loved the world" is a reference to the planet itself :chuckle: