Is the land restoration to the nation of Israel found in the new covenant?

[jgr]

Chang's article is focused on the mitochondrial gene that is traced back to a single woman; a gene that all people have in common and Ralph and Coop's article is focused on European lineages. Not Mid-Eastern. If either article had mentioned Mid-East lineages blending with other lineages, then they might be relevant to the topic of this thread.

Chang's statement:

“all individuals who have any descendants among the present-day individuals are actually ancestors of all present-day individuals.”

Whatever his, Ralph's and Coop's studies focus on, they ultimately support that statement.

Their studies and their conclusions have never been disproved.

There's no mistaking "all" and "any".

 

[jgr]

These numbers of “hundreds of millions” are just estimates and not actual proof and it is highly unlikely that the number would rise to billions in ten years. There is no telling as to what rate the Abrahamic gene is being passed on. You are relying more on theory and conjecture than proven fact and it would be a far-fetched scenario to suggest that every mixing event that has taken place is still taking place.

The rate of Abrahamic gene propagation would be expected to be reflective of changes in global population over extended time intervals.

Global population has only ever increased over extended time intervals.

Abrahamic gene propagation has undoubtedly done the same.

Mixing events have not decreased. On the contrary, they have continually increased, as reflected in continual global population increase.

Abraham's genes among them.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Hell CE.
I am Partial Preterist/Amill. I view much of the Olivet Disourse and much of Revelation as fulfilled in the 1st century, more specifically, 70ad.................
An interesting thread on PP/Amill/Premill.........It appears there is really not much difference between those except perhaps semantics/interpretations concerning the Hebrew symbology in both the Olivet Discourse and Revelation........
Amill or Premill works that respond to partial preterism?
A recommended thread:

Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament

THE SYMBOLISM IN BOOK OF REVELATION

One man studied and found 348 allusions (not illusions, Light) in Revelation from the Old Testament. You see the similarity in wording and the context mirrored in Revelation and the particular Old Testament story, and immediately can recognize the reference source!
That's IF you know the bible well enough to even notice that.

95 of the 348 plain references used in Revelation as taken from the Old Testament are repeated in Revelation.
That makes about 250 Old Testament passages are cited. How many chapters are in Revelation? 22. That makes about TEN OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES FOR EVERY CHAPTER!
==================================================
Here are some of the ones I have come up with. Please feel free to add or comment on them.

Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Books in Daniel Daniel 7:9 and 11:10.
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Cried and joy Temple/City: Ezra 3:12,13 and Reve 18:18, 19:4
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Ear to hear: Isaiah 6:9,10 and Matt 13:15, Reve 2,3,13
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Holy Holy Holy Isaiah 6:6 and Revelation 4:8
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Jericho, Priest and Trumpets: Joshua 6:4, Hebrews 11:30, Matt 24:31, Reve 8:6
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Lift hands to heaven and swore..: Daniel 2:7 and Reve 10:5
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Light Revelation to Israel and Nations: Isaiah 9:2, Luke 2:32, Reve 1:1
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Moses and Elijah, fire falling, as is also seen in Revelation.
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Moses and Elijah
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Mountain of fire cast into Sea
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Pierced: Zech 12:10 and Reve 1:7
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Sacrifice/Supper of God: Ezek 39:17 and Reve 19:17
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Sanctuary/Tabernacle filled with smoke
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Silence/Hush: Zech 1:7, 2:13 and Reve 8:1
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Sodom and Egypt: Matt 2:15, Reve 11:8
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Song of Moses: Exodus 15:1 and Revelation 15:3
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Spirit lifting, taking Ezekiel and John
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Stars 7
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Tree of Life and Garden: Genesis 3:24 and Reve 2:7
Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
Whip.........Nahum 3:2, John 2:15,

I will be sure to take a look at the threads you listed at some point but I do know this: Just because similar analogies, expressions, and terminologies are used in various passages of scripture, that does not mean that they are all talking about the same thing. Context is the definer.

I give you this much credit in that the list you provided of seemingly comparable scriptures is a worthy study but best commented on in a different thread.

 

[jgr]

Because we witness and feel its effects. Not so with your claim of present day humanity being descended from Abraham.

What effects do you witness and feel that are unmistakably attributable to the genes of 1000-year-old ancestors in your own personal lineage?

I'm sure none that you can specifically identify, but they are present and influential nonetheless.

Or what about Adam and Noah, whom you've agreed are ubiquitous?

Same with their genes.

And same with Abraham's genes.

 

[parousia70]

What is so carnal about approaching scripture at face value, receiving its full counsel, rendering each passage within its proper context, and without imposing any presuppositions upon what is being read?

Face Value?
Claiming "must shortly come to pass.... for the time is near" actually means "wont come to pass for thousands of years.... for the time is far off' is the polar opposite of approaching scripture at face value without imposing presuppositions. In fact, presupposition is the ONLY thing that could cause someone to render such passages the way you do.

As for some of the passages you cite, (Rev. 9:21, 19:3, 14:11) you are attempting to apply them to a people that they either do not specifically address or do not address at all.

Says the Guy who claims Revelation 3:3 was NOT a promise Jesus made (and KEPT) TO the air breathing blood pumping human beings alive in the first century Chruch @ Sardis to whom the letter was directly addressed and first delivered to, but instead is a promise made (and applied) to people "not addressed in the passage at all", existing some 2+ millennia later...

Is today Opposite day or something?

Or, is this more a case of "do as I say, not as I do"?

 

[Contenders Edge]

So you believe Jesus is presently reigning, but his rule of law is not being enforced? Considering there are presently believers all over the world, I disagree.



This is a subjective argument. There is not one theological doctrine that doesn't rely on a single verse to support their belief. Dispy's are a prime example of that. A literal 1,000 year reign is only found in revelation 20, and yet the rest of scripture is absence of a 1,000 year reign. You are guilty of this as well. So let's stick with objective arguments.

you again refuse to address colossians 1:23.



There is a greek word for entire world: kosmos. why not use that instead?



As a preterist I disagree.

But you are free to believe that even though Jesus said all these things would be fulfilled within their generation, they did not.




In post 556 you literally stated:

Do you know what “imminent” means? It means the Jesus could return at any given time, whether that day be near or far off.

imminent means near, not far off.




I am doing neither. For we know that it is not the lunar eclipses, solar eclipses or falling stars that influence events on earth, but God.

Astrology definition: the study of the movements and relative positions of celestial bodies interpreted as having an influence on human affairs and the natural world.

Astronomy definition: the branch of science which deals with celestial objects, space, and the physical universe as a whole.

But ancient culture did view heavenly signs as associated with events on earth.



Showing earthquake trends by decade is not data manipulation. Not from a statistical significance standpoint but purely counting, earthquakes increased from 1990 to 2010, however they decreased from 2010 to 2018. That is not data manipulation.

In order to show a real increase in earthquakes the data set has to be statistically significant.



The data from the BGS is incomplete, hence it only goes to 2010. but its data is derived from the USGS and only on earthquakes of magnitude 7 or greater. Both the BGS and USGS agree that earthquakes are not increasing in a statistically significant manner.



So plain counting is secular now?



Right, Jesus simply stated there would be earthquakes in various places. Nothing more and nothing less.

Matthew 24:7 There will be famines and earthquakes in various places

“So you believe Jesus is presently reigning, but his rule of law is not being enforced? Considering there are presently believers all over the world, I disagree.”


Believers are not being sent out to punish people for their wickedness but are sent out to warn of judgment and call men to repentance in Christ. I do not see the saints ruling with an iron rod and dashing the nations to pieces like clay pots as the book of Revelation says will happen. (Rev. 2:26-27)

I do not see those who persecute Christians for their faith being swiftly brought to justice. I do not see peace being enforced throughout the world and wars ceasing. I do not see all the animals peacefully coexisting with one another and man as would be the case if Jesus were physically present in the world. Wickedness and immorality are on the increase in various parts of the world.

Most importantly, I do not see Jesus ruling from Jerusalem and all the nations of the world going there to pay homage to Him.

This present world with all its sin and wickedness does not look like a world where the law of Jesus Christ is being presently enforced as the scriptures say will happen.


“There is not one theological doctrine that doesn't rely on a single verse to support their belief. Dispy's are a prime example of that. A literal 1,000 year reign is only found in revelation 20, and yet the rest of scripture is absence of a 1,000 year reign. You are guilty of this as well. So let's stick with objective arguments.”


Most theological doctrines and arguments that I have come across so far have relied on more than one single passage of scripture. As for the thousand year reign, the specified time length thereof is only mentioned in Revelation 20. There is no denying that. But there are a lot more scriptures that give details about what that era will be like in comparison to this present age, but that is another topic for another thread.


“you again refuse to address colossians 1:23.”


How was the Gospel preached to every creature under Heaven if the Apostles had not visited every continent on the planet? This where we must consult every passage of scripture pertaining to how God makes Himself known to all the world.


“There is a greek word for entire world: kosmos. why not use that instead?”


Kosmos includes both inhabited and uninhabited lands where as Oikumene pertains to just inhabited lands which would include lands and people outside the Roman empire.


“As a preterist I disagree.
But you are free to believe that even though Jesus said all these things would be fulfilled within their generation, they did not.”


You are just as free to your beliefs as well and to dismiss the ramifications of such.


“In post 556 you literally stated:

Do you know what “imminent” means? It means the Jesus could return at any given time, whether that day be near or far off.

imminent means near, not far off.”


I have no choice but to concede that I stand corrected as far as man’s perspective goes concerning what imminent means but nevertheless, the point is what may seem like a far off event to us is not a far off event in the eyes of God and that is what Peter wants us to keep in mind as it pertains to those things that have not yet come to pass. They are to be treated as imminent even if they seem far off and generations seem to pass before all things come to pass. It is an admonition made to every follower of Christ in every generation.

The return of Christ could easily take place in one generation as it could in another. If it were not so, Peter would never have said that a thousand years is as a day in the sight of the Lord and that the Lord does not count slowness as we might count it.


I am doing neither. For we know that it is not the lunar eclipses, solar eclipses or falling stars that influence events on earth, but God.
But ancient culture did view heavenly signs as associated with events on earth.


The Jews at the time Jesus spoke of those signs in the heavens that would precede His return did not view heavenly signs as being associated with forthcoming events. In fact, the Bible forbids such activity.

The moon was still used to mark months, the sun was used to mark different times of each day, and the stars were used to mark the beginning of different seasons, but never in that particular generation were they used to predict forthcoming events as Pagan Greco-Rome might have done.

And any signs in the heavens God uses to warn of or herald a forthcoming event are not going to have anything to do with any astrological horoscope.


“Showing earthquake trends by decade is not data manipulation. Not from a statistical significance standpoint but purely counting, earthquakes increased from 1990 to 2010, however they decreased from 2010 to 2018. That is not data manipulation.”


Showing earthquake trends or any trend for that matter by decade instead of annual does not give the full picture of what is actually happening and because the annual trends are available, it would be data manipulation to leave years out.

That is why when it comes to examining data, every detail must be taken into account even if that data does not lead us to where we hope it will.


In order to show a real increase in earthquakes the data set has to be statistically significant.”


When all eighteen years are put together, the data may be fluctuative with spikes and dips but an overall increase in frequency is shown even if you don’t want to accept it.


“The data from the BGS is incomplete, hence it only goes to 2010. but its data is derived from the USGS and only on earthquakes of magnitude 7 or greater.
Both the BGS and USGS agree that earthquakes are not increasing in a statistically significant manner."


Whether a gradual or sharp increase is taking place, an increase is an increase and because the USGS data gives a more complete picture, that is the source to which I have appealed.


“So plain counting is secular now?”


I did not say that plain counting is a secular invention. I merely stated that the data being examined is subjected from an interpretation based on a presupposition. Christians and non-Christians can have the same data and scientific evidence presented before them but yet will still interpret that evidence and data according to the presuppositions they hold to.

 

[keras]

They were Gentile converts

The Galatians were a Celtic people, who migrated to Anatolia. Celts were Cimmerians, who were descendants of the ten Northern tribes, who left the Caucasus region and moved across Europe.

Migrated from where; Wiki does not say. It's all part of the coverup instigated by God, to hide His Israelite people among the nations.
Whether they, now the Christian peoples; have kept their genetic heritage or not, is immaterial to us, that is God's business. What counts for us is Faith, so this argument is unfruitful and of no value.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Chang's statement:

“all individuals who have any descendants among the present-day individuals are actually ancestors of all present-day individuals.”

Whatever his, Ralph's and Coop's studies focus on, they ultimately support that statement.

Their studies and their conclusions have never been disproved.

There's no mistaking "all" and "any".

You are misapplying their research and data and carrying it beyond the scope of their publications to defend your Preterist position. Chang's work was focused on human origins in general. Ralph and Coop's on European ancestry and descent. Nothing more nothing less.

 

[Contenders Edge]

What effects do you witness and feel that are unmistakably attributable to the genes of 1000-year-old ancestors in your own personal lineage?

I'm sure none that you can specifically identify, but they are present and influential nonetheless.

Or what about Adam and Noah, whom you've agreed are ubiquitous?

Same with their genes.

And same with Abraham's genes.

I would not know what was present an influential unless I had a DNA test on me and chances are, what was present within my personal ancestry a thousand years ago, might not be present in me now.

But as far as Abraham's genes go, once again, unless genetic samples could be taken from people of every nation and ethnicity (and that would require a massive amount from each) we can never be sure as to how many people possess genes unique to the Abrahamic lines, specifically the line of Isaac. But I do know that not everyone descends from Abraham like you have been so insisting.

 

[Contenders Edge]

The rate of Abrahamic gene propagation would be expected to be reflective of changes in global population over extended time intervals.

Global population has only ever increased over extended time intervals.

Abrahamic gene propagation has undoubtedly done the same.

Mixing events have not decreased. On the contrary, they have continually increased, as reflected in continual global population increase.

Abraham's genes among them.

While there is no denying that the global population has increased and that mixing events have decreased with increased interaction between people of different ethnicities and nationalities, as it pertains to Abraham's descendants (the line of Isaac in particular) you cannot unequivically say that all of humanity at present is descended from him unless a DNA test could be conducted on virtually every individual and the rate of mixing events could be observed.

For example, the frequency of how often Arabs marry non-Arab peoples would have to be tracked and the same with Jews marrying non-Jews and from that point on, who their off-spring marry and so forth.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

For example, the frequency of how often Arabs marry non-Arab peoples would have to be tracked and the same with Jews marrying non-Jews and from that point on, who their off-spring marry and so forth.

Why the heck would you want to go thru all that trouble figuring it out ........
You are obsessed with it like no one I have ever seen........
I mean almost 40 pages of the same o same 0.............

 

[parousia70]

as it pertains to Abraham's descendants (the line of Isaac in particular) you cannot unequivically say that all of humanity at present is descended from him unless a DNA test could be conducted on virtually every individual and the rate of mixing events could be observed.

Would not the converse also be true then?

Namely that you cannot unequivocally say that ANY single professed "Jew" alive today is factually, genetically descended from Abraham, in the absence of an Abrahamic DNA sample for Comparison?

Which means, we are stuck with either accepting or rejecting any individual claim of Abrahamic descent based on what?

Feelings?
A Hunch?

What?

It seems you want to tiptoe upon a narrow fence line between these two opposite possibilities, accepting neither, but somehow clinging to the hope that SOME people at present are descended from Abraham, so you blindly accept THEIR claims, in the absence of any genetic proof that anyone is, while you use the fact that there is no genetic proof anyone is descended from Abraham in your attempted refutation of jgr's assertion that EVERYONE is...
View attachment 260964

 

[Contenders Edge]

Do genes exist outside of persons?



He was referring to the children of promise, Jewish believers in Christ in the passage, with Isaac as the model. (Romans 9:7)

The true significance of God's choice of Isaac had nothing to do with genetics. Rather, Isaac was the "child of promise", a product of the faith and obedience of Abraham and Sarah. Faith, because both Abraham and Sarah believed God's promise that Abraham would sire a son even though both of them were well beyond the point of physical capability. (Hebrews 11:11-12) Obedience, because Abraham was willing to obey God's instructions to sacrifice Isaac, in apparent violation of His own promise. Yet in further faith he obeyed to the point where God's intervention was elicited. (Hebrews 11:17-19). God's response was to honor all three of them by choosing Isaac's lineage to be that through which Messiah would come.

Hebrews 11
11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.
12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

We then further see Isaac, the "child of promise", continue his parents' spiritual legacy to also become a spiritual progenitor of those of faith and obedience in and to Christ -- His Church -- His "children of promise" heirs:

Romans 9:7-8
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Galatians 4:28
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Galatians 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Romans 8:16-17
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.

Thus Isaac, in the full tradition of his parents Abraham and Sarah, continued their legacies of faith and obedience, to the benefit of us all who follow in their spiritual footsteps.

“Do genes exist outside of persons?”


That depends on whether you count plants and animals.


“He was referring to the children of promise, Jewish believers in Christ in the passage, with Isaac as the model. (Romans 9:7)”


In Galatians 4:28 and other passages, Isaac is presented as the spiritual model for those of us who are in Christ. Romans 9:7 is stating that being a descendant of Abraham and an Israelite is not what makes you a child of God, yet still counted for the seed.


“The true significance of God's choice of Isaac had nothing to do with genetics. Rather, Isaac was the "child of promise", a product of the faith and obedience of Abraham and Sarah. Faith, because both Abraham and Sarah believed God's promise that Abraham would sire a son even though both of them were well beyond the point of physical capability. (Hebrews 11:11-12) Obedience, because Abraham was willing to obey God's instructions to sacrifice Isaac, in apparent violation of His own promise. Yet in further faith he obeyed to the point where God's intervention was elicited. (Hebrews 11:17-19). God's response was to honor all three of them by choosing Isaac's lineage to be that through which Messiah would come.”


No one ever said that the significance of God’s choice had anything to do with genetics. But it is because of the faith and obedience of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that God has borne with the people of Israel and not wiped them out of existence.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Why the heck would you want to go thru all that trouble figuring it out ........
You are obsessed with it like no one I have ever seen........
I mean almost 40 pages of the same o same 0.............

I never said I wanted to go through all the trouble of figuring that out, but jgr is welcome to try if he wants to prove his point.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I never said I wanted to go through all the trouble of figuring that out, but jgr is welcome to try if he wants to prove his point.

Guess this thread will go another 40rounds................


Page 39 of 39
Replies:
774
Views:
10,025

 

[Contenders Edge]

Would not the converse also be true then?

Namely that you cannot unequivocally say that ANY single professed "Jew" alive today is factually, genetically descended from Abraham, in the absence of an Abrahamic DNA sample for Comparison?

Which means, we are stuck with either accepting or rejecting any individual claim of Abrahamic descent based on what?

Feelings?
A Hunch?

What?

It seems you want to tiptoe upon a narrow fence line between these two opposite possibilities, accepting neither, but somehow clinging to the hope that SOME people at present are descended from Abraham, even though there is no genetic proof that anyone is, while you use the fact that there is no genetic proof anyone is descended from Abraham in your attempted refutation of jgr's assertion that EVERYONE is...
View attachment 260964

jgr's assertion is theory and conjecture and not proven fact. As it pertains to the Jews, DNA results cannot be argued with and while the Jewish community does take such into consideration, it takes more than just a DNA test to be accepted as Jewish. There are traditional and legal requirements that have to be met as well.

That some people are descended from Abraham is not a hope. That in and of itself is a fact. Deny that and you are denying scripture, history, science, and the numerous DNA tests that have been conducted on many people to determine their ancestry.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Guess this thread will go another 40rounds................


Page 39 of 39
Replies:
774
Views:
10,025

Probably but who knows. There will be those currently engaging in this thread who will eventually drop out, but I am willing to go the distance.

 

[parousia70]

As it pertains to the Jews, DNA results cannot be argued with and while the Jewish community does take such into consideration, it takes more than just a DNA test to be accepted as Jewish.

Where's that sample of Abraham's DNA to compare to?

There are traditional and legal requirements that have to be met as well.

Correct. There are LEGAL requirements indeed.
In order to be considered a "Jew", Biblically, one must follow the requirements Set forth by the LAW of Moses.
Read MOSES and his requirements. People who call themselves Jews today demonstrably do NOT keep the Law of Moses now, but instead have invented their own version of the "Law" to follow...

If you would just read Moses then you would have no confusion on this and make unsupportable claims that any people on our planet observe the Law of Moses today, and therefore are rightfully, Biblically, LEGALLY, Jews.

Nearly 1/2 of the Law of Moses required a Temple and legitimate Levitical priests just in order to observe the Law.

We know they don't keep the Law of Moses because of how many of Moses' precepts depended on Temple sacrifices and the mediation of the Levitical priesthood of Aaron, which went fully extinct at AD 70.

We know they don't keep the Law of Moses because of how few people they've stoned to death.

That some people are descended from Abraham is not a hope. That in and of itself is a fact.

A "fact" you cannot supply even one quark of genetic proof to support.... hmmm

What Does scripture call people who:
1) have no verifiable genetic link to Abraham/Jacob?
2) do not Follow the Law of Moses?

Since Scripture does not ANYWHERE call people who fit that description "Jews", by what authority do you call them Jews?

..and the numerous DNA tests that have been conducted on many people to determine their ancestry.

Where's the DNA test that unequivocally ties ANY human alive today to Abraham?
Show us the link to that test.

Otherwise, it truly is just a "hope" of yours that you cannot demonstrate "unequivocally".

 

[Contenders Edge]

Face Value?
Claiming "must shortly come to pass.... for the time is near" actually means "wont come to pass for thousands of years.... for the time is far off' is the polar opposite of approaching scripture at face value without imposing presuppositions. In fact, presupposition is the ONLY thing that could cause someone to render such passages the way you do.



Says the Guy who claims Revelation 3:3 was NOT a promise Jesus made (and KEPT) TO the air breathing blood pumping human beings alive in the first century Chruch @ Sardis to whom the letter was directly addressed and first delivered to, but instead is a promise made (and applied) to people "not addressed in the passage at all", existing some 2+ millennia later...

Is today Opposite day or something?

Or, is this more a case of "do as I say, not as I do"?

“Face Value?
Claiming "must shortly come to pass.... for the time is near" actually means "wont come to pass for thousands of years.... for the time is far off' is the polar opposite of approaching scripture at face value without imposing presuppositions. In fact, presupposition is the ONLY thing that could cause someone to render such passages the way you do.”


You clearly have disregarded Peter’s admonition that we cannot view slowness or swiftness as it pertains to the return of Christ from man’s perspective, but must view it according to God’s. (2 Pet. 3:9)


“Says the Guy who claims Revelation 3:3 was NOT a promise Jesus made (and KEPT) TO the air breathing blood pumping human beings alive in the first century Chruch @ Sardis to whom the letter was directly addressed and first delivered to, but instead is a promise made (and applied) to people "not addressed in the passage at all", existing some 2+ millennia later...”


Sardis, though appearing to be alive outwardly was inwardly dead. When Jesus said that He would come upon them as a thief, He was not addressing the entire world. He said that He would come upon them suddenly in judgment if they did not repent of their inward death.

There are other passages in scripture that speak of the Lord returning as unexpectedly as a thief which do address the entire world. Clearly, you have no regard for context or the full counsel of scripture as it pertains to prophecy.

It appears that Christ was involved with the seven churches addressed in the book of Revelation in a way that He was not involved with the other established fellowships; hence the reason why the first three chapters in the book of Revelation was addressed to these seven churches but that does not mean that what was written to these seven churches does not apply to us today as well.

But I do not want to delve further into that on this thread, but would be more than happy to on another thread.


“Is today Opposite day or something?”


No, you are just taking things out of their proper context and overlooking important details to which your Preterism has blinded you.

 

[parousia70]

You clearly have disregarded Peter’s admonition that we cannot view slowness or swiftness as it pertains to the return of Christ from man’s perspective, but must view it according to God’s. (2 Pet. 3:9)

So the over 100 passages in scripture that speak of the nearness of the return relative to the apostles themselves can be thrown out of our Bibles as meaningless because of how you interpret the one single passage of 2 Peter 3:9?

Really?

So what is Slow to God?
When God says something is "far off" can He be believed?
How far is "Far off" to God?
Does God have Slow?
Does God have Swift?
Does God have Soon?

Near/Far/Soon/Long/Swift/Slow are HUMAN time adjectives which God is not Bound by. Not EVER.
THAT is what Peter is teaching.
Contrary to your assertion God dos not have to wait SOON for anything.
God is TIMELESS... "Soon" is a time constraint God is NOT bound by, even though you need Him to be in order for your paradigm to be supported.

Opposite of your claims to the contrary, God can tell time correctly, and can (and DOES) correctly communicate it's passing to human beings in a way we can understand and adhere to..

Whenever God places a time limit on the fulfillment of prophesy, it is given to be understood by how time relates to men, not how time relates to God.
Every time, Without Fail. Always.

Your presuppositions require the opposite to be true, but the scriptural record of God placing a time limit on a prophesy, and then fulfilling that prophesy in within that time limit he placed upon it simply does not support your position, as He ALWAYS fulfills His prophesies WHEN he says He will.

Sardis, though appearing to be alive outwardly was inwardly dead. When Jesus said that He would come upon them as a thief, He was not addressing the entire world. He said that He would come upon them suddenly in judgment if they did not repent of their inward death.

Was that a Physical Coming?
What did that coming look like?

There are other passages in scripture that speak of the Lord returning as unexpectedly as a thief which do address the entire world. Clearly, you have no regard for context or the full counsel of scripture as it pertains to prophecy.

There is only one coming of Christ as a thief taught in scripture, and the Glorified Jesus applied that one and only thief's coming to 1st century peoples.

Your presuppositions require there be multiple Comings of Christ as a thief but scripture again, simply does not allow for it.

No, you are just taking things out of their proper context and overlooking important details to which your Preterism has blinded you.

Rather, it's demonstrably your futurist presuppositions that have blinded you to the truth about these things.