Daniel's 70th week

[mkgal1]

It is another evidence that your doctrine does not add up. That is why you have no explanation or justification for it.

No, it's evidence that I realize discussion with you just goes 'round and 'round - repeating the same things. For those with actual interest in an explanation of "the coming of the Son of Man"- there's this article: https://www.thatancientfaith.uk/hom...cle/the-coming-kingdom-of-the-son-of-man.html

 

[mkgal1]

I thought you believed that the elect dead went to heaven until the coming of Titus in AD70?

No.

Hebrews 9:8 - By this arrangement the Holy Spirit was showing that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.​

 

[sovereigngrace]

No, it's evidence that I realize discussion with you just goes 'round and 'round - repeating the same things. For those with actual interest - there's this article: https://www.thatancientfaith.uk/hom...cle/the-coming-kingdom-of-the-son-of-man.html

I am not interested in your links.

This is ongoing testimony that Preterists are dependent upon their mentors for answers. You repeatedly do this because Preterism does not add up and cannot be truly explained. This is more evidence why Bible students should reject the doctrine.

Their fixation with the coming of Titus in AD70 is totally unscriptural. It totally negates the scriptural focus on Christ's First and Advents.

 

[sovereigngrace]

No.

So when did this begin?

 

[Al Touthentop]

Did they literally see Jesus coming in clouds in AD70 or they only recognise that the destruction of Jerusalem is Jesus bringing judgment?

If they didn't literally see Jesus coming in AD70 what makes you so certain that Luke 21:27 is fulfilled in AD 70 without any witnesses or writing or anything to prove that this event took place...

We have an amazing witness, Josephus. But the problem is Jesus didn't say he was coming in person at all. He said he would come in glory and power. And he did. And those who followed his warnings and instructions were saved from Jerusalem's great tribulation.

Any scriptures states that He (Jesus ) comes back multiple times?

Nope. And Matthew 24 isn't talking about Jesus coming back in person on the last day.

1Corinthians 15:23.." But each in turn; Christ the Firstfruit then, when He comes, those who belong to Him...

Which is talking about the day of Judgement.

If you dont believe that Jesus is coming back in person then maybe you should look at Acts:1:11...
Acts 1:11..."Men of Galilee", they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven....

He's coming back. But he isn't coming back to earth. We meet him in the air.

And I believe Jesus only come back ONCE and for all..

When he comes back, the earth is going to burn up and saints and sinners will be judged. So fleeing to the hills above Judea would be a stupid thing to do.

 

[mkgal1]

I am not interested in your links.

I know you aren't - that's why I prefaced it by saying "For those with actual interest in the 'coming of the Son of Man'".

 

[Al Touthentop]

This error has been corrected repeatedly (even in this thread, I believe). Take note of the specific definition that's assigned for each verse:

3. the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί); ; Philippians 2:15; used especially of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Matthew 11:16; Matthew 12:39, 41f, 45; Matthew 16:4; Matthew 23:36; Mark 8:12, 38; Luke 11:29f, 32, 50; Luke 17:25; Acts 13:36; Hebrews 3:10; ἄνθρωποι τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 7:31; ἄνδρες τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 11:31; τήν δέ γενεάν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται, who can describe the wickedness of the present generation, Acts 8:33 (from Isaiah 53:8 the Sept.) (but cf. Meyer, at the passage). Strong's Greek: 1074. γενεά (genea) -- race, family, generation

Besides which, apparently, if "this generation" refers only to the Jewish race, we Gentiles are really wasting our time following Christ. When Jesus comes back, only the Jews will be saved. Oh what a tangled web when somebody twists the scriptures to fit their preconceived notions.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I know you aren't - that's why I prefaced it by saying "For those with actual interest in the 'coming of the Son of Man'".

You cannot explain what the sacred text means here. That is why you have to lean on your Preterist teachers, who are also in error on this matter. Preterism simply doesn't add up. It is covered in multiple holes and contradictions, and their supporters just duck around them, as you are demonstrating here.

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Mat 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Besides which, apparently, if "this generation" refers only to the Jewish race, we Gentiles are really wasting our time following Christ. When Jesus comes back, only the Jews will be saved. Oh what a tangled web when somebody twists the scriptures to fit their preconceived notions.

What are you talking about?

 

[mkgal1]

This is ongoing testimony that Preterists are dependent upon their mentors for answers. You repeatedly do this because Preterism does not add up and cannot be truly explained. This is more evidence why Bible students should reject the doctrine.

For the sake of others that may be reading - an entirely different paradigm can't be stated in a few sentences. THAT is the reason for a linked article. Preconceived assumptions placed on another person is "gossip" or "bearing false witness". You came to your own conclusion based on false evidence. How does it affect you whether or not people believe Jesus fulfilled His prophetic words?

 

[Al Touthentop]

It is another evidence that your doctrine does not add up. That is why you have no explanation or justification for it.

It is you who has no rational explanation for your doctrine. By your twisting of the scripture you would have only Jews being saved on the last day. If Jesus was talking in terms of race - and the translators would have used the word race if in that context doing so was appropriate - then only Jews will be saved on the last day. You can't even see how your sophistry has tangled you up.

 

[mkgal1]

Besides which, apparently, if "this generation" refers only to the Jewish race, we Gentiles are really wasting our time following Christ. When Jesus comes back, only the Jews will be saved. Oh what a tangled web when somebody twists the scriptures to fit their preconceived notions.

Exactly! Unfortunately there are many people that have been coming to that very conclusion by seeing Scripture that way. I know a lot of people that are now atheists because of it, which is why I'm so insistent against God being misrepresented that way.

 

[Al Touthentop]

What are you talking about?

This is the summary for all of your posts to me. You have never once tried to understand anything but your own hardened position. That's why you don't even know how badly you've twisted yourself up.

The translators who translated η γενεα αυτη - literally "the generation this" - as "this generation" rather than "this race," did so because that was what those words meant in that context.

You don't even know how a lexicon is put together. That's why you attempt to apply definitions which do not apply to the places you wish had been translated to suit your doctrine. You prove yourself to be a very poor scholar indeed when you do that. You think it isn't obvious that you are arguing with actual scholars when you argue with the very lexicons that you think prove your point but all you're doing is showing everyone how ignorant and childish your exegesis is, if we could even call it that.

And given your understanding of the text elsewhere, it is truly perplexing. I wonder how you could understand anything given your penchant for twisting of definitions.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Exactly! Unfortunately there are many people that have been coming to that very conclusion by seeing Scripture that way. I know a lot of people that are now atheists because of it, which is why I'm so insistent against God being misrepresented that way.

I love that about you.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I love that about you.

Do you love the fact that she will not tell us that the second coming of Christ is a literal physical future event rather than an ongoing process or that the resurrection of the living and the dead is a literal physical future event rather than an ongoing process?

 

[sovereigngrace]

This is the summary for all of your posts to me. You have never once tried to understand anything but your own hardened position. That's why you don't even know how badly you've twisted yourself up.

The translators who translated η γενεα αυτη - literally "the generation this" - as "this generation" rather than "this race," did so because that was what those words meant in that context.

You don't even know how a lexicon is put together. That's why you attempt to apply definitions which do not apply to the places you wish had been translated to suit your doctrine. You prove yourself to be a very poor scholar indeed when you do that. You think it isn't obvious that you are arguing with actual scholars when you argue with the very lexicons that you think prove your point but all you're doing is showing everyone how ignorant and childish your exegesis is, if we could even call it that.

And given your understanding of the text elsewhere, it is truly perplexing. I wonder how you could understand anything given your penchant for twisting of definitions.

Not so! Your whole doctrine is built upon the meaning of that one word. Refute that and your whole doctrine crumbles.

There are multiple posts on here that have been sidestepped and totally ignored. They have to be. For you to address them would expose the Preterist theory.

 

[sovereigngrace]

This is the summary for all of your posts to me. You have never once tried to understand anything but your own hardened position. That's why you don't even know how badly you've twisted yourself up.

The translators who translated η γενεα αυτη - literally "the generation this" - as "this generation" rather than "this race," did so because that was what those words meant in that context.

You don't even know how a lexicon is put together. That's why you attempt to apply definitions which do not apply to the places you wish had been translated to suit your doctrine. You prove yourself to be a very poor scholar indeed when you do that. You think it isn't obvious that you are arguing with actual scholars when you argue with the very lexicons that you think prove your point but all you're doing is showing everyone how ignorant and childish your exegesis is, if we could even call it that.

And given your understanding of the text elsewhere, it is truly perplexing. I wonder how you could understand anything given your penchant for twisting of definitions.

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Mat 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

 

[sovereigngrace]

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Mat 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

I am willing to give you time to search the internet to see what your teachers say.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Not so! Your whole doctrine is built upon the meaning of that one word. Refute that and your whole doctrine crumbles.

The meaning is "this generation" as is written in EVERY translation. You wish to change that definition, but the scholars who translated it that way, did so because that is the proper meaning in that context. You're arguing with all of the translators. What gives you so much expertise and authority? Your preconceived doctrine. It's certainly not sincere exegesis.

There are multiple posts on here that have been sidestepped and totally ignored.

Yes, by you.

 

[Al Touthentop]

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Mat 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

Do you think we live in heaven or in the winds?