preterism

[Justme]

Hi Toms,

That was in the 33Ad timeframe. Are you thinking that they came for the week and decided to stay for the next 27 years? In such a case, they would not be from other nations, but would be residents, and certainly would not be national combatants.[/QUOTE

No, Toms, I'm thinking that the Holy Spirit entered that upper room and at the same time the lanquage of the people was changed so they were from origonal 'nations' ..speaking in tongues/lanquages.

You quoted part of my post:

Okay let's just stick to one.. This is from my last post.
This would be to explain one of the signs. The sign that the parousia was part of the answer that Jesus gave to this question.
4"Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"
************************************

Then you said this:

Now don't try to move on until we have at leats resolved one item. I am having such a hard time to try to get the preterists on here to address a single point before they want to move onto to another one.

Mark recorded the question exactly as Luke did.
7"Teacher," they asked, "when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?"

Matthew recorded the question as:
"Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

All three of these recorded questions are in response to a single statement which all three recorded with exactly the same meaning.
2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

The response by Jesus, recorded by all three are alike in these key instances.

Flee from Judea.............
great tribulation..........
coming of the son of man.............

All three writers can be correct as written, if the 'end' and the 'coming' are SIGNS of the destruction of the temple.

Is there any other verses that would agree with that interpretation? Yes....
Mark 13
30I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

You can realize that if the 'coming', the 'end' and the great tribulation(destruction of temple and the wrath against the people of Jerusalem) is past then great portions of Revelation takes place in the spiritual or heavenly or the invisible to mortal realm. Therefore, pointing out ANY scripture related to that realm and saying "it never happened" is a non- argument. Not finding any physical, historical evidence would be totally understandable, there isn't any tangible evidence. That's why it is called faith.

So the bottom line is this, if the 'this generation' was a generation in the first century, I am biblically correct in this interpretation, no questions asked. Show me scripture to prove I'm wrong. AND remember "it didn't happen" isn't a suitable argument against a spiritual, heavenly, invisible eternal event.

Also remember:
2 Cor 4:18
So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

Justme

 

[parousia70]

ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, or "finished" them; that is, their tour through them, and their ministry, or the preaching of the Gospel in them,

till the son of man be come; which is not to be understood of his second coming to judgment, but either of his resurrection from the dead, when he was declared to be the Son of God, and when his glorification began; or of the pouring forth of the Spirit at the day of Pentecost, when his kingdom began more visibly to take place, and he was made, or manifested to be the Lord and Christ; or of his coming to take vengeance on his enemies, that would not have him to rule over them, and the persecutors of his ministers, at the destruction of Jerusalem.



​

I believe some one said something about reading other sources beside those that support you. Surprising what one might learn if they realize Gentry is not scripture, and research somewhere other than, "Preterist Archives."




And if you are interested Robertson, Gill, and Matthew Henry, are available online, try Crosswalk.

I get my scripture quotes exclusively from crosswalk.com, and got the JFB quote from there as well.

What I was getting at is this quote of yours:

chap. 12, Jesus has rejoined the disciples, just as He said.

Are there any commentaries that share this view of yours, that Jesus' "return" to them in Chapter 12 fulfilles the "son of man comes" of 10:23?

None of your quotes share this view.

The only commentary you provided that comes close to addressing what the "Son of Man coming" in 10:23 is referring to is Matthew Henry, who unlike you, only asserts concretely what it DOSEN'T refer to, but offers no concrete example of what it does refer to, claiming it "could be the Resurrection, ascention, pentacost or even Jeruslaems 70AD destruction.

Why are you so selective in your agreement with Him?

What makes you think he is so right about it NOT meaning the 2nd coming, while you disagree on what He thinkst it DOES referr to?

Iif He is so wrong about what it does mean, what makes you so suure he is right about what it dosen't mean?

So far, this appears to be some sort of unique revelation that you alone are in possession of.

 

[parousia70]

Exactly my point - so 70AD was not the worst tribulation of all time.

Please address the prior biblical use of "ever was nor shall be" I listed in my post #79. None of those uses support your personal interpratation of the phrase.

Don't need to. The context shows that ["You" excludes the original apostles] clearly. The onus is on you to show that the historical evidence of the signs and all that i have seen so far is "invisible" evdience.

The contest shows not such thing. Your previously held bias is all that demands the apostles be excluded. Once you show historical evidence of God being SEEN the varoius times HE was depected as such inthe OT, than your arguemnt may have merit.

Saw it but it does not answer anything in this regard. No matter what you say, the Bible is clear on this point:

Matt 24:21-22
21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

You have to show me historical fulfillment of the worst tribulation in history, one so bad that it threatened all mankind with decimation.

Again with the Body count. Sheesh.

 

[parousia70]

I don't know where you saw any recantation. Please deal with me honestly and respond to what I have said, not what you wish that i said.

You said, and I quote once again:

So you do agree that using the word "you" to mean only the audience present at the time is absurd - good!!! progress!!!

This blanket statement cites Nothing about context at all. Then you later say:

That is why we need to look at the context. Clearly we can agree that some cases are intended solely to be 1st century, others clearly are not.

Which is it Tom? Always Absurd or justified by context?

Pick up the phone and ask any publisher, or author whether the first person who heard the words or read the book was the intended auidence. Come on, let common sense prevail!

I prefer to let scripture interprate scripture rather than relying on modern day publishers to tell me what the Bible means.

Show me in scripture where, without explicit instruction, "YOU" excludes the original audience the message was delivered to.

Why not admit You can't do it so we can move on?

Conetxt says otherwise...especially since so far all the evidence of a historical fulfillement is "invisible". (Try putting that type of evidence forward ina court of law and see how far you get!)

LOL, Try to Prove Jesus is the son of God in a court of law and see how far you get!!!!!

 

[parousia70]

Hi Parousia70,

Hey was that fella you knew with the similar view of Matt 10:23, was he ALSO an American with a birthday of Aug 6? And a complicated..'location'....

Justme

Yeah I noticed that amazing coincidence.
More evidence pointing to my previous speculation that they were seperated at birth.

 

[Toms777]

In the Olivet Discourse, was Jesus trying to speak to timeless truths, or did He have a specific event in mind? Was He using the disciples' questions as a springboard to answer a different question or was He addressing them? Did the disciples understand His answer or was it too much for them?

Do you have children? If so, no doubt you have experienced, as I have, times where children ask questions which are mis-directed because they do not know enough to ask the right question. So in response, you answer them, but perhaps not the way that they were expecting.

Consider that when reading this passage. We know tghat they asked for "sign" and we know that Jesus gave several different signs and divided them up into those that respresent the approach to the end (but the end if not yet) and those that show that the end time has arrived.

So who would you assumje knew best? Jesus or the Apostles?

 

[Suede]

Suzannah

Hello, welcome to the discussion.

+++Well, I sure did have "fresh eyes" and I sure read this entire thread with them. And I have to say that all of those who have posted in favor of "preterism" have one thing in common: they all seem to confine Jesus and His words, to the "present" of His day, thereby completely denying His ability to know the future, to know the hearts of each of us here in our "present" when those of us with nothing better to do, would be sitting around debating this issue.+++

I know of no Preterist that denies Christ's ability to know the future. However, the fact is that the Bible was written to specific groups or actually to specific individuals in the 1st Century. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of the texts is to them. Can we still find meaning in those texts? Sure. Are some more general and involve all of us? Yes, John 3:16 is a great example. But too often people within their generation believe the Bible was written just to them specifically and ignore audience relevance. Besides, Preterism being a mode of eschatology looks at "End Times" passages specifically and discusses though. We don't feel that there is nothing for present Christians.

+++You all keep saying that the Bible was written "for" us but not "to" us. To me, this just simply begs the question that Jesus would not know that we would be sitting here at our computers at 4:03 am on this particular morning, and therefore, nothing He had to say "then" is "relevant" to us now????+++

No, Jesus would know we would all be here, but this just simply doesn't remove the 1st century fulfillment of prophecy. We must remember, that verses would have been relevant to the 1st century believers as well. There has to be a happy medium there. We mustn't ignore them.

+++If that's the case, then all of us should hang up our Christian hats and go to bed. This "preterism" thing is absurd, in my opinion, judging from what is written here. I am not attacking persons but simply stating that I don't agree with any of this doctrine. +++
No, there's still so much left to do. The Great Commission, the healing of Nations. Christians should be busier now then ever! Let's think about this. In Futurism, Christianity ultimately loses! This great leader has to arise, and the church has to slip into apostasy, and there's a world government and only Christ showing up can stop it. In other words, the Church is an utter failure. But that's counter to the Bible. We are the victors through Christ, and unfortunately it is Futurism and it's negativity that hamstrings the Church today. It's ok to disagree with it, but if it can't be objectively disproven using the Bible....We don't dismiss Cults with such slightness, we Biblically disprove them and demonstrate why they are wrong. As you can see in this post, the Futurists are at a lack of Biblical and scriptural posts that can refute it and leave much to emotionalism and ad hom attacks. Take care,

SUEDE

 

[Toms777]

Gents,

Early on I suggested that we try to deal with one sign at a time, to avoid getting overwhelmed with enormous messages. Well, we are going off on too many tangenst for me to handle without giving up things that I consider important.

So, here is the way that I have to handle it. I have a life outside of this board, so I will choose to deal with one issue at a time, and if others wish to go off on tangents, that is fine, but anyone who goes off on tangents in discussions with me should not expect response. I may deal with a couple of the messages that were sent in my direction today, but for the most part, for time reasons, I will have to ignore them and get back to a single focus at a time.

Now let's start with this one:

Where historically would I find a time where all flesh was in threat of being exterminated? (which is what Jesus said was an attribute of the worst tribulation of all time).

 

[Toms777]

You said, and I quote once again:

[/font]

This blanket statement cites Nothing about context at all. Then you later say:

Which is it Tom? Always Absurd or justified by context?

I have been consistent right from the start and this is the last time that I will deal with this. I don't have time to go around in circles.

1) All scripture must be assessed in context.
2) It is absurd to think that the word "you" must always refer to those standing there at the time (examples have been given - this is standrad english usage).

Clear? Good!

If not, I don't think that I can help you further on this point. English lessons come at additional cost

 

[Suede]

Toms777



+++Yes, Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets. The fulfillment was Jesus:
Luke 16:15-16
16 The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.
I don't see the problem until and unless one places restrictions on the Bible which are nto found in the Bible such as your have.

Now we know that all prophecy was not fulfilled in 70AD for at least 2 reasons. First, the signs that Jesus gave us to look for have not occurred - I have tried to go through them one at a time, and so far no one has shown any historical fulfillment.+++



Well we have already seen that the signs that Jesus gave DID in fact happen, you however turn a blind eye to them. You must historically DISPROVE what has been presented, so far you have not so ultimately your words will be empty until you can back them. You demanded proof and were given it, we have demanded proof and have gotten none in return. I’ll ask you again, please historically disprove it.



+++Those who say that these were fulfilled invisibly are ignoring what is said in the book of Luke:

Luke 21:25-31
25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; 26 men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of heaven will be shaken. 27 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near."
29 Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.

These signs are visible and we are told to look for them and we are told to look up to see Jesus returning.+++



Really? “WE” are told to look for these signs? Are you sure? Let me quote some other verses in Luke 21 and bear in mind that Jesus is having a PRIVATE conversation with his disciples.



20"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. (This of course already happened, another historical fulfillment. Please refute it though)



22 because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled.

(those days were the days of vengeance, those days, not now. So that ALL things written could be fulfilled. Not some, not in part, but all.)

31 "So you also, when you see these things happening, recognize that the kingdom of God is near.

(translation: when my disciples see these things happening)


So much for the “we” theory.



+++ Why look up if we could not see Him return, as we are told we will return the way that he left:

Acts 1:9-11
9 Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven."+++



Hmmmm, out of their sight and in clouds? Didn’t Jesus say he would be coming in clouds? And doesn’t this verse claim that it was out of the sight of the disciples?

+++Second, the Book of Reveleation was written in 96AD and thus was to be fulfilled after AD70.+++


Sorry, objective evidence shows otherwise and even the “late daters” can’t agree on a firm date! This is a sandy shore indeed. Parousia70 and JustMe have already given you evidence of this, and once again you have failed to counter it.



+++Uh huh, because you cannot show the histrical fulfillment, provide references in Jospehus, the problem is with me. Have you ever read the definition of an ad hominem argument?+++



You’ve been given it by myself and at least two others here. You’re probably upset because it is you that can’t historically refute them. Ad Hom? Yea, you forget I’m a Preterist, I have to wade through these all the time from my fellow “Christians”. "Sticks and stones may broke my bones but Futurist doctrine can never disprove me."



+++Let's look at the use of the word "You". This does not relate to this prophecy, but just to show you that "You" prophetically does not always refer to strictly the present audience.

Gen 3:14-15
14 So the LORD God said to the serpent:
"Because you have done this,
You are cursed more than all cattle,
And more than every beast of the field;
On your belly you shall go,
And you shall eat dust
All the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel."

Is the "You" here, the serpent or Satan? If Satan, are you telling me that Satan crawls on His belly?+++



This isn’t a good argument to refute the Olivet Discourse, but anyways. The serpent IS Satan.



And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (Rev 12:9)

And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; (Rev 20:2)



+++If the serpent, are you telling me that Jesus died on the cross to kill a snake?+++



Yes, what else would he do?



“Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.” (Hebrews 2:14-15)



+++Matt 5:11-12 "Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Does this only apply to the audience? Does this mean that if we are reviled, he abandons us because we were not there as part of the audience?+++



The Beatitudes. That’s a general address to Christians. However, it did also have meaning to the 1st Century Christians.



+++What about the Great Commission?+++



That is something that Preterism confirms and affirms. This however is a good example of people that go after something they don’t know much about. Preterism is all about the Great Commission and the healing of Nations as well. Futurism however tells us that the Great Comission ends in apostasy and ultimately defeat. Something to think about.

+++You need to be consistent in your application of scripture to all these verses+++



I am, I understand audience relevance. Futurists are inconsistent in that they must put all verses into the future or into the present. Preterists don’t do this. We consistently apply scripture in the approriate manner, that’s the difference.

Now as stated earlier, please Historically refute Preterism. We are STILL waiting.

SUEDE

 

[Suede]

Toms777



+++First, to be honest, If I see long copy and pastes in the future, I am likely to ignore them. I have thousands (liertally) of books and have done considerable reading. Brief excerpts are fine, but for the sake of us all and our time, it would be preferred if excerpts can be brief and to the point and in general if there is a specific point, that it be summarized.+++



The long post was necessary, I apologize for it’s length, but it was appropriate.

+++Zech 14:1 tells us that it is the Day of the Lord. In the Day of the Lord, Isaiah tells us in Is 2:17-18 that only the Lord will be exalted and that all idols will be abolished. If that happened in 70AD, are you telling me that there are no more idols? Are you telling me that the Lord alone is exalted?+++



Remember audience relevance? Isaiah 2:17-18 is addressed to the house of Jacob. The OT is full of Israel turning to idols, again and again. They don’t anymore. I haven’t seen any golden calves lately.



+++But this is different because we are told of the physical effects of His coming and we are told of signs that we are to look for which indicate His coming, and we are told every eye shall see Huim. This does not apply to the other references.+++



You still fail to understand prophetic language. Remember, only Believers are saved, but not all people will be saved. Isaiah tells us that even in the New Age, which we are in, physical death still happens. John tells us in Revelation that even AFTER New Jerusalem has come that the wicked STILL exist on earth. The error lies in Futurist assumptions. We were all taught that “When Christ comes there will be no more evil, and the earth will be physically restored, and no one will physically die….” The fact is, these thoughts are not Biblically correct but rely on dogmatic thought that has been passed on without evaluation or questioning. Remember, only what is in the Bible is true, that is the sole authority. If it demands 1st Century fulfillment, then your personal thoughts on the subject are pointless and moot. We bend to the Bible, not the other way. I too was once a futurist until I returned to the Bible alone and put away all the Hal Lindsey and Jeffery R Grant and LaHaye books away. The fact remains, Futurism is not Biblical, and if there are those that think otherwise, then it is those that need to objectively disprove it. So far, no Futurist has done this! You haven’t either. You demand Historical proof, but let the record show that you’ve countered with none! Sorry, we are all unimpressed by the person that can’t bring forth one shred of evidence to buttress his theology and the only thing they can do is just duck, dodge and critic from afar. The lack of proof is in the pudding of Futurism. If you wish to believe in Futurism, so be it, but none can objectively prove it.

SUEDE

 

[Suede]

Toms777

+++Where historically would I find a time where all flesh was in threat of being exterminated? (which is what Jesus said was an attribute of the worst tribulation of all time).+++

Here's a better idea, since you've been given historical proof here countless of times. Why don't YOU historically disprove it? All the Preterists here have been extremely generous with you, you aren't the only one with a life you know. We here have addressed the History of it several times and have yet to have the same courtesy applied to us. In fact, your "all flesh being destroyed" has ALREADY been addressed!! Check out posts 79 and 80 for your requested answers! We are going in circles, again. I alone have asked this of you in a lot of my posts to historically DISprove the 70 AD fulfillment, so I throw down the gaunlet that you can't do it. Prove me wrong though.

SUEDE

 

[parousia70]

Now let's start with this one:

Where historically would I find a time where all flesh was in threat of being exterminated? (which is what Jesus said was an attribute of the worst tribulation of all time).

Show me where historically I can find extra biblical evidence that All flesh saw God Kindle this fire and draw his sword in the 6th century BC, and your argument would have merit.

[On Yahweh's coming to Israel for Babylonian Exile - 6th Century BC]
As I live, says the Lord Yahweh, surely with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with wrath poured out, will I be king over you: and I will bring you out from the peoples, and will gather you out of the countries in which you are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with wrath poured out; and I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples, and there will I enter into judgment with you face to face...Hear the word of Yahweh: Thus says the Lord Yahweh, Behold, I will kindle a fire in you, and it shall devour every green tree in you, and every dry tree: the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burnt thereby. All flesh shall see that I, Yahweh, have kindled it...Thus says Yahweh: Behold, I am against you, and will draw forth my sword out of its sheath, and will cut off from you the righteous and the wicked. Seeing then that I will cut off from you the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall my sword go forth out of its sheath against all flesh from the south to the north: and all flesh shall know that I, Yahweh, have drawn forth my sword out of its sheath (Ez 20:33-35,47-48; 21:3-5)


Until you can do such, your argument is moot. You need the above depection of "all flesh" be symbolic, while Christ's depection be literal, but interprative consistancy demands otherwise.

Perhaps you should try another argument.

 

[parousia70]

1) All scripture must be assessed in context.
2) It is absurd to think that the word "you" must always refer to those standing there at the time (examples have been given - this is standrad english usage).

Clear? Good!

If not, I don't think that I can help you further on this point. English lessons come at additional cost

Apparantly you need the lessons.

My answers:

1) Correct.

2) Incorrect.
In scripture The word "YOU" NEVER EXCLUDES the original audience from application. You need it to, but it never does.

There is no charge for my imparting this simple, unrefutable fact to you.

 

[parousia70]

Exactly my point - so 70AD was not the worst tribulation of all time....... No matter what you say, the Bible is clear on this point:

Matt 24:21-22
21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

You have to show me historical fulfillment of the worst tribulation in history.

Sorry, My bad, see my post #80 here:
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=1489796&postcount=80

My Post #79 does not address the great trib, it only addresses the coming that every eye would see, which you still have no rebuttal for.

You won't be able to refute post#80 either, but I'm willing to be entertained by any attempt you choose make. (if you ever choose to do so, thus far your MO seems to be not one of point by point rebuttals, but rather plain avoidance)

If you have no answer, just say so, so we can move on.

 

[Toms777]

Apparantly you need the lessons.

My answers:

1) Correct.

2) Incorrect.
In scripture The word "YOU" NEVER EXCLUDES the original audience from application. You need it to, but it never does.

There is no charge for my imparting this simple, unrefutable fact to you.

You are too late....I have refuted it as part of common simple english.

And I would not pay for advise on english from someone who did not know that!

BTW, you reasoning from the Buible is circular. You say that it never happens, and when it is pointed out to you, you say that cannot be because it never happens and you won't look at common english usage.

There is no way of rebutting a person who usese circular resoning because they premise is their predefined conclusion. No external factual basis for their view, however.

 

[Toms777]

Sorry, My bad, see my post #80 here:
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=1489796&postcount=80

My Post #79 does not address the great trib, it only addresses the coming that every eye would see, which you still have no rebuttal for.

You won't be able to refute post#80 either, but I'm willing to be entertained by any attempt you choose make. (if you ever choose to do so, thus far your MO seems to be not one of point by point rebuttals, but rather plain avoidance)

If you have no answer, just say so, so we can move on.

It was refuted before you posted it. It does not address the question because I see nothing whcih says that all flesh was on earth was threatened with extermination.

If the best that you can do is to keep regurgitating old messages, then please, don't bother. We been there done that and moved on.

 

[Toms777]

Toms777

+++Where historically would I find a time where all flesh was in threat of being exterminated? (which is what Jesus said was an attribute of the worst tribulation of all time).+++

Here's a better idea, since you've been given historical proof here countless of times. Why don't YOU historically disprove it? All the Preterists here have been extremely generous with you, you aren't the only one with a life you know. We here have addressed the History of it several times and have yet to have the same courtesy applied to us. In fact, your "all flesh being destroyed" has ALREADY been addressed!! Check out posts 79 and 80 for your requested answers! We are going in circles, again. I alone have asked this of you in a lot of my posts to historically DISprove the 70 AD fulfillment, so I throw down the gaunlet that you can't do it. Prove me wrong though.

SUEDE

That is silly. If the externmination of the world was to have occured in 70 Ad it would be recorded somewhere. You made the claim - show us the historical record. The lack of a record is proof enough that it did not happen.

 

[Toms777]

The long post was necessary, I apologize for it’s length, but it was appropriate.

Well, like I said, I just don't have time to go through it.

If you have something that shows historical evidence which shows the near extermination of all mankind, then please provide it, otherwise, I just don't have the tim to go through such a long message which tries to address several different areas.[/QUOTE]

 

[Toms777]

Show me where historically I can find extra biblical evidence that All flesh saw God Kindle this fire and draw his sword in the 6th century BC, and your argument would have merit.

Look, I said that I don't have time to yet again be drawn off into all sorts of side argumwents which turn longer and longer. You made the claim - deal with the issue, and kindly respect my request to keep focused on the issue, or I will simply have to ignore your comments.:

Matt 24:22-23
22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

Show me the historical evidence that the world was at risk of having mankind exterminates.