Well you got a long wait ahead of you buddy until you can prove where in any of your past posts were actual quotes directly from the bible, otherwise it's all just quotes from man-made theories of what someone thinks the bible said: preterism.
Feel free to show me anywhere you quoted directly from the bible in any of you posts, and I'll be happy to give an explanation. Simple huh?
Anything that's not in the Bible is just a man-made theory. That certainly is simple.
Did you get out of bed this morning?
Is that in the Bible?
It's just your man-made theory.
Couldn't be simpler, eh?
The following comes from your source.
These people are lost, without Christ.
Your Two Peoples of God doctrine is part of the problem, instead of the solution.
Even John Nelson Darby admitted that part of Luke chapter 21 was about 70 AD.
"Luke 21:1-38
The Lord's discourse in chapter 21 displays the character of the Gospel in a peculiar manner. The spirit of grace, in contrast with the Judaic spirit, is seen in the account of the poor widow's offering. But the Lord's prophecy requires more detailed notice. Verse 6 (Luk_21:9), as we saw at the end of chapter 19, speaks only of the destruction of Jerusalem as she then stood. This is true also of the disciples' question. They say nothing of the end of the age. The Lord afterwards enters upon the duties and the circumstances of His disciples previous to that hour. In Verse 8 (Luk_21:8) it is said, "The time draweth near," which is not found in Matthew. He goes much more into detail with regard to their ministry during that period, encourages them, promises them necessary help. Persecution should turn to them for a testimony. From the middle of Verse 11 to the end of Verse 19 (Luk_21:11-19) we have details relative to His disciples, that are not found in the corresponding passage of Matthew. They present the general state of things in the same sense, adding the condition of the Jews, of those especially who, more or less, professedly received the word. The whole stream of testimony, as rendered in connection with Israel, but extending to the nations, is found in Matthew to the end of Verse 14 (Luk_21:14). In Luke it is the coming service of the disciples, until the moment when the judgment of God should put an end to that which was virtually terminated by the rejection of Christ. Consequently the Lord says nothing in Verse 20 (Luk_21:20) of the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, but gives the fact of the siege of Jerusalem, and its then approaching desolation — not the end of the age, as in Matthew. These were the days of vengeance on the Jews, who had crowned their rebellion by rejecting the Lord. Therefore Jerusalem should be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled, that is, the times destined to the sovereignty of the Gentile empires according to the counsel of God revealed in the prophecies of Daniel. This is the period in which we now live. There is a break here in the discourse. Its principal subject is ended; but there are still some events of the last scene to be revealed, which close the history of this Gentile supremacy.
We shall see also that, although it is the commencement of the judgment, from which Jerusalem will not arise until all is accomplished and the song of Isaiah 40 is addressed to her, nevertheless, the great tribulation is not mentioned here. There is great distress, and wrath upon the people, as was indeed the case in the siege of Jerusalem by Titus; and the Jews were also led away captive. Neither is it said, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days." Nevertheless, without designating the epoch, but after having spoken of the times of the Gentiles, the end of the age comes. There are signs in heaven, distress on earth, a mighty movement in the waves of human population. The heart of man, moved by a prophetic alarm, foresees the calamities which, still unknown, are threatening him; for all the influences that govern men are shaken. Then shall they see the Son of man, once rejected from the earth, coming from heaven with the ensigns of Jehovah, with power and great glory — the Son of man, of whom this Gospel has always spoken. There the prophecy ends. We have not here the gathering together of the elect Israelites, who had been dispersed, of which Matthew speaks.
That which follows consists of exhortations, in order that the day of distress may be a token of deliverance to the faith of those who, trusting in the Lord, obey the voice of His servant. The "generation" (a word already explained when considering Matthew) should not pass away till all was fulfilled. The length of the time that has elapsed since then, and that must elapse until the end, is left in darkness. Heavenly things are not measured by dates. Moreover that moment is hidden in the knowledge of the Father. Still heaven and earth should pass away, but not the words of Jesus. He then tells them that, as dwelling on earth, they must be watchful, lest their own hearts should be overcharged with things that would sink them into this world, in the midst of which they were to be witnesses. For that day would come as a snare upon all those who had their dwelling here, who were rooted here. They were to watch and pray, in order to escape all those things, and to stand in the presence of the Son of man. This is still the great subject of our Gospel. To be with Him, as those who have escaped from the earth, to be among the 144,000 on Mount Zion, will be an accomplishment of this blessing, but the place is not named; so that, supposing the faithfulness of those whom He was personally addressing, the hope awakened by His words would be fulfilled in a more excellent manner in His heavenly presence in the day of glory."
.
Did you get out of bed this morning?
Is that in the Bible?
It's just your man-made theory.
Couldn't be simpler, eh?
Anything that's not in the Bible is just a man-made theory. That certainly is simple.
Again no link! How do I know you didn't alter any of the wordings BAB? Am I suppose to just take your word and accept what you wrote?
Why all the fuss jgr?
Were you unable to find any verse(s) to quote in any of your prior posts?
As I said, I'll be happy to provide an explanation as soon as you provide a verse from any of your post. Still waiting.
That's pretty much it. No compromise. If it's not supported by the bible, it means nothing to me.
Here's what the Bible teaches:Your Replacement theology is the problem. You can't accept what the bible teaches and accuse others for not embracing your doctrine over the bible.
Here's what the Bible teaches:
The Israelite apostles of the Jewish Messiah say I am a Jew (Romans 2:27-29), say I am "Abraham's seed" (Romans 4:16/Galatians 3:29), say I am "the peculiar people, royal priesthood, holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9-10), say I am the circumcision-less Israel of God (Galatians 6:15-16), say I am "no longer a stranger but a fellow citizen of the commonwealth" (Ephesians 2:19), say I was once not a people but now am the people of God (1 Peter 2:10) and say I am the circumcision (Philippians 3:2-3). Each and every one of these statements takes a key identifier/distinctive of Israel and labels me with it. Meanwhile, Christ calls the disobedient genetic sons of Abraham the "sons of satan" and the "synagogue of satan" (Revelation 2:9/John 8:39-47), and St. John says that those who deny the Son have no claim whatsoever to the Father (1 John 2:23)
Why would you try to dig up information about Lincoln from the bible? That's like trying to find evidence apples are red or green by digging through oranges. It's simply not there! Is this how preterists approach prophecy?I have a theory that Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president of the United States....
I can't find one scintilla of evidence in scripture to support it, however, so it's still just a theory....
The source is "e-Sword", which is a free downloadable Bible program found in the link below.
Feel free to download this powerful tool into your computer.
Please check it to see if I am making things up.
Compare it to "Judaism 101", which seems to be one of your sources of truth.
e-Sword: Free Bible Study for the PC
John Nelson Darby is the person who brought your Two Peoples of God doctrine to America about the time of the Civil War. It was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread like a virus through the evangelical Church.
Darby's attempts to keep the Church separated from Israel falls apart in the passage below.
When James addressed his letter to "the twelve tribes", who were his "brethren" in the "faith", who was James talking to?
I don't see how more information about John Darby proves most scholars believes Luke 21 was already fulfilled in 70 ad. The only thing I've gotten out of this so far is you seem to follow John Darby.....a lot!Please check it to see if I am making things up.
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
.
This does me no good. What if I download your source today and tomorrow you copy and past an article from another source?
What's so hard about posting a link whenever you copy and paste something? It only takes 10 seconds to do. Is that too hard to do or are you afraid I might find something you don't want anyone to see from your source?
I don't see how more information about John Darby proves most scholars believes Luke 21 was already fulfilled in 70 ad. The only thing I've gotten out of this so far is you seem to follow John Darby.....a lot!
Are you unable to find any support to your claim? Or were you just making things up?
This doesn't prove most scholars believes Luke 21 was fulfilled in 70 ad either.
Seems like you're grasping at straws. I'm not buying it, you haven't convinced me yet.
Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
Most Bible scholars agree that the first half of Luke 21:24 is about 70 AD.
Please check your source "Judaism 101", to see what they say about it.
.
Seville90210 said: ↑
Most scholars on this forum does not mean most scholars around the world. Only the preterists on this forum agrees with you.
BABerean2 said: ↑
Even John Nelson Darby admitted that part of Luke chapter 21 was about 70 AD.
"Luke 21:1-38
The Lord's discourse in chapter 21 displays the character of the Gospel in a peculiar manner. The spirit of grace, in contrast with the Judaic spirit, is seen in the account of the poor widow's offering. But the Lord's prophecy requires more detailed notice. Verse 6 (Luk_21:9), as we saw at the end of chapter 19, speaks only of the destruction of Jerusalem as she then stood. This is true also of the disciples' question. They say nothing of the end of the age. The Lord afterwards enters upon the duties and the circumstances of His disciples previous to that hour. In Verse 8 (Luk_21:8) it is said, "The time draweth near," which is not found in Matthew. He goes much more into detail with regard to their ministry during that period, encourages them, promises them necessary help. Persecution should turn to them for a testimony. From the middle of Verse 11 to the end of Verse 19 (Luk_21:11-19) we have details relative to His disciples, that are not found in the corresponding passage of Matthew..................
Seville90210 said: ↑
Again no link! How do I know you didn't alter any of the wordings BAB? Am I suppose to just take your word and accept what you wrote?
BABerean2 said: ↑
Please check it to see if I am making things up.
I don't see how more information about John Darby proves most scholars believes Luke 21 was already fulfilled in 70 ad. The only thing I've gotten out of this so far is you seem to follow John Darby.....a lot!
This doesn't prove most scholars believes Luke 21 was fulfilled in 70 ad either.
Seems like you're grasping at straws. I'm not buying it, you haven't convinced me yet.
Seville90210 said: ↑
Your Replacement theology is the problem. You can't accept what the bible teaches and accuse others for not embracing your doctrine over the bible.
parousia70 said: ↑
Here's what the Bible teaches:.......................
Hello Seville. That is a great video series. [still waiting on part 4]Calm down now paro. That all happened in 70ad.
.
Good to see you coming around brother Sevi!That all happened in 70ad.
parousia70 said: ↑
Here's what the Bible teaches:
Seville90210 said: ↑
That all happened in 70ad.
Another convert to PreterismGood to see you coming around brother Sevi!
I'm glad you agree with the scriptures I posted and their implications.
That's a smart move on your part. You are on the right path friend! Keep it up!
As I've always said, ALL Christians are preterist, we only vary by degree.
Another convert to Preterism
[tho I think Seville was just being "sarcastic"]
Difference between amillennialism & preterism
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?