When Doctrine Corrects Christ

[The Gospel of Christ]

Jesus said he would return on the clouds in power and great glory. You are ignoring scripture and injecting a manmade preterist error into the text:

Mt 24:30
And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Ac 1:9-11
And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.


Rv 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Your doctrine is not of Christ...it is a manmade fabrication that ignores how the scripture says Jesus will return in numerous places.

Goodbye

Shepherdsword, I affirm the future return of Jesus Christ. I am not denying Acts 1 or the resurrection of the dead.

What I'm challenging is your assumption that every reference to Christ coming on the clouds must describe that same final event.

You quoted Matthew 24:30, Acts 1:9–11, and Revelation 1:7.

Now show where Scripture says those three passages must refer to the same event.

You've assumed that connection and then used it to override Christ’s explicit time marker.

Your system’s assumption is being treated as more authoritative than Christ’s own words.

That's the very interpretation under dispute.

Isaiah 19:1 describes the LORD coming on a cloud against Egypt. The prophecy concerns divine judgment, not a physical descent onto Egyptian soil.

So cloud-coming language can describe God acting in judgment. That means the meaning of Matthew 24 must be established from its own context, not simply assumed from your interpretation of Acts 1.

And Matthew 24 contains a time marker you still have not accounted for:

“This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” — Matthew 24:34

You can't quote another passage, assume it describes the same event, and then use that assumption to move Christ’s generation 2,000 years forward.

That's the interpretive move under dispute.

I have answered your question. Christ came in judgment against Jerusalem in AD 70, and I affirm His future final return.

Now answer mine:

Where did Jesus identify another generation as “this generation”?

Book. Chapter. Verse.

Until you can answer that.. yes, goodbye.

 

[Scooter Jackson]

I'm challenging is your assumption that every reference to Christ coming on the clouds must describe that same final event.

OK, so post all the scripture references that have Jesus returning in the clouds

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

As easy as 1, 2, 3....


“Here we observe yet another previously overlooked dispensation: the Honeymoon Cloud City Incident, during which Chewbacca became intoxicated, destroyed Lando’s bar, and caused great distress to his new bride Princess Leia, who was ultimately forced to bail him out of jail.”

View attachment 89534


And boy don't try to tell them thats not what the script actually says, or you'll be in for it..


Once the system has decided what the text must mean, pointing out that the text does not actually say it is treated as the problem.

So if you're "misled" and sitting there going - "but the script says they just got captured and are being taken to Vader. And they're not even married."

Then, obviously such a person is “unenlightened.”

You need their system to see what the script doesn't say.

Now apply that to Christianity, where eternal souls are at stake. Where does that lead when a human system becomes more authoritative than Christ’s own words?

^ This really just can't be topped as a 12 year old would get it...

For Gen X and older..

It’s like your parents and their entire theological system brainwashed you into believing that Tom Hanks and his friend in Bosom Buddies are REALLY WOMEN; not men dressed as women.



So you grow up, dedicate your life to studying Bosom Buddies, write books about it, attend conferences, go to school and study their system and become a world-renowned expert on the show.

Then your friends finally sit you down and say:

“DUDE! THEY’RE MEN!!! THEY’RE DRESSED AS WOMEN! IT SAYS IT RIGHT IN THE INTRO!!!”

And they stare at you like you’ve lost your mind.

“No. Our system clearly teaches that they’re women pretending to be men who are secretly women. You’re just watching the show without the proper interpretive framework.”

Your friends: “Brother, THE ENTIRE PREMISE OF THE SHOW IS THAT THEY’RE TWO MEN PRETENDING TO BE WOMEN SO THEY CAN LIVE THERE!!!”

Them: “That’s merely your interpretation. You need to study our system before you can truly understand what the show is really saying.”

And that’s how you can spend your entire life becoming an expert on something while being completely wrong about the very premise you claim to understand.

 

[JimKnox]

^ This really just can't be topped as a 12 year old would get it...

For Gen X and older..

It’s like your parents and their entire theological system brainwashed you into believing that Tom Hanks and his friend in Bosom Buddies are REALLY WOMEN; not men dressed as women.

View attachment 89586

So you grow up, dedicate your life to studying Bosom Buddies, write books about it, attend conferences, go to seminary school and study their system and become a world-renowned expert on the show.

Then your friends finally sit you down and say:

“DUDE! THEY’RE MEN!!! THEY’RE DRESSED AS WOMEN! IT SAYS IT RIGHT IN THE INTRO!!!”

And they stare at you like you’ve lost your mind.

“No. Our system clearly teaches that they’re women pretending to be men who are secretly women. You’re just watching the show without the proper interpretive framework.”

Your friends: “BRO!!! THE ENTIRE PREMISE OF THE SHOW IS THAT THEY’RE TWO MEN PRETENDING TO BE WOMEN SO THEY CAN LIVE THERE!!!”

Them: “That’s merely your interpretation. You need to study the system before you can understand what the show is really saying.”

And that’s how you can spend your entire life becoming an expert on something while being completely wrong about the very premise you claim to understand.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

You should be ashamed of yourself.

For what? Trying to save people's eternal souls?



Still waiting btw...

Where did Jesus identify another generation as “this generation”?

Book. Chapter. Verse. >


^ I hope you can produce it soon, otherwise Christ is a fallible teacher and not the Son of God.

And that is a very serious charge for your theology to be making.