Another smoke screen! But that's better than your gay smoke screens!
When Doctrine Corrects Christ
- Thread starter The Gospel of Christ
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Hal Lindsey made L. Ron Hubbard look restrained.
At least Hubbard had the decency to call it science fiction.
At least Hubbard had the decency to call it science fiction.
The question is where Jesus said that "genea" meant a descendant generation?
Please note that and age or generation is interchangeable in the above words used
Jay, this actually makes your problem worse.
Yes, genea can have more than one possible sense.
But a word having more than one possible meaning does not make those meanings interchangeable in every sentence.
Context determines which meaning applies.
It's like saying
“Bat” can mean a flying mammal or baseball equipment.
Therefore:
“Babe Ruth stepped up to the plate holding a large nocturnal mammal.”
or
“Bark” can mean tree covering or a dog’s sound.
So:
“The oak tree barked at the mailman.”
See the problem? A dictionary listing several possible senses of a word does not mean you can swap those senses around whenever your theology needs them.
Your own lexical material says: “a generation; by implication, an age.”
Fine, but that doesn't remotely establish:
“THIS generation” = a 1,024-year prophetic age.
You still have to prove that specific meaning from the actual context. Jesus didn't merely throw the isolated word genea into space and leave us to choose whichever dictionary gloss makes a chronology work.He said:
“THIS generation.”
And Luke surrounds that statement with:“when YE shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies...”
“when YE see these things...”
and then:
“THIS generation shall not pass...”
So pointing to a lexicon and saying “Look! It can also mean age!” proves nothing about your 1,024-year calculation.
Just as “bat” having two meanings doesn't put a flying mammal in Babe Ruth’s hands, “age” appearing somewhere in genea’s semantic range doesn't put 1,024 years into Jesus’ mouth.
That number still has to come from somewhere.
So we're back to where did JESUS give it?
Book. Chapter. Verse.
Otherwise 1,024 years is your number. Not His.
The same can be asked of your understanding, where did Jesus say that the Greek Word "Genea" represent a "descendant generation" where the descendant generation has a nominal timespan of around 40 or so years?
Where does Jesus tell us that a "generation" is around 40 years?
You have the same problem with your understanding.
Jay, no, I dont have the same problem.
I'm not claiming Jesus secretly defined genea as an exact 40-year mathematical unit.
You're claiming He meant a 1,024-year prophetic age.
Those are completely different claims.
I don't need Jesus to say:
“By generation I mean exactly 40 years.”
because my argument is not built on an exact numerical conversion.
My argument is built on the actual wording and audience:
“THIS generation.”
“when YE shall see...”
“when YE see these things...”
then:
“THIS generation shall not pass...”
That's ordinary contextual reading.
You, however, are asserting an extraordinary mathematical definition:
genea = 1,024 solar years
So yes, you need to prove that equation.
Where did Jesus give it?
Book. Chapter. Verse.
Saying “well, where did Jesus say 40 years?” doesn't produce 1,024 years.
It just dodges the question again.
Im not supplying an exact number Jesus never gave. You are.
If somebody read a Tom Clancy novel the way you do the Bible, every sentence would become unusable.
The main character says, “Meet me at the bank at noon,” and instead of following the scene you’d stop and say:
“Bank can mean a financial institution or the side of a river. Noon can symbolize fullness. ‘Meet’ can mean a spiritual encounter. Therefore he may actually be describing an event 1,024 years later beside the Mississippi."
At that point you're not reading the book anymore.
You're replacing the story with your system.
Last edited:
And thats exactly how you get Star Wars looking like this.
By "rightly dividing" the word of George Lucas.
By "rightly dividing" the word of George Lucas.
Last edited:
Hey Jack, I've been rightly dividing the Titanic and have come up with some amazing results I never knew existed in the story.
Turns out the iceberg was from a different dispensation.
The Titanic that left Southampton was apparently under the Pre-Iceberg Administration, while the Titanic that hit the iceberg had already entered the North Atlantic Judgment Dispensation.
So technically, not the same Titanic in the same doctrinal sense.
Then once the ship started taking on water, that whole section became parenthetical and no longer applied to the passengers who were still above deck.
The lifeboats? Different dispensation.
The poor people down below in steerage? Different audience.
The musicians playing while the ship sank? Transitional period.
Jack freezing in the water? Clearly not applicable to Rose, because she had already entered the Post-Floating Door Covenant
And once Rose was picked up by the Carpathia, we entered an entirely new administration, so everything that happened on the Titanic could safely be reassigned to the previous dispensation.
I also discovered that the ship's name apparently changed halfway through.
Before the iceberg: RMS Titanic
After the iceberg: Mystery Titanic, formerly hidden from the passengers but later revealed to the lifeboats.
So after rightly dividing everything, the Titanic basically makes it to New York with only a minor hiccup.
The iceberg belonged to another dispensation.
The sinking was for another audience.
The deaths were parenthetical.
The broken hull was transitional.
The freezing water was not doctrinally binding on Rose.
And any scene that appears to contradict another scene can simply be moved into a different dispensation until the problem disappears.
Amazing.
I used to think the Titanic sank.
Turns out I just wasn't rightly dividing it.
Look what happened when I rightly divided The Dukes of Hazzard. I was misled my entire life to believe Jesse Duke was a pig farmer, but now I know he was the glorious, incorruptible, ever-righteous Sheriff of Hazzard County; the white-bearded scourge of gunrunners and moonshiners.
With his nephews serving as deputies and dispatch, racing across the county in the souped-up General Lee, no criminal ever escaped the long arm of Jesse Duke’s divinely efficient rural justice.
Boss Hogg, Enos, and Rosco were actually evil pig farmers, running guns into the United States with help from the IRA, while apparently growing the devil’s lettuce on the side. Fortunately, the infallible Jesse Duke, patron saint of carbureted justice and terror of Hazzard County corruption, was watching them at all times.
Turns out the iceberg was from a different dispensation.
The Titanic that left Southampton was apparently under the Pre-Iceberg Administration, while the Titanic that hit the iceberg had already entered the North Atlantic Judgment Dispensation.
So technically, not the same Titanic in the same doctrinal sense.
Then once the ship started taking on water, that whole section became parenthetical and no longer applied to the passengers who were still above deck.
The lifeboats? Different dispensation.
The poor people down below in steerage? Different audience.
The musicians playing while the ship sank? Transitional period.
Jack freezing in the water? Clearly not applicable to Rose, because she had already entered the Post-Floating Door Covenant
And once Rose was picked up by the Carpathia, we entered an entirely new administration, so everything that happened on the Titanic could safely be reassigned to the previous dispensation.
I also discovered that the ship's name apparently changed halfway through.
Before the iceberg: RMS Titanic
After the iceberg: Mystery Titanic, formerly hidden from the passengers but later revealed to the lifeboats.
So after rightly dividing everything, the Titanic basically makes it to New York with only a minor hiccup.
The iceberg belonged to another dispensation.
The sinking was for another audience.
The deaths were parenthetical.
The broken hull was transitional.
The freezing water was not doctrinally binding on Rose.
And any scene that appears to contradict another scene can simply be moved into a different dispensation until the problem disappears.
Amazing.
I used to think the Titanic sank.
Turns out I just wasn't rightly dividing it.
Look what happened when I rightly divided The Dukes of Hazzard. I was misled my entire life to believe Jesse Duke was a pig farmer, but now I know he was the glorious, incorruptible, ever-righteous Sheriff of Hazzard County; the white-bearded scourge of gunrunners and moonshiners.
With his nephews serving as deputies and dispatch, racing across the county in the souped-up General Lee, no criminal ever escaped the long arm of Jesse Duke’s divinely efficient rural justice.
Boss Hogg, Enos, and Rosco were actually evil pig farmers, running guns into the United States with help from the IRA, while apparently growing the devil’s lettuce on the side. Fortunately, the infallible Jesse Duke, patron saint of carbureted justice and terror of Hazzard County corruption, was watching them at all times.
Last edited:
Yes no problem..
At this point, I’d trust an orangutan to land the Space Shuttle before I’d trust this method to land on the intended meaning of Scripture.
At this point, I’d trust an orangutan to land the Space Shuttle before I’d trust this method to land on the intended meaning of Scripture.
Similar threads
