Search results

Those who are of the natural offspring of David or who have attached them to such in a national sense. Can you do the same?

You need to study the history books. Physical Israel still existed after AD70. So, your whole logic doesn't add up. You are building one error upon another. You invent meanings of Greek words to support your position. This is what Full Preterist do. Ironically, you are advocating the same...

The word genea means: 1) fathered, birth, nativity 2) that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family 2a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy 2b) metaphorically a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character 2b1)...

Very well put! He has not furnished us with anything concrete to support his thesis because it doesn't exist. All we have is his word for it. The Greek word itself means “the end.” He is adding unto Scripture to support his beliefs.

I showed you various Scriptures above but you refused to acknowledge/address them. You must have no viable answer. If you had a rebuttal you would definitely give it. That is who you are. On most issues, you stand on strong biblical ground. On this subject, we are dealing with your opinions and...

It is pointless talking to you until you clam down, become respectful and get serious about addressing Holy Writ. Your petty name-calling is not working. What is more: your opinions will never trump God's Word.

If you think that you are succeeding by name-calling and insults then can i can guarantee it is not working. I thought you were better than that.

It is certainly not my intention to misrepresent your beliefs. I apologize if I have. My struggle is that you are trying to create another period or age that was not completed at the cross which Scripture does not recognize. Your theology seems to be contradicting itself. You appear to be...

So, is the end of this "Mosaic Age" the end of the old covenant in your view?

Please do not speak on my behalf. Your allegation is false. I am waiting for you both to address the hard detailed (and compelling) biblical evidence that forbids your claims. Unfortunately, that is proving difficult. You can interpret that as frustration all you want in order to justify your...

It was gone! You are inventing a new arrangement - with a new starting and termination point that is extra to the old covenant and new covenant. That is insane. The reality is: it didn't exist. That belong to the Full Preterist manuals. The old covenant was long gone by AD 70. All that was left...

I showed you the biblical evidence. Do with it what you want. It is crystal clear to me. Full Preterists do this all the time. They search until they find an obscure meaning to support their error. You are using their exact arguments. Can I remind you? This leads to heresy.

Not so. We are poles apart. The sign is His coming. Read the Book.

It finished from God's perspective on the cross. Sorry you do not believe that.

You seem to build your doctrines on man. I prefer to let the Bible speak for itself.

Even after the old covenant finished at the cross?

You are not talking to a Pretribber now bro. Your petty name-calling and 2 or 3 line replies do not cut it with me. Address each point and passage if you want me to take your arguments serious.

Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire: Whilst the baptism of the Holy Ghost was 1st announced by John the Baptist it never seen...

You are twisting what it is saying. The second coming ushers in the end. Let the texts speak for themselves.

There is a difference between being born of the Spirit and being baptized in the Spirit.