John Darby

[VictoryinJesus]

Get irritated (which I shouldn’t) when the whole focus becomes the temple being destroyed in 70AD. He said concerning the stones, not a one would be left standing not overturned. In the OT The word speaks of overturning the stones, stone tables of the heart and not a one will be left standing until they all be overturned. So yeah...are stone tables of the heart still overturned?

to go even further what buildings was He speaking of Mark 13:1-2 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here ! [2] And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Matthew 23:27-28 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. [28] Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

holding the truth in unrighteousness...
But within are full of what ‘dead men’s bones’ are they not pregnant (full) of that which belongs to the Lord and do not even know it with ‘dead men’s bones’. Who speaks life to those bones delivered out from their bellies? Do you see it, how He said I will take what is Mine out piece by piece from the devourers teeth?

 

[Truther]

I’m being serious. I don’t know what I am or where I fit. Things I once believed to be true are dissolving and every day there is correction. Maybe it would be better to say, a work in progress?

I understand.

However, these "spiritualizations" are not a good idea. This is precisely how false doctrines arise...and I have seen some doozies.

 

[Truther]

looked up again what it means. No. I’m not preterist.

do not know if this will help. Get irritated (which I shouldn’t) when the whole focus becomes the temple being destroyed in 70AD. He said concerning the stones, not a one would be left standing not overturned. In the OT The word speaks of overturning the stones, stone tables of the heart and not a one will be left standing until they all be overturned. So yeah...are stone tables of the heart still overturned?

Let me blow your mind a minute.

I can prove to you that we are adopted into future national Israel's covenant(not our own).

However, we only get to access one small portion of it and only in a partial way.

This will be your foundation to make sure you do not over-spiritualize the verses as you just mentioned.

Would you like to see what I am saying?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Let me blow your mind a minute.

I can prove to you that we are adopted into future national Israel's covenant(not our own).


However, we only get to access one small portion of it and only in a partial way.

This will be your foundation to make sure you do not over-spiritualize the verses as you just mentioned.

Would you like to see what I am saying?

‘Would you like to see what I am saying’

yes.

 

[Taken]

To converse with folks, it is important to understand each others beliefs. This minimizes misunderstandings. There are many preterists around, but almost all of them will not say they are. I am open to being labeled a "futurist", because that is what I believe and teach.

On this forum, wait long enough and someone will chime in...and label you, speak for you, then want you to defend your label and what you did not say!

Taken

 

[Taken]

Uh, huh. Now...how's about you present a scripture verses beside every single one of those points. You know, the ones saying that we can't 'see the Christ', but we can 'see the son of man'. That would be dandy, thanks.
Because, when I read my bible, I do see these titles given to Jesus. I see him use them himself...I see his Disciples using them...both of them. And the remarkable thing is...they don't seem to mention anything that you're trying to push...and they always seem to be able to see him...even when Jesus was calling himself 'Christ' in John 17. Isn't that an amazing thing?

Already posted no man has Seen God at any time.

(And Bruce Jenner calls himself a woman.
Men call themselves wives.
Children call themselves Batman.)

Is Jesus, Christ?
And Christ, God?
And "therefore", is Mary the Mother of God?
And "therefore", men HAVE Seen God?

My point is the difference between:
Believing, Knowing, Understanding....
And
Seeing.

 

[Taken]

I can prove to you that we are adopted into future national "Israel's covenant"(not our own).

Agree.

 

[Enoch111]

I can prove to you that we are adopted into future national Israel's covenant(not our own).

The Church is NOT national Israel, and Israel is NOT the Church. But the New Covenant applies to both the Church and redeemed and restored Israel since Christ Himself if the Mediator of the New Covenant (Testament). The eternal home of the Church is the heavenly city New Jerusalem. The eternal home of Israel is greater Israel on earth, with a redeemed and restored city of Jerusalem.

 

[Taken]

Truther-
Did you say "the Church is national Israel"?

 

[Truther]

‘Would you like to see what I am saying’

yes.

Okay, check this out in Hebrews 8(regarding future national Israel in the millennial reign of Christ, per God's promise to the fathers)....


8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.



It speaks of a passage in Jer 31 regarding the nation of Israel after the return to them of Christ.

Now look at the passage in Hebrews 10...


15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.


This is where we are INCLUDED in future national Israel's MILLENNIAL covenant to the fathers, but only in a partial way per 1 Cor 13...


8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.


We are in a "partial" millennial experience right now, which is not our covenant, but we are hitching a ride on future national Israel's covenant. But it is not fully developed yet.

 

[Truther]

The Church is NOT national Israel, and Israel is NOT the Church. But the New Covenant applies to both the Church and redeemed and restored Israel since Christ Himself if the Mediator of the New Covenant (Testament). The eternal home of the Church is the heavenly city New Jerusalem. The eternal home of Israel is greater Israel on earth, with a redeemed and restored city of Jerusalem.

You are speaking of future national Israel in the millennial reign of Christ, correct?

 

[Naomi25]

what is the chaff?

Well, in John's imagery here, the chaff seems to be the wicked, wouldn't you say? He's not using the 'good grain vs the weeds' analogy in quite the same way Jesus does in Matt 13; here John is speaking about the actual harvest process and what is determined good and bad, in terms of said harvest. In a harvest of wheat, one needs to rid the good grain of the chaff that surrounds it. The chaff is useless; it cannot be used for food, so it must be divided from the grain itself.
John is saying that Jesus is going to come and determine the grain from the chaff, the righteous from the wicked, and the wicked "he will burn with an unquenchable fire".
We see this same concept of the wicked being cast into eternal fire in other passages as well.

And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. -Mark 9:43

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. -Matthew 25:41

 

[Naomi25]

LOL-
You could not imagine? the point I was making, that returning, to a place, is going back to where you had been before?
That was my point!

So, let me get this straight: your point was the point I was making. So instead of just saying, 'yeah, I agree', you decided upon a somewhat convoluted way of 'agreeing' without actually coming TO the point.
Got it.

 

[Naomi25]

Why would I try to Disprove "coming again" means a return, When I saiid return means coming again?
LOL

You've said a LOT of things and most of them were either contradictory or made zero sense. Let me refresh what you HAVE said:

If it were Christ "Returning"...
( as you said, but Scripture doesn't)

Now, to cover my bases, I defined "return", in case your objection was the fact that Jesus wasn't 'returning'. I also, if you recall, covered the fact that the bible CLEARLY spells out that Jesus CHRIST is the one who, in your own agreement, is 'returning':

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. -1 Corinthians 15:23

Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. -1 Thessalonians 5:23

Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, -2 Thessalonians 2:1

For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. -2 Peter 1:16

Once again....you have ignored the fact that under your OWN criteria; the meaning of 'return' and clearly biblical proof, Jesus Christ is returning. And you have yet to prove otherwise.

So, you KNOW Jesus IS the Christ, solely because ... a person told you, or you read that?

I see what's happening here. Just like you're claiming that man cannot SEE Christ, YOU cannot see every time SCRIPTURE says Christ. Right?! Because if you could, and if you were reading ANY of my posts, you'd clearly see that i'd not only read it, i've been providing ample verses and proofs to you.
Fair dinkum man. It's just becoming embarrassing. But, for sake of my own thoroughness, check out the angelic host proclaiming who had just arrived on scene:

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.- Luke 2:11

And do you know what happened after that? The shepherds took themselves off to Bethlehem and SAW a baby in a manger: who "is Christ the Lord".

To your obvious dismay, I am not embarrassed to seek deeper meanings of Scripture.

Well, you ought to be. Especially in the face of so obvious proof otherwise, and your clear inability to prove otherwise. You attempt to use your 'logic' to stand against clear textual proof. If it wasn't such heresy, it'd be funny.

Why would I mmmmm, try to dig up Scripture that say what you say? And not what I said?

Maybe it would be more fun to watch you quote me saying what you just said, I said!

You are going to quote me, making that claim ... right?

I was being a tad facetious. But my point was valid; by insisting that 'The Christ' never came to earth, you more or less fudge the distinction between the person's of the Son and the Father. Which is a huge, huge problem.
You laugh off the idea of providing biblical verses that back up your point, but in all honesty and seriousness now: you. have. nothing. What you have are a few verses saying that the Son of Man will be 'coming on the clouds'. What that proves is that Jesus will be returning. End of. The bible clearly shows that he calls himself that. But, as I've REPEATEDLY shown, the bible also titles him...while ON earth, as the Christ.
Until YOU provide bible verses that show that he retains that title only in heaven, all you are is hot air. I'm sorry to say that so bluntly, but you've gone on and on and I'm growing tired of providing solid biblical evidence to someone who, apparently, values his own intellect and reasoning above God's own word and revelation.

What is irrelevant, is you expecting me to defend thing I did not say.

Of course. Especially when you don't defend all the stuff you did say. How silly of me to toss out some sarcasm and expect you to then address that. Although, it did give you a nice distraction to focus on so you could ignore the gaping holes in your...well...everything.

 

[Naomi25]

Perhaps you can explain...your meaning of:

Phil 2
[7] But made himself of no reputation..

What Reputation?

You don't think that leaving a throne of glory, where angels praised and all of creation exalted him, to come into a human body and world, where mistreatment, hunger, weariness and ultimately torture and death, was not a form of "giving up his reputation"?

If that is your understanding, I disagree with you.
I certainly have said no such thing.

Again, let me remind you what you have said:

The Fact IS: Christ is Never Revealed Being Sent to Earth.
The Fact is: you have Christ "Returning"
...to Earth...without one witness Ever having SEEN Christ on Earth!
WHY is that ^ ??
What is in Dispute is you linking them all together, when Scripture Clearly does not.

You, whether you 'mean it' or not, have communicated that the Christ and the Son of Man are two separate...people...entities? I don't know. And that the 'Christ' one has never been to earth, and will not return to earth. And all of this is somehow 'linked', to the fact that man cannot 'see' God.
So, you know, if I've drawn the 'wrong conclusion' on what you're saying...might not be solely my fault.

And?

And? What do you mean...and? You WHOLE ARGUMENT is that...and I quote: "what is in dispute is you linking them all together, when scripture clearly does not"
And when I have inundated you with scriptures calling Jesus BOTH Son of man and Christ here on earth AND at his coming...in fact when I provide both out of Jesus' very own lips, your only response is "and"....?

I think...on my behalf, that's a mic drop.

I've noticed your repeated list of Scriptures and snarky remarks...

Have you noticed...
Not once have I Denied Jesus is the Christ?

Not the issue. The issue is you've denied he was the Christ while on earth. Or that we could see him as the Christ while on earth. Or something equally as wacky. The point, in either or any way is: the bible doesn't back you up. The bible repeatedly calls Jesus the Christ; while he was here on earth and while people were looking right upon him.

Have you noticed...
I have spoken of ORDER / Timing?

Have you noticed...
I have spoken of knowing, without seeing?

I'm sure you have a lovely little sequence all worked out in your head, and sometimes sequences and orders are great. But they have to be biblically backed up. And yours is not. Your 'timing' and 'knowing' and 'seeing' has not been supporting by a single verse. You cannot prove that Jesus as Christ and Jesus as Son of Man were 'divided' and you're whole premise is based upon that.

You have given your Sacred..."Therefore" speech. (And BTW, wanted me to defend, things Your have said FOR me, that I did not say!)

Are you Catholic?
Because your "Therefore" speech sounds Like Catholic preaching.
(In such: Jesus was born of Mary, Jesus is Lord, Lord is Christ, Christ is God, THEREFORE...Mary is the Mother of God!
Since ... Mary is "Therefore" the Mother of God, she must needs be herself holy, oooh ya right! Ok, Mary was Naturally born, but, but, but...Scripture is only True for every other person (is born in Sin), but not Mary, after all, she is (by "Therefore" teaching), the Mother of God, she is "THEREFORE" excepted, and Sinless!!! LOL).

Are you Catholic?
Is a Human woman, The mother of God?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but no, I'm not Catholic. Mary is to be respected, she was obviously a godly woman to be chosen as Christ's mother, but she was just like any other woman born to man. Probably fallible.
And if you're going to judge a person for 'Therefore's'...then no wonder you had an issue with the bible. It's full of 'em. Paul in particular loved them.

 

[Naomi25]

had to sleep on it but yes. As the sword (think not I come to bring peace but a sword) to divide, To separate, to cut...The old man from the New. Dividing asunder unto Christ and what so ever is joined unto Him, is Alive and cannot be divided evermore. (Romans 8:35-39) Consider the promise of ‘opening the widows of heaven’ and pouring out a blessing so great there is no room to receive them ...so great there is no room in Adam but in Christ are the promises ‘yes, and Amen.’

It's an interesting idea, and...sure...a tempting one. I don't think you'd find a Christian who would deny they'd love to believe that in the end everyone became saved. But, I'm not sure a faithful reading of scripture and those particular passages, can be arrived at that conclusion. Firstly, there is a difficulty in reading them as only particular personality traits being separated, rather than people. It stretches the metaphor a little too much. And then there are other things Christ says, like this:

“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. -Matthew 7:13–14

Jesus, more than anyone else in scripture, speaks of the consequences of our rejection of him. And I suppose this ought to be expected; not just because, as God, he would be aware as none other. But because he knew what he was about to pay for the freedom of those who would, ultimately, place their trust in him.
I think, when it comes to the passages that speak of blessings, as you've quoted above, we can expect to see a 'great multitude', as Revelation tells us. The number of those redeemed will be vast. But, I expect what those passages are also speaking of is the greatness of blessings.

1 Corinthians 2:9 - But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”—

How remarkable...we can't even imagine what God has prepared for us. I don't know about you, but I can imagine some pretty awesome things.
This, perhaps, makes the other even more weighty...and it should. It should create in us all a deep desire to witness to and love the lost.

as far as the chaff ...without Christ all would be chaff and carried away by the wind with no place found for them ...yet ‘it is for His tender mercies we are not consumed’.

...to the praise of his glorious grace...

how often does a passage change to reveal something we didn’t see there before. Especially when we stop trying to put ‘us’ on one side, and ‘them’ on the other. Spending all our time debating ‘us’ that do not perish, and ‘those which do perish’ taking all the focus off that which is of us which perishes and comes to nothing, and that which is of God and does not perish. I’m sorry this is long and you do not have to reply to keep this back and forth going, but consider the following. How often ‘he shall suffer loss’ is said in pointing the finger of vanity (Which is supposed to be removed from the midst) at another without Christ. Those not like the rest who do not suffer any loss with the grand high opinions of themselves. instead Paul inspired by the Holy Spirit said ‘for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,’ and Christ also said unless one suffers (for the Holy Spirit is long suffering) the loss of all things ...
1 Corinthians 3:13-15 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. [14] If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. [15] If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Philippians 3:7-11 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. [8] Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, [9] And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: [10] That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; [11] If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

to suffer the loss by fire ...That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

Well. But all means I don't consider that I know or understand all the things of God. For that matter, I don't understand a great chunk of what a lot of people would be considered 'knowable'. So, I can't claim that my thoughts or opinions on this are right.
However, I can't seem to shake the clear idea that the bible teaches that the only way to the Father is through faith in Jesus Christ. And yet, we know that many, many people die without him. Indeed, many die in open hostility to him. And for me, I see the bible saying that for man, it is to 'die once and after that comes judgment'. If these, openly hostile to Christ, come to stand before him after they die, and he waves them through into eternity, what then about the whole NT? Why the gospel? Why the call to come to Christ at all? Why Christs death upon the cross if he was going to wave through unrepentant, unregenerate people?
For me, too many questions remain. So...while yes, the idea of judgement is hard, I place my trust in God; I know he is both good and just...what he wills and purposes is right.

 

[Naomi25]

Already posted no man has Seen God at any time.

(And Bruce Jenner calls himself a woman.
Men call themselves wives.
Children call themselves Batman.)

Is Jesus, Christ?
And Christ, God?
And "therefore", is Mary the Mother of God?
And "therefore", men HAVE Seen God?

My point is the difference between:
Believing, Knowing, Understanding....
And
Seeing.

May I demonstrate the sort of logic you're using? You may have come across this before, its from the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. QED."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.


And your logic has about the same amount of biblical evidence.
And you know what? I'm about done with this. A person making extraordinary claims he can't or won't provide scripture with, only his own amazing observation powers, is just not worth it.
I hope, for your sake, that when Jesus comes back, that he's decided to take a form which you can see. Because, you know, based on your logic and going on bible verses it could go either way.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

How remarkable...we can't even imagine what God has prepared for us. I don't know about you, but I can imagine some pretty awesome things.

Maybe so can I ‘imagine some pretty awesome things’ prepared for His glory in ‘But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, [28] Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.’

1 Thessalonians 5:24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

John is saying that Jesus is going to come and determine the grain from the chaff, the righteous from the wicked, and the wicked "he will burn with an unquenchable fire".

How does the outward ‘old man’ perish while the inward is renewed day to day? Which is the old man in the above? Which is the new in ‘the prayer of a righteous man availeth much’ or 1 Peter 3:4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

I’m sorry if I’m misunderstanding but the chaff is me. Maybe I have a warped way of seeing it but considering my past and all that I’ve done ...destroying, wasting, cursing, opposing God, disobedient. Would not say it is evil but good for all of that to come to nothing. Actually it is a blessing (imo). For all of that to decrease and Him increase.

“John is saying that Jesus is going to come and determine the grain from the chaff, the righteous from the wicked, and the wicked "he will burn with an unquenchable fire".”

consider everything there burned is false. His word says every man is a liar. liars burn. That you may bear grain, The grain being ‘let God be true.’

 

[VictoryinJesus]

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. -Matthew 25:41

‘Depart from me, you cursed’ I never knew you. Hebrews 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

John 16:21-22 A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world. [22] And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.