Warning Preterist False Doctrine

  • 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!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jordan

Active Member
Apr 6, 2007
4,875
6
38
False doctrines are annoying and evil to us Christian Bible believer.Ecclesiastes 1:3 - What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?Ecclesiastes 1:9 - The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.Ecclesiastes 2:11 - Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun.Ecclesiastes 4:7 - Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun.Psalm 97:10 - Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.Lovest thou in Christ Jesus (Yahshua) our Lord and Saviour.
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(JesusReigns;12789)
Kriss: You have never made your case against the clear verses that I posted yet you accuse me of following a false religion. Who said the words I posted? Did I? No! Jesus Himself said them, yet you do not deal with them--you simply make unfounded accusations and call me names!Mat. 10:23; 16:28; 24:34; 26:64; James 5:8; 1 Peter 4:7; Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 7, 12, 20--what did the writers and the speakers say (not me)--what did THEY say?JesusReigns(NOW)
It is not the words.It is your interpretation of them I take fault with you don't seem to get that. You follow the error of the Thess when false doctrine crept into the church. They thought Christ had already come. ll Thess is Pauls correction of this doctrine. If you think you are right fine so be it. Go talk to people that want to hear it. Then please stop pushing your man Made doctrine and open your eyes, ears. I have no problem with anyone having a lack of understanding if you are willing to accept that maybe you dont know it all. You do not have to accept our explanations but you have to be willing to consider them.to have a discission You just appear to want to push your belief on us. You dont appear to be interested in conversation but rather in stating your opinions and in some admission by us that you are right. We are not believe anything that comes along Christians here. We are interested in Gods word not mens interpretations of Gods Word you do not appear to accept there is a difference. You think you have found truth what you have found is a safe man made doctrine devoid of any faith, its all happened.One that you have to ignore half of Gods word to make work. We take all of Gods word into account it must all fit like a glove you cant ignore the parts that don't fit your doctrine or it is a false doctrine. Its like building a house it doesnt matter if you expert on roofing if you don't understand how to build the foundation and the wallsall of Gods blueprint must build upon the next. Precept upon precept. Your doctrine ignores this fact. You pick out verse and decide they have a absolute literal meaning. You do not allow for the entire plan or blueprint of God to come into account.you can not take everything literal just as you can not take everything symbolicly you must take into account the sum of all the parts to determine how it fits the whole. We are following Gods word by denying your doctrine of Lies. If you can not be here without asking us to go against God then please take your leave if you want to hear God then by all means stay
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
You keep bring up the Same scripture James 5:8James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.So what does this prove it tells us to be patient., establish our hearts for the lord drawth near. This doesnt mean anything I told my kids be patient you'll be an adult soon enough its closer/nearer than you think Now if a 5 year old thinks thats next week,its because that is his time frame of near. That Does not make it so. A satilight is in near earth orbirt, and a plane circles near your house are they the same?you say night is near, the person that lives in the far noth says night is near are they the same? You are taking a verse to mean what you have decided it means whether or not it does.You do the same in 1Peter near is a realitive term it implies no exact time.Same in Rev1: near is a relitive term near to a five year old is not the same as to an adult again you use scripture to prove your doctrine rather than letting scripture define Gods doctrine.
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(kriss;12815)
You keep bring up the Same scripture James 5:8James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.So what does this prove it tells us to be patient., establish our hearts for the lord drawth near. This doesnt mean anything I told my kids be patient you'll be an adult soon enough its closer/nearer than you think Now if a 5 year old thinks thats next week,its because that is his time frame of near. That Does not make it so. A satilight is in near earth orbirt, and a plane circles near your house are they the same?you say night is near, the person that lives in the far noth says night is near are they the same? You are taking a verse to mean what you have decided it means whether or not it does.You do the same in 1Peter near is a realitive term it implies no exact time.Same in Rev1: near is a relitive term near to a five year old is not the same as to an adult again you use scripture to prove your doctrine rather than letting scripture define Gods doctrine.
When you use a time reference word, you mean it in the sense it is meant to convey. Simply because the 5-year-old does not UNDERSTAND and is IMMATURE does not negate the meaning of the word!JesusReigns
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(kriss;12815)
You keep bring up the Same scripture James 5:8James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.So what does this prove it tells us to be patient., establish our hearts for the lord drawth near. This doesnt mean anything I told my kids be patient you'll be an adult soon enough its closer/nearer than you think Now if a 5 year old thinks thats next week,its because that is his time frame of near. That Does not make it so. A satilight is in near earth orbirt, and a plane circles near your house are they the same?you say night is near, the person that lives in the far noth says night is near are they the same? You are taking a verse to mean what you have decided it means whether or not it does.You do the same in 1Peter near is a realitive term it implies no exact time.Same in Rev1: near is a relitive term near to a five year old is not the same as to an adult again you use scripture to prove your doctrine rather than letting scripture define Gods doctrine.
I am not trying to push my beliefs, kriss. I am trying to get you and others to be honest with simple words. I have not taken verses to mean something simply because I want them to.Do you not know that I became a preterist BECAUSE I was willing to do what you say I am not willing to do--listen and be taught?I may appear to be pushing my beliefs but what I am trying to push is to get people to look at CONTEXT and AUDIENCE RELEVANCE. How can we discuss God's Word if everyone wants to say what they think the words say?Furthermore, no one who opposes me has ever presented their beliefs except with the usual dispensationalist speak! I AM willing to change. I AM willing to listen. But when all I get is opinions and speculations, I will not be moved.Words do matter, kriss. The reason I keep bringing them up is because you are not being honest with them. Do you not see that you redefine simple words only because they do not fit your system? Taken in a noneschatological context, these words such as at hand, near, soon, shortly would present no problem for you. As a matter of fact, I can provide many noneschatological verses where those words are used. The same people who make them mean something else in eschatolgical passages will give them their normal, usual, everyday meanings in noneschatolgical passages. Why? Because in those noneschatological passages they do not contradict the dispensationalist's preconceived ideas of end things.You cannot take time words and make them relative, kriss. They are not! That is what keeps me pushing. Can we be honest with a passage such as Matthew 10? Can you look at it and at least see how someone might see it the way I do? Agree or not, could you at least, instead of completely demonizing me, see how I could arrive at the conclusions I arrive at based upon the context and the words of the passage itself?Does it not even a little bit appear to you that in Matthew 10 Jesus is speaking to THOSE disciples about things that were soon to happen to THEM? Does it not even the slightest bit appear to you that Jesus is somehow saying that He is going to come back to THOSE disciples? Do you never get that sense? What about THIS generation? Is it so unreasonable for someone such as I to take that expression in the way it is NORMALLY understood? Is that so outlandish?What about Matthew 26:64 when Jesus is speaking directly to that flesh and blood Caiaphas and tells HIM that he is going to see Him COMING on the clouds of heaven? Can you not even see in the least how someone could take those words at face value?Here is the sum of it all. When a time reference word occurs, it is the NORMAL thing to take it literally. Wouldn't you agree? Even it you make some case that near does not mean near and soon does not mean soon and shortly does not mean shortly, and at hand does not mean at hand, would you not agree that they are, then, not being used by the writer or speaker in their NORMAL meanings?I do understand how the words fit together, and I do have a concept of the whole plan of God. But like all concepts they begin with individual words which are put together to form meaningly expressions which then lead to that overall understanding. I do not mean to be unkind. That was not my purpose. But how can we communicate and share God's Word with one another if we will not look at each passage and each verse in their historical contexts and give proper attention to what the words meant to those who first heard them?I do NOT know everything. I never said I did. But one thing I do know. It is wrong to so quickly throw out the "h" word at fellow believers. And it is equally wrong to make such condemning accusations against such a believer for simply taking the words of the Bible at their face value.I am not telling you to throw out everything you believe. But why do you condemn me for taking verses at their face value? Is that not what I have done in the verses I provided? Is not the way I understand them the normal way most people would take such passages after a simple first reading?I study diligently every day because I do not want to ever again follow the teachings of men. I did that for many years. You may disagree with me, and I know you most certainly do, but what I believe are MY beliefs arrived at through hours and hours of intense study and prayer. I know you don't believe this, but I am open to change because I do not ever again want to misinterpret God's Word. But I find that many on this board do the exact same thing I did for years--follow a system and read that system into the Bible (eisegesis) instead of getting a system out of the Bible (exegesis).That is the cause for stumbling over simple time reference words. They don't fit our system so they must be ignored, downplayed, or redefined. That is not being honest with the Scriptures. JesusReigns
 

Tama

New Member
Jun 7, 2007
182
0
0
42
(JesusReigns;12895)
What about Matthew 26:64 when Jesus is speaking directly to that flesh and blood Caiaphas and tells HIM that he is going to see Him COMING on the clouds of heaven? Can you not even see in the least how someone could take those words at face value?MY beliefs arrived at through hours and hours of intense study and prayer. I know you don't believe this, but I am open to change because I do not ever again want to misinterpret God's Word. That is the cause for stumbling over simple time reference words. They don't fit our system so they must be ignored, downplayed, or redefined. That is not being honest with the Scriptures. JesusReigns
JesusReigns - This is a 'one word doctrine' It is based on 1 word you found in the Matthew 10...What about rest of things Jesus said to US (yes to us) even though he was directing it to people in front of Him. We base out lifes and our faith on word that were directed to specific individuals in the new and old testament. Apostles wrote letters to sertain churches, and now we live by them!!! Same thing with Jesus's word!!!God gave LAW to Moses, and we now live by it!!! When God created Adam and Eve he told them to reproduce, he didn't direct those words to us, but we do what Adam and Eve were told to do!!! And there are many many more scriptures that show us that we should not take every word literally. God talks to US thru words once said to someone esle in the Bible.
 

jodycour

New Member
Jun 4, 2007
338
0
0
63
Natchitoches, La
In Mth.26:64I only see that Jesus is telling the High Priest, in a very short period of time I will be seated on the right side of my Heavenly Father.He did not designate a particular time. He knew that he would soon be dying!Concerning other scriptures that you brought up concerning Jesus talking to His disciples, You fail to realize that the disciples where asking Him 3 Questions!1: When would Jerusalem be destroyed? In this one I personally believe that this possibly did happen in 70 A.D.But the other two Questions He very obviously meant that they would happen in the future.But you can't take every thing literally like you do!
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(Tama;12896)
JesusReigns - This is a 'one word doctrine' It is based on 1 word you found in the Matthew 10...What about rest of things Jesus said to US (yes to us) even though he was directing it to people in front of Him. We base out lifes and our faith on word that were directed to specific individuals in the new and old testament. Apostles wrote letters to sertain churches, and now we live by them!!! Same thing with Jesus's word!!!God gave LAW to Moses, and we now live by it!!! When God created Adam and Eve he told them to reproduce, he didn't direct those words to us, but we do what Adam and Eve were told to do!!! And there are many many more scriptures that show us that we should not take every word literally. God talks to US thru words once said to someone esle in the Bible.
Tama: I actually agree with you! But there are also many places where Jesus told a specific person or group of people about things that were to personally happen to them and to them only. That is the case in Matthew 10. Jesus is NOT speaking to us there, although we can certainly learn from the experiences of those disciples and THEY went out to the lost sheep of Israel as Jesus commanded THEM.I would really like you to tell me what those things Jesus said to those disciples in Matthew 10 meant to them. Why did Jesus say YOU? JesusReigns
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(JesusReigns;12892)
When you use a time reference word, you mean it in the sense it is meant to convey. Simply because the 5-year-old does not UNDERSTAND and is IMMATURE does not negate the meaning of the word!JesusReigns
that is most ridiculous thing I have ever heard Near does not depict any specific distance that is strictly what you want it to be. Tell me how far is near? you cant answer the question. No one can. And yet you claim to know. and its us using the wrong meaning? You are reading what isn't there. You also use this example as appears in Rev. well John was older when he wrote Rev. the resurrection had already occurred and he still uses the term Near.This alone makes your whole theory wrong. Also the other Apostles were prophesying when they used the term. what do prophecies mean? to tell the future. Who were they getting their information from? GodHow long is a day to God 1000 human years(2 Peter) so to God its only been 2 1/2 days sense Christ. another thing that proves your theory wrong.The thing is you have nothing to teach us you don't seem to get that it is we that could teach you but you will not listen. Without understanding the overall plan of God you are grasping at straws.Claiming you understand how far near is. You throw all common sense out the window as I said you want to force scripture to meet you. Instead of you coming to the understanding of scripture.
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(quote)I may appear to be pushing my beliefs but what I am trying to push is to get people to look at CONTEXT and AUDIENCE RELEVANCE. How can we discuss God's Word if everyone wants to say what they think the words say?Furthermore, no one who opposes me has ever presented their beliefs except with the usual dispensationalist speak! I AM willing to change. I AM willing to listen. But when all I get is opinions and speculations, I will not be moved.Words do matter, kriss. The reason I keep bringing them up is because you are not being honest with them. Do you not see that you redefine simple words only because they do not fit your system?(quote)I never said words did not matter in fact most people here will tell you we preach language context all the time. But it is you who have them wrong just as in the post above. No matter how much we show you words like ALL/EVERYONE/NEVER and many more you ignore them or change the meanings you only want to pay attention when it suits you. Doesn't it cause you any pause to think you are being mislead when you disagree with everybible scholar all literature written for thousands of years.And dump it all for some Recent Man made doctrine? Do you have any discernment at all?Do you not realize that the Old testament is the New testament concealed the New Testament is the Old testament revealed
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
Now as for Mathew 10 which I have quoted to you at least twice now. that you continue to ignor Who are the lost sheep of Israel? They are the gentiles (the church to come) all the cities of Israel means basically all the cities of the world.This is History The 10 tribes were scattered over the Caucus mountains into Scotlandinto England and eventually to America and around the world.The Jews the tribes of Judah and Levi they were then they are today.they were the Tribe of Judah the priest tribe of Israel The Sadducees and pharisees. The leaders of the Jews that wanted Christ dead because he was interfering with their teaching. They never converted to Christianity. You must learn to understand how the Bible uses the words Israel and Judahthey are not the same thing
 

Joyful

New Member
Jan 7, 2007
812
7
0
Please forgive me for interrupting,May I ask which denomination are you Jesus Reigns?thank you
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(kriss;12930)
that is most ridiculous thing I have ever heard Near does not depict any specific distance that is strictly what you want it to be. Tell me how far is near? you cant answer the question. No one can. And yet you claim to know. and its us using the wrong meaning? You are reading what isn't there. You also use this example as appears in Rev. well John was older when he wrote Rev. the resurrection had already occurred and he still uses the term Near.This alone makes your whole theory wrong. Also the other Apostles were prophesying when they used the term. what do prophecies mean? to tell the future. Who were they getting their information from? GodHow long is a day to God 1000 human years(2 Peter) so to God its only been 2 1/2 days sense Christ. another thing that proves your theory wrong.The thing is you have nothing to teach us you don't seem to get that it is we that could teach you but you will not listen. Without understanding the overall plan of God you are grasping at straws.Claiming you understand how far near is. You throw all common sense out the window as I said you want to force scripture to meet you. Instead of you coming to the understanding of scripture.
kriss: You are assuming that John was very old when he wrote the Revelation. All the evidence for this late dating is based on an ambiguous statement by Irenaeus. There are any credible evidences for a pre-AD 70 dating of the book which makes John 25 years younger than you suppose! John used the words near and shortly because the resurrection and all the things of the Revelation had not yet happened but were near--in his day.2 Peter 3 does not prove what you suppose it does and quite frankly I am growing weary of futurists using that verse to negate the impact of every time reference in the Bible. That is not its meaning. Peter said that WITH God a thousand years is AS a day and a day is AS a thousand years. He did not say that a day IS a thousand years or a thousand years IS a day! Furthermore, all Peter is saying in this verse is that God is not bound by time. If we could experience a thousand years, they would definitely feel to us as a thousand years because that is exactly what they would be! But God exists outside the passing of time. A thousand ACTUAL years go by and they are as the blinking of an eye to Him because He is eternal. But God communicates with us in terms we will understand--in terms that express the time frame in which we exist! When He had His inspired writers use such expressions as near, shortly, soon, at hand, He meant for us to understand them in their natural, normal, everyday usages. I CAN tell you how far near is--"to, at, or within a short distance or interval in space or time" and "close in time, space, position or degree" (American Dictionary of the English Language). Do I know the exact point at which near ceases to be near and becomes far? Does the word "near" have a specific distance? No. But it has a restriction--a point at which near becomes far. There may be some give and take and slight subjectivity, but all concepts of near will involve a reasonable amount of time and distance. You know that.And I know that near in time is NOT thousands of years! Again, I am not the one forcing anything when I take words at their face value, kriss? Are you not the one forcing things when you say near and soon and shortly and at hand are all "relative?" I am competely dumbfounded that you are accusing me of misunderstanding a word that has been clearly understood by millions upon millions of people throughout the ages in its common sense. Honestly, your interpretation of these simple, ordinary, common words is what is outside of the mainstream and not mine!You live your life every day with a clear understanding of these words. I'm sure you yourself use them in exactly the way I am taking them and the biblical writers intended them. If a friend tells you that he is coming to see you soon, but he doesn't come for twenty years, would you not wonder what took him so long? Of course you would. Because, you, like all of us, have a resonable concept of nearness and farness.How do you understand "near" (engus) in the following, kriss?Mark 6:36--(the disciples speaking) "Send them away that they may go into the SURROUNDING (engus) country." Was this country far away or nearby?Mark 13:28--(Jesus speaking) "When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is NEAR (engus)." Is summer close to coming when trees bud or a long way off? Any problems here with "near?" Luke 19:11--"Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was NEAR (engus) Jerusalem . . . . " Do you understand by this word that Jesus was in close proximity to the city of Jerusalem? I think you do.Luke 2:13--"Now the Passover of the Jews was AT HAND (engus)." What do you understand John to mean? Do you not clearly and without any thought understand that the Passover was soon to take place?Luke 3:23--"Now John also was baptizing in Aenon NEAR (engus) Salim."Is not Aenon in very close proximity to Salim? Do you question the meaning of the word "near" in this passage? Probably not.John 6:4--"Now the Passover, a feast of the Jews, was NEAR (engus)." I bet you never give this a second thought when you read it. Near means near--soon!John 6:19--"They saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing NEAR (engus) the boat." Did not John mean close to the boat? Have you ever stop to question the meaning of the word "near" in this verse? Probably not. There is no reason to. It does not harm your concept of eschatological events.John 6:23--"other boats came from Tiberias, NEAR (engus) the place where they ate bread." Were the boats in close proximity and very near to the palce where they ate bread? Yes, of course. That's the meaning of the word "near!"See also John 7:2 (Passover NEAR); 11:18 (NEAR Jerusalem); 11:54, 55 (NEAR the wilderness; Passover NEAR); 19:20 (NEAR the city); 19:42 (tomb NEARBY); Acts 1:12 (NEAR Jerusalem); 9:38 (NEAR Joppa); 27:8 (NEAR Lasea); Rom. 13:11 (salvation NEARER); Eph. 2:13 (brought NEAR by the blood of Christ); Heb. 6:8 (NEAR to being cursed--SOON?)I suspect that you have no problems with the word NEAR (engus) in these noneschatological passages. But it is the same word which is used in the following:philippians 4:5--"The Lord is NEAR" (engus). Revelation 1:3--"The time is NEAR" (engus).Revelation 22:10--"The time is NEAR" (engus).I can point out the same thing for other time reference words. Those used in noneschatological passages are allowed to mean what they normally mean; but those which occur in eschatological passages are redefined, downplayed, or simply ignored! That is not sound exegesis!JesusReigns
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
Faithful read the first post on this page he is what you call a preteristhe believes the bible is over all prophecey was fufilled in 70 AD including the second coming it is a False religion
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(Faithful1;12938)
Please forgive me for interrupting,May I ask which denomination are you Jesus Reigns?thank you
Faithful1: I claim no denomination; but if I had to choose, I would most nearly consider myself independent baptist. JesusReigns
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(JesusReigns;12939)
kriss: You are assuming that John was very old when he wrote the Revelation. All the evidence for this late dating is based on an ambiguous statement by Irenaeus. There are any credible evidences for a pre-AD 70 dating of the book which makes John 25 years younger than you suppose! John used the words near and shortly because the resurrection and all the things of the Revelation had not yet happened but were near--in his day.2 Peter 3 does not prove what you suppose it does and quite frankly I am growing weary of futurists using that verse to negate the impact of every time reference in the Bible. That is not its meaning. Peter said that WITH God a thousand years is AS a day and a day is AS a thousand years. He did not say that a day IS a thousand years or a thousand years IS a day! Furthermore, all Peter is saying in this verse is that God is not bound by time. If we could experience a thousand years, they would definitely feel to us as a thousand years because that is exactly what they would be! But God exists outside the passing of time. A thousand ACTUAL years go by and they are as the blinking of an eye to Him because He is eternal. But God communicates with us in terms we will understand--in terms that express the time frame in which we exist! When He had His inspired writers use such expressions as near, shortly, soon, at hand, He meant for us to understand them in their natural, normal, everyday usages. I CAN tell you how far near is--"to, at, or within a short distance or interval in space or time" and "close in time, space, position or degree" (American Dictionary of the English Language). Do I know the exact point at which near ceases to be near and becomes far? Does the word "near" have a specific distance? No. But it has a restriction--a point at which near becomes far. There may be some give and take and slight subjectivity, but all concepts of near will involve a reasonable amount of time and distance. You know that.And I know that near in time is NOT thousands of years! Again, I am not the one forcing anything when I take words at their face value, kriss? Are you not the one forcing things when you say near and soon and shortly and at hand are all "relative?" I am competely dumbfounded that you are accusing me of misunderstanding a word that has been clearly understood by millions upon millions of people throughout the ages in its common sense. Honestly, your interpretation of these simple, ordinary, common words is what is outside of the mainstream and not mine!You live your life every day with a clear understanding of these words. I'm sure you yourself use them in exactly the way I am taking them and the biblical writers intended them. If a friend tells you that he is coming to see you soon, but he doesn't come for twenty years, would you not wonder what took him so long? Of course you would. Because, you, like all of us, have a resonable concept of nearness and farness.How do you understand "near" (engus) in the following, kriss?Mark 6:36--(the disciples speaking) "Send them away that they may go into the SURROUNDING (engus) country." Was this country far away or nearby?Mark 13:28--(Jesus speaking) "When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is NEAR (engus)." Is summer close to coming when trees bud or a long way off? Any problems here with "near?" Luke 19:11--"Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was NEAR (engus) Jerusalem . . . . " Do you understand by this word that Jesus was in close proximity to the city of Jerusalem? I think you do.Luke 2:13--"Now the Passover of the Jews was AT HAND (engus)." What do you understand John to mean? Do you not clearly and without any thought understand that the Passover was soon to take place?Luke 3:23--"Now John also was baptizing in Aenon NEAR (engus) Salim."Is not Aenon in very close proximity to Salim? Do you question the meaning of the word "near" in this passage? Probably not.John 6:4--"Now the Passover, a feast of the Jews, was NEAR (engus)." I bet you never give this a second thought when you read it. Near means near--soon!John 6:19--"They saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing NEAR (engus) the boat." Did not John mean close to the boat? Have you ever stop to question the meaning of the word "near" in this verse? Probably not. There is no reason to. It does not harm your concept of eschatological events.John 6:23--"other boats came from Tiberias, NEAR (engus) the place where they ate bread." Were the boats in close proximity and very near to the palce where they ate bread? Yes, of course. That's the meaning of the word "near!"See also John 7:2 (Passover NEAR); 11:18 (NEAR Jerusalem); 11:54, 55 (NEAR the wilderness; Passover NEAR); 19:20 (NEAR the city); 19:42 (tomb NEARBY); Acts 1:12 (NEAR Jerusalem); 9:38 (NEAR Joppa); 27:8 (NEAR Lasea); Rom. 13:11 (salvation NEARER); Eph. 2:13 (brought NEAR by the blood of Christ); Heb. 6:8 (NEAR to being cursed--SOON?)I suspect that you have no problems with the word NEAR (engus) in these noneschatological passages. But it is the same word which is used in the following:philippians 4:5--"The Lord is NEAR" (engus). Revelation 1:3--"The time is NEAR" (engus).Revelation 22:10--"The time is NEAR" (engus).I can point out the same thing for other time reference words. Those used in noneschatological passages are allowed to mean what they normally mean; but those which occur in eschatological passages are redefined, downplayed, or simply ignored! That is not sound exegesis!JesusReigns
Pure rubbish, Blasphemy, trash, garbage.
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(kriss;12942)
Pure rubbish, Blasphemy, trash, garbage.
Are you serious? That's your response? People who make such statements as yours above do so because they cannot defend what has been said to them. This is ridiculous!JesusReigns
 

JesusReigns

New Member
Jun 9, 2007
65
0
0
74
(kriss;12934)
(quote)I may appear to be pushing my beliefs but what I am trying to push is to get people to look at CONTEXT and AUDIENCE RELEVANCE. How can we discuss God's Word if everyone wants to say what they think the words say?Furthermore, no one who opposes me has ever presented their beliefs except with the usual dispensationalist speak! I AM willing to change. I AM willing to listen. But when all I get is opinions and speculations, I will not be moved.Words do matter, kriss. The reason I keep bringing them up is because you are not being honest with them. Do you not see that you redefine simple words only because they do not fit your system?(quote)I never said words did not matter in fact most people here will tell you we preach language context all the time. But it is you who have them wrong just as in the post above. No matter how much we show you words like ALL/EVERYONE/NEVER and many more you ignore them or change the meanings you only want to pay attention when it suits you. Doesn't it cause you any pause to think you are being mislead when you disagree with everybible scholar all literature written for thousands of years.And dump it all for some Recent Man made doctrine? Do you have any discernment at all?Do you not realize that the Old testament is the New testament concealed the New Testament is the Old testament revealed
kriss: That is where you err. It is NOT recent, manmade doctrine. I base my preterist beliefs on the words of Jesus and His inspired writers. I have demonstrated that to you in the passages I quoted. When did I even mention the teachings of any man or creed? And why do you see the need to be so hateful, kriss. Comments such as "do you have any discernment at all" are conversation stoppers and personally I resent it. Can we be civil?One of my favorite verses is Romans 3:4--"Let God be true but EVERY man a liar." I do my own thinking and my own Bible study. I do not follow the teachings of men no matter how many of them there are. Wrong is wrong is wrong--it doesn't become any more right simply because more people believe it! All must be judged against God's Word no matter how many letters one has after his name or how many titles he claims. Again, could we stick to some Scriptures? You are so often giving me simple statements without any Scriptural support. You harshly and hatefully accuse me of things yet you rarely attempt to prove my interpretations wrong with sound exegesis of your own!I am not the one appealing to the beliefs of men. You are when you imply that one must follow the teachings of certain men or creeds or he is totally wrong in his interpretation. JesusReigns
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(JesusReigns;12945)
Are you serious? That's your response? People who make such statements as yours above do so because they cannot defend what has been said to them. This is ridiculous!JesusReigns
You ask me if thats my reply? I gave you Gods word but a man of Satan would twist them as you have and to that yes thats my reply sense you deny Gods Words
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(JesusReigns;12946)
kriss: That is where you err. It is NOT recent, manmade doctrine. I base my preterist beliefs on the words of Jesus and His inspired writers. I have demonstrated that to you in the passages I quoted. When did I even mention the teachings of any man or creed? And why do you see the need to be so hateful, kriss. Comments such as "do you have any discernment at all" are conversation stoppers and personally I resent it. Can we be civil?One of my favorite verses is Romans 3:4--"Let God be true but EVERY man a liar." I do my own thinking and my own Bible study. I do not follow the teachings of men no matter how many of them there are. Wrong is wrong is wrong--it doesn't become any more right simply because more people believe it! All must be judged against God's Word no matter how many letters one has after his name or how many titles he claims. Again, could we stick to some Scriptures? You are so often giving me simple statements without any Scriptural support. You harshly and hatefully accuse me of things yet you rarely attempt to prove my interpretations wrong with sound exegesis of your own!I am not the one appealing to the beliefs of men. You are when you imply that one must follow the teachings of certain men or creeds or he is totally wrong in his interpretation. JesusReigns
I base my believe on THJE WORD OF GOD I rebuke youget behind me in the name of Jesus Christ you man of the devil
 
Status
Not open for further replies.