Featured Let Jesus be Jesus and Preterism Rings and Reigns all through the Bible

That be J.N.Darby, the "father" of dispensationalism and the object of your scorn?

 

:wavey:

 

Logos! I have a new respect for you! (Actually, I don't think I had any opinion of you heretofore but... you know what I mean, right?) You are hilarious! I love it when people interject humor into their posts and arguments. Life is more fun when we can laugh together and at each other and still have disagreements. I will consider your argument even moreso because of it! So long as it is not true mockery, I think presenting an argument with humor generally shows a confidence and maybe even is evidence of a mastery of the subject at hand. One sure way to know if people are tracking with you in an argument is to use humor and if they don't respond appropriately then you can be confident that they are not tracking with you. So... this subject is interesting to me and though I'm not 'on board' know that I'm tracking with you... Thanks!

 

This is engaging in an attempt to "shift burden of proof"...(Another logical and debate fallacy you are engaging in)

This is also an example of poor debate....One I, (at least) will not fall for.

You have made positive and ill-advised assertions in support of your theological pre-dispositions...we have NO task, or requirement, other than to expose it's failings....Sorry, man....that's how real debate works.:wavey:

 

This is "question begging"...at minimum...MOST, if not ALL (generally conservative) Theological positions expressed in Scripture will feel consistent if the whole of Scripture is involved...The exact converse might be asked of you yourself...

Read it from a "dispensational" perspective...and you will also find "harmony"...Most Conservative Theological perspectives do....

Here is your fallacy: You think that

"Consistency" = "Validity" and "Validity"= "Soundness"

You are wrong:

A "Consistent" or "Valid" argument, is not sufficient to create a "Sound" one:

And it is painfully obvious that you are unaware of the distinction.

I leave it now, to your Pre-terist freinds (whom you are embarrassing) to explain this to you....
There are numerous arguments, and fallacies of yours I might continue to expose, but this is sufficient for now.

 

Hyper cal and arminianism are not each extremes at opposite ends of the spectrum... Only hylercal is.

 

Well, after reading your posts in this thread I think I was probably mistaken in thinking that you were just employing bravado and shtick.

 

Good to see you back, Logos. When I have time I want to add to this thread too. We have just returned last night from a 10-day trip here in China.

Now that I finished my writing assignment, I can get to posting here as well. I don't know if you were aware of it, Logos, but there is a Preterist Bible being published in a very short while, first online then hardcover.

I was busy doing the Ezra-Nehemiah introduction, but it is now finished. Much harder than I had imagined.

Back to the OP: There are several apocalyptic image comings in the OT, in Isa. and elsewhere, that definitely get short shrift from futurist interpreters.

 

If preterism is so apparent in the bible, then why do you need a special bible to explain it? You people are sounding more and more like the Jehovah Witness crowd, imo.

 

Predictable JW cheap shot. "You people" have your own futurist-biased Bibles. You just don't know it. I would go into detail - it is very rich topic - but it is off-topic here.

 

Special bible? My Geneva & KJV give the same soon, quickly, this generation, etc grammatical context for judgement against Israel. They both show the high priest witnessing this with a "coming in clouds" judgement metaphor. What bible are you using that speaks of the prophesied judgement in thousands of years to generations not yet born? I think you're using the special bible.

 

Methinks y'all sure enough do protest too much.

 

"What bible are you using that speaks of the prophesied judgement in thousands of years to generations not yet born? I think you're using the special bible."

The bible I use says no man knows the day nor the hour. You people are the ones that claim you do know when everything happened. Now exactly when did the abomination of desolation take place? Not the one with the pig, but the one where a man sets himself up as god in the temple? Or have you spiritualized that like every other thing you can't answer?

 

Boys, being able to spiritualize everything to fit your opinions is like being the house at Las Vegas. You never lose.

Matthew 24:21-23 (ESV)
21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.
22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it.

Please, someone explain when this event happened. It will be a time like no other upon the earth, yet I am sure A.D. 70, bad as it was, didn't come close to that description. And if Christ came back then, why the admonition not to believe it? Logically speaking you don't have a leg to stand upon. Only made up spiritualizations.