Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

A look at "this generation"...


Recommended Posts

  • Members
5 hours ago, Invicta said:

Only by the ignorant. 

If something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, and waddles like a duck, guess what...... it is probably a duck.

Over the years you have been independently identified by many different people as a preterist by the opinions that you state in regard to eschatalogicsl matters. Can you explain that?

Are all these different people "ignorant"?

If you think everyone else is driving the wrong way down the highway,  maybe it isn't everyone else who is ignorant.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, DaveW said:

If something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, and waddles like a duck, guess what...... it is probably a duck.

Over the years you have been independently identified by many different people as a preterist by the opinions that you state in regard to eschatalogicsl matters. Can you explain that?

Are all these different people "ignorant"?

If you think everyone else is driving the wrong

way down the highway,  maybe it isn't everyone else who is ignorant.......

If people don't know the difference between preterism and historicism they are ignorant.  Preterism and futurism  are closer to each other than historicism because they were both invemted by Jesuits to challenge the true teaching that the pope is antichrist.  The preterists sayy he was in the past, the futurists say he is in the future.  The futurists say Revelation is nothing to do with the church, but refers to the Jews in the future.  Preterism says it has nothing to do with the church but refers to the Jews in the past.  You should welcome preterists Because they agree with you in callenging  the true teaching.  Historicism teaches that the book of Revelation is the history of the church written in advance in signs , Revelation 1:1.

Do you think that Christ had nothing to say to the church in her tribulation through the ages by Rome.pagan and papal?

  • Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And yet over the years people have constantly "mistaken" what you teach as preterism.......

And you still continue to rewrite history to suit your own beliefs.

We have been over this time and time again - the view that most of us hold here is NOT a Jesuit invention as it is found in writings back to the 2nd and 3rd century, before Jesuits and before your false 1800's date, and proof has been previously presented.

You know this and yet you still LIE about it being a recent invention. Yes, I said LIE - Because you knowingly present as fact that which has been disproven in discussions with you, with incontrovertible historical proof.

And in any case (as has also already been pointed out to you on many occasions) the history of a doctrine or belief is of no consequence sequence - it is whether or not it is biblical that counts.

And as has been clearly pointed out to you many times in the past and also in this thread, if your view were correct then many of the things mentioned in the Bible would have been seen in history, and they simply have not. And they would not have been missed.

You do the equivalent of making the flood a local flood by your poor attempts to reconcile your view with historical evidence.

Your view and history do not match.

Your view and the Bible do not match.

You are wrong.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
41 minutes ago, Invicta said:

Do you think that Christ had nothing to say to the church in her tribulation through the ages by Rome.pagan and papal?

Which church exactly?

Do you mean the churches that are not mentioned throughout the Book of Revelation after chapter 3?

Until chapter 22 when He mentioned who he is writing to.

Yet another reason why you are wrong......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
13 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Well Mr. Roby, you have not addressed, or even acknowledged the issue that No Nics stated. He specifically addressed your assertion that God speaks to different people differently in regard to opposing doctrines. Your reply was non-responsive because the subject you put forth was in regard to different gifts, not doctrines.

  God definitely stresses a certain doctrine to one person, while stressing a nother doctrine to another person. hence, we have one Christian writer making books about the Holy trinity, while another writes about baptism. As  for OPPOSING doctrines, I don't see any.

5 hours ago, Invicta said:

If people don't know the difference between preterism and historicism they are ignorant.  Preterism and futurism  are closer to each other than historicism because they were both invemted by Jesuits to challenge the true teaching that the pope is antichrist.  The preterists sayy he was in the past, the futurists say he is in the future.  The futurists say Revelation is nothing to do with the church, but refers to the Jews in the future.  Preterism says it has nothing to do with the church but refers to the Jews in the past.  You should welcome preterists Because they agree with you in callenging  the true teaching.  Historicism teaches that the book of Revelation is the history of the church written in advance in signs , Revelation 1:1.

Do you think that Christ had nothing to say to the church in her tribulation through the ages by Rome.pagan and papal?

  • Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

  the line of popes is not the "beast". Scripture makes it plain that he will be only one man. However, we can't rule out the possibility that a pope or some other RC high official might be the "beast from the earth", that is, the antichrist's sidekick, the false prophet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 3/27/2019 at 4:08 PM, Invicta said:

So you have three encylopaedias, but I have the bible.  Jesus said all those things would happen before this generation passed away. 

I don't disagree that the eschatological events have not happened.  The eschatological events begin at verse 36.

  Well, I have Bibles also! And the fact is, those events prophesied by Jesus have NOT occurred yet, but as Jesus' words are always 100% correct, they WILL happen. Jesus' words aren't wrong; your guess of what He meant by "this generation" is incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
15 hours ago, robycop3 said:

  God definitely stresses a certain doctrine to one person, while stressing a nother doctrine to another person. hence, we have one Christian writer making books about the Holy trinity, while another writes about baptism. As  for OPPOSING doctrines, I don't see any.

  the line of popes is not the "beast". Scripture makes it plain that he will be only one man. However, we can't rule out the possibility that a pope or some other RC high official might be the "beast from the earth", that is, the antichrist's sidekick, the false prophet.

All the kingdoms in Daniel 2 were dynasties, so it is reasonable to suppose that he that replaced the Roman empire is also a dynasty. 

 The pope is the successor of Caesar,  He bears Caesar's title of Pont Max.  The title of Julius Caesar.  

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
13 hours ago, Invicta said:

All the kingdoms in Daniel 2 were dynasties, so it is reasonable to suppose that he that replaced the Roman empire is also a dynasty. 

 The pope is the successor of Caesar,  He bears Caesar's title of Pont Max.  The title of Julius Caesar.  

 That's simply a man-made title. The late wrestler King Kong Bundy, though bearing the name of a giant gorilla, was still a man.

  The line of popes is not the antichrist.  Believing that is as silly as believing Nero was the antichrist. What pope had a miracle-working false prophet as his sidekick,  and was cast alive into the lake of fire?

Edited by robycop3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 3/28/2019 at 11:14 AM, robycop3 said:

(As for "lemme" or any other textese/slang I choose to use, I shall do so as I choose. I don't tell anyone else how to "talk", nor make fun of their spelling, and I'm not gonna pay any attention to anyone trying to "correct" me.  And everyone makes typos if they use a keyboard a lot, as I do, & I don't belittle them for it unless they do me. Fair enough?)

Well, that's all fine, but I don't, can't, and won't take you seriously as long as you use such inferior grammar. Others may, but I would think anyone claiming to represent a PERFECT God would be more mindful and respectful in their representation of him.

Carry on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I's fixin' to write a'buncha stuffs bouts the bible's stuff, but I 'cided not to...but at least my spellin looks neat'n stuff 'n shows I'm hip to this new gen'ration. I knows what the Bible sez...cause I've been all studyin' 'n such...standin' up ginst false doctrin'n stuff for the last 40 years...even though I don't get the basics of diff'nt bibles teach diff'nt things'n stuff. 'least I believe stuff, 'n my audience wants to hear it.

'n stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
49 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

I's fixin' to write a'buncha stuffs bouts the bible's stuff, but I 'cided not to...but at least my spellin looks neat'n stuff 'n shows I'm hip to this new gen'ration. I knows what the Bible sez...cause I've been all studyin' 'n such...standin' up ginst false doctrin'n stuff for the last 40 years...even though I don't get the basics of diff'nt bibles teach diff'nt things'n stuff. 'least I believe stuff, 'n my audience wants to hear it.

'n stuff.

SMILE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Members
On 3/28/2019 at 2:32 PM, DaveW said:

Were also taught to make up "history" to suit yourself, because you have a proven track record of it on this site, as has been pointed out to you many times previously.

Many doctrines you say originated in the 1800's are clearly seen presented in documents back to the second and third century, including your version of Preterism.

Answer this will you: If you position is so far removed from preterism, how is it that you are so often and regularly identified by your teaching as a preterist?

And by so many different people over the years?

Call it what you will, but it is regularly identified as preterism.

Because those who say it are thick.

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They know full well I am not a preterist.

I have futurist friends and preterist friends.  The latter would not class me as a preterist.  I believe the pope is antiichrist as did the reformers and more importantly the prereformers like the Waldedses, the Lollards and the Hussiters, and the Hugueots in France to name of few. Many of those died proclaiming the gospel.  I think preterists and futurists are on the same side in playing down their persecutor.

I stand on the side of the martyrs through the ages, as well as those of today, very few of which don't make the daily news.

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
19 minutes ago, Shoostie said:

Invicta, I saw that you hold to a late date of Revelation.  How do you square that with whatever reasons you're being "accused" of being a preterist?

DaveW accused me of making up history about the early writers, but when I suggested he read some, he said he didn't need to he had the bible.  So it seems he doesn't know the history only repeats what others say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...