Jump to content
Online Baptist

Brother D

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brother D

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
  • Denomination
  • IFB?

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You are mostly right about those events, which Jesus spoke of, happening in 70 AD. But, in fact desolation did come in 70 AD, and wouldn't you think that something causing that would be an abomination? Your definition of "this" comes up a little short. 1 (used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as present, near, just mentioned or pointed out, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis): This is my coat. 2 (used to indicate one of two or more persons, things, etc., referring to the one nearer in place, time, or thought; opposed to that Th
  2. Yes, I know. I was being sarcastic. You have completely ignored all the boiling hatred and attacks on me spewing from Dave W in his posts. You are a disgrace and your moderation is pathetic. Now, little man, ban me so that your whole life doesn't feel totally impotent, because God knows you can't answer me.
  3. You spammed verses. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spamming: A number of other definitions of spamming also apply. You posted several verses with the phrase "my people", and not one of them was useful, because none of them identified who "my people" are. And, the charge of spamming wasn't just because of those three verses, but because of a pattern of behavior of people in doctrinal error spamming verses, whether three or dozens of verses, which don't support the poster's position, especially when said poster does't even attempt to explain how those verses supp
  4. I addressed the key verse/phrase Dispensationalists use to deny Mark 13 (and related) is a prophesy of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Jesus didn't physically come in 70 AD. I pointed out that the Old Testament sometimes uses clouds symbolically for judgement. I pointed out "Jesus coming in the clouds" has the quality of an idiom because the context makes no discussion of the verse as if it's literal. And, the verse itself seems to have a pointless reference to clouds, if taken literally. You countered that the "coming in the clouds" is like manner, in reverse, of Acts 1. I po
  5. Dispensationalism was only popularized in the late 20th-century, mainly by Pentecostal preachers. It's not biblical nor the traditional view of Baptists. How are Jews who reject God his servants? Besides, it's not true that Jews are descendants of Jacob. Jews are a religion, not a race.
  6. Yes, I read the Masoretic text. Besides, I already passed on pursuing the mixed multitude argument, but for another reason. Wrong. Nothing in Deut 10 contradicts God saying to Israel they are not God's people. Nothing there that contradicts Jesus telling descendants of Jacob that they are children of the Devil. Nothing there that contradicts Paul saying not all Israel is Israel. Nothing there that supports Dispensationalism.
  7. R:e Ex 12:38 ALSO and THEM are translator interpolations. Those words are not in the MT. However, on second thought, I withdraw this verse from my case because it's not compelling. 1) Israel 2) Gentiles 3) Israel 4) Gentiles Paul uses Hosea, "As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people" to support his statement, "But also of the Gentiles". Your attempt to spin Paul's statement fails because the church is Israel, but your argument requires that the church being something else. If the church were something else, you would have just made Paul cont
  8. Both Old and New Testaments teach over and over and over that only those with Faith in God count as the seed of Abraham. Does Ishmael ring a bell? When you read the Bible, to you remember Paul saying Christians count as the seed of Abraham. "Backslide" means returning to bad behavior. It doesn't mean rejecting God. A backslid Christian still calls Jesus lord and savior, but has returned to some of his pre-Christian behavior. It's not just my definition. The verse in question (Hos 11:7) tells us the people still acknowledge God, and therefor were God's people by faith. And,
  9. Jim, are you trying to be the poster child for people who spam verses without any clue what those verses say? You didn't even bother to type a single word of your own. Those verses don't say God-haters and Antichrists are God's people, all because of what you pretend is their ancestry. Just you and other Dispensationalists say that. Sadly, you quote Ex 3:7 and 3:10, but not the verses in between which tells who "my people" are. From Exodus 3:9, "the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me." Do you get that? They are calling to God! They have faith in God and that is why t
  10. Your questions are not an explanation of why God told Israel they are not his people. Your questions don't lead to the answer you want. And, I answered each of your questions. The explanation of why God told Israel they are not his people is that they were not his people (and they weren't his people because they didn't have faith in God). How many times are we going to go around with this? I said you, or rather Dispensationalists, say Jews are God's people apart from faith. That is a contradiction of what the Bible teaches, cover to cover. You did point to
  11. You didn't explain why God said Israel is not his people, if they are his people. You didn't give me tools to read it myself. You gave my questions to avoid giving me an answer. The Bible says be ready to give an answer. The explanation, which is true, but you reject, is that being the natural seed of Abraham doesn't make someone's God's chosen people. Every Christian should know that no one belongs to God apart from faith. And, so, Israel, without faith, is not God's people. And, everyone of faith is God's people and counts as the seed of Abraham. The only difference between s
  12. "Shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go" doesn't mean reversed? Isn't "come" the reverse of "go"? Besides, that's not the point. I was illustrating what it might look like if "coming in the clouds" were literal. As I have repeatedly pointed out, if taken literally "coming with the clouds" has no connection to the context, compared to Acts 1 were leaving to the cloud is flows with the context. The nature of an idiom is that it doesn't connect, or flow, with the context, if taken literally. Acts 1 also doesn't designate that Christ coming as he left, "he was
  13. I did read your first post, you didn't explain why God told Israel they aren't his people, if they are his people. You said, "The kingdom was divided at the time; in which, God said they weren't his people..." You didn't offer any explanation for why God would say Israel are not his people, if they are his people. I already know the circumstances of God's statement that Israel is not his people. I know it was a divided kingdom. I also know that "not my people" means "not my people." I answered your questions, but you are not answering my questions. You ke
  14. DaveW, you're a hateful troll and I will no longer be replying to you.
  15. If Acts 1 were reversed, it would be something like this: "Men of Galilee were looking up and they saw Jesus come into sight from out of a cloud. When Jesus had come down, the men asked Jesus if he were going to now restore the kingdom to Israel. Jesus stayed in Jerusalem and presented himself alive and spent 40 days speaking about the kingdom of God." Jesus sending his angels, nor the other verses you posted, have nothing to do with a physical presence or an appearance in clouds. If "coming in the clouds" isn't an idiom, then there are no idioms in the Bible. You a
  • Create New...