| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Pastor Dave" |
| Date: |
29 Jan 2008 02:57:51 PM |
| Object: |
@ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 04:58:37 -0800 (PST), tevans9129
<tevans9129@charter.net> said the following:
I had a discussion recently with a Preterist
and came away just as frustrated as you are.
To adopt a Preterist view, you have to take
such a radical departure from the Bible's
literal intent that it's almost impossible
to conduct a legitimate conversation.
You see folks, this is where Futurists lie. They claim
that the Bible has a "literal intent" and yet, don't stick
to their own rule!
Tell us, you who kept claiming claims about Ezekiel
and demanded that I provide historical events that
*EXACTLY* mirrored Ezekiel and then ran away
when I quoted Ezekiel and showed how modern
war could *NOT* possibly line up with a literal
interpretation, why did you paste this in here?
And tell us, Mr. Literal, why is it that you claim that
Rev 19 says that Jesus will ride a literal horse down
from Heaven, yet claim that the sword sticking out
of His mouth while He does it, is symbolic for the
word of God?
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
It seems like everything is really something else.
You mean like when you say that "soon" and "now" means,
"thousands of years, because it's all about me, me, me!" ???
As far as I've been able to determine, Preserists
are the only ones who date the Revelation in the
50-60 AD range. They have to do this to
accommodate their view.
Actually, that's flat out load of *****! But you knew
that, which is why you avoid everything I post on the
subject of the dating of Revelation!
And you haven't answered the question... Why did you
R-U-N A-W-A-Y when I responded to your Ezekiel
demand, which btw, you made when you responded
to a post a sent, by snipping 99% of it to ask your
question, because you could not refute what I posted,
or you certainly would have!
And don't bother with your "It was too long" *****,
because it simply wasn't too long!
Now we're all waiting for your answer, which we know
isn't coming! At best, you'll deny this happened (which
would be a stupid mistake, considering that I have the
posts saved locally on my system) and then claim that
you did answer me. <chuckle>
--
Who's more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?
- Obi Wan Kenobe
.
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
29 Jan 2008 07:09:00 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq4vp31u6c26rs394kupulviagjti4dali@4ax.com...
[snip]
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
Now come out swinging (as neither one of you knows what he is talking
about).
Ike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy ®" |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
30 Jan 2008 10:06:37 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:09:00 GMT,
in article <M6Qnj.3857$4f.150@trndny06>,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@verizon.net>
wrote:
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq4vp31u6c26rs394kupulviagjti4dali@4ax.com...
[snip]
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
Now come out swinging (as neither one of you knows what he is talking
about).
Ike
Correct. But sometimes, neither do you. Your definition of
them not knowing what they are talking about, is them not
knowing what _you're_ talking about. Basically, you're like
Glenn, in that you claim to the effect that you have your own
unique interpretation of the Bible, that no one in church
history, before you, was able to discern.
©2007 pulpitfire.net, pulpitfire.org, pulpitfire.com
--
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself
up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every
thought to make it obedient to Christ. †2 Corinthians 10:5
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
30 Jan 2008 10:57:14 AM |
|
|
"Randy ®" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:oi71q31jqc7clalsdbltkv8mqjhreq9fr0@4ax.com...
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:09:00 GMT,
in article <M6Qnj.3857$4f.150@trndny06>,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@verizon.net>
wrote:
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq4vp31u6c26rs394kupulviagjti4dali@4ax.com...
[snip]
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
Now come out swinging (as neither one of you knows what he is talking
about).
Ike
Correct. But sometimes, neither do you. Your definition of
them not knowing what they are talking about, is them not
knowing what _you're_ talking about. Basically, you're like
Glenn, in that you claim to the effect that you have your own
unique interpretation of the Bible, that no one in church
history, before you, was able to discern.
And what if it were true?
I showed you before, but you didn't listen then either...
What did the angel with the little book say?
"With these stones, I mingle these branches, by marriage, to the good root
of wood, bound in joy and brotherly love, one nation in God."
What did the seven thunders say?
Their names...
EPHESOS SMYRNA PERGAMOS THUATIERA SARDEIS PHILDELPHIA LAODICEA
Ahem.
The marriage of the Lamb is in Revelation 10, and that fact alone makes hay
of all the Dispensationalist doctrines, as it demonstrates how God will join
together the "earth" and "sea" as One, that is, one Israel.
And you heard it here first, folks.
No man taught me this--it was just there all along, waiting to be
discovered.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Ike
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=AEandy?=" |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
31 Jan 2008 09:57:27 AM |
|
|
On Jan 30, 10:57 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
"Randy =AE" <pulpitf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:oi71q31jqc7clalsdbltkv8mqjhreq9fr0@4ax.com...
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:09:00 GMT,
in article <M6Qnj.3857$4f.150@trndny06>,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net>
wrote:
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq4vp31u6c26rs394kupulviagjti4dali@4ax.com...
[snip]
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
Now come out swinging (as neither one of you knows what he is talking
about).
Ike
Correct. But sometimes, neither do you. Your definition of
them not knowing what they are talking about, is them not
knowing what _you're_ talking about. Basically, you're like
Glenn, in that you claim to the effect that you have your own
unique interpretation of the Bible, that no one in church
history, before you, was able to discern.
And what if it were true?
I showed you before, but you didn't listen then either...
What did the angel with the little book say?
"With these stones, I mingle these branches, by marriage, to the good root=
of wood, bound in joy and brotherly love, one nation in God."
What did the seven thunders say?
Their names...
EPHESOS SMYRNA PERGAMOS THUATIERA SARDEIS PHILDELPHIA LAODICEA
Ahem.
The marriage of the Lamb is in Revelation 10, and that fact alone makes ha=
y
of all the Dispensationalist doctrines, as it demonstrates how God will jo=
in
together the "earth" and "sea" as One, that is, one Israel.
And you heard it here first, folks.
No man taught me this--it was just there all along, waiting to be
discovered.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Ike
1) Once you adopt the principle of acrostic interpretation, you can
select any number of random words, and come up with whatever meaning
you want, then claim that's what the Bible teaches.
2) Revelation 10 is not talking about the marriage of the Lamb.
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
31 Jan 2008 12:03:33 PM |
|
|
"®andy" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b8e7777c-0108-44ce-82ed-443ee1e64baa@k39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 30, 10:57 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
[snip]
I showed you before, but you didn't listen then either...
What did the angel with the little book say?
"With these stones, I mingle these branches, by marriage, to the good root
of wood, bound in joy and brotherly love, one nation in God."
What did the seven thunders say?
Their names...
EPHESOS SMYRNA PERGAMOS THUATIERA SARDEIS PHILDELPHIA LAODICEA
Ahem.
The marriage of the Lamb is in Revelation 10, and that fact alone makes
hay
of all the Dispensationalist doctrines, as it demonstrates how God will
join
together the "earth" and "sea" as One, that is, one Israel.
And you heard it here first, folks.
No man taught me this--it was just there all along, waiting to be
discovered.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Ike
1) Once you adopt the principle of acrostic interpretation, you can
select any number of random words, and come up with whatever meaning
you want, then claim that's what the Bible teaches.
LOL
First, it's NOT "acrostic interpretation." It's LINGUISTIC interpretation.
Ephe = With
-sos = forward plural of the masculine suffix, also meaning "stones," which
makes it "these stones."
Smyrna = I mingle these, from "Myrrh," a plant resin used to make compounds,
also forward plural, i.e. "these," as pertains to branches.
Per = by
Gamos = marriage
Thua = the "root" of Greek words for "wood," i.e. Thyine, Thymous, etc.,
etc.
Teira = variant spelling of the word "tiara," meaning "beautiful, good, or
ornamental."
Sard- = root of words meaning "joy" or "laughter," as in "sardonic," which
means feigned or ironic laughter," from the Sardinios plant, a
hallucinogenic that caused convulsive laughter.
eis = into
Philadelphia = brotherly love (everyone should know this one already).
Lao = singular version of "laos," i.e. "nation."
de = in
Cea = God, as in the root words "Belshazzar" (Lord-God-King), Caesar
(God-King), Tsar (King), Kaiser (God-King).
It's NOT open to any interpretation. It's HIGHLY SPECIFIC.
Second, they're not random. They're in the order Jesus gave them twice (and
that they are stated twice means they have to be stated a third time). In
addition, they were an ancient postal route, which, from Patmos, to Ephesus,
to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, to
Laodicea. When connected, they form a crude triangle.
http://www.ourfatherlutheran.net/biblehomelands/sevenchurches/revelation.htm
How did John do this? How did John name cities that existed before him in
the right order? And in the right place? And at the right time?
He didn't: Jesus GAVE this information to John, but John couldn't perceive
what it was about.
2) Revelation 10 is not talking about the marriage of the Lamb.
YES, IT IS--the reference is from ROMANS 11, and God merging the "branches"
from the Gentile "tree" to the "root" of the Israelite "tree."
Every time Matthew refers to a "strong" or "mighty" angel, he quotes or
alludes to the words of a prophet, in this case, PAUL.
HE is the angel, and it's HIS prophecy being quoted.
Even when you are faced with overwhelming facts, you STILL continue to
resist the Word of God.
Worse, EVERYTHING YOU KNOW ABOUT PROPHECY IS WRONG, but you're not about to
admit it--that's how deceived the deceived are...
"And He shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie..."
YOU and the rest are the ones he was talking about...
Ike
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy ®" |
|
| Title: Re: @ TEVANS2919: PLEASE READ 2 |
30 Jan 2008 09:56:53 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:57:51 -0500,
in article <cq4vp31u6c26rs394kupulviagjti4dali@4ax.com>,
Pastor Dave <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 04:58:37 -0800 (PST), tevans9129
<tevans9129@charter.net> said the following:
I had a discussion recently with a Preterist
and came away just as frustrated as you are.
To adopt a Preterist view, you have to take
such a radical departure from the Bible's
literal intent that it's almost impossible
to conduct a legitimate conversation.
You see folks, this is where Futurists lie. They claim
that the Bible has a "literal intent" and yet, don't stick
to their own rule!
Tell us, you who kept claiming claims about Ezekiel
and demanded that I provide historical events that
*EXACTLY* mirrored Ezekiel and then ran away
when I quoted Ezekiel and showed how modern
war could *NOT* possibly line up with a literal
interpretation, why did you paste this in here?
And tell us, Mr. Literal, why is it that you claim that
Rev 19 says that Jesus will ride a literal horse down
from Heaven, yet claim that the sword sticking out
of His mouth while He does it, is symbolic for the
word of God?
Let me tell you something about *YOU* that *IS*
literal... H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E !
There's more!... I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T T-O S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E !
Oh yea! There's also at least one more!... L-I-A-R !
It seems like everything is really something else.
You mean like when you say that "soon" and "now" means,
"thousands of years, because it's all about me, me, me!" ???
As far as I've been able to determine, Preserists
are the only ones who date the Revelation in the
50-60 AD range. They have to do this to
accommodate their view.
Actually, that's flat out load of *****! But you knew
that, which is why you avoid everything I post on the
subject of the dating of Revelation!
And you haven't answered the question... Why did you
R-U-N A-W-A-Y when I responded to your Ezekiel
demand, which btw, you made when you responded
to a post a sent, by snipping 99% of it to ask your
question, because you could not refute what I posted,
or you certainly would have!
And don't bother with your "It was too long" *****,
because it simply wasn't too long!
Now we're all waiting for your answer, which we know
isn't coming! At best, you'll deny this happened (which
would be a stupid mistake, considering that I have the
posts saved locally on my system) and then claim that
you did answer me. <chuckle>
You're full of it. You have about five prophetic phrases in
the Bible that you interpret literally, such as "at hand",
"soon", and "this generation". You insist those can only be
interpreted in the strictest literal sense, only from an
earthly, human perspective, and then, can only have the one
meaning that you decide, which would require them to mean by
A.D. 70. Then you have to spiritualize, almost every single
other thing the Bible says about prophecy, to the point it
becomes almost a perfect contradiction to what it plainly
states, before you can make it look like your A.D. 70
interpretation actually works. You seldom fail to try and
make a vicarious atonement out of futurists, for your own
glaring errors.
©2007 pulpitfire.net, pulpitfire.org, pulpitfire.com
--
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself
up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every
thought to make it obedient to Christ. †2 Corinthians 10:5
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
