Scoffers on AFF - Page 40

Sean · #1 10-09-2015, 03:22 PM

probably 5....LOL

Sean · #2 10-10-2015, 12:57 AM

Loren, I am trying to tell you that the passage is covering the entire church age, into the Millienial.

Do you actually think that the world is everlastingly righteous?("and to bring in everlasting righteousness")

Loren, it is not even "hypothetically" righteous.

If you think that the Lord is simply, slowly but surely working on it, then He is slow as molasses.(2000 years of less righteousness)

Godsdrummer · #3 10-10-2015, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

Loren, I am trying to tell you that the passage is covering the entire church age, into the Millienial.

Do you actually think that the world is everlastingly righteous?("and to bring in everlasting righteousness")

Loren, it is not even "hypothetically" righteous.

Quote:

Where does the verse say that the whole world is righteous?

If you think that the Lord is simply, slowly but surely working on it, then He is slow as molasses.(2000 years of less righteousness)

Hence is the point. Sean. If the scripture does not fit YOUR thinking YOU change the meaning THAT IS FUTURISM.

The verse very clearly states all 6 things will come to pass within 70 weeks. There is not one word that remotely suggest a 2000 year gap anywhere in the passage.

Futurist instead of finding what is meant by "everlasting righteousness" would much rather say the word lies, and make a Gap between point a and point b.

YOU ARE NOT READING THE VERSE, SEAN, READ THE VERSE WITHOUT YOUR PRECONCIEVED MIND SET!

It does not matter what you or I think the verse should say, it is what the verse says that is important.

Sean · #4 10-10-2015, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Hence is the point. Sean. If the scripture does not fit YOUR thinking YOU change the meaning THAT IS FUTURISM.

The verse very clearly states all 6 things will come to pass within 70 weeks. There is not one word that remotely suggest a 2000 year gap anywhere in the passage.

Futurist instead of finding what is meant by "everlasting righteousness" would much rather say the word lies, and make a Gap between point a and point b.

YOU ARE NOT READING THE VERSE, SEAN, READ THE VERSE WITHOUT YOUR PRECONCIEVED MIND SET!

It does not matter what you or I think the verse should say, it is what the verse says that is important.

The point is Loren, the world is NOT righteous, and the Lord has had 2000 years to spread righteousness as it spirals out of control from spiritual to carnal unrighteousness.

Doesn't that make you wonder?

Is being a preterist that big a deal to you to, override reality?

With this in mind, you are not defending your preconcieved opinion of scripture to defend preterism?

I just look at world events and society and realize how satanic and sin sick our world is getting when I read the verse.

Either the Word of God lied to us, or the King of Righteousness has not returned yet.

Godsdrummer · #5 10-10-2015, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

Loren, I am trying to tell you that the passage is covering the entire church age, into the Millienial.

Do you actually think that the world is everlastingly righteous?("and to bring in everlasting righteousness")

Loren, it is not even "hypothetically" righteous.

If you think that the Lord is simply, slowly but surely working on it, then He is slow as molasses.(2000 years of less righteousness)

Sean Sean, Sean, where does it say the world would be righteous? Are you righteous? Does the spirit of God make one righteous? Did the cross and the work of the cross give you access to be right in the eyes of God? Is not the promise of salvation for all time?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

The point is Loren, the world is NOT righteous, and the Lord has had 2000 years to spread righteousness as it spirals out of control from spiritual to carnal unrighteousness.

Doesn't that make you wonder?

Quote:

No I wonder how someone can be so small minded, that they cannot see what is right before their eyes.

Is being a preterist that big a deal to you to, override reality?

Quote:

You don't know what reality is Sean. You are so deep in the rut of your traditions and what you have been told by those that are in the same rut, you can't see the forest for the tree.

With this in mind, you are not defending your preconcieved opinion of scripture to defend preterism?

Quote:

I am not defending anything, I am trying to show you what scripture says. To read scripture without the blinders of tradition.

I just look at world events and society and realize how satanic and sin sick our world is getting when I read the verse.
Either the Word of God lied to us, or the King of Righteousness has not returned yet.

I guess then you don't think Christ was the king of righteousness and he did not come. I am beginning to think that If you lived in the time of Christ you would have been a Pharisee and taken part in putting Christ on the cross. Because the same scriptures you attempt to use for a second coming were the same scriptures they used to justify crucifying the Christ.

Sean · #6 10-10-2015, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Sean Sean, Sean, where does it say the world would be righteous?

Right here....when He comes in His kingdom.....

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying,....

According to this passage, the world will be purged of unrighteousness when Jesus comes, Right?

Are you righteous? Does the spirit of God make one righteous? Did the cross and the work of the cross give you access to be right in the eyes of God? Is not the promise of salvation for all time?

Yes, to a few of us, but we are talking about a particular time that the whole world will be subjected to the Righteous ONE!

Try not to confuse the events, Loren.

I guess then you don't think Christ was the king of righteousness and he did not come. I am beginning to think that If you lived in the time of Christ you would have been a Pharisee and taken part in putting Christ on the cross. Because the same scriptures you attempt to use for a second coming were the same scriptures they used to justify crucifying the Christ.

He is to me Loren, but He WILL be the King of righteouness to the entire world and to ALL mankind, just try to be patient, okay?

mfblume · #7 10-10-2015, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

Loren, I am trying to tell you that the passage is covering the entire church age, into the Millienial.

Prove it. Don't just tell it.
Show us the reasons.

shazeep · #8 10-10-2015, 10:05 AM

ok please don't be asking him to repost all of those verses that he takes literally, that point to the spiritual Revelation. Or just skip right to the sword question so he'll ignore you!

Rudy · #9 10-10-2015, 11:43 AM

Man, all this stuff is confusing to me. One would think there would be a simple process to eliminate what is history and what is future.

shazeep · #10 10-10-2015, 12:11 PM

Sean, when pressed you reveal that you do not even agree with a literal interpretation, at least at Rev, so what are you asking?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudy

Man, all this stuff is confusing to me. One would think there would be a simple process to eliminate what is history and what is future.

yes--and i suggest to you that there is. Leaving aside the obvious implications of "Understand I AM" for the moment, all one need do is ask themselves how holding either perspective, or even a belief in some elements of both, changes how they operate right now, which is after all the only place we will ever be. It is always "now," iow, but even a preterist has a belief in a "then." Things will be different then--whenever then might be--than they are now, the only diff being that then will have become now.

So, outlining the differences in a preterist v a futurist perspective of "now" might clarify our widely held confusion, which btw i believe is manufactured, and intended at some level in order to obscure the kingdom.