I Will Aoplogize To Dom

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by diakonos

Posting together for over a decade and MTD is the only guy that doesn’t know what EB believes.

I have always suspected what he believes. When I have asked him about it he always denied.

Lets see how this works.

Diakonos:

Do you believe Jesus came and resurrected the dead Christians and gathered the living to himself in 70ad?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I brought them on by asking him to present his belief in a straight forward manner so I and others would know what they are?



Was I being willfully ignorant by asking him what it was he DOES believe? Many times? I even asked him on THIS THREAD. He did not answer here either after all that.

It is YOU who have pointed out to me what he has taught here before in his own words. At any time he could have done that. Then if anyone cared the discussion could have moved forward.

What you rightly describe as "taunting" and "tormenting" is very accurate. I guess its ok because I am so silly.




Thats funny I think I remember the same kind of thing coming from you in some of our discussions!

I do appreciate the link you sent and I respect your teaching on various issues,

I dont think you understand what's going on. But I could be wrong, I've been wrong about things before.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

This is hilarious even to a guy who doesnt do humor well!

A simple yes or no? I have asked Dom about his full preterists beliefs multiple times over a long period of time . When not evading or dodging he tells me to go to the Eschatology section! He never even provided a link!

And yet when I point you right to 3 links that are very detailed what I believe about holiness and perfection you say you dont want to waste time wading through ONE THREAD to hear it? All you want is yes or no?

Be ye therefore perfect EVEN AS your Father in Heaven is perfect. Matt 5:48

My doctrine is in this context. Now go and listen to the 3 videos which together are less than an hour.

Unless you injecting that into the thread for distraction purposes.

This is the standard for every Christian that ever lived.

MTD: "This is hilarious even to a guy who doesnt do humor well!"

Your sentence structure, misspelling, and lack of punctuation are what's hilarious.

I asked YOU two simple questions about YOUR view of perfection, and you answered me by complaining about questions you've had on EV's position on eschatology"? What is the deal?? Is he my dad or something?? Then you say I am guilty of "injecting that into the thread for distraction purposes"?

Well, so much for you providing a perfect answer...

Here's how I would have answered YOU if YOU had asked me THE SAME TWO QUESTIONS.

1. Do you feel you are completely perfect like Jesus Christ is perfect?

NO

2. If you do, please explain what "perfect" means to you.

Perfect means "spiritually mature." So, I am not completely like Christ today, but I certainly am not like I was when I first was saved either. It's like a 10-year-old son saying he's not as mature as his 30-year-old father, but he's also more mature than when he was a 2-year-old toddler.

The Bible says, "For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."....(Hebrews 10:14) Did you see it? "BEING". It speaks of a process of BEING perfected.

Look at that--I didn't even need to post three videos or start a new thread...now that is what I call PERFECTION!

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The guy's been around since, what? The days of the original FCF? If anyone genuinely doesnt know his eschatology it is either because they are new here, or willfully ignorant. Like I have been saying, the only people who seem to actually have any communication problems with him are certain individuals who have some kind of personal problem with him. Usually due to him pointing out some silliness on their part, then they double down on the silliness, and then they get trolled ("taunted" and "tormented").

Exactly!

And then there's the issue that every post that EB has made since 2004 has included a link to my Website. My Website has studies from EB. It also has studies from me that detail the FE view of prophecy. It's kinda hard to believe that such blatant evidence of EB's view of prophecy could have been missed.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Exactly!

And then there's the issue that every post that EB has made since 2004 has included a link to my Website. My Website has studies from EB. It also has studies from me that detail the FE view of prophecy. It's kinda hard to believe that such blatant evidence of EB's view of prophecy could have been missed.

BTW, I love that Acts 2:45 avatar of yours!

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by diakonos

Posting together for over a decade and MTD is the only guy that doesn’t know what EB believes.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by Esaias

BTW, I love that Acts 2:45 avatar of yours!

He’s not holding two .38’s?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Esaias

BTW, I love that Acts 2:45 avatar of yours!

Acts 2:45? I had eight verses before in mind. Either way, I made it to be the "hootinst, tootinist, shootinist bobtail wildcat in the west!”

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by diakonos

He’s not holding two .38’s?

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Oh? Now you are saying you never denied you are a full preterist?

Well then I was right about you all along. There is no apology necessary to you. You have lied and deceived through many threads and posts.

You say you deny A RAPTURE took place in 70ad.

This is the way Prets operate. Take a word and strangle the life out of it so you can hide behind what you really believe.

The whole point has been did what is commonly called the rapture altho all it means is the saints being gathered to Christ for immortality occur in 70ad. Did the resurrection of the dead in Christ occur in 70ad.

So to confuse and blur the issue you deny a "rapture" happened. But you believe Jesus came and gathered the saints.

OK.



Signed by you.

So what most Christians call the rapture or at least the gathering together of Christians to Jesus you affirm happened in 70ad.

Thats what I have been saying all along.

You are a liar and a deceiver.

Michael,

Dom may not be "deceiving you". Many Preterists don't believe what most Evangelicals might call the "rapture" is mentioned anywhere in Matthew 24, Luke 21, or Mark 13.

For example, Matthew 24:29-31

Matthew 24:29-31
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Many Post-Trib Futurists see verse 31 as the "rapture". Many Pre-Trib Futurists see it as a final gathering of the elect, comprised of "Tribulation saints". I'm sure some Preterists might see this as a final gathering together of Christ's elect (what would be the equivalent of the Rapture), but many don't. Many other Preterists see this gathering by angels as more than just a single event immediately following the fall of the Temple in AD 70. They believe that after the fall of the Temple, the OT system was abolished. And now a new Covenant is in play. And so, beginning with the fall of the Temple, the angels in heaven have been strictly gathering the souls of Christ's Christian elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. This isn't a "gathering of the elect" in the since of a one time event "rapture". But rather it began in AD 70 and continues until this very day. It essentially describing angels gathering of the souls of the elect... at death.

I've also heard Preterists point out that the term "angelos" or "angel" is to be understood best as "messenger". They see these "messengers" gathering the elect as evangelists preaching the Gospel and gathering in the souls of the elect as a result of the preached Word.

As you can see, it can get confusing if Futurists assign a meaning to a text (like claiming it speaks of the rapture). To the Preterist, the text doesn't even mention the rapture at all.

So, Dom is most likely not trying to deceive anyone. There's simply a breakdown in communication because one side sees a text relating to a topic that the other doesn't see at all in the text.