The Second Coming of Christ

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by afp1996

That works for me. I don't have prewritten material. So that will not effect me. I can reference the scripture and only quote the important ones. I will go first and allow Brother Jason to have the last word. If that is okay with him. I will began my preparing my opening statements.

looks like we're ready. go ahead brother

[afp1996]

The references to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ left in the context of scripture with the authors original intent in mind demands a 1st Century Coming, specifically within the generation of Jesus Christ. To determine when the Coming was/will be, let's define what a Coming is, biblically. Pay careful attention to text, context, and intent of the author.

Isa 13:1, 4, 10-11, 19-20
(1) The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.

(4) The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together: the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle.

(10) For the stars of heaven... constellations...shall not give their light: the sun shall be ...darkened ... the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
(11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

(19) And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
(20) It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.


This is a prophecy against Babylon. Context shows the Coming of the Lord in judgment on Babylon. Intent of the author, to foretell the overthrow of Babylon. This is a biblical Coming of the Lord. Babylon did experience the presence of our Lord.

Notice some ingredients of this Coming:

The Lord gathered the kingdoms of nations together for his Coming.
The sun, moon, and stars stopped shinning.
The world was punished for evil.
Babylon would no longer be inhabited.

This is the way that all the Comings of the Lord have been:

Examples, Isaiah 34:1-17; Eze. 32:1-10.

This is vitally important in understanding New Testament references of the Coming of the Lord. Jesus, speaking of His Coming, used the exact or similar language when speaking to his followers about His Coming. How one can change meanings of prophetic language used in both Testaments to say that they have different meanings, when text, context, and authors intent are the same is beyond me. This is exactly what I expect Jason to do. Readers, your responsibility is to not allow this.

Jesus' Coming is understood by his previous Comings in the Old Testament.

Luk 21:23-24
(23) But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
(24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luk 21:20
(20) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Mat 24:29
(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:

Luk 17:29-30
(29) But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
(30) Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Rev 18:21-24
(21) ...Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.
(22) ...voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters,...no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be...the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(23) ...the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee...voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(24) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

This Coming was in judgment.

[Praxeas]

Hold on. We need a format
Below are the two general ones. There is always room for modifications, but the point is that there is a definite beginning and a definite ending.

The following rule sets will be used. I am opting for the first one. If you two agree then we can move on. If not then we need to modify which rule set and agree.

1. FIRST - Limited to 200 , 300 , 400 , 500 or more words per post.
   1. Topic must be posted and agreed upon along with debate room reserved.
   2. Opening
      1. Debater 1 makes opening statement
      2. Debater 2 responds
      3. Response from Debater 1
      4. Response from Debater 2
      5. Response from Debater 1
      6. Response from Debater 2
   3. Cross Examination - Part 1
      1. Debater 2 asks 1st question
      2. Debater 1 responds
      3. Debater 2 asks 2nd question
      4. Debater 1 responds
   4. Cross Examination - Part 2
      1. Debater 1 asks 1st question
      2. Debater 2 responds
      3. Debater 1 asks 2nd question
      4. Debater 2 responds
   5. Concluding remarks from both sides.
      1. Debater 2 makes closing statement
      2. Debater 1 makes closing statement
2. SECOND - Limited to 200 , 300 , 400 , 500 or more words per post.
   1. Topic must be posted and agreed upon along with debate room reserved.
   2. Opening
      1. Debater 1 makes opening statement.
      2. Debater 2 responds
      3. Debater 2 makes "second" opening statement
      4. Debater 1 responds
   3. Cross Examination
      1. Debater 2 asks 1 question
      2. Debater 1 responds
      3. Debater 1 asks 1 question
      4. Debater 2 responds
   4. Concluding remarks from both sides
      1. Debater 2 makes closing statement
      2. Debater 1 makes closing statement

You agreed on 700 words. Put all quotes by the other in quote tags. I will count words to make sure each party is complying. IF it goes over it will need to be edited before the other person can respond. Personally I like the first one. Concluding remarks will have no word count limit, but be no more than a single post

[Praxeas]

Also make sure your posts are clear, separated into specific points and your main points are clearly evident. IF there is a specific point you want to make it should not be buried in a paragraph somewhere. In fact it might be best to start with the point you are making then your evidence. Separate points in a outline form perhaps using a numbering or alphabet system. So if in your post you made three main arguments they would be 1,2&3 and that way we can all see if the other person addresses each point.

Also when you are making a counter reply to the other person's post you MUST quote them. Ok? What we don't want is someone making an opening post and the other person ignoring it and just posting their own polemic without addressing the points of the other person.

That is how this works, this is not making a speech. It is debate. So the second person WILL BE attempting to refute the points of the other.

If after all that you want to reverse roles we can start another debate where Jason makes the affirmative and defends afp will be countering his points

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Hold on. We need a format
Below are the two general ones. There is always room for modifications, but the point is that there is a definite beginning and a definite ending.

The following rule sets will be used. I am opting for the first one. If you two agree then we can move on. If not then we need to modify which rule set and agree.

[LIST=1][*]FIRST - Limited to 200 , 300 , 400 , 500 or more words per post.[LIST=1][*]Topic must be posted and agreed upon along with debate room reserved.[*]Opening

1. Debater 1 makes opening statement
2. Debater 2 responds
3. Response from Debater 1
4. Response from Debater 2
5. Response from Debater 1
6. Response from Debater 2

[*]Cross Examination - Part 1

1. Debater 2 asks 1st question
2. Debater 1 responds
3. Debater 2 asks 2nd question
4. Debater 1 responds

[*]Cross Examination - Part 2

1. Debater 1 asks 1st question
2. Debater 2 responds
3. Debater 1 asks 2nd question
4. Debater 2 responds

[*]Concluding remarks from both sides.

1. Debater 2 makes closing statement
2. Debater 1 makes closing statement

You agreed on 700 words. Put all quotes by the other in quote tags. I will count words to make sure each party is complying. IF it goes over it will need to be edited before the other person can respond. Personally I like the first one. Concluding remarks will have no word count limit, but be no more than a single post

This is fine with me, the only thing I would request changed is to reverse the closing statements. If Debater 1 opens the debate, I feel like Debater 2 should get the last word.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Also make sure your posts are clear, separated into specific points and your main points are clearly evident. IF there is a specific point you want to make it should not be buried in a paragraph somewhere. In fact it might be best to start with the point you are making then your evidence. Separate points in a outline form perhaps using a numbering or alphabet system. So if in your post you made three main arguments they would be 1,2&3 and that way we can all see if the other person addresses each point.

Also when you are making a counter reply to the other person's post you MUST quote them. Ok? What we don't want is someone making an opening post and the other person ignoring it and just posting their own polemic without addressing the points of the other person.

That is how this works, this is not making a speech. It is debate. So the second person WILL BE attempting to refute the points of the other.

If after all that you want to reverse roles we can start another debate where Jason makes the affirmative and defends afp will be countering his points

Okay. Do we need to start over, or do I need to respond?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jason

This is fine with me, the only thing I would request changed is to reverse the closing statements. If Debater 1 opens the debate, I feel like Debater 2 should get the last word.



Okay. Do we need to start over, or do I need to respond?

You can respond. Since closing remarks are just that, closing remarks, there is no order. You can post them at the same time. In other words closing remarks are not responds to someone elses closing remarks

[afp1996]

The first one is fine with me also. I can edit my opening remarks to show my points if that is needed.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by afp1996

The first one is fine with me also. I can edit my opening remarks to show my points if that is needed.

please do

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by afp1996

The references to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ left in the context of scripture with the authors original intent in mind demands a 1st Century Coming, specifically within the generation of Jesus Christ. To determine when the Coming was/will be, let's define what a Coming is, biblically. Pay careful attention to text, context, and intent of the author.

Isa 13:1, 4, 10-11, 19-20
(1) The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.

(4) The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together: the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle.

(10) For the stars of heaven... constellations...shall not give their light: the sun shall be ...darkened ... the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
(11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

(19) And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
(20) It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.


This is a prophecy against Babylon. Context shows the Coming of the Lord in judgment on Babylon. Intent of the author, to foretell the overthrow of Babylon. This is a biblical Coming of the Lord. Babylon did experience the presence of our Lord.

Notice some ingredients of this Coming:

The Lord gathered the kingdoms of nations together for his Coming.
The sun, moon, and stars stopped shinning.
The world was punished for evil.
Babylon would no longer be inhabited.

This is the way that all the Comings of the Lord have been:

Examples, Isaiah 34:1-17; Eze. 32:1-10.

This is vitally important in understanding New Testament references of the Coming of the Lord. Jesus, speaking of His Coming, used the exact or similar language when speaking to his followers about His Coming. How one can change meanings of prophetic language used in both Testaments to say that they have different meanings, when text, context, and authors intent are the same is beyond me. This is exactly what I expect Jason to do. Readers, your responsibility is to not allow this.

Jesus' Coming is understood by his previous Comings in the Old Testament.

Luk 21:23-24
(23) But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
(24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luk 21:20
(20) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Mat 24:29
(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:

Luk 17:29-30
(29) But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
(30) Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Rev 18:21-24
(21) ...Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.
(22) ...voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters,...no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be...the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(23) ...the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee...voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(24) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

This Coming was in judgment.

Word Count: 697

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by afp1996

The references to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ left in the context of scripture with the authors original intent in mind demands a 1st Century Coming, specifically within the generation of Jesus Christ. To determine when the Coming was/will be, let's define what a Coming is, biblically. Pay careful attention to text, context, and intent of the author.

Isa 13:1, 4, 10-11, 19-20
(1) The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.

(4) The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together: the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle.

(10) For the stars of heaven... constellations...shall not give their light: the sun shall be ...darkened ... the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
(11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

(19) And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
(20) It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.


This is a prophecy against Babylon. Context shows the Coming of the Lord in judgment on Babylon. Intent of the author, to foretell the overthrow of Babylon. This is a biblical Coming of the Lord. Babylon did experience the presence of our Lord.

Notice some ingredients of this Coming:

The Lord gathered the kingdoms of nations together for his Coming.
The sun, moon, and stars stopped shinning.
The world was punished for evil.
Babylon would no longer be inhabited.

This is the way that all the Comings of the Lord have been:

Examples, Isaiah 34:1-17; Eze. 32:1-10.

This is vitally important in understanding New Testament references of the Coming of the Lord. Jesus, speaking of His Coming, used the exact or similar language when speaking to his followers about His Coming. How one can change meanings of prophetic language used in both Testaments to say that they have different meanings, when text, context, and authors intent are the same is beyond me. This is exactly what I expect Jason to do. Readers, your responsibility is to not allow this.

Jesus' Coming is understood by his previous Comings in the Old Testament.

Luk 21:23-24
(23) But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
(24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luk 21:20
(20) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Mat 24:29
(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:

Luk 17:29-30
(29) But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
(30) Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Rev 18:21-24
(21) ...Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.
(22) ...voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters,...no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be...the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(23) ...the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee...voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee...
(24) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

This Coming was in judgment.

Word Count: 697