User Tag List

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910
Results 136 to 145 of 145

Thread: Open View and Preterism

  1. #136
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,752
    Thanks
    684
    Thanked 7,073 Times in 3,765 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Maybe it's an invalid view (to you) because you disagree with it, rather than the other way around. And that should concern you, I would think--at least enough to be willing to check it out fully.

    I'm not sure that Dispensationalism and Preterism are any more in conflict than Open Theism and Dispensationalism. What I mean by that is that the systems don't necessarily lock in the eschatologies. Your statement, "I just simply read it and take it for what it seems to say", is exactly what preterists say--in some cases--just like it is exactly what Dispensationalists say--in some cases.

    For instance, when Preterists read
    [Mat 24:32 KJV] Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer [is] nigh:
    [Mat 24:33 KJV] So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, [even] at the doors.
    [Mat 24:34 KJV] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
    they say, "if it says 'this generation', then it must mean exactly what it says and those things must have happened in the generation Jesus was talking to."

    When Pre-tribs read those same verses, they say "the fig tree means when Israel is revived, so 'this generation' must mean 'a different generation from this'", and they go to great lengths to try to figure out which generation it will apply to. Which seems to do the same kind of violence to the text that the preterists do claiming that the sun has already been darkened and the moon already did not give her light. (In fact, the sun was darkened within the generation Jesus spoke to--at His crucifixion. But I don't think that's the event Jesus is talking about.)

    I'm not claiming to know which is right, but that there is some merit to the idea that at least some of those things happened within the generation that was alive in Jesus' day--and that part at least is read by preterists as "meaning what it says", which you claim to promote.
    Why 70 A.D. then?

    Matthew 24 isn't the only place Jesus mentions fig trees as a sybolic reference to Israel. Luke 13 seems to directly indicate the Jesus was giving Israel about a year's time to show some fruit.

    How does a year turn into something closer to 40?

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Derf (May 30th, 2019),JudgeRightly (May 23rd, 2019)

  3. #137
    TOL Legend Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    9,916
    Thanks
    2,810
    Thanked 4,832 Times in 2,902 Posts

    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147739
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    LOL!!!

    You've been on my ignore list for so long I can't even remember what prompted me to put you there. I, like you it seems, occasionally pop up a post just to see if the stupidity continues and you seem to never disappoint. The idea that I am a waste of your time is easily the most laughable thing anyone has said on this website in the last six months.
    See? Not a civil tongue in you, Clete. You just do bullying type of discussion and are extremely two-dimensional in your theology, young unstudied man. If people didn't tell me or quote you, I'd be happily in bliss with you continuing on ignore. You are just this petty of a man to back stab and just this insecure in your theological prowess that you must use vibrato to try and shout over people. It is your modus operandi. Again, TRY to be a better person. It is, and always will be about this between us. You've got nothing I want and you can't ever one-up me try as you like. I often pray how best to address you. You are and always have been, a bull in a china shop. It is the WRONG way to do theology.


    As if anyone gives a rip about your degrees!
    False vibrato. You don't. Or at least your false vibrato doesn't. You ARE just this two dimensional in your theology.

    At some point, in all you lofty education, did anyone tell you that words mean things and that you don't get to just make things up and plug them into the meaning of whatever word you choose? Obviously not because 'preterism" isn't the first word you've stretched the meaning of past all recognition.
    I don't want to play this 'smarter than you' game, Clete. I see behind your veneer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Believing that some end time prophesy has already come to pass does not make you a preterist. It might make you an idiot (depending on the prophesy), but not a preterists. Preterism involves the belief that Israel's destruction in 70 A.D. was the culmination and fulfillment of at least some significant portion of John's Revelation among other end time prophesies (e.g. Matt. 24). If that isn't part of your doctrine then you are not any sort of preterist if the word has any meaning at all. The major distinction between partial and full preterism is that full preterists believe that ALL biblical prophecy was fulfilled in the first century, again primarily focused on Israel's first century destruction. The vast majority of actual preterists are, in fact, "partial" or "orthodox" preterists, which is the older and more rational of the two. Not that either of them are actually rational. In any case, believing that the martyrdom of the Apostles was a fulfillment of prophecy DOES NOT make you a preterist of any stripe, color or smell! To even make such a comment betrays an ignorance of, or a flippant disregard for the word's meaning.
    You have about 5 ideas behind your belt and are clueless after that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Of course, that won't prevent you from calling yourself one. Preterism is a four syllable word that the majority of people you mention it to[o] would have to ask you the definition of. That will both feed you ego and allow you to turn the word into anything you want or need it to be. That won't change the facts of reality but who needs facts when you have degrees?!
    Your ego with your little nothing of an education is much bigger than mine. I DON'T talk about you behind your back. That's all on you, Clete. You cannot help yourself. I'll leave you now. Take the last word and try to "justify" your actions these past two days. It is not just me that you've done this to in thread, on TOL. You can't seem to debate any other way and I despise it. Things of God SHOULD be joyful, even in correction but you are uncorrectable. Your layman theology tower is complete. There is no way discussion, correction, learning, or discourse CAN take place with you. You only do this to stroke your own pride. There is no service, grace, or love of the Savior in our conversations. It is all a Clete thump and smack and you haven't and it seems, cannot, change.

    THINK for a moment. Labels are your thing because you can't seem to think or do theology without them BECAUSE your understanding is only of these. Do you read your bible everyday, Clete? To be more like your Savior? Is all of this just a mental exercise for you? It is all you have EVER offered on TOL. There is no devotion in you that I've ever seen. It amounts to an thin academic discussion with little or no spiritual value. It just bothers me, so I put you on ignore. It is an argue fest that scripture says to avoid BUT I WANT you to know you are like this. Only the Spirit can change you. I realize I'm blunt, but there is some affection in the whole reason for taking you off of ignore for a few moments. It isn't just to try to "put you in your proper place."
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

  4. #138
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    10,225
    Thanks
    34,531
    Thanked 8,719 Times in 5,595 Posts

    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147641
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    LOL!!!

    You've been on my ignore list for so long I can't even remember what prompted me to put you there. I, like you it seems, occasionally pop up a post just to see if the stupidity continues and you seem to never disappoint. The idea that I am a waste of your time is easily the most laughable thing anyone has said on this website in the last six months.


    As if anyone gives a rip about your degrees!

    At some point, in all you lofty education, did anyone tell you that words mean things and that you don't get to just make things up and plug them into the meaning of whatever word you choose? Obviously not because 'preterism" isn't the first word you've stretched the meaning of past all recognition.

    Believing that some end time prophesy has already come to pass does not make you a preterist. It might make you an idiot (depending on the prophesy), but not a preterists. Preterism involves the belief that Israel's destruction in 70 A.D. was the culmination and fulfillment of at least some significant portion of John's Revelation among other end time prophesies (e.g. Matt. 24). If that isn't part of your doctrine then you are not any sort of preterist if the word has any meaning at all. The major distinction between partial and full preterism is that full preterists believe that ALL biblical prophecy was fulfilled in the first century, again primarily focused on Israel's first century destruction. The vast majority of actual preterists are, in fact, "partial" or "orthodox" preterists, which is the older and more rational of the two. Not that either of them are actually rational. In any case, believing that the martyrdom of the Apostles was a fulfillment of prophecy DOES NOT make you a preterist of any stripe, color or smell! To even make such a comment betrays an ignorance of, or a flippant disregard for the word's meaning.

    Of course, that won't prevent you from calling yourself one. Preterism is a four syllable word that the majority of people you mention it too would have to ask you the definition of. That will both feed you ego and allow you to turn the word into anything you want or need it to be. That won't change the facts of reality but who needs facts when you have degrees?!

    Clete
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    See? Not a civil tongue in you, Clete. You just do bullying type of discussion and are extremely two-dimensional in your theology, young unstudied man. If people didn't tell me or quote you, I'd be happily in bliss with you continuing on ignore. You are just this petty of a man to back stab and just this insecure in your theological prowess that you must use vibrato to try and shout over people. It is your modus operandi. Again, TRY to be a better person. It is, and always will be about this between us. You've got nothing I want and you can't ever one-up me try as you like. I often pray how best to address you. You are and always have been, a bull in a china shop. It is the WRONG way to do theology.


    False vibrato. You don't. Or at least your false vibrato doesn't. You ARE just this two dimensional in your theology.

    I don't want to play this 'smarter than you' game, Clete. I see behind your veneer.

    You have about 5 ideas behind your belt and are clueless after that.

    Your ego with your little nothing of an education is much bigger than mine. I DON'T talk about you behind your back. That's all on you, Clete. You cannot help yourself. I'll leave you now. Take the last word and try to "justify" your actions these past two days. It is not just me that you've done this to in thread, on TOL. You can't seem to debate any other way and I despise it. Things of God SHOULD be joyful, even in correction but you are uncorrectable. Your layman theology tower is complete. There is no way discussion, correction, learning, or discourse CAN take place with you. You only do this to stroke your own pride. There is no service, grace, or love of the Savior in our conversations. It is all a Clete thump and smack and you haven't and it seems, cannot, change. Goodbye Clete.
    Thread is starting to devolve into mud-flinging.

    Knock it off, please, or I'm going to lock the thread. And I'd rather not do that, because this is one of my favorite topics.
    Last edited by JudgeRightly; May 23rd, 2019 at 10:49 AM.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Derf (May 30th, 2019)

  6. #139
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    10,225
    Thanks
    34,531
    Thanked 8,719 Times in 5,595 Posts

    Mentioned
    85 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147641
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    See? Not a civil tongue in you, Clete. You just do bullying type of discussion and are extremely two-dimensional in your theology, young unstudied man. If people didn't tell me or quote you, I'd be happily in bliss with you continuing on ignore. You are just this petty of a man to back stab and just this insecure in your theological prowess that you must use vibrato to try and shout over people. It is your modus operandi. Again, TRY to be a better person. It is, and always will be about this between us. You've got nothing I want and you can't ever one-up me try as you like. I often pray how best to address you. You are and always have been, a bull in a china shop. It is the WRONG way to do theology.


    False vibrato. You don't. Or at least your false vibrato doesn't. You ARE just this two dimensional in your theology.

    I don't want to play this 'smarter than you' game, Clete. I see behind your veneer.

    You have about 5 ideas behind your belt and are clueless after that.

    Your ego with your little nothing of an education is much bigger than mine. I DON'T talk about you behind your back. That's all on you, Clete. You cannot help yourself. I'll leave you now. Take the last word and try to "justify" your actions these past two days. It is not just me that you've done this to in thread, on TOL. You can't seem to debate any other way and I despise it. Things of God SHOULD be joyful, even in correction but you are uncorrectable. Your layman theology tower is complete. There is no way discussion, correction, learning, or discourse CAN take place with you. You only do this to stroke your own pride. There is no service, grace, or love of the Savior in our conversations. It is all a Clete thump and smack and you haven't and it seems, cannot, change. Goodbye Clete.
    Also...

    It's "bravado," not "vibrato."


  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Clete (May 23rd, 2019),Lon (May 23rd, 2019)

  8. #140
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,752
    Thanks
    684
    Thanked 7,073 Times in 3,765 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    You have about 5 ideas behind your belt and are clueless after that.
    This is as close to an argument against anything I've ever said that I can remember you ever posting, which is why you're such a long standing member of my ignore list.

    The fact that you like being there is the best reason you've ever produde to entice me to take you off of it.


    THINK for a moment. Labels are your thing because you can't seem to think or do theology without them BECAUSE your understanding is only of these. Do you read your bible everyday, Clete? To be more like your Savior? Is all of this just a mental exercise for you? It is all you have EVER offered on TOL. There is no devotion in you that I've ever seen. It amounts to an thin academic discussion with little or no spiritual value. It just bothers me, so I put you on ignore. It is an argue fest that scripture says to avoid BUT I WANT you to know you are like this. Only the Spirit can change you. I realize I'm blunt, but there is some affection in the whole reason for taking you off of ignore for a few moments. It isn't just to try to "put you in your proper place."
    You're projecting, Lon. The reason you annoy me so much is precisely because I am passionate about what I believe and you're as sloppy and careless with what you say as it seems possible to be.

    The fact that you think that discussions of theology ought not be approached in a dispassionate, rational manner is only evidence that you are incapable of doing it, not that it shouldn't exist or that there is some problem with the fact that I am capable of it.

    The fact is, I caught you with your pants around your ankles and it's embarrassed you. The word preterist has a definition and you displayed, as I said, either a blatant ignorance of or a flagrant disregard for that definition, which is your typical mode of operation around here. You don't really seem to care what words mean. So long as you can make some wildly convoluted connection to it within the recesses of your over educated brain then you're perfectly fine with stretching the meaning of nearly any word to means whatever you want it to mean, which, of course means it means nothing at all.

    So you go on despising the use of sound reason and I'll go on using it. We'll see who gets further.

    And, by the way, speaking of definitions, what is the word used to describe someone who launches into a insult laden tirade that begins with a comment about how there's "not a civil tongue in you"?

    It starts with 'hypo' and rhymes with "throw a fit".

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  9. #141
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    You should read back through your post and notice how you're so unconvinced of your position here that you intuitively see the evidence against it and preemptively undermine the counter arguments.

    If God promising land and a nation whose numbers are as the stars in the sky to Abraham isn't a falsifying counter example, what in the world could be? I understand that sometimes the exception proves the rule but I don't think that can possibly apply here. I mean, God started making prophecies about far distant places and peoples as early as Genesis chapter 3 and pretty much didn't stop all the way through to John's Revelation. When the entire bible is full of exceptions then maybe the exception is the rule.

    And, do you really think its hard for God to figure out what the condition of a people's hearts and minds will be in the future? Has there ever been a time since Adam's fall when the condition of men's hearts wasn't wicked? Further, you know, as an Open Theist, that God is not required to fulfill a prophesy of blessing toward a people who are evil nor a prophecy of destruction against a people who repent (Jer. 18). If He were, Jesus would have returned, set up Israel's Kingdom and the Millennium would have been over with a thousand years ago.

    Lastly, while exploring what God's motives might be for doing this or that is interesting and is often a fruitful thing to do, I think I would shy away from making doctrine based on a lack of understanding as to what God's motives are, especially when you can clearly see several examples of Him doing precisely the thing that you think "wouldn't make any sense".

    Clete
    I'm not sure what the point of your post is, Clete, though I appreciate the response. If you're trying to convince me to be convinced of a position you're not convinced of, why? Are you trying to say nobody should post if they aren't completely convinced of their position? I understand most people here are merely here to 'splain to the world what truth is, but that's not why I'm here.

    I've learned lots of stuff since I've been here. I've heard positions I disagreed with and then reconsidered. I even suggested at the onset of this thread that I'm considering the idea--not that I'm convinced of it.

    It seems to me that anyone that is so convinced of his theology that he can't question it a little is too perfect for this world. Even Jesus said, "If possible, let this cup pass from me...", as if He wasn't so sure He really had to go through with it.

  10. #142
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Correct. Preterism IS founded upon a natural reading of the text

    As you say: Matthew 24:34 as literal is a 'plain reading' of the text.

    Matthew 24:13, is clearly read as directly to the Apostles and disciples, they surely were persecuted to death, every last one of them. It 'was' a time of great tribulation and the whole of Matthew 24 is seen as specific to the time.
    You'd see a good many MAD and Covenant agreeing on this.

    I'm partial for several reasons, I believe there are good arguments regarding future prophecy that hasn't happened yet.

    -Lon
    Yes, I agree. I'm open to the possibility of a further tribulation period, but I'd like to ask what purpose is there in it? And why would God promise to punish His people in the future so gravely. The best I can see is that they rejected the Messiah He promised them. And if that's what 70 AD was all about, why plan another one? Because they rejected Him AGAIN? or to a greater extent? I think this is where the literal interpretation breaks down when used on prophetic language--when we say that the sun and moon haven't been darkened, so those prophecies can't have been fulfilled, while we can already read of sun and moon prophetic language that isn't so dire to the whole world.

    And God could easily still allow the use of types and antitypes using the existing prophetic language for other things, like destruction of the US, for instance, if it continues down its wayward path.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Derf For Your Post:

    Lon (May 23rd, 2019)

  12. #143
    TOL Legend Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    9,916
    Thanks
    2,810
    Thanked 4,832 Times in 2,902 Posts

    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147739
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Also...

    It's "bravado," not "vibrato."

    No, it could have been a tremulous voice as well.
    Last edited by Lon; May 23rd, 2019 at 07:10 PM.
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

  13. #144
    TOL Legend Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    9,916
    Thanks
    2,810
    Thanked 4,832 Times in 2,902 Posts

    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147739
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Thread is starting to devolve into mud-flinging.

    Knock it off, please, or I'm going to lock the thread. And I'd rather not do that, because this is one of my favorite topics.
    Last post on this from me. I really do want to see him change, but I will not read anything from Clete now in thread. He can have the last words.
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    This is as close to an argument against anything I've ever said that I can remember you ever posting, which is why you're such a long standing member of my ignore list.


    The fact that you like being there is the best reason you've ever produde to entice me to take you off of it.
    No idea what you meant to type. DON'T take me off ignore. I put you on mine first. Again, if you weren't quoted or someone didn't tell me, I'd have no idea of your petty, immature, backstabbing. I DON'T talk about you behind your back in these threads because I simply don't read you. You aren't important to any conversation on TOL to me, not even for Open Theism questions BECAUSE you accuse first and learn, if ever, last. I'm a BETTER theologian than you. You don't even hang around long enough to hear half of the conversation, just the soundbytes you are interested in. You got this one wrong (again, see the link, Mr. Ignorant). Muz, Chickenman and a few others are better equipped to field any of the conversation, importantly, in a meaningful manner. You just shouldn't be taking potshots at me, behind my back. What kind of disdain do you have to have to even take me off ignore to do this kind of thing??? Especially when you are quite mistaken.




    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    You're projecting, Lon. The reason you annoy me so much is precisely because I am passionate about what I believe and you're as sloppy and careless with what you say as it seems possible to be.
    See here, you were/are wrong. YOU are projecting. You know what ONE (1) kind of partial preterist is, likely from wiki or something. It isn't helpful in this case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    The fact that you think that discussions of theology ought not be approached in a dispassionate, rational manner is only evidence that you are incapable of doing it, not that it shouldn't exist or that there is some problem with the fact that I am capable of it.
    See that 'fact' up there? It is 'subjective' to "just Clete." That, I believe, IS a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    The fact is, I caught you with your pants around your ankles and it's embarrassed you. The word preterist has a definition and you displayed, as I said, either a blatant ignorance of or a flagrant disregard for that definition, which is your typical mode of operation around here. You don't really seem to care what words mean. So long as you can make some wildly convoluted connection to it within the recesses of your over educated brain then you're perfectly fine with stretching the meaning of nearly any word to means whatever you want it to mean, which, of course means it means nothing at all.
    As I've shown, YOU are the one who is sloppy. Why didn't you just ask, or ask someone to ask 'what kind of preterist' I was, if it didn't fit your only knowledge of it? Were all your teachers/mentors this simpleton/simplistic? You don't have to be. Ask more, accuse less. It hurts YOUR image for having done it the wrong way. And, in a basal as well as unkind manner. I ask about your daily devotions because you are so full of salt and vinegar, no matter if you are wrong or right. It certainly could be against 'just me' but I've not seen it particular to me, but to all you converse with. You 'think' you've got answers and you really don't. You aren't read well-enough for that, as is clear even here. You cannot admit ignorance so will come up with something else, just like you did entering this conversation 'about' me. In IGNORANCE, you made an ignorant statement that wasn't factual, logical, or truthful at all. I have trouble ever showing you such things, so I simply leave you on ignore. Our conversations are ever unprofitable. I know my own actual prowess. -Lon
    Last edited by Lon; May 23rd, 2019 at 08:15 PM.
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

  14. #145
    TOL Legend Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    9,916
    Thanks
    2,810
    Thanked 4,832 Times in 2,902 Posts

    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147739
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Thread is starting to devolve into mud-flinging.

    Knock it off, please, or I'm going to lock the thread. And I'd rather not do that, because this is one of my favorite topics.
    My apologies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Lon just sort of instinctively stretches the meaning of words until they mean nothing at all.

    If you don't believe that at least most of biblical prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. with the destruction of Jersusalem, then you're not a preterist in any meaningful sense of the word.
    In effect, "Don't listen to Lon, he doesn't know what he is talking about."

    I guess I could have just ignored him and simply posted "Partial Preterism, if you are interested."

    In hopes it helps get your thread back on track. -Lon
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us