POST GAME SHOW - Battle Royale III

[Knight]

Battle Royale III Dee Dee Warren vs. Jerry Shugart.

TOPIC:
Is the Great Tribulation Past or Future??

So who won????

[Hitch]

Jello is a derivitive of animal products. But it doesnt compare to meat. DeeDee turned Jerry into jello.

HITCH

[rapt]

Was that actually a debate? Who did the rating? Why was it only rated one?

It was interesting to see TOL's most "prized" dispensationalist show his utter inablity to defend his fantasies, even to the point of sinking so low as to accuse Dee Dee of hating God, and of being an "idiot". But what did we expect? His every bubble was popped, and he got angry. He responded in the flesh because he HAS nothing else to respond with. The proper response would have been humility: for Jerry to admit he is standing on sand. But even after his every point was completely demolished, even his twisting of the references he used, claiming that they agreed with him when they do not, he remains obstinate to the point of childishness, ranting names to try to make himself appear smart. He defeated his own purpose by his own foolishness.

[rapt]

Hitch, did you vote yet? I did, so how is it that the score is one to one?

[cirisme]

[sleepy]Huh? Is it over?[/sleepy]

I've only read to round 6, and if the last 4 rounds were like the first 6 then....

• Nobody won
• It's boring

I'll take a look at the last rounds and see whether it was similar or not.

[Jerry Shugart]

Jello?

Dee Dee´s answers only prove that all she has between her ears is JELLO!!

And those that believe her littles FABLES also prove that their little heads are full of nothing but JELLO!

I mean,who can take this seriously--that although the prophet Zecharia reveals that in the future the Lord Jesus Himself shall fight against those who come against Jerusalem and DEFEAT THEM,Dee Dee has the gall to say that this represents the DEFEAT in Jerusalem in AD70!!!!

How ridiculous can it possibly be?

And what about her non-answer concerning the parable of the "tares and wheat"?This parable is about the same time period as the Olivet Discourse--"the end of the age"(Mt.13:40;24:3).And in this parable,the field is the WORLD,and at the harvest that happens at the end of the age,the "unrighteous" are gathered together and cast into a furnace of fire(Mt.13:30,40-43).

Dee Dee says that the "world" only means the Roman Empire.Using her own definition,are we to believe that all the "unrighteous" people were taken out of the Roman Empire in AD70?

Of course they were not.That NEVER happened.And that can ONLY mean that the "great tribulation" did not happen in AD70,as Dee Dee says.

Dee Dee says that this parable is "teaching about the inaguration of the kingdom,with judgment beginning with God´s people and the outworking of His progressive redemption in judgment."

She is correct that it is about the inaguration of His Kingdom,but according to the very words of the Lord Jesus Christ this judgment does not just involve God´s people.

This is about ALL the "unrighteous" who are in the "field" at the end of the age.They areall gathered out and burned.

And not even Dee Dee will argue that all of the "unrighteous" people living in the Roman Empire were gathered out and burned in the first century.So we can see that the circumstances surrounding the end of the age does not match Dee Dee´ideas concerning the end of the age of the Olivet Discourse.She is in error.

But no matter what she says in answer to this,there will be those who will agree with her.If they will believe that the following verses represent the defeat of Jerusalem in AD70,then they will believe ANYTHING BUT THE TRUTH:

"Then shall the Lord go forth,and fight against those nations,as when He fought in the day of battle...And it shall come to pass,in that day,that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem"(Zech.13:3;12:9).

When will the madness end?

In His grace,--Jerry

[Chivato1969]

Dear Everyone:

Like I said on the other thread, this debate was a total bloodbath in favor of Dee Dee without considering whose doctrine anyone happens to agree with. I say again, it seems to me that this poll is asking who won the debate, not how many futurists are here, and how many preterists are here. We all could have found that out without going through the trouble of a debate. Dee Dee was in the difficult position of defending an unpopular view and that also must be taken into consideration when assessing the damage done to Jerry.

So again, I am asking any of Jerry's supporters to please post how they can say that Jerry won the debate.

[cirisme]

I mean,who can take this seriously--that although the prophet Zecharia reveals that in the future the Lord Jesus Himself shall fight against those who come against Jerusalem and DEFEAT THEM,Dee Dee has the gall to say that this represents the DEFEAT in Jerusalem in AD70!!!!

There seems to be a contradiction in this preterist claim. On one hand, preterists want me to believe that ad70 was the worst thing in the world to happen, yet they were victorious?

Incredible.

[cirisme]

yet they were victorious?

By they, I mean Israel. Not preterists.

[Chivato1969]

Dee Dee´s answers only prove that all she has between her ears is JELLO!!

Shame on you Jerry, you have made a complete donkey of yourself with your namecalling. I have been uncomfortable with this whole idea of Christians publicly debating like this from the get-go and your behavior has confirmed why. You obviously have a personal dislike for her and that is a shame for you are both brother and sister and Christ.

[cirisme]

You obviously have a personal dislike for her and that is a shame for you are both brother and sister and Christ.

Which one is Christ?

Do you mean "in" Christ?

[rapt]

Chivato:

So again, I am asking any of Jerry's supporters to please post how they can say that Jerry won the debate.

Yes, please, all you disps who voted for Jerry! Please tell us WHY you did.

[cirisme]

I hope that rapt and rev won't take this thread over too.

Although, I wouldn't mind even if they get to shouting, my ignoring skills are getting better.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Jerry:

I was hoping that you and I could come to the same agreement with this thread that we did with the other. It seems best that the observers should be able to comment on the "finished" debate without our adding to it and interfering. I was not intending upon posting here at all. I could respond to your allegations you just made, but I will not do so here.

Can we agree not to post here and leave the observers to themselves?? The debate is over... rehashing and adding to the points here does not fair... for either of us.


Dear Crisisme:

The explanation is painfully simple, but I will not post it here. If you like, please define where you see the "problem" and post it on the thread that you and I were already partcipating in when this whole thing stated, or anything other questions you have.

[cirisme]

The explanation is painfully simple

It usually is. Painful that is.

(just teasing )