No announcement yet.

POST GAME SHOW - Battle Royale III

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hey Cirisme, (excuse me for not ignoring you), but did you vote for Jerry?

    Revelation 22
    14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

    15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.


    • #17
      I've got to read that thing!

      Hey Cirisme, (excuse me for not ingnoring you), but did you vote for Jerry?
      I haven't voted for anyone.

      And if the rest of the battle went as I expect, I probably won't be.


      • #18
        I just saved the entire battle.

        So, tonight when I'm working I'll read the whole thing and see who won.


        • #19
          I cannot vote again. It wont let me cast a vote.

          The debate was hands down in Dee Dee's favor. She skillfully and Scripturally made her points and verified them. As well she was able to entertain Jerry's questions and put them to rest.

          I have just recently (about a month) changed my "end-time" view considering the Scripture which I never had while, FOR YEARS, following the Futurist Club of Prophets. So I can honestly say I know exactly what the futurist train of thought is and can say it derailed long before it left the station. I was disappointed in Jerry's debating skills and he use of slander to "make a point". It was uncalled for, especially since he knew Dee Dee's view BEFORE he agreed to debate, if he thought the way he has shown us concerning his opponent then he should'nt have agreed to debating her. But we can see from the posts that Jerry got backed into his unscriptural corner and was being HAMMERED by the word of GOD that was tearing down his fantasies and delusions.

          A gentleman would save face and apologize publically, let alone what should a Christian do?
          Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!


          • #20
            Dee Dee,

            It doesn´t surprise me that you say that you can answer the things I posted but will not.And none of those that support you have not even ATTEMPTED to respond to the same points.And I can see why.

            You have already had your chance to respond to them,but your answers fell short of making any sense.The parable of the "wheat and tares" states that at the end of the age the tares in the field will be cast out of the kingdom and burned.That did not happen in AD70,which you think represents the "end of the age".

            Or are you under the illusion that all the "unrighteous" were cast out of the Roman Empire in AD70?

            Perhaps since you will not respond that Chivato1969 will answer.


            • #21
              I don't see why the combatants can't participate here. The battle is over, and whatever they say now won't affect what they said in the battle.


              • #22
                Dear Jerry:

                I did not say I would not answer your misrepresentations and misunderstanding of what I said about the Kingdom parables, I just said that I would not do so here. My last post listed a whole laundry list of things you dodged... The topic of this thread is not a debate, it is for comments on the debate that has already occured.

                Can we agree to leave the observers to themselves?? I will answer your questions about that specific issue if you like on the thread that Rapt started. If you go and post it there, I will answer.


                • #23

                  Perhaps you overlooked the fact that Dee Dee said early on in the debate that I was dishonest.I guess you overlooked the fact that she also said that my teaching has "BLASPHEMOUS implications".

                  And yes,I did call her an IDIOT,and that is because she repeatedly made IDIOTIC statements.Or do you believe her interpretation of Scripture whereshe says the following verses refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70?:

                  "Then shall the Lord go forth and fight against those nations,as when He fought in the day of battle.Are you not aware that in the "day of battle" that He was VICTORIOUS?So if He fought in Jerusalem as He did in the DAY OF BATTLE,then He will be VICTORIOUS.

                  But Dee Dee says that this refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70!

                  What could be more idiotic?

                  And what about this verse:

                  "And it shall come to pass,in that day,that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem"(Zech.12:9).

                  Dee Dee makes the COMPLETELY IDIOTIC statement that this verse refers to AD70,when Jerusalem was destroyed.So I am not making a slander against Dee Dee,because she did in fact make an idiotic statement,and it takes an IDIOT to say such a thing.

                  Now I will ask you.Do you believe that these verses from Zechariah are referring to the DEFEAT of Jerusalem in AD70?

                  In His grace,--Jerry


                  • #24

                    You have God standing up and defending the WRONG Jerusalem!

                    Think of where the Bible tells us Jerusalem is NOW!

                    Heb:12:22: But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
                    Heb:12:23: To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
                    Heb:12:24: And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

                    Was those who came against Jerusalem DEFEATED?

                    The Jews were hard-core against the Biblically Jerusalem and were DEFEATED with and ATROCIOUS loss. Think of this Jer, the Romans started persecuting the Christians (jerusalem) not long afterward and guess what buddy? IT FELL with a SLAM, dat da da ~ dat dada da ~ dat da da dat dada da

                    You need to quit looking here on earth for things that please God but look in heaven from which comes our salvation and Saviour.

                    That is the #1 ERROR of the Futurist dilemma. Looking for love in all the wrong places.
                    Oh man, would ya look at this...we got alot of work to do!


                    • #25
                      I agree with cirisme.The battle is over and nothing said herewill change what has already been said.

                      In His grace,--Jerry


                      • #26
                        Jerry can we agree or not?? And I proved your dishonesty, which is well documented on another thread that I can provide the link to for whoever is interested. And if anyone is interested, I can also prove my statement about blasphemous implications. I never said you were intentionally blasphemous, for I do not believe that you are. But your theology does have blasphemous implications. I do feel that you sincerely are searching the Scriptures, but are sincerely wrong.


                        • #27

                          "And it shall come to pass,in that day,that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem"(Zech.12:9).

                          Are you saying that this verse refers to the heavenly Jerusalem?

                          And you seem to be saying that the "nations" who came against Jerusalem were Jews.Is that what you are saying?

                          If you will read the previous verse,you can see that "in that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem."

                          Do you think that this refers to the heavenly Jerusalem?

                          The #1 error of the preterists is looking for the truth from the doctrines of men instead of the word of God.

                          In His grace,--Jerry


                          • #28
                            You proved that I was dishonest?

                            Even rapt said that he was sorry for saying that I misrepresented what I was saying.He saw the truth.My words were plain,and the facts are clear.I never misrepresented anything.

                            You finally had to admit that you could only PROVE that I was DISHONEST by saying that my answer IMPLIED something that was dishonest.

                            Provide the link.I want everyone to see how you accused me of being dishonest when I was not being dishonest.

                            In His grace,--Jerry


                            • #29
                              I have answered Jerry's Kingdom parable question here:



                              • #30
                                And Rapt since withdrew that retraction if my understanding is correct. I cannot speak for him, and he and I do not always agree on everything believe it or not.