D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Well AJ you are entitled to be wrong 
I won't beat you today... maybe tomorrow.... if you're lucky. :kiss:
I won't beat you today... maybe tomorrow.... if you're lucky. :kiss:
POST GAME SHOW - Battle Royale III
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
C
cirisme
Guest
And you have only a slight bias.
Don't press your luck. No one gets by me unscathed.
Besides, with all the insults and lack of content that would be flying around, I'd hate to see you on the wrong side of Mr. Ignore List.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Calm down AJ, I was joking with you. Again you can be wrong.... if you thought there was lack of content, then you weren't reading carefully... as to insults... as for out and out insults, considering the tone of the Battles as indicated by Knight himself, I don't think there were really all that many. I was only offended at one thing which is pretty good for ten rounds. The rest was par for course in such an endeavor. You are being a tad bit melodramatic.
C
cirisme
Guest
Yes, and so can you.
...it seemed to exceed what even Knight himself did in BR II, but he is in charge and it is up to him. And even if he has no problem with it(which seems to be the case), I do!
Ah, but I'm not talking about you being offended. I'm not even talking about being offended at all!
Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle, and I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Ignore as well; I have a feeling you'll be in contact with him quite a bit.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Well AJ suit yourself. If that is all it takes to get on your ignore list considering the very genial relationship we have had, then so be it, for a girl, I am not quite so fickle with my friendships.
outbackin5
New member
Please, my sisters and brothers in Christ...
Philippians 2
14 Do all things without grumbling and faultfinding and complaining [[12] against God] and [13] questioning and doubting [among yourselves],
15 That you may show yourselves to be blameless and guileless, innocent and uncontaminated, children of God without blemish (faultless, unrebukable) in the midst of a crooked and wicked generation [spiritually perverted and perverse], among whom you are seen as bright lights (stars or beacons shining out clearly) in the [dark] world...
Out....
Philippians 2
14 Do all things without grumbling and faultfinding and complaining [[12] against God] and [13] questioning and doubting [among yourselves],
15 That you may show yourselves to be blameless and guileless, innocent and uncontaminated, children of God without blemish (faultless, unrebukable) in the midst of a crooked and wicked generation [spiritually perverted and perverse], among whom you are seen as bright lights (stars or beacons shining out clearly) in the [dark] world...
Out....
Revelation717
New member
Unmistakably mistaken
Unmistakably mistaken
Jerry, I can't believe you would so bold facedly contradict what the Scripture clearly and undoubtedly says!
What nerve!
I asked you if the reference in Zech 12: 10 was future or fulfilled to which you replied:
The shame of it astounds me, do you not feel any repentence?
I honestly cannot believe you would say this when I had already given you proof postive of the answer from the SCRIPTURE.
To all the futurists out there that think Jerry's points are Scriptural and valid look at this proof of his denial of God's word:
The answer to whether or not Zech. 12: 10 is future or fulfilled is right here, found in the Gospel according to John chapter 19:
Joh:19:36: For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
Joh:19:37: And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.
Now compare:
Zec:12:10: And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Jerry, your stiffnecked denial of God's word astounds me.
Jerry, can't you read?
Unmistakably mistaken
Jerry, I can't believe you would so bold facedly contradict what the Scripture clearly and undoubtedly says!
What nerve!
I asked you if the reference in Zech 12: 10 was future or fulfilled to which you replied:
The shame of it astounds me, do you not feel any repentence?
I honestly cannot believe you would say this when I had already given you proof postive of the answer from the SCRIPTURE.
To all the futurists out there that think Jerry's points are Scriptural and valid look at this proof of his denial of God's word:
The answer to whether or not Zech. 12: 10 is future or fulfilled is right here, found in the Gospel according to John chapter 19:
Joh:19:36: For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
Joh:19:37: And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.
Now compare:
Zec:12:10: And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Jerry, your stiffnecked denial of God's word astounds me.
Jerry, can't you read?
Revelation717
New member
Jerry's comment to JackS:
I question your honesty Jerry, can you honestly say that they shall look on Him whom they peirced is future when Scripture says these things were done that the Scripture should be FULFILLED?
I reallly do question your honesty, where are you now big boy?
I question your honesty Jerry, can you honestly say that they shall look on Him whom they peirced is future when Scripture says these things were done that the Scripture should be FULFILLED?
I reallly do question your honesty, where are you now big boy?
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Dear Knight:
I have had an evening to reflect some on what you said and have some further comments (big surprise). You said:
Well I wouldn’t say NO group talks more trash, as the Christadelphian Posse that was romping around TOL a whiles back would certainly win in that category, but if you are limiting it to comments surrounding this debate, then fine, I will give you that, though Sola may have made up for the whole lot of any friends of mine with his Hitler comments. But really Knight, they all start crying?? Really, ALL of them? And crying?? I don’t see anyone “crying” Knight because a little trash was talked back. In fact more than a little “trash” went back and forth between both sides. And I remind you that is exactly what you had expressed you wanted in these debates. Does that make any comments off limits?? Where would you draw the line??
I cannot speak for any of my friends, but Jerry crossed the line in the debate, and the fact that you cannot see that is pretty ironic. There is a line between talking “smack” which both Jerry and I have done in spades, and ending a debate, not with calling the ideas that one’s opponent put forth as “idiotic” (which is stronger terminology than I ever used even once for Jerry’s ideas – and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise), but with outright calling one’s opponent an idiot in no uncertain terms. Surely you can see the difference.
And surely Knight, you cannot possibly think that anything I have said comes to close to Jerry’s twisting of Psalm 56:5 and wielding it to say I hate God. That is completely shameful and way beyond talking “smack” or “trash”. I have confessed several times that Jerry’s eschatology does not remove him from being a brother in Christ, and notice that such a comment has never been reciprocal on his end.
I have had an evening to reflect some on what you said and have some further comments (big surprise). You said:
Well I wouldn’t say NO group talks more trash, as the Christadelphian Posse that was romping around TOL a whiles back would certainly win in that category, but if you are limiting it to comments surrounding this debate, then fine, I will give you that, though Sola may have made up for the whole lot of any friends of mine with his Hitler comments. But really Knight, they all start crying?? Really, ALL of them? And crying?? I don’t see anyone “crying” Knight because a little trash was talked back. In fact more than a little “trash” went back and forth between both sides. And I remind you that is exactly what you had expressed you wanted in these debates. Does that make any comments off limits?? Where would you draw the line??
I cannot speak for any of my friends, but Jerry crossed the line in the debate, and the fact that you cannot see that is pretty ironic. There is a line between talking “smack” which both Jerry and I have done in spades, and ending a debate, not with calling the ideas that one’s opponent put forth as “idiotic” (which is stronger terminology than I ever used even once for Jerry’s ideas – and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise), but with outright calling one’s opponent an idiot in no uncertain terms. Surely you can see the difference.
And surely Knight, you cannot possibly think that anything I have said comes to close to Jerry’s twisting of Psalm 56:5 and wielding it to say I hate God. That is completely shameful and way beyond talking “smack” or “trash”. I have confessed several times that Jerry’s eschatology does not remove him from being a brother in Christ, and notice that such a comment has never been reciprocal on his end.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Revelation717,
It is clear that the verse at John 19:37 refers to the time when the Lord was crucified.We can see that by the context.
But if you insist that that verse teaches that ALL the prophecies concerning those who would "look on Him Whom they have pierced"have been fulfilled,then the following verse must have also been fulfilled at the time the gospel of John was written:
"Behold,He cometh with clouds,and every eye shall see Him,and THEY ALSO WHO PIERCED HIM;and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him."(Rev.1:7).
And since the preterists themselves teach that the gospel of John was written BEFORE 70AD,then that means that all these things happened BEFORE AD70.That means that their little theories are in error.
And speaking about who is speaking the truth and who is not,why do you continue to insist that the "Jerusalem" that Zechariah speaks of is the "heavenly Jerusalem"?
You must ignore all the verses that make it plain that the Jerusalem is the same Jerusalem that is on earth.
"And it shall be that whosoever will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King,the Lord of hosts,even on them shall be no rain"(Zech.14:17).
Are you under the illusion that all the FAMILIES OF THE EARTH will go up to the heavenly Jerusalem?
Now,Rev,it is your time to demonstrate that it is not you who is telling a big fib,and explain how this verse could possibly be in reference to the "heavenly Jerusalem".
In His grace,--Jerry
It is clear that the verse at John 19:37 refers to the time when the Lord was crucified.We can see that by the context.
But if you insist that that verse teaches that ALL the prophecies concerning those who would "look on Him Whom they have pierced"have been fulfilled,then the following verse must have also been fulfilled at the time the gospel of John was written:
"Behold,He cometh with clouds,and every eye shall see Him,and THEY ALSO WHO PIERCED HIM;and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him."(Rev.1:7).
And since the preterists themselves teach that the gospel of John was written BEFORE 70AD,then that means that all these things happened BEFORE AD70.That means that their little theories are in error.
And speaking about who is speaking the truth and who is not,why do you continue to insist that the "Jerusalem" that Zechariah speaks of is the "heavenly Jerusalem"?
You must ignore all the verses that make it plain that the Jerusalem is the same Jerusalem that is on earth.
"And it shall be that whosoever will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King,the Lord of hosts,even on them shall be no rain"(Zech.14:17).
Are you under the illusion that all the FAMILIES OF THE EARTH will go up to the heavenly Jerusalem?
Now,Rev,it is your time to demonstrate that it is not you who is telling a big fib,and explain how this verse could possibly be in reference to the "heavenly Jerusalem".
In His grace,--Jerry
Revelation717
New member
Jerry, even if I told ya I rather doubt you could understand and even if you understood I rather doubt you could admit it.
John 19: 37 clearly says that these things were done that the Scriptures should be fulfilled. This is a clear undeniable reference to Zech 12: 10.
SO WHAT if you found another verse that is common in wording. The Scripture is CLEAR as crystal that John 19 :37 is speaking directly of Zech 12:10!
Besides Jerry have you read Revelation 1:1 yet?
Re:1:1: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass
Why would the writer of Revelation in many such instances say these things would SHORTLY come to pass if he indeed meant :Oh 'bout 2000 or so later?
Doesn't make much sense does it? To you it may but if any told you "I'll have it done for you shortly" and AFTER about 50 years or so the work isn't finished I may assume you'd be the type of chap that would call the fella an idiot for not "Having it done SHORTLY". Think of it.
Look at Revelation 17, I'm sure you and your futurist crew think this is the RCC or some worldwide religion stew but have you ever tried comparing SCRIPTURE with SCRIPTURE?
Look at Ezekiel 16, Ezekiel 23 and Jeremiah 3.
These chapters tell us who the whore is, it is the same Jerusalem that you say God will defend in that day. Earthly Jerusalem is a WHORE! God has laid her in bed and she has been stripped naked by her lovers and exposed her filthiness.
Yet you say she is holy. HMMMM
God says she's a harlot.
Woe to them that call evil good, eh?
No, I am not under the illusion that ALL the families of the earth will go up to heavenly Jerusalem. Escpecially those of the Dispensational Futurist family. But all those who know heavenly Jerusalem came DOWN to us will also know this is the bride of the Lord Jesus Christ, He is our heavenly city and in Him do we tabernacle.
Re:3:12: Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Re:21:2: And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Re:21:10: And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Funny you don't understand this.
When Jesus was on the Mt. Transfiguration, His disciples say Moses and Elijah tabernacling in their heavenly city. Think it strange that Peter would ask the Lord if it was good that he make tabernacles there for Moses and Elijah? He did not understand at that time that they were ALREADY in their heavenly tabernacle, Jesus Christ.
So yes, Jerry, all those that do not go up to the heavenly Jerusalem will not receive rain. They are dry as chaff but those that receive the rain shall be as wheat. And when the threshers come the chaff will be burnt up.
M't:3:12: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Lu:3:17: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
Joe:2:23: Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month. The first month being Abib the month of the Passover when our Lord was crucified
Joe:2:24: And the floors shall be full of wheat, and the fats shall overflow with wine and oil.
Joe:2:25: And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you.
Joe:2:26: And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe:2:27: And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe:2:28: And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: This was fulfilled on Pentecost as Peter said
Joe:2:29: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
Joe:2:30: And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
Joe:2:31: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.
Joe:2:32: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
Speaking of Jerusalem, Jeremiah combines this thought with Revelation 17:
Jer:3:3: Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain; and thou hadst a whore's forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed.
Like I said Jerry, why do you keep looking to the ethnic jew and a city that has been desolated for salvation? Salvation is of the Lord and He is no repector of persons. Read the Bible again, but this time....please try to understand. If you forsake those fables of men and misconceptions you've been taught maybe your eyes will be enlightened so you can understand.
John 19: 37 clearly says that these things were done that the Scriptures should be fulfilled. This is a clear undeniable reference to Zech 12: 10.
SO WHAT if you found another verse that is common in wording. The Scripture is CLEAR as crystal that John 19 :37 is speaking directly of Zech 12:10!
Besides Jerry have you read Revelation 1:1 yet?
Re:1:1: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass
Why would the writer of Revelation in many such instances say these things would SHORTLY come to pass if he indeed meant :Oh 'bout 2000 or so later?
Doesn't make much sense does it? To you it may but if any told you "I'll have it done for you shortly" and AFTER about 50 years or so the work isn't finished I may assume you'd be the type of chap that would call the fella an idiot for not "Having it done SHORTLY". Think of it.
Look at Revelation 17, I'm sure you and your futurist crew think this is the RCC or some worldwide religion stew but have you ever tried comparing SCRIPTURE with SCRIPTURE?
Look at Ezekiel 16, Ezekiel 23 and Jeremiah 3.
These chapters tell us who the whore is, it is the same Jerusalem that you say God will defend in that day. Earthly Jerusalem is a WHORE! God has laid her in bed and she has been stripped naked by her lovers and exposed her filthiness.
Yet you say she is holy. HMMMM
God says she's a harlot.
Woe to them that call evil good, eh?
No, I am not under the illusion that ALL the families of the earth will go up to heavenly Jerusalem. Escpecially those of the Dispensational Futurist family. But all those who know heavenly Jerusalem came DOWN to us will also know this is the bride of the Lord Jesus Christ, He is our heavenly city and in Him do we tabernacle.
Re:3:12: Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Re:21:2: And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Re:21:10: And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Funny you don't understand this.
When Jesus was on the Mt. Transfiguration, His disciples say Moses and Elijah tabernacling in their heavenly city. Think it strange that Peter would ask the Lord if it was good that he make tabernacles there for Moses and Elijah? He did not understand at that time that they were ALREADY in their heavenly tabernacle, Jesus Christ.
So yes, Jerry, all those that do not go up to the heavenly Jerusalem will not receive rain. They are dry as chaff but those that receive the rain shall be as wheat. And when the threshers come the chaff will be burnt up.
M't:3:12: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Lu:3:17: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
Joe:2:23: Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month. The first month being Abib the month of the Passover when our Lord was crucified
Joe:2:24: And the floors shall be full of wheat, and the fats shall overflow with wine and oil.
Joe:2:25: And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you.
Joe:2:26: And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe:2:27: And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe:2:28: And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: This was fulfilled on Pentecost as Peter said
Joe:2:29: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
Joe:2:30: And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
Joe:2:31: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.
Joe:2:32: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
Speaking of Jerusalem, Jeremiah combines this thought with Revelation 17:
Jer:3:3: Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain; and thou hadst a whore's forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed.
Like I said Jerry, why do you keep looking to the ethnic jew and a city that has been desolated for salvation? Salvation is of the Lord and He is no repector of persons. Read the Bible again, but this time....please try to understand. If you forsake those fables of men and misconceptions you've been taught maybe your eyes will be enlightened so you can understand.
Listen to Revelation717's tone...
Now I am beginning to understand why Jerry used the term "idiotic".
The "all" was a "figure of speech" you may want to investigate what that means.
That's a good point.
OK, I repent.
The "preterist posse" takes 2nd place. How's that?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Revelation717,
If you had read my posts on the Battle Royal you would see why the Lord´s words concerning His coming has not yet come to pass.There will always be unbelievers around who will attempt to make hay out of His promise that He will come quickly.
"Knowing this first,that there shall come in the last days scoffers,walking after their own lusts,and saying,Where is the promise of His coming?"(2Pet.3:3,4).
Isn´t that EXACTLY what you are asking?
And there are two reasons why the Lord´s arrival has been delayed.One is the fact that the Lord´s promise was made to a "faithful" church,and almost since the beginning the church has been anything but faithful to the truth of God.And the second reason can be found in the answer to the words of Peter quoted above:
"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise,as some men count slackness,but is longsuffering toward us,not willing that any should perish,but that all should come to repentance"(2Pet.3:9).
And also notice that the Lord promises to bring "rewards" to all the believers when He comes (Rev.22:12).Again,you must have to abandon your common sense if you believe that that happened in AD70!
And are you saying that at the time the Apostle John wrote the words at John 19:37 that the following verse had already been fulfilled?:
"Behold,He cometh with clouds,and every eye shall see Him,and they also who pierced Him;and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him"(Rev.1:7).
Do you honestly believe that EVERY EYE has seen Him coming with clouds?Do you believe that all kindreds of the earth wailed becvause of Him in AD70?
From the context of John´s word we can see that he was referring to the fact that those who pierced him also looked upon Him when He was on the cross.
And if I understand you correctly,you are saying that the events described by Zechariah have already come to pass,and we are supposed to believe that the "heavenly Jerusalem" is NOW on earth,and NOW all the families of the earth are NOW coming to the heavenly Jerusalem to honor the king.
Well,you must not be aware that at this moment the Lord is not on earth,but instead is at the right hand of the Father IN HEAVEN!
In His grace,--Jerry
If you had read my posts on the Battle Royal you would see why the Lord´s words concerning His coming has not yet come to pass.There will always be unbelievers around who will attempt to make hay out of His promise that He will come quickly.
"Knowing this first,that there shall come in the last days scoffers,walking after their own lusts,and saying,Where is the promise of His coming?"(2Pet.3:3,4).
Isn´t that EXACTLY what you are asking?
And there are two reasons why the Lord´s arrival has been delayed.One is the fact that the Lord´s promise was made to a "faithful" church,and almost since the beginning the church has been anything but faithful to the truth of God.And the second reason can be found in the answer to the words of Peter quoted above:
"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise,as some men count slackness,but is longsuffering toward us,not willing that any should perish,but that all should come to repentance"(2Pet.3:9).
And also notice that the Lord promises to bring "rewards" to all the believers when He comes (Rev.22:12).Again,you must have to abandon your common sense if you believe that that happened in AD70!
And are you saying that at the time the Apostle John wrote the words at John 19:37 that the following verse had already been fulfilled?:
"Behold,He cometh with clouds,and every eye shall see Him,and they also who pierced Him;and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him"(Rev.1:7).
Do you honestly believe that EVERY EYE has seen Him coming with clouds?Do you believe that all kindreds of the earth wailed becvause of Him in AD70?
From the context of John´s word we can see that he was referring to the fact that those who pierced him also looked upon Him when He was on the cross.
And if I understand you correctly,you are saying that the events described by Zechariah have already come to pass,and we are supposed to believe that the "heavenly Jerusalem" is NOW on earth,and NOW all the families of the earth are NOW coming to the heavenly Jerusalem to honor the king.
Well,you must not be aware that at this moment the Lord is not on earth,but instead is at the right hand of the Father IN HEAVEN!
In His grace,--Jerry
Hey Jerry,
I just gotta ask:
You said:And there are two reasons why the Lord´s arrival has been delayed.One is the fact that the Lord´s promise was made to a "faithful" church,and almost since the beginning the church has been anything but faithful to the truth of God.And the second reason can be found in the answer to the words of Peter quoted above:
I want to ask you about point one. I will make an assumption and if my assumption is incorrect then I will stand corrected. My assumption is that you believe that the Lord's promise will be fullfilled soon?
If this is true then you must also believe that the "faithful" church is living today?
Input please.
You also said:
And if I understand you correctly,you are saying that the events described by Zechariah have already come to pass,and we are supposed to believe that the "heavenly Jerusalem" is NOW on earth,and NOW all the families of the earth are NOW coming to the heavenly Jerusalem to honor the king.
Now I can't speak for Rev, but I can say so what is your problem with this? If this Jerusalem represents the church then yes, familes of the earth are coming to the church to honor the King. For the church is the true Isreal, the child of promise. As it says in Galations 3:26,"if you are in Christ, then you are Abrahams seed heirs according to what was promised."
You also said:
Well,you must not be aware that at this moment the Lord is not on earth,but instead is at the right hand of the Father IN HEAVEN!
Amen a point we can agree upon. Maybe we should focus on where we agree and not on where we disagree? For what is really important is this:
"If you love me you will obey what I command."
Might be more important to help each other focus on this goal rather than trying to prove you are correct?
I just gotta ask:
You said:And there are two reasons why the Lord´s arrival has been delayed.One is the fact that the Lord´s promise was made to a "faithful" church,and almost since the beginning the church has been anything but faithful to the truth of God.And the second reason can be found in the answer to the words of Peter quoted above:
I want to ask you about point one. I will make an assumption and if my assumption is incorrect then I will stand corrected. My assumption is that you believe that the Lord's promise will be fullfilled soon?
If this is true then you must also believe that the "faithful" church is living today?
Input please.
You also said:
And if I understand you correctly,you are saying that the events described by Zechariah have already come to pass,and we are supposed to believe that the "heavenly Jerusalem" is NOW on earth,and NOW all the families of the earth are NOW coming to the heavenly Jerusalem to honor the king.
Now I can't speak for Rev, but I can say so what is your problem with this? If this Jerusalem represents the church then yes, familes of the earth are coming to the church to honor the King. For the church is the true Isreal, the child of promise. As it says in Galations 3:26,"if you are in Christ, then you are Abrahams seed heirs according to what was promised."
You also said:
Well,you must not be aware that at this moment the Lord is not on earth,but instead is at the right hand of the Father IN HEAVEN!
Amen a point we can agree upon. Maybe we should focus on where we agree and not on where we disagree? For what is really important is this:
"If you love me you will obey what I command."
Might be more important to help each other focus on this goal rather than trying to prove you are correct?
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Dear Knight:
Please reread my post to you for you responded to something else entirely. I am referring to the Debate itself, and not on the comments here on this thread or the other. I thought I made that clear. Maybe I didn't. Or are you saying it is okay to degenerate in the last line of a debate to call one's opponent an idiot when one's opponent NEVER crossed that line because one does not like what one's supporters are saying?? Are you serious?? Also are you claiming that it is appropriate for Jerry to change the meaning of a Scripture and then use it to claim that I hate God?? Do you really Knight?? I know you well enough to see that for some reason your judgment is seriously impaired here.
Good, you're making progress. Can we have that title officially under our names?
Actually if you had read the debate you would see that I know that full well. You may want to explain that to Jerry. He seems to think all always means all. Thank you for the living demonstration of the error of that presumption.
And that was never my point. What he said here or others said here was never my point. So Knight, do you think it was appropriate for Jerry to use Psalm 56:5 to say that I hate God?? Why are you so quick to jump on Rev and Rapt or whoever (deserved or not) but you won't say a word about the bad behavior of him?? I again challenge you to find where I ever in that Debate degenerated into an attack on the person rather than the eschatology. I never said Jerry was deceived by satan (he said I was), I never called him outright names as to his total character (he called me an idiot), and I never questioned his Christian commitment (he said I hate God), and that is just peachy with you Knight?? Not a word about that??
And about the "dishonesty" charge that I leveled. Yes I did, but not to his entire state of being, I said he used sources dishonestly and I proved it. I do not believe that Jerry is an outright dishonest person. I do not believe he kicks his dog either.
Please reread my post to you for you responded to something else entirely. I am referring to the Debate itself, and not on the comments here on this thread or the other. I thought I made that clear. Maybe I didn't. Or are you saying it is okay to degenerate in the last line of a debate to call one's opponent an idiot when one's opponent NEVER crossed that line because one does not like what one's supporters are saying?? Are you serious?? Also are you claiming that it is appropriate for Jerry to change the meaning of a Scripture and then use it to claim that I hate God?? Do you really Knight?? I know you well enough to see that for some reason your judgment is seriously impaired here.
Good, you're making progress. Can we have that title officially under our names?
Actually if you had read the debate you would see that I know that full well. You may want to explain that to Jerry. He seems to think all always means all. Thank you for the living demonstration of the error of that presumption.
And that was never my point. What he said here or others said here was never my point. So Knight, do you think it was appropriate for Jerry to use Psalm 56:5 to say that I hate God?? Why are you so quick to jump on Rev and Rapt or whoever (deserved or not) but you won't say a word about the bad behavior of him?? I again challenge you to find where I ever in that Debate degenerated into an attack on the person rather than the eschatology. I never said Jerry was deceived by satan (he said I was), I never called him outright names as to his total character (he called me an idiot), and I never questioned his Christian commitment (he said I hate God), and that is just peachy with you Knight?? Not a word about that??
And about the "dishonesty" charge that I leveled. Yes I did, but not to his entire state of being, I said he used sources dishonestly and I proved it. I do not believe that Jerry is an outright dishonest person. I do not believe he kicks his dog either.
- Status