Hyper-Futurist Challenge

[researcher]

Mat 17:12 but I say into you, that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.

Jesus said John the Baptist was Elijah. Good enough for me. ;)

John the Baptist was surely being humble when he denied being Elijah. As any true prophet should be. ;) :D

 

[Matthew24:34]

How in the name of anything that is reasonable is anyone supposed to address ALL the numerous things you bring up Prophecy Countdown? You can take that as my inability to do so--I don't care. We are not writing books here and doing BOOK apologetics. Are these things you simply came up with now or is this something you compiled over a great deal of time? If the latter is true, it is not reasonable for anyone to deal with your post without spending the same amount of time to refute you!

Again, it is so easy for people to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs. What are we supposed to do now, PC? Look them ALL up and study ALL of them in their contexts? That is what I feel the need to do, and I simply do not have the time to do that. Are we to assume that you are using all of those passages properly or are we now forced to go to everyone of them and study them using proper hermeneutical principles--principles that require much time and effort?

I resent such an approach on these boards. I will not engage in them!

Matthew24:34

 

[parousia70]

Parousia70
So you are saying the Rivers of Living water that spring out from the hearts of believers today are inferior to the rivers of living water that are coming in the future?

No I did not say that, you just did.

So, if they are NOT inferior, are the Rivers of Living Water that spring from us now as believers of the same efficacy as the Rivers of Living water of Zech 14?

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Researcher
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah come.

Mat 17:11 And he answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things:
Mat 17:12 but I say into you, that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then understood the disciples that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Mal 3:1 Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:
and the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.
Mal 3:2 But who can abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap:

Mat 11:10 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way before thee.

Guess the day of the Lord happened already. Elijah showed up 2000 years ago.

Was Jesus coming to vent His righteous judgment upon the Earth on the day of the Lord or was the Lord coming as a meek king?
Jesus said “thy King cometh unto thee, meek.â€Â

These are the prophetic words of Zechariah.

Zechariah 9: 9. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.â€Â

Matthew 21: 4. “All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,â€Â
Matthew 21: 5. “Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.â€Â

Elijah and Moses were there for the Lord, to talk about the Lords soon ‘decease’ i.e. death, demise upon the cross in verse 31, and that was nothing to do with the day of the Lord.

Luke 9: 29. “As He prayed, the appearance of His face was altered, and His robe became white and glistening.â€Â

Luke 9: 30. And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:
Luke 9: 31. Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.

Mark 9: 9. And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought.

Matthew 17: 12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Matthew 17: 13. Then the Disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Jesus related John as being in kind to Elijah, both heralding the Lord, but at different times.
John the Baptist heralding Jesus, at the legs of iron, being the Roman Empire time span on the Metal Empire Statue of Daniel 2: 38 – 45.
Then we will have Elijah and Moses, at a much later time at the feet of iron and clay During the fourth beast kingdom, Daniel 7: 23. Rev 13: 1 – 5, made up of the lion, bear, leopard, and fourth beast of Daniel 7: 3 – 7 yet to form up.

John was there to herald the coming Messiah as Moses and Elias/Elijah will do for 1260 days of witnessing, plus 3½ days before the day of the Lord in Rev 11: 1 – 15.
That is the similarity of Elijah and John the Baptist and of course Moses.

John the Baptist was there to herald the light of the world, then at that time of the legs of iron in the world. The Word was with God and was God and everything that was created was done so by Jesus and that God is come on Earth incarnate.

John denied being Elijah or ‘that Prophet’ a phrase understood by Jews to mean Moses, however John heralds Jesus in like manner that Elijah will do before the terrible day of the Lord.
These things John the Baptist and the Lord had to overcome.

“they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed.†They beheaded John.
“Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.†They crucified Jesus.
Matthew 17: 12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

John 1: “And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?â€Â

20. “And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.â€Â

21. “And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.â€Â

22. “Then said they unt him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us.â€Â

They were not pulling these questions out of thin air they knew about these things. Deut 18: 17 – 20. Malachi 4: 5, 6.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Parousia70
So you are saying the Rivers of Living water that spring out from the hearts of believers today are inferior to the rivers of living water that are coming in the future?

No I did not say that, you just did.

So, if they are NOT inferior, are the Rivers of Living Water that spring from us now as believers of the same efficacy as the Rivers of Living water of Zech 14?

I have given you a detailed answer to this question when asked originally. Why do you keep repeating it? :naughty
Please, go back and at least read my original answer to it.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Originally posted by researcher
Guess the day of the Lord happened already. Elijah showed up 2000 years ago.

You're not understanding this subject fully.

Malachi prophesied:

Malachi 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

And in Matthew:

Matthew 3:11, "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:"

Here is Matthew's testimony regarding the identity of John the Baptist:

Matthew 3:1 "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight."

And here is some interesting dialogue between John the Baptist and representatives of the Pharisees that takes place in John 1:

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not . Art thou that prophet ? And he answered, No.
John 1:22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?
John 1:23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.
John 1:24 And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.
John 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?
John 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
John 1:27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

*Note: Notice how the Pharisees differentiated between Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and the Messenger of Malachi 3:1 as seen in verses 21 and 25 in John above. Nothing too significant, but worth noting.

When asked about the identity of John the Baptist, here's what Jesus said about him:

Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matthew 11:14 "and if you are willing to accept it", he is Elijah who is to come.

Later, however, we see a shift in the presentation of the identity of John the Baptist:

Matthew 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Matthew 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things .
Matthew 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Matthew 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Jesus sums it up here:

Matthew 21:32 "For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him."

"If" the Jews had received Jesus as the Messiah, "then" John the Baptist would have fulfilled the role of the prophet of Malachi 3:1 and Malachi 4:5-6. However, since the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, then John the Baptist did not fulfill the stated role of Elijah. In other words, John the Baptist could have been Elijah, but wasn't because of the rejection of Jesus as Messiah. Also if you recall, Isaiah had prophesied that they would reject the Messiah in his first advent (Isaiah 53).

Matthew 11:14 and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come.

"John is the Elijah who is to come, IF you are will to accept the message". Of course, the message was not accepted, Jesus Christ was crucified, and the Kingdom was rejected, so John was not regarded as "the" Elijah who "is" to come before that great and dreadful day of the Lord. If they would have accepted Christ as Messiah, then the Kingdom would have been ushered in at that time (Matthew 22:1-8), and John the Baptist would have been regarded as Elijah (Matthew 11:14). In other words, Elijah must come before “the day of the Lordâ€Â, when Jesus comes as King of Kings (plural) and Lord of Lords, and the day of vengeance of our God (Isaiah 61:2, Revelation 19:16), not the “day†when Christ came as the Lamb of God, was rejected and crucified, and offered salvation and grace to humanity (Isaiah 61:1).

Using simple logic: Did the Jews accept the message? No, they did not. Question: “Was John Elijah if they were NOT willing to accept it?†Obviously the answer is NO! If the Jews DID NOT accept the message, thus resulting in John NOT being Elijah; and Elijah MUST COME before that great and terrible day of the Lord, which YOU CLAIM is 70 AD, how can this be? The Jews, who rejected the message, resulting in John not being Elijah, were the very targets of the 70 AD destruction, yet because they didn’t accept the message, John was not Elijah, thus Elijah did not come. However, before that great and terrible day of the Lord, he MUST!

:amen

Many thanks to you Osgiliath, I posted my reply before I read yours and you have done a much better and thorough explanation than me.

PC

 

[researcher]

Researcher
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah come.

Mat 17:11 And he answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things:
Mat 17:12 but I say into you, that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then understood the disciples that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Mal 3:1 Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:
and the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.
Mal 3:2 But who can abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap:

Mat 11:10 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way before thee.

Guess the day of the Lord happened already. Elijah showed up 2000 years ago.

Jesus related John as being in kind to Elijah, both heralding the Lord, but at different times.
John the Baptist heralding Jesus, at the legs of iron, being the Roman Empire time span on the Metal Empire Statue of Daniel 2: 38 – 45.
Then we will have Elijah and Moses, at a much later time at the feet of iron and clay During the fourth beast kingdom, Daniel 7: 23. Rev 13: 1 – 5, made up of the lion, bear, leopard, and fourth beast of Daniel 7: 3 – 7 yet to form up.

John was there to herald the coming Messiah as Moses and Elias/Elijah will do for 1260 days of witnessing, plus 3½ days before the day of the Lord in Rev 11: 1 – 15.
That is the similarity of Elijah and John the Baptist and of course Moses.
PC

Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

That happened already. Revelation 11 is a historical event.

Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70AD. :\

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

How in the name of anything that is reasonable is anyone supposed to address ALL the numerous things you bring up Prophecy Countdown? You can take that as my inability to do so--I don't care. We are not writing books here and doing BOOK apologetics. Are these things you simply came up with now or is this something you compiled over a great deal of time? If the latter is true, it is not reasonable for anyone to deal with your post without spending the same amount of time to refute you!

Again, it is so easy for people to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs. What are we supposed to do now, PC? Look them ALL up and study ALL of them in their contexts? That is what I feel the need to do, and I simply do not have the time to do that. Are we to assume that you are using all of those passages properly or are we now forced to go to everyone of them and study them using proper hermeneutical principles--principles that require much time and effort?
I resent such an approach on these boards. I will not engage in them!
Matthew24:34

If it is so easy, as you say "to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs." Then it must be much, much easier to be critical of persons than tackle the biblical text used by them in context within the discussion and retreat with excuses.
It was a challenge by a preterist and answers from parousia70 that were dealt with and you jumped in by your own free choice, you should have thought about how much time you had before doing so.
If you can't backup your statements with the scriptures or it gets to hard and you haven't the time to spare then it would be better for you not to say anything. :naughty

2 Timothy 2: 15. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2: 16. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

2 Timothy 3: 14. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2 Timothy 3: 15. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 3: 16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 3: 17. That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Matthew24:34]

[quote="Matthew24:34":3da56gq0]How in the name of anything that is reasonable is anyone supposed to address ALL the numerous things you bring up Prophecy Countdown? You can take that as my inability to do so--I don't care. We are not writing books here and doing BOOK apologetics. Are these things you simply came up with now or is this something you compiled over a great deal of time? If the latter is true, it is not reasonable for anyone to deal with your post without spending the same amount of time to refute you!

Again, it is so easy for people to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs. What are we supposed to do now, PC? Look them ALL up and study ALL of them in their contexts? That is what I feel the need to do, and I simply do not have the time to do that. Are we to assume that you are using all of those passages properly or are we now forced to go to everyone of them and study them using proper hermeneutical principles--principles that require much time and effort?
I resent such an approach on these boards. I will not engage in them!
Matthew24:34

If it is so easy, as you say "to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs." Then it must be much, much easier to be critical of persons than tackle the biblical text used by them in context within the discussion and retreat with excuses.
It was a challenge by a preterist and answers from parousia70 that were dealt with and you jumped in by your own free choice, you should have thought about how much time you had before doing so.
If you can't backup your statements with the scriptures or it gets to hard and you haven't the time to spare then it would be better for you not to say anything. :naughty

2 Timothy 2: 15. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2: 16. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

2 Timothy 3: 14. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2 Timothy 3: 15. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 3: 16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 3: 17. That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.[/quote:3da56gq0]

PC: I can and DO back up what I say with Scripture. Anyone who takes the time to read my posts knows that. It is ridiculous accusation. I never said I don't take the time or don't care to take the time to do that. I simply remarked that when people post a very lengthy treatise filled with a multitude of verses, it is difficult for those of us who want to make sure they are being understood and being used in their contexts to deal with all of them. I prefer that when people supply verses or passages that THEY take the time to present the context in which they are found.

Did I not predict that you would turn around and accuse me of making excuses? I throw your own words back at you PC--YOU did not bother to take the time to present the verses you used in their contexts. It is YOU who should say nothing at all if you cannot keep your posts to a manageable length and keep them restricted to a manageable number of verses or passages which YOU present in their contexts. Again, I resent this throwing of a multitude of verses at people. What are you expecting us to do, PC? Look them ALL up and make sure that YOU are using them properly?

2 Timothy 2 and 3 apply to YOU as well, PC!

Sincerely, Matthew24:34

 

[Osgiliath]

Originally posted by Prophecy Countdown
If it is so easy, as you say "to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs." Then it must be much, much easier to be critical of persons than tackle the biblical text used by them in context within the discussion and retreat with excuses.
It was a challenge by a preterist and answers from parousia70 that were dealt with and you jumped in by your own free choice, you should have thought about how much time you had before doing so.
If you can't backup your statements with the scriptures or it gets to hard and you haven't the time to spare then it would be better for you not to say anything

Welcome to the party PC. Unfortunately, this party is a bust. Matthew never backs anything up, but of course he says he does. You will find out soon enough that all he is capable of is pretending everyone else is whacked (never mind that full-preterism is by its very nature whacked since it tries to replace 2,000 years of Christian interpretation with its radical revision - so radical in fact that it is nothing like ANYTHING that has EVER been considered Christian!) "Hey everybody, got some breaking news for you; the Church has missed the basic fundamentals of Christian eschatology for two millennia, but we’ve got the answer that billions have missed; including ALL of our Christian forefathers - even those that lived right after 70 AD." What a joke.

You will be bored to tears real quick PC. It's the same shallow nonsense over and over and over again. Go back and look at my "Full-Preterist Challenge" thread and you will see how he "backs things up".

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Researcher

Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

That happened already. Revelation 11 is a historical event.

Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70AD

Which is your opinion only, without any biblical backup whatsoever.
I will give you an easy question based on that one verse you use.

Rev 11: 1. And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

Revelation 11: 2. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty two months.

If as you say that

“Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70ADâ€Â

how come there is no mention of the Temple being destroyed?
Also Revelation states that it is the ‘city’ and ‘Outer Court’ that the Gentiles trample upon?
Yet the Romans smashed the Temple in 70AD so why is it not the same description if as you claim Revelation 11: 2 is about that specific event?
Nowhere in Revelation 2: does it say the Temple of God was destroyed.

The time factors involved in Daniel 2: concerning the Metal Empire Time Statue, where the Roman Empire, at which 70AD falls to within at the LEGS OF IRON time span which is not the time When God sets up His kingdom. God will set up and give His kingdom to the Saints at the time span of the FEET OF IRON AND CLAY according to Daniel 2: 39 – 45 and in Daniel 7: verses 18 and 27 confirms that He will do so which was made clear in great detail in earlier posts using the scriptures. All historic Empires are accounted for until we get to the feet of iron and clay and it doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

So coming back making rhetorical repetitive statements that do not
stand biblical scrutiny is futile. :naughty
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Originally posted by Prophecy Countdown
If it is so easy, as you say "to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs." Then it must be much, much easier to be critical of persons than tackle the biblical text used by them in context within the discussion and retreat with excuses.
It was a challenge by a preterist and answers from parousia70 that were dealt with and you jumped in by your own free choice, you should have thought about how much time you had before doing so.
If you can't backup your statements with the scriptures or it gets to hard and you haven't the time to spare then it would be better for you not to say anything

Welcome to the party PC. Unfortunately, this party is a bust. Matthew never backs anything up, but of course he says he does. You will find out soon enough that all he is capable of is pretending everyone else is whacked (never mind that full-preterism is by its very nature whacked since it tries to replace 2,000 years of Christian interpretation with its radical revision - so radical in fact that it is nothing like ANYTHING that has EVER been considered Christian!) "Hey everybody, got some breaking news for you; the Church has missed the basic fundamentals of Christian eschatology for two millennia, but we’ve got the answer that billions have missed; including ALL of our Christian forefathers - even those that lived right after 70 AD." What a joke.

You will be bored to tears real quick PC. It's the same shallow nonsense over and over and over again. Go back and look at my "Full-Preterist Challenge" thread and you will see how he "backs things up".

Hi Osgiliath, you have made my day, my wife was laughing her head off as I read your post to her, and I have a big grin on my face between the chuckles. Now I’m back to laughing. :biglol
Thankyou for your welcome it was very kind of you.
I started to answer Matthew24:34, but when I saw your post it confirmed all that I had suspected and written down in my reply, unsent thus far so again you have saved me having to respond.

I love this work Osgiliath. I am going over to your “Full-Preterist Challenge†I will join you there.
Once again many thanks for your kind welcome it was greatly appreciated.
PC

 

[researcher]

Researcher

Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

That happened already. Revelation 11 is a historical event.

Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70AD

Which is your opinion only, without any biblical backup whatsoever.
I will give you an easy question based on that one verse you use.

Rev 11: 1. And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

Revelation 11: 2. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty two months.

If as you say that [quote:2fdvzgwu]“Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70ADâ€Â

how come there is no mention of the Temple being destroyed?
Also Revelation states that it is the ‘city’ and ‘Outer Court’ that the Gentiles trample upon?
Yet the Romans smashed the Temple in 70AD so why is it not the same description if as you claim Revelation 11: 2 is about that specific event?
Nowhere in Revelation 2: does it say the Temple of God was destroyed.

The time factors involved in Daniel 2: concerning the Metal Empire Time Statue, where the Roman Empire, at which 70AD falls to within at the LEGS OF IRON time span which is not the time When God sets up His kingdom. God will set up and give His kingdom to the Saints at the time span of the FEET OF IRON AND CLAY according to Daniel 2: 39 – 45 and in Daniel 7: verses 18 and 27 confirms that He will do so which was made clear in great detail in earlier posts using the scriptures. All historic Empires are accounted for until we get to the feet of iron and clay and it doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

So coming back making rhetorical repetitive statements that do not
stand biblical scrutiny is futile. :naughty
PC[/quote:2fdvzgwu]

The verses below were all the same thing, and what is described in the verses already happened.

Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Rev 14:19 And the angel cast his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress, the great winepress, of the wrath of God.
Rev 14:20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and there came out blood from the winepress, even unto the bridles of the horses, as far as a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

All of those verses were fulfilled in the first century.

 

[Matthew24:34]

"He laughs best who laughs last", last line from Denis Diderot's "Rameau's Nephew"

It's the final outcome that matters. In a matter of rivalry or opposition, one party or the other may think he's winning and have a laugh on the other party. But not until it's all over do we know who has the last laugh. And whoever has the last laugh--that is, the victor, the winner, the one who succeeds or prevails in the end--is the one who gets to celebrate the most. That's the party who laughs best. WikiAnswers.com

When more and more years pass without the Lord's return, more and more futurists who now laugh at preterists will be forced to admit their error.

Here are the stages concerning opponents as outlined by Mahatma Ghandi--

First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they attack you.
And then YOU WIN!

:P :D :yes :biglaugh :rolling :wink3 :tongue2 :snicker :distorted :bday 3 2

 

[Osgiliath]

But what if you're wrong Matthew? I know you will never admit you could be wrong; but hypothetically speaking; what if you are? Are you just going to say; whoops? Just out of curiosity (hypothetically once again), what do you think the consequences would be if that were the case? I don't know myself (only God can judge a person's heart), but I'm wondering if you have ever given that any thought.

 

[Matthew24:34]

But what if you're wrong Matthew? I know you will never admit you could be wrong; but hypothetically speaking; what if you are? Are you just going to say; whoops? Just out of curiosity (hypothetically once again), what do you think the consequences would be if that were the case? I don't know myself (only God can judge a person's heart), but I'm wondering if you have ever given that any thought.

When have you admitted the possibility of being wrong, Osgiliath? Only the preterist is to consider such a possibility? Again, time is on the preterist's side.

Actually, although I posted all those laughing icons, none of this is funny at all. It is not funny when a believer twists the words of our Lord to his own ends. It is not funny when believers, who are themselves wrong, point their fingers at others and laugh! It is not funny when believers do not know how to properly study the Bible. It is not funny when believers falsely accuse someone, as you did, of not supporting their claims with the Scriptures. That is either an error on your part or an outright lie! The posting of numerous passages is not an indication of support for one's position. I spend a great deal of time exegeting the verses I use, Osgiliath--employing proper hermeneutical principles foreign to most here--such as CONTEXT, audience relevance, cross-referencing words and expressions, etc. Disagree with me if you must, but do NOT falsely portray me, Osgiliath. Just because I do not post the entire Bible to support my beliefs, does not mean that I do not support my beliefs with well-thought out and deeply exegeted verses and passages. You might trying doing that yourself some time instead of lazily posting a myriad of verses out of their contexts so that you can pat yourself on the back and say--"See, I support my beliefs with the Scriptures!"

You berate me and tell others that I am guilty of not using the Scriptures to support my beliefs. That is an outright falsehood, Osgiliath. Sadly, some who believe you do so without even reading what I have posted! I await an apology for this false portrayal.

Matthew24:34

 

[Osgiliath]

Originally posted by Matthew24:34
I support my beliefs with the Scriptures!"

You said it; YOU support your beliefs! However in the reverse, the Scriptures DO NOT support YOUR beliefs.

Scriptures should have come first in that sentence, not "I".

As far as an apology, I apologize if I have made you to think that I'm simply out to "smear" you personally. That is simply not true. However, I do not apologize for denouncing someone who is teaching CONTRARY and DIVISIVE doctrine....doctrine that divides Christians from historic Christianity (Romans 16:17-18). When I say that you don't support your beliefs with Scripture; YOU DON'T! Blatant manipulation of Scripture to conveniently conform to a false belief system does not qualify as "supporting claims with Scripture". That is a lie in itself. Your doctrine is NOT merely "existing at a different level of understanding", it is existing OUTSIDE the Biblical and Apostolic teachings/traditions passed on to the Body of Christ (2 Thessalonians 2:15). I make no apologies for exposing this heresy for what it is. As far as I'm concerned, you’ve apostasized from the faith that "saved" you, and are now an enemy of the Gospel, and I will not remain silent on this matter. You keep insisting that I am not showing "Christ-like behavior" and that I am arrogant; yet you by your very words consider me (along with 2,000 years worth of Christians) as being too dumb to understand what you supposedly claim. Who then is not Christ-like? Who then is being arrogant? Take the log out of your own eye!

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Researcher
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah come.

Mat 17:11 And he answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things:
Mat 17:12 but I say into you, that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then understood the disciples that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Mal 3:1 Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:
and the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.
Mal 3:2 But who can abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap:

Mat 11:10 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way before thee.

Guess the day of the Lord happened already. Elijah showed up 2000 years ago.

Jesus related John as being in kind to Elijah, both heralding the Lord, but at different times.
John the Baptist heralding Jesus, at the legs of iron, being the Roman Empire time span on the Metal Empire Statue of Daniel 2: 38 – 45.
Then we will have Elijah and Moses, at a much later time at the feet of iron and clay During the fourth beast kingdom, Daniel 7: 23. Rev 13: 1 – 5, made up of the lion, bear, leopard, and fourth beast of Daniel 7: 3 – 7 yet to form up.

John was there to herald the coming Messiah as Moses and Elias/Elijah will do for 1260 days of witnessing, plus 3½ days before the day of the Lord in Rev 11: 1 – 15.
That is the similarity of Elijah and John the Baptist and of course Moses.
PC

Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

That happened already. Revelation 11 is a historical event.

Rev 11:2 took place between 66 and 70AD. :\

Do you think Revelation 19: and 20: occurred around 70AD?

 

[researcher]

Do you think Revelation 19: and 20: occurred around 70AD?

I think Rev. 19 and 20 happened up to Rev 20:6.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

[quote="Prophecy Countdown":fk3z8xcw][quote="Matthew24:34":fk3z8xcw]How in the name of anything that is reasonable is anyone supposed to address ALL the numerous things you bring up Prophecy Countdown? You can take that as my inability to do so--I don't care. We are not writing books here and doing BOOK apologetics. Are these things you simply came up with now or is this something you compiled over a great deal of time? If the latter is true, it is not reasonable for anyone to deal with your post without spending the same amount of time to refute you!

Again, it is so easy for people to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs. What are we supposed to do now, PC? Look them ALL up and study ALL of them in their contexts? That is what I feel the need to do, and I simply do not have the time to do that. Are we to assume that you are using all of those passages properly or are we now forced to go to everyone of them and study them using proper hermeneutical principles--principles that require much time and effort?
I resent such an approach on these boards. I will not engage in them!
Matthew24:34

If it is so easy, as you say "to throw a bunch of scripture passages around to supposedly support their beliefs." Then it must be much, much easier to be critical of persons than tackle the biblical text used by them in context within the discussion and retreat with excuses.
It was a challenge by a preterist and answers from parousia70 that were dealt with and you jumped in by your own free choice, you should have thought about how much time you had before doing so.
If you can't backup your statements with the scriptures or it gets to hard and you haven't the time to spare then it would be better for you not to say anything. :naughty

2 Timothy 2: 15. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2: 16. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

2 Timothy 3: 14. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2 Timothy 3: 15. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 3: 16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 3: 17. That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.[/quote:fk3z8xcw]

PC: I can and DO back up what I say with Scripture. Anyone who takes the time to read my posts knows that. It is ridiculous accusation. I never said I don't take the time or don't care to take the time to do that. I simply remarked that when people post a very lengthy treatise filled with a multitude of verses, it is difficult for those of us who want to make sure they are being understood and being used in their contexts to deal with all of them. I prefer that when people supply verses or passages that THEY take the time to present the context in which they are found.

Did I not predict that you would turn around and accuse me of making excuses? I throw your own words back at you PC--YOU did not bother to take the time to present the verses you used in their contexts. It is YOU who should say nothing at all if you cannot keep your posts to a manageable length and keep them restricted to a manageable number of verses or passages which YOU present in their contexts. Again, I resent this throwing of a multitude of verses at people. What are you expecting us to do, PC? Look them ALL up and make sure that YOU are using them properly?

2 Timothy 2 and 3 apply to YOU as well, PC!

Sincerely, Matthew24:34[/quote:fk3z8xcw]

It is not necessary to answer all my questions but just the ones you have time to from your perspective.
Where do you place Daniel chapter 7 in the past or present and how do you see the beasts in verses 3 - 7 as representative of?
Also how would you explain Daniel 8: 20: 20. "The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia."

21. "And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power."
PC