The absurdity and heresy of Preterism

[John146]

What Jesus was actually saying was that Abraham saw the lamb that was trapped in the mountain, and he took it and sacrifice it instead of Issac, so in that sense, he was glad.

People interpret that to say what they want it to say, that Abraham saw the cross where the Son of God would die for everyone's sins.

And it was actually a ram, not a lamb.

 

[KJV1611]

And it was actually a ram, not a lamb.

You do realize that a ram is a MALE SHEEP.

 

[John146]

You do realize that a ram is a MALE SHEEP.

Does scripture refer to Jesus as a lamb or a ram?

 

[KJV1611]

Does scripture refer to Jesus as a lamb or a ram?

It does in the verse your trying to twist.

 

[John146]

It does in the verse your trying to twist.

Actually, the following prophecy was said earlier in this passage...

8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

 

[KJV1611]

Actually, the following prophecy was said earlier in this passage...

8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.[/QUOTE
What part of a ram is a lamb do you not understand?

 

[John146]

I understand brother, I’m not disagreeing, but the wording in the KJV is what matters. Christ is never referred to as a ram, but a lamb.

 

[Dan_473]

They had no understanding though. Moses was condemned for striking the rock a second time. Once Christ was crucified for us, we are to call upon that rock, not put Him back on the cross over and over.

that makes sense.

an interesting thing that I think goes along with that,
in the lxx, the Greek translation of the Old testament that the New testament often quotes from,
I think the word for the Assembly of Israel was
ecclesia.
same word is used in the New testament for "church".

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

an interesting thing that I think goes along with that,
in the lxx, the Greek translation of the Old testament that the New testament often quotes from,
I think the word for the Assembly of Israel was
ecclesia.
same word is used in the New testament for "church".

Keep in mind, though, that that same word "ecclesia" is also used for the mob of people gathered in Acts 19 (esp. vv. 32,39,41 and translated as "assembly" there in the kjv)... yet they were not "the Church [ecclesia] which is His body" either.



[see Eph1:20-23 WHEN (as to its existence)]

 

[biker]

yes, I hear what you're saying and you may well have the right of it.

I agree that for irenaeus, "universally" meant the area he was familiar with.

the church was founded at Rome? do you agree with that?
most people say the church was founded at Pentecost in the upper room.

Universally speaking, once Rome got involved and used its influences, one could say this branch of the Church was indeed founded. Many Nations imulated Rome like it once did Greece. I believe when we use the term GRECO-ROMAN pagan gods/goddess that it began with Greece and Rome adopted them from Greece like Nations adopted Christianity from Rome in the early years of AD.

the church is organized at Rome.
again, agree?
if so, still true today?
if true back then but not today when did it stop, in your view?

It definitely stopped when people saw that God and the corrupted Roman Catholic Church were 2 separate idealisms. This is how we have what we do today with Baptist, Methodist, Wesleyan, Pentecostal, etc.

was irenaeus thinking of Bishops who were appointed? if so, when did that process stop?[/QUOTE[

Some Churches have Bishops today. What's interesting, Polycarp and the Apostle John were seen as Bishops. I wonder if this title was given to those with life long devotion and true knowledge of God.

one of the things I'm interested in is whether these changes were made at a particular point in time, or a kind of gradual shift as God led the church from one phase to another.

I think they were made as more sects sprung up that were not associated with the Catholic Church. Once these sects were established and accepted, they were independent and able to believe God according to the Bible, not according to the Catholic Regime.

 

[Absolutely]

I don’t know who teaches it probably no group, I got it from the Bible.

The truth is not well received in “Christian” churches, any group that would teach this would be ran out of their church for even bringing it up.

It’s sort of like any democrat who doesn’t want to disband the police will be excommunicated.

So you have your own interpretation outside the brethren?

 

[KJV1611]

So you have your own interpretation outside the brethren?

I don’t follow the pack I follow Gods word. The pack says my Bible is full of errors. That’s why I stopped listening to the brethren.

 

[Truth7t7]

I have no intention of changing the truth of Scripture. But when a person cannot interpret Scripture properly -- for example you -- then they make a mishmash of Scripture.

The "flaming fire" which Christ brings with Him to the battle of Armageddon at His Second Coming is NOT the supernatural fire which burns up the earth and its atmosphere later on. The first is meant to destroy all the enemies of Christ and Israel.

If Christ were to dissolve the earth at His Second Coming, none of the events between Revelation 19 and the end of Revelation 20 would happen. And that my friend is PATENTLY ABSURD.

The very fire seen in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 below "Second Coming" is the very "Fire In Final Judgement" seen in 1 Corinthians 3:13 below, this fire will judge "All" mens works "All"

You falsely suggest there are "Two Different" accounts of Jesus Christ returning in fire?

Now that's a real big fairy tale.

P.S. the book of Revelation is seen in "Parallel Teachings" of same events, not chronological as is falsely taught in Dispensationalism.

1 Corinthians 3:13KJV
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Malachi 3:2KJV
2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:

2 Thess 1:7-8KJV
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

 

[Truth7t7]

I don’t follow the pack I follow Gods word. The pack says my Bible is full of errors. That’s why I stopped listening to the brethren.

You deny a future "Literal" coming of Jesus Christ in the clouds of heaven as seen below, you have stated God hasnt shown this in the Holy bible.

Your views are "Full Preterist" and this is considered "Heresy" by many within the Church.

Matthew 24:29-31KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[KJV1611]

You deny a future "Literal" coming of Jesus Christ in the clouds of heaven as seen below, you have stated God hasnt shown this in the Holy bible.

Your views are "Full Preterist" and this is considered "Heresy" by many within the Church.

Matthew 24:29-31KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Do you think I care what you or a group of people that worship under Baal’s shaft think about my beliefs?

 

[Truth7t7]

Do you think I care what you or a group of people that worship under Baal’s shaft think about my beliefs?

Baal's Shaft, what might that be?

 

[KJV1611]

Baal's Shaft, what might that be?

You’re the expert figure it out.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I understand brother, I’m not disagreeing, but the wording in the KJV is what matters. Christ is never referred to as a ram, but a lamb.

And there is a huge difference between a full grown ram with horns, and a lamb which is an yearling.

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year... (Exodus 12:5)

 

[KJV1611]

And there is a huge difference between a full grown ram with horns, and a lamb which is an yearling.

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year... (Exodus 12:5)

I’m confused, are you and 146 trying to say that the ram wasn’t a foreshadow of Jesus?

 

[Dan_473]

I think they were made as more sects sprung up that were not associated with the Catholic Church. Once these sects were established and accepted, they were independent and able to believe God according to the Bible, not according to the Catholic Regime.

when you talk about sects springing up that allowed people to believe according to the Bible, do you mean the Protestant Reformation?

if so, then it sounds like the things irenaeus was saying about the church would have been true up until the Protestant Reformation.