Matthew Chapter 24

[Guest shiloh357]

Israel was never destroyed as nation, btw.

So me a map mad after 70 ad and before 1948 where such a nation existed.

Like the beast in Revelation (since the two are historically connected) Israel

[BlindSeeker]

Is it too hard for you to just answer the question?

I did answer the question.

Yes, but just peppering people with commentaries and Scripture passages does not really mean you have made your point. It does not mean that you have made an organized, recognizable statement.

Again, thank you for your opinion.

The point behind the metaphor is that just listing verses and statements of other people is not good enough IF you are genuinely interested in making a point. Otherwise it just comes off as showing off and trying to appear intellectual.

Your refusal to answer a simple question like, "what is your point" shows that you are motivated by pride more than a real desire to share truth.

So now comes the judgment as well . . .

My point was presented in the first two sentences of the OP . . . and I added to it in posts 5 and 12.

I am sorry if you missed it.

I am glad you were able to be succinct in your points:

You do not like the OP.

It

[BlindSeeker]

Israel was never destroyed as nation, btw.

So me a map mad after 70 ad and before 1948 where such a nation existed.

Like the beast in Revelation (since the two are historically connected) Israel

[Guest yod]

Israel was never destroyed as nation, btw.

So me a map mad after 70 ad and before 1948 where such a nation existed.

Like the beast in Revelation (since the two are historically connected) Israel

[BlindSeeker]

OK...we are on page 3 of the thread and you still can't coherently state a point to this? oy...why am I wasting time even responding???

Preterism has to ignore or spiritualize many literal verses to reach a flawed conclusion. You seem to ignore all requests for clarity of purpose so how can anyone reach any other conclusion except you have invented a private interpretation based on preterist error?

Peter 1:20

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

So now another Watchman joins the accusations . . . . sigh . . .

Please show me the basis for your conclusion that I have invented a "private interpretation" by taking any verse out of its context and rendering an interpretation for it. That is the meaning of the verse you submitted, to interpret a verse out of its original scriptural and historical context.

I find yours to be a hollow accusation since I have submitted a whole chapter in chronological order accompanied by the comments of learned men with the testimonies of an eyewitness which seems to give credence to both the commentators listed and my personal position as well so those who wish to could openly critique.

Since Shiloh and you are unable to find the mystical

[traveller]

Hey - I'm still reading - I'm just slow what with work and web duties and all.

Basically, what I see so far - is very interesting. I kinda wish youd' take it a bit farther actually - like a "and then what happened."

First - I'm wondering if what the apostles knew at the time really mattered to the answer they received. And bear with me William - I'm not really ready with my thoughts yet - haven't had the time. But - what i mean is - though Jesus could have answered them concerning the near future, could He not have also meant the more distant future? He certainly knew we'd be reading His word today, and discussing it right now. There are many parts of it like onion layers. Or dual times and meanings. Did I make any sense? Sorry - in a hurry.

And - as far as the in depth discussions - I miss them too. Things have certainly speeded up around here. That said - we do still have them you know. Just a bit fewer and farther between. But it's ok brother - the Lord is still glorified here.

[traveller]

Sadly, I do not see the same spirit reflected here again. If it were not for Hellbunny, I would believe I wasted my time and have but regrets for posting the OP . . . but she is enough.

Wanted to add that discussion of the word is never wasted. It does not return void. You might not see any benefit - but there is that. Whether it caused someone to pick up their bible and refresh on things (me) or one to study deeper on others (me) - even if it's becasue of conflicting opinions - then it's never a time wasted.

[BlindSeeker]

Sweet Sister Traveller . . . such a cool and refreshing breeze you are . . .

[kitty1]

I have to say it was worth the the read, and something I will be revisiting again, see I am just starting to get the meat. I have been born again for a number of years but it's only been this last year that I would say I have moved from the milk to the meat.

I also happens that the book of Matthew is my favorite so any thing new I learn from it is so exciting.

I just wanted to say Thanks for posting this and I will be rereading it again and most likely again as I tend to chew my meat slowly.

God bless.

[eric]

Well, William, I haven't finished reading all of the post, but what I have read so far, has not been a waste of time, not for me at any rate. however I shall continue reading the full entire post with both an open bible and mind.

eric, with a little 'e'