Answering the "Replacement Theology" Critics (Part 1)

American Vision ^ | 10/7/2005 | Gary DeMar

[tabsternager]

“Using your rationale here, the ‘abomination of desolation’ is ‘armies surrounding Jerusalem’. Is that what the abomination of desolation means to you?”

What kind of army do you think the Roman army was? Here’s a quote from B.H. Carroll about the Roman army:

“The Roman sign was a straight staff, capped with a metallic eagle, and right under the eagle was a graven image of Caesar. Caesar claimed to be divine. Caesar exacted divine worship, and every evening when those standards were placed, the Roman legion got down and worshipped the image of Caesar thereof, and every morning at the roll call a part of the parade was for the whole legion to prostrate themselves before that graven image and worship it.”

[Uncle Chip]

Oh come on — cite something from prophet Webster or prophet Oxford for me. I promise I won’t take off for any misspellings or mispronunciations.

[1000 silverlings]

Here's one from Lawrence Welk:

I just had an idea that went right over my head.

[tabsternager]

“Since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in that temple of 70AD a stubborn fact that you keep tripping over.”

Were you there? I assume you weren’t.

Have you ever read Josephus’ eye-witness account? I also assume by your above statement that you haven’t.

[1000 silverlings]

And don’t even think about posting Strong’s definition of “stand”, lol, or ho ho ho as the case may be

[Uncle Chip]

So when did the Jews head for the hills??? 1]when they saw the soldiers with those staffs surrounding Jerusalem or 2]when the soldiers with those staffs were supposedly in the temple???

[tabsternager]

“Similar but not identical and not parallel.”

Amazing. You can’t see (or I should say refuse to see) the obvious, that Matthew and Luke are about the exact same event. And yet when it comes to the phrase “this generation” in both of the chapters, you change the “this generation” in Matthew to mean “that generation” but keep the “this generation” in Luke as is.

[Uncle Chip]

You can’t see (or I should say refuse to see) the obvious, that Matthew and Luke are about the exact same event.

Look up the meanings of the words "similar" and "identical" in the Books of Oxford or Webster. Like those two passages, the meanings of those words are "similar" but not "identical".

[Quix]

I have documented several points of prophetic Scriptures any one of which blows that interpretation out of the water.

Of course, Replacementarians are loathe to touch the facts.

But don’t mind me. Go ahead spouting UnBiblical hogwash of hazard to innocent souls. It’s just God watching.

[topcat54]

Are Matt 24:15 and Luke 21:20 identical passages??? Yes or No --

Biblically speaking, yes, they are.

[Uncle Chip]

Are Matt 24:15 and Luke 21:20 identical passages??? Yes or No -- Biblically speaking, yes, they are.

LOL -- and what is the biblical definition of "identical"???

[topcat54]

LOL -- and what is the biblical definition of "identical"???

Radically different than the dispensational version and the very heart of our disagreement.

[Uncle Chip]

Radically different than the dispensational version and the very heart of our disagreement.

But one that you cannot find anywhere -- especially in the Bible.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Have you ever read Josephus' eye-witness account?

There are many websites that offer Josephus' firsthand account of the events of 70 A.D. Here's a very comprehensive one...

THE WAR OF THE JEWS
THE HISTORY OF THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM

[fortheDeclaration]

If you think those passages are identicial you have a reading problem.

A 4th grader weren't think they are.

[fortheDeclaration]

[“Since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in that temple of 70AD a stubborn fact that you keep tripping over.” ]

Were you there? I assume you weren’t. Have you ever read Josephus’ eye-witness account? I also assume by your above statement that you haven’t.

Oh,stop your nonsense, the events of 70AD are nothing like what are described in Matthew.

Josephus doesn't say a single word about any 'Abomination of desolation' standing in the Temple.

[fortheDeclaration]

“The Roman sign was a straight staff, capped with a metallic eagle, and right under the eagle was a graven image of Caesar. Caesar claimed to be divine. Caesar exacted divine worship, and every evening when those standards were placed, the Roman legion got down and worshipped the image of Caesar thereof, and every morning at the roll call a part of the parade was for the whole legion to prostrate themselves before that graven image and worship it.”

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) (Matthew 24:15)

11And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. (Daniel 12:11)

None of these have anything to do with Roman Armies.

[fortheDeclaration]

And don’t even think about posting Strong’s definition of “stand”, lol, or ho ho ho as the case may be

How about Webster's?

[Alamo-Girl]

Hmmmm... but how do you really feel? LOL!

[fortheDeclaration]

You mean like the prophecy that Christ predicted regarding the fall of Jerusalem in Matthew?

21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Matthew 24:21)

Now, where else in scripture does Christ ever use 'hyperbolic' language as you claim this to be?