Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: topcat54
You've been taken to task before over your blatant misinterpretation and misapplication of that passage in this context. Another sign that your emperor is not wearing any clothes.

No I wasn't -- you just screamed unfair at how John characterizes that Preterist "not in the flesh coming" in 70 AD. John saw Preterism coming 2000 years ago.

1,591 posted on 11/21/2007 11:09:23 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1585 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip; tabsternager; 1000 silverlings; Lee N. Field; Lord_Calvinus; wmfights; Alex Murphy
No I wasn't -- you just screamed unfair at how John characterizes that Preterist "not in the flesh coming" in 70 AD. John saw Preterism coming 2000 years ago.

Absolutely you were and you know it. 1 John is talking about Christ's first coming, when He was clothed with flesh and tabernacle among His people. This was being denied by the Gnostics and others who claimed Christ was some type of phantasm.

You know that it does not apply to partial preterist (like you find around here) because you know that we have consistently affirmed a future bodily second coming.

I’m not sure if you are fundamentally dishonest, just get that way when backed into a corner.

1,596 posted on 11/21/2007 12:43:12 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- an error of Biblical proportions.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1591 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson