“Jesus Christ will personally throw the Antichrist and the False Prophet into the Lake of Fire when he returns.
Nero committed suicide. So the Antichrist wasn’t Nero.”
You’re tying the two of them together. I’m not.
“...your beliefs match exactly those of a preterist.”
And you actually know what all my beliefs are because...?
You’ve decided I’m a “preterist” and so you feel as though you can ignore and condemn me now. Nice, tight logical, self-serving circle you’ve got there.
“Reacted reflexively”? Because I refuse to deny and discard Scripture and buy into a belief system that has no basis whatsoever in reality?”
No. Because you’ve decided that putting a label on people with whom you disagree, and then reacting in shock, horror, and condemnation of that label, is a bona fide substitute for real discussion. Your mind is completely closed to the truth and so you react like this - in a knee-jerk way - whenever someone presents an idea that challenges your beliefs.
And in that regard, you are no better than a jihadist.
“Did you not just make a reference to Nero and try to claim he was the Antichrist?”
No. You made that connection. I didn’t.
“Did God bring the Jews back from among the nations into their own land and their own nation which was reborn in 1948 in 70AD?”
It would be better if you actually answered the question I put to you, since your version of it is simply asinine and something I never wrote or suggested.
“And Jerusalem being destroyed has nothing to do with events that will occur right before Christ’s return...”
I never said it did. Like most people reacting reflexively to the issue, you read things into what’s written and don’t really care to have a civil discussion about it.
All your posts demonstrate is that you’re not a serious Bible student and that you don’t want your beliefs challenged.
As for the rest, it’s not even worth addressing.
Here is the exchange with your exact words:
GN:
“Jesus Christ will personally throw the Antichrist and the False Prophet into the Lake of Fire when he returns.
Nero committed suicide. So the Antichrist wasn’t Nero.”
You:
Yes there was. His name was Nero. Read Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. Again, the word “world” means something different today than it did in Jesus’ time. Back then, it meant “Roman Empire.”
So who tied the two together? It wasn't me!
And you actually know what all my beliefs are because...? You’ve decided I’m a “preterist” and so you feel as though you can ignore and condemn me now. Nice, tight logical, self-serving circle you’ve got there.
I'm going by what you've written. If you don't like being associated with the preterist garbage you write, then don't write it.
No. Because you’ve decided that putting a label on people with whom you disagree, and then reacting in shock, horror, and condemnation of that label, is a bona fide substitute for real discussion. Your mind is completely closed to the truth and so you react like this - in a knee-jerk way - whenever someone presents an idea that challenges your beliefs.
Take responsibility for what you believe. If your beliefs match those of a preterist, then own it. I didn't come up with the label "preterist" - that has been in use long before I was born. If you don't like that label, then change your beliefs.
And I didn't react in shock, I reacted in contempt.
“Did you not just make a reference to Nero and try to claim he was the Antichrist?”
No. You made that connection. I didn’t.
I've done you the favor of reposting what you wrote. Go back and refresh your memory.
It would be better if you actually answered the question I put to you, since your version of it is simply asinine and something I never wrote or suggested.
Again, here is what you wrote:
Were the Jews dispersed throughout the world or not?
My response to you was an answer to your question. You take the preterist position that the dispersing of the Jews in 70AD was fulfillment of prophecy which then means that the prophecies God gave us for the time of His return have already been fulfilled.
My response was the answer. The Jews have been regathered into their own nation, which was reestablished in 1948, which was not fulfilled in 70AD but in our generation. And only a preterist would call actual, factual, fulfillment of end-time prophecy asinine.
“And Jerusalem being destroyed has nothing to do with events that will occur right before Christ’s return...”
I never said it did. Like most people reacting reflexively to the issue, you read things into what’s written and don’t really care to have a civil discussion about it.
And, yet again, here is the exchange:
GN:
“Since none of it was fulfilled in 70AD, then yes, it’s end-time.”
You:
Was Jerusalem destroyed in 70 AD or not?... If so, then you have to explain how the many prophecies surrounding this one event were not fulfilled. Good luck! LOL!
And, yet again, an instance of you attempting to claim that the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD was a fulfillment of end-time prophecy and therefore all end-time prophecy was fulfilled in 70AD.
If you at least take ownership of your own words, you won't lose as much credibility.
All your posts demonstrate is that you’re not a serious Bible student and that you don’t want your beliefs challenged.
This is coming from someone who actively denies reality and thinks that everything that shows us Christ's return is near has already happened.
Don't flatter yourself. There isn't much worse Biblical ignorance than believing that the Book of Revelation happened already in 70AD.
If you knew where WE ARE located in God’s Word, you would actually have some truth regarding the Rapture, Tribulation, and Christ’s 2nd Coming.