ECT Tet and IP: so what's the bottom line, really?

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Is that anything like the standard Jews views in Jesus' day?
It's imagining you were in a club that doesn't exist.
And then you imagine you get kicked out of the club that doesn't exist.
It's all fiction.

Back to reality .....
Expect another gazillion soapbox posts from him about how everyone does not look at everything the same way.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
It's all fiction.

Yep, that's what Dispensationalism is, "fiction".

No one taught a rapture, and restored kingdom of Israel with the Mosaic Law in place before Darby invented it in 1830.

Why is your belief system built around fiction?
 

Right Divider

Body part
It's imagining you were in a club that doesn't exist.
And then you imagine you get kicked out of the club that doesn't exist.
It's all fiction.

Back to reality .....
Expect another gazillion soapbox posts from him about how everyone does not look at everything the same way.
Just way too many people using that fallacious "majority equals truth" thing. Or "early equals truth".... the list goes on and on.

I was discussing the problems of RCC doctrine with my Cathaholic mother-in-law and one of her "arguments" was basically "how can it be wrong when so many people believe it". I told her that she could just as well be a Muslim.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yep, that's what preterism is, "fiction".

Wrong Tambora.

Dispensationalism has an inventor, Preterism doesn't.

John Nelson Darby invented Dispensationalism, it didn't exist before him.

You (nor any other Dispy) has been able to show one person responsible for Preterism.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Once again, I have reduced a preterist into being unable to think for themselves.

I guess that's what the brainwashing of preterism does to you guys.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Yep, that's what Dispensationalism is, "fiction".

No one taught a rapture, and restored kingdom of Israel with the Mosaic Law in place before Darby invented it in 1830.

Why is your belief system built around fiction?


Ribera had a Jewish AC in the temple in the future in his eschatology that 'protected' the pope from the Reformers.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Ribera had a futurist eschatology going already, to protect the pope.

Ribera didn't teach a rapture.

Ribera didn't teach a secret parenthetical dispensation.

Ribera didn't teach a future Israel theocracy.

Ribera didn't teach 2P2P

Ribera didn't teach that one day Christ Jesus would sit on a man made throne in Jerusalem and oversee animal sacrifices for sin atonement.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Ribera had a Jewish AC in the temple in the future in his eschatology that 'protected' the pope from the Reformers.

Ribera's Jewish temple wasn't condoned by God. It was an evil temple.

Darby taught that a future temple (with animal sacrifices for sin atonement) would be part of God's plan. Darby taught that Jesus would sit in this temple and oversee the animal sacrifices.

Ribera didn't have the Christians being raptured away before the Jewish AC in the temple.

Ribera never taught the rubbish Darby invented.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Once again, I have reduced a preterist into being unable to think for themselves.

I guess that's what the brainwashing of preterism does to you guys.

Your Little Johnny W impersonation isn't working.

It's making you look even more foolish than he does.

And, it just shows that you Darby followers live in denial.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Ribera didn't teach a rapture.

Ribera didn't teach a secret parenthetical dispensation.

Ribera didn't teach a future Israel theocracy.

Ribera didn't teach 2P2P

Ribera didn't teach that one day Christ Jesus would sit on a man made throne in Jerusalem and oversee animal sacrifices for sin atonement.


Yes, but the 'theocracy' he did teach about was AC's; that's how the title AC was deflected from the Pope, which was Rib's task. The thing is that this material later became adopted by the Brethren who were trying to solve disputes between RCC and Protestants.

Let me tell you what this is like. I was in Moldova 10 years ago, and a Baptist pastor's youth group was thriving. The Orthodox priest was incensed, and found people to go out at night and throw bricks through the windows of the Baptist church, in an impoverished country where it can easily take 2 months to repair and where winter is really raw--and the Soviets sometimes turn off all centralized propane when they feel like it. They knew the priests considered them antichrist.

If you lived around that for 200 YEARS you probably would be inclined to find something that bridged some gaps. As you may know from the Tudor period, Elizabeth, etc, it was much more violent than broken windows. You lost family and friends, sometimes daily.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yes, but the 'theocracy' he did teach about was AC's; that's how the title AC was deflected from the Pope, which was Rib's task.

You just admitted that Ribera's task was to do anything to deflect the Reformers position that the pope was the anti-Christ.

So, Ribera conjured up a bunch of fiction that the anti-Christ was a future person that appeared right before the Second coming of Christ.

The only thing Ribera and Darby had in common was a future anti-Christ.

Other than a future anti-Christ, there was nothing Ribera taught that came close to Dispensationalism.
 
Top