House Church Talk - Re: Was baptisms Now dispensations again

[Scott Dowlen]

... except that one of the false teachings that troubled the very early
church was that Jesus had come (or at least that the resurrection had
already occurred) and that everyone alive at that time had missed it.  But
the Revelation shows that it will be impossible to miss it.  IMO, generation
should not ever stretch longer than the approximate average lifespan of one
single human, unless the context makes it very clear that another span of
time is meant.

To me the word 'generation' in verse 34 is referring to the people alive
when the final signs begin to take place (as indicated in verse 33), not
necessarily the generation that heard the prophecy originally.  Also, the
word 'soon' (IIRC) also means 'suddenly' -- not that its coming is moments
away, but once the signs begin, they will progress swiftly or suddenly.


Did any of that make sense?


Scott D.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: House Church Talk -bounces at housechurch.org
> [mailto:House Church Talk -bounces at housechurch.org]On Behalf Of flash
> Sent: Friday, 06 February, 2004 3:33 PM
> To: House Church Talk  at housechurch.org
> Subject: House Church Talk -  Re: Was baptisms Now dispensations again
>
>
> My interest is in the arena we have been robbed of due to the
> prevalence of dispensations.
> Jesus in diepensations comes again after long arm waving that
> generations equal 2000 plus years
> to get us to today when Jesus has not come again, yet.  So,
> we wait for Jesus to come again and
> then we die.  Hmmm...
>
> So, maybe in AD70 when there were some years of destruction
> Jesus did come?  It sounds
> interesting and plausible from the understanding of words
> like "generation", and "soon" -
> that's all.  No drawn out theological twist or mashing.
> Consistent word meanings in the
> Bible - generation, soon.  Then, what does it mean we are
> today if Jesus came in AD70?  I will
> need to see where soon is in the Bible, and also generation.
> And of course, the battle ground
> is Mt24.
>
> I can try to be convinced of what I have heard - again, i.e.
> dispensations and Jesus has not
> come.  I can try to be convinced of what I have not heard -
> Jesus came in AD70 - and what does
> that mean?  I mean, I am raised under the influence of
> dispensations and Jesus is coming - but
> how does that jive with the words of the Bible?  I know all
> this sounds like "preterist" talk
> and it is partially, i.e. "partial preterist."  But, lets
> entertain some thoughts within
> traditional theology.  I mean, NO - I am not accepting
> anything of Joseph Smith or Mary Baker
> Eddy.  Neither am I accepting most of what is taught as late
> great planet earth nor left
> behind.
>
> Hope you catch the drift and carry on some, Bruce, others.
> Thanks,
> Dan ChicagoArea
>
>
>