mens hair loss

Victory Words with Larry Siegle-12.10.2010

by Michael J Loomis on December 13, 2010

Victory Words with Larry Siegle and Michael J Loomis.

December 10, 2010

www.thepodcast.org – www.unravelingtheend.com – www.fulfilled.tvwww.ad70.tv – www.ad70.net – www.whatispreterism.com

Thank you for making this preterist podcast series part of your preterist media library.

Play

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

futuredoughnut December 13, 2010 at 8:12 pm

It seems that it all comes down to the meaning of words.
Mansions (monai). Old word from menō, to abide, abiding places, in N.T. only here and Joh_14:23.
BAGD cites μοναι in a sense LIVE ,STAY In later times the noun is used for “Monastery”(MM Lampe) The translations “mansions” is derived form the Latin Vulgate -mansiones, (lodging places) but the modern associations of the term make this misleading.Robert Grundry stresses the connection with μενω (remain, stay) a person or thing remains where he or it is (BAGD) Grundry sees a reference to a spiritual position in Christ , much as Pauline theology.(ZNTW,58[ 1967] p 70

Michael J Loomis December 14, 2010 at 2:01 pm

Where was Jesus going that they couldn’t? To His death and martyrdom and then to the Father. Which they couldn’t yet go at that time. Would they go there? Yes. And some would even die a martyr’s death like Jesus.
So Jesus was going to go where they couldn’t yet go. And he was going to prepare a place for them. Does the passage give us a location of that dwelling place that he was going to prepare for them.
First off…I know you(ROE) won’t agree with this interpretation because you do not believe in the deity of Christ. Nor are you a trinitarian.
However…I personally believe that John 14 is probably one passage that supports the trinity and the deity of Christ more than any other.

1. Jesus was going where they couldn’t…To the Father.
2. Jesus would prepare a dwelling place for them in His Father’s house.
3. Jesus was the only way into that House.
4. He had to go so the Helper could come.
5. He had to go…The cross was not plan B.
6. If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home(dwelling) with him.

I really don’t know how this passage could get any simpler. Yet it seems to be getting overly confused.

The dwelling place in this passage is the New Jerusalem. It was prepared in Heaven and would come down to Earth(Rev. 21&22).

At the latest this began at Pentacost in Acts 2. The New Jerusalem “had” come down and in that day was being built up as a holy habitation for God in which the believers were the living stones being fitted together.

Now obviously you can’t interpret this passage as simply as me because you hold to certain doctrines that can’t afford this interpretation. Much like Ed Stevens. He can’t concede this point either because it kicks the legs out from under his literal rapture view. I believe it safe to say that Ed needs this passage to be a going to heaven. As do you ROE.

This passage is speaking of nothing other than Revelation 21&22. The tabernacle of God being with men. Here on Earth through the auspices of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit…Not only in Heaven.

Putting all doctrinal presup’s aside…Where am I wrong?

futuredoughnut December 15, 2010 at 12:18 pm

@ Michael Loomis The dwelling place in this passage is the New Jerusalem. It was prepared in Heaven and would come down to Earth(Rev. 21&22). This passage is speaking of nothing other than Revelation 21&22. The tabernacle of God being with men. Here on Earth through the auspices of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit…Not only in Heaven.
I couldnt agree more 🙂

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: