- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The fallacy of hasty generalizations defined:
Hasty generalization is the logical fallacy that occurs when a conclusion is based on a very small sample. My daughter attends school in Indiana and she told me that Indiana squirrels are black. She based her conclusion from a small sample of squirrels she saw outside the window of her dormatory. In eschatology the futurists commit the fallacy of hasty generalization by basing their conclusions from a small sample of select scriptures. This has resulted in false expectations and hopes which have no foundation in scripture.
Two examples of futurist's false hopes:
1. That all men, both the saved and the unsaved will bow their knee to Christ and confess Him as Lord.
Paul said that every knee shall bow to Christ and that every tongue will confess Jesus is Lord. The futurist's generalize Paul's statement to include the unsaved. Thus they falsely expect that a time will come when Christ will be universally acknowledged. But Paul cited Isaiah 45 which in its context clearly indicates that God was calling His elect people to be saved and that the bowing of the knee and the confession of the tongue is unto salvation.
Quote Isaiah 45:4-25 (New King James Version)
4 For Jacob My servant’s sake,
And Israel My elect,
I have even called you by your name;
I have named you, though you have not known Me….
22 “ Look to Me, and be saved,
All you ends of the earth!
For I am God, and there is no other.
23 I have sworn by Myself;
The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness,
And shall not return,
That to Me every knee shall bow,
Every tongue shall take an oath.
24 He shall say,‘ Surely in the LORD I have righteousness and strength.
To Him men shall come,
And all shall be ashamed
Who are incensed against Him.
25 In the LORD all the descendants of Israel
Shall be justified, and shall glory.’”This is very clear friends. Isaiah's prophecy referred only to the elect of Israel. It had nothing to do with unsaved men. There is no such teaching that all men inclusively will confess Christ. It says that God is calling His elect from the ends of the earth to be saved. Then it says that the Lord swears by Himself that they ALL will bow to Him and confess Him. This confession involves that they “take an oath” (vs. 23). The oath means that they will have a covenant relationship with the Lord. In the oath they say, “Surely the Lord is my righteousness and strength.” It is very clear from Isaiah that the bowing of the knee and the confession of the tongue RESULTS IN SALVATION. Paul did not apply the statement to unsaved men beyond what Isaiah said. He merely included the Gentiles among the elect (Philippians 2:10).
Unsaved men if they die impentinent will curse Christ forever in the lake of fire.
2. That God will be universally worshiped in a kingdom on earth.
One of the prophecies futurists invoke to support their false expectation that God will be universally worshiped is Isaiah chapter two. It says this:
Quote 1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
2 Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD’s house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow to it.
3 Many people shall come and say,“ Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths.”
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
4 He shall judge between the nations,
And rebuke many people;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore.According to the futurists this means that God will be universally worshiped because it says that “all nations” shall come to the Lord's mountain to hear about Him. BUT…. The same prophecy in Micah indicates otherwise. Micah's account adds one important little detail that the futurists overlook. Micah says that all people will worship their false gods as well.
Quote 1 Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD’s house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And peoples shall flow to it.
2 Many nations shall come and say,“ Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths.”
For out of Zion the law shall go forth,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
3 He shall judge between many peoples,
And rebuke strong nations afar off;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore.[a]
4 But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree,
And no one shall make them afraid;
For the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken.
5 For all people walk each in the name of his god,
But we will walk in the name of the LORD our God
Forever and ever.Note that Micah's prophecy is exactly the same as Isaiah's with one detail added. It says that “all people shall walk in the name of his god” and that by contrast “we shall walk in the name of our God forever and ever “(vs. 5).
So there you have it. There are two groups of men called “all nations” and “all people.” The one group worships the true God while the other worships the various gods they imagine. Therefore, the universal worship of God has to do with ALL HIS PEOPLE. There is not one scintilla of biblical evidence that there will be a “golden age” when the true God will be worshiped by all men inclusively.
The futurists obviously have false expectations that are totally without basis. But God's people will not be disappointed for that which He has promised us is by far better than what the futurists have to offer. Paul said,
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. < br>9 But as it is written:
“ Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”That which God has for us has not even entered into our hearts. The futurists will not realize their expectations. But it won't matter for God has something far better for those futurists who love Him.
thinker
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 04 2009,03:52) Hi TT,
Patience.
We ain't seen nothin yet.
Isn't that what I said?
thinker
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 04 2009,12:14) hi above
is this the purpose, to create confusion?
TThe purpose is to defend the truth of the Gospel.
Some prefer to sit on the sidelines and throw stones at the participants, while others prefer to ingage in the battle! Paul was a defender of the truth and encourages us to do the same in Love!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,03:18) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Keith,
If it's just a “little game” then why play? In fact, in a pm you once told me that you would not debate me on Preterism. So I am surprised to see that you do engage with me. No one is twisting your arm to play my “little game.”I started many threads on the trinity about many passages and you did not call that a “little game.” You're right that many threads are hard to follow. But so is one thread that is cluttered with many related subjects under one larger subject. In such threads good points get lost.
You said that you will be creating some threads. That's fine. But maybe we should go to “debates” and duke it out one on one.
thinker
Hi WJ,
Paul never taught trinity so why do you claim an alliance with him?
The battle is in defence of scripture, not man's ideas.
We pull down such speculationsQuote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,12:47) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,03:18) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Keith,
If it's just a “little game” then why play? In fact, in a pm you once told me that you would not debate me on Preterism. So I am surprised to see that you do engage with me. No one is twisting your arm to play my “little game.”I started many threads on the trinity about many passages and you did not call that a “little game.” You're right that many threads are hard to follow. But so is one thread that is cluttered with many related subjects under one larger subject. In such threads good points get lost.
You said that you will be creating some threads. That's fine. But maybe we should go to “debates” and duke it out one on one.
thinker
JackI realize that it is not just a game. My statement is because I think that diversions are created by creating all these threads and adding confusion in the mix in the attempt to divert the conversation away from particular points, IMO.
An age ole debaters trick!
As far as a debate one on one, I thought that is what we were doing, but okay I will agree to a debate in the debates thread to prove that Preterisms assumption that 70 AD is the date that Jesus returned and all the prophetic scriptures concerning the return of Jesus and the New heavens and the New earth and the Kingdom of God have been fulfilled is false!
I am somewhat limited in time and may not be able to agree to your time constraints.
But it is your challenge so give me the rules and lets see!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,05:13) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,12:47) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,03:18) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Keith,
If it's just a “little game” then why play? In fact, in a pm you once told me that you would not debate me on Preterism. So I am surprised to see that you do engage with me. No one is twisting your arm to play my “little game.”I started many threads on the trinity about many passages and you did not call that a “little game.” You're right that many threads are hard to follow. But so is one thread that is cluttered with many related subjects under one larger subject. In such threads good points get lost.
You said that you will be creating some threads. That's fine. But maybe we should go to “debates” and duke it out one on one.
thinker
JackI realize that it is not just a game. My statement is because I think that diversions are created by creating all these threads and adding confusion in the mix in the attempt to divert the conversation away from particular points, IMO.
An age ole debaters trick!
As far as a debate one on one, I thought that is what we were doing, but okay I will agree to a debate in the debates thread to prove that Preterisms assumption that 70 AD is the date that Jesus returned and all the prophetic scriptures concerning the return of Jesus and the New heavens and the New earth and the Kingdom of God have been fulfilled is false!
I am somewhat limited in time and may not be able to agree to your time constraints.
But it is your challenge so give me the rules and lets see!
WJ
Keith,
I have confessed to you twice in a pm that my mind gets over stimulated on this particular subject. Yet you say that I am just using an “age ol debater's trick.”I did the exact same thing in creating many threads against the Arains here. Many of those threads came in a wave. Not you or anyone said “an age ole debater's trick.”
I love truth and I love to defend what I believe is the truth. I got a lot of stuff in my head and it's just coming out. That's all!
You said that you don't have the time to reply to so many threads. So I will stop the new threads for a while. However, you don't have to reply at all though I enjoy engaging with you.
Love in Christ,
Jack
Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,14:29) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,05:13) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,12:47) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,03:18) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Keith,
If it's just a “little game” then why play? In fact, in a pm you once told me that you would not debate me on Preterism. So I am surprised to see that you do engage with me. No one is twisting your arm to play my “little game.”I started many threads on the trinity about many passages and you did not call that a “little game.” You're right that many threads are hard to follow. But so is one thread that is cluttered with many related subjects under one larger subject. In such threads good points get lost.
You said that you will be creating some threads. That's fine. But maybe we should go to “debates” and duke it out one on one.
thinker
JackI realize that it is not just a game. My statement is because I think that diversions are created by creating all these threads and adding confusion in the mix in the attempt to divert the conversation away from particular points, IMO.
An age ole debaters trick!
As far as a debate one on one, I thought that is what we were doing, but okay I will agree to a debate in the debates thread to prove that Preterisms assumption that 70 AD is the date that Jesus returned and all the prophetic scriptures concerning the return of Jesus and the New heavens and the New earth and the Kingdom of God have been fulfilled is false!
I am somewhat limited in time and may not be able to agree to your time constraints.
But it is your challenge so give me the rules and lets see!
WJ
Keith,
I have confessed to you twice in a pm that my mind gets over stimulated on this particular subject. Yet you say that I am just using an “age ol debater's trick.”I did the exact same thing in creating many threads against the Arains here. Many of those threads came in a wave. Not you or anyone said “an age ole debater's trick.”
I love truth and I love to defend what I believe is the truth. I got a lot of stuff in my head and it's just coming out. That's all!
You said that you don't have the time to reply to so many threads. So I will stop the new threads for a while. However, you don't have to reply at all though I enjoy engaging with you.
Love in Christ,
Jack
JackOk, I accept your explanation and oppologise for my insinuation. But this debate has pretty much been between you and I, so it seems like wisdom to have only a couple of threads for it.
Love back to you, Keith
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,09:24) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,14:29) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,05:13) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,12:47) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 05 2009,03:18) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,11:16) Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 04 2009,11:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 04 2009,10:31) Jack Another thread for the Preterists agenda? Why so many threads?
WJ
What's wrong with the Preterists having an agenda? We are in a theological, i.e., eschatological revolution or haven't you heard?You had no problem with my agenda when I started many anti-trinitarian threads.
thinker
JackIts not the agenda, its the fact that if you create a thread for every single passage that preterist claim to be interpreted a certain way then it would be endless. How can anybody follow this subject with a billion threads?
WJ
JackOk, as I think about it, fine. Then lets play your game.
I have some threads that I will be creating!
WJ
Keith,
If it's just a “little game” then why play? In fact, in a pm you once told me that you would not debate me on Preterism. So I am surprised to see that you do engage with me. No one is twisting your arm to play my “little game.”I started many threads on the trinity about many passages and you did not call that a “little game.” You're right that many threads are hard to follow. But so is one thread that is cluttered with many related subjects under one larger subject. In such threads good points get lost.
You said that you will be creating some threads. That's fine. But maybe we should go to “debates” and duke it out one on one.
thinker
JackI realize that it is not just a game. My statement is because I think that diversions are created by creating all these threads and adding confusion in the mix in the attempt to divert the conversation away from particular points, IMO.
An age ole debaters trick!
As far as a debate one on one, I thought that is what we were doing, but okay I will agree to a debate in the debates thread to prove that Preterisms assumption that 70 AD is the date that Jesus returned and all the prophetic scriptures concerning the return of Jesus and the New heavens and the New earth and the Kingdom of God have been fulfilled is false!
I am somewhat limited in time and may not be able to agree to your time constraints.
But it is your challenge so give me the rules and lets see!
WJ
Keith,
I have confessed to you twice in a pm that my mind gets over stimulated on this particular subject. Yet you say that I am just using an “age ol debater's trick.”I did the exact same thing in creating many threads against the Arains here. Many of those threads came in a wave. Not you or anyone said “an age ole debater's trick.”
I love truth and I love to defend what I believe is the truth. I got a lot of stuff in my head and it's just coming out. That's all!
You said that you don't have the time to reply to so many threads. So I will stop the new threads for a while. However, you don't have to reply at all though I enjoy engaging with you.
Love in Christ,
Jack
JackOk, I accept your explanation and oppologise for my insinuation. But this debate has pretty much been between you and I, so it seems like wisdom to have only a couple of threads for it.
Love back to you, Keith
I hear you brother. It's like I said my mind gets over stimulated on this subject. That's the main reason I stayed away from the board for a week while my daughter was home for Thanksgiving. If I hadn't I would have thought about nothing else while she was home.No more preterist threads for a while.
Jack
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 05 2009,05:00) Hi WJ,
Paul never taught trinity so why do you claim an alliance with him?
The battle is in defence of scripture, not man's ideas.
We pull down such speculations
Nick,
Paul said, “to Christ be the glory forever and ever.” The apostle John said that he wrote that we might “believe in the name of the Son of God and that we might have CONFIDENCE IN HIM” (1 John 5).This is why WJ has alliance with Paul and the apostles. Christ is ashamed of you because you are ashamed to have confidence in Him because you think He is as a “worm.” Would the apostle John tell us to have faith and confidence in a man who was as a worm?
thinker
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
