Preterists and Futurists are Accountants. Jesus is a Math Professor

[spauline]

Preterists and Futurists are alike in this regard: mainly, they are ACCOUNTANTS.

Spiritual Historicists, and, imho, Christ, therefore, is like a MATHEMATICIAN.

And the humorous thing in this analogy is that is a really funny and appropriate way to symbolize what Jesus was to the Sadduccees and Pharisees, respectively.

And today, IOW, Futurists are quite like PHARISAICAL accountants, and Preterists, are really alot like SADDUCAICAL accountants.

For the Pharisees surely argued, “whose wife will she be [in the Resurrection]”, and the Sadduccees laughed, perhaps understandably, at this folly, but used it as an excuse to doubt, or at least, take the other extreme.

And what was Christ’s response? Hypocrites! You do not know what you are talking about. For how can mere accountants of either form of hypocrisy, attempt to reprimand a mathematician?

Funny thing this is. Other examples, are the Breakfast Club. The criminal, who is also the shop boy, who merely ASSEMBLES the Lamp, dares not only to brag, but even REPRIMAND the nerd, who is the physicist. The nerd says, “without physics, there would be no lamps!” And the criminal says, “And without Lamps there would be no light!” But before the nerd could put the criminal in his place, and show the ultimate defeat of the criminal, by saying, “And therefore without physics there would be no light!”, the princess (Molly Ringwald) interrupts, with her soft heart that would rather not think and therefore enter the conflict, “Stop it guys, it proves nothing.”

And this is how I interpret this: the nerd is Christ, the criminal is a Pharisee, and Molly Ringwald is the Sadduccee.

 

[patrick457]

Spiritual Historicists, and, imho, Christ, therefore, is like a MATHEMATICIAN.

Our Lord did say the following words:
“Go and sine no more”,
“Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division”,

And last but not the least,
“Go forth and multiply.”

A mighty mathematician is our God
A solver never failing
Our scholar He, amid the flood
Of algorithms prevailing.

 

[spauline]

Our Lord did say the following words:
“Go and sine no more”,
“Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division”,

And last but not the least,
“Go forth and multiply.”

A mighty mathematician is our God
A solver never failing
Our scholar He, amid the flood
Of algorithms prevailing.

oh yes, but he said other things. On account of which I should like to elaborate to the person, or type, that is, in these times, practically, an apocalyptic Sadduccee.

So then let the truly orthodox and wise Catholic talk to the modern apocalyptic Sadducee:

well, in reality, you are a Sadducce, and this, is an understandable reaction to the Pharisee.

For the Pharisees are arguing, “Whose wife will she be in the Resurrection?” And because admittedly, such questions are irrelevant, so the hypocrite on the left dismisses the entire question, which is to say, in an extreme form, he denies the Resurrection altogether, or else says, hypocrite that he has become, why even ask ANY questions about it all? For in the end, does it matter at all?

And what did Christ say to the Sadducees, TG, who presumably thinks?

So then the Futurists are like Pharisaical engineers, who argue over arbitrary numbers involved in the building process, and don’t understand that the greater abstract laws are the substance of what matters, from which, they even know what to do with figures that arbitrary.

Similarly, the Preterists are like Sadduceical engineers, rejoicing in how mere figures as well, numbers–that are themselves just as intrinsically useless as the Pharisees’ figures–somehow show that the writings aren’t really all that important, and they just conveyed accounting statistics to the persons in their time, and that, after all is said and done, the only real message that God ever wanted to know about it is that, in a very, very, very, very, very vague sense, some day, there shall be a new heaven and earth, and no one exactly “when”, that is in terms of literal time [which is true], and so then, why bother at all.

There is some truth to this yes, for admittedly, our end is at death. And that is more important.

but the problem is that, you, a left hypocrite, do not understand that the book is not about US individually. Certain layers of meaning can apply, yes, to the individual. But I should like to let you know, to enlighten you, as it were, that the book is not, in its primary sense, about US individually.

It is about, what the Divine Plan for the whole human race is, which is to say, what the greater spiritual ages of Salvation HISTORY is, and not just that the ages ARE what they are, but WHY they are what they are, or, that is, why God did the things he did in the bigger picture, so that in the end, the greatest possible spiritual good may be attained, even though, granted, the final time shall be mostly darkness, incurable.

Which also brings us back to this question you didn’t answer, and I know why. Because you not only do not think it is necessary for you PERSONALLY to think about these things yourself, but even more, that no Christian should, much less the Church, for which you stand here and say that she in fact not only herself doesn’t care about these questions now, but she never will, and hence will know never know the answers, both because you claim, in your hypocritical ignorance, that Christ himself dismissed the totality of all questions in one verse (which by the way is not only misunderstood by hypocrites on the right, but also on the left, and in fact, taken aside from other verses that suggest there another side to the equation), and that in fact, Christ therefore, never willed anyone, much less His Bride, to ever even care about these questions, much less seek to ask the questions, much less seek to find answers that are promised to already lie in the Scripture and Tradition, awaiting to be resolved through doctrinal development, which St. Paul himself prophesies in the 2 Thess. 2, and which the Catechism references, and which are you ignoring to a large extent.

…

 

[spauline]

…

Meanwhile, you might read Ott’s Fundamentals. There you will find that he asserts in shorter words what I am saying, which, again, is this: the apocalypse is not primarily about our individual end. It is about the great spiritual stages of salvation history, and their meaning and the understanding thereof, which includes the reality that a final manifestation of inquity shall come, and, AT that time, it will be made manifest to the Church that it IS the final manifestation, which is to say, again, INCURABLE, and the Church shall solemnly proclaim it, even as Noah preached the destruction of the world in the beginning.

And still you did not answer this question: if the message is indeed, in the end, nothing but a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, *very *vague promise of an end, how the hell will the Church know when the final one is the final one.

Does the Church understand what theological essence of iniquity is? Of course. But that is not the WHOLE of the mystery, you left minded hypocrite, only PART of it. The rest of the mystery is this, which you are not aware of, because if you were, you wouldn’t say what you say, and dismiss the hypocrites of the right completely, like most other Catholics today, who are otherwise balanced, but left minded hypocrites in this particular issue, pushed away from it as the Sadduccees were from the useless speculation of the Pharisees.

So, IOW, the other part is this: How will the Church recognize WHEN humanity will be embracing the lie of iniquity she already knows, in such a manner that she cannot practically be brought back?

Which sort of brings up just a little thing that is rather a problem today, and that is this: that a great number of the world that used to know Christ now really embraces this supreme lie, this iniquity.

so the point is not merely WHAT the theological essence of the iniquity is, but at what point in history shall humanity whore themselves to the lie and be incapable of being restored to faithfulness.

And some people, who do care in some sense about these questions, are wondering whether humanity is now incurable, or whether an *** whipping might bring them back.

because in a certain sense, we ask ourselves, first, are they fully culpable for their apostasy? This in turn leads to ecclesiological questions, which certainly have bearing, and that since these ecclesiological problems are in fact the primary seed cause of why humanity is now a whore, whether the ecclesiological problems can be resolved?

Which, for example, raises this question, not that everybody cares, but that Jesus cared and so does the Church. Namely, will they ever be one again. If not, it is perhaps understandable that the world is a whore, for there is no consensus on just how she should not be a whore, and she says, until such time as it clear amongst you all why i shouldn’t be a whore, i shall remain one.

but if they are able to made one (and by the way, how would that happen? does it matter? ), could the woman then come back to faithfulness, or would she still be a whore and never come back. Of course, eventually, in the end, she will be an irrevocable whore.

but it seems Christ wanted her to be as faithful as possible before she becomes a permanent whore.

but maybe you are right, all these questions are fruitless.

yes, you are right. For since hypocrites on the right do indeed ask irrelevant questions, it is probably true that there are no valid questions.

but what did Christ say to them hypocrites. FYI, it is the verse about that Resurection. And the Sadduccees who denied it, or at least, didn’t care about it all.