I'm pretty sure he did claim the transfiguration to be the fulfillment of the prophesy. But I don't have the time to trawl back through his long convoluted posts, which hardly make any sense to me at the best of times.
Now come on, seriously, what sort of a fool do you take people for???
Not ONCE EVER did I make that claim and to top it off, I reminded you repeatedly, over and over as per just one of the many examples following on the 14-11-17 and many before this on;
Transfiguration, transfiguration, transfiguration, transfiguration, transfiguration, transfiguration, transfiguration, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, IS NOT, is not, is not, is not, is not NOT, NOT, NOT part of Matt 16:28 BECAUSE, it another event and it is about six days latter. Another event and I have told you that I have NEVER used it, implied that it has anything to do with what I been talking about Matt 16:27-28 = Zeroooooooooo!
Now you know what I think is the problem, and I don't say this out of disrespect as I myself got caught up in the same way in the early days with Bowral - Your so fixated on where your trying to drive the matter or your preconceived ideas, your looking at my posts like your driving a car down the road and instead of looking at the road in front, your looking out the side window.
In other words, your NOT seeing what's in front of you.
Anyway, if memory serves me correct, I think Mr G "may" have made that claim and I am not Mr G ha.
So rolled up in the nonsense, we now have three events and I have "only" ever referred to one based on your first reference which I confirmed the verse from the onset, Mark 9:1, which you never once said it wasn't not once.
1. The some standing here, 2. Transfiguration, and 3. the grand events = 3 totally different subject/events/times.
