Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Obviously not because it's not silly at all. Do you realize how silly it is for you to not recognize the effect Christ's death, resurrection and the preaching of the gospel through the Holy Spirit has had on Satan for the past 2,000 years or so?
Has the Holy Spirit been dwelling permanently in God's people from the very beginning of history? No. How can you not know this?
Was that the case in Old Testament times? What Premils like yourself clearly don't understand is the tremendous effect that Christ's death, resurrection and the preaching of the gospel through the power of the Holy Spirit has had on Satan the past 2,000 years. Premils think nothing ever changed in regards to Satan. Then what in the world are passages like Hebrews 2:14-15 and 1 John 3:8 about?
Not used to having my view challenged? How can you tell? As a 40 year non-Trinitarian I'm more than used to challenges and how to handle them. Look at my picture. I'm still smiling.
One of the biggest errors inserted into the scriptures is the page in from of Matthew with big red letters proclaiming, "The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ."
I don't believe so.
You don't.
How can it be an assumption when he's talking about Israelite and Gentile believers being brought together as one entity? How can that not make you think of the church where Jew and Gentile believers are brought together as one?
Now who is making assumptions? I never even remotely hinted at the idea of an individual Jew being broken off in order to be replaced by an individual Gentile. That is a straw man argument.
I don't know what you're talking about here.
Who said that? Not me. Are you talking to me here or someone else?
Of course.
Of course. Why are you acting as if I've said any of these things?
No, I absolutely can not see that. What he taught regarding the branches is how salvation works. If an individual loses or is lacking faith then they are cut off. If someone puts their faith in Christ they are added to the church. Is that not what is being portrayed in Romans 11 in a figurative way? I believe so.
I think we've already clearly established that what seems obvious to you is not obvious to me and vice versa. So, let's not act as if we both don't already know that. Clearly, no matter how obvious I think something is, I know it's most likely not obvious to you and vice versa.
Why do you think he's speaking in any different context than he was in Romans 10:9-13 where he wrote about there being no difference between Jew and Gentile in regards to salvation?
No, it does not! Can you not see that the criteria for being part of the cultivated olive tree is faith and those without faith are cut off and not part of it? How is that any different than how individual salvation works? It isn't.
Good grief. Do you think that is not obvious? Please don't say things like this to me as if I wouldn't already know this. We all know this.
LOL! What?!! In no way, shape or form is Paul saying that. The ones who crucified Christ were cut off from the olive tree! How can you think they are holy? My goodness, you've outdone yourself here. I thought your interpretations of Romans 9:6-8 and 1 Peter 2:9 were horrible, but this might be even worse. Come on now. I believe you're better than this.
Not the branches that are cut off! Only the branches that remain along with the branches that are grafted in.
The nation of Israel that includes unbelievers is not holy. Come on! That is utterly ridiculous. Paul was talking about unbelieving Israelites being the enemies and believing Israelites being beloved. Unbelievers would never be included amongst God's beloved. That is not taught anywhere in scripture.
Yes, and it includes Gentile believers. So, how can the Olive Tree represent the nation of Israel when Gentile believers are not part of the nation of Israel?
Yes, they do! Wow! Unbelievable. To be considered holy means that you belong to Christ. There is no other way to be considered holy. Come on. Please open your spiritual eyes here.
No, no, no, no, no! Read Matthew 23. You are trying to tell me that people like the Pharisees and scribes that Jesus called snakes and hypocrites and such are holy and beloved. No way! Jesus would never have talked to them that way if that was the case. To be holy and beloved means that you have a personal relationship with Christ. The branches that were cut off back then, which would have included people like the Pharisees and scribes that Jesus called snakes and hypocrites, were not holy and beloved. If any of them were grafted back in, like the Pharisee Saul (Paul) was, only then would they be considered holy and beloved again.
Who said otherwise?
Yes, he did! That is implied because the ones who did not have faith were cut off. If lacking faith results in being cut off, then it only follows that having faith is what allows you to be part of the tree.
Yes. Hello? So, what does that suggest about those who have faith then?
No one is saying that! Faith is required to be part of the olive tree and it has nothing to do with one's nationality. If it had to do with nationality then none of the Israelites would have been cut off.
You don't seem to be handling them well on this forum. It looked like you were ready to just tuck your tail between your legs and run away just because someone had the gall to disagree with you.
You are the one who was acting as if your views can't be challenged, not me. I'm open to responding to any challenges to my view. That is not the impression you were giving about your own views.
Where in the world did I say that the seven churches aren't Christian churches? I never said that. Please don't lie like this.
It's addressed to Christian churches. What do you think a verse like this means:
Why do I need to when it's so obvious? I've never seen anyone suggest that it's not addressed to the church before.
Jesus said both positive and negative things about each church. So? They were Christian churches but most of them had some issues that they needed to deal with. That doesn't mean they were not Christian churches.
I feel the same way. But, I don't like you making assumptions about me that aren't true. You really need to stop doing that. I don't believe what I do because of tradition. That is 100% false. I study these things for myself.
Good reference, Jeff. Once again a Premil has completely overlooked what scripture teaches. Nothing new. Jesus will be the Judge on the great white throne, as this verse, and passages like Matthew 25:31-46, make abundantly clear.
You "Add" to scripture
You didn't say that. I did. If anyone just lied it's you. But I rather think you just misunderstood. No big deal.
You can't just use another verse with the same word (church) and say that proves the meaning of that word. That's circular reasoning.
Is it so obvious? Check your premise.
In and of itself, no, it doesn't mean they were not Christian churches. But I've told you about the mystery God kept secret until Paul, I've shown you how the things John said to the seven churches are radically different that what Paul spoke to the Christian church. Put two and two together. Consider the whole scope of scripture.
I used to believe exactly like you until I realized it was tradition and was not at all what the actual scriptures say. I've seen it from both sides and feel quite capable of seeing the difference. You have decided to stay on one side of the fence and avoid an honest examination of the other side, so naturally you would feel you understand the scriptures and are not following tradition.
Do you somehow think I didn't already know this? Of course context is very important and I believe you frequently miss the context in scripture. But, you already knew that, right?
Why are you isolating Romans 9 instead of including it with Romans 10 and 11? Paul wasn't making a point in Romans 9 and then changing the subject in Romans 10. You understand that, don't you? Here is what Paul said in Romans 10 where he was expanding on what he was saying in Romans 9:
Yes, I agree with this.
This is a baseless claim based on your doctrinal bias.
Oh, really? Then explain this:
Oh, really? Is that what Romans 10:9-13 is about? Is that what this passage is about:
Wrong. Did you somehow not read the passages above that I quoted? Clearly, Paul was not just talking about the nation of Israel in Romans 9 as you claim. You are seeing what you want to see instead of what Paul actually said.
You can't get past the idea that the Gospels were written to and about Israel and not the Christian church?
No, not even a tiny bit. You must have a bad memory. Have you forgotten that you said "I give up"?
You had said "I give up". How was I supposed to take that? You apparently have already forgotten that you said that.
I'm not going to waste any more time arguing against something that only you believe. I'd rather spend time refuting things that multiple people believe. The seven churches in Revelation existed at the time John wrote the book, which you ridiculous deny and they were Christian churches. That is obvious and not worth my time to argue about any further. It'd be like spend more time arguing with someone who says that 1 + 1 = 3. Why bother?
Don't tell me why I believe what I do. I will tell you. And I told you that I don't believe what I do because of tradition. Period. That is a fact. You can't tell me why I believe what I do.
So, when you said "I give up", you didn't mean it? I can only go by what you say. Just say what you mean from now on.I've seen it from both sides and feel quite capable of seeing the difference. You have decided to stay on one side of the fence and avoid an honest examination of the other side, so naturally you would feel you understand the scriptures and are not following tradition.
Have you noticed how many times I've said in this post, "I've shown you...?" Still want to claim I'm tucking my tail between my legs?
I can't get past how amazed I am at your utter lack of discernment. That's what I can't get past. So, you're saying John 3:16 doesn't apply to Gentiles then, are you? And when Jesus said He has other sheep besides His Israelite sheep, you don't recognize that as Him referring to Gentiles?
We will be caught up in the air, at which point Jesus will destroy His enemies (just read 1 Thess 4:13-5:11 and 2 Thess 1:7-10) and then the judgment will occur. That is what scripture teaches. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking that He won't destroy His enemies at the same time we are caught up to Him in the air. That is exactly what passages like 1 Thess 4:13-5:11 and 2 Thess 1:7-10 indicate.
I don't understand your question. Can you clarify it? There will be an order to things when they happen on the day Christ returns, but if 1 Cor 15:51-52 is any indication then those things will happen quickly.
We will be. What is the problem here? You're not doing a good job of explaining yourself here.
Who is saying that? You're not making any sense.
The church, of course. Your point is?
No, that's ridiculous.
Obviously. Goodness gracious, man, I hope you eventually actually get to a point in this post or I will be forced to tear my hair out.
Are you somehow not aware that even believers will stand before Christ's throne to give an account of ourselves?
How could I see that? That would require me to completely ignore passages like Romans 14:10-12, 2 Corinthians 5:10 and Matthew 25:31-46.
How is that a problem? The judgment would occur just after that occurs. Very simple. You're making something simple into something convoluted for some reason.
I have explained my view MANY times, and you're acting like I have not yet come up with a logical explanation for what I believe? LOL!
You are clearly wrong, but are you open to correction? I have my doubts.Maybe I'm wrong the way I see the difference and maybe you can come up with a better explanation. I'm all ears!
Usually that phrase in a discussion such as ours means one person has no idea how to get through other's thick skull. Think outside the box and try not to think the worst of someone.
OK, I will try better. For your part, I'd consider looking in the mirror and repeating the same exhortation.
Okay, so you're saying I shouldn't take anything you say at face value. Got it. And, you're implying that you think I have a "thick skull" and at the same time telling me to "try not to think the worst of someone". Okay, buddy!
I was only taking about that particular issue that we've already discussed enough at this point and not the overall discussion. You seemed to want to quit discussing any of this with me when you said "I give up".OK, but just to be clear, that's not you tucking your tail between your legs and running away? I'm just kidding. I understand what you're saying, namely that you give up. Wait, isn't that exactly what it means to tuck one's tail between their legs and running away? If we took your view, that's exactly what it would mean. But, like I said, I understand you to simply say you can't get through my thick skull. See...I'm equal opportunity here!
I never indicated that I was wanting to give up on the entire discussion. I just don't want to spend a lot of time refuting the things that only you believe such as your belief that the book is not addressed to Christian churches. That would be like spending a bunch of time trying to convince someone who thinks 1 + 1 = 3 that it equals 2 instead. What's the point? If I'm going to spend a good amount of time refuting something then it makes more sense to me to do that in regards to something that more than just one person believes.
OK. I'll get more specific. I have said that the Gentiles are tangentially involved with Israel, so that would explain John 3:16. However, that doesn't change the fact that Jesus said he come only for Israel and that he sent the Apostles out with precise instructions to go only to Israel.
There is no reason to think Jesus will destroy his enemies immediately after the rapture either. How does Thessalonians indicate that? Now if you were to understand that there is a whole 7 year tribulation between the two events, it'd all make sense. Like I've said many times, the entire scope of scripture must be considered when building a system of belief in your mind. There are tons of other verses that would make it clear there is some time between the rapture and Jesus coming to earth.
Yes. Those Christians who are asleep will be raised and it does sound like those alive at that day will be changed right after. But that still has nothing to do with the throne of judgment. Nor does it have anything to do with the 7 years of tribulation. It has nothing to do with Revelation at all. It occurs before Revelation and is in fact the reason all hell will break lose at the tribulation. Christians are the light of the world. We are the only thing holding back Satan from doing the things he will do in the tribulation. Light gone...look out below!!!
It couldn't be you're doing a good job of understand me. Not a chance. At least in your world I guess.
No, you should absolutely not ignore those verses. But you should also not ignore to whom and when each was written. You have to read and act on your own mail, not that of your neighbor.
Our disagreement lies in when things will occur.
Not one word in your response deals with the "Fact" of the "Last Day" resurrection seen in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, a complete non-response
And you say that without mentioning that I said I too have a thick skull? Cherry picking to make me out as bad as you can.Okay, so you're saying I shouldn't take anything you say at face value. Got it. And, you're implying that you think I have a "thick skull" and at the same time telling me to "try not to think the worst of someone". Okay, buddy!
I thought we cleared that up. Come on guy, new information ought to clarify the past.
Maybe we run in different circles, but I'm not even close to unique in my views. I didn't make them up you know. I'm not that smart. Somebody told me and I simply did what the Bereans did in Acts, namely, I searched the scriptures to see if what they said was true or not. I didn't just cling to the verses I thought I already knew. I prayfully considered the new information and found that what they said was true indeed.
Have you ever noticed that 1 Thessalonians 4 doesn't say Jesus comes down to earth? I says we will meet him in the air. Is that significant? I think it is. I think it is highly significant.
