(kriss;12815)
You keep bring up the Same scripture James 5:8James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.So what does this prove it tells us to be patient., establish our hearts for the lord drawth near. This doesnt mean anything I told my kids be patient you'll be an adult soon enough its closer/nearer than you think Now if a 5 year old thinks thats next week,its because that is his time frame of near. That Does not make it so. A satilight is in near earth orbirt, and a plane circles near your house are they the same?you say night is near, the person that lives in the far noth says night is near are they the same? You are taking a verse to mean what you have decided it means whether or not it does.You do the same in 1Peter near is a realitive term it implies no exact time.Same in Rev1: near is a relitive term near to a five year old is not the same as to an adult again you use scripture to prove your doctrine rather than letting scripture define Gods doctrine.
I am not trying to push my beliefs, kriss. I am trying to get you and others to be honest with simple words. I have not taken verses to mean something simply because I want them to.Do you not know that I became a preterist BECAUSE I was willing to do what you say I am not willing to do--listen and be taught?I may appear to be pushing my beliefs but what I am trying to push is to get people to look at CONTEXT and AUDIENCE RELEVANCE. How can we discuss God's Word if everyone wants to say what they think the words say?Furthermore, no one who opposes me has ever presented their beliefs except with the usual dispensationalist speak! I AM willing to change. I AM willing to listen. But when all I get is opinions and speculations, I will not be moved.Words do matter, kriss. The reason I keep bringing them up is because you are not being honest with them. Do you not see that you redefine simple words only because they do not fit your system? Taken in a noneschatological context, these words such as at hand, near, soon, shortly would present no problem for you. As a matter of fact, I can provide many noneschatological verses where those words are used. The same people who make them mean something else in eschatolgical passages will give them their normal, usual, everyday meanings in noneschatolgical passages. Why? Because in those noneschatological passages they do not contradict the dispensationalist's preconceived ideas of end things.You cannot take time words and make them relative, kriss. They are not! That is what keeps me pushing. Can we be honest with a passage such as Matthew 10? Can you look at it and at least see how someone might see it the way I do? Agree or not, could you at least, instead of completely demonizing me, see how I could arrive at the conclusions I arrive at based upon the context and the words of the passage itself?Does it not even a little bit appear to you that in Matthew 10 Jesus is speaking to THOSE disciples about things that were soon to happen to THEM? Does it not even the slightest bit appear to you that Jesus is somehow saying that He is going to come back to THOSE disciples? Do you never get that sense? What about THIS generation? Is it so unreasonable for someone such as I to take that expression in the way it is NORMALLY understood? Is that so outlandish?What about Matthew 26:64 when Jesus is speaking directly to that flesh and blood Caiaphas and tells HIM that he is going to see Him COMING on the clouds of heaven? Can you not even see in the least how someone could take those words at face value?Here is the sum of it all. When a time reference word occurs, it is the NORMAL thing to take it literally. Wouldn't you agree? Even it you make some case that near does not mean near and soon does not mean soon and shortly does not mean shortly, and at hand does not mean at hand, would you not agree that they are, then, not being used by the writer or speaker in their NORMAL meanings?I do understand how the words fit together, and I do have a concept of the whole plan of God. But like all concepts they begin with individual words which are put together to form meaningly expressions which then lead to that overall understanding. I do not mean to be unkind. That was not my purpose. But how can we communicate and share God's Word with one another if we will not look at each passage and each verse in their historical contexts and give proper attention to what the words meant to those who first heard them?I do NOT know everything. I never said I did. But one thing I do know. It is wrong to so quickly throw out the "h" word at fellow believers. And it is equally wrong to make such condemning accusations against such a believer for simply taking the words of the Bible at their face value.I am not telling you to throw out everything you believe. But why do you condemn me for taking verses at their face value? Is that not what I have done in the verses I provided? Is not the way I understand them the normal way most people would take such passages after a simple first reading?I study diligently every day because I do not want to ever again follow the teachings of men. I did that for many years. You may disagree with me, and I know you most certainly do, but what I believe are MY beliefs arrived at through hours and hours of intense study and prayer. I know you don't believe this, but I am open to change because I do not ever again want to misinterpret God's Word. But I find that many on this board do the exact same thing I did for years--follow a system and read that system into the Bible (eisegesis) instead of getting a system out of the Bible (exegesis).That is the cause for stumbling over simple time reference words. They don't fit our system so they must be ignored, downplayed, or redefined. That is not being honest with the Scriptures. JesusReigns