Search results

Again, not what it says! Goodness, and you give ME grief about my "mens leaven". You can't even read a passage straight without sticking a great big gap in there that is just not there. Do you notice all the words you used that are NOT there? 'thousand years reign', 'future reign'....those are...

I wonder how many times Amillennialists are forced to point out a basic exegetical mistake like this. I know you pride yourself on being 'a straight arrow pointing to scripture', so how can you say that Revelation 20 says that Satan will not be allowed to 'seek whom he may devour"? Let me remind...

It did apply to myself; I used to be a Dispensationalist. But the Spirit bought me great discomfort on that doctrine and pushed me to look for it in scripture. It wasn't there...as you know. However, the more I read, studied and prayed about it, I found Pre-Millennialism wasn't there either...

Protesting? Maybe I am...but "too much"? I don't think so. In fact, since you have now flip-flopped on your own opinion about the reliability of the ECF, I don't think I'm protesting enough. You can't keep changing your story or how it is you view the beliefs of the ECF just to suit your...

I was totally blown away by this. I also had heard of his 'conversion' but hadn't put much stock in it. I felt his "Sunday Services" were dodgy...how can it be 'Church' with no preaching or gospel proclamation. But, at the same time his new album released, social media started blowing up with...

My final point is this: when looking at Revelation 20, people assume it has to be read literally and chronological. However, we know that Revelation is an apocolytic book. The genre of apocolypse is not TO be read 'literally'. In fact, the most 'literal' interpretation is to read the book as the...

I thought it best to start a new post for this one...its gonna be long! Because I disagree mightily with you...there is plenty biblical evidence for it. And it's nice that you have confidence in yourself and your views, but I hope that confidence is not a hardness of heart to what the bible...

Wait...so let me get this straight: You can know from 2000 years later what the "first century" Church accurately believed, but Justin, who, by the way, IS considered an ECF, only about 70 years or so after them, is not a reliable source? I wonder if you just proved my point once and for all...

I'm not sure I actually made a case for the Amil view being "a popular view" that was held at the same time. I just pointed out that Justin himself said that there were other views present at the same time and he considered them biblical enough to not call them heretics. The fact is, even if...

It doesn't necessarily bother me either. I don't see it in scripture, but should I be wrong, I don't think I'll mind very much. 1000 years of near paradise on earth with Christ ruling? Kinda hard to feel bummed by it if it does happen. I just think that's not what the bible is referring to.

Um. I'm not exactly sure how to say this, and I most certainly don't wish to hurt your feelings; never that. But...honestly, I'm just not sure why you keep tagging me into this thread. I think I've said more on tattoos etc than I've ever really had thought on, ever, and I'm honestly not sure...

Okay...well...alright, let's touch on this a little more then. I have a problem when people attempt to base the validity of their understand of a particular doctrine on whether or not the 'Early Church Fathers' believed it or not. And I do so for a couple of reasons. First; we know from the...

It is very true Christ gives us NEW life; thus the bible verse promising a new heart and spirit. However, he does not give us HIS life. We are able to live our new lives through him, and it is by the Spirit within us that we move forward in Godliness. But again, we do not have HIS life. And the...

Mmmm, well, clearly I disagree, and a good perusal of the books can tell us that most groups of thought can dredge up early Church Fathers. I prefer to stick to scripture, as you say. And sure, post-trib makes sense, clearly. But where I cannot budge, although surprisingly I have often tried, is...

I have a feeling we're both talking and neither of us is managing to 'hit' it, in terms of the other really hearing. I am not speaking of the 'Christian life' as being one where we attempt, on our own, to straighten up and do right. I also think that what saved people in the OT is what saves...

Well, I do not believe this to be exactly accurate. and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away. -Matthew 27:60 The verse tells us that "he"...Joseph of Arimathea..had cut in the rock, this 'new' tomb of...

In one respect, I sort of agree with you, even though I'm not sure I'm on board with your definition of "Christ in you" as you put it. I think the 'key' to ridding ourselves of sin is not on 'changing our habits'. That implies trying to pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps, and even now, I...

I'm afraid I still don't see your point. Yes, we are aware of Christ dwelling within us after our salvation. Of course we are...that is what the gospel preaches; be forgiven and recieve him. But knowing this, having the Spirit within us as our promised helper, still doesn't diminish the...

Perhaps my memory is faulty, as I recall no such conversation. Not saying it didn't happen...just that I don't remember, sorry! I...can't quite see how you arrive at your conculsions, however...sorry. You look at the word 'new' in Ez 36, which is Strong's no. 2319 and say we must follow it back...