Search results

You know, I think that applies both ways. Especially on forums like this. You don't know me, not really; you don't know my intent, my thoughts or desires or hopes. So when you engage in open conversation with others, who are here with the acknowledged intent to talk about doctrinal differences...

I'm sorry if I made your question into something it was not, that was not my goal at all...I was only attempting to answer the question as I saw it...sorry if I got it wrong. If I now go on and do the same, forgive, again...not my intent. I know most Dispensationalists agree that Jewish people...

Well, by all means....if false doctrines are made the same way sound doctrines are, let's just do away with them both!! Except...that's a little like shooting ourselves in the foot, wouldn't you say? Well, off the top of my head the number 1000 springs to mind. In the OT we are told that God...

Ok. I'm dancing right on the edge of my familiar frustration with you again. First, to my mind, you make a big deal about mocking the 'rapture' because it cannot possibly be a 'physical expectation'...silly us! No...it's about an emotional connection we have with Christ, right? Return to me and...

No, I'think you mistaked my purpose. I meant to say that some 'could', and sadly do...assume that because Christians accept that suffering is a part of life...indeed, part and parcel of following Christ, that we in fact seek it out and enjoy it. That is a mistaken and twisted view on their part...

So...what you're saying is that if a verse doesn't say "return" it's no good. Doesn't matter if is says "second coming", or "at his coming", or "he is near" (in regards to earth shattering events surrounding the world "seeing the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with great power and...

Ek...I fear I am once again in danger of just not getting you. Do you agree that the actual word used IN scripture is 'harpazo' or not...because if you look up the greek, that is indeed what is used. And, if you do recognize the use of 'harpazo' instead of 'rapture'....why do you insist that it...

It's true, on either side, yours or mine, there needs to be a perspective shift. I think the question everyone must ask themselves is: what leaves the least amount of questions or holes? For me, when added all up, it's easy. Paul describes this 'twinkling of an eye' event as the one that happens...

Hi 'friend of'. The thing about building doctrines...any doctrine...be it Dispensational or Amillennial, is that we pull different verses together that give us a better view of what we're trying to look at. So, sure....1 Thess 4:17 only mentions the 'dead in Christ'. I expect that's because Paul...

Forgive me, but I think this is a case of making the text mean what you want it to mean. If it only meant "some of" those belonging to Christ, then it would have said "then at his coming, some that belong to Christ". Instead it says "at his coming, those who belong to him". "Those" is the...

:rolleyes: Sure. The proof will always be WHEN it takes place. The same could have been said for Christ's first coming; with the Pharisees saying "sure, all those prophecies SAY all that stuff, but the proof will be when he's standing before us with all those credentials". Except....a person who...

That argument would only make sense if God did not intend to offer the same salvation to the Jews as he did the Gentiles. But, as we can see from the Apostles and even Paul, clearly he did. Paul made a point; even though he was the "apostle to the Gentiles" to stop of the synagogues 'first'...

Not just the antichrist. Jesus told us that persecution and suffering would be normal in the interadvental period. Matt 24 lists numerous things that will be normal, but increasing during this time; persecution for our faith is but one of them. But we are also told these things about suffering...

So...we're talking about creatures who dwell around the Throne of God, praising him constantly, who have bizarre appearances (so not humans), and you're stalling on the "angel" part? Tell me....are we told of any other sort of creation it could be? We're told there are different 'levels', you...

Oh, come now! If this is the best objection this man can muster against genre and the use of symbolism then he should just go home. He writes about unveiling and how the book was written to be shown! And then misses the point completely. What do we see with? Eyes? Pictures? Images? What sort of...

I'm sorry...but...isn't it just two sides of the same coin? One can't "interpret symbols" if they haven't been "used" in the first place. No? Okay...let me just stop you there for a second: you know how you're always asking me to correctly quote you etc? Well...my "viewpoint" is not just a...

Then you weren't paying attention in English class. "When an author wants to suggest a certain mood or emotion, he can also use symbolism to hint at it, rather than just blatantly saying it", or "The actions of a character, word, action, or event that have a deeper meaning in the context of the...

Yes, I was speaking to that, thanks. However, in regards to your point of Chapter 14 'speaking forward', to me, this is just another place where Dispensationalists cannot hold up their 'chronological' scheme of Revelation. For those who see Revelation as a series of recapitulating visions (one...

Hi Trekson! Yes, I am doing well, thanks...I just had a lovely craft weekend away! :D Fair point. I should say..."I" think it's clear that the bible teaches a single event. And...I'm not alone in that belief. But, putting aside that for a moment, I think one of the points I'm attempting to make...

The problem I see with that is that there starts to be a blurring of the timeline to try and make it 'convenient' for Dispensational doctrine. There is no time differentiations in any of the texts that speak of Christ's return...nothing that would reveal a 'first' or 'second' aspect to his...