Search results

That it's a current reality. And that per the synonyms of both words an understanding begins to emerge: "Restrain"- synonyms: confine, constrain, bind, detain, govern, hinder, limit, prevent, restrict, subdue.......etc "Bound" - constrained, restrained, bent, compelled, driven, foreced...

Actually, I think if you look back over our conversation you'll find that what I've talked about is backing opinion with scripture, which I suppose, yes, is a crazy, selfish, hateful demand. One done only to make me feel better. Shame on me. But, inevitably, there comes a time to move on from a...

Wrong! Oh, so very wrong! Has our very, very long debate taught you nothing about me? While you've been spouting insults, I've been doing my best to SHOW you that there is a very logical, hermeneutical principle behind how we come to a passage. It depends on the text itself with it grammatical...

Actually...to be honest, considering how much scripture you DON'T use, and how much I DO use to try and make my case...I can't help but wonder if you respect it less than I do. At some point, you have to realise the excuse and accusation of "spiritualizer" just won't hold much weight anymore.

That's slightly funny, actually. Because from where I'm sitting, I'm the only one who's been even slightly bothered backing up my thoughts with scripture. I can make it "say anything and don't have to prove a thing?" What a laugh! You, who have provided plenty of pickled opinions to back up his...

Thanks. I shall. I feel comfortable in how the scriptures fit together and feel God has led me to the conclusions I now sit in.

It's inconsistent when you don't have any fast rules about these metaphors, symbols or figures of speech. You say scripture must be taken literally: fine. Then you say we must take into account metaphors, symbols and figures of speech...also fine, even though you finger point when others do it...

"Restrain"- synonyms: confine, constrain, bind, detain, govern, hinder, limit, prevent, restrict, subdue.......etc "Bound" - constrained, restrained, bent, compelled, driven, foreced, impelled, obliged.....etc Can you truly not see the similarites?

Here's the thing. For Idealists, it's fully within our hermeneutical principles to, as you say, have figurative language with literal meanings. In fact, it happens more than you think. It's also in our wheelhouse to go strictly literal if the text demands it, as it often does. The problem with...

Still unsure how what you're trying to say is essentially different to what I said, really. Okay. Let's follow this through. According to your logic. Where is Jesus now? According to Acts 1:9 he should be hovering in the clouds still....cause that's all it says. Even verses 10 and 11 don't say...

It's not the Rapture I see as illogical, I see scripture as clear on the topic. What I was unclear on was Taken's point.

Uh. Hi. I don't really have anything to say on this matter, however. ;)

Plain sight? Perhaps, if you were talking about the dead space in-between a full stop and the next sentence. I heartily disagree, both with your interpretation and conclusion. But I don't think me taking the time to lay out the theological process is getting anywhere, and I have other demands on...

Ahem. You DO know that 'restrained' is a synonym of 'bound'...right?

Wait. Let me get this right. After my repeated attempts to get you to support your own claims with scripture (which I shouldn't have to ask for, by the way), and after showing you outright how things are just not in scriptural text, your big move is to say I'm following in Satan's footsteps by...

So, I'm unclear on what you're actually saying here. You said: "no men do not receive their new bodies up "there". Men are raised up out and off the earth in glorified bodies. Men remaining on earth, with earthly eyes will not SEE a bunch of glorified bodies rising up to the clouds. I see...

First, I never said the AC is Satan. Secondly, I'm not sure how you can say I am removing text. Thirdly, this might hold more weight if you could prove Chapter 20 comes chronologically after Chapter 19. The problem with holding Revelation is a chronological narrative, is that Jesus seems to...

Sigh. I didn't have this absurd notion. I SAID it was absurd. I disagree with the 'remaining in heaven for 7 years', obviously, but no...I absolutely did not say we were going to be hovering in the clouds for that long. I was attempting to clarify what Taken had said, as it sounded very much...

Well, there's a blunt question. But incredibly good points. My question would be more along the lines of...how on earth does that all fit with their "literal" hermeneutic? The book says "stars will fall to earth". Thus, according to their literal interpreting scheme, they must say just that. But...

Again...it does NOT say that once Satan is bound he cannot "exert any influence on earth". It only says he will be stopped from "deceiving the nations". It is quite specific. One could say, oddly specific. The difference between this and the Trinity, is that the doctrine of the Trinity, while...