Search results

The verses, though. "One shall be taken, and the other left" doesn't describe a rapture? So then, let me see if I have this right... Matthew 24 doesn't say anything about a rapture, then?

I agree. It also plainly speaks of Jesus returning at that time... yes? Same chapter, but a few verses later: Mathew 24:39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and...

Much better than the opening post. :gd

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all...

I think "interfaith" is nonsense - it's self-contradictory. Faith is placed in persons (a Person), rather than ideas. You cannot serve two masters. A group that serves many masters is... not a group. My only experience with "ecumenical" is multiple Christian churches coming together to build...

I imply that... you think I'm teaching something untrue? What? First thought... I'm not trying to teach. Just discuss.

I read that as being about martyrdom. He that endures to the end [is martyred], shall be saved. Note: the same phrase also occurs in Matthew 10 and Mark 13

Aye. Also, it provides the answer to the question about adoptions.

Yes, that seems to be the hole that needs filled

There was a lot of adoption that happened after that.

Changing the font size and using bold won't help. Do you suppose that only one Hebrew word can be translated 'promise?' That's silly. Anyway, what point are you driving towards? You've already correctly said that "promise" occurs in the New Testament in relation to Abraham. Are you trying...

You are arguing with the translator? "Promise" is within the range of outputs for this Hebrew word. Read the lexicon.

Christianity endorses everything that's in the Noahide covenant. Well, the church in Acts 15 did, anyway. When faced with the question of whether Gentile converts must go under the Law, the ruling was that they did not, but that they did need to uphold the Noahide rules. Covenants can only be...

We were talking about Abraham's children... not just Jews.

Yeah, there was a period of about 3 years where I was very depressed and had continual thoughts of suicide. It turns out, those were side effects of the allergy/asthma medication the doctor gave me. Always read up on any medications you take. The pharmaceutical companies are not trustworthy...

Just the facts? And then you immediately say something disprovable. Psalm 105:42 For he remembered his holy promise, [and] Abraham his servant. They are. Almost a third of the world's population today. Over half if you count Islam, too. You're reckoning Abraham's descendants as being...

There's two questions there. Literally everyone has the opportunity to participate in the Noahide covenant. However, salvation is not part of that covenant, so nobody is saved that way.

Dispensations end at some point, and there's a transition to the next one. Covenants are permanent. The Noahide, Abrahamic, and Mosaic covenants are all still in effect to this day. Not everyone is a part of all of them, but they're still around.

It's Ab haGoyim (אב המון) The promise is fulfilled in the adoption. Those who believe like Abraham, become Abraham's children. Point it out, then?

No. I call that Replacement Theology (derogatory). Covenant theology, so far as I know, understands the Bible in terms of covenants: 1) Adamic covenant (I don't actually believe in this one) 2) Noahide covenant 3) Abrahamic covenant 4) Mosaic covenant 5) Davidic covenant 6) New covenant Not...