|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 2, 2022 6:14:51 GMT -8
I am not asking you to "help" me see. I am asking you to proide any verse in scripture that explicitly states a third temple of stone will be built because an explicitly stated verse does not require any "seeing." It is self-evident. You are dodging the question and doing exactly what I said you'd be doing: posting verses that you read inferentially to say something they do not actually explicitly state, and then blaming me because I can't "see." It is a wretchedly ungodly practice. So... Strike 2. Another swing and a miss. No, I do not have to do any of that stuff because you are avoiding answering the question asked, trying to change the subject, and implicitly accusing me of blindness when all that was asked of you was to provide just one verse anywhere in scripture that explicitly states another temple of stone will be built. Show me the verse explicitly stating a third temple of stone will be built.And eg, perhaps it has escaped your recognition but when you post something that is interpreted to say something it does not actually state then it is you who is not reading scripture literally! Do not read scripture non-literally to make it say something it does not actually state. This is one of the reasons I have asked what I asked: show me the literal statement, the explicitly stated verse. PROVE you actually do read scripture literally AND do so with some consistency by posting the verse that explicitly states a third temple of stone will be built. When this exchange proves there is no such scripture you are going to learn I read scripture MUCH more literally than you. I will be able to point to scripture that actually explciticly states what I believe. You may disagree, but you won't be able to say I did not read the text literally. Now, if you would please be so kind as to stop avoiding the question and..... Show me the verse explicitly stating a third temple of stone will be built.
thx good God man. Just because it does not say it word for word does not mean it is not true do you want to discuss the word or not? Has the abomination of desolation taken place yet? If so. when did it take place? if it has not. THE TEMPLE MUST BE REBUILT thats ALL you need to know.. Actually there are multiple references to the soon coming third temple. They are found in the books of Daniel,Matthew and Revelations but I`ll give you one of the two best ones, found in 2nd Thessalonians 2, 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
This is a direct statement from Paul who said that the temple will exist and that the anti-Christ will sit in it and claim to be God. It is the primary sign that the first resurrection is eminent. The lack of ability to discern this straight forward assertion by Paul among many Christians baffles me. It has to be some kind of spiritual blindness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 7:49:20 GMT -8
good God man. Just because it does not say it word for word does not mean it is not true do you want to discuss the word or not? Has the abomination of desolation taken place yet? If so. when did it take place? if it has not. THE TEMPLE MUST BE REBUILT thats ALL you need to know.. Actually there are multiple references to the soon coming third temple.. "References" were not requested. EXPLICITE STATEMENTS is what was requested AND I explained why. The reasons why EXPLICITE statements were requested are at least four-fold: - ALL Christians should build doctrine first and foremost on what is plainly, explicitly stated. Not a single Dispensationalist has done that here in this thread.
- Dispensationalist generally refuse to build the Dispensational Premillennial eschatology first and foremost on what is plainly, explicitly stated and this thread is living proof of that fact. This fact is evidenced by the complete failure to provide a single verse explicitly stating a third temple will be built and the refusal to read the verses literally that explicitly state disciples go through the great tribulation.
- There are doctrines like the Trinity, and/or the divinity of Christ, that are built on inference. Inference is not the problem. Those doctrines are built first and foremost on what is plainly, explicitly stated in scripture and only then are the inferential cases formed. That does not happen with Dispensationalism, and it is not happening right here and now in this thread.
- Dispensationalists refuse to collaborate in any occasion of disagreement. Defensiveness is the automatic response, even when invited to do otherwise and shown great kindness and patience in support of the invitation. Despite the claim to be on good terms with other members of Christ's body, and the ad nauseam claim to read scripture literally, neither actually happens with any consistency and, again, this thread is living proof of that fact. I can't get a straightforward truthful answer to any of these very basic questions. And I have asked and asked more than once.
- I started my inquiries because ONE POSTER stated something that isn't true, and no one has caught the error! Instead, everyone has ignored the error and fixated on my questions and the entire digression has become a focus on the temple and not the error the other poster made. This error does not require anyone to hold a specific eschatological position to see the error. Everyone should see, everyone should agree the error is an error, everyone should make note of it for the other poster's benefit, everyone should encourage and exhort our brother to look at the error, and no one has done so!!! I can't even get a single direct answer to my questions that stem from the error!
- There is no evidence in the entire thread the doctrine of imminence is correctly understood, nor that the belief Christ can return ANY time is compromised by the expectation of a temple, national boundaries, a priesthood, animal sacrifices, etc. Simply put: If a temple, land boundaries, priesthood, Law, and sacrifices are all going to be restored prior to the rapture or Jesus' return then he cannot and will not come back at any moment!!! He might come back at any moment after those events occur but he's not coming back before those events according to Dispensational Premillennialism!!! At best a contradictory duality is held by the Dispensational Premillennialist.
And all of the above are examples of how Dispensationalists take things to far! By not answering my questions and moving the cnversation forward COLLABORATIVELY many of the problems existing solely within Dispensationalism have been manifested right here in this thread for any willing to see them. If any of you asked me,
"Do you believe Jesus can return at any time?" Yes! It is because I believe Jesus may come back at any moment that I reject ALL eschatologies teaching a bunch of stuff must first occur before Jesus comes. Predictions like that ALWAYS compromise the doctrine of imminence. It does not matter the eschatology, and no one has to subscribe to a specific eschatology to understand this.
"Where is the verse that explicitly states a third temple of stone will be built?" There is no such verse.
"Do you believe another temple will be built?" LOL! No, absolutely not! NONE of the OT prophecies actually state a third temple will be built and every single one of the OT mentions of a future temple can and should be read in light of other scriptures that tell us two temples were subsequently built (and I can actually quote verses stating these temples were built). Scripture, NOT an eschatology literally invented by one man in the 1800s should be used to understand scripture. Scripture is the best tool for understanding scripture.
"Matthew 24 and Revelation 2 and 7's mentions of the great tribulation preclude a pre-tribulational view because those passages clearly, explicitly state disciples go through the great tribulation, the great tribulation, not just any tribulation. How do you address this?" I accept and believe the scripture exactly as they are written. I read them literally.
"Can you tell me where that chapter explicitly states Jesus physically comes to earth?" Yes, I can tell you where the chapter states Jesus physically comes to earth: It does not anywhere explicitly state any such thing. This too is another example of inferential reading indicating a failure to take the text literally, to read it as written. And if I were asked these questions and I refused to answer them I'd be trashed for delaying. The posts would not be kept about the posts. All of these are examples that answer the question asked in this op: " Do Dispensationalists take things too far?" YES! and not only do they take things too far on a few occasions, they do so all over the place in BOTH content AND method because no one can get a Dispensationalist to answer the simplest of question or discuss the undeniable inferential nature of Dispensationalism.
I'd like ALL of you to go back and re-read this opening post. AFTER having read the opening post again, read through the thread and look to see how many actually directly addressed the concerns of this OP. Then take a look at yourselves and ask, "How is it we consistently prove incapable of discussing these very real and valid concerns that do not exist in any other theology?"
And then start over. Post something that is specifically and directly related to the op - and do it with some semblance of scriptural evidence that proves the op incorrect! Either that, ot openly acknowledge the problem(s) and talk to the non-dispies here about better, more scripturally consistent alternatives.
That, after all, is why the forum exists  .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 8:10:40 GMT -8
good God man. Just because it does not say it word for word does not mean it is not true......... Actually there are multiple references to the soon coming third temple. They are found in the books of Daniel,Matthew and Revelations but I`ll give you one of the two best ones, found in 2nd Thessalonians 2, 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Not a single word in any of those four verses explicitly states a third temple of stone will be built. The verses "reference" a temple, but there were already TWO temples standing at the time Paul wrote those verses to the Thessalonians. One of the two temples was subsequently destroyed and the other remains intact to this day. There's absolutley no reason to infer another temple of stone in these verses and they most definitely do not explicitly state one will be built. Except none of the verses do directly" state any of it applies to a third temple. There's no mention of a third temple at all. It is an assumption these verses pertain to a third temple, NOT something " directly" stated in the text itself. No third temple is mentioned. A third temple cannot be " the primary sign" because there's no explicit mention of a third temple. And this is a very common response BUT this kind of a response is called "personal incredulity," and personal incredulity is always and everywhere meaningless. You can be both baffled and wrong. The two are not mutually exclusive conditions. The irony here in this thread is that I have explicitly, openly offered to engage the discussion about inferential reading of scripture and not a single poster here has taken up the offer. I can't even get a single person to acknowledge one simple, undeniable fact fo scripture: There is not verse in the entire Bible that explicitly states another temple of stone will be built. That position is always and only reached by an inferential reading of scripture. That lack of collaboration has been repeatedly demonstrated here in this thread. We could ALL collaboratively be much, much, much, much, much further along in this conversation but we're not. And this too is a very common response. It's called the ad hominem, and ad hominem is always and everywhere a fallacious response. The idea "If you can't see it then you must be spiritually blind" does nothing to provide an explicit verse. What it does is avoid the matter of explicit statement AND it does so at the expense of violating Philippians 2:3 = the mandate to consider others MORE significant than ourselves, to look first at ourselves and ask if WE are the "spiritually blind" person who cannot see or accept what is actually plainly, explicitly stated in the text of scripture. More importantly, logical fallacy is ALWAYS evidence of flesh, not Spirit. These thoughts, when they occur within us, are always to be resisted. The Holy Spirit never teaches a person to argue fallaciously. Our conscience should (and probably does) pique us when the impulse to post red herring, straw man, ad hominem, false dichotomy, non sequitur, etc. It's telling on every occasion when these otherwise very common responses occur. The 2 Thessalonians 2 text does not actually explicitly state another temple of stone will be built. If we read that passage from the point of view of the original author and the original audience, we necessarily understand there were two temples standing at the time the 2 Thes. 2 text was written. It is only because the temple of stone existing at that time was later destroyed that a third temple is imagined, and the only reason I brought up the temple in the first place is because waiting on another temple compromises the doctrine of an imminent return! and no one here seems to see that! Now watch how many will disagree and resort to fallacious responses to avoid engaging those facts. It won't be the non-dispies proving themselves incapable of having that discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 3, 2022 9:43:08 GMT -8
ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...................ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
|
|
|
Post by Bible Highlighter on Oct 3, 2022 9:50:47 GMT -8
That is not an answer to my question. I asked, 1) Do you believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture?The answer to that question is a simple, " Yes, I believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture," or " No, I do not believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture." I can infer from your post you do believe another temple will be rebuilt but I do not know if you believe it will be built BEFORE the rapture (or the return of Christ. So would you please answer the question asked as specifically and concisely as you are willing and able?
Do you believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture?
Preterism is irrelevant to my inquiries. The verses cited preclude a pre-tribulation eschatology because they report disciples going through " the great tribulation." Regardless of what preterism may or may not assert, how do you address the scriptures precluding a pre-trib interpretation? This is evidence of the problem to be solved. Things nowhere stated are being read into scripture. I cited Revelation as the only place the millennium reign is explicitly mentioned and noted there's not a single word in the entire chapter mentioning Jesus coming to earth. You quote verses 7 and 8 to show satan and humans are on earth. There's no mention of Jesus being on earth. Go back and re-read the entire chapter and look for the place where it actually states Jesus is physically on the earth. Revelation 20:1-10
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time. Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison, and will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the sand of the seashore. And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
These verses are the only place in the entire Bible mentioning a reign "for a thousand years." Which one of these verses states Jesus physically here on earth? Which one states Jesus, not satan, or those reigning with him, is physically here on earth? Verses 7 and 8 do not state any such thing. So... NONE of the specific questions I asked were answered. A response was given, and I appreciate the effort, but no actual answer occurred. So, @bible Highlighter , - Do you believe another temple will be built before the rapture, or the return of Christ?
- How do you respond the texts of Matthew 24 and Revelation chapter 1, 2 and 7 clearly reporting disciples go through "the great tribulation"?
- Where is the verse that states Jesus is physically on the earth during the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20?
I have at least two more questions directly related to your specific answers to those three questions. I am relying on you. I don't want to assume you believe things you have not said you believe, so please do answer these three questions. Thx
I believe the most important thing we should focus on is living holy unto the Lord after we are saved by God’s grace.
Peace be unto you in the Lord Jesus. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 16:05:11 GMT -8
That is not an answer to my question. I asked, 1) Do you believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture?The answer to that question is a simple, " Yes, I believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture," or " No, I do not believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture." I can infer from your post you do believe another temple will be rebuilt but I do not know if you believe it will be built BEFORE the rapture (or the return of Christ. So would you please answer the question asked as specifically and concisely as you are willing and able?
Do you believe another temple of stone will be rebuilt before the rapture?
Preterism is irrelevant to my inquiries. The verses cited preclude a pre-tribulation eschatology because they report disciples going through " the great tribulation." Regardless of what preterism may or may not assert, how do you address the scriptures precluding a pre-trib interpretation? This is evidence of the problem to be solved. Things nowhere stated are being read into scripture. I cited Revelation as the only place the millennium reign is explicitly mentioned and noted there's not a single word in the entire chapter mentioning Jesus coming to earth. You quote verses 7 and 8 to show satan and humans are on earth. There's no mention of Jesus being on earth. Go back and re-read the entire chapter and look for the place where it actually states Jesus is physically on the earth. Revelation 20:1-10
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time. Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison, and will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the sand of the seashore. And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
These verses are the only place in the entire Bible mentioning a reign "for a thousand years." Which one of these verses states Jesus physically here on earth? Which one states Jesus, not satan, or those reigning with him, is physically here on earth? Verses 7 and 8 do not state any such thing. So... NONE of the specific questions I asked were answered. A response was given, and I appreciate the effort, but no actual answer occurred. So, @bible Highlighter , - Do you believe another temple will be built before the rapture, or the return of Christ?
- How do you respond the texts of Matthew 24 and Revelation chapter 1, 2 and 7 clearly reporting disciples go through "the great tribulation"?
- Where is the verse that states Jesus is physically on the earth during the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20?
I have at least two more questions directly related to your specific answers to those three questions. I am relying on you. I don't want to assume you believe things you have not said you believe, so please do answer these three questions. Thx
Then do not debate it. Discuss it. I completely agree. However, your statement about living holy unto God is directly related to this op AND your post. How? If I put it in simple terms then How we live today should have consistency with our thinking, our words, and our doctrines! Or to put it another way, we should be able to live in a manner with what we say we believe. That hasn't happened for many in this thread. That is the specific reason I engaged your posts the way I did and asked you the specific questions I asked. Anyone who says they believe the world is going to go to hell in a handbasket any day now ought to live as if they actually believe this is true. For example, if a Christian claims to believe all the Christians are going to be raptured next week, then there's no reason to make any big purchases because we're not going to be around to use them. Similarly, if we're all going to be raptured within the next ten years, or even the next 20 years, then there is absolutely no warrant for investing in college savings funds or retirement accounts for the youngest among us. We're not going to be around to spend the money or reap from the investment. We would literally be giving the money away to the ungodly when it could be spent on better things. This means that our teachers should teach accordingly and when they don't, we have reason to hold them accountable and when we don't do that, we compromise our own integrity again. Furthermore, the outside world is watching all this lack of integrity. They have reason to conclude Christians are hypocrites who say things they do not truly believe. It bears a very poor witness to the God we claim to serve. That is not holy living. That is a mess. So.... do not debate this with me, come along side of me and discuss it. Do it because you especially, Bible Highlighter, posted something in this thread that is impossible. NO ONE can believe in an anytime rapture AND future events preceding the rapture AT THE SAME TIME. It's not scriptural and it's not logical. Neither is it holy living. So walk with me while we sort this out because this op is asking of Dispensationalists take things to far and you chose to post in this thread and then refused to discuss your own post. I completely agree. Yes, my blessing of peace for you, too, but I wonder if the irony of extending a blessing of peace where debate is unnecessarily perceived and peaceful conversation is refused is recognized. I hope you'll reconsider your views and discuss this op with me. |
|
|
|
Post by Bible Highlighter on Oct 3, 2022 16:52:30 GMT -8
As I said before. I don’t like to debate Eschatology. Then do not debate it. Discuss it. I completely agree. However, your statement about living holy unto God is directly related to this op AND your post. How? If I put it in simple terms then How we live today should have consistency with our thinking, our words, and our doctrines! Or to put it another way, we should be able to live in a manner with what we say we believe. That hasn't happened for many in this thread. That is the specific reason I engaged your posts the way I did and asked you the specific questions I asked. Anyone who says they believe the world is going to go to hell in a handbasket any day now ought to live as if they actually believe this is true. For example, if a Christian claims to believe all the Christians are going to be raptured next week, then there's no reason to make any big purchases because we're not going to be around to use them. Similarly, if we're all going to be raptured within the next ten years, or even the next 20 years, then there is absolutely no warrant for investing in college savings funds or retirement accounts for the youngest among us. We're not going to be around to spend the money or reap from the investment. We would literally be giving the money away to the ungodly when it could be spent on better things. This means that our teachers should teach accordingly and when they don't, we have reason to hold them accountable and when we don't do that, we compromise our own integrity again. Furthermore, the outside world is watching all this lack of integrity. They have reason to conclude Christians are hypocrites who say things they do not truly believe. It bears a very poor witness to the God we claim to serve. That is not holy living. That is a mess. So.... do not debate this with me, come along side of me and discuss it. Do it because you especially, Bible Highlighter, posted something in this thread that is impossible. NO ONE can believe in an anytime rapture AND future events preceding the rapture AT THE SAME TIME. It's not scriptural and it's not logical. Neither is it holy living. So walk with me while we sort this out because this op is asking of Dispensationalists take things to far and you chose to post in this thread and then refused to discuss your own post. I completely agree. Yes, my blessing of peace for you, too, but I wonder if the irony of extending a blessing of peace where debate is unnecessarily perceived and peaceful conversation is refused is recognized. I hope you'll reconsider your views and discuss this op with me.
As for your claim that believers should be selling everything and living like Jesus is coming at any moment: Well, that would be ideal if we knew for a fact He was coming back today, but in reality we simply don’t know. We even see in Scripture of the saints doing things and planning things (even though I believe they looked for His return at any moment). Their lives were not put on hold. Parents should provide for their children still. Believers still need to put food on the table by working in the event the Lord may not return today. Being ready at any moment does not mean we stop paying our bills because he is going to come back today. That’s not realistic. We also have to consider He may not come back today, and we have to live this life. Being ready for Jesus at any moment means we have to live holy. It would be illogical if a person just stopped living life and starved to death and or stopped paying their bills, and or no longer provided for their family all by expecting Jesus return soon. That would be an extreme unhealthy view of looking at His return at any moment. I think a Christian should want to focus more on helping the poor, and preaching the gospel more if they knew for sure He was coming back today or next week. But we should just naturally be doing these things any way. For death can also just as equally claim our lives earlier than we would have hoped, too. This is why we need to focus all the more on living for Jesus first. I see that as our #1 priority in life. The Any Time Rapture viewpoint is likened to death in that it can come at any moment by surprise. That does not mean we put our lives on hold just because that such a thing could happen. So your argument is flawed. The Any Time Rapture is motivation for us to not wanting to to go through the Tribulation. This makes sense because if we truly live holy in a way that is pleasing to the Lord by faith, God is going to reward us.
Hebrews 11:6
“…for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 17:17:54 GMT -8
Then do not debate it. Discuss it. I completely agree. However, your statement about living holy unto God is directly related to this op AND your post. How? If I put it in simple terms then How we live today should have consistency with our thinking, our words, and our doctrines! Or to put it another way, we should be able to live in a manner with what we say we believe. That hasn't happened for many in this thread. That is the specific reason I engaged your posts the way I did and asked you the specific questions I asked. Anyone who says they believe the world is going to go to hell in a handbasket any day now ought to live as if they actually believe this is true. For example, if a Christian claims to believe all the Christians are going to be raptured next week, then there's no reason to make any big purchases because we're not going to be around to use them. Similarly, if we're all going to be raptured within the next ten years, or even the next 20 years, then there is absolutely no warrant for investing in college savings funds or retirement accounts for the youngest among us. We're not going to be around to spend the money or reap from the investment. We would literally be giving the money away to the ungodly when it could be spent on better things. This means that our teachers should teach accordingly and when they don't, we have reason to hold them accountable and when we don't do that, we compromise our own integrity again. Furthermore, the outside world is watching all this lack of integrity. They have reason to conclude Christians are hypocrites who say things they do not truly believe. It bears a very poor witness to the God we claim to serve. That is not holy living. That is a mess. So.... do not debate this with me, come along side of me and discuss it. Do it because you especially, Bible Highlighter, posted something in this thread that is impossible. NO ONE can believe in an anytime rapture AND future events preceding the rapture AT THE SAME TIME. It's not scriptural and it's not logical. Neither is it holy living. So walk with me while we sort this out because this op is asking of Dispensationalists take things to far and you chose to post in this thread and then refused to discuss your own post. I completely agree. Yes, my blessing of peace for you, too, but I wonder if the irony of extending a blessing of peace where debate is unnecessarily perceived and peaceful conversation is refused is recognized. I hope you'll reconsider your views and discuss this op with me. Therein lies the rub. I am open and have demonstrated an openness that has not been reciprocated. Look at this your post, Bible Highlighter. You've made this about us, and not the op. What openness is demonstrated by that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 17:34:03 GMT -8
Then do not debate it. Discuss it. I completely agree. However, your statement about living holy unto God is directly related to this op AND your post. How? If I put it in simple terms then How we live today should have consistency with our thinking, our words, and our doctrines! Or to put it another way, we should be able to live in a manner with what we say we believe. That hasn't happened for many in this thread. That is the specific reason I engaged your posts the way I did and asked you the specific questions I asked. Anyone who says they believe the world is going to go to hell in a handbasket any day now ought to live as if they actually believe this is true. For example, if a Christian claims to believe all the Christians are going to be raptured next week, then there's no reason to make any big purchases because we're not going to be around to use them. Similarly, if we're all going to be raptured within the next ten years, or even the next 20 years, then there is absolutely no warrant for investing in college savings funds or retirement accounts for the youngest among us. We're not going to be around to spend the money or reap from the investment. We would literally be giving the money away to the ungodly when it could be spent on better things. This means that our teachers should teach accordingly and when they don't, we have reason to hold them accountable and when we don't do that, we compromise our own integrity again. Furthermore, the outside world is watching all this lack of integrity. They have reason to conclude Christians are hypocrites who say things they do not truly believe. It bears a very poor witness to the God we claim to serve. That is not holy living. That is a mess. So.... do not debate this with me, come along side of me and discuss it. Do it because you especially, Bible Highlighter, posted something in this thread that is impossible. NO ONE can believe in an anytime rapture AND future events preceding the rapture AT THE SAME TIME. It's not scriptural and it's not logical. Neither is it holy living. So walk with me while we sort this out because this op is asking of Dispensationalists take things to far and you chose to post in this thread and then refused to discuss your own post. I completely agree. Yes, my blessing of peace for you, too, but I wonder if the irony of extending a blessing of peace where debate is unnecessarily perceived and peaceful conversation is refused is recognized. I hope you'll reconsider your views and discuss this op with me. If by that you mean anyone whose eschatology is off and is not living holy, then that person, whoever that may be has wasted his life making it about eschatology, then yes, I completely agree. Which brings us back to Dispensationalism because Dispensationalism is a theology expressly defined by eschatology!!I Dispensationalism intentionally elevates ecclesiology and eschatology to the forefront of Christian doctrine. I can quote leading dispensationalists going all the way back to John Darby, the inventor of this eschatologically-based theology. As has already been demonstrated by several Dispensationalists in this thread there is a recurring tendency to interpret scripture to make it say things it does not actually state and then accuse those who disagree of being closed, blinded and other epithets. That is neither open nor holy! This was demonstrated remarkably with your own statement, " I also not only believe in an AnyTime Rapture (Which could potentially be a Pre-Trib Rapture), I also believe that the remaining saints will be taken up by angels in the Middle of the Tribulation". Again, I ask you how is it possible to believe in an "anytime rapture" AND also believe in the saints being taken up in the MIDDLE orf the tribulation? The two premises contradict one another! Be open to looking at that contradiction. Live holy and rid your living of that contradiction. If the saints are raptured mid-tribulation then the tribulation must first occur. Unless you believe the tribulation occurs AFTER Jesus' second advent this is a contradiction. And it is not me who is wasting his life in Christ believing something that cannot possibly be true. Be open to looking at your own posts at least as much as you would like for me to be open to it. Anytime pre-trib rapture. Mid-trib rapture (not-anytime because it can only be mid-trib). And both predicated on the existence of a third temple still yet to be built! (which means the rapture canot and will not be "anytime," but ONLY after the temple is built) Be open to examning your own post as you would like me to be. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2022 17:44:55 GMT -8
Then do not debate it. Discuss it. I completely agree. However, your statement about living holy unto God is directly related to this op AND your post. How? If I put it in simple terms then How we live today should have consistency with our thinking, our words, and our doctrines! Or to put it another way, we should be able to live in a manner with what we say we believe. That hasn't happened for many in this thread. That is the specific reason I engaged your posts the way I did and asked you the specific questions I asked. Anyone who says they believe the world is going to go to hell in a handbasket any day now ought to live as if they actually believe this is true. For example, if a Christian claims to believe all the Christians are going to be raptured next week, then there's no reason to make any big purchases because we're not going to be around to use them. Similarly, if we're all going to be raptured within the next ten years, or even the next 20 years, then there is absolutely no warrant for investing in college savings funds or retirement accounts for the youngest among us. We're not going to be around to spend the money or reap from the investment. We would literally be giving the money away to the ungodly when it could be spent on better things. This means that our teachers should teach accordingly and when they don't, we have reason to hold them accountable and when we don't do that, we compromise our own integrity again. Furthermore, the outside world is watching all this lack of integrity. They have reason to conclude Christians are hypocrites who say things they do not truly believe. It bears a very poor witness to the God we claim to serve. That is not holy living. That is a mess. So.... do not debate this with me, come along side of me and discuss it. Do it because you especially, Bible Highlighter, posted something in this thread that is impossible. NO ONE can believe in an anytime rapture AND future events preceding the rapture AT THE SAME TIME. It's not scriptural and it's not logical. Neither is it holy living. So walk with me while we sort this out because this op is asking of Dispensationalists take things to far and you chose to post in this thread and then refused to discuss your own post. I completely agree. Yes, my blessing of peace for you, too, but I wonder if the irony of extending a blessing of peace where debate is unnecessarily perceived and peaceful conversation is refused is recognized. I hope you'll reconsider your views and discuss this op with me. As I said previous to ALL: you take responsibility for your half of the discussion, and I will take responsibility for my half. No, that completely misses the point. Whether by sure knowledge or faith the salient underlying aspect of holy living is integrity. People who teach things that are contradictory are lacking in integrity. People who believe these contradictory things are either lazy, duped, or lacking in integrity. People who see the contradictions and do nothing about it are, again, lacking in integrity. People who don't live in a manner consistently with what they teach are lacking in integrity and appeals to a lack of surety not only don't change these facts, those appeals are part of the problem to be solved IF the goal is holy living. God does not reward that way of living with blessing. The rapture cannot occur anytime if a temple must first be built. The rapture cannot occur anytime if the tribulation must first begin. The rapture cannot occur anytime if the AoD must first occur. All of these beliefs contradict the premise of an anytime rapture. Furthermore, I showed several scriptures explicitly stating the disciples not only experience the great tribulation but go through it. Are you opening to examining those scriptures with me? Be as open to ALL of scripture as you'd like me to be of your use of a select few. Can you now see how waiting on various milestones precludes an anytime rapture? Simple question. Yes or no? |
|
|
|
Post by Bible Highlighter on Oct 4, 2022 3:39:04 GMT -8
Again, I am not interested at this point in my life in going over these things with you if you are not open to the things I said so far in Scripture on this matter. Therein lies the rub. I am open and have demonstrated an openness that has not been reciprocated. Look at this your post, Bible Highlighter. You've made this about us, and not the op. What openness is demonstrated by that?
www.christianforums.com/threads/my-new-end-times-chronology.8109642/
But I am not interested at this time in debating it or discussing it at great length (if one disagrees). The focus of my life right now is to live for the Lord and not to discuss Eschatology. Maybe God will lead me back to that study later in my life. But right now… living for the Lord is more important. Too many people today want to justify sin and or doing the wrong thing under the name of Christianity. |
|
|
|
Post by Bible Highlighter on Oct 4, 2022 3:51:37 GMT -8
If your Eschatology is off and you are not living holy, then you have wasted your life making it all about Eschatology. If by that you mean anyone whose eschatology is off and is not living holy, then that person, whoever that may be has wasted his life making it about eschatology, then yes, I completely agree. Which brings us back to Dispensationalism because Dispensationalism is a theology expressly defined by eschatology!!I Dispensationalism intentionally elevates ecclesiology and eschatology to the forefront of Christian doctrine. I can quote leading dispensationalists going all the way back to John Darby, the inventor of this eschatologically-based theology. As has already been demonstrated by several Dispensationalists in this thread there is a recurring tendency to interpret scripture to make it say things it does not actually state and then accuse those who disagree of being closed, blinded and other epithets. That is neither open nor holy! This was demonstrated remarkably with your own statement, " I also not only believe in an AnyTime Rapture (Which could potentially be a Pre-Trib Rapture), I also believe that the remaining saints will be taken up by angels in the Middle of the Tribulation". Again, I ask you how is it possible to believe in an "anytime rapture" AND also believe in the saints being taken up in the MIDDLE orf the tribulation? The two premises contradict one another! Be open to looking at that contradiction. Live holy and rid your living of that contradiction. If the saints are raptured mid-tribulation then the tribulation must first occur. Unless you believe the tribulation occurs AFTER Jesus' second advent this is a contradiction. And it is not me who is wasting his life in Christ believing something that cannot possibly be true. Be open to looking at your own posts at least as much as you would like for me to be open to it. Anytime pre-trib rapture. Mid-trib rapture (not-anytime because it can only be mid-trib). And both predicated on the existence of a third temple still yet to be built! (which means the rapture canot and will not be "anytime," but ONLY after the temple is built) Be open to examning your own post as you would like me to be.
• Matthew 24:1a-2
And... the temple... There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
• Mark 13:1a-2
And... of the temple, ...there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Today, the wailing wall of the temple still stands and so it is impossible for the things that Jesus talked about would be fulfilled. This is as far as I am going to go on this. As I said, I am not here to endless debate Eschatology. Find somebody else if that is what you want to do. I am sure there are others who can explain it to you better if you are open and not trying to push your model upon them. For already, you have claimed my model is not correct because it is originated with Darby.
Side Note:
No offense, but I am sure my words will fall on deaf ears here (in how I don’t want to debate Eschatology), and you will still persist to sell me on discussing (debating) Eschatology like a used cars salesman wants to push for me to buy one of his used cars that I don’t want. If you ever been solicited by telemarketers by phone or at your door to the point of annoyance, you should hopefully understand how I feel when I say… “no, I am not interested.” |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2022 15:15:06 GMT -8
Therein lies the rub. I am open and have demonstrated an openness that has not been reciprocated. Look at this your post, Bible Highlighter. You've made this about us, and not the op. What openness is demonstrated by that? Hmmm.... So.... it turns out it you who is not open. Follow the logic here, BH. I'm being invited to discuss the position in a different forum only if I agree with the position when you already know I disagree. If it's not going to be debated or discussed here in this forum what reason would I have for thinking anythng different will occur in that forum? This amounts to " I'm going to tell you what I believe but I refuse to discuss any of it with anyone who disagrees, no matter how open to discussion they claim to be." What is the topic of this op? This op is about whether or not Dispensationalists take things too far. I will argue Dispensationalists entering the thread to off-topically tell everyone their new position while refusing to discuss any of it with those who disagree, no matter how open they may be, is a clear example of the problem to be solved. It is an example of Dispensationalists taking things too far. Therefore, I thank you for your contribution to the thread. No, it does not. No one can scripturally nor rationally lay claim to imminent, anytime rapture and also lay claim to a mid-trib rapture and an expectation the temple will first be built and the AoD prophecy fulfilled. The three expectations contradict any and all claims of imminency. "Hi Honey, I'll be home any minute now."
"Oh, but first I have to drive to Florida and pick up some shrimp, drive over to the eastern shore of Maryland and pick up some blue crabs and then fly out to Seattle and back to pick up some salmon."
"I'll be home any minute now." That is the direct opposite of making sense. That is non-sensical! No, it does not. Your post claimed an anytime rapture AND a mid-trib rapture but scripture states the following, Matthew 24:9
"Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name."Revelation 7:14
I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
The disciples are handed over to tribulation AND those who come out of it will be those who have washed their robes... Both scripture and reason prove otherwise. I recommend you go back and look at the relevant scriptures again and read them exactly as written. Definitely abandon the Dispensationalist hermeneutic. |
|
|
|
Post by Bible Highlighter on Oct 4, 2022 19:45:02 GMT -8
But I am not interested at this time in debating it or discussing it at great length (if one disagrees). Hmmm.... So.... it turns out it you who is not open. Follow the logic here, BH. I'm being invited to discuss the position in a different forum only if I agree with the position when you already know I disagree. If it's not going to be debated or discussed here in this forum what reason would I have for thinking anythng different will occur in that forum? This amounts to " I'm going to tell you what I believe but I refuse to discuss any of it with anyone who disagrees, no matter how open to discussion they claim to be." What is the topic of this op? This op is about whether or not Dispensationalists take things too far. I will argue Dispensationalists entering the thread to off-topically tell everyone their new position while refusing to discuss any of it with those who disagree, no matter how open they may be, is a clear example of the problem to be solved. It is an example of Dispensationalists taking things too far. Therefore, I thank you for your contribution to the thread. No, it does not. No one can scripturally nor rationally lay claim to imminent, anytime rapture and also lay claim to a mid-trib rapture and an expectation the temple will first be built and the AoD prophecy fulfilled. The three expectations contradict any and all claims of imminency. "Hi Honey, I'll be home any minute now."
"Oh, but first I have to drive to Florida and pick up some shrimp, drive over to the eastern shore of Maryland and pick up some blue crabs and then fly out to Seattle and back to pick up some salmon."
"I'll be home any minute now." That is the direct opposite of making sense. That is non-sensical! No, it does not. Your post claimed an anytime rapture AND a mid-trib rapture but scripture states the following, Matthew 24:9
"Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name."Revelation 7:14
I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
The disciples are handed over to tribulation AND those who come out of it will be those who have washed their robes... Both scripture and reason prove otherwise. I recommend you go back and look at the relevant scriptures again and read them exactly as written. Definitely abandon the Dispensationalist hermeneutic.
May the Lord bless you and keep you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2022 5:19:48 GMT -8
Hmmm.... So.... it turns out it you who is not open. Follow the logic here, BH. I'm being invited to discuss the position in a different forum only if I agree with the position when you already know I disagree. If it's not going to be debated or discussed here in this forum what reason would I have for thinking anythng different will occur in that forum? This amounts to " I'm going to tell you what I believe but I refuse to discuss any of it with anyone who disagrees, no matter how open to discussion they claim to be." What is the topic of this op? This op is about whether or not Dispensationalists take things too far...... There is nothing new in what has been poster here or in the other forum. Nothing. The belief this is something new is one of the many problems to be solved. I keep asking for a joint walk through the scriptures but the response is ad nauseam and ad hominemic (I'm not open). Nice straw man. The accurate understanding is 1) I have provided plenty of scripture, not doctrine, and reason, not doctrine, to necessarily understand there are huge inconsistencies and contradictions in the position posted (both here and in the other forum). Then why bring it into a discussion board? What should happen you shoud ask the mods to delete or move all your posts in this thread because 1) they have nothing to do with the op other than 2) prove the op correct (Dispensationalists teach things off-topically and refuse to debate them), and 3) I already know everything about the position asserted because I've examined all of the eschatological positions (including the one posted here and in the other forum), 4) I used to be an ardent Dispensationalist, and 5) what has happened is the dictating to everyone how they should believe while accusing anyone who disagrees of not being open-minded. " Here's what I believe and I'm not going to debate it." Yeah. We get that. Dispensationalists take things too far. Thank you. He does. That does not change the fact living a life inconsistent with one's stated views is a fruitless, unholy, and non-scriptural way to live. Knowing it and refusing to discuss it makes it worse, not better. Life will be lived out never seeing what's been stated in these two forums because it's not consistent with the whole of scripture. Literally hundreds of thousands of Dispensationalists have lived and died never seeing their eschatology realized even while assuring otherwise up to the day they die. Just within my lifetime this has been true of Chuck Smith (founder of the Calvary Chapel sect), John Walvoord (former president of Dallas Theological Seminary), Harold Camping, scores of their contemporaries. It's about to happen to Hal Lindsay and David Jeremiah, and all their contemporaries, just as much as it will happen with Thomas Ice, Michael Vlach, John MacArthur, Alistair Begg, Michael Youssef, Jack Morris, Jack Graham, Gary Hamrick, Robert Jeffress, Michael Oxentenko, Dan Sexton, and all their contemporaries. Every single one of these men teach an eschatology they claim will happen within their lifetime and every single one of them will be proven wrong. It has been that way since John Darby invented the eschatology. Everyone knows it. So, perhaps like yourself, try to work out the inconsistencies so as to make it believable but it's the entire eschatological position that is problematic all the way down to its roots. It's been flawed from its inception. Dispensationalists take things too far. God bless you and keep you, too. |
|
.
