Respectfully, what does Aristotle have to do with God's word?
Man's wisdom and God's do not mix, and never will.
Did I use Aristotle to build my case? No, I used the Bible. Good grief, man, use your reading skills.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Respectfully, what does Aristotle have to do with God's word?
Man's wisdom and God's do not mix, and never will.
Respectfully, what does Aristotle have to do with God's word?
Man's wisdom and God's do not mix, and never will.
LOLYou realize you are clinging to your Darbyesque fantasies despite overwhelming Biblical proofs to the contrary.
LOL
First, prove that ALL Christians were actually "raptured" in 70 CE.
Prove that the Earth burned in fire.
Prove that Jesus spent 1000 years reigning as King in Israel.
You should realize that you actually have zero proof, but instead have taken license to misinterpret scripture and thus fail to recognize you have a job as an ambassador in the Kingdom. Be sure not to bury your treasure for you will be held to account.
You only need to provided how and why you came to believe what you understand to be true.I am supposed to prove the unbiblical far-fetched tenets that you believe? I will pass.
You only need to provided how and why you came to believe what you understand to be true.
One has to start with what the text says. Also known as a literal reading. If there is other meaning to be discerned, that needs to be explained where it can be understood that is what it should only mean. I know why I believe as I do in a pre-millennial post trib rapture. Sinse 1967 I have studied to understand what it was I believed on this matter.I feel that it would be futile, 37, until you show a greater willingness to consider that you may be over-literalizing things. IOW that you would recognize that the apocalyptical language of Revelation is the same genre as the corresponding OT prophetical books.
One has to start with what the text says. Also known as a literal reading. If there is other meaning to be discerned, that needs to be explained where it can be understood that is what it should only mean. I know why I believe as I do in a pre-millennial post trib rapture. Sinse 1967 I have studied to understand what it was I believed on this matter.
They seem unBiblical you cuz they HAVEN'T HAPPENED YET.I am supposed to prove the unbiblical far-fetched tenets that you believe? I will pass.
We many not agree on meanings. My off the rail as you called it, sentance 3, "If there is other meaning to be discerned, that needs to be explained where it can be understood that is what it should only mean."Sentences 2 and 3 is where you went off the rails, my friend. The Bible is more given to spiritual language than you recognize
But the "inconvenient" Bible verses you claim to be figurative/symbolic have NO indication, either in the context or the verses themselves, that they're such. Preterists SAY they're metaphoric because they prove preterism false, & many prets would rather try to change the meanings of some Scriptures rather than admit their pret doctrine is wrong & drop it.Sentences 2 and 3 is where you went off the rails, my friend. The Bible is more given to spiritual language than you recognize
Nope, you prove your farfetched tenet that the rapture happened in 70CE, the Earth burned and we are now living in the new heavens and new earth in Paradise.I am supposed to prove the unbiblical far-fetched tenets that you believe? I will pass.
Show me the covenantal language and how it fits your view of 70CE, even though John wrote after 70CE.I feel that it would be futile, 37, until you show a greater willingness to consider that you may be over-literalizing things. IOW that you would recognize that the apocalyptical language of Revelation is the same genre as the corresponding OT prophetical books.
The Bible uses the same rules of literature as any other book. Knowing how God works in covenant helps us understand poetic language of the prophets. However, your claim gives you license to make things up and then call it "spiritual" interpretation. It's ripe for your imagination, apart from the Spirit of God.Sentences 2 and 3 is where you went off the rails, my friend. The Bible is more given to spiritual language than you recognize
Show me the covenantal language and how it fits your view of 70CE, even though John wrote after 70CE.
You certainly have to force John to write before 70CE or your entire house of cards crumbles and make no mistake, it is a house of cards.John wrote before 70 AD. See earlier post in this thread on that. Irenaeus, writing a century after the fact,blundered on the dating. The seeming multiplicity of ancient testimony on the later date is strictly from those who simply accepted his erroneous date as fact.
You certainly have to force John to write before 70CE or your entire house of cards crumbles and make no mistake, it is a house of cards.
There is a leap of thousands of years.
At least you said OK to my assertion...OK. Whatever. I am not wasting my time on this any more.