Search results

Glad to hear it. Carry on.

Um... I gave you a passage already. Paul tells Titus (an elder) to appoint more elders.

Based on what BIblical passage? My contention is that one who has passed some test or confirmation has met the qualifications and thus can be appointed by the elders. That test is that such a person has risen from within the congregation and shown himself to be a qualified leader. There is no...

If you look at my siggie, I believe in a plurality of elders. So this would not be an issue except in extreme cases. And your scenario also presents one of the flaws of the sole pastor model of church. However, in that case, I would not say that the church is no longer valid. My guess is that it...

But since such confirmations are part of the qualifications of elders, isn't that implicit in the elders appointing other elders? This thread is not about church government. A biblical case can be made for nearly all kinds of governments. My point as it pertains to this thread is that a church...

Why does a church have to elect elders? There is more of a NT precedent for elders appointing elders than anything else. Paul did it. And Paul tells other elders to do it. Act 14:23 And when they [Paul and Barnabas] had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they...

Is it being led and under the guidance of elders? Because God has not called a Bible study teacher or discussion facilitator to watch over souls. It is not church.

I can only assume he did since he no longer responds to my posts. What's up, Evangelist6589 (is the number right, cause I did it by memory?)?

I have to be on ignore. Evan has not responded to my charges of his arguments being weak b/c they are arguments of silence. NOt sure what I did to get on ignore either. Anyone want to ask him?

There is hubris. You arguments aren't good b/c they are weak. And this b/c they are based on arguments of silence. You still have avoided this.

Bible colleges tend to decrease in size and enrollment when they do this. Mine sure did. I hope not for them.

Your soteriology is certainly misguided and thus lost. But salvifically? No.

Oh Evan... where are you?

Because he is preaching to Bible illiterate morons who couldn't theologize their boogars out of their nose.

:BangHead: Even when I was a dispie... I thought it was unhelpful to get too specific in these kinds of things. Then you start sounding like Jack Van Impe and that aint a good thing.

Any thoughts to your "two good arguments" being arguments of silence, Evan? Or am I on ignore?

As the OP has suggested, the salient issue is Rev 20. Considering the genre of Revelation (apocalyptic), (1) what makes you think the picture in Rev 20 is meant to be taken literally rather than a picture of victory?, (2) what makes you think the number "1,000" should be taken literally when the...

I was thinking the same thing. Maybe since the 1950's, but Baptists have been around for a long time... longer than dispensationalism has been around.

Here is another Beale article that will help you w/ the symbolism. I wish you could read his book "John's use of the OT in Revelation." He has a short article on Rev. 1:1 and how it is helpful for the entirety of Rev as it indicates its interpretation.

Many Amills believe Rev 20 is not a chronological follow up to ch. 19. There is exegetical, intertextual, and theological reasons for this. That is the main thing for Rev. 20. I know that is not evidence, but allow me to make an argument later. This is just the foundation for understanding our...