Featured John Nelson Darby and Pre-trib-dispensationalism

Yes I can agree with this acts 15 makes it clear that the apostles look back on what it already taken place with that fulfilled prophecy of the tabernacle of David

 

Forever?

 

Hello TC I have to confess this time I actually didn't even look up the quote as soon as rev Mac said that he used his inter linear again I didn't even read it because it was so bad the last 2 or 3 times a used it I didn't even check on this one maybe It got one of them correct...lol

 

I'd like to talk to management....

 

Actually I disproved it.
First, the word "thousand" is used literally not figuratively. It is used six times in seven verses and you failed to demonstrate how it is used figuratively. You just made a baseless claim. Opinion means nothing. Back it up with facts.

Second, you ignore context. You won't even deal with the context. You can't. The context proves you wrong.

 

Vines Dictionary for the phrase must shortly come to pass, we have "en tachei" literally with swiftness, what I used from the interlinear, to the slaves of Him what is binding to be coming in Swiftness. Again when He comes it will be in swiftness.
Revelation 3:11 the word "tachu" The neuter of the word "tachus" swift, quick and signifies quickly. Thus when He comes it will be swiftly. Again backing up the interlinear.
Revelation 1:3 the hour or "Kairos" The Season is near, or the time is at hand, the for season (era) near (is near). Young's analytical backs it up too.

 

You never got back to me OR.

The word "thousand" is used 521 times in 395 verses, and that is only the singular form "thousand."
How many of those times do you think it does not mean exactly one thousand?

If "thousand" "rarely means exactly 1000..." as you say, then how many times in the 521 times it is mentioned does it not mean "exactly 1000"?
Would you like to get back to me on that?

 

Actually, this could be a picture of Gerry Garcia.

HankD

 

There is always going to be tension between those who render the Scriptures from the pinnacle of literal authority in comparison to those that render the Scriptures from the precipice of allegory.

The two will rarely agree, and especially as it concerns soteriology.

Imo, there are matters that cannot be compromised and all views should hold as literal.

I suggest that the Scriptures are just too clear on the following short list:

1) A physical bodily return to again walk on this earth. "... This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."

2) Believers are to be expectantly patient as a farmer waits for both seasonal reigns must be patient. "Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. The farmer waits for the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late rains. You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.

3) There is an order to the coming of Christ. "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first."

4) The conditions prior to the return will be like the time prior to the flood and those who doubt the promise. "Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”

5) His return will be sudden and world known. "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. “Behold, I have told you in advance. “So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them. “For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. “Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.​

What other statements would you add to this list that are "must holds" as related to the coming of the King of Kings?

 

Ad hominems and false allegations get you no where. There are other moderators on this thread.
My questions have strictly to do with scripture. I have made no mention of Ice or Darby in this current round of discussion which is strictly on the term "thousand" as used in scripture. Why have you? Darby or Ice can't help here. It is just the Bible brother. If you are not willing to address the Bible what are you willing to address?

 

What has been done about this behavior? Giving benefit of doubt to you of course, any type of abuse by leaders should be dealt with on forums, harrassment, lying, false witness, misrepresenting others, threats, toleration of this from ones personal 'camp' towards those he/she opposes. I'd think a fairly busy forum like this would want to 'disarm' one from this behavior and/or not allow it to reflect the board itself. What happens when this is reported? Brushed under a rug?

 

Some moderators are vulnerable because they dare to bring their view in challenge or support in the threads usually with such documentation that they think is valid.

That others may not agree is great and makes for wonderful threads. However, when participants decidedly attempt to goad someone into a corner, whether it is toward a moderator or a newbie, it is wrong.

When a moderator is involved in a debate, they by default should not expect to be protected by their position anymore or less than any other poster.

Nor should a moderator expect that the title speaks with greater authority, and neither should the participants in a thread in which a moderator posts their views and thoughts.

However, neither should the moderators be in any manner treated disrespectfully, or expected to not respond when a poster crosses the line of charity.

Frankly, there are times when we all may overstate, misstate, or present what is not exact of what another poster's view and statements actually contain. I have, more than once, miss articulated a view of another, and the older I get the more likely things like this will happen.

Such times, when rare, are easily overlooked.

But when such times are purposed, and just mean, then it is time for the authorities of the threads to step in and in my opinion do these things:

1) snip the inappropriate remarks and state why they were snipped.
2) should the poster continue to "rant," publicly warn the poster and suggest they move away from the discussion for a time - to reflect and to cool.
3) should the poster continue, publicly remove privileges from that poster for a time, say a week) that the members of the board may all understand that infractions are not a small slap on the wrist.
4) should the poster return and take up a "rant" they will be removed on a permanent basis.​

It all should be public, and not just "banned" shown on a person's name.



That is my opinion, and I am unanimous in that.