G
GabrielMyAngel
Guest
Not that I at all take the word of "author unknown", no matter when the speech was penned. I italicized the points I wanted to make in the reply.[/qote]
Whether or not you "take" his words is inconsequential. These words were unquestionably written and widely circulated more than a thousand years before you claim this doctrine originated.
You are interpreting it to fit in with the pre-trib rapture, not at all looking at it objectively. It's also some old writing, there are many old writings, not all of them are considered to be scripture, as you have elevated it to be in this example.
And I'm not avoiding anything, I'm reading the texts you wrote correctly, not slanted. You must use the proper vocabulary, plural's are not singulars, in this example.This is simply an attempt to avoid what Irenaeus said. And it wholly fails to explain his words.
Not so that is the very opposite of what he said.
This is nothing but imagination on your part. No scripture says that there will be a tremendous war in which we will take part. It says that at this time "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh." (revelation 19:20-21)
We are in the battle right here, right now, already! Do you think we are going to just stand by and spectate the final battle? Are we spectating now? Are we part of his army, or are we not? Are we part of his family, or are we not? Are we given glorified bodies to sit and loaf around in, or is there a deeper purpose for it?
Well, then lay them bare on this little forum, let's extract the data and analyze it.You have just seen the conclusive proof that this is simply untrue. There are also at least three other teachers that mentioned a pre-tribulation rapture before 1800, but I did not bother with them, as the ones I cited are so much older.
In saying this, you simply demonstrate that you do not understand the rapture doctrine at all. After the rapture, God will again turn his attention to the nation of Israel. The prophecies are written for them and about them. These prophecies explicitly tell, not in dark parables but in plainly stated language, how they can tell when it is time to run, where to go when they run, and how many days to stay there. They also tell why they will have to run at this time, and detail the daily progress of the armies advancing upon Jerusalem.
Lay the scriptures out here, so they can be analyzed within their proper context, not pieced together to fit some false doctrin.
The fact that a doctrine has been perverted and twisted beyond recognition is not even evidence, much less proof, that there is anything wrong with the doctrine.
It's not resting at all well with me, trust me, I've tried to embrace it, but the more I've looked into it, and have observed others doing the same, the more it didn't fit, the more errors came up, the more "adjustment" to the original scriptures had to be addressed, the more rotten the fruits it produced. The tree is withered and it must be chopped down. I know, you promote it, it's a hard thing to have to question ones own beliefs, but you do want to believe because you have tested it, looked at it from all angles, studied the pro's and con's, and don't just take some ones word for it? I know,it's super popular, it's something that has a great deal of appeal, we have this get out of tribulation free card, or we are told that, but what if you are wrong, what if all of this is pushing you into areas that leaves you vulnerable?
Should I bombard you with writings outside of scripture and continue this debate forever? We don't have time for this, only point out scripture, within itself, not your slant or angle, and we'll have something to discuss without questioning some obscure author and what they meant in their writings.
Upvote
0