If your reading this and you are a Premillennialist, I'm sorry, I don't have a problem with you personnally I just need to vent.
So, I have a huge problem with Premillennialism as it is, it might even be my pet peeve, but televangelist John Hagee just fired me up about it (forgive me for listening to him). So he writes all these books, seromons, etc. about how Jesus will come back and set up a 1,000 year long Jewish rule under Jewish laws where the Jews come first and Christians come 2nd and accuses all who disagree with this of beign anti-semites. GRRRR !!!!
Where do people get this stuff from? To me it is the equivalent of saying that Jesus' death wasn't good enough and we need to revert to the Old Covenant again. Why did Jesus come in the first place? To make a better covenant, making the old one obsolete.
Then he talks about the Edict of Milan (which he said made Christianity the official religion, but it didn't.) He goes on to say that the Christianity that was "made official" then was not the Christianity taught by Jesus.
So what does he want me to believe, that Christianity practised in 2006 is closer to the original than Christianity practised in 313?
Does this bother anyone other than me?
So, I have a huge problem with Premillennialism as it is, it might even be my pet peeve, but televangelist John Hagee just fired me up about it (forgive me for listening to him). So he writes all these books, seromons, etc. about how Jesus will come back and set up a 1,000 year long Jewish rule under Jewish laws where the Jews come first and Christians come 2nd and accuses all who disagree with this of beign anti-semites. GRRRR !!!!
Where do people get this stuff from? To me it is the equivalent of saying that Jesus' death wasn't good enough and we need to revert to the Old Covenant again. Why did Jesus come in the first place? To make a better covenant, making the old one obsolete.
Then he talks about the Edict of Milan (which he said made Christianity the official religion, but it didn't.) He goes on to say that the Christianity that was "made official" then was not the Christianity taught by Jesus.
So what does he want me to believe, that Christianity practised in 2006 is closer to the original than Christianity practised in 313?
Does this bother anyone other than me?