Thessalonians 4 Does Not Teach a Rapture Separate from the Second Coming

[Spiritual Jew]

Yes, when I respond to your post I'm really responding to any readers of our exchange. I'm not trying to debate with you or be disagreeable. I'm just stating as fact what I personally believe on the matter of postribulational belief. Yes, we believe in Postrib for different reasons. But there are commonalities as well. I was just pointing out the differences so others may consider my reasons for being Postrib.

I do not take Dan 7 as the Ascension. I've argued this before. It can be viewed that way, yes. I just don't think so.

How do you reconcile your understanding of Daniel 7:13-14 with it saying that the Son of Man, Jesus, came with the clouds of heaven TO the Ancient of Days and was brought before Him? Do you not believe the reference to the Ancient of Days there is a reference to God the Father? If you do believe that, then where do you think He is located? Heaven, right? So, it's talking about Jesus going to heaven, not coming from heaven.

 

[RandyPNW]

How do you reconcile your understanding of Daniel 7:13-14 with it saying that the Son of Man, Jesus, came with the clouds of heaven TO the Ancient of Days and was brought before Him? Do you not believe the reference to the Ancient of Days there is a reference to God the Father? If you do believe that, then where do you think He is located? Heaven, right? So, it's talking about Jesus going to heaven, not coming from heaven.

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

So, the Son of Man comes with the clouds of heaven. We see this in Jesus' Olivet Discourse...

Matt 24.30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."

We see this also in 1 Thes 4...

1 Thes 4.15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

We see this in the book of Revelation...

Rev 1.7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,”
and “every eye will see him,
even those who pierced him”;
and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”

I dare say that this presentation of the Son of Man coming with the clouds form the blueprint for NT eschatology in which the Son of Man Comes Again.

When I put all of this together, I think the NT consistently portrays the coming of the Son of Man at the end of the age, when Antichrist is destroyed, and not at the Ascension.

I do see how you may read it, because it appears that the Son of Man 1st approaches the Court of Heaven, the Ancient of Days, before he comes to establish God's Kingdom. And Christ did ascend 1st to heaven, to the right hand of God the Father, well before he will return to set up God's Kingdom on the earth.

But in the Daniel account, the context is all about the 4th Kingdom, which I believe to be Rome, and the evolution of this dual empire into a 10 nation confederation under the Antichrist. So for me, the context is not the Ascension, but the Antichrist.

You may wonder how I skip over this appearance before the Court of Heaven? I do because I believe it is just an explanation of Christ's mission when he returns. He is ordered, in advance, to come back, destroy the Antichrist, recover God's People, and establish God's Kingdom on earth.

He does not interrupt his return to visit the throne in heaven, as I see it. Rather, I believe this is parenthetical as an explanation, to show without any chronological order, the fact he has already received orders. And it shows him actually doing this as if by way of flashback.

Regardless, this is my view and how I justify it. You're welcome to advocate for your position, as well.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

So, the Son of Man comes with the clouds of heaven. We see this in Jesus' Olivet Discourse...

Matt 24.30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."

We see this also in 1 Thes 4...

1 Thes 4.15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

We see this in the book of Revelation...

Rev 1.7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,”
and “every eye will see him,
even those who pierced him”;
and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”

I dare say that this presentation of the Son of Man coming with the clouds form the blueprint for NT eschatology in which the Son of Man Comes Again.

When I put all of this together, I think the NT consistently portrays the coming of the Son of Man at the end of the age, when Antichrist is destroyed, and not at the Ascension.

I do see how you may read it, because it appears that the Son of Man 1st approaches the Court of Heaven, the Ancient of Days, before he comes to establish God's Kingdom. And Christ did ascend 1st to heaven, to the right hand of God the Father, well before he will return to set up God's Kingdom on the earth.

But in the Daniel account, the context is all about the 4th Kingdom, which I believe to be Rome, and the evolution of this dual empire into a 10 nation confederation under the Antichrist. So for me, the context is not the Ascension, but the Antichrist.

You may wonder how I skip over this appearance before the Court of Heaven? I do because I believe it is just an explanation of Christ's mission when he returns. He is ordered, in advance, to come back, destroy the Antichrist, recover God's People, and establish God's Kingdom on earth.

He does not interrupt his return to visit the throne in heaven, as I see it. Rather, I believe this is parenthetical as an explanation, to show without any chronological order, the fact he has already received orders. And it shows him actually doing this as if by way of flashback.

Regardless, this is my view and how I justify it. You're welcome to advocate for your position, as well.

In Daniel 7:13-14 it talks about Jesus being brought TO God the Father, which would be in heaven, and that is exactly what happened at His ascension.

Look at the obvious similarities between these passages:

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

I would hope that you agree that Ephesians 1:19-23 refers to Christ's resurrection and ascension to the right hand of God the Father when He was placed "Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named" with "all things under His feet" and was made "head over all things to the church"? How is that not the same as Him coming with the clouds of heaven TO the Ancient of Days (God the Father) and being brought before Him (where else would that be than heaven?) and being given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom"? You're trying to say He's not given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" until He returns, but that is not what we see described in Ephesians 1:19-23. We see that as having been done when He ascended to the right hand of the Father.

By saying all this, I'm not denying that the Son of Man, Jesus, will come in the clouds in the future when every eye will see Him. I'm just saying that is not what Daniel 7:13-14 is describing. Instead, it describes His ascension to the right hand of God the Father and being given power and authority at that time just like we see described in a passage like Ephesians 1:19-23.

 

[RandyPNW]

You didn't address what I said at all. I mentioned how it talks about the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven TO the Ancient of Days and being brought before Him. Why did you not address that?

I said this, in case you didn't read it or understand it:
"I do see how you may read it, because it appears that the Son of Man 1st approaches the Court of Heaven, the Ancient of Days, before he comes to establish God's Kingdom. And Christ did ascend 1st to heaven, to the right hand of God the Father, well before he will return to set up God's Kingdom on the earth."

How is this not addressing where Jesus is "being brought to God the Father which would be in heaven?" I plainly said that Jesus, the "Sonof Man," is approaching, or "being brought," before the "Ancient of Days!" I did not ignore your point? On the contrary, I acknowledged it.

You are talking about when He comes in the clouds FROM heaven, but that is not what is referenced in Daniel 7:13-14 where it talks about Jesus being brought TO God the Father which would be in heaven and is exactly what happened at His ascension.

As I just said, I referenced that. And I explained why I hold to my position against your theory. I believe the entry of the Son of Man into the Courtroom in heaven before the Ancient of Days was a parenthetical part of the vision, given to explain why the Son of Man was descending from the clouds of heaven.

He was given a mandate to take God's authority to the earth to establish God's Kingdom here. And to do that he was given orders to defeat the Little Horn, ie the Antichrist.

In all of the NT references to Jesus' approach to God in heaven, we only have the Ascension. It is true that with the Ascension Jesus is approaching God in heaven to sit at His right hand. And in the 2nd Coming we don't have Jesus approaching God in heaven, but rather, coming back from heaven.

But inasmuch as Dan 7 is referencing the 2nd Coming, I believe the portrait of Jesus appearing before God in heaven to be an explanation of his mandate from God the Father. And this was, as you indicate, received at the Ascension.

Since the Dan 7 vision is about the 2nd Coming, I view the vision of the Mandate to be parenthetical and derived from the fact of the Ascension. Obviously, the Ascension did not happen and will not happen at the 2nd Coming. But it is mentioned because that is where Jesus obtained the authority to Come back with power, which will take place at his 2nd Coming.

There are obviously some points we agree with, and some we don't. Take care...

 

[Dale]

Earlier I posted Matthew Henry's comments on the I Thessalonians 4 passage that has become the Dispensationalists' favorite passage. To Henry, there is no gap in time between the rapture and the Second Coming and the Final Judgment. They could be all on the same day.
Here is what the Encylopedia Britannica said about this passage years ago.

“The designation ‘eschatological’ would be more distinctive, because doctrinally they chiefly reflect the difficulties raised among Greek converts by the proclamation of ‘Christ and the resurrection’ (Acts xvii, 22-32; cf, I, I. 9-10). The drama of a return of the glorified Jesus to judgment and renewal of the world represented in such books of ‘Prophecy’ as the Revelation of John, was taken over by the primitive church from contemporary Jewish Apocalypse ...”

“In I, iv, 13-18, Paul applies such parts of this primitive apocalypse as will serve to ‘comfort’ those in danger of losing their Christian hope, and pases at once in v. 1-11 to futrther practial exhortation to watch and be sober as children of the light about to dawn, not overtaken like the sinful world by the Coming of the Lord to judgment.”

--Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946, under Thessalonians

Like Matthew Henry, the Britannica sees I Thessalonians 4 as pointing to the Second Coming and judgment. There is no mention of a “rapture of the saints” followed by years of Tribulation where those who became Christians too late are still suffering.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I said this, in case you didn't read it or understand it:
"I do see how you may read it, because it appears that the Son of Man 1st approaches the Court of Heaven, the Ancient of Days, before he comes to establish God's Kingdom. And Christ did ascend 1st to heaven, to the right hand of God the Father, well before he will return to set up God's Kingdom on the earth."

How is this not addressing where Jesus is "being brought to God the Father which would be in heaven?" I plainly said that Jesus, the "Sonof Man," is approaching, or "being brought," before the "Ancient of Days!" I did not ignore your point? On the contrary, I acknowledged it.

I edited my post not long after I saw that part of what you said, which I missed the first time I read your post. You can look at my post again and see that this is no longer there. But, I obviously didn't edit it before you saw it, unfortunately. Anyway, please disregard what I said there.

But, after reading the rest of your post it seems you decided to not address what I said and pointed out about the similarities between Daniel 7:13-14 and Ephesians 1:19-23 for some reason.

 

[RandyPNW]

I edited my post not long after I saw that part of what you said, which I missed the first time I read your post. You can look at my post again and see that this is no longer there. But, I obviously didn't edit it before you saw it, unfortunately. Anyway, please disregard what I said there.

But, after reading the rest of your post it seems you decided to not address what I said and pointed out about the similarities between Daniel 7:13-14 and Ephesians 1:19-23 for some reason.

I referenced Eph 1.19-23 because it agrees with your sense that at the Ascension Jesus approached the throne of Heaven. And that is found in Dan 7, where the Son of Man approaches the Ancient of Days in heaven.

So, I was hypothetically agreeing with you. My point was, I believe the reference in Dan 7.13, where Jesus approaches God's throne in heaven, is parenthetical...

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence."

This may, hypothetically, be where Jesus ascended into heaven, following his resurrection. But it is placed in Dan 7.13 right before the coming of the Kingdom to show the *legal basis* for his establishment of God's Kingdom on earth. It may even be that Jesus begins his Coming with a quick visit to the throne room to reestablish the authority he had obtained at the Ascension?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I referenced Eph 1.19-23 because it agrees with your sense that at the Ascension Jesus approached the throne of Heaven. And that is found in Dan 7, where the Son of Man approaches the Ancient of Days in heaven.

So, I was hypothetically agreeing with you. My point was, I believe the reference in Dan 7.13, where Jesus approaches God's throne in heaven, is parenthetical...

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence."

This may, hypothetically, be where Jesus ascended into heaven, following his resurrection.

Hypothetically? I can't believe you're being serious here. It clearly is referring to His ascension. When He ascended to heaven He was placed at the right hand of the Father, so Him being brought to the Father in heaven lines up exactly with that.

But it is placed in Dan 7.13 right before the coming of the Kingdom to show the *legal basis* for his establishment of God's Kingdom on earth. It may even be that Jesus begins his Coming with a quick visit to the throne room to reestablish the authority he had obtained at the Ascension?

Him being given a kingdom refers to Him being given power and authority over all things, as He undeniably was when He ascended to the right hand of the Father.

When Daniel 7:14 says "there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" that lines up with what Paul said was given him upon His ascension to the right hand of the Father.

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Do you agree that he was put in a position "Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named" with God having "put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church" when He ascended to heaven to the right hand of the Father? If so, how does that not line up with Daniel 7:14 saying he was given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" after describing Him as having been brought to the Ancient of Days (God the Father) in heaven?

 

[RandyPNW]

Hypothetically? I can't believe you're being serious here. It clearly is referring to His ascension. When He ascended to heaven He was placed at the right hand of the Father, so Him being brought to the Father in heaven lines up exactly with that.

I can't believe you're being serious here? It clearly is referring to the 2nd Coming! You see where that kind of argument goes? I was just suggesting that even if you're right, that it refers to the Ascension, it can still be aligned with the 2nd Coming as a flashback, or some kind of parenthetical explanation. Otherwise, if we see the Son of Man coming with the clouds as the 2nd Coming, it makes no sense for him to turn around just as he's descending from the clouds to go back to heaven and appear before God!

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I can't believe you're being serious here? It clearly is referring to the 2nd Coming! You see where that kind of argument goes? I was just suggesting that even if you're right, that it refers to the Ascension, it can still be aligned with the 2nd Coming as a flashback, or some kind of parenthetical explanation. Otherwise, if we see the Son of Man coming with the clouds as the 2nd Coming, it makes no sense for him to turn around just as he's descending from the clouds to go back to heaven and appear before God!

Of course I'm being serious here. We're having the same discussion on the other forum, but I'll point out here again that you are being completely dishonest with the text. Daniel 7:13 EXPLICITLY refers to Jesus coming with the clouds of heaven while being brought TO the presence of the Ancient of Days (God the Father) who is in heaven. That's exactly what happened at His ascension. But, you try to twist the text to be saying something about Him coming FROM heaven instead. No, it talks about Him coming TO heaven. I can't believe that YOU are being serious here.

 

[RandyPNW]

Of course I'm being serious here.

I was being facetious--just throwing back at you your same argument, that "you're not serious if you don't agree with me!"

I think we're both being serious, and I think we're both being honest. But I won't carry on a conversation with someone who is falsely judging me, calling me dishonest, etc. Get back with me when you get a little more "friendly."

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I was being facetious--just throwing back at you your same argument, that "you're not serious if you don't agree with me!"

I think we're both being serious, and I think we're both being honest. But I won't carry on a conversation with someone who is falsely judging me, calling me dishonest, etc. Get back with me when you get a little more "friendly."

I can't do anything but conclude that you're being dishonest when you try to say that Daniel 7:13 is talking about Jesus coming FROM heaven when it explicitly describes Him as coming TO heaven.

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came TO the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

This describes what happened at Christ's ascension when He came from earth to heaven and was set at the right hand of God the Father (referred to as "the Ancient of Days" in Daniel 7:13).

 

[RandyPNW]

I can't do anything but conclude that you're being dishonest when you try to say that Daniel 7:13 is talking about Jesus coming FROM heaven when it explicitly describes Him as coming TO heaven.

It does *not* say to the vast majority of scholars in history that Jesus coming with the clouds means he is coming *to heaven!* They can't all be liars! Get back with me when you can argue without personal insult or judgmentalism.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It does *not* say to the vast majority of scholars in history that Jesus coming with the clouds means he is coming *to heaven!* They can't all be liars! Get back with me when you can argue without personal insult or judgmentalism.

We're talking about Daniel 7:13 here. You are trying to say that a vast majority of scholars say that Daniel 7:13 is about Jesus coming from heaven rather than to heaven? Give me some kind of evidence to back that up. I don't believe that is true at all.

Edit: After doing some checking on many different commentaries and quotes of known scholars, I can see that what you said is definitely not true that a vast majority of scholars would say that "Jesus coming with the clouds" in and of itself, means He is coming from heaven. He came with the clouds of heaven TO heaven at His ascension and will come with the clouds of heaven FROM heaven at His return. THAT is what a vast majority of scholars in history believe. Also, a vast majority of scholars have not believed that Daniel 7:13 is about the second coming of Christ. Many have believed, like me, that it's about His ascension. Probably for the same reason as I do. It obviously refers to Him coming TO heaven in God the Father's presence and not to Him coming FROM heaven.

 

[RandyPNW]

We're talking about Daniel 7:13 here. You are trying to say that a vast majority of scholars say that Daniel 7:13 is about Jesus coming from heaven rather than to heaven? Give me some kind of evidence to back that up. I don't believe that is true at all.

Edit: After doing some checking on many different commentaries and quotes of known scholars, I can see that what you said is definitely not true that a vast majority of scholars would say that "Jesus coming with the clouds" in and of itself, means He is coming from heaven. He came with the clouds of heaven TO heaven at His ascension and will come with the clouds of heaven FROM heaven at His return. THAT is what a vast majority of scholars in history believe. Also, a vast majority of scholars have not believed that Daniel 7:13 is about the second coming of Christ. Many have believed, like me, that it's about His ascension. Probably for the same reason as I do. It obviously refers to Him coming TO heaven in God the Father's presence and not to Him coming FROM heaven.

Daniel 7:13 Commentaries: "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.

Ellicott: In this verse the judgment is supposed to have already taken place upon earth, and the Son of man comes in the clouds to claim His kingdom.

Matthew Henry: The great event foretold in this passage, is Christ's glorious coming, to destroy every antichristian power, and to render his own kingdom universal upon earth.

Jaimieson-Fausset-Brown (your view): He "comes to the Ancient of days" to be invested with the kingdom. Compare Ps 110:2: "The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength (Messiah) out of Zion." This investiture was at His ascension "with the clouds of heaven."

Gill:
Saadiah interprets them of the angels of heaven, with which he will be attended:
the Messiah, as most Christian interpreters, and even the Jews themselves, both ancient and modern, allow. In the ancient book of Zohar (u) it is said,
"in the times of the Messiah, Israel shall be one people, to the Lord, and he shall make them one nation in the earth, and they shall rule above and below; as it is written, "behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven"; this is the King Messiah of whom it is written, "and in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven, set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed", &c....
and came to the Ancient of days; his divine Father, from whom, as man and Mediator, he receives his mediatorial kingdom, is invested with it, and insisted it, to it; see Revelation 5:7 this is not to be understood of his first coming in the flesh, which was from his Father, and not to him; nor of his ascension to heaven, exaltation and session at the right hand of God, when he indeed received the kingdom from the Father, and was made and declared Lord and Christ; but this seems to respect what shall be upon the destruction of the fourth beast, when Christ shall receive and take to himself his great power, and reign, and more visibly appear by his Father's designation and appointment, and his open glory, to be King and Lord over all..

Please note what I underlined above concerning my statement about the "majority of scholars." Since I don't have all of the commentaries immediately available I'm only going on what I've read through the years. Beyond that, as I told you, the context is the coming and inception of the Kingdom of God, which is eschatological. It involves the destruction of Antichrist and the authority Jesus was given in order to bring this about.

Yes, there are those who feel this has to be about Jesus' Ascension--I'm not arguing there are no proponents of this view. Just the vast majority of scholars and commentaries *I've read* viewed this as eschatological, ie the Coming of Christ's Kingdom.

Since I tie this verse to most all of NT eschatology about the Son of Man or about the Coming of Christ I see it all as eschatological. Jesus' Coming with the clouds in the New Testament is eschatological--no question about that. The book of Revelation is eschatological--no question about that. Who doesn't think the Olivet Discourse, with its coming of the Son of Man with the clouds, is not eschatological? To me it is all too obvious that Matthew is talking about the same event as mentioned in Dan 7.13!

The only thing that concerns us here is what the throne room scene means, and when it takes place? It could simply be what initiates Jesus' 2nd Coming, when he comes with the clouds and with angels. It could be a paranthetical explanation as to what Jesus' Coming with the clouds means, or an explanation of the authority he obtains in order to Come.

It makes no sense to me that Jesus "comes with thte clouds" in order to appear in heaven. If he is in the clouds he is already in heaven! He "comes" with the clouds meaning he *descends* from heaven. Paul explicitly described this 2nd Coming as a "descent" from heaven, and not an appearing before a heavenly throne.

Maybe Jesus appears before the Ancient of Days on his way down, in a micro-second? I don't know. I understand the problem. But I don't understand your careless accusations? I point above to scholars who agree with my position--do you call them "liars" too?

 

[ARBITER01]

Luk 21:36 Watch therefore and be constant in prayer, that ye may be counted worthy to escape all these things, which shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

I'm more concerned about the marriage supper of the Lamb than I am with people's theological opinions otherwise.

 

[RandyPNW]

Luk 21:36 Watch therefore and be constant in prayer, that ye may be counted worthy to escape all these things, which shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

I'm more concerned about the marriage supper of the Lamb than I am with people's theological opinions otherwise.

How is that not just another "theological opinion?"

 

[ARBITER01]

How is that not just another "theological opinion?"

I consider it faith.

When it's The Lord Jesus revealing something to you as truth, then it's no longer just a personal opinion, it is fact, ie faith.

By all means, continue to debate/argue.