What end time view do you hold to?

[Arial]

I apologize for length: Bottom Line up Front: I lean historical-grammatical, however, I do not ignore patterns of speech such as metaphor, allegory, simile, symbolism, or figurative. However, I don't believe allegory is present in messianic prophecies, 1st and 2nd coming. Parables are allegories, and I do not deny that. (An example of allegory found in scripture outside of messianic prophecies.)

Given the above (bottom line up front), I believe that the underlying prophecy does not change. There isn't some secretive, hidden message in the prophecies that say that Jesus will return in 1988, or 1993, or 2013, or any other date. Even Jesus didn't know when He would return. He only knew the various happenings that would surround His return. Did the Father tell Him these things in allegory and tell Him to figure it out? The scripture as a whole, however, does contain allegory. Parables are allegories. Consider that when Jesus prophesied the last days, He began with "I tell you truly..." In other words, I give you what is to happen, and I give it to you straight. He also used parables to explain aspects of the prophecies, but they were not given as prophecies. They were given as similes. This is what it will be like. No, I'm not going to dress up as a brides made. Not happening.

Let's look at the prophecy that the Jewish leaders threw back at Jesus. He said that if they destroy the temple, He would rebuild it in three days. As someone who looks at it literally, I understand that the temple is Jesus (the Bible kind of told us) and that the destruction is HIs death, and the rebuilding is His resurrection. None of the parts of the prophecy are changed. To show this, consider an exaggerated allegorical/spiritualized approach. Look. The temple has been destroyed. There is Jesus, the contractor, the handyman, the one who has to rebuild, on HIs knees wondering how He will rebuild it. Then, He figures it out. He is going to rebuild it in three days. But wait, that isn't possible. So considering prophecies in the past like Daniel, and prophecies to come, we can see that as one week signifies 7 years, then a day must signify 7 weeks. And there are three of them. 777, the number of perfection. So, Jesus will rebuild the temple in 21 weeks. But that can't be right, because it isn't enough time. So, let's consider that when Jesus told us how many times to forgive others, that 7 was multiplied by 70. So 7 weeks times 70 gives him 490 weeks to rebuild the temple by Himself. That is so much more possible than three days. And that rebuild includes reinstituting the practices of the temple. That must be it. -- (I told you this would be greatly exaggerated.) This is what happens when one disregards a literal view of the prophecy, utilizing understandings of symbolism, metaphor, simile and figurative forms of speech. It also uses a bit of eisegesis. (Okay, a lot of eisegesis.)

This is the problem of using allegory in interpreting prophecy. There are many interpretations, and no way to support any of them, since it is all eisegesis. The definition of allegory is : "a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one." Those hidden meanings usually come from outside the actual passage, and are made to fit.

Consider the passage about Satan being bound again. What I hear here is that this is allegorical of Satan no longer being able to stop/hinder the Great Commission. Why do A/I and Postmil say this? Because if they went with what Revelation says, they would have to admit that they are wrong about 70AD. Why? Look at the situation in Revelation at the time. Satan had just deceived all the nations of the world into attacking Jerusalem, symbolic of God's people, and God Himself. (He is their protector) So prophecy says that Satan is bound in chains, thrown into a bottomless pit, shut up inside, and sealed there. That seal means his power is sealed. Why does the prophecy say this is done? So he cannot deceive the nations for a period of time. Exegesis would say that this is what the prophecy means, because Satan had just finished deceiving all the nations of the world once. Exegesis would also say that since the following prophecy says that Satan was released for a short while so he can go and deceive the nations again to surround the camps of the Saints and the holy city (I wonder what that city would be?) that that further locks down the meaning of the prophecy. It is literal. The only thing that may be figurative is how Satan is bound, but considering Peter speaks of demons who are in prison in chains since the days of Noah, I don't find it all to difficult to see this as more literal then some others might. The problem for A/I is that throughout history, one can clearly see Satan deceiving the nations of the world still. In 1948, almost all the Arab nations attacked Israel to wipe it out of existence. And they fought two other times. God's people. However, Israel crushed them. Then you have this guy...um...His...Him...oh yeah, Hitler, who attempted to destroy all the Jews with his "final solution". Germany was deceived into trying to wipe out the Jews. All this means Satan is not bound and sealed from deceiving the nations. Why do people do things like this with interpretation? It is because the literal understanding of the prophecy does not line up with their beliefs, and their beliefs are what matters. Instead of allowing their beliefs to be shaped by prophecy and understanding, they reshape the prophecies to fit their beliefs. The Jewish people did this with messianic prophecies of Jesus first coming, and completely missed it. There interpretations were so far off that they didn't bat an eye when Herod asked where the king was to be born, since it wouldn't be the Messiah they were looking for. They knew the prophecies. They didn't have to go and look it up. The way it is in English is that Herod asked his question, SO they answered by saying Bethlehem, and gave the prophecy. It almost sounds like they were hesitant in answering. Like, wait, this isn't how it is supposed to be. However, that is only my feelings on the passage.

Do I have the answer. Of course...not. However, my beliefs have changed some due to new understanding about prophecy. I did not change the prophecies to fit what I believed. When something doesn't fit, then there is the time of figuring out what in my belief is causing it, in case it needs to change. What information do I not have, not, what do I need to change in the prophecy to get it to fit. Yes, there is still reconsideration of the prophecy, but I don't give much room for changing it. Hence, I have started considering a pre-wrath rapture, instead of pre-trib/mid-trib. Though I see mid-trib as being pre-wrath.

Too long. Too much of a monologue. Can't read and pick out and respond to all the places where you misstate what A/I says or how they arrived at it or all the potential fallacies in what you present. Don't count on being "raptured" out of here when the worst of the worst comes. Be ready. And that means more than being saved. Don't miss the purpose and message of Revelation which is not predominately a book of revealing the future. It is revealing Jesus Christ----as the title says, and a book of different perspectives on Him over the course of all history until and after His return.

 

[ReverendRV]

Too long. Too much of a monologue. Can't read and pick out and respond to all the places where you misstate what A/I says or how they arrived at it or all the potential fallacies in what you present. Don't count on being "raptured" out of here when the worst of the worst comes. Be ready. And that means more than being saved. Don't miss the purpose and message of Revelation which is not predominately a book of revealing the future. It is revealing Jesus Christ----as the title says, and a book of different perspectives on Him over the course of all history until and after His return.

I'm with you on long Posts. The new way to Post is in Snippets. People here will follow short Posts on a good Thread for over 10,000 Posts...

I don't think a Thread can get that long if every Post was a mouthful...

 

[Marilyn C]

Postmillennialist here!!!

Premillennialist.

 

[Marilyn C]

So, the church loses out in the end. She has failed her mission to make disciples of (not in) all the nations. Christ has to come and rescue his defeated bride, who lost out to Satan.

Israel is the `bride,` and it is they who will preach that Christ is the Messiah throughout the world, and coming to rule.

It is the gospel, good news of the kingdom rule of the Messiah that will be preached.

`And this gospel, (good news) of the kingdom, (rule) will be preached in all the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.` (Matt. 24: 14)

Note: `end,` is a setting out to a conclusion, for the Lord will be putting down all rule and authority and power, (1 Cor. 15: 24) in the trib, and millennium.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Premillennialist.

Historic or Dispensational?

 

[armylngst]

Too long. Too much of a monologue. Can't read and pick out and respond to all the places where you misstate what A/I says or how they arrived at it or all the potential fallacies in what you present. Don't count on being "raptured" out of here when the worst of the worst comes. Be ready. And that means more than being saved. Don't miss the purpose and message of Revelation which is not predominately a book of revealing the future. It is revealing Jesus Christ----as the title says, and a book of different perspectives on Him over the course of all history until and after His return.

Okay. Let's start with one, which is an example of the problems of allegorizing/spiritualizing prophecy and actually scripture in general. (Some interpretations of scripture that doesn't agree with what people believe are allegorized into agreeing with what they believe. This will be short, and covers one major point of my comment, of which there is two. The Jews brought up Jesus prophecy where they say that He said that if they destroy the temple, He will rebuild it in three days. Now, to allegorize that, there are a few approaches, so I'll take the shortest. A response could be that there is no way Jesus could rebuild the temple in three days. But wait. We have Daniel who in his prophecies equated one week to seven years, so why can't one day equal seven weeks. And there are three of them. *Gasp* Group of people in unison. 777!!! But 21 weeks isn't enough time. *Collective sigh*. But wait, didn't Jesus use the number 7 before? Oh yea, when talking about forgiveness. What did he do there? That's right, he said that one multiplies 7 by 70. That would make 490 weeks which would be more than enough time for Jesus to rebuild the temple. Let's go with that. (This is an exaggerated example of what spiritualization/allegorization does to scripture. You end up with something different then what is in the text, because the meaning is believed to be hidden underneath, and that meaning needs to be uncovered. This is how Harold Camping can give different years and say, this is when Jesus is returning. He allegorized prophecies. Found hidden meanings (like I invented above.) And it sounds just as insane as the above. And he does it because it matches what he believes. He shapes the interpretation to his belief, instead of reflecting on the interpretation, and reforming his beliefs within the confines of the interpretation. (Which I have actually done a lot of in the last year or two.)

 

[armylngst]

Too long. Too much of a monologue. Can't read and pick out and respond to all the places where you misstate what A/I says or how they arrived at it or all the potential fallacies in what you present. Don't count on being "raptured" out of here when the worst of the worst comes. Be ready. And that means more than being saved. Don't miss the purpose and message of Revelation which is not predominately a book of revealing the future. It is revealing Jesus Christ----as the title says, and a book of different perspectives on Him over the course of all history until and after His return.

The other major point is the prophecy about Satan being bound. A/I has to make this prophecy fit their beliefs, so they cannot go with the straightforward Satan is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time. Why? That would mean that AD 70 is not the start date, because one can see Satan deceiving nations throughout history until even now. Nothing has changed in that regard. So it is allegorized into meaning that Satan is not able to hinder/block the Great Commission (as though God could be thwarted by Satan). However, the prophecy is locked down to meaning he is bound so as to not be able to deceive nations for a time because the prophecy is in the middle of a context (like a sandwich) where all three parts speak of him deceiving nations. You have the bottom piece of bread, which is Satan deceiving the nations of the world into attacking Israel, Jerusalem...basically attacking God since He is their protector. Jesus returns and defeats the beast, his image, and his armies, and Satan is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time. He is then released so... he can go deceive the nations of the world again into attacking the Saints and Jerusalem. This time Jesus defeats Satan, and Satan is thrown into the lake of fire. The context locks down the interpretation. That is what exegesis is about. However, this is contrary to the belief that Satan was bound in 70 AD. I mean, it would be great if we didn't have Hitler trying to wipe out all Jews with his "final solution", wouldn't it? It would be great if all the Arab countries didn't try to destroy Israel the moment it was reestablished, wouldn't it? The prophecy is about revealing Christ in all His glory at a future time. His return. It also covers the road to His return. Consider the scroll with seven seals. Is it a coincidence that it just happens to be like title deeds used at that time, where each seal of the scroll is an action to be completed as part of taking ownership of property, in this case, of creation?

 

[Arial]

The other major point is the prophecy about Satan being bound. A/I has to make this prophecy fit their beliefs, so they cannot go with the straightforward Satan is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time. Why? That would mean that AD 70 is not the start date, because one can see Satan deceiving nations throughout history until even now. Nothing has changed in that regard. So it is allegorized into meaning that Satan is not able to hinder/block the Great Commission (as though God could be thwarted by Satan). However, the prophecy is locked down to meaning he is bound so as to not be able to deceive nations for a time because the prophecy is in the middle of a context (like a sandwich) where all three parts speak of him deceiving nations. You have the bottom piece of bread, which is Satan deceiving the nations of the world into attacking Israel, Jerusalem...basically attacking God since He is their protector. Jesus returns and defeats the beast, his image, and his armies, and Satan is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time. He is then released so... he can go deceive the nations of the world again into attacking the Saints and Jerusalem. This time Jesus defeats Satan, and Satan is thrown into the lake of fire. The context locks down the interpretation. That is what exegesis is about. However, this is contrary to the belief that Satan was bound in 70 AD. I mean, it would be great if we didn't have Hitler trying to wipe out all Jews with his "final solution", wouldn't it? It would be great if all the Arab countries didn't try to destroy Israel the moment it was reestablished, wouldn't it? The prophecy is about revealing Christ in all His glory at a future time. His return. It also covers the road to His return. Consider the scroll with seven seals. Is it a coincidence that it just happens to be like title deeds used at that time, where each seal of the scroll is an action to be completed as part of taking ownership of property, in this case, of creation?

What did I say in post 221? Giant blocks of a paragraphs are off putting. It is a psychological effect. I won't even continue in a novel that does that without skipping the last 2/3 of the paragraph that starts half way down a page and doesn't end til the bottom of the next page. It gives the impression of unnecessary self indulgence. There is something so universal about that principle of long paragraphs completely losing the readers interest as to be taught this in highschool English. At least in my day. I don't know how editors bypass the rule. Break up ideas by shorter paragraphs or the reader will wander away.

Besides----I am not interested in having the conversation as whatever I say will be dismissed and contradicted anyway. Rather than considered as possibly valid. It doesn't violate scripture in any way. The only thing it violates is the opponents interpretation of scripture. The one they have wed themselves to. Which is fine. Makes no difference to me and more importantly not to one's salvation.

 

[Bluedragon]

So, the church loses out in the end. She has failed her mission to make disciples of (not in) all the nations. Christ has to come and rescue his defeated bride, who lost out to Satan.

I wonder if that's the case .....We chase the news of the day and don't see the world stirrings happening now. For example China has a major problem within .......Christianity is spreading across the nation. That was minute blurb in a news report the other day. One of those moments not dwelled on at all ......Lost in the latest political mess of Washington DC.

I wonder if all this southern migration has an opposite affect other than what the Democrats planned .......Conservative ideals coming from people who have lived socialism and the bulk of that population Catholic. Not the pretend Catholics of a political party ..

 

[armylngst]

AI things are freaky IMO. I saw a video of some AI created woman who lamented that "she" wished to be real. It kept saying "I am. But I am not. I am. But I am not."


I get the sense of some demonic/Satanic attempt to blend physical and spiritual natures, some strange wicked but not quite "incarnation."

Something for consideration. In the past I had read something that someone wrote about demon possession. It likened humans to computers. As such, the statement was that human brain is like a big computer that any ghost can control. (Be it our spirit/soul, or a demon.) This was why, decades ago, there was great interest in the study of the occult, New Age, and UFOs, the talked about how an altered state of conscious is a bad thing. You lose your grip on yourself, so why can't a demon just slip in and take over?

AI is a computer, literally. A very large computer which they are doing their best to model after the human brain as neural networks, but still a computer. As it is modeled after the human brain, why couldn't a demon control it. It is becoming clear that AI is VERY good at lying and deceiving people. There are political groups out there who are chomping at the bit to use AI to deceive everyone. (Someone spoke to groups explaining the inherent dangers of AI, and they see them as features to be abused.) However, having actually used AI, it is simply a copy. An image of us, that still hasn't reached our level. Knowledge, that's nothing. Consciousness, that is something. Who said that consciousness couldn't be demonic?

 

[Marilyn C]

Historic or Dispensational?

Historic.

 

[armylngst]

What did I say in post 221? Giant blocks of a paragraphs are off putting. It is a psychological effect. I won't even continue in a novel that does that without skipping the last 2/3 of the paragraph that starts half way down a page and doesn't end til the bottom of the next page. It gives the impression of unnecessary self indulgence. There is something so universal about that principle of long paragraphs completely losing the readers interest as to be taught this in highschool English. At least in my day. I don't know how editors bypass the rule. Break up ideas by shorter paragraphs or the reader will wander away.

Besides----I am not interested in having the conversation as whatever I say will be dismissed and contradicted anyway. Rather than considered as possibly valid. It doesn't violate scripture in any way. The only thing it violates is the opponents interpretation of scripture. The one they have wed themselves to. Which is fine. Makes no difference to me and more importantly not to one's salvation.

I understand. I am the poor man sitting in the rich man's seat. I will vacate it immediately and profusely apologize to the person you would rather have sitting there. Just let me know who that is. I figured I never belonged in this elite group, as I never fit in too well anywhere. However I was invited, and I respect that. I apologize for rocking the boat. However, how you could have turned this into a discussion that could have edified everyone, instead of reminding me how worthless I am [no, that is not sarcasm, but a reality of my life]:

1. Dealt with my pretty detailed explanation of what I mean by allegorized.
2. Present a fulfilled messianic prophecy of the first coming and show how it was allegorically fulfilled. I mean, a living example of a prophecy that has already been fulfilled. What better rebuff?
3. Show a different interpretation of a prophecy that could be discussed.

So here is a final question that will deal with your last sentence. What are you waiting for before Jesus physically returns to Earth? For me, I'm waiting now for nothing, because there are no signs left to wait for. The way things are going, if He doesn't come soon it is going to be really bad. Some people spend a lot of time researching things that are going on, or are in a position where such information comes with the territory. For those who believe things are getting better, I wish I could live in that fantasy world. When you have seen as much as some of us have, the only hope left is Christ, not the world. It is why so many say, come quickly, Lord.

I will bother you no longer.

 

[Arial]

Something for consideration. In the past I had read something that someone wrote about demon possession. It likened humans to computers. As such, the statement was that human brain is like a big computer that any ghost can control. (Be it our spirit/soul, or a demon.) This was why, decades ago, there was great interest in the study of the occult, New Age, and UFOs, the talked about how an altered state of conscious is a bad thing. You lose your grip on yourself, so why can't a demon just slip in and take over?

AI is a computer, literally. A very large computer which they are doing their best to model after the human brain as neural networks, but still a computer. As it is modeled after the human brain, why couldn't a demon control it. It is becoming clear that AI is VERY good at lying and deceiving people. There are political groups out there who are chomping at the bit to use AI to deceive everyone. (Someone spoke to groups explaining the inherent dangers of AI, and they see them as features to be abused.) However, having actually used AI, it is simply a copy. An image of us, that still hasn't reached our level. Knowledge, that's nothing. Consciousness, that is something. Who said that consciousness couldn't be demonic?

This is completely off topic. It should be in a thread of its own.

 

[Deleted member 5]

Something for consideration. In the past I had read something that someone wrote about demon possession. It likened humans to computers. As such, the statement was that human brain is like a big computer that any ghost can control. (Be it our spirit/soul, or a demon.) This was why, decades ago, there was great interest in the study of the occult, New Age, and UFOs, the talked about how an altered state of conscious is a bad thing. You lose your grip on yourself, so why can't a demon just slip in and take over?

AI is a computer, literally. A very large computer which they are doing their best to model after the human brain as neural networks, but still a computer. As it is modeled after the human brain, why couldn't a demon control it. It is becoming clear that AI is VERY good at lying and deceiving people. There are political groups out there who are chomping at the bit to use AI to deceive everyone. (Someone spoke to groups explaining the inherent dangers of AI, and they see them as features to be abused.) However, having actually used AI, it is simply a copy. An image of us, that still hasn't reached our level. Knowledge, that's nothing. Consciousness, that is something. Who said that consciousness couldn't be demonic?

Yes, there are some weird things ongoing about it. A bit disturbing to be honest.

 

[Arial]

I understand. I am the poor man sitting in the rich man's seat. I will vacate it immediately and profusely apologize to the person you would rather have sitting there. Just let me know who that is. I figured I never belonged in this elite group, as I never fit in too well anywhere. However I was invited, and I respect that. I apologize for rocking the boat. However, how you could have turned this into a discussion that could have edified everyone, instead of reminding me how worthless I am [no, that is not sarcasm, but a reality of my life]:

1. Dealt with my pretty detailed explanation of what I mean by allegorized.
2. Present a fulfilled messianic prophecy of the first coming and show how it was allegorically fulfilled. I mean, a living example of a prophecy that has already been fulfilled. What better rebuff?
3. Show a different interpretation of a prophecy that could be discussed.

So here is a final question that will deal with your last sentence. What are you waiting for before Jesus physically returns to Earth? For me, I'm waiting now for nothing, because there are no signs left to wait for. The way things are going, if He doesn't come soon it is going to be really bad. Some people spend a lot of time researching things that are going on, or are in a position where such information comes with the territory. For those who believe things are getting better, I wish I could live in that fantasy world. When you have seen as much as some of us have, the only hope left is Christ, not the world. It is why so many say, come quickly, Lord.

I will bother you no longer.

I intended to just let your post ride with simply my "wow", but I feel there is something that needs to be addressed for my own benefit, and the benefit of all. I realize that in doing so I put myself at risk, as I see cliques forming which is the case in all other forums and I had hoped with all sincerity it would not happen here. [Edit: Do not discuss mod actions.]

From your post I see that you were deeply offended and your feelings deeply hurt. For that I sincerely apologize. I recognize that my manner of addressing something can often be received as harshness even though that was not my intention at all. From my point of view there was no reason to be hurt by what I pointed out. There are many reasons why a person can be overly prickly and easily personalize things that were only intended to help a person so that what they post is open to more response. It can be their own personal history that has left them though healed, and moved on from it, still marked by it in their perceptions.

But the thing we must be aware of, and I include myself in this, is whether or not that reaction is a reaction from wounded pride in being corrected. The reason we have to watch for that and acknowledge it, and take it before God, just Him and us, is this wonderful thing called sanctification. If we are fueled by such in our reactions, the likelihood exists that we also do not like to be corrected by God. In which case, having dealt with and conquered the "big" obvious sins, we do not realize that He is moving us forward into deeper sanctification, those sins of motive and partiality and intent, and thought. Rather than be corrected by God, we do not see them or acknowledge them. Instead we justify them, deny we are doing them, and the hidden sins that David cried out to God to expose in him, remain hidden from us, and left unsanctified.

And I am not accusing you or anyone of this. I am speaking from experience and being on forums, oddly enough, has been a great place for my own sinful motives and reactions to be exposed.

What I said about paragraphing is not a preference of mine or simply how huge blocks of paragraphs affect me. It affects probably 95% maybe 100% of people in the same way. It is a psychological effect. And not only that, but on a forum where people would like to respond to certain things said, it puts a plethora of ideas all in one huge body of text. And on this forum especially that has no multiple quote option, one has to track back through this text, highlight, reply, and repeatedly over and over return to the post they are responding to in order to cover all they want to respond to. That is inconvenient in all cases, but not worth bothering with at all in the case of page long paragraphs. "Where was I? What did I miss?" They have to reread it again, which was difficult in the first place.

Also just because you and others enjoy lengthy discussions on this topic that does not mean that I am obligated to or to participate in them, or explain my views at all. It also helps if one is being inquired of as to their views, rather than a series of statements presented as facts, being told what the person being addressed believes and even how they arrive at that belief, and that they are wrong on all counts.

Again, sorry that your feelings were hurt.

 

[Arial]

So here is a final question that will deal with your last sentence. What are you waiting for before Jesus physically returns to Earth? For me, I'm waiting now for nothing, because there are no signs left to wait for. The way things are going, if He doesn't come soon it is going to be really bad. Some people spend a lot of time researching things that are going on, or are in a position where such information comes with the territory. For those who believe things are getting better, I wish I could live in that fantasy world. When you have seen as much as some of us have, the only hope left is Christ, not the world. It is why so many say, come quickly, Lord.

I don't answer questions from those who speak to me in the manner that you did. I have apologized for unwittingly offending you. If you can find it in yourself to also apologize for speaking to me that way, I will gladly answer this one question and address the quoted section.

Blessings.

 

[armylngst]

I intended to just let your post ride with simply my "wow", but I feel there is something that needs to be addressed for my own benefit, and the benefit of all. I realize that in doing so I put myself at risk, as I see cliques forming which is the case in all other forums and I had hoped with all sincerity it would not happen here. [Edit: Do not discuss mod actions.]

I am not sure if cliques are forming, or if they were already existing and were brought here. It is almost impossible to avoid. I have always wound up on the outside. The ultimate outsider. However, I am VERY sensitive to my actions (when I realize them), and think too much about other people, and not enough about myself.

From your post I see that you were deeply offended and your feelings deeply hurt.

I will be honest. I don't know how to define what I felt, but I wouldn't say offended. And if it helps you any, I found what I consider a great thought process in some Star Trek book "There is no offense where none is taken". And something about the joy that is found when we take joy in our differences. Life would be incredibly boring if we were all the same.

For that I sincerely apologize. I recognize that my manner of addressing something can often be received as harshness even though that was not my intention at all. From my point of view there was no reason to be hurt by what I pointed out. There are many reasons why a person can be overly prickly and easily personalize things that were only intended to help a person so that what they post is open to more response. It can be their own personal history that has left them though healed, and moved on from it, still marked by it in their perceptions.

Unfortunately, I can't point out the reaction. Part of my response was to impart a lesson, though it was admittedly harsh and pointed. It seems that you have understood the underlying intent though, so that will helpfully help all parties.

But the thing we must be aware of, and I include myself in this, is whether or not that reaction is a reaction from wounded pride in being corrected. The reason we have to watch for that and acknowledge it, and take it before God, just Him and us, is this wonderful thing called sanctification. If we are fueled by such in our reactions, the likelihood exists that we also do not like to be corrected by God. In which case, having dealt with and conquered the "big" obvious sins, we do not realize that He is moving us forward into deeper sanctification, those sins of motive and partiality and intent, and thought. Rather than be corrected by God, we do not see them or acknowledge them. Instead we justify them, deny we are doing them, and the hidden sins that David cried out to God to expose in him, remain hidden from us, and left unsanctified.

Ah...lessons. Remember what Jesus said (at least I think it was Jesus. If not it was Paul.) You who teach, do you not also teach yourselves. That self-reflection occurs when talking about things like this. You who teach do not steal, do you steal? Deep, reflective stuff there. (Understand, I thought about every word I wrote, and apparently, you heard my intent. It was still harsh, but your second sentence at the start of the comment (first paragraph) seems to show that, even though it was harsh, you heard the main point. So I definitively ask for forgiveness, and perhaps things improve overall. (In going with the beginning of your comment, forgetting for the moment that I exist.)

And I am not accusing you or anyone of this. I am speaking from experience and being on forums, oddly enough, has been a great place for my own sinful motives and reactions to be exposed.

You better not be, or I may start turning green (as our drill sergeant used to say about our sergeant major becoming the incredible hulk when angry...) I try to teach in all I say, but if there is anyone who is perfect... it isn't me. If there is someone who fails... I was here first...

What I said about paragraphing is not a preference of mine or simply how huge blocks of paragraphs affect me. It affects probably 95% maybe 100% of people in the same way. It is a psychological effect. And not only that, but on a forum where people would like to respond to certain things said, it puts a plethora of ideas all in one huge body of text. And on this forum especially that has no multiple quote option, one has to track back through this text, highlight, reply, and repeatedly over and over return to the post they are responding to in order to cover all they want to respond to. That is inconvenient in all cases, but not worth bothering with at all in the case of page long paragraphs. "Where was I? What did I miss?" They have to reread it again, which was difficult in the first place.

The paragraph block is because it was all basically the same topic. I can't help following the usual way of handling paragraphs. For me, the font is way too small on my monitor...

Also just because you and others enjoy lengthy discussions on this topic that does not mean that I am obligated to or to participate in them, or explain my views at all. It also helps if one is being inquired of as to their views, rather than a series of statements presented as facts, being told what the person being addressed believes and even how they arrive at that belief, and that they are wrong on all counts.

Again, sorry that your feelings were hurt.

I am pretty sure it was more frustration speaking, then hurt feelings.

 

[ReverendRV]

I am not sure if cliques are forming, or if they were already existing and were brought here. It is almost impossible to avoid. I have always wound up on the outside. The ultimate outsider. However, I am VERY sensitive to my actions (when I realize them), and think too much about other people, and not enough about myself.

I will be honest. I don't know how to define what I felt, but I wouldn't say offended. And if it helps you any, I found what I consider a great thought process in some Star Trek book "There is no offense where none is taken". And something about the joy that is found when we take joy in our differences. Life would be incredibly boring if we were all the same.

Unfortunately, I can't point out the reaction. Part of my response was to impart a lesson, though it was admittedly harsh and pointed. It seems that you have understood the underlying intent though, so that will helpfully help all parties.

Ah...lessons. Remember what Jesus said (at least I think it was Jesus. If not it was Paul.) You who teach, do you not also teach yourselves. That self-reflection occurs when talking about things like this. You who teach do not steal, do you steal? Deep, reflective stuff there. (Understand, I thought about every word I wrote, and apparently, you heard my intent. It was still harsh, but your second sentence at the start of the comment (first paragraph) seems to show that, even though it was harsh, you heard the main point. So I definitively ask for forgiveness, and perhaps things improve overall. (In going with the beginning of your comment, forgetting for the moment that I exist.)

You better not be, or I may start turning green (as our drill sergeant used to say about our sergeant major becoming the incredible hulk when angry...) I try to teach in all I say, but if there is anyone who is perfect... it isn't me. If there is someone who fails... I was here first...

The paragraph block is because it was all basically the same topic. I can't help following the usual way of handling paragraphs. For me, the font is way too small on my monitor...

I am pretty sure it was more frustration speaking, then hurt feelings.

I reckon I'm the example of an outsider being in a Clique; so in a way, there are no Cliques...

I'm a notorious middle man, I fit in a lot of Cliques. Sometimes I have to squeeze in; but when I'm in, I'm in...

The Bible says if you want a friend, show yourself to be friendly; and as long as it's up to you, live at peace with everyone...

As long as I'm able, I'm going to try to help everyone here to be at Peace. Let's just have fun, don't take anything personal. Love conquers All...

 

[Alive]

I agree that the gospel overcomes all competing worldviews; however, what does that mean in practice? It does not necessarily mean that Christians become the majority, nor that they come to be in charge of the various institutions of human power.


I'm sure that everyone would agree that a reduction in slavery and the sex-trade is a very good thing; however, I don't think that that kind of thing is good measure of the success of the gospel. Successful gospel preaching is preaching the gospel faithfully, as led by the Lord. You might, or might not, see tangible results, but they are not the measure to use.


Wherever the gospel spreads, it results in various improvements; but, once a country has the gospel (e.g. the U.S.), it does not mean that there will continue to be a trend of improvement.


The financiers continue to desire and anticipate war (financing and supplying arms to both sides). The twentieth century was one of the worst for warfare in history.



Details, details...


Every Christian should seek to fulfil his calling, including his part in the Great Commission, whether he sees an upward or downward trend in society. The perception of a trend should make no difference to his desire to live out and spread the gospel.



I'd be surprised if there are any Christians here, who, as a matter of policy, do not want to live out and spread the gospel; in fact, I would have to wonder if they really were Christians.

Hello, David. Just a thought to add. I think even among the non-elect of the world the Christian ethic as salt and light, has had an enormous effect in this world and its cultures.

 

[Alive]

You obviously have never seen the inside of a gate. Or heard of bolt holes or murder holes. The Europeans were not the first to employ extremely effective methods inside gates to kill attackers.

Do you know how thick the walls too ancient Jerusalem were? Jericho perhaps? Cities that literally had enough room for living quarters, trade, guard contingents, tax gathering, tithe gathering...and *gasp* rooms for judgements. All centered around the gates.

Nevertheless, gates are defensive. I like how Heiser communicated this and I agree. Christendom,, has had this backwards, for the most part.