[CCWoody]

the facts of the Gospel aren't hard to explain to a Roman Catholic, either. That isn't the problem, is it? Thank God Woody's salvation isn't at stake in this (the_doc to the contrary, notwithstanding). ~ Dan

I am an Amillennialist because I finally got the facts of the gospels straight. I found it impossible to square what the gospels plainly reveals with what the Premillennialists tell me is going to happen. For example, I could not make Matthew 13:36 fit Premillennialism, despite the assurance by Premillennialists that it fits. I found that they were not being honest with the passage. This is just one of many things I noticed.

Of course, I'm not an Arminian for the same reason. I found that they were not being honest with what the gospels teach. For example, they tell me that people will go to hell because they don't believe, but there is a very interesting encounter with Christ that says that it is much more than a matter of belief. But, that is another thread.

Woody.

[BibChr]

Nonsense.

If you mangled and abused the soteriological and Christological passages as you do God's prophetic Word, you'd be a universalist, a unitarian — or anything else you want. Amillennialism both dovetails with Roman Catholicism AND warrants their criticism that every reader becomes a little Pope. That's all you are, randomly applying the grammatico-historical approach here, and imposing baseless spiritualizing metaphors there, guided only by your prejudices and tradition.

You are a Christian in spite of your mangling of God's prophetic Word.

Dan