Posted on 09/01/2006 5:32:18 AM PDT by xzins
Another survey which might interest some Lurkers is this one:
As a final point, of course I strongly agree with you about “attitude.” How we say what we say carries as much – if not more – weight than what is actually said.
Is your thinking that just because God spoke it beforehand it has to fit into one form or another, all the time in every case, using some cookie cutter approach?
You're not trying to deny that God uses symbols and images when He speaks through the prophets, now are you?
"I have also spoken by the prophets, And have multiplied visions; I have given symbols through the witness of the prophets." (Hos. 12:10)
Aren't you one of the same guys that say "context is important"? We learn from the context exactly what God meant in Exodus 7. It's not rocket science cuz its in the very same chapter. God did not choose to use prophetic symols and images to predict what would happen in Egypt.
Just for the record, do you claim to follow the grammatical-historical method or do you have some other method for interpreting the Bible that I'm missing?
These results are quite confusing. E.g., practically the same definition is given for historical premil as for dispensational premil. Then you have view such as "partial rapture" under dispensational premil, and you have folks like b-d listed under both.
The pretrib rapture is a distinctive of dispensationalism.
I'm sure you can end up with any mix with such poor definitions.
Is that an "e"?
No, it's more like an (f), questioner is trying to wiggle out of an uncomfortable situation and so ignore the text by jumping to another, unrelated portion of Scripture.
But to get back to my point which you are obviously trying to avoid, what does the language in Isaiah 13 about "sun, moon", etc with respect to ancient Babylon tell you about the language Jesus uses in Matthew 24?
If you are going to use a technique other than the grammatical-historical method to justify your results, please specify that in your answer.
Thank you.
I'll take that as an "e".
Hey guys, any of you dispensationists and other non-preterists want to take a stab at this question?
d. blood
You must have had to invent and then jump through literalist hoops to make that language speak of actual cosmic phenomenon.
You don't think the Bible actually means what it says, do you? What kind of hyperliteralist are you anyway?
:-)
/sarcasm
First you said that I posted that I dislike Ashkenazi Jewish people, (and I'd sure like to see that post,) then you hint that I would like to see the demise of Israel. Nothing could be farther from the truth and I would appreciate it if you refrain from posting those assumptions.
You have to invent and then jump through literalist hoops to make this language speak of actual cosmic phenomenon.
= == == == =
No.
Not when one collects all the plausible Scriptures (in context) related to a topic and ALLOWS THE BIBLE to interpret THE BIBLE.
Are we reduced to Dipsy crackpots being compared to the crackpots on the other side? Not my priority.
Please do not associate me with this type of thing again.
Luke does not exactly parallel the others. Luke is much more specific about the sequence of events.
Yes. Those are great threads.
I'd still love to have the time to do a more statistically accurate study of either a representative sample or say at least half of all believing or religion forum FREEPERS. I realize that given the givens, it won't likely be done before Jesus returns! LOL.
Besides . . . at some point, all folks with consciousness and sanity will be Dipsies! LOL. Events do have a way of overtaking all manner of THEORIES! LOL.
It is gratifying and comforting to me that even a lot of secular folks (including but beyond FREEPERVILLE) I know, are not abject clueless regarding these issues. It is almost as though Holy Spirit and/or His witness created within them has alerted them to the fact that this era IS different AND IS BECOMING MORE SO almost at a geometric rate.
Many are not yet ready to give up their hedonism and submit to God Almighty. But more and more are seriously watching the signs of the times and bracing themselves to do so in a rush when the scales tilt MORE UNDENIABLY toward the rather decisive and desperate need to do so.
Praise God that HE IS ABLE to draw all men unto Himself as He is lifted up.
Sometimes when Revelation and all the above gets to be a bit much, I have to remind myself that Revelation is about CHRIST COMING IN GLORY. It's about HIS MAJESTY not only winning out but being decisively DEMONSTRATED OVERWHELMINGLY--and not just to Israel; not just to mankind--but TO ALL CREATION. PRAISE GOD.
Truly all creation waits eagerly, groaningly expectantly, yearningly for the manifestation of the sons of God . . . whatever that means . . . it is destined to be glorious and to put the enemy to rout rather overwhelmingly REDEMPTIVELY.
imho, of course.
I'm sure you can end up with any mix with such poor definitions.
= = = =
Interesting assertion.
Not today. I have yet to get my papers ready for Wed's class and am TRYING to avoid the MORE futile exercises in soooooooooooooo eggregioiusly . . . . watering the wind.
The above is what I wrote in post #259. It is the entire post.
This is what 1000fish exerpted in post #490: 1000fish would vote with the PCUSA for the demise of Israel
This is the 1000fish comment that goes with his excerpt in #490: First you said that I posted that I dislike Ashkenazi Jewish people, (and I'd sure like to see that post,) then you hint that I would like to see the demise of Israel. Nothing could be farther from the truth and I would appreciate it if you refrain from posting those assumptions.
My take on the above is that someone has a problem with either reading comprehension or prevarication.
***Hey guys, any of you dispensationists and other non-preterists want to take a stab at this question?***
Well, if you say it was actual platlet loaded red blood cells then one could argue that when Christ declared the bread and wine to be his body and blood that they became the real thing.
PM, sad to say, but I admit to be a literate Christian. I am able to view with literacy the page before me and answer the questions about what I see. This literacy on my part is a shocking affair, beginning with reading, grammar, and composition classes in grade school continuing up through college.
The text does not say that the waters turned to fondue cheese, koolaid, milk, coca-cola, or bath oil.
It does say that the waters turned to blood.
How? God did it.
How? Dunno. Probably the same way He turned water into wine and raised a dead man eternally from the grave to be seated forever at the right hand of power. (He hasn't explained the "how" of those to me, either.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.