Replies

To: Uncle Chip; P-Marlowe; xzins; Dr. Eckleburg; tabsternager; Lee N. Field

"the sign of the Son of man appeared in the heavens"

Literally speaking, the "the sign of the Son of man" is not the second coming.

But I can understand your confusion. If you do not carefully compare Scripture with Scripture you will come up with all sorts of unbiblical notions.

493 posted on 11/09/2007 10:44:19 AM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism is a disease ... as contagious as polio.")

To: topcat54

Literally speaking, the "the sign of the Son of man" is not the second coming.

You're dancing on me here! Do you believe that that sign of the Son of man appeared in 70 AD or not??? Yes or No --

I thought you guys had all the answers -- so answer it.

497 posted on 11/09/2007 10:47:53 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794