[topcat54]

Is the validity of your argument so weak, that you have to resort to ad hominem attacks?

That is not an ad hominem. The fundamental problem is that dispensationalists cannot grasp that non-dispenationalists do not come to the text with dispensational presuppositions. Likewise, because of your presuppositions, you cannot imagine a more valid interpretation of the text. How is that ad hominem?

[JohnnyM]

its ad hominem, because rather than debate the argument you resort to name calling. Rather than defend your position you claim my dispensationalism has blinded me, which is incorrect, since I am not a dispensationalist.

When the Bible uses apocalyptic language to describe the destruction of a people or a city, the language, such as the coming of the Lord on a cloud, is always the cause for the destruction.

You quoted Isaiah in post 221: Isaiah 19:1, "Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it."

Here the Lord comes on a swift cloud and decimates the idols of Egypt. It is His coming which causes the destruction. Now compare that with Matt 24:29-31. The Lord coming in the cloud happens AFTER the great tribulation and is not the cause of it. It is you who is bringing in something outside of Scripture to interpret the text.

JM