Replies

Let me be the first to "disagree." But a quick preface first: I used to be a mid-tribulationist. One day, a man whom I respected a great deal as a Bible scholor (and still do) gave me a manuscript defending and supporting the pre-tribulationist viewpoint.

Now, I have to admit that I REALLY WANTED to believe the pre-trib' view and I respected his logical mind so I read and studied with great anticipation.

When I was finished, I became a mid-/post-tribulationist. All of his supports were speculation and he took definite poetic license with The Word. I wanted to be convinced but this definitely didn't do it. It actually exposed the whole belief as "wishful thinking" and trying to infer stuff that simply was not there.

Now that I've said that, I must say that this post is similar. I can make arguments against every single paragraph that contains substantive claims. I am not trying to say this guy is not sincere or highly knowledgeable. It just baffles me that some are arguing that he so "nails it."

No, I'm not going to refute it right now because there is just too much there right now. But not one single paragraph had any information whatsoever that would convince me of any of his point.

He's preaching to his particular choir.