Amillennialism - the majority view in Christendom

[Invicta]

9 hours ago, John81 said:

Lot was not removed from the earth but taken to a safe place. Noah was not removed, he was provided a safe place. Both remained on earth and witnessed the judgment of God upon the wicked even as God protected them. Neither Lot nor Noah serve as examples to support the pre-trib rapture.

Better to stick to the verses which directly address the matter.

It's also not really helpful when folks argue back and forth over Catholic this or that since regardless of what the RCC does or doesn't do, say or believe, the Word of God stands as our reliable source.

 

In the case of Noah, it was the sinners that were taken away,  In the case of the tares, it is the tares which are taken away.

Mt 13:25  But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
Mt 13:26  But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
Mt 13:27  So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
Mt 13:29  But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mt 13:30  Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
 

Mt 13:36  Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
 

Mt 13:38  The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mt 13:40  As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

[Invicta]

23 hours ago, Alan said:

Brethren,

If a person wants to learn more of the historical belief in the pre-tribulation, pre-milleniall coming of Christ for the Church than plenty of information is available on the internet. The detractors of this biblical belief, and the false teachers of A-millenialism, and the "historical" interpretation of Revelaltion, will find fault with every writer and defender of this biblical truth.

In these last days every biblical truth, including prophecy, is being questioned and  attacked by false prophets, false teachers, and miss-guided brethren. Any man of God who stands for the truth and exposes the error of any false doctrinal belief, like a-milleniallism, will be verbally denounced, scorned, mocked, and some fault in his life or writing will be purposely brought out in public in a effort to vilify his beliefs.

The phrase, "Darby Worshippers," is designed to belittle, and mock, those who believe in the pre-tribulation, pre-millenial belief in the coming of Christ for the chruch. The phrase "Darby worshippers," is a slander. It, and other belittling and mocking phrases are  written in an effort to intimidate the man of God and belittle him in the eyes of those who read his works.

 

I was in the Brethren as you know and I can say that to me the admiration of Darby was close to worship, and we were not even the exclusives.  

We were once camping in Normandy, France, where we met a French man who said he couldn't understand the scripture until he read Darby.  He seemed to know all about the churches for miles around including the times of the services. When we asked if he would like to come to a service with us he said "No." as he read in Darby that you should only worship in homes and gave me a list of scriptures where it says the church met in someone's house. Darby published a bible in French.

 

[Alan]

On ‎2016‎年‎1‎月‎30‎日 at 8:01 AM, Invicta said:

I was in the Brethren as you know and I can say that to me the admiration of Darby was close to worship, and we were not even the exclusives.  

We were once camping in Normandy, France, where we met a French man who said he couldn't understand the scripture until he read Darby.  He seemed to know all about the churches for miles around including the times of the services. When we asked if he would like to come to a service with us he said "No." as he read in Darby that you should only worship in homes and gave me a list of scriptures where it says the church met in someone's house. Darby published a bible in French.

 

Every time this issue comes up you give us one more story that is slanderous against the Brethren and apply them to us here on OnLine Baptist in order to denigrate those who believe in the pre-tribulation and pre-millennial coming of Christ. These slanderous attacks are continual and not conducive to an honest discussion of the issues involved.

[John81]

3 hours ago, Alan said:

Every time this issue comes up you give us one more story that is slanderous against the Brethren and apply them to us here on OnLine Baptist in order to denigrate those who believe in the pre-tribulation and pre-millennial coming of Christ. These slanderous attacks are continual and not conducive to an honest discussion of the issues involved.

This is the same reason it's not beneficial in discussion with "Calvinists" to accuse them of being followers of Calvin, or telling another with differing views they are following this or that preacher.

Sometimes bringing up a historical timeline or pointing out certain teachers of a view can be helpful, but what's most helpful is to stick with "what does Scripture say" and then flesh out what that means.

One instance from a personal perspective for myself on OB would be the difficulty I had in understanding how the 70 weeks were to be seen as 69 weeks, followed by a large gap before the 70th week. So many here continually repeated the same thing which didn't explain it to me and then made personal attacks and false accusations because I asked a question they were unable to answer well. Thankfully one brother took the time to pursue different angles of explanation and took the time to put the relevant verses together so I was finally able to understand how that "gap" was arrived at.

[swathdiver]

On 1/26/2016 at 1:23 PM, Heir of Salvation said:

What, exactly is "false"?

Sir, Your question was answered in my original reply.  The Roman church and her harlots do not believe that Christ's sacrifice was enough to save a man, works are required.  The Romans and her harlots do not believe that Christ was good enough to forgive man his sins so they set up priests to do so.  This is a few of many examples why their beliefs may seem to be biblical on the surface but a cursory examination will show them to be of the devil.  The babylonian God and Christ is NOT the same as the God and Christ found in the Word of God.

Edited January 31, 2016 by swathdiver
Mistake - left out "NOT"

[Invicta]

5 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Sir, Your question was answered in my original reply.  The Roman church and her harlots do not believe that Christ's sacrifice was enough to save a man, works are required.  The Romans and her harlots do not believe that Christ was good enough to forgive man his sins so they set up priests to do so.  This is a few of many examples why their beliefs may seem to be biblical on the surface but a cursory examination will show them to be of the devil.  The babylonian God and Christ is the same as the God and Christ found in the Word of God.

Is the phrase I have highlighted in red what you intended to say?  If so can you please explain what you mean?

Sorry I have read your post again several times and i understand now what you mean

Edited January 31, 2016 by Invicta
Appology

[Invicta]

7 hours ago, Alan said:

Every time this issue comes up you give us one more story that is slanderous against the Brethren and apply them to us here on OnLine Baptist in order to denigrate those who believe in the pre-tribulation and pre-millennial coming of Christ. These slanderous attacks are continual and not conducive to an honest discussion of the issues involved.

I don't think I applied them to you.

 

[swathdiver]

My apologies, the last sentence in my previous post, which you highlighted has been corrected.  Sometimes my fingers miss what my brain wanted them to type!  

[Heir of Salvation]

22 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Sir, Your question was answered in my original reply.  The Roman church and her harlots do not believe that Christ's sacrifice was enough to save a man, works are required.  The Romans and her harlots do not believe that Christ was good enough to forgive man his sins so they set up priests to do so.  This is a few of many examples why their beliefs may seem to be biblical on the surface but a cursory examination will show them to be of the devil.  The babylonian God and Christ is NOT the same as the God and Christ found in the Word of God.

It was not answered.

I didn't say the Roman Church or her harlots believe the sacrifice was enough to save man.

I didn't say The Romans and her harlots believe Christ's sacrifice was good enough to forgive man's sins without a priesthood.

I didn't even say their views were Biblical.

I don't deny their heretical views are of the devil either.

I said what I meant and meant what I said.  And I said absolutely none of those things.

Please quote exactly which statement I MADE which is "false".

The reality is, no proposition I stated about their beliefs is "false".  If any of them were, you'd be able to quote which one it is, and tell us which one.  

I realize that you simply dislike me altogether and that's wonderful for you. But don't poison a conversation for no reason.

Edited February 1, 2016 by Heir of Salvation