Theology Online | Christian Forums & More

  
Active Threads
Social Groups
Go Back   Theology Online | Christian Forums & More > Politics, Religion, And The Rest > Religion > Exclusively Christian Theology
Reload this Page The motivation behind Mid Acts Dispensationlism
Exclusively Christian Theology This forum is exclusively for those who consider themselves Christian and consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  (#361) Old
SaulToPaul SaulToPaul is offline
Gold level Subscriber
 SaulToPaul's Avatar

 

Reputation:
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 07:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai View Post
You make "soon" mean "later", "near" mean "far", and "at hand" mean countless thousands of years off in the future.
Soon is soon. Later is later. Near is near. Far is far. At hand is at hand.
I also recognize when a letter is prophecy and speaking to those in a future time to whom soon will be soon, near is near, at hand is at hand.





1. Land forever. Gen 17:8 (KJV)
2. City FROM heaven. Rev 21:2 (KJV)
3. Heavenly places. Eph 2:6-7(KJV)


Don't mix them, leavening the whole household of God. Luke 13:21 (KJV)
   
Reply With Quote
  (#362) Old
SaulToPaul SaulToPaul is offline
Gold level Subscriber
 SaulToPaul's Avatar

 

Reputation:
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 07:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai View Post
Not to mention your "general compartments/three inheritances" theory
1. How many general sections were in the temple?
2. Can you find scriptures that show someone will inherit land forever, the City forever, or heaven forever?
3. Is there such a thing as the household of God growing into an holy temple in the LORD?





1. Land forever. Gen 17:8 (KJV)
2. City FROM heaven. Rev 21:2 (KJV)
3. Heavenly places. Eph 2:6-7(KJV)


Don't mix them, leavening the whole household of God. Luke 13:21 (KJV)
   
Reply With Quote
  (#363) Old
SaulToPaul SaulToPaul is offline
Gold level Subscriber
 SaulToPaul's Avatar

 

Reputation:
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 07:52 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai View Post
This is what dispensationalists do. They claim to be literalists, but it is they who make up all kinds of stuff that isn't there.

Matthew 24:34 (KJV). Tet: "Literal"


Yet, Christ came in 70ad, every eye saw him, yet only believers saw him, and yet the kingdom did not come with observation, yet only Josephus mentions it.

"who make up all kinds of stuff that isn't there"





1. Land forever. Gen 17:8 (KJV)
2. City FROM heaven. Rev 21:2 (KJV)
3. Heavenly places. Eph 2:6-7(KJV)


Don't mix them, leavening the whole household of God. Luke 13:21 (KJV)
   
Reply With Quote
  (#364) Old
SaulToPaul SaulToPaul is offline
Gold level Subscriber
 SaulToPaul's Avatar

 

Reputation:
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
SaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peersSaulToPaul is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 07:54 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai View Post
I can't believe you say this, when we all know that if it wasn't for Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Anderson, and Bullinger; what you believe wouldn't exist today.
Everything I believe, I attempt to show you my reasoning out of the scriptures.

Do you see this with Nang?


Her attitude is basically this: "If you were spiritual, you would magically see that what the reformers say is true, despite what you think you see in the scriptures".

Do you see how elitist and disingenuous this is? God has granted her the wisdom to see what the scripture really means. God could not have possibly meant what he said, and through comparing scriptures with each other, teach us what we need to know.





1. Land forever. Gen 17:8 (KJV)
2. City FROM heaven. Rev 21:2 (KJV)
3. Heavenly places. Eph 2:6-7(KJV)


Don't mix them, leavening the whole household of God. Luke 13:21 (KJV)
   
Reply With Quote
  (#365) Old
john w john w is offline
TOL Legend
 john w's Avatar

 

Reputation:
john w is well respected by his peers
john w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 01:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nang View Post
Taking God at His word requires word studies.

To comprehend God's language, one must study each word as it is used throughout the entire Bible. When one takes the time to do hard and prayerful study, the Holy Spirit truly leads the Christian into all truth, as Jesus promised He would. John 16:13

This is a proper approach, rather than adopting some hair-brained and innovative theory invented by men, and then forcing all of scripture (by proof texting) to support the scheme.

Darby had to publish his own bible with footnotes dividing the times, to support his unorthodox beliefs. Between his edition of the Bible and Scofield's, the largest proof-texting effort was thrust upon Christendom. Other than the success of Joseph Smith's like efforts, these two take the cake.
"rather than adopting some hair-brained and innovative theory invented by men,"-Nag


You learned that sophistry from Tet., or your teachers. That does NADA for your "argument," and is deception, and you know it, and Tet. knows it.

Should we learn from women? Aliens?

Who teaches you, Nag? Let me guess:God...your SOF.

All you con artists, employing this sophistry, need to do, is say, "false teaching," present your case, and be done with it. But you don't, adding "by men," exposing your deceit.

Prove that you have God made teachings, i.e., not "invented by men."





Saint John W
   
Reply With Quote
  (#366) Old
john w john w is offline
TOL Legend
 john w's Avatar

 

Reputation:
john w is well respected by his peers
john w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peersjohn w is well respected by his peers
July 11th, 2012, 02:21 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetelestai View Post
I can't believe you say this, when we all know that if it wasn't for Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Anderson, and Bullinger; what you believe wouldn't exist today.
We all know that if it wasn't for J Stewart Russell, Max King, RC Sproul, G North, Hank Hannegraff, G DeMar, K Gentry.........................................you r AD 70/Preterisr teachers, what you believe wouldn't exist today.





Saint John W
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright ©1997-2012 TheologyOnLine

Logos Bible Study Software Up to 15% OFF FOR THEOLOGYONLINE MEMBERS! Study twice, post once.
Logos Bible Software —take your Bible study to the next level.