the church
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
Since the church of Rome is a made up as LDS, Islam, and JW, I asked chatgpt what Paul said when the translators say "Bishop", and that doesn't exist. I think the "church fathers" are people who went with the circumcision as Paul describes in Galatians, that exist in the first century letters. I think they are real. Just wrong.
Idolater
Popetard
Right at 0:57 he says, "I started studying the Bible with a true heartfelt desire to understand God's Word, but as I progressed, I found several passages that seemed to contradict".
Welcome to the club. That's not unique. That's true, for literally everybody who starts studying the Bible with a true heartfelt desire to understand God's Word.
Jumping right from that spot, which everybody who starts studying the Bible with a true heartfelt desire to understand God's Word encounters immediately, to Dispensationalism, is a GIGANTIC leap. But you guys just act like it's no big deal and obv. It's not obv to many people that some form of Dispensationalism is the correct resolution to the apparent contradictions in the Bible, especially when the Bible USED TO BE a little bigger than it is today, for like, 1500 years straight it was a little bigger.
I would say ESPECIALLY, given that the Bible for near 1500 years straight, it was a little bigger than it is today, in the Protestant communions, that Dispensationalism is a very big leap, to attempt to resolve the apparent contradictions that everybody faces when they first start studying the Bible with a true heartfelt desire to understand God's Word.
Literally everybody.
Idolater
Popetard
The solution to the apparent contradictions in the Bible is not obv Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism is a stretch explanation for them, a minority report. The majority report is some form of ancient Christianity, whether it's Catholicism, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, Eastern Orthodoxy, English Anglicanism, or something like that. The next most popular view would be a Protestant communion like Lutheranism or Presbyterianism, or Congregationalism, or Methodism. But only after those would we start to consider any form of Dispenationalism.
This doesn't refute Dispensationalism, that's not what I'm saying, and that's not WHY I'm saying it either. You just, if you're any form of Dispensationalist, you need to defeat the claims that all these other Church traditions have. They all claim to precede Dispensationalism, in claims to being the Church in the Bible. Dispensationalism is claiming to be the Church that Paul talked about, the Body of Christ. Dispensationalism is not first in line, in making that claim. There are many older traditions ahead of them in line. So Dispensationalists can't just say, Oh we're obv first in that line. Not without defeating everybody else's claims, who have been staking their claims, for a lot longer than Dispensationalism has been around.
This doesn't refute Dispensationalism, that's not what I'm saying, and that's not WHY I'm saying it either. You just, if you're any form of Dispensationalist, you need to defeat the claims that all these other Church traditions have. They all claim to precede Dispensationalism, in claims to being the Church in the Bible. Dispensationalism is claiming to be the Church that Paul talked about, the Body of Christ. Dispensationalism is not first in line, in making that claim. There are many older traditions ahead of them in line. So Dispensationalists can't just say, Oh we're obv first in that line. Not without defeating everybody else's claims, who have been staking their claims, for a lot longer than Dispensationalism has been around.