Tin Foil Hat Eschatology

[Sheepdog]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull :noid:


:beam:

[Undomiel]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull :noid:


:beam:

Probably because the whole bible sounds like a space alien story. Where did the angels come from? The sky. Where did Jesus go to? The sky. Where will Jesus come from? The sky. Where will New City Jerusalem come from? The sky. Where does the destruction come from in Ezekiel? The sky. Where is the promise given that the earth will never again be destroyed by a flood? The sky. Etc, etc.

[furay]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible?
Because that is the natural byproduct of 'to each man his own individual interpretation of the scriptures' philosphy most western churches champion.


:beam:
That is a great smilie! :lmbo:

[Undomiel]

Because that is the natural byproduct of 'to each man his own individual interpretation of the scriptures' philosphy most western churches champion.



That is a great smilie! :lmbo:


Catholic or?

[Spiritus Naturae]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull :noid:


:beam:

My sentiments exactly. It is a duty on the part of each Christian to interpret Scripture responsibly. Scripture interprets Scripture, importing from outside the text especially in regards to eschatology can get pretty wild.

:uneasy: :duh:"Remember...friends don't let friends interpret Scripture drunk. Be responsible don't drink and interpret..." :uneasy: :duh:

[Sheepdog]

Probably because the whole bible sounds like a space alien story. Where did the angels come from? The sky. Where did Jesus go to? The sky. Where will Jesus come from? The sky. Where will New City Jerusalem come from? The sky. Where does the destruction come from in Ezekiel? The sky. Where is the promise given that the earth will never again be destroyed by a flood? The sky. Etc, etc.

hrm... i disagree with you... though i can't quite put my finger on why.

Because that is the natural byproduct of 'to each man his own individual interpretation of the scriptures' philosphy most western churches champion.

sigh. yup, unfortunately i have to agree. i really wish we would teach our pastors less psychology and more on how to exegete responsibly. and the same goes for what is preached from the pulpit.

[Sheepdog]

My sentiments exactly. It is a duty on the part of each Christian to interpret Scripture responsibly. Scripture interprets Scripture, importing from outside the text especially in regards to eschatology can get pretty wild.

:uneasy: :duh:"Remember...friends don't let friends interpret Scripture drunk. Be responsible don't drink and interpret..." :uneasy: :duh:

:hehe:

[Undomiel]

:hehe:


I don't drink. Please don't insult me, I have given no one reason to be rude to me.

[Spiritus Naturae]

I don't drink. Please don't insult me, I have given no one reason to be rude to me.

No, no, no, no.... My little 'mock PSA' regarding intoxicated eschatology was in no way directed towards you. The line in the post about, "interpreting responsibly" simply made me think of those drunk driving PSA's we see from time to time. I apologize if you saw it otherwise. :flowers:

[Undomiel]

No, no, no, no.... My little 'mock PSA' regarding intoxicated eschatology was in no way directed towards you. The line in the post about, "interpreting responsibly" simply made me think of those drunk driving PSA's we see from time to time. I apologize if you saw it otherwise. :flowers:

Thanks. I think the tin foil hat idea too, is a bit uncalled for, as usually people who think they're being harrassed by something from the sky, are either being literally harrassed, demonically, or are quite insane. In either case, it really isn't very funny.

[Sheepdog]

... as usually people who think they're being harrassed by something from the sky, are either being literally harrassed, demonically, or are quite insane.

Much like many futurists i've ran into. hence it is apt as an analogy, even if you don't find it funny.

[Undomiel]

Much like many futurists i've ran into. hence it is apt as an analogy, even if you don't find it funny.

Let me tell you a little story. My husband is in the US military. He was stationed in the United Arab Emirates during the Gulf War. Before they sent our military over there, they gave them all vaccinations, inoculations and little white pills that they did not identify. One of the inoculations was an experimental (meaning it hadn't been approved by the FDA for use on humans) vaccine to prevent Tick Borne Encephalitis. When he came home I caught the Encephalitis unbeknownst to us. Within a couple months I started developing massive mental and emotional problems but had no clue what was wrong with me. This got progressively worse, in fact, it was so bad, my husband and I nearly divorced (which was so out of character for me, that anyone who knew us well would've been immediately suspicious, sadly, because we lived 2000 miles away from the nearest people that did know us well, there was no safety net, my husband simply thought his wife no longer loved him).

Anyway, as time advanced I went slowly and completely insane. Encephalitis is basically a swelling of the neural tissue of the brain caused when infection eats the protein sheaths off the nerves. There are no words to describe this, but suffice it to say, I've had a breast entirely removed and two children without any pain meds, and the insanity caused by the Encephalitis was still much, much worse. Eventually, I developed fevers, couldn't sleep, couldn't concentrate, migraines, and finally, I could no longer see. I was literally blind. This entire process took almost four months.

My husband took me to the hospital, and got a wheelchair to take me to the door because I was so weak. I had no clue where I was and not long after, I was in a coma. A few hours later, I was no longer breathing on my own. We had three small children at the time. It was pretty devastating. I recovered due to a miracle and went home, but for years afterwards, I suffered with the damage to the neural tissue in my brain - short term memory lapses, difficulty staying positive and upbeat, no ambition, basically depression, fatigue syndrome, and so on. This was exacerbated by the financial difficulties created when I had to be in the Critical Neural Care unit for 5 days and the hospital for a month.

There wasn't a single thing funny about it. Not a thing. And I believed all manner of strange things were happening to me before I finally went into the coma. So, just for your edification, remember, the people who come here have all kinds of life history and experiences. Your words can either be healing or harming.

[semmie]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull :noid:


:beam:
have you always felt this way...or just since reading the Left Behind books? :eh:

you have to admit, end-time literature in the bible is extremely hard to work through--especially revelation. it's not chronological but there does seem to be some specific order to the course of events; it's not literal, but it needn't necessarily all be figurative as a result; it's not very much like anything else we're familiar with in scripture, but it has a firm scriptural foundation (both OT and NT).

tell me this is an easy book to interpret?

now, i'm not justifying a quick or easy answer. but if it were really as simple as you made it sound in this initial post, then it probably wouldn't be such a debated issue in the church.

having said that...i agree with you.

peace,
~sarah

p.s. do you think they thought jesus was crazy when he explained the law, the prophets, and the poets? they probably thought he should interpret things more biblically, too...:wink:

[dizzle]

Undomiel, I understand your point, but let me give a bit of a counter. I have been medicated in the past for depression and I suffer from OCD (not bad enough in a sustained way for meds). The depression was very, very bad. I can sympathesize iwth what you say about a change of personality and helplessness to stop it. However, I do not expect that the rest of the world has to tone down jokes or jabs because of my unique circumstances. I don't get offended if in a debate, a very typical jab of "did you take your meds" is said. I don't get offended when someone says something is retarded because I have a retarded aunt. I don't get offended when someone says "only your mother would think that is a good article" when my mother is dead, which was a very painful event for me. In other words, I don't expect stilted, walking on eggshells for me. I am not saying you are doing that, but I am saying in the real world, jokes are made and we have to toughen up. I do think a lot of what is promoted by futurism is "tin foil" and yeah I will say it, because the sceptics are, and some of the stuff that is out there makes the rest of us look bad and makes Christianity a laughing stock. No "to the soul" insult was meant to anyone, and it is being overly sensitive to take it that way IMHO. You didn't criticize Terral (that I saw for his rampant insults on preterists - such as "pretenders" - don't you think it is potentially hurtful to be portrayed in that way by your standards? Of course! But you know what, I make like a duck and let it roll off of my back). Not trying to pick a fight with you, but suggessting you are getting overly indignant when it is not necessary. I too have struggled with mental disorders (depression and OCD), which is the only reason I thought I had a place to say something. I can understand. I understand the pain, and the shame - and have worked to dispel some o that shame for Christians because our bodies are fallen, and our minds will have blips that are quite right sometimes. Jesus will finally heal it all.

I am really sorry to hear what happened to you. If you would ever need anyone to share with, my PM box is open. I am glad you shared, and I will try to be sensitive to your experiences, but realize it is a gift to not take offense when none is intended. Very rarely is any true offense to the soul intended.

And if any offense was given in this post, I did not mean it, and free apologize for that which was not intended sister.

[Sheepdog]

hi there Semmie :smile:

have you always felt this way...or just since reading the Left Behind books? :eh:

actually, seeing how i got caught up in this stuff even before Left Behind, it isn't just that (i actually haven't read any of the Left Behind books, admittedly). it's mostly from stuff i see on the Internet that, and in fact a few posts here are what got my thinking about posting this.

the Left Behind books are a great example of this though, based on the reviews i've read on them.

you have to admit, end-time literature in the bible is extremely hard to work through--especially revelation. it's not chronological but there does seem to be some specific order to the course of events; it's not literal, but it needn't necessarily all be figurative as a result; it's not very much like anything else we're familiar with in scripture, but it has a firm scriptural foundation (both OT and NT).

tell me this is an easy book to interpret?

actually, you'd have to beat me with an ugly stick in order to get me to disagree with the above. Prophecy is by no means easy to interpret rightly. Which is why i sympathize greatly with people who are seeking to understand it all; and why i don't sympathize with those who for the sake of an easy answer come up with a goofy interpretation. if they were ignored by the church, i wouldn't have a problem, but they infect others with their end times paranoia. that is what sets me off.

that's the bottom line for me. if someone needs help understanding a prophecy, i'll do what i can to help. if someone presumptively presents a flawed interpretation in hopes of influencing Christians who otherwise don't know better, i view them as a threat to the church and will treat them as such.


now, i'm not justifying a quick or easy answer. but if it were really as simple as you made it sound in this initial post, then it probably wouldn't be such a debated issue in the church.

yeah. and just so you guys know, i never intended to imply it was easy.

p.s. do you think they thought jesus was crazy when he explained the law, the prophets, and the poets? they probably thought he should interpret things more biblically, too...:wink:

i suspect not. if i were in their shoes, i would have though Jesus was crazy when he was talking about us eating His flesh and drinking His blood (John 6). but interestingly, they rightly interpret what he was saying as some figurative teaching... though they could not understand it.

[studyhound]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull :noid:


:beam: Tin Foil Hats - for the discriminating lunatic futurist .
http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

[Sheepdog]

Undomiel, i sympathize with the situation you found yourself in. I am genuinly glad that you eventually got the help you needed. I hope and pray others who suffer with mental illness will also get teh help they need.

that said, you have to understand, once such people start influencing others, they become a threat. a threat to the mental well being of others, as well as their spiritual well being.

i know this for a fact. i was heavily influenced by the alien conspiracy subculture. one time i had a run in with Mormons. my faith was weak, but fortunately i was suspicious and did my research. if i didn't find out what they taught, i could have seriously shipwrecked my faith on their account.

if you don't see how dire bad teaching really is, consider this: You know who the J's Witnesses are, right? (I don't like saying "Jehova's Witnesses"; i know that isn't really a Biblical name for God, but it's the principle.) Seem harmless, right, how they just go door to door? I'm sure they are nice, friendly people.

However, did you know that the Witnesses have a higher incidence than the rest of the population of such mental illnesses as Schizophrenia, Paranoid Schizophrenia, and Neurosis? see here: http://www.carm.org/jw/mental.htm

does that make you mad? It infurates me! Yet that is just mental health; why don't we get angry over what people like these do to other people's spiritual health?

knowing how a bad worldview can drasticly affect people (usually for the worse), it enrages me how badly the church is falling short on this. why aren't we addressing bad theology!? why aren't we inoculating the church with sound doctrinal teaching? why aren't we teaching laypeople how to rightly interpret the Bible, so they can deal appropriately with those who interpret the Bible all wrong?

for this reason i'm glad i've become so desensitized... few things actually ever make me angry, but i am prone to explode and lose control when i do get mad. cracking jokes like i do also acts as a sort of pressure valve, keeping me nice and cool.

this is why i marginalize people who spout nonsense, regardless of their mental makeup. i do hope those who need help get it, but the second these people are taken seriously, the well being of others (spiritually, if not mentally as well) is at stake. i think that the reason our society mock and ridicule the conspiracy mongerers in our society is because we know that some among us are very impressional, and we really don't want them being led into the dillusion these people share. so if we treat the paranoid with contempt, the reasoning is that those who we also can have influence on will listen to us and not them.

this is never personal for me. i never have any hostile feelings towards people individually: it is thoughts, beliefs, worldviews, and bad arguments that i wage war against. not for the sake of these people (though being ridiculed is a good motivator to rethink one's view), but for the sake of everyone in general.

[Terral]

Sheepdog:
Sheepdog >> How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than kooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible?
The truth of the real world is often stranger than fiction. Let’s look at what Scripture says is coming in the future, and find some websites showing that those things are here in the world as we speak.

“And he deceives those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life. And it was given to him to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast would even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed. And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.”

The beast coming back to life is in the likeness of Christ being raised from the dead (Rom. 10:9). The beast had a wound from the sword, and Christ had the wound of the Roman spear (John 19:34). All the people shall be forced to take the mark of the beast in their right hand as described above. These are not figurative statements, but descriptions of things that shall literally take place. Scripture does not merely say a mark will be placed on their hand, but on their right (dexios: #1188) hand. Those who refuse the mark or refuse to worship the beast are killed. Those who try to steal (acquiring without the mark) shall have their right hand cut off, and the mark placed in their forehead. How do you suppose a world government is going to enforce these things, so that nobody is able to break these rules? We can find the answer by the way we are about to start placing implants in all of our inmates in prisons. http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=2568 (http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=2568)

Micro transmitters are being used right now to track all sorts of things from our global network of satellites. They are used in cars (http://people.howstuffworks.com/news-item159.htm (http://people.howstuffworks.com/news-item159.htm) ), kids (http://vigilant.tv/article/2431/more-claims-about-surgical-microchip-tracking (http://vigilant.tv/article/2431/more-claims-about-surgical-microchip-tracking) ), and talk about putting them in terrorists ( http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Chip_Implants/ (http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Chip_Implants/) ).
Sheepdog >> How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)
Olivet and Revelation use a tone of imagery from the OT? Christ is describing ‘end of the age’ events in Matthew 24, and NONE of those things are FULFILLED in the OT. Even when Christ taught in parables, those ‘images’ were representative of something. You are using the general ‘imagery’ term in reference to things you simply do not understand. Everybody will be forced to have the mark of the beast near the ‘end of the age.’ This same ‘beast’ is worshipped by everybody as being God, just as Paul says of the ‘man of sin’ in 2Thes. 2:3+4. Those descriptions are not of mere images, but of a literal ‘son of destruction’ being worshipped by everybody on this planet as being God. Some kind of microchip technology is the only way that this kind of law can be enforced on a global population. We know all of this is global, because Christ says so:

“Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.”
Sheepdog >> hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull.
Nobody is saying that these things occur during our lifetime. Our ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12) mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17), when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand.’ 2Thes. 2:2. The events of Revelation all occur DURING the “Lord’s day” (Rev. 1:10, day of the Lord), and we are taken when that day BEGINS. The earth is just readying itself for the dawn of the “Day of the Lord” that shall begin the moment our mystery church is taken. We shall see all of the events of Revelation (and Matt. 24) from heaven.

In Christ,

Terral

[Sheepdog]

Sheepdog:

The truth of the real world is often stranger than fiction. Let’s look at what Scripture says is coming in the future, and find some websites showing that those things are here in the world as we speak.

ah yes. we could also look up the websites that have UNREFUTABLE PROOF of the existance of space aliens.

you are doing exactly as i am talking about. using news (in this case, internet websites, which are often seen as the least reliable sources) to interpret the Bible.

I think the Dapper would look best on you. what does everyone else think?

[semmie]

why aren't we addressing bad theology!? why aren't we inoculating the church with sound doctrinal teaching? why aren't we teaching laypeople how to rightly interpret the Bible, so they can deal appropriately with those who interpret the Bible all wrong?
maybe it's too complicated. maybe the "church" is so divided theologically, that it's virtually impossible to address "bad theology," except for on an individual level. i'm not disagreeing with you, because this is a serious issue, and i, too, am frustrated with the lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills. i guess i'm just wondering...how do you undo years of bad theology in the corporate body of christ? i'm not sure you can.

and this has been a problem since the beginning of the church. i'm always amazed to read in 2 Peter 2, where pete speaks of false teachers being "with" us and communing with us.

tickling ears, remember?

[Mickey]

knowing how a bad worldview can drasticly affect people (usually for the worse), it enrages me how badly the church is falling short on this. why aren't we addressing bad theology!? Sheepdog,

You ask,"why aren't we addressing bad theology!?"

That is a question that I keep asking the preterists.They refuse to use their brains and instead they continue to "pretend" that certain verses are not in the Scriptures.

The Lord Jesus Christ makes it plain that at the "end of the age" that a world wide judgment will take place.His disciples asked Him what would be the signs leading up to the "end of the age":

"Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age?"(MT.24:3).

The preterists close their eyes and "pretend" that the "end of the age" has already taken place.They ignore the words of the Lord Jesus in an earlier parable where He makes it as plain as possible that a judgment will come upon the whole world at the "end of the age".

"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. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age"(Mt.13:36-40).

The preterists have no answer for these words of the Lord Jesus.THey just ignore them in the hope that they will just go away.They also ignore the Lord's words in the Olivet Discourse where He speaks of a world wide judgment:

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth"(Lk.21:32-35).

The Apostle John also describes a world wide judgment that will come upon all those who worship the beast:

"And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world"(Rev.13:7,8).

This is what the "third angel" says in regard to those who will worship the beast:

"And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb"(Rev.14:9,10).

And then later we see the wrath of God come to "the earth" upon those who worship the beast:

"And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image"(Rev.16:1,2).

So the Scriptures declare in no uncertain terms that at the "end of the age" a world wide judgment will take place.There was no world wide judgment in AD 70,but despite that fact the preterists are willing to argue that the "end of the age" has already come and gone.They offer no explanation for all these Scriptual passages that prove that they are wrong.They just close their eyes and "pretend" that these verses do not even exist.

These verses are like the proverbal "you know what" that is in the punchbowl.The preterists have come to the party and know that this is in their punch bowl,but they just close their eyes and pretend that it is not there.They sit around and try to sound intelligent about the things of Scripture all the while knowing that the "you know what" is spoiling their little party.They avoid discussing this subject like the plague!

In Christ,

Mickey

[furay]

i guess i'm just wondering...how do you undo years of bad theology in the corporate body of christ? i'm not sure you can.

1. Have the Western Churches confess that they have gone astray
2. Repent
3. Rejoin the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church

Not gonna be easy, but if it is God's will it can be done. Then again, perhaps the Eastern Church should amend its own schisms before a greater reunification can take place.

[Terral]

Semmie, Sheepdog:
Sheepdog >> Why aren't we addressing bad theology!? Why aren't we inoculating the church with sound doctrinal teaching? Why aren't we teaching laypeople how to rightly interpret the Bible, so they can deal appropriately with those who interpret the Bible all wrong?

Semmie >> maybe it's too complicated. Maybe the "church" is so divided theologically, that it's virtually impossible to address "bad theology," except for on an individual level. I'm not disagreeing with you, because this is a serious issue, and I, too, am frustrated with the lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills. I guess I’m just wondering...how do you undo years of bad theology in the corporate body of Christ? I’m not sure you can.
Your personal info above indicates a whopping 1 per day posting average. How about we hit the Board and begin addressing the topics of debate while showing folks the ins and outs of accurate Scriptural Interpretation? You attack bad theology by showing yourself approved to God by accurately handing the word of truth. 2Tim. 2:15. Point out the errors in the testimony of everyone singing off key. Paul says,

“ . . . preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.” 2Tim. 4:2.

“This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith.” Titus 1:13.

“These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.” Titus 2:15.
Did Sheepdog address any of my points in Post #18? No. Standing in unbelief and denial of these things serves nobody. Since our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17), when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand’ (2Thes. 2:2), then we view all of those ‘day of the Lord’ events from heaven (Eph. 2:6). When you realize that all of the events of Matthew 24:3-31 occur on the ‘day of the Lord’ (Matt. 24:29, Joel 2:31, Acts 2:20, 2Pet. 3:10), then you realize that they are all fulfilled in the future. When Christ tells the Twelve about all those stones being cast down (Matt. 24:1-29), He is describing the fulfillment of Zechariah 14:3-7:

“Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet [ Christ coming ] will stand on the Mount of Olives [ Matt. 24:30 ], which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives [ Christ sitting there teaching about these things ] will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south.”

You tell me if Christ is describing the fulfillment of this Zechariah Prophecy to the Twelve in Matthew 24, or describing the historical events of The Romans ransacking Jerusalem 70 AD.? Can any of you prove that these things in Zechariah took place 2000 years ago? NO YOU CANNOT, or the Mount of Olives would be split wide open to this day. And yet, you continue to believe that “already fulfilled in 70 AD” nonsense. Who is holding onto ‘bad theology?’ That answer is very obvious to many of us posting on this Board. Either refute this clear evidence of ‘the facts’ or begin making your retractions to this Preterism Interpretation of Matthew 24. Otherwise your accusations of hypocrisy above apply directly to you . . . We are waiting . . .

In Christ,

Terral

[semmie]

1. Have the Western Churches confess that they have gone astray
2. Repent
3. Rejoin the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church

Not gonna be easy, but if it is God's will it can be done. Then again, perhaps the Eastern Church should amend its own schisms before a greater reunification can take place.
who is the "one holy catholic and apostolic church" ?

honestly, if i knew who the "one holy catholic and apostolic church" was, and if they practiced appropriate theology and fellowship manners, i would join them in a heartbeat.

i appreciate your sentiment, though; and i would much prefer to see the correction and unification of the body, than the continuation of dissention and false teachings.

[semmie]

Semmie, Sheepdog:

Your personal info above indicates a whopping 1 per day posting average. How about we hit the Board and begin addressing the topics of debate while showing folks the ins and outs of accurate Scriptural Interpretation? You attack bad theology by showing yourself approved to God by accurately handing the word of truth. 2Tim. 2:15. Point out the errors in the testimony of everyone singing off key. Paul says,

“ . . . preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.” 2Tim. 4:2.

“This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith.” Titus 1:13.

“These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.” Titus 2:15.
Did Sheepdog address any of my points in Post #18? No. Standing in unbelief and denial of these things serves nobody. Since our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17), when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand’ (2Thes. 2:2), then we view all of those ‘day of the Lord’ events from heaven (Eph. 2:6). When you realize that all of the events of Matthew 24:3-31 occur on the ‘day of the Lord’ (Matt. 24:29, Joel 2:31, Acts 2:20, 2Pet. 3:10), then you realize that they are all fulfilled in the future. When Christ tells the Twelve about all those stones being cast down (Matt. 24:1-29), He is describing the fulfillment of Zechariah 14:3-7:

“Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet [ Christ coming ] will stand on the Mount of Olives [ Matt. 24:30 ], which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives [ Christ sitting there teaching about these things ] will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south.”

You tell me if Christ is describing the fulfillment of this Zechariah Prophecy to the Twelve in Matthew 24, or describing the historical events of The Romans ransacking Jerusalem 70 AD.? Can any of you prove that these things in Zechariah took place 2000 years ago? NO YOU CANNOT, or the Mount of Olives would be split wide open to this day. And yet, you continue to believe that “already fulfilled in 70 AD” nonsense. Who is holding onto ‘bad theology?’ That answer is very obvious to many of us posting on this Board. Either refute this clear evidence of ‘the facts’ or begin making your retractions to this Preterism Interpretation of Matthew 24. Otherwise your accusations of hypocrisy above apply directly to you . . . We are waiting . . .

In Christ,

Terral

hold it right there, little mister.

don't assume you know what my stance is, and then ask me to refute yours.

~sarah

[cbro]

Undomiel, I understand your point, but let me give a bit of a counter. I have been medicated in the past for depression and I suffer from OCD (not bad enough in a sustained way for meds). The depression was very, very bad. I can sympathesize iwth what you say about a change of personality and helplessness to stop it. However, I do not expect that the rest of the world has to tone down jokes or jabs because of my unique circumstances. I don't get offended if in a debate, a very typical jab of "did you take your meds" is said. I don't get offended when someone says something is retarded because I have a retarded aunt. I don't get offended when someone says "only your mother would think that is a good article" when my mother is dead, which was a very painful event for me. In other words, I don't expect stilted, walking on eggshells for me. I am not saying you are doing that, but I am saying in the real world, jokes are made and we have to toughen up. I do think a lot of what is promoted by futurism is "tin foil" and yeah I will say it, because the sceptics are, and some of the stuff that is out there makes the rest of us look bad and makes Christianity a laughing stock. No "to the soul" insult was meant to anyone, and it is being overly sensitive to take it that way IMHO. You didn't criticize Terral (that I saw for his rampant insults on preterists - such as "pretenders" - don't you think it is potentially hurtful to be portrayed in that way by your standards? Of course! But you know what, I make like a duck and let it roll off of my back). Not trying to pick a fight with you, but suggessting you are getting overly indignant when it is not necessary. I too have struggled with mental disorders (depression and OCD), which is the only reason I thought I had a place to say something. I can understand. I understand the pain, and the shame - and have worked to dispel some o that shame for Christians because our bodies are fallen, and our minds will have blips that are quite right sometimes. Jesus will finally heal it all.

I am really sorry to hear what happened to you. If you would ever need anyone to share with, my PM box is open. I am glad you shared, and I will try to be sensitive to your experiences, but realize it is a gift to not take offense when none is intended. Very rarely is any true offense to the soul intended.

And if any offense was given in this post, I did not mean it, and free apologize for that which was not intended sister.

Could it be that talking about your problems is the cause of the misspelling I have not seen you do before?

[Terral]

Sarah:
Sarah >> hold it right there, little mister. don't assume you know what my stance is, and then ask me to refute yours.
Sheepdog’s doctrinal stance (Preterist) is well documented on this website, and we are currently engaged in debate on this ‘end time’ topic. By taking a good look around you will find yourself in the ‘Eschatology 201’ forum of this Board. Your statement to Sheepdog goes like this:
Sarah Original >> i'm not disagreeing with you [ Sheepdog ], because this is a serious issue, and i, too, am frustrated with the lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills.
What are the ‘doctrinal’ views of the Preterists you are ‘not disagreeing with’ in these discussions? Sheepdog’s Thesis statement (Topic Sentence) in the OP of this thread says, “How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? . . . hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull.” Who do you suppose he is talking about little missy? That’s right . . . Terral. Funny stuff right? :lol: Yea . . . right . . .

I am just one of the members of this Board who also seeks ‘doctrinal accountability’ from those calling themselves Preterists. There is a huge difference between pointing fingers at others over lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills and actually doing something about it. The argument presented to you is just one of ten offered to Preterists on this site on this thread: ( http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45320 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45320) ). If you are going to make such bold statements, and not disagreeing with my debating opponents, then you can tow the line for them also. I do not expect you to refute one statement from any of my posts, because they are doctrinally sound, and according to proven methods of Biblical interpretation. When you pin them down to being doctrinally accountable over what the Bible says (Zech. 14:3+4), they do this . . . :eek:

In Christ,

Terral

[furay]

who is the "one holy catholic and apostolic church" ? Sorry if I was ambiguous. I meant the Eastern Orthodox Christian Church.

honestly, if i knew who the "one holy catholic and apostolic church" was, and if they practiced appropriate theology and fellowship manners, i would join them in a heartbeat.
Its not a question of "if" they practice those things... because if they are indeed the Church that Christ founded (and they are - history speaks for itself) then the fruit will also speak for itself, which it does. All the best.

[Undomiel]

Undomiel, I understand your point, but let me give a bit of a counter. I have been medicated in the past for depression and I suffer from OCD (not bad enough in a sustained way for meds). The depression was very, very bad. I can sympathesize iwth what you say about a change of personality and helplessness to stop it. However, I do not expect that the rest of the world has to tone down jokes or jabs because of my unique circumstances. I don't get offended if in a debate, a very typical jab of "did you take your meds" is said. I don't get offended when someone says something is retarded because I have a retarded aunt. I don't get offended when someone says "only your mother would think that is a good article" when my mother is dead, which was a very painful event for me. In other words, I don't expect stilted, walking on eggshells for me. I am not saying you are doing that, but I am saying in the real world, jokes are made and we have to toughen up. I do think a lot of what is promoted by futurism is "tin foil" and yeah I will say it, because the sceptics are, and some of the stuff that is out there makes the rest of us look bad and makes Christianity a laughing stock. No "to the soul" insult was meant to anyone, and it is being overly sensitive to take it that way IMHO. You didn't criticize Terral (that I saw for his rampant insults on preterists - such as "pretenders" - don't you think it is potentially hurtful to be portrayed in that way by your standards? Of course! But you know what, I make like a duck and let it roll off of my back). Not trying to pick a fight with you, but suggessting you are getting overly indignant when it is not necessary. I too have struggled with mental disorders (depression and OCD), which is the only reason I thought I had a place to say something. I can understand. I understand the pain, and the shame - and have worked to dispel some o that shame for Christians because our bodies are fallen, and our minds will have blips that are quite right sometimes. Jesus will finally heal it all.

I am really sorry to hear what happened to you. If you would ever need anyone to share with, my PM box is open. I am glad you shared, and I will try to be sensitive to your experiences, but realize it is a gift to not take offense when none is intended. Very rarely is any true offense to the soul intended.

And if any offense was given in this post, I did not mean it, and free apologize for that which was not intended sister.

Thanks for the compassion. Encephalitis is a pretty bad ailment, but it didn't cloud my ability to think clearly or rationally after it was passed. Just the days leading up to it, were very bad.

My husband and I went to a restaurant one night and as we sat enjoying a meal, a mentally ill lady came in. She was also homeless and very hungry and also quite loud. She sat down in a booth and asked to place her order. The waitress refused to take her order. Nearby, a man in another booth by himself, started cursing at the homeless lady and complaining that she was in the restaurant. My husband called the waitress over and told her that he would pay for the homeless lady to have a dinner. The waitress looked as if she was going to refuse, but finally, begrudingly took the woman's order.

In the meantime, the restaurant owner called the police, while the lady sat there having her dinner. They arrested her as soon as she was done. Before they did, however, I asked them a few questions. I wondered if there was anything they could do to help her, but they said the only thing they could do was put her in jail overnight, make sure she was fed, given any necessary medical attention and bathed, and release her the next day. There were no state mental institutions, and no private mental institution would take her without insurance or at the very least, a home address. Since she was homeless, they had no where to send the bill. I felt so bad for her, that I went home and prayed for her and called every hospital in the area to find out what their position was on such things. She was out of luck - no hospitals wanted her, and she was so very much in need of medical, mental and emotional help.

A nearby catholic church had let her sleep in their shelter several times, but she was free to wander where she pleased and would get lost. One night, she got so lost, she froze to death. It was a very sad and revealing story about the way people handle mental illnesses. They ignore them or ridicule them or call them demon possession (even if it isn't demon possession, although that is likely to be the diagnosis in some cases). Jesus told us to be compassionate and loving, even to the least among us, so I think she qualified for some compassion but sure didn't see or understand much of it before she died.

Long story short, I'm just a bit too sensitive about this subject, primarily because I experienced it first hand, and also because I've seen the results of how our societies deal with it. People who are mentally ill are often treated as if they had leprosy, even if they aren't even remotely violent or are otherwise well-mannered.

As far as the futurists giving christianity a bad name because it sounds like a scifi - I'll remind you that many of those same who criticize it, believe in aliens, they just don't want to admit that the two seem to bear alot of similarity. They've rejected God, angels and so on, so anything they think IS real, like alien life, for example, they refuse to admit may actually be proof of the angels and demons and so on. Personally, that's what I think alien sightings are - angelic in origin.

[Undomiel]

Undomiel, i sympathize with the situation you found yourself in. I am genuinly glad that you eventually got the help you needed. I hope and pray others who suffer with mental illness will also get teh help they need.

that said, you have to understand, once such people start influencing others, they become a threat. a threat to the mental well being of others, as well as their spiritual well being.

i know this for a fact. i was heavily influenced by the alien conspiracy subculture. one time i had a run in with Mormons. my faith was weak, but fortunately i was suspicious and did my research. if i didn't find out what they taught, i could have seriously shipwrecked my faith on their account.

if you don't see how dire bad teaching really is, consider this: You know who the J's Witnesses are, right? (I don't like saying "Jehova's Witnesses"; i know that isn't really a Biblical name for God, but it's the principle.) Seem harmless, right, how they just go door to door? I'm sure they are nice, friendly people.

However, did you know that the Witnesses have a higher incidence than the rest of the population of such mental illnesses as Schizophrenia, Paranoid Schizophrenia, and Neurosis? see here: http://www.carm.org/jw/mental.htm

does that make you mad? It infurates me! Yet that is just mental health; why don't we get angry over what people like these do to other people's spiritual health?

knowing how a bad worldview can drasticly affect people (usually for the worse), it enrages me how badly the church is falling short on this. why aren't we addressing bad theology!? why aren't we inoculating the church with sound doctrinal teaching? why aren't we teaching laypeople how to rightly interpret the Bible, so they can deal appropriately with those who interpret the Bible all wrong?

for this reason i'm glad i've become so desensitized... few things actually ever make me angry, but i am prone to explode and lose control when i do get mad. cracking jokes like i do also acts as a sort of pressure valve, keeping me nice and cool.

this is why i marginalize people who spout nonsense, regardless of their mental makeup. i do hope those who need help get it, but the second these people are taken seriously, the well being of others (spiritually, if not mentally as well) is at stake. i think that the reason our society mock and ridicule the conspiracy mongerers in our society is because we know that some among us are very impressional, and we really don't want them being led into the dillusion these people share. so if we treat the paranoid with contempt, the reasoning is that those who we also can have influence on will listen to us and not them.

this is never personal for me. i never have any hostile feelings towards people individually: it is thoughts, beliefs, worldviews, and bad arguments that i wage war against. not for the sake of these people (though being ridiculed is a good motivator to rethink one's view), but for the sake of everyone in general.

I don't have any actual conspiracy theories. I just believe that people who experience UFOs or Aliens, are in fact, interfacing with either holy angels, fallen angels or demons. That's what I think the whole thing is about. I don't discount their experiences, although I'm sure not all of them are legitimate. I think the reason their stories are criticized by skeptics in our societies is for the same reason these same people criticize religion - if they can't see it, can't feel it, can't taste it, it ain't real (unless of course, it is accepted by atheistic science, like schrodinger's cat). This does nothing to explain the hundreds of thousands of personal religious experiences as well as the countless UFO sightings and alien visitation testimonies. People who have these experiences, may very well be having real spiritual and physical experiences, afterall, it isn't like similar stories aren't told in the bible.

To relieve your mind, I'm neither JW or Mormon (although I doubt that's going to make much of a difference in your personal view of me, which is currently rather negative).

[Sacrificial Ram]

However, did you know that the Witnesses have a higher incidence than the rest of the population of such mental illnesses as Schizophrenia, Paranoid Schizophrenia, and Neurosis? see here: http://www.carm.org/jw/mental.htm

I am not really sure about accepting statisitics about either the Mormons or the Jehovah Witnesses from that particualar site. I know I certianly wouldn't
trust them for their science either.

[Amazing Rando]

have you always felt this way...or just since reading the Left Behind books? :eh:

you have to admit, end-time literature in the bible is extremely hard to work through--especially revelation. it's not chronological but there does seem to be some specific order to the course of events; it's not literal, but it needn't necessarily all be figurative as a result; it's not very much like anything else we're familiar with in scripture, but it has a firm scriptural foundation (both OT and NT).

tell me this is an easy book to interpret?

now, i'm not justifying a quick or easy answer. but if it were really as simple as you made it sound in this initial post, then it probably wouldn't be such a debated issue in the church.

having said that...i agree with you.

peace,
~sarah

p.s. do you think they thought jesus was crazy when he explained the law, the prophets, and the poets? they probably thought he should interpret things more biblically, too...:wink:

Sarah- one of the keys that really opened my eyes to the scholarly understanding of biblical prophecy was from NT Wright- Check this thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43649&highlight=Wright+Rando) for a few quotes from a book of his I've typed out.

[Amazing Rando]

Could it be that talking about your problems is the cause of the misspelling I have not seen you do before?

You've never seen Dee Dee misspel anything? Hoo boy, just you stick around a little longer! :rofl:


:eek:

[Amazing Rando]

I don't have any actual conspiracy theories. I just believe that people who experience UFOs or Aliens, are in fact, interfacing with either holy angels, fallen angels or demons. That's what I think the whole thing is about.

Interesting theory! It's certainly a lot more plausible than believing that extraterrestrials really have traversed the lightyears just to visit little planet earth.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

You've never seen Dee Dee misspel anything? Hoo boy, just you stick around a little longer! :rofl:


:eek:
:offtopic: Rando misspelled misspell Anyone else find this slightly amusing?

(Note to Rando. This is not in the least a slight against you, as my spelling and typing are both horific.)

[Amazing Rando]

:offtopic: Rando misspelled misspell Anyone else find this slightly amusing?

(Note to Rando. This is not in the least a slight against you, as my spelling and typing are both horific.)

As has been shown by your horrific misspelling of "horrific!"

:rofl:

We both suck, brother! :wink:

[Tim C.]

How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible? How come we are so quick to use the Newspaper to interpret the Olivet Discourse or Revelation, when it is probably better to use the Old Testament? (since, as anyone who has actually read the OT should have noticed, Olivet and Revelation both use a ton of imagery from the OT.)

I usually suggest this site to conspiracy theorists in the Political Science forum, but i wonder if futurists need it too: http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/

hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skullFunny, I was speaking with a friend about this very thing yesterday. The question was: "Why is sneering at futurist premillennial brethren so common amongst preterists?" The answer is simple. It is because preterists have no solid Scriptural exposition to present against us, neither do they have any church history to present against us. So, the only thing left for them to do is to present character attacks against us and attempt to make us look like a "goofy clan." This deceptive and non-Christian tactic will steer many of the unstudied away from dispensationalism.

Oh well, at least you said "many" instead of "all."

-Tim

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

As has been shown by your horrific misspelling of "horrific!"

:rofl:

We both suck, brother! :wink:
I see you caught that intentional goof there. Yeah that's the ticket. It was intentional, and very clever I might add. Yeah, that's the ticket.


(And if you believe that I have some swamp, er I mean ocean front property in Tennesee to sell you.)

[Ted]

Semmie,

You said you have to admit, end-time literature in the bible is extremely hard to work through--especially revelation. it's not chronological but there does seem to be some specific order to the course of events; it's not literal, but it needn't necessarily all be figurative as a result; it's not very much like anything else we're familiar with in scripture, but it has a firm scriptural foundation (both OT and NT).

I fear I must disagree with you on this. While it is true that the literary form is not a familiar Western one, the apocalypse is a well-known Jewish form, and that knowledge should allow the student of scripture to begin to see the literary organization of the book. After that, Revelation is not “extremely difficult.”

Revelation may be tedious. In that, I refer to the amount of work involved. There are so many symbols that have to be tracked to their OT roots that a lot of time is required. Also, the entire book is centered in the tabernacle, so a thorough knowledge of it is required. But again, that’s not difficult, it’s just time-consuming. If you will forgive me, a single example will show how simple the task is, and how stupid I have found myself on occasion.

The fifth Trumpet has weird locusts. Most interpreters throw up their hands and simply call them “demonic.” But one day I said to myself, “You clown, you teach that the Bible interprets itself. Why don’t you practice what you preach?” So I started checking out the OT sources of the parts of these beasts. (Actually a couple are NT.)

The lion’s teeth are imagery depicting Satan’s fury. The “hair like a woman’s hair” turned out to be a parody of Nazirite hair. “Something like crowns (stephanoi)” turned out to be a parody of the victor’s crown promised to overcomers. They are made of “something like gold,” or fool’s gold. You get the picture. Every part of the locust is an image of Satan-inspired false piety.

Compare this to LaHaye and Jenkins’ book “Revelation.” This “technical” work spends 42 pages on the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls, and doesn’t use a single OT text to help us understand them. That’s tinfoil exegesis. And they tuned into the wrong celestial radio station.

Terral,

You said Even when Christ taught in parables, those ‘images’ were representative of something.
For once, I agree with you. For the rest of the onlookers, this illustrates the difference between “literal” and “literalism.” Literalism requires that the bare words, stripped of their sources, be fulfilled exactly. Thus, we often hear the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls declared to be 21 successive plagues. That’s nonsense. But they still have a “literal” meaning. That is, they have an application within the real world we inhabit. If we are careful to avoid calling a figurative or symbolic interpretation “spiritualizing,” we have an opportunity to understand the “literal” meaning behind the symbols.

Ted

[Sheepdog]

maybe it's too complicated. maybe the "church" is so divided theologically, that it's virtually impossible to address "bad theology," except for on an individual level. i'm not disagreeing with you, because this is a serious issue, and i, too, am frustrated with the lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills. i guess i'm just wondering...how do you undo years of bad theology in the corporate body of christ? i'm not sure you can.

and this has been a problem since the beginning of the church. i'm always amazed to read in 2 Peter 2, where pete speaks of false teachers being "with" us and communing with us.

tickling ears, remember?

true... not sure if it was as widespread as it is today (actually it could have been though... didn't Paul mention that a lot of "believers" turned their backs on him and the Gospel?).

to start, we need to topple the idol of "it's true to me because it is my personal interpretation." people bad mouth Tradition, but i don't know which is worse, that or novelty.

another good starting point is teaching how to best exegete Scripture. and they do this in Seminaries... so at least we has some sort of system to draw from. understanding betrays me why we aren't teaching this to lay people as well as the "heart" stuff.

beyond that i don't know. i'd rather be a realist than a cynic (a realist is a cynic who actually tries to fix what he complains about). but what can i do?

[Sheepdog]

Sheepdog,

You ask,"why aren't we addressing bad theology!?"

That is a question that I keep asking the preterists.They refuse to use their brains and instead they continue to "pretend" that certain verses are not in the Scriptures.

Ok, who let Mickey out of his cell?

Your personal info above indicates a whopping 1 per day posting average. How about we hit the Board and begin addressing the topics of debate while showing folks the ins and outs of accurate Scriptural Interpretation?

i've done this a-plenty, and i will do it more.

You attack bad theology by showing yourself approved to God by accurately handing the word of truth. 2Tim. 2:15. Point out the errors in the testimony of everyone singing off key. Paul says,

Paul's Commands To "Preach The Word"

“ . . . preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.” 2Tim. 4:2.

“This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith.” Titus 1:13.

“These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.” Titus 2:15.



Did Sheepdog address any of my points in Post #18? No.

of course not. because it is the same old goofiness.

do i have to go around refuting any bum who comes up with an interpretation of the Bible? I know i don't have the time, but others might. I know your tactics, and i know how you interpret the Bible, that's why i don't take you seriously... why should I, lest a weaker Christian follow's my example and takes you seriously as well?

I am not really sure about accepting statisitics about either the Mormons or the Jehovah Witnesses from that particualar site. I know I certianly wouldn't
trust them for their science either.

aren't you a nontheist of some sort? did you ask permission before posting in this forum?

yeah yeah yeah... everyone knows Matt Slick is the epitome of evil. :ahem: how about this: instead of dismissing someone with an ad hom, how about addressing the reported material? Surely the editors of the British Journal of Psychiatry don't know what they are doing. (i say that with a lot of sarcasm, in case you don't detect it.)

[Sheepdog]

I don't have any actual conspiracy theories.

Undomiel, i was not indicting you or anything. please understand, i was just giving my reasons why i may seem "insensitive" at times.

I just believe that people who experience UFOs or Aliens, are in fact, interfacing with either holy angels, fallen angels or demons. That's what I think the whole thing is about. I don't discount their experiences, although I'm sure not all of them are legitimate. I think the reason their stories are criticized by skeptics in our societies is for the same reason these same people criticize religion - if they can't see it, can't feel it, can't taste it, it ain't real (unless of course, it is accepted by atheistic science, like schrodinger's cat). This does nothing to explain the hundreds of thousands of personal religious experiences as well as the countless UFO sightings and alien visitation testimonies. People who have these experiences, may very well be having real spiritual and physical experiences, afterall, it isn't like similar stories aren't told in the bible.

granted, but it isn't relavant to what i'm trying to say. whether ET exists or not, his evangelists are competing against us for the hearts and souls of people.

To relieve your mind, I'm neither JW or Mormon (although I doubt that's going to make much of a difference in your personal view of me, which is currently rather negative).

please don't think that... it seems you didn't get my point. these people, how sad it is they fall into this stuff, are no less a threat to the work of the Kingdom than the "most reasonable" atheists. (... which are about as existant as invisible pink unicorns :wink:). that is all i am trying to say.

[Sheepdog]

[size=2]Funny, I was speaking with a friend about this very thing yesterday. The question was: "Why is sneering at futurist premillennial brethren so common amongst preterists?"

man, if this is what it takes to become the most hated person in this forum i'll have to post more threads like this! :lmbo:

So, the only thing left for them to do is to present character attacks against us and attempt to make us look like a "goofy clan." This deceptive and non-Christian tactic will steer many of the unstudied away from dispensationalism.

well, we have that and sound Bible exegesis, history a la Josephus and other historians of the day. etc.

Oh well, at least you said "many" instead of "all."

yeah, because i don't want to disrespect the sensible dispensationalists, and other futurists, that are made to look bad by the antics of the goofballs here.

[Sheepdog]

Semmie,

You said

I fear I must disagree with you on this. While it is true that the literary form is not a familiar Western one, the apocalypse is a well-known Jewish form, and that knowledge should allow the student of scripture to begin to see the literary organization of the book. After that, Revelation is not “extremely difficult.”

Revelation may be tedious. In that, I refer to the amount of work involved. There are so many symbols that have to be tracked to their OT roots that a lot of time is required. Also, the entire book is centered in the tabernacle, so a thorough knowledge of it is required. But again, that’s not difficult, it’s just time-consuming. If you will forgive me, a single example will show how simple the task is, and how stupid I have found myself on occasion.

The fifth Trumpet has weird locusts. Most interpreters throw up their hands and simply call them “demonic.” But one day I said to myself, “You clown, you teach that the Bible interprets itself. Why don’t you practice what you preach?” So I started checking out the OT sources of the parts of these beasts. (Actually a couple are NT.)

The lion’s teeth are imagery depicting Satan’s fury. The “hair like a woman’s hair” turned out to be a parody of Nazirite hair. “Something like crowns (stephanoi)” turned out to be a parody of the victor’s crown promised to overcomers. They are made of “something like gold,” or fool’s gold. You get the picture. Every part of the locust is an image of Satan-inspired false piety.

Compare this to LaHaye and Jenkins’ book “Revelation.” This “technical” work spends 42 pages on the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls, and doesn’t use a single OT text to help us understand them. That’s tinfoil exegesis. And they tuned into the wrong celestial radio station.

if i remember right i don't agree with your view, but the above is actually pretty good. well done.

You said
For once, I agree with you. For the rest of the onlookers, this illustrates the difference between “literal” and “literalism.” Literalism requires that the bare words, stripped of their sources, be fulfilled exactly. Thus, we often hear the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls declared to be 21 successive plagues. That’s nonsense. But they still have a “literal” meaning. That is, they have an application within the real world we inhabit. If we are careful to avoid calling a figurative or symbolic interpretation “spiritualizing,” we have an opportunity to understand the “literal” meaning behind the symbols.


true (for the record i don't disagree... i just disagree with what literal events certain futurists try to correspond to the symbolism).

[semmie]

Terral,

methinks your feet are too big for your shoes. :eh:

first, i am familiar with mr. diggity-dog, and i know what room we're in, and i know what i said in response to dig's OP. i did not say that i agreed with the Preterist stance. what i did not disagree with him about was the lack of interpretational accountability. i am very decidedly not a preterist.

second, i'm curious: what is your purpose in asking anyone who disagrees with you to give specific objections and/or refutations? if i thought you were honestly interested in the discussion, i'd probably entertain your request. but i think you have some other reason.

third, you still have no idea what my stance is--except i've now revealed to you that i'm not a preterist.

fourth, i agree with mr. diggity that many of the futurist views are whacky and have no scriptural basis. whether or not those views belong to you doesn't really matter to me. when sheepy said "many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories," i had no idea that he was making some personal statement about you. he certainly gave no indication of it. you must read well between lines...

and finally, my observation is that the preterists do not address your concerns for various reasons--not because they have no response, and certainly not because they have no reason for what they believe.

and who said anything about microchips anyway?

because grace is enough,
~sarah

[semmie]

Semmie,

I fear I must disagree with you on this. While it is true that the literary form is not a familiar Western one, the apocalypse is a well-known Jewish form, and that knowledge should allow the student of scripture to begin to see the literary organization of the book. After that, Revelation is not “extremely difficult.”

Revelation may be tedious. In that, I refer to the amount of work involved. There are so many symbols that have to be tracked to their OT roots that a lot of time is required. Also, the entire book is centered in the tabernacle, so a thorough knowledge of it is required. But again, that’s not difficult, it’s just time-consuming. If you will forgive me, a single example will show how simple the task is, and how stupid I have found myself on occasion.

The fifth Trumpet has weird locusts. Most interpreters throw up their hands and simply call them “demonic.” But one day I said to myself, “You clown, you teach that the Bible interprets itself. Why don’t you practice what you preach?” So I started checking out the OT sources of the parts of these beasts. (Actually a couple are NT.)

The lion’s teeth are imagery depicting Satan’s fury. The “hair like a woman’s hair” turned out to be a parody of Nazirite hair. “Something like crowns (stephanoi)” turned out to be a parody of the victor’s crown promised to overcomers. They are made of “something like gold,” or fool’s gold. You get the picture. Every part of the locust is an image of Satan-inspired false piety.

Compare this to LaHaye and Jenkins’ book “Revelation.” This “technical” work spends 42 pages on the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls, and doesn’t use a single OT text to help us understand them. That’s tinfoil exegesis. And they tuned into the wrong celestial radio station.
hi ted,

i think i missed the part where you disagreed with me. it sounded more to me like you explained the reason i find this particular type of interpretation so difficult.

i definitely agree with you regarding the apocolyptic writing, symbolism/imagery, and how tedious/time-consuming it can be. still, i would call it difficult. how much of it is symbolic? how much of it is literal? is it written chronologically, or is there some other order to the events? maybe you could answer these questions because you are familiar with this literary style. i, however, know only what i've encountered in the bible of this style. i admit freely that i am not comfortable with the "literary organization" of the book of revelation in particular.

it's not that i feel these things are incomprehensible or too much for us to work through. but i do feel it is a lot to work through, and a lot of different pieces to place together, and a lot of different levels of piecing things together...

again, maybe you find this a simple task. i find it incredibly difficult...and i love it.

thanks for disagreeing.

be blessed,
~sarah

[Tim C.]

me: Funny, I was speaking with a friend about this very thing yesterday. The question was: "Why is sneering at futurist premillennial brethren so common amongst preterists?"

Sheepdog: man, if this is what it takes to become the most hated person in this forum i'll have to post more threads like this!You're not the "most hated" person in this forum. I actually appreciate preterists who spout the kind of garbage found in your original post. It demonstrates to lurkers that preterist apologists find the need to caricature futurists, and make them into a "goofy clan." Why the need for this? The answer is not hard to find. It is because these people have no solid Scirptural exposition or historical evidence to present. So they turn to this deceptive and non-Christian tactic as a "last resort."

My "most hated" poster would be a preterist who sits down in a calm manner and presents solid Scriptural exposition and historical evidences which I cannot answer. Of course, such a thing does not exist.

well, we have that and sound Bible exegesisNope. Preterists follow a singular line of evidence - the time texts - to arrive at ALL of their conclusions. That, friend, is not what we call "solid Scriptural exposition." Rather, it is called "wresting the Scriptures."

history a la Josephus and other historians of the day. etc.Josephus doesn't help preterism in the slightest bit. And, of course, since the Christian church of the first three centuries knew NOTHING of a great tribulation fulfilled, a Lord returned, a kingdom established, and etc., then your strange view is immediately called into question. Preterists really do have the strangest view out there. They seem to think all these things were fulfilled without the ancient church noticing it! Now there is a "conspiracy theory" fer ya.

yeah, because i don't want to disrespect the sensible dispensationalists, and other futurists, that are made to look bad by the antics of the goofballs here.What ever happened to sitting down in a calm manner and presenting solid Scriptural exposition and/or solid historical evidence? What is the purpose of these "wacko tin hat" comments? And, sir, I think you were not careful at all to say in your original comment that you are addressing only a few details of futurism which not all futurists agree upon. I think you were sneering at our position in general. I see it every day from preterists, and your original post was a perfect example of it.

-Tim

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

[
QUOTE=Tim C.]

Nope. Preterists follow a singular line of evidence - the time texts - to arrive at ALL of their conclusions. That, friend, is not what we call "solid Scriptural exposition." Rather, it is called "wresting the Scriptures."



-Tim



[/QUOTE]



Sorry I couldn’t let this one go. Here is Tim C.'s above paragraphs with the appropriate blanks filled in.



Nope. Preterists follow a singular line of evidence - the time texts [that tell when the prophecies should be fulfilled] - to arrive at ALL of their conclusions [about when the prophecies should be fulfilled]. That, friend, is not what we call "solid Scriptural exposition." Rather, it is called "wresting the Scriptures."



What else should we use to determine the timing of prophecy, the genealogies?



The way you say it, you would think it was a bad thing to use time text to actually determine time.



What's next? Will it soon be bad exegesis to use the Gospels, to explain Jesus' earthly ministry?

[Sheepdog]

first, i am familiar with mr. diggity-dog, and i know what room we're in, and i know what i said in response to dig's OP. i did not say that i agreed with the Preterist stance. what i did not disagree with him about was the lack of interpretational accountability. i am very decidedly not a preterist.


i do have to wonder though, if Terral had a problem comprehending that, how well can he actually comprehend Scripture?

(Sorry Semmie, i don't mean to exploit your excellent post for my purposes, but i felt it had to be asked.)

[Terral]

Hi Semmie:
Semmie >> first, i am familiar with mr. diggity-dog, and i know what room we're in, and i know what i said in response to dig's OP. i did not say that i agreed with the Preterist stance. what i did not disagree with him about was the lack of interpretational accountability. i am very decidedly not a preterist.
Please accept my apologies for perhaps misunderstanding the meaning of your original reply to Sheep, and for asserting that you were a Preterist; and for having very large feet. :wink:
Semmie >> second, i'm curious: what is your purpose in asking anyone who disagrees with you to give specific objections and/or refutations? if i thought you were honestly interested in the discussion, i'd probably entertain your request. but i think you have some other reason.
My longer reply to Sheepdog demonstrating my interpretation skills and willingness to be doctrinally accountable is (#18) on this thread. Sheep’s reply to me is (#19), where his entire post says:
Sheepdog (Post #19) >> “ah yes. we could also look up the websites that have UNREFUTABLE PROOF of the existance of space aliens. you are doing exactly as i am talking about. using news (in this case, internet websites, which are often seen as the least reliable sources) to interpret the Bible. I think the Dapper would look best on you. what does everyone* else think?
Who among everyone* on this board perks up to give Sheep’s illusion the appearance of credibility? This appears in post (#20) from you.
Semmie in Post (#20) >> i'm not disagreeing with you, because this is a serious issue, and i, too, am frustrated with the lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills. i guess i'm just wondering...how do you undo years of bad theology in the corporate body of christ? i'm not sure you can.
You can see from reading Sheep’s post that he quoted “Originally quoted by Terral.” If you have been paying attention, then you know Sheep started this thread over my statements regarding the ‘mark of the beast’ and ‘micro technology.’ Your statements about ‘doctrinal accountability’ and ‘bad theology’ caught my attention, because you are found standing directly in the line of fire between Sheep and Terral over the very issue (bad theology), which is the topic of this discussion! Therefore, either your statements are being made in complete ignorance of what is going around you, or you are standing with Sheepdog and taking jabs at me. Since “I’m not disagreeing with you” (Sheepdog), then the person you are accusing of ‘lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills’ and ‘bad theology,’ is the person on the other side of this debate from Sheepdog. Therefore, you were being asked in Post #23 to display any sign of your own ‘doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills,’ by explaining to everyone how you interpret a major point of contention between Sheepdog and Terral. Which side of this discussion is guilty of your charge of having a ‘bad theology?’ Or did you feel justified in laying these claims without any accountability at all? I have no problem over the claims of anything you describe above, but the person making them has some explaining to do. Dee Dee starts threads over untrue comments that she perceived I said (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45284 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45284) ). All I am doing here is asking for you to be accountable for statements you are making in this thread.
Semmie >> third, you still have no idea what my stance is--except i've now revealed to you that i'm not a preterist.
The questions posed to you have an answer if one is willing to be doctrinally accountable and has adequate interpreting skills. If you are blowing smoke then we shall continue seeing this song and dance routine . . .
Semmie > > fourth, i agree with mr. diggity that many of the futurist views are whacky and have no scriptural basis. whether or not those views belong to you doesn't really matter to me.
That is what you call ‘lack of accountability’ we are talking about. Christ is describing events relating to the ‘end of the age,’ that shall take place at least 1000 years in our future. We know that because Christ is describing ‘day of the Lord’ events taking place in Matthew 24 (Luke 21, etc.). Matt. 24:29 (Joel 2:28-32, Acts 2:17-21). Paul says that our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17) when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand.’ 2Thes. 2:2. We are ‘gathered’ when that ‘day of the Lord’ BEGINS. Since the ‘day of the Lord’ (2Pet. 3:10) is as “a thousand years” (2Pet. 3:8, Rev. 20:5), then we are taken 1000 years, before the ‘end time’ (end of the age; Matt. 24:3-31) events of the same ‘day of the Lord.’ Since we have the microchip and satellite technology to enforce the ‘mark of the beast’ (Rev. 13) prophecies even now, then we can speculate that this same technology will be much more advanced by the ‘end of the age.’ Since Christ is describing events that are still in our future, we cannot limit the scope of the fulfillment to the technology of 2000 years ago when Scripture was written. That would be showing a definite “lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills,” according to one’s “bad theology.” Therefore, you can Pretend that my charge of hypocrisy has no basis whatsoever to your series of posts on this thread all you like, but my statements are supported by Scripture and an interpretation and explanation, according to a sound theology.
Semmie >> when sheepy said "many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories," i had no idea that he was making some personal statement about you. he certainly gave no indication of it. you must read well between lines...
No. I have been debating with Sheepdog on these topics for the past month or so. Sheep knows what all this means . . .
Semmie >> and finally, my observation is that the preterists do not address your concerns for various reasons--not because they have no response, and certainly not because they have no reason for what they believe.
Heh. Again, the ‘doctrinal accountability’ and ‘bad theology’ issue raises her ugly heads. What you have just proven is that being blinded by false doctrine in no way prepares anyone to be ‘doctrinally accountable’ for what they have been led to believe. Those who demand doctrinal accountability for developing their own sound theology will refuse to be lead around by the nose, according to such lame excuses, shell game tactics and convoluted reasoning I see from the Preterists on this Board. This place is a propaganda machine for Preterists to paste their misinformation and delude others, while taking no responsibility whatsoever to defend the things about which they make bold assertions.
Semmie >> and who said anything about microchips anyway?
Do you read the OP’s for the threads in which you come and out make such bold statements about doctrinal accountability and accuse others of having a bad theology?
Sheepdog in OP >> hey, maybe it will block the cosmic rays the Beast will use to communicate with the microchip implanted in your skull
Dee Dee Warren (with avatar) >> Dee Dee Warren (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/member.php?u=13) Did you say MICROCHIP?!?!
Sheepdog was writing on this Dee Dee Warren thread (Does the Mark of the Beast require microchip technology? ) (Post #47) to me, and says this: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44727&page=3 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44727&page=3) (Jan. 6th at 6:36 PM)
Sheepdog >> ". . . now all you need are black helicopters and alien death rays . . . some of the stuff i read from some futurists make me wonder if they are getting their prophecy from Ray Bradbury rather than the Bible."
Funny stuff right? Yea, they all laugh it up . . . Did you note that time carefully? (Jan. 6th at 6:36 PM). And he drafted his thesis statement for this OP and posted on (Jan. 7th at 6:26 PM). Did you note the ‘microchip’ carryover from the previous thread that died on (Jan. 7th at 5:51 PM)? My point is that you should not be standing in the middle of a discussion without even knowing what is going on around you and preach about ‘doctrinal credibility’ and ‘interpretation skills’ over the ‘bad theology’ of others without being accountable for your own statements . . . first. If you had read the other thread, then you would see that Dee Dee’s topic sentence on the Microchip business says this: “In another thread Terral said with regards to the Mark of the Beast:,” which is still another carryover from a previous thread . . . Getting the picture?
Semmie >> because grace is enough,
What we were witnessing is attempted character assassination by the main cast of this Board in a series of threads intended to make me look like a goofball. You coming along and ‘not disagreeing’ with them at the right time gave their charade a greater appearance of credibility. If grace is enough, then all of that doctrinal accountability hype does not mean anything . . . You really need to make up my mind . . .

In Christ,

Terral

[Sheepdog]

[size=2]You're not the "most hated" person in this forum.

i was actually being hyperbolic, actually. don't feel bad, i should have marked that statement in a way that made it clear it was kind of tongue-and-cheek

I actually appreciate preterists who spout the kind of garbage found in your original post. It demonstrates to lurkers that preterist apologists find the need to caricature futurists, and make them into a "goofy clan." Why the need for this?

because a significant proportion of them are a goofy clan of sorts. you may go snipe hunting for deeper motives, but as for me, i simply call it as i see it.

The answer is not hard to find. It is because these people have no solid Scirptural exposition or historical evidence to present. So they turn to this deceptive and non-Christian tactic as a "last resort."

My "most hated" poster would be a preterist who sits down in a calm manner and presents solid Scriptural exposition and historical evidences which I cannot answer. Of course, such a thing does not exist.

of course. because everytime good Preterist expositors come up with something, you have to duck and dodge and reassert your refuted point. i've seen this before with you.

Nope. Preterists follow a singular line of evidence - the time texts - to arrive at ALL of their conclusions. That, friend, is not what we call "solid Scriptural exposition." Rather, it is called "wresting the Scriptures."

that, friend, is not the only line of evidence. you should know this, but you seem to ignore it.

Josephus doesn't help preterism in the slightest bit. And, of course, since the Christian church of the first three centuries knew NOTHING of a great tribulation fulfilled, a Lord returned, a kingdom established, and etc., then your strange view is immediately called into question. Preterists really do have the strangest view out there. They seem to think all these things were fulfilled without the ancient church noticing it! Now there is a "conspiracy theory" fer ya.

strange, compared to leaders of One World Governments putting micrchips in people's arms? really? :huh:

and i know it has been shown that where some (at least one that i can remember off hand) that were shown to be aware that the Olivet Discourse was arleady fulfilled. but keep spouting your willful ignorance... keep saying it until you convince yourself and others it is true. that's how lies are spread, isn't it?

What ever happened to sitting down in a calm manner and presenting solid Scriptural exposition and/or solid historical evidence?

exactly! that is what i'm wondering. that's why posted this thread.

What is the purpose of these "wacko tin hat" comments?

it is part of my style to deal with arguments as appropriate. those that demand respect get my serious consideration and answer; those that demand only contempt only get such.

And, sir, I think you were not careful at all to say in your original comment that you are addressing only a few details of futurism which not all futurists agree upon. I think you were sneering at our position in general. I see it every day from preterists, and your original post was a perfect example of it.

ah. thank your for telling me what i was actually up to. i didn't even know that, goober! :bonk:

[Terral]

Semmie:
Originally Posted by semmie >> first, i am familiar with mr. diggity-dog, and i know what room we're in, and i know what i said in response to dig's OP. i did not say that i agreed with the Preterist stance. what i did not disagree with him about was the lack of interpretational accountability. i am very decidedly not a preterist.

Sheepdog >> I do have to wonder though, if Terral had a problem comprehending that, how well can he actually comprehend Scripture? (Sorry Semmie, i don't mean to exploit your excellent post for my purposes, but i felt it had to be asked.)
The operative term here is 'exploit.' Are you beginning to catch on to this ploy? His space alien microchip lingo in the OP is a trolling tool to hook futurists into posting their views, so he can use his peanut gallery side show routine on other members and on his own thread. What is the topic sentence describing his original hypothesis from his OP again? “Sheep >> How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible?”

He is running diversion for the Preterists here looking for every opportunity to discredit anyone with a futurist interpretation for the ‘day of the Lord’ and ‘end of the age’ prophecies of Scripture. You are his blow up doll being used to take jabs at me. Are we having fun yet? They are not here to defend their man-made theology or their concocted interpretations. They are here to paste propaganda and convince the untaught and unstable to follow in their charade. My post on “Ten Questions For Preterists” they want to shut down, and no monkey business is going on over there, like the garbage we are seeing here. My “Preterist Debate Thread – Questions and Answers” * http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45270 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45270) ) has zero replies, because none of them can reconcile Zechariah 14 into their misinterpretation. This is a form of spiritual wickedness (2Thes. 2:10-12) in the eyes of the Lord. If you cannot see what they are up to, then you are not paying any attention whatsoever.

In Christ,

Terral

[Tim C.]

me: You're not the "most hated" person in this forum.

Sheepdog: i was actually being hyperbolic, actually.Sir, don't give me your pseudo-intellectual bullsh_t as an excuse for the deceptive and non-Christian tactic employed in your original post.

Sheepdog: don't feel bad, i should have marked that statement in a way that made it clear it was kind of tongue-and-cheekRight. You "forgot" to earmark it. And in so doing, you just so happened to present a generalized and sensationalized criticism which will lead the unstudied into the idea that futurists are a "goofy clan." Yeah, but you were not really trying to do that. Right. You expect me to believe that?

me: I actually appreciate preterists who spout the kind of garbage found in your original post. It demonstrates to lurkers that preterist apologists find the need to caricature futurists, and make them into a "goofy clan." Why the need for this?

Sheepdog: because a significant proportion of them are a goofy clan of sorts. you may go snipe hunting for deeper motives, but as for me, i simply call it as i see it.A significant proportion of preterists hold wacky and unscriptural views. Shall we start generalizing?

me: The answer is not hard to find. It is because these people have no solid Scirptural exposition or historical evidence to present. So they turn to this deceptive and non-Christian tactic as a "last resort."

My "most hated" poster would be a preterist who sits down in a calm manner and presents solid Scriptural exposition and historical evidences which I cannot answer. Of course, such a thing does not exist.

Sheepdog: of course. because everytime good Preterist expositors come up with something, you have to duck and dodge and reassert your refuted point. i've seen this before with you.Where are the early Christians who thought those things had been fulfilled, Sheepdog?

Answer: None of the early Christians thought those things had been fulfilled.

Now how is it that "preterism" teaches all those things had been fulfilled, while none of the early Christians thought they had been fulfilled?

Preterism needs to assume that the ancient church consisted of a bunch of stupid morons who did not realize that the great tribulation, return of the Lord, establishing of the kingdom, and etc., had already been fulfilled.

The early church allegedly "didn't notice" these fulfillments?

I smell a "conspiracy theory"!

me: Nope. Preterists follow a singular line of evidence - the time texts - to arrive at ALL of their conclusions. That, friend, is not what we call "solid Scriptural exposition." Rather, it is called "wresting the Scriptures."

Sheepdog: that, friend, is not the only line of evidence. you should know this, but you seem to ignore it.That IS the only line of evidence. Whenever confronted with a problem, the preterist merely suggests: "Since 'this generation' saw the fulfillment, then (fill in the blank ________) must have been fulfilled at AD 70."

This is not solid Scriptural exposition, Sheepdog. It is what we call "wresting the Scriptures."

me: Josephus doesn't help preterism in the slightest bit. And, of course, since the Christian church of the first three centuries knew NOTHING of a great tribulation fulfilled, a Lord returned, a kingdom established, and etc., then your strange view is immediately called into question. Preterists really do have the strangest view out there. They seem to think all these things were fulfilled without the ancient church noticing it! Now there is a "conspiracy theory" fer ya.

Sheepdog: strange, compared to leaders of One World Governments putting micrchips in people's arms? really?Care to answer the above devastating blow to preterism, Sheepdog?

Sheepdog: and i know it has been shown that where some (at least one that i can remember off hand) that were shown to be aware that the Olivet Discourse was arleady fulfilled.Cite the author and book and chapter, Sheepdog.

Sheepdog: but keep spouting your willful ignorance...Willful ignorance?

I'll bet the above "quote" you have in mind comes from a fourth century amillennialist apostate. How much you wanna bet that my "willful ignorance" is already aware of the twisting of history you are about to present?

keep saying it until you convince yourself and others it is true. that's how lies are spread, isn't it?Right. If we keep making futurist premillennialists into a "goofy clan," then perhaps we can mislead the unstudied into a denial of dispensational theology.

me: What ever happened to sitting down in a calm manner and presenting solid Scriptural exposition and/or solid historical evidence?

Sheepdog: exactly! that is what i'm wondering. that's why posted this thread.Ah, I guess thats why you posted a caricature of futurist premillennialism which was completely void of any Scriptural exposition or church history. Yeah, thats right.

me: What is the purpose of these "wacko tin hat" comments?

Sheepdog: it is part of my style to deal with arguments as appropriate. those that demand respect get my serious consideration and answer; those that demand only contempt only get such.Ah, well since futurist premillennialism is drawn straight from Scripture and is verified by the testimony of the ancient church, then I guess we demand your attention.

me: And, sir, I think you were not careful at all to say in your original comment that you are addressing only a few details of futurism which not all futurists agree upon. I think you were sneering at our position in general. I see it every day from preterists, and your original post was a perfect example of it.

Sheepdog: ah. thank your for telling me what i was actually up to. i didn't even know that, goober!Your original post crap is the same crap I've seen hundreds of times before, Sheepdog. If you people put the same amount of effort into Scriptural exposition as you did to character assasination and caricature, then perhaps we would actually have some evidence/substance to talk about?

-Tim

[Undomiel]

Sheepdog,

In response to your email: No sweat. I would be in error to claim I don't make snap judgements based on lack of understanding.

Back on topic: I do think the fact much of what is stated in the bible in regards to the whereabouts and activity of angelic beings, God, Jesus and so on, supports my theory about aliens and UFOs being manifestations of a spiritual and physical nature.

[semmie]

Hi Semmie:

Please accept my apologies for perhaps misunderstanding the meaning of your original reply to Sheep, and for asserting that you were a Preterist; and for having very large feet. :wink:

My longer reply to Sheepdog demonstrating my interpretation skills and willingness to be doctrinally accountable is (#18) on this thread. Sheep’s reply to me is (#19), where his entire post says:

Who among everyone* on this board perks up to give Sheep’s illusion the appearance of credibility? This appears in post (#20) from you.

You can see from reading Sheep’s post that he quoted “Originally quoted by Terral.” If you have been paying attention, then you know Sheep started this thread over my statements regarding the ‘mark of the beast’ and ‘micro technology.’ Your statements about ‘doctrinal accountability’ and ‘bad theology’ caught my attention, because you are found standing directly in the line of fire between Sheep and Terral over the very issue (bad theology), which is the topic of this discussion! Therefore, either your statements are being made in complete ignorance of what is going around you, or you are standing with Sheepdog and taking jabs at me. Since “I’m not disagreeing with you” (Sheepdog), then the person you are accusing of ‘lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills’ and ‘bad theology,’ is the person on the other side of this debate from Sheepdog. Therefore, you were being asked in Post #23 to display any sign of your own ‘doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills,’ by explaining to everyone how you interpret a major point of contention between Sheepdog and Terral. Which side of this discussion is guilty of your charge of having a ‘bad theology?’ Or did you feel justified in laying these claims without any accountability at all? I have no problem over the claims of anything you describe above, but the person making them has some explaining to do. Dee Dee starts threads over untrue comments that she perceived I said (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45284 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45284) ). All I am doing here is asking for you to be accountable for statements you are making in this thread.

The questions posed to you have an answer if one is willing to be doctrinally accountable and has adequate interpreting skills. If you are blowing smoke then we shall continue seeing this song and dance routine . . .

That is what you call ‘lack of accountability’ we are talking about. Christ is describing events relating to the ‘end of the age,’ that shall take place at least 1000 years in our future. We know that because Christ is describing ‘day of the Lord’ events taking place in Matthew 24 (Luke 21, etc.). Matt. 24:29 (Joel 2:28-32, Acts 2:17-21). Paul says that our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17) when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand.’ 2Thes. 2:2. We are ‘gathered’ when that ‘day of the Lord’ BEGINS. Since the ‘day of the Lord’ (2Pet. 3:10) is as “a thousand years” (2Pet. 3:8, Rev. 20:5), then we are taken 1000 years, before the ‘end time’ (end of the age; Matt. 24:3-31) events of the same ‘day of the Lord.’ Since we have the microchip and satellite technology to enforce the ‘mark of the beast’ (Rev. 13) prophecies even now, then we can speculate that this same technology will be much more advanced by the ‘end of the age.’ Since Christ is describing events that are still in our future, we cannot limit the scope of the fulfillment to the technology of 2000 years ago when Scripture was written. That would be showing a definite “lack of doctrinal accountability and interpretation skills,” according to one’s “bad theology.” Therefore, you can Pretend that my charge of hypocrisy has no basis whatsoever to your series of posts on this thread all you like, but my statements are supported by Scripture and an interpretation and explanation, according to a sound theology.

No. I have been debating with Sheepdog on these topics for the past month or so. Sheep knows what all this means . . .

Heh. Again, the ‘doctrinal accountability’ and ‘bad theology’ issue raises her ugly heads. What you have just proven is that being blinded by false doctrine in no way prepares anyone to be ‘doctrinally accountable’ for what they have been led to believe. Those who demand doctrinal accountability for developing their own sound theology will refuse to be lead around by the nose, according to such lame excuses, shell game tactics and convoluted reasoning I see from the Preterists on this Board. This place is a propaganda machine for Preterists to paste their misinformation and delude others, while taking no responsibility whatsoever to defend the things about which they make bold assertions.

Do you read the OP’s for the threads in which you come and out make such bold statements about doctrinal accountability and accuse others of having a bad theology?


Sheepdog was writing on this Dee Dee Warren thread (Does the Mark of the Beast require microchip technology? ) (Post #47) to me, and says this: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44727&page=3 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44727&page=3) (Jan. 6th at 6:36 PM)

Funny stuff right? Yea, they all laugh it up . . . Did you note that time carefully? (Jan. 6th at 6:36 PM). And he drafted his thesis statement for this OP and posted on (Jan. 7th at 6:26 PM). Did you note the ‘microchip’ carryover from the previous thread that died on (Jan. 7th at 5:51 PM)? My point is that you should not be standing in the middle of a discussion without even knowing what is going on around you and preach about ‘doctrinal credibility’ and ‘interpretation skills’ over the ‘bad theology’ of others without being accountable for your own statements . . . first. If you had read the other thread, then you would see that Dee Dee’s topic sentence on the Microchip business says this: “In another thread Terral said with regards to the Mark of the Beast:,” which is still another carryover from a previous thread . . . Getting the picture?

What we were witnessing is attempted character assassination by the main cast of this Board in a series of threads intended to make me look like a goofball. You coming along and ‘not disagreeing’ with them at the right time gave their charade a greater appearance of credibility. If grace is enough, then all of that doctrinal accountability hype does not mean anything . . . You really need to make up my mind . . .

In Christ,

Terral
wow, terral.

the post you keep mentioning of mine (post #20) where i am "not disagreeing" with sheepdog, was not a response to post #19. i converse with sheepdog, and have a steady, logical flow of discussion leading up to post #20, and suddenly, because you're around, i'm suddenly on this bandwagon of Tweb folks who are trying to set you up for character defamation?

you're trying a little too hard, buddy.

i have no idea what all this nonsense is about, because frankly--i have better things to do than read EVERY thread about preterism. and honestly, if there's a problem with you and sheep, then let it stay there. don't drag me into it just because i conversed with your opposition.

i complimented you on one of your posts in another thread; should sheepdog assume now that i agree with your theology?

you need to back off. i won't defend myself to someone who assumes i'm his enemy just because i have interacted with those he can't get along with.

leave me out of it, kid. resolve it between yourselves.

because there is a difference between theology and grace,
~sarah

[Terral]

Hi Semmie:
Semmie >> leave me out of it, kid. resolve it between yourselves. because there is a difference between theology and grace,
Thank you very much for writing. My apologies for taking our discussions a bit too seriously at times. I have looked again and now realize what you are saying. Dee Dee and Sheep just happened to be ragging on the futurists here when you came along. Thank you again for making your clarifying statements. Sheep knows . . . but,

I am a dummy sometimes. :metro: <- Terral

In Christ,

Terral

[Sheepdog]

Semmie:

The operative term here is 'exploit.'

so, if you can't comprehend what she posted, how can we expect you to comprehend Scripture?

Are you beginning to catch on to this ploy? His space alien microchip lingo in the OP is a trolling tool to hook futurists into posting their views, so he can use his peanut gallery side show routine on other members and on his own thread.

actually that wasn't my intention at all. just because you guys can't resist the temptation to spout your nonsense in every thread you post to doesn't mean i was trolling for it.

i was earnestly curious why certain futurist views were so goofy. i'm starting to get my answer, though not in a way i was expecting :teeth:

What is the topic sentence describing his original hypothesis from his OP again? “Sheep >> How come many of the futurist views sound like little more than cooky space alien conspiracy theories than interpretations of the Bible?”

and many of them do!

He is running diversion for the Preterists here looking for every opportunity to discredit anyone with a futurist interpretation for the ‘day of the Lord’ and ‘end of the age’ prophecies of Scripture.

of course, that presumes certain futurist interpretations deserve any credit in the first place.

You are his blow up doll being used to take jabs at me.

dang, show some respect for crying out loud. she doesn't deserve that kind of comment. have you no sense of chivalry?

Are we having fun yet?

i know i am.

They are not here to defend their man-made theology or their concocted interpretations. They are here to paste propaganda and convince the untaught and unstable to follow in their charade. My post on “Ten Questions For Preterists” they want to shut down, and no monkey business is going on over there, like the garbage we are seeing here. My “Preterist Debate Thread – Questions and Answers”

yeah, it's all a conspiracy against you, Terral. we are part of the One World Government, and we are coming to put a microchip in your forehead :rofl:

[Sheepdog]

[size=2] * edited by a moderator * as an excuse for the deceptive and non-Christian tactic employed in your original post.

ahh, nice to see we can have a discourse without resorting to profanity :lmbo:

Right. You "forgot" to earmark it. And in so doing, you just so happened to present a generalized and sensationalized criticism which will lead the unstudied into the idea that futurists are a "goofy clan." Yeah, but you were not really trying to do that. Right. You expect me to believe that?

all this from a comment regarding being hated by futurists. dang, if you interpret the Bible this way, it is little wonder you believe as you do.

A significant proportion of preterists hold wacky and unscriptural views. Shall we start generalizing?

how have i generalized? what have i said specifically that was a generalization?

true or false: many futurist views are whacky and unscriptural.

Answer: None of the early Christians thought those things had been fulfilled.

do i have to dig up the thread where you got whollaped on this point?

That IS the only line of evidence. Whenever confronted with a problem, the preterist merely suggests: "Since 'this generation' saw the fulfillment, then (fill in the blank ________) must have been fulfilled at AD 70."

... and because it is the right way to interpret the key passages in light of how similar imagery and such is used in the Old Testament, and thus how it meshes with what we know about the events of the 1st century, etc. You just ignore everything else but the immediacy texts because those are easier for you to squirm out of than with the weightier evidences.


Care to answer the above devastating blow to preterism, Sheepdog?

:yawn:

* edited by a moderator *

:hehe: funny thing is, i don't have to do much to make you guys look goofy. you are doing it to yourselves.

[Undomiel]

Sheepdog,

I'm thinking that your position is fear of our atheistic society, that they will tease you for believing the miracles, the unexplainable and the fantastic that so often appears in scripture. Who cares what they think? You aren't here to please atheists or agnostics. You're here to please God. They mocked God, Jesus, every Apostle, and many christians down through the centures. They still do. Oh well.

I find that, psychologically-speaking, the people who pitch the most stones in debates of this nature are in great fear of something. Something is inspiring them to overt, fearful behavior, and it typically involves fear of how others will view them. Eh, people will view you how they please, no matter what. Once you become a christian, that's a given. It's almost in the job description.

In the meantime, I don't think "goofy" or "weird" are necessarily effective tools to use against christians, who get called goofy and weird just for believing in Jesus and God and so forth, in the first place. Perhaps you need a new set of derogatory terms that are better descriptions of your beliefs regarding futurism, as you aren't making any ground at the moment.

[Abigail]

I'm thinking that your position is fear of our atheistic society, that they will tease you for believing the miracles, the unexplainable and the fantastic that so often appears in scripture. Who cares what they think? You aren't here to please atheists or agnostics. You're here to please God. They mocked God, Jesus, every Apostle, and many christians down through the centures. They still do. Oh well. I agree with this statement

[Ted]

hi ted,

i think i missed the part where you disagreed with me. it sounded more to me like you explained the reason i find this particular type of interpretation so difficult.

i definitely agree with you regarding the apocolyptic writing, symbolism/imagery, and how tedious/time-consuming it can be. still, i would call it