"Despise Not Prophesyings" (Unless It Violates Your Terms Of Service)

[phoneman-777]

On 8/4/2023 at 3:12 PM, Solus Christus said:

Ars not all assumptions, aren’t we all using a lens?: denominational upbringing, eschatological view, and etc? 

Its like history, all history is biased, it is point of view of the victor, persecuted, and etc. 

 

The Protestant Historicist lens utilizes the Bible and historic facts alone, both of which are immune to wild speculation, revisionist historians, private interpretations, etc.

Edited August 6, 2023 by phoneman-777

[phoneman-777]

On 8/5/2023 at 9:31 AM, AnOrangeCat said:

Certainly we can take an absolute stance with the plainly stated fundamentals, such as the divinity of Jesus and Him dying for our sins and so on. But when it comes to prophecy we're no longer in that domain. 

Whoa whoa, Fab Feline, Jesus Himself says "Blessed is he that readeth and keepeth (or "obeys") the words of the prophecy" of Scripture, which means He's not only made accurate interpretation possible, but He expects us to obtain a blessing by doing so.

So, when it comes to taking an "absolute" stance, we're well able to do so when it comes to Eschatology - EVEN MORE SO than Soteriology - for while the vast majority of Bible prophecy can be understood now, Salvation will be "our science and our song" throughout the ceaseless ages of eternity, as our knowledge of it will never cease to grow!

[phoneman-777]

The medical world discovered gradually increased voltage with each defibrillation attempt actually results in the heart becoming more "stubborn" to what's medically termed "conversion" - when a successful return to proper rhythm is achieved. They now recommend cranking it way up from out the gate. Likewise, the best way to shock Jesuit Preterists and Jesuit Futurists out of the stupor of deadly eschatological deception is to present both why Historicism makes Biblical sense and why their beliefs make no sense. Most choose to remain in deadly deception, but a few will always put forth a little objective effort and often choose to convert.

 

For instance, Futurists claim Paul's "restrainer" of 2 Thessalonians 2 is the "Holy Spirit" or "the Holy Spirit filled church" or some other "agent of holiness" because only an agent of holiness fits into their belief system.

Enlighten them with facts by saying the Early Church Fathers (far less removed from Paul than we are almost two thousand years later) who had anything to say about it said that Paul said the restrainer was the PAGAN ROMAN EMPIRE, and most Futurists could care less. They choose ignorance, then proceed to accuse the critics.

They're not interested in asking why Paul refused to write in a letter what he says he'd previously told them in person, a question any honest Christian ought to ask. Paul refused because the Christian church would have been immediately exterminated as an insurrectionist movement the moment a letter talking about "WHEN THE PAGAN ROMAN EMPIRE IS TAKEN OUT..." wound up in the hands of Roman authorities. Ever heard of January 6? "Insurrectionists" in jail for peacefully protesting a rigged election?

So, Paul told them "after my departing, grievous wolves will come in" when the Roman Empire would be "taken out of the way" and the Antichrist would arise. Did that happen? Even secular historians with no ax to grind will tell you "THE PAPACY IS NONE OTHER THAN THE GHOST OF THE DECEASED ROMAN EMPIRE, SITTING CROWNED UPON THE GRAVE THEREOF." Did the Papacy go on to fulfill all the identifying marks of Bible prophecy? You won't know unless you ask, right? But, that requires a man be "willing to do His will, then he shall know of the doctrine" and most people don't want to even consider, let alone do all that which a Papal Antichrist points to. That way they can say, "Well, we can't really be sure about eschatology".

Edited August 6, 2023 by phoneman-777