It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
One verse the blog owner you linked to cites is
Here is a link
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by 547000
One verse the blog owner you linked to cites is
Here is a link
1 Corinthians 1:8
I always thank my God for you because of the grace of God that was given to you in Christ Jesus. For you were made rich in every way in him, in all your speech and in every kind of knowledge - just as the testimony about Christ has been confirmed among you - so that you do not lack any spiritual gift as you wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. He will also strengthen you to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into fellowship with his son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
The blogger claims that any time that Paul uses the term, Day of the Lord, he means something along the limes of the Old Testament prophets talking about the day of vengeance against the Lord's enemies. Then he says that even though Paul is talking about a similar occurrence, one should not mistakenly believe Paul means the Lord as in YHWH, but should realize Paul means the Lord as in Jesus. So, what is the blogger's logic here, making a distinction between the "Day of the Lord" from one person called "the Lord", from another "Day of the Lord" who the Lord is a different person, but the nature of the "Day of the Lord" is the same? Couldn't there be a different sort of "Day of the Lord" from the OT version? I think there could be.
If you read the verse cited by the blogger in context, you see Paul is being very specific about who exactly he is addressing, which were the members of the church he founded in Corinth. When he tells them to stay true to their calling which was signified as authentic by the spiritual gifts he is referring to having been given to the very persons he is addressing, he is talking about something which will happen to them. Either Paul did not know what he was talking about and was wrong about those people seeing Jesus returning, or Paul meant something else, like maybe after they die they will meet Jesus at their day of Judgement, their personal "Day of the Lord".
edit on 14-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
Or that the dead, too, will see the coming of the Lord?
I think if it meant being, or not being, a Christian, whether or not you believed the earth is going to burn up to a crisp with nothing left of it, then it probably would have said so in the Bible at least once.
Originally posted by 547000
Well, I stand opposed to everything you believe in. It's very hard to believe you are a christian because all the points you argue for say otherwise. I think you will be caught by surprise when the simple childishness of the truth reveals itself.
I would say it is the opposite.
Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by jmdewey60
The works of the NT are a completion of the OT.
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Theophorus
I'll go over it again for those who don't take such a literal approach to scripture.
Physical things that grow can be measured.
Common sense tells us there's a difference between things that can be measured, and things which can not. knowledge and grace are two things which can not. (prove how they can) We as humans obtain knowledge and lose knowledge, obtain grace and lose grace. its not a constant.
Your interpretation of what scripture says and what is truth, conflict. you must be mistaken
Would you not consider something that was previously unknown that has been learned... growth?
Knowledge can be measured, thats pretty obvious... if you want proof, ask a 4 year old a simple math equasion... he likely will not have the answer until he learns math... that is growth of knowledge which can be measured.
Growth of the spirit is growth of knowledge of spiritual matters...
Now which conflicts are you talking about...
Btw thank you for being civil... this i can work with
no. Growth would be defind as the expansion or increase in some quantity over time of something already known.
Would you not consider something that was previously unknown that has been learned... growth?
simple question for you.What tool would one use to measure knowledge?
Knowledge can be measured, thats pretty obvious... if you want proof, ask a 4 year old a simple math equasion... he likely will not have the answer until he learns math... that is growth of knowledge which can be measured.
the one where you seem to take a truth stance as to the literal translation of what the bible says about 'spiritual growth' and what common sense tells us. obviously the bible doesnt lie, so your interpretation is either wrong or common sense is stranger than fiction.
Now which conflicts are you talking about..
no. Growth would be defind as the expansion or increase in some quantity over time of something already known.
simple question for you.What tool would one use to measure knowledge
the one where you seem to take a truth stance as to the literal translation of what the bible says about 'spiritual growth' and what common sense tells us. obviously the bible doesnt lie, so your interpretation is either wrong or common sense is stranger than fiction.
Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by Akragon
I have not once quoted from the Bible. Seems to me that you enjoy basing truth from a book you say is contradictory and erroneous.
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Frira
Or that the dead, too, will see the coming of the Lord?
If they are dead, then they already left and went to the Lord, so Jesus does not have to go, or come, anywhere.
Kalista is into the Harrowing of Hell which is still believed by the Orthodox Church, apparently, and he posted a link to a painting of it. He also gave a pretty good description of it.
Just for fun, I'll add... I also believe in the Harrowing of Hell (not in scripture, per se), but taught by the Church before the New Testament was canonized-- so has merit as oral Tradition.
I have to reject the idea that there is yet no kingdom
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60
I have to reject the idea that there is yet no kingdom
His kingdom is in heaven. Jesus Himself said His kingdom was not of this world. We are awaiting Him and the arrival of His kingdom on Earth. Where He will rule and reign for 1,000 years.
Originally posted by Akragon
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60
I have to reject the idea that there is yet no kingdom
His kingdom is in heaven. Jesus Himself said His kingdom was not of this world. We are awaiting Him and the arrival of His kingdom on Earth. Where He will rule and reign for 1,000 years.
my friend..
The kingdom of heaven is at hand...
Matthew
It is within... and without
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
From His own mouth.........
Originally posted by Prezbo369
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
From His own mouth.........
You mean from mouth of whoever it was that wrote the gospel of john, 100 years after the Jesus character supposedly died.........