Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You seem to take a pretty dim view of the those who think differently than do you.
I see. I stick with the Bible myself. Many people have many plans for what they want to do in the time to come. I've followed such things for a long time. They come, they go, they change, and no matter, God will do as God will do.
Rather, with the real Christians gone, the fake Christians will be ripe for the plucking.
LOL. And I would say your problem is not being an amillennialist and being a premillennialist instead. This thread is about a pre-trib rapture. Is that your belief?
What does this even mean? Do you think symbolic words can't be trusted or something?
It also describes things like a woman sitting on many waters while reading a beast with seven heads and ten horns. Is that literal, too?
My doctrine comes from the Bible. My doctrine recognizes obvious symbolic language such as when it talks about a sword coming out of Christ's mouth. There will not actually be a literal sword coming out of His mouth, so it should not be understood that people will be literally slain with a literal sword.
What is your point? Some scripture doesn't clearly indicate one way or another whether something is symbolic or literal. So, when you interpret those texts literally when I think they are symbolic, should I tell you that your interpretation lacks Scriptural authority?
My point is simple.
This is all obvious to everyone. Why do you think there is even the need to make an obvious point like this? There isn't.
So what? The Bible doesn't have to declare them to be symbols in order to be symbols. That's my point. Such as the sword coming out of Christ's mouth. That is a symbol, but it doesn't specifically tell us that.
So, apparently, you think that to lack scriptural authority just means there isn't anything that explicitly calls something a symbol even though we can spiritually discern that, such as in the example I gave of the sword coming out of Christ's mouth. Seems kind of silly to call that a case of lacking scriptural authority. Let's say someone thinks that the sword coming out of Christ's mouth is a literal sword. Do you think that person would have the scriptural authority to say so just because it doesn't specifically say that the sword is symbolic?
I agree 100%, excellent explanation
You believe and teach the Church "Won't" be on earth to see the antichrist revealed, a direct disregard to the warnings and teachings in scripture
So it would seem, yes? But there are a great many people, even here on this forum, who play fast and loose calling this and that symbols, this is not real, it's symbol, and I'll tell you what it means.
I didn't mention in my post what I believed it symbolized, but I agree with you that it symbolizes His word. On the day He returns He will destroy all of His enemies who rejected His word (Matt 24:35-39, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12, Rev 19:17-18, Rev 20:9, etc.).
That was C.I. Scofield and his 1909 reference bible, that magically put Darby's teachings in the margins, selling millions of copies around the world, and the Darbyism cancer continues to grow presently
No, I haven't. It seems like you have something against symbols.
Israelite openly showed you a basic elementary example of "Symbolic" and you continue to opposites basic truth
The pre-trib rapture view also teaches that the church won't be on earth when the mass falling away Paul talked about in that passage occurs. I don't see how the mass falling away can occur without the church being here because it has do do with many in the church falling away from the faith.
