View Single Post
  #48  
Old 05-26-2007, 09:03 AM
Brother Strange
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digging4Truth View Post
Brother Strange...

Of course you will, likely, deem me as biased as I am already a partial preterist but the debate so far really has to go to Brother Blume.
If you are already a Partial Preterist, I can understand how you would be biased. I appreciate your honesty here. I can only pray that you will not become cemented in that doctrine as so many have already become. There is a spirit involved in this doctrine that consumes away the soul, in my opinion from studying this for so long. It happens so often, when people becomes wraped up in the spirit of this doctrine, they become very much "in your face" with it. That spirit, not the doctrine itself, got the likes of Larry Smith and others defrocked.

Quote:
I read your first post and it made me go Hmmmmmmmmmm...but Brother Blume's response was succinct and thorough and did point out very well the error of even speaking of en without tachos and I noticed that you never touched on the list of scriptures he gave that contain the term pair "en tachos".
I should have dealt with the whole but I didn't think it neccessary to deal with the obvious. Sometimes you have to address the obvious as well.

Quote:
Brother Strange
Could you make a post that deals directly with the plethora of "en tachos" examples given and their context in the rest of scripture versus the context you feel is demonstrated in Revelation. Also if you could touch on why you feel that the meaning of "en tachos" is different in Revelation than it is in the rest of the Bible. Thanks
See my last response to Bro. Blume above, given just a few moments ago.

Anyway, bro Blume made this statement:


Quote:
Here are ALL the verses in the entire New Testament that use the COMBINATION of the two greek terms that Bro Strange failed to realize are the only verses we can use.
But, he did not leave any scriptures and certainly not the one that I cited in Rev. 22.

If he is consistent with the interpretation that he insist upon, he will have to state flatly that Jesus has returned as seen in Rev. 19, that the White Throne Judgment is past, that all prophecies subsequent to the return of Jesus is also past.
Reply With Quote