ARCHIVE: The "Great tribulation" and the Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

[Nathon Detroit]

Re: Mixed messages with carrots

Re: Mixed messages with carrots

Originally posted by jpholding
Sir Canned Ham forbids posting links, as they seem to irritate him with the spectre of depth discussion

JP, that is a blatant lie and you know it. I have no problem with external links, people add them all the time. I only asked (on two different occasions) that you make your argument HERE at TOL and then if you like you could add external links as references. You were simply attempting to let your links speak for you (so to speak).

TOL's purpose is to debate the issues here on our forum.

 

[Faramir]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
Dear Mattthew:

Please do check out that link that Knight provided. My dispensational opponent there actually answers questions. I think it will give you some of the information you are looking for. Of course Knight is wrong that it is embarassing to me... but I will allow you to be the judge of that.

Well said Dee Dee

Knight? Jerry? did ya miss me?

 

[jpholding]

Psycho-pattern

Psycho-pattern

Dear Tinpants,

JP, that is a blatant lie and you know it. I have no problem with external links, people add them all the time.
I only asked (on two different occasions) that you make your argument HERE at TOL and then if you like you could add external links as references.

You were simply attempting to let your links speak for you (so to speak).

Given that my argument had not been made yet, how could you possibly make such a judgment??? Dog, if you had WAITED a few ticks I would have made my argument. I gave links first to give people an idea where I'd be coming from. Background context. If you don't do this you end up with confused folks like Matthew who walk in here and have no idea what we are talking about because they lack the context. May as well just speak in tongues. The links gave necessary background to my position and coming argument. If you'd rather I'll waste bandwidth posting whole danged articles here verbatim.

As it is I had someone (a Tekton reader) who tuned in from my link to here and wrote me saying they had no idea what preterism was and asked for help understanding what we were talking about. Minus your Quick Draw McGraw tendencies, they would not have had that problem. And how many out there just giving up rather than writing and asking for help?

And given your performance so far, you're still clearly avoiding depth discussion. Speak a piece about what I wrote back there about Dan. 12:2 and maybe I'll believe you're not trying to hide behind that shield.


Good night,

JP

 

[Faramir]

Knight I see you have learned how to answer a post point by point. Verry good. Now I will do the same for you. Maybe now this thread can stop spinning and actually get somewhere. FYI your post responding to my post will be in black, my response to that post will be in blue.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Faramir
1) Some of the ECFs did support a fulfillment of the OD in AD70 (but they were not early enough for you, how convenient)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Faramir, with all due respect the very premise of this thread is that the earliest church fathers did not record the events 70AD as being the great Tribulation.

Like I said, convenient. Dispensationalist start the thread, redefine ECF half way through the debate when it suites their purpose, and insist that they are being fair.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Many of the ECFs were inconsistent with there eschatology.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This point would help neither side of the argument.

Well, at least you agree with Dee Dee on this. However, it was a dispensationalist that started this tread, right? If you now admit that the ECFs were inconsistent, then why did you think it was important to allege that they did not believe in an AD 70 fulfillment of the "Great" Tribulation?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Many (most, all) of the ECFs made mistakes much worse than a bad eschatology.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We all agree.... but something as important as the Great Tribulation should get at least some notice.

I already answered that (see #4 below)
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) Most of the arguments present by Dispensationalist in this thread assume that the "Great" Tribulation is a world wide all life as we know it affecting event. Of course the ECF never said that(world wide thing) happened. It did not happen. No preterist ever said it did.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "localized Great Tribulation" theory is comical. "All" may not mean "All" but it should most certainly mean at least "some", don't ya think? One third may not really mean one third but it certainly should mean more than one five hundredth dont ya think?

Hint, localized is the key word here. "All" would be a large part of the local population. And certainly more than one five hundredth of the local population was affected

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) The preterist have given reason why we believe that the tribulation in the OD and Rev. was in fact the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. These reasons have been summarily ignored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They have not been ignored in the least. They have been rejected! As Dee Dee so rightly points out you shouldn't overstate your case, it makes you look silly.


Here we are in agreement. How silly of me. I did in fact overstate my case. I said that our arguments had been ignored. Saying our theories are comical is not ignoring our arguments. What I should have said is that an honest response to our auguments has been avoided like the plauge. But you are getting better.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

 

[smilax]

Originally posted by Knight
That is the dumbest thing I have ever read!

And I suppose Jerry's argument about Christ's present judgment of the nations as damaging to evangelism was a brilliant argument in favor of the dispensationalist viewpoint.

You really shouldn't let common conclusions blind you to meaningless arguments.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Re: Psycho-pattern

Re: Psycho-pattern

Originally posted by jpholding
Dear Tinpants,

Good night,

JP

Good riddance!

 

[automatthew]

JPH wrote:
> Automatthew: You are at a disadvantage of course as the members here have discussed this issue in detail in other threads.

Participants in a discussion should not have to discourse at a level suitable for the uninformed. My initial ignorance is my problem.
But this particular thread contains little more from one side than repetitions of "You're wrong!", "I reject that!" and "But what about Auxiliary Topics D-Z?" Oh, yes, and "That's the dumbest thing I've ever read." Defenses previously mounted don't inform current discussions unless you refer to them.
How about: "You're wrong for the same reasons you were wrong the last time we had this argument (which may be reviewed at this link)." Or: "I reject that argument based on factors that have been discussed ad infinitum in this forum. The beating most recently administered on this topic may be found here." Even: "Zounds, woman, we had this argument last week and even your mother agreed that I won."


> You come as one "low context" in a high-context setting

Granted. I agree that the Dispensationalists are operating in a high context environment, that of their own begged questions. Seriously, though, as a relative newcomer to the topic, I will not presume to pronounce upon the issues. I will presume to pronounce upon bad reasoning. It's always open season on fallacious arguments, and slings are just as good as swords and spears.

Matthew

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by automatthew
Participants in a discussion should not have to discourse at a level suitable for the uninformed. My initial ignorance is my problem.
But this particular thread contains little more from one side than repetitions of "You're wrong!", "I reject that!" and "But what about Auxiliary Topics D-Z?" Oh, yes, and "That's the dumbest thing I've ever read." Defenses previously mounted don't inform current discussions unless you refer to them.
How about: "You're wrong for the same reasons you were wrong the last time we had this argument (which may be reviewed at this link)." Or: "I reject that argument based on factors that have been discussed ad infinitum in this forum. The beating most recently administered on this topic may be found here." Even: "Zounds, woman, we had this argument last week and even your mother agreed that I won."

Or how about....

"None of the earliest church fathers believed that the Great Tribulation happened in 70 AD."

"OK your right but a few later church fathers did say..... "

Even that would be refreshing at this point.

 

[Lion]

Holding out...

Holding out...

Knight-Thanks. I cannot stand dishonest, manipulative, sarcastic, pointless posters like Holding.

Enough is enough already. Especially considering the allowances you made for him to participate at all. How many times does someone have to show his contempt and rudeness before being banned?

I think you gave him far too many chances.

 

[Solly]

Lion: I cannot stand dishonest, manipulative, sarcastic, pointless posters.

Me neither.

Knight:
But then again there are actually people out there who deny the Holocaust actually happened and have wasted their entire life crafting reasons and explanations as to why we should all take them seriously. Likewise we have other people claiming the tribulation DID happen! Go figure!
Oh give me a break....... is it any wonder why people accuse preterists of acting like a bunch of immature goofballs.
That is the dumbest thing I have ever read!
Consider this an official warning. Jerry DID say he made a mistake. If you wish to debate the issues then fine.... otherwise please take your innappropriate comments to another website.

Lion: How many times does someone have to show his contempt and rudeness before being banned?

I suppose it depends which side you are on. it is easy to win a debate by banning the opponent instead of answering questions.

Scarecrow: "That's the trouble. I haven't got a brain...only straw."
Dorothy: "Well, how can you talk, if you haven't got a brain?"
Scarecrow: "I don't know. But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?"
Dorothy: "Yes, I guess you're right."

Picture below: Lion and Sir Tinpants seen in company with an unidentified STRAW MAN. :doh:

 

[Lion]

Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

There have recently been several instances where members of the preterist camp have acted with unchristian like guile, and manipulative tactics. I don’t mind strategy; in fact I think strategy in dealing with the Gospel is fine. However lying and gangland tactics cross over the line and will not be tolerated..

Through private discussions I have had with various members and owners of TOL I have been alerted to many of these sneaky and dishonest, tactics. I will mention a few:

Wolf Pack-I had been warned from, other theological sites, about a tactic used by preterists when they enter a new Christian site. The tactic, is to come in as a group, and viciously attack an unsuspecting poster from all sides, ganging up on him and cheering each other on while insulting the other posters responses.

Swarm-Preterists pour into a site like a wave of insects, flooding the site with their theology, thereby effectively turning it into a preterists site and a free (since they don’t pay for it) and expansive (since there is already a built in, ready and waiting audience) vehicle for their theology.

False Fence Sitter-The King Has No Clothes-A supposed “neutral” or “not yet decided” new member jumps into a conversation between a preterist and a non-preterist, acting like he is hearing the arguments for the first time, when in reality he is a preterist of long standing and completely decided on the issue being discussed. He then receives the spirit and becomes completely convinced that the preterist arguments are more logical and right, attempting to sway the other party (as well as other viewers) with the old “The King Has no Clothes” gambit.

The Lying Game-A very new member begs to be made a moderator, (after just a few posts) and when a suspicious administrator asks if this new member is a preterist, states that he has never been a preterist but really wants to be a moderator, practically begging. When the administrator checks the new member’s profile, (submitted before being asked if he was a preterist) he finds that the new member had listed himself as a preterist.

When I was first told of these types of tactics used by preterists, I was advised, (by the administrators of these other sites), to immediately ban all of them as a group, and allow none of the them an opportunity to spread their corrupt theology. Knight and I and the other owners of TOL discussed this and we decided not to take such a harsh action until we could observe and draw our own conclusions.

Each of the examples listed above are true cases that have taken place here, on this site, very recently. So I have made my decision.

As one of the founding member/owners of Theologyonline I here and now put all preterists on notice.

The next attempt at sneaky, deceitful, or wolf pack antics, any of you perform, will result in my strong recommendation to have all preterists permanently banned from this site.

This is no idle threat. I myself enjoy debating the preterists and would miss them, but I will not tolerate any further deceptions or secret attempts to attack this site.

Make no mistake about it. We are an Acts-9, dispensational, open view website. And our main mission is to promote what we believe to be the truth, through honest debate and studying of the Bible, and thereby strengthen and build the Body of Christ. We are not a preterist site, nor do we intend to allow this site to be high-jacked or railroaded by corrupt doctrines or unscrupulous tactics.

Understand this, there will be no second chance from this point forward.

For those preterists that are not engaging in any of these tactics, please ignore these remarks as they are not intended for you, but rather for your dishonest colleagues.

I pray that we all on TOL (except for the atheistic pagans that are headed for hell unless they humble themselves and accept the gift of Jesus Christ) can honestly, and with conviction and honor, continue to study and strengthen the Body of Christ through this ministry.


In Christ.

 

[Solly]

And noone has addressed the matter that you guys keep speaking of something called THE Great Tribulation when there is no such phrase in scripture. Before you start dragging in other scriptures to give content to a phrase of your own making, you must justify your use of said term, not only as it stands, but the fact that it apparently refers to a world-wide conflagration when the only passage it appears in quite specifically refers to Judaea:

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains Presumably to escape the cobras, heat seeking tomahawks and cave busters: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.

The figurative language of these verses is similar to that of many passages in the OT which refer to civil commotions and historical events. See Isa 13.9; 19.1,5; 34.2,4; Ezek 33.2,7; Psa 18.7-14; 68.1; etc. Further, Lk 21.28 shows that these verses cannot refer to the general judgment of the great and final day; and the same appears also from the limitation to this generation in Mt 24.34 and the parallel passages.
A Harmony of the Four Gospels, Edward Robinson DD LLD, Religious Tract Society: London, c 1870
(For those who do not know, RTS was the main Evangelical Anglican publisher in the UK in the 19th cent)


The sound of one hand clapping is louder that your responses!!

 

[Lion]

Sorry Solly

Sorry Solly

Solly-You must have missed the dishonest point of my thread.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Matthew:

I am glad you responded. I do believe that JP somewhat misunderstood your post, but perhaps I am wrong. The very good point and well placed satirical illustration was not lost on me, and I appreciated it heartily.

But this particular thread contains little more from one side than repetitions of "You're wrong!", "I reject that!" and "But what about Auxiliary Topics D-Z?" Oh, yes, and "That's the dumbest thing I've ever read."

And you are right. Absolutely right.

Defenses previously mounted don't inform current discussions unless you refer to them.

Jerry and I have had previous discussions, but I can assure you that a lot of the same things seen here, happened then., especially the endless game of never fully interacting with the points at hand and diversions down rabbit trails. With all due respect to Knight, he has never engaged me before in this topic, and failed to do so here in a substantive way. I am sure that he disagrees with that assessment, and I can only leave in the hands of the readership to decide for himself. Lion has engaged me (the only one of the group who has done so meaningfully), and Knight did link to the dicussion which I highly encourage everyone to read. But it will not help you much with what was discussed here... it focuses almost primarily on the 70 weeks, not the specific subject which was addressed here... or might I say addressed heavily by one side and simply hand-waved away by the other side.

How about: "You're wrong for the same reason
s you were wrong the last time we had this argument (which may be reviewed at this link)." Or: "I reject that argument based on factors that have been discussed ad infinitum in this forum. The beating most recently administered on this topic may be found here."

Because it has not happened.

Even: "Zounds, woman, we had this argument last week and even your mother agreed that I won."

And ditto.

Granted. I agree that the Dispensationalists are operating in a high context environment, that of their own begged questions. Seriously, though, as a relative newcomer to the topic, I will not presume to pronounce upon the issues. I will presume to pronounce upon bad reasoning. It's always open season on fallacious arguments, and slings are just as good as swords and spears.

And you have hit the nail so squarely on the head that I feel that nail's pain. Perfectly stated. And do not think you are the only who has noticed.... the lurker traffic here has amazed me for the messages and emails I have[ gotten expressing astonishment and observing the same things you have articulated so well.

Now......

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE HAPPENINGS AND NONHAPPENINGS ON THIS THREAD, I WILL NOT BE PARTICIPATING IN IT ANY LONGER.

Thank you profusely Matthew, Solly, Faramir, Smilax, JP for your insights that helped personally me greatly. I love hearing fresh voices and ways of expressing the issues involved. I look forward to further interaction with you.

 

[Lion]

Golly Solly

Golly Solly

Great argument Solly, the word Bible is not in the Bible either, so I guess it doesn’t exist. Oh and neither is the word trinity, but that don’t mean it ain’t so.

If you think there is no great to the tribulation debate, check out my battle with DD on the Easter thread and gain some insight.

 

[Solly]

Re: Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

Re: Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

Originally posted by Lion
There have recently been several instances where members of the preterist camp have acted with unchristian like guile, and manipulative tactics. I don’t mind strategy; in fact I think strategy in dealing with the Gospel is fine. However lying and gangland tactics cross over the line and will not be tolerated..

Through private discussions I have had with various members and owners of TOL I have been alerted to many of these sneaky and dishonest, tactics. I will mention a few:

Wolf Pack-I had been warned from, other theological sites, about a tactic used by preterists when they enter a new Christian site. The tactic, is to come in as a group, and viciously attack an unsuspecting poster from all sides, ganging up on him and cheering each other on while insulting the other posters responses. - evidence on this site?

Swarm-Preterists pour into a site like a wave of insects, flooding the site with their theology, thereby effectively turning it into a preterists site and a free (since they don’t pay for it) and expansive (since there is already a built in, ready and waiting audience) vehicle for their theology. - evidence on this site?

False Fence Sitter-The King Has No Clothes-A supposed “neutral” or “not yet decided” new member jumps into a conversation between a preterist and a non-preterist, acting like he is hearing the arguments for the first time, when in reality he is a preterist of long standing and completely decided on the issue being discussed. He then receives the spirit and becomes completely convinced that the preterist arguments are more logical and right, attempting to sway the other party (as well as other viewers) with the old “The King Has no Clothes” gambit. - evidence on this site?



The Lying Game-A very new member begs to be made a moderator, (after just a few posts) and when a suspicious administrator asks if this new member is a preterist, states that he has never been a preterist but really wants to be a moderator, practically begging. When the administrator checks the new member’s profile, (submitted before being asked if he was a preterist) he finds that the new member had listed himself as a preterist. - evidence on this site?

When I was first told of these types of tactics used by preterists, I was advised, (by the administrators of these other sites - Name them, I would like to ask them myself), to immediately ban all of them as a group, and allow none of the them an opportunity to spread their corrupt theology. Knight and I and the other owners of TOL discussed this and we decided not to take such a harsh action until we could observe and draw our own conclusions. - aaah, you have no conclusive evidence on this site.

Each of the examples listed above are true cases that have taken place here, on this site, very recently. So I have made my decision.

As one of the founding member/owners of Theologyonline I here and now put all preterists on notice.

The next attempt at sneaky, deceitful, or wolf pack antics, any of you perform, will result in my strong recommendation to have all preterists permanently banned from this site.

This is no idle threat. I myself enjoy debating the preterists and would miss them, but I will not tolerate any further deceptions or secret attempts to attack this site.

Make no mistake about it. We are an Acts-9, dispensational, open view website. And our main mission is to promote what we believe to be the truth, through honest debate and studying of the Bible, and thereby strengthen and build the Body of Christ. We are not a preterist site, nor do we intend to allow this site to be high-jacked or railroaded by corrupt doctrines or unscrupulous tactics.

Understand this, there will be no second chance from this point forward.

For those preterists that are not engaging in any of these tactics, please ignore these remarks as they are not intended for you, but rather for your dishonest colleagues.

I pray that we all on TOL (except for the atheistic pagans that are headed for hell unless they humble themselves and accept the gift of Jesus Christ) can honestly, and with conviction and honor, continue to study and strengthen the Body of Christ through this ministry.


In Christ.

Lion, unless you are prepared to name names and deal with people on an individual basis, then I will take this as an attempt to win a no-win argument. I am a moderate praeterist who has become so through being on this site - is that what sticks in your craw? - so take decided offense at your comments. I am aware of no Wolf Pack resident here, in fact I wish more would come forward; so where is this wave of insects?

I have not been told that I am obliged to hold and promote an Acts-9, dispensational, open view for the pleasure of posting here. This is a theology discussion forum. Are all discussions allowable as long as the dispies can win? Are you so unsure of your "truth" that you must evict those who dare to contradict it?

Judges 6.28 And when the men of the city arose early in the morning, behold, the altar of Baal was cast down, and the grove was cut down that was by it, and the second bullock was offered upon the altar that was built. 29 And they said one to another, Who hath done this thing? And when they enquired and asked, they said, Gideon the son of Joash hath done this thing. 30 Then the men of the city said unto Joash, Bring out thy son, that he may die: because he hath cast down the altar of Baal, and because he hath cut down the grove that was by it. 31 And Joash said unto all that stood against him, Will ye plead for Baal? will ye save him? he that will plead for him, let him be put to death whilst it is yet morning: if he be a god, let him plead for himself, because one hath cast down his altar.

I find it objectionable that JP, after less than 50 posts is *edit: apparently* banned, while Sozo goes on his merry way, posting yet another apology, even after telling Gerald that he would rather squash him than talk to him. THIS is the ministry of the Body of Christ, with conviction and honour?

For those preterists that are not engaging in any of these tactics, please ignore these remarks as they are not intended for you, but rather for your dishonest colleagues.

Really? Care to name them?

The next attempt at sneaky, deceitful, or wolf pack antics, any of you perform, will result in my strong recommendation to have all preterists permanently banned from this site.

So that means me then. Your conviction and honour in approaching me privately before hand is duly noted.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Lion:

Am I allowed to respond or will that be taken as a sign of mutiny? Those accusations are completely, absolutely, and utterly baseless as against any of the participants in this thread. Statements are easy proof is scarce. It is also easy to make a blanket statment about a group, and then add, oh, if you are not one of them, disregard this. And for the record I thoroughly condemn anyone lying and saying they are not a preterist when they are one, and declare totally idiotic anyone who would deny being one when it is plastered on their profile.

 

[Solly]

Re: Golly Solly

Re: Golly Solly

Originally posted by Lion
Great argument Solly, the word Bible is not in the Bible either, so I guess it doesn’t exist. Oh and neither is the word trinity, but that don’t mean it ain’t so.

If you think there is no great to the tribulation debate, check out my battle with DD on the Easter thread and gain some insight.

What, you mean read more of the same obfuscation and avoidance being posted here, where people are accused of misrepresenting DF, although a right view of DF is never given?
Where old writers are called in support of DF, but if they happen to support nonDF, then they were obviously off base?
Where nonDFers are called upon to prove the non-existence of something that doesn't exist? And no proof is given that it does exist?
And where the other side are characterised as a wolf pack, even though this thread started with the a DF wolf pack against one, and taunts were cast about "where are the other praeterists?" And now we are here, the Uruk Hai turn tail and threaten to ban?

"Bible" is not in the Bible, but "scripture" is.

Trinity is not in the Bible, but the Father Son and Holy Spirit revealed as God is.

THE Great Tribulation is not in the Bible, unless it is an SRB. Dispies have taken two words and added a definite article, making something that is not there - bible is a collective noun for the books that comprise it. Trinity is a noun describing the ThreeOne union of the godhead.
THE Great Tribulation is not so mentioned in the Bible.

To further make your case, you must ignore the Lukan parallels, where he says: there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 21.23 Which people? Then let them which are in Judaea 21.21 Why? When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21.20

 

[Faramir]

Re: Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

Re: Danger-Important Notice For All Preterists!

UNBELIEVABLE

From the fist time I logged onto TOL, every moment has been a pleasure. Until now. I am outraged by these accusation. It takes a lot to make me upset but right now I am livid.

Originally posted by Lion
There have recently been several instances where members of the preterist camp have acted with unchristian like guile, and manipulative tactics. I don’t mind strategy; in fact I think strategy in dealing with the Gospel is fine. However lying and gangland tactics cross over the line and will not be tolerated..

Through private discussions I have had with various members and owners of TOL I have been alerted to many of these sneaky and dishonest, tactics. I will mention a few:

When I was first told of these types of tactics used by preterists, I was advised, (by the administrators of these other sites), to immediately ban all of them as a group, and allow none of the them an opportunity to spread their corrupt theology. Knight and I and the other owners of TOL discussed this and we decided not to take such a harsh action until we could observe and draw our own conclusions.

Each of the examples listed above are true cases that have taken place here, on this site, very recently. So I have made my decision.

Do you have the TF to name names and tell us who you are accusing. If you do then please do so. If you do I will apologize to you for being an unwitting dupe in their dishonest tactics, and publicly denounce them for using said tactics. If you do not I can only assume that these are nothing more than baseless assumptions on your part.

Originally posted by Lion
As one of the founding member/owners of Theologyonline I here and now put all preterists on notice.

The next attempt at sneaky, deceitful, or wolf pack antics, any of you perform, will result in my strong recommendation to have all preterists permanently banned from this site.

This is no idle threat. I myself enjoy debating the preterists and would miss them, but I will not tolerate any further deceptions or secret attempts to attack this site.

Make no mistake about it. We are an Acts-9, dispensational, open view website. And our main mission is to promote what we believe to be the truth, through honest debate and studying of the Bible, and thereby strengthen and build the Body of Christ. We are not a preterist site, nor do we intend to allow this site to be high-jacked or railroaded by corrupt doctrines or unscrupulous tactics.

Understand this, there will be no second chance from this point forward.

For those preterists that are not engaging in any of these tactics, please ignore these remarks as they are not intended for you, but rather for your dishonest colleagues.

I know that I am not engaging in any of these tactics, but you sure make me sound guilty.

Did I find out about TOL through JP's site? Yes

Were JP and Dee Dee influential in me becoming a preterist? Yes

Did I mention this fact as soon a JP began to post on this site? Yes.

Why? I thought it only fair to mention it so that debaters and readers would know that we were coming from a common perspective.

Did JP's web site tell me come here and gang up on the Dispies? NO It invited JP's readers to view a thread of a debate between Dispensationalist and Preterist.

Did JP and Dee Dee contact me privately to come to TOL? NO. Other than being on JP's e-mail list neither one of them knew me from Adam until I started posting on TOL.

Originally posted by Lion
I pray that we all on TOL (except for the atheistic pagans that are headed for hell unless they humble themselves and accept the gift of Jesus Christ) can honestly, and with conviction and honor, continue to study and strengthen the Body of Christ through this ministry.


In Christ.

I thought so too

Where in the Bible does it say to accuse fellow Christians openly and in public. Shouldn't you confront them alone and privately? Did you do this? If you did already do this, I apologize, but I feel like I am being accused, and I know that I have not received a private message from you.

If might makes right, then I guess you can take your ball and go home. I plan to continue participating at TOL (unless I get banned), but I will no longer discuss eschatology, unless I can get some guarantee that I will not be falsely accused of using deceitful tactics. An apology would be nice too.