PDA

View Full Version : The Think-Not Generation by Todd Strandberg


billiefan2000
3rd January 2004, 12:52 PM
What does everyone think of what is said

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-think-not.html

frisian
3rd January 2004, 12:59 PM
Frankly Rapture "doctrine" is not related to salvation that I can tell.

Seems some turn into paranoid sky watchers losing track of other things.

Just my opinion at the moment.

billiefan2000
3rd January 2004, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by frisian
Frankly Rapture "doctrine" is not related to salvation that I can tell.

Seems some turn into paranoid sky watchers losing track of other things.

Just my opinion at the moment.


Even though the bible proves a pre trib rapture it is till somehow only doctrine

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-pre-trib-rapture.html

http://pages.zdnet.com/rayandjay/id26.html

http://lionofjudah.tribulationforces.com/prophecy/prophecy.html

http://bible-studies.cephasministry.com/novia_net_todd_rebuttals_rap61.html

http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/graphic1designer/prophecy/prophecy.html

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/7895/margwho.html

http://www.lmcneeseministries.org/Defending%20Pre-Trib.htm

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by billiefan2000



Even though the bible proves a pre trib rapture it is till somehow only doctrine

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-pre-trib-rapture.html

http://pages.zdnet.com/rayandjay/id26.html

http://lionofjudah.tribulationforces.com/prophecy/prophecy.html

http://bible-studies.cephasministry.com/novia_net_todd_rebuttals_rap61.html

http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/graphic1designer/prophecy/prophecy.html

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/7895/margwho.html

http://www.lmcneeseministries.org/Defending%20Pre-Trib.htm

How does it relate to salvation again? Or didn't you say anything in that regard?

Lord Emsworth
3rd January 2004, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by billiefan2000
the bible proves

Hmm, nice oxymoron you got there. I'll remember that one.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by Lord Emsworth


Hmm, nice oxymoron you got there. I'll remember that one.

I don't believe the Bible calls itself proof.

sparklecat
3rd January 2004, 01:20 PM
How about "the Bible states this position as doctrine?" And yes, it is doctrine, and interpretation of Scripture.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by sparklecat
How about "the Bible states this position as doctrine?" And yes, it is doctrine, and interpretation of Scripture.

Isn't doctrine when "man" takes scripture and proposes interpretation? How could the Bible state a position as doctrine?

Lord Emsworth
3rd January 2004, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by sparklecat
How about "the Bible states this position as doctrine?" And yes, it is doctrine, and interpretation of Scripture.

How about "The doctrine states this biblical position"?

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by Lord Emsworth


How about "The doctrine states this biblical position"?

There, better said by the non-Christian IMO.

:D

c4ts
3rd January 2004, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by frisian


I don't believe the Bible calls itself proof.

Sure it does. God himself says he cannot lie because he's God.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by c4ts


Sure it does. God himself says he cannot lie because he's God.
Oh you are thinking abstract. I was thinking literal.

c4ts
3rd January 2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by frisian

Oh you are thinking abstract. I was thinking literal.

Actually, there is a bible passage where God lies but I forgot where it is.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by c4ts


Actually, there is a bible passage where God lies but I forgot where it is.

All within one verse? Is that what you mean by passage? Or in a chapter? Which Bible?

Perhaps someone else recalls.

Lord Emsworth
3rd January 2004, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by frisian
All within one verse? Is that what you mean by passage? Or in a chapter? Which Bible?

Perhaps someone else recalls.

Genesis 2:17 (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/kjv/gen002.htm#017)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

could be seen in such a way.

But I am not sure if that was what c4ts had in mind and if there isn't a good explanation.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 02:23 PM
That has been explained to me to mean spiritual death that very day since it suggests nowhere that Adam and Eve died physically that day.

The idea
3rd January 2004, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by frisian
That has been explained to me to mean spiritual death that very day since it suggests nowhere that Adam and Eve died physically that day.
Some Nigerians are offering 20% of 700 million spiritual dollars.

c4ts
3rd January 2004, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by Lord Emsworth


Genesis 2:17 (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/kjv/gen002.htm#017)

But I am not sure if that was what c4ts had in mind and if there isn't a good explanation.

Works for me.

The idea
3rd January 2004, 02:36 PM
Warnings that Judgment Day is coming have been sounded repeatedly, but few people are listening to them.
Now, is that just a coincidence? A boy has been repeatedly calling out about a wolf and few people are listening.

Lord Emsworth
3rd January 2004, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by frisian
That has been explained to me to mean spiritual death that very day since it suggests nowhere that Adam and Eve died physically that day.

"Die" without any further explanation seems for me to point only into one direction. Even more so that not having eaten from "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" may render spirituality baseless.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by Lord Emsworth


"Die" without any further explanation seems for me to point only into one direction. Even more so that not having eaten from "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" may render spirituality baseless.

Not sure I follow.

frisian
3rd January 2004, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by The idea

Some Nigerians are offering 20% of 700 million spiritual dollars.

Ok, why not just say 140 million spiritual dollars? Or 50% of 280 million spiritual dollars?

Or merely spiritual dollar, or dollars with no exact number amount indicated?

Lord Emsworth
3rd January 2004, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by frisian


Not sure I follow.

To die spiritually would mean that one has spirituality in the first place. Methinks spirituality can only come after having eaten from "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" or, to put it in other words, having awareness. But I might be wrong

frisian
3rd January 2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Lord Emsworth


To die spiritually would mean that one has spirituality in the first place. Methinks spirituality can only come after having eaten from "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" or, to put it in other words, having awareness. But I might be wrong

I am not sure that spiritual is defined as "having awareness. Nice questions though. Will have to bother the folks at RR about that angle.

:D

The idea
4th January 2004, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by frisian
Ok, why not just say 140 million spiritual dollars? Or 50% of 280 million spiritual dollars?

Or merely spiritual dollar, or dollars with no exact number amount indicated?
My understanding was that some Nigerians were sending e-mail offers of 20% of 700 million dollars. Now, if you can explain that the word "death" really meant "spiritual death" then what's to prevent them from explaining that the word "dollars" really meant "spiritual dollars"? Thus, it would seem that your "spiritual insertion technology" can be applied to get away with fraud.

frisian
4th January 2004, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by The idea

My understanding was that some Nigerians were sending e-mail offers of 20% of 700 million dollars. Now, if you can explain that the word "death" really meant "spiritual death" then what's to prevent them from explaining that the word "dollars" really meant "spiritual dollars"? Thus, it would seem that your "spiritual insertion technology" can be applied to get away with fraud.

It certainly can be applied to get away from fraud, but absolutely?