ARPEL,
Whether it is intentional or not your posts are starting to take on the appearance of a condescending tone simply because someone wishes not to discuss this subject with you. This is the very reason that I myself do not normally get involved into this subject because all to often it denegrates into unchristian like behaviour coming from some otherwise very good Christians. I would suggest refraining from such rhetoric. It would aid in a much better ability to continue in the subject.
Pastor Roger,
Nothing I have said is condencending nor insulting.
I was discussing the doctrine of Eternal Security with a pastor (elsewhere)l who, kept referring me to 70 some odd papers he had written on the subject being discussed.
He pointed out Judas Isacariot was saved and then lost his salvation.
His premise centered around Judas's salvation being sealed because he was numbered with the 11 apostle, chosen by Jesus and was amazed when I pointed out to him that Judas Iscariot never believed in Jesus
to the saving of his soul, but perished in his sin of unbelief (this is a well documented fact.)
At that point he (the pastor) became abusive and accused me of twisting scripture together with other claims, this is understandble, since you can imagine, if one was able to find a verse in scripture which destroys preconceived notions (as allinall points out) one would have to undue the work of the building being built upon the foundation of the Apostle's and Prophets, not to mention having to amend his writings, (I never read them, his discussion with me was enough to keep me from becoming interested in peeking).
So, you see, I understand your concern, but be assured I am well able to defend my position, without the debate degenerating into an argument which turns ugly. I agree there is no need for this.
I believe a contributing factor to discussions leading up to arguments are the interjection of false or misleading information.
For instance, allow me to use this thread as an example;
You answered my query concerning Pre Tribulationism not being taught prior to the 19th century, using Morgan Edwards as an example of pre trib teaching prior to 19th century.
Another person pointed out the Pseudo Ephraim in the 4th century as evidence of pre tribulationism being taught in the church.
I firmly rebutted both points with factual evidence, neither were, nor have been considered pre tribulation teachings accepted nor advanced by giants of the faith, within the church prior to the 19th century.
Now, you take the position I am being condescending by pointing out this dissimination of false information, but nothing could be furthere from the truth.
I have an interest that my brothers and sisters in Christ know the truth, about false teaching being circulated within the church in these days, these are perilous times.
And this is the way it is done, by assumptions and pre assumptions, and pre concevied notions, (see I do agree with some here).
In the meantime those who read the false information, posted by some who should know better, (the unlearned, lazy, and young babes,) hear this things and just assume they are true.
Morgan Edwards, never taught Pre Tribulationism, at best he advanced Mid Tribulationism within the Baptist church.
and,
the Psudo Ephraim is FALSE, that is why it is entitled the
"False Ephraim" (c 4th century, and it doesn't make any difference how many original copies are floating around).
As I understand it, FORUMS are for the purpose of discussing, exchanging ideas, disseminating factual information, in hopes of learning and being taught.
The dissemination of false information or spin should have no place in so much as the discussion of Christian doctrines.
Bringing up or accusing persons interested in getting at the truth, of being argumentative or condescending doesn help the cause. either.
It's Ok if you do bon't want to discuss this matter.
I understand.
God Bless,
"Let no man deceive you" Jesus, Mat 24:4
By the way?
What is this "Global Moderator", your title?
Where does one get it?
