I have a suggestion

[Kathi]

Pardon me, but that verse is, in no way, self explanatory. And, I'm pretty sure that is exactly why he posted it.

I take it literally and it made sense to me.

 

[reba]

What does that verse mean to you Kathi?

 

[Kathi]

What does that verse mean to you Kathi?

Which verse?

 

[Gary]

Which verse?

The one you take literally.
.

 

[Willie T]

I take it literally and it made sense to me.

And the two verses that mention dogs returning to their vomit are simply to inform us that canines have strange eating habits?

See? We are to read and understand that there is an associative, underlying message to glean...... not simply read the words, literally, and go merrily on our way, now being informed of canine dietary behavior.

 

[reba]

this verse?

"Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather." (Matthew 24:28 NASB)

There. Now you don't have to wonder ever again.

You just gave a verse that is self explanatory as to what you were saying but sometimes a person posts Scripture only for their answer which leaves me .Maybe that is a passive way of answering a reply?

I take it literally and it made sense to me.

 

[Kathi]

this verse?

Have you ever heard of the saying "Where there is smoke there is fire"?

 

[Gary]

You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead.

 

[reba]

Have you ever heard of the saying "Where there is smoke there is fire"?

I take it literally and it made sense to me.

Are you now saying this verse "Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather." (Matthew 24:28 NASB) means ...Where there is smoke there is fire?

 

[Shimshon]

As the good book says, when a poor man eats a chicken, one of them is sick.

 

[Jesse]

You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead.

isn't that kind of "pointless". haha

 

[Willie T]

isn't that kind of "pointless". haha

Hey, that's pretty sharp.

 

[jasonc]

heres a cornfusing one. Jerusalem shall be trampled underfoot until the Times of the gentiles be fulfilled. three places in the bible that term is used. by the Lord, by Paul and first mentioned in Daniel. how long is that period?

 

[Shimshon]

Hey, that's pretty sharp.

Funny, I thought it was bluntly obvious.

 

[jasonc]

Most Christians today say they take the bible literally and say what kathi has just said. then when you really listen to them on certain subjects its not a literal in some areas but someone thoughts on the verses. ie end times chiefly, or if not then about pentacost being for the apostles only in the gifts.or osas and non osas.

 

[Jesse]

Most Christians today say they take the bible literally and say what kathi has just said. then when you really listen to them on certain subjects its not a literal in some areas but someone thoughts on the verses. ie end times chiefly, or if not then about pentacost being for the apostles only in the gifts.or osas and non osas.

It amazes me how many people DO NOT take the Bible literally, they always say it was meant for that time or it doesn't apply to us, or Jesus was speaking only to Israel.

We have filters on according to our denominations.....and even those who claim they are "non-denominational", these still have their own doctrine.

My end times is probably much different than yours and we'll both claim we're taking it literally.

 

[jasonc]

It amazes me how many people DO NOT take the Bible literally, they always say it was meant for that time or it doesn't apply to us, or Jesus was speaking only to Israel.

We have filters on according to our denominations.....and even those who claim they are "non-denominational", these still have their own doctrine.

My end times is probably much different than yours and we'll both claim we're taking it literally.

im a preterist. unless you aren't its probably close to what I say. I will take the position of amil a lot here but its because that it the closest fit, not because I cant see the chialism but what is being pushed for the millennium is some weird stuff and I cant follow that. another type of gospel. imho.

 

[Jesse]

Funny, I thought it was bluntly obvious.

I also drew that conclusion.

 

[Jesse]

im a preterist. unless you aren't its probably close to what I say. I will take the position of amil a lot here but its because that it the closest fit, not because I cant see the chialism but what is being pushed for the millennium is some weird stuff and I cant follow that. another type of gospel. imho.

I have no idea what all the "ists" are or what I am. I believe the church and Israel are the same and in a post trib, what is that called? And it's literal! lol

 

[jasonc]

I have no idea what all the "ists" are or what I am. I believe the church and Israel are the same and in a post trib, what is that called? And it's literal! lol

ok, then we aren't the same. im not a tribber of any type. I don't see any seven year trib to come.