Why The Experts Disagree.

[eddif]

GOD let Jerusalem be destroyed because the False Jews in it were pagan Ashkenazi doomed to first and second death.
Maybe you should understand that White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are the True House of Israel who are the only ones to spread the real Gospel?

God sent his son that people might be saved. God desires Jew and gentile be made into one new man. Jesus did not lead a punishment squad.

Read Romans 3. See the advantage the Jew has. Read that all were not bad. Read who has the promises. Fuss at me. Run me down country. Let us reason together.

Ephesians 2:12 kjv (to gentiles)

12. That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

That is a gentile without Jewish history. A lot of nations know of God because of Jewish influence.

Tell me how wrong I am. ( nicely so both both of us can continue here) . If we need another thread that can be arranged.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[eddif]

Jesus had a ruddy complexion aka a pale complexion that could blush. Show me a black that can blush.
Anglo-Saxons travelled from exile from Northern Israel - The House of Israel - to exile south of the Caspian and then followed the east wind as it blew westwards and north until eventually planting themselves in the sea.
I live in GOD's Own Country - North England where Protestantism started. My 'tribe' is racially distinct from the rest of the British Isles. This is all in the Bible but your eyes seem dimmed.
Try understand Deuteronomy 32:26 which prophecies the WASPs as losing all knowledge of Jewishness and especially language while no Jew ever stopped speaking Hebrew.
Jesus stopped being a Jew when he was baptised and started preaching the gospel. That's one of the reasons why the Jews hated and crucified him.
There is another real reason why Caiaphas and Annas had to kill Jesus and that is revealed when an angel tore the veil of the Holy of Holies the moment Jesus expired. I doubt you'll understand or believe so I won't burden your brain with this truth.
You have obviously been brainwashed by the Anti Defamation League which really should be called the the League of Satan's followers.

Wait stop.

This is not British Israelism 101.

eddif

 

[XRose]

Wait stop.

This is not British Israelism 101.

eddif

British Israelism is Chrsitianity.
You can choose to follow Satan if you wish but by denying the truth of the Bible you are calling GOD a liar.

 

[eddif]

British Israelism is Chrsitianity.
You can choose to follow Satan if you wish but by denying the truth of the Bible you are calling GOD a liar.

Matthew 5
Good traits of the kingdom of God.

Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

Not genetics which are external.
eddif

 

[eddif]

Jews curse the name of Jesus. Do you curse him too? They also claim he is being eternally tormented in boiling excrement. Is that your belief?

Can you consider that you were led down a path to believe what you just posted, and did not get it from Bible study ?

eddif

 

[T. E. Smith]

Jesus had a ruddy complexion aka a pale complexion that could blush. Show me a black that can blush.

Please do not seriously suggest that Jesus was not Jewish. You'll make me laugh. We aren't saying Jesus was "black" but rather that he was Jewish. Of course Jews can blush. Jewish complexion is something in between "white" and "black" as far as I can tell, though of course those terms are not clearly defined.

So XRose your posts have uniformly been highly offensive and exclusionary. I'm putting you on ignore too and am hoping you see the error of your ways. I don't know what intolerant religious upbringing you were brought into, but I'm sorry for it.

 

[eddif]

This wake-up post merely confirms that the vast majority of 'educated' Christians and the ministers of pagan Catholicism and Judaism have no grasp of the Revelation because as Jesus said: Their eyes are dimmed and their ears are blocked' because of the false teaching and lack of belief in the New Testament.
Mainly though their dullwittedness is due to the fact that they don't have the gifts of discernment, wisdom and knowledge freely dispensed as in 1 Corinthians 12:
8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Jews cannot access the gifts because they, like Muslims, are anti-christs who deny Jesus; Catholics cannot because they are pagans who worship the moon goddess Diana-Ishtar and offer cakes to the sun as well as contradicting GOD's order not to drink blood.

Satan's first gang of fallen angels is imprisoned inside Earth. His second gang and himself were expelled from heaven (I think in 1914) and are presently confined to Earth fomenting all today's sin, crime and troubles. and all will be imprisoned with the first gang during Jesus's millennium. After the millennium Satan and his two gangs will be freed and rise to have a short season of tempting humans to discover the last tares hiding in the wheat of Christains. Satan's leader on earth - the pope- has a throne showing Satan and gangs rising to go off on their short season. The hair of Satan is a beast to ram home the fact he is evil.
Catholics claim the throne is showing the resurrection of Jesus but in fact as the beast hair reveals it is actually teh release of Satan and his gangs,

Knowing his time is short Satan and his second gang are rushing around the world trying to recruit everyone to doubt the reality of GOD, Jesus and the Bible accounts.
I'm watching the world rush towards Armageddon which will be an interesting experience.

The Jews are the example of the spiritual gifts in operation. The prophets used them sometimes. The gentile Christian’s had to be told of the gifts. The sons and daughters of Jews received prophecy at Pentecost.

eddif

 

[Goldwing]

Thank you. Actually I study scripture without the punctuation, chapter number and verse numbers as I try to read them like the letters they are. Punctuations can actually take away from the full context and I think this is what causes many to error in their understanding.

OK, but my earlier question to you Glory, was that you mentioned in a earlier post that the "Nation of Israel", is mentioned in Rev., prophecies. I disagreed, and said that only one of the twelve prophecies in Rev., mention, Israel, and that is in Chapter 7, involving the 144,000. This I claim is the, "New defined Israel", made up of any individuals who choses to live by faith in God, not biological descendants of Abraham as you believe.

Since the selection of the 144,000 are referred as the "first fruits", of the harvest of souls that come out of tribulation, (Rev. 14:4), this is still a future event. Scholars on genealogy tells us that all the records that traced anybody of Jewish decent to any of the twelve tribes were lost in A.D. 70 when Jerusalem was destroyed. Therefore, today know one can prove that they are a descendant of any one of the twelve tribes.

These facts do not support your claim.

 

[Paul E. Michael]

I don't have the responsibility to answer someone who is angry and extremely rude, who quibbles over tiny things like whether the term "myth" can be applied to an object, and who asks sarcastic questions constantly. You've just joined a week and two days ago and I'm already sick of your posts. You're going on my ignore list.

Here, once again, instead of trying to respond rationally to anything I have written, you have chosen to speak abusively against me, calling me "angry," "extremely rude," "someone...who quibbles," "someone...who asks sarcastic questions constantly," and telling me you are "sick of [my] posts". All of that abusive language you have directed against me is contained in just one, your latest, reply post to me. Below, you'll find an exhibition of other instances, from other posts of yours, of you employing abusive language against me:

In post #3 of your thread, Christ Mythicism: Recommended Reading, you said to me:

Your point is just semantics and is not even consistent with the way "myth" is used in the English language.

By saying that something I said "is just semantics," either 1) you are saying something that is cognitively meaningful, and thus either true or false, or 2) you are merely speaking emotively, rather than in a cognitively meaningful way, and are trying to cast aspersion against me, trying to belittle me.

If #1 is the case, please tell us, by quoting my exact words, to which thing you are referring by your phrase "just semantics," and explain exactly what you mean whenever you say that something "is just semantics," and exactly why you are saying that what I have written "is just semantics."

If #2 is the case, then I ask you: Do you really imagine that I am (and other readers of these forums are) not well aware of that all-too-common, vulgar shtick that many talkers so often resort to performing because they cannot answer simple questions asked them, nor respond rationally and honestly to criticism of things they have said? Crying "That's just semantics!" or "You're obsessed with semantics!" is invariably a loud and clear advertisement that the one crying such things knows he/she cannot respond rationally to criticism that has been leveled against his/her utterances. See, semantics is all about questions of meaning. When I ask you questions about what (if anything) you mean by certain words or forms of words you choose to use, and you react to them by crying out that my questions are "just semantics," that's you advertising that you know you cannot answer such questions.

In post #103 of the thread, Why The Experts Disagree., you said to me:

You should turn down the aggression in your posts.

If you're going to accuse something I have written of being an instance of aggression, could you please quote my exact words, and explain exactly why you are accusing them of being an instance of aggression? Until you have satisfied this request, I shall continue to consider your saying to me, "You should turn down the aggression in your posts," to be an attempted barb, an instance of abusiveness from you against me, your only provocation to it being the fact that you cannot respond rationally to my criticism of what you, or someone else, has said. In saying that to me, are you, perhaps, projecting onto me something you see in yourself?

In any case, would you like someone to say to you, "You should turn down the aggression in your posts"? Is that something you'd like me to say to you?

In post #10 of your thread, Christ Mythicism: Recommended Reading, you said to me:

Must you be so insufferable, Paul? You won't make any friends this way.

What motivated you to say this to me? Do you really not consider it base and puerile to say such a thing as what you said to me in that quote? Myself, I just can't bring myself to say such things to others as I've just quoted you saying to me. I mean, at the very best, it just is not a good look to behave that way. Wouldn't you agree?

In post #15 of the thread, Study: Only 37% of American Pastors Have a Biblical Worldview, you said to me:

You sound like a very hostile, angry guy. You really need to calm down.

Is what you say to me in this quote not merely a slight variation of what you have said to me in the quotes I've already exhibited, above? Again, would you like for me to say to you, "You sound like a very hostile, angry guy. You really need to calm down"? Can you, in all honesty, deny that what you have said, here, is not an instance of abusive language against me?

I tell you what, Smith: How's about you go and make a list of quotations of my exact words from my posts in these forums, about which quotes you can bring yourself to claim, in all honesty, that they are instances of abusive language against you, or against anyone else in these forums, as I've compiled this list exhibiting your abusive language against me.

You, as I quoted above from your most recent reply post to me, say to me: "You're going on my ignore list."

Do you consider it something for you to be proud of, the fact that you feel an impulse to censor me? I mean, take a look at how relatively few posts I have in these forums, to date. It would be an easy matter for anybody to skim through them and see for themselves just what has provoked you to want to censor me. Do you imagine that anyone who would review them could, after having done so, come away saying, in all honesty, "Oh, it is just dreadful! Alas, to behold the torrent of savage verbal abuse poor T. E. Smith has had to endure from the pen of mean, old Paul E. Michael, in the space of less than 30 posts in these forums!" You and I both know that nobody could honestly say such a thing. For you to broadcast that I'm "going on [your] ignore list" is a further, loud and clear advertisement that you know that you cannot respond rationally to any of my criticism, nor to the questions I've asked you. You may as well think of your "ignore list" as your "chagrin bin". I can understand why you might silently put me on "ignore," but I scratch my head in puzzlement as to how you imagine it could be to your benefit, or credit, for you to publicly declare that you are putting me on "ignore". What, really, is there for you to feel triumphant about in resorting to such a performance as that?

And, I got news for you, Sir: you're certainly not going onto my "ignore list". I'll still be able to read, criticize, and subject to questioning, as I see fit, things you choose to write in your posts. It's obviously no skin off my nose that you will, on account of your self-imposed blinders, fail to respond rationally to such future questions and criticism from me—that you will make no attempt to defend your utterances against criticism that never comes into your view, by your own choosing. Your promised, upcoming, self-imposed silence to my criticism and questions will, really, be a welcome improvement in affairs in light of the stuff you've thus far written in reaction to my criticism and questions. I guess what I'm trying to say is that your failure to respond rationally to my criticism and questions while I am on your "ignore list" will not be any more dismal than your failure to do so while I have not been on it.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

GOD let Jerusalem be destroyed because the False Jews in it were pagan Ashkenazi doomed to first and second death.
Maybe you should understand that White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are the True House of Israel who are the only ones to spread the real Gospel?

My understanding is that Jesus said the blood of all the prophets murdered would be required if that generation. He also told parable whereby those who murdered the son were themselves killed for that reason. And I don’t believe that last sentence, but you certainly have the right to believe this.

 

[jaybo]

This wake-up post merely confirms that the vast majority of 'educated' Christians and the ministers of pagan Catholicism and Judaism have no grasp of the Revelation because as Jesus said: Their eyes are dimmed and their ears are blocked' because of the false teaching and lack of belief in the New Testament.
Mainly though their dullwittedness is due to the fact that they don't have the gifts of discernment, wisdom and knowledge freely dispensed as in 1 Corinthians 12:
8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Jews cannot access the gifts because they, like Muslims, are anti-christs who deny Jesus; Catholics cannot because they are pagans who worship the moon goddess Diana-Ishtar and offer cakes to the sun as well as contradicting GOD's order not to drink blood.

Satan's first gang of fallen angels is imprisoned inside Earth. His second gang and himself were expelled from heaven (I think in 1914) and are presently confined to Earth fomenting all today's sin, crime and troubles. and all will be imprisoned with the first gang during Jesus's millennium. After the millennium Satan and his two gangs will be freed and rise to have a short season of tempting humans to discover the last tares hiding in the wheat of Christains. Satan's leader on earth - the pope- has a throne showing Satan and gangs rising to go off on their short season. The hair of Satan is a beast to ram home the fact he is evil.
Catholics claim the throne is showing the resurrection of Jesus but in fact as the beast hair reveals it is actually teh release of Satan and his gangs,

Knowing his time is short Satan and his second gang are rushing around the world trying to recruit everyone to doubt the reality of GOD, Jesus and the Bible accounts.
I'm watching the world rush towards Armageddon which will be an interesting experience.

You wrote that Jews cannot access the gifts because they, like Muslims, are anti-christs who deny Jesus.

This anti-Semitism is absurd. Jesus was a Jew, as were all the apostles, including Paul. All of the early churches were 100% Jews. The entire Bible was written by Jews with one exception: Luke. There are many Jews whose spiritual eyes have been opened by God and recognize the Jewish Messiah as their Savior.

Try reading Romans 12. God can cut you off for your slandering of His chosen people!

 

[dwb001]

Getting back to the OP... why people disagree... particularly experts...

Well everyone has their own bias and they bring that to their interpretations.
I have mine and you have yours.
If you have no bias... then I would have to say that you are blind to your own bias.

And experts have much more to lose if their bias is exposed, or their arguments are disclosed as flawed.

It amazes me that people do not follow the instructions in Revelation on how to deal with Revelation.
Rev 1:3 "...reads, hears and keeps the words of this prophecy..." Paraphrase
So if Rev 1:3 is how one gets a blessing from Revelation... I would consider that the basis of how to engage with the book.
Read... Don't interpret... Just read and see what Jesus was showing John.
Hear... Take in the vision as John wrote it and listen to what the vision is saying.
Keep... Don't alter the text... don't bring in outside sources(other Prophets or teachings)

But people see a connection to other prophetic texts and bring those texts in to modify Revelation.
Just because two prophets see the same event does not mean that we can interchange the symbols from one book to another. Daniel and John saw many of the same events... but a Daniel image should not be forced on to John's writings... and vice versa.

And Revelation is a special book... everyone that I have heard misses this fact.
Jesus, himself, commissioned this book.
By special request from the risen Lord... the book of Revelation was ordered to be written. Rev 1:19.
Does that not have any impact on anyone else here?

 

[for_his_glory]

dwb001 I would not call it bias, but how each of us understands the book of Revelation by how we allow ourselves to study this book whether we allow man to teach us or study for ourselves. It does take from Genesis to Revelation as the prophecies extend through out the whole Bible. Some take Revelation literally while others, like me, take it literally and symbolically within the literal. There is no right or wrong, but only how we study, which includes history and cultural times of the era when John could only understand things as he could only see them within his time and eyes as I am sure John would not have seen in his visions those things we see in our own generation.

Revelation was given to John in visions as prophecies that had their beginnings in the Old Testament, being fulfilled in the New Testament and yet much to be fulfilled in future events before the great and terrible day of the Lords return.

Revelations is given to all nations and tongues that live throughout the whole world as in Jew and Gentile. Israel is mainly mentioned, but not all of Israel is Gods chosen people. Those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb are joined as a branch with Israel as God is the root of that branch and those who are sealed by His Holy Spirit are His own who find favor in Him, Romans 11:11-31. Therefore, our attention needs to be on those things that are happening in Israel especially Jerusalem as being Gods Holy City.

Within Gods final chastisement on man He continues to call them to repentance and one has to take into consideration during the time of the seven trumpets sounding what God pours out that destroys man will be a third part of every nation simultaneously being destroyed unless they repent and turn back to God. This also includes those who call themselves a Christian, but by name only as they have not Gods Holy Spirit dwelling in them and will also be destroyed, Matthew 7:21.​

 

[dwb001]

dwb001 I would not call it bias, but how each of us understands the book of Revelation by how we allow ourselves to study this book whether we allow man to teach us or study for ourselves. It does take from Genesis to Revelation as the prophecies extend through out the whole Bible. Some take Revelation literally while others, like me, take it literally and symbolically within the literal. There is no right or wrong, but only how we study, which includes history and cultural times of the era when John could only understand things as he could only see them within his time and eyes as I am sure John would not have seen in his visions those things we see in our own generation.

And that would be a bias.
The very words you are saying are showing your bias.
If there is no right or wrong... then the Bible can say whatever we want it to.
I believe that in order for John to be an accurate recorder he wrote what he saw... and if we saw the same thing we would write the same things.
You just implied that if John was smarter(more advanced in his education) he would have written something different.
That is so very biased... because you are further along your vision of what John wrote is clearer... not very convincing.

Revelation was given to John in visions as prophecies that had their beginnings in the Old Testament, being fulfilled in the New Testament and yet much to be fulfilled in future events before the great and terrible day of the Lords return.

In a single vision... please don't try to muddy the water with multiple visions... just a single vision.

Revelations​

Do you mean the book of Revelation?
Revelations is not a book of the Bible.

is given to all nations and tongues that live throughout the whole world as in Jew and Gentile. Israel is mainly mentioned, but not all of Israel is Gods chosen people. Those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb are joined as a branch with Israel as God is the root of that branch and those who are sealed by His Holy Spirit are His own who find favor in Him, Romans 11:11-31. Therefore, our attention needs to be on those things that are happening in Israel especially Jerusalem as being Gods Holy City.

Within Gods final chastisement on man He continues to call them to repentance and one has to take into consideration during the time of the seven trumpets sounding what God pours out that destroys man will be a third part of every nation simultaneously being destroyed unless they repent and turn back to God. This also includes those who call themselves a Christian, but by name only as they have not Gods Holy Spirit dwelling in them and will also be destroyed, Matthew 7:21.​

And rather then engaging with the topic... it sounds like you just want to preach.
I would prefer if you stuck to topic.

 

[for_his_glory]

And that would be a bias.
The very words you are saying are showing your bias.
If there is no right or wrong... then the Bible can say whatever we want it to.
I believe that in order for John to be an accurate recorder he wrote what he saw... and if we saw the same thing we would write the same things.
You just implied that if John was smarter(more advanced in his education) he would have written something different.
That is so very biased... because you are further along your vision of what John wrote is clearer... not very convincing.


In a single vision... please don't try to muddy the water with multiple visions... just a single vision.

Do you mean the book of Revelation?
Revelations is not a book of the Bible.

And rather then engaging with the topic... it sounds like you just want to preach.
I would prefer if you stuck to topic.

There is nothing bias in what I wrote as we can clearly see that our understandings are not all the same and many do claim they are right and everyone else is wrong claiming they are experts, which is something I would never do as I have been corrected by others as the Holy Spirt has used others to correct my understandings as we need to be opened for correction.

John could never understand the world we live in now with all the technology, weaponry there is today and the different types of governments there are today, just like we could not recognize any future technology, weaponry etc. etc.

Umm, you might want to read Revelations as John received multiple different visions while he was in the Spirit on the isle of Patmos. It was not just one long continual vision.

Of course I'm talking about the book of Revelation. What do you mean Revelation is not a book of the Bible?

I'm not preaching anything, but giving my replies to that of the OP why the experts disagree as everyone else is giving their understandings. If you do not like my replies then please ignore them and do not reply back, it's that simple.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I don't understand your reasoning for the statement above that I highlighted. The author doesn't claim to be an expert. He is explaining why theologians of different faiths, who are considered to be the most knowledgeable
on the prophecies, have different interpretations of the same prophecies. In the piece Mr. Wilson is sharing four hermeneutics that he had previous discovered over the course of several years. You yourself state "there are always new things to learn". "What we thought we knew, another can bring a different light of truth". This is exactly what Mr. Wilson is trying to do. As one who has taken the time to understand his discoveries and realize they are indeed the "present truth", the challenge with knowing "present truth", is finding individuals who are "teachable", as you yourself acknowledge we should be, but seem to be resistant. The discovery of the four hermeneutics, is the only means by which one can make the Bible it's own interpreter/speak for itself, overriding our individual biases and impediments, which he is making his readers aware of.

The laws of mathematics, the laws of gravity, are recognized the world over, therefore, there is worldwide unity because the world understands they are natural laws that govern their behavior. If christians recognized the four laws Mr. Wilson has discovered and applied them correctly as in dealing with math problems there would be unity, within our Christian communities instead of diversity, and this would edify the Bible teachings as Paul points out in (1Cor. 14:26)

As you understand the four hermeneutics he discovered, which ones do you think would not allow the Bible to speak for itself?

Example: rule one deals with chronology within each apocalyptic prophecy. It states events will happen in the order given, (and fulfilled prophecy as proven this every time, therefore it is a constant, therefore it must be a natural law) In all of your interpretations of Rev., have you given thought to chronology, and does your interpretation follow this rule?

A private interpretation, does not, but rather changes the chronology to fit ones bias. Which is why there are multiple interpretations. Does this sound reasonable to you?

It leaves out the historic events that match the things John saw. All the hermeneutical studies in the world will be of no use if one is not educated in history. If one applied hermeneutical education to Isaiah 53 and knew nothing of the birth and life and death of Jesus, the truth would still elude the most educated.

 

[dwb001]

There is nothing bias in what I wrote as we can clearly see that our understandings are not all the same and many do claim they are right and everyone else is wrong claiming they are experts, which is something I would never do as I have been corrected by others as the Holy Spirt has used others to correct my understandings as we need to be opened for correction.

And again you show a bias.

John could never understand the world we live in now with all the technology, weaponry there is today and the different types of governments there are today, just like we could not recognize any future technology, weaponry etc. etc.

Prove it. Prove that the vision given by Jesus would be any different than the one John saw.

Umm, you might want to read Revelations as John received multiple different visions while he was in the Spirit on the isle of Patmos. It was not just one long continual vision.

When did John exit the Spirit and reenter? When did one vision stop and another begin?
John moves from place to place but never exits the vision.

Of course I'm talking about the book of Revelation. What do you mean Revelation is not a book of the Bible?

You said Revelations... the s makes it something else.
Please be careful with your words.

I'm not preaching anything, but giving my replies to that of the OP why the experts disagree as everyone else is giving their understandings. If you do not like my replies then please ignore them and do not reply back, it's that simple.

If I could ignore you I would... but that is not an option on this site.
I rely to ideas that are faulty... not to people.
If you say nothing incorrect... don't expect me to say anything.
If you make statements of fact that are only opinion... I will respond to the faulty idea.

 

[for_his_glory]

And again you show a bias.


Prove it. Prove that the vision given by Jesus would be any different than the one John saw.

When did John exit the Spirit and reenter? When did one vision stop and another begin?
John moves from place to place but never exits the vision.

You said Revelations... the s makes it something else.
Please be careful with your words.

If I could ignore you I would... but that is not an option on this site.
I rely to ideas that are faulty... not to people.
If you say nothing incorrect... don't expect me to say anything.
If you make statements of fact that are only opinion... I will respond to the faulty idea.

I'm done. You have a good day as you have already proven the point of the OP by not wanting to have a healthy conversation with me.

 

[dwb001]

I'm done. You have a good day as you have already proven the point of the OP by not wanting to have a healthy conversation with me.

You see.... I have to engage with poor ideas.
An important part of any healthy conversation is the asking of questions.
When did you ask me a question that I didn't engage with?
I have asked a couple of you in post #137 that you have refused to engage with.
There are still questions I have asked that you won't answer... and yet you say that you are done.
By definition, you are the one giving up on healthy conversation.
Please don't hide every time your worldview is questioned.
It is not healthy... in fact I believe it retards your growth.
That is what we are all here for, isn't it? To help each other grow?

 

[for_his_glory]

You see.... I have to engage with poor ideas.
An important part of any healthy conversation is the asking of questions.
When did you ask me a question that I didn't engage with?
I have asked a couple of you in post #137 that you have refused to engage with.
There are still questions I have asked that you won't answer... and yet you say that you are done.
By definition, you are the one giving up on healthy conversation.
Please don't hide every time your worldview is questioned.
It is not healthy... in fact I believe it retards your growth.
That is what we are all here for, isn't it? To help each other grow?

One can only grow if given to healthy conversations in which as you always do would rather argue your points of views without even considering others points of views or understandings. This is why so called experts can not even agree. If you want in-depth understanding of how I understand the book of Revelation, which by the way you said was not in the Bible, then go to the End Time forum and click on Revelation as you can read the book I wrote on Revelation.

Again, I never tell people they have to believe me, but to do their own studying from the scriptures I give.