An SDA who eschews exclusivism and advocates the Reformers' interpretation of antichrist? I'll take it.
The pope or Pr. Harry? Hmm............tough choice. I always wondered why Leroy E Froom was messing around with SDA. Now I know.
a very good example of why, i think, the lord likes you.
beware these snakes.
1228 diábolos (from 1225 /diabállō, "to slander, accuse, defame") – properly, a slanderer; a false accuser; unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship.
[1228 (diábolos) is the root of the English word, "Devil" (see also Webster's Dictionary).
1228 (diabolos) in secular Greek means "backbiter," i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer). 1228 (diábolos) is literally someone who "casts through," i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy). Satan is used by God in this plan – as a predictable wind-up toy, playing out his evil nature.]
you truly want to brust my bubble don't you?
No, I really don't wanna brust your bubble. It will brust of its own accord, and under its own weight, without any assistance from me.
I just don't close the door to the fact that God may have some people out there that He speaks to.
Neither do I, but based on their record to date, even you gotta admit their hit rate has been pretty abysmal.
What I am supporting is Rainy and her right to be here and discuss these issues with us.
Straw man. So do I. I did not tell her to go away, and wish she hadn't. I love all of you just the same regardless of dis/agreement on eschatological matters.
You can get irate with me all you want. If it helps protect Rainy from the abusive feeling she will get from you...then I will take it. I'm not sure why you seem so frantic about it all, other than you hate that pentecostals are pentecostals.
Ad hominem. You attribute some very powerful and unpleasant emotions to me that I simply don't recognise, and would most likely be hypertensive if I did. My BP was fine last time I checked. My only agenda, if I have one, is the defense of truth against error, and I most certainly do not 'hate' pentecostals. I have no idea where you got that from, other than a possible desire to becloud the issue.
If I want to personally check the list of all the anti-christ types that this old world has seen...what is it to you?
Sorry, not a clue what you're saying here. I have no problem with you checking any list/s you want. I might even encourage you to do so if it helps.
If you truly think it's not a salvation issue...why are you so bent on changing people's minds?
Firstly, you really shouldn't confuse defending a position with proselytising for it. I simply present the case. The rest is entirely up to you, and I do not lose any sleep over what you do with what I post.
Secondly, I do not believe it affects the salvation of Christians who hold opposing views, but there is no doubt it can affect the salvation of non-Christians (such as unbelieving Jews, for example) who vainly imagine they can put off saving faith until their Messiah returns. Such ideas strike at the heart of the gospel, as both Galatians and Hebrews (and many other NT passages) attest. To teach there will be further opportunity for salvation following the second advent based on racial identity (or how the 'nations' treated the Jews) is a fundamental error, and yes, I will shout it from the rooftops for the benefit of anyone who will listen.
National Enquirer mentality
Again, ad hominem.
You watch some video or read some book written by someone who wants to banish certain ideas other have, and you are an expert all of sudden.
Straw men and ad hominem arguments all in the same sentence. You excel yourself.
I don't believe for two seconds that you ever believed similar to what I do.
I don't doubt it for a moment. But minor differences aside, the most basic errors are pretty much the same across the board.
You concern me because you do not act like someone who truly believes this is not a salvation issue, like you originally told us.
Already addressed above, I believe.
Meantime, back at the palace, let's just agree to differ shall we?
By all means share how you feel, but I would have thought my palace 'joke' was evidence that my humour is not quite spent yet.
Don't forget, you challenged me to come up with vids that are representative of what I believe. If you prefer that I don't respond to direct questions in future, just say so.
Well I understood the 'palace' reference as being our place within the body of Christ, not as a joke.
That's a much better interpretation (just for a change!), but no, not what I had in mind. It was more along the lines of your 'meanwhile, back at the ranch,' as in:
A quote line to introduce a new topic of conversation, or to end a particualarly embarrassing line of talk.
It really wasn't a challenge. Just a comment to ponder on.
Sure looked like a challenge to me. If I'd known, I wouldn't have bothered.
..why isn't the church putting out more to counter it?
Which church would that be then? How about The Finalist Church of No Second Chance? Or The Church of The Elusive Third Temple? I quite like The Church of the Noisiest Rapture You're Ever Likely To Hear This Side of The Second Advent - What, With A Cry of Command, The Voice of an Archangel, and God Blowing His Own Trumpet To Boot, And All To Be Swiftly Followed By The General Resurrection And Judgment - So What's Secret About That Then, And Where's Your Millennium Now? '
But none of those are gonna work, are they? And the reasons should be pretty obvious. Thankfully, Christians have decided to divide themselves on much more serious matters, such as church govt. and infant baptism. Who needs to add eschatology to the mix?
...all I see is basher videos by individual people of believers and non-believers alike. Why not just put good news info out there for the people to see?
I don't know what you mean. The 'news' that Pr. Harry is the Antichrist is the best news since Luther almost gave himself a black fingernail. Personally, I'll be keeping a close eye on his forehead.
Let's face it veks, I'm never gonna be nominated for the Annual Refreshed Award for Tact & Diplomacy, am I? Yeah, I tend to call a spade a spade, and when I see YT vids with titles such as these:
......I make no apologies for describing them as sensationalist trash. That's exactly what they are. They even contradict each other in their titles for goodness sake. Some say construction is about to start, others that it's almost complete. Speaking of which, how's this for a title?:
An indepth look at the rebuilding of the Jewish Third Temple Jesus warned us about
I mean, ........really. I take it this was recorded in one of those gospels that didn't quite make it into the canon? But seriously(!), this is what passes for prophetic fulfilment for - what - maybe up to 90% of US believers today? This is what they're all getting so excited about? This story has been doing the rounds for 70-odd years now, and the frenzy shows no signs of abating. On the contrary, there is every indication that it still has some way to go before it reaches fever pitch and pops the top of the looney tune thermometer.
And when there's still no 3rd Temple to show for all that wasted time, effort and energy, do you think their enthusiasm for it will then die down? Will it heck. I'm still not quite sure why refreshed asked (apparently rhetorically) where our rebuttals of all this garbage were to be found.
Why would you invite a critique of material that comes out of your own stable, then take offence when proferred?
And speaking of stables, where's high ho silver when you need him?
Remember that sis. who left an 'instruction manual' to family & friends in the event of her sudden & mysterious disappearance? When I can find the time, was seriously considering writing a rebuttal google doc. myself & linking it in the comments below her vid.
But I'd probably be wasting my time - apart from appearing like an ogre who would take candy away from a baby. Do I really want to be the one to disabuse her? Sometimes, it's best to leave them well alone with their pet delusions.
OTOH, other readers might benefit from a rebuttal.