cmotherofpirl Posted July 30, 2005 Share Posted July 30, 2005 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Jul 29 2005, 04:08 PM']Hrm... I'm Catholic and you have me really confused. Well... the difference between premils and amills - premills believe Christ has yet to establish a kingdom, amills believe he has. Basically Protestants HAVE to reject amill because if Christ has established a kingdom, where is it? (answer: The Catholic Church is the only one who can make such a claim) The end of the world will ensue at the second advent of Christ (yes inDouche He is coming again and we do not know the hour or the day so we must be ready), however unlike 'rolling end the world' theorists who actually establish dates for the end of the world (Billy Graham himself has done this), we live carrying out the mission to evangelize, both realizing we could be in heaven tomorrow, but we must continue in the temporal affairs of the world (feeding the hungry, curing the sick, visiting the imprisoned, clothing the naked, et.al.) The "1000 years" as I understand it, but I'm still learning is an age we are living in now, the thousand years is not necessarily meant to be taken literally (see the 10 biblical ground rules for studing Eschatology) - so that makes us amill. "Rapture" by David Currie, is a wonderful positive look at biblical exegesis on the "Last Days". In a very real way we are living in the Last Days, though not in the way many Protestants believe we are. I'm still reading through material though, but this is probably an area we could all use some brushing up, if not learning about for the first time as I pretty much am. [right][snapback]664191[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 30, 2005 Share Posted July 30, 2005 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Jul 29 2005, 04:08 PM']Hrm... I'm Catholic and you have me really confused. Well... the difference between premils and amills - premills believe Christ has yet to establish a kingdom, amills believe he has. Basically Protestants HAVE to reject amill because if Christ has established a kingdom, where is it? (answer: The Catholic Church is the only one who can make such a claim) The end of the world will ensue at the second advent of Christ (yes inDouche He is coming again and we do not know the hour or the day so we must be ready), however unlike 'rolling end the world' theorists who actually establish dates for the end of the world (Billy Graham himself has done this), we live carrying out the mission to evangelize, both realizing we could be in heaven tomorrow, but we must continue in the temporal affairs of the world (feeding the hungry, curing the sick, visiting the imprisoned, clothing the naked, et.al.) The "1000 years" as I understand it, but I'm still learning is an age we are living in now, the thousand years is not necessarily meant to be taken literally (see the 10 biblical ground rules for studing Eschatology) - so that makes us amill. "Rapture" by David Currie, is a wonderful positive look at biblical exegesis on the "Last Days". In a very real way we are living in the Last Days, though not in the way many Protestants believe we are. I'm still reading through material though, but this is probably an area we could all use some brushing up, if not learning about for the first time as I pretty much am. [right][snapback]664191[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I never said anything about taking 1000 years literally. The age of peace is not an age established by Christ, it is simply an age of peace which is the result of the minor[ in God's terms not ours] chastisement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted July 30, 2005 Author Share Posted July 30, 2005 (edited) You're quickly written four points don't say much of anything to someone who is not familiar with the escatology. Perhaps you could expand on each of your four points. I should add, my response wasn't necessarily a disagreement with your post. I didn't understand anything that you were trying to say in your post. I was merely sharing my point of view. Edited July 30, 2005 by Brother Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Yeah Mulls, you know we all love ya. Dont sweat it. The only problem with one of the theories(cant remember which one but it coincides with that whole "Left Behind" thing) is there is a large flaw in it. My sister had me watch the original when it came out, I wasnt impressed with any of it. The problem: If all the good folks are "caught up in the clouds" to meet God, then who is left "good" to lead the rest of the folks on Earth toward God. It would seem rather silly for God to take these folks away and leave the rest *not worthy enough* on earth to go through a tribulation. Who will be their example. It just baffles the mind. Pax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Um, you're fogetting... They all can just crack open the Bibles that are left behind, read it and voila! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted August 1, 2005 Author Share Posted August 1, 2005 Don't forget, Kirk Cameron gives us an example how they will 'get saved' too with preachers who didn't 'really believe in Jesus' even though they 'thought they did' and those good Gospel reverands who have recorded tapes for those who are 'left behind'. The left behind 'rapture', like 'faith alone' is a fantasy, completely lacking any biblical evidence or support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 So much for assurance if the pastor wasn't saved though he thought he was... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_M Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulls Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 way to take movies seriously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_M Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted August 2, 2005 Author Share Posted August 2, 2005 The movie was modeled quite seriously mulls. They had a huge campaign to try to get as many people to see it as possible, because they strongly believed what they were filming is the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_M Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 you mean "left behind"? I think I saw that....if it's the one I think I saw..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Aug 2 2005, 08:40 AM']The movie was modeled quite seriously mulls. They had a huge campaign to try to get as many people to see it as possible, because they strongly believed what they were filming is the truth. [right][snapback]668434[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Well, I really doubt that most people who read the books and/or saw the movie thought, "Yep, this is how it's going to happen." Even the authors said it was a ficticious account of how it [i]could [/i]happen. Though no doubt they believed something "to that effect" was going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted August 2, 2005 Author Share Posted August 2, 2005 Exactly: "Something close to this effect will happen". I believed it. -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 My sis believed it. And hoped for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now