ARCHIVE: The "Great tribulation" and the Testimony of the Early Church Fathers
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Knight the Canned Ham
Knight the Canned Ham
Oy vey,
Preterists are just plain bizarre! If the Great Tribulation could go unnoticed at the time of its occurrence (which is what you are arguing) what possible purpose could it have served as a prophetic event?
Lift thy visor and pay attention!
It WAS noticed.
Those who noticed best and did the best documentation were unbelievers (Josephus, Tacitus).
The patristics quoted were just not very sharp tools. Heck man, only one (Didymus the Blind) so much as knew Hebrew; you think they would recognize Hebrew figures of speech?!?
Matthew 24:98 See, I have told you for the 765th time, and you are still dense.
You'd be hard pressed to deny human ability to misunderstand things and miss prophetic significance. Uh, how many years did Israel and Judah miss the implementation of the Deuteronomic curses...?
JP
Knight the Canned Ham
Oy vey,
Preterists are just plain bizarre! If the Great Tribulation could go unnoticed at the time of its occurrence (which is what you are arguing) what possible purpose could it have served as a prophetic event?
Lift thy visor and pay attention!
It WAS noticed.
Those who noticed best and did the best documentation were unbelievers (Josephus, Tacitus).
The patristics quoted were just not very sharp tools. Heck man, only one (Didymus the Blind) so much as knew Hebrew; you think they would recognize Hebrew figures of speech?!?
Matthew 24:98 See, I have told you for the 765th time, and you are still dense.
You'd be hard pressed to deny human ability to misunderstand things and miss prophetic significance. Uh, how many years did Israel and Judah miss the implementation of the Deuteronomic curses...?
JP
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Dear Knight:
I wanted to acknowledge your request to me to also comment on that post directed to JP. I will do so as soon as possible, and I have some thoughts to add not addressed by JP so it will not be redundant.
I wanted to acknowledge your request to me to also comment on that post directed to JP. I will do so as soon as possible, and I have some thoughts to add not addressed by JP so it will not be redundant.
Forward Eorlingas!!
Forward Eorlingas!!
Not as bizarre as DFs who continue to use a phrase that does not appear in scripture, and which is actually a patchwork of ideas. THE Great Tribulation? I haven't seen inside such a book, but is this possibly one of the inspired headings in the equally inspired SRB?
Possibly because you are looking for an eighteen wheeler where none should be. I am sure the Jews noticed it though, as did the Christians who were living there at the time. And it is not, surely, beyond the bounds of reason that some of those disciples would still be around in 70ad as leaders of the church, just as John was alledgedly still around in 90ad?
No, more like: Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. *Yet this tribulation will be completely misunderstood by My people in the name of defending the indefensible."
*Added for risible effect
Forward Eorlingas!!
Not as bizarre as DFs who continue to use a phrase that does not appear in scripture, and which is actually a patchwork of ideas. THE Great Tribulation? I haven't seen inside such a book, but is this possibly one of the inspired headings in the equally inspired SRB?
bold added
Possibly because you are looking for an eighteen wheeler where none should be. I am sure the Jews noticed it though, as did the Christians who were living there at the time. And it is not, surely, beyond the bounds of reason that some of those disciples would still be around in 70ad as leaders of the church, just as John was alledgedly still around in 90ad?
I don't seem to remember Jesus including the Great Tribulation going unnoticed in His prophecy regarding the Great Tribulation.
Now let's see did the verse go.....
Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. *Yet this Tribulation will go completely unnoticed by My people."
* Added for comedic value
No, more like: Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. *Yet this tribulation will be completely misunderstood by My people in the name of defending the indefensible."
*Added for risible effect
Last edited:
Smilax, You Forget --
Smilax, You Forget --
Smilax, you apparently haven't heard the answer:
"Jesus made two similar discourses at about the same time! One was about 70 AD and the other was about the future Great Tribulation!"
In the great tradition of:
Q: "When Jesus said "Blessed are you who whine" in the Sermon on the Mount, it's in the 3rd person in Matt and thd 2nd person in Luke. Which is correct?"
A: "Both! Maybe he said both in the same discourse -- once in 2nd person the other in 3rd. Or maybe he said one while on the Mount and the other after he walked down on the plain."
:crackup:
JP
Smilax, You Forget --
Smilax, you apparently haven't heard the answer:
"Jesus made two similar discourses at about the same time! One was about 70 AD and the other was about the future Great Tribulation!"
In the great tradition of:
Q: "When Jesus said "Blessed are you who whine" in the Sermon on the Mount, it's in the 3rd person in Matt and thd 2nd person in Luke. Which is correct?"
A: "Both! Maybe he said both in the same discourse -- once in 2nd person the other in 3rd. Or maybe he said one while on the Mount and the other after he walked down on the plain."
:crackup:
JP
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Dee Dee accuses me of lacking reading skills,but yet she provided NOTHING to back up her charges against me.Yes,she provided more proof that she simply will not believe what Scripture says when it doesn´t fit her mistaken beliefs.
She also demonstrates that she understands nothing about warfare.She seems to think that the idea of fighting on horseback is some obsolete art and that this type of warfare will never happen.She should talk to the USA Military and inform them that they are wasting their time by continuing to have a Calvary.
She proves that she is nothing more than a modern day Sadducee.If she would have lived before the Lord was born at Bethelem,she would have poured her scorn upon the following verse as well:
"Therefore,the Lord Himself shall give you a sign;Behold,the virgin shall conceive,and bear a Son,and shall call His name Immanuel"(Isa.7:14).
Since by her experience she could not conceive of such a thing happening,she would put her REASON above REVELATION and deny what Scripture so plainly states.I am sure that she would have a grand old time deriding those who believe that God will fulfill this verse just as it is written.
And if you need further proof of her unbelief,she has aleardy provided it by her interpretation of the prophecies of Zechariah.When it is revealed that the Lord will fight against all the nations that will come against Jerusalem in the future,Dee Dee says that this refers to Jerusalem in 70AD when Jerusalem was utterly destoyed.
She twists the Scriptures until she has them saying EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what they actually say.And with that she is real proud of herself!
In His grace,--Jerry
She also demonstrates that she understands nothing about warfare.She seems to think that the idea of fighting on horseback is some obsolete art and that this type of warfare will never happen.She should talk to the USA Military and inform them that they are wasting their time by continuing to have a Calvary.
She proves that she is nothing more than a modern day Sadducee.If she would have lived before the Lord was born at Bethelem,she would have poured her scorn upon the following verse as well:
"Therefore,the Lord Himself shall give you a sign;Behold,the virgin shall conceive,and bear a Son,and shall call His name Immanuel"(Isa.7:14).
Since by her experience she could not conceive of such a thing happening,she would put her REASON above REVELATION and deny what Scripture so plainly states.I am sure that she would have a grand old time deriding those who believe that God will fulfill this verse just as it is written.
And if you need further proof of her unbelief,she has aleardy provided it by her interpretation of the prophecies of Zechariah.When it is revealed that the Lord will fight against all the nations that will come against Jerusalem in the future,Dee Dee says that this refers to Jerusalem in 70AD when Jerusalem was utterly destoyed.
She twists the Scriptures until she has them saying EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what they actually say.And with that she is real proud of herself!
In His grace,--Jerry
Last edited:
yashcheritsiy
New member
Re: There are still marbles beneath that visor
Re: There are still marbles beneath that visor
Greetings,
Ah yes, JP, blaming everything on "hyperbolic ancient texts" which you can't explain and/or which shoots preterism down like slow duck, eh?
If you want to allegorise, well, you go boy! :thumb:
I'll prefer to allegorise only that which the context (and not theological outrage) suggests should be allegorised.
Yashcheritsiy
Re: There are still marbles beneath that visor
Originally posted by jpholding
Tut tut. Knight asked for more preterists to stop in and make his day? Oh dear. Did I just hear a can opener?
I shall return in the morning once I have read back through this exchange...meanwhile one may peruse
weblinks deleted...
There goes Knight again, reading a hyperbolic ancient text like a modern literal news report... :doh:
JP
Greetings,
Ah yes, JP, blaming everything on "hyperbolic ancient texts" which you can't explain and/or which shoots preterism down like slow duck, eh?
If you want to allegorise, well, you go boy! :thumb:
I'll prefer to allegorise only that which the context (and not theological outrage) suggests should be allegorised.
Yashcheritsiy
Faramir
New member
Sarcams Mode OFF
Sarcams Mode OFF
Dear Forum:
I am posting this for two reasons:
1) I am new to TOL and not every one knows me and may take some of the things I say in the wrong way.
2) In light of recent post on other threads on TOL that seem to be of a personal attack nature, I just wanted to clarify where I am coming from.
With that said:
Some of my post on this tread have had a somewhat (ok very) sarcastic tone. I in no way intend for this to be or to be taken as a personal attack on any of my "opponents", and I do not consider there similar statements a personal attack on me.
I consider eschatology to be a non-salvation issue and therefore, in the big picture I consider my "opponents" in this debate as brothers and sisters in Christ.
I use sarcasm because it is an effective rhetorical tool used in a debate and it makes the debate a whole lot more interesting. I like using it and I like when it is used against me.
This is mainly directed to those here at TOL who do are reading this thread, but not participating. I assume that my "opponents" in the debate already know this because they can give it with the best of them. And I do make an effort to not use sarcasm or "inflamatory" language against someone unless I percieve that they have used a similar tactic agasint me or one of my "allies"
Sorry for the sap Solly.
Sarcams Mode OFF
Dear Forum:
I am posting this for two reasons:
1) I am new to TOL and not every one knows me and may take some of the things I say in the wrong way.
2) In light of recent post on other threads on TOL that seem to be of a personal attack nature, I just wanted to clarify where I am coming from.
With that said:
Some of my post on this tread have had a somewhat (ok very) sarcastic tone. I in no way intend for this to be or to be taken as a personal attack on any of my "opponents", and I do not consider there similar statements a personal attack on me.
I consider eschatology to be a non-salvation issue and therefore, in the big picture I consider my "opponents" in this debate as brothers and sisters in Christ.
I use sarcasm because it is an effective rhetorical tool used in a debate and it makes the debate a whole lot more interesting. I like using it and I like when it is used against me.
This is mainly directed to those here at TOL who do are reading this thread, but not participating. I assume that my "opponents" in the debate already know this because they can give it with the best of them. And I do make an effort to not use sarcasm or "inflamatory" language against someone unless I percieve that they have used a similar tactic agasint me or one of my "allies"
Sorry for the sap Solly.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Yes,they not only are forced to allegorize every prophecy that does not fit their distorted views,but they prove over and over that they can also delude their minds into believing things which are simply unbelievable.
For instance,their own site,the preteristarchive.com says,"Irenaeus,Bishop of Lyons,companion of Polycarp,John´s pupil..."
So they admit that Irenaeus and Polycarp were companions,and that Polycarp studied under John,the very author of the Revelation.If there is any man´s testimony outside of the Apostles that we can trust in regard to things like the antichrist,it would be Irenaeus.And it would be pure folly to even assert that Irenaeus would not know whether or not the events concerning the antichrist had come to pass or not.
But there are those BRILLIANT scholars taking part in these discussions who would attempt to undermine what he says by saying that he did not even have a knowledge of the languages of the OT.But that same person must not understand that John,as well as Polycarp and Irenaeus,could all speak and write in the Greek language.
And if anyone has even bothered to read the writings of Irenaeus it is obvious that he was very serious when it came to the revealed things of God.So one must delude their minds to believe that Irenaeus would not have a knowledge as to whether the things concerning the "great tribulation" have come to pass or not.
In Book Five,Chapter XXV,"The Fruad,Pride,and Tyrannical Kingdom of Antichrist as Described by Daniel and Paul",Irenaeus writes that the reign of Antichrist REMAINS IN THE FUTURE:
"1.And not only by the particulars already mentioned,but also by means of the EVENTS WHICH SHALL OCCUR IN THE TIME OF ANTICHRIST is it shown..."
2....in which Temple the enemy SHALL sit,endeavoring to show himself as Christ,as the Lord also declares:'But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,which has been spoken of by Daniel the prophet,standing in the holy place...
We also read the following:
"But he (John) indicates the number of the name now (the mark of the beast),that WHEN THIS MAN COMES we may avoid him,being aware of who he is"("Against Heresies 5.30.4).
"For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just,which takes place AFTER THE COMING OF THE ANTICHRIST,and the destruction of ALL NATIONS under his rule..."("Against Heresies",5.35.1).
There is no doubt that Irenaeus was a serious stundent of the Holy Scriptures,so how are we supposed to believe (even though he was a companion of Polycarp,who was a student of the Apostle John)John) that he would be IGNORANT of the fact that the "great tribulation" and the "antichrist" had already come and gone?
I would suggest that the only way that anyone could believe this is by DELUDING their mind!
Not only that,but there is not any evidence that even one of the Christians who lived in the second century believed that the "great tribulation" and the "antichrist" had come and gone.
But despite all this,there are those who will point to the testimony of unbelievers in their failed efforts to convince anyone gullible enough to believe their "fables".
In His grace,--Jerry
For instance,their own site,the preteristarchive.com says,"Irenaeus,Bishop of Lyons,companion of Polycarp,John´s pupil..."
So they admit that Irenaeus and Polycarp were companions,and that Polycarp studied under John,the very author of the Revelation.If there is any man´s testimony outside of the Apostles that we can trust in regard to things like the antichrist,it would be Irenaeus.And it would be pure folly to even assert that Irenaeus would not know whether or not the events concerning the antichrist had come to pass or not.
But there are those BRILLIANT scholars taking part in these discussions who would attempt to undermine what he says by saying that he did not even have a knowledge of the languages of the OT.But that same person must not understand that John,as well as Polycarp and Irenaeus,could all speak and write in the Greek language.
And if anyone has even bothered to read the writings of Irenaeus it is obvious that he was very serious when it came to the revealed things of God.So one must delude their minds to believe that Irenaeus would not have a knowledge as to whether the things concerning the "great tribulation" have come to pass or not.
In Book Five,Chapter XXV,"The Fruad,Pride,and Tyrannical Kingdom of Antichrist as Described by Daniel and Paul",Irenaeus writes that the reign of Antichrist REMAINS IN THE FUTURE:
"1.And not only by the particulars already mentioned,but also by means of the EVENTS WHICH SHALL OCCUR IN THE TIME OF ANTICHRIST is it shown..."
2....in which Temple the enemy SHALL sit,endeavoring to show himself as Christ,as the Lord also declares:'But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,which has been spoken of by Daniel the prophet,standing in the holy place...
We also read the following:
"But he (John) indicates the number of the name now (the mark of the beast),that WHEN THIS MAN COMES we may avoid him,being aware of who he is"("Against Heresies 5.30.4).
"For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just,which takes place AFTER THE COMING OF THE ANTICHRIST,and the destruction of ALL NATIONS under his rule..."("Against Heresies",5.35.1).
There is no doubt that Irenaeus was a serious stundent of the Holy Scriptures,so how are we supposed to believe (even though he was a companion of Polycarp,who was a student of the Apostle John)John) that he would be IGNORANT of the fact that the "great tribulation" and the "antichrist" had already come and gone?
I would suggest that the only way that anyone could believe this is by DELUDING their mind!
Not only that,but there is not any evidence that even one of the Christians who lived in the second century believed that the "great tribulation" and the "antichrist" had come and gone.
But despite all this,there are those who will point to the testimony of unbelievers in their failed efforts to convince anyone gullible enough to believe their "fables".
In His grace,--Jerry
smilax
New member
Okay. So when do we read apocalyptic visions literally, and where do we draw the line? When a bear takes over the world? When a giant bowl of fermented grape juice hovers over our heads? Why don't we give God a body while we're at it?
On the other hand, the context (first-century Jewish audience, along with the time markers) demands fulfillment (at least in the primary sense) during that span.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
..... and why can't we trust Irenaeus when he says that Jesus lived to be fifty years old?? And why can't we trust Irenaeus when he says that the Church is Israel?? What an ad hoc arbitrary tripe salad. The Bible is full of records of people who studied under the Apostle's themselves and fell into grievous error..... and who is talking about putting inordiant credence into the words of men?
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Err, Jerry, we have been done this road before. You do realize that the OT was written originally in Hebrew don't you?? That was what JP said. You trying to trump that by claiming that they knew the language of a translation (the LXX) is just plain dumb. You might as well claim that I know the ancient languages because I can read an English translation.
Aaahhh, Dee Dee
You spoke to him!!
----
Jerry
A very serious student indeed, as were all the church fathers. None more serious than Origen perhaps, who was never sainted because of his errors. And where did all this serious get them? The Roman Catholic Church. (apologies to any RCs reading)
Look, look everybody, I'm right because everybody who agrees with me in the Church Fathers are right as well!
Jerry Shugart?
No, the Pope!!
When do you make that pilgrimage Jerry, since you put so much trust in the ECF?
Perhaps you missed my post where I pointed out that Thomas Oden can assemble a catena of quotes from the ECF showing they believed in Justification by faith alone, and a Catholic writer could just as easily do the same showing justification by works.
You spoke to him!!
----
Jerry
A very serious student indeed, as were all the church fathers. None more serious than Origen perhaps, who was never sainted because of his errors. And where did all this serious get them? The Roman Catholic Church. (apologies to any RCs reading)
Look, look everybody, I'm right because everybody who agrees with me in the Church Fathers are right as well!
Jerry Shugart?
No, the Pope!!
When do you make that pilgrimage Jerry, since you put so much trust in the ECF?
Perhaps you missed my post where I pointed out that Thomas Oden can assemble a catena of quotes from the ECF showing they believed in Justification by faith alone, and a Catholic writer could just as easily do the same showing justification by works.
Last edited:
Faramir
New member
Sarcasm Mode ON
Sarcasm Mode ON
I'm Back!!!!
Just a suggestion, when you are being mocked, make sure you know why. :doh:
Did you read this (emphasis mine):
I take your questions seriously. That is why I am here. I love being challenged. I have no problem answering any question that you ask. What I have a problem with is the portion of the above quote that is in bold.
You (the plural you, not just Knight) ask us (also plural ) a question. Fine. We answer the question. Fine. Then you (plural) tell us we are wrong, without saying why, without addressing the issues we raised. Then you expect us to answer more questions. Then you accuse us of not answering. If this is your idea of an argument I can give you a link to a Monty Python sketch that you would love .
You are constantly attacking the preterist position (I have no problem with this is a debate forum, I expect that). Then when the preterist answer, you tell us we are wrong (again, no problem, I don't really expect you to agree with us). The you tell us we are wrong, without addressing the issues raised in our answer and then ask us a million more question and accuse us of being "chicken" because we can not address one million of your questions (that figure is of course hyperbolic )
I put the area that I have a problem in bold for your convenience.
It seems to me that this is the dispensationalist tactic:
Hey lets make these preterist look stupid by asking them so many question that they can not possibly answer them all. If they do answer a question lets just avoid answering there well reasoned response, by asking more questions and maybe no one will notice. Hey were not falling for it.
Please, bring the questions on. Iwill be happy to answer any question you have. All I ask is that you show me the same respect when I have a question for you.
Note: edited to add last two paragraphs that accidentally got cut.
Sarcasm Mode ON
I'm Back!!!!
Just a suggestion, when you are being mocked, make sure you know why. :doh:
Did you read this (emphasis mine):
I take your questions seriously. That is why I am here. I love being challenged. I have no problem answering any question that you ask. What I have a problem with is the portion of the above quote that is in bold.
You (the plural you, not just Knight) ask us (also plural
) a question. Fine. We answer the question. Fine. Then you (plural) tell us we are wrong, without saying why, without addressing the issues we raised. Then you expect us to answer more questions. Then you accuse us of not answering. If this is your idea of an argument I can give you a link to a Monty Python sketch that you would love .You are constantly attacking the preterist position (I have no problem with this is a debate forum, I expect that). Then when the preterist answer, you tell us we are wrong (again, no problem, I don't really expect you to agree with us). The you tell us we are wrong, without addressing the issues raised in our answer and then ask us a million more question and accuse us of being "chicken" because we can not address one million of your questions (that figure is of course hyperbolic
)I put the area that I have a problem in bold for your convenience.
It seems to me that this is the dispensationalist tactic:
Hey lets make these preterist look stupid
by asking them so many question that they can not possibly answer them all. If they do answer a question lets just avoid answering there well reasoned response, by asking more questions and maybe no one will notice. Hey were not falling for it.Please, bring the questions on. Iwill be happy to answer any question you have. All I ask is that you show me the same respect when I have a question for you.
Note: edited to add last two paragraphs that accidentally got cut.
Last edited:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Err,Dee Dee,are you so ignorant that you are not even aware that not all of the OT was written in Hebrew?The point I was making is the fact that both Polycarp and Irenaeus,as well as John,could speak in the Greek languge.And since Polycarp was a pupil of John,then there would be no reason why Irenaeus could not understand the teaching of the Holy Scriptures.
But instead of discussing these issues,you ignore the message and put all your effort into attempting to discredit the messenger.Instead of addressing the things I said,you put words in my mouth that I never said so that you can say that I am "plain dumb"!
Earlier,you accused me of lacking "reading comprehension",but then you failed to cite one instance to back up your claim.Instead of discussing the issues,your efforts are put into attacking the messanger.But then when challenged to prove what you said,you come up empty handed!
If you want an example of something that is just PLAIN DUMB,just go to what jpholding said that the words of some of the profets were nothing but "trash talk"!
Well,the Lord Jesus Himself quoted the same EXACT PROPHETS who he accuses of talking trash.That is about what I expect from those who follow the "fables" that are taught by the preterists.
In His grace,--Jerry
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
And here is exhibit one in the case of Jerry's Lack of Reading Comprehension. The OT was written in Hebrew and Aramaic... and that helps your still plain dumb assertion that certin ECF could speak and read Greek in what way??? Oh it doesn't. And notice I did not call you as a person just plain dumb, you accept Christ as your savior, so I am sure you have some sense somewhere... I called your statement just plain dumb, and you have compounded the dumbess of it tenfold and are showing it off like a child who just made his first successful use of the potty.
And why did not Ireneaus understand the Scriptures when it teaches that Christ died in his thirties? And why did not Ireneaus understand the Scriptures in your view when he said that the promises of Israel fell to the Church.
I hope you bought a nice basket for those cherries you are picking.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Solly,
You make such a good argument as to why we should believe that Irenaeus was in error when he taught that the great tribulation and the antichrist had not yet come.
He was never "sainted" by the church at Rome!
None of the second century Christians believed that the "great tribulation" or the "antichrist" had come and gone,but you still insist that it did.And if you will read the post concerning the Catholic origin of the teaching of the preterists,you will see that this teaching was not originally a part of the teaching of the church at Rome until many of hundreds of years later.
In His grace,--Jerry
You make such a good argument as to why we should believe that Irenaeus was in error when he taught that the great tribulation and the antichrist had not yet come.
He was never "sainted" by the church at Rome!
None of the second century Christians believed that the "great tribulation" or the "antichrist" had come and gone,but you still insist that it did.And if you will read the post concerning the Catholic origin of the teaching of the preterists,you will see that this teaching was not originally a part of the teaching of the church at Rome until many of hundreds of years later.
In His grace,--Jerry
smilax
New member
So, Jerry, do you believe in baptismal regeneration?
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1:21:1: "It happens that their tradition respecting redemption is invisible and incomprehensible, as being the mother of things which are incomprehensible and invisible; and on this account, since it is fluctuating, it is impossible simply and all at once to make known its nature, for every one of them hands it down just as his own inclination prompts. Thus there are as many schemes of 'redemption' as there are teachers of these mystical opinions. And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole faith."
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1:21:1: "It happens that their tradition respecting redemption is invisible and incomprehensible, as being the mother of things which are incomprehensible and invisible; and on this account, since it is fluctuating, it is impossible simply and all at once to make known its nature, for every one of them hands it down just as his own inclination prompts. Thus there are as many schemes of 'redemption' as there are teachers of these mystical opinions. And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole faith."
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Now Smilax, you are not expecting Jerry to be consistent are you? That has never been his strong point.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Exhibit Two in the Case of Reading Comprehension Versus Shugart:
Solly was speaking of Origien not Irenaeus. Bzzztt!!!!
Solly was speaking of Origien not Irenaeus. Bzzztt!!!!