My name is Jordan Hampton, and I'm a Christian. This channel will help you explore Christian philosophy and theology. I summarize book chapters and journal articles in the philosophy of religion through animated videos and interviews with Christian scholars.
For more resources go to www.theanalyticchristian.com
Пікірлер
This is absolutely smooth brain stuff. Anyone who thinks this is sound logic has a IQ below room temperature 😂🤣
We are not a Global Church we are Lord Jesus Christ church, His church that He has saved of His own, you are leading people to Hell's fire, and you don't know what you're talking about, and you're not saved, because you would know about the rapture of The Bride, Church, or the true believers. You don't know what you're talking about and when Lord Jesus comes to rapture us true believers, remember to then believe in Jesus then that saved us and not take the mark of the beast, because you will be going to Hell's fire if you don't have your head chopped off after the rapture, because that is your only saving your life, since you didn't believe before the rapture and was saved under Grace at that time. You don't know what you're talking about! You are not hearing our Lord Jesus voice. Lord God said we would hear his voice and you aren't. Listen to Robert Breaker video's and he will guide you by Lord God's words and you will be set free. Robert Breaker on U-Tube. We that love Lord Jesus are sick of people like you guiding people away from Lord Jesus. Admit you're a sinner and know you need a Savior and turn to Lord Jesus and be saved.
FALSE PROPHECIES AND THE RAPTURE Why do people believe that the Bible talks about a future Rapture? I will make $50 000.00 available to anyone who can show from the Bible, that it predicts: (1) a future Second Coming of Jesus (2) a future Rapture What people do, is read their generation into the Biblical narrative. People like Hal Lindsay, in his novels: "The Late Great Planet Earth" and "Satan is Alive and Well on Planet Earth" do this. He associated Israel as the Fig Tree, as mentioned the Gospel narrative. The nation was born in 1948 and in1988, 40 years later, a Biblical generation, Jesus will return. He, unfortunately, was not the first: many Christian sects, including the Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witnesses have inserted their generation into the Gospel narrative and predicted the return of Jesus for MANY FOR CENTURIES. Jesus made false predictions about his return and setting up a kingdom in his disciples' lifetime. Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. In those chapters, he gave a detailed description of what will happen, including his coming with power and glory with his holy angels but he capped those statements by saying: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, this GENERATION will not pass away until ALL these thing are fulfilled." Even the late great C. S. Lewis the great Christian proponent from Oxford University had to admit that those statements are the most embarrassing verses in the Bible. Jesus also said: "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Matthew 10:23. Israel did not have many towns and his return NEVER happened and we are here 2000 years later. Note that the Apostle Paul said that time was so short, that he said that people should not even get married. 1 Corinthians 7:29. He also told his followers that some of them will not die but their bodies will be transformed, and they will meet Jesus in the air; see 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 KJV and1 Thessalonians 4:1-18. Furthermore, Jesus misquoted the Tanakh; Hebrew scripture, known to Christians as the Old Testament. Mark 2:25-28, in which he claims that Abiathar was the high priest at the time of David and the Shew-bread incident. In fact, it was Ahimelech, 1 Samuel 22:10. Abiathar was the grandson of Ahimelech and was NEVER a high priest. This fact is attested to in Jewish history. Last, Ezekiel prophesied that the Egyptians would be enslaved, the land would be unoccupied for 40 years and the Egyptians would speak a Canaanite language. Furthermore, all of the Canaanite languages are dead along with those ancient inhabitants; Ezekiel 29. Isaiah 19:18. Those things never happened. To make them happen, you would have to resurrect those extinct peoples and their languages. Concerning the Rapture and Second Coming, one can confidently say: NOT THEN, NOT NOW, NOT EVER.
I don't see how this helps you get out of the dilemma. You still have the problem. The extent to which god is responding to moral parameters, morality doesn't come from god. To the extent that he is not responding to moral parameters it is arbitrary.
Jesus makes a false prediction in Mark 9:1. He was referring to some seeing the literal return of the Son of Man at the end of the world - the Parousia, and we can tell this by reading the surrounding context and ruling out other interpretations that conservatives like to offer. First of all, there are two major indicators that Mark 9:1 was not referring to the Transfiguration or the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. 1. Mk. 9:1 is connected to the previous passage (Mk. 8:38) which explicitly refers to the Parousia like it does in Mt. 16:27-28. --- For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” --- Obviously, the "Son of Man coming" in v. 28 can only refer to the previous passage where he comes "with angels and rewards each person according to what they have done." Since this did not happen during the Transfiguration or the destruction of the Temple then that demonstrates these interpretations must be incorrect. Moreover, coming with "power" (δυνάμει) in Mk. 9:1 refers to the Parousia - Mk. 13:26, a phrase which Luke 9:27 omits. This is consistent with Luke's pattern elsewhere of redacting/removing the Markan Jesus' imminent eschatology. He does this because he's writing much later at a time when it had become embarrassing that the original imminent predictions never came true - see 2 Thess 2, 2 Peter 3, and John 21:22-23 for how other authors dealt with this embarrassment. 2. It does not make sense to warn "some will die" before seeing an event if the event in question was to take place a mere six days later as Mk. 9:2 says. Obviously, the warning necessitates a length of time long enough for some of those standing there to die. "With respect to Transfiguration interpretation of the prophecy, here are a few comments: (1) Jesus gives the promise in a very solemn form ("Amen amen I say unto you") which is inappropriate by this reading, as it is hardly surprising that the disciples would be alive six days later. The reference to tasting death does not imply immediacy but the passage of time. (2) The Matthean form adds to the saying the statement that the Son of Man "shall reward every man according to his works" when he comes. This has universal scope and cannot pertain to the Transfiguration but rather Judgment Day (Matthew 10:15, 11:22-24, 12:36) which brings with it punishment and rewards (ch. 25). This cannot pertain to the Transfiguration but rather a future event at the "close of the age" (24:3), when the Son of Man comes in glory (24:30). The Markan form, which refers to the Son of Man as being ashamed of those ashamed of him, also has in view judgment. (3) The preterist interpretation that assigns fulfillment of all of the Olivet discourse to the Jewish War, again, needs to explain the universal scope ("all tribes of the earth shall mourn" - Mt. 24:30, "which took them all away" - Mt. 24:39, "before him shall be gathered all the nations" - Mt. 25:32) and the expectation (particularly explicit in Matthew) that this occurs at the "close of the age". - zanillamilla
Michael Rota's Pascal's wager indeed is a stronger version...
He should totally debate Pastor Stephen Davey from The Shepherd's Church in Cary, NC.
It amazes me that your timing of the rapture makes the great crowd IN HEAVEN ( Rev 19;1-3 ) rejoicing at the destruction of the Babylon harlot is not the church . How absurd it is to believe that NONE of the holy apostles and the entire church will not be rejoicing at the destruction of the harlot. You cannot say that the great crowd is the church in Rev 19:1-3 because it makes your timing of the church AFTER Rev 19:15 and Matt 24: 29-31 IMPOSSIBLE . I bet you missed that !
Mr B Gates is the antichrist He still controls Microsoft which owns Chat GPT AI to mention Gavi and his screwing with any genome he pleases thinking he is God also his foundation that is everywhere Do you think that Bill would give up control of Microsoft with its many many software’s including A.I with its backdoors and numerous APIs that run on most G7 and G20 nations, banks, and governments smartphone apps, computer servers, and desktops. Most fortune five hundred corporation's use these as well. In conjunction with AI, which is much further along then they reported do you realize the power Bill has not even mentioning what his Bill and Malinda Gates foundation has its fingers in He has already been reveled not just by me google it also google the pope together with bill
You could pass away peacefully to escape the tribulation. BTW We are already in tribulation it started with covid
@@TheCrawfojo Dr. Halsted makes a biblical case in this interview that the tribulation is the time between the ascension and the second coming of Christ. Why do you think it started with Covid?
@@TheAnalyticChristian That was the most obvious sign google the term gang stalkers (locus) and the term targeted individuals and understand it These people are victims of the locus in rev 9
Oh man. Another guy another take. We don't know for sure for sure because the Bible gives us enough to know we have to keep our eyes on Jesus alone and stay steadfast until the end. Whenever the end may be. And it doesn't give us all the details Denying the 7y Great Tribulation period called Jacobs trouble with an antichrist and false prophet and Millennium Kingdom? We're just in this sorta cyclical tribulational period but not one that if the time wasn't shorted NO human flesh would survive? Thereby avoiding the purpose of the Great Tribulation and what on earth the church would have to do with purpose? Leading Jesus back to earth? When it says that a great earthquake gives an escape route to His children - hardly the image created of a victory parade. Bring heaven here. Yes but only once all evil is in hell, Millennium is complete judgements are complete and all tears are dried. Not in the moments after the second coming. Agree though we just don't know enough.
Man these comments are a tire fire. People are so trigger by the denial of a doctrine that literally no one believed until the 19th century.
I see that you are also rejecting tHe word of God and choosing man's opinion over God's TRUTH!! I am joking.
@@andrewmoon1917you almost had me😜
@@andrewmoon1917😂
We are saved from sin in this life along with given the gift of eternal life. So we still want spread the Good News!
If the minimal definition of "Good" is what works, then yes!
just because the word rapture is not in the Bible does not mean scripture does point to us being taken out it is spiritually discern by those with the Holy spirit not intellectuals looking at it from a carnal mind you cant get there from here as they say 7 year tribulation is judgment on the lost not the saved
@@justonfletcher9508 Matthew Halsted and I are both Christians honestly searching for the truth in God’s word. That is very uncharitable of you to imply that he and I are looking at it from a “carnal mind”
All will come to knowledge of Christ and believe either in this life or the next.
All I heard was men who are so weary of preterism they throw out the partial preterism baby with the full preterism bathwater. Tom is (W)right, these two are wrong (and by extension IP).
@@rocketmanshawn I think they make a good case. I need to investigate NT Wright’s case further. What book or article would you recommend from NT Wright on this?
Good interview. Halsted is a good thinker.
@@rocketmanshawn this is one of the few positive comments about the interview. Thanks!
@@TheAnalyticChristian It amazes me that your timing of the rapture makes the great crowd IN HEAVEN ( Rev 19;1-3 ) rejoicing at the destruction of the Babylon harlot is not the church . How absurd it is to believe that NONE of the holy apostles and the entire church will not be rejoicing at the destruction of the harlot. You cannot say that the great crowd is the church in Rev 19:1-3 because it makes your timing of the church AFTER Rev 19:15 and Matt 24: 29-31 IMPOSSIBLE . I bet you missed that !
Sounds like a compromise. You're just hedging your bet against being wrong. There is no 50% chance any more than you can be 50% pregnant.
@@MrHardhead2 how am I compromising? I’m way more than 50% confident that Christianity is true. But, for someone who is only 50% confident, they should commit to living a Christian life. Where am I going wrong in my thinking here? I suppose you think I am going wrong when I say “Christianity has a 50% chance of being true” based on your last comment when you say, “There is no 50% chance any more than you can be 50% pregnant.” Think carefully here. There’s a difference between saying “You are 50% pregnant” and saying “There is a 50% chance that you are pregnant.” The first of those statements is clearly false. Either you are pregnant or you are not pregnant. Being pregnant does not come in degrees. However, there is nothing incoherent about the second statement. Sometimes pregnancy tests are accurate and sometimes they are not. At home pregnancy tests are typically 98% accurate. Now let me use your own pregnancy example to show why your objection fails. Suppose a woman bought a very cheap pregnancy test and on the box it said the test is correct half of the time. She takes the test and receives a positive result. She then believes, “There is a 50% chance that I am pregnant.” It would be wrong for her to then go drink alcohol, smoke, ride a roller coaster, etc. The chance of her being pregnant is high enough such that she should commit to living in a way that would be safe and healthy for her child. Now image the woman then chooses not to drink, smoke, ride roller coasters etc. In fact she takes daily prenatal vitamins and engages in other healthy activities. Suppose someone came along and told her, “sounds like a compromise. You’re just hedging your bet against that pregnancy test being wrong.” You see how that objection just doesn’t have any force? Similarly, that objection won’t have any force in the case of someone who thinks Christianity has a least a 50% chance of being true.
This was a (divinely ordained?) waste of time
Really? I thought those were intriguing argument for divine determinism even if they aren’t persuasive.
God is perfect pre-trib rapture nothing more nothing less God is perfect 💙🤔🔥☝️🤍🙏
I too believe God is perfect. But in what sense is a pre-trip rapture is perfect? I’m confused. And is a post-trib rapture any more or less perfect than a pre-trip one?
@@TheAnalyticChristian okay let me add this in John 14 Jesus said he goes to prepare a place for us so that he can come back himself and receive us to him self in his father's house are many mansions and he goes to prepare a place for us so if we are post tribulation when will we ever to be able to enjoy our mansions in heaven if we don't go there first before he comes to Earth for the second time..... Remember he only comes to the clouds to receive us later at the end of the tribulation he puts his foot on earth that is the second coming
It's a "Mistake" to consider the opinions of someone who clearly doesn't actively practice Christianity
I think the argument should be used mainly for people who bring in skepticism or solipsism into denying existence of God. It would be good way to attack them by using their reasoning againsts them by saying according to your reasoning ... But this probably works for lay people who is inconsistent with their beliefs. And many atheists deny some skepticism and solipsism so it doesnt work as a really good argument. Also I think this argument would be better if meaning was replaced by things like human dignity.
Also, Im not sure but maybe the meaning argument can be improved by the fact that naturalists atheists deny free will?
The church is the body of Christ…meaning us.
How exactly does this connect with what was discussed in this interview?
thilipsis(tribilation) refers to the suffering of the christians. orge(wrath) and thymos(fury) refers to the suffering of none christians. no christians no tribulation.
I haven’t done a word study of each, but it seems like thlipsis includes more than just Christians because in Acts 7:11 uses thlipsis to describe the suffering of all of Egypt and Canaan, which included no Christians at the time and many who were not Jews.
@@TheAnalyticChristian thilipsis comes after Egypt and canan when the focus returns to the fathers which are the Jews not having food and drink. why you say no Jews when is talks about the Jews?
That Generation in context, Matthew 24 If Jesus meant the the generation of His time, then all these things must have happened, when did these things occur? Matthew 24:27-44. ######################### For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near-at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away. “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. ######################### Does it make more sense that these things did happen to that generation, or that these events are still yet to come, but when it does, that gen"generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place?"
@@williambillycraig1057 if you haven’t watched the video I suggest at the end titled “Solving the problem of the delay of the Parousia” then go and watch it for an answer to your question here.
@@TheAnalyticChristian ok, I will. Thank you
It is an hour long. 😞 I hope it is good. 🙂
Hey, I watched it, and my takeaway was that this judgment was delayed, but it will happen. Is this right? If so, the generation that sees these events "will by no means pass away till all these things take place " will be the one that sees all these things come to pass in some yet-to-be-determined event. If this is right, then I think it supports my original statement. If my takeaway is wrong, then please let me know. Thank you
@williambillycraig1057 There's a change in Matthew 24 at verse 35. Everything did happen in that generation except for the "2nd coming".
I reject this.... I reject that...what authority does he think he has over the word of God? absolutely nothing and no respect.
@@smigadrum He deeply respects the word of God. He’s devoted his life to studying it and teaching others about it. What he is rejecting is not the word of God, but an *interpretation* of the word of God.
Anybody can interpret including him, but you have to use scripture WITH scripture to interpret itself and not your own private interpretation.
@@smigadrum scripture with scripture is exactly what he did in this video.
Where did you get the idea that he thinks he has authority over the word of God? Can you give an example?
You are assuming your reading is that of authority. On whose authority do you base your interpretation? And if you say God’s authority, you are being hypocritical and arrogant.
The author asks that we take off our glasses; he assumes he has no glasses.
@@williambillycraig1057 he asks that you set aside your assumption about what the tribulation is and try your best to look at the texts that use the Greek word “thlipsis”, see how that is used throughout the New Testament, and let that inform your view of what the tribulation is. He is not claiming that he has no interpretive lens.
@@TheAnalyticChristian, it would have been better if he had acknowledged that. Instead, he said we should take ours off. To me, this implies that he believes that he does not wear them.
@@williambillycraig1057 listen again to what he said at that point in the interview. Immediately after saying to take off our interpretive lens he clarified and said he meant setting aside our assumptions and looking at the way “thlipsis” is used.
@@TheAnalyticChristian OK, I hate to ask, but do you know what time stamp he said that at?
I wear glasses
Speaking on 1 Cor, the author states that this is not the rapture; that is true, it is the changing of our bodies, which is only part of the whole. It seems to me that the author only partially states our ideas about the rapture, attacks that part of the argument as a whole, and then believes he defeated the whole idea.
@@williambillycraig1057 all Matthew is aiming to show when discussing the passage from 1 Corinthians 15 is that that passage is not teaching the rapture. It is teaching the resurrection at the second coming of Christ though. There is nothing in that passage about the rapture.
I agree; that is why I said, "The author states that this is not the rapture; that is true; it is the changing of our bodies, which is only part of the whole." The author who was interviewed stated that someone wrote in some book that this is one of the top three rapture verses. I do not know anyone who claims this passage is about timing; as others point out, this passage shows what will happen to our bodies before the rapture. The author should have quoted the authors directly where they say this passage proves the rapture's timing, but I do not believe that he can, so I believe this is why he paraphrased; it seems dishonest to me.
John 14:1-4 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know.” Where does Jesus say He is going, what is He building and when He comes back, where will we go? The plain reading seems to be that where He is going, He will come to take us there, not to bring there to us. This will happen, but it does not happen in the passages, you have to read that into the text.
@@williambillycraig1057 at worst, this text is ambiguous. It could be compatible with the rapture interpretation or it could be compatible with Matthew’s view. If that’s the case we will have to look to other texts to determine which view we should adopt. However, Matthew’s point is that this text seems to be teaching about a *final* dwelling place for us, not a temporary one. If that is right, then it makes better sense to interpret Jesus as teaching that he will bring the home he makes here at the final even when heaven and earth become one.
@@TheAnalyticChristian You said, "Matthew’s point is that this text seems to be teaching about a final dwelling place for us, not a temporary one." I agree, in Revelation 21:1-4 it reads, Now I saw a new heaven and earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also, there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” At the end of the millennium, our home in heaven will be brought to earth.
Sspeaking on 1 Thes, the author seems to beleive in the rapture, he only disagrees on the timing of it and the purpose. The word "rapiemur" (we will be caught up) in the Latin Vulgate is the key term that has been translated and interpreted in various ways, leading to the concept of the Rapture in Christian eschatology.
@@williambillycraig1057 when you say, “the author seems to believe in the rapture” we have to be careful. If all you mean by rapture is “caught up in the air with Christ” then yes the author says that. But if by “rapture” you mean “caught up in the air with Christ and taken back to heaven to stay for seven years then return to earth” then no the author does not say that. And if Matthew’s interpretation is correct, then the author and his readers would have understood that we would be caught up in the air to immediately return with King Jesus to earth.
@@TheAnalyticChristian The definition is to be caught up, so I believe we all believe in the rapture. There are pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, and pre-wrath raptures. I think the author should have defined his view better. I did get the takeaway that he believed in the post-trib, but I do not think he came out and said it.
The Text of Rev 3:10: "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." An event will "come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." The promise is to be taken out from the time of this global trial, not to be kept safe in the time of trial. These will be kept out of the the time of the trial.
Or preserved while on the earth during
@@rocketmanshawn Rev 3:10, "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." The Greek word ek is definitely "from" in Greek. And seeing that this trial will cover the Earth, we must be taken out "from" the Earth before the time of the trial begins. But that is how I read it, thank you for responding.
You have tribulation confused with Gods wrath. Pretribulation rapture is not biblical
People like this author create an either/or dilemma. Either the letters addressed specific issues faced by the seven literal churches in Asia Minor, or the letters symbolically represent different phases in the history of the Christian church over the past 2000 years. Are these the only two options? Consider this statement: Either this author beats his wife, or he has stopped beating his wife; which statement is true? Could it be that the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represent the Church ages to come? I believe so, and this is what most of us in our camp hold to, but this was not addressed here. The author even stated that only some people think this. Shouldn't he address what most believe? It would have been a better dialogue.
@@williambillycraig1057 the Bible was written *for* us but it was not *to* us. John was not writing a letter to 21st century Christians. We need to understand what his words meant *to* the original audience and then based on that, we see what those words mean *for* us today.
@@TheAnalyticChristian Could I say the same: "We need to understand what his words meant to the original audience, and then, based on that, we see what those words mean for us today." So, as I said, "the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represent the Church ages." So I could say I do "understand what his words meant to the original audience, and then, based on that, I see what those words mean for us today." That is, "the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represents the Church ages." Speaking on the book of Revelation, it has been pointed out that "There is partial fulfillment (the past) as well as final realization (the future) regarding those things in history. Thus the symbolism of Revelation attests to dual fulfillment." (1) I believe that is what is going on here. (1) Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. Stanley N. Gundry and C. Marvin Pate, Zondervan Counterpoints Collection (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 173.
@@williambillycraig1057when you are determining eschatology the first application is best. When you are considering conduct of believers and the culture within churches across time, I could see an application then. But not an eschatological application.
Rapture to be light headed dazed or confused it's not of God 😊 God's children will not be removed from this earth it is theirs 😊
6:10 the ones who died in Christ according to 1 Thessalonians 4:13,14 the ones who died knew they would all change in the twinkling prior to the ones who got caught up in the rapture. It covers both groups
If the tribulation is the pouring out of the wrath of God on the World, and we are saved from the wrath of God...
I reject...i reject...I reject...who and what is this guy speaking on his own authority?
@@smigadrum I agree with you. This is pretty routine though. Some new self-proclaimed "Biblical Scholar" always trots out and tries to debunk sound theology in the name of promoting their particular brand of heresy.
False starting premise If the tribulation Assumes the existence of a specific tribulation that is supposed to happen sometime in the future
@@miketatreau2347explain the hermeneutical and exegetical basis for the dispensational theory.
The Rapture is a protestant heresy
What in your view makes it a heresy as opposed to merely a false doctrine?
@@TheAnalyticChristian Heresy is false doctrine. Duh.
Recently my wife and I have questioned rapture ideology. My mother in law is a die hard “rapture is coming” person and can’t even fathom how we could question it because she’s been told about the rapture since early childhood. At the same time, she’s unable to directly point to scripture that supports her point of view. I’m thankful for these videos and these perspectives,
Thank you for watching! I would highly encourage to read Dr. Halsted’s book
Since the Bible is not univocal, it says nothing about anything until you impose your own reading onto the texts and interpret
🤓🤓🤓
Why is that true?
What do you mean by univocal?
@@TheAnalyticChristian Having one overall meaning. Unambiguous
😅😮😢😢😮😅
This video adds nothing to the fine tuning argument but a layers of why am I in that universe
Fine tuning is actually an argument against god. An all powerful god would not need a fine tuned universe.
I find this argument a bit odd. We will tend to discover the discoverable things early on, and the hard-to-discover things late or not at all. So the things we've discovered so far will be very heavily skewed towards ones with high discoverability.
None of it needs to be discoverable. All we need is to exist and procreate, and yet here we are on a planet with a protective yet transparent atmosphere. Why do we have an abundance of chemical fuels that allow us to escape the gravitational pull of our not-too-massive planet? Why is the moon almost exactly the same size in the sky as the sun therefore allowing us to perform experiments on gravitational lensing that confirm the predictions of general relativity? All coincidence? Perhaps... But perhaps not.
Pascal's Wager would work even if Christianity has a much lower chance of being true than 50%...say 5%. :)
Depends on your priors I guess
Random question. If God created us through evolution, do you think he did that with angels too?
I don't think so. But that's not to say he didn't create them through some sort of process as well.
Hello jordan,possible to add chapters in that video please ?
He claimed all the contrary
Yes. And he was sentenced to death by the Sanhedrin for doing so. Cloud Rider: Jesus claimed to be the Cloud Rider (Mt26:64, Mt24:30, Luke21:27, Mark13:26, Rev1:7). The Cloud Rider is God (Dt33:26, Ps68:32, Ps.104, Is.19). And the Cloud Rider is said to be worshiped in (Daniel 7:13). Dt. 33:26 “There is no one like the GOD OF JESHURUN, who RIDES ACROSS THE HEAVENS to help YOU AND ON THE CLOUDS IN HIS MAJESTY. Ps. 68:32 O kingdoms of the earth, SING TO GOD; sing praises to THE LORD, Selah. To HIM WHO RIDES IN THE HEAVENS, THE ANCIENT HEAVENS; behold, he sends out HIS VOICE, HIS MIGHTY VOICE. Psalms 104 Bless THE LORD, O my soul! O LORD MY GOD, You are very great; You are CLOTHED WITH SPLENDOR AND MAJESTY. He wraps HIMSELF in light as with a garment; HE STRETCHES OUT THE HEAVENS like a tent, laying the beams of HIS CHAMBERS in the waters above, making THE CLOUDS HIS CHARIOT, walking ON THE WINGS OF THE WIND. Isaiah 19 Behold, the LORD RIDES ON A SWIFT CLOUD; He is coming to Egypt. The idols of Egypt will TREMBLE BEFORE HIM, and the hearts of the Egyptians will melt within them. Daniel 7:9 “THRONES were set in place, and THE ANCIENT OF DAYS TOOK HIS SEAT. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. HIS THRONE WAS FLAMING WITH FIRE, and its wheels were all ablaze. Daniel 7:13 and there before me was one LIKE A SON OF MAN, COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN. HE APPROACHED THE ANCIENT OF DAYS and was led into his presence. HE WAS GIVEN AUTHORITY, GLORY AND SOVEREIGN POWER; all nations and peoples of every language WORSHIPED HIM. HIS dominion is an EVERLASTING DOMINION that will not pass away, and HIS KINGDOM is one that will never be destroyed. Mark 13:26 At that time PEOPLE WILL SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN CLOUDS with GREAT POWER AND GLORY. And HE WILL SEND HIS ANGELS and gather HIS ELECT from the four winds… Luke 21:27 At that time they will see the SON OF MAN COMING IN A CLOUD WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY. Mt. 24:30 “Then will appear the SIGN OF THE SON OF MAN IN HEAVEN. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN, WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY. Revelation 1:7 Behold, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even THOSE WHO PIERCED HIM; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen. Mt. 26:64 Tell us if you are the Messiah, the SON OF GOD.” …Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on YOU WILL SEE THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE MIGHTY ONE AND COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN.” Then the HIGH PRIEST TORE HIS CLOTHES and said, “HE HAS SPOKEN BLASPHEMY! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, NOW YOU HAVE HEARD THE BLASPHEMY. What do you think?” “He is WORTHY OF DEATH,” they answered.
Here are some verses that refute the idea that Jesus was viewed as God in the earliest Christian sources. 1 Cor 11:3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, *and the head of Christ is God.* This text presents a hierarchical structure where Jesus is subordinate to God. 1 Cor 15:25-28 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. *When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.* Being made "subject to" God obviously means he's _not_ God. Mt. 9:8 When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; *and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.* The text says God "gave" the authority to forgive sins to the man Jesus, making a clear distinction between the two. Acts 2 refers to Jesus as a "man" and a prophet who was exalted by God. Acts 2:22-24 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. Acts 2:30-33 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For more, see J.R. Daniel Kirk's A Man Attested By God.
In Andrew Loke's new book "Studies on the Origin of Divine and Resurrection Christology" page 30 he says the terms Paul uses for seeing Jesus "are not ambiguous with regards to the nature of the seeing when they are used with reference to persons with bodies (such as Jesus) within a certain context." Refutation: Paul does not specify whether these "appearances" happened *before or after Jesus was believed to be in heaven.* Without that important bit of context, the nature of the appearances in Paul's letters still remains ambiguous.