Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (33762)	10/26/2002 3:21:03 AM
From: Berry Picker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 39621

Dear Greg I can fully hear the "I'm busy" plea. In fact I really question the use of time posting here at all. I have 2 children that are on their own, another 7 that are 9 years and younger, and one on the way. I have a full time job. I spend a lot of time with my hobby - the stock market and get rich quick schemes. I have a keen interest in theology and I have a lot of things that I am trying to get written. You however do encourage me to correspond, as it is plain to me that you are taking a very intelligent - all be it presuppositional - approach to the subject at hand. I do not find a lot of people who plainly see the inconsistency of P.P's in spending hours refuting gaps only to insert their own. May I suggest to you an excellent example of such in a book I think every bible student should read? "The Seventy Weeks of Daniel" by Philip Mauro. This fellow died the year I was born. He wrote this book in 1923. While Mauro, when he lands upon the end of the book of Daniel, insert yet his "own" gap to maintain the yet future return of Christ and General resurrection after very soundly proves that the 70th week of Daniel cannot be separated from the 69 and place beyond the "cutting off" of the Messiah. I know you have already told me you are busy, in fact you may be too busy to properly handle all of this while you are attempting to graduate from bible college but perhaps you could incorporate the book into a paper and hand it in at your course. It appears that you have, of the 11 points of Gentry, chosen the very first one and that is fine. It was his first point. Re>>The Apostles creed and the Nicene Creed are both clearly looking forward to the return of Christ and the resurrection. If you wish to camp on a point this would be a good one to start with. And so I will - but not tonight. I would, as you have shared, like to tell you a little of myself. I was raised in the Anglican Church until my father sought divorce without biblical cause when I was about 14 years old. I sang in the choir, which was pretty much what church was about for my father? I was kicked out of "confirmation" the second time and flunked the first. I became a "hippy" and pretty much lived according to my own conscience until I was 26 when Christ struck me down and made me his own. I first attended Pentecostal assemblies, even "spoke in tongues" (tongue in cheek) believed in the rapture - post tribulation - as the rest was just too escapist for me to believe that God would ordain such suffering for our historical brothers and let us off the hook and as well as various out of context verses I found in Revelation. I became a Calvinist when I was 33 and joined the Bible Presbyterian Church. They where "chiliast" Premillennialists historicists. Upon studying still more scripture and recognizing the impossible concept of a millennial rule of Christ 'physically' on earth became Postmil. I was a personal friend of Reg Barrow in 1990 when he republished a book call "Christ's Second Coming - will it be premillennial" BY David Brown. It may interest you that Reg had Kenneth Gentry write the foreword to that edition. Still Water Revival Books as it most commonly known printed only 1500 copies of the book. I do not know where you would get a copy but it is excellent when refuting an earthly millennial rule. David Brown - who originally published the book in the 1840's was one of the trio known as - "Jamieson, Faucett, and Brown" I was fortunate enough to have bought 2 copies of this and other books that Reg published in those days. You may be able to get a photocopy from them however - I did not check. Kenneth Gentry was converted from dispensationalism in 1975 - I was converted in 1985. He 'had' a ten-year jump on me. :-) Gentry claims it was through studying Oswald Thomas Allis' "Prophecy and the Church" that he discovered dispensationalism to be untenable. In any case in 1990, both Gentry and myself were partial Preterists. I have changed upon more intently studying. Now while Gentry may say "Must study has made you mad" I do, without name-calling, find partial to be truly inconsistent. They have 2 second comings. So my next post to you will address the first objection raised by Gentry and now by yourself as stated by Gentry: Creedal Failure First, hyper-preterism is heterodox. It is outside the creedal orthodoxy of Christianity. No creed allows any second Advent in A. D. 70. No creed allows any other type of resurrection than a bodily one. Historic creeds speak of the universal, personal judgment of all men, not of a representative judgment in A. D. 70. It would be most remarkable if the entire church that came through A. D. 70 missed the proper understanding of the eschaton and did not realize its members had been resurrected! And that the next generations had no inkling of the great transformation that took place! Has the entire Christian church missed the basic contours of Christian eschatology for its first 1900 years? Good night for now however. Brian