Bible Scavenger Hunt
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?
The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?
Comments
-
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?I don't see where Scripture would support the mentioned rather popular doctrines.
-
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?I don't see where Scripture would support the mentioned rather popular doctrines.
That's the point. Many today believe doctrines nowhere found in scripture. With book sales in the multimillions of dollars teaching
-
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?
There is also no direct Scripture stating a Trinity, but you adhere to that....
-
You cannot find that the Bible directly supports that Wolfgang or Dave are saved. It is NOT there. Still many might say so and I bet Wolfgang and Dave do. I wonder about @Big_Snort_?
Do they? Please tell us. I remember way back asking Bill and got the most amazing answer which I may publish later (maybe @Big_Snort_ remembers it)
-
@GaoLu said:
You cannot find that the Bible directly supports that Wolfgang or Dave are saved. It is NOT there. Still many might say so and I bet Wolfgang and Dave do. I wonder about @Big_Snort_?Do they? Please tell us. I remember way back asking Bill and got the most amazing answer which I may publish later (maybe @Big_Snort_ remembers it)
But, you cannot trust any scripture if you can make it mean whatever you want. Still no proof texts from the other forums I posted this challenge in.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?
There is also no direct Scripture stating a Trinity, but you adhere to that....
Scripture plainly depicts one God having three persons. But the blind will argue against it it to the death.
-
@reformed said:
There is also no direct Scripture stating a Trinity, but you adhere to that....In my opinion, this is a salient point for those who claim to hold to sola scriptura to keep in mind.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?
There is also no direct Scripture stating a Trinity, but you adhere to that....
Scripture plainly depicts one God having three persons. But the blind will argue against it it to the death.
It also plainly depicts the doctrines you attack here. What's the difference?
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines?The 7 year tribulation?
The pre-trib rapture?
The restored Roman Empire?
The rebuilt Temple?
The return to animal sacrifices?
Russia marching on Israel?
A Gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks?
There is also no direct Scripture stating a Trinity, but you adhere to that....
Scripture plainly depicts one God having three persons. But the blind will argue against it it to the death.
It also plainly depicts the doctrines you attack here. What's the difference?
Where might we find those scriptures?
-
- Do you really not know and you want to know?
- Or are you "loaded for bear" and intending to pick off anything anyone says?
- Before launching into such a discussion, knowing your authentic, transparent intentions would be helpful.
-
@GaoLu said:
1. Do you really not know and you want to know?
2. Or are you "loaded for bear" and intending to pick off anything anyone says?
3. Before launching into such a discussion, knowing your authentic, transparent intentions would be helpful.I'm showing there is not one scripture to support any of the claims I posted. Yet people believe them based on pure conjecture.
-
Why don't you just answer the 2 simple questions I asked?
-
@Dave_L said:
@GaoLu said:
1. Do you really not know and you want to know?
2. Or are you "loaded for bear" and intending to pick off anything anyone says?
3. Before launching into such a discussion, knowing your authentic, transparent intentions would be helpful.I'm showing there is not one scripture to support any of the claims I posted. Yet people believe them based on pure conjecture.
You can argue the same for the Trinity.
-
@GaoLu said:
1. Do you really not know and you want to know?
2. Or are you "loaded for bear" and intending to pick off anything anyone says?
3. Before launching into such a discussion, knowing your authentic, transparent intentions would be helpful.Does it make a difference? One way or the another, the questions remain: "Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines? The questions can be asked independently of Dave.
1. Is there an answer to be had?
2. Is the answer obvious?
3. Are those who adhered to these "popular doctrines" have something to hide?
4. Is there any support all for these "doctrines" not to say, indirectly?
5. If a doctrine is "popular" does it means it's or has to be biblical?
6. The answer to Dave's questions may cause an unraveling of churches and people's peace of mind across the American land and around the world?All truth (anytime, anywhere, for any reason) can stand close examination! What are the answers to Dave's questions? CM
-
It did to me.
One way or the another, the questions remain: "Does scripture directly support any of today’s most popular doctrines? The questions can be asked independently of Dave.
True. But that doesn't change that you are weasling out for the n'th time on questions. that is a trust killer.
- Is there an answer to be had?
Of course.
- Is the answer obvious?
Yes.
- Are those who adhered to these "popular doctrines" have something to hide?
Mostly likely not. They write theologies and commentaries, have seminaries and churches.
- Is there any support all for these "doctrines" not to say, indirectly?
They say directly.
- If a doctrine is "popular" does it means it's or has to be biblical?
Absurd.
- The answer to Dave's questions may cause an unraveling of churches and people's peace of mind across the American land and around the world?
Probably not. Never has since millennia past.
All truth (anytime, anywhere, for any reason) can stand close examination! What are the answers to Dave's questions? CM
Maybe if you would answer questions then others would be inclined to invest the time to do the same. Otherwise, it seems a waste of time on a deaf and blind audience of stone.
When I have proven you clearly wrong as is done above regarding the historicity of Dispensational theology, you utterly ignore that and keep building on a false foundation. Truth is we may not be far off in our theology on the matter, but your defense of it is despicable.
Frankly, I don't think your questions were sincere which is why I asked. If you answer those questions I asked, your motives may not look good. If that is not true, give a reason to think so.
I have been rough on you testing to see if you responded to the kind of language you use. You do amazingly, but aside from that, in the spirit of the OP, I stumbled over this site, which will answer all your questions (which I doubt you really have) with plenty of direct Scripture. Go ahead, take a few days to flail away at it. I have pretzels and await.
http://christinprophecy.org/articles/why-i-believe-in-a-pre-tribulation-rapture/
Post edited by GaoLu on -
> @reformed said:
> You can argue the same for the Trinity.
Good point and in fact there are a number of different commonly held doctrines/theologies that this could also be applied too. -
Not so with the trinity. The name is nowhere found. But the concept of one God in three persons is clearly taught. I was baptized in the personal name of God, Jesus Christ (in the New Covenant) as the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each having personal identities not shared with the others.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@GaoLu said:
1. Do you really not know and you want to know?
2. Or are you "loaded for bear" and intending to pick off anything anyone says?
3. Before launching into such a discussion, knowing your authentic, transparent intentions would be helpful.I'm showing there is not one scripture to support any of the claims I posted. Yet people believe them based on pure conjecture.
You can argue the same for the Trinity.
This is not true. The name trinity is nowhere found. But the concept of one God eternally manifest as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit permeates the New Testament.
The false doctrines listed in the OP haven't a single verse that directly validates any of them.
-
@GaoLu said:
Why don't you just answer the 2 simple questions I asked?I answered them. I'm showing here and on two other forums that no body has direct scripture quotes to support the false doctrines listed in the OP. Yet they come out swinging beating the air the best they can.
-
Really.
-
@Dave_L said:
Not so with the trinity. The name is nowhere found. But the concept of one God in three persons is clearly taught. I was baptized in the personal name of God, Jesus Christ (in the New Covenant) as the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each having personal identities not shared with the others.
Same thing with the Tribulation Dave. The fact that you can't understand that is the same thing is astounding.
The Trinity has no direct Scripture quotes either.
Get over yourself.
-
This is not true. If you can support any of these OP doctrines with direct quotes from scripture, let's have at least one.
-
@Dave_L said:
This is not true.It is not just true, it is a fact.
One, the word Trinity is nowhere to be found in the Bible, and two the word/term 'Person' is never once used in the Bible to describe God.
Things/concepts in the Bible that are clearly taught are clearly taught. Like, for example, no one can argue that NT does not portray Jesus as having been crucified/resurrected. They can claim to not believe in the crucifixion/resurrection, but they can not argue the Bible doesn't teach it because it clearly states it and describes it.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
This is not true.It is not just true, it is a fact.
One, the word Trinity is nowhere to be found in the Bible, and two the word/term 'Person' is never once used in the Bible to describe God.
Things/concepts in the Bible that are clearly taught are clearly taught. Like, for example, no one can argue that NT does not portray Jesus as having been crucified/resurrected. They can claim to not believe in the crucifixion/resurrection, but they can not argue the Bible doesn't teach it because it clearly states it and describes it.
Persons all say "I" "me" as do the three "persons" of the one Godhead. Find the "Daniel gap" directly mentioned in scripture, not merely read into it, and you can make all this go away.
-
@Dave_L said:
Not so with the trinity. The name is nowhere found. But the concept of one God in three persons is clearly taught. I was baptized in the personal name of God, Jesus Christ (in the New Covenant) as the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each having personal identities not shared with the others.The one individual whose name supposedly is Jesus Christ, is his own Father and at the same time his own Son and is also the Holy Ghost ???
Strange ideas, Dave_L ....
-
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
Not so with the trinity. The name is nowhere found. But the concept of one God in three persons is clearly taught. I was baptized in the personal name of God, Jesus Christ (in the New Covenant) as the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each having personal identities not shared with the others.The one individual whose name supposedly is Jesus Christ, is his own Father and at the same time his own Son and is also the Holy Ghost ???
Strange ideas, Dave_L ....
It is obvious there is a problem here unless we have three distinct persons in the one God. Stop thinking of God materialistically and expand to unlimited spiritual possibilities.
-
@Dave_L said:
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
Not so with the trinity. The name is nowhere found. But the concept of one God in three persons is clearly taught. I was baptized in the personal name of God, Jesus Christ (in the New Covenant) as the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each having personal identities not shared with the others.The one individual whose name supposedly is Jesus Christ, is his own Father and at the same time his own Son and is also the Holy Ghost ???
Strange ideas, Dave_L ....
It is obvious there is a problem here unless we have three distinct persons in the one God. Stop thinking of God materialistically and expand to unlimited spiritual possibilities.
You should do the same with your eschatology.
-
@Dave_L said:
It is obvious there is a problem here unless we have three distinct persons in the one God. Stop thinking of God materialistically and expand to unlimited spiritual possibilities.The problem is a different one ... Scripture does NOWHERE teach that there are three persons in the one God
-
@reformed said:
You should do the same with your eschatology.I should do what with my eschatology ?
-
@Dave_L said:
Find the "Daniel gap" directly mentioned in scripture, not merely read into it, and you can make all this go away.What is the Daniel gap?
Are you referring division(gap) between the Hebrew text found in chapter 1 and the Aramaic text spanning from chapter 2 to 7, with the Masoretic text reverting back to classical Hebrew from chapter 8 till the end of the book?
By the way, I traditional do not regard the book of Daniel as a book of prophecy but rather as belonging to the Hagiographa and or Ketuvim (the writings).
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
