1. The article's hogwash has no foundation.
2. The article purports to talk about a major END TIMES phenomenon called THE RAPTURE from Thessalonians and essentially trashes one perspective on the Rapture. A major reason such theological cluelessness trashes the Rapture is that they trash the whole notion of the END TIMES BEING CURRENTLY, IN OUR ERA.
2.1 I don't know HOW OR WHEN "THE RAPTURE" will occur. I only know it's Biblical and WILL OCCUR in these END TIMES at some point. 3. I undercut the whole foundational premise of the Original Post by asserting that the END TIMES OBVIOUSLY IS RUNNING CURRENTLY IN OUR ERA. I encourage you to wake up.
4. A lot of idiotic questions, pontifications, issues are no longer worth my bother. I have grown weary of that level of discourse.
5. The truths about current realities are too obvious. Folks still groveling around at such a huge level of ignorance don't deserve to have a lot of those points responded to because the points fly in the face of too many solid facts and are too absurd to be worth a gnat's burp's worth of time and energy.
6. ANYONE WITH THE BRAZENNESS TO MAKE MY ALMIGHTY GOD FATHER-SON-SPIRIT OUT TO BE A LIAR ABOUT HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES TO THE BLOOD CHILDREN OF JACOB can expect to persistently earn my fiercest responses. I have not the least bit of an apology about that. I'm actually muting and "TONING DOWN" already, what I'd prefer to say--THAT'S WARRANTED to be said in response to such demonized hogwash from hell.
7. It is NOT a small thing to seduce the unwitting into the notion that ALMIGHTY GOD is NOT faithful regarding HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES.
8. You are welcome to think of me and feel toward me however you think God would approve of you doing. My task is to be a watchman on the wall, not win a popularity contest.
9. I will say again--I don't need to deal with the petty silliness of the points in the article because I trash the whole foundation the article is propped up on.
10. I hope to post shortly another bit of documentation showing quite startlingly starkly how WRONG the REPLACEMENTARIAN, PRETERIST/A-MIL/POST-MIL/RUN-OF-THE-MIL theological perspective of such willfully blind constructions are.
The "ferocity" with which you defend the 180-year-old rapture theory is used to compensate for your admitted lack of substantive argument. You cannot cite passages from scripture or opinions from the fathers on pretrib rapture, so you substitute rude graphics, loud fonts, and fantasy maps. Your quoted words above indicate that you support or oppose theological argument based upon its usefulness to the political requirements for modern Israel.
ok, my apologies for the above post, you explained yourself pretty well in post 12, thank you.