I’ve been away for a few days. I don’t remember where you and I were talking before regarding Morey’s eschatology. You can move it to the proper category if you remember. You were using logic incorrectly and falsely accusing me of fallacies. Might I suggest Morey’s tape series on logic.

I believe Morey’s eschatology is agnostic to some degree. It is based on uncertainty. He would not use that term of course. This view doesn’t make Morey a bad person. This is a non-essential issue.Morey is still a brothe in Christ.

The views below are traditional various views taken from various people/denominations. Which one does Morey subscribe to?

Rapture:
1) pre-trib?
2) partial-trib?
3) mid-trib?
4) post-trib?

which one does Morey subscribe to? How about the millennialism?

Millennium
1) Historic Mill?
2) Dispensational Mill?
3) Post Mill?
4) A-Mill?

which view does Morey hold on the millennial?

Now in relation to the tribulation itself, Morey out-right denies Greg Bahnsen’s preterist view (he doesn’t reallly care for Bahnsen for some reason). He subscribes to the futuristic view I’m pretty sure. So in this sense he is not agnostic because he expects it to happen in the future. In terms of the specifics I do deem him agnostic.

Perhaps he has changed his views over the years. If not, then via the Rapture/Mill views listed above that are generally one of the views of all denominations, which does he hold.

Which view did the 1st century christians hold on the mill and rapture? What does Morey say? Is there ANOTHER view perhaps not mentioned above?-perhaps the first century view?

Check-Mate! : )

Jean Cauvin

You then say: If Jesus can be a (Jerk)or have rightous anger agaiinst apostates, than why cant God do somethings and command us not to do it?

That won’t work, Travis. You are changing definition to suit your own ends (just like Calvinists do with words like “love” and “world.”) You can’t say Jesus can be a jerk OR have righteous anger as if “jerk” and “righteous anger” are one and the same. Here is the definition of jerk: a contemptibly naive, fatuous, foolish, or inconsequential person. See? That is not compatible with righteous anger. A jerk is a fool, Travis, and speaks from a contemptous, angry, bitter heart that is short on love if not devoid of it.

The question you need to ask yourself is why would God command us to love even our enemies when God does not do it? Why would God command us to pray for those who persecute us when God Himself will not? What would you say of a human who did such a thing? Wouldn’t you call them a hypocrite? Who did Jesus have his harshest words for? Was it not the hypocrites of the church? Yet you want to make God into one?

I dont understand how you can say God has not caused death to come to people, BOC would agree, The God of Isreal has set his people apart and all through the OT has saved his people by killing other people. Doesnt sound to loving to me, (if I was to use your definition.) So again it matters when you say, ” for God so loved the world,” that you define the world to be everyone, I ask why God didnt spare those that he destroyed? This is a reason why I say God is Love and has mercy on all whom he wants to have mercy on, Hes God he can do that, and command us to live in peace, just like you said

“First, lets get one thing clear: you, nor any of us, is Jesus.”

If Jesus can be a (Jerk)or have rightous anger agaiinst apostates, than why cant God do somethings and command us not to do it?

JOHN CALVIN IS STILL DEAD!!!!!
HE WAS PREDESTINED TO DIE LIKE ALL OF US!!!!!!

AMEN

Sorry spelling isnt my specialty, you knew what i meant! I not a theologian, and could care less if you are impressed with my biblical knowladge, its not the point, the point is you are grafted in I am grafted in, and now Romans 3 still stands, and so does Romans 11:11, which means we are the true seeds of of Abraham, Who happen to start out a Pagan, not an Isrealite, and it so happened that God said it will be his desendens that he will number like the stars. Im not negation Isreal being choosen, they were and are, but were everyone in ancient isreal going to heaven? No, just like Isreal who for now we are to make jelous, so that they may be saved, and that the gentiles also may be saved, and it may so happen that God will work with the nation of isreal in the future, but it will only be because the are believers in Jesus Christ. Not because they are Isrealites but because of what Christ did.

Im not going to make fun of you BOC I dont think its funny that you believe what you do.

I was not relativisizing the definition of arrogance but rather, asserting that arrogance IS arrogance regardless of the little caveats you want to attach to it. It’s all repugnant. A rose is a rose no matter what you call it, Travis. Love is love, Travis. That is to say, LOVE is NOT mockery and is not being a jerk (even sometimes).

It is so true that you become what you worship. The Calvinist who worships a smug God who hates some, oppresses some, marginalizes some, acts arrogantly towards some, is glib towards some, condescencing towards some, chooses some over others becomes just like the God they have created. OR, perhaps it is not like that at all – perhaps they have instead created a God in their own image? Hmmm. Because any fallen human can fit the above definition, don’t you think?

JOHN CALVIN IS STILL DEAD!!!!!
HE WAS PREDESTINED TO DIE LIKE ALL OF US!!!!!!

If I use this logic, than we are both correct when we define Love, I define it as encompassing mockery (sometimes), and you dont, so it doesnt matter, right, now we are both still going to heaven?

Where did the Pharisees call Jesus a “jerk”?