Lee W. Brainard

Truth is not a democratic process or a popularity contest. Truth is still true, even when men like Noah or Martin Luther must stand alone.

Just a heads up for those watching current events. There is almost zero chance that the US will be weakened to the point that the US dollar will be replaced by the Chinese Yuan, not via China's own muscle, not via the combined muscle of BRICS. China is not a major player in the last days picture. Russia and other BRICS nations get smoked in Gog and Magog. As for the US dollar, it remains to be seen whether an existing currency or a future currency will be the currency of the reconstituted Roman empire. One thing I can say with certainty, the deep state guiding the world toward the Roman Empire's return would be braindead to destroy America's economic, industrial, technological, and military might. They would be far better off to take over America from the inside and exploit this strength to forward their own agenda.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗙𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗠𝗮𝗴𝗼𝗴 Many on social media are now opining that in the next few months if the war drags on, the world will be plunged into the famines, digital control, and absolute disaster of the tribulation, and based on this FEAR factor, they think that the rapture has to happen in the immediate future. 𝙏𝙤 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙪𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜:soothkeep.info/the-coming-fal…

He will literally have the mighty sword of his infinite creative power coming out of his mouth executing literal judgment during a literal second coming and a literal Armageddon. All the nations of the world will literally be gathered against Jerusalem, Israel, and the Lord whom they know is going do descend from heaven. All the gathered nations will literally be crushed with blood literally flowing bridle deep. This makes perfect sense if taken literally. Why grasp after hyper-technical straws that authorize you to allegorize it?

@soothkeep You’re demonstrating this in spades. recognizing literal means true but doesn’t categorically mean wooden. Jesus wasn’t really a temple made of stones that needed to be reconstructed in 3 days. Jesus will not “literally” have a giant sword coming out of his mouth.

The ideology of amillennialism has some serious problems, because it denies many unconditional Messianic promises written concretely throughout the Old Testament. It essentially calls God a liar. The prophecies in the Bible may be fulfilled once or twice or even three times, but they are always fulfilled literally and powerfully. Chuck Missler, The Rapture: Christianity's Most Preposterous Belief

This is an unreasonable objection. Not a single dispensationalist on the planet believes that literal interpretation means there are no metaphors or figurative language. What we do believe is that things should be taken literally unless they are impossible or nonsensical to take literally. What we do believe is that we should use the same principles of interpretation for the second coming that we use for the first coming. There is nothing in the tribulation, the second coming, Armageddon, or the kingdom that is impossible or nonsensical. Men simply don't want the Lord to come down here and fix the world. They would rather leave it alone or fix it themselves.

@soothkeep That’s right, there is absolutely no metaphors or similes in the Bible. Everything is literal 🙄 "Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep."

@matt2216 It is not bias to believe that the tribulation, the second coming, and the kingdom are literal. It is bias to reject them taken literally.

@soothkeep Why do dispensationalists have to create their own hermeneutic to make their interpretations work? I prefer letting the inspired NT writers interpret the OT text. Consistent literal hermeneutic is contentedly biased and designed to produce a biased theology.

The only reason men balk at taking Revelation literally (and all the similar passages in the OT, the Gospels, and the Epistles) is that they are uncomfortable with a second coming that actually crushes the world in judgment, and establishes a kingdom in righteousness, where everyone on earth is born again, and the words out of Jesus mouth are the final arbiter in everything. That will be the end of debates over church tradition.

There's almost nothing about Revelation that screams that we have to take it strictly literally. It actually screams that those things are symbolic. I'm not sure why you would take such a hard uncompromising stance on something that has been debated and unsettled within the Church basically from it's founding. Of course it could be metaphorical. The thing is, nobody really knows for sure, and that's why it's been debated and controversial. Is it part of a creed of orthodoxy that we have to interpret that strictly literally?

@KathyIReck1 This is a common soundbite, but it is untrue. youtube.com/watch?v=PfBeTn…

@soothkeep The word rapture is not in the original text. It’s a Latin word and the original text is in koine Greek. This narrative didn’t surface until the mid 1850’s

If every believer used the exact same literal interpretation principles for the second coming that they used for the first coming, every believer would take the tribulation, the second coming, and the kingdom in the way that you mock as "wooden." It is not wooden literalism to believe that Jesus will literally bring seven years of judgment upon the world, then literally descend at a literal Armageddon, and then literally establish in his literal person a literal kingdom here on earth. When men call this "wooden," they admit that they hate the Bible's teaching that Jesus is literally going to come down here and fix the problems. They don't want Jesus to fix the world's problems the way the Bible teaches he is going to fix them. They love this world by and large. They want the worldly church to fix the world's problems and slap Jesus' name on it.

@soothkeep This is such a silly statement. Literally≠woodenly Everyone knows this. It’s just the false way for dispensationalists to pretend they alone take prophecy “literally”. Besides being untrue, it actually demonstrates the presuppositions of the broken hermeneutic.

If this is true, why did the Lord say, "The kingdom doesn't come with observation"? In other words, the kingdom doesn't come incrementally, step by step, decade by decade. The only kingdom arrival in the Bible, and there are many passages on the matter, is the arrival and establishment of the Kingdom in one awful but glorious day that starts with a literal Armageddon and ends with a literal sheep and goats judgment here on earth. There will be no room for debate over church teaching or church tradition. Jesus himself will be physically on the throne. Prior to that day, the kingdom is not here in any sense.

@soothkeep @jimmyblack33 Vs 30 says here’s the promise & then vs 31-33 say here is how it’s fulfilled.The “right hand” is throne language and that’s why the New Testament repeats this over and over again. The kingdom starts small and grows larger and u need eyes to see it.This is what Jesus talked about.

@rabbriansamuel Amen! Not all Israel is the Israel of God. Not all Israel embraces Israel's Redeemer.

Tell me, at what point in the Bible did national Israel actually stop being Israel? At the cross? No,. Acts 1:6: Lord, are You restoring the kingdom to ISRAEL at this time? At Pentecost? No. Acts 2:22: Men of ISRAEL, hear these words! At Paul's conversion? No. Acts 13:16: Men of ISRAEL, and you who fear God, listen. I know that you will respond with Romans 9, "not all of Israel is Israel". But why do you quote that and ignore Paul's other passages? Such as: 1 Corinthians 10:18: Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? Do you see that Israel never stopped being Israel through the Bible?

Acts 2 doesn’t say Jesus is on David’s throne. It says He’s at God’s right hand in heaven. David’s throne is an earthly throne connected to Israel. If Jesus is already on it, then where is the kingdom, the rule from Jerusalem, and the peace the prophets talked about? None of that has happened. - Kristen

@soothkeep @jimmyblack33 Acts 2 tells you Jesus sits David’s throne right now.

@ElifNull Irenaeus (this includes Irenaeus' "two churches") soothkeep.info/explosive-pret… Ephraim soothkeep.info/?s=Ephraim Eusebius soothkeep.info/?s=Eusebius+ The Didache soothkeep.info/?s=Didache - Kristen

@soothkeep Please do go ahead quote them. none of them held to the distinctives of dispensationalism. I'm interested what you particularly believe about the Didache. You'll be surprised once you read that they all viewed the Church as the true Israel.

@jesus_is_issue Jesus fulfills promises, He doesn’t rewrite them. God made real promises to Israel. You can’t spiritualize them and call them “fulfilled.” If it didn’t happen the way God said, it’s not fulfilled yet. - Kristen

JESUS – All Promises Fulfilled in Him Chuck Missler spoke passionately about taking God at His word. Yet Messianic promises don’t hinge on a future land or throne... they’re fulfilled in Jesus. 2 Cor 1:20: every promise is “Yes” in Him. He is Abraham’s seed, David’s son, true Israel (Gal 3:16). The kingdom isn’t distant with charts (Lk 17:21): it’s here, “Christ in you,” reigning now. Calling amillennial brothers liars misses the point. They see promises powerfully fulfilled in the new covenant people. Rev 20’s thousand years? Symbolic in apocalyptic style, pointing to Christ’s current rule with saints. We can differ on timing without dividing over Jesus. Jesus is the literal fulfillment. Live from His life in you today.

@ElifNull All of church history? What about Ephraim? Irenaeus? Eusebius? The Didache? soothkeep.info/?s=Church+fath… - Kristen

@soothkeep If your belief denies all of church history, your belief is wrong. Dispensationalism started in 1830 and believes everyone before them was wrong, but they discovered the truth while everyone was in darkness. Sounds cultish because its the same logic all other cults use.

@ReformedGunn It does if it redefines clear promises. If God made concrete, unconditional promises to Israel and you turn them into something spiritual or symbolic, then He didn’t fulfill them as stated. - Kristen

@soothkeep Amil doesn't deny any of these things, and it most certainly doesn't call God a liar, essentially, or otherwise.

@jimmyblack33 If those promises were “literally fulfilled” in that generation, then where is Israel’s restored kingdom, the throne of David, and Jesus? You’re calling it “literal,” but you’re actually redefining clear promises into something else. - Kristen

@soothkeep To the contrary... it correctly sees Jesus (and that generation) as the literal fulfillment of those promises.

You’re misreading the argument. It’s not saying the gospel is in error or that God doesn’t choose. It’s saying your interpretation creates a contradiction with the clear teaching that the gospel is offered to all. Instead of accusing the Bible of conflict, the obvious conclusion is your reading of Acts 13:48 is erroneous. - Kristen

“This emphasis on human responsibility in the gospel is in keeping with the clear teaching of Scripture that election follows faith (2 Thess. 2:13, 1 Pet. 1:2) “ Election FOLLOWS FAITH? “But we should always give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you as the first fruits for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.” (2 Thessalonians 2:13 LSB) “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to the obedience of Jesus Christ and the sprinkling of His blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.” (1 Peter 1:2 LSB) I didn’t see “election following faith” here nor anything suggesting it. Rather the 2 thess passage suggests GOD’s choosing. “because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God, for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh are not able to please God.” (Romans 8:7–8 LSB) “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him in love,” (Ephesians 1:3–4 LSB) “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:44 LSB) “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose. Because those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers; and those whom He predestined, He also called; and those whom He called, He also justified; and those whom He justified, He also glorified.” (Romans 8:28–30 LSB) ELECTION precedes faith. In your article you said “ the contradiction we see between the free offer of the gospel and the Reformed election of Acts 13:48—we are forced to conclude that either the free offer of the gospel is in error or the common translation of Acts 13:48 is in error.” Interesting that the reformed interpretation of the text means “the free offer of the gospel is in error”? Are believers in unconditional election preaching an erroneous gospel? Bold statement to make! I reckon many reformed / Calvinist believers would find that offensive to say the least! I am shocked to see you denying unconditional election. When it is clearly defined by the apostle in Romans 8 and 9 as well as Ephesians 1. The Triune God has been choosing His people THE ENTIRE BIBLE!

For those who didn't understand my answer to the question on Acts 13:48 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗲𝗱 𝗕𝘆 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝟭𝟯:𝟰𝟴? Many Christians are perplexed by Acts 13:48 which states, “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed” (NKJV). They can’t reconcile the phrase “appointed to eternal life” with the free offer of the gospel that is suggested by such passages as “the Lord is … not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲: soothkeep.info/perplexed-by-a…

You somewhat answered your own question. One is born again and the other is not. However, if you truly believed, yet lived like hell for 30 years, only you and God know if you were truly born again at that moment or later. Being born again doesn't mean you'll live in sinless perfection. But there should be change. Sometimes it's not as quickly as we think it should be. Praise the Lord you're on track now! - Kristen

@soothkeep This has always hit home with me, Lee, as I was the guy that received Christ at a young age, but then lived like hell for almost 30 years before my path straightened. What is the difference between two people who receive the Gospel, where one is born again and the other is not?