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.

@ErbunnNinja So not literal. - Kristen

@soothkeep It doesn’t, it just views those as already being fulfilled in Christ.

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

The Great Revival/Apostasy of the Last Days x.com/i/broadcasts/1…

1 Cor 10:13  There has no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above what you are able [to bear]; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, so that you may be able to bear it.

1 Corinthians 10:13  There has no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above what you are able [to bear]; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, so that you may be able to bear it.

Silence isn't a rejection and John 7:42 does say it. Cyrus “messiah”: “Messiah” just means chosen/anointed and many people were called that. Jesus is THE Messiah. Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 describe someone suffering and being rejected in a way that matches Jesus. Daniel: It partly fits Antiochus, but not completely. Jesus even points to it as future. - Kristen

@soothkeep - Jesus wasn’t born in Bethlehem, in Mark or John - Cyrus II is the messiah of Deutero-Isaiah - Isaiah 53 & Psalm 22 have no messianic import. Nor do they say “pierced”, except in the Christian Bible - Daniel is an apocalypse about Antiochus IV Epiphanes & the Seleucid Empire

@bobcrane77 @ThisNarrowWay "You're just wrong" isn't an arguement. It means you don't have one. - Kristen

@soothkeep @ThisNarrowWay I’ve been thru all this. You’re just wrong. This interpretation was invented in the 1800’s. John of Gischala and Eleazar stopped the sacrifices in 68 A.D. then they killed the religious leaders. You know, the ones that pierced him. I’ve spent 15 years diligently studying this.

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…

@wake_not_woke Nope. He could come this very day. What the text is saying is that nothing implies He MUST come immediately. - Kristen

@soothkeep In my mind it does....because you are saying that certain things have to happen before Jesus comes again

@wake_not_woke It doesn't do away with imminence in the slightest. - Kristen

@soothkeep Although....that does away with the doctrine of imminence. Jesus can come at any time

To name a few..... - Messiah’s first coming - born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), - Preceded by a messenger (Isaiah 40:3; Malachi 3:1), - Entering Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9), - Rejected and pierced (Isaiah 53; Psalm 22; Zechariah 12:10), and - “cut off” (Daniel 9:26). - Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed as foretold (Daniel 9:26) Many prophecies have been fulfilled LITERALLY, so there is no reason to allegorize the remaining prophecies just so amil's can say they've been fulfilled. - Kristen

@soothkeep Which prophecies from the Hebrew scriptures, do you believe have been “fulfilled”?

Jesus cannot be the one mentioned in Daniel 9:27 because He is already identified earlier as the Messiah who is “cut off” in Daniel 9:26, and the next verse shifts to a different person. “The prince who shall come.” That person makes a 7-year covenant (Daniel 9:27), but Jesus made an eternal covenant (Heb. 13:20), not a temporary one, and He doesn’t break covenants (Matthew 5:17), while this figure breaks it halfway through and stops sacrifices (Daniel 9:27), which didn’t happen when Jesus died and sacrifices continued until 70 AD. Also, this ruler sets up the abomination of desolation (Daniel 9:27), and Jesus said that event was still future (Matthew 24:15), proving it wasn’t Him. - Kristen

@ThisNarrowWay @soothkeep Daniel 9:27 is about the 3 1/2 ministry of Christ. Nowhere does it mention a peace treaty, nowhere does it say it’s the Antichrist. You believe in a literal interpretation, right? It literally doesn’t say it’s The Antichrist.

Live tonight at 8pm cst! Come with your questions! youtube.com/live/GVap0O5NH…

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.

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.

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.