Isabella said:
What's rude is requesting books or other information that supports your opponent's point of view, then dismissing the evidence presented because either you don't have patience to study it, or the author is biased. Of course the author is biased! Why else would he present evidence in support of a given point of view if he were not? There's not one book in a thousand in which the author is able to give unbiased treatment to both sides of any issue. So you can search in vain for something written by an anti-Christ author that will support our point of view, or you can actually read and study what the pro-Christ authors say and give it an honest evaluation.
No matter what one may or may not feel about the lifestyle of a non Christian , they still have no right to call them Anti-Christ, even IF technically you are using it to mean non Christian, the connotation is something which is evil and sinful and considering that I am preaching against intolerance and peace towards everyone REGARDLESS of faith, I do not think my beliefs are FAR from what Jesus was preaching!
1 John 4:2-3 NKJV By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, (3) and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
You are, by definition, antichrist. And that does not have
connotations of being evil and sinful, being anti (against) Christ
IS evil and sinful. Either He is God come in the flesh, lived a sinless life, died, was buried, rose again, and has a right to demand our worship, or He is a liar. According to your beliefs as professed in many places on this forum, He is a liar. I am not using "antichrist" technically to mean non Christian, I use it as did the Apostle John in the preceding passage. John was one of the original 12 Disciples and the one who was closest to Jesus during His approximately three years of ministry, and who wrote the Gospel of John, three epistles (including 1 John, quoted from above), and the book of Revelation.
There is no middle ground: once you are confronted with the truth of God's Word, either you are for Christ, or you are against Christ. Anyone who denies that Christ is God come in the flesh is against Christ, regardless of whether or not they profess to believe other things He said. And regardless of how many "good works" they might do. And regardless of how "tolerant" they may be, or how much they promote "peace."
The world's "tolerance" means to tolerate anyone of any faith or no faith, except true Christians, because true Christians are not afraid to tell the truth. We do
not say that you have no right to believe whatever you want to believe. We just say what the Bible teaches: if you die believing the lies promoted by the world rather than Biblical Truth, you will be damned for eternity. But you still have the right to believe those lies if you so choose. We are nothing more than messengers of Truth, not the authors of that truth.
The people who cause the most damage to Christianity are not the atheists and other openly antichrist types; rather, those who profess to be Christians, but who compromise Scriptural Truth so as not to offend someone, cause far more damage. I have more respect for an honest atheist than for a dishonest self-proclaimed "Christian" like that. I think most men on this forum are true Christians, and many of us have already paid the price for offending someone because of our belief in Biblical Marriage.
I will not back down from what I know to be truth, and probably, neither will any other man on this forum. We may disagree among ourselves about some things (Preterism vs. futureism, what is an Apostle, etc.), but we have some very basic beliefs in common. (Who Jesus of Nazareth is and what He did for us.) Some might try to soften what they say more than I do, but I have not seen Dr. Allen, Doc, John Whitten, DTT, Steve, or any other leader or member of Biblical Families compromise what they believe in any way.
Either prove us to be wrong (from Scripture, if it is a doctrinal issue), or admit that you can not do so. But do not dismiss evidence presented by someone just because you don't have patience to read it, or because you disagree with something you know the author believes (like what he might believe about the Shroud of Turin), or the author is biased, or some other equally invalid reason.
Isabella, since first coming across some of your posts a few months ago, I have seen nothing but trivial arguments from you. When confronted with substantive arguments by a Christian, you either ignore those arguments or attack the messenger. So I am calling your bluff:
Someone who is as much of an expert on genetics as you claim to be is surely intelligent enough to understand Josh McDowell's book, "The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict." So read it and then refute anything he says in it, if you can.
But don't cop out with something like your response to a book recommended by Dr. Allen:
I have read through a bit but don't really have the patience for it to be honest.
If you really seek truth and not just justification for your anti-Christ belief system, you will find the patience necessary to read something like that.
And I also stand by my earlier admonition: actually read the Bible itself instead of just trusting what others say about it.
