I know that this video is too long for most. However, it is very instructive. It shows me that someone can be very good at quoting large parts of scripture and still be wrong. I think that Mr. Hitchcock wins this debate by a good margin.
Here is a video of Mr. Hitchcock’s debate opponent and recent comments that he has made. From what I know about history, Mr. Hanegraaff is outright wrong and John Haller calls him out on it. Forward to minute 41 to see Mr. Hanegraaff’s comments.
If you want to know a few things you didn’t about the book of Revelation, check out the first video above. The video is a bit fuzzy, but you can easily make out the debaters and the discussion.
Hank is NOT wrong. He advocates for reliance upon the INTERNAL evidence right out of the book of Revelation and not upon an indefensible, unbiblical system of interpretation (dispensationalism, futurism, rapturism, etc., it knows many names).
Respectfully, in the shadow of God’s love and mercy
Thank you for your comment, Keith.
And to you as well Chris!
And what as well?
Sorry, Keith. I didn’t get the order of the comments correct by looking at the back page (admin). It showed this comment after the one you made to Manny.
Thank you for your kind words.
Haven’t used this forum much. Did not mean to post anonymously. My name is Keith A. Wimer and I have written over 500 published articles on a variety of subjects with eschatology being chief among them. Just as a bit of background.
It IS a non-essential issue and as such I follow the paradigm that we are to be charitable to one another when debating it. However, it is a matter, like ALL things biblical that the Lord expects us to define and exegete “biblically.” Consequently, when I see where brothers and/or sisters are looking at something in an unbiblical manner, such as dispensationalism or futurism or whatever you want to call, I do my best to humbly and politely suggest that they re-think the matter.
Your judgment of me in this matter was incorrect. But no offense is taken.
I’m glad it wasn’t Knut. He is a troll who roams the internet spreading lies.
First, I don’t consider myself a dispensationalist.
Second, I know we disagree on futurism at this time. You can call that unbiblical if you like but I think that is presumptuous. With Bible scholars on both side of the issue there is a possibility you are wrong as there is a possibility I am wrong. I continue to study my Bible and take it where it leads me. Thus far, my studies lead me to believe that most of Revelation is to take place in the future. I have studied many views, including what I call modern historicism. My conclusion is not set in stone and I’m sure God will make things clearer as events occur.
You may leave a link to the summary of your views and I will look at it, thus rethinking the matter.
Your longer comment was directed to a friend of mine. You have no right to tell him how to spend his Bible study time. If a certain study seems to him to be going nowhere, it’s not wrong to switch to a different study. I don’t think its humble or polite to ask someone to go beyond what they think they are capable of.
I’m glad no offense was taken as no offense was meant.
This is all above my pay grade.
May I humbly and politely suggest that it should NOT be above the pay grade of any Christian believer? We are, after all, to study to show ourselves approved. Workmen who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth…
Seriously Anonymous…give my friend a break. Do you know all there is about the scriptures? Is there no subject where you come to the end and have to give up for the time being or maybe permanently while still on this planet? The reasons could be many.
I understand your point and agree with the scripture completely. I´m glad your suggestion was made humbly and politely; it comes off differently as I read it. This topic is certainly not an essential issue.
note: Since you didn’t leave your name, I have a feeling this may be you, Knut. If it is you, your hubris has no limits.