Two Guys and A Bible Tuesdays At 7pm Eastern, 6pm Central - Join us
You are here: Home » Full Preterist Radio » Fulfilled Radio Update 2

Fulfilled Radio Update 2

Fulfilled RadioHello to all the encouraging supporters and listeners of Fulfilled Radio. On behalf of Don and myself, I would like to apologize for our technical difficulties we’ve experienced on this weeks broadcast. I am working to resolve the problem.

As we told you before, we were looking for a permanent solution to using our existing format, and after yesterday, we both decided it was time to make that move as quickly as possible. The station is already secured and I’m uploading past broadcasts as I write.

We’ll also have much more control over the broadcast quality, recordings and live productions. As soon as I get enough material uploaded and do some preliminary testing, I will put the new broadcast player on the website.

It’s a tedious process but for now. I am in conversation with my son who lives in Chicago, IL who has experience as a TV show host and interviewer about being our station engineer and part-time DJ as we mature in this process. Eventually, he’ll be managing the files and relieving me of that duty.

Thanks so much for your patience during this early phase of our launch but we’re committed to bringing you quality information over the airwaves. Shortly, we will be world wide with access to more stations. Stay tuned!



About William Bell

One comment

  1. February 4, 2013 9:59 pm by thomas grelenee Hey S&L I just came back home and I would like to comment further to your questions.Let me first say that I do not import any scripture into an interpretation of any other scripture. The things being spoken of in the sentences (propositions) in each inspired text that I am attempting to interpret are complete in that text. That is the definition of a complete or perfect sentence. There is in a complete sentence a subject, a verb, and a predicate.If you are aware of the three laws of thought: 1) Identity, 2) excluded middle, and 3) non-contradiction, then you know what I am saying. If we wish to import any other sentence (proposition) from any other source, other than contained in our text under consideration, then we can only do so according to the axioms and theorems of logic in the form of a syllogism. you seem to agree with this by the use of your mathmatical example. However, this would not be correct logically since a universal affirmative proposition is not able to be directly controverted. The correct formal logical expression would be All B is C, All A is B, therefore All A is C. Materially expressed it would be: All B is some C, All A is some B, therefore All A is some C. What unites A to C is the middle term B of which A is a part.I really did not mean to get into such a technical explanation however I think it is warranted in our discussion concerning 1 Th. 4:13-18 and your question about two resurrections.In Acts 1 we have the Spirit describing the Lord ASCENDING into the heavens (uranos). In our Th. text we have the Spirit describing the Lord DESCENDING from the heavens (uranos). For our purposes we are concerned with the Lord descending from heaven WITH them who sleep in Jesus for the purpose of rapturing the living ones (oi zontes) and the dead in Christ (nekroi en cristo) to be with Him forever. We are not concerned with any other events or terms described as “COMING” unless the textual term is PAROUSIA and the definition of the subject “COMING” is understood to be the Lord descending from heaven. such for instance would be 1 Th. 3:13.What must be understood in interpreting scripture is that there are many different things that can be predicated of the same subject AND there are many different subjects of which the same thing can be predicated. So, the important point in interpreting a specific scriptural text is the definition of the subject of the text and what is being specifically predicated of that specific subject. You say: “I am encountering multiple references that place a bodily resurrection of the dead, both the just and the unjust, just before the final stage of Jerusalem’s destruction”. I do not understand the scriptures as you present them here. The begining must be with the definition of the subject “the just” and the definition of the subject “the unjust” according to the resurrection which is being predicated of both subjects. For instance, I know that scripture states absolutely that there is only one just righteous man and that was the Lord Jesus Christ and He was resurrected. The scripture also states that there is no man of himself who is just and righteous, no not one (in Adam all die), but there are some of them who will also be resurrected if they are in Christ (in Christ all are made alive) and the just righteousness of the Lord is imputed to them. With this understanding of scripture according to the gospel we definitely have two different resurrections occuring at two different times.we have the resurrection of the dead occuring with the Lord Jesus Christ the first fruit of them that sleep (1Cr. 15:23) then those that are Christ’s at his (parousia) coming. (1Cr. 15:23)We have the resurrection of Christ in 30AD as the first fruit of them that sleep (1Cr. 15:23) but what about the rest of them that sleep that are His? Our text 1 TH. 4:14 tells us that “them who sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him when he descends from heaven (uranos)” This response is getting much too long so I’ll stop here. I hope this is helpful to you and that we can keep the dialog going.Tom

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *