[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Religion See other Religion Articles Title: The "Rapture" Business -- Part Two I was involved, the other day, in another thread here at Freedom4um, in which the discussion turned to the question of whether "the rapture" is a Biblically-supported concept. After exchanging a post or two with Yertle Turtle and Zipporah, I began to wonder whether we were all working from the same definition of "rapture." Having done some reading, I still think that's the problem (definitional differences, that is). 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17 says (NASB translation, emphasis added by me): For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. The term "rapture" cames from the Latin verb raptus, meaning "to seize, catch, or carry away." The same verb supplies the root of the name of a whole category of birds that get their groceries in this way: "raptors" are eagles, hawks, buzzards, condors, and so on. If we take "rapture" to mean simply a catching-up from above (which, since I am a simple-minded person, is how I understand the term), I don't think there can be much dispute about whether living believers will be removed from the earth's surface and drawn to the Lord, following the general resurrection of the believing dead. I gather, however, from the reading to which Zipporah was kind enough to provide a link, that others have added to that meaning. I am reproducing the text from that link here, and interjecting some comments in italic font. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Does the Bible teach the "Rapture"? By Donald Hochner There are many Christians today who would love to be able to escape the troubles of this world. They believe that the Church will be "raptured" just before the great tribulation or the destruction of this world, depending on which "futurist" view you hold to. However, this kind of "escapism" is not taught in Scriptures. "Rapture," "futurism," and "escapism" haven't been defined yet -- nor will they be in the rest of Mr. Hochner's essay. And that's not good. Also there is no guarantee in Scriptures that would lead us to believe that the Church will be "caught up" in order to avoid suffering or persecutions because Jesus prayed that the Father would "not to take them (elect) out of the world, but to keep them from evil one" (John 17:15). But what if there was some other reason for a catching-up? I agree with Mr. Hochner that the church is not promised immunity from suffering and persecution. Indeed, the New Testament is pretty well filled with promises to the contrary: promises that were already being made good for the savagely-persecuted first century church. Also, I think Mr. Hochner is stealing a base by putting that parenthetical "elect" after "them" in John 17:15. As usual, context is everything; this is right in the middle of a chapters-long discourse by Jesus to his twelve disciples at the Last Supper, and the "them" absolutely refers to those disciples. What is said may apply also to believers in general, and it may not ... but the plain and direct meaning of the text is not to be casually "blown off" with a single word in parentheses. Besides, when Jesus says He's not praying for His disciples to be taken out of the world right then, that obviously does not mean that they will never be taken out of the world in any way, at any time. Every one of them died, as have all believers that I know of since then, apart from the small minority of us who are alive today -- and I'm old enough now that I can sort of see my opportunity to sneak off by way of the grave coming up, too. The "rapture" theme is the most popular and well-known subject among evangelical Christianity. Most believe (I once did) that we will "zoom" up to meet with Christ in the air without experiencing physical death or have our faith tested, to see whether it be real or not. They usually refer the passages in 1 Thes. 4:13-18 as their proof text. But I believe they have taken these verses out of context. Most futurist's views have fallen short in their failure to properly take into account the historical-grammatical and cultural context of the prophecies; specifically what they meant to their first century audience. In order to understand the passage in 1 Thes. 4:13-18, we must understand the overall view of this epistle by Paul and the NT writers before we come to any conclusion. These passages will be our anchor for this brief study. We cannot look at all the instances for this would be time consuming, and the space required would be prohibitive. You may be able to discern more of the meaning after reading what I have written. Of course, we must go back into the beginning of this epistle of 1 Thessalonians. It was Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy's greeting to the church of the Thessalonians in the first century (about AD 50's). Anytime you see the word "we", it means Paul, Silvanus, Timothy, and the brethren in their time, not to us as the readers in the present time. Keep in mind that the NT was written for us, not to us. Very true ... and Mr. Hochner might have wanted to keep that in mind himself, when he inserted his personal assumption into John 17:15, as I noted above. Paul wrote in this epistle, that they were "in much tribulation" (1:6). They had already "suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition" (2:2). From what quarter was the persecution? It was from the apostate Jews. This can be found in this epistle: "For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the Prophets, and drove us out. They are not pleasing to God, but hostile to all men, hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved; with the result that they always fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them to the utmost" (2:14-16). Does the phase "fill up the measure of their sins" in verse 16 ring a bell? Yes it does. This can be found in Matt. 23: "Consequently you bear witness against yourself, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. fill up then the measure of the guilt of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how shall you escape the sentence of hell? Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, that upon you may fall the guilt of all righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zecheriah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things shall be upon this generation" (vv. 31-36). We must remember the context in which those words were spoken. Jesus told the scribes and the Pharisees "Behold, your house [temple] being left to you desolate!" in their generation (vv. 36, 38). Either we have to say it is all future (and make Jesus a liar for saying any of it would occur in that generation), or make it all fulfilled at AD 70 (and preserve the integrity of Jesus). Also there is another connection in James 5: "Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. You have condemned and put death the righteous man; he does not resist you" (vv. 1-6). James was the leader of the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. He warns the apostate Jews to turn into the Lord, otherwise they'll face the wrath of God because they were living in the last days of the Old Covenant system. We know that the temple and the Old Covenant system was burned by fire during the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Obviously, the word "you" was referring to the Jewish people in the first century, to which James was speaking, and not to us. Read the next few verses: "Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. Behold, the farmer waits for the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late rain. You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand. Do not complain, brethren, against one another, that you yourselves may not be judged; Behold, the judge is standing at the door" (James 5:7-9). Lastly this also can be found in Rev. 18: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying 'Come out of her, my people, that you may not participate in her sins and that you may not receive of her plagues, for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (vv. 4-5). Who is this harlot, Babylon the great? Most in the futurist camp would say Rome, the future apostate Christianity. Not quite! The Bible has the answer as to the identity of the great city referred to. Rev. 11:8 says the great city (see Rev. 14:8; 16:19; 17:1, 18; 18:2) which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where the Lord was crucified. It was Jerusalem, without a doubt. The harlot was apostate Israel because of her rejection of the Son of God. Before Christ died on the cross, the Jewish people cried and "prophesied" against themselves saying: "His blood be on us and on our children" (Matt. 27:25). They didn't realize what they were saying, as after 40 years (a generation) later God was accomplishing all things as the OT and the NT had predicted (Luke 21:22, 32). In addition, what about the phase "wrath has come upon them (apostate Jews) to the utmost" in same verse in 1 Thes. 2:16? Paul even mentioned this two other times in this epistle: "And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who delivers us from wrath to come" (1 Thes. 1:10). "For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thes. 5:9). This also can be found in Matthew 3 when John the Baptist warns to the Jews: "But when he (John the Baptist) saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers (see also in Matt. 23), who warned you to flee from the wrath [about] to come?" ...And, "the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire". ...And, "His (Jesus) winning fork is in His hand, and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (vv. 7, 10,12). Obviously, John the Baptist was warning the apostate Jewish people. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians not to be disturbed by these afflictions because they believed that God had destined them for this and it came to pass (1 Thes. 3:3-4, 7). They knew it was according to God's purpose predestined to occur. Note that Paul was saying that the Lord "may establish your hearts unblamable in holiness before our God and Father at the *coming* of our Lord Jesus with all His saints (1 Thes. 3:13). The word "coming" is very important and we cannot overlook this one. The Greek word for "coming" is parousia. It is mentioned 17 times reference to the coming of Christ, four of them in this epistle (1 Thes. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23). If you are a futurist, whether you are Premill, Postmill, or Amill: how many "comings" do you believe will occur? I have to interrupt at this point to complain about the jargon. "If you are a futurist," he says ... how am I supposed to know whether he's talking to me or not? He keeps using these terms without defining them. "Premill, Postmill, or Amill" ... not only not defined, but he can't even be bothered to spell them out. From my experience (I was one of them), futurists believe there are two or more "comings" of Christ whether they realize or not. Let me explain what I mean. If you are a pretribulation Premill (or a Dispensationalist), there are three different comings of Christ in the future. You may say, "No way!" I'll show you what I mean with the Greek word "parousia" in these passages: 1. The second coming of Christ in the pretribulation rapture: *1 Thes. 2:19 *1 Thes. 3:13 *1 Thes. 4:15-17 *2 Thes. 2:1 (see below after 7 years of great tribulation) *James 5:7-8 *1 John 2:28 2. The third coming of Christ after 7 years of great tribulation: *Matt. 24:27-31, 37-39 *2 Thes. 2:8 3. The fourth coming of Christ after 1,000 years *1 Cor. 15:23-24 (most aren't sure of this) *2 Peter 3:10-13 So, they believe there are three comings of Christ in the future. Would you agree with that? Does the Bible teach that? I have shown this to some futurist brethren, and their eyes didn't even blink! They were speechless. As for the moderate or "inconsistent" preterist (Postmill or Amill), they believe two "comings" of Christ, one in AD 70 to judge Israel; but the literal, final coming of Christ is still in the future according to their creeds or the traditions of men. I'll show you: 1. In AD 70: *Matt. 24:27-31 (some are sure about vv. 37-39) *2 Thes. 2:1 *2 Thes. 2:8 *James 5:7-8 *1 John 2:28 2. In the future: *1 Thes. 4:15-17 *1 Cor. 15:23-25 *2 Peter 3:10-13 Look closely for the futurist's theological gymnastics here, then ask yourself if the first century brethren would have understood two or more different comings being spoken of using exactly the same Greek word and terminology. If the NT writers understood two or more different comings separated by different periods of time, we would expect them to stop somewhere and explain to this us. Since they did not do that, we must assume the same coming is under consideration. More on that shortly. Tell me, dear reader, if this makes sense to you. Paul writes to the Thessalonians and informs them "to wait for His Son from heaven" who delivers them "from the wrath to come" (1 Thes. 1:10) even if it did not occur in the first century? Those in the futurist camp would say that there is what has now been an almost 2,000 years gap, because "those things simply didn't happen" when the destruction of Jerusalem occurred in AD 70. I would counter with this: Paul says that they (first-century brethren) should wait for the Son. Would it make sense to inform the first-century brethren to wait for the Son, if His coming was to happen in our time? That would be pointless to the Thessalonians, and it would make Paul's informing them useless, because these men would only come in our time. Now, we'll do a little study on 1 Thes. 4:13-5:11. Please make sure you have the Bible in hand, verifying all that is taught to you (Acts 17:11). This may change the way you view the fulfillment of prophecy, perhaps even the way you view the whole Bible, as it did for me. I believe there is a connection between 1 Thes. 4:15-17, Matt. 24:30-31, 1 Cor. 15:50-5 and Rev. 11:15 as being the same event in AD 70 because of the last "trumpet of God": "For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, and remain until the coming [parousia] of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thes. 4:15-17). "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, the all the tribes of the earth [land] will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the our winds, from one end of the sky to the other" (Matt. 24:30-31). "Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed" (1 Cor. 15:50-52). "And the seventh (trumpet) angel sounded; and there arose loud voices in heaven, saying, 'The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever" (Rev. 11:15 and read vv. 16-19). Also, I think it would be easier for us if we can make a comparison between parallel passages such 1 Thes. 4-5 and Matt 24: 1. Christ Himself Returns Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:16 2. From Heaven Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:16 3. With a Shout Matt. 24:30 (in power) I Thess. 4:16 4. Accompanied by Angels Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:16 5. With Trumpet of God Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:16 6. Believers Gathered Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:17 7. In Clouds Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:17 8. Time Unknown Matt. 24:36 I Thess. 5:1-2 9. Will Come as a Thief Matt. 24:43 I Thess. 5:2,4 10. Unbelievers Unaware of Impending Judgment Matt. 24:37-39 I Thess. 5:3 11. Judgment Comes as Travail upon Expectant Mother Matt. 24:8 I Thess. 5:3 12. Believers to Watch Matt. 24:42 I Thess. 5:4 13. Warning Against Drunkenness Matt. 24:49 I Thess. 5:7 Do these parallel passages cause your jaw drop to the ground? The conclusion is inescapable that 1 Thes. 4-5 is dealing with exactly same coming, judgment, and resurrection that Matt. 24 is. If we don't relocate this prophecy of Matt. 24 into our future, then it was a prophecy to them, who were there at the Mount of Olives, when Jesus spoke, that is: in "that generation" (Matt. 24:34). We must compare Scriptures with Scriptures to interpret them properly. It does not matter what you or I may think, but what saith the Scripture? I do not care what the "prophecy experts" may say; it is the Word of God, "sola scriptura" that makes the decision for me. The futurists realize that a true analysis of biblical text related to the timing of prophetic events endangers their eschatological position. You might ask, "but doesn't the Bible say that we shall be caught up together to meet the Lord in the air?" Yes it does, but what does the word "air" means? Is it in our atmosphere or the air we breath? Well, I'm just a simpleminded man, but I would suppose from reading 1 Thessalonians 4:17 that the "air" being referred to here is the kind of "air" that contains "clouds." Now, maybe those "clouds" can be spiritualized away too. But what happened to the exegetical principle that the plain and straightforward meaning of a text is the preferred one? We can compare with other Scriptures in Eph 2:2: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience." The word "air" is an another word for heavenly or spiritual realm. Satan was always an opponent of the scheme of the redemption as we can see throughout the Bible. He was (but is no longer) the prince of the power of the air. In Rom. 16:20 Paul says that Satan would be crushed "shortly" (see Gen 3:15). Jesus now has taken over that sphere and rules in the "air" with the saints since the destruction of Jerusalem. If that is the same "air" where the saints were to meet and be gathered, then there is no necessity for us to believe that the rapture gathering and meeting was to be physical and visible either. It was accomplished when the faithful remnant of Jewish believers with the ingrafted Gentiles was transformed (and transferred) into Christ's new spiritual Israel (new covenant) when the old fleshly-based (old covenant) was taken away in AD 70. The "gathering together" is the heavenly places in Christ - the spiritual kingdom of God. Satan is no longer around here; he is now in the lake of fire. Also notice what Paul wrote: "By the word of the Lord, thatwe who are alive, and remain until the coming of the Lord" in both verses 15 & 17 of 1 Thessalonians. They were expecting of an imminent parousia in their lifetime. We need to step back out of our 20th century mindset and stop looking at the NT as if it was written in our generation. Otherwise Paul was mistaken and not an inspired writer. The Bible is inerrant, infallible, and sufficient. As we have seen 1 Thes. 5 cannot be isolated from the context of 1 Thes. 4. 2 Thessalonians cannot be ignored either. In this context (1 Thes. 4:13-5:11) Paul calls this parousia, "the coming of the Lord" (1 Thes. 4:15) and the "day of the Lord" (1 Thes. 5:2 with numerous passages in the OT and the NT) and says it will be like "a thief in the night" (see Matt. 24:42-44; 2 Peter 3:10; Rev. 3:3) with "birth pangs" (1 Thes. 5:2-3) in the same event during the first century. The "destruction" of Jerusalem had come upon them in AD 70 (1 Thes. 5:3) from the Roman armies as God's instrument. In conclusion, there is no evidence in the NT that teaches the two comings of Christ in the first century and another one in the future. Also, nowhere is there any mention of a multi-coming of Christ like as the Dispensationalist system claims (parousia or "rapture" before 7 years of tribulation, the parousia after the great tribulation and the parousia at the end of 1,000 years). The word "rapture" is nowhere to be found in the Bible, neither is it taught there. Ah, now where have I heard an "argument" like that before? Why, I believe it was the last time I had a crew of Jehovah's Witnesses in my living room, explaining solemnly that the word "trinity" appears nowhere in Scripture. And they're correct, as far as that goes; it's just that the doctrine of the trinity is supported so extensively by Scripture. I'm always ready to hear a reasoned argument that says I've misunderstood 1 Thessalonians 4, or any other part of the Bible; but I'm short on patience with "the word '[fill in word here]' isn't in the Bible. Mr. Hochner should confine himself to honest arguments. There is no Scriptural support for this kind of dream, and we should reject it outright. This escapist philosophy is pure fiction. We are not taught to escape reality in the Scripture, but rather to face it knowing that God will work all things out for our good (Rom. 8:28-30). Mr. Hochner's argument depends on his attribution of base motives to those who disagree with him: they are "escapist philosophers;" they want to "escape reality." I'm sure that is true of some who disagree with him; I am equally sure it is not true of others. He is our sovereign God and nothing can happen to thwart His plan. To say otherwise is blasphemy to God. Soli Deo Gloria! Donald Hochner = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I don't really have much of a detailed eschatological position. While I am convinced that God is going to wrap up this phase of the story at some point, after two millennia of church history, I guess my feeling is that it's pretty unlikely that it (the conclusion) would happen during my brief lifetime on the planet's surface. I think that the Bible's instructions for Christians are quite plain, are repeated many times, and I don't see that there's anything about the way I should live, or the manner in which I should attempt obedience to my redeemer that depends in any way on the details of how God is going to finalize history. I think that exchanging views about these matters is a fine exercise in logic, reasoning, and scholarship -- as long as the exchange is conducted with respect and charity. Sadly, that's seldom how it's done.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 79.
#38. To: Enderby (#0)
The underlined words in the above quote are very misleading in that James says (KJV) in James 1:1: James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. (ASV) Jam 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion, greeting. (GNB) From James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ: Greetings to all God's people scattered over the whole world. (CEV) From James, a servant of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ. Greetings to the twelve tribes scattered all over the world. He is not addressing his comments to the jews or christians in jerusalem, but to the israelites scattered abroad, which would be those taken in the Assyrian dispersion, and the Babylonian which refused to return, as well as any others that had gone elsewhere, whether thru captivity, i.e., Egypt, or migrated on their own initiative. Furthermore, 10 of those tribes were NOT jewish (jewish being defined as being from judea for this comment). They were israelites, meaning from the northern kingdom, rather than the southern kingdom where jerusalem is. So, obviously the word 'you' is NOT referring to jewish people in the first century as those to whom james was addressing. Technically this may have nothing to do with the meat of the non-rapture or rapture discussion, but it tells me I'd have to research ALL this author is purporting.......which is OK because I don't take none of them as the only RIGHT opinion.
I agree, Rowdee. And in general, without regard to the main point that he's trying to make, I found Mr. Hochner's work to be both slipshod and contentious. On the other hand, none of the epistles are actually addressed to us; yet most of what is said can be applied to us. I guess the "bottom line" is that some discernment is called for. As with everything in life, that is.
On the other hand, none of the epistles are actually addressed to us; I agree too that Mr. Hochner's work is something to be "wary" of. In Rowdee's response in #37, it is pointed out that Peter is adressing the Tribes of Israel. So couldn't it be adressing us, if indeed we are of those Tribes? If it were possible to trace it that far back, there are no doubt descendants of those Tribes walking the planet today. AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt addressed this issue of True Israel in another post. When it comes to the "rapture", I think it's BS. The particular verse(s) used to support this "theory" are taken from the writings of Paul. When it comes to the writings of Paul, I feel a GREAT deal of discernment are in order. After all, many of his writings tend to fly in the face of all the rest of Scripture. Paul was sent to Jerusalem at about the age of ten to attend the rabbinical school of Gamaliel, who was the son of Simeon the son of Hillel. Hillel, (the grandfather of Gamaliel), held that tradition was superior to the Law. Gamaliel was a most eminent rabbi who was mentioned both in the Talmud and in the New Testament (Acts 5:24-40; 22:3). Gamaliel was called Rabban - one of only seven teachers so called. He was a Pharisee, (remember the warnings of the Messiah about the Pharisees?) but he rose above party prejudice. He composed a prayer against the Christian "heretics". He lived and died a Jew. The religious school of Gamaliel (Hillel) was chiefly oral and usually had a prejudice against any book but Scripture. They used a system of Scriptural exegesis, and Josephus in his writings expressed the wish to have such a power of exegesis. When school was in session, learned men met and discussed scriptures, gave various interpretations, suggested illustrations, and quoted precedents. The students were encouraged to question, doubt, even contradict. From his education, both from Gamaliel and in the desert from the Messiah, Paul developed a divine viewpoint attitude toward human history. Back to the topic of rapture. As I have posted before (and not wanting to search all my posts to find the thread) wouldn't it be a bit more prudent to forego whatever Paul's writings may be interpreted to say and use the teachings of the Messiah Himself? After all we see in 2 Peter (note, NOT a writing of Paul).... 2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. So about the "rapture" as taught by the Messiah: Matthew 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. That sure doesn't sound like all those "rapture believers" have a whole hell of a lot to look forward to. Maybe they should get out of those churches full of masonic symbolism, where they're learning Babylonian Talmudic teachings in disquise by some pulput parrot, and put their noses in Scripture and STUDY to show themselves approved as we were told to do. Hey, if they don't want to do that, then they can't complain about the spanking they get. After all what Father worth his salt won't discipline his kids when they don't do as they're told!!!! I intended to end this post at the paragraph above, but feel I need to add a bit more. When it comes to the writings of Paul, I am extremely leery.. Satan knows Scripture better than any of us, and it's certainly NOT beyond his scope to use them in some way to deceive us if he can. Considering Paul's history, I think his writings present that opportunity. When I see something written by Paul which is in direct conflict/opposition with what the entire rest of Scripture says, I find it suspect. Look at grace, which Paul spoke so much of. In ALL of Old Testament, the word grace came from the Hebrew chen an adjective meaning favored; in Paul's writings it came from the Greek word charis a verb meaning an act of gratification..... I find it conceivable that the Creator could indeed find favor in some people, but I find it very hard to believe that ANY of us have done anything so special that He should be in gratification of it - let alone ALL of us with the only requirement being to believe in Him. Just my 2¢
Had Paul not come along when he did, do you believe that christianity would have survived? Reverted back to judiasm? Or what? I can't believe that the man, or any man, would go to his death hawking a lie. I don't have a problem with his background, i.e., Roman citizen, judaism/pharisee, Benjamite. His educational background made him, IMO, a great candidate to be converted and put to use for Christ's benefit. I've been trying to do a lot of background reading the past couple of weeks-- before starting a deeper study of the N.T. One thing I believe many miss, and I'm not saying that you do, or any number on this board do, is that we really need to try to look through the eyes of the people at THAT time. We can't place todays' values on how it was back then. Right now, I'm thinking of sacrifices. Most people in this nation abhor bloodshed, it's repulsive. And yet, it was very much a part of the sacrificial system back in O/T times. Blood signified 'the life of the soul'. I go round and round with a cousin over this. Hey, I'm not crazy about seeing blood or shedding blood--even for juicy steaks or lamb chops! But, I see the symbolism this represented as a forerunner of what Christ would do. Cousin still can't see this. I just have to tell him that when he becomes God, he can do it his way. That was what to me was remarkable about the apostles. Even Judas died an ugly death. But none of them denied Jesus Christ or his message....even though faced with terrible deaths. It would have been a lot easier back then to 'back out' or deny what they had been teaching/preaching.
Hmmmmmm.... I don't know. I do know one thing - the word Christian only appears in Scripture 3 times. And it was never once a word used by the apostles to describe themselves. In each instance it was a name given them by someone else. If someone calls you a communist (just because you've read The Communist Manifesto, or happen to know a lot about it) - doesn't mean that you ARE a communist. What about Bush, Hitler, et al? OK, I know they are of a whole different ilk to start with, but... ALL men are liars. Well, at least according to Paul. But he's right. Not that a person may intentionally be lying, but it happens. I'm sure we've all had a situation where something happened that we would have bet the house on, and later found out we were wrong. Wasn't intentional - man makes mistakes. God doesn't. His background did make him a GREAT candidate to teach to the ones he was sent to teach! Remember, Paul was a lawyer. And lawyers are very adept at clever wording to convince others of their arguement. He HAD to, or else there was NO hope of achieving his goal. That alone makes Paul's writings considerably more difficult to deal with. How many lawyers do you really trust? I feel that what we're missing today is the same thing that was missing when the Messiah walked the planet. Adherence to God's Laws. From the very start of Scripture man always thought he had a better way than what the Creator asked. From the moment Eve went against the Creator's law and partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil right up to this very day. The Creator made a contract (covenant) with man, and we've violated our end of that contract from day 1. He told us not to eat pork or rabbit or shrimp; but we do. He told us not to pay or charge usury; but we do. He told us not to have hybrid crops or crossbreed cattle; but we do. He told us to keep the Sabbath but we don't. He told us not to worship other gods but we do. The Messiah attempted to get us back on track and follow His Father's Laws. He even said as much while teaching in the temple - "Did not Moses give you the law, and yet you keepeth not the law?" They weren't then, and we're not now. It does seem to me that the ones that claim to be christian seem to quote from Paul a great deal, even more than they quote from the Messiah Himself. I'm not saying you do, or anyone else in particular, just a general observation. I don't claim to be christian. I'm not jew, amish, or any "organized" religion. They all have a certain "standard", and I don't ascribe to those standards. I am very spiritual. I study Scripture. I'm not the sharpest tack in the box, and all I'm after is the truth. I think we're ALL in pursuit of the truth. I enjoy your posts, as well as AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt's posts, and noone 222's... I learn from all of you guys. I hope that the offerings of insight I give don't offend any of you, and that maybe you can glean something from my posts. My method of study is really quite simple - I don't interpret any of it; to do so in my opinion is to create a diversion, and allow the opportunity to fall from truth. I take it all literally. When He said don't wear fabrics mingled of woollen and linen; I take that seriously, and make sure what I wear is 100% cotton or whatever. I feel if we lived by the Law the Creator gave us in the first place, there would never have been need for the sacrifice of His Son, hence I place considerably less importance on New Testament than Old, save for the actual teachings of the Messiah Himself. But I have found the Messiah reinforced the Mosaic Law, not contradict it. I realize my beliefs place me in a very tiny minority, and I accept that. And I think He has rewarded me for that. Adhering to His Laws has kept me from participation in the abundant Babylonian Talmudic nonsense we're surrounded with, and I thank the Creator everyday for it.
I feel that what we're missing today is the same thing that was missing when the Messiah walked the planet. Adherence to God's Laws. From the very start of Scripture man always thought he had a better way than what the Creator asked. From the moment Eve went against the Creator's law and partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil right up to this very day. The Creator made a contract (covenant) with man, and we've violated our end of that contract from day 1. He told us not to eat pork or rabbit or shrimp; but we do. He told us not to pay or charge usury; but we do. He told us not to have hybrid crops or crossbreed cattle; but we do. He told us to keep the Sabbath but we don't. He told us not to worship other gods but we do. The Messiah attempted to get us back on track and follow His Father's Laws. He even said as much while teaching in the temple - "Did not Moses give you the law, and yet you keepeth not the law?" They weren't then, and we're not now. I hope you won't be offended, and think I'm picking on you, because I don't mean to. However, God said, "Is not my Word like a fire, that hammereth the rock [THEIR "ROCK"] into pieces?" We all have to hash out His Word, and learn to speak in one voice according to what the Bible says, because the Devil has been dividing us for 2,000 years. So what I am doing is adding my interpretations, and while they may not always be right, I hope they will spark people to think outside the box the Luciferians have created for us. Here's the hated Paul again: Gal 3:24 — Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Gal 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Gal 3:26 ¶ For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. This is a serious threat to the Pharisees of the NWO. And doesn't it go along with what Jesus said: Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. http://www.blueletterb ible.org/tsk_b/Gal/3/24.html Jesus FULFILLED the law for us. And "heaven and earth" was the TEMPLE to the Jews. I already went through this one with noone222 on the thread "Should Christians Be Subservient to This Government", and it was all off the top of my head, or more likely off the top of God's head, because I had never researched it before, and it all just came tumbling out, and I don't even remember what I said! YES, we should obey God's law, but HIS law is Love God with all your heart and soul, and your neighbor as yourself, because ALL the law springs from that, that is the ROYAL LAW of Scripture. If you want more law, look at the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7. That's the New Earth God wants to create. The Pharisees LOVE it when we preach THE LAW, because that's what they are all about, and have ALWAYS been about, but THEY HAVE NEVER PRACTICED WHAT THEY PREACHED. That is why God threw them out of His Temple, and fought against them, and destroyed their temple, and their city, and their whole abominable system, and will do it again! John 10. Following LAW and not the Gospel of the Kingdom will bring us back into bondage. They can't WAIT to enforce the Noahide LAW! break....
what you posted that your father said to you about the internet made me think of these Mencken quotes: "As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." Mencken also said, "The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the greatest liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth."
#83. To: christine (#79)
Yikes! How true. I have to jump to my father's defense though. He is one of the most intelligent men I have ever known. However, he was a small town boy, raised in a different time, when they all thought our government was our friend, and he has always been very loyal in that regard. Little did we know that the whole time they were building a trap all around us. He spent his whole life, in what he thought was the service of his country. It would kill him to know the truth at this point, that he was working for a Private Corporation filled with some of the most Satanic men to ever walk the earth. We've all been had. But isn't it nice to know God foresaw all this, to a T? Kind of hard for an honest person to deny His existence.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||