| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Pastor Dave" |
| Date: |
22 Jun 2005 08:22:25 PM |
| Object: |
DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
Feather (and everyone else),
I was going to send this information to you via email,
but it got too long, as usual and I thought maybe
others could benefit from it as well. :)
Darby (a member of the Plymouth Brethren
and founder of Darbyism) helped bring
dispensationalism to the forefront, with his
premillenial view. Dispensationalism itself
came about in the 18th century. And he
is the founder of what would be called,
"Traditional Dispensationalism". It was
a scattered bit of theology before that.
So, since premillenial dispensationalism became
the predominant version, it has, as I said, come
to the forefront.
Dispensationalism as a whole, was not a big force
until the 20th century, or maybe late 19th century.
I forget the exact timing.
The Rapture, made more famous by Scofield
(if memory serves, it was not invented by him,
but Darby, ), when he included it in his "Scofield
Study Bible". Now every serious scholar knows
that the SSS is trash and yet, almost all of them
seem to grab onto this idea, as time progressed.
Scofield also tried to (along with Ryrie, another
poor scholar) help firmly systematize it into seven
dispensations.
A wonderful read (although a very difficult one, if
you're not familiar with a very formal style of writing
and then, in older English), is, "The Parousia", which
was written (contrary to what "stone" says), as
A RESPONSE to the NEW, heretical doctrines.
James Stuart Russell was smarter than I am.
And I have a "super genius" IQ, so that's saying
something. I don't mean that in an inflated way.
I'm trying to pay him a compliment. He's a hard
man to follow sometimes, but if you're patient,
you'll get there and it's worth it. :) His doctrine
is solid and the armor is chink proof.
Picture it this way... You see me in the news groups
and you know that not one person has been able to
refute one single Biblical point I've made, ever (with
a couple of exceptions on very minor things not related
to anything important). That's not praise to me, but
to God and I'll show you why. Follow my point here...
Imagine a book that has been out for about 1 1/2
centuries and imagine that no one, ever, has launched
a successful attack on it. In fact, I can't ever
remember seeing a rebuttal of it at all, except of
course (this is why I used me as an example, so you
could relate) for the personal attacks of those who
claim he was saying something new and that he was
aligning with the Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy.
And of course, some of them lie and claim that
Preterism was invented by some Roman Catholic monks
who were spies for the Pope and even accused me of
that. Until I showed someone a web site that said the
same thing about their belief. :)
Now think about that and let it sink in. A century and
a half (roughly) of time to come up with a rebuttal and
no one has been able to seriously attempt it, let alone
do it? Which doctrine is standing the test of time?
Yes, I'm getting long winded now. So much for ONE
more point, huh? :) Anyway, you would be amazed to
learn how short a period of time this new "Jesus is
coming soon" teaching is. While there have been those
who have put the world wide judgment off into the
future for many centuries (they are now called "partial
Preterists"), many believed it was all fulfilled. What
is clear, is that the idea that Jesus has not returned
yet, is new and it is heretical. The new doctrine has
only been in major force for probably no more than
three generations (maybe only two) and then, mostly
in America. But we tend to think that the whole world
revolves around us and our life times. Isn't that what
the evolutionists do? Uniformitarianism?
Anyway, I must analyze things. My brain works and
I see no reason to turn it off, just because my Bible
is open. I don't "lose my mind when I open my Bible",
like the end timers. :) And if I must analyze things,
then is doing that Biblical?
Acts 17:10-12
10) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and
Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into
the synagogue of the Jews.
11) These were MORE NOBLE than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of
mind, and SEARCHED the Scriptures daily, whether those
things were so.
12) THEREFORE many of them believed; also of honorable
women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
Thus, it is not our OPTION to analyze and verify. It
is our REQUIREMENT to do so.
We are also told we should...
"...henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro,
and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the
sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they
lie in wait to deceive;" - Ephesians 4:14
People who do no research, ARE THOSE who are
"carried about by every wind of doctrine". Don't
believe me? How many times do they pick up end
timer books, for the specific purpose of seeing that
it is all about THEM and that "Never before have we
seen the prophecies of the Bible being fulfilled before
OUR eyes!!!" ??? They are willing to throw the Bible
in a shredder and twist it like a pretzel, if only....
if only it can be ABOUT THEM!
Back to the original point (yea, right)...
This traditional (meaning since it started)
dispensationalism is in trouble now, because
of Preterism and its truth unfolding tactic. Now
we see them beginning to run to, "Progressive
Dispensationalism" and "Covenant Theology".
They are "carried about with every wind of doctrine"
that tells them it's all about them, or that allows
them to retreat without admitting they have it
all wrong. :)
Progressive Dispensationalism: Note in the following
link how they're forced to admit that Christ rules on
the throne of David IN HEAVEN! Preterism is forcing
them to be honest. But of course, they will twist it
up anyway and also note that now, end timers will point
to this Heavenly rule as a "new doctrine", because this
form of dispensationalism started in 1986. (:
Preterism isn't about dispensationalism and states
clearly (and always has) that Christ's rule is from
Heaven and not from Earth. Full Preterists (if I was
to take a label, it would be this one) also believe
that Christ is now under the Father, since if all was
done, then 1 Corinthians 15:28 applies.
Anyway... http://tinyurl.com/99d8d
Covenant Theology: Right or wrong, note the wording.
With the church fathers, it was "present" but not
"developed". In other words, they were dumb and we're
smart and we know more than they did. The opposite is
true. The closer you get to an event, the more you're
likely to know more about it and I find it interesting
that even now, those who defend the corrupt Alexandrian
Texts actually try to claim that we know more now about
the Biblical texts, than they did even in the second
century. Ridiculous! I guess man has to glorify
himself. (: Point being, look to the root of it all,
dear and not what's on the surface. Remember, this is
the spirit we're dealing with here, not the flesh.
Anyway... http://tinyurl.com/arf9n
Here's a few links I dredged up. Take them for what
they're worth. I haven't scrutinized them all.
This first one, is John Darby's writings, so you can
get it straight from the horses mouth.
http://tinyurl.com/9gmw5
http://www.credenda.org/issues/13-5eschaton.php
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Darbyism
Now note here (the above link), that Darby felt that
seeing evil in society was something to rejoice about,
because it meant the imminent return of Christ. Of
course we all know that evil just started in OUR life
time and that "imminent" means thousands of years
away. :)
Side note: Check this definition of imminence from an
end timer, that someone actually tried to defend when
they wrote to me (caps his). :)
"Hence, the coming of the Lord to get His own
is and has been IMMINENT. It could happen
any moment. It might not happen for a couple
more thousand years. The coming for the saints
(pretribulation rapture/resurrection) is and has
been IMMINENT and shall remain so. Amen!"
Anyway, looking at Darby's statement again and
knowing what he brought to the church, can you
now see why the end timers actually pray for the
destruction of the world? John said, "even so Lord,
come". That is true. But bear in mind, that John did
not believe what Darby did. John knew it was a local
destruction and the removal of the Old Covenant
system. Many horrors, yes, but John didn't say,
"Come and kill people, Lord!". He awaited the Lord's
return and mourned over his fellow Jews. End timers
can't wait to see the world burn up and billions of
people die, so THEY can have THEIR new Earth.
Selfish to the extreme of not even caring about
human life maybe?
And let's take a look at Darby's own words, in the
Revised Preface of the Second Edition of the New
Testament (1871) and consider them carefully.
"It has been in no way my object to produce a learned
work; but, as I had access to books, and various
sources of information, to which of course the great
mass of readers, to whom the word of God was equally
precious, had not, I desired to furnish them as far as
I was able with the fruit of my own study, and of all I
could gather from those sources, that they might have
the word of God in English, in as perfect a
representation of it in that language as possible." -
John Nelson Darby
He didn't try to produce a learned work and was putting
forth his beliefs ("my own study"). He then went on to
reject the Textus Receptus, saying it had, "no real
authority" and even claimed that the English work
wasn't even taken from it and went on to compliment
those who brought the Russian Codices, which are
Constantinopolitan. He also admitted to using the text
of Tischendorf, who brought us the highly corrupted
Sinaiticus, which almost every modern English Bible is
based on.
Anyway, back to the point. :)
Look, this all boils down to one thing, interpretation
wise.
The early church took the clear, simple statements of
the Bible literally ("this generation") and knew that
the fantastic statements were symbolic ("stars
falling").
The dispensationalists and any end timer, takes
the fantastic statements of the Scripture literally
and then takes the clear simple statements of
Scripture and says that they mean something
other than what they say. Then, if you don't agree
with them, they'll claim that you don't believe the
Bible and that YOU are "interpreting".
What does it make more sense to take literally?
This generation, or stars are literally going to fall
to Earth? This is a big DUH! :)
And they skip words and add words. Check it out...
"Every eye shall see Him". - Revelation 1:7
That's fine, but is it literal? If they finished
the quote, we would know... "...and they also
which who pierced Him". You see, now the
people who crucified Him (the Jews) must
see Him also. How, if He hasn't returned yet?
They're dead.
Well, no problem, they say. That just means they'll
see Him at the resurrection. Okay, well, isn't that a
big DUH??? If it is literal and physical and world
wide, won't EVERYONE see Him anyway, since all
would be raised? So what would be the point in saying,
"even those who pierced Him", if it's talking about the
resurrection?
You see, they want you to believe that it is US
literally seeing Him return and for those who
pierced Him, it means at the resurrection.
Okay, then I have a question. If they will see Him
when they are RAISED, isn't that AFTER He has
arrived? And since that's true, how will "every eye,
AND THEY ALSO which pierced Him" see Him
RETURN, which is what the passage addresses,
not the resurrection that happens afterward, when
those who pierced Him can't see Him, because
they're still in the ground and haven't been raised
yet?. I mean didn't THEY tell us that we would see
Him return and use that verse as their proof text?
Is it any wonder they not only leave out the
surrounding verses, but chop that one up
to only five words???
The fact is, the passage is dealing with who would
see Him RETURN, not what happens afterward.
The fact is, that it was dealing with the generation
alive at the time, since that is the ONLY generation
that could fulfill that, even assuming that it would be
to see Jesus coming in the sky, as Jesus in the flesh.
But this brings us to another point. This visible (as
far as seeing the person of Christ) return is heresy,
even to a Jew. Men cannot look upon the glory of
God, even in Christ. The Transfiguration was just
a taste and they had a problem looking at Him then.
How could they look at Him in all His glory? And we
can't say, "But they saw Him after He rose", because
we would be forgetting one key passage.
"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet
ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say
unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father;
and to my God, and your God." - John 20:17
So to say that we would be able to look at Christ,
in all His glory, is ridiculous and futile.
And as far as the end timers are concerned, it all
boils down to their desire for it to be all about them.
As one person said to me in a response, "If the
Bible's not about us, then what good is it?".
This is ego, vanity and fear. I say fear, because they
are afraid to take the dirt nap. They aren't so sure
of Christ and so, don't want to die. Therefore, they
absolutely must bring Him here, while THEY are still
alive and have Him rule from Earth, in THEIR lifetime,
so that they don't have to die.
If they are so sure, then why are they afraid? And
don't let them tell you they're not. If you want to
know for sure, tell them Jesus is not coming back
in their life time. Over the Net, they'll put on a
good act and claim that's okay. Do it face to face
and watch their expression. The face doesn't lie.
And even after they say that maybe it won't be in
their life time, you'll always get, "But you don't know
that for sure". :)
Now people say, "What's the big deal?". You see,
when the end timer has run out of arguments and
knows that they can't refute anything you've said,
they'll claim it isn't that important in Christian
doctrine and that they don't want to argue about it.
Oh really? Well then, I have a question.
Why is it that you spend so much time on the subject?
And why do these "end times prophecies" books take
up so much shelf space in your house, or bookmarks
in your browser, or phrases in your searches in Google?
And how is it not a point regarding salvation? Assume
for a moment that I'm right and Jesus did return, as
promised. Aren't you calling Him a liar? I mean,
didn't He say that He would return within the
generation alive at the time and aren't you saying
He was wrong? How can we claim to be saved,
when we call Jesus a liar? Do YOU want to stand
before Him and explain that one? I sure don't!
Yes, it is a part of the issue of salvation. Calling
Jesus a liar is a sure way to keep you out of Heaven!
They make it all about THEM and then claim to
be glorifying Christ? Not so! They are glorifying
THEMSELVES!
And were the Apostles wrong? They certainly taught
imminence. Paul said he spoke directly to the risen
Christ and was instructed by and learned his doctrines
from Him. But the end timer will say that even if they
had that wrong, it's not a major point. W-H-A-T ?!?!?!
How can we trust ANYTHING we read in our Bibles,
if they couldn't get that right? We are supposed to
be able to TRUST our Bibles. This is NOT like when
David's adultery was told of and we can say that just
because something is listed, that doesn't mean that
God approved of it. While that is true for David's
adultery, we are not talking about sinful acts here.
We are talking about doctrine taught by the Apostles,
to the church. And let us not forget, that the
resurrection was the "hope" that they looked for.
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath
begotten us again unto a lively hope by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,"
- 1 Peter 1:3
It was Christ's return and the resurrection that WAS
THE CENTRAL POINT of their teaching. Without it,
THERE WAS NO FAITH!
1 Corinthians 15:12-19
12) Now if Christ be preached that he rose from
the dead, how say some among you that there
is no resurrection of the dead?
13) But if there be no resurrection of the dead,
then is Christ not risen:
14) And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching
vain, and your faith is also vain.
15) Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God;
because we have testified of God that he raised up
Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead
rise not.
16) For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ
raised:
17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain;
ye are yet in your sins.
18) Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ
are perished.
19) If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are
of all men most miserable.
The fact is, if the Apostles could get something wrong
that was as major as that, then they could get a lot of
stuff wrong and we are wasting our time. And how dare
these end timers say that they have it right and the
Apostles has it wrong! What vanity! What ego! They
say that's not what they're claiming, but indeed,
it is!
So they want us to believe, that Jesus got it wrong.
The Apostles got it wrong. But NOW, THEY have
it right. If that isn't the height of self glorifying,
I don't know what is! SHAME ON YOU PEOPLE!!!
I know what I believe. I believe Jesus. I took Him at
His word. They, have not. They have a real problem
when it comes time to answer to Him.
Now when they stop CLAIMING to have refuted
my points (and of course always pretend they
don't see the messages in which I ask them to
prove they have refuted even one) and actually
try to, then they will have some credibility. But
while they continue to attack me personally, to
try to divert attention away from the issues, they
have zero credibility.
And those like Cindy, who post old messages,
claiming to have beaten me in a debate, do
harm to the Kingdom, not good. She does that
and then when I post the rebuttal, she says she
already refuted it and then posts a message from
that old set of messages that came before my
rebuttal (during that debate) and lies and claims
that I ran away from the debate after that. Until
of course, I paste in the message that she omitted
from that debate. Then she attacks me and runs
away, claiming that I am not being honest and that
she is tired of making me look ignorant, or something
to that effect.
And what I am REALLY tired of, is the end timers who,
when you say something, paste in some passages,
thinking that by doing so, it means that the whole
world now bows to their belief. When I ask them to
explain it in their own words (they always post web
links and I don't debate a web page), they cannot do
it. Why is it that something that is so true and is
from God and they know their Bible, cannot be defended
by them? I mean, I would think that if I am so much
in error, that I would have been taken out a long
time ago.
Then, when you show them some passages that
prove that it cannot be a literal, visible, in the
flesh, world wide appearance of Christ and you
show them Luke 17:20-21, in which Christ clearly
says that the Kingdom will NOT be visible to the
eye, what do they do? They paste in more passages
that they think are literal.
Now while they THINK they are refuting what
I've said, all they've really done, is to pit the Bible
against itself. Notice, they did NOT discuss the
passages *I* quoted. Rather, they pasted one
in, which, if literal, means that Jesus contradicted
himself and what is utterly mind blowing, is that
THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS!!! And
when you point out to them what they just did,
THEY IGNORE YOU!
The fact is, it cannot be that it is a literal,
physical Kingdom and that it can't be seen
with the eye. That's ridiculous! But that is
exactly what they are stuck with, by their
own words. And hey, when's the last time
you saw an end timer quote Luke 17:20-21?
Leaving out parts of the Gospel, are they?
Hmmmmm.....
So am I being too harsh? NO! They are twisting
and perverting the Scriptures, for their own
gratification and since WHEN, ANYWHERE,
ANY TIME in Scripture, has any man of God
responded lightly about this? I am not God, but it
this should upset any Christian.
Now I try. I really do. I try to be polite and start
that way. But this mockery of twisting of God's
word just angers me and as I become more
established, it angers me more. I know it is
a righteous anger and I do try to be careful not
to let it turn into an unrighteous anger. But
don't be confused and think that because I
call someone a liar, that I am attacking them.
I am simply stating fact. Now they may claim
the same thing. But remember, I am not the
one who cannot defend my belief. I am not
the one who responds with personal attacks,
instead of a rebuttal. And they lie and they
know they are lying and they continue to lie.
What also bother me, is when these end timers
try to act as if I don't know anything about the Bible.
They wish to talk to a pastor, as if I am ignorant of
what the Scriptures say. That's ego. I thought at
first that maybe it was because some people claim
the title and it is know that they aren't really
pastors. But then I said no, because it's not like
people in these groups don't know me. I am not
vain about my title, but I do think that they should
approach me with more respect than they do. They
wouldn't talk to a pastor like that face to face, but
they have no problem doing that to me over the Net.
On paper, their fierce. In paper, they're nothing.
I refer to them, as "paper tigers".
If you can't stand for what you believe, then don't lie
and pretend to be something you're not. One person
said to me that I am bold on paper, but I wouldn't be
in person. I responded and told him that I speak
exactly the same way in person and I do. I am always
polite AT FIRST, just as I am here. But if they
continue on with their lies and hypocrisy, then I call
them to task for it. I want Biblical proof. If you
can't provide it, then you shouldn't be saying what
you're saying.
"Stone" claims that he did not respond to any of my
message and that he didn't respond to my proof that he
was lying about when Preterism came about (it was the
historic belief of the church), when he claimed that it
was invented by 15th century RCC monks (I quoted early
church fathers), because I had quoted Origen. Okay,
but is Origen the ONLY person I quoted? No! He is
lying. He knows he was proved wrong and yet, he will
continue to promote what he now KNOWS is a lie.
And of course, there's always "Ray", who has had his
supposed "calculator from God" thoroughly refuted and
when I did so, he accused me of impersonating him and
of being someone else and he said he wanted to murder
me (in an supposed apology to me, mind you) and that he
wanted to put me in a mosque, where "they'll know what
to do with me".
"Oldwetdog", for example, claims that Jesus IS coming
back in OUR life time. He also claims that Europe is
in the Bible. "It used to be Rome" he says. Isn't it
interesting, how the end timers have a magic wand that
they can use to just replace countries with other ones?
And isn't it interesting that he said that a battle
would take place and that the places "God and MaGog"
were involved, when only one is a place and the other
is a person? Of course, when this was pointed out to
him... that's right, you guessed it, no response. :)
Guess he didn't get that message. Or any that bothered
him to read. :)
He also claims that Jesus told them in Matthew 24:3
about "the end of the world". Now I explained to him
that Jesus was not talking about the end of the world.
I have explained the Greek to him and he responded
once (ignoring that and of course, telling me I was
blind). He still promotes it of course, which means
that he knows he's promoting a lie, but that he needs
it to say that, to keep his false doctrine intact.
And while he claims that "this generation shall not
pass, til all these things be fulfilled" means some
generation way off thousands of years later, wouldn't
that be a big DUH! to say that? OF COURSE the
generation alive when it happened, would see it happen!
DUUUUHHHH!!! The reason Jesus said it and the shock
was, that it was the generation He was speaking to and
that is why He said, 'THIS GENERATION" and did not
say, "THAT GENERATION".
I have pasted in (at the bottom), my response that
I sent to him today. Take a read through, please,
as it will cover some of the problems with THEIR
approach to literalism. As I said, they take the
fantastic literally and twist the clear simple
statements. One guy, when shown a problem
with Jesus' appearance being literal, in the flesh
(I pointed out the line of sight problem that every
pilot knows about), said to me, "Well, maybe He
will circle the planet a couple of times". :)
You see what I mean? ANYTHING to protect
their self glorifying doctrine! :)
And I just love the times when they take Zechariah
literally and say that Jesus is going to stand on the
mount while it splits open and He'll have one foot on
one side and the other foot on the other side. Now
they have created a giant "Gumby" Jesus, who's legs
will just keep stretching and getting longer and longer
as the mountain keeps splitting farther apart. :)
Of course, when they claim that Acts 1:11 says we will
see Him and you show them that it doesn't actually say
that, but if it did, it could only be those in Bethany
("in the same way"), who would see Him, because it
would have to then be the same spot and not even then,
because He was covered in clouds and this presents a
problem for their "world wide" sighting, the personal
attacks start. :)
Yes folks, these are the "true Christians who know the
truth and thank God you have THEM on your side!".
Now please don't misunderstand, none of this message
is to glorify me. NO!!! Rather, I take JOY in the
fact that God is being shown to be true and that He is
the One who has blessed me with the truth and it is by
His power and His wisdom, that I have come to know the
truth. Jesus made a promise and He kept it!
This message is simply designed to point out some facts
about these people and their man made doctrines.
Anyway, with this paste of that response to
"oldwetdog", I will say farewell for now. :)
************************************************************************************
When we read prophecy, we must remember that God has determined
the meaning of the metaphor, and we must seek His meaning.
What did God mean when He said..."this generation?" Is it a metaphor?
Ge 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into
the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.
Ps 95:10 Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said,
It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways:
Mt 11:16-17 But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto
children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, And saying,
We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned
unto you, and ye have not lamented.
Mt 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this
generation.
Mt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all
these things be fulfilled.
In the first several examples, it is clear from the context that the
reference is to the generation then living, those who were present
and heard His words.
In the last reference, Mat 24:34, "This generation" can only be the
generation who sees "these things:" since that is included in His
context as "ye shall see." If this is to be the generation who hears
His description of the signs, or not, that is another question.
And now you act like a moron. There is no difference,
but yet, you insist on adding your own twist to it.
Where did Jesus say, "this can only be..."?
You make claim and offer ZERO PROOF for it!
For those interested in truth, take a look at the
following...
Matthew 16:27-28
27) For the Son of man shall COME in the glory of his
Father with his angels; and then he shall REWARD
EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS WORKS.
Now note Revelation...
"And, behold, I COME QUICKLY; and my REWARD
is with me, to give EVERY MAN ACCORDING AS
HIS WORK SHALL BE." - Revelation 22:12
Same wording and He said, "QUICKLY". And He
meant quickly. When anyone tries to claim that a
word can mean any amount of time, then they make
it mean nothing at all and Jesus wasn't about saying
nothing.
Now note the very next verse in Matthew 16...
28) Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here,
which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son
of man coming in his kingdom.
Note: Some of those STANDING THERE would not
die before it happened. That means at least one will
be alive, but not most. He said, "some".
No, it isn't the Transfiguration. That was eight days
later and they were all still alive.
No, it wasn't Pentecost. Only one was dead, which
would mean that most were still alive and Jesus said
"some" would still be alive.
You fail to take His statement into context,
given the above and also, what did He say
JUST BEFORE He said what He said in
Matthew 24?
Matthew 23:36-38
36) Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come
upon this generation.
37) O JERUSALEM, JERUSALEM, THOU that killest
the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto
THEE, how often would I have gathered THY children
together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens
under her wings, and YE would not!
38) Behold, YOUR house is left unto YOU *DESOLATE*.
He says specifically, "Jerusalem". And He says
specifically that it is "their house" that is to be
"left to them desolate".
As Daniel said, desolations were DETERMINED.
Jesus said Jerusalem would be destroyed. Jesus
prophesied a LOCAL judgment, that would have
world wide implications. Read what He said and
compare it with Daniel's prophecy...
Daniel: "they shall destroy the city and the
sanctuary"
Jesus: "Behold your house (temple) is left to you
desolate." - Matthew 23:38
The fact is, that He blasted them in the temple
and told them that their generation was the
culmination of all of the prophecies.
IMMEDIATELY after that, He told the disciples
that the temple would be destroyed. THAT is
what prompted their questions. You fail to
understand how the Jews wrote, thought
and lived.
This was not some casual thing for them. To hear
Jesus say these words, was like the end of it all
for them.
It was D-E-V-A-S-T-A-T-I-N-G !!!!!
THE END OF LIFE AS THEY KNEW IT!!!!!
THE END OF THEIR WHOLE LIVES FOR JEWS!!!!!
This is not like you seeing your church destroyed.
The closest you could get, would be to see extremely
devout Roman Catholics who would die a thousand
deaths for their Pope hearing that Vatican City and
the Papal system would be destroyed. And even
then you've only scratched the surface.
And what else did Jesus say about this?
Luke 21:20-22
20) And when ye shall see JERUSALEM compassed
with armies, then know that the DESOLATION THEREOF
is nigh.
21) Then let them which are IN JUDEA flee to the
mountains; and let them which are in the MIDST OF IT
depart out; and let not them that are in the countries
enter thereinto.
22) For THESE BE THE DAYS of vengeance, that ALL
THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN may BE FULFILLED.
It was LOCAL event with world wide IMPLICATIONS.
Jesus said that when Jerusalem is compassed
by armies and is desolated, all things that are
written are fulfilled. Daniel was something that
"was written", btw. :)
"See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you,
There shall not be left here one stone upon another,
that shall not be thrown down." - Matthew 24:2
It is a fact that in 70AD, Rome burned down the temple
and afterward, pried every stone apart, to retrieve the
melted gold that ran in between them. There was quite
a bit of it. The doors alone were 40 ft high and
covered in gold.
Now why doesn't this count? Why doesn't a direct, to
the letter fulfillment of His words count? Even though
this happened in the first century, that doesn't count,
right? Jerusalem is surrounded and destroyed. Jesus
said that there would not be one stone left upon
another in the temple and that happened. But that
one doesn't count, because it's not about you???
Daniel dealt with the Messianic times and Jesus said
that He would return within the time of the generation
alive at the time.
Anything anyone says that tries to contradict those
facts, is just them pitting the Bible against itself.
Posting this passage or that passage, without first
explaining why Jesus' words don't mean what they
clearly say (remember, we shouldn't try to wrap the
clear, simple statements around our personal
interpretation of the more difficult, fantastic ones)
is to ignore half of what Jesus said and it is to make
a scenario in which he contradicts Himself.
Let me give you an example of why it should not
be taken as a literal, physical Earthly government,
when it speaks of the Kingdom of God and the
"new heaven and earth".
The end timers tell us that in this new heaven and
earth scenario, that there will be no more death.
They refer us to Revelation and show us the following
passage, which comes after it talks about the new
heaven and earth being created and the holy city
coming down to Earth...
"And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;
and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow,
nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for
the former things are passed away." - Revelation 21:4
However, one of the passages that end timers also
use, to show that it is a literal, physical, Earthly
kingdom, is the following passage from Isaiah...
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days,
nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the
child shall die a hundred years old; but the sinner
being a hundred years old shall be accursed."
- Isaiah 65:20
So I have a question... three actually ("Come,
let us reason together, saith the Lord.")...
Since the end timers take this literally, if there
is no more death, then how is it that Isaiah,
who is also talking about the new heaven and
earth, says that a child will die 100 years old?
Is there death, or isn't there death?
You see, if we take it literally, then the Bible
contradicts itself, clear and simple and I'm
sorry, but there is no way around that fact.
My second question is... If the old heaven and
earth have passed away and the judgment has
taken place and all of the sinners are thrown in
the lake of fire, who are these people outside
the gates of the New Jerusalem, in the following
passage, which comes after all of this has taken
place...
Revelation 22:14-15
14) Blessed are they that do his commandments,
that they may have right to the tree of life, and
may enter in through the gates into the city.
15) For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and
whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters,
and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Now please don't tell me that they're people who
sinned after the judgment. No one, knowing the
fate of those who sinned, is going to leave the
presence of God and sin, so that He can throw
them into the lake of fire. That's RIDICULOUS
to propose! And we should note that the text
doesn't say that they get destroyed after that,
so now you have God taking refuge in the holy
city, the New Jerusalem.
Question number 3 is, Given your scenario of
literalism, which places God as having created
this new heaven and earth, which taking their
conclusion to its logical end, has the earth
getting corrupted by sinners again, how do
they explain God having to take refuge in the
holy city, the New Jerusalem, since He cannot
live in the presence of sin? Did God give up
His perfect and holy Heaven, only to move
down here, to Earth, where the crime rate
would once again soar?
"Come, let us reason together...".
I'm sorry, but their beliefs and the resulting
scenarios, are not "reasonable" to conclude. (:
You are taking the statements literally. They are
symbolic. For example, Isaiah 65:20 says that
the child will die 100 years old. Revelation 21:4
says that there will be no more death. Can both
be literal? According to the literalists, the Bible
contradicts itself. They always pit Scripture
against itself and then ignore your post when
you point that out to them.
No, these things are not literal. It is symbolic
speech for the Kingdom of God in Christ and
the New Jerusalem is symbolic for the bride of
Christ (Rev 21:2) and believers are the bride
of Christ (John 3:29; 2 Cor 11:2) and Rev 21:3
says that the temple of God is with men and
He will dwell with them. Now where is the
temple of God in Christ?
"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God,
and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"
- 1 Corinthians 3:16
The disciples had just asked, "Tell us, when shall
these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy
coming, and of the end of the world?"
And what were "these things"? What He just said.
The temple would be destroyed. He answered their
questions.
You also, even after I have explained this to
you, insist on promoting a lie. I call it a lie now,
because this has been explained to you.
That is a bad translation. The word should not
be "world", but rather, "age".
The word for the planet Earth in the Greek, is
"kosmos" and it is a word that the writers of the
NT knew.
"That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables;
I will utter things which have been kept secret from
the foundation of the world (kosmos)." - Matthew 13:35
The word in Matthew 24, is "aion", which simply means,
"an age". They were asking when the "end of the age"
was going to be and He told them, it would be within
their generation.
The difficulty was that they did not understand,
Don't tell us what they understood and didn't
understand.
After all, who is the Messiah? Is He not sent from
God? And didn't He just finish telling them that
the temple would be destroyed? So didn't He just
associate the two events for them??? So does it
matter what they might have been looking for?
They didn't need to figure it out. They were just
told what to think. :)
Look at what Babylon did (destroyed the temple
and the city) and God said He used Babylon and
called them "His people" (which He meant they
were for that specific purpose). Note what the
Lord says to them, by Jeremiah the prophet:
Jeremiah 21:1-14
1) The word which came unto Jeremiah from
the LORD, when king Zedekiah sent unto him
Pashur the son of Melchiah, and Zephaniah
the son of Maaseiah the priest, saying,
2) Inquire, I pray thee, of the LORD for us; for
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon maketh war
against us; if so be that the LORD will deal with
us according to all his wondrous works, that he
may go up from us.
3) Then said Jeremiah unto them, Thus shall ye
say to Zedekiah:
4) Thus saith the LORD God of Israel; Behold,
I will turn back the weapons of war that are in
your hands, wherewith ye fight against the king
of Babylon, and against the Chaldeans, which
besiege you without the walls, and I will assemble
them into the midst of this city.
5) And I myself will fight against you with an
outstretched hand and with a strong arm,
even in anger, and in fury, and in great wrath.
6) And I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both
man and beast: they shall die of a great pestilence.
Note that God says He will fight against Jerusalem,
yet it was not God in person that they could see.
So it is no stretch to say that they understood the
destruction of the temple with a "coming", since that
is how God did it the last time and as I said, who but
God could remove the temple?
Note also here, where God says that He is the one
who set up Nebuchadnezzar as His ruler for that
time period...
"And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom
which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king
of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the
yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish,
saith the LORD, with the sword, and with the famine,
and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them
by his hand." - Jeremiah 27:8
7) And afterward, saith the LORD, I will deliver
Zedekiah king of Judah, and his servants, and
the people, and such as are left in this city from
the pestilence, from the sword, and from the famine,
into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,
and into the hand of their enemies, and into the
hand of those that seek their life: and he shall smite
them with the edge of the sword; he shall not spare
them, neither have pity, nor have mercy.
8) And unto this people thou shalt say, Thus saith
the LORD; Behold, I set before you the way of life,
and the way of death.
9) He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword,
and by the famine, and by the pestilence: but he that
goeth out, and falleth to the Chaldeans that besiege
you, he shall live, and his life shall be unto him for
a prey.
Note the parallel in Luke 21:20-22...
Luke 21:20-22
20) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed
with armies, then know that the desolation thereof
is nigh.
21) Then let them which are in Judea flee to the
mountains; and let them which are in the midst
of it depart out; and let not them that are in the
countries enter thereinto.
22) For these be the days of vengeance, that all
things which are written may be fulfilled.
10) For I have set my face against this city for evil,
and not for good, saith the LORD: it shall be given
into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall
burn it with fire.
11) And touching the house of the king of Judah,
say, Hear ye the word of the LORD;
12) O house of David, thus saith the LORD; Execute
judgment in the morning, and deliver him that is
spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor, lest my
fury go out like fire, and burn that none can quench
it, because of the evil of your doings.
13) Behold, I am against thee, O inhabitant of the
valley, and rock of the plain, saith the LORD; which
say, Who shall come down against us? or who shall
enter into our habitations?
14) But I will punish you according to the fruit of
your doings, saith the LORD: and I will kindle a fire
in the forest thereof, and it shall devour all things
round about it.
Also understand that this involved 70 years.
"And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an
astonishment; and these nations shall serve the
king of Babylon seventy years." - Jeremiah 25:11
Now after reading the above, you can see that yes,
they could have easily associated the coming of the
Messiah (God) with the destruction of the land, city
and the temple by the Roman army. And the "people
of the prince" in Daniel (who is the Messiah and not
the AntiChrist) takes on new meaning for you here,
doesn't it? :)
Isaiah 8 also foretells of judgment and the people
knew that God used the Assyrians to judge Jerusalem.
This is why I asked you to read Nehemiah, who
is saddened by the loss and cannot function without
sorrow overburdening his heart. The only thoughts
of the Jews who loved God and even those who
now knew God's judgment, were of the holy temple
and the coming back to their land and the rebuilding
of the temple. This was the center of their life and
without it, they were lost and the focus of their
people, throughout their generations, would be
to rebuild the temple, just as it is now, even two
thousand years later.
Also bear in mind that Jesus told them that the temple
would be destroyed. Does it not seem logical for them,
knowing what happened to the first temple and that it
was by the judgment of God and His coming, that they
would associate a "coming" with Jesus' words that the
temple in front of them would be destroyed?
Put yourself in the mind set of those Jews. Who else
but God could allow the temple to be removed? And
if you were told by the Messiah that the temple was
to be destroyed, would it not occur to you that it
would be the Messiah's "coming" in whatever sense
that was, that would trigger this event? Sure, this
may have been a strange thing to them, but so were
lots of things Jesus taught them. :)
All of this brings us to another point in this
discussion. This invisible (as far as seeing
the person of Christ) return is heresy, even
to a Jew. Men cannot look upon the glory
of God, even in Christ. The Transfiguration
was just a taste and they had a problem
looking at Him then. How could they look
at Him in all His glory? And don't say, "But
they saw Him after He rose", because you
would be forgetting one key passage.
"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet
ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say
unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father;
and to my God, and your God." - John 20:17
You see, there would be a change, when He ascended.
Now read Daniel 7:13, which is the prophecy of Christ's
ascension and remember, the disciples weren't always
dumb. :) Sometimes they had a glimmer of lucidity. :)
They knew that Scripture. And btw, aren't we assuming
that when they said "coming", that they meant "return"?
What if they were referencing Daniel 7:13, which btw,
uses the word "came"? "He CAME TO the Ancient
of Days". Remember that He had already told them...
Matthew 17:22-23
22) And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto
them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands
of men:
23) And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall
be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.
So they already knew that He would be killed. Thus, it
is possible that they are associating His "coming" with
Daniel 7:13 and the destruction of the temple being a
result of God's judgment on Jerusalem, for the lives of
all of the prophets and the Son.
That is just a side comment, designed to make you think
and to let you know, that we cannot bind their mind set
by what we, as Christians know and by our ignorance of
what they knew, because almost all Christians,
including and sometimes especially Pastors, are
ignorant of their Old Testament and the Jewish way of
life. Sure, the Pastors go to college/seminary, but
they get taught to be ignorant, since they are told,
"Jesus is coming soon and this means this and Jesus
really meant something else when He said this", etc..
Pathetic and I am ASHAMED of them AND the schools!
What is more likely, is that they were associating it
not only with Daniel 7:13, but with the text found in
Daniel 9 as well. And let us not forget (AND THIS
IS VERY IMPORTANT), that they would have known
that they were seeing in the Roman Empire, the 4th
kingdom Daniel mentioned. They may not have been
scholars, but they could count to 4. :)
Let us also not forget, that Daniel hung his prophecy
on Jeremiah's and knew that the 70 years were about
to come to a close (Daniel served Nebuchadnezzar
while Jeremiah's prophecy was still being fulfilled)...
Daniel 9:1-2
1) In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus,
of the seed of the Medes, which was made king
over the realm of the Chaldeans;
2) In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood
by books the number of the years, whereof the word
of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he
would accomplish seventy years in the desolations
of Jerusalem.
Anyway, back to the future. The future for Daniel,
anyway. :)
Daniel's prophecy was Messianic and the people knew
the time was ripe for the Messiah to appear. Did not
the three men go to see the child? They read it in the
stars and knew the prophecy and remember, they even
knew where He was to be born.
Matthew 2:3-6
3) When Herod the king had heard these things,
he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
4) And when he had gathered all the chief priests
and scribes of the people together, he demanded
of them where Christ should be born.
5) And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judea:
for thus it is written by the prophet,
6) And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, art
not the least among the princes of Judah: for out
of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my
people Israel.
We can see that Herod knew that the prophecy existed.
He just didn't know where it was found in Scripture.
And we can see that the chief priests knew also and
they knew what the prophecy said.
Herod knew that the timing was right for the Messiah to
appear. Let us not forget that the Jews in that day
knew the following, whether they were waiting for a
physical kingdom or not.
1) They knew they were in the 4th kingdom of Daniel's
prophecy.
2) They knew the they were in the 69th week of Daniel's
70 weeks.
3) They knew there was no break in time between
the weeks. That is modern dispensational foolishness,
that was invented by Darby in 1800. The church didn't
break up the weeks and if anyone tried to, it would
have been considered heresy. How shamelessly the
vain modernists try to make the Bible all about them!
4) The faithful knew the Messiah must suffer and die
and ascend and return.
Now try putting reading the passages, knowing that
Jesus told them He was going to be killed, before
Matthew 24.
Also, read the following, which Jesus just finished
saying in the temple, just before their questions...
Matthew 23:29-38
29) Woe to YOU, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
Because YOU build the tombs of the prophets, and
decorate the tombs of the righteous,
30) and say, If WE had been in the days of OUR fathers,
WE would not have been partakers with them in the
blood of the prophets.
31) Therefore you are witnesses to yourselves, that
YOU are the sons of those who killed the prophets;
32) and YOU fill up the measure of YOUR fathers.
33) Serpents! Offspring of vipers! How can YOU
escape the condemnation of hell?
Note that Jesus is speaking to THEM and NOT some
generation thousands of years away. THEY are the
ones who will FILL UP the measure of their fathers.
THEY will be the ones upon whom the judgment will
come. Jesus tells THEM that THEY can not escape
the damnation of Hell.
34) Therefore, behold, I send prophets and wise men
and scribes to YOU. And YOU will kill and crucify some
of them. And some of them YOU will scourge in YOUR
SYNAGOGUES and persecute from city to city;
Note here that Jesus says that He will send THEM
prophets and wise men and that THEY will kill them
in their SYNAGOGUES. This is not a statement
about Gentiles. And don't let the "crucify" statement
throw you. The Bible clearly teaches that the Jews
crucified Jesus (Acts 5:30).
35) so that on YOU may come all the righteous blood
shed on the earth, FROM the blood of righteous Abel
TO the blood of Zechariah the son of Berachiah,
whom YOU killed between the temple and the altar.
Now here Jesus sets the time line for the event. It
starts with Abel and goes up until Zechariah, whom
THEY killed in THAT generation. That is the final
generation before the judgment comes. Of course,
as Scripture teaches, the Son was the cap on it all,
but Jesus was still alive when he said this and was
setting the time line to end with their generation.
36) Truly I say to YOU, All these things shall come
on THIS GENERATION.
Jesus here confirms it. It will come upon that
generation, not a generation thousands of
years away.
37) O JERUSALEM, JERUSALEM, the one killing
the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her,
how often would I have gathered YOUR children
together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under
her wings, and YOU would not!
Note that Jesus specifies Jerusalem. It is not
the whole world that He is discussing here.
38) Behold, YOUR HOUSE is left to YOU desolate.
And here is where He pronounces what that
judgment will entail. Their "house" is the temple.
Maybe now you can better see why I placed that in
my first message in this thread, to set the stage for
Matthew 24:1-4a.
And now let us look at what else Jesus said, before
this even and see how He stated what His return
would include (were going further back in time from
His discourse now)...
Matthew 21:33-41,45
33) Hear another parable: There was a certain
householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged
it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and
built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and
went into a far country:
34) And when the time of the fruit drew near, he
sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they
might receive the fruits of it.
35) And the husbandmen took his servants, and
beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
36) Again, he sent other servants more than the first:
and they did unto them likewise.
37) But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying,
They will reverence my son.
38) But when the husbandmen saw the son, they
said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let
us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
39) And they caught him, and cast him out of the
vineyard, and slew him.
40) When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh,
what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41) They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those
wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other
husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their
seasons.
45) And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard
his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
Side note: You will notice that it says, "chief priests
AND Pharisees". The chief priests were typically
Sadducees, not Pharisees and since they didn't
believe in a resurrection at all, you can see why there
was such a great influence of thinking of an Earthly
kingdom in that day. And FYI, the Pharisees, et al,
did not always exist. They came about in the 2nd
century BC, if memory serves. I may be a bit off on
the timing, but it is somewhere in that range.
Anyway... :)
Note that the Jews are the husbandmen, under the
OldCovenant, especially the religious power structure..
Note that the people that were sent to them, were
prophets, who God used to tell the Jews that they
were not doing the right things and instead of
showing the fruits that God desired, they treasured
their own traditions and loved the power. So they
beat some and killed some.
Note that it says specifically, "last of all" he sent
his son.
Now here's my question...
When the lord of that land returns to destroy the
husbandmen, when does he do that? Does he
do it to those very same husbandmen that killed
his son? Or does he come back and destroy
those who live thousands of years later?
Please note that the chief priests and Pharisees
perceived that He spoke of THEM. Not some
Jerusalem thousands of years later, but THEM.
He was the Son of God and they sought to kill
Him and so, He told this parable TO THEM,
ABOUT THEM and told them straight out, that
they were to be the object of the judgment.
As He told them, they were the generation and
as He told them in Matthew 23 above, the cup
would be filled by THEM, IN THEIR GENERATION.
Now here's the thing. While the disciples may not
have glued all of the pieces together at all times,
as I said, they had moments of lucidity regarding
this. Look at Peter. One second he is calling Jesus
the Christ and the next, he is saying that he won't
let Jesus die.
And remember, Jesus rebuked Peter, so yes, Peter
knew Jesus must die. Yet, after it happened, some
believe that they still went back to thinking that all
was lost. Why? We can't assume that it was because
they figured He wasn't the Messiah. Remember, they
still considered Him their Lord (John 20:2).
What we can conclude, is that they did not know yet
that His physical resurrection was prophesied of Him
(John 20:9).
That is not to say they didn't know that He said He
would rise. After all, even the unbelievers knew He
said that and they even took it physically. :)
"Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said,
while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise
again." - Matthew 27:63
Maybe the disciples just figured His rising was a
spiritual statement, or maybe they now doubted
that He was "the one", because of the way He
died, in such disgrace, etc., etc., etc..
We can imagine a lot of things. What we can't do,
is jump to conclusions, based on what we think today,
having read all of the Scriptures..
So we can't point at one piece of Scripture in which
we think that they thought all was lost and claim that
it means that they couldn't have figured this or that
out. It is clear by their waffling, that they could
indeed understand many things that Jesus told them.
Then, of course, they went back to being dense.
Point being, that they understood and then still didn't
always put it together. And sometimes they did put it
together and it didn't stick. That doesn't mean they
didn't put anything together and they knew the
Scripture prophecies.
We should also understand, that while we can read a
Gospel in a day, this was 3 1/2 years to them and lots
of things were said, that they probably forgot about,
until reminded. Matthew 23-25 was a big reminder.
And didn't Jesus tell them...
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom
the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you
all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said unto you." - John 14:26
So even if they didn't remember it all at one specific
moment in His ministry, God would make sure they
did and we should not assume, as I said, that they
knew less than they obviously did.
To sum it up, let's not speculate about what they knew
and didn't know and though and didn't think. The fact
remains, that they pointed at the buildings, He said
they would be destroyed and this prompted their
question about His "coming". The rest is imagination
and speculation. :)
In order to understand this we must see the
significant difference between the "Olivet
Discourse" as recorded by Matthew and Luke.
As I pointed out, He specified a local event in Luke.
In order to understand which generation He was referring
to when He said "this generation" we must also ask, "what
shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
You also, even after I have explained this to you,
insist on promoting a lie. I call it a lie now,
because this has been explained to you.
That is a bad translation. The word should not
be "world", but rather, "age".
The word for the planet Earth in the Greek, is
"kosmos" and it is a word that the writers of the
NT knew.
"That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables;
I will utter things which have been kept secret from
the foundation of the world (kosmos)." - Matthew 13:35
The word in Matthew 24, is "aion", which simply means,
"an age". They were asking when the "end of the age"
was going to be and He told them, it would be within
their generation and He said the physical aspect of it
would be a local event..
Luke 21:20-22
20) And when ye shall see JERUSALEM compassed
with armies, then know that the DESOLATION THEREOF
is nigh.
21) Then let them which are IN JUDEA flee to the
mountains; and let them which are in the MIDST OF IT
depart out; and let not them that are in the countries
enter thereinto.
22) For THESE BE THE DAYS of vengeance, that ALL
THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN may BE FULFILLED.
They asked and Jesus answered and yet, you still
insist that it is something else. He told them the
temple would be destroyed. He told them it would
involve Jerusalem and Judea. These things DID
COME TO PASS and yet, YOU would STILL have
us ignore this fact and keep looking into the future.
But of course, as you have said before, it's all about
YOU and YOUR generation and He's coming back
within our lifetimes.
YOU HYPOCRITE!!!
When Jesus said He was coming "quickly", that means
thousands of years. But when it's YOUR life time, all
of the sudden, "quickly" means, THIS GENERATION
LIVING NOW. You are sad and you have no problem
twisting the Scriptures like a pretzel, to force it to
fit your man made doctrine. If it doesn't say it, hey,
no problem, just add the words in there, ignore what
Jesus actually said and then claim that the Bible says
exactly what you say! (:
First, God has always given signs to His People.
And He said that included Jerusalem being surrounded
by armies and that happened AFTER He said it and just
so happened to be within the generation alive at the
time ("this generation"). But even though all of that
matches up, we should just ignore all of that, because
it's not all about YOU, right? You have been corrected
about this and you know this. Thus, you are working
for Satan, not God!
***************************************************
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
23 Jun 2005 07:36:19 PM |
|
|
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information very much; it's been on
my mind, as you know, and I have been very curious around the history of
dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rowland Croucher" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 04:54:54 AM |
|
|
"Feather Forestwalker" <feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:7AIue.8184$hK3.4411@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information very much; it's been on my
mind, as you know, and I have been very curious around the history of
dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
God bless,
Feather
But tell him Feather to concentrate on the material in the Scofield Bible
*between* Scofield's notes (he'll know what you're talking about :-)
--
*
Shalom! Rowland Croucher
* *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ *
(15200+ articles, 3200 clean jokes/stories)
*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 11:15:59 AM |
|
|
Rowland Croucher wrote:
"Feather Forestwalker" <feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:7AIue.8184$hK3.4411@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information very much; it's been on my
mind, as you know, and I have been very curious around the history of
dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
God bless,
Feather
But tell him Feather to concentrate on the material in the Scofield Bible
*between* Scofield's notes (he'll know what you're talking about :-)
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember
even *seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark T wh@tfunwithfundies0146" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 06:09:08 PM |
|
|
"Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
But tell him Feather to concentrate on the material in the Scofield Bible
*between* Scofield's notes (he'll know what you're talking about :-)
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember even
*seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
I have one. It is gathering dust as a door stop along with my Dakes
Annotated Reference, The Amplified Bible and Strongs Concordance (other
"must haves" for the super-spiritual fundy).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Reaper" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 06:14:13 PM |
|
|
Mark T wrote:
"Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
But tell him Feather to concentrate on the material in the Scofield Bible
*between* Scofield's notes (he'll know what you're talking about :-)
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember even
*seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
I have one. It is gathering dust as a door stop along with my Dakes
Annotated Reference, The Amplified Bible and Strongs Concordance (other
"must haves" for the super-spiritual fundy).
I actually like reading the Amplified from time to time... It gives you
a nice perspective.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 08:02:33 PM |
|
|
Mark T wrote:
"Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
But tell him Feather to concentrate on the material in the Scofield Bible
*between* Scofield's notes (he'll know what you're talking about :-)
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember even
*seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
I have one. It is gathering dust as a door stop along with my Dakes
Annotated Reference, The Amplified Bible and Strongs Concordance (other
"must haves" for the super-spiritual fundy).
Sometimes, Mark, I just have to shake my head. Now's one of those times. . .
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark T wh@tfunwithfundies0146" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 09:12:12 PM |
|
|
"Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember even
*seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
I have one. It is gathering dust as a door stop along with my Dakes
Annotated Reference, The Amplified Bible and Strongs Concordance (other
"must haves" for the super-spiritual fundy).
Sometimes, Mark, I just have to shake my head. Now's one of those times. .
.
I gave lots of bibles I DO read ... I like The Message Bible and the
Jerusalem Bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 09:51:48 PM |
|
|
Mark T wrote:
"Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
hehehe. I'll pull out my Scofield in case he doesn't have one in the
office. I catalogued all of his Bibles for him, and I don't remember even
*seeing* a Scofield in there. . .
I have one. It is gathering dust as a door stop along with my Dakes
Annotated Reference, The Amplified Bible and Strongs Concordance (other
"must haves" for the super-spiritual fundy).
Sometimes, Mark, I just have to shake my head. Now's one of those times. .
.
I gave lots of bibles I DO read ... I like The Message Bible and the
Jerusalem Bible.
I find The Message to contain several dichotomies; such as the watering
down of the power of God in several verses, yet at the same time in
other areas, building it up.
I like The Jerusalem Bible; had a copy of it til I gave it to my
daughter. . .
I prefer my NASB, NIV, NKJV and am becoming fond of the Literal. . .
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Roman" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 08:22:16 AM |
|
|
Feather Forestwalker wrote:
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information very much; it's been on
my mind, as you know, and I have been very curious around the history of
dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
I agree that it is a very good read.
However, I'm curious to know why you want to print it up for your
Pastor. Do you need his opinion on it? If so, why? If he is not a
"preterist" (for lack of a better term) he's going to completely
dismiss the article. Unless he reads it in front of your he'll
probably take a look at the first few paragraphs and decide to use it
as toilet paper because the whole thing flies in the face of a rapture.
After he has wiped his butt with it and flushed it down the toilet
he'll probably say to your next Sunday something along the lines of,
"What that Pastor Dave guy wrote would have been great had he based it
on any facts. You have to be careful what you read on the internet
because it's full of heretics and people possessed by the Debbil."
He'll then go on to point the same scriptures used to prove there is a
rapture coming and why we are most definitely in the end times. I
mean, what else do you expect him to do or say if he actually reads the
whole thing? Do you think he will denounce everything he has ever
believed in regarding the end times and start preaching that the end of
the world (literally "end of the age") happened in 70 A.D. and that
Jesus has already returned??? Do you think he will give up his
standing in the church or his leadership because of Pastor Dave's
write-up?
You are an intelligent person, Feather. You probably read what Pastor
Dave had to say and said to yourself, "Sheesh, what Pastor Dave is
saying makes a lot of sense but it's so contrary to what I have been
taught for my whole Christian life it can't be correct...........can
it?"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 11:15:16 AM |
|
|
David Roman wrote:
Feather Forestwalker wrote:
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information very much; it's been on
my mind, as you know, and I have been very curious around the history of
dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
I agree that it is a very good read.
However, I'm curious to know why you want to print it up for your
Pastor. Do you need his opinion on it? If so, why? If he is not a
"preterist" (for lack of a better term) he's going to completely
dismiss the article. Unless he reads it in front of your he'll
probably take a look at the first few paragraphs and decide to use it
as toilet paper because the whole thing flies in the face of a rapture.
After he has wiped his butt with it and flushed it down the toilet
he'll probably say to your next Sunday something along the lines of,
"What that Pastor Dave guy wrote would have been great had he based it
on any facts. You have to be careful what you read on the internet
because it's full of heretics and people possessed by the Debbil."
He'll then go on to point the same scriptures used to prove there is a
rapture coming and why we are most definitely in the end times. I
mean, what else do you expect him to do or say if he actually reads the
whole thing? Do you think he will denounce everything he has ever
believed in regarding the end times and start preaching that the end of
the world (literally "end of the age") happened in 70 A.D. and that
Jesus has already returned??? Do you think he will give up his
standing in the church or his leadership because of Pastor Dave's
write-up?
*LOL* No to all of it. . .especially having to wait til next Sunday. I
am his secretary; we talk about all kinds of doctrine. . .and we study
Scripture together every Wednesday evening in a group, and every Sunday
morning in a group. Most of the people in our church have decided that
the rapture is going to happen, etc and so forth. Our pastor has, too,
of course. . .
You are an intelligent person, Feather. You probably read what Pastor
Dave had to say and said to yourself, "Sheesh, what Pastor Dave is
saying makes a lot of sense but it's so contrary to what I have been
taught for my whole Christian life it can't be correct...........can
it?"
Pretty much. . . .pretty much, and while I *have* thought that on
occasion, there's much comfort in knowing that God is Sovereign over all
things and that in the end. . .only He knows what's going to happen in
our world. *grin* That's sorta chicken, isn't it?
When faced with what Pastor Dave is saying is the truth (we aren't
calling Jesus Christ a liar if we believe these things are to come, are
we?), we may or may not have a decision to make. I am taking a middle
ground for now, until I can research for myself, as time allows, more on
this subject of End Times "theology."
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 04:43:03 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:15:16 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
<feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
You are an intelligent person, Feather. You probably
read what Pastor Dave had to say and said to yourself,
"Sheesh, what Pastor Dave is saying makes a lot of
sense but it's so contrary to what I have been taught
for my whole Christian life it can't be correct...........can it?"
Pretty much. . . .pretty much, and while I *have* thought
that on occasion, there's much comfort in knowing that
God is Sovereign over all things and that in the end. . .
only He knows what's going to happen in our world. *grin*
That's sorta chicken, isn't it?
Yes. :) And let me say, your statement rules out
any possibility of leaving what you've been taught.
You are (without realizing it, I'm sure), closing your
mind to the possibility. You said...
"...only He knows what's going to happen in the end".
Key words... "going to".
What if the "end" they spoke of, already happened?
Isn't that the point? :)
When faced with what Pastor Dave is saying
is the truth (we aren't calling Jesus Christ a liar
if we believe these things are to come, are we?),
If He said He was coming back within that
generation and you don't believe that, then
what do you think you'd be calling Him?
we may or may not have a decision to make.
He said something. You must decide if
it's true. Are we to pick which part of His
teachings we want to make a decision
about, when the entire reason He came,
was to achieve the end? After all, THAT
was the "hope" of the Apostles and the
Christians they reached. The resurrection
and the removal of the old system.
Acts 24:14-15
14) But this I confess unto thee, that after
the way which they call heresy, so worship
I the God of my fathers, believing all things
which are written in the law and in the
prophets:
15) And have hope toward God, which they
themselves also allow, that there shall be
a resurrection of the dead, both of the just
and unjust.
And how important is it, really?
Colossians 1:21-23
21) And you, that were sometime alienated
and enemies in your mind by wicked works,
yet now hath he reconciled
22) In the body of his flesh through death,
to present you holy and unblamable and
unreprovable in his sight:
23) *IF* ye continue in the faith grounded
and settled, and be not moved away from
the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard,
and which was preached to every creature
which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am
made a minister;
If they're not moved away from, "the hope of
the Gospel". What exactly is that "hope"?
Acts 24:14-15
14) But this I confess unto thee, that after
the way which they call heresy, so worship
I the God of my fathers, believing all things
which are written in the law and in the prophets:
15) And have HOPE toward God, which they
themselves also allow, that there shall be
a RESURRECTION of the dead, both of
the just and unjust.
That faith is in Christ, yes, but also in what Christ
was going to do, as Paul said many times (see
comments further down for more on this).
I am taking a middle ground for now, until I can
research for myself, as time allows, more on
this subject of End Times "theology."
It seems to me, that aside from our initial salvation,
this is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing that we are
to study. Remember... the Apostles didn't just go
around preaching, "Get saved". The people would
have said, "From what and why should I?". No,
they preached the whole Gospel and that included
the "hope" of the Gospel, which as Paul said, was
the resurrection.
It also seems to me, that you are straddling the
fence out of fear. Fear of letting go, just in case.
We are not called to sit on the fence regarding
this issue. Gee Feather, even the end timers
know that. :)
"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but
of power, and of love, and of a sound mind."
- 2 Timothy 1:7
Now this next passage is VERY IMPORTANT!
Understand that the writer is definitely a Jew
and is writing to Jews, who would understand
what he is saying about the old vs the new.
And we have this text, because it applies to
us too. The resurrection issue and the new
are what gives us "hope" in Christ.
"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without
wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)"
- Hebrews 10:23
Now what does he say? What is, "our faith"?
Is it just, "Get saved and don't worry about
the rest, because you're free to say and believe
whatever you want and call the 'hope' whatever
you want"? Saved from what? Isn't that of
the utmost importance? Isn't what it means
and the resurrection the central focus of our
faith in Christ?
Read the following as you have never read it
before and understand, that without this and
the proper teaching and understanding of it,
all was lost. Study it slowly and carefully, as
I said, as you never have before! Take your
time chewing on it and digest it slowly.
Now I know that this deals with those who say
there is no resurrection. We can use it however,
to see how important the belief was and what it
was and what it means, before and after it happens
and how we are worshipping God incorrectly, no
matter how devoutly, if we do not understand this.
I have placed some notes in here as well.
1 Corinthians 15:12-32
12) Now if Christ be preached that he rose
from the dead, how say some among you
that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13) But if there be no resurrection of the
dead, then is Christ not risen:
14) And if Christ be not risen, then is our
preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
You see, here Paul says that without the
resurrection, the whole concept of the faith
is in vain.
15) Yea, and we are found false witnesses
of God; because we have testified of God
that he raised up Christ: whom he raised
not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
It makes us liars, if we preach other than this
and I say, that it makes us liars, if we preach
it in a way that we know may be incorrect,
because of fear. God knows what we're
doing. :)
People say, God knows our heart. Yes, He
does and people would be wise to remember
that. How can we be honest in our faith,
when we speak in an unsure manner?
Faith in Christ means more than just believing
that HE rose. It also means faith that in Him,
WE will rise and do so, when and how He said.
He did say when (a time frame) and we were
told how in Scripture, so it isn't as if it is a side
issue.
How much time Feather, is devoted in the Gospels
and letters and books of the NT, to the resurrection
and eternal life? Wasn't that THE WHOLE IDEA?!
Without that, there is no faith. It is in vain.
16) For if the dead rise not, then is not
Christ raised:
17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith
is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18) Then they also which are fallen asleep
in Christ are perished.
19) If in this life only we have hope in Christ,
we are of all men most miserable.
We would be THE MOST MISERABLE and
I would suggest, that being unsure about this
teaching, makes us miserable. People may
not see that, but it gnaws at us, when we are
unsure. I know it did with me, until I finally gave
up and realized I could not avoid it any more.
I had to resolve it and I prayed to God to show
me the truth, without telling him what it meant.
That is when that book I sent you fell into my lap.
Is that coincidence?
You see Feather, I didn't tell God what it meant,
as the end timers do, becoming "newspaper
prophets". I asked Him. I didn't care who said
what. I really didn't, Feather. I just had to know
and so I threw it all away. Everything I was
taught. Gone. Just gone. The whole church
could just take a back seat, because I wanted
to know what the truth was and I had to subject
myself to the Lord and let HIM AND HIM ALONE
teach me. I would not speak to anyone about it,
at all. No one mattered. They were human. For
me that was wise, because I didn't even know
what the stuff I believe in now was and certainly
no one would have been able to help me there.
But I am a pastor and I had to know. How long
could I skip Revelation, which seemed so difficult
for me at that time, while preaching in a church?
As you know, the book I sent you doesn't deal
with Revelation much. But what sense it started
to make, when I didn't ignore what the writers
clearly said regarding time frames! And how
much sense the NT made, when I realized the
hundreds of passages I breezed right through,
without even seeing what they were saying and
how the NT records the signs that Jesus gave
us beginning to come true before their eyes!
So anyway, I began my journey, knowing that
this was of the utmost importance! This spoke
to our whole faith! So I proceeded.
And frankly Feather, it is fear and fear alone
that keeps you from proceeding and that fear
is probably like those who won't give up celebrating
Christmas once they realize it is a pagan holiday,
because of peer pressure and frankly, because
their too much of a woos to stand up for God!
Then they go to church and claim to be worshipping
God. The truth is, they are worshipping Him with
their lips and not their heart. "God knows our heart"
is a copout line that those who won't do the right
thing use, when they're too chicken to stand up for
Christ. Then they claim they don't stop celebrating,
because it would hurt the children. That's a load of
crap! They're chicken, plain and simple! What hurts
the children more? Guiding them truthfully? Or
having them continue is pagan practices? It is the
weakness of the parents and they are hurting their
children. Apply that same example to this issue
and all believers.
The bottom line is, you're looking for someone
to excuse your lack of courage. You're looking
for someone to say it's okay to know something
may not be true and then go to church and join
in with them and their end time fables. That is
what your question...
"...we aren't calling Jesus Christ a liar if we believe
these things are to come, are we?"
....is designed to evoke from people. An excusing.
Personally, I don't care if I have to stand against
the whole world and the whole world is against me.
"I know in whom I have believed" (2 Tim 1:12) .
"What shall we then say to these things? If God
be for us, who can be against us?" - Romans 8:31
20) But now is Christ risen from the dead, and
become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21) For since by man came death, by man came
also the resurrection of the dead.
22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall
all be made alive.
23) But every man in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his
coming.
24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have
delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;
when he shall have put down all rule and all authority
and power.
Note that Paul not only spoke of needing to believe
in the resurrection, but in how and in what order it
was to happen and there is nothing anywhere in his
preaching, that suggested a wait for thousands of
years. Paul preached to the people he wrote to, that
it was going to happen in an imminent manner.
Now if "imminent" doesn't mean what it says, then
nothing in the Scriptures means what it says and
if the Apostles got this wrong, then we can't trust
anything they said.
So was it imminent? Let's take a look at what Paul
said to Felix. What did he tell Felix he was in chains
for and what did he believe (he knew Felix was
familiar with these things)?
Acts 24:14-15,25
14) But this I confess unto thee, that after
the way which they call heresy, so worship
I the God of my fathers, believing all things
which are written in the law and in the prophets:
15) And have hope toward God, which they
themselves also allow, that there shall be
a resurrection of the dead, both of the just
and unjust.
25) And as he reasoned of righteousness,
temperance, and JUDGMENT TO COME,
FELIX TREMBLED, and answered, Go thy
way for this time; when I have a convenient
season, I will call for thee.
Note that Paul reasoned of the judgment to
come. Yes of righteousness, etc., but why?
Because the judgment WAS BOUT TO HAPPEN!
You see, the common translation doesn't
do the text any real service. When Paul said,
"there shall be a resurrection", the Greek word
there which was translated as "shall be", is
actually, "mello" and means, "be about to be".
Paul told him of a resurrection that was ABOUT
TO HAPPEN. Not something far off into the
future. THAT is why "Felix trembled". After all,
who "trembles" visibly (someone saw it to write
about it), about something that's going to happen
thousands of years away?
And Paul was not "playing it safe, just in case".
Is that how it appears they lived their lives and
preached the Gospel? Did they preach a "just
in case" Gospel? Do we see them going along
with something, "just in case" it's right?
Paul did not say, "might happen very soon".
He implied emphatically (that is the sense
given in the Greek) that it was "about to happen".
It was already in the works (be, about to be).
So do we believe Scripture, or do we believe
our own newspaper prophecies?
25) For he must reign, till he hath put all
enemies under his feet.
Note, there was a time limit to Christ's reign.
Not His whole reign, since that is eternal,
but His positional reign.
So what does it mean? It means that His reign
in that position had a time limit. After that time
limit had expired, His position would change.
This is something that may sound heretical to
people and something the end timers may argue
against, but the fact is, that the Scripture says
what it says and it says it clearly. V25 says there
is a time limit and that time limit is until He has
put all enemies under His feet. Of course, the
end timers like to say, "But we don't have the
new heaven and earth yet and people die".
That's another discussion, but Luke 17:20-21
is clear.
The fact is, that His position after His ascension
had a time limit.
26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
Death is the last enemy to be destroyed. That
was accomplished at the resurrection, when
"death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire".
27) For he hath put all things under his feet.
But when he saith all things are put under him,
it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put
all things under him.
28) And when all things shall be subdued unto
him,then shall the Son also himself be subject
unto him that put all things under him, that God
may be all in all.
Once that happened, the Son placed Himself
under the Father and is not positionally of
coequal authority with the Father after that.
This is the major point. If the resurrection has
occurred, then we are not giving the Father His
full honor, when we say that Christ is in a position
of coequal authority with the Father. We are
saying that God is not "all in all" yet.
So you see, this is not some minor point that we
can brush aside. It is of the utmost importance!
29) Else what shall they do which are baptized for
the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they
then baptized for the dead?
30) And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
31) I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ
Jesus our Lord, I die daily.
32) If after the manner of men I have fought with
beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the
dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for tomorrow
we die.
Anyway, sorry if I was harsh, but this is too important
to say, "Oh, okay, no big deal.". :)
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 10:14:11 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:36:19 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
<feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information
very much; it's been on my mind, as you know,
and I have been very curious around the history
of dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
Absolutely! Also, please feel free to print the post
I did on Daniel. Just put a copyright notice at the
bottom with my name. It's not that I care of they
use it. But I don't want to see it printed in a book
somewhere, since it will be part of mine (with some
changes, of course).
I'd love to know how someone who believes this end
times stuff explains Jesus being anointed and crucified
on the same day. :)
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "Feather Forestwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 11:17:14 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:36:19 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
<feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
<snipped for space only>
Thanks, Dave......appreciated this information
very much; it's been on my mind, as you know,
and I have been very curious around the history
of dispensationalism and the rapture view, in particular.
May I print this up for my pastor? It's a very good read.
Absolutely! Also, please feel free to print the post
I did on Daniel. Just put a copyright notice at the
bottom with my name. It's not that I care of they
use it. But I don't want to see it printed in a book
somewhere, since it will be part of mine (with some
changes, of course).
I'd love to know how someone who believes this end
times stuff explains Jesus being anointed and crucified
on the same day. :)
;) Yer funny. . .Mike wouldn't plagiarize in a *book*, mind you. He
might use some material in a sermon without realizing he's doing it.
I've seen him do that with articles and essay's I've written, but it
doesn't bother me. . .
God bless,
Feather
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: DARBYISM & THE END TIMERS' LIES |
24 Jun 2005 02:06:11 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:17:14 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
<feather@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:36:19 GMT, Feather F | | | | |
