| Author | Message | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1972 Registered: 10-2002  |
BTW, I forgot to mention this when I had to run earlier... For a fun parallel, compare the Isaiah 2 & Micah 4 part about "the mountain of the Lord being raised up in the last days" with the stone that hits the statue's feet in Daniel representing the Kingdom of Christ, how it grew and filled the earth. Similar imagery, eh? Similar pointing to Jesus Christ and the kingdom He brought with His sacrifice and put inside of us in His Spirit! ("The Kingdom is within you!") Also, it's an unproveable point I realize, but note how the Isaiah/Micah passage begins with "In the last days...". Remind you of anywhere with similar language? (**cough** Hebrews 1! Acts 2!) Could it be that just as Acts 2 and Hebrews 1 pointed to Christ's sacrifice, resurrection and outpouring Spirit "in these last days", that in the same way perhaps Isaiah and Micah point to the same thing, too?  Again, not proveable, particularly if one wants to look at literal Jerusalem, etc., but it does add to the massive chorus of witnesses that these things point to Christ and the Kingdom He has put within us by His Spirit, instead of pointing to literal Jerusalem and/or its literal future. The Hebrews 12 text, again, is the most specific about this reality -- that in Christ we all have come to Mount Zion and the new Jerusalem. It's pretty awesome -- HE is pretty awesome!!! Can't you see?? Mount Zion and Jerusalem have ALREADY been lifted up and are filling the earth!! "Zion" was raised up when Jesus Christ was raised up! Salvation has already come out of Zion, just as David cried out for it to! His kingdom --in the Spirit in hearts-- is already filling the earth! Only it is not a kingdom of this world that fights with the weapons of the world, but instead it fights with more powerful spiritual weapons and throws down the trembling gates of hell! In the world's eyes there is no "kingdom", but in the Spirit we see that even though our blood is shed, the kingdom reigns and overcomes by the blood of the Lamb and the word of our testimony about Him! The kingdom is already filling the earth even as we speak! Mount Zion (the church) has already been lifted up --raised up!-- with Him and sits in heavenly places in Him! The "mountain" grows and grows as more and more souls are added to His Kingdom! We cannot see it with our literal eyes, but in the eyes of the Spirit and with the eyes of faith we see that the "cloud of witnesses" grows larger and larger as time passes. The "last days" began when Christ died, was resurrected, and when His Spirit was poured out on us all! They continue even now, and TODAY "Zion" is being lifted up and growing; TODAY people are added to "the new Jerusalem" and being seated with Christ Jesus in heavenly places! HALLELU YAH!!!!! | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1973 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi Grace, I think Colleen is absolutely right that "race" and cultures do not disappear in Christ, and that God can do certain things for certain cultures and treat peoples separately. The primary reason for this, however is not a genetic/DNA reason. It isn't based on flesh, but rather based on hearts... based on the beliefs of the peoples. As you know, Chinese people have a special culture and unique way of looking at things. Same here in Japan. God often speaks to various people in certain unique ways because He knows exactly which spots in peoples' hearts need to be touched. He knows which places are hardened, which places are open. He knows the cracks in the cultural walls! (We often don't, though!) I wrote this on an older thread probably over a year ago... I believe strongly that there are primarily two obstacles to Jews seeing and receiving Jesus as their Messiah. The first is a stronghold passed down from generation to generation -- putting the nation (and culture) and the land (and temple) above the Messiah. This is seen clearly in John 11 when the high priests don't want to risk losing their "place [temple] and nation" because of Jesus. They chose rather to put Him to death. Jews today aren't responsible for that generation's decision by any means, but they have been influenced as a result of that prior generation's decision. Today Jews can tell you that the religion is not so much concerned with eternal truths as it is concerned with community, Jewishness, its special culture and traditions. At the point when that spiritual choice was made, those things became in a very real measure a substitute for God. The desire for truth, for eternity was quenched or subordinated to a great extent, and the "goal" instead was seen to be holding onto & enjoying their unique "culture". Whoa! Notice any parallel there to postmodern Adventism??!! Because of the inconsistencies, errors, and sheer difficulty of figuring out the SDA things, claims, and the Bible itself, many SDAs (especially in SoCal) have taken the postmodern approach of giving up on there actually being real "truth", saying instead that the culture of SDA is what matters, the traditions are what matter. Whether they're "right or wrong" is not important. It's relative, they say. Part of them has been disappointed and daunted by the apparent difficulties, by the waiting for God to somehow show up but not seeing Him, hearing or feeling Him. So instead they've created their alternate goal, their alternate "purpose". Does that make sense? The second main hindrance to Jews seeing and receiving Jesus as the Messiah is simply the church and its history. The church got really sidetracked in history by seeking to establish Christ's kingdom according to land & possessions, organization & hierarchy. It made the same mistake that Zionist Jews are making today in Israel and that the chief priests made in Christ's day -- craving land & kingdom instead of The Kingdom. The church has often not shown Jews a transcendant kingdom, or what theologians call in the gospel of Luke "the upside-down kingdom" where the poor are honored, where leaders are servants, where riches are not needed, where forgiveness and love are given to enemies, where basically the agape love of Christ reigns supreme. Today instead of calling people to this Kingdom, a very large part of the British & American church is instead calling for Israel to receive her land as she covets her old glory. She is longing for a glory that she had long ago instead of seeing that there is a greater heavenly glory God wants to give her. In order to receive that she needs to fall to the ground like a grain and die to her desires for her old kingdom, for her old land, and let God restore whatever He wants to restore. Right now she's fighting for all her might to get her old fading glory, and every time she has a little success it strengthens her. And the words of Isaiah 57 then ring true, "You would not give up and say it is hopeless, and found renewal of your strength" instead of seeking Him. Because of dispensationalism, thousands and thousands of Christians are sitting their either egging Israel on or passively tiptoeing around saying, "It's God fulfilling His promise to them." The "life from death" that Paul speaks of and that will be "riches for the world" will be when many Jews let their grain of wheat fall to the ground and die; when they repent from their dead works and find life in Christ's glory alone, letting go of their old glory and instead beholding the glory of the Holy Spirit. When they die to the old kingdom and receive the new Kingdom. On a surface and practical level, this will mean much life in the Middle East because it will involve repenting for the many nations that were displaced and hurt by the ways in which Israel re-took the land throughout the 20th century. Yes, nations had wrongly wounded her, too. But because both she and the nations around her only know "an eye for an eye", when she lays down her right to take out an eye, the repentance, love and forgiveness she learned from the Messiah will become a suprise to her enemies and in her former enemies Christ will receive "the nations as His inheritance" as the Psalms say. Right now Israel does not know that her neighbors are the Messiah's inheritance! She is busy trying to secure her own old, expired inheritance, and is busy fighting and destroying His eternal inheritance--herself and her neighbors! Okay, now what this all comes back to is the separation of Church and Israel you mentioned. God often treats cultures and peoples different, however it is not based on genetics or DNA. I am half-Mexican but know almost nothing of Mexico, since I was not raised there, cannot speak its language, nor got much of its culture, etc. God has specific things He is saying and will say more and more to Mexican hearts, but I will not understand them and be moved by them in the same way that a more Mexican-Mexican person would! The way that God "treats differently" various cultures is not so much because God treats them differently, but it is rather because we are all different! I don't know if that makes sense, but I hope it does! The reason God has some special things in store for Jews is because their hearts have a unique situation going on -- an inherited stronghold of desiring land, culture & old glory instead of desiring the Messiah, the eternal Kingdom and the inheritance of neighbors. (In Abrahamic terms, she wants to be blessed herself first before she feels she will be able to be a blessing to the nations; she wants to get her inheritance first and only after she gets that she thinks she'll be ready to start blessing the nations. It's backwards in Christ!) This is a long way of saying that yes, God has a special purpose and plan for Jews, even for the current state of Israel, but it is exactly opposite of what we think! It is not about the returning of the land, not about the "fulfillment of the promises" because they were already fulfilled in Jesus Christ! Instead the plan is for repentance! Just like God allowed all of us to crucify Him so that we could know His forgiveness and repent, in the same way He is allowing Israel to retake her old land by the power of her flesh so that she can see the sin of what she has done in His eyes, repent and in so "dying to self" become the blessing to the nations she was meant to be! It is for the same reason that God allowed the church to receive Constantine's crown, and then church began to try expanding "the kingdom" with the sword instead of with the Spirit and love. This is pictured in Revelation 6 when the rider on the first white horse receives a crown and bow and rides out to conquer, forgetting that Christ has already conquered, that we overcome in Christ by faith, not by the weapons of the world. The bow speaks of the weapons of the world, pulled by the arm of flesh and filled with the fiery darts of the enemy instead of the love of God. Behind that rider comes horse after horse of destruction, death and abuse. God allowed this to happen because He knows what is in mankind's heart, and somehow He will redeem it all. A day when the church will repent en masse will come: The "two witnesses" prophesy to many kings and nations dressed "in sackcloth" -- clothed in the garments of repentance! Not preaching to the wicked, wicked world that they'd better stop their immorality and obey God's law, but rather repenting for all the ways in which we've gotten in God's way as He's tried to love them through us throughout the years! And then as we stand in that love, in the same way as that love in Christ caused people to hate Him and crucify Him, in the same way Christians will be persecuted en masse until Christ comes Himself riding on a white horse! Unlike when the church rode out abusive on the white horse, Christ rides making right judgment and carrying what we did not carry -- the sword of the Spirit coming from His mouth. The armies of heaven were not behind us before with the first white horse, but they are behind Him when He comes "faithful and true"! It is a bitter pill for us to swallow -- to go out and repent to the nations! But it will be like life from death for so many! The church and Israel have often spiritually done the same things! I believe the church will lead the way in repentance before Jews will begin to cry out themselves. It is seeing the church display the eternal Kingdom in this way that will remind the hearts of religious Jews of "home" in such a way that they will remember what has been marginalized and squashed for centuries -- their longing for eternity, their longing for their eternal home... Abraham's longing for the city with foundations, for their home above instead of for the city of bondage below! In this way the Jews will be made "jealous" and will see the Messiah. ***** Ok, dinnertime. More later. Bless you in Jesus! Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1974 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi Grace, Continuing... This is exactly the reason that I am so shocked at dispensationalism and at the number of Former Adventists who are embracing it, because dispensationalism does the exact same thing you're describing: it says that anything about "Jerusalem" or "Israel" is literal but anything about sacrifices, festivals or priests (and more) is spiritual or symbolic. The end chapters of Ezekiel and Zechariah that Colleen quoted are prime examples of what's inconsistent about dispensationalism. The chapters contain things about priests (Levites & specific descendants) and things about the Old Covenant festivals. The "prince" sections preceding the final chapters of Ezekiel talk about the prince making sacrifices for himself & for the people, too, and keeping the Sabbaths & New Moons. Look at the last two chapters of Isaiah and it gets even more confusing for the dispensational system. The dispensationalist loves the parts about the restoration of Jerusalem and reads those very literally. But the parts about priests & Levites, grain offerings, Sabbaths & New Moons are "spiritualized" like you said. Occasional dispensationalists try to iron out things with the "millenium" explanation by saying that perhaps this is a picture of things "during the millenium". It's a nice try, but it screws up the fulfillment of the shadows in Christ by having people return to the shadows! And Zechariah 14 would then say that people would get judged by God because they don't keep the shadows! And the end chapters of Ezekiel would have people still offering sacrifices, including the "prince"! But more obviously with Isaiah 65-66, the entire section dealing with the restoration of Jerusalem which dispensationalists say refers to the millenium comes after the "new heavens and new earth" are created! Midway through Isaiah 65 God declares He will make a new heavens and new earth. The whole "restoration of Jerusalem" and "Zion in travail" giving birth to people in one day comes in this section, after the new heaven & earth are said to be created. The Sabbath & New Moons are said to be kept in the new earth! If we take the last two chapters of Revelation in a linear timeline, then the millenium comes first and the new heavens & earth come second. The dispensational millenium theory puts literal Jerusalem, temple and possible festivals, etc. as being during the millenium, not in the new earth where "there is no temple". But Isaiah describes offerings, priests, New Moons & Sabbaths as being in the new earth! Now even more obvious than all of this, right after Isaiah reports God saying the new heavens & earth will be made, he says immediately afterward that people will die there!! Now who is going to take that literally?!? DEATH in the new earth?!? It just doesn't fit!! The system is far too inconsistent, arbitrary and unwittingly anti-New Covenant. It requires too much reading with one eye closed. Too much acceptance of cognitive dissonance. Too much ignoring of plain things written in the New Testament. And all of this confusion & inconsistency arises simply because John Darby began his theorizing by postulating that Israel is separate from the church -- meaning that all the Old Testament promises made to Israel were meant for literal circumcized-in-the-flesh Israel, and would be fulfilled to them distinctly from the church. It sounds like wisdom to say that "We read the OT promises literally." It sounds like wisdom to say that if they weren't, then God would be faithful. It sounds like wisdom in the exact same way that an Adventist "sounds wise" when they say, "We believe in the validity of the Old Testament" to defend the necessity of Sabbath-keeping. It sounds like wisdom in the exact same way that the Adventist "sounds wise" when they say that "We believe all the Bible is inspired" to excuse using Ecclesiastes to defend the State of the Dead doctrine. It sounds like wisdom and sounds like a good, solid principle of interpretation. But it is not a principle of interpretation that the Bible itself teaches! The most awesome, awesomest thing I think we all hopefully learned when coming out of Adventism is that the Bible interprets itself! God hasn't left things a puzzle for us to theorize over or figure out how to do things. No, He explains Himself! Like Hebrews 1:1-3, explaining that things during the older days were seen in parts and various ways. Or in Hebrews 10 and Colossians 2, saying that things before were "shadows". We learn that the New explains the Old, that the Light explains the shadow instead of the other way around. The way that the apostles interpreted things gives us concrete examples. We learn that the Amos passage in Acts 15 was not taken to the literal letter, but was applied according to the spirit. We learn that although John the Baptist did not build literal highways in the desert, he nevertheless was "the voice crying out in the wildreness" and the Elijah who was to come. And we learn that having come to Christ, "We have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem" according to Hebrews 12. The "future fulfillment" idea of dispensationalism which you & Colleen have cited means that all of the baggage I mentioned above needs to be explained. The sacrifices, the grain offerings, the feasts of Tabernacles, New Moons, Sabbaths, Levites and more things like "death" being in the new earth, because all of these things were "promised to Israel". If God does not make people keep festivals or offer sacrifices in the new earth, is He being unfaithful to His promises? If He gives people eternal life instead of letting them die in the new earth, is He being unfaithful to His promises to Israel which say there will be death in the new earth? I think you're right that God has preserved them, just as Jesus said in the gospels that "this race will certainly not pass away until all these things are fulfilled." It is incredible what they've been through. It's been really difficult at many points, particularly the Holocaust. Sadly there's often more to the story... particularly the very disturbing reports of Jews in America lobbying Roosevelt to aid in the creation of the Israeli state in Palestine rather than do something about the reports of genocide coming out of Nazi Germany, and the quote of one leader saying that livestock in the land of Israel was worth more than the blood of European Jews (I don't take all reports as gospel, but do leaf through jewsagainstzionism.com for some of these... some might need to be taken with a certain grain of salt). That God has preserved Jews is undoubtable. That they "formed a nation just as Scripture said they would" is doubtable for the 'baggage' reasons I listed above: 1) Did they do it in the new earth? 2) Will there be "death" in their new nation in the new earth? 3) Will they give grain offerings? 4) Will they have priests & Levites? 5) Will they celebrate New Moons & Sabbaths in the new earth? Darby made a theory which became popular even though it ignored sound Biblical interpretation principles. People got used to reading the Bible with one eye shut -- taking one part (about "Jerusalem/Israel") literally, and "spiritualizing" other parts that looked less favorable or messed with Christology. (It is just like the Adventist way of taking "law" to mean the Ten Commmandments whenever it's favorable and "ceremonial" whenever it's mentioned unfavorably.) When the state of Israel was created --neverminding the role that Zionists/dispensationalists had in encouraging it and bringing it about-- people felt that Darby's system was verified. No matter what context said, no matter what inconsistencies there were in that way of reading prophetic scriptures, the sheer existence of the "Israel" state made it seem like Darby was right, he got that right! It's exactly the same for Adventists when they feel that they've seen something in the world which Ellen White predicted. That she got that one thing right validates the "system" even though the system ignores context and has problems in it all over the place. That single "validation" makes it more difficult to recognize and acknowledge other errors. Ok, bedtime. And that's all for today! Bless you in Jesus! Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1975 Registered: 10-2002 |
P.S. To my chagrin, no one here has acknowledged the three texts I posted in my first post on this thread. No one has reacted to how they really do make the whole pre-trib rapture thing very clear -- clearly mistaken to the core.  I believe the reason for this is exactly what I described in that post to Jim02. | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 2060 Registered: 5-2007  |
Ramone, Up to now, I have not responded because I am simply in a state of 'expecting his return at any time' and not concerned when the rapture occurs. At this stag of my life, it is most likely that the Lord will 'take me home'. In which case, I will be raised up and join him upon his return. So, I have no reason to get into theological debates that will certainly happen as God has planned out before the creation of the world. We are commanded to simply be ready and watching. It could happen now, which is why one might call me a "pre-tribber". But, since no man knows the time of the return of Jesus, why debate things related to this promised event? Fearless Phil | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 779 Registered: 7-2008  |
Phil... Well said !!..This discussion about the rapture is of little value in the believers life. Christ will come when Christ will come. Simple as that. When this happens doesnt matter to me at all. Why should it?? Animal | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 798 Registered: 2-2008  |
I was studying through Matthew and I saw something there I hadn't seen before in the parables in Chap. 13. Jesus was teaching that the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field (v.24). The enemy came and sowed bad seed. The slaves asked the landowner if he wanted them to gather up the tares. The landowner says (v.29,30), "no, for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, 'First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.'" Then Jesus teaches again in v.47-50 about catching fish. In v. 49-50, He says, "So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." In both of these parables, I don't see that wheat or good fish where separated from the bad before the harvest at the end of the age. Am I reading too much into these parables? vivian | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 800 Registered: 2-2008 |
I was studying through Matthew and I saw something there I hadn't seen before in the parables in Chap. 13. Jesus was teaching that the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field (v.24). The enemy came and sowed bad seed. The slaves asked the landowner if he wanted them to gather up the tares. The landowner says (v.29,30), "no, for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, 'First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.'" Then Jesus teaches again in v.47-50 about catching fish. In v. 49-50, He says, "So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." In both of these parables, I don't see that wheat or good fish where separated from the bad before the harvest at the end of the age. Am I reading too much into these parables? vivian | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1976 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi Phil & Tom, What you've said is something that does sound wise, and I really believe you're right to a very real extent. It's just that in this setting it sounds like more of a dodge than a statement of faith in Christ. I'm not saying it is a dodge, but the timing of saying that is unfortunate, because what you've said really doesn't match the discussion. No one here is going off into road-mapping sequences of events and no one is departing from the gospel. On the contrary, probably the biggest spiritual burden I feel about Revelation discussions, end times theorizing and dispensationalism is that it simply departs so far and wide from the gospel. The gospel is meant to be and truly is the central thing in every age, even in the "end times". But in Adventism the obsession with end times was centered around the Sabbath day. And likewise in dispensationalism the end times are made to center around literal Israel in the flesh and physical land. The gospel becomes a side-dish. This is really obvious when you hear otherwise gospel-preaching ministers start to talk about the end-times. One minute they will be talking about the gospel of God's grace and the freedom of Christ will literally be sparkling in the fresh air. And then when "end times" come in, a pall comes over things. The message is diverted because you need to know "this and this", and "this thing" or whatever. You need to know that Sabbath is important. Or you need to know that we have to support physical Israel. Or you need to know the sequence of events. Because you don't want to be "left behind"! Here is the spiritual mess that drives so much discussion (and even sheer thinking) about the end times: 1) There is the fear that if I don't know these things, I will be lost or will suffer really bad. 2) Then there is the opposite extreme of disregarding them entirely (or claiming to disregard them when challenged by them). While this may seem like a liberation and freedom from the above fear, it's not always the case. Often it's an unconscious attempt to keep from facing that very same fear. Most end times discussions are thought or fought between these two fears: One, the fear of not knowing and being screwed and Two, the fear of facing that fear. The first group tries to accumulate as much "knowledge" about the end times because the more you know, the less chance you have of being "left behind" (or lost). The second group has a very understandable kneejerk reaction against any knowledge, sometimes against even speaking with any certainty about things in the end times. What we know however from the New Testament is that indeed we are saved and safe in Christ's grace, and the gospel is all about His grace. And at the same time, He spoke of a lot of things that were coming so that when they happened, people would not be surprised but would trust Him even more. Safe and saved in His grace doesn't mean we can't know anything about the end times; the opposite is equally true, that knowing things about the end times doesn't necessarily make us safer or more saved. So your question comes in: What does it matter? Good question. Here's a similar question: If God is sovereign, why do we need to pray? A quick answer to the latter one is simply that He told us to -- He asked us to pray that harvesters be sent out into the ripe harvest fields. In short, if He said it, then He's probably got a really good reason for telling us about it. The same goes with the end times: if He said things, it's best to assume that He had a really good reason to tell us about them rather than assuming it simply doesn't matter to us at all. Now where this comes in importantly --and where your comments come in unfortunately-- is in talking about the pre-trib rapture. Truly the teaching is one that could only have come from a society with a high standard of living! Truly it could only have come from a people so well-off that they gradually and unwittingly phased "suffering" out of the gospel. And that is something that really matters. Today we are largely afraid of suffering, especially in the United States. Many American Christians cannot conceive of ever living in "a non-Christian country". Many would rather die than live in such a place! The kind of countries in which the apostles lived were places that many American Christians would fear to live in, not merely because of fear of suffering, but because it's uncomfortable to our personal freedoms, liberty, sense of justice, and well it just ain't comfortable not being in the majority in society! The pre-trib rapture enters here and grants Christians their wish. Widespread tribulation and persecution are for the future, not for us. They can never come upon us. We will be removed before such things happen. The teaching also appears to solve the problem of the two fears: the first fear is rendered irrelevant because hey, we'll be zipped out of here, and the second fear (the fear of the first fear) is also rendered irrelevant, because all in all "the end times" are said to be irrelevant for the church. All of this occurs because the end times are seen in a different light than the gospel. The gospel of God's grace is seen as good for today, but the end requires figuring things out or knowing some special knowledge (which day to keep or which country/race to support or defend). Etc. For some reason we think that the message or central thing in the end times has got to be some special knowledge, some special thing we must do or thing we must preach or whatever. The idea of it all being about "Jesus" and "love" in the end just seems too easy. It seems too simple. But the end is all about the gospel, just as things are today. Seeing things through the gospel makes the end times light. It doesn't make end times knowledge necessary nor does it make the knowledge unnecessary. Instead it lightens the load and what you receive instead is God's heart. Example: Look at that cry at the end of Revelation, when the bride cries out "Come!" Usually we look at that and think, "Yes, Lord, come!" We read it as a longing for Christ to come. And we skip over a lot of the rest of Revelation or anything "end times" because we're used to those things being heavy. We're used to the fear of being left behind without end times knowledge, or we're used to assuming that any knowledge about the end times is impractical or out of harmony with the gospel. So we skip to the part about just wanting Christ to come. And we want Him to come, it is true! But in taking that part we are basically only looking at our own desire instead of His. He put the rest of the book there for a purpose, and looking at that bride's cry more closely, we can see some of that purpose: Whoa! This part isn't a cry for Jesus to come soon at all. It is a cry to people to come to Jesus!!! This is what I'm talking about when I say that through the gospel God lightens the "end times" and all that is left afterwards is His heart. One big, big reason for the "end times" things He spoke to us about in the New Testament is so that we might share in His heart for people who don't know Him yet, or people on the edge of walking away from Him. And whatever God has spoken to us in the Bible about these things, it is to give us encouragement and so that we might have hope. If we are afraid of looking at these things or think that they don't matter, simply put we're cheating ourselves of some good encouragement and hope. Especially if we're in a country or age in which some really extreme suffering hits us. The book of Revelation in particular gave a lot of hope and encouragement to a church birthed in a time of many martyrs' deaths. But it is easy to see how we can miss this because we have largely phased out of the church the truth of suffering accompanying life the gospel. Now Phil, I'll speak directly about one thing you said. You said "since no one knows the time of the return of Jesus, why debate things related to this promised event?" ... and you said, "It could happen now." While the gospels do say that we don't know the exact day or hour, at the same time, the epistles also say that certain things will happen first, and not to let anyone alarm you saying that the day has already come and gone and you missed it. In other words, while we do know we can't know the day & hour, at the same time God did not say that we wouldn't know things that would happen before the last day. He did tell us about things that would happen before the last day so that we would know the time was near, so that we could be encouraged, so that we could lift up our heads. I want to say one last thing today as carefully, politely and lovingly as possible. Please honestly ask yourself: If I were talking about "end times" things in accordance with the pre-trib rapture, would you be popping in here to say that it really doesn't matter or "Why debate things?" If I weren't showing how dispensationalism undermines the New Covenant and distracts us from the simple gospel, would you or anyone else here be objecting? Blessings and love to you in Jesus, Phil, and you, Tom, and everyone else here. Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1977 Registered: 10-2002 |
Vivian, what you read and concluded is consistent with what the rest of Scripture says, and the vast majority of Christians in history prior to the last 250 years would agree with you. | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 782 Registered: 7-2008 |
When I encounter a non christian...what does he NEED to hear from me? The timing of Christ return?..I dont think so. They need to hear that as sinners, our salvation rest soley upon the shed blood of Christ and the power of HIS resurrection. They need to hear the statement of Christ.."You MUST be born again". The more clear and simple our presentation of the gospel will lead to more people to come to a saving relationship with Christ. Isnt that what we want, Isnt THAT what God wants ?? As a side note.... I dont advocate the Pre-trib rapture theory. God is abundantly capable to deliver His children thru hard difficult end time events...isnt He??God would truly recieve the greater glory in doing so. ...Animal | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 783 Registered: 7-2008 |
One more thing... What I said before WAS NOT a dodge. I am shocked you made that statement. You have no idea of my Journey to Christ or my present walk with Him. Here is your statement... "What you've said is something that does sound wise, and I really believe you're right to a very real extent. It's just that in this setting it sounds like more of a dodge than a statement of faith in Christ." You want my statement of faith?..You got it pal... I,Animal, confess that I am a sinner in need of salvation..I need help and deliverance from my sin. I confess that my only hope is to run to the arms of my refuge..Jesus Christ. I surrendered my heart to Him in 1977. I rejoice in the saving grace that He has poured upon me. He IS my Lord and Savior. I dont deserve His saving grace..but accept it for I have no other hope. HE is everything to me." Hope that tells you of my FAITH in Him. | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 2061 Registered: 5-2007 |
Ramone, I was simply responding to why I had not posted on the theme up to now. Fearless Phil | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1979 Registered: 10-2002 |
Tom, I said the timing was unfortunate because it did not match the discussion. The timing of it made it sound like a dodge. That doesn't mean it was a dodge. What it actually felt like was that maybe what I had written earlier wasn't read or understood. What I wrote over and over earlier is that the gospel is THE thing now and in the end, and the truth of the New Covenant needs to be the lens through which we look at life now, the OT prophets, and the things to come. The reason that dispensationalism falls so far short is precisely because it adds things to the gospel which subtly subvert it, because it partially abandons the truth of the New Covenant and returns to shadows in order to tell Christians what's coming in the future. In other words, it says that one needs to abide by shadows to know what's coming instead of simply looking at the gospel. It is smack in the middle of me saying these kinds of things that you came in and said "No, it doesn't matter!" What the heck, Tom? I was saying the gospel is what matters today, yesterday and tomorrow. I was faulting dispensationalism because it messes with the New Covenant. What was wrong with that, Tom? If some system messes with the New Covenant, is it okay do you think? Does it "not matter"? No one was judging you or your walk with Jesus Christ. No one asked for your statement of faith. No one got angry at you and no one gave you cause to get angry. I am your brother. I simply said the timing of your statement was unfortunate because with the gospel we are on the same page. Bless you in Jesus, brother. Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1980 Registered: 10-2002 |
Phil and Tom, I respect and love both of you even though I know you both very little. I don't mean to accuse, I don't mean to hurt or anything like that. I'm your brother. The subject of dispensationalism and the pre-trib rapture is something that I believe needs to simply be seen through the lens of the gospel instead of as if it were on a separate track that required special knowledge of some Old Testament commandment or some Old Testament country or whatever. I wrote my earlier post to both of you partially because it was shocking for me to hear what you both said because I had spent such time and effort on this thread trying to show that it is all about the gospel, that it is all about the New Covenant, that we can rest in Jesus, that we can trust Him, and that we can take His words to mean what they mean. And above all we don't have to be afraid. Coming in as your comments did at that time, it felt like I had not been read or heard at all, but like your comments were directed towards someone else entirely instead of actually responding to me. I hope you can understand how bizarre it was for me to spend so much time pointing to the gospel, New Covenant and no-fear-in-Christ, only to have your comments come in and say that "No, Ramone, those things don't matter, only Christ matters." Who were you talking to? It wasn't me! Who were you arguing with? Not me! I'm shouting "the gospel!" and "the new covenant!" and saying that the very same is the thing by which we ought to look at all things, even "end times" things, because the New covenant gospel is the true plumbline of all things, even "end times" things. Do you think I'm in error for saying that? Do you think I'm in error merely for saying that Christ talked about some end times things clearly instead of obscurely? If I am proclaiming that resting in Jesus is the thing even in the end, what is the problem? Please consider these things and re-read what I wrote before assuming that I'm debating like an endtimes-junkie or whatever that doesn't know that resting in Jesus is the biggest most awesomest thing in the universe. ***** Phil, For you I posed a different question because I hit closer to something somewhat near-and-dear to you right at the start by questioning the pre-trib rapture. I know with your age it may seem inconsequential and I can't & won't dispute that. At the same time, the questions and points that I asked you are things that have ramifications at least for others because they connect directly to our understanding/proclamation of the New Covenant, and they also affect the Christian testimony of "love" and "suffering" in the world. As I mentioned, I believe that Jesus didn't take so much time to tell us about things that didn't matter. Is it good to close our eyes to part of the New Covenant or shy away from letting God's words mean what they say about there being no pre-trib rapture (1 Th.4:16-17, 1 Cor.15:51-52, Matthew 24:29-31)? Is it safe to build on sand? Yes on the whole obviously we are all resting on the Rock here. But what happens when the Spirit starts to reveal things built on sand in our lives? Will we turn them over to Christ? Will we surrender them or be afraid of examining & possibly letting go of them? You're right that you do have the right to believe what you like and not examine it. You're right that resting in Jesus is all we need. But you were wrong to think that discussion of things Jesus spoke about is inconsequential because "no one knows the day or hour." No one here was debating the day or hour or even trying to calculate it. We were talking about things that Christ talked about, not trying to look into things that He did not talk about. But again, you don't have to look into these things. You don't have to and no one can force you (and no one should try, either). Yet please be careful of mixing up the "no one knows the day or hour" with things that Christ in fact did reveal and speak clearly about. If you don't want to examine them, that's okay for you. But others might want to and others might care. And if in fact as I'm arguing the New Covenant gospel is the rule of interpretation even in "end times" and "prophetic" things, then we needn't fear examining these things because the gospel brings rest through and through. We needn't worry about becoming end times buffs, prophecy junkies, legalists, beast-watchers or anything like that. We needn't fear that nor need we fear "great tribulation" either. The gospel is greater than all of these things, and through the gospel we may even look into these things in His rest instead of in fear or confusion. Bless you both in Jesus again, Ramone | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11122 Registered: 12-2003  |
Ramone, I do believe that all of us here are shouting with you, "The Gospel" and "The New Covenant". Moreover, the pre-trib rapture really is irrelevant to the issue of God's plans for the Jews. One doesn't have to believe in "pre-trib" to believe that God is keeping His promises to Abraham and to David--not only spiritually but physically as well. Of course, we don't know in advance how it will all play out, but God does keep His promises. Moreover, it is clear that God redeems us spiritually and physically, and the physical creation is part of His eternal plan. There is no reason to dismiss the idea that the fulfillment of God's promises may well be physical, as they state, as well as spiritual. The question of end-times is not a point that should ever divide the body of Christ. To be sure, the disjunction of the extremely disparate views create much heat, but these are not the essence of the gospel. We can have fellowship with one another if we know Jesus; while our view of end times may color much of our worldview, nevertheless Jesus is bigger than our understanding and misunderstanding. Paul is unequivocal that we must not be arrogant about our place in His olive tree. The root, he reminds us, supports us--not the other way around. Moreover, he makes the point in Romans 11:24 that we are wild branches, and our graft into the tree is against nature. It God has done this, he asks, "how much more" will Jews "be grafted into their own olive tree?" Even more to the point, he says in v. 28-29 that while from the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for our sake, yet from God's perspective "they are beloved for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Now, I don't pretend to know how this will look. I do know, however, that the words mean something, and the meaning is quite clear. The "how" is not clear, but the "what" is. More and more I am convinced that the plain words of the Bible are most consistently understood when we take them at "face value" unless we are obviously looking at figurative language. Even then, the figurative language is telling us something, and the more places Scripture uses the same figures, the more we can be pretty certain those words mean something that the clear "picture" represents. All this to say, we can't divide over eschatology. We can trust the Holy Spirit to continue to teach us, and even if members of The Body never agree on the details of end times, that's still OK. We can and must be dogmatic about the gospel. Prophecy, though, is less clearly explained, and we need to avoid being dogmatic about things not clearly stated. Colleen | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 571 Registered: 11-2005 |
Hi Ramone, I'm sorry I haven't been able to respond back yet. I'm completely swamped with stuff in my life right now. But I have read all of your posts and appreciate the time you've put into writing them. I have them printed off, and intend to go back through and respond specifically once I get a moment to do so! But I just want you to know that your posts haven't gone unnoticed... I've read every word. And there is much I'd like to comment on once I get a moment to write it all out. Until then, please know I appreciate everyone's input into this discussion. It's been helpful for me. Okay... Off to bed before I collapse! Grace | ||
| Christo Registered user Username: Christo Post Number: 215 Registered: 2-2008 |
Hi Everyone, I thought of a reason to doubt the nation of Israel as a fulfillment of promises of God, in that Israel had 12 tribes, but it seams that primarily the descendants of the tribe of Judah are the ones who have staked their claim, at the apparent exclusion of all others. When Zionistic nationalists claim title, in a way it parallels the modern church ministry claiming title to tithes, as if they are Levites. There are a lot of strongholds that need to be dissolved, and I don't think that the current nation of Israel is a fulfilled promise of God. I am reminded of an sda legend, (something out of Daniel, and the sea meaning a people) that talked about North America being a barren land, and somehow picturing into prophesy, totally disregarding the millions of Native Americans who already inhabited this so called barren land. All this to satisfy political-relgio ambitions that have plagued humanity since Nimrod. The promises of God are not political, or religious, but are spiritual. It seams that religious abuse is combated with political abuse, and vice-versa and so the situation collectively remains the same in the middle east, and individuals suffer. All sides in that region are approaching the situation in the same way according to the flesh, as that is the nature of their religious beliefs. It was the same 2000 years ago when Jesus walked the Earth.( Roman occupation, religious fanatics, and profiteers ) People get hurt as a consequence. I can't see the natural branches who are cut off receiving any of the promises of God until grafted in, because being grafted in is the promise of God. HEBREWS 8: 6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: 9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: 11AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERY MAN HIS NEIGHBOR, AND EVERY MAN HIS BROTHER, SAYING, KNOW THE LORD: FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST. 12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. 13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. The Lord calls me every day, and lifts me up from the mess that the human condition persists in. OH JESUS, Chris | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1981 Registered: 10-2002 |
Thanks everyone. Colleen, thanks for what you've shared, however, really I'm curious to your responses about the things I've written. It's fine saying that we agree on the New Covenant, but... Will you allow the New Covenant to sift the arbitrary millennial usages/interpretations of the ends of the prophets? Or will people be returning to the shadows and sacrifices in the millennium--Christ the Prince included? Will the word of Hebrews 12 be allowed to say that we who believe are "in Zion" and "Jerusalem" because we are in Christ as His church of the firstborn? Do Christians have a right to "the land" today or are we only heirs of Abraham in the future? Are God's promises fulfilled according to DNA (the flesh) or according to the Spirit? Are God's promises fulfilled in perishable predestined-to-be-destroyed land or are they fulfilled in Christ Jesus? What is our inheritance or the Jews' inheritance -- old or new Jerusalem? Old glory or new? Fading or lasting? Since Hebrews 12 says we've come to Zion and Jerusalem already in Christ, Hebrews 1 says we're already in the last days, and Daniel 2 likely pictures the mountain of the Lord coming from the Rock of Christ after the Roman Empire, could it be that the prophecies of Isaiah 2 and Micah 4 are already being fulfilled and do not depend on physical land or physical Jerusalem, but are fulfilled in Christ and in the heavenly Jerusalem? Etc. Blessings to you & everyone in Jesus! Ramone | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 572 Registered: 11-2005 |
Hi Ramone, I had some free time at work so had a chance to really read through all that you wrote. First, you bring up a good point about Old Covenant "shadows" being in dispensationalism. I had never thought of it that way before, and you've got me thinking now... I'm going to have to look into that more. I have a couple of questions though. I wasn't able to determine from what you wrote whether you believed there would be a millenium. What are your thoughts on the millenium? Also, what do feel will happen at the end of time? Do you believe that there will be tribulation, or that the church is now living in the "tribulation" period? I guess I'm a bit confused. Second, I can't help but see that our current state of affairs with the Middle East REALLY fit the idea that there is a future fulfillment of promises for Israel. I guess you could argue that some of that "fulfillment" was politically created, but doesn't everything come under the umbrella of God's sovereignty? I admit, I feel completely ignorant about this subject and have so many questions, that I'm not even sure how to ask them. I guess for me, I can't get past the idea that our current state of affairs is fitting what I'm reading in my Bible. It just makes the most sense... I'd like to hear your thoughts about end-time events (like sequence). What is your stance exactly on everything (from the tribulation, to the second coming, to the millenium, to the new earth, etc). I think that would be helpful to me to see your big picture as you understand it. Because obviously our "pictures" have totally different looks and our "sequence" is on totally different paths. And while I understand your points against dispensationalism, I'm not seeing how it all fits together "otherwise" (non-dispensational view). Also, what I see going on in the Middle East is the carry-over from Isaac and Ishmael. But the birthright (and promises) belonged to Isaac, not to Ishmael. If I believe what the Bible said about that, then the birthright righfully belongs to "Isaac". And to this day, they are still fighting over that. So if the "church" has replaced Israel, and the promises are now being fulfilled through the church, then what about the Jews and the Muslims? I don't understand. While I admit I can see your logic, it's not fitting with what's going on in the world and the church. I'm confused... Grace |
