Posted on 01/13/2010 10:49:12 AM PST by Kaslin
Over the weekend, former John McCain campaign strategist Steve Schmidt told "60 Minutes" something shocking about McCain's former running mate, Sarah Palin. It seems that when Schmidt met Palin after McCain selected her, he was surprised that she was so calm. Schmidt apparently asked her how she could remain so tranquil in the face of such a monumental life change. She responded, "It's God's plan."
Naturally, the media went bonkers over this revelation. The New York Times approvingly reported comic Jimmy Fallon's one-liner: "God responded: 'What? Really? Don't bring me into this.'" The Week asked whether Palin was "simply devout -- or delusional?" The Nation suggested that Palin was "a little bit dimmer than we thought."
Nothing is quite as shocking to media establishment types as someone who actually believes that God takes an active part in individual human destinies. If you thought the media's reaction to this was absurd, think what their reaction would have been if they had been around during the days of Moses. One can envision the headlines from local newspapers: "Exiled Prince Claims God Sent Him to Free Slaves: Advisers Say Moses' Staff Flying at Half-Mast." (British newspapers would report it slightly differently: "Jewish Nut Job Invades Royal Palace On 'God's Mission': Pharaoh Tells Him to go Jump in the Bloody Nile.")
The truth is that it is a common article of faith in virtually all major religions that God guides the footsteps of each and every human being. Benjamin Franklin, a not-so-religious theologian, said that the American Revolution could be successful only with the direct help of God. As he put it, "The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?"
Yet nowadays, it is considered trite to point to the influence of God in human lives -- unless you are liberal. Then it is considered perfectly normal. How many athletes do we see who thank God after each touchdown? How many actors who win Oscars thank God?
Even certain beloved socialist presidents believe in divine intervention on a personal scale. For example, when then-Sen. Barack Obama gave an anti-war speech, Sen. Harry Reid approached him to congratulate him. "That speech was phenomenal, Barack," said Reid. Reid describes what happened next: "Without the barest hint of braggadocio or conceit, and with what I would describe as deep humility, he said quietly: 'I have a gift, Harry.'"
It is worthwhile asking: a gift from whom? Gaia? Santa Claus? The Easter Bunny?
Clearly, even our atheistic President Obama -- a man who avers that religious folk cling bitterly to their God because they're poor and downtrodden -- believes that occasionally, the Deity rests his hand on someone's shoulder. Unfortunately, unlike Sarah Palin, Obama also believes that God's presence is redundant to his own.
There's a reason the media elites allow liberals to get away with God-talk. It's because the media elites know that liberals aren't particularly serious about their God-talk. Everyone could see Bill Clinton crossing his fingers behind his back when talking about God, just as everyone can see President Obama laughing behind his hand when he mentions religion.
It's those benighted morons of the religious right who truly threaten the media elites. The right's suggestion that God stands behind the vast flow of history scares the living daylights out of the liberal establishment because it threatens their own sense of control. After all, it is not God who made Barack Obama president of the United States -- it is the editorial board of the New York Times. And it was not God who discarded Hillary Clinton like a used tissue -- it was the brilliant men and women of the alphabet networks.
If the media elites are wrong -- if God is indeed a driving factor in history -- then things may not go as the media elites plan. Sarah Palin may indeed meet with success rather than media-ordained failure. The tea parties may indeed become a mainstream movement, rather than the fringe movement the media wishes them to be.
And that scares liberals. Because in the liberal view, no divine presence can be directing things. For the left, the only gods behind history are the gods of economics (see Thomas Friedman and Karl Marx), multiculturalism (see John Dewey), genes (see Richard Dawkins) and environment (see Al Gore and Jared Diamond).
Here's a newsflash for liberals: Incredible as it may seem, Palin's view represents that of the vast majority of mankind. People across the globe agree with Palin that their lives fit into God's grand scheme. When liberals laugh at Palin on this score, they risk laughing at billions. And even liberals should understand that billions can impact the flow of history.
Depending on your view of the rapture,
the “endzone” would be when a good portion of the population
“disappears”.
going to heaven is good, but not enough for me. it’s the first resurrection and coming back here to earth to rule and reign with Him!!! Yes, it’s close and exciting!
It’s increasingly evident that the critical divide in America is not between Rep’s and Dem’s, free-marketers and socialists, but between those who know God and seek to obey him, and those who want to follow only their own human lusts. Republicans like Schmidt who are concerned only with winning (not caring much about why) are little if any better than Demonrats. To country-clubbers like Romney, Schmidt, etc., abortion is just a side issue.
Many true Christians respond like Paul did when he was converted somewhere between the donkey’s back and the ground. IIRC Paul was the last known recorded person to hear and see the light of Jesus Christ. Stephen before being stoned to death saw Christ standing at the right hand of the Father. Since then it is the Holy Spirit that works in us and guides us humbly into a relationship with Jesus Christ and God’s plan and will for our lives. A moment and a day at a time.
Soli Deo Gloria!
I pray for God’s protection over Sarah Palin and her family. I pray that she does the holy will of God and that her relationship with Him grows stronger everyday.
Acts 22:10 And I said, What shall I do, LORD? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.
only the dead in Christ, and true believers that are alive at that time will be taken up, but not all of those will come back to earth. only the overcomers take part in the 1,000 years on earth.
Sounds to me as if the left is not familliar with Christians.
“The right’s suggestion that God stands behind the vast flow of history scares the living daylights out of the liberal establishment because it threatens their own sense of control.”
That’s right. The essence of Liberal/Democrat/Socialist politics is to play God with people’s lives. But what happens when the real God shows up?
It’s increasingly evident that the critical divide in America is not between Rep’s and Dem’s, free-marketers and socialists, but between those who know God and seek to obey him, and those who want to follow only their own human lusts. Republicans like Schmidt who are concerned only with winning (not caring much about why) are little if any better than Demonrats. To country-clubbers like Romney, Schmidt, etc., abortion is just a side issue.
Ahhh..., there you go... and you're exactly right. That divide is also right here on Free Republic, too..., just as you say.
Agree 100%
Christ’s Example of Humility
Philippians 2:1 So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy,
2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.
3 Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.
4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.
5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Lights in the World
12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,
13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without grumbling or questioning,
15 that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world,
16 holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain.
17 Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.
18 Likewise you also should be glad and rejoice with me.
going to heaven is good, but not enough for me. it’s the first resurrection and coming back here to earth to rule and reign with Him!!! Yes, it’s close and exciting!
You're exactly right! Amen on that one.
Going to Heaven is one thing and that's where a lot of Christians even stop and go no further.
BUT, as you say, coming back to this very same earth that we're on right now and ruling and reigning with Jesus, the Messiah of Israel is the thing to look forward to -- that coming 1,000 year reign of the Messiah of Israel...
I'm almost jumping up and down right now in anticipation... :-)
Depending on your view of the rapture...
Yeah..., and without getting into all of it and the details, I can say it in "shorthand" with just this...
Pre-Tribuational, Pre-Millennial, Dispensational...
That pretty well wraps it up in a few words... (the actual details are a lot longer than that and getting into it would take up books and books -- but those three words pretty much wraps it up in a nutshell for me...).
It’s Tribulational, isn’t it?
not sure...i know the meaning of pre trib, but the rest??? Without writing a book, please explain the other two.
I only know what i have read in the Word.
Why are there so many? How do they differ? Does it matter?
by Dr. David R. Reagan
I almost gave up studying Bible prophecy the very first week I started. I was turned off by the vocabulary. I kept running across terms like premillennial, amillennial, and postmillennial. It sounded to me like much of prophecy was written in tongues!
Thankfully, the Holy Spirit encouraged me to stick with the task, and before long I began to realize that the terms really were not all that difficult to understand.
Basically, there are four major end time viewpoints. Or, to put it another way, there are four different interpretations about what the Bible says concerning end time events.
Historic Premillennialism
The oldest viewpoint is called historic premillennialism. It is termed "historic" for two reasons: to differentiate it from modern premillennialism and to indicate that it was the historic position of the early Church.
It is called "premillennial" because it envisions a return of Jesus to earth before (pre) the beginning of the Millennium. The word, millennium, is a combination of two Latin words mille annum which simply means one thousand years.
A diagram of this viewpoint is presented below. It divides the future of the world into four periods: 1) the current Church Age; 2) a seven year period called the Tribulation; 3) a reign of Christ on earth lasting one thousand years (the Millennium); and 4) the Eternal State when the redeemed will dwell forever with God on a new earth.
This view is based on a literal interpretation of what the Bible says will happen in the end times. One of its distinctive features is that it places the Rapture of the Church at the end of the Tribulation.
According to this view, the Church will remain on earth during the Tribulation. At the end of that period, Jesus will appear in the heavens and the Church will be caught up to meet Him in the sky. The saints will be instantly glorified, and then they will immediately return to the earth to reign with Jesus for a thousand years.
The Church Fathers
This is the only view of end time events that existed during the first 300 years of the Church. With one exception, all the Church Fathers who expressed themselves on the topic of prophecy were premillennial until A.D. 400. Justin Martyr, who was born in A.D. 100, went so far in his writings on the subject as to suggest that anyone with a different viewpoint was heretical.
Those today who disagree with this view respond to the near unanimity of the early Church Fathers by saying they were simply wrong in their interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures.
It certainly should be noted that these early church leaders were not prophetic scholars. They wrote very little on prophecy, and what they wrote was sketchy. Their main concern was not prophecy, but the deity of Jesus, the oneness of God, the practical problems of church organization, and survival amidst persecution.
Yet their concept of end time events should not be dismissed out of hand as crude and primitive, for anyone who has studied the prophetic Scriptures will have to admit that the Church Fathers' viewpoint presents a plain sense summary of the Bible's teachings about the end times.
The one exception to the consensus opinion among the early Church Fathers was Origen (185-254 A.D.). Origen's approach to all of Scripture was to spiritualize it. He therefore denied the literal meaning of prophecy. He looked upon its language as highly symbolic and expressive of deep spiritual truths rather than of future historical events.
Although Origen could not accept the premillennial viewpoint, he did not develop an alternative. That task fell to the Church Father named St. Augustine (358-434 A.D.) who ultimately had the greatest impact on the development of church doctrine. He conceived an alternative viewpoint at the end of the fourth century.
Amillennialism
The concept formulated by Augustine is illustrated below. It is called amillennialism. This strange name derives from the fact that in the Greek language a word is negated by putting the letter "a" in front of it. Thus, amillennial literally means "no thousand years."
The term is misleading, however, because most amillennialists do believe in a millennium, but not a literal, earthly one. They argue that the Millennium is the current spiritual reign of Christ over the Church and that it will continue until He returns for His saints. They thus interpret the thousand years as a symbolic period of time.
One appealing aspect of the amillennial view is its simplicity. The Church Age comes to a screaming halt as a result of the Rapture of the Church. There is no Tribulation, no literal earthly Millennium, and no eternity on a new earth. Augustine spiritualized everything, arguing that the kingdom is the Church, the Millennium is the current Church Age, and the new earth is symbolic language for Heaven.
Augustine's view of end time events was adopted by the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. and has remained Catholic dogma to this day. It is also the current majority viewpoint among mainline Protestant denominations. In other words, the amillennial viewpoint is the one that is held today by the vast majority of all those who profess to be Christians.
Postmillennialism
The third view of end time events, called post-millennialism, did not develop until the mid-seventeenth century, long after the Reformation. The Reformation had little impact on prophetic views because the Reformation leaders had their attention riveted on the questions of Biblical authority and justification by faith.
The postmillennial view was a product of the rationalistic revolution in thinking. It was developed in the mid-1600's by a Unitarian minister named Daniel Whitby. It was immediately dubbed "postmillennialism" because it envisioned a return of Jesus after (post) a literal thousand year reign of the Church over all the earth. This view is illustrated below.
Postmillennialism spread quickly within the Protestant world, probably for two reasons. First, it gave Protestants an opportunity to differ from the Catholic position. More importantly, it was a theological expression of the prevailing rationalistic philosophy of the age, a philosophy that boldly proclaimed the ability of mankind to build the kingdom of heaven on earth.
The postmillennial view holds that the Church Age will gradually evolve into a "golden age" when the Church will rule over all the world. This will be accomplished through the Christianization of the nations.
To its credit, it can be said that this viewpoint served as a mighty stimulus to missionary efforts during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Missionaries were seized with the vision of speeding up the return of the Lord by preaching the gospel to all the world.
A Sudden Death
By 1900 nearly all segments of Protestant Christianity had adopted the postmillennial viewpoint. But the view was to be quickly dropped.
Postmillennialism died almost overnight with the outbreak of the First World War. The reason, of course, is that this great war undermined one of the fundamental assumptions of the postmillennial viewpoint the assumption of the inevitability of progress. This had always been a fatal flaw in the postmillennial concept, due mainly to its birth in rationalistic humanism. Its visions of the perfectibility of man and the redemption of society were destroyed by the atrocities of the war.
Another fatal flaw of the postmillennial viewpoint was its lack of a consistent Biblical base. To expound the view, it was necessary to literalize some prophecies (those concerning the Millennium) while at the same time spiritualizing other prophecies (the personal presence of the Lord during the Millennium). Also, it was necessary to ignore or explain away the many prophecies in the Bible that clearly state that society is going to get worse rather than better as the time approaches for the Lord's return (Matthew 24:4-24 and 2 Timothy 3:1-5).
The sudden death of postmillennialism left a prophetic vacuum among Protestant groups. Since the postmillennial view was based to a large extent upon a spiritualizing approach to Scripture, most Protestant groups returned to the spiritualized amillennial viewpoint they had abandoned in the 1700's.
However, a new choice of prophetic viewpoint presented itself on the American scene about this same time, and some of the more fundamentalist Protestant groups opted for it. This view was technically called "dispensational premillennialism" because it originated with a group who had been nicknamed "Dispensationalists." I call it the modern premillennial viewpoint.
Modern Premillennialism
The modern premillennial viewpoint crystallized in the early 1800's among a group in England known as the Plymouth Brethren. The view is illustrated below.
As can be readily seen, this viewpoint revives the historic premillennial view except for its concept of the Rapture of the Church. The Plymouth Brethren envisioned two future comings of Jesus, one for His Church and one with His Church. Their concept of the Rapture has since come to be known as the "pre-Tribulation Rapture."
This viewpoint has been attacked as being "too new to be true." But its advocates are quick to point out that the Bible teaches the principle of "progressive illumination" regarding prophecy (Daniel 12:4 and Jeremiah 30:24). What they mean by this is that the Bible itself indicates that end time prophecy will be better understood as the time nears for its fulfillment.
Comparisons
Looking back over these four views of the end times, we can see some significant differences. But let's not overlook the similarities.
1. All agree that Jesus is coming back for His saints.
2. All agree that the redeemed will spend eternity in the presence of God.
These two points of agreement are far more important than the many points of disagreement.
Still, the areas of disagreement are significant. Two of the views (the amillennial and postmillennial) deny that Jesus will ever manifest His glory before the nations in a world wide reign of peace, justice and righteousness. The postmillennial view also denies the soon coming of the Lord, for according to this view, the Lord cannot return until His Church has ruled over the world for a thousand years.
The key to the differences is the approach to Scripture. If you tend to spiritualize Scripture, you will end up with an amillennial or postmillennial viewpoint. If you tend to accept Scripture for its plain sense meaning, you will have a premillennial viewpoint.
A Plea
I urge you to accept the plain sense meaning of Scripture. Don't play games with God's Word by spiritualizing it. When you do so, you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean, but in the process you will lose the true meaning that God intended.
Remember, the First Coming prophecies meant what they said. That should be our guide for interpreting the prophecies of the Second Coming.
Post #35 outlines it a bit more in a comprehensive manner and explains other viewpoints, too...
the rapture has confused most. I have given a lot of study and prayer to understand this subject. Not until i looked at the issue through the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment did it all fit so nicely.
It’s obvious you have spent time on the subject. And it does matter to know what is really going to happen.
Heb 6:1-2
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation....(of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.)
oh my, thanks. will look it over.
Nice. Easy to understand. Drum rollll. I’m definetely with the Historic Premillennialism view. For years I believed the pre trib teaching and was angry when it was being challenged by what i read in the Word. I have settled on it now, and find comfort in it.
First of all, I have a great deal of respect for Sarah Palin’s religious faith, she is a devout Christian, she lives her faith, and I would feel very comfortable sharing a church pew with her. No worries at all.
What this God-mocking-and-ridiculing world does not understand is that when Christians, in their walk with God, seek that ‘peace that passeth all understanding’, it is a rare event when they are not blessed WITH that peace, the kind of peace that lets you remain calm and tranquil when the world around you is spinning madly out of control.
Sarah Palin has placed herself into God’s Hands, that much is sure. I may not (and do not) agree with each and every policy position that she has, I do not approve or condone everything that her political action committee has done, but those are not issues that are even close to being as important as her moral character, and based upon what I have witnessed both in the printed word and in video, I believe she certainly possesses the kind of moral character I would want to find in a person I would trust with the lives of my loved ones, and on that basis, I certainly would trust her more than the usurper, pretender and sociopath that is stinkin’ up the White House right now.
I’m still a fair distance away from being ready to sign on to a Palin presidential candidacy (and it would of course help a great deal if she actually decides to run, lol) but I’m not losing any sleep over the prospect of her one day speaking those words “I, Sarah Palin, do solemnly swear...”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.