50 Reasons Why We Are Living In The End Times: Part 1

The Bible says we cannot know the time of the Lord's return (Matthew 25:13). But the Scriptures make it equally clear that we can know the season of the Lord's return (1 Thessalonians 5:2-6):

This passage asserts that Jesus is coming like "a thief in the night." But then it proceeds to make it clear that this will be true only for the pagan world and not for believers. His return should be no surprise to those who know Him and His Word, for they have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to give them understanding of the nature of the times.

Furthermore, the Scriptures give us signs to watch for — signs that will signal that Jesus is ready to return. The writer of the Hebrew letter referred to these signs when he proclaimed that believers should encourage one another when they see the day of judgment drawing near (Hebrews 10:25-27). Jesus also referred to the end time signs in His Olivet Discourse, given during the last week of His life (Matthew 24 and Luke 21). Speaking of a whole series of signs which He had given to His disciples, He said, "When you see all these things, recognize that He [the Son of Man — that is, Jesus] is near, right at the door" (Matthew 24:33).

Every time I think of "Signs of the Times," I am reminded of a great man of God named Elbert Peak. I had the privilege of participating with him in a Bible prophecy conference held in Orlando, Florida in the early 1990's. Mr. Peak was about 80 years old at the time.

He had been assigned the topic, "The Signs of the Times." He began his presentation by observing, "Sixty years ago when I first started preaching, you had to scratch around like a chicken to find one sign of the Lord's soon return."

He paused for a moment, and then added, "But today there are so many signs I'm no longer looking for them. Instead, I'm listening for a sound — the sound of a trumpet!"

One hundred years ago in 1907 there was not one single, tangible, measurable sign that indicated we were living in the season of the Lord's return. The first to appear was the Balfour Declaration which was issued by the British government on November 2, 1917.

This Declaration was prompted by the fact that during World War I the Turks sided with the Germans. Thus, when Germany lost the war, so did the Turks, and the victorious Allies decided to divide up both the German and Turkish empires.

The Turkish territories, called the Ottoman Empire, contained the ancient homeland of the Jewish people — an area the Romans had named Palestine after the last Jewish revolt in 132-135 AD.

In 1917 Palestine included all of modern day Israel and Jordan. In the scheme the Allies concocted for dividing up the German and Turkish territories, Britain was allotted Palestine, and this is what prompted the Balfour Declaration. In that document, Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, declared that it was the intention of the British government to establish in Palestine "a national home for the Jewish people."

The leading Evangelical in England at the time was F. B. Meyer. He immediately recognized the prophetic significance of the Declaration, for he was well aware that the Scriptures prophesy that the Jewish people will be regathered to their homeland in unbelief right before the return of the Messiah (Isaiah 11:11-12).

Meyer sent out a letter to the Evangelical leaders of England asking them to gather in London in December to discuss the prophetic implications of the Balfour Declaration. In that letter, he stated, "The signs of the times point toward the close of the time of the Gentiles... and the return of Jesus can be expected any moment."

Before Meyer's meeting could be convened, another momentous event occurred. On December 11, 1917 General Edmund Allenby liberated the city of Jerusalem from 400 years of Turkish rule.

There is no doubt that these events in 1917 marked the beginning of the end times because they led to the worldwide regathering of the Jewish people to their homeland and the reestablishment of their state.

Since the time of the Balfour Declaration, we have witnessed throughout the 20th Century the appearance of sign after sign pointing to the Lord's soon return. There are so many of these signs today, in fact, that one would have to be either biblically illiterate or spiritually blind not to realize that we are living on borrowed time.

I have personally been searching the Bible for years in an effort to identify all the signs, and it has not been an easy task to get a hold on them. That's because there are so many of them, both in the Old and New Testaments.

I have found that the best way to deal with them is to put them in categories, and in doing that, I have come up with six categories of end time signs. We will explore these catetories beginning in Part 2 of this series.

***Which is why I didn’t; I pointed out that not only are the Oneness Pentecostals not Trinitarian, many others are as well.

While the basis of the original remark is true, it is quite reasonable to say that among Pentecostal structures (as much as such can be measured), the great majority of modalist doctrines spring from the Oneness branch, or are forks thereof.***

Or have been influenced by them. Yet modalism is frequent enough in the Christian mainstream. http://home.sprynet.com/~eagreen/monarch.html says that:

“Sabellius taught the strict unity of the godhead: ‘one Person, three names.’ God is ‘hyiopator,’ Son-Father. The different names, Father, Son, and Spirit, merely describe different forms of revelation; the Son revealed the Father as a ray reveals the sun. Now the Son has returned to heaven, and God reveals himself as the Holy Spirit. The concept that the Trinity subsists in different Persons is lost. Sabellius’ view saw the existence of the Son as confined to his earthly work. Consequently he cannot continue to be ‘an advocate with the Father’ (1 John 2:1) or be said to ‘live forever to make intercession’ (Heb. 7:25).

SUMMARY OF MONARCHIANISM

Monarchianism represents an early movement intended to preserve the bible teaching of the Unity, or Oneness of God, against the duality or plurality of gods proposed by gnostics. Monarchianism is represented by two divergent views, adoptionism and modalism. While each upholds the Unity of God both err with respect the doctrine of the Trinity; adoptionism by sacrificing the deity of Christ, modalism by not recognizing Christ as a Person distinct from the Father. Both will frequently reappear in history; adoptionism recurs when a rationalistic, anti-miraculous interpretation of Scripture comes into fashion; modalism recurs as a failure to teach the doctrine of the Trinity clearly. Harold Brown observes:
“An implicit or naive modalism is sometimes found in modern fundamentalist circles that insist on the deity of Christ but are unwilling to make the theological effort to formulate a clear doctrine of the Trinity.” [HERESIES; pg. 99]

***Modalism is common amongst all Protestant denominations, and not just the Pentecostals. That is why I said that either a large minority or a small majority do not hold the Christian beliefs on the Trinity. Ask around and you may be surprised even amongst your peers.

It was my impression, from your comments, that the observation was being settled against Pentecostals specifically, or at least by insinuation. If that is not the case, then I am glad you have reiterated your position.

However, I still believe that the case cannot be made. Far and away, all of Protestantism (as it is loosely defined) is trinitarian.***

Browsing through the various denominational websites, the Trinity is rarely defined apart from the Creeds or the occasional Catholic definition (usually used without reference to Catholicism :) ).

Modalism is probably the most common unknown heresy today. Just for your own experience, read up on modalism and quietly and casually ask your peers about the Trinity. I’d be interested to know a couple of weeks from now, with a sizeable sample, how many of them wandered into modalist territory.

***Christianity is a belief set, not knowledge. Therefore there is no PROOF. There is the definition of Christianity set by the Church. If you deviate from that, it is by definition, non Christian.

What a pompous, ill-conceived idea.***

Pompous? No. Ill conceived? It is part of the responsibility of the Church and is extensively documented going right back to the Apostles and the Apostolic Fathers.

***The individual does not have the authority to do so and still call it Christian.

It is not an “individual”. It is not even a single chapel. It is a whole fork... some 24 million adherents, and that is just in the Pentecostal Oneness movement.***

It matters not a whit about the cutlery. :) The authority is placed upon the Consensus Patrum, which, through the Ecumenical Councils beginning in the second century, validated its doctrinal developments and growing understanding of God and the Faith.

***No, to not define Christianity is what breeds confusion.

I will agree, but only partially. Christianity is best defined by what we all agree upon... If one thoughtfully considers our factional arguments, one will find they never center on the Gospel... We ALL know the truth... It is the doctrines of men, on ALL sides, which keep us apart... What we DON’T KNOW, but think we know, is what we argue over.***

We don’t all agree on anything. Simon Magus and the Gnostics; and the Judaizers were the first major threats against the Church. The Creeds were developed for the people to have a formula that they could recite in short form that was a summary of the Faith. It was not what people think (people in this country thought that Obama was the One last election; the overwhelming majority of Renaissance thinkers believed in a flat earth) that matters, but what is deemed to be right.

***Catholicism is not a denomination. It is Christianity; everything else is a man made copy or imitation. And the Catechism of the Church is very explicit. There is no deviation permitted in the doctrine of the Faith.

Nonsense. ***

It is not nonsense. The Catechism is clear.

***Well, which is it? Quiet? Or rock da’ house? I have been to a handful of Pentecostal services which got quite out of hand and were less worship than mob emotion.

It is BOTH. And emotion does play a part. I cannot imagine being plugged into the Great Creator of all things without it being an emotional experience! But that is not to say that there are not a great many impersonators, as there are in any aspect of the Body. To determine the authentic experience, one must first understand the Spirit in one’s self, I think.***

That is a tall order. How does one go about that understanding without the possibility of satan and not the Holy Spirit being the leader if one has a loose grasp of Christian faith?

***“Who had him killed?”

After being convicted of heresy by the church, he was defrocked and turned over to civil authorities in the Low Countries, who in turn were under Charles V.

It was his heresy against the Catholic Church that resulted in his death. The English started pursuing him because of his opposition to Henry’s divorce & his translating, but Henry’s new wife SUPPORTED Tyndale, so the main force for pursuit seems to have been Thomas More - who hated Tyndale for translating. And in the end, Thomas More died before Tyndale, for refusing to support Henry’s marriage, but Tyndale was still caught and and charged with heresy...and Queen Anne’s failure to give birth to a boy meant Henry soon turned against her. And in any case, Henry VIII probably couldn’t have saved Tyndale, since he was caught in a Catholic area under Charles V...who didn’t like Henry.***

True enough. Let’s throw in Cromwell, a Catholic hater, into the mix, though. And let us not forget that it was actually a Henry Tudor spy that got Tyndale arrested. Thomas More died before Tyndale? You may mean executed by Henry. :)

***Also, from what I read, it wasn’t his translating, but his frequent writings on salvation by faith.

Surely you are not denying that the Catholic Church convicted many of heresy, or that the penalty was death?***

Tyndale hacked off people on all sides; the Church was still in the business of attempting to save peoples’ souls by forcing confession from them before they died, yes.

***Baptists were killed in both. I read somewhere that Baptists, tired of being killed by both sides, once took over a town...and killed non-Baptists. They were overcome, and other Baptists thought their example proved why church and state should be separate.***

Those who fight and run away shall live to fight another day? :)

***Our ancestors in faith were excellent examples of courage, but not so good on mercy...***

Many of them. Many of them were great martyrs. St. Jean de Brebeuf is a case in point. Others were great servants of the people - St. Damien in Hawaii, and Mother Teresa in Calcutta, for instance.

***Personal belief may or may not coincide with Christianity.

Bricks and mortar may or may not coincide with Christianity. ***

By bricks and mortar, I thought that you were referring to the Church. The Church defines Christianity. Therefore it is entirely coincindent.

***Firstly, now do you know that they are Christians?

It is the Spirit who sanctions.***

That is not an answer.

***Secondly, groups such as the Oneness Pentecostals claim to be Christians yet clearly are not.

According to you. It is the Spirit who sanctions. While I find errors in their doctrine, I find more error in Catholicism, and even Calvinism (my own historical roots).

The Spirit moves upon the Oneness churches. They see the gifts of the Spirit in their churches regularly. That means more to me than any doctrinal error does.***

Not to me. That is the point. This is a claim of innate knowledge, which is Gnostic. And not Christian, given the definitions of the heresy of Gnosticism.

***Thirdly, the Church is the only organization authorized to compile doctrine and to teach.

Agreed. But then one must determine the identity of the Church.***

Already done. Scripture, and the Apostolic and Apostolic Father writings are clear.

*** will show you Scripture that sanctions the Church.

Sure. and I will show you Scripture that shows that the Spiritual gifts show the Presence in the Church (IOW prove the Church). Anyone can hang up a sign and throw up some pews...***

And many do. One must go to Scripture, which points to the Apostles, then the Apostolic Fathers for correct identification.

***Where is your personal sanction? Can you photocopy it and post an image on this thread pleasea?

Why?***

You claimed that you have been personally sanctioned by the Holy Spirit. What is the manner of that sanction? How can you show it?

***I don’t have a religion. The Trinitarian doctrine took hundreds of years to formulate and understand. It is difficult; so very difficult that a large portion of Protestants fail in that understanding even today.

It’s a pity the Apostle Paul wasn’t around when your church ‘formulated’ the doctrine of the Trinity...I’ll bet he would have liked to have known what it was all about...***

I think that he would. For instance, Paul never referred to Jesus as divine. Not once in his writings. Also, he did not refer to the Holy Spirit. For example, we have 1 Timothy 5:
21
I charge you before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels to keep these rules without prejudice, doing nothing out of favoritism.

Did Paul not know about the Holy Spirit? And what about subordinationism? Like the Synoptics, God the Father is often portrayed as superior to Jesus. Galatians 4:
4
But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman,

***So Jesus tells the Apostles that He and the Father are one...And they say, huh?, We don’t get it...Maybe in a few hundred years someone will figure it out...***

That’s the point. They didn’t get it. Paul wrote first and his Christology is certainly not explicit of even Christ’s divinity, much less addressing the Holy Spirit. The Synoptics, written later, get further into it and John, written last, gets more explicit; yet it took several hundred years and several hundred excommunications to actually write down and define what the Trinity actually is.

And many or possibly most self described Christians still don’t get it.

“For instance, Paul...did not refer to the Holy Spirit...Did Paul not know about the Holy Spirit?”

Time to break out your Bible, blow off the dust and delve in!

A partial list:

” 9You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.” - Romans 8

“16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.” - same

Rom 1:4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Rom 5:5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

1Cr 2:10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God.

1Cr 2:11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.

1Cr 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,

1Cr 12:3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.

“Paul wrote first and his Christology is certainly not explicit of even Christ’s divinity, much less addressing the Holy Spirit.”

From a less dusty copy, in about 30 seconds of looking:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. - col 1

8See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.

1Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy,

To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers, 3remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. 4For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, 5because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction.

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.