Bad bad Puddy Cat....always trying to gobble up the dispensationalists!
Posted on 02/24/2009 10:10:12 AM PST by topcat54
Calvary Chapel of Chino California held “ The Southern California Prophecy Conference” last week (Feb. 20–22, 2009). I wonder if those who came to hear speakers like Tim LaHaye, Mark Hitchcock, Paul McGuire, David Hocking, David Reagan, and Ed Hindson were aware that Chuck Smith, the founder of the Calvary Chapel network of churches, made some very definite predictions about when the “rapture” was going to take place.
While cleaning up my office, I came across a cassette tape of a sermon Chuck Smith preached on December 31, 1979. He told his very accepting audience on that day that the rapture would take place in 1981. The former Soviet Republic going into Afghanistan in August of 1978 was the prelude to what Smith considered to be a full-force invasion of the Middle East. It would not be long before “Russia” would invade Israel, Smith told his audience. All of this was said to have been “predicted” by Ezekiel 2600 years ago.
Smith went on to claim in his end-of-the-year message of 30 years ago that because of ozone depletion Revelation 16:8 would be fulfilled during the soon-coming Great Tribulation: “And the fourth angel poured out his bowl upon the sun; and it was given to it to scorch men with fire.” According to Smith, Halley’s Comet would pass near the earth in 1986 and would wreck atmospheric havoc for those left behind as debris from its million-mile tail pummeled the earth. Halley’s Comet did appear in 1986 with no damage done to our planet. (A similar prelude to the end had been predicted based on the so-called Jupiter Effect.[1]) ...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanvision.org ...
can’t
stop
laughing
Bad bad Puddy Cat....always trying to gobble up the dispensationalists!
THANKS.
Then one of the objectives has been reached!
LOL.
Though I don’t think God is very amused with the idea that He won’t keep His promises to the blood children/Nation of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Well, by that standard, was this thread an open invitation for your comments?
I think it's called fair game.
I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: (2 Tim. 4:1)
Judgment day is after the thousand years.
What'd you do with the preceeding part of the chapter??? The chapter doesn't start at verse 11...
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Someone's going to reign with Jesus for a thousand years...Apparently it won't be you...
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
I'll be taking part in the first ressurection...
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Hey, there I am...I see me...I won't be having any part of that judgement you'll be at...
Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
These guys will be judged according to their works...That ain't me...Going to be millions of Catholics at this judgement as well...Good luck to ya...
My judgement takes place a thousand years before this:
2Co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
My bad works will be burned up and that fire burning those works will save me...
1Co 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.
You don't get rewarded for being bad...I may get a few rewards...I may get none...But I'll be there nonetheless...
Oh, and BTW, Jesus Christ appeared numerous times in the Ot...And His appearing takes place more times in the NT that you have figured out...
Have learned on FR that what I thought was very basic OBVIOUS Scripture . . . some folks would consider otherwise.
The absurd notion that most of the END TIMES prophecies were fulfilled in 70AD etc. is just mind bogglingly UNBIBLICAL-TO-THE-MAX.
It's hard for me to conceive that there are even folks who dare to think of themselves as "Christians" who would dare to imagine that God would fail to fulfill even the tiniest of His promises to Israel literally.
Am reading an interesting book:
FROM IRAQ TO ARMAGEDDON: The Final Showdown Approaches
by Keith Intrater.
He notes . . . ---------------------------------------------
If their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? "Most Jewish people, because of their rejection of Yeshua, have been like branches cut off of their own tree. The gentile church has been like branches grafted into the tree of faith (see Rom 11:16-22). However, we are to believe that the Jewis people will return and be grafted into the faith of their own Messiah--the most spiritually "natural thing" for them to do." In the meantime, we have a paradoxical position toward the Jewish people who have not yet eceived the Lord. It is part negative and part positive.
If their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!
They also, if they do not continue in unbelief will be grafted in, for God is ABLE to graft them in again. [Qx emphasis]
And so ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED. [QX emphasis]
For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this MYSTERY, lest you should be WISE IN YOUR OWN OPINIONS, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullnes of the Gentiles has come in. And so . . .
[Qx emphasis]
Concerning the gospel they are enemies FOR YOUR SAKE, but concerning the election they are BELOVED for THE SAKE OF THE FATHERS.
. . . The third group is the Messianic Jews, those who are Israeli citizens, Jewish and believers in Yeshua. This group currently numbers around seven housand. It is this group that I am primarily identified with. I believe they have a key role to play in the Kingdom of God. . . . p92 We know that Paul's answer tot he question whether the prophetic purposes of Israel have been made void is "CERTAINLY NOT! (Se Rm 11:1). But how could the destiny of Israel not be canceled, considering the rejection of the Messiah and the punishment from God? Here Paul's answer is also clear: The Remant. Throughout history there was always a minority of true believers within the greater nation of Israel. Despite the sins of the nation, that believing remnant carried within it (in seed form) THE DIVINE DESTINY OF THE NATION. Every nation, in fact, has a propheticcalling from God.That calling is not seen in the overall population of the nation, but in the community of true believers found within the nation. The prophetic calling of the United States is not seen in the motion pictures from Holywood. That of South Africa is not seen in the racial problems; of Germany, not in Nazism; of Russia, not in communism, etc. The destiny of a nation and its covenant with God are found within the remnant of believers within the nation. Th same is true in Israel. The source of its destiny is not in Tel Aviv discos, nor political parties, nor rabbinic councils. It is in Yeshua, and in the community of citizens that believe in Him. If one wants to understad the destiny of Israel, he must look not to the larer unbelieving population of Israel, but to the core community of believers within the nation. Gentile Christians become confused by not making this distinction. Either they reject God's purposes for Israel altogether, or they try to make something overly spiritual of Israel's pioneers and politicians. . . . The way tohave a balanced theology concerning israel and its destiny is to consider the Messianic jewish community within Israel. Paul wrote [p93] that the way to understand God's plan for Israel was TO COMPARE THE FAITHFUL REMNANT IN THE TIME OF ELIJAH TO THE MESSIANIC JEWISH COMMUNITY OF HIS DAY. In Elijah's time, in Paul's time, and EVEN SO AT THIS PRESENT TIME--there was a remnant and there still is a remnant. AND HOW MANY ARE IN THAT REMNANT? SEVEN THOUSAND. In the time of Elijah, there was a remnant of seven thousand believers within Israel who carried with them the destiny of the nation. Today there is also a remnant within Israel numbering about seven thousand. This remnant is part of bringing us to a new 'age of Elijah' in our generation. God had to point out to Elijah the importance of the seve thousand faithful ones. The revelation of the remnant gave him hope, faith, and a better understanding of God's purpose. I believe God is trying to point out the importance of the Messianic remnant within Israel today as well. p95 The prophetic call for the community of faith to recognize the place of Israel is not a racist preference for the Jewish people, bu rather a SUBMISSION TO THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD. ,FONT COLOR=NAVY> It is a recognition of Jerusalem as the seat of HIS earthly authority and a recognition of Yeshua as King of the Jews.
God has not cast away His people whom He oreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Eliljah . . .
what does the divine response say to him? 'I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.'
Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
It is even somewhat conceivable that his Biblical insights COULD be a path or some fair-minded REPLACEMENTARIAN Calvinsts to acquire a BIBLICAL understanding of prophecy in our era. . . . perhaps even in the nick of time, at the rate Biblical prophecy is being increasingly fulfilled.
END TIMES PING LIST PING TO POST #
127
RE Israel and the remnant of believers in Israel as a major key in Biblical prophecy fulfillment.
INDEED.
Thankfully, only with illogical UNBiblical absurdities!
What a wonderfully apt cartoon!
ROTFLOL.
What a confirmation!
It’s been pretty easy to construe, to perceive REPLACEMENTARIAN CALVINISTS as barking chihuahuas about END TIMES PROPHECIES.
“baptist calvinist” - good term, but it’s not exact enough. My current church would claim it as their own, as they are amillenial and preterist, yet ‘baptist’.
A longer term but maybe better is “dispensational sovereignist”, which is how I’d describe my views.
Hmmmmmm
I think I’ll just tiptoe quietly away from those machinations.
The Calvinist glasses don’t work as well as the “Amillennial Shades”, which are needed to read that great new book called “The Preterist Code”.
Tom Hanks is memorizing the script right now.
A “dispensational sovereignist” is quite different from an “Experimental Predestinarian”, as well.
...with apologies to Jody Dillow’s book “The Reign of the Servant Kings”.
Well that a confusing distinction, even for a Baptist. :-)
Believe it or not, even those who subscribe to the misnamed “replacement theology” (aka covenant theology, so I guess that’s me) are looking for the “trumpet blast” signaling Christ’s Second Coming.
Many Reformed Baptists also accept covenant theology over and against dispensationalism.
Oh dear!
Now you didn't learn that from scripture...You learned that from someone who doesn't like what the scripture says in plain language...
The 'thief in the night' is swift destruction, not the 'rapture' of believers. For a thorough study as to why it does mean that, go here. Granted, I did the study, but I promise... it's thorough.
Well, I gave your man, Herman Utics a fair shot...Here's one of the things he said...
That is, that on the Day of the Lord Christ will "steal away" the righteous before or during a period of tribulation and leave the unrighteous behind to endure the tribulation; or all will experience the tribulation, the righteous will be "stolen away" immediately afterwards, leaving the unrighteous to live during the post-tribulation reign of the anti-christ.
Now this is where your buddy Herman fails...Jesus doesn't come to steal anyone from anywhere...Jesus is NOT a thief...He shows up at a time when He's not expected, like a thief would...
But He doesn't show up as a thief to His flock of sheep...That's the point of the whole passage...
1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
Jesus tells us what's going to happen...
1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
And we know the approximate time when Jesus will show up...And He won't be coming as a thief because we're watching for Him...
1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
That's certainly what it will appear like to those that are 'left behind'...That's because they won't see Jesus...He doesn't step foot on earth...We go 'up' and meet Him in the air...They're going to think we got stolen, by someone, or something...
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
You guys figure a thief will come rolling in with the lights flashing and the horn blasting, screaming out the car window as he approaches???
Naw, but thanks anyway...I'll skip Herman Utics and trying to figure out what the scripture means...I'll just read it and believe what it says instead...
“Experimental Predestinarian
Goodness.
That sounds like Alice and the Red Queen loose in the rabbit hole’s chemistry lab!
TaraP doesn’t mind and that’s all that matters.
“Future Grace by John Piper
Written by Gary Gilley
Piper likes to shock. He makes statements, and creates phrases (e.g. Christian hedonism) that unravels his readers. His goal is to get our attention and provide a basis for changing the way we think. It works, but it also confuses. While I appreciate much of what Piper says, I have found that his readers interpret him in many ways. This is always true to some degree – we all put or own spin on what we read and hear, but Piper’s writings seem to lend themselves to this problem more than most. Why? Because he says things so many different ways. About the time you think you know what he is saying he addresses an issue from a different direction and leaves you scratching your head. Or he attacks a time-honored position of Bible teachers, replaces it with his own, then turns around later and softens his blows – only to attack afresh in a future chapter. Such tactics are common place in Future Grace.
The book opens with a full-fledged assault on living the Christian life motivated by gratitude (he calls it the “debtor’s ethic”). This is unfortunate, surely there are bigger demons to exorcise from the Christian community (later, he will admit that gratitude is not all bad, as long as it is not taken too far, see pp. 48,49 and chapter 7). He replaces gratitude with “living by faith in future grace.” Surely no one questions that the Christian life is lived by faith, but why he had to behead the straw man of gratitude to prove this point escapes me. Faith and gratitude are not enemies, they are friends. Both should be embraced.
It is impossible to miss Piper’s primary point – living faith in future grace. He repeats this phrase hundreds of times throughout the book, as often as ten to fourteen times on a given page. He repeats it at every opportunity, at every turn. I felt like the people of Israel who had eaten so much manna that it was making them sick. But like the people of Israel, I could live with this. My struggles run deeper.
I believe Piper’s mistake began with the title. He attempts to reduce the whole Christian life down to one component, “future grace.” This is an unfortunate and narrow-minded deduction. Once this premise is established he then attempts (forces) to reconcile everything else in Scripture around this thesis. It cannot be done and the result is a distortion of the Christian life.
Rather than writing about the privilege of placing our faith in God as one of the many important elements of living for Him (remember that Paul even spoke of faith, hope and love, and the greatest was love), Piper becomes too narrow and actually makes claims for faith that cannot be substantiated. Even the phrase “faith in future grace” is fraught with problems. Is all of the Christian life a faith in future grace? Is there no looking back with gratitude to God’s faithfulness (Piper, remember, calls this the debtor’s ethic). What about the present? Is God doing nothing now? Is everything in the future? When the future comes will it not be the present, a present in which, according to Piper, we will then be looking to the future? And do we really place our faith in future grace or do we place our faith in the God who gives grace in all tenses (past, present and future)? Undoubted, our author would agree that our faith is in God, not in “grace,” but he seldom says so. Instead, it is “faith in future grace.” This troubles me for it is not unlike the theology of the Word of Faith movement that believes faith to be a force that can be controlled and manipulated through the right methods. Piper would surely deny this, but he comes dangerously close to such a view in Future Grace (see chapters 6,8,12). Not only does he use confusing terminology but he often speaks of unleashing power through faith (see chapter 12 especially pp.161,162 for one example, also p.185).
Piper has good chapters on anxiety (3), grace (5) and patience (13). But he places the Christian under the Law (chapters 12,19) and his view of the gospel left me with grave concerns. In chapter 15 he presents a very confusing gospel message. He says nothing about repentance of sin but adds “delight” in God as a prerequisite for conversion. He also confuses, I believe, salvation with sanctification. Piper states, “I say that saving faith must ‘include’ delight. Delight in the glory of God is not the whole of what faith is. But I think that without it, faith is dead” (p.203). So now the poor sinner must not only trust God but must delight in him before he can be converted. Incredible!! In addition, our eternal salvation, according to Piper, is dependent upon how well we live as Christians. “Jesus said, if you don’t fight lust, you won’t go to heaven. . . . If we don’t fight lust we lose our soul. . . . Faith delivers from hell, and the faith that delivers from hell delivers from lust. . . . Faith alone is necessary for justification, but the purity that confirms faith’s reality is also necessary for final salvation” (pp. 332,333). Wow, this certainly sounds likes works to me.
Future Grace has some excellent material but it is so entwined with questionable statements and theology that it is not worth the struggle to filter through it. Additionally, if swallowed without discernment this volume could do great damage.”
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.