| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/27/2009 12:40:43 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior. |
Posted on 07/25/2009 2:40:04 AM PDT by Quix
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):
"You yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night... But you brethren, are not in darkness, that the day should overtake you like a thief; for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night or darkness; so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober."
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).
A Personal Experience
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!"
The First Sign
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 1917
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.
Amen. May God open their eyes to the truth so they can know there is a lie in their right hand (Isaiah 44.)
THE CALVINISM DEBATE Part 1 of 2
3. CALVINISM’S DOCTRINES ARE CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN TEACHING OF GOD’S WORD.
THE BIBLE VS. THE CALVINIST DOCTRINE THAT FAITH IS A WORK
Calvinism says that grace means man cannot do anything, cannot even believe, because otherwise grace would not be grace and the sinner would have something to boast of.
4. CALVINISM INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE BY THEOLOGY RATHER THAN BY CONTEXT.
Its doctrines are not supported by the plain language of Scripture but are read into the Scripture. In Bible interpretation, the principle rule is to interpret according to the plain language of the text and according to the context.
5. CALVINISM MISSTATES WHAT NON-CALVINISTS BELIEVE.
There are many strawman arguments that the Calvinist erects and defeats, but by defeating them he has only defeated a figment of his own imagination.
Just out of curiosity, have you recently abandoned Calvinism to become a devotee of the prophet-deity J-d (he has the “mind of Christ”)? Are you among the “millions” who have seen UFOs?
Catholic art does not have a canon. An artist is free to make any image he can, from cheaply sentimental to blasphemous. Some of it finds its way into churches. That is very unfortunate, but for that reason you cannot point out to any particular piece of art, vaguely suggestive of Catholicism, and project a Catholic doctrine from it.
Mary with infant Jesus on the cross with adult Jesus is something quite unique. There are many traditional ways to depict the intimacy that exists between Jesus and His mother but this is not one of them. What we have here is one, unique case of artistic license. I have seen much worse.
Were it depicting Mary as actually physically crucified, -- attached to the cross with nails or ropes like Jesus is,-- I would have a serious problem with this cross. As it is, with Mary floating in the air, it simply conveys the perfectly Catholic idea that Mary -- and in fact all faithful Christians -- participate in the suffering of Christ.
[I, St. Paul] rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church. (Colossians 1:24)
HORRIFIC.
And they dare to accuse anyone else of blasphemy!
Mind boggling.
INDEED.
And the rabidly duplicitous clique . . .
are soooooooooooo gifted at parsing words and phrases and nuances . . . when it suits them . . .
and deploring such when it suits them.
Takes double-mindedness to a whole new much lower level of the hellish depths of hideousness.
‘That wording . . . not there.’
. . . brazenly ignoring equal wording.
As though no one else would be bright enough to notice!
Sheesh.
INDEED.
You posted: “Rome has not essentially changed. Rome declared that what it said at the time of the Reformation was infallible and could not change. Declared it to be irreformible truth. Rome has not changed and precious truths of God’s word are still worth upholding even at the cost of unity even at the cost of being considered “troublemakers” in the religious world.”
As a Catholic, I find that statement to be completely wonderful and comforting. The Protestant admission that Rome has not changed is the most amazing praise. We are, as Christ promised, still here, still led by the Holy Spirit, still holding fast to the teaching and tradition taught by the Apostles, and still being called “troublemakers.” This happy Catholic finds that exhilarating.
The world has changed. Men have fallen away and started their own churches. But the Catholic Church is virtually the same as it was in the days of the Apostles. The gates of Hell, and Hell’s helpers, have not prevailed against it. Christ started it, prayed for it, and protects and guides it. It is forever. Thank you, Jesus! I am so grateful to be a Catholic Christian.
Another
GROSSLY UNFITTING, GROSSLY UNTRUE
bearing false witness.
Where in the Rosary is this
BEARING FALSE WITNESS RITUAL included?
Given it’s frequency in appearing above Roman Catholic/Vatican Rep names, it MUST be a thoroughly incorporated ritual.
Or is there a collection of lies that the magicsterical exhorts the faithful to spin out, fling out randomly to Prottys just as a matter of course in daily life?
Sorry, but Catholic paintings traditionally depict Mary at the foot of the cross, as she is described in the Bible.
Try to keep up, a QUESTION cannot be false witness or untrue, it is simply a QUESTION.
It is admirable that you can be somewhat candid in putting the best face on it.
Thanks.
NOPE.
Holy Spirit clearly left the cathedrals long ago.
Thankfully, He has returned a bit here and there with some of the Charismatic folks earnestly WORSHIPING GOD AND GOD ALONE IN SPIRIT AND IN TRUTH.
IIRC,
The same &/or very close wording has been STATED as a statement repeatedly.
Regardless, the intent of the heart is more than a little guessable.
Huh? I don't know any.
“Holy Spirit clearly left the cathedrals long ago.”
Saying that doesn’t make it so.
Christ promised the Holy Spirit would stay with the Church and guide it. He keeps His promises. And, as we just heard, the Church hasn’t changed. Christ warned his followers they’d be called troublemakers. We’re still being called troublemakers today. As far as I can tell, that means we’re doing something right!
(Hello, Quix! I hope you are well and happy today. M.)
When any congregation, any organization
quits being HIS, PUTTING HIM FIRST . . . following HIS VOICE, SPIRIT, WORD,
God Almighty definitely has the option to leave the dry husk shell.
THAT would have NOTHING TO DO with Him leaving HIS CHURCH UNIVERSAL made up of authentic believers of every label and flavor.
##########
THANKS for your kind thoughts and concerns.
My throat & chest have taken a turn toward serious soreness and worse congestion after being better for several days. Going to rest more and up the homeopathic stuff.
Granny—any good recommendations for sore throat?
You dare to insult praying the gospel?!! The Rosary is praying the gospel..AND it is in scripture. It is most advisable to understand these things...Bless your heart
For many, that’s probably true.
For many, it appears to not be true.
ritual is a very tricky thing to do in a God-pleasing way.
You can put up any sites that you want that wishfully think that Mary is considered Co-Redemptrix however, I have posted to you before and remind everyone on this site that the offical Vatican ruling is that Mary is not a co-redemptrix.
Here is a quote from THE CURRENT Pope Benedict.
The Pope on Co-redemptrix
“Yet when asked, in a 2000 interview by Peter Seewald contained in the book God and the World, whether the Church would go along with the desire to solemnly define Mary as Co-redemptrix, Ratzinger’s response doesn’t look good. He says that the title Co-redemptrix “departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings” (53). He also says that “for matters of faith, continuity of terminology with the language of Scripture and that of the Fathers is itself an essential element; it is improper simply to manipulate language” (54). “
The Vatican in 2009 will not allow this. Any other Catholic quotes that you find regarding this may be referred to this quote.
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.