Posted on 11/26/2011 3:33:54 PM PST by Iggles Phan
Ah...
The title FOOLED me!
It SHOULD have pointed out the NARROW definition found here!
There is enough scripture to support all 3 major ways of looking at it; if ones CHOOSES their bible selections carefully.
Ah...
You got sucked in by the title as well!
Quit bashing us, you HATER!!
--MormonDude(Would you like to visit a REAL Temple of GOD? Come to Indianapolis' open house when we finish our's there!)
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-mormon-church-to-build-temple-01242011,0,1022195.story
The Articles of Faith outline 13 basic points of belief of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The Prophet Joseph Smith first wrote them in a letter to John Wentworth, a newspaper editor,
in response to Mr. Wentworth's request to know what members of the Church believed.
They were subsequently published in Church periodicals.
They are now regarded as scripture and included in the Pearl of Great Price.
|
THE ARTICLES OF FAITH
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535—541
Joseph Smith |
Reminds me of the Coasters.
Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He’s a clown, that Charlie Brown
He’s gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why’s everybody always pickin’ on me)
Posting a thread before understanding Scripture, then denouncing advanced eschatology studies and accusing it of being sinful, then calmouring about how they are being picked on...
I guess the following was translated poorly:
Romans 7:2King James Bible
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
New International Version
For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.
There is enough scripture to support all 3 major ways of looking at it; if ones CHOOSES their bible selections carefully.
I'm not saying that you personally are guilty of this, but that very attitude expressed in that statement is why we tolerate so much heresy at the expense of the Gospel.
Unfortunately, nominal Christians approach the Scriptures as a way to support their preconceived notions rather than submitting themselves to the authority of the Word. This is how we get the various heresies such as Pelagianism/Arminianism ("Free Will"), Benny-Hinn "miracle" workshops, Gap Theory/Day-Age Evolutionary Origins, Prostitutes for Jesus and Premillennial Dispensationalism.
The Goal is to implement hermeneutics that harmonize the entire body of Scripture, rather than to cherry pick proof-texts, redefine technical terms and then eisegete the remaining missing parts.
Staying within context of the OP, The Futurists reject the most fundamental premise of Scripture, in that the prophets prepare the way for the LORD. Rather the Futurists view the OT as a totally worthless collection of writings and prophecies that bear absolutely no relevance to the past three thousand years of human existence, and only serve as some future puzzle-book for a band of God-hating reprobates that will allegedly be "Left Behind" after this post-Christian Western culture completes making their mess of things.
That is why these Cosmic Chicken Littles spend the vast majority of their time conjuring up camp-fire stories to scare the living Hell out of each other, and justifying their "Everyone is Doomed Except Me So I Will be Anxious Anyway" theories with obscure and vague "Bible Truth"™ hidden deeply in the Scripture via Hebraic acrostic "Bible Codes" that once extracted by modern computer programs, will Divine the Truth better than any Ordained Prophet of God.
It requires total biblical illiteracy to sleep at night after spreading the FUD that makes their hysterical system "work". That is why they have no problems whatsoever in perverting "confirm the Covenant" to mean something totally opposite of its meaning (aka the Covenant made with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and boldly assert, through the miracle of circular reasoning, that it can only mean a modern "Peace Treaty authored by the AntiChrist" (even though the idea of AntiChrist proposed in 1&2 John, a half millennia later bares no resemblance to anything they describe here)
There is no "rapture" of any sort that matches the Dispensational scheme. In order to sell this, they must totally reject what Jesus Christ Himself said regarding His Parousia. They must reject the Tares & Wheat Parable. They must reject all of the "this generation", "you", "at hand", "immediately", "very soon" and "now" time references that He made, and replace them, with "thousands of years from now" and "hundreds of generations from now".
Dispensationalists can't agree on three, four, six, seven or eight Dispensations that are "clearly described" in Scripture" yet they totally reject the Two Age model that Jesus Christ and the Disciples consistently and plainly taught.
I submit that gnostic Futurist camp-fire stories where the narrator can trash America (total abuse of the "Curse those who curse you.." clause), condemn their reprobate neighbor, be completely ignorant of Bible doctrine, secular foreign policy and human nature yet somehow be the smartest person in the room by claiming Nostradamus-like ability to parse Ezekiel 38 and various passages from Zechariah, is popular and preferred over giving glory to God and His love for His Church.
The problem with the concept that once a person takes that position there are other portions of scripture that they need to find an alternate interpretation for. It starts an avalanche of having to find or create interpretations that don’t make sense.
Most Dispensationalists go to the Book of Revelation to constrive their ‘seven year deal’ with ‘the Antichrist’. But, there are two peculiar things about this: a) Revelation does not mention ‘the Antichrist’, and b) there is no ‘seven year deal’ mentioned anywhere in Revelation.
We all know that the "seven year deal" is synthesized out of a required re-interpretation of the seventy weeks to completely delete the last and most important week - the ministry of our LORD for the first half, and the second half by the disciples in Judea before the Paraclete (at the end of the seven years) sent them out unto the whole world, and to substitute that week of our LORD's ministry into a week of the alleged Antichrist's ministry.
One can successfully argue that when given the chance, Dispensationalists will replace Jesus Christ with Satan at every critical time in prophetic history. They maliciously attribute to "the antichrist" confirming the Covenant, and then rob God of the climax of His work in the last week (his Incarnation, Ministry, Death & Resurrection), only to bestow it upon their Father the Devil as his time of "ministry".
As for 1 and 2 John, you are tossing pearls before swine - they don't read the Bible like you, me and thousands of years of faithful believers - they watch TV and subscribe to newsletters that tell them what they want to hear.
If you view this thread objectively, they are firmly convinced in several gross lies. They reject the historical fact that the Great Tribulation already occurred in and about 70AD. They completely reject the fact that in Christ there are no divisions of the Church between Old Covenant (that doesn't save) Jews, and New Covenant, "the parenthesis" Church. I doubt that they can properly classify the Pharisee Paul as "Jew" or "Christian" under their system since to do so breaks the "logic" of Christ having to deal with "the Jews" hundreds of generations after the sin (the crucifixion) of their ancestors.
They must believe in a 'Second Fall' of regenerated Christians who spent the last seven years in a cosmic rave in order to subscribe to their Millennial Kingdom - this means they must, by necessity, reject the Doctrines of Grace and the Doctrines of Redemption.
They also believe that people can be saved and understand Scripture without the Paraclete (1 Cor 2:14) or else the whole "two prophets" thing doesn't make any sense.
They also must believe that none of the Prophets spoke of Jesus Christ (outside of Isaiah for a couple chapters), never established themselves as prophets by telling of near events that were fulfilled, never saw the Church, never saw the expansion of the Gospel to the whole world, and at no time ever was of particular use to anyone of faith since ALL of the prophecies can only be observed and recognized by those who hate God and would never read the Scriptures (since allegedly ALL Christians, infants, retards and the insane are "raptured" up to heaven)
I have a difficult time trying to find any doctrine that Dispensationalism doesn't attempt to crush under the weight of its vain glorification of Satan.
John 17: 15 Jesus said, “I pray NOT that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.”
You have repeatedly used this verse to show there will be no rapture, but you are taking it out of context. Jesus is praying for his Disciples. Read the entire section.
John 17:12 says, “While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.”
If Jesus was talking about everyone, then he meant we would all be saved except the man of perdition. In this instance he was praying for his Disciples only.
I Thes 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Notice in that verse where the person ends up?
Acts 8:39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. 40 But Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea.
Philip ended up in a different place didn’t he?
II Cor 12:3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
Well, well, again the verse clearly indicates that although he was “caught up” the reason and end destination was different. Each time the word harpazo is used yet the end destination is different. Let’s make a comparison.
Let’s change the word to “traveled”. Each time the person “traveled” to a different place for a different purpose. Compare that to each time you travel. Each time you travel to a different destination but return home. Then you decide to travel to a different place to establish a home in a different state. By your example because we used the word “traveled” we should assume that you will return back to your original home? Would that make sense to you?
Now let’s look at that verse in Thessalonians again.
I Thes 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. You did see the ”ever be with the Lord” in there right? When you traveled that last time was it to ever be in your new home? Or should we assume that because you used the same word to get there that you do not mean that you have really changed your residence? Your reasoning looks more like the flim flam used by the RCC to deceive the people.
What are you doing making sense on this flame bait thread?
Let's address the original articles accusations and questions directly.
Before studying, let's face God in prayer, confess our sins to Him, by 1stJohn 1:9 so we have assurance we are returning to fellowship with Him, so that God the Holy Spirit may guide us properly through faith in Christ.
First, let's consider the following statement.
In the 'Rapture' (or Dispensational) scheme the believer is asked to take the Person of Daniel's 70th Week (Who is Jesus Christ at the Cross) described in Chapter 9, verse 27a:
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, ..."
... and reverse this 'he' to mean a 'future Antichrist'.
A tremendous error is made here, which most Dispensational believers quickly identify. The Rapture and the Tribulation are 2 distinct events discussed in Scripture.
Daniel's 70th week is identifiable with the Great Tribulation and descriptions of the 70th week are associated with the Great Tribulation.
There isn't a simple verse stating the exact time of the Rapture. Many a theological debate could be put to rest immediately on academic grounds, if such a passage exists. Rather, by doctrinal study, eschatology provides the mature believer in Christ by spiritual perception and doctrinal grounding the ability to understand many things to come, which He has provides as a blessing to those who study it.
There is no disagreement between Christian denominations regarding the second coming of Christ. The day and hour isn't known per the Olivet Discourse in Matt 24:36-42 and in Luke's account in Luke 21:34-36. Unlike the 2nd Coming, which has signs of its approach, the Rapture isn't so announced. It occurs like the Great Flood, where people are eating, drinking, and giving one another in marriage. These are not sinful, but conditions common for survival and propagation of the human race.
So the first point needs to be made that the Rapture is distinct from the Great Tribulation, although other doctrinal studies might associate the 2, one preceding the other or intertwining them. (Hence the terms, Pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib)
Why would He save us and then pour out His wrath and expect us to endure to the end? You need to put on your common sense cap.
What do you think He is going to do? Take us OUT of the Body of Christ, and OUT of our spiritual seating in heavenly places in Christ, and make us endure to the end? For What? To place us BACK INTO the Body of Christ and re-seat us in heavenly places in CHrist? ONce again, use your common sense. And GOd's word of truth.
A frightful prospect to be judged on used . . . Ktx
Seems like some of these would be fitting in their cases:
MAXIMUM ABSURDITIES in Scripture & history mangling!
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
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.
