Posted on 11/26/2011 3:33:54 PM PST by Iggles Phan
My problem with the 'Rapture' (pre-millenial; pre-tribulation) teaching is that it forces its adherents to actually REVERSE the Person of Jesus Christ to the Devil.
That's correct.
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'.
Are you confused?
Is this Jesus Christ or Antichrist?
1. The Historic View.
This view is typified by the 1599 Geneva Bible notes. These are the notes of John Calvin, Miles Coverdale, and John Knox to name a few.
1599 Geneva Bible Notes on Daniel 9:27a:
"By the preaching of the gospel he confirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles. Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection."
It's pretty clear that the Reformers believed that Christ was the Person of Daniel's Great 70th Week.
2. The Modernist View (Dispensational).
In contrast however, compare this historic view to the Dispensational view typified in the Ryrie Study Notes (1978). Look who the modernists assign to this very same Person in Daniel 9:27a:
"The prince of verse 26, the Antichrist previously introduced in 7:8, 24-26, who will make a pact with many (of the Jewish people) at the beginning of the tribulation period. But in the middle of the week (i.e., 3 1/2 years later) Antichrist will break his covenant and desecrate the Temple by demanding worship of himself in it."
The difference couldn't be farther apart.
Historic Christianity says that Jesus fulfilled the 70th week AT THE CROSS, but Rapture Christianity (Dispensationalism) says that the Devil fulfills it in a 're-built' temple.
Therefore, Dispensationalism is no less than a frontal assault on the Cross of Christ. It reverses Jesus Christ to the Devil. It is malicious and a pernicious doctrine.
Remember, this Dispensational view was NEVER known until 1830. That's why it is a Modernist view. It was invented by JN Darby and popularized by CI Scofield, two con-men to Christianity.
In the 20th century, carpetbaggers such as Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, Jack (and Rexella) Van Impe, John Hagee and others have made fame and fortune off of this con game. They have marketed this 'Rapture' theology like a cheap box of laundry detergent on TV and radio, and with videos and books.
My hope and prayer is that the Church starts to wake up out of its slumber and starts challenging its pastors, ministries, and teachers. The Cross of Christ is at stake here!
For the Glory of Christ Jesus. Amen.
So the challenge stands: Do you deny those words of God that speak to the event commonly known as the Rapture?
Don't be shy. You've already shown your delusions of omniscience and omnipotence when you denied 1 Thessalonians 4 which talks about the Rapture. Go ahead and deny the rest. I dare you.
That is why is is consistently ignored and discarded by Replacement Theologists, especially as we see the prophecies and promises made by God to His chosen people and nation coming to pass. God promises to curse those who curse His people and it's not exactly a comforting thought to be on record as having denied what God has said about His people, the Jews.
No true Christian will deny any part of Scripture. These passages, more than any, shines the spotlight on the fact that Replacement Theology is in in direct contradiction to the word of God.
Any doctrine that requires any denial of Scripture is demonic and any person who knowingly and deliberately denies any part of Scripture is not truly Christian.
Replacement Theology has to deny a lot of what God wrote to make their claims. And that fact alone exposes it for what it is.
i could not find the verse you cited:
Joshua 21: 43-45.
Because I was looking in the DR not the KJV.
LOL - I guess these people were too.
And this shuts down your false, lame Irving reference.
I have been perfectly clear on this and evade nothing.
I Thessalonians 4 sounds like I Corinthians 15.
The same Saint Paul calls that the resurrection.
Nowhere does he call it ‘the rapture’.
Using god’s word, instead of my own, is a sign of truly believing the Word of God.
You're on record as having denied much of what God Himself has written.
You are aware of the fact that you will stand before Him one day and answer to Him, right?
Fabulous passage.
“LOL - I guess these people were too.”
Answer:
All of these people cited in your Early Church reference were Historic Premillenialists, ... NOT Dispensational Premillenialists. You are trying to confuse the two and that is an error.
There is a HUGE difference here.
None of them ever heard, taught, preached, or believed in a pre-trib, pre-mil ‘rapture’. That doctrine is not to be found ANYWHERE in Historic Premillenialism. Dispensational Premillenialism was the sole invention of 19th century mavericks.
Even the great Baptist soul-winner of London, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, who was a contemporary of Irving and Darby never believed in the Dispenational ‘rapture’.
In fact, he openly fueded with Darby:
“Ye men of Plymouth (speaking about Darby’s Plymouth Brethren), why stand ye here gazing up into heaven… …Be not so taken up with speculations as to prefer a Bible reading over a dark passage in the Revelation to teaching in a ragged-school or discoursing to the poor concerning Jesus. We must have done with day-dreams, and get to work.”
Notice how Spurgeon viewed dispensational doctrine as mere speculation and day-dreaming. He also observed that this New-Found belief defeated the will of once-attentive and victorious believers.
In response, Darby was then derisive towards Spurgeon’s Baptists in a letter written by him from Canada in 1863,
“I can conceive nothing more false than a Baptist testimony – more poor than a Baptist Church: the whole thing is a mistake. We are, according to 2 Timothy ii, purging ourselves from great evil in a great baptized mass, begin to think and found, as with heathen, in a false position. …Nothing would induce me to go to a Baptist meeting; I would as soon go to popery… If the assembly takes the ground of being Baptists, of course I should not go…”
Ironically, the Baptists of today are those who most ardently accept and defend Darby’s Dispensational scheme.
I suspect that Darby would be very proud of them for turning their backs on Spurgeon’s 19th century Baptist teachings, and Spurgeon would be equally disappointed.
Boy, how times have changed.
What impressive
fancy footwork and quiet
slipping and sliding past the early church references to
PRETRIBULATIONAL Dispensationalist perspectives in the writings cited.
Or maybe you just didn’t read the whole post.
Or maybe you are not that interested in factual presentations from unrubberized history.
Worse than denial of what is written has been the constant misdirection of those seeking His Word and attacks upon Scripture attempting to use God’s name in vain.
I recognize some postmillenialists might adhere their position, due to lack of doctrinal study, but one positive aspect of pretrib premillenialists, at the expense of being dogmatic has been a patient endurance of the many false accusations leveled against sound doctrine and eschatology from those who attack the pretrib position.
Another plus for pretrib premil believers is their recognition that the Church, in many ways, repeats many of the errors of the Hebrew nation documented in the OT.
Do enduring believers really believe we are so much less tempted than OT Israel in the modern Church Age?
IMHO, it probably will take a Millennium of perfect rule by Jesus Christ for humanity to begin to approach what God has planned for us for all eternity. Even then we know that the Adversary will be unbound for a while, indicating that even after a Millennium of perfect rule, we still will lapse into temptation.
This is an aspect of the human condition ignored by those who are not pretrib premil.
“This is the one of the strongest Scriptures that exposes Replacement Theology for the demonic doctrine that it is and absolutely destroys it for all time.”
Answer:
So, according to your view, Saint Paul is a damned ‘Replacement Theologian’ too.
The New Testament clearly states that Abraham’s seed are those by faith (alone). To deny this is to deny the Cross of Christ. Proof text - Galatians 3:26-29:
“For ye are ALL the children of God by FAITH in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is NEITHER Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are ALL ONE in Christ Jesus. And IF ye be Christ’s, THEN ARE YE ABRAHAM’S SEED, AND HEIRS ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE.”
This is an Eternal Promise. It has nothing to do with the carnality of flesh. It has nothing to do with so-called ‘replacement’. It has everything to do with the Fulfillment of Christ at Calvary!
Dispensationalism is a doctrine of the flesh. It emphasizes man’s DNA over the Blood of Christ.
It gets to the point that you wonder not who is sitting at the keyboard denying Scriptural truth, but what is doing it.
Of course the post wasn't read. Its just an opportunity to deny the truth, and that opportunity will not be missed.
Very well said, Cvengr. Thank you.
Thank you for showing Dispensationalism is indeed true. During this CHURCH AGE, we are all believers, both Jew and Greek, but as Romans 11 so well points out, the promises remain for the Jews in the Millennial Reign.
Dispensationalists read the Bible literally, as God intended for it to be read, and if the Bible is literally true then those who feel that they have the divine authority to decide what parts of the Bible are true and which are false, and those who have made the choice to allegorize Scripture into meaninglessness are doomed.
That's what this is all about - the failed attempt to use the word "dispensationalism" to justify the denial of Scripture and try to escape the eternal consequences for the denial of Scripture.
Dispensationalism is a threat. That's why it comes under such attack. We can validate what we believe with Scripture and that can't be tolerated by those who can't do the same. If the Bible is true, then they are doomed.
Denial of scripture sends us to hell? Hmmm, I thought it was denying Christ that sends us to hell.
So when you die, at your judgment, are you going to tell Jesus I believed in scripture or are you going to tell him I believed in you?
After all Jesus did not write one word of the Bible. It is the inspired word of God but, Jesus never put pen to paper.
But he did tell the Apostles to go to all nations and preach his word.
WELL PUT.
QUITE SO.
THX THX.
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.