| Author |
Message |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 736
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 03, 2005 - 9:49 pm: |     |
Jeremy, I liked your clever analogy of the true gospel of grace as related to Labor day. No longer do we have to labor for our salvation, but instead, knowing that our salvation has been secured, we are free to labor for the Master.
Stan |
Violet
Registered user
Username: Violet
Post Number: 238
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, September 04, 2005 - 6:05 pm: | |
I have a question. If adventists really want Jesus to come why are they fighting for religious liberty? I would think they would be drafting Sunday law legislation themselves to hurry things along. |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 1838
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, September 04, 2005 - 6:37 pm: | |
I think, tongue in cheek, that because they are not perfect yet, they are not ready for Jesus to come, a la EGW. Remember, they have to be perfect like Jesus, so they delay His coming, and they fight for religious liberty.
Just my thinking on this.
Diana |
Patriar
Registered user
Username: Patriar
Post Number: 154
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 04, 2005 - 9:31 pm: | |
Violet:
I've asked that question a hundred times! I think the crux of it is the fear. They are scared to death of what the Sundaykeepers are going to do.
I remember one of my SDA elementary teachers telling us to NEVER EVER say out loud what our worst fear of dying is because Satan will make sure we die that way in the time of trouble. Then she gave us word pictures of being made to kneel on giant razor blades that would cut lengthwise up our legs...YIKES!
Pretty much made me want to never the time of trouble!
I am so thankful to be free of that!!
Patria |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 947
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, September 04, 2005 - 10:08 pm: | |
I'm always surprised when I hear how so many SDAs are afraid that the "Sunday-keepers" are going to put them to death, when their authoritative "Spirit of Profiting" wrote that there would be NO martyrs during the "time of trouble." She said that they would sentence people to death for breaking the Sunday Law, but that no one would be killed!!
So why do so many not believe what she says about it???
Jeremy |
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 291
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, September 05, 2005 - 7:37 am: | |
Jeremy,
I think people are more worried about being tortured than being a martyr! It was my understanding (hearing this while growing up) that there would be plenty of physical and psychological torture. I can't remember what I heard about martyrs, but the torture part was worrisome enough. |
Violet
Registered user
Username: Violet
Post Number: 239
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Monday, September 05, 2005 - 10:31 am: | |
What always scared me wa being put in jail. And with conditions the way they are now in the jail system I could really see how they would be scared.
I have been listening to David Jerimiah over the past several weeks. He is going verse by verse through Revelation. His spin on it is that the church will be raptured before the tribulation. This is based on after the 4th chapter the church is not addressed. He thinks that the 144,000 will be jews that will go forward and tell others of Jesus and then they will be saved. After that time the great throne judgement will happen when Jesus comes back in all His glory.
I am so lost on the second coming---does anyone have any input? |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 2501
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 05, 2005 - 1:42 pm: | |
Violet, the Bible is just not clear on the exact sequence of events leading up to the second coming. Christians hold many different views about when the church is caught up with Jesus. They hold different ideas about whether the church is raptured before, during or after the tribulation (read that "time of trouble").
Jesus, Paul, and John in Revelation have given us clear foretelling of broad events that we can expect, but exactly how these things will play out is just not specifically explained. Many people representing each differing view quote texts to prove their position, but I believe that we won't actually know for sure until the events happen.
The exact sequence of events is not a testing truth. Born-again believers hold different understandings and can still worship together and share fellowship together. When we make eschatology a point of division, we've taken our focus off Jesus.
There is one fairly popular belief, however, that I do not believe, and that is that the Jews will be saved separately and differently from the Gentiles. I've even read one author (who's not isolated in this opinion) that says there is a second gospel for the Jewsótheir salvation will be through somewhat different means than the Gentiles'. I find this teaching to be unbiblical. Ephesians is so clear that the mystery of Christ was the tearing down the wall of separation between Jews and Gentiles. Saying the Jews have a different gospel or means of salvation than the Gentiles is erecting that wall again.
Romans 11 says that all, Gentiles and Jews, will be saved by faith by the blood of Jesus. Everyone is saved the same way.
When I read eschatological passages, I pray that God will help me to know what I should know and teach me the truth. So far I don't have all my questions answered, but I feel much more peaceful about NOT knowing exactly. And I find that new insights keep coming as I keep studying.
Colleen
|
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 742
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Monday, September 05, 2005 - 3:56 pm: | |
I agree Colleen. We don't need to divide over eschatology. There is another view that I hold, and that is the Preterist view that all Bible prophecy has been already fulfilled, as I believe that Revelation was intended to be understood in the first century when it is written, and that the only event we are waiting for now is the glorious return of our Lord, that will not be secret in anyway, but every eye will see Him.
Also related to what Colleen was saying is a teaching by some dispensationalists that I was unaware of until I heard a Bible answer man show hosted by a Calvary Chapel pastor, where he actually told a caller that it is possible for an unbeliever to decide when he wants to be saved, either by grace before the "rapture", or wait until after when in essence he would have to be saved by holding out and rejecting the mark of the beast--which is a works based salvation! I couldn't help thinking how dangerous that sounds to tell a caller that he was indeed in charge as to when he wants to be saved. Now its true, the pastor did not recommend that a person wait, but still, implying you can be saved if you wait just is so unbiblical. Can anyone tell me where they get this teaching that you can choose when to be saved, before or after the tribulation?
I also believe that the focus of preaching should not be on eschatology. Because speculating on eschatology just subtracts from focusing on Christ and Him crucified. The details are vague for a reason, but God has revealed all that is necessary. Thankfully we don't need to worry about the details as Colleen mentioned above.
Stan |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1036
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 06, 2005 - 9:53 am: | |
I've also listened to David Jeremiah for years, and what you quote above Stan is the exact opposite of what he has said. Just today, he said that those who'd had the chance to respond to the gospel before the rapture would be sent "strong delusion" afterwards, so that they could not respond then. So, it is certainly a teaching of "SOME", not all. And I have no clue where they would get that, as all I've ever heard from a variety of teachers is the "strong delusion" view. The more and more "dispensational" teachers I hear, the more variations I hear of dispensationalism. Gets harder and harder to generalize as each tries to understand scripture in those contexts and seems to adjust their beliefs accordingly.
Like both mentioned above, studying escatology is interesting and I enjoy the speculation, but I don't think there is any one group that has a corner on the market in their understanding of scripture. I've got major questions with all the views I've studied, and just decided to live with the quandry that creates. Some day, maybe God will tell me, or maybe I'll just be around to see how it all happens. I do hate to see how it divides the body with negativity and attacks from opposing viewpoints. |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 746
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 06, 2005 - 12:47 pm: | |
Melissa, Yes, I don't believe David Jeremiah teaches the view that I heard. That is why I was so surprised. There are many variations on the theme, but some teaching borders on heretical, like the view I heard on that radio show.
Stan |
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3
Post Number: 13
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 1:18 pm: | |
Stan,
Sorry if I'm "Late to the Party" but I've been reading a little about Preterism and it sounds to me like it rules out the glorius return of our Lord. Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Brian |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 764
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 1:56 pm: | |
Brian3,
You are talking about hyper-preterism or full preterism that is a heresy, that says Christ came in AD 70, and that there is no second coming, and you either go to heaven or hell when you die.
The view that I hold is partial preterism, which says all prophecy has been fulfilled except the literal second coming. This view is held by people like R.C. Sproul, and Hank Hanegraf (who has written a novel called the last disciple to counteract the "Left Behind Series" by LaHaye). I base my belief on the fact that all through the epistles they expected Christ to come back even in the first century. There is no teaching by Paul that the Temple in Jerusalem must be rebuilt, and the sacrificial system must be reinstituted before Christ can come. The Book of Hebrews seems to contradict this whole dispensational system. Also the book of Revelation was also written to the first century church, and they were meant to understand it. Revelation is very symbolic, but the object is the glory of Christ. But again, I don't believe eschatology should be our major focus of study, and we definitely should not divide over the issue.
Stan |
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3
Post Number: 14
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 11:27 am: | |
Stan,
Thanks! I've since found a couple of links with information on Full and Partial preterism. Do you have any you recommend? I can see how at least with Partial preterism the statements about the old covenant "fading" away and salvation "coming" in Pauls writings make some sense.
I've probably hijacked this thread enough :-)
Thanks,
Brian
Colleen, If Stan would like to email me directly please give him my email. Thanks!
|
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 767
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 2:46 pm: | |
Brian3,
Yes, New Covenant Theology is very relevant to our view of eschatology. I remember on the "New Covenant Theology" thread that you mentioned how you liked Reisinger's review of the Decalogue related to NCT. By way of review there is a link regarding New Covenant Theology that I think is one of the best doctrinal statements I have ever read and wish I could find a church that teaches this belief statement. www.ptitx.org/News/whatis-NTC.htm This link does talk about the problems of both Covenant theology and Dispensationalist Theology. There are great resources to study eschatology from a Reformed viewpoint at www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/eschatology.html.
And to lighten up a bit on a Friday, here is a link describing the eschatology of the rock band Led Zeppelin. I don't know if this is a joke, or if it is for real, but it is interesting if you were or are a Led Zeppelin fan. www.one-salient-oversight.blogspot.com/2005/08/led-zeppelin-bass-player-changes-view.html
Stan
|
|
