My church discusses are we in the end times?

[seekingtruth1]

(edited so its easier to read)

This is what i learned last night from my pastor presentation before I forget:

1. Dispensationalists are heretics ,
2. Promises meant for the Jews are now for the church.
3. Dispensationalists also belive Jews go to heaven another way (FAlse),
4. Premillinealists dont practivc the immediacy of their faith in other words they arent as motivated to live out their faith (false),
5. Post millin and amilline DO and are motived MORE to do so b/c of their eschatological views. (false IMO)
6. Premill are focused on fitting SIGNS, like current events happening in the EU into bible prophecy (true and False)
7. Whereas amillinealists see SIGNS as issues like genocide in Africa and feel the need to act to help....( i see that too as a sign of the end and want to help) But he wasnt really saying they even see that as a sign of the end really.
8. The premillinealist believe the Jews will be dealt with in the 1000 year reign not in the 7 years....( HUH?)
9. B/c the Jews didnt get Bible prophecy right about Jesus coming, prophecy is only useful and relevant after the fact. Therefore we cant
know what prophecies mean until after they happen ( which to me means he thinks we can put the book of REV in the trash) and
prophecy is never meant to tell u where you are going. (Big Huh?)
10. B/c there is symbolism used in Revelation then you cant say whether it is all symbolic or all literal so its basically not knowable.
So in otherwords its less useful to concern yourself with this book.
11. The focus on Isreal is an anomoly of the premillinealist church/ politics in the US. ( Yes and no...)
The ONLY examples of premillineast leaders were.....drum roll

HAGEE and Jack Van Impe!! ( maybe 2 defn 1 false prophet)

Next,

2 slides focused on the concerns he has with "Rapture theology" while omitting concerns or objections with the other positions. That is teh only position that is associated with problems and concerns.

The Concerns:

1. They believe in 2 different modes of salvation b/t Jews and Gentiles in end times which he feels Conflicts with Galatians 3:28 amd Eph 2 11-22 (false with teh exception of Hagge and Robertson)

2. Unconditional support for Isreal ( I do see alot of this, and I do not unconditionally support Isreal b/c they sin too.) ( I do see some people who take a pre-trib position or post trib position feel that feel Isreal can do NO wrong and I think thats not scriptural and not what the Lord means by blessing Isreal. But I digress as that is not the full point of this.

3. Rapture theology cheapens past persecution of the church and seeks escapism.

4. It was first taught by Darby based on Mary Mcdonalds visions in 1830. The early church never taught it.

5. The case for the Rapture is soley based on REV 20. He didnt say why I am only guessing it is b/c the ones in heaven that John says while Trib is taking place are the ones in the white robes.

When a quiet woman spoke up....the only one who I could see actually brought her Bible ( I didnt either ) she said there were other passages like Thess for example that support the Rapture..... he got really angry and told her she was wrong 2x and that REV 20 is the only passage the rapture folks use to support their claim.

I would have been fine with "I dont have an opinion" on all this so here are the different views but that didnt happend b/c none were adequeatly or even accurately in some cases fleshed out...ALL positions have "holes" or things people can say dont add up. So then to be fair and list them so we can deal with them fairly. Thats how people can fairly discern what they belive is Truth and how we how we can learn, and sharpen our arguments for why we belive a, b or c. But that didnt happen!
The only one that was presented "with concerns" was the Premilinealists who embrace a Rapture....(He doesnt belive in any rapture. ) and the ridiculous leaders that anyone would find concerning. IIt was fallacious reasoning all around .I think its our ONLY ever discusion of it!

He further noted that Luther didnt even want REVElation included in the Bible b/c he thought so little of its importance or relevance to their lives which was his way of intimating to us...hey it only deserves one night of our time..... There was no mention of the letter to the churches of the blessing promised to those who read and heed it.

[WhitemoonG]

Really provocative.

So 1st Thessalonians 4:16-18 wasn't "taught" until Darby in 1830?


As for Luther having little use for the book of Revelation, I guess it might be fairest to say that he did some amazing and courageous things, but he was NOT an apostle, and even someone of his stature isn't going to be right about everything.


Interesting, the pooh pooh ing of prophecy as too cryptic and pointless until fulfilled, when it becomes history.

I could agree with a general working concept of some prophetic passages being very clear cut, point blank and unambiguous, and others a bit more challenging (then and now) to fully analyze, etc. with many somewhere in between, but COME ON!


When Micah 5:2 predicted the teeny little roadblip called Bethlehem as the seemingly unlikely place for the Messiah to be born, the scribes, etc. easily pointed that out to Herod, even without any reason to think it had for sure already happened. Herod didn't have any mystical confusion in telling his goons where to go to kill all the little boys, etc.


When Daniel prophetically announces 69 weeks (groups of 7 years), i.e. 483 years will transpire from the date of a specific decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem until the Messiah is "cut off", which takes it exactly to 29 A.D. (remember the Gregorian/Roman calendar was actually a bit off from the start, and would extrapolate to Jesus being born at about 4 "B.C."), why is that so "shrouded in mystery" or whatever? Any diligent student of the available scripture parchments would have been able to figure that out and recognize the time.


Jesus referred to the Old Testament and Moses and various passages with the idea that they had long since been there, most of it not so difficult to understand, but rather the biggest problem with the populace was due to HARDENING OF THEIR HEARTS; not respecting it, not wanting to study or acknowledge it.


When Paul instructed the Thessalonians in 4:18 to comfort themselves with the hope of the RAPTURE described with point blank clarity in 4:16-17,

is your pastor going to accuse PAUL of "cheapening the persecution" suffered at times by the Church, including PAUL HIMSELF frequently having been persecuted?


To me, instead of diligently searching and studying the scriptures, following the Berean example, "rightly dividing the word of truth" as Paul admonished Timothy,


what they are promoting is a nice, easy, lazy, convenient, gloss and schlock approach to bland platitudes.

[seekingtruth1]

Really provocative.

So 1st Thessalonians 4:16-18 wasn't "taught" until Darby in 1830?
Sort of he is saying the rapture wasnt a concept that was developed intil Darby. He admits Imminency was taught by Paul and the church then but went away as a teaching once the church took over the Roman Govt and being Christain was safe and "cool" socially. And hasnt been taught anymore, almost like then well we who dont are correct b/c noone has in years.As for Luther having little use for the book of Revelation, I guess it might be fairest to say that he did some amazing and courageous things, but he was NOT an apostle, and even someone of his stature isn't going to be right about everything.

Exactly, so what if Luther found it of no use. I can totally see where these prophecies made SO little sense given the time in which they found themselves. I have struggles with a few until recently as they are all unfloding before my eyes.

Interesting, the pooh pooh ing of prophecy as too cryptic and pointless until fulfilled, when it becomes history.

Yeah this really irked me bigtime! Plus its liek we have no direction. It the same as saying its pointlesss to study it! Funny how Jesus found it important enough to study and quote.. I am not saying it always makes sense....but its worthy fo attention and study. The second coming is a prophecy so how does his argument hold up then?

I could agree with a general working concept of some prophetic passages being very clear cut, point blank and unambiguous, and others a bit more challenging (then and now) to fully analyze, etc. with many somewhere in between, but COME ON! It was dissapointing to say the least.

When Micah 5:2 predicted the teeny little roadblip called Bethlehem as the seemingly unlikely place for the Messiah to be born, the scribes, etc. easily pointed that out to Herod, even without any reason to think it had for sure already happened. Herod didn't have any mystical confusion in telling his goons where to go to kill all the little boys, etc.

Great points! I wish you were there!


When Daniel prophetically announces 69 weeks (groups of 7 years), i.e. 483 years will transpire from the date of a specific decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem until the Messiah is "cut off", which takes it exactly to 29 A.D. (remember the Gregorian/Roman calendar was actually a bit off from the start, and would extrapolate to Jesus being born at about 4 "B.C."), why is that so "shrouded in mystery" or whatever? Any diligent student of the available scripture parchments would have been able to figure that out and recognize the time.

Jesus referred to the Old Testament and Moses and various passages with the idea that they had long since been there, most of it not so difficult to understand, but rather the biggest problem with the populace was due to HARDENING OF THEIR HEARTS; not respecting it, not wanting to study or acknowledge it.


Excatly that is why they didnt see Jesus - its not that they couldnt have known...they felt it was important to study prophecy they just woudlnt accept it.


When Paul instructed the Thessalonians in 4:18 to comfort themselves with the hope of the RAPTURE described with point blank clarity in 4:16-17,

is your pastor going to accuse PAUL of "cheapening the persecution" suffered at times by the Church, including PAUL HIMSELF frequently having been persecuted?


To me, instead of diligently searching and studying the scriptures, following the Berean example, "rightly dividing the word of truth" as Paul admonished Timothy,


what they are promoting is a nice, easy, lazy, convenient, gloss and schlock approach to bland platitudes.

Anyway the answer to the qw he originally posited "are we in the end times" was yes since we have been since Jesus left. But that wasnt what people are concerned about the want to know are we in the END END that is headed to Trib....and well that qw was certianly never answered. Or maybe it was b/c I do belive he doesnt belive in any of it and doesnt care b/c in the end Christ comes and thats it. He is agnotsic about it ecept for pre trib rapture view...on that he is more dogmatic that they IS incorrect... Ay yi yi!

[ATYCLB]

He further noted

Who's "he"? :scratch

[seekingtruth1]

Who's "he"? :scratch
sorry my pastor

[Mopsie]

Very interesting! Having grown up in the RCA and later being a part of the CRC the same thing is noted according to Calvin. I have personally been scorned for being sensitive to End Times prophecy, being chastised for being "overly concerned." Because Calvin did not offer commentation on Revelation that somehow makes the book irrelevant and disguised by a code that cannot be understood. I fail to see their point. I imagine if the times in which Calvin and Luther taught were so clearly marked by prophetic occurances (increase in knowledge and technological advances, the restoration of Israel as a nation, etc.) they would have felt differently. Don't misunderstand me, I have a great appreciation for much of what was done and taught by both Martin and Luther and others who attributed to and responded to the Reformation, but I feel as though their failure to recognize the book of Revelation as credible and such an integral core of understanding the whole scheme of God's plan has been such a disservice for present day believers.

Our family has since severed ties with the RCA and CRC denominations.

(edited so its easier to read)

This is what i learned last night from my pastor presentation before I forget:

1. Dispensationalists are heretics ,
2. Promises meant for the Jews are now for the church.
3. Dispensationalists also belive Jews go to heaven another way (FAlse),
4. Premillinealists dont practivc the immediacy of their faith in other words they arent as motivated to live out their faith (false),
5. Post millin and amilline DO and are motived MORE to do so b/c of their eschatological views. (false IMO)
6. Premill are focused on fitting SIGNS, like current events happening in the EU into bible prophecy (true and False)
7. Whereas amillinealists see SIGNS as issues like genocide in Africa and feel the need to act to help....( i see that too as a sign of the end and want to help) But he wasnt really saying they even see that as a sign of the end really.
8. The premillinealist believe the Jews will be dealt with in the 1000 year reign not in the 7 years....( HUH?)
9. B/c the Jews didnt get Bible prophecy right about Jesus coming, prophecy is only useful and relevant after the fact. Therefore we cant
know what prophecies mean until after they happen ( which to me means he thinks we can put the book of REV in the trash) and
prophecy is never meant to tell u where you are going. (Big Huh?)
10. B/c there is symbolism used in Revelation then you cant say whether it is all symbolic or all literal so its basically not knowable.
So in otherwords its less useful to concern yourself with this book.
11. The focus on Isreal is an anomoly of the premillinealist church/ politics in the US. ( Yes and no...)
The ONLY examples of premillineast leaders were.....drum roll

HAGEE and Jack Van Impe!! ( maybe 2 defn 1 false prophet)

Next,

2 slides focused on the concerns he has with "Rapture theology" while omitting concerns or objections with the other positions. That is teh only position that is associated with problems and concerns.

The Concerns:

1. They believe in 2 different modes of salvation b/t Jews and Gentiles in end times which he feels Conflicts with Galatians 3:28 amd Eph 2 11-22 (false with teh exception of Hagge and Robertson)

2. Unconditional support for Isreal ( I do see alot of this, and I do not unconditionally support Isreal b/c they sin too.) ( I do see some people who take a pre-trib position or post trib position feel that feel Isreal can do NO wrong and I think thats not scriptural and not what the Lord means by blessing Isreal. But I digress as that is not the full point of this.

3. Rapture theology cheapens past persecution of the church and seeks escapism.

4. It was first taught by Darby based on Mary Mcdonalds visions in 1830. The early church never taught it.

5. The case for the Rapture is soley based on REV 20. He didnt say why I am only guessing it is b/c the ones in heaven that John says while Trib is taking place are the ones in the white robes.

When a quiet woman spoke up....the only one who I could see actually brought her Bible ( I didnt either ) she said there were other passages like Thess for example that support the Rapture..... he got really angry and told her she was wrong 2x and that REV 20 is the only passage the rapture folks use to support their claim.

I would have been fine with "I dont have an opinion" on all this so here are the different views but that didnt happend b/c none were adequeatly or even accurately in some cases fleshed out...ALL positions have "holes" or things people can say dont add up. So then to be fair and list them so we can deal with them fairly. Thats how people can fairly discern what they belive is Truth and how we how we can learn, and sharpen our arguments for why we belive a, b or c. But that didnt happen!
The only one that was presented "with concerns" was the Premilinealists who embrace a Rapture....(He doesnt belive in any rapture. ) and the ridiculous leaders that anyone would find concerning. IIt was fallacious reasoning all around .I think its our ONLY ever discusion of it!

He further noted that Luther didnt even want REVElation included in the Bible b/c he thought so little of its importance or relevance to their lives which was his way of intimating to us...hey it only deserves one night of our time..... There was no mention of the letter to the churches of the blessing promised to those who read and heed it.

[Mitsy]

So sad and so blind. :ohno May God open your pastor's eyes to His truth. :pray Praying for God's sheep who are in the care of your pastor that the Lord will protect them from wrong teaching.

[Buzzardhut]

sorry my pastorand your Pastor's name is?............drum roll....................? :scratch

[HeIsEnough]

I didn't catch your church affiliation either....what is its name?

[HeIsEnough]

(edited so its easier to read)

This is what i learned last night from my pastor presentation before I forget:

1. Dispensationalists are heretics ,
2. Promises meant for the Jews are now for the church.
3. Dispensationalists also belive Jews go to heaven another way (FAlse),
4. Premillinealists dont practivc the immediacy of their faith in other words they arent as motivated to live out their faith (false),
5. Post millin and amilline DO and are motived MORE to do so b/c of their eschatological views. (false IMO)
6. Premill are focused on fitting SIGNS, like current events happening in the EU into bible prophecy (true and False)
7. Whereas amillinealists see SIGNS as issues like genocide in Africa and feel the need to act to help....( i see that too as a sign of the end and want to help) But he wasnt really saying they even see that as a sign of the end really.
8. The premillinealist believe the Jews will be dealt with in the 1000 year reign not in the 7 years....( HUH?)
9. B/c the Jews didnt get Bible prophecy right about Jesus coming, prophecy is only useful and relevant after the fact. Therefore we cant
know what prophecies mean until after they happen ( which to me means he thinks we can put the book of REV in the trash) and
prophecy is never meant to tell u where you are going. (Big Huh?)
10. B/c there is symbolism used in Revelation then you cant say whether it is all symbolic or all literal so its basically not knowable.
So in otherwords its less useful to concern yourself with this book.
11. The focus on Isreal is an anomoly of the premillinealist church/ politics in the US. ( Yes and no...)
The ONLY examples of premillineast leaders were.....drum roll

HAGEE and Jack Van Impe!! ( maybe 2 defn 1 false prophet)


Some simple and quick answers for your pastor. (You'll have to pardon my shortness and some sarcasm....I'm tryin!)

1. Dispensationalists are heretics

Amill and dominion people are trying to take over the world....for the church. No need for the Lord to come back when we have such effective churches, like the Roman Catholic Church, who take over whole countries, if necessary.

2. Promises meant for the Jews are now for the church.

I don't yet have a Sycamore tree with my plot of land right outside of Jerusalem. My little kitty cat would lay down with a lamb, but the tiger at my zoo may have different ideas.

3. Dispensationalists also belive Jews go to heaven another way (FAlse),

Yes, this is false on both counts. Some well meaning but deluded dispensationalists may believe this, the vast majority do not.

4. Premillinealists dont practivc the immediacy of their faith in other words they arent as motivated to live out their faith (false),

This is merely libel. I do not, however, mistakingly believe my church will slowly but surely envelop the entire world and take this world for Christ...or some such thought. One at a time, us "Premillinealists" work in cooperation with the Lord to call His people out of this world.

5. Post millin and amilline DO and are motived MORE to do so b/c of their eschatological views. (false IMO)

I don't know. I seem to recall a certain group who wanted nothing more from their Savior then to rule the world. I don't desire to rule this world. I desire the Lord to come back, remove the evil, and rule the world like only He can, directly.

6. Premill are focused on fitting SIGNS, like current events happening in the EU into bible prophecy (true and False)

Considering there is virtually no prophecy which is about these United States, and that all prophecy relates directly to Israel proper, it seems prudent and wise to see what is happening in and around Israel and watch for the signs that Christ told us to watch for......

7. Whereas amillinealists see SIGNS as issues like genocide in Africa and feel the need to act to help....( i see that too as a sign of the end and want to help) But he wasnt really saying they even see that as a sign of the end really.

Sounds to me like he was boasting just a tad. We are "so much better than that!" comes to mind. Again, another libelous charge which is an expression of his heart. I think your pastor should be careful with every word which he speaks.

8. The premillinealist believe the Jews will be dealt with in the 1000 year reign not in the 7 years....( HUH?)

Its difficult to see how an amill person even gives much consideration to these two things.

9. B/c the Jews didnt get Bible prophecy right about Jesus coming, prophecy is only useful and relevant after the fact. Therefore we cant
know what prophecies mean until after they happen ( which to me means he thinks we can put the book of REV in the trash) and
prophecy is never meant to tell u where you are going. (Big Huh?)

Seems to me we should double our efforts to get prophecy correctly, considering the devastating impact that followed the Jews and their not getting these things correct. Those not looking where they walk, fall into a pit.

10. B/c there is symbolism used in Revelation then you cant say whether it is all symbolic or all literal so its basically not knowable.
So in otherwords its less useful to concern yourself with this book.

Regardless of your pastors view on this, he needs to take a doctrinal stand which does indeed include this book. To do less is foolish. To actually attempt to 'figure it out', will invariably lead him to a premill understanding.

11. The focus on Isreal is an anomoly of the premillinealist church/ politics in the US. ( Yes and no...)

You should ask your pastor some pointed questions. Ones I enjoy hearing the responses to....like....

If Jesus is coming back, explain why, where, how and what will He do when He gets here. (not only your opinion, but with scriptural backing from the whole counsel of God)

Show me America in the biblical record of prophecy.

I like these two, they show a lot about ones thinking. I'm sure there are plenty of others