Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

However, untold thousands believe in the "secret rapture of the church" prior to the tribulation period. This is because untold thousands don't want to have to think of suffering through a tribulation time frame. The late Corrie ten Boom called this pre-trib rapture teaching the "American doctrine." Go figure.

The belief in a secret rapture of believers before the tribulation is also because of a best-seller, "The Late, Great Planet Earth," by Hal Lindsey which was set loose in the l960s. It has been a paperback aggressively pushed by practically every evangelical / fundamentalist engine going.

Theologians, videos, films and preachers bolster up this myth with their earnest preachings and teachings.

Yet this is nothing but a myth, accented as much by certain theologically conservative Protestant segments similar unto the Roman Catholic underlining of the immaculate conception of Mary. Nevertheless, if there is no biblical support for such a Mariology teaching, it is bogus. Likewise, the pre-tribulation rapture teaching is bogus.

The pre-trib rapture concept was manufactured in the 1800s in an 18 year old Plymouth Brethren girl's dream, told to her Pastor, John Darby, and then relayed to C. I. Scofield who bought into the dream as revealed truth. Scofield placed this pre-tribulation rapture notion as a footnote in his popular Bible, hence the spread of the myth.

However, just the opposite is biblical truth. In Matthew 24:29-3l, for instance, the rapture ("gathering together") is placed in the same time frame as the open second coming of Jesus Christ. And all of this is "after the tribulation" (verse 29). That is it in a nutshell!

Yet pre-tribulation rapturists sidestep this clear passage for more oblique passages. The latter are twisted and turned in order to fit into the "American doctrine." Yet such twisting is not sound exegesis. And for biblically-riveted evangelicals and fundamentalists to commit this drastic error is bordering on the horrific.

All other passages in Scripture relating to the "gathering together unto Him" must refer back to the literal time line provided by Jesus in Matthew 24.

One must not use a symbolic passage in the Book of Revelation or any other symbolically-based section of the Bible by which to draw a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine.

Further, one must not take words of the apostle Paul so as to insert them opportunistically into a conjured pre-tribulation string of Scripture references. Yet this has been done ad infinitum.

Instead, Jesus' literalism of Matthew 24 must be used as the benchmark for all other "gathering together" themes of Scripture.

One starts with literalism and moves into symbolism when seeking to understand Scripture; it is not the other way around.

During the 1970s and 1980s there was much written and preached about a pre-tribulation rapture. This has wound down some in the last decade or so. Why?

Today, with the world situation being what it is, there is not that much risk-taking in preaching dogmatically the pre-tribulation rapture. Why?

Is it because there are many who are beginning to question its validity? Is it because the world state is so uncertain that to go out on a limb with a false hope may ricochet?

One wonders, with world events progressively becoming more and more anti-Christian, why the pre-tribulation rapture persons are not celebrating each dawn as the day when Jesus may return to earth.

Such is not the phenomenon on a large scale. Furthermore, it may be because the next generation has not bought into this notion.

In any case, it is a myth, a legend of conservative Protestantism's own conjuring and has no base in the Holy Scriptures.

Yet these very Protestants are the ones who ardently point out the myths of Catholicism while holding to some of their own myths. Both segments of Christendom need to do some serious housecleaning of manufactured legends in order to return to the simple Bible truths; otherwise, the church suffers from severe lack of knowledge.

What is so frightening about holding to a pre-tribulation rapture? It is more than mere academic quibbling. Holding to such a notion is drastically weakening the church worldwide.

The church should be preparing for spiritual battle against the most evil forces arrayed by hell.

Instead, the church is languishing with a false hope. This is all orchestrated by the demonic powers in order to eventuate in a limp army of believers. And to see that through in this age of laxity in religion does not take much on the part of the dark powers. In addition, the apostate segment of religion is doing its fair share of blackening truth.

Does it take much intelligence to realize that there are awesomely wretched days yet ahead for the righteous remnant?

Those who are not strong will drop--fall away, as biblically predicted. They will be too numerous to contemplate. But for those who are truly into carrying the daily cross there will be nothing able to thwart their zeal for Christ.

Already the remnant is being strengthened by the Spirit of light. He is gathering His own together in the power of the resurrection and the might of the revealed Word. There numbers are few; but their ardor before the Father is lovingly honored.

Set your vision upon the difficulties yet to be. They are but the trials permitted by the coming Christ.

At the close of the tribulation period, then there will be the gathering together of the believers from the four corners of the earth. They will greet Jesus in the clouds as He descends through space, having left the right hand of the Father in heaven.

The gathering together ("rapture") and the second advent then will be realized as one and the same event occurring at the end of the tribulation time frame. Jesus' declaration in Matthew 24:29-3l states it clearly.

Those people who were deported could have stayed right where they were, and those who were left in the Land after the deportation (2Chron.34:6) did as well.

2 Kings 17:6 In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.

Have looked on a map for Medes?

See where it is? See the Black Sea above it?

Notice how far from the northern kingdom lands the Israelites were placed? You also might note where Turkey is.

I guess you're saying that "deportees" also apply to Judah when it was taken by the Babylonians.

No need to record an event that didn't need to happen.

There is now, evidently.

Good try though.

That is a false assumption on your part, based on another false assumption that a large number of Israelites were needed to complete Hosea 1, in the present, which is in fact, a future Millennial prophecy.

Nonsense.

But you have constructed a logical view that is based on it and cannot deal with anything that contradicts those assumptions, so you keep repeating them as if they are facts, which they are not.

Right back attcha.

No one has ever said that the 10 tribes went back as did the Southern tribes, only that people from all 12 tribes were in the Land, and that they have merged to become known today as a single people-Jews.

You've changed your story again.

You have no proof of your assumption. I am completely sure there were some of the northern tribes mixed in with the southern. I can't see how this seems important to you.

A whole lot of the northern tribes are missing. You would have to presume them all dead. Where did you get this assumption?

Do you have any evidence of that at all?

Look at the map again.

Well, your theory is wrong, Americans are not Israelites.

That's not my theory. My theory is that the entire globe is packed with the seed of Abraham (and of course not through Ishmael). This is to whom God's promises are made. And it was clearly made via bloodline.

And God's plan for "the Jew", as you say, that is to say, Israel, was pretty much spelled out in Genesis, and the current Jews have accomplished none of it, nor anywhere in the past has Israel blessed all nations.

Sounds to me that your sect has put together a rather weak set of assumptions, none of which work out when examined closely.

I can see why you would be exasperated.

No, a 'hypothetical' can rejected if it is seen as irrelevant.

No, a hypothetical can never be irrelevant. It is a hypothetical.

So, you view that the Americans (and Western Europe) must be Israelites in order to fulfill Hosea 1 doesn't hold up, if most of them end up being destroyed before the Kingdom is set up.

No, my view is that much of the world by this time is populated by the seed of Abraham.

If you are interested in finding the truth, you will discuss what I am saying, not what you think that I should be saying.

I understand what you're saying. You're saying that all the northern kingdom was wiped out except for a small number of each tribe that became part of Judah. Then, when Christ comes, the "sands of the sea" Hosea would be fulfilled by Israelites being raised from the dead and will choose Christ as their king.

I'm saying this all conjecture based on interpretations of scripture made from a preconception. That means, you did not read any of what snippets you posted to me and the meaning forced you to the ideas you hold,; you had the ideas first, then searched for scripture that would support it.

Is this not true?

Instead of dealing with hypothetical, deal with what actually is and will be.

You do not know what is and what will be. Neither do I. The notion that you do I would call arrogance.

Prove that the northern kingdom vanished with nothing but mere traces left in Judah.

Look at the map in the last post. Geography is most important to those without automobiles, trains, and planes.

Assyria fell in 612 BC. Judah was captured in 590 BC, and returned in 540 BC. At no time is there any evidence at all there were members of the northern kingdom present in their home lands as any population at all.

Prove there was, other than a couple of hundred that avoided the Assyrians, then prove there were representative of each tribe, which you must do for prophecy to be fulfilled when you say it will.

Then show me credentials of the Arch Angel that visited you and revealed God's plan, when it will happen, how it will happen, and how it will manifest in material reality.

You sure didn't get it from the Bible.

I have another question for you Diego.

I haven't forgotten you.....I have been thinking about this and I see that [Genesis 15:12] is the only scripture that defines darkness as 2825. chashekah (khash-ay-kaw') darkness; figuratively, misery. In other words.....a state of mind. The other scriptures show it to be 6205. araphel (ar-aw-fel')gloom (as of a lowering sky. In other words....actual dimming of light.

"Chashekah" is also used four more times in Hebrew scripture: [Psalm 82:5] They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

[Psalm 139:12] Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

[Isaiah 8:22] And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness.

And.....[Isaiah 50:10] Who is among you that feareth the LORD, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? let him trust in the name of the LORD, and stay upon his God.

I think we would both agree that the darkness written about here would be "spiritual" in nature.....as in....not following truth (light).

On the other hand the places in scripture where "araphel" is used show it describing actual cloudy, gloomy conditions .....sometimes even speaking of the cloud where God had hidden himself from the Israelites [Deuteronomy 4:11/5:22].

When I think of darkness I think of Satan. What does all this darkness mean?

There is no doubt that Satan would love to keep humanity in the dark as he has been doing....very successfully....for some time now. Satan was once described as the "Morning Star" [Isaiah 14:12]....hardly an example of darkness, but now he is the "Prince of Darkness"....so to speak and his cohorts certainly dwell in darkness today [2 Peter 2:4] For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.

[1 John 1:5] This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

There indeed appears to be a stark difference in the road we will ultimately choose.....and separation from God will be eternal darkness.

I have another question and also an observation.

I'm not at all certain of the Hebrew calendar. Did we just complete a Jubilee year or are we now going into one? What is the equivalent of Hebrew months to our May through September? At one time I had a copy of the calendar but can't place it now.

As for the observation....In reading in Isaiah this morning something caught my eye. Chapter 14 is about Lucifer being brought down and in it I see a type of Saddam Hussein. The prophecy certainly fits:

Isaiah 14:9 Hell from beneath is moved for the to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.

11.Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

12.How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

15.Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

16.They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

22."For I will rise up against them, "saith the Lord of hosts, "and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew,' saith the Lord.

He certainly shook the nations and their leaders. Hell is certainly waiting for him (I shouldn't judge so I'm guessing here). We pulled him out of a pit and what a sight he was. As far as vs.22 his sons were killed (maybe even a nephew or two).

I believe Daniel also references him as a type in his prophecy about Nebuchadnezzar:

Daniel 4:25That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will.

33.The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws.

Seven months passed from Saddam's statue being toppled until he was pulled out of the pit, his spider hole (or should I say serpent hole?) and again, do you remember how he looked? Hair like eagles' feathers, etc.

The statue itself is very interesting. Daniel described the king's dream and said:

Daniel 2:28 But there is a God in heaven That revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days.....

Daniel goes on to tell him that the statue's weakest point is:

2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

Where did the statue of Saddam fail and who pulled it down? It bent at the ankles and was taken down by someone who was "formed of clay". This is as it will be with Satan in that the elect, a mixture of clay, are his weak spot.

In that same chapter where Daniel described the statue we see that the makeup of the statue represents various kingdoms and that the head of gold was Babylon. In Daniel 8:2 we see that Babylon/Iraq is no longer important and has switched to Iran of today. In 8:19 the angel tells Daniel what will happen in end times and this concerns Iran.

So....After taking the long way around to get to my point, or observation, it was necessary to show what I belive is the importance of Iran in prophecy of end times.

Keeping that in mind we now go back to Isaiah:

Isaiah 14:29Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.

A warning for us not to rejoice that Saddam is gone because he's being replaced by another serpent. What caught my eye this morning was that the fiery serpent of Persia/Iran is flying to the United States this morning.

John 8:44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

We are certainly living in interesting times as shown in the film Douglas KC linked us to, a time in which all prophecy will be fulfilled.

So...That is what has been on my mind this beautiful morning. Just thought I would share it with you and DouglasKC. Please let me know about the calendar question. .........Ping

I'm not at all certain of the Hebrew calendar. Did we just complete a Jubilee year or are we now going into one?

I think the simple answer is that nobody really knows anymore. I found some good information at biblestudy.org

I personally believe the reasoning here:

According to William Whiston's footnotes to Josephus, 24 B.C. was a Sabbatical year, and 23 B.C. was a Jubilee year. This would mean that A.D. 27 was a Sabbatical year, and A.D. 28 was a Jubilee year. If this is true, then 1977 was a Sabbatical year and 1978 a Jubilee year. Sabbatical years would occur in 1985, 1992, 1999, 2006, 2013, 2020 and 2027, with the next Jubilee in 2028.

According to this reasoning, it's not till 2028. I don't believe there's a way to prove it biblically though.

Your observations are interesting. I haven't studied a whole lot of prophecy other than those that are clearly end time. In Isaiah 14 though some of the preceding verses don't seem to indicate a time table of today. For example:

Isa 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!
Isa 14:5 The LORD hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the scepter of the rulers.
Isa 14:6 He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, he that ruled the nations in anger, is persecuted, and none hindereth.
Isa 14:7 The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.
Isa 14:8 Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us

I could be wrong, but I thinks it's indicating a more peaceful time than now. But it's possible that certain sections of scripture can be applied to other events. I'm not a prophet so I don't know. :-(

I think the simple answer is that nobody really knows anymore. I found some good information at biblestudy.org

Thank you Douglas. I have your link, as well as Diego's, on my favorite's list now. After reading it I agree with you in that it sounds like it will be 2028. The odd thing is I could swear I heard it mentioned before that 2007 was a Jubilee year.

Can you imagine this nation actually doing what was proposed in the article - forgiving debt every seven years? At first it sounds terrific for many people but knowing how people are it wouldn't be long before they were purchasing "things", cars, homes, etc. that they could never afford........Say, isn't that what is happening now?

Is.14:4-8...I could be wrong, but I think it's indicating a more peaceful time than now. But it's possible that certain sections of scripture can be applied to other events. I'm not a prophet so I don't know. :-(

What a sad face. Not to worry we don't need any new ones as God sent all we would ever need.

It looks like the verses you referenced, Is.14:4-8, are about God taking sorrow away. Babylon, the great harlot, I believe, is symbolic of the people carried away by Satan when they followed him in the one world system and false religion that he brings. So...it does seem the world is finally at peace in vs.7 and that means Satan has been done away with, at least for a time, and we aren't under his influence any longer.

The rest of the chapter is in reverse order in that verse 9 tells us how he will fall, how he will be "brought down to the grave", whereas the first part was after that fall. The remainder of the chapter deals with how God will accomplish it. In vs. 25 we see the "Assyrian", which is another of Satan's names.

The chapter is about Satan but Saddam Hussein certainly is a strong "type" for him, as Nebuchadnezzar was. One of the differences is that Nebuchadnezzar ended up loving God. I don't think that happened in the mind of Hussein.

I see what you mean about us not being in a "peaceful time" as in vs.7 but I still feel that much of this chapter is teaching with types. Sort of a heads-up on things coming to a conclusion. In other words, Father is saying....Wake up and look around you!

Anyway, that's how I read it :-)

.........Ping

Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days";..........How do you answer folks when they give the above scripture as a reason to not follow food laws, Sunday worship, etc.?

Let's look at verse 8: Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. This is the subject of the chapter....freedom from "HUMAN" traditions.

Verse 14: Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. 1378. "Ordinance" dogma (dog'-mah) a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical) decree, ordinance.

Paul is speaking to the folks about man made law.....not God's law....but Talmudic law. This is the same law Our Saviour speaks of in [Mark 7:6-9] He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Christ's sacrifice did away with animal sacrifice, priestly duties and other physical requirements: [Hebrews 7:12] For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Many new Christians who had formerly been Jews continued to be burdened by their former beliefs. The Temple even had a literal wall separating Jews from Gentiles and Gentiles dare not pass through it. It was difficult for some to forget these past "Ordinances" and Peter himself had been affected by it: [Galatians 2:11-12]

On the other hand Gentiles had pagan influence in their background with it's restraints and regulations also and Paul, here....is telling these folks not to be troubled if anyone criticizes you for for observing a Feast Day, a Sabbath or any dietary requirement taught by Paul. He is saying......"Don't let people judge you for doing these things"!

[Ephesians 2:15] Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in "ordinances" (DOGMA); for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace. Many people believe these verses and passages are referring to God's Laws being done away with. Nothing could be further than the truth.

[Revelation 14:12] Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Deuteronomy 4:40] Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, for ever.

(Mark 3:19-21, 31), during the period when he was preaching, Jesus' relatives, his mother and his brothers, believed that he was mentally ill.

Young's Literal Translation[Mark 3:21] And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.

The friends referred to here, are not his family. His "Family" (mother and brothers) arrive in verse 31. Mark records them saying nothing! His sisters could have been with "The Friends". He was in Galilee so it is quite conceivable that some of these friends could have been neighbors or previous acquaintances.....but they were not his mother and brothers.

Luke records the same event [8:19-21] but does not mention the "Friends" calling Him crazy. The "Family" says nothing!

We know that Mary is aware of His power and Messiah ship as scriptures confirm her receiving this revelation from the Holy Spirit.....no need to dwell on that. [John 2:5] Mary simply says, (knowing his power) "Do whatever he tells you". No where in scripture are we told that Mary doubts Him at all ....or thinks that He is crazy! The brothers....on the other hand, do not feel the same!

It seems that the John 7:5 verse wouldn't agree with that. Yup!

The brothers were very jealous of Him, hated Him and wanted Him dead! This is one of the reasons you see none of them (there were four) at the tomb and why Jesus gave to John, his cousin....the responsibility of caring for His mother. Our Lord did not select any of His own brothers to be an Apostle and none was selected to be a replacement for Judas.....so their standing among the Apostles could have been quite suspect also.

[John 7:1-5] After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him. Now the Jew's feast of tabernacles was at hand. His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest. For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world. For neither did his brethren believe in him.

As you read this scripture you can just visualize the sneers and hear the taunts from His brothers. They knew the Jews had it in for Him....wanting to kill Him, but they were telling Him to go to the feast, putting Himself in jeopardy. He goes anyway....without His brothers knowing it (verse 10).

Our Lord had a special childhood and as such His brethren may have taken on their jealous nature during this time. These brothers are mentioned in [Acts 1:14] as being in prayer with Mary early after the resurrection and they may have been rehabilitated and now considered believers (verse 15)....I'm not sure. Still, 15 years later, Peter...having escaped from prison felt it not safe to stay with the brothers [Acts 12:17]. James, the Apostle, had just been killed....and Herod had noticed how it had pleased the Jews (verse 3) so in attempting to kill Peter he figured he would get "The Grand Poobah". It backfired (verses 6-9). At this time in Jerusalem things had changed radically from shortly after the formation of the church at Pentecost. Early on, thousands were becoming Christians daily [Acts 2:41] and people attempted to place sick folk in Peter's shadow [Acts 5:15]. Something had changed in this short period of time since the first "Christian" Pentecost and Herod noticed that by killing Apostles........it pleased the Jews! Why?

Peter was afraid of James {Galatians 2:11-12] and as Bishop of Jerusalem [Acts 15:19], James carried a lot of authority. We are speaking of The Lord's brother here [Galatians 1:18-19]....not the Apostle James (and cousin of Our Lord) who was killed by Herod [Acts 12:2]. How ever did James become the bishop of Jerusalem....with all his baggage?

Why did Peter instruct the folks at John Mark's mother's house [Acts 12:12-17] to go and tell the "brothers" what happened? Why didn't he just send word to the Apostle John or some other Apostles? Why is Peter reporting to them (the brothers)? Were they his superiors in the Jerusalem church? We know that James is head of the church in chapter 15 so it stands to reason that by A.D.49 (date of the Council) the brothers are firmly in control of the fledgling Christian Church.

[Acts 12:1-3] Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) It kind of makes you wonder just "WHO" of the church wouldn't have been vexed????? Surely, by the next morning, the entire city of Jerusalem would have heard of Peter's escape. Why does Peter want James to know this in the middle of the night?

[Matthew 13:54-58] And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things? And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

This was Our Lord's own statement about His brothers. They gave Him no honor or respect. This was His opinion of James, Joses, Simon and Judah.....and evidently His sisters also! There is no place in scripture where it is said His own family (brothers and sisters) honored Him. James writes in his own book that he is a servant of Jesus Christ....but never mentions the resurrection. There is no indication anywhere else in scripture that he is saved....except his own words in [James 1:1].

[John 7:6-10] Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready. The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

See the difference in Our Saviour's opinion of Himself.... and His brothers. The world cannot hate them because the world is evil! The world hates Him....because He testifies of it. We sometimes forget how much Our Lord was hated. In the Gospel of John itself there are twenty instances of people trying to harm Him or kill Him.....and this included his own flesh and blood.

Well.....15 years later Peter is evidently subservient to these same brothers.....and he is fearful of them. There was division in the early church and James and the brothers were leaders of one of the factions.....the circumcision faction [Galatians 2:4][Galatians 2:12]! These brothers did not honor Our Lord, they were not picked to be disciples nor chosen as Apostles, Our Lord said the world could not hate them, they evidently sought Our Lord's capture, imprisonment and death at the Feast, Our Lord did not entrust the care of His mother to any of them, not one was even considered to replace Judas.....but one became the leader of the Jerusalem Church!

Yes....your "Jewish" friend did have an interesting question.....and most folks are not aware of the answer. Our Lord's brothers were indeed suspect. The fact he groups them in together with Mary in some kind of conspiracy just means that he hasn't been taught New Testament scripture correctly. Not hard to understand that!

Enter Paul!

1Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

11 Samuel 24:1 And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”

Chronicles was written after Samuel so it is fair to say Ezra or Nehemiah....whom ever the author was...... simply referred to Satan as the instigator of the entire affair of II Samuel. It was understood that David had been influenced by something evil.

The numbering of Israel and Judah was for military purposes and the question would be.....who was the "he" in [II Samuel 24:1]?

The victories always came from God by Israel doing exactly what The Lord had instructed. God did not need the armies counted! Sometimes it only took a few Israelites to destroy an entire enemy force....sometimes a single man. God always overpowered the enemies of Israel through "HIS" supernatural power.

The "he" was not God....it was Satan and by the time I Chronicles was written, it was common knowledge that David had been influenced by Satan to do the census.

[I Chronicles 21:1-4] And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. And David said to Joab and to the rulers of the people, Go, number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan; and bring the number of them to me, that I may know it. And Joab answered, The LORD make his people an hundred times so many more as they be: but, my lord the king, are they not all my lord's servants? why then doth my lord require this thing? why will he be a cause of trespass to Israel? Nevertheless the king's word prevailed against Joab. Wherefore Joab departed, and went throughout all Israel, and came to Jerusalem.

[II Samuel 24:1-4] And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people. And Joab said unto the king, Now the LORD thy God add unto the people, how many soever they be, an hundredfold, and that the eyes of my lord the king may see it: but why doth my lord the king delight in this thing? Notwithstanding the king's word prevailed against Joab, and against the captains of the host. And Joab and the captains of the host went out from the presence of the king, to number the people of Israel.

Joab knew this wasn't from God or he would have not said what he said! He knew this was not a good thing and he let his opinion be well known. He says basically, "God has always given us the right amount of men to do the job. Why do we need to count them?" Well....the King's word was law and David's orders were law. Remember, the instigation was by Satan....and Satan wanted the census taken....to undermine the Holy protection offered to Israel by The Lord God! Satan wanted the folks to turn inward.....to themselves for their own protection.....ignoring God.

Joab knew exactly what was going on and he was dead set against it.....but, he was not in charge! He tells David that the only time Israel needed to be numbered was when Moses had taken the census in Numbers which then allowed a fighting man to be listed on the roster and allowed him to claim land for his family in the promised land. This is now over four hundred years later and David is no longer depending on The Lord God for his victories!

Finally.......[I Chronicles 21:8] And David said unto God, I have sinned greatly, because I have done this thing: but now, I beseech thee, do away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly.

And......[II Samuel 24:10] And David's heart smote him after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly. If the census had been requested by The Lord as your correspondent seems to think.......why then would David ask for forgiveness.....from God?

Thank you for your quick and thorough response.

I’ll give her your explantion of those scriptures today and see if she listens or not.

She has an enormous ego and it isn’t completely unfounded as she also has an enormous intellect but one tires of the subtle, and at times, not so subtle, reminders about it.

She hints that her vast knowledge of the Bible and knowing so many hidden things (such as God and Satan being one), are from what she calls “personal experience.” She never elaborates but dangles her, what I term, “magic carpet ride” with God in front of the rest of us lowly mortals.

Normally this would be easy to ignore....using the kick the dust off teaching, but so many very impressionable young people think she is all knowing. They are involved in things God explicitly tells us to stay away from, such as homosexuality, worshipping mother earth or various other mythological garbage or she tells them there really is no devil....not to worry, all of you are going to be fine.

She is tickling their ears and they believe her. I truly wonder at times who has really been instructing her in her “personal experiences.” I think of the serpent in the garden twisting the Words of God and leading some astray.

I know that sounds “far-fetched” but it is how I feel. Knowing that, I hope you won’t mind getting more questions, that is, if she continues to talk to me because she actually challenged me yesterday. She said that if I found it necessary to continue to correct her that we could consider it a biblical fight. So....a bloody, beat-up Ping may be asking questions from a superior weapon ~ Diego.

Thank you again,

...........Ping

I have an interesting question for you.

On another forum someone asked the following question:

When the Israelites left captivity, they left in a hurry, but took their livestock with them. In Exodus 10:25 Moses tells Pharaoh they needed the animals for sacrifices and burnt offerings, In Exodus 16, the Israelites are grumbling because they are hungry so God send manna for them to eat. We know that they still had the livestock, because in Exodus Chapter 17 they are grumbling again for water for themselves and their cattle (livestock).

Were the cattle (livestock) only for sacrifice? While they were wandering in the wilderness, they weren’t very obedient and it doesn’t tell us that they kept the Passover. While they were camped at Mt. Sinai there was some shenanigans going on (making a golden calf and such).

Once the generation died that had left Egypt and they were ready to finally enter the Promised Land, the first thing they did was get back into fellowship with God. They re-established the covenant of circumcision (Joshua 5:7-9) and they also celebrated Passover for the first time since they left Egypt. At this point the manna stopped.

Now, my question is, since they were not obedient to God for all those years, why didn’t they eat the cattle? They stopped and camped along the way, so they could have done butchering. The animals came with them and didn’t all die off (young ones had to have been born). God did send them quail, but I just can’t find a satisfactory reason for them not to have eaten the cattle. What do you think?

Well....what do you think? One of the answers was that there wouldn't have been an abundance of cattle (because of the plagues in Egypt) so they conserved them. It seems a 40 year span would have given them time to multiply.

Anyway, it's an interesting question and I wondered what your thoughts would be.

........Ping

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.