Posted on 08/10/2010 2:09:49 PM PDT by Viking83
If you could ‘see’ in the magnetic spectrum, you would see that this planet is now thoroughly filthy, wrapped in the electromagnetic envelope of porn and lies, etc. All one needs to ‘receive’ the filth is the tuned receiver of the constantly ‘there’ around us of the electromagnetic waves carrying the filth, covering our world with the filth, tainting beyond human understanding the gleaming jewel God created originally for the human family as dwelling place. The tribulation severity will cleanse this filth away, in prep for the new, clean place for human dwelling, humans ‘redone’ as God intended ... now learn of the thousand year slice when the author of lies a murderer from the start will be loosed and destroyed in the end.
” most Catholics don’t know what they believe”
Dream on.
My friend, the process of canonization of the books of the Bible cannot be fully attributed to “Catholic Councils”. The process of determining the canonized books was a process that occurred over a three hundred year period. Most of the NT canon was accepted as such in the first hundred years, before there could be said to be a church under the authority of the Bishop of Rome. Believers in Asia and Africa, in many cases having divergent views, sometimes bordering on the heretical, also contributed to the acceptance of canon. Some books weren’t immediately accepted while a couple accepted by some groups did not stand the test of time and were thrown out. By the 4th century when the councils met and the canon was formalized, it was already generally accepted which books were inspired.
You are correct in saying that Revelation is one of the last to be accepted. But, having said that, it was. And, given this, it must be believed to be just as true and authoritive as any of the gospels. Ultimately, the determination of which books are worthy to be called scripture is determined by no earthly person but by the Holy Spirit who resides in all believers.
You got it!
Looking over the thread so far (to post 39), I'm inclined to let the popists and the dispys play dueling cliches.
"We interpret literally!". Yeah right. Where's the gap?
"We gave you the Bible!". Not remotely. Canon doesn't work the way you think it does.
Good analysis. Simple, logical to follow, backed by Scripture.
God’s going to act like a parent. The good kids aren’t going to get punished for the actions of the bad ones. Why would the faithful in Christ have to endure the tribulation?
God’s not a bureaucrat. “Oh well, you just happened to land your existence during a sucky period, so you get hit with a giant comet for your trouble.”
Incorrect.
Men and institutions make a determination about which scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Look at the difference between a Catholic (and Orthodox) Bible and a protestant one. They are different because men made the decision to remove or include certain books.
The Ephraem quote of which you speak is from PSEUDO- Ephraem. Meaning the FALSE Ephraem. As opposed to the well known true Ephraem. Ephraem the Syrian, who lived AD 306 to 373. Pseudo-Ephraem, writing years after the true Ephraem, wrote under a false name, falsely ascribing his writing to Ephraem the Syrian. He falsely impersonated the true Ephraem. No one knows the false Ephraem’s true name.
On the second coming, the writings of the true Ephraem, Ephraem the Syrian, are in perfect agreement with Barnabus, Justin Martyr, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hyppolyutus, Victorinus, Lactanius, Methodius, etc., and vitually everyone else who wrote in those times.
Everyone of these writers listed here were what we would call today, post-tribulationists, that is, they spoke of only one second coming taking place at the end of the tribulation. None of them said a thing about a pretrib rapture, or a two stage second coming. They obviously had never heard of it, else they would have addressed the issue. They weren’t shrinking violets afraid to address the issue of two very different doctrines of the second coming, which one is right? far from it, they in fact wrote to set forth what they believed to be the true doctrines handed to them from the Apostles.
So, did the false Ephraem actually believe in a pretrib rapture and a two stage second coming? If so, he assuredly didn’t get it from the true Ephraem. If so, he was a virtual loner, as no one else back then believed it.
Truth is, modern pretribers, casting about trying to find at least one early centuries writer in support of their doctrine, interpret P-D’s (Pseudo-Ephraem) words to mean what they want it to say.
Quoting Dave McPherson here, the last section of P-E “places the resurrection of those who sleep in Jesus and the rapture of those who meet Jesus (details found only in I Thess. 4) at the Matt. 24 coming!” The same post-tribulational coming that the real Ephraem wrote about, in other words.
To summarize, P-E couldn’t have meant a pretrib rapture in the section Grant Jeffery quotes from, because in P-E’s last section he has the resurrection and rapture taking place at the Matt. 24 coming.
Correction, this sentence should say:
Truth is, modern pretribers, casting about trying to find at least one early centuries writer in support of their doctrine, interpret P-E’s (Pseudo-Ephraem) words to mean what they want it to say.
P-E not P-D.
ping for later reading
I read the left behind series and another called “The Christ Clone Trilogy” (which IMHO, was better). One interesting difference between the books was in the LB series, Christians just disappeared, and in The CCT, The spirit left, leaving millions of bodies everywhere and those left behind going WTF!?!? They figured it out eventually.
That could get a little messy.
Are we to be caught up body and soul ?
You said:
“There is one REAL question I have for the non rapturites.”
“There are ONLY two answers and NEITHER support a non rapture position.”
The non-rapture position? Non-rapturites? What are you talking about here? Are you referring to Full Preterists who do not believe in a future rapture?
The “Five Myths about the Rapture” article, is about people who believe in a future rapture, but have different views about when it will take place. Trust me, I believe in the rapture. However, I do not believe it will take place before the tribulation, I believe it takes place at the end of it.
Were you to change your words to this your questions would make more sense:
“There is one REAL question I have for those who do not believe in a pretribulation rapture.”
“There are ONLY two answers and NEITHER support a non pretrib rapture position.”
You are not the first, nor the last to believe that the “Left behind” series is grossly inadequate in telling the truth or even coming close to the way things will be before Christs returns.
However, if you think the Catholics are the ones who have it right, then you are sadly mistaking.
No, the Holy Spirit in His infinite wisdom allowed for the difference so man would not know the whole end. As Christ said when He walked with us. “Only the father Knows”.
Those who claim the Scriptures are man driven are sadly low-balling the Lords purpose in all He does.
I erred, I should have capitalized the word,
“Father”,
I did not mean to insult nor belittle His power and authority by forgetting to capitalize the “F” in Father.
However, if you think the Catholics are the ones who have it right, then you are sadly mistaking.
I noticed the same thing, Vike. The author of that article says nothing about the official eschatology of the RCC - Amillennialism. Amills, of course, are not pretribs, what they believe, however, is as false as pretrib is.
If I were forced to choose between the two, I’d choose Protestant Pretribism. The Amillennial eschatology of the RCC is far worse, in my opinion.
Only thing for sure is this: however God brings this world to a conclusion, it will exactly match with Scripture and will be NOTHING like anything man has conceived. Meanwhile we can all have fun argying about it.
You may want to check this defense of the pre-tribulation rapture position:
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-critics.html
One reason I do not write extensively on my understanding of the end times is because no man knows, and the best we can do is lead others in the proper path that will get them into heaven when the you know what hits the proverbial fan.
End times discussions are interesting and it does bring people to the discussion of Christ, but so soon after the debate begins, the talk of Christ's Salvation takes a back seat to everyone's opinion of the end.
I am reminded of the tale ( I say tale because I do not believe it is based on fact), but the tale of the day a normal street person was giving advise on the stock market in the late 1920's.
Well Joseph Kennedy was walking by and overheard the discussion. Afterwords he contacted his stock broker and told him to liquidate his stocks. When asked why, his reply was,"When normal penniless street bums begin talking and giving advice on the stock market it's time to bail."As the fable continues, within a week the stock market crashed.
I do not mean to say that there are no good lessons to be learned in eschatology, but there are way too many learned and unlearned men who have decided they know better than Christ did when He walked among us, and He did not know the time nor hour, "Only the Father does" as He told His disciples.
I for one have not been given the insight. So the best I can do is look at the evidence from all sides, decide what fits best with the context of Scripture as for making sense. Then with my years of in depth study of Scriptures, my knowledge understanding of history and the historic way men eventually always turn from Him, I can only conclude that some have it close.
Unfortunately for many lost souls, far more (many, many more) are way out there on Pluto in their understanding of both the Scriptures as far as Salvation and eschatology.
Very honest words, Vike. I think there are others out there, confused by the different eschatological positions, that have the same viewpoint as you.
As for myself, a former Dispensational Premillennialist, and after some 40 years of study trying to get to the bottom of all this, I firmly believe the Historic Premillennialist position (post-trib) is the correct and true position. It was the writings of early Christianity, the few centuries after the Apostolic first century AD, that convinced me.
In post 47 I mentioned these writers, Barnabus, Justin Martyr, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hyppolyutus, Victorinus, Lactanius, Methodius. They were post-tribulationists and Premillennialists.
My reasoning was simple. These people lived aprox. 2000 years closer to the truth than we today. Surely, all these could not have been wrong. And they wrote so matter of factly about it. Obviously, because such doctrines as Roman Catholic Amillennialism, and Protestant Pretribism hadn’t been invented yet.
With that fact in mind, I found the Bible to be in harmony with it.
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.