jerry kelso
Food For Thought
jerry,
Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
You should listen to your own brethren.
Dr. Thomas Ice, Executive Director, Pre-Trib Research Center:
"
Irenaeus
Some have thought that Irenaeus (c. 180) could be a pre-trib rapture statement since he actually speaks of the rapture: “the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this [the tribulation],” as noted below:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.[7]
However, the very next statement speaks of believers in the tribulation. When taken within the context of all of Irenaeus’ writings on these subjects, it appears that he was not teaching pretribulationism.
"
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote.
Correct. "we wouldn't taken to the Lord".
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Then why did you make a bogus claim about Barnabas in your post 128?
Where did I say that Barnabas wrote Hebrews?
All of these wrote during the Reformation era prior to the appearance of dispensational modernism. They were unanimous in declaring the apostate papacy to be the antichrist of that era, under which the true Church was suffering.
Their guffaws would have been long and loud at any suggestion of a pretrib rapture which had never occurred.
jgr,
1. I see you understand nothing much about dispensationalism and immanency concerning the rapture or the imminent return of Christ.
2. Most pre-trinkets would disagree and I read the next statement and all it talked about was the recapitulation of the nature of the corruption of the Antichrist.
The snatching away is pre-trib terminology such as 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 and then he quotes Matthew 24:21 which is about the time of Jacob ‘s trouble which is tribulation separate from the present church.
2. New Advent and Freedom watchers. Not that it will make any difference for you will cry wolf and scream heretics.
3. We would be taken to the Lord is what it is supposed to be, got in a hurry.
4. New Advent and Freedom Watcher and Beginning To End.
5. Nothing bogus. Barnabas preached with Paul and Paul certainly did not believe in post rapture 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2.
6. I never said that you said Barnabas wrote Hebrews. I said scholars could not really substantiate he wrote it. My personal opinion I said was Paul.
Just by these kind of replies sure gives the perception that you don’t really pay close enough attention or you are trying so hard to prove your doctrinal stance instead of trying to search and find the real truth.
7. The Bible shows a pre-trib rapture 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; Revelation 4:1 and the Jewish persecution of the time of Jacob’s trouble Jeremiah 30:7; Daniel 12:1; Matthew 24:21 etc.
It shows the Jews will have a nation called Israel like today. The difference is that they won’t be backslidden Isaiah 2; 9:6-7; Jeremiah 31:31-34, Joel 2; Ezekiel 36:25-29; 37:16-28; Luke 1 with Zachariah’s prophecy, Luke 2 and Simeon and Anna as well.
It also shows they will be at the head of the nations Isaiah 2:2-4 which will be the earthly Jerusalem.
David will Be King Over Israel Ezekiel 37 verse 20 I believe.
And Christ over the nations from the same capital, Jerusalem Zechariah 14 if I recall.
8. There has always been dispensational teachings and concepts from the time God drafted the redemption plan.
Paul said he was given the dispensation of the grace of God.
I believe in being careful of making doctrines out of perceptions like many do such as the spiritual jew theory.
But there is no comparison between the two.
The spiritual Jew context was getting on the physical Jew that was disobedient and blasphemous towards the gentiles.
The real physical Jew is one who is truly saved inwardly which was always the case for the law could not save anyone.
It was not for the physical Jew who was not truly saved.
What is interesting to to not is that in vs. 28-29 the uncircumcision that represented the heathen gentile is not mentioned.
Because God has never been a respect of persons he has always made a way for a gentile to be saved whether in the Old or New Testaments. Compare Ezekiel 18:20-32 with Romans 2:25-27.
So the context doesn’t warrant a whole new doctrine called the spiritual Jew theory.
9. A dispensation is a stewardship of an economy. This denotes a caretaker to take care of an economy.
A covenant is an agreement or contract between men, or between men and God.
God made covenants and originate with him. Some are unconditional promises and are usually based on fulfillment of certain conditions. They all relate to the earth and we’re given to individual and representative men and some have been fulfilled and some are still future.
There were many stewards in each covenant.
Many believe that the New Covenant has not happened yet. It’s for Israel to receive their land (Matthew 5:5)
The promise is in Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:7-13.
It’s unconditional and covers the Millennium and the New Heaven and the New Earth. It is based on the finished work of Christ.
It has nothing to do with the church.
10. The truth is that the New Covenant was made in Jeremiah 31:31 with the house of Israel and the house of Judah not according to the covenant that he made in Egypt.
The church was not in effect in Egypt and is not the same kind of physical nation as Israel and Judah.
Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews 8:8-12 are the same New Covenant that will be made with the real Israel Nd Judah, not the church.
That doesn’t mean the New Covenant wasn’t the finished work of Christ because Hebrews 8:6-7 shows this to be true.
So there is only one New Covenant which happened at Calvary.
But to stay true to context Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews:8-12 specifically is the New Covenant to the houses of Israel and Judah.
The reason is so God can fulfill his unconditional promises of the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants.
The only way to believe otherwise is to spiritualize scriptures and their context and not believe that God’s Unconditional covenants that are specifically to them is not true or it ended at Calvary etc. and the church has been amen their place which is replacement theology.
11. It took the reformationists of the 15th and 16th century and the revivalists of the 17th and 18th centuries to remove the crooked and corrupt Catholic Church who were legalistic and power hunger mixed in with the government.
The Catholic Church as a whole we’re Antichrists but not the Antichrist of Revelation 13 for that one will be a man, the son of perdition.
12. The Catholic Church still believes they are the one and only church and all the Protestants are just branches that are their children and have to come into their fold.
There are also some other Protestant denominations that believe they are the only church and they are all wrong.
They either believe you have to be baptized in water or the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues and they are also wrong on those points.
So you are right the CC called anything outside their denomination or belief system, which was more vocal and law in the dark ages. The biggest reason was belief in Apostolic Succession. They were wrong on that too. History records all this historical nonsense and sham.
This is why the CC has had to keep modifying their image. But it’s not working and I am saying this more to the leadership.
This doesn’t mean there are no sincere Catholic Christians because there are.
My father used to teach many that we’re hungry for the Holy Spirit in the charismatic renewal in the 1970’s.
But you cannot hide the truth about the cancerous side of the CC even today. Read the news. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0