What is it?

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

You guys are violating the context of this thead, which wasn't to argue the 894,354,901,899 dispensational theories.

 

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

 

[Dispy]

Jerry, if you do not believe that the Tribulation started in Acts 2, the PLEASE tell me what Peter was referring to in verses 15-20 when he quoted Joel 2:28-32. It has to be that either Peter didn't know what he was talking about, or Joel was not referring to the Tribulation in Joel 2:28-32.

Here are the words of Cornelius Stam in regard to Acts 2 and the quote from Joel:

"While the signs of the last days began to appear at Pentecost, they did not all appear. Indeed, after a time those which had appeared began to disappear again.According to Joel's prophecy, as quoted by Peter, the signs of Pentecost were to be followed by signs both in heaven and on earth, and the pouring out of the Spirit was to be followed by the pouring out of God's wrath.

Thank God, these latter signs did not appear--have not even yet appeared. God had not altered His plan to judge this wicked world, but in matchless love He interrupted the prophetic program, held off the day of judgment, saved the chief of sinners and ushered in the day of grace."​

(Stam,"Acts Dispensationally Considered",Volume 1,p.54).

Dispy,I have never read either Stam or Sadler saying that any part of the Tribulation was ever in effect.In fact,I have already quoted Sadler where he says that the "Tribulation" will not take place until the present dispensation is past.

In His grace,--Jerry​

"Dispensationalism Made Easy"

http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

I also agree 100% with Stam. I have and have read all of his writings at least two time, and some more often.

If the signs of the "last days" (Tribulation) are beginning to appear, that means the Tribulation has started. When those signs stopped, that means that it was interrupted; being they will resume at a later time. They will resume at the rapture of the Chruch, the Body of Christ.

Not all the signs appred because the tribulation was interrupted by the setting aside of Isreal and the ushering in of the dispensation of GRACE.

It it is cloudy and you see the signs of a few sprinkles, that means it is starting to rain. If the sprinkles stop, that means that rain has stopped. If it rains a few minutes later, that means that the rain was interrupted.

You are not telling me what you believe, but if you believe what Stam is writing, then at least you see that Peter is talking about the "last days," the Tribulation.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

 

[nancy70x7]

Dispy,

Daniel 9:27 says "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

The Antichrist confirms a covenant with Israel , and it is that event which begins the Tribulation period. The Antichrist wasn't around in the first century. The prophet Daniel sees the 70th week as one whole week.

The more I consider your belief, the more implausible it becomes.

 

[Dispy]

Dispy,

Daniel 9:27 says "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

The Antichrist confirms a covenant with Israel , and it is that event which begins the Tribulation period. The Antichrist wasn't around in the first century. The prophet Daniel sees the 70th week as one whole week.

The more I consider your belief, the more implausible it becomes.

Can you show me a verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel has to be signed prior to the beginning of the Tribulation? If you do, I would very seriously consider changing my view.

What is Joel talking about in 2:28-32? Is he talking about Pentecost, or the last days. Peter in Acts 2:17, says "...the last days." Aren't the "last days" the Tribulation?

What was Peter talking about in Acts 2:15-20. Didn't he have his understanding of the Scriptures (OT) opened prior to Jesus returning to heaven (Luke 24:45), and wasn't he speaking "as the Spirit gave him utterance" (Acts 2:4)? Do you think that Peter didn't know where he was in the timetable of prophesy? PLEASE clear these things up for me.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord

 

[JerryShugart]

Also, I know of no Scripture that says that a covenant has to be signed PRIOR to the start of the Tribulation. There surely wasn't one signed when the Tribulation started in Acts 2. However, I do believe one will be signed either prior to the resumption of the Tribulation or very shortly thereafter, but at least PRIOR to the start of the Great Tribulation.

Dispy,

As I said,Pastor Paul Sadler places the beginning of the "Tribulation" sometimes after the present dispensation comes to an end.

You asked Nancy:

Can you show me a verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel has to be signed prior to the beginning of the Tribulation? If you do, I would very seriously consider changing my view.

Dispy,all the dispesationalists I know think that the "Tribulation" lasts for seven years and it corresponds to the 70th week of DAniel's prophecy.

Here is what Pastor Sadler says about the beginning of that week:

At the same time, the Anti-Christ strikes a covenant with the nation Israel, which allows her to re-establish the Old Testament sacrificial system. This brings peace to the Middle East.


"And he [the man of sin] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [7 years]: and in the midst of the week [middle of the Tribulation] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation..." (Dan. 9:27).

We believe the Anti-Christ will seek to conceal his identity for as long as possible at the beginning of the Tribulation (Sadler,"The Present Obsession with the Anti-Christ")

He also says:

When this present program abruptly comes to a close at the sound of the trump, Paul says, "And then shall that Wicked [one] be revealed...." In other words, the man of sin will not be revealed until after the Rapture.

I do not know where you got the idea that the "Tribulation" had its beginning already but I have never read that in any of the writings of either Pastor Stam or Pastor Sadler.

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"

http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[Dispy]

Dispy,

As I said,Pastor Paul Sadler places the beginning of the "Tribulation" sometimes after the present dispensation comes to an end.

Previously you posted: "Are you aware that Pastor Paul Sadler teaches that the "great tribulation" remains in the future?"

The "great tribulation" is the last 3 1/2 years of the entire tribulation period. As I posted earlier, I do believe the Tribulation was interrupted probably within the 1s year.

You (Dispy) asked Nancy: "Can you show me a verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel has to be signed prior to the beginning of the Tribulation? If you do, I would very seriously consider changing my view."

Dispy,all the dispesationalists I know think that the "Tribulation" lasts for seven years and it corresponds to the 70th week of DAniel's prophecy.

I will agree with all of them, The Tribulation will last 7 years and it corresponds to the 770th week of Daniel's prophesy. However, I do believe it was interrupted in its early stages.

Here is what Pastor Sadler says about the beginning of that week:
"At the same time, the Anti-Christ strikes a covenant with the nation Israel, which allows her to re-establish the Old Testament sacrificial system. This brings peace to the Middle East.

"And he [the man of sin] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [7 years]: and in the midst of the week [middle of the Tribulation] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation..." (Dan. 9:27).

We believe the Anti-Christ will seek to conceal his identity for as long as possible at the beginning of the Tribulation (Sadler,"The Present Obsession with the Anti-Christ."

It appears to me that Pastor Sadler is saying that the the covenant will be signed in the beginning of the week. That would mean that the Tribulation had already started.

He also says:
"When this present program abruptly comes to a close at the sound of the trump, Paul says, "And then shall that Wicked [one] be revealed...." In other words, the man of sin will not be revealed until after the Rapture."

I agree 100% with that also.

[/size]I do not know where you got the idea that the "Tribulation" had its beginning already but I have never read that in any of the writings of either Pastor Stam or Pastor Sadler.

From Acts 2:15-20.

What was Peter speaking of in Acts 2:15-20 if it wasn't "the last days" - the Tribulation. What are "the last days" in vs 17.


added at 12:55

Here are the words of Cornelius Stam in regard to Acts 2 and the quote from Joel:

"While the signs of the last days began to appear at Pentecost, they did not all appear. Indeed, after a time those which had appeared began to disappear again.According to Joel's prophecy, as quoted by Peter, the signs of Pentecost were to be followed by signs both in heaven and on earth, and the pouring out of the Spirit was to be followed by the pouring out of God's wrath.

Thank God, these latter signs did not appear--have not even yet appeared. God had not altered His plan to judge this wicked world, but in matchless love He interrupted the prophetic program, held off the day of judgment, saved the chief of sinners and ushered in the day of grace."(Stam,"Acts Dispensationally Considered",Volume 1,p.54).

It appears to me that Pastor Stam is saying the the "last days" (Tribulation) began to appear. Wouldn't that mean that the Tribulation had started?

The later signs did not appear because the Tribulation was interrupted.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often, and Love the Lord!

 

[nancy70x7]

The covenant isn't confirmed before the Tribulation, it BEGINS the Tribulation, the 70th Week of Daniel, the last "7" or heptad. The second the covenant is confirmed becomes the first second of the Tribulation. I don't know how I can make it any more plain.

 

[Dispy]

The covenant isn't confirmed before the Tribulation, it BEGINS the Tribulation, the 70th Week of Daniel, the last "7" or heptad. The second the covenant is confirmed becomes the first second of the Tribulation. I don't know how I can make it any more plain.

Where does it say that?

In my post #29 I wrote and asked the following:
I do believe that I did say that the Dispensation of the Law was interrupted by the Chruch age. We have no disagreement there.

I never did say that Daniel or Revelation had anything to say about the Tribulation being interrupted. What I was saying is that Jeol 2:28-32 is speaking of the Tribulation, and that Peter in Acts 2:15-20 is saying that the signs that were being demonstrated was what Joel was saying was beginning to happen, i.e. the Tribulation. This Dispensation of Grace "...was kept secret since the world began." Therefore, one would not expect it to be in the OT.

Either Peter didn't know what he was talking about, or Joel 2:28-32 isn't speaking about the Tribulation.

If the Tribulation that started in Acts 2 wasn't interrupted, then it should have lasted for 7 years and the Christ would have returned to established His Kingdom already.

PLEASE tell me what you think Peter was saying in those verses. I can't find anywhere in Acts 2 or 3 that says that the Chruch, the Body of Christ, Jew and Gentile on equal footing, without distinction, and not under the Law, being started.

Eagerly awaiting your reply.

In my post #32 I wrote and aked the following:
Nancy, I am not basing what I believe about the Tribulation on what Joel says. I am basing it upon what Peter said at Pentecost in Acts 2:16 "But THIS IS THAT WHICH WAS SPOKEN BY THE PROPHET JOEL; And it shall come to pass [/B]IN THE LAST DAYS (the TRIBULATION),[/B] saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh..."

According to Joel says in 2:28-32, these signs are beginning to appear. If Joel isn't referring to the Tribulation, then what is he referring to?

I would appreciate your responding to them.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

 

[JerryShugart]

Previously you posted: "Are you aware that Pastor Paul Sadler teaches that the "great tribulation" remains in the future?"

The "great tribulation" is the last 3 1/2 years of the entire tribulation period. As I posted earlier, I do believe the Tribulation was interrupted probably within the 1s year.

Pastor Sadler says that the "Tribulation" will not come until the present dispensation is over:

"The tribulation is a prelude to the coming millennial kingdom."

He has this under the "Dispensation of Divine Government" which comes after the present dispensation has ended.

The Tribulation will last 7 years and it corresponds to the 770th week of Daniel's prophesy. However, I do believe it was interrupted in its early stages.

It appears to me that Pastor Sadler is saying that the the covenant will be signed in the beginning of the week. That would mean that the Tribulation had already started.

Here is what Pastor Sadler says again:

At the same time, the Anti-Christ strikes a covenant with the nation Israel, which allows her to re-establish the Old Testament sacrificial system. This brings peace to the Middle East.

"And he [the man of sin] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [7 years]: and in the midst of the week [middle of the Tribulation] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation..." (Dan. 9:27).

If the 70th week has already started,then that would mean that the Anti-Christ has already made a covenant with the nation of Israel which allows the re-establishment of the sacrifical system.

Do you think that this has already happened?

You said:

Can you show me a verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel has to be signed prior to the beginning of the Tribulation? If you do, I would very seriously consider changing my view.

Pastor Sadler says that the 70th week will begin when the Anti-Christ makes an agreement with Israel to re-establish the sacrifical system.Do you think that that has already happened?

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

Dispensationalists theories count is now:

674,352,536,849

 

[BillR]

Dispensationalists theories count is now:

674,352,536,849

Do you have anything productive to say or are you going to troll this thread forever.

 

[Dispy]

Dispensationalists theories count is now:

674,352,536,849

Do you have anything productive to say or are you going to troll this thread forever.

Oh just let the KID play. He is just trying to impress us with his ability to type numbes now.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

 

[Dispy]

Previously you posted: "Are you aware that Pastor Paul Sadler teaches that the "great tribulation" remains in the future?"

The "great tribulation" is the last 3 1/2 years of the entire tribulation period. As I posted earlier, I do believe the Tribulation was interrupted probably within the 1st year.

Pastor Sadler says that the "Tribulation" will not come until the present dispensation is over:

"The tribulation is a prelude to the coming millennial kingdom."

He has this under the "Dispensation of Divine Government" which comes after the present dispensation has ended.

Jerry, I again agree with Pastor Sadler 100%, but now lets look at the context in which he said it.

From his book Exploring the Unserchable Riches of Christ" on page 62:
V. The Kingdom Age (Dispensation of Divine Government."

A. God dispenses and justice on the Christ-rejected world (Ps.2:1-12).

1. The Prophetic program will resume. Once again the Jewish nation will be in view (Rev. 7:1-8).

2. The tribulation is a prelude to the coming mullennial kingdom..."

Now let us see what is to resume.
Back in Luke 24:45 Jesus, before returning to heaven, opened the understanding of the scriptures to His disciples. They, of course, had only the OT Scriptures.

At Pentecost Peter and the 11 were speaking as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). Therefore, there is no doube in my mind and Peter and the 11 knew exactly where they were in the timetable of prophesy.

Pentecost was still in the prophetic period. Israel has not yet been set aside. Peter is explaining to his listeners exactly what was happening. He is saying the happenings were prophesied by the OT prophet Joel in Joel 2:28-32. He quotes Joel almost word for word, and really he is telling them that what Joel said, and what was happening is the fulfillment of his (Joel's) prophesy.

The prophetic timeclock stopped when God set the nation of Israel aside. That didn't happen until after Stephen was stoned (Acts 7), which was sometime after Pentecost.

With the setting aside of Israel, the prophetic timetable was interrupted. This also interrupted the Tribulation and the dispensation of the Law.

After the rapture of the Church, the Body of Christ, the tribulation will resume (1. above) and the Law will again be in effect.

The Tribulation will last 7 years and it corresponds to the 70th week of Daniel's prophesy. However, I do believe it was interrupted in its early stages.

It appears to me that Pastor Sadler is saying that the the covenant will be signed in the beginning of the week. That would mean that the Tribulation had already started.

Here is what Pastor Sadler says again:

At the same time, the Anti-Christ strikes a covenant with the nation Israel, which allows her to re-establish the Old Testament sacrificial system. This brings peace to the Middle East.

"And he [the man of sin] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [7 years]: and in the midst of the week [middle of the Tribulation] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation..." (Dan. 9:27).

If the 70th week has already started,then that would mean that the Anti-Christ has already made a covenant with the nation of Israel which allows the re-establishment of the sacrifical system.

Do you think that this has already happened?

You said:

First of all, you have not shown me one verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel and the anti-Christ has to be signed prior to the start of the Tribulation. It wasn't signed when it started at Pentecost. I haven't seen where Pastor Sadler has said that it has to be.

NO I don't believe that the covenat between the anti-Christ and the nation of Israel has been yet signed. I feel certain that it will be signed shortly after the rapture of the Chuch when the Tribulation resumes.

Can you show me a verse of Scripture that says that the covenant with Israel has to be signed prior to the beginning of the Tribulation? If you do, I would very seriously consider changing my view.

Pastor Sadler says that the 70th week will begin when the Anti-Christ makes an agreement with Israel to re-establish the sacrifical system.Do you think that that has already happened?

Please give me his exact quote where he said that. Again my answer to your question is NO!!!

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love The Lord!

 

[JerryShugart]

Dispy,I said:

"Pastor Sadler says that the 70th week will begin when the Anti-Christ makes an agreement with Israel to re-establish the sacrifical system.Do you think that that has already happened?"

You replied:

Please give me his exact quote where he said that. Again my answer to your question is NO!!!

Here it is:

Having control of the kingdoms of this world, the Anti-Christ negotiates a peaceful solution with those nations that are at war with one another. Eventually, he forms an alliance with these nations which serve as his seat of authority (Rev. 13:2 cf. 17:9-13). At the same time, the Anti-Christ strikes a covenant with the nation Israel, which allows her to re-establish the Old Testament sacrificial system. This brings peace to the Middle East.

"And he [the man of sin] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [7 years]: and in the midst of the week [middle of the Tribulation] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation..." (Dan. 9:27).

http://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/articles/999290024.html

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"

http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[nancy70x7]

Dispy,

No, what you said was that you believe the Dispensation of Law was interrupted by the Tribulation. Proof follows.

This is from your first post to this thread:

The present "church age" (dispensation of grace) didn't start until after the setting aside of Israel after the stoning of Stephen.

It was the Tribulation that started at Pentecost (Acts 2:15-20), not the church age .

Now you're saying:

I do believe that I did say that the Dispensation of the Law was interrupted by the Chruch age.

Which one interrupted the Law Age? Was it the Church Age or the Tribulation? You need to make up your mind, bro.

Whatever else you believe, you must believe that the Holy Spirit was given in His indwelling/abiding ministry at Pentecost. Consider Acts 11:15-17. This proves that the Holy Spirit fell upon both groups - Jews In Acts 2 and Gentiles as well in Acts 11. Both groups were BAPTISED WITH THE HOLY GHOST.

As to your question regarding the Joel passage (and Dispy, you seem to be inordinately fixated on this passage to the exclusion of all others...BAD HERMENEUTICS, BRO!), consider this:

That Peter means for his hearers to understand that he is using the Joel passage as an
illustration is made clear by three obvious facts.

First, none of the things that Joel speaksof, i.e., “prophecy,” “dreams,” “visions,” “blood, fire and billows of smoke,” the sundarkened and “the moon [turned] to blood” took place (Joel 2:28, 30, 31). Second, none of the things that did take place on Pentecost, “the sound of a mighty
rushing wind,” “tongues of fire,” “speak[ing] in other tongues” (Acts 2:2–4), are mentioned by Joel.

Third, the application of Peter’s sermon focuses on personal salvation (Acts 2:38, see
also 2:40). There is no offer of the kingdom, no promise of Christ’s return, and no promise of national salvation.

In spite of the observations above, many continue to see Pentecost as a fulfillment of
Joel 2. Can Peter’s introductory statement, “this is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel,” mean anything less than a fulfillment? While it is true that Peter does use the demonstrative pronoun to introduce a fulfillment (Acts 4:11), that is not his only way of using it. In 1 Peter 1:25b, Pete appends to a quotation from Isaiah the explanation that, “This is the word that was preached to you.” Certainly he means, “This is the kind of word that was preached to you” (i.e., an everlasting word). He does not imply that Isaiah 40:6–8 was fulfilled in the congregations to whom he was writing. The context must determine usage and Acts 2cannot be a fulfillment.

The reasons for taking Peter to mean that the events of Pentecost are like what Joel
spoke of are both exegetical and theological. First, Joel speaks of an outpouring of theSpirit on Judah (see Joel 2:28 with the repeated use of the “your” to describe the “allflesh” which will receive the outpouring of the Spirit. Joel 2:32 speaks of Mount Zionand Jerusalem as the recipients of deliverance. Judah and Jerusalem are mentioned in Joel 3:1).

Second, the events spoken of in Joel 2 that precede the outpouring of the Spirit have
not been fulfilled. The heavenly wonders of Joel 2:30, 31 did not take place on Pentecost.The judgment of the Gentiles and the restoration of the land of Israel that follow theoutpouring of the Spirit (Joel 3) have not been fulfilled.

Third, Peter does not specifically say that Pentecost fulfills “that which was spoken
by the prophet Joel.” The experience of Pentecost does not touch upon all that Joel predicted.

Fourth, the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost was for the formation of the Church,
the body of Christ. It is similar to but distinct from the outpouring of the Spirit upon repentant Judah. The outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost is viewed as the fulfillment of the baptism of the Spirit and the beginning of the Church (Acts 1:5; 11:15–17). The Scripture makes careful distinctions and the interpreter should observe them at all times. If the predictions of Joel 2:30–31 are to be taken literally, then some qualification has to be made to Peter’s statement, “This is that.” No matter what qualifier is chosen there is room for debate. Over all it seems most satisfactory to understand Peter’s words as “This is like that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.”

Excerpt from a larger body of text found at http://www.chafer.edu

Look under "Back Issues" of the CTS Journal. It is from Volume 1 No. 1, and is titled "A Doctrinal Study of Acts 2:14"

I hope this convinces you of the error of your interpretation.

If you choose to continue in your abberant belief concerning the events of Pentecost, please do not identify yourself as a dispensationalist. Dispensationalists do not believe that the Tribulation started at Pentecost. For you to claim you are a dispie just gives ammo to people like Augustine_Was_Calvinist, who lives to discredit dispensationalism. You make him salivate, I'm sure.

 

[JerryShugart]

Third, the application of Peter’s sermon focuses on personal salvation (Acts 2:38, see
also 2:40). There is no offer of the kingdom, no promise of Christ’s return, and no promise of national salvation.

nancy,

On the day of Pentecost Peter did in fact tell the nation of Israel if they would repent and return to the Lord then the Father would send back the Lord Jesus:

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you"(Acts3:19,20).

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"

http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[nancy70x7]

JerryShugart:

Acts 3:19,20 did not happen on the day of Pentecost.

Do you really want to complicate this thread further by bringing this up now?? It is an interesting thing to explore, but in a different thread, please!

 

[JerryShugart]

JerryShugart:

Acts 3:19,20 did not happen on the day of Pentecost.

nancy,

I can see no evidence that what Peter said at Acts 3:19,20 did not happen on the day of Pentecost.Perhaps you can give me the Scriptual evidence that leads you to believe as you do.

Do you really want to complicate this thread further by bringing this up now?? It is an interesting thing to explore, but in a different thread, please!

I just saw something that I thought needed correction.And I really do not know how that this could complicate this thread.

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"

http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[Dispy]

GOOD MORNING Jerry:
Went to bed early last night shortly after typing my last post to you. Woke up early with the subject still on my mind.

I layed in bed and got to thinking when I first really believed the Tribulation started at Pentecost. I was taugh, believed and wanted to belive it was the Church age started at Pentecost.

It was in a small church when I first heard my first dispensational message. Prior to that I didn't know what the word "dispensation" even meant.

Prior to being led to a small Church in Riverdale, Ill. one Sunday morning, I had gone unchurched for close to 15 years. Pastor Stam was teaching that morning, and I didn't know that he wasn't their regular pastor (that post was vacant at the time), or that he was the founder and president of The Berean Bible Society.

The Sunday morning he started a series on the book of Acts, and gave an overview of the book. I sat dumbfounded as he answered all of the questions of my youth that no one else could ever explain. (That is why I became unchurched, a long story.) Hey, I didn't even have to ask a question. I became a dispensationalist that very day.

I bought his 4 volume set of "Acts Dispensationally Considered" and have read them at least 4 times. Every time I read them I would keep finding new things that I didn't recall reading before. Also, being he wrote and spoke in the same manner, I could almost hear his voice in the words he wrote.

It never stuck in my mind that he wrote (and you quoted) the signs of the last day began to appear in Acts 2:15-20. It never sunk in that he was talking about the Tribulation.

Going to his teachings, over several weeks, on Acts, I got to know him personally. Also, later on when I retired from the Army and moved back to South Dakota, he would visit our church at least once a year. We would renew aquaitenaces and oh how I THANK GOD for the priveldge of knowing him.

It was some years later, in my own personal Bible study, that I became aware that Peter was speaking of The Tribulation.

Believing that, put a question in my mind that made me not mention to anyone what I believed. I was afraid they would ask me me the question that I had on my mind.

Yes, I did believe Peter at Pentecost was speaking of the Tribulation, but if that were true, then, in my mind, the anti-Christ had to be alive at that time. So you can see why I never mentioned it.

Some years ago, at the Brean Bible Fellowship (BBF) conference at Cedar Lake, Indiana (my wife and I go there yearly), I was talking with Pastor Paul Sadler about Acts 2:15-20 and what I believed. He stated then that what I believed was correct. Then I asked the question that was always on my mind about, if that were true, the the anti-Christ had to be alive at that time.

I liked the way he explained it, and believe he gave me the right explanation. His reply was (don't recall the exact words) was this:

He stated he believes the anti-Christ could possibly be alive today. He would be a very charismatic person who people would follow. He would eventually come to believe that he was Christ, and deceive the many people.

Also, Pastor Sadler stated that he believed that such a person existed at the time of Pentecost, and in every generation since.

His explanation appears very logical to me.

Had forgotten my past conversation with Pastor Sadler until this morning.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!