Doctrines: Islands to Themselves?

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

It has been said is that the most important thing about ones doctrines is their ability to influence the formation of ones intents resulting in subsequent actions. Doctrines have consequences for good or for evil.

We have been discussing end time doctrines and attaching seemingly harmless names to them such as pre millennial, pretribulational, etc. But are they in reality harmless? Does it really matter what view one holds to? Are we to assume that it really doesn’t matter, we all can simply agree to disagree and that such views should not or could not separate true believers nor do any temporal or eternal harm?

My question to the list is does it matter what end time view one holds to? Do any or all of them affect the way we conduct our lives and could any of them have a detrimental effect upon our own lives or those around us? Could our end time views have a positive or detrimental effect upon any nation and the peoples of a nation? Have we really given proper thought to the consequences of our views upon not only our lives but the lives of others as well? What might be a consequence, good or evil, of any particular view point concerning the end times?

 

[InChrist]

As time goes by, as I learn more about our Saviour, and understand more of Scripture, and as I see the state that the world is in, and more importantly the state that the professing church is in... the more I realise that the doctrines we adhere to have far reaching consequences. We only have to look at history and see how the doctrines of the Catholic church had such devistating impact upon the world to understand that what we uphold as truth matters. The internet is such a great way to find out the state of the professing Church not only in your own backyard, but the whole world over. And from what I see and read, it is very sick. I am better understanding why the Laodicean church of Revelation 3 has Christ standing OUTSIDE knocking on the door waiting upon the individuals within who will hear.

The Bible says that the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth, and there can only be one truth... and it is the truth that will set us free. We can be free through salvation and then put ourselves back under bondage just by adding to ourselves doctrines of men.

I think that when we are dogmatic about what we perceive to be truth, we need to be careful. We should ALWAYS be teachable and not as stubborn mules. As soon as I think that I have a handle on doctrine, a question is thrown, or I read a verse, and I have to go back to the drawing boad, asking the Lord to show me and guide me into the truth of the matter.

My folks have been missionaries here in Australia since I was 6 years old, and they have seen some pretty big shifts in church doctrines over the last 30 years. Some that were considered in the 70's to be harmless, not anything to divide over, and now the consequences of those doctrines are coming to bare fruit... the apostate "one world church" kind of fruit.

It seems to me that if the Pharisees, the religious leaders of their day, and the Jews who were God's own chosen people, could have gotten the doctrine so wrong that they missed their Messiah, then a lot of our own crowd who have read and studied the Scriptures and profess to be looking for His Coming could miss the true call of the Lord Jesus Christ into glory, and bow the knee to the anti-type of Christ who comes posing as God. People may think that is a ridiculous thought, but I'm sure that the Pharisees thought it ridiculous that they would crucify their own Messiah until it happened.

I personally believe a lot of the doctrine you adhere to will be dependent upon the view you have of Israel. Is God finished with her or not? Your perspective on this issue is the guide to where you will stand on things future. It will effect whether you believe tongues, apostles, prophets, visions and dreams and all manner of miracles is for the church today or not. It will affect whether you think the Church (and consequently the world) has to perfect itself before Christ returns or whether Christ Himself does the perfecting when He returns. It will affect whether you believe that material wealth and blessings are your right as a believer or not. It will affect whether you believe you can lose your salvation or not. It will affect whether you believe you should be "building the kingdom" (not spiritually, but literally) or not.

My main point is that a lot of error concerning the role of the Church both now and in the future is involved when Scriptures pertaining to Israel are brought in as church doctrine. And do I think that this error is dangerous? Yes. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. Jesus warned against false teachers and false doctrine. Paul warned about false teachers and false doctrine. There will be many at the day of judgment who cry "Lord, Lord", who the Lord never even knew. We probably should take heed.

 

[Ed Edwards]

The correct eschatology: pretribulation rapture2,
pre-millinnial Second Advent of Jesus (physical Millinnial
Kingdom) Futurist, is insperatable from the other Major
Doctrines. No Major doctrine is complete without the
pretriublation rapture1/resurrection1.

Recall these are the Major Doctrines:

Bibliology - The Study of the Bible
Theology - The Study of God the Father
Christology - The Study of God the Son
Pneumatology - The Study of God the Holy Spirit
Anthropology - The Study of Man
Hamartiology - The Study of Sin
Soteriology - The Study of Salvation
Ecclesiology - The Study of the Church
Angelology - The Study of Angels (& devils)

Eschatology - The Study of Last Things

Eschatology is interwoven with the other Doctrines
of the Bible. Obviously i spend all my time making
a living* and supporting the Pretribulation rapture/resurrection
eschatology on the internet, else i would write a book showing
how these great doctrines taught in the Bible all lead ONLY
to the correct Eschatology: pretrib, pre-mill, and futuristic.
(Well, till the Lord comes to glorify us at the pretribualtion
rapture1/resurrection1 - Then the whole Gentile Church will be
Preterists )

*Note - after I wrote this, I retired (in Aug 2006). But
I'm raising two grandchildren in Jan 2009 a 17-year-old boy
and a 11-year-old girl.

 

[Allan]

It has been said is that the most important thing about ones doctrines is their ability to influence the formation of ones intents resulting in subsequent actions. Doctrines have consequences for good or for evil.

We have been discussing end time doctrines and attaching seemingly harmless names to them such as pre millennial, pretribulational, etc. But are they in reality harmless? Does it really matter what view one holds to? Are we to assume that it really doesn’t matter, we all can simply agree to disagree and that such views should not or could not separate true believers nor do any temporal or eternal harm?

My question to the list is does it matter what end time view one holds to? Do any or all of them affect the way we conduct our lives and could any of them have a detrimental effect upon our own lives or those around us? Could our end time views have a positive or detrimental effect upon any nation and the peoples of a nation? Have we really given proper thought to the consequences of our views upon not only our lives but the lives of others as well? What might be a consequence, good or evil, of any particular view point concerning the end times?

I DO believe that those of various eschatologies can stand united in Christ regard the essetials. What we understand about what is to come is not something that is required in the Christian life or walk though it does have a distnct and even large effect in both these areas.

As for eternal harm? No, there is not nor can there be any. Once we die we will know the truth. Or if Christ come (no matter what view you take) we will know the truth then as well and what we were wrong on will not matter any more.

As for Temporal, Yes, I do believe it 'can' have an effect whether directly or indirectly. Here is a quote from a Reformed Amil who is speaking of those who hold to Dispensationalism - in a positive light: (from a previous posting of mine in another thread)

Here is an portion from Richard J. Mouw, a non-dispensational Reformed theologian who is currently President at Fuller Theological Seminary.

By their fruits ye shall know them, and I have benefitted greatly from the spiritual fruits of dispensationalism. Throughout my youth, the majority of my spiritual mentors were dispensationalists. When I first began my personal devotional life, it was a Scofield Bible that I read on a daily basis. Dispensational charts [which MacArthur maligns] hung on the walls at the Bible conference where I worked during my high school summers. At youth rallies and Bible clubs, from itinerant teachers and radio evangelists (including the founder of the seminary I now lead!), in handbooks and magazines, I learned the importance of "rightly dividing the Word of Truth."

Later on I was to hear many negative things said, especially by my Reformed colleagues, about dispensationalism's "heresies." But the criticisms never quite rang true. Dispensationalists were supposed to downplay the relevance of the Old Testament for the Christian life; but some of the best preaching I have ever heard on the Psalms was from dispensationalists. Dispensationalist theology drew strict theoretical boundaries between Jesus as Israel's messiah and Jesus as the Lord of the church; but the Jesus I learned about from dispensationalists was a heaven-sent Savior who showed a matchless love for both Gentile and Jew. The dispensationalist perspective undercut Christian social concerns; but long before I had ever heard of Mother Teresa, I saw dispensationalists lovingly embrace the homeless in rescue missions. Whatever the defects of the older dispensationalism as a theological perspective, it embodied a spirituality that produced some of the most Christlike human beings I have ever known.

One hundred years ago, as dispensationalists anticipated the beginning of a new century, they were not optimistic. They expected wars and rumors of wars. They feared the coming of Antichrist. In contrast, mainline Protestantism and liberal theologians expressed a deep faith in historical progress. They saw the kingdom of God expending in its influence. The twentieth century was to be "the Christian century": war and poverty and famine would be virtually eliminated.

Now, I ask, who had a better sense of what was going to happen in the twentieth century? It seems obvious that Protestant liberalism was simply wrong in its predictions, whereas much of the dispensationalist scenario was vindicated. Why have we not given the dispensationalists more credit for their insights? Who was better equipped to prepare their children for the now much-heralded demise of Enlightenment optimism--the dispensationalists or their cultured despisers?

The answers seem to me to point clearly in the direction of vindication for the dispensationalists' view of history....Because of those theological instincts, as well as their very real spiritual gifts, that I raise up two cheers for the older dispensationalists. [Richard Mouw, "What the Old Dispensationalists Taught Me," Christianity Today, March 6, 1995, page 34].

 

[ktn4eg]

Many "good brethren" may [agree to] disagree on the various points concerning the end times.

IMHO, whatever your view(s) on such matter(s) may be, I believe all of us need to heed Peter's advice as found in II Peter 3:

(v. 11) "Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what matter of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness[?]"

(v. 14) "Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless."

(v. 18) "But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen,"

 

[Matt Black]

I don't think one's eschatological outlook is a neutral matter: it does inform and influence the way you interact with the world. If you're pre-mill, pre-trib rapture, for example, you will tend to have a world-view which states that things are going to get much worse before they get better and that there's nothing you can - or should - do about it. There will thus be a tendency of withdrawing from 'the world' (which was the default position, particularly with regard to politics, of the pre-mill tribe before Reagan's election in 1980 and looks like it may be again in the future), as regarding it as irredeemable, which in turn will lead to a lack of support - or even hostility to - social action-type programs. There is of course also the whole Christian Zionist spin-off from this position as well. The post-mill or a-mill position is more likely to be concerned with attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth, will thus have a more positive and engaging outlook towards social-betterment programs and attempt at least to be more even-handed on the whole Israel-Palestine issue.

 

[Allan]

I don't think one's eschatological outlook is a neutral matter: it does inform and influence the way you interact with the world. If you're pre-mill, pre-trib rapture, for example, you will tend to have a world-view which states that things are going to get much worse before they get better and that there's nothing you can - or should - do about it. There will thus be a tendency of withdrawing from 'the world' (which was the default position, particularly with regard to politics, of the pre-mill tribe before Reagan's election in 1980 and looks like it may be again in the future), as regarding it as irredeemable, which in turn will lead to a lack of support - or even hostility to - social action-type programs. There is of course also the whole Christian Zionist spin-off from this position as well. The post-mill or a-mill position is more likely to be concerned with attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth, will thus have a more positive and engaging outlook towards social-betterment programs and attempt at least to be more even-handed on the whole Israel-Palestine issue.

No offense personally meant here Matt but what you gave is pitfully ridiculous, and actaully the complete opposite as I showed in post from one who IS of the Amil crowd.

Please do not bring polotics into this section. There is a section already set up for this.

But I will agree with you that is does inform and influence how you interact with the world.

 

[Matt Black]

Politics etc is relevant to the issue of religion so I will bring it up when I please, thanks. And your post above agrees with my contention that pre-mill dispies tend to be pessimistic about the future.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Allan: Please do not bring politics into this section

Matt Black: Politics etc is relevant to the issue of religion so I will bring it up when I please, thanks. And your post above agrees with my contention that pre-mill dispies tend to be pessimistic about the future.

HP: I am enjoying the open discussion among all. I believe so far that there have been some good points raised from different perspectives. We can learn many things from positions even running in opposition to what one might believe themselves. My goal was not to post some missive of my own, but rather to listen, learn and then possibly interact as we go along.

In due respect to both Allan and Matt, I believe Matt has every right to bring what some may see as an issue to another that they see as purely ‘political.’

I am reminded of the issue with the issue of whether or not Obama is constitutionally qualified. I was told by many that that was a political issue, or that was a purely campaign issue. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was and still is a Constitutional issue, not a political issue or a campaign issue.

My point is that what one might see something merely political, may in fact not be to others. What one may see as a political move by one may be clear acts of the forces of evil being frustrated by another. What may on the surface seem to be political, may have roots that run far deeper. What one might see as mere political may be as Matt pointed out, clearly issues of religion, good verses evil, the forces of God verses the forces of the anti Christ. I believe ones end times view clearly affects how one labels conflicts, and to who one might yield, (or might be now unwittingly offering their support,) their support to and why.

Continue on. :thumbs:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Matt Black: // ... And your post above agrees with my contention that pre-mill dispies tend to be pessimistic about the future. //

Mat 24:21-22 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of the worlde to this time, nor shalbe.
22 And except those dayes should be shortened, there should no flesh be saued: but for the elects sake those dayes shalbe shortened.

The GREAT TRIBULATION is worse thing that ever happens in World History. My Lord and Saviour, Messiah Jesus was also a tad pessimistic about the future. I have 2000 years more history than Jesus had - and know lots of bad things that have happened in the Earth. Fortunately, I have had my BLACK PLAGUE shot -- have you? Or did your family develop immunity when THE PLAGUE killed some 25 Million people in the 12th Cenury (1101-1200).

 

[LadyEagle]

The post-mill or a-mill position is more likely to be concerned with attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth, will thus have a more positive and engaging outlook towards social-betterment programs...

Matt, since I am one of those pre-mill dispies with a pessimistic outlook on the future, why don't you tell us about your positive and engaging outlook toward social betterment programs and attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth?

What goals do you have? How do you propose to partially build the Heavenly Kingdom here on earth? How long do you think it will take, assuming you were in charge, what would you do? How would you eliminate discrimination against the unborn, for example, as part of your social program? Etc. Thanks.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

LE: Matt, since I am one of those pre-mill dispies with a pessimistic outlook on the future, why don't you tell us about your positive and engaging outlook toward social betterment programs and attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth?

What goals do you have? How do you propose to partially build the Heavenly Kingdom here on earth? How long do you think it will take, assuming you were in charge, what would you do? How would you eliminate discrimination against the unborn, for example, as part of your social program? Etc. Thanks.

HP: May I answer for myself as well? My goal is to do the work of the Lord while there is day. I propose that the spreading of the gospel is in the end the only way to build the kingdom of God on this earth. God says that my task will never be fully accomplished nor will all our efforts combined. In the end souls will not accept our message and hardened heart will choose selfishness over benevolence. All may never even have a chance to hear the gospel let alone accept or reject it. It is as impossible for us as believers to eliminate evil period, and as such we will never end the butcher and murders of those unborn nor even of some of those born. No social program can or will be established on this earth, as long as evil is present, to do any such thing. Still the same, we are told to work while it is day to do all we can to protect the innocents and to carry the gospel forward. It is my full intention to do just that with all the strength and muster I have by the help and wisdom afforded me via the Holy Spirit, and I will leave the results to Him. Duty is mine, the results the Lord's.

Tell us of your plans since you are asking. Answer your own questions for the list from your perspective.

 

[billwald]

It would be nice to see some thread that doesn't get turned into a rant about abortion. How about an "abortion free" sub list.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Billwald: It would be nice to see some thread that doesn't get turned into a rant about abortion. How about an "abortion free" sub list.

HP: Where is the rant Bill? Why would one on God’s side and the side of life call the bringing of attention to the most heinous sin in God’s eyes, the murder of the unborn or innocents, a ‘rant?’

The blood of millions of innocent babies flows from this nations protected offices of butchery. God is not mocked and whatsoever we sow we shall reap. God has vowed to judge every nation that commits such atrocities and we are no exception. Is it that you simply do not like to be reminded of our impending fate or what?

May I suggest a place that already exists for such an abortion free sub list? It can be found at about three to ten beleow the surface of most any sandy beach.

 

[hillclimber1]

Matt, since I am one of those pre-mill dispies with a pessimistic outlook on the future, why don't you tell us about your positive and engaging outlook toward social betterment programs and attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth?

What goals do you have? How do you propose to partially build the Heavenly Kingdom here on earth? How long do you think it will take, assuming you were in charge, what would you do? How would you eliminate discrimination against the unborn, for example, as part of your social program? Etc. Thanks.

I'm also a pre-mil dispensationalist, and I have a pessimestic outlook for the nations, including ours, but an extremely positive hope for millions of people that will face great hardships soon.... I am now retiring, (in the process) and can hardly wait to devote my full time to introducing people to my Savior.....

We can do whatever our individual consciences tell us in "building the Kingdom" but until that glorious day the Lord steps onto the Mt. of Olives, we'll be spinning our wheels..... But, the saved will already be with Jesus....

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Hillclimber: I'm also a pre-mil dispensationalist, and I have a pessimestic outlook for the nations, including ours, but an extremely positive hope for millions of people that will face great hardships soon.... I am now retiring, (in the process) and can hardly wait to devote my full time to introducing people to my Savior.....

We can do whatever our individual consciences tell us in "building the Kingdom" but until that glorious day the Lord steps onto the Mt. of Olives, we'll be spinning our wheels..... But, the saved will already be with Jesus....

HP: Your retirement sounds exciting! Go for it. :thumbs: What I do not understand is what you conceive of as building the kingdom, and that ‘wheel spinning’ comment. God’s Kingdom is not of this world or His servants would have fought. (the Lord has forgiven Peter ) When we work for the salvation of souls we are doing the highest work possible and the wisest work possible in His Kingdom. “He that winneth souls is wise.” Our whole purpose is to win souls and as we do glorify God.

Joh 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

We are kingdom building when we are at the task God gave us. No need spinning any wheels now. We have important Kingdom building work to do now while there is still day. :thumbs:

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

I don't think one's eschatological outlook is a neutral matter: it does inform and influence the way you interact with the world. If you're pre-mill, pre-trib rapture, for example, you will tend to have a world-view which states that things are going to get much worse before they get better and that there's nothing you can - or should - do about it. There will thus be a tendency of withdrawing from 'the world' (which was the default position, particularly with regard to politics, of the pre-mill tribe before Reagan's election in 1980 and looks like it may be again in the future), as regarding it as irredeemable, which in turn will lead to a lack of support - or even hostility to - social action-type programs. There is of course also the whole Christian Zionist spin-off from this position as well. The post-mill or a-mill position is more likely to be concerned with attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth, will thus have a more positive and engaging outlook towards social-betterment programs and attempt at least to be more even-handed on the whole Israel-Palestine issue.

Matt -- I think that's a pretty fair assessment. While one's eschatological views are non-essential, it does indeed impact your world view.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

I propose that the spreading of the gospel is in the end the only way to build the kingdom of God on this earth....we are told to work while it is day ... will leave the results to Him. Duty is mine, the results the Lord's.

Great post there.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Matt, since I am one of those pre-mill dispies with a pessimistic outlook on the future, why don't you tell us about your positive and engaging outlook toward social betterment programs and attempting to at least partially build the kingdom of Heaven here on earth?

What goals do you have? How do you propose to partially build the Heavenly Kingdom here on earth? How long do you think it will take, assuming you were in charge, what would you do? How would you eliminate discrimination against the unborn, for example, as part of your social program? Etc. Thanks.

GE:
Hey, I'm an amill and have a very pessimistic outlook for everything earthy and earthly, and entertain as only bright spark in the future, the coming again of Jesus Christ.

 

[Marcia]

Politics etc is relevant to the issue of religion so I will bring it up when I please, thanks. And your post above agrees with my contention that pre-mill dispies tend to be pessimistic about the future.

Matt, we might be seen as being pessimistic about the future, but I would call it realistic. Also, this view of the future does not preclude for Dispies the Bible's commands to take care of others and to show mercy.