Is The Church Guilty Of Putting...

Why do you and other pastors insist on building a whole doctrine on one proof text? It is hard for me to understand that.

Of course we are to be on guard, spiritual guard and alert to avoid temptations.

However, Christ spoke much more about how we are to treat people and also the example of His life shows we are to go out and help others. He talks little about what we are to believe. He did, when talking and helping people talk about their actions:

"sell all you have................"
"go and sin no more.........."

Christ said nothing about 'end times' to the rich young ruler, the woman at the well, the people he healed, etc.

The passage in Matthew on the judgement stresses what we did, not what we believed:

I was hungry, thirsty, naked, sick, in jail and ye.............................

We are to live in the here and now and not worry about the future .... worry about the problems of today.

I fear you ignore all the examples and teachings of Christ by dwelling on a hypothetical topic; when the Christ will return. In actuality we have been in the 'end times' since Christ returned to heaven.

Live today! Work today! Witness today!

 

But, the "I was hungry and thirsty" was referring to when they were alive on earth. You and I are now alive on earth. It is the now that is important. If we take care of the 'now', then we need not worry or be conderned about the future.

 

The now is all we have in this life. The past is gone and the future has not arrived ... when it arrives it is the now and that is assuming we live until it arrives. All we have is the now. We humans are always in the now. We can think about the past. We can plan for the future. But in the final analysis what we have now is the present moment.

 

If that works for you, then God bless you brother!:godisgood:

 

Luke 21:20-24 with reference of "days of vengeance" being to the parable in Mt 22:7.

So no distinctives one vs. another. Hmm.

Rev 2:22 -- "...I will cast her [Thyatira] into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her [Ephesus, Pergammum, Sardis, Laodicea, and the world] into great tribulation,..."

skypair

 

"Worry looks around, sorry looks back, Faith looks up."

First of all there is nothing hypothetical about bible prophecy, I believe every word of it. Don't you?

Prophecy shows the way to Christ more than anyother subject. To be ignorant of it is a mistake IMHO. It is fulfilled prophecy that proves Christ is who He claims to be. Most of the Bible is prophecy whether in the future or fulfilled. If we ignore it we are ignoring what was meant for us to know. How can we be properly prepared if we have no idea?. How can we witness if we are ignorant of prophecy? How can we say that Christ will return or for that matter know it is true?. You say we should be out witnessing instead. What about your self. How do you witness thinking prophecy is hypothetical?
MB

 

Same passage but in Luke, Jesus appears to answer the disciples question regarding the temple whereas in Mt He doesn't. It is said that it was the Luke passage that warned the Gentiles to leave Jerusalem before 70 AD whereas the Jews were slain.

Hey, I wasn't revealing what Reform believers see. :laugh:

Truth is, the "historical" churches were merely "props" for revealing the future, TC. Such as, isn't it "quaint" (but who cares) that Laodicea had hot springs and cold springs feeding the water system. Is there ANYTHING helpful to us about the "historicities" of these cities? N-n-n-no. John could have mentioned 20 cities. He could have named 7 totally other cities. Tell me what the significance to us is of these actual cities.

And remember, TC, The Revelation is a book LOADED with imagery. And here you stand insisting on literal-only applications!

skypair

 

I don't "divorce" them from history. I merely say that 1) they do not exist today -- literally -- and 2) the importance of even looking at those churches is to study the continuing SPIRITUAL aspects of each.

And do you? I do.

So you are not amil, postmil, or preterist. How about this --- do you see the church preparing the earth for Christ's return as D. James Kennedy did? Is that why you hesitate to identify any church eras? Is that why you refuse to see that the last church is WORSE at "changing the world" than all the rest?

See, Rev 2-3 were definitely NOT written to show us the church converting the world religiously, politically, or economically. But know what? The is PRECISELY what AC's church teaches. And as soon as the rapture hits, he will say, "The tares were taken by the angels and now all "wheat" ["believers"] must gather into my "barn" (Satan's version of Mt 13:30) And those who thought they were preparing the way for Christ's kingdom to come will have self-fulfilled their own prophecy -- the "strong delusion" that Paul spoke of in 2Thes 2:11.

So I don't know if that is your "hangup" but you do seem to hesitate at some important dispy elements.

skypair

 

OK. Just checking. :thumbs:

Yet Rev 2-3 IS scripture, my man! Unconvincing scripture? Is it unconvincing that the church lost her love at a given point in time? that she was persecuted at another period? that she embraced Nicolaitans at yet another? that being "cast into a bed and into [not great persecution, but] great tribulation" is yet another time? What time does "spew thee out of My mouth" represent (have you seen it?)?

A few days ago, it sounded to me like you were searching out the dispy premil view of The Revelation. Where is the "blind alley" that deterred your quest?

skypair