Old folks who think they love old things

[TCassidy]

Tom, my Great Grandfather buried his wife & two of his children & worked a 100 Acre farm in NE Pennsylvania (the old fashioned way--plowing with horses). Bottom line, he lived well into his 80's & he had a handshake like a vice grip. My grandfather lived till he was 88, a coal miner since he was 11.

Maybe hard work has other rewards that we neglect.

My great grand dad worked a farm in Ohio from the time he was 15 years old until his death at 85. His first wife gave him 11 children, and died at age 39. His second wife gave him 9 children, and outlived him due to being 20 years his junior.

My dad died an old, old man at 69 but my mother lived to be 102.

I would love to do a little hard work. Unfortunately, due to a bout with meningitis and encephalitis back in the 1970s I have been left with a heart that only beats 50% as effectively as it should, and with even slight exertion I go into tachycardia. I am also a cancer survivor, grateful for the extra years, but the treatment was almost as bad as the disease.

And on top of all that I suffer from a rare form of MS that is slowly robbing me of the use of my arms and legs, hearing, and sight. I would really love to live long enough to see my grandkids grow up (the youngest is only 5) but if not I have lived a wonderful life, loved and been loved, and I have few regrets. I have finished my course, I have kept the faith, and there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness that does not fade away.

 

[HankD]

My great grand dad worked a farm in Ohio from the time he was 15 years old until his death at 85. His first wife gave him 11 children, and died at age 39. His second wife gave him 9 children, and outlived him due to being 20 years his junior.

My dad died an old, old man at 69 but my mother lived to be 102.

I would love to do a little hard work. Unfortunately, due to a bout with meningitis and encephalitis back in the 1970s I have been left with a heart that only beats 50% as effectively as it should, and with even slight exertion I go into tachycardia. I am also a cancer survivor, grateful for the extra years, but the treatment was almost as bad as the disease.

And on top of all that I suffer from a rare form of MS that is slowly robbing me of the use of my arms and legs, hearing, and sight. I would really love to live long enough to see my grandkids grow up (the youngest is only 5) but if not I have lived a wonderful life, loved and been loved, and I have few regrets. I have finished my course, I have kept the faith, and there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness that does not fade away.

You are on my prayer list brother!

Grandkids are great for the most part, though a couple of ours have brought a little disappointment.

HankD

 

[nodak]

Wow, what a bunch of ageist tripe the OP is.

Really? Really think those over say 60 do not have clue when dispensationalism, many of the newer hymns, KJVO, etc, came into being?

It sounds more like the rantings of a 16 year old who thinks he knows more than daddy does.

According to scripture, younger people are to listen to and honor their elders, not be in rebellion against them.

Sorry, but in our town the churches doing things what were described as being what folks mistakenly think are "old" are the thriving ones. The ones that decided to put the young whippersnappers in charge of everything are the dying ones.

Or as my dad used to say, sometimes listening to those who have been there done that and already made the mistakes helps.

 

[Luke2427]

Wow, what a bunch of ageist tripe the OP is.

Really? Really think those over say 60 do not have clue when dispensationalism, many of the newer hymns, KJVO, etc, came into being?

No, I don't think it. I know it.

I have been preaching long enough and to enough of them to know that most of them have NO IDEA when dispensationalism was born. NONE.

They have NO IDEA what truly old hymns of the faith are.

I said "most" not all.

I do, however, find that the folks in their eighties are ten times more knowledgeable than folks in their fifties and sixties.

According to scripture, younger people are to listen to and honor their elders, not be in rebellion against them.

I'm not a younger person.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Wow, what a bunch of ageist tripe the OP is.

That, and the fact he calls the Rapture a "new doctrine," which is a bold-faced lie. But hey! We rarely want to depart from teachings others whom we respect have given us, even if those teachings are as wrong as winter is long. :laugh:

 

[Luke2427]

That, and the fact he calls the Rapture a "new doctrine," which is a bold-faced lie. But hey! We rarely want to depart from teachings others whom we respect have given us, even if those teachings are as wrong as winter is long. :laugh:

1830, Darby. Even then it took a while for it to get popular outside of the Brethren movement. It was Scofield who made it known to the larger Body of Christ at the turn of the century and it was TBN who made it what it is today.

Before that only an EXTREMELY small amount of people ever espoused a notion even CLOSE to it.

But hey! We rarely want to depart from teachings others whom we respect have given us, even if those teachings are as wrong as winter is long. :laugh:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

1830, Darby. Even then it took a while for it to get popular outside of the Brethren movement.

Often said. Very, very wrong.

Examining an ancient pre-tribulational statement

"All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins." -Ephraem of Nisibis (306-73) [Though the authorship is not substantiated beyond a reasonable doubt, it is most likely the Syrian author/pastor/evangelist's work]

Further, there is this from John Darby, who preceded Spurgeon in the London pulpit by a hundred years.

[URL="http://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/9807/980703_d.html]John Darby and the pre-tribulational rapture[/URL]

Peter Jurieu was a French Calvinist preacher and was considered 'the Goliath of the French Protestants". He wrote in A.D. 1687 about the Rapture and the Premillennial return of Christ. Jurieu discussed the coming of Jesus to translate the saints priour to the time He returns in Judgment. He preached in Rotterdam as one of the greatest of the Reformers in his day. Jurieu refuted the millennial teaching of his day and clearly argued for the premillennial position regarding Christ's return. He also believed that Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the Battle of Armageddon. His book disproves the theory that the pretrib rapture was first invented by Darby. Over 130 years before Darby, Jurieu spoke of a secret Rapture, "a kind of clandestine coming of Christ' prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon. In chapter 24:8:1 he wrote of John's prophecy about the Millennium, "the saints shall reign with christ a thousand years". He commented, "But to me it seems very evident that this reign shall begin with some miraculous appearance of our Lord in His glory. After which He shall go back to Heaven."

I would suggest you stop either denying, misstating, or outright lying about the facts regarding the origin of Rapture theology now, since it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the teaching is not only biblical, but has been around from the beginning.

 

[Luke2427]

Often said. Very, very wrong.I would suggest you stop lying about the origin of Rapture theology now, since it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the teaching is not only biblical, but has been around from the beginning.

That statement is questionable but even if it were undeniably the absolute EPITOME of Darby's new doctrine of the rapture, it still would represent an infinitesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

I already knew about that quote which is why I qualified my statement with "EXTREMELY small percentage of Christians."

My post still stands.

 

[exscentric]

"TBN who made it what it is today."

Upon what assumptions/facts is this based? Facts would be nice not just your exclamations.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

That statement is questionable but even if it were undeniably the absolute EPITOME of Darby's new doctrine of the rapture, it still would represent an infinitesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

Since Paul taught the premilliennial rapture, you're again very, very wrong. Since you can't admit you're wrong, you obviously have no interest whatsoever in knowing the truth, just in forcing your erroneous views on others, so I won't bother with you anymore. Sorry I did in the first place. In order to be reasonable, you have to first be humble. Try learning some before we chat sometime in the next fifteen-twenty years, if then.

 

[TCassidy]

That statement is questionable but even if it were undeniably the absolute EPITOME of Darby's new doctrine of the rapture, it still would represent an infinitesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

I already knew about that quote which is why I qualified my statement with "EXTREMELY small percentage of Christians."

My post still stands.

Luke, you need to do a little more study. Historic Chiliasm has been around since Old Testament times.

"Many early Christian interpreters applied the earlier Jewish apocalyptic idea of a temporary Messianic kingdom to their interpretation of chapter 20 of John's apocalypse. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian all made explicit references to the concept of a thousand year earthly kingdom at Christ’s coming.

"The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, that is the belief of a visible reign of Christ in glory on earth with the risen saints for a thousand years, before the general resurrection and judgement. It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius, while Caius, Origen, Dionysius the Great, Eusebius (as afterwards Jerome and Augustine) opposed it."

—Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church

"Irenaeus and Justin represent two of the most outspoken premillennialists of the pre-Nicean church. Other early premillennialists included Pseudo-Barnabas, Papias, Methodius, Lactantius, Commodianus Theophilus, Tertullian, Melito, Hippolytus of Rome, Victorinus of Pettau and various dissenting groups such as the Montanists."

Encyclopedia of the Early Church

 

[Luke2427]

Luke, you need to do a little more study. Historic Chiliasm has been around since Old Testament times.

"Many early Christian interpreters applied the earlier Jewish apocalyptic idea of a temporary Messianic kingdom to their interpretation of chapter 20 of John's apocalypse. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian all made explicit references to the concept of a thousand year earthly kingdom at Christ’s coming.

"The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, that is the belief of a visible reign of Christ in glory on earth with the risen saints for a thousand years, before the general resurrection and judgement. It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius, while Caius, Origen, Dionysius the Great, Eusebius (as afterwards Jerome and Augustine) opposed it."

—Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church

"Irenaeus and Justin represent two of the most outspoken premillennialists of the pre-Nicean church. Other early premillennialists included Pseudo-Barnabas, Papias, Methodius, Lactantius, Commodianus Theophilus, Tertullian, Melito, Hippolytus of Rome, Victorinus of Pettau and various dissenting groups such as the Montanists."

Encyclopedia of the Early Church

We're not talking about Chiliasm. We're talking about the rapture. Respectfully, if you were well studied on the subject you'd not conflate the two. Millions are the Christians who have adhered to a historic premillennialism over the past two thousand years who would not touch "rapture theology" with a ten foot pole.

 

[Luke2427]

TCassidy, this might be helpful to you in your future eschatological studies:

Two varieties of premillennialism

Premillennialists fall into two primary categories: historic premillennialism and dispensational premillennialism. Historic premillennialism is so called because it is the classic form which may be found in writings of some of the early church fathers (mentioned above), although in an undeveloped form. Dispensational premillennialism is that form which derives from John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) and dispensational theology. It is dispensational premillenialism that first taught the notion of a pre-tribulation rapture.

Historic premillennialists reject the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture and the uniquely Jewish nature of the dispensationalist's millennial kingdom (see below). It is often assumed that all premillennialists are dispensational in their theology. This is a confusion that should be avoided. Historic premillennialists such as George Eldon Ladd are consistent Calvinists who did not accept the basic tenets of dispensationalism.

 

[Rippon]

Further, there is this from John Darby, who preceded Spurgeon in the London pulpit by a hundred years.

Darby was born in 1800. Spurgeon was born in 1834. Study history.

 

[DHK]

That statement is questionable but even if it were undeniably the absolute EPITOME of Darby's new doctrine of the rapture, it still would represent an infinitesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

I already knew about that quote which is why I qualified my statement with "EXTREMELY small percentage of Christians."

My post still stands.

I am sure your post will stand. It always will. I doubt if anyone will delete it.
At least here you have made an admission: "an infinietesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

That is like the thread on education where you made the remark about the home-schoolers and the Christians schools, that those that graduated from them, would not affect the outcome of the statistical analysis because they were such a infinitely small group.
I think that from the time you made that statement you have had to eat some of your words, at least if you are honest. It has been shown or demonstrated that among fundamentalists, (the ones that you were attacking in that thread) the majority of them either home-school or send their children to a Christian school. You were proven wrong then.
No doubt you will be proven wrong here.
That infinitely small number that disagrees with you always ends up to be far greater than you thought it was.

 

[TCassidy]

I think it is time to give up on Luke. He is either too stupid or too arrogant to understand rather simple things.

He fails to understand that Chiliasm taught a premillennial catching away of the saints. Most of them considered that catching way to correspond to Christ's physical return to Earth. Some have called it the "U Turn" rapture theory. Spurgeon wrote and spoke often on this subject.

His problem seems to be that Luke fails to see the distinction between and connection of:

1. Chiliasm (Premillennialism)
2. The catching away of the saints
3. Dispensationalism

The catching away of the saints is an important part of Chiliasm.

Dispensationalism has less to do with the return of Christ as it does with a hermeneutical methodology forced on the scriptures too see the bible narrative as a series of tests, failures, judgement, then a change of dispensation.

The more radical forms have several different "plans of salvation." The truth is, of course, that every age has been an age of grace, and there is only one "plan of salvation" - Christ crucified.

I really wish these young kids would spend as much time in study as they do on the internet. It would do wonders for their ministry, their walk with Christ, and their relationships with others.

 

[Luke2427]

I think it is time to give up on Luke. He is either too stupid or too arrogant to understand rather simple things.

This is the kind of stuff people say when they are upset at being shown to be ignorant on a subject they pretended to know something about.

RAPTURE.

That was what we were talking about.

RAPTURE.

Then you very ignorantly and pompously say I need to "do some more study" because I have not considered that chiliasm is a very old doctrine- which is wrong because I have known about that for many years.

But to every SINGLE PERSON who reads the last two pages who knows BEANS FROM APPLE BUTTER about eschatology they will see that you stepped int it- that you did not know what you were talking about.

Historic Premil DENIES A PRETRIB RAPTURE. PERIOD. EVERYBODY who has spent two hours in an eschatology class knows that. It is eschatology 101. You literally would be tested on that tidbit YOUR FIRST WEEK of eschatology.

But you didn't know. You just pretended to be knowledgeable and pompously spoke down to me.

You stepped in it. Plain and simple.

 

[Luke2427]

I am sure your post will stand. It always will. I doubt if anyone will delete it.
At least here you have made an admission: "an infinietesimally small percentage of Christians throughout 1800 years before Darby who held to such a notion.

That is like the thread on education where you made the remark about the home-schoolers and the Christians schools, that those that graduated from them, would not affect the outcome of the statistical analysis because they were such a infinitely small group.
I think that from the time you made that statement you have had to eat some of your words, at least if you are honest.

No I haven't. I proved it. You, as usual, do not know what you are talking about.

Only 278,000 private school graduates a year out of the 3.3 million. And that's ALL private schools, secular, Christian and otherwise.

Not statistically significant.

 

[TCassidy]

Historic Premil DENIES A PRETRIB RAPTURE. PERIOD. EVERYBODY who has spent two hours in an eschatology class knows that. It is eschatology 101. You literally would be tested on that tidbit YOUR FIRST WEEK of eschatology.

But you didn't know. You just pretended to be knowledgeable and pompously spoke down to me.

I really don't know why I bother with you as you are such an arrogant young pup that you are obviously unteachable. However, I will make one more attempt.

You say, "Historic Premil DENIES A PRETRIB RAPTURE." . . . "But you didn't know. "

I did not say that Historic Chiliasm teaches a PRE TRIB rapture. In fact I went out of my way to include the FACT that Historic Chiliasm often included the "U Turn" rapture theory. That would require a Post Trib rapture, not a Pre Trib, which I never mentioned.

I am sorry I did not use shorter, more easily understood, words. But I (wrongly) assumed you, the self appointed expert on all things Theological, would be able to understand. My mistake.

Now, what part of many Chiliasts believing in a Post Trib rapture did you not understand?

 

[DHK]

No I haven't. I proved it. You, as usual, do not know what you are talking about.

Only 278,000 private school graduates a year out of the 3.3 million. And that's ALL private schools, secular, Christian and otherwise.

Not statistically significant.

Yes I do know what I am talking about. Your statistic is wrong and you won't admit it. How many private Christian schools are there, just the evangelical ones, and out of those just the fundamental ones? Try using a credible source.
Then out of evangelicals how many are home-schooled, and out of those how many are fundamentalist. Again, use a credible source.

Since your target is fundamentalists not being educated or not graduating from High School, I contend you don't have the right data. How many fundamentalists are there in America? How many fundamentalists have graduated from High School? Do your own research for once in your life instead of relying on someone else's skewed report.

Take a look a the thread in the Seminary and College forum: "What Colleges have you attended"
I would submit to you that the person that has the most degrees, is the most educated, has the most education, that has posted there is an IFB.
That in itself gives you some idea that your data is skewed.