The Bible Only?

[JimsHelpmeet]

Just to address the OP, I think commentaries can be a valuable tool so long as proper discernment is exercised. For example, I wouldn't want to read a commentary that was written by Catholics, because it would be skewed in their bias. Same with a Charismatic one. I think Joyce Meyer has a Bible commentary. I wouldn't touch that with a 10ft pole. I have a John MacArthur commentary, but I rarely use it. It was a gift from a loved one, and it was expensive, so I can't bear to just discard it. Still, I have to be careful. MacArthur teeters on Calvinistic and he uses either the NKJV or NAS (I can't remember which is used in my updated edition of the commentary). 

 

My favorite is the J. Vernon McGee set of commentaries. Our head deacon uses these in preparation to teach his Sunday school class. I can't remember which one my pastor uses, but it's another solid KJV commentary that is rather well known. I also use an older version Scofield Study Bible. I try and use it mainly for the purpose of definitions for words I may not be familiar with and find where certain passages correspond to another passage. The chain referencing is particularly helpful.

[AVBibleBeliever]

Actually they are largely synonymous in both languages. You have to limit the English definition to support your point above. I'll use only the English Webster's 1828 for "testament" to demonstrate since you don't like Greek:

 

"the name of each general division of the canonical books of the sacred Scriptures; as the Old Testament; the New Testament. The name is equivalent to covenant, and in our use of it, we apply it to the books which contain the old and new dispensations; that of Moses, and that of Jesus Christ."

Things that are different are not the same/synonymous.

 

A testament remains in effect after the death of the testator

 

A covenant ends when one of the covenanted partners dies.  That is why you will find that God swore by himself to Abraham because Abraham would die but God cannot so his covenant is forever.

 

The blood of the New Testament is not a New Covenant.  While going to the Greek you will find it equivalent you need to study out the the differences using only the Bible Definitions not Webster's and not Strong's.

[candlelight]

Now hold on there, Ma'am. I most certainly Do believe in a catching away of the saints. I just happen to reject the pre-tribulation catching, for a post-trib/pre-wrath catch. If you're going to name names, please keep your facts straight. IN fact, the reason I believe as I do is because there is more evidence of the event of Rev 14:14 as the catching away, because nowhere else in scripture do we see anything like it, but here. Despite an earlier comment by AVBB that 1Thes 4 teaches a pre-trib rapture, all it teaches is the FACT of the rapture-it has nothing at all to do with the time.

 

Revelation 14:14?  

 

'And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle." ~ Revelation 14:14

The white cloud, in this scripture, is talking about the saints (us) who have already been "caught up" in the pre-trib rapture.  The whole pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, etc.  are man made sayings, though.  That is where the confusion lies.  There is only one "rapture".  The word of God speaks for itself.  I have posted numerous scriptures, in another thread, that point to a pre-trib rapture.  I don't even like saying pre-trib, b/c as I said, it is man made.  The rapture is imminent.  The Lord will save us from the wrath to come, as evident in numerous scriptures throughout the KJV.  Also, the scripture below should be noted.

"Behold, I shew you a mystery; (secret); We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed,  In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:  for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." ~ I Corinthians 15-51

So, are the "dead" who are raised incorruptible, going to walk around the earth like zombies?  Think about it.

"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent (precede) them which are asleep.  16  For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God:  the dead in Christ shall rise first:  17 Then we which are caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air:  and so shall we ever be with the Lord.  18 Wherefore, comfort (cheer) one another with these words." ~ I Thessalonians 4:16-18  

You know these scriptures, Ukelelemike.  However, you are not reading Revelation 14:14 correctly.  The words, "white cloud"  should cast some light on the subject, though.

[candlelight]

From my discussion with Covenanter, I understand that he does believe that we will be caught up to meet with the Lord in the air. 

 

You've got to be kidding me, Invicta.  Covenanter doesn't believe in the rapture of the saints.  He referred to it as the "fake rapture" in many posts.

Besides, Calvinists aren't "rightly dividing the word of truth."  When are Calvinists going to see that preterism is not a Biblical doctrine?  

[TheSword]

Things that are different are not the same/synonymous.

 

A testament remains in effect after the death of the testator

 

A covenant ends when one of the covenanted partners dies.  That is why you will find that God swore by himself to Abraham because Abraham would die but God cannot so his covenant is forever.

 

The blood of the New Testament is not a New Covenant.  While going to the Greek you will find it equivalent you need to study out the the differences using only the Bible Definitions not Webster's and not Strong's.

 

You don't like Greek (which I purposefully didn't use here because you would dismiss it anyway) and you don't like English. Ok, fine. Please show me chapter and verse where the Bible re-defines "testament" and "covenant" the way you're making the distinction. There are no instances of "a covenant is..." or "a testament is.." To my recollection, the Bible doesn't come with its own dictionary so I'm not sure how you can know what any of the words really mean if you don't use the English definitions? Is the Bible written in English or in its own language? You can't have it both ways.

[prophet1]

Actually there is no prOBlem here:
"Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:" (Ex 12:5)
A goat kid and a lamb were used interchangably as the Pesach sacrifice, so He could just as properly be considered the Kid of God, though of course the Bible DOES use the term Lamb when referring to Christ, so its better. But there would be no disresepect in calling Him otherwise, unless, of course, it was meant as such.

Not what I meant. Jesus can make Covenants, and can have a Testament. An animal cannot.

Anishinaabe

[prophet1]

Revelation 14:14?

'And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle." ~ Revelation 14:14

The white cloud, in this scripture, is talking about the saints (us) who have already been "caught up" in the pre-trib rapture. The whole pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, etc. are man made sayings, though. That is where the confusion lies. There is only one "rapture". The word of God speaks for itself. I have posted numerous scriptures, in another thread, that point to a pre-trib rapture. I don't even like saying pre-trib, b/c as I said, it is man made. The rapture is imminent. The Lord will save us from the wrath to come, as evident in numerous scriptures throughout the KJV. Also, the scripture below should be noted.

"Behold, I shew you a mystery; (secret); We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." ~ I Corinthians 15-51

So, are the "dead" who are raised incorruptible, going to walk around the earth like zombies? Think about it.

"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent (precede) them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore, comfort (cheer) one another with these words." ~ I Thessalonians 4:16-18

You know these scriptures, Ukelelemike. However, you are not reading Revelation 14:14 correctly. The words, "white cloud" should cast some light on the subject, though.

So John saw Jesus sitting on the Saints?
Weird!

Anishinaabe

[candlelight]

So John saw Jesus sitting on the Saints?sio
Weird!

Anishinaabe

 

So, if this is John's vision, then what is ukelelemike talking about with Revelation 14:14?  I don't understand where he stands with the "catching away."

In fact, I would like ukelelemike to answer this question, not you, prophet.

[Ukulelemike]

How can there be seven trumpts sounding during the tribulation AFTER the LAST trump is sounded when the rapture takes place at the beginning of the tribulation?  How many "Last" trumpets can there be?

[Covenanter]

How can there be seven trumpts sounding during the tribulation AFTER the LAST trump is sounded when the rapture takes place at the beginning of the tribulation?  How many "Last" trumpets can there be?

And why are there more questions than answers???????????

[candlelight]

How can there be seven trumpts sounding during the tribulation AFTER the LAST trump is sounded when the rapture takes place at the beginning of the tribulation?  How many "Last" trumpets can there be?

 

Ukelemike, I studied prophecy back in 1998.  I am very rusty.  The "catching away" caught my attention.  I don't understand where you are going with this scripture.  It sounds like a twist of words on the subject.  Like I said, I spoke with my IFB church in Bible study and prayer, one Wednesday night, and told my brothers and sisters in Christ, that I knew of an IFB who didn't believe in a pre-trib "rapture."  My pastor was shocked, especially when I said he was an IFB preacher.

All posts like this due is fuel the Calvinists with their warped theology on preterism.  Sometimes, I have to wonder if I am still on an IFB site.  It is totally confusing.  

I feel like a gerbil on a treadmill.  OB, with it's varying opinions, make me so thankful that I attend a strong IFB church and can fellowship with like-minded believers.  I am also not the only one who feels this way.  Many former OB members are on Facebook and have no desire to come back to OB.

Like I stated, I don't have a prOBlem with people who come on OB from different faiths to learn more about the word of God.  What I do mind is people who constantly promote false doctrine like "replacement theology" and nothing is done about it.  It appears they have now formed a little group, for moral support, and are thriving b/c their heresy has been accepted.  I will no longer talk about the "rapture" as it does nothing but cause prOBlems.  You believe what you believe and I will hold to the position that I have held since 1998.   

[HappyChristian]

Forums are places of discussion. And a variety of views will be presented because there are a variety of people on them.  Who look at scripture in a variety of ways.   There have been IFB for years who have believed in mid-trib and post-trib raptures, as well as pre-trib (the predominant view) and double raptures (pre- and mid-).  I'm not really surprised by much that people believe - especially IFB. 

 

In one of my college classes, we were discussing prophecy.  The president of this college was a good friend of Ian Paisley's, but did not agree with him on prophecy and infant baptism.  Paisley is a mid-tribber.  Anyway, the teacher in that class was showing us why Paisley was wrong in his trib beliefs - using the verses IP uses.  As we walked out of that class, I told another student that if I weren't convinced in my own mind in a pre-trib rapture, it would have been easy to sway me to believe in a mid-trib rapture.  That was absolutely not the effect the teacher was going for, but it was a result of looking at scripture the way a mid-tribber does.

 

That said: we all need to be convinced in our minds and hearts of what we believe, and it has to be grounded totally in scripture - rightly divided.  If we are not, a forum can simply mess us up.  And, while we are convinced in our own minds, if we are to be biblical, we must refrain from the type of confrontation that is conflict for the purpose of conflict (which many often use and claim it to be a defense of the "faith"). 

 

Verses can be applied in a variety of ways, prompting a variety of beliefs around that same topic.  Is it heresy?  Well, we need to be careful of flinging that word around. It's been applied on the forum lately like a battering ram.  Folks who don't agree with other folks on one little thing claim the others are heretics.  And vice versa.  Yes, there is real heresy presented at times.  But often the label is given because the labeler can't think of any other way to erm, uh - undermine the other person's point of view. We all want to be right (and I always am...    NOT!). But that doesn't make anyone who disagrees with us heretics.

 

 

And before I'm accused of moral relativism, just stop and think about what I've said, folks.  Jesus tells us "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."  Yes, I know. Some folks think that blasting at others to browbeat or sarcasm them into agreement is defense of the faith and thereby love.  But it isn't. We can be firm without being OBnoxious...

 

Look at some of the things that have been thrown around the forum lately.  Some of the wording, attitude, etc.  Some adults on here sound like children.  And I guarantee that you wouldn't allow your children to speak to each other in that manner. Well, not if you're a good parent, anyway. But it's justified on here in the name of defending the faith... Look at that verse again.  "Love one to another." 

 

Not for another. TO.  We can have love for someone and treat them awful.  As has been done multiple times on this forum of late.  OR we can be active and proactive and OBey scripture.  TO is an active preposition, for is not.

 

Let's show love to one another. Yes, be firm in your stance.  Support your position with scripture.  But do it scripturally and not like a recalcitrant child would do.

 

It's not my intention to ruffle feathers, but if I have, so be it.  

[Ukulelemike]

Ukelemike, I studied prophecy back in 1998.  I am very rusty.  The "catching away" caught my attention.  I don't understand where you are going with this scripture.  It sounds like a twist of words on the subject.  Like I said, I spoke with my IFB church in Bible study and prayer, one Wednesday night, and told my brothers and sisters in Christ, that I knew of an IFB who didn't believe in a pre-trib "rapture."  My pastor was shocked, especially when I said he was an IFB preacher.

All posts like this due is fuel the Calvinists with their warped theology on preterism.  Sometimes, I have to wonder if I am still on an IFB site.  It is totally confusing.  

I feel like a gerbil on a treadmill.  OB, with it's varying opinions, make me so thankful that I attend a strong IFB church and can fellowship with like-minded believers.  I am also not the only one who feels this way.  Many former OB members are on Facebook and have no desire to come back to OB.

Like I stated, I don't have a prOBlem with people who come on OB from different faiths to learn more about the word of God.  What I do mind is people who constantly promote false doctrine like "replacement theology" and nothing is done about it.  It appears they have now formed a little group, for moral support, and are thriving b/c their heresy has been accepted.  I will no longer talk about the "rapture" as it does nothing but cause prOBlems.  You believe what you believe and I will hold to the position that I have held since 1998.  

I can appreciate where you are, Candlelight. I held to the pre-tribulation position since the early days of the 1970's.  But even then, there were aspects to it that mildly bugged me, things it seemed were being kind of pushed to the side and never dealt with.

 

You know what? I am going to start a psot in this-not to fight or to try and convince anyone of my position, but more to lay out my journey, if you will, to being where I am today, very IFB, but particularly happy about the "I" (independent) part of the title. I will title it, "Why I Left Pre-Trib" or something like that.

[candlelight]

HC, so you don't believe that "Replacement Theology" is heresy?  I have said this before, but I feel like I am back in the RCC with the Calvinists on this site.  And, they DO NOT know how to "rightly divide the word of truth."  They should be labeled as heretics, b/c they are spewing false doctrine, from the depths of hell.  Yet, they continue to get away with this garbage on an IFB site and the rest of us are told that we are being contentious?  There is something seriously wrong with that.  Not only do former IFB's on Facebook not want to come back to OB, many on this site are not posting b/c of this nonsense.  It must be stopped.  It is not Biblical.  I was contacted by a young man, on Facebook, who goes to a non-denominational church. He is hungry for the word of God.  I was thinking about recommending this site to him, but thought again.  I certainly would not want him to pick up any false doctrine on this site.  The dogma that is spewed all the time by the Calvinists should be taken to CARM, where they would be welcomed with open arms.   

[ASongOfDegrees]

How can there be seven trumpts sounding during the tribulation AFTER the LAST trump is sounded when the rapture takes place at the beginning of the tribulation?  How many "Last" trumpets can there be?

The last "trump" is the SOUND a trumpet makes. It does not mean "the last of seven trumpets".

 

Therefore, the rapture will take place after the last "trump" of a trumpet while the Second Coming will follow the last or seventh trumpet.

 

Notice in I. Thess. 4:6 where it is compared with the "voice of the archangel".

 

Also, in Revelation 4:1 where God's voice sounded like a trumpet and then John was told to "come up hither". 

 

This is a trumpet that "trumps" before the tribulation. It has nothing to do with the seven trumpets at the end of the tribulation.

 

trump2   [truhmp]  Show IPA Literary.

noun

1.

a trumpet.

2.

its sound.