Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Are We Teaching the Bible Well in Our Churches?


Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
3 hours ago, Steven Yeadon said:

That makes more sense, since you cannot turn your face to someone you have your back to. The only part that gets me now is why those cold in faith would call out to God in their distress as told to us in Jeremiah 2:27. I mean, as explained to us elsewhere in the bible, the Israelites had such faith that Jerusalem, the holy city, was unbeatable.

I think that people who were at one time people of faith know deep down where to look in times of trouble. Even the lost will often talk about turning to God during times of trouble (although if they do not turn for forgiveness, "turning" to God is moot for the lost). Sometimes that is a reason God allows trouble/distress - to cause us to turn to Him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 11/28/2017 at 8:07 PM, Steven Yeadon said:

I don't subscribe to the churches in Revelation pertaining to church ages, but I have noticed that the scandal here is not that most Christians are lukewarm. I reserve the distinction of being lukewarm for the regular churchgoer who contributes half-heartedly as if to mock God and might tithe say 10% of his or her income but would never consider going more. Who volunteers at church on Saturday but is just like everyone else it seems when they hit the work week. This definition lets me know when I myself backslide and have to love God with a whole heart, remembering my first love. Something that convicts me tonight since I have been very busy and keep making excuses not to read the Word. 

No, this is a church in America, compared to the more faithful and persecuted non-Western church, that is getting cold in its love for those outside the fold and even within it. I would never call a group of people who turn their faces towards God but put their backs to Him lukewarm. Jeremiah 2:27 shows that utter ruin and destruction is reserved for those who turn their faces to God but keep their backs to Him. They are like the Pharisees more than a Disciple halfhearted in their love for God

I can finally use my PC now that it's functioning properly. So no more walls of texts. I've done some research and I would have to disagree. The 7 Churches DO represent Church age eras. I will lay them out in context.
 
There are a lot of reasons why we should accept the correct interpretation that the 7 churches, in addition to being actual churches of that time, also represent Church Age eras: 
 
1) Many exegetes who have a vast knowledge about the Bible have came to this same conclusion from independent examination over a lot of centuries; that is to say, on the one hand it's not a "confessional doctrine" so the fact that many others have come to this conclusion not because of tradition is important, and on the other hand it's not a idea that was not fully thought through of one person from one tradition in one generation.  When expert fishermen from several states go to the same river or lake over the course of many years, it is not unreasonable to conclude that there may be fish there -- and at least it's notable to take a look.
 
2) If the churches mentioned were merely contemporary, the 2 chapters after the introduction, preface all future prophecy in the book of Revelation would be a) a seemingly odd emphasis in Revelation which is pretty much entirely about the future, and b) much lessened in their application for us today.  Like the first point, it is not decisive, but any wise exegete would see that this point also makes an off-hand dismissal of this interpretation unwise.
 
3) As all who have treated the subject of the Church ages have seen, the 7 eras bear an uncanny comparison in their main trends to what has actually occurred in the Church Age and sequentially and chronologically so. But it's clear even to an average observer that Sardis bears a striking resemblance to the RCC (Roman Catholic church) of the late middle ages to a "T" and that Philadelphia following Sardis fits the experience of the age or generation of the Reformation and what followed after.  And anyone who hungers for the truth of the Bible can possibly fail to see that we are in the age of Laodicea:  thinking they are blessed and rich, but in reality being wretched poor and blind and naked -- because they are (as an era) lukewarm about the truth.  And dismissing this interpretation without a fair hearing is an indication of no real desire in the truth (it's just easier to proclaim "there is no proof").
 
4) To end subject with the strongest argument, we know that these 7 churches represent what would happen in the Church Age because it essentially says so in the book of Revelation:

"Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches." Revelation 1:19-20

*In between these 2 passages (below and above) we have the 7 churches in chapters 2-3.
 
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter." Revelation 4:1 
 
The things which must be hereafter are the things that take place during the Tribulation and all that follows after it -- that is what the book of Revelation is about, the "revealing" of Jesus Christ to the world, including the Tribulation and Millennium, judgment and eternal state that follows after.  If the 7 churches were simply churches in the 1st century, "which must be hereafter" would be wrong or at the very least, give a wrong impression, because of course the 2,000 year Church Age is what immediately precedes the Tribulation and the following events.  Nothing in either passage or in the 3 sections taken as a whole suggest a gap; rather, a seamless continuation is shown in both setup verses: Revelation presents the Tribulation that follows directly after Laodicea --  but if Laodicea is just a local church some two thousand years ago, that would make little sense.  In John's day, the Church Age was no longer hidden in mystery because it had already occurred and been explained by the entirety of the remainder of the New Testament, not present only in the book of Revelation.  So "must be hereafter" really must mean, after the Church Age...which has just been shown.
 
God Bless,
Daniel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But to accept the " church=age" theory one must accept the RC "church" and reformation "churches" as legitimate churches. 

One must also accept that since we are now in the "Laodicean age" that the previous ages do not apply to us fir we no longer in those ages - they are past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I don't think it is necessary to accept the RCC and the reformation as legitimate just because of the "church age theory". After all, the real church as an institution has existed since Jesus established it. It has been with us from the beginning and all through the so called church age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

I don't think it is necessary to accept the RCC and the reformation as legitimate just because of the "church age theory". After all, the real church as an institution has existed since Jesus established it. It has been with us from the beginning and all through the so called church age.

But most people who hold to the church age thought on this passage do as has been done above and relate, for instance, Sardis to the RCC - but this implies that Jesus recognised them as a legitimate church with the mentioned problems, whereas I and I suspect the majority here would not agree that the RCC was EVER a legitimate church.

Furthermore, there is no indication in the passage that it relates to anything other han seven actual, physical, real churches. 

I won't have a knock down drag out over it, but that is my opinion. :10_wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
27 minutes ago, DaveW said:

But most people who hold to the church age thought on this passage do as has been done above and relate, for instance, Sardis to the RCC - but this implies that Jesus recognised them as a legitimate church with the mentioned problems, whereas I and I suspect the majority here would not agree that the RCC was EVER a legitimate church.

When did the Bishop of Rome become the pope, and when did the Roman Church become the Roman Catholic Church?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
22 hours ago, DaveW said:

But to accept the " church=age" theory one must accept the RC "church" and reformation "churches" as legitimate churches. 

One must also accept that since we are now in the "Laodicean age" that the previous ages do not apply to us fir we no longer in those ages - they are past.

If we take into consideration that there is only one Church (the body of Christ), and if we accept that the 7 in Revelation represent eras of the one Church, then we will not be talking about the RCC or Reformation "churches" but the corporate Body of Christ consisting of believers in each era, many of whom were in fact in "churches" irrespective of their membership in THE Church, just as is often the case today).  But if we don't accept the 7 era interpretation, then what right do we have to apply our Lord's words except in the general terms to anyone except the 7 which are long gone nearly two thousand years ago?

Edited by (Omega)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
41 minutes ago, (Omega) said:

If we take into consideration that there is only one Church (the body of Christ), and if we accept that the 7 in Revelation represent eras of the one Church, then we will not be talking about the RCC or Reformation "churches" but the corporate Body of Christ consisting of believers in each era, many of whom were in fact in "churches" irrespective of their membership in THE Church, just as is often the case today).  But if we don't accept the 7 era interpretation, then what right do we have to apply our Lord's words except in the general terms to anyone except the 7 which are long gone nearly two thousand years ago?

On the contrary, if we accept the  church age theory, then we can ONLY apply the current church age to the current church, by the very definition of each church representing a particular age.

However, if we accept that each letter" was written to a particular church, it follows that it applies only to that church, EXCEPT for the fact that each church letter includes this:

Rev 2:7  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; .....

This then makes each letter to each of the CHURCHES to apply in a secondary way to every individual church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
6 hours ago, DaveW said:

On the contrary, if we accept the  church age theory, then we can ONLY apply the current church age to the current church, by the very definition of each church representing a particular age.

However, if we accept that each letter" was written to a particular church, it follows that it applies only to that church, EXCEPT for the fact that each church letter includes this:

Rev 2:7  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; .....

This then makes each letter to each of the CHURCHES to apply in a secondary way to every individual church.

Do you think that Christ was only concerned for the 7 churches, or His entire church? The revelation of Christ is clearly meant for the entire body of Christ, which is His bride. It's said to bless ALL who read it (Rev.1:3). John's apostolic authority reached out to the entire church, not just 7 local churches (1Cor.9:1-5; 12:28; Gal.2:7-9). Jesus' message was not designed to address specific issues in particular churches (1-3 John). This was a message given by God to THE 7 "churches". (Rev.1:11: the definite article is important here, because obviously there were clearly more than 7 local churches at the time it was written, and It was meant to bless all who read it. (Rev.1:3)

Edited by (Omega)
Fonts and Grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I live in Oakland, CA, and there are no IFB churches within a 100 mile radius. Although there are churches that use only the King James Bible, some of their doctrines seem off kilter. I can honestly say that this website is the only place where I can not forsake the assembly of believers as scripture states, but a website does not suffice. I use to attend a church which was nearby which was the closest to an IFB church and what an IFB church believes with regards to doctrine, and other fundamental beliefs that the IFB holds to. That church moved to another location too far of a distance for me because I can only drive so far because of my chronic pain in my legs and ankles. And now that it has been taken over by 7th day Adventists. I am absolutely appalled that even some Baptist churches here in Oakland disseminate new age doctrines of devils such as "Mother Gaia", and that homosexuality is taught in the bible. I cannot comprehend how someone behind a pulpit, that has theological degrees from prominent Universities, can come to such a conclusion. 

I am no Pastor, just an old white haired preacher (with memory problems) that have studied the bible for over 40 years, and my main forte is doctrinal issues. This is why I become indignant when false doctrines are being disseminated to the congregations. Jesus said, "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:19). The Word of God clearly states: "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;" and having their ears tickled (1 Tim. 4:1-3,4). These are referred to as "feel good ministries." This is one of the reasons as to why I believe that our dear Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, will return for His bride in this generation as it is laid out in scripture. I've also noticed that bad "bible teachers" also come with a bad attitude. This seemed to be the case in Jesus' day when He dealt with the Pharisees and Sadducees. Every word Jesus spoke was TRUTH, and no guile was found in Him. This was one of the reasons why the religious leaders had so much animosity towards Him. Furthermore, they hated Him because He corrected their false teachings that were handed down through traditions of men (Mk, 7:8,9).

My greatest desire is for a spiritual revival, and an awakening to the truth of scripture, and to worship God in spirit and in truth (Jn.4:24) I pray for this almost every day. My wife cries herself to sleep because of the current state that the churches and the rapid decline of morality. We are living in an age where "Christian" rap songs, and other CCM. The lyrics are bad enough, but even the style of music concerns me. Music alone can sway the listeners to do things they normally wouldn't do had they not listened to it. 

But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him. And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee. Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well. (1 Samuel 16:14-16)

In closing, I believe the Greatest Revival will take place during the Tribulation.

After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; (Revelation 7:9)
 
And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:13,14)

Time is too short, and life is running on empty to not engage in some sort of ministry (cf. James 4:14), and I encourage anyone who isn't in a ministry to do just that. 

God Bless,

Daniel

 

Edited by (Omega)
Font Size
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@(Omega) I feel so bad for you. I looked online and the one church that mentioned Oakland, once I looked it up said San Leandro. I'm not familiar with the area (I live in Nevada). Here's a link to the site http://fundamental.org/fundamental/churches/index.php3?action=listchurchesinstate&statename=California I hope you can find a home soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...