Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
27 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

Dave, if Cloud is talking breaking fellowship with brethren over the issue of pre-trib / post-trib rapture, it is inappropriate. That's Mike's bottom line point, and its a fair point.

The indignation being displayed here is disproportionate to the thought communicated. 

So somehow I am the bad guy for pointing out that someone is blatantly misrepresenting someone else?

What Mike has accused Cloud of is simply not true.

But I don't care to argue about any further. I pointed it out, and it is done. Fire away at this messenger all you like.......

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

While I really like David Cloud and a lot of how teachings, I am disturbed a bit over his insistence not only that the pre-trib rapture is CLEAR biblical doctrine, but that it is to be considered a fundamental of the faith, meaning, if I understand Fundamentalism properly, that it is a salvation issue, and that anyone who is NOT pre-trib must be separated from, that is even more disturbing. 

I also find the above reasoning concerning brother David Cloud a misrepresentation and disturbing. It seems to me that it was said in order to discredit David Cloud's teaching that the coming of the Lord Jesus for the church is pre-tribulational.

Also, I find the same arguments listed above in the previous posts against the pre-tribulation view of the Second Coming of Christ faulty reasoning. Furthermore, I can find the same faulty reasoning in the writings of Philip Mauro, Dr. Roland Rasmussen, and Pastor Steven Anderson.

Edited by Alan
grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
14 hours ago, DaveW said:

And again, you are choosing to smear Cloud on this matter by suggesting that he holds pre-trib and "the fundamentals" as salvation matters - which he doesn't. 

Separating over a false doctrine taught does not necessarily mean that he is saying it is a salvation matter.

Following the doctrinal teachings of a woman would also be a fairly weighty matter, but not necessarily a salvation issue - but I would separate from someone who follows the doctrinal teachings of a woman.

 

You really do appear to be trying to paint Cloud with a brush that is not of his making.

And again, you are misrepresenting what I said. I merely said that David Cloud holds the Pre-trib rapture to be a fundamental of the faith, and that, according to MY understanding as a Fundamentalist, (AT LEAST IN THE EYES OF SOME FUNDAMENTALISTS), a fundamental is a matter of salvation. I further clarified that David Cloud has said that it is a subject worthy of separation, BUT NEVER SAID HE BELIEVES IT TO BE A MATTER OF SALVATION. If I seemed to imply that, I apologize, I didn't mean to.

WHETHER or not he holds to Fundamentals as salvations issues, I don't know-I suspect NOT because he, like myself, holds to many more things as fundamentals than the basic five that many believe to be the fundamentals of the faith, being:

"1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9).  2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27). 3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14). 4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15). 5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20)."

In no way have I misrepresented David Cloud-I do not know if he holds that all fundamentals are salvation issues, but I DO know that he believes the pre-trib rapture IS a fundamental and it is worthy of separation. If you disagree with that, you can read it yourself:  https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/another_church_enters_post-tributional_wilderness.php     Here is a small quote from the article:     "I am sad to report that Pastor Charlie Haddad and Joshua Koura of Grace Bible Baptist Church of New Castle, NSW, have abandoned the fundamental doctrine of the Pre-tribulational Rapture and are wandering in the aforementioned wilderness. Though they admit that they haven’t come to a settled position (and therefore should be keeping their mouths shut as learners instead of teachers), they have become sowers of doubt and confusion.

I have a personal stake in this, because last October I preached a Bible conference at Grace and assisted in the ordination of Joshua. Now I must withdraw my participation in that ordination and my support of that church. "

My main point I sought to make, is that the Bible does not clearly teach any specific timing for the rapture, though it DOES clearly teach a literal pre-millennial return of Jesus Christ-but please, show me clearly where we see Him returning before the tribulation period. I was raised pre-trib, grew up pre-trib, and after a considerable study, I changed my position because I found it wanting.  But that's just the problem, ALL the timing positions are wanting, all are full of assumptions, and every one of them lacks anything specific, EXCEPT, as clearly seen in Rev 14:14-17. This is the only passage that clearly shows Jesus in the clouds reaping the earth, the ripe harvest, just prior to the outpouring of the vials of wrath. THAT is the beginning of wrath, not Rev 6, THAT is tribulation-there is a clear separation between them, as seen in the trumpets and the vials. Trumpets are judgments, vials are wrath. Those with the Spirit of God are protected from the judgments through being marked by the Holy Spirit, which means we could potentially be living then, but protected from God's judgment. 

And again, I do not declare this as an absolute doctrime, because again, I am making assumptions, as well, but the bottom line is, while I greatly respect Dr. Cloud in , as I said, 99.5% of his teachings, I disagree here. I am not angry at him, and I don't take his stance personally, I merely state what we has made clear in association with the OP. I do not hold that anyone who disagree with me is my enemy, and I don't even see it as a reason to separate, UNLESS, as some I know on all sides of the aisle, it becomes such a  matter of contention, that the contention, itself, becomes reason for separation. 

By the way, for what it matters, I use quite a bit of Dr. Cloud's material-currently I have a class going using his 1 year discipleship course, and am awaiting his Digital Baptist Library. I have greatly appreciated and benefitted from his work and material, I just happen to disagree with him in this. 

 

Edited to include: From this article, https://www.wayoflife.org/database/is_fundamentalism_merely_five_fundamentals.html  David Cloud makes it clear that he does NOT hold to the idea of the fundamentals only being "the Five" and all salvation issues.  So I do, indeed, recognize that fact, and again, if I seemed to imply otherwise, I did not and I apologize. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
5 hours ago, Alan said:

I also find the above reasoning concerning brother David Cloud a misrepresentation and disturbing. It seems to me that it was said in order to discredit David Cloud's teaching that the coming of the Lord Jesus for the church is pre-tribulational.

Also, I find the same arguments listed above in the previous posts against the pre-tribulation view of the Second Coming of Christ faulty reasoning. Furthermore, I can find the same faulty reasoning in the writings of Philip Mauro, Dr. Roland Rasmussen, and Pastor Steven Anderson.

Not at all meant to 'discredit' his teaching, but to disagree. I have no axe to grind with David Cloud, and if you're at all familiar with me and my posts, I am often a great supporter of him. But this is the problem: to so many today, to disagree is to 'discredit', or to 'hate', (not said nor implied by you, just speaking generally." I disagree on the timing, and I disagree that it is a fundamental, but I don't seek to discredit him in any way. 

As I said in my above comment, I also see issues with ALL the positions, because the Bible doesn't teach any one clearly enough to take a fundamental stand on it. As for the three you mentioned, I only know Anderson, and I am hardly a follower of his, and I came to my understanding before I even knew him, and not based on any man's writings or teachings, save for a study of scripture.

I suppose my only thing with Brother Cloud's position is that, though we agree on pretty much everything else, because of this, he would never consider speaking at our church, or probably speaking with me in any way, and I think that's a great loss, but that said, I respect his position on it and don't seek to have our church in his lists, nor do I seek to argue the point with him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
25 minutes ago, Alan said:

Empty.

 

I dont know who David Cloud is. I dont CARE who David Cloud is. But that response is rude, condescending and not worthy of a brother and a man of God. A brother offers an explanation and an apology for any misunderstanding, and this is the most Biblical, mature, gracious response you can muster? 

Do you not see this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
52 minutes ago, Ukulelemike said:

Not at all meant to 'discredit' his teaching, but to disagree. I have no axe to grind with David Cloud, and if you're at all familiar with me and my posts, I am often a great supporter of him. But this is the problem: to so many today, to disagree is to 'discredit', or to 'hate', (not said nor implied by you, just speaking generally." I disagree on the timing, and I disagree that it is a fundamental, but I don't seek to discredit him in any way. 

As I said in my above comment, I also see issues with ALL the positions, because the Bible doesn't teach any one clearly enough to take a fundamental stand on it. As for the three you mentioned, I only know Anderson, and I am hardly a follower of his, and I came to my understanding before I even knew him, and not based on any man's writings or teachings, save for a study of scripture.

I suppose my only thing with Brother Cloud's position is that, though we agree on pretty much everything else, because of this, he would never consider speaking at our church, or probably speaking with me in any way, and I think that's a great loss, but that said, I respect his position on it and don't seek to have our church in his lists, nor do I seek to argue the point with him. 

A long time ago I made it a point to to argue with a moderator. In my estimation, you are trying to discredit David Cloud due to his teaching, his correct teaching I may add, on the Second Coming of Christ.

45 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

I dont know who David Cloud is. I dont CARE who David Cloud is. But that response is rude, condescending and not worthy of a brother and a man of God. A brother offers an explanation and an apology for any misunderstanding, and this is the most Biblical, mature, gracious response you can muster? 

Do you not see this?

Weary Warrior,

You are misjudging me very much. I deleted my post because I deleted what I wanted to say as I did not want to argue with a moderator and because you had to write something, so,  I just said the word, "empty." You are taking my post entirely wrong.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
20 minutes ago, Alan said:

A long time ago I made it a point to to argue with a moderator. In my estimation, you are trying to discredit David Cloud due to his teaching, his correct teaching I may add, on the Second Coming of Christ.

Weary Warrior,

You are misjudging me very much. I deleted my post because I deleted what I wanted to say as I did not want to argue with a moderator and because you had to write something, so,  I just said the word, "empty." You are taking my post entirely wrong.

 

I see what you are saying, and in that case, I am entirely in the wrong. I do apologize completely for my post. I am sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
41 minutes ago, Alan said:

A long time ago I made it a point to to argue with a moderator. In my estimation, you are trying to discredit David Cloud due to his teaching, his correct teaching I may add, on the Second Coming of Christ.

Weary Warrior,

You're welcome to that opinion, of course, I just don't understand how my disagreement is meant as a 'discredit'. By definition, to discredit means "harm the good reputation of (someone or something)." in no way am I seeking to harm his reputation, and have gone to great lengths to make that clear. But hey, if you equate disagree with discredit, by all means, carry on with that, though I will hold to what I have said on the matter. I suppose we can leave it there.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

shall look upon me who they have pierced”, only one soldier and.those that witnessed the crucifixion could possibly be included in that prophesy. Jesus said the day is coming that all who are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of man and come forth. On that great day Christ shall give a shout and a roar as it states in Jer. 25. This is definitely the last day. The trump is also mentioned. This is the rapture for we which are alive and remain shall not proceed those which have fallen asleep or “passed away” as some would say. So even those that pierced him will hear his voice. Do you remember when Jesus said in Jn 11 “Lazarus come forth” and although he was dead four days already he heard and came forth. On the last day those Roman soldiers that pierced Jesus will hear his voice and also “every eye shall see him”. Even all those that have fallen asleep since the beginning of the world. For the harvest is ripe as it says in Revelation and have patience for he waits for the first and the last fruits. In your patience possess ye your souls. ”That day is great. It is even the time of Jacobs trouble but he shall be saved out of it”.  That day is a day of darkness and gloominess a day of wastness and desolation. A day of.   Let me copy it word for word...

That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness,
16 A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers.
17 And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.

18 Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD'S wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.   
 

Jesus said finally in Luke 21:36 pray always that yes me counted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass and stand before the Son  of man.   
when he comes in his glory he shall separate the sheep from the goats and place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on the left....  

So this second question you have I’m not quite sure what is being requested. The Word of God is far more concerned about the gospel and salvation than any particular invasion of a country. The Scriptures speak in parables that must be interpreted.  Remember Jesus on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection he expounded to them in all the Scriptures from Moses to all the prophets the things concerning himself. Can you find Jesus in every Old Testament book of the Bible? He’s there because He not only spoke the Word he Is the Word. And beware lest you stumble and wrestle with the Scriptures because they can be and are a stumbling block to many as both Jesus and Peter and other prophets warned about.  “Jesus, why do you speak to them in parables?” Did he say so they can understand better? No! He said so in hearing they will not hear”  Verily thou art  a God that hide the himself oh God of Israel, the Savior.  
 
I could go on but I hope this helps. Thank you for your inquiry. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 3/4/2020 at 9:02 AM, TomB said:

"They shall look upon me who they have pierced”, only one soldier and.those that witnessed the crucifixion could possibly be included in that prophesy.

 I can't agree with you there.  The Jews who called out "Crucify Him" were also giuilty of piercing him as well as all those who neglect or reject his call to salvation are also guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 3/4/2020 at 5:02 PM, TomB said:

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

shall look upon me who they have pierced”, only one soldier and.those that witnessed the crucifixion could possibly be included in that prophesy. Jesus said the day is coming that all who are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of man and come forth. On that great day Christ shall give a shout and a roar as it states in Jer. 25. This is definitely the last day. The trump is also mentioned. This is the rapture for we which are alive and remain shall not proceed those which have fallen asleep or “passed away” as some would say. So even those that pierced him will hear his voice. Do you remember when Jesus said in Jn 11 “Lazarus come forth” and although he was dead four days already he heard and came forth. On the last day those Roman soldiers that pierced Jesus will hear his voice and also “every eye shall see him”. Even all those that have fallen asleep since the beginning of the world. For the harvest is ripe as it says in Revelation and have patience for he waits for the first and the last fruits. In your patience possess ye your souls. ”That day is great. It is even the time of Jacobs trouble but he shall be saved out of it”.  That day is a day of darkness and gloominess a day of wastness and desolation. A day of.   Let me copy it word for word...

That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness,
16 A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers.
17 And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.

18 Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD'S wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.   
 

Jesus said finally in Luke 21:36 pray always that yes me counted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass and stand before the Son  of man.   
when he comes in his glory he shall separate the sheep from the goats and place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on the left....  

So this second question you have I’m not quite sure what is being requested. The Word of God is far more concerned about the gospel and salvation than any particular invasion of a country. The Scriptures speak in parables that must be interpreted.  Remember Jesus on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection he expounded to them in all the Scriptures from Moses to all the prophets the things concerning himself. Can you find Jesus in every Old Testament book of the Bible? He’s there because He not only spoke the Word he Is the Word. And beware lest you stumble and wrestle with the Scriptures because they can be and are a stumbling block to many as both Jesus and Peter and other prophets warned about.  “Jesus, why do you speak to them in parables?” Did he say so they can understand better? No! He said so in hearing they will not hear”  Verily thou art  a God that hide the himself oh God of Israel, the Savior.  
 
I could go on but I hope this helps. Thank you for your inquiry. 
 

 

 

You are making claims that are not proven by Bible verses, making vague references to vague passages, where you say they mean one thing, but there is no correlation of what you are saying with the vague references you give.

I have been able to find the verses and passages that you refer to because I am able to use a search engine, but with each verse I identify, it doesn't say what you are suggesting.

And you join passages together that have no reason to be joined together.

If you were serious about stating your case, then you would at least give proper verse references for each of your claims, but it seems to me that you don't want people to find the passages you refer to in case they actually read them and find that they don't actually say what you are saying.

At one point you say "Let me copy it word for word..." but then you leave off the reference, and the passage has no apparent link to anything you are saying - at least as far as I can tell.

You talk about the harvest is ripe, but give no reference to it, but have you actually read Revelation 14? (verse 15 for anyone reading this, because He doesn't want to tell you). It is nto relevant to your point.

 

Classic example of what I am talking about (but this time he at least gives a reference!):

" quote from TomB:

Jesus said finally in Luke 21:36 pray always that yes me counted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass and stand before the Son  of man.   
when he comes in his glory he shall separate the sheep from the goats and place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on the left....   "

Note that quoting in this way is implying that the verses are somehow joined together - he is almost trying to make it look like line 3 is a continuation from the end of line 2. THEY ARE NOT EVEN IN THE SAME BOOK!

 (Note that I am not criticising the spelling mistakes - we all do that.)

The complete verse is:

Luk 21:36
(36)  Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

I don't know why he chose to leave out the "Watch ye therefore" but he did.

I will however say that the verse he quoted has nothing to do with goats or sheep as far as Luke is concerned. If there is a link between these two subjects as he implies, it is not obvious from the Luke passage.

In fact if you look up the sheep/goats reference you find the only reference to goats and sheep being separated to be in:

Mat 25:31-33
(31)  When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
(32)  And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
(33)  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
 

I will note again that he refused to share that reference - I think because it has nothing to do with Luke as he is trying to imply.

Folks, please don't listen to this guy until he starts to properly quote or at least reference his passages, and explain the links that he is suggesting, because he is joining things together that the Bible simply does not put together. And THEN, check his references - as you should with EVERY PERSON who presumes to teach you about the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
5 hours ago, DaveW said:

 

You are making claims that are not proven by Bible verses, making vague references to vague passages, where you say they mean one thing, but there is no correlation of what you are saying with the vague references you give.

I have been able to find the verses and passages that you refer to because I am able to use a search engine, but with each verse I identify, it doesn't say what you are suggesting.

And you join passages together that have no reason to be joined together.

If you were serious about stating your case, then you would at least give proper verse references for each of your claims, but it seems to me that you don't want people to find the passages you refer to in case they actually read them and find that they don't actually say what you are saying.

At one point you say "Let me copy it word for word..." but then you leave off the reference, and the passage has no apparent link to anything you are saying - at least as far as I can tell.

You talk about the harvest is ripe, but give no reference to it, but have you actually read Revelation 14? (verse 15 for anyone reading this, because He doesn't want to tell you). It is nto relevant to your point.

 

Classic example of what I am talking about (but this time he at least gives a reference!):

" quote from TomB:

Jesus said finally in Luke 21:36 pray always that yes me counted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass and stand before the Son  of man.   
when he comes in his glory he shall separate the sheep from the goats and place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on the left....   "

Note that quoting in this way is implying that the verses are somehow joined together - he is almost trying to make it look like line 3 is a continuation from the end of line 2. THEY ARE NOT EVEN IN THE SAME BOOK!

 (Note that I am not criticising the spelling mistakes - we all do that.)

The complete verse is:

Luk 21:36
(36)  Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

I don't know why he chose to leave out the "Watch ye therefore" but he did.

I will however say that the verse he quoted has nothing to do with goats or sheep as far as Luke is concerned. If there is a link between these two subjects as he implies, it is not obvious from the Luke passage.

In fact if you look up the sheep/goats reference you find the only reference to goats and sheep being separated to be in:

Mat 25:31-33
(31)  When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
(32)  And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
(33)  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
 

I will note again that he refused to share that reference - I think because it has nothing to do with Luke as he is trying to imply.

Folks, please don't listen to this guy until he starts to properly quote or at least reference his passages, and explain the links that he is suggesting, because he is joining things together that the Bible simply does not put together. And THEN, check his references - as you should with EVERY PERSON who presumes to teach you about the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I suspect a lot of this is more due to just not being adept at putting his(?) thoughts together in writing very well. I will admit to not even being sure as to what point he is trying to make here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
On 3/4/2020 at 1:02 AM, TomB said:

 

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

shall look upon me who they have pierced”, only one soldier and.those that witnessed the crucifixion could possibly be included in that prophesy. 

 
 
 

 

Let's look in CONTEXT, (because context is king in biblical interpretation):

"The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah. In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.  And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn." (Zech 12:7-10)

In context, we see the entire setting here is Judah, Jerusalem, the house of David. This is figurative for Israel as a whole, the people of God, who, at the time of context, being invaded by the armies of the world, and when Jesus returns, they will all see Him, "whom they have pierced". Why does all Israel count as those who have pierced Jesus? Because this speaks of the crucifixion as a whole, not just the Roman guard himself who pierced His side, because it was not Rome that sought to kill Jesus, it was the Jews who demanded it, who threatened Pilate if he didn't, and it was the Jews who said, "His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matt 27:25). THEY pierced Jesus just as surely as if their hands held the blade that did so. 

So those in Jerusalem will see Jesus come down, and immediately recognize who He is, that this is the one their fathers pierced and killed, that He is the one they have rejected for so long, and they will weep and mourn for their blindness and rejection and, I suspect, for all the time they lost not serving Him that was before their faces the whole time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
2 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Let's look in CONTEXT, (because context is king in biblical interpretation):

"The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah. In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.  And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn." (Zech 12:7-10)

In context, we see the entire setting here is Judah, Jerusalem, the house of David. This is figurative for Israel as a whole, the people of God, who, at the time of context, being invaded by the armies of the world, and when Jesus returns, they will all see Him, "whom they have pierced". Why does all Israel count as those who have pierced Jesus? Because this speaks of the crucifixion as a whole, not just the Roman guard himself who pierced His side, because it was not Rome that sought to kill Jesus, it was the Jews who demanded it, who threatened Pilate if he didn't, and it was the Jews who said, "His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matt 27:25). THEY pierced Jesus just as surely as if their hands held the blade that did so. 

So those in Jerusalem will see Jesus come down, and immediately recognize who He is, that this is the one their fathers pierced and killed, that He is the one they have rejected for so long, and they will weep and mourn for their blindness and rejection and, I suspect, for all the time they lost not serving Him that was before their faces the whole time. 

Amen and Amen, Brother Mike. Thanks for posting this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
On 3/3/2020 at 12:26 PM, Alan said:

 I deleted my post because I deleted what I wanted to say as I did not want to argue with a moderator and because you had to write something, so,  I just said the word, "empty."

I took it the other way too.  I've edited the post to say 'deleted comment' to remove future confusion. 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think most pre-trib, pre-mil people don’t think that people professing to be post-trib are actually post trib at all, I think they would be considered “mid-trib” if they’re using the post trib pre wrath phrase. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
9 hours ago, OlBrotherDC said:

I think most pre-trib, pre-mil people don’t think that people professing to be post-trib are actually post trib at all, I think they would be considered “mid-trib” if they’re using the post trib pre wrath phrase. 

Correct. Personally, I call it post-trib, because I see a significant difference between the 'tribulation' and the 'wrath', the tribulation occurring before the falling of God's wrath. 

In the tribulation, while God controls all that happens, yet Satan also is given (controlled) free reign to persecute Israel and any believers present. But when God's wrath falls, Satan and the Antichrist and their followers are directly punished by God's wrath, and they no longer have power. And as for how long each takes to happen, the Bible isn't clear, which is why I can still see us not know WHEN Christ will return. It isn't as if one things start, we will have an exact number of days or weeks until the rapture. The wrath of God may well occur very quickly, in a matter of days, even hours. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
On 1/18/2020 at 1:47 AM, LYDIA WESTERN said:

This is my first time on here. I’m an Australian IB Pastor’s daughter. There’s smoke everywhere over here, just by the way. My friends house burnt down the other day.

One of the churches that we have had an interface with have suddenly come out as Post-Trib. If anyone knows David Cloud, he was out here just recently and did a full series of meetings with them and then found out AFTERWARDS (from my pastor brother) that they’ve been “studying” the subject of prophecy all year, and hey presto! The church is in for the guillotein. I’ve got friends in that church, and now they’re telling me they’re post-trib. It’s a bit lonely here in Australia. Most of our churches are hundreds of km apart. Apparently the States sometimes has more than one IB church in a big town! I can’t believe it! They must have more friends too then to make up for any losses.

I was just wondering if anyone has any helpful thoughts on a post-trib view (or pre-trib view, depending how you look at it).

As far as I can see, we are not appointed to wrath (and that meaning the whole 7 year tribulation). God will keep us “from the hour of temptation” that will come upon the whole earth”. 

 

 

many of the Early Church fathers held to a form of that, which is called Historical Premil position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. 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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 42 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...