Hambone

A member of the republican party, if they're a Christian, them they are not following the instructions of the Bible. For the republican party is made up of believers and unbelievers.

14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

2 Cor 6:14-18 (KJV)

Your correct all humans are flawed, but we are not forbidden to be yoked together with our church family, that is assuming they are following Jesus correctly. While we are forbidden to me members of a group of people who are following the old devil.

That said, there be few who heed these verses.

Just curious. Do you call yourself an American?

Game over. I win.

I would have tased him, too. He is an idiot. He should have simply complied with the requests of the officers. Everyone wants to jump on the officers. That's always the knee-jerk reaction. These officers don't know Anderson. Him not complying only raises their suspicion of the culprit (Anderson). They don't know that he wasn't hiding something, or trying to pull a fast one on them. I don't feel sorry for this idiot in the least.

I have to disagree here. What would have happened if the church in Germany had stood up to Hitler? Sadly, we will never know.

If we pay to support such a government, are we not doing the act itself? If I hire a hitman to kill someone, I still kill them. If I pay the government to perform an immoral deed, am I not as guilty as the government?

Were the early colonialists in America wrong for refusing to pay taxes to Britain?

Had the church stood up to Hitler, it would have probably met the same fate as many Jews did. There was no strong Christian presence in Germany. That is why Hitler came into power. The church presence that was there had lost its savor, very much like the church we have in the US today. I can name at least 100 people I personally know that didn't vote and call themselves born again Christians.

Jesus Christ paid taxes to the Roman Government. Did that make him guilty of the misdeeds committed by the Roman Government? Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's... If Christ was guilty of lawbreaking, He would not have risen, and we would all still be hopelessly lost.

As far as the government being representative of the people....that is a joke. This administration and the last does/did not represent the will of the people. While the current administration has a high approval rating, the vast majority of Americans disagree with most of the policies he has pushed and aims to push through. The people only matter at election time to our government. In between, we might as well be Rome.

As long as were are doing these things it really doesn't matter when He actually comes for us.

Should we pay our taxes and obey the laws then?

Yes. You should. Until the government asks you to commit genocide, an abortion, or any other immoral act, you must obey tax laws and other laws.

As a Christian when chapter 4 of Revelation starts I'm all ready in Heaven with Jesus.

Revelation 4:1 and its relation to the rapture is a theory. I'm assuming (you know what they say about assuming) that you are of the belief that after this the word "church" is not used, and that means something. In my opinion, it means no more than the fact that the word church isn't used in Rev 4-22. If you were to apply this 'theory' to the Gospel of John, I guess you could say that nothing in the Gospel of John applies to the Church.

Personally, I think the soldiers should concentrate on reaching other soldiers - not the muslims. Why? They aren't there as missionaries - but perhaps God will lead them back one day. They are there fighting to bring the freedom that will allow churches to flourish (even though lost soldiers don't really realize that is one of the results). And those churches can minister to the muslims. If Christian soldiers would be the witness they need to be to their fellow soldiers, I believe more of them would be saved. Especially those who have faced serious battle time!

How is it personal? Where did I attack you? I made some statements, summarized:
1. You are making extreme accusations against the military and its members
2. You know very little of the military
3. Your comments reek of anti-military sentiment
4. You are free to make these statements thanks to the very people you are calling disobedient
5. You would not survive in China

I don't see the attack....
I know many GREAT Christians who are members of the military or former members. I witness, attend church, go to church functions, etc. As of yet, I and thousands of other Christians in the military haven't been persecuted under the UCMJ.

There was a time in history in America where there was no choice about serving in the military' date=' back during the time they had the draft, now we have an all volunteer military service, so anyone who signs up now, does so freely.[/quote']

You are taking this to the extreme. Yes, we are on "active duty" 24/7, but we do have our own time. As someone mentioned before, you cannot attend a political rally in uniform, especially if you are on duty. As I said before, if you are preaching or reading your Bible while on your employer's dime, you are a thief.

Honestly, you speak about that which you know little about. I am currently in the military, and am just as free as most Christians are where ever they are employed to practice their beliefs. This sounds more like an anti-military tirade than anything. It's reall sad that you go after those who protect your right to write on a forum like this. If you wrote something like this in China, you would disappear.

Here:

It is assumed by pretribulationists that the church is not present on earth during the events spoken of in the majority of the book of Revelation. This thinking is based primarily on the absence of the word "church" from Revelation 3:22 to Revelation 20:16. If the "church" is not mentioned, it is concluded, she must have been raptured prior to the events written about. Further, it is assumed that the invitation to the apostle John in Revelation 4:1 to "come up hither" is a picture of the rapture of the church preceding the events of the 70th week.

It is important to examine these assumptions because they clearly attempt to place the rescue of the righteous (the rapture) before Daniel's 70th week and not after. If that is so, it should be clearly taught in Scripture.

For several compelling reasons, it is a false conclusion to assume that the church will be raptured before the 70th week of Daniel (and for that reason is not mentioned between chapters 4 and 20):

1. The plain teaching of Scripture. Jesus, in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:3-31), outlines the sequence of events in the last days relative to the church. Verses 3-14 parallel Revelation chapter 6 and depict those events from the beginning of the 70th week to the rapture. Then, in verses 15-28, He focuses on the middle time period of that future week (the final 7 years) and emphasizes two key events: (a) a time of great persecution, and ( the "cut[ting] short" of "those days" of persecution for "the sake of the elect". Finally, in verses 29-31, He highlights what it is that will "cut short" that persecution, the rescue of the elect (the rapture).

Paul echoes this same teaching in his 2nd letter to the Thessalonians 2:1-12: (a) the apostasy comes first, ( the revealing of the man of lawlessness, © the "challenge" to all who will not bow down to him and worship him "as being God", and (d) the coming of the Lord to "gather together" believers unto Himself.

In Revelation 6-8, we have the same sequence repeated: (a) the 70th week begins, ( the pressure builds [seals 1-3], © the midpoint [seals 4-5] and apex of the persecution (against the "saints") arrives, (d) the "cut[ting] short" of that persecution with the same cosmic announcement [seal 6] as Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24:29-31 followed by the rapture of the saints (Revelation 7:9ff). There is absolutely no teaching either by hint or by direct instruction that the church will not be present during the 70th week of Daniel.

2. The recipients of the book of Revelation. In Revelation 1:1 we read: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants,..." In Revelation 22:6, we read: "the Lord,... God... sent His angel to show to His servants..." Eight times in the book of Revelation, we encounter the reference "servant". This special term is applicable in the New Testament to the apostle John, Paul, and Timothy. It is a word that has reference to all true believers as opposed to "tares", "darnel", or look-alikes. What does this mean? By writing the book of Revelation to the servants, Jesus is clearly focusing not on the church in general, but faithful servants. They are to know what will transpire during that climactic era of history. Why? Perhaps to avoid unnecessary exposure to the evil empire of Antichrist. Perhaps to be able to assist struggling believers who did not prepare themselves when they should have. Perhaps to be able to effectively serve the Lord in some capacity with strength during those challenging days. Only God fully knows.

We are made to understand that the church in general will, for the most part, be a compromising body at the time of the end. When Jesus addresses the seven churches in Revelation, His primary appeal is a call to repentance. Each of those churches is in one or more compromising situations and needs to change their spiritual condition if they are to be overcomers. The clear desire of Christ is that the individuals in each of those churches be victorious rather than suffer the consequences. It's the church in general that will not know what is happening when the end-time events unfold and in chapter 6:7-11 and chapters 12 and 13, we see that they pay a high price for their unpreparedness.

3. The use of "saint"(s) in the New Testament. The New Testament uses the term "saint" some 59 times. Virtually every reference clearly indicates it means a true believer in Christ. Link that with the conspicuous absence of any reference in the major eschatological works of the Bible that supposedly teach some sort of "revival" during the 70th week of Daniel. The fact is, the repeated reference of mankind in Revelation during this time is that they "did not repent" (cf. Rev. 9:20-21; 16:9,11). When the persecution begins at the midpoint, that experience won't be the most conducive means of seeing people come to Christ in great numbers. Who then are these saints? Are they believers who come to Christ after the beginning of the 70th week? Yes and no. Certainly it must be acknowledged that there will be some who come to Christ once the 70th week begins. But are those potentially trickling numbers worthy of a worldwide vendetta by Antichrist? Hardly! No, there must be a significant enough body of "saints" still present when Antichrist reveals himself to warrant his widespread wrath. The great multitude in Revelation 7 speaks to that clear reality.

4. The misrepresentation of John being the church. It is said that the church is not present during the events of Revelation because in chapter 4:1, John is called to "come up hither". John is said to be a picture of the church, and therefore it (the church) is in heaven during the days of the 70th week of Daniel. But is that a valid inference? Nowhere in all of the New Testament is there warrant to apply the understanding that John represents the church in Rev. 4:1. The context clearly implies that "John" refers to... John, and no one else. He is simply given a heavenly perspective of what is going on behind the visible world and what will take place during the last days. Nothing else. To say otherwise is to grasp at straws to try to support a hollow argument.

5. The argument from silence. It is maintained that since the word "church" isn't used again from 3:22 until 22:6, she is absent from the events unfolding during that time period. That's an argument from silence. If we apply that same argument to the gospel of John, we have to conclude that the gospel of John isn't for the church because the word church isn't even mentioned in all of its chapters. Can that be true?

The overwhelming evidence is that the church is indeed present during the 70th week of Daniel regardless of whether the word is used or not. What one believes must be squarely built on what the Bible clearly says, not on what we might like it to say for whatever reason. What we believe about the last days will have tremendous implications for our lives should we enter those days. Let us be Bereans, searching to see if these things are so. (Acts 17:11)

The Berean spirit of the Baptist Church (IFB) is not alive. We will attack other people's beliefs in a heartbeat, and rightfully so in most cases; but we have a real problem being critical of ourselves and what we have been taught. As I have already said, I was a pre-tribber through and through because that is how I was raised, what I was taught, and I took what many great preachers taught me at face value without researching the Bible myself (as the Bereans did). As I grew in the Lord and my Christian walk, the pre-tribulational rapture just didn't sit well. I judge everything as,"Am I as sure about this as I am my very salvation?" I could not say with the same amount of absolute certainty that I believed the PTR to be correct. After years of reading, research, and travelling I have come to doubt the pre-trib view, and am quite sure that we will in fact be present during the tribulation.

Also, as I have said, this is not a salvation issue. If we are raptured (and I'm wrong) before the tribulation, GREAT!!!! My salvation is in Christ, not whether I'm a pre/post-tribber. However, if I am correct, I pity those who will not be prepared--especially those pastors that will be hunted down for answers as to why we are still here......I have learned to err on the side of caution.

Amen... Wilchbla. Well said. I love your part about a "theory." It is NOT a "theory." A "theory" does NOT offer any...Biblical proof, Biblical logic, let alone Biblical common sense. The Book of Revelation clearly points this out. Below is a prophetic verse from Revelation:

Revelation 4:1... 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. King James Bible

Note:

The greatest thing for the "true" church is that God WILL take care of it. Amen. That is surely comforting to me; however, the scripture above should speak for itself. That is all that we need. :smile

In Christ Jesus,

Molly

Revelation 4:1 and its relation to the rapture is a theory. I'm assuming (you know what they say about assuming) that you are of the belief that after this the word "church" is not used, and that means something. In my opinion, it means no more than the fact that the word church isn't used in Rev 4-22. If you were to apply this 'theory' to the Gospel of John, I guess you could say that nothing in the Gospel of John applies to the Church.

Waterboard him. :thumb

KJVO....

Let's set one thing straight. There is only one Bible for the English speaking people of the world: the KJV.

If they speak German and use a German Bible, what is the problem? While their beliefs are false, I don't believe their use of the german Bible is an issue. And if they believe they have the best German translation, that is up to them.

Why do you think we will be here for the tribulation? I ask you, because we agree on many things posted here a value your opinion. I am pre trib though. Just so you know. In Christ.

I personally don't believe in a pre-trib rapture. That is my conviction from my studies. I don't belive the Bible supports it. I can provide my reasoning (and I have on this forum), but I figure if I'm wrong--yipee! I'll be raptured, since my rapture is based on my salvation, not my belief in the pre-trib rapture. But, if I am right, I believe there will be a great upheaval in the church. You are talking millions of Christians who figured they had a free "get out of tribulation" card coming to the preachers and wanting answers! The belief is very much an American belief. Most Chinese and North Korean Christians don't believe in a pre-trib rapture because of the things they've gone through, and the fact that God doesn't provide "get out of tribulation" card often. People like to compare the rapture to Noah, but Noah wasn't escaping tribulation--he was escaping destruction, which is exactly what believer will be escaping at the last trump (which happens at the end of the tribulation, by the way). Furthermore, the pre-tribulation rapture is a very new belief. There are no records prior to the 1800s of any of our church "fathers" preaching pre-trib. Most people will jump on this and say Paul did--but I use the exact same verses to support my views. Also, IF Paul had taught this, I think it would have been mentioned at one time or another during the 1800 years between Paul and the time it became popular.

I am a hard core IFB, don't get me wrong, but the more I study the subject, the more I am convinced I'm correct. I believe the Baptist Church is stuck in a paradigm on this subject--but it is still my church.

Where does it say, in the Bible, its up to each individual to obey or not obey 2 Corinthians 6:14 or any other commandment? Doesn't the Bible actually say, If you love me you will keep ALL of my commandments, not just those that suit your need at the moment?

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

Military requirements are "Caesar's" the time you spend off duty is God's. Give each their due.

You should not be trying to convert anyone's faith whether you are in the military, work at McDonalds, or are a lawyer for a firm--if you are on your employer's time. Our job in the military is not to proselytise.

It is right for you to read your Bible, but if you are reading it on your company's dime, you are a thief, and sinning.

I am in the military, and I don't appreciate the implication that I am somehow disobeying God because I cannot convert people to Christianity during the performance of my duties. I attend church, I support missions, and I witness to other military members. In fact, our church reaches out specifically to military members being right next door to an Air Force base. It is not the job of the military to be witnesses for Christ. But, by living our lives as Christians should, we are a witness to those we are around. I don't have to preach on the street corner of the base I am assigned to to be a witness. We are allowed to invite unsaved military members to church, to Bible studies, etc. You cannot, however, go into an Iraqi village passing out tracts or other Christian material as a soldier. It is disrespectful to their culture and unbecoming of a soldier. If you want to win them to Christ don't join the military. Become a missionary.

I haven't personally read it, but my wife swears by it, and has given it to many women who are having rough times. I have witnessed changes in people's lives due to this book. I don't agree with the Pearls about everything, but their books are great. There is no substitute for the Bible when looking for Biblical principles on issues, but the Pearls have a knack for revealing those principles from the Bible and guiding a person as to how to apply those principles in their daily life.

That's another thing I forgot to mention about American "torturers". There is always a medical team on standby in case. Sometimes fear will cause someone to pass out or--and it hasn't happened yet as far as I know, but it is possible--cardiac arrest.

I heard someone say that most of the things considered "torture" by the government are done by idiot high school kids to each other in the public schools all the time.

LOL. Scary, but funny.

Apparently there are some hardcore BBs that believe that. That's not the case as far as I know here. There are many different views from what I've been able to dig up and read. Some BBs are almost cult-like.

While I believe God could communicate through whatever media He desired, we now have his completed Word. There is no need for him to speak through donkeys, burning bushes, clouds, etc. We have the Word of God and Pastors (men of God) that can help us communicate with God. There are many unsaved wise people, but if it is of a spiritual matter, I would consult the Bible or your pastor.

Not a silly question. I've actually wondered that myself. I personally know an evangelist who lost his memory of everything (salvation, wife, how to speak, how to walk, who he was, his history, etc.) due to meningitis. He is saved, of course, but when he re-learned everything, I wondered if it was necessary for him to be "born again, again", or if his salvation, although he didn't remember it, was good still. You may have heard of John Bishop. He's now a great evangelist.

Hm. Was it not the conservative gov who indulged in this torture.

Torture is not designed to get the truth, in fact it cannot. It is designed to get confessions, true or not.

As for your question, NO. Our government was far from conservative. Even if you consider it conservative, Nancy Pelosi and several liberal Democrats approved of the methods being used and encouraged our troops to "step it up a notch" if they needed to. It wasn't until the liberals realized the political damage that could be done to an opponent that they began to scream,"torture!" That is one reason Cheney is asking Obama to release certain documents--he knows the names.

As for your statement, I can personally attest that you can indeed get a truthful response through torture--not that that makes torture right. Again, waterboarding is not torture in my opinion. If making Ahmed Muhamed Whatever THINK that he's drowning saves one American life, it is worth it. Our own troops endure waterboarding in SERE training--not all, but some--because it is a well known tool used by more than just us, and that is why we condition our own to it--to be prepared. Of course, the enemy we are fighting now would just as soon chop off your head, or put you feet first, slowly through a wood chipper. We still haven't found a way to condition a person for a wood chipper.

Regardless, our interrogators are well trained. They know how to get good information out of prisoners, and it usually doesn't involve waterboarding. But, if a person is waterboarded, it is because we have some intel, and need details to prevent a horrible attack. A good interrogator knows if a person is being truthful or not, and how much pressure he needs to apply to get a truthful response. Most of the detainees at Gitmo would talk by simply giving them a Subway Sandwich. Literally. Osama's driver LOVED Subway, and was treated like royalty. He didn't have a cell. He had what amounted to an entire cell block--all for himself.

If you believe waterboarding, sensory dep, and sleep dep is torture, then yes, we do torture in the US.

We could do like other countries and bind you and throw you from the roof of a building, skin you, put you in a wood chipper, rape you, etc. I think I'd prefer the Americanized version myself.

If you don't like it, don't join the military--at least not an area that would require you to do something that's against your convictions. The military does the dirty work that civilians don't want to or have to do. I pray you never have to see the things I've seen, and the reason I do them is to make sure my children never have to.

I don't agree with torture, but I also don't believe that waterboarding is torture. I believe it is a very useful tool used in lieu of actual torture, using fear to get information. Being a trained SERE instructor, I can attest to the fact that it is extremely scary, and I would rather be beaten (which isn't torture either, in my opinion, as long as there is no permanent physical disfigurement/scarring).

I love my country as much as I love my family (in different ways, of course), but I would give my life readily for either. There is nothing I would not do to rescue or save either from harm. So, if waterboarding didn't work, and my family, or several thousand American lives were at stake, you would have to lock me up because I would do ANYTHING to protect them.

Americans should be glad they have people who protect them in spite of themselves. I have been all over the world and never seen such a spoiled, ignorant, self-absorbed bunch of people as I see in today's Americans. Speaking of the last generation or two, of course (and I am a product of the last couple generations).