Brother Rick

So, you say if something that is the truth comes from a less than ideal source that somehow makes it no longer the truth? Your wrong. Balaam was a false teacher that is most likely in hell, yet he spoke the word of God on several occasions. Caiaphas the high priest spoke the word of God in John 11:49-52 though he was a major player in the crucifiction of Christ. The truth remains the truth unless something is added to it or taken away from it that changes it. At what point do you draw the line? If someone was to secretly write "Jesus was a liar" in the back of your copy of the KJV without you knowing would that false statement now written in your bible mean someone couldn't get saved from reading your copy of the KJV? Silly I know, but not much more silly than you claiming the source one hears the gospel from determines whether or not a person is saved rather than simply repentance and faith toward God in the heart through the truth of the gospel itself regardless of the source.

In actual point of fact a person could be saved without the scriptures at all as long as the gospel was presented to them accurately and they repented and believed on Christ. As far as your criticism of the MV's, those criticisms are valid, but since one does not require a complete and accurate understanding of bible doctrine in order to be biblically saved, those flaws are not generally of consequence when it comes to salvation. Salvation is not meant to be extremely complicated or difficult to understand. It is basic, it is simple, and the MV's do not corrupt the truth to such an extent that gospel is completely lost and changed into a lie. What they do is mess up enough truth so that a contradictory mess is created where scripture no longer interprets scripture much of the time. The deeper into bible doctrine you go the worse it gets. What ends up happening is that the Holy Spirit only has a cumbrous, dull, chipped sword of questionable metallurgy to use instead of a sharp, quick and powerful two edged sword to use in the life of the believer or the lost person. Now that said, the Holy Spirit, being a talented swordsman, can do a lot even with a lousy sword given the chance, but why handicap him?

Jesus gave an example of what we are to do with those who do not quite quote the Gospel word for word.

"And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great. And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." - Luke 9:48-50.

You do not have to know all of the Bible to lead someone to Christ, that is what Dr. Gipp is saying, We know the death, burial and resurrection to be the Gospel, that is the Gospel. The second a person gets saved they can tell another how to get saved by giving their testimony, without having known any of the Bible other than how to get saved. (Example the woman at the well, the lame beggar in from of the Temple, as soon as they got saved they ran to tell others, not knowing anything else, but how Jesus saved them). All anyone needs to be saved is to know that Jesus died to save them and that only He can save them. Now, once they receive Christ, that is when they need to learn which Bible is the true Word of God. That is how I look at it anyway.

To be honest, I have wondered why some use that term as well. I just figure they mean it's not physical. For instance, I believe in the Kingdom of God now is spiritual, but the Kingdom of Heaven later is spiritual. They are both just as literal and real as the other though.

If he was, he was still missing the point that the resurrection of the just has several phases to it - with one of them being Christ and the firstfruits after the cross. What Christ was basically saying was that there will come a time when everyone will rise again, either as just or unjust - not one isolated event.

That is consistant with the rest of Scripture, including paul's epistles and the end of Revelation, history that followed Christ's words, and the definition of the word "hour."

John 5:24-29, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

So this is a common passage to teach a general resurrection at the Great White Throne judgment, which eventually leads to a general judgment, which leads to an allegorizing of the entire book of Revelation. In other words, this is one of the passages that are used by non-dispensationalist to generalize everything and in the end make a general mess of things.

Here’s what is going on here. In verse 24 Jesus is talking about spiritual resurrection, those that “hear” his word are passed from death unto life. At the end of the passage, we see in verse 29 a resurrection of the just and the unjust (Acts 24:15, Dan. 12:1-2). The Bible says that “the hour is coming” in which all of this will occur.

So should we simply believe because the Bible says “hour” here that this is to all occur in one hour? Non-dispensationalist have rested much of their theological position on not merely the word “hour” in this passage, but their definition of the word “hour.”

So does the word “hour” always mean sixty minutes, 3,600 seconds? Does it ever mean anything else? What about the phrase “that was their finest hour”? Does that refer to sixty minutes, or does it refer to a generic period of time?

You can already see where I’m going here. A Preterist will demand the most strict and over-literal interpretation of Rev. 1:3, and in turn will generalize the rest of the book of Revelation, and anywhere else in the Bible that speaks of end time events that have not been fulfilled. This is all done ignoring other passages in the Bible where God speaks of things being at hand or occurring in “a little while” (such as the birth of Christ in Hag. 2:6-7 which was written 500 years before Christ was born).

Other non-dispensationalists will demand the same thing here, without considering other Scriptures. They will insist that Jesus meant what they mean whenever they use the word “hour.” The book of John was written a really long time ago, and considering that the word “hour” today doesn’t always mean a literal sixty minutes, it would be irresponsible to cram all of Bible prophecy into this verse without looking at how John uses the word hour at other times:

John 2:4, “Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.”

John 4:21, “Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.”

John 4:23, “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.”

John 7:30, “Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.”

John 8:20, “These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.”

Rev. 3:3, “Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.”

Rev. 3:10, “Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.”

Those are seven examples where the apostle John uses the word “hour” and it clearly represents “time.” Obviously no one thinks that John never used the word “hour” to represent a literal “hour,” so to be fair let’s look at some examples where that occurs:

John 4:6, “Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.”

John 4:52, “Then enquired he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him.”

John 11:9, “Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world.”

John 19:14, “And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!”

Rev. 9:15, “And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men.”

Rev. 18:10, “Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.”

Rev. 18:17, “For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,”

Rev. 8:1, “And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.”

So this should prove that the word “hour” can go either way: “time” or literal hour. So how does one go about distinguishing the difference? A serious student of the Bible should be careful before jumping to conclusions on something like this. Let’s look at the passage that is up for debate again:

John 5:28-29, “Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

It’s best to examine the verse based upon two things:

1. Context.
2. Subject matter.

Okay, so let’s examine the immediate context.

John 5:24-29, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

What a minute, look at verse 25 again:

John 5:25, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.”

Right there in the immediate context Jesus is using the word “hour” to represent not merely one unit of sixty minutes, but literally 2,000 years of time! That passage speaks of the spiritual resurrection that happens every time a person trusts Christ and becomes a believer. Just a couple breaths of air later Jesus uses the word “hour” again to describe the resurrection. Jesus could just as easily be using the term to describe time as he could a literal specific “hour,” if not more so.

Therefore, to clearly place the interpretation of the passage we would need to ask one simple question:

“Does the rest of Scripture support the idea that there is one isolated resurrection in which everyone is resurrected within the same sixty minute period?”

The answer is simple: no, Scripture does not support that and neither does history.

Matthew 27:51-53, "And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52) And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53) And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."

Daniel and Jesus both spoke of a resurrection of the just and the unjust as being a future event, and yet many saints have already resurrected and there are many that still will. By admitting that there is yet a future resurrection the non-dispensationalist has already proved himself wrong on the passage in question!

The resurrection of the just must contain at least two specific times of resurrection.

That hatred started before Dubya, Jerry. Clinton's antics made us a laughingstock. And, to be honest, civil unrest has been a hallmark of the middle east for many a year - long before the US ever existed. I agree that some of the things we've done have fed the flame, though.

I don't see how we couldn't be near another world war. And it wouldn't surprise me if we ever found out that the "powers that be" planned it...

I totally agree, Rick, that Israel shouldn't have to ask permission...but that is the consequence of accepting money from another government. I know Israel told America they don't need out $ anymore...they can refuse it...I don't think we should be giving any tax $ to any country - Israel included. That isn't what sovereignty is about, and we can show our friendship in ways other than $.

Love the video. Thanks for posting.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

Right to privacy is explicit, but not for contraception. (Jan 2012) More laws don't solve problems on abortion. (Sep 2011) Efforts to fund abortion ranks among stupidest policies. (Apr 2011) Deregulate the adoption market. (Apr 2011) Abortion laws should be a state-level choice. (Apr 2011) Abortion causes inconsistent moral basis for value of life. (Apr 2011) Day-after pill allows individual moral choice. (Apr 2011) Abortion is murder. (Apr 2008) Roe v. Wade decision was harmful to the Constitution. (Apr 2008) Define life at conception in law, as scientific statement. (Feb 2008) Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty. (Feb 2008) Get the federal government out of abortion decision. (Nov 2007) Delivered 4000 babies; & assuredly life begins at conception. (Sep 2007) Nominate only judges who refuse to legislate from the bench. (Sep 2007) Save “snowflake babies”: no experiments on frozen embryos. (Sep 2007) No tax funding for organizations that promote abortion. (Sep 2007) Embryonic stem cell programs not constitutionally authorized. (May 2007 Sanctity of Life Act: remove federal jurisdiction. (Sep 2007) Voted YES on banning federal health coverage that includes abortion. (May 2011) Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007) Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005) Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005) Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004) Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003) Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003) Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002) Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001) Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001) Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000) Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999) No federal funding of abortion, and pro-life. (Dec 2000) Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003) Rated 56% by the NRLC, indicating a mixed record on abortion. (Dec 2006) Bar funding for abortion under federal Obamacare plans. (Jul 2010) Prohibit federal funding for abortion. (May 2011) Prohibit federal funding to groups like Planned Parenthood. (Jan 2011) Supports the Pro-life Presidential Leadership Pledge. (Jan 2012) Report on Medicaid payments to abortion providers. (Apr 2009)

:ot: What I REALLY want to know, Rick, is...is that YOU in your picture? :11backtotopic:

I make sure my family is part of a local church. I believe it would be contrary to Scripture to not place one’s self under the authority of a local church and pastor. Therefore, if I moved I would make sure to find the best church in my area, join up, and do everything I could to be a help - even if it wasn't a KJVO church.

That being said, I'm not going to move somewhere unless God tells me to go there. I highly doubt God would move my family to an area where there is no good church, unless he wanted me to start one.

How many people have fallen into the world, and how many marriages have blown up because people moved somewhere that there is no good church (perhaps to make money or some other trivial temporal purpose)?

You know I don't agree with you brother, but I have to admit it makes so much more sense that the tribulation was Roman (pagan and Catholic) persecution than one isolated incident in 70 A.D.

I believe the man of sin was revealed in Paul's day, not exactly how you do, but close. I believe that in Paul's day the man of sin was revealed to be the position of the Roman Emperor, which would eventually morph into the position of the Pope. The Babylon of Revelation is Rome, and the Antichrist is the position of the pope. In this, you and I agree somewhat. I believe there is a future Antichrist that will be the final man of sin, who will also be revealed to be the son of perdition at the middle of the Tribulation when it all hits the fan.

I just got a review on my Revelation book, and the person reviewing it said he was enjoying it until he hit the middle and was ambushed by what I believe about the RCC. Not all dispensationalists are kind to the bloody whore, many of them still call her what she is, especially the dispensationalists that are King James only.

We can't spank our kids, it might hurt their self-esteem (sarcasm added)...

I'll be studying this in the near future but right now I have Jesus Christ's pre-passion ministry to study.

I can't help but say this argument over the word rapture is a waste of time. Words men use to describe the actions of the Lord, are just men's words. Even our vocabulary falls far short of describing God's wonder and work. Take the word "physics" for example. It's a term used by man to describe the laws God applied to the universe. We don't even understand many of the laws of physics. I'm certain God overlooks this flaw in man because I'm certain there is much more to these laws than the word physics implies. However, until Christ tells me the true name for physics I'll be using physics as a heading for gravity (which keeps me earthbound until the Lord causes me to "come up hither").

I'd agree with that, Invicta!

You guys are splitting hairs, there's nothing wrong with calling the act of someone being caught up to heaven a “rapture.” It's the commonly accepted term and people know what you're talking about. If I start yammering on about a pre-Tribulation translation no one is going to have any idea what I'm talking about. I understand that the scriptural term for the future catching up alive saints (not resurrected) is actually "the blessed hope." That term is fine to use for the future rapture, but you can't apply it to Enoch and Elijah.

Anyways, the term rapture is a commonly used and accepted term that describes a catching up to Heaven of an alive saint. Just because it is not in the Bible, like the word Trinity isn't, doesn't mean we have to get all hair lipped about it. You guys don’t like the word “dispensation” and it is in the Bible, and so is the idea that there are different ages in which God deals with different people different ways.

There are clear cut raptures and dispensations in the Bible and they are undeniable. If that threatens your theology, then reexamine your theology.

Wouldn't want to be found guilty of rightly dividing in seeing a difference between a rapture and a resurrection!

Those voters who claim to be Christian, conservative or "values voters", were unwilling to look at the 9 or so Repubs who were originally in the race and get solidly behind one of them. Now they are left with "choices" they don't like, not to mention weak choices, and it's greatly their own fault.

Had these core Republicans got behind one candidate early on, whether Bachmann, Paul, Perry or another, and gave them full support from beginning to end, then one of them would likely either be the nominee by now or well on their way to being the nominee.

As it is, once again they squandered their chance to do this. By withholding their support they allowed others to fund the wimpier candidates while allowing the others to go unfunded and unable to compete.

Now the core Republicans are faced with a proven failure most in his own Party don't even care for, a flip-flopper who will say whatever he thinks necessary to get elected, another big government politicians, and one who is too much like the Founders to suit their modern, enlightened tastes.

So, most will rule Ron Paul out without any signficant consideration or thought, which leaves them stuck between two Catholics and a Mormon, all three of which are big government and globalization supporters with no real love of the Constitution and no intention of keeping any oath they may take to the same.

Is it any wonder voters in the different States are not united?

Always try & do as the One & only true Expert says, & even if things go wrong it will not be because your disobeyed the Father.

Some children will rebel against their fathers & mothers Christian teachings, but we must remember, God gave us humans free will, & the children are using their free will to rebel against God. And that surely does not mean God's way is not the right way.

I believe anyone of us could rip that article, "

Spanking kids can cause long-term harm: Canada study
" apart and expose it as pure gobbledygook. Secular history alone exposes this as pure bunk.

I've got a better title for his article, Satan's generational success - methods to heathenism.

Whenever I see these articles it either makes me laugh, or makes me a little angry. I'm a second-generation Christian who was spanked as a kid, a lot. So many times....

Anyways, I've never smoked, done drugs, or took a drink. I saved sex for after marriage, and in fact the only woman I've ever kissed was my wife. As far as "gray matter" goes, I have Bible College degree and a secular degree, have written two books, and have the brains and diligence to pay my bills (800+ credit score) and keep our home even when times are tough. I'm not the smartest guy around, but I guide our home according to biblical financial principles and I've seen God honor that over and over again.

My wife and I have been married for eight years and have a wonderful relationship. We spank our kids, and get comments all the time about how happy, well behaved, and respectful they are.

There's nothing special about me in of myself. I have a rotten, dirty, selfish old nature that rears it's ugly head every day. If left unchecked, I know my flesh and I know where it would take me. I attribute anything good that I am today to God, His word, and the application of biblical principles by my parents. One of the clearest biblical principles is to spank (not abuse) your children and raise them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

I don't say all of this without knowing there are a ton of second-generation Christians out there that were raised just like me and are doing a good job with their families. I also know that sometimes kids can be raised right and still go off into the world; I've seen that before, and I've seen them come back too. What I haven't seen is a kid that was spanked, and raised biblically, be a complete mess when it comes to functioning as a member of society. Even if they give up on God, they still are decent, upstanding people that have a firm grasp of personal responsibility.

Forget what the "experts" say.

http://health.yahoo....rm-canada-study

Reminds me of a professor I had who was very liberal and, of course, very anti-spanking. Funny thing is, he would often use his children in his examples (he taught various sociology courses) and they were all disfunctional and nothing most people would want their children to be like.

Naturally, something that God commands and something Christians have practiced successfuly for 2,000 years, comes under attack by the lost, worldly servants of the devil. What better way to corrupt families, and therefore communities, societies and whole nations, than by convincing parents not to properly parent. Then we get what we see today, generations of children grown up spoiled and undisciplined, many of which are now adults and carrying on in the same way.

I will continue to trust and obey God, the world can keep their worldly "wisdom".

Israel themselves have stated that financial aid would be unnecessary if America were not giving their Arab enemies all around them billions of dollars a year in financial aid. Israel has a booming economy and is one of the most hi-tech nations in the world. If all aid were cut off to everyone, Israel would shine bright as her economy, military and technological prowess greatly outdoes any of their Arab neighbors, even combined.

An end to all financial aid and cutting the strings holding Israel back from doing what's in her best interest would be the best blessing America could give to Israel.

Obama would love an excuse to look tough on foreign policy and to divert attention away from all the problems at home.

Here is another issue that is involved with Music. Music speaks to the soul, and drives morale. Remember the old cadences the Army would march to? Bad music produces bad morale. If we get too somber and "serious" about things, we can actually depress people, and not lift them up.
For instance, while the tune to "love lifted me" is very catchy and moving, the theme of the song is the Chorus. We should be happy and uplifted that God's love was so strong that He reached to where I was sinking to lift me out of my sin! See? That is a happy thought, and demands a happy tune.

So, yes, we are going to have differences as to how we apply the Scriptural teaching on music. However, considering the origins of rock music, and the destruction it has helped bring to our society and culture as a whole, I think it is safe to say that we draw the line there. We have so many of the old standard hymns and gospel songs, that we really don't need to incorporate any of this new stuff (CCM - rock styled "music") into our churches. It opens up too many doors for bad things to infiltrate and destroy the work of previous generations.

My grandfather said this many times: "When the music in a church goes downhill, the church itself will not be far behind."
I agree with him - I have seen it happen far too many times personally. Bad music brings in bad morals and bad theology.