John Young

I agree with your dismissal of the errant views, however, I don't agree with your conclusion. While it is true that the translators did use a variety of synonyms, they did not use Easter and Passover interchangeably or they would have used Easter more than once. Additionally, if you were correct in the reasoning, your paper does not prove their reasoning as you only cited their statement to the general uses of words in the whole of scripture and merely asserted that was what was done in Acts 12:4. Easter does retain its etymology as it refers specifically to the morning of the resurrection and generally to the CHRISTIAN celebration. It does not refer to the OT celebration of the Jews but to the Christian elements of the week that Christians were celebrating IN acts 12 (which was 10 years after the Resurrection of Christ). Herod wanted to show the Jews a pleasure so attempted to stifle the christian elements of the Passover week which culminated the Sunday after the week of unleavened bread, On Easter morning Resurrection, where the Christians calibrate Christ power over the grave, Herod planned on taking Peter (Jesus' pillar of the church and "greatest" apostle of the faith) and executing him. Showing his power over the church and thus the futility of the Christian faith. Webster 1828: E'ASTER, noun A festival of the christian church observed in commemoration of our Savior's resurrection. It answers to the pascha or passover of the Hebrews, and most nations still give it this name, pascha, pask, paque. Etymology: Old English ēastre ; of Germanic origin and related to German Ostern and east; perhaps from Ēastre, the name of a goddess associated with spring. (The goddess connection is spurious at best and is a result of false etiological practices of comparing unrelated words by sound and have no real bearing on the actual word. It was unknown if the purported goddess "Ēastre" was even worshiped as only record of her was from Bede in the 500's A.D. when he recounting pagan folklore 500 of years previous. In the christian era common uses referring to looking towards the "East" or towards the "dawn" or "spring time" and the spring month but never in regards to a goddess. It is similar how our days and months and planets all are named after false gods but we do not worship them as such.) Acts 12:1-5 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) 4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people. 5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him. 11 And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.

No. You should first consider the origin of such information and the reasons of those who are telling you these things and try their hearts. God has made it clear that you can tell a tree by it's outward fruit and not some shadowy or mystical information or conspiratorial connections of symbols. If you want to know who a person is look at their clear and open teachings, actions, and practices. Luke 6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 12:34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Deuteronomy 30:11-15 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.15 See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; Romans 10:8-10 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

One of My favorite Preachers Pastor Phil Lydick of Bible Baptist Church, in Spokane Valley, WA: https://www.facebook.com/pg/biblebaptistchurchsv/posts/?ref=page_internal My sending Pastor Steven Zantjer of Green Meadow Bible Baptist Church in Kalamazoo, MI. They don't live stream but they upload a day later after personal information is edited out of the recording. Some good special singing. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuftG-mE0HPfnEQ7CoBWMNA I also like Pastor James Knox of THE BIBLE Baptist church in Deland, FL. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFZPl1MeGSxe2ocXZPgbsfw One other one to recommend is Pastor Bob Gray II of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Longview, TX: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxOSWjezO3uPo8jAuTRKzOQ/featured

Thanks for posting. It was a blessing.

I suggest you read the letter of James in the Bible and take it to heart. Don't play games with your faith, as you won't please or amuse God. Either believe or don't and don't base your faith off of what you can get form God because a half hearted believer or those who are self serving will get nothing. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+1&version=AKJV

Perhaps, but on this forum he has been fairly good following the Administrator's request not to discuss it and has generally only replied to direct comments to him here. I can respect him for that.

As independents we should already be separated. The better question should be, "With whom will I fellowship?". A person's doctrine, practices, and location does not determine my separation but it does determine my level of fellowship.

The first paragraph of a paper is not for examples. It is for the introduction of your topic and its focus/purpose for the paper. To tell the reader "this is what I will be speaking about". Within the first two sentences you should grab the readers interest and then present the central thought or proposition of the paper and then explain to the reader how you will analyze the issue for a possible resolution. Only after your introduction should you go into examples and the examples should not lead into new topics or issues but should be confined to illustrating a point that is part of the general topic. Using "the LGBT community" as an example of how the church treats sinners fails to provide a proper example because the way a sinner is received is not the same way a "community" is received as they are two completely different things and therefor introduces a new topic separate from the intent of your paper and confuses the reader rather then helps your main point. Additionally the example of Slave owners and Politicians does not help your paper's focus either because these are not examples of actual christian failings towards the sinner and introduces a new topic of people who manipulate Christianity for their own gain which will distract from the focus of your topic and confuse the reader. If your topic and focus is for Christians to have "Compassion Through Understanding" of the sinner then your paper should focus on identifying with Christians who have a genuine desire be compassionate but fail to do that because we forget to be understanding of each other and others. Give examples of attempt and failure, give the reasons for that failure (lack of understanding, biases, rush to judgement, etc.) From there show solutions and practical applications of the things you purpose as the solutions, and finish up with community effort of togetherness. Keep it clear and flowing form one paragraph to the next. Don't let any one example take over the paper's central idea. Keep it focused and try not to add new concepts or ideas separate from that specific topic. If yo do that your paper will be better overall and more enjoyable for the reader.

Deleted extra comment

Part 2... Take note of these verses from Acts 15: Acst 15:1-2 And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. [This was the mark of entering the National covenant, they were saying that they had to enter the national covenant before they could be saved by Christ] 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. 6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. [they believed without entering in to the national covenant] 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? [the Israel of old and the Jews of the day could not keep the national covenant as God demanded in order for the nation to be properly established] 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. [meaning that even though the Israelite and Jews could not keep the national covenant they were still saved the same way as the gentiles]12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: 14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, [the old testament version of the church, which was a covenant for all nations, Isaiah 56] which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. [A quote from Amos 9 which also makes clear the that the nation will be destroyed and Jacob will be scattered while the Tabernacle of David is rebuilt and then later that Jacob will return to reestablish the Nation of Israel] 18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. [Meaning while christian Jews should not try to make gentiles convert, the Christian gentiles needed to make these concessions so that the Jews could keep their National covenant in good conscience and not be defiled when the gentiles meet with them in services.] Part 3.... Acts 21:18-28 goes on to teach this: 18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe [Paul and James celibrate souls saved by faith in their ministries]; and they are all zealous of the law: [the issues then becomes about the national covenant of Israel] 21 and they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. [A lot of people think that Paul is teaching to Jews to forsake the National Covenant but both Paul, James, and the other Apostles agree that this is NOT what Paul is teaching for the JEWS. Rather he teaches the National covenant e has nothing to do with one's salvation and that Gentiles should not try to keep it as part of their salvation or sanctification before God (just as Peter stated in acts 15:10)] 23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. [Paul has always been an observant jew who kept the National covenant and James and Paul want to show this to the Jerusalem church] 25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.[They were giving the offering of the Nazorite to bless their nation]27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, 28 crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place. In his defense Paul states clearly that he believes this physical nation to still be the Nation of Israel as seen in these verses: Acts 24:10 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself: Acts 24:17 Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings. Acts 26:4 My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews; Acts 28:19 But when the Jews spake against it, I was constrained to appeal unto Cæsar; not that I had ought to accuse my nation of.

The nation of Israel was established by the National Covenant at Mt. Sinai. It is not synonymous with the Old and New Testament Covenants which started with the first and second Adams and has different requirements to be part of then the testaments. The early church made this distinction clear in Acts 15 and Acts 21 that entering the National Covenant of Israel was not a requirement for the gentiles nor was it the same covenant that you receive when you are saved by God. It was however still a covenant in effect for Jews who wished to identify with the nation of Israel. To say otherwise is to contradict the Apostles and fundamentally misunderstand what Paul is teaching in regard to Being "Jewish". Salvation, as Peter stated in Acts 15:11 is the same for all people: But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. James also makes clear in Acts 15:17-18 that of all people, including gentiles of old. that are called by his name who are saved and will be saved: 17 that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. 18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Paul is in agreement with this as well when he states that all people of every age is saved the same way, by calling on the name of the lord: Romans 10:11-13 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. While they all believe and taught that Salvation was the same for all people they rejected the idea that the National Israelite Covenant was for all people, that it was required for salvation, or that it was for all saved believers. They taught that the Household of Faith and the Israelite Nation were different and were entered differently. They did not teach that the National covenant suddenly became a spiritual national covenant for all believers. Rather they taught the spiritual household of faith for all believers in the Old Testament was "David's Tabernacle" and in the New Testament was rebuilt by Christ into what is now the Spiritual Body of Christ. What Paul teaches is that a Jew (someone in the national covenant of Israel) is nothing without Salvation. He is not teaching that saved gentiles are now the true Jew. Rather , he is teaching a Saved Jew is a true Jew.

Have you checked directly with Ruckman's church book store and college? If anyone would have that information or how to get it, it would be them. http://store.kjv1611.org/

"The Rapture" (Part one: A word about "the rapture". Part two: What is the rapture, Where do the Major Christian Frameworks place the rapture and why.) Part one: A word about "the Rapture". As we study The four returns of Christ as outlined, we are going to intentionally not speak too much about the rapture directly nor make it the primary focus, as Revelation is not about the Rapture, nor is specifically stated as an event in the book of Revelation. The Rapture and its order in the events is actually spoken of more by apostle Paul than by anyone else and that only briefly with the intent to give peace of mind to church age believers. The timing of Paul's church rapture in many theologies are then overlaid on to passages such as Matthew 24, and the book of Revelation. Not based on the contextual method of study but rather on incomplete similarities and theological assumptions of what constitutes a rapture and to whom it actually applies. Because the word "rapture" does not appear in English scripture (Its the Latin word for "Catching away" something, as in reference to a Kidnapping or theft, or as in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 "caught up" together). The Timing and Placement of the rapture in various rapture theories therefor is heavily dependent on other terminology that they associate with happening with or as being the rapture itself, such as The call of "Apostle john to heaven", "The falling away", "The ascension of the two witnesses" "The return of Christ after the tribulation", "The reaping of earth by the angels", "The gathering of Israel/ or the elect", "The resurrection", and etc. Depending on their assumed associations of the given theology "the Rapture" will be placed in any one of these assumed locations with little more proof given than stating "this is also that". Another tactic that is often done in rapture theologies is the rearrangement of the Book of Revelation to suit their given preference. Sometimes the Book is broken into two, three, or even four or more, sections and then placed in a parallel timeline or mixed and matched arrangement of chapters in order to get the preferred result. Otherwise the natural chronological and progressive flow of the book becomes inconsistent with their rapture placement and other theology assertions. Given the diversity and variant opinions, and assumptions on the rapture, and the tampering of the book's natural flow and manipulation of terms, (Not just among heretics, or "Christians" in general, but also among otherwise good fundamental Baptist) the question needs to be asked, Why would otherwise contextually consistent Christians chose one view over the other? and additionally divide over the issue? To the simple it seems a frivolous thing to divide over a few years or on something "no one can agree on or prove definitively and we have no control over anyway". However, as with most theology, what is on the surface to the simple, as non issue, or matter of preference, is actually a defining issue. Where you place the rapture will ultimately determine which theology as a whole you will allow to teach you the Bible. In general Rapture theologies do not exist in a vacuum but are the end result of an overall Biblical framework and understanding the reasoning behind them belongs to them of full age (That is why Revelation is the last book in the Bible!). Unfortunately because of the emotional and sensational nature of end times events in general, and OUR rapture most specifically, it is most often one of the very first things a young and unlearned Christian wants to learn or is concerned about. (given a show of hands most of us would have to agree this was true for us as well). Because of this were we emotionally lock in our placement will determine what we decide is theologically correct in our later development and study. There are also many who were told a location but later changed their position after "much study" (usually meaning a charismatic and skilled teacher picked apart a flawed version of their told placement in favor of the teachers preferred placement) but do not change their previous framework. Given time the framework must change with the rapture theology in order for the person to remain theologically consistent. So if "the timing of the rapture" is the only thing "we disagree on"...give it time and the rest will also change. Either that or the person is not an honest biblicist and is fine with picking and choosing theology with no theological constancy or is choosing to remain ignorant, simple, or detached from study, in favor of his chosen crowd of fellow Christians. So what does this all have to do with "The Four Returns of Christ" as outlined? Simply put, the major Frameworks in Christianity place the Rapture at one of these key points in the Return of Christ and confuse the simple to where they feel that they cannot understand the overall events and timings and therefor need a chart or skilled teacher to untangle the book of Revelation. It is the hope of this study to untangle the book of Revelation from artificial frameworks in favor of the bible's natural and consistent contextual flow. In so doing I hope to show, among other things, the simple flow of the book and events do not need to be rearranged, that the Rapture's correct placement is Pre-tribulational, and that the correct framework is dispensational in nature (in a later study I would like to look at the various errors within the certain dispensational views that cause many to forsake the truths of its basic bible principles for another framework. However that study will probably be a while off.) and lastly to show and teach the events in a way that can be grasped by the simple christian so that they can start off on a good theological footing. In part two we will look at the assertions of what the rapture is biblicaly, the reason for it, and according to the various frameworks, the Rapture placements and their fixed associations with their given theological Framework and why one must follow the other in order to be theologically consistent. Until then is their any clarification or additions that anyone would like to ask or add that would be helpful to the study so far?