John Young

(Bonus Point) 11. Ulterior Motives: Up to this point we have assumed errant but sincere motives in the harts of those hindered by the previous ten points and the desire on all to come to agreement on the truth. If we in honest and sincerer hearts deal with the above hindrances to clearly understanding the scripture there will be a greater consensus and good will on the subject of End Times. Yet we must also acknowledge the hindrance of those who are not interested in coming to the truth but rather prefer to keep them in place for one reason or another. Most of the reasons are self serving in one way or another and are held knowingly to some degree. They can include but are not limited to some of the following: 

11a. Fear of Going Beyond the Group: Generally we do not learn our doctrine in a vacuum. We learn with others and tend to adopt the particular views held by our teachers and peers. We have a natural tenancy to want to be part of the group. Group learning is wonderful and helps ensure you are placing your education on a strong foundation of truth and consensus. For basic education this typically is a must and there is safety in the consensus to ensure your foundation is correctly laid. Such things as the alphabet, arithmetic, dates of events, etc are not controversial in the main. Yet when it is time to construct true ideas from foundational truth and apply them that it becomes controversial with the Group. The Group by nature does not like new or different yet without these error cannot be challenged and truth cannot advance. Not going beyond is safe and endears you to the group but does nothing to purify or refine our doctrine. We often chose to stay and tow the party line rather than make waves.

We see this in scripture with Jewish groups such as Pharisees and Sadducees, Herodians, Essene, etc. All were fundamentally Jewish yet had differing ideas. To go beyond your group in that time often meant joining an opposing group, and this is often the tenancy today. To trade one group for another and then adopt their ideas rather than going alone. Yet Jesus challenged them to go beyond their Fear and group think to that of Love and Scriptural truth.

11b. Love of Novel Ideas: Greek Individualists mindset, as in Acts 17:21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.) is the foundation for most Western secular study. Paul encountered such in Athens at Mars Hill. Often this is thought of going beyond the group, being an individual, yet it is the opposite error, from fearing the Group, to having ideas merely for the sake of ideas. Rather, Paul called us to unity (1 Cor. 14:26). To use our study to edify the group rather than to merely have something “new”. Our ideas must be grounded in truth and be for the edifying of our group. To grow the group in truth. (Acts 17:11)

11c. Personal Notoriety: Becoming known as a teacher of a particular idea or as a leader of an established group will often hinder change from an errant line of thinking as you are now considered it’s champion. To promote the idea or group will be to promote yourself, amassing a following and influence that would be lost if it were abandoned for the truth.

11d. Personal Profit: Ideas are big business and when its tied to your livelihood you are prone to protect the it the best you can. Philippians 3:18-19 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

11e. ….. What would you add to this list of  Ulterior Motives?

On 10/1/2023 at 3:55 PM, Joe Chandler said:

Systematic theology has a doctrine, build on certain principles that lead a man to interpret the bible according to those principles.

I agree to a point. Yet many fail to realize how much the principles of biblical stewardship actually play into their practical ministry. Its principles are the foundation of any successful endeavor. While Systematic theologies such as covenant, dispensationalism, Calvinism, etc. re primarily of the mind and much of the systems are theoretical in the sense they cannot be tested or are simply constructs to help convey a perspective of study, the principles of stewardship are tested and tried every day in practical ministry and everyday life. Such are the principles conveyed in the Book of proverbs, parables and throughout scripture itself. Practical theology is often neglected as it is not noval or overly exciting or debatable in theological circles. Its just there working.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

Unfallen Angels are called sons of God in the Old Testament.

These are all examples of substitution by assertion. There is no verse that indicates they were called sons and several that indicate they are never called sons. 
 

8 hours ago, Jerry said:

There are many passages where the Angel of the Lord is clearly the pre-incarnate Christ.

There are only assertions made by teachers. No verse actually shows this and one passage as shown above that clearly shows He is not.

This shows the power of assertion even in light of clear passages to the contrary. And many of us are guilty of it in some way or another because we just assumed it was so. Until we can deal with all the scriptures as they are written, (not just about angels and God's sons) our doctrine will be lacking.
 

12 hours ago, Jerry said:

If at least one reference to an angel in Revelation is not a physical angel (but Jesus), then why couldn’t chapters 1-3 be something other than a literal angel?

As the original example so too are the assumptions and substitutions in regard to the angel of the Lord. "Because it fits" is not sufficient reason. Particularly when Hebrews makes it clear that no angel is a son. There needs to be more than that to build doctrine on. In regards to the angel of the Lord, it is more appropriate to simply consider him the Lord's personal representative angel, as Matthew 28 shows plainly they are not the same.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Hebrews 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

Matthew 28:1-5 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. 2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. 5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. 8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

2 hours ago, Jerry said:

talking about making angels mean pastors throughout the rest of the book?

What I am saying is that it is an example of substitution theology. The book is clear that it is speaking of angels throughout. Yet the word "pastors" fit the person's theology better so it is substituted. Such substitutions are not in the text yet it is made to fit through through sheer will of the teacher and, statement as if a fact. Sure there is attempt made at justification through reasoning and allusion to messengers being the general meaning of the word angels so ergo it must be pastors, yet it is substitution nonetheless, which breaks the picture scripture is making in the use of Angels in each stage. 7 church angles, 7 trumpeting angels, 7 pouring angels. 

That's not to say there is no justification for substitution imagery if scripture makes it in the process of symbolism and allegory which it clearly does in other instances. Yet it needs contextual basis and not mere assertion due to the fact what is clearly presented is inconvenient for the teacher.

On 9/26/2023 at 11:31 AM, Joe Chandler said:

Allow me to add a problem that I see among us. We seem to know what a passage means, but not what the passage actually says.

Example #1: The seven churches of Asia Minor in Revelation. Some are adamant that each church represents the different church ages. Some are equally adamant that each church is merely a representative example of churches today. The bible doesn't say any of that. All that is revealed in scripture is that there were 7 churches and that Christ had a message for each of them. 

Example #2: Those who hear and reject the gospel today cannot be saved after the rapture. This was the objection I most heard concerning the Left Behind series. The verse says, 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Who is sent the strong delusion? Those who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Could that be referring to people who heard and rejected the gospel? Yes it could. Does it say that? No. Maybe I am too literal.

I would say many things these could be placed under #7.

Yet we can also say for your first example that Christ exhorted all who can hear to hear what the Spirit said unto the 7. This means the things for the seven are also for all who are in the Spirit to hear.

Revelation 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; ...
Revelation 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; ...

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; ...
Revelation 2:29 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Revelation 3:6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Revelation 3:13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Revelation 3:22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

As for the second I would tend to agree with you on a strong likelihood due to the spiritual depravity and strong delusion but not a hard can't. More of a don't want to of Romans 1, as indicated by the words "had pleasure" in 2 Thess 2:12.

On 9/26/2023 at 11:05 AM, Joe Chandler said:

I do not know what Stewardship theology is.

Its the same thing as what the bible says about Stewardship. Here is a good video: 

20 minutes ago, TheGloryLand said:

11. Because of false teaching, there is much confusion.

2Pet.2

1. [1] But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

I have had a few people mention this as a possible separate point. Yet this list is more for bible believers to make progress on end times and I think learning how to spot and deal with false teachers should be its own separate topic of discussion. I also didn't add it because with a subject like this its too easy to claim everyone with a different opinion is a false teacher. It also could probably be discussed somewhat under 8 and 9 but I'll keep it in mind as a separate point or subject of study. Thanks!

22 minutes ago, SureWord said:

I would say #3 causes the most confusion. 

I agree. If we all could get settled on this one then bible theology would be much easier to discuss and understand. Also I was surprised on how many otherwise bible believing baptist would state the apostles were wrong when teaching these passages. The even use Paul's correction of Peter as their excuse to disregard the decision on the matter.

Why there is confusion on “End Times” among Baptist.
By John Young, 9-23-2023

The “End Times” is of great interest, yet there is confusion and hindrances which keeps even the most experienced bible believer from properly understanding the subject. Below I show generally and simply 10 hindrances I see. If you can think of more feel free to comment them below. Over time we will expound on each in more detail to show why we believe each is a hindrance to understanding the truth. 

1. Bible Theology: Of the three main theologies (Covenant, Dispensational, Stewardship), Covenant and Dispensational wrongly lump all bible covenants into one. The only main difference is Covenant holds to a transfer of ownership from Israel and Dispensational holds to a pause of ownership. Yet the bible holds that Promises, Covenants, Testaments and etc. are held by God and only apply to persons qualified by him to be in them and their regulations are to be considered individually held.

2. Order of Revelation: Many have to split up and re-arrange the book to fit their theology. Yet the book does not call for spitting, retelling, or overlaying its events. Rather it shows a clear progression. Covenant and Dispensationist both try to split up and re-arrange the book while ignoring its structure.

3. Division of Church and State: Covenant reject the teaching and commands of the Apostles, that the church and Israel are separate institutions, as stated in Acts 2:41-47; 15; 16:4-5; 21:19-28 in favor of their own theology. Many adherents, particularity Pre-wrath supporters, state boldly, and without fear, that the Apostles teaching and command for the churches to follow is wrong. This a great concern.

4. Appeals to History: While outside history can compliment the scripture it does not have authority to supplant or justify fulfillment of prophesy. This right belongs only to scripture. So, unless the bible shows or states the event as being fulfilled, then the event is yet future. Covenant and Dispensationalist will often appeal to flawed “customized to the event” version of history to fulfill a particular prophesy, so that the scripture will not interfere with their theology on future events. This is wrong.

5. Confusion of Terms: Intentional intermixing of separate and like terms are used to re-order events to favor theology over the plain reading. Day of “***”, Gathering, Rapture, Return, Resurrection, etc.

6. Substitution Theology: Often when the plain reading cannot be ignored and there is no scriptural justification, they will simply switch out the terms for one that does fit in their conceived teaching. Some examples are Angels to Pastors, Day of the Lord to Day of Christ, Babylon to USA.

7. Assumption Theology: When coming to a seemingly confusing or hard passage, rather than leaving it alone or searching scripture for an explanation (which usually will contradict his theology), the teacher will uphold his theology by appealing to “It seems” or “looks like” or “I think” statements.

8. Opposition Theology: Rather than developing theologies to give understanding and to show the clarity of scripture on a matter, many teachings arise in opposition to another teaching. Over time this develops In a disregard for scriptural context in favor of promoting one flawed theology over another.

9. Vilifying Opponents: Frustrated by opposition theology that lacks the contextual clarity of scripture, the adherence have little choice but to keep followers by tribalism and fear-mongering, leading to willful ignorance and stalled development of the true scriptural position or investigation on a matter.

10. Biblical Context: Rather than a culture of teaching deep contextual study of scripture, in the order and priority of scripture, theology and opinions of men are sought to teach on a topic and treated as if studying a matter, leading to a prioritizing, reordering and systematizing of things scripture does not.

2 hours ago, MikeWatson1 said:

I want to get a membership transfer .. and be voted in..but don't know if it is going to happen. .

The senior pastor said it won't be a problem to get a transfer..but nothing has happened..

What do I do?

A transfer letter is simply a recommendation letter from your old church to the new church stating you were in good standing with them and that they recommend you to the new for membership. Sometimes you can't get a letter or its indefinitely delayed for whatever reason. In those cases you should simply speak with the pastor, perhaps discus any reasons the letter may not have been given and ask if you can join by your statement of like faith before the congregation. Each church has their criteria for membership. Some simply take your word of faith but others may want more. You will have to decide on your own if their requirements are worth becoming a member with them. 

11 hours ago, Joe Chandler said:

I couldn.t find Tylenol in the thread.

Tylenol probably pre-blocked a lot of people when they joined, so only a few could see what he.

Aspirin felt his tried and true expertise was neglected but I keep telling him he needs an account to post but he says his dialup times out before the sign up page can load.

59 minutes ago, Joe Chandler said:

Advil: Can we get back to door to door soul winning, please.

I thought Tylenol had some really good points about door to door sewing. Did you know Paul the Apostle used to do that tent sewing for money?

Just make sure its only the actor (or consenting silent partner) you hit! lol

On 5/17/2023 at 12:02 AM, Joe Chandler said:

Also, there is no such word as "plenish" therefore it cannot be re"plenished". Replenish stands alone as you explain above.

Root word is plenty as in you have a plentiful supply. When your plenty is diminished you will need to replenish. 

Many Baptist, myself included, consider themselves Non/Anti-Denominational as well. We simply use things like Independant, Fundamental, Baptist, to indicate our local church's faith and particular doctrine and not as group a group to be holden to in some subservient hierarchy. Though sadly many do fall into the trap of treating their particular fellowship of churches as a defacto denomination.

Not to nit pick but a lot of BBQs went on in the bible and were commanded by God and supported with tithes and offerings of God's people....

My opinion is that a church can pay whichever ministry worker they want at the level their church needs to maintain the level of ministry they want. You get what you pay for and part time volunteers can only do so much before the ministry or minister suffers due to lack of time and resources.

I like what Brother David Rea (IFB missionary in Zambia) said in regard to this revival and revivals in general.

"Christians are hungry for a revival that will change our nation. They are hungry for a movement that will cause young people to flock to Christ. So much so that men who should know better are posting tacit approvals of what us going on at Asbury.
Satan is not against religious experiances. He is the author of them.
We are a nation of Christians who flat put refuse to witness with over 95% never sharing their faith even one time.
We are a nation where over 50% of professing believers deny salvation is through Jesus alone. 
It seems to me that many who are excited about Asbury are excited about it due to so many young people showing up and manifesting a hunger for God. This hunger must be met with sound bible preaching not feel good song services.
Absent of this, any revival, will die. It cannot be sustained on emotion. 
And the absence of biblical preaching may be evidence the revival is not genuine at all.
Remember Hindus hunger for gods, Muslims hunger for a god, and Mormons worship Adam, the only god whom they have to do (doctrines and covenants, volume 1, page 50, right hand side, half way down the page). Hunger for God means little without biblical, doctrinal preaching.
Without DOCTRINE, no revival can take place.
And... NOTHING is going to replace the command of God for every church member to preach the Gosple to every creature.
There are no short cuts... GO tell them."

Also, this is the chapel service that was at the start of the Asbury event (Basically challenging the student body to receive and express the genuine love of God in their daily life, instead of focusing on personal hurts or offences):

On 2/16/2023 at 1:00 PM, PastorMatt said:

I really hope it's real

All I know is that it Isn't my Revival. All that really matters is if those experiencing revival draw closer to God and not further away because of it. Everything else doesn't matter, ie opinions of critics and those looking in on revivals that aren't reviving them personally (because when you aren't being dealt with directly by God it will never seem real) or are only trying to find doctrinal faults in order to dampen its potential effects of their revival. Only they whom God is dealing with directly can truly respond to their revival. The rest is just sensationalism masquerading as revival and people with mere curiosity.

In addition to 3+4 =7, 3*4=12 is interesting note but I don't think its a pattern that is used.

I've attached a picture of "the Sevens of Revelation". The general pattern of seven divided in half (3+4= 7) is common throughout the Book Of revelation. I welcome any discussion of the pattern here in this thread.

Attached a Picture of the basic outline: 

On 11/29/2022 at 5:15 PM, Heaven_Came_Down said:

He's not a hyper, he teaches against it.

He teaches against a certain type of hyper-dispensationalism but he still over divides and wrongly adds to salvation. Anyone who adds man's efforts, works or law keeping, in ANY dispensation to gain eternal salvation is wrongly dividing a work that belongs to God alone. Eternal salvation of the soul by GOD has ALWAYS been and will ALWAYS be by Faith in Christ Alone. Though they may not have known the method of salvation (on a Cross) nor received the promise before us (had to wait with Abraham) they always had faith on the object of their salvation which was Christ. Anyone who teaches otherwise is wrong and hyper-dispensational. You can follow him if you want but I stand by my statements.

Hebrews 11:39-40 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.