Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
7 hours ago, LYDIA WESTERN said:

When Jesus says, “And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced,” is he talking to Christians or to that particular group of people living between the walls of Jerusalem across from the Mt. of Olives?

Second question. If the people he’s referring to are that particular group living between those four walls, then is that the same group that the Russian/Muslim invasion is going to march against and then God will destroy 1/6 of their armies and “in that day shall all Israel be saved, and they shall know that I am the Lord”? Because if those people (whoever they are) between those four walls are saved then please WHO are the people standing at the base of the Mt of Olives when Jesus appears who had pierced him? Presumably the last lot living between those four walls got Raptured because they all got saved before the mid-rapture.

 

Those who look upon Him whom they pierced clearly refers to the Israelites who are in Jerusalem when Christ returns, because it is the Jews that pierced Him. Yes, the Romans did the actual act, but it was the rejection of the Jews that placed Him there, and they will mourn when they realize who He is and all they have lost in rejecting Him for so long. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

TomB, The above study on the trumpets was taken from the following link:   TomB, If you would carefully study the "Trumpets" in the Bible, in both the Old and New Testament, it

And again, you are misrepresenting what I said. I merely said that David Cloud holds the Pre-trib rapture to be a fundamental of the faith, and that, according to MY understanding as a Fundamentalist,

I can see that you and I disagree. I agree with part of you definition. Endure means to suffer; to last, or remain. So...the Lord is referring to those who last (or remain) through the suffering

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

While I myself am firmly pre-trib, I know personally some IFB preachers who have recently moved to the post-trib side. It's odd, because I also know that these fellows are in agreement with me on the difference between the church and Israel, and they do not hold the reformed theology of the church taking Israel's covenant. As has been correctly pointed out on here, bad covenant theology is often the culprit. But not with these guys.

Honestly? I think for some it partly stems from guilt and grief over the carnality of the church today, and a belief that for us to get caught out early is to get off easy. I can see where they're coming from, but I cant hold the doctrine in light of everything in scripture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
On 3/1/2020 at 8:27 AM, weary warrior said:

While I myself am firmly pre-trib, I know personally some IFB preachers who have recently moved to the post-trib side. It's odd, because I also know that these fellows are in agreement with me on the difference between the church and Israel, and they do not hold the reformed theology of the church taking Israel's covenant. As has been correctly pointed out on here, bad covenant theology is often the culprit. But not with these guys.

Honestly? I think for some it partly stems from guilt and grief over the carnality of the church today, and a belief that for us to get caught out early is to get off easy. I can see where they're coming from, but I cant hold the doctrine in light of everything in scripture.

I lean to the post-trib/pre-wrath position, not because of any covenant theology or any such thing, I just find the arguments for pre-trib to be weak. Mind you, I say I LEAN that way, because I don't see, after considerable study, that the Bible clearly shows any of the positions to be proven.

The various arguments for a pre-trib all include a considerable amount of assumption connected to the passages, and a few are, actually, contextually incorrect. For example, 1Thes 4:

13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

I read time and again, that if we were to go through the tribulation period, how could we be comforted, as it says here we will be? How can we comfort one another, with this hanging over our heads?  Well, if we read this in context, (and sadly, many who use this argument are usually big proponents of the importance of context), we see the timing of the events of the tribulation have nothing to do with it; rather, it is the fact that our loved ones who have died in Christ, we will see again, that they will come back with Christ and receive their glorified, resurrected bodies, and we will join them AND Jesus forever. THAT is our great comfort, not missing the tribulation, which is never mentioned here. 

There there is the assumption that, since the tribulation period is called the time of Jacob's trouble, and that Israel is in primary view here, that means we will be removed from earth first. Except there's no precedent for that idea-Noah is pointed to, but he and his family weren't spared the flood, rather, they were lifted above and rode out the flood-yet they still were there, protected, but watched as their friends, neighbors and loved ones died, heard their cries for help outside the ark. Then they had to ride it out for a year and a month in the ark, and were let out to survey the mess it left, and scrape together a new life from the ruins. So it is possible we will be here to witness the mess, kept safe by the mark of the Holy Ghost from many of the troubles the Lord sends upon the wicked. 

My point being, there is nothing in scripture that says we will escape the triblulation, just the wrath at the end. As for Jesus' imminent return, well, in 1Thes 5 we read:

"But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."

We see that the reference to the thief in the night it to the lost, but WE, His people, are NOT in darkness that is should overtake us as a thief. WE will not know the day, but we will be aware of the times and seasons. We will know it is nigh when it is nigh. 

 

 

 

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

I lean to the post-trib/pre-wrath position, not because of any covenant theology or any such thing, I just find the arguments for pre-trib to be weak. Mind you, I say I LEAN that way, because I don't see, after considerable study, that the Bible clearly shows any of the positions to be proven.

The various arguments for a pre-trib all include a considerable amount of assumption connected to the passages, and a few are, actually, contextually incorrect. For example, 1Thes 4:

13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

I read time and again, that if we were to go through the tribulation period, how could we be comforted, as it says here we will be? How can we comfort one another, with this hanging over our heads?  Well, if we read this in context, (and sadly, many who use this argument are usually big proponents of the importance of context), we see the timing of the events of the tribulation have nothing to do with it; rather, it is the fact that our loved ones who have died in Christ, we will see again, that they will come back with Christ and receive their glorified, resurrected bodies, and we will join them AND Jesus forever. THAT is our great comfort, not missing the tribulation, which is never mentioned here. 

There there is the assumption that, since the tribulation period is called the time of Jacob's trouble, and that Israel is in primary view here, that means we will be removed from earth first. Except there's no precedent for that idea-Noah is pointed to, but he and his family weren't spared the flood, rather, they were lifted above and rode out the flood-yet they still were there, protected, but watched as their friends, neighbors and loved ones died, heard their cries for help outside the ark. Then they had to ride it out for a year and a month in the ark, and were let out to survey the mess it left, and scrape together a new life from the ruins. So it is possible we will be here to witness the mess, kept safe by the mark of the Holy Ghost from many of the troubles the Lord sends upon the wicked. 

My point being, there is nothing in scripture that says we will escape the triblulation, just the wrath at the end. As for Jesus' imminent return, well, in 1Thes 5 we read:

"But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."

We see that the reference to the thief in the night it to the lost, but WE, His people, are NOT in darkness that is should overtake us as a thief. WE will not know the day, but we will be aware of the times and seasons. We will know it is nigh when it is nigh. 

 

 

 

Your reasoning and interpretation of scripture is logical and well thought out. It is a reasonable way to approach it.

For me, honestly, if it were imperative that we were crystal clear on this subject, Christ would have made it more clear. But there remains a certain amount of shrouding and mystery over the details and timing of things at the end, and that is deliberate. So placement of the rapture is one doctrine that I do not fuss about, or contend with others over. Its going to happen in the Father's own good timing, and nothing we believe or do here now regarding that mystery will make any differance in anything.

I think its going to take place in  particular order that makes some sense to me, but I could be wrong. The comfort is that if my understanding is wrong, there is no problem. Im still to live every day like the Lord is returning for me today. If I do that, it will all take care of itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
7 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

Your reasoning and interpretation of scripture is logical and well thought out. It is a reasonable way to approach it.

For me, honestly, if it were imperative that we were crystal clear on this subject, Christ would have made it more clear. But there remains a certain amount of shrouding and mystery over the details and timing of things at the end, and that is deliberate. So placement of the rapture is one doctrine that I do not fuss about, or contend with others over. Its going to happen in the Father's own good timing, and nothing we believe or do here now regarding that mystery will make any differance in anything.

I think its going to take place in  particular order that makes some sense to me, but I could be wrong. The comfort is that if my understanding is wrong, there is no problem. Im still to live every day like the Lord is returning for me today. If I do that, it will all take care of itself.

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

A concern I have is, if it ISN'T pre-tribulation,  and all those pre-trib believers begin to clearly see events of the tribulation taking place, how might this affect their faith? Will they think they were left behind? Will they be angry at God for leaving them? I so often hear the argument that God would NEVER cause His children to go through such terrible tribulation, but then I wonder, Have they read Foxe's Book of Martyrs? Have they read how believers have historically always been treated? The millions slaughtered by the Romans, the Jews, the Catholics, the Muslims, the communists? I am afraid we have become too soft in America with the lack of real persecution. 

So I am all for Him taking us before the trouble begins, because I certainly don't want to go through it, even protected, but if we must, better to be ready, at least for the possibility, so if it DOES occur, I am at least mentally prepared.

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

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

This is wrong.

The "Fundamentals" are not all associated with salvation and it is a gross misrepresentation for you to argue it in this way.

Two offices is a fundamental but has nothing to do with salvation.

Two ordinances is a fundamental but has nothing to do with salvation (how they are observed does, but not the fact there are only two).

There are others but you get the picture.

For you to characterise Cloud in this way is totally improper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
1 hour ago, DaveW said:

This is wrong.

The "Fundamentals" are not all associated with salvation and it is a gross misrepresentation for you to argue it in this way.

Two offices is a fundamental but has nothing to do with salvation.

Two ordinances is a fundamental but has nothing to do with salvation (how they are observed does, but not the fact there are only two).

There are others but you get the picture.

For you to characterise Cloud in this way is totally improper.

Well, as a Fundamentalist myself, I actually agree with you-I believe there are many fundamentals-but I also know that there is a large group who hold that a fundamental is an absolute, and a matter of salvation, and separation must occur in such matters. And David Cloud has made clear that he will separate from those who don't hold to a pre-tribulation rapture position. Personally, I believe the requirement for a fundamental would be any doctrine the Bible is absolutely clear on, but I don't know that it extends always to a salvation issue, or even always meaning there must be separation, though usually I would do so. 

Again, I like Cloud and find probably 98% of all he teaches, I agree with-in this I disagree, primarily because of the leaps and assumptions that have to be made to arrive at that point. Again, I don't say he is wrong, I say there is just not solid enough biblical evidence to go on, and to make it a fundamental is wrong. I would agree that a pre-millennial literal rapture of the church and return of Christ to be fundamentals, because they are clearly taught-the timing of the rapture is the problem.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

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

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

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

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

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

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

just the wrath at the end.

Forgive me, but, the wrath of God is not just "at the end." The wrath of God, the JUDGMENT of God, starts at Revelation 6:1 with the Anti-Christ conquering the nations of the world, and continues to the moment the Lord Jesus steps in Jerusalem.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
27 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

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

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

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

What Mike has accused Cloud of is simply not true.

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Empty.

 

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

Do you not see this?

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

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

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

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

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

45 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

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

Do you not see this?

Weary Warrior,

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

 

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

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

Weary Warrior,

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

 

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

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

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

Weary Warrior,

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

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

" quote from TomB:

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

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

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

The complete verse is:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

" quote from TomB:

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

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

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

The complete verse is:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

 

When the Scriptures says, They

 
 
 
 

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

 
 
 

 

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

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

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 40 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online


  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Alan

      Happy Birthday John Young! God Bless! 🍰
      · 1 reply
    • KJV ME!

      Now it is time for me to step out of my shell and let go... I AM STRICT KJV!... In scripture God said he would preserve his word... Well did he or didn't he?... If there is every translation under the sun, then he didn't but I KNOW HE DID!... The preserved word of God called the KJV is for the English people has been around for over 400 years and what is interesting to me, is the KJV was translated in 1611 and the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620... Coincidence?... A new book the preserved KJV word of God for the New World... So take that you KJV naysayers... I have been reading, studying and digging through the KJV for over 50 years... My belief is 100% Christ and scripture says so... Glad to be here and its time to take these shackles off!   
      John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
      I am... Brother Ramsey
       
      · 1 reply
    • stan1964stanssb

      Praise God I found such a powerhouse of the outpouring of His Spirit and unapologetic in regards of the defense of the KJV Bible. When I became a Christian back in 1984, I was told to get & read the KJV. It's been my choice all these years.
      · 0 replies
    • 1Timothy115  »  Ukulelemike

      Mike,
      RE: This is why I am here, why are you?
      Also, the land in Egypt wasn't land God gave them it was land Joseph through Pharaoh gave them. God gave them Canaan.
      Dave 
      · 1 reply
    • Alan

      Praise the Lord! Sherry and I, safe, tired, and joyful,  are back in Taiwan.
      · 0 replies
  • Popular Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      27,621
    • Total Posts
      279,879
  • Topics

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Alan

      Happy Birthday John Young! God Bless! 🍰
      · 1 reply
    • KJV ME!

      Now it is time for me to step out of my shell and let go... I AM STRICT KJV!... In scripture God said he would preserve his word... Well did he or didn't he?... If there is every translation under the sun, then he didn't but I KNOW HE DID!... The preserved word of God called the KJV is for the English people has been around for over 400 years and what is interesting to me, is the KJV was translated in 1611 and the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620... Coincidence?... A new book the preserved KJV word of God for the New World... So take that you KJV naysayers... I have been reading, studying and digging through the KJV for over 50 years... My belief is 100% Christ and scripture says so... Glad to be here and its time to take these shackles off!   
      John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
      I am... Brother Ramsey
       
      · 1 reply
    • stan1964stanssb

      Praise God I found such a powerhouse of the outpouring of His Spirit and unapologetic in regards of the defense of the KJV Bible. When I became a Christian back in 1984, I was told to get & read the KJV. It's been my choice all these years.
      · 0 replies
    • 1Timothy115  »  Ukulelemike

      Mike,
      RE: This is why I am here, why are you?
      Also, the land in Egypt wasn't land God gave them it was land Joseph through Pharaoh gave them. God gave them Canaan.
      Dave 
      · 1 reply
    • Alan

      Praise the Lord! Sherry and I, safe, tired, and joyful,  are back in Taiwan.
      · 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...