CLE Forum
General Category => Bible Discussion => Topic started by: Christopher_Belflower on August 18, 2018, 05:52:55 AM
-
Good day saints!
Just had some things on my mind and wanted to vent so I stopped working on other things to share. Sorry if there are grammatical errors. This is not an official article or anything, just spend a few hours venting on the keyboard... haha. I pray you may learn something you didn't previously know about the Word of God!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R9cjTIVUxHtRsHuJhpz8RoK9HoqNUG5hyImFdSMoRas/edit?usp=sharing
-
Have you shown this to the guy you had the argument with yet? I just love how you destroy their arguments with simple logic and back up your positions with Scripture! People always want to overcomplicate issues that are really simple to understand if you're willing to listen to what the Bible says rather than what some preacher or Bible college wants you to believe.
I'm not surprised that 'pastor' doesn't want to talk to you anymore. He's probably pretty tired of being proven wrong by a 'layperson' after all the money he spent on his 'education.' If you're right, he has to admit everything he's ever been taught and that he himself has taught others is wrong and he's not willing to do that. Easier (and more profitable) to remain willfully ignorant. ::) :P
Blows my mind that this guy had the nerve to say you just dismissed his arguments without much thought when you took three days to write eight pages telling him why he was wrong! Yeah, you really don't need to think (or study) much to write eight pages, do you? Sheesh!
-
Hi Jeanne,
No, I haven't shown this to him because I posted it here, within 10 mins after I finished typing it. I sent him my response previously, which you read approximately 80% of the conversation. I ended the messenger chat with, if He cannot see from the theme of Romans that Gentiles are grafted into the already existing people of God and Scripture states over and over and over again that it's ONE body, then we truly have nothing further to discuss.
He already threatened to terminate conversation unless I read his Pre-Trib book and I'm not going to do it because the authors other writings lack clear exegesis and rather is full of presumptions.
hmmm...willful ignorant: Sadly, after showing proofs to pastor that the word 'nation' is not exclusive to Gentiles and that Israel is included in the word 'nation' per John 11:48, I received a direct quote from him: "OK, so I will give you that the word can be used for the nation of Israel, That being said, I still can't see a general resurrection, call it years of study in another position, Call it stubbornness, call it me having absolute assurance in that position, call it whatever you want."
-
I have just been reading through the article. One interesting point does come up
What is the Church_.docx
I have surmised that if a man were stranded on a desert island with nothing but food, water and a King James Bible, they would come to no other conclusion than that of this so called Covenant Theology. They certainly would not find "The Rapture", they would not find "The Antichrist", they would not know the words, "Second Advent", they would not know to build an "Altar" and to tell church-goers they should come forward to the altar and confess their sins, they would not teach "tithes".
1 John 2 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
Reading for the first time on a deserted island I think that I would get the impression from scripture that an individual was going to come who is referred to as the antichrist.
I'm enjoying reading this article and will continue reading the rest of it tomorrow. Thanks for posting it Chris.
-
Reading for the first time on a deserted island I think that I would get the impression from scripture that an individual was going to come who is referred to as the antichrist.
Interesting point Kevin. Certainly John Nelson Darby would have also came to that conclusion if stranded on a deserted island, thankfully I have you guys to correct me if I say something that's not true or purely speculative. Thanks for correcting me!
Regarding "that antichrist":
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 1 John 4:3
Taking precept upon precept, it should be noted THAT antichrist is an "IT" and according to John, "IT" is a spirit and is already in the world since John's day.
-
BTW Kevin, I am truly grateful that you identified that statement!
Because I have read over that verse so many times, I had never noticed the two 'it's' in 1 John 4:3.
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. Proverbs 27:17 :)
-
Reading for the first time on a deserted island I think that I would get the impression from scripture that an individual was going to come who is referred to as the antichrist.
Interesting point Kevin. Certainly John Nelson Darby would have also came to that conclusion if stranded on a deserted island, thankfully I have you guys to correct me if I say something that's not true or purely speculative. Thanks for correcting me!
Regarding "that antichrist":
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 1 John 4:3
Taking precept upon precept, it should be noted THAT antichrist is an "IT" and according to John, "IT" is a spirit and is already in the world since John's day.
According to scripture though it would certainly seem that the antichrist is an individual as well as there being a spirit of antichrist.
Revelation 13 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
also
Revelation 14 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Interesting discussion all the same :)
-
Interesting points Kevin,
Who is the beast? Because antichrist is not mentioned one time in Revelation. You would have to show me the verse in Scripture that says, "that antichrist" is "the beast".
Being that there are two types of people in the world, those in Christ, and those without... If you are not sealed with the Spirit of God... You have only one other option.
I will be doing a Study of Revelation Chapter 1-22 once I finish Matthew 24.
Not really going to get into it now, but just some food for thought:
Rev 13:
16 And he causeth ALL, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 and that NO man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Eze 3:
8 Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.
9 As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
Proverbs 15:
9 The way of the wicked is an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness.
26 The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD: but the words of the pure are pleasant words.
If you are without Christ: Your WAY (the mark of your hands) and THOUGHTS (mark on your head) are wicked abominations.
Jude
10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Ecc 3:
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
If you are not born again, you are still bound by the strong man (satan) (Matthew 12:29/Mark 3:27) and according to Jesus Christ:
John 8:
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
-
Rev 13:
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
If you are without Christ: Your WAY (the mark of your hands) and THOUGHTS (mark on your head) are wicked abominations
That would be both the hand and the forehead right?
Rev 13 says hand OR forehead
Are you saying that the mark in revelation wont be a literal mark that you receive?
I'm just trying to understand what exactly your saying.
-
I'm just trying to understand what exactly your saying.
I haven't done the study yet, i was just "food for thought"
The subject was "What is the church?"
Kevin wanted to talk about "The Antichrist"
The Bible never adds a definite article to antichrist. Rather, Scripture says "IT" is a spirit.
Kevin switched subjects from "The Antichrist" to "The Beast" implying they are the same without offering Scriptural evidence to that claim.
I provided a few notes, that I have that are not fully realized yet. That's all.
But if the question is do I think "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" is to be read literally? Then the answer is no. And when I finish my study, I will tell you all why.
-
Fair enough ;)
-
Thanks for your comment though Thomas, I'll ensure to address your AND/OR point later.
Also, I just noticed your emphasis on receive the mark in revelation.
So to address that comment:
Would you say ALL men have received condemnation?
-
I put emphasis on recieve because it -->seemed<-- to me that it was referring to a literal mark.
Thats why I also emphasized "that had the mark."
But I'm open to learning something new if it can be proven through scripture, I just look at it for what it says as I'm sure you understand
-
Gotcha! Well, you have a keen eye! I anticipate the Matthew 24 study to be approximately 150 pages, I'd love it if you would critique it and correct me in all areas that I am in error. Have a great day Thomas. :)
-
And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
-Gen 4:15
The problem is mixing together transitive with intransitive verbs. Transitive verbs have a particular object, so in this instance, Cain was the object. In Revelation, it says HE or HIS, which would be the object. The transitive verb of mark is to draw lines upon something/someone in any particular shape, or an outward visible sign, which makes sense in the situation with Cain, specifically, "lest any finding him should kill him," so that way the warning from God would be there not to seek vengeance.
Using the word 'mark' in an intransitive way, without an object, would result in the word meaning "to observe or point out," which is the method being suggested by Chris B (based on what I read so far; correct me if I'm wrong), and that would be incorrect.
For example:
And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
-Rev 14:9
The context is any man, but it says "HIS" forehead or "HIS" hand, which is a specific object. That's transitive, which means it's a visible sign.
Compared to:
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
-Rom 16:17
It is a commandment to mark (observe or point out) "THEM" (any of those those who cause offenses against the doctrine of Christ), which is intransitive, not referring to a particular object. That is not the same way that is used in Rev 14, which is why we don't get out a Sharpie and draw lines on them, that they would receive a mark from us.
Even if this were not the case, the context makes it well-understood, which means we don't need to rely on a grammar dictionary, but this is just to give an idea of why the KJB translators backed these up with the few words they added in to help understand the sentences. This is why I have a desire to mostly avoid the Book of Revelation until I'm done inspecting the rest of the doctrine in the New Testament--small errors can throw doctrine way off track.
-
the context makes it well-understood, which means we don't need to rely on a grammar dictionary, but this is just to give an idea of why the KJB translators backed these up with the few words they added in to help understand the sentences.
Although you are right about that, I often think about how much more I would understand scripture if I only paid more attention in English grammer class in school.
I remember learning a few years of German in high school, and thinking "wait is English this complicated too?" It's just that I'm used to the language and American English speakers of the modern era are very lazy linguistically.
-
But you're talking to a guy who failed high school English and had to go to night school to make it up so he could graduate. I had no interest in this until I started studying the Word of God, so it is by the Spirit of God that we are even led to learn these things in the first place. :o
-
Chris,
The method you have suggested I am using is both correct and incorrect in this instance.
What I am suggesting is that the Book of Revelation is a symbolic book. Written in the fashion of Daniel, as visions.
For example:
Daniel 8:
3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.
5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
Is the ram which had two horns pushing westward using a transitive verb?
Later in the chapter it is revealed that the ram is actually symbolic of something else:
Daniel 8:
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
This is describing something that was literally seen by Daniel and in like manner, John for the purposes of The Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
So what you say is correct, John literally see's marks on people's hands or foreheads.
However, these literal marks are symbolic in that they mean something else. In this particular case, the something else I suggested is that ALL men before they are sealed by the Holy Spirit are condemned. ALL men are enslaved. ALL men are deceived. And this is the theme of Chapter 13, that we are all doomed and in need of a savior. The "things" described in Chapter 13, are suggestive of the hopeless depravity of mankind, worshipping false beasts.
John 3:
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Revelation 13:
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
This is not even an option: ALL receive the mark, No man might buy or sell save he had the mark, and ALL men have the mark.
The primary issue, is that people have been supplanted with the doctrine that these verses are future, but a careful reading of Scripture will prove that presupposition to be false. My study is to show that Revelation is relevant for what has happened in the history of Christs church and what is happening in the lives of man.
And Chapter 14, verse 1 opens with our Great Hope, The True Lamb as opposed to the false lamb mentioned in Revelation 13:11, This Lamb is standing on mount Zion, with the full people of God, the elect of God, having the Fathers name "written in their foreheads."
Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Without getting to much into the weeds of the matter, hopefully I have made myself clear on this point.
-
I'm sorry Chris, but that's not going to work on me.
And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
-Gen 6:13
Thus, if I interpret Scripture the way you are doing it, then all flesh was destroyed, which means we don't really exist. Obviously, based on the context, this means all men, except Noah and his family.
Obviously, based on the context, "he causeth all" in Rev 13 means all who take it. That's explained in the context:
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
-Revelation 13:8
That is, all men, who are not of Christ.
The reason I'm handling you firmly on this one is because you're now teaching others, and if you missed that context, then your presupposition is getting in the way of the truth.
-
Firm is good,
Eph 1:13
In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
You can be predestined before the creation of the world and yet, be in condemnation in this world until the day you are sealed in the Spirit.
-
To your specific point I agree:
All who are not in the book of life since the foundation worship the dragon and beast.
But those who have not been sealed "YET" would also worship the dragon and beast until such time as God in His mercy redeems us from our iniquity and seals us that holy Spirit.
I'm using myself as a case and point: I worshipped the dragon and beast for most of my adult life: I did much wickedness in the sight of the Lord and had no regard for Him. I did not seek Him or obey him, I was lost and blindly worshipped the false idols of the world until that day I was sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.
Of course God in not trapped in time as you understand, and He knows those who are His outside of time.
-
Okay, the problem I have is with those two verses you quoted: Revelation 13:16-17 where it says no man will be allowed to buy or sell without the mark. That clearly makes a distinction that those who refuse to take the mark will be excluded from all forms of commerce and will have to find other ways to provide for themselves.
-
All,
If this post seems to indicate that I am doing any teachings, please understand it is not.
It was speculative, as I haven't even began my study on Revelation. I anticipate beginning that sometime in September and I will be in Study until January 2019. I stated loosely the thesis, but I haven't even started so please do not read things here as validated proofs from Scripture. These last few comments since the subject matter changed from antichrist to the beast have been fun conversation for me, but I do not want to mislead anybody so until I present this information in a properly formatted article, take all comments at face value.
Thanks.
-
All,
If this post seems to indicate that I am doing any teachings, please understand it is not.
It was speculative, as I haven't even began my study on Revelation.
Proverbs 10:19 - In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin: but he that refraineth his lips is wise.
But you wrote a 66 page article teaching that the prophecies in Daniel 9 have already been fulfilled. You are currently writing an article on your interpretation of Matthew 24 and you have said you will do one on Revelation after that. How can you say you are not doing any teachings? I'm not convinced that hardly anything you are teaching here and in your articles that I've read so far is something you just speculate. You are teaching these doctrines of yours, not speculating them.
When you claim things like this...
"Taking precept upon precept, it should be noted THAT antichrist is an "IT" and according to John, "IT" is a spirit and is already in the world since John's day."
...or this...
"If you are without Christ: Your WAY (the mark of your hands) and THOUGHTS (mark on your head) are wicked abominations."
...or this...
"The primary issue, is that people have been supplanted with the doctrine that these verses are future, but a careful reading of Scripture will prove that presupposition to be false. My study is to show that Revelation is relevant for what has happened in the history of Christs church and what is happening in the lives of man."
...or this...
"All who are not in the book of life since the foundation worship the dragon and beast.
But those who have not been sealed "YET" would also worship the dragon and beast until such time as God in His mercy redeems us from our iniquity and seals us that holy Spirit."
...then it is not merely speculating. You are teaching these things.
If you haven't even began your study on Revelation, then stop making claims about what it says and asserting your interpretations when you clearly don't know what you are talking about. You are not dealing with this out of wisdom but rather out of foolishness by teaching things from scripture that you admit that you haven't even studied yet. Again, if you are just speculating these things (which would mean you don't understand them fully) don't teach them as if you know.
Interesting points Kevin,
Who is the beast? Because antichrist is not mentioned one time in Revelation. You would have to show me the verse in Scripture that says, "that antichrist" is "the beast".
Being that there are two types of people in the world, those in Christ, and those without... If you are not sealed with the Spirit of God... You have only one other option.
I will be doing a Study of Revelation Chapter 1-22 once I finish Matthew 24.
Not really going to get into it now, but just some food for thought:
Rev 13:
16 And he causeth ALL, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 and that NO man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Eze 3:
8 Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.
9 As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
Proverbs 15:
9 The way of the wicked is an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness.
26 The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD: but the words of the pure are pleasant words.
If you are without Christ: Your WAY (the mark of your hands) and THOUGHTS (mark on your head) are wicked abominations.
Jude
10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Ecc 3:
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
If you are not born again, you are still bound by the strong man (satan) (Matthew 12:29/Mark 3:27) and according to Jesus Christ:
John 8:
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
If you are going to put out any articles, you need to do a better job than this. It is plain as day that all you did here was a key word search in an attempt to connect verses together that have completely different contexts.
The primary issue, is that people have been supplanted with the doctrine that these verses are future, but a careful reading of Scripture will prove that presupposition to be false. My study is to show that Revelation is relevant for what has happened in the history of Christs church and what is happening in the lives of man.
If you haven't even began study in the book of Revelation, then it's obvious (by what you have taught about it here so far) that you are going to interpret it through the glasses of a false presupposition that future events have already taken place. As it stands, I can only expect false doctrine out of what you teach of it.
-
Timothy,
I clearly misunderstood, or still do misunderstand what these Forums are. It's evident that anybody who speculates on a passage of Scripture or shares an idea will be met with swift rebuke and criticism. I do not have all knowledge, nobody does, I came here to learn. Free and open communication is frowned upon, which appears to be the case, as I stated in the Masha debacle, one must proofread, analyze and check all references before posting on one of these Forum pages. This greatly hinders the possibility of bringing one to a proper understanding, because of fear of attack, it's best to remain silent.
I specifically stated, "Any feedback is welcome" when the Daniel article was posted. Interesting, you never mentioned a single word regarding the so-called "false doctrine" between 19 July and today. I welcome you to show me why Daniel 9:24 is not fulfilled. Show me how that prince is "The Antichrist"? Show me that the last week of Daniel has a gap of undetermined amount of time separating the 69th and 70th? Show me why verse 26 is not regarding the destruction of the temple in 70AD? Explain to me why these 4 verses in Daniel are concerning the 7-year "Great Tribulation." Understand the 7-years of the future "Great Tribulation" comes from Daniel 9:24-27. But then if the 7-years are not fulfilled, understand that means that Christ was unable to fulfill the things God determined He would fulfill in 70 weeks (which includes those things mentioned in verse 24) and you and I are still dead in our sins and trespasses. Show me how that is wrong because I spent many months looking and searching the Scriptures daily to understand.
I stated in the article that I would love to be "raptured" if it were a true biblical principle as an example of my willingness to grow. Not that you believe in rapture, but show me because that article is how I interpret Daniel and if you have nothing to say over 66 pages besides to swoop in today and profess the blanket statement that cover to cover its false doctrine and everything I say is false doctrine... I may need to consider if this is a place that seeks to edify a brother or bring them down. How can I grow in understanding without being shown the error?
Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof. Proverbs 18:21
Clearly, since you hold that article as a false teaching but will not address the specifics, as to where I am mistaken in my interpretation, then you have falsely accused me of teaching false doctrine.
-
If I may make a suggestion, Chris, I would suggest that any speculation on Scripture that you are not yet sure of be posted in the private section of the forum so as to avoid confusion among non-Christians and new Christians. Based on the articles you have written, you ARE in a teaching position, so if you are in error it will be much more highly criticised here than it would be in an open debate amongst Christians only. This is not to say that we will not point out errors in the private section of the board, but it won't be shut down the way it is here. Better to get doctrine sorted out within the church than to present it to the public as fact where it might cause others to stumble.
-
Jeanne,
That is nice to know. I'm not sure if I missed the directions on how to be part of an online church or if they are not available to be read. Currently, my understanding is, whatever is posted is susceptible to heavy scrutiny and possible screams of false teacher. So, I will not let my personality come out again. It will be just the facts from now on to avoid accusations. I went from a CCM church in year one, to a Fundamental Baptist Church, years two and three.
I chalk this up to the growing pains of learning a unique form of fellowship.
-
Timothy,
I clearly misunderstood, or still do misunderstand what these Forums are. It's evident that anybody who speculates on a passage of Scripture or shares an idea will be met with swift rebuke and criticism. I do not have all knowledge, nobody does, I came here to learn. Free and open communication is frowned upon, which appears to be the case, as I stated in the Masha debacle, one must proofread, analyze and check all references before posting on one of these Forum pages. This greatly hinders the possibility of bringing one to a proper understanding, because of fear of attack, it's best to remain silent.
Proverbs 13:1
A wise son heareth his father's instruction: but a scorner heareth not rebuke. A man shall eat good by the fruit of his mouth: but the soul of the transgressors shall eat violence. He that keepeth his mouth keepeth his life: but he that openeth wide his lips shall have destruction. The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing: but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat.
Proverbs 27:5
Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips. A stone is heavy, and the sand weighty; but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both. Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy? Open rebuke is better than secret love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful. The full soul loatheth an honeycomb; but to the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet. As a bird that wandereth from her nest, so is a man that wandereth from his place.
Proverbs 13:8
A righteous man hateth lying: but a wicked man is loathsome, and cometh to shame. Righteousness keepeth him that is upright in the way: but wickedness overthroweth the sinner There is that maketh himself rich, yet hath nothing: there is that maketh himself poor, yet hath great riches. The ransom of a man's life are his riches: but the poor heareth not rebuke. The light of the righteous rejoiceth: but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out. Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom. Wealth gotten by vanity shall be diminished: but he that gathereth by labour shall increase.
Luke 17:3 Context
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
Titus 1:13
-
Titus 1:13
This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith
-
This sharpness is not because I don't welcome anybody to speculate and have discussion on things, but because you lied about what you are doing saying that you are not teaching.
Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
I mean, to write out a 66 page article and to be working on another that will apparently be around 150 pages and call that 'speculation' is not only absurd, but dangerous. And what you have done here is flippantly throw around verses by doing key word searches to teach from a book you admit you haven't even studied. If you are going to teach, you need to take responsibility and be more prudent of what you say rather than doing it in this manner that you have.
spec
-
did I say that? I said THIS POST. and I received secret rebuke, not open.
-
Now I am a false teacher and a liar... WOW!
From the very first posting: "Just had some things on my mind and wanted to vent so I stopped working on other things to share. Sorry if there are grammatical errors. This is not an official article or anything"
Do you people read?
-
If people are not allowed to just have conversation, just say so. There are no rules posted as to proper etiquette for Web Ministry.
-
From the onset, my intro informed that this was just something on my mind that bothered me, the conversation I had with the fellow.
So if I say this is not an official article, and then later say the things in THIS POST are speculative. NOT the things in the Daniel Article and not the Future article, But THIS POST.
Not only do I then become a false teacher because Timothy accused the entire Daniel Article of being false teaching.
Not only that, but all future articles are false teachings.
And not only that, but now I am liar because when I say from post #1 this is not an official article, then later reaffirm that THIS POST is speculative.
Timothy, you are too much.
Matthew 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
I would hate to be your enemy :(
-
Chris B, take a good amount of time and go back and re-read all of the posts in this thread. I know that you claim that it is speculative, but you're writing indicated that you are teaching people something,as if you are right about it and it is fact. The contradiction (lie) is that you claim it is not teaching. No one here is saying that you can't teach our have ideas, they are correcting you on your contradiction. And I agree with everything Timothy corrected you on.
Please dont say something that you will regret later before you read everything over.
(I dont want you to let emotions get in the way of what is actually going on.)
-
1. The forum is a place where Christians (and even non-Christians) can come to talk within reason. There is the church as a whole, and then there is our church specifically; not everyone here is a part of our church. One of the reasons I opened this up was to allow other Christians a place where they can post their teachings if they want, but that does not mean they will not be met with scrutiny.
2. A false teacher is someone who pushes a doctrine that is proven to be false, not someone who makes an error and corrects it. As far as I understood Tim's post, he did not accuse you of being a false teacher, but we will not suffer error or sin to go unchecked on this forum. (e.g. The thread concerning the false accusations on sarcasm is being addressed so heavily because false accusations are lies; otherwise, it wouldn't be worth my time to write all those long posts--thus, we are not here talking about this matter because we like fighting; there is reason for it.)
3. You did lie because you contradicted yourself.
If this post seems to indicate that I am doing any teachings, please understand it is not.
Saying that "it's not teaching," doesn't make it so. Believing that it's not teaching, doesn't make it so.
The title of this thread is called "What is the church?" and in your original post, you are quoting Scripture and giving explanations with direct punctuated statements behind them. That is teaching. Get used to that. If you believe it is unfair to be judged on "venting" as teaching, welcome to my world. I would not be allowed to do that without being held accountable. Those who teach in Christ's church are set to a higher standard, but a lower position to serve; I don't always like it either, but I have learned that I have to be careful with every word I say, even when I'm frustrated, and that's because the Living God expects that higher standard from us:
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36
(e.g. My statement that God expects a higher standard from us, and posting Mat 12:36, is teaching, which we are all called to do in certain capacities.)
I can already tell you've started to lose your calm demeanor by simply looking at the number of quick posts you started throwing out at the end, instead of reading everything, and responding step-by-step. That's out of character for you based on the previous conversations you've had with us, and it's definitely out of character for you to accuse "you people" of not reading, when I know for a fact that a number of the people who have responded to you in this thread are much better at reading and comprehension than I am. Now, you could come back and say, "Guys, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I said that," then we can take that as error instead of lying because there's repentance behind it, but as it stands, you're rejecting what Tim said, and I agree with Tim.
4. I've known Tim a lot longer than you. He's been with our church for five years, and I've told our church a number of times that, if the church had to judge a matter, I would trust them to go to Tim rather than me to judge that matter because he studies the Bible thoroughly and has good discernment and humility. I say this, not for you to respect his person, but so that you know that he is not your enemy. He's firm because he has a love of the truth, as I'm sure you also desire, so let's continue to be reasonable. He may not talk much, but when he does, it is meaningful, and he has always had good reason for it. (i.e. I cannot recall any example of a time where he spoke too quickly; he is careful with his words.)
-
Chris,
Thanks for helping me to see the issue where I lied about teaching. I was ignorant to the definition of what teaching was. My perception was that I was sharing. I was under the understanding that unless you "published" an article or did an audio teaching or in the event of a church building: taught a Sunday school class, or had a bible study, then it was not teaching. When you say, using Scripture and giving explanations with direct statements behind them, is teaching. Then I have to admit that is what I was doing. So I am sorry for misleading that it was not teachings. I'll seek to glorify Christ in future posts knowing that we have the greater condemnation.
I did not notice Timothy correct me when I said he accused me of being a false teacher, so perhaps he still holds that view. If he disagrees with the Daniel 9 article, that is absolutely fine, I have no issues with a disagreement. But if there are false teachings, I would appreciate the specifics on what exactly is not accurate or opposed to the Word of God with regards to that teaching so I can amend it to reflect the truth.
Thanks again, understand I was very stressed out earlier from the brethren, I don't have A/C in my house during the day(thats no excuse) But it's a bit miserable sometimes with the humidity and then not understanding where I was wrong compounded the issue. Thanks to all for highlighting my error.
-
Maybe that's why red peppers seem to be a universal vegetable symbol for anger. 8)
-
I'm sorry it's taken me so long to respond. I can log on at work but I typically don't have enough time to make a thought out post. And I have to think about what to say here because normally people don't come back in repentance like that. I know I haven't spoken to you before until now but I hope there's no hard or awkward feelings between us going forth. And please tell me if you ever suspect that from me. I understand I don't say much because I've never been very social, even among friends. But I don't want you or anybody here to fear that I'm going to say something. I would rather everyone fear the Lord God instead of a dum-dum like me. If you only know how dumb I really am. Some may not realize it because I don't say much. :P
I don't know where I called you a false teacher, but I'll be honest and say that I am convinced you have taught error in your article on Daniel 9. I had read the first one where it was 44 pages, but after you edited and added to it I wanted to go back through its entirety to make sure I understood all your points before saying anything. I wanted to give it a chance and look into it in more detail because I have, at one time, believed in the pre-trib doctrine and so I understand I could be wrong. The book of Daniel is not something you understand right away and I don't want to claim that I understand it fully. But there are points that you made that, when I compare it with scripture, does not line up. Give me some time and I will work on addressing some points in that thread later.
-
Interesting points Kevin,
Who is the beast? Because antichrist is not mentioned one time in Revelation. You would have to show me the verse in Scripture that says, "that antichrist" is "the beast".
The subject was "What is the church?"
Kevin wanted to talk about "The Antichrist"
The Bible never adds a definite article to antichrist. Rather, Scripture says "IT" is a spirit.
Kevin switched subjects from "The Antichrist" to "The Beast" implying they are the same without offering Scriptural evidence to that claim.
Hi Chris B
:) No, I never claimed the antiChrist and the beast were one and the same.
If you read again, here is what I posted.
Revelation 13 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
Nevertheless I do now concede that I am wrong with what I wrote and I do need to do more reading on the subject because you are quite right in that what I wrote doesn't add up. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
I'm no expert on Revelation and although I do take an interest there is just so much in there. For me I really do tend to think that I will only ever be able to understand Revelation as I see the events unfolding and being able to correlate them with scripture.
Thanks again though.
-
Maybe that's why red peppers seem to be a universal vegetable symbol for anger. 8)
I had never come across that before. I just learned something new. ::)
-
Timothy and Kevin,
So I owe you both an apology, and so I just want to say sorry for my responses. To Kevin for presenting materials loosely and with arrogance. And to Timothy for being ignorant or stubborn, not sure which was more prevalent but I feel guilty of both sorry in both cases.
The transparency here is good to have so there can be no respecter of persons. If Timothy had been wrong in his comments, certainly others would have said something so I am willing to admit that I was both ignorant of my actions, and stubborn in that I refused to go back and read every post with proper discernment.
Timothy, take your time on the article. If there are areas that need to be corrected, I am for it. As I mentioned on the Revelation 1:1 post, I only wrote the article because I could find no proper teaching on the subject. And to be honest, everything that all Christians understand about the future hinges on Daniel 9.
Understand I do not think the matter of future events is nearly as important as living holy lives now and preaching the gospel. But clearly, the interpretation of those 4 verses is the source of the 7-years unfulfilled, whether you are Pre-Trib or Post-Trib. Both adhere to a 7-years future and that time comes because the prophecy in Daniel is somehow not fulfilled. I would love to know how it is not fulfilled when God says He will fulfill it in 490 years. To me, Daniel 9:24 it is a clear verse of Scripture. Everything under verse 24 is under the umbrella of time required to fulfill. Now those verses (25-27) present problems because they are not so clear. So my approach was this: Scripture is clear in verse 24 and God does not lie. How can we (man) reconcile the other verses when the top verse is fulfilled. This is what the whole issue boils down to. Is verse 24 fulfilled or not? And if not, why not?
-
I have to admit that while, after reading your article, I can clearly see the correlation between Daniel 9 and Matthew 24, I'm still a bit sceptical of throwing Revelation into the mix there, too. However, I have not studied the topic in enough detail, myself, in order to make an argument either for or against it.
-
I wasn't annoyed in any way and I didn't think you were arrogant towards me, I'm just always grateful when Biblical topics come up for discussion and as time allows I can delve in to the topics and try to get a more thorough understanding. I figured that you had made an accidental error and it was easy for me to bring up the previous post to clarify the error that had occured.
Studying scripture and trying to learn and have it change our lives and the way we interact with one another is where we differ from many others who call themselves Christians because they can't be bothered doing any of those things.
-
And to Timothy for being ignorant or stubborn, not sure which was more prevalent but I feel guilty of both sorry in both cases.
Don't worry about it. I'm still ignorant on a bunch of stuff and I've spoken out of ignorance and stubbornness several times when I believed in the pre-trib doctrine in fact. Let's move on as if it never happened. :)