BioMember of FIEC churches since 1957 - the year of my conversion & baptism.
Married to Ann.
FIEC is the UK equivalent of IFB, with a doctrinal basis that insists onfundamentals, but allows divergence on other matters.
Thanks, MC for this vital teaching. At Pentecost Peter preached Jesus Christ crucified, risen and ascended, Lord and Christ, and the Jews from every nation under heaven were convicted. 3,000 repented that day and were baptised in the name of Jesus Christ. On the Emmaus road, Jesus taught that Christ had to suffer and enter his glory. John wrote his Gospel so that "ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name." This is a practical doctrine for our preaching, listening and believing, and our prayers - Acts 4:23-31
Rubbish. Our beliefs are justified by Scripture, certainly NOT by Jesuit writings. I've never read any Jesuit writings, and I doubt if anyone on the forum has. RC's are not 100% wrong in their basic doctrine, so teaching partial Preterism does not make that doctrine wrong. Likewise futurism, baptism of converts, the Trinity, virgin birth, heaven, etc. Doctrines must be tested by Scripture, NOT by who taught them.
Not necessarily. My views are compatible with premil - but dispensationalists build on the delayed 70th week to support their end-of-time tribulation/millennial views. There could, of course be a serious tribulation before Jesus' return. Many Christians around the world are suffering very serious tribulation. See 2 Thes. 1. It's not premil vs preterist, although I hold an amil, partial pret position. I understand Invicta supports me from a premil understanding.
Dave, I am a patient man, but my patience is limited. The summary statement of the prophecy is: 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. No amount of grammatical analysis, however exhaustive (or exhausting) can change 70 weeks into 350 weeks - and counting. Rather than reading my posts (Bro. Scott's), you may find it more convincing to read Paul's letter to the Romans, particularly noting his teaching on "righteousness."
We will be with our son & family in Peterchurch this weekend. I looked up the church notices: The Wye Dore Parishes [Tyberton, Madley, Vowchurch, Turnastone and Peterchurch] Rogation Sunday – 3rd May 2015 A traditional celebration for all the family when we pray for a good harvest, eat lunch together and “beat” the bounds of the parish. There will also be an adult baptism at St Peter’s spring. Service @11.00am At St Peters Church, Peterchurch At approximately 11.30 we will head out for our walk. Please bring a packed lunch. There will be a short walk and a longer walk for you to choose from. There are no other services in our Church’s on this Sunday Was that written by the local greengrocer ?
The summary statement of the prophecy is: 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. That statement declares that the 7-fold purposes determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city will be finished in 70x7 years. (We all agree that 70 weeks means 490 years.) We also agree that Jesus' saving ministry, death, resurrection & ascension are the basis for the fulfilment of the prophecy. Also that the 69th week takes us to the baptism & Holy Spirit anointing of the Lord Jesus. Simple grammar then adds the 70th week - of 7 years - from the date of Jesus' baptism to completion of the prophecy. That takes us to about 3 1/2 years after Calvary. The disagreement has NOTHING to do with grammar, but EVERYTHING to do with imposed doctrine. I believe that the predictions of v. 24 should (grammatically) be expected in the 70 weeks, & the new covenant writers make that very clear. The status of believers in Christ is everlasting righteousness by faith in Christ. See 1 John 3:1-10 & Acts 3:22-26 . Actual sins do not affect that status - we are in effect stumbling along the way in our walk in the Holy Spirit with our Saviour. Isaiah 53:1-12 predicts our Lord's saving work in similar terms to Dan. 9:24 Dispensational doctrine demands a future for national Israel after Jesus returns - post trib, & premil, so denies that the Gospel fulfilment recorded in Acts is the fulfilment of the prophecy. It therefore separates the 70th week from the 69, & sees the promises fulfilled in a future dispensation. That is NOT a grammar argument. However, I see no good logical, Scriptural or grammatical reason why dispensationalists should not agree with me on the completion of the prophecy in the 490 years. (Apart from the prophesied destruction of AD 70 where God graciously allowed 40 years for repentance.)
Read my posts in the debate, with an open Bible to look up the cross refs, & an open mind to consider what I am saying may be Scriptural truth, even if I disagree with what has been accepted by fundamentalists for the last 14 "wks."
How about Matthew 16:18-19 "18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. We need grammar applied to scripture, otherwise we all would need to rely on a pope.
Ian: Grammar alone cannot give an interpretation of that passage. Nor can dictionary definitions. Nor the dictates of a pope. Every individual word is readily understood, but none of the clauses after "Thou art Peter" can be properly understood by grammatical analysis. Spiritual understanding is absolutely necessary, aided by cross references to Acts & the epistles.
Yes. but little plough boys, as well as shepherds, fishermen & tax collectors have been equipped by the Holy Spirit to become apostles, prophets, evangelists; pastors and teachers. 1 Cor. 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
We learn from that, that men do not use punctuation, while women can express themselves in few words - in this case the sentence is reduced by 28.5714% fewer words. Let's try again: A woman, without her man, is nothing. A woman: without her, man is nothing.