Jump to content

Ukulelemike

Member Since 17 Oct 2012
Offline Last Active Today, 07:45 PM
-----

#394141 Way Of Life - Hating The Rapture

Posted by Ukulelemike on Today, 04:30 PM

Are you referring to the Second Coming or the catching away of the Church (slang is Rapture)? Your Scriptural references apply only to the former and not the latter. You remember the Scriptures dealing with the catching away of the Church, don't you? You know the whole thief in the night; the hour no man knoweth, two in the field, one taken; etc etc etc.

 

If you want to be here for the trib my friend, I recommend you collect and study every doomsday show on the discovery channel you can find. You will need it or just surrender your head without any attempt to evade and survive.The idea that believing in a mid or post trib/pre-wrath catching up, means one 'wants to be here for the trib' is error. No one in their right mind would want to be, but when one's study finds no clear passages of scriptuire that says otherwise, and the only really clear scripture declares it to take place just prior to the outpouring of God's wrath AFTER the tribulation, then what else can we do? By the way, it isn't TV shows and movies or works of fiction I will seek to, but to the Bible. Not much chance to survive and evade, at least not for long. In fact, most WILL die, because it will be given to the Antichrist to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. I suspect there will be far more going up first, from the grave, than "we who are alive and remain".

 

It would be a shame if you are the only born again person prior to the Lord coming in the air not spared from this great tribulation. Who will you talk to about being left behind? It will be lonely for you. (I am poking fun-please forgive) Maybe not as lonely as you believe.

 

Of course, if you are born again, you won't be here whether you have been deceived into mid or amil or not. Hey to each their own I suppose but it amazes me that folks can actually confuse the differences between the two events in Scripture. Still haven't seen the scripture that proves this out, that Christians won't be present for the tribulation time.

 

But hey, apparently there are diverse group of religious folks on this site supposedly being lead by the Spirit in their study of the Scriptures and almost none of them agree on much of anything, even repentance unto salvation. Can't argue that.




#394135 Way Of Life - Hating The Rapture

Posted by Ukulelemike on Today, 02:19 PM

Got a couple in our church who used to attend a Methodist church-the only reason they come to mine is because they moved away from that one. Now, all the things they have heard about the worldliness of the Methodists today, the error, the outright lies sometimes going forth there, woman preachers, etc, yet when they visit that area, they always go back to that church, and then gush about how wonderful it was to be there.  Again, kind of slow folks-she's a bit slow and he has a form of Aspergers.

 

This is my group-as well, I have an Armenian lady who is from an Orthodox church in Armenia, who only goes to ours because there is no orthodox church to attend. She argues about how terrible the Jews are, crosses herself, and in her heart is still orthodox, even tho9ugh she hears the truth regularly. With her, I suspect it is a language thing, as she speaks English only so well. But at least she got it last week concnerning Baptism, and she now agrees that baptism doesn't protect a baby, that it has nothing to do with salvation. But its slow, after so long being immersd in a religion that is a major part of her culture.

 

But I am thankful for each person, and thankful that they are there and I can keep them under the gospel, and maybe, one day, they will hear and understand.




#394134 Way Of Life - Hating The Rapture

Posted by Ukulelemike on Today, 02:12 PM

If that's accurate I would say "wow!" Then I would wonder about the pastors they have and just what they preach and teach.

 

Now, if we are talking about the IFB folks/churches that have chose to take a Leftward turn, then I could see some of them looking to "lesser" sources but that's because they are heading that direction anyway.

Even in my little church, I have to fight always to keep them on track. I have one man who is a bit slow, and he, at times, seems to want to listen to any weirdo he meets on the local trail, than he will to me. Then I have to spend time in refuting everything this fellow is told, because, of course, it all sounds so good. Again, he's a bit slow, brain damaged thrice over, so he's a challenge. Someone once told him that he was supposed to confess his sins before the church to be forgiven. Once. I have spent the last 8 months having to, at almost every service, tell him its not true. I have given entire messages on it, and still, he asks about it.

 

Another man, smart guy, but with an SBC background, I recently had to tell him that his hero, Billy Graham, has a lot of problems and he's not the one we should be going to for our doctrine.

 

People are stubborn, they don't always pay attention, and they are so bombarded with so much junk out there that sounds so good and feels so good, that the truth must be continually laid bare before them, time and again.




#394119 David Cloud

Posted by Ukulelemike on Today, 11:18 AM

i MUST AGREE THAT WE DO NEED WORKS LIKE hAM'S, AS PASTORS GENERALLY DON'T HAVE THE TIME AND KNOWLEDGE TO GO AND DO THE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH NEEDED TO GET THE INFORMATION SUCH A MINISTRY CAN SUPPLY.

 

Sorry for yelling. Works like Ham's and Hovinds are great and are an excellent resource for pastos and churches, but they should be approached and used as any outside resource is-by always examining everything by scripture, and, yes, by warning if there are problems or inconsistencies.  

 

Bottom line, in this or any work or ministry-we must be careful to avoid being followers and idolizers of men, however good they might be, and just use the information. Many have discounted Hovind's excellent work, because he is in prison-big mistake, because Hovind has done excellent work.  So, we should not discount Ham's work because of what he might do that is wrong or questionable-it doesn't make the truth less truth. Just, in both cases, reminds us that men are fallible. What Hovind did was not wrong, but done in a wrong manner-let's learn from that, but still hold to and teach the truths he teaches and taught. As well, re know that we don't follow Ham to attend and speak at CCM concerts, but we still use and appreciate the work he has done in his field.




#394113 A Lot Of Talk About The End And The Rapture . . . . How Near?

Posted by Ukulelemike on Today, 09:55 AM

We speak a lot on the imminent return, how the Apostles, like Paul, acted as though the rapture could occur at any minute. But, have we considered that Paul and the other apostles didn't yet have the book of the Revelation,  if it was, indeed, written, as many believe, around 90AD? And the Revelation contains a lot about what would occur around the rapture, and the subsequent second coming of Christ Jesus, things the Apostles and other believers didn't know, as the book and its contents, in total, had not yet been delivered.

 

That having been said, merely for consideration, I don't worry much about the rapture or its timing. The Lord will call us when He calls us. Yes, I pray for the Lord to return; Yes, even so, Lord Jesus, Come! But until then, we have the promises of the word of God to hold to until then: that wicked men will wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived, the very men spoken of at the beginning of this post, who think they are in charge, yet are not. We are promised tribulation, (not speaking of THE tribulation here), in this life if we will live faithfully for Jesus. We are promised that the world will hate our Lord, and thus, us; that the devil will fight us. that in general, things are going to get worse, before they get better. And even when it seems things are getting better, ('peace, peace') then will come sudden destruction.

 

So really, I think we need to just continue to concentrate on the work of God, on souls, on living faithfully for the Lord until we either die and go to glory, or the Lord returns. We don't really know what all is on God's agenda before Jesus calls us out-nothing says He told us everything-so let us just be faithful. I love my wife dearly, but she is one of those that is constantly looking at this and that as signs: this is the chip, that may be the antichrist, middle east, israel, etc, etc., and I have to remind her to relax and just keep busy.  Yes, we should be watchful, but in all the watching, like on the walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah's time, have one eye on the enemy, and your sword strapped on, while working the work until it is complete.




#394076 David Cloud

Posted by Ukulelemike on Yesterday, 03:14 PM

If ken Ham is evangelical, then of course he wouldn't call out Graham, because he would be in agreement with him.

 

It isn't that David Cloud is holding Ham to IFB standards, but to BIBLE standards. And he is right to do so, because all who claim Christ, who have a following, need to have error made known, so others don't follow them into their error.

 

Kit you said it was the CCM groups that are so dangerous to believers, and I agree wholeheartedly. And it was this, the attendance to a CCM concert, and endorsement of it, that Cloud warned concerning Ham-not, I think, to beat-up Ham, but to warn those who follow Ham not to follow in his ways. Remember, we are not to let our liberties become a stumbling block, and Ken Ham's liberty in attendance to, and speaking at, a CCM concert, could indeed become a stumbling block to those IFB's who follow Ken Ham.

 

I think we also need to discern the difference between an 'attack' and a warning. In reading this article, Cloud first praised Ham and his ministry for the good they do: 

For example, Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research do a fantastic job of defending the literal Genesis account of creation against Darwinian evolution. Ken Ham’s Creation Museum is a masterpiece of biblical apologetics.

 

This isn't an attack, and the article doesn't focus just on Ken Ham and his minstry, but on others as well, all with the new evangelical mindset, and the willingness to often partner with about anyone who is of the same mind in one or two areas.

 

Like promise Keepers, which encapsulate Baptists, mormons, Catholics, pentecostals, et al, all joining under the banner of being better husbands-a worthy goal, but unbiblical joining together.

  Or the old Moral Majority, protestants, Catholics, Mormons, etc, all joining hands to fight for certaingood political goals, but still, unbiblical.

 

I, myself have watched some creation-based videos by 7th-day adventists, and they are very good, but if I show them to my church, it is always with the warning against all the problems the group has doctrinally. And that being said, I would never go to a meeting, even just about creation vs Evolution done by Water Vieth, (the SDA fellow), because it would be an unbiblical joining together.




#394028 David Cloud

Posted by Ukulelemike on Yesterday, 10:58 AM

From his recent article, here are the questions he asks about whether or not someone is considered neoevangelical:

 

 

 

Wait.  I mean, it sounds great.... but the thing is, he never claims to be a church.  Also, where in the Bible does it say a Creationist Museum guy who goes around doing seminars has to have a written doctrinal statement outside of the Bible?  Also all the other points...they are all pretty much extra-scriptural as far as the job that Ken Ham is doing.   And what in the world does a public stand against Billy Graham have to do with any of this?  Why does Billy Graham even matter?  Huh?  Wait...our church doesn't even have a statement against Billy Graham.....maybe we aren't real Baptists!  Uh oh!

Billy Graham matters because he is the epitomy of new evangelical compromise, widely accepted by Christian leaders everywhere, and kind of the gold-standard for modern-day evangelists.

 

As for a doctrinal statement, personally, any site purporting to be a Christian ministry, I look for a doctrinal statement. Let the redeemed of the Lord say so-I want to know what a man or ministry believes before I consider his work.




#394027 David Cloud

Posted by Ukulelemike on Yesterday, 10:54 AM

Do you know that David Cloud is an active missionary in Nepal? He's living for Christ in one of the most demonic places on earth, and witnessing, first-hand, how a little conpromise can open vast doors to Satan to destroy Christians. He is involved in things that most of us will never know, much less be willing to do.

 

Now, I agree that it seems at times that he spends a bit too much time in some of his articles justifying himself and his ministry, but think: what is it that he is really doing? He's adjuring believers to a pure faith in Christ. He's warning people about those who, on one hand, claim Christ, but on the other, are actively involved in things that are truly ungodly, which, while they can do, because of those who follow them, others may follow them into their ungodly activities.

 

So, is it wrong to beloieve that Christians should live in a holy manner? Is it wrong to warn others of the things well-known, famous Christian leaders are doing that will lead to worldliness and compromise? I say, in fact, that this is exactly what we as believers should be doing.

 

By the way, if you read his articles, you'll find that, generally, David Cloud praises the good many have done, and gives credit where due in their teachings and activities. But then, yes, he warns about compromise by those same people.

 

I have to admit, the one things I have never heard anyone say about David Cloud, is that he is a hypocrite, or that he is involved in compromise. Except those who call him a Bible corrector because he (rightly) says that there have been changes made in such things as spelling and updating of punctuation, in the KJV since the 1611 came out. That's not Bible correcting, its just fact. The Bible most KJV folks hold is NOT the 1611 version, but a later edition with changes in it. That's not correcting, its fact.

 

And I have never once read anywhere that Cloud is trying to turn anyone to be his disciples, (though as I recall, Paul DID tell people to follow Paul, though that was dependent upon Paul following Christ).

 

I admit to not having read his article on Ken Ham. Is this the latest in his articles? I'll look it up.  I admit I wasn't impressed with Ham's recent 'debate' with Bill Nye, though really, the forum was really poor for doing a real debate, so it really wasn't his fault. I just heard Nye say a lot that has been long-since proven false, but was not addressed by Ham. But again, bad forum, so not really his fault. I think it was designed to come out with no clear winner, just two guys having their say.




#393971 Matthew 24

Posted by Ukulelemike on 17 November 2014 - 10:52 PM

He was talking to his disciples privately. The message is inherently for the Jews, but it is a message for all to hear.

 

All of the signs that Jesus Christ said to watch for didn't happen during the disciples' lives. In fact, some of the disciples died shortly thereafter...Judas Iscariot and James (John's brother). Yes, Judas Iscariot was there during Matthew 24. If the message ONLY applied to the disciples, yet Judas and James died, does that mean Matthew 24 happened BEFORE Judas killed himself? Did Matthew 24 happen BEFORE James was killed by Herod? Or does Jesus' prophecy get "a pass" as far as they are concerned?

 

The Lord also said that "they" would be delivered up to be afflicted AND killed...and then he goes into a whole other set of signs for "them" to watch for. How could "they" watch for these other signs if they were dead?

 

He was talking to his disciples privately. The message is inherently for the Jews, but it is a message for all to hear.

 

Otherwise, when Christ told Nicodemus, "Ye must be born again." (and all that pertains to that), only Nicodemus could be born again since that's who Christ was talking to.  :scratchchin:Except Jesus said, "Ye", which is plural. Basically, He said, "Verily, verily I say unto thee, (Nicodemas) Ye, (everyone) must be born again."




#393970 Matthew 24

Posted by Ukulelemike on 17 November 2014 - 10:50 PM

His disciples.

 

Thus, can we assume it is to ALL His disciples?




#393948 How Old Is The Earth

Posted by Ukulelemike on 17 November 2014 - 12:21 PM

Why don't we just do this:

 

Gap theorists, please proivide the clear verses that prove a gap. Don't give us your interpretation or your explanation, just give the clear scripture that gives us a gap.

 

For the proof against it, I provide ALL of Genesis 1, into Genesis 2, as taken at face value, disproves a gap. Seven days, six of creation from "God created the heaven and the earth", to "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made." 

 

I also provide, at the giving of the Sabbath, in Ex 20, one reason for the Sabbath was the creation week: "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."   Ex 31: 17: "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."  

 

In SIX days, the earth, the heaven, specifically meaning not just heaven as we think it, but literally the space to put eveything in, and the sea. Six days, no room for anything before it.




#393947 How Old Is The Earth

Posted by Ukulelemike on 17 November 2014 - 12:13 PM

In reference to a comment made earlier, I have to say that belief in a Gap Theory is not a non-essential. If the classically-accepted Gap Theory is correct, then we have death occurring before sin. Since the Bible states that death is a consequence of sin, this idea would have serious consequences on our soteriology.

AND the Bible says that sin came by man, specifcally Adam. We know that Lucifer, the devil, sinned and tempted Eve, but it was Adam that brought sin into the world, and the world, including the earth, suffered for it. Sin by man, and death by sin, salvation by Christ. No room for sin or judgment before that.  




#393933 How Old Is The Earth

Posted by Ukulelemike on 17 November 2014 - 09:26 AM

Seems to me that, for there to be any gap, it ewould have to add to the days given in Gen chapter one. For there to have been an earth for life to exist on, there would have to be a sun and moon and atmosphere, etc. I don't know whether the gap being expounded above is the version that has Lucifer reigning over a proto-human race, as well as being the place the dinosaurs fit in, and then, when they all died in the great pre-deluge deluge, leaving us all the fossils, but if it IS, then its impossible, because it would, indeed, have to be another entire earth. if God destroyed everything, including all life, then this is another earth, unlike the flood of Noah, from which the Lord saved a remnant both of men and animals, thus it being the same earth, just judged.

 

However, the Bible calls this earth the first earth, and later, the new heavens and Earth, the second earth. As well, if there was life, then there had to be an entire creation, thus, days and nights, and so, the count given in genesis 1 must be incorrect-it could Not be THE first day, or THE second day. Maybe then the new bversions have it right, where it says, "a day" and "another day". THAT would fit a gap, because 'a day' could contextually apply to anything.




#393774 Way Of Life - When Was The Pre-Tribulation Rapture First Taught?

Posted by Ukulelemike on 13 November 2014 - 05:57 PM

This thread is about historical, not Biblical, evidence for the PreTR. We're still waiting. There's plenty of evidence for PostTR. 

 

There's also an awful lot that seems to completely ignore and disregard the whole argument.  Honestly, I haven't found a whole lot of historical references to a pre-trib position. Though I am certainly not an expert in the subject from an historical perspective. But I don't take a huge amount of stock on what historical people have taught or said, because we know that even during the time the Apostles were still on earth, much error was already creeping in.

 

Still, the subject at hand IS, what has been taught on the subject historically by believers. We should hold to that, so I will cease from making posts appealing to scripture. Everyone knows where I stand, anyways. LOL




#393760 Way Of Life - When Was The Pre-Tribulation Rapture First Taught?

Posted by Ukulelemike on 13 November 2014 - 12:22 PM

The way I understand it, there is no clear picture in scripture of a removing of the saints anywhere, until Rev 14:14. The closest thing pointed at by PreTR's is Rev 4:1, when John is called up to Heaven.   The problem with this being a picture of the rapture, is that, it is only John, and it is in the spirit, not the flesh, and it is for the express purpose of receiving the vision. It is otherwise not connected to any rapture, any removing of the church, any more than Isaiah being brought in a vision into Heaven, or Ezekiel being brought into heaven in a vision.

 

It seems to me that, scripture being as clear as it is that theere WILL be a removing of the saints to escape the wrath to come, that scripture would also provide a clearer view of it occuring, seeing as an entire book was written expressly concerning the end days.  Not just a hint, not just one person going up, and then we look and say, Oh, that must be when it happens." And no one yet has given any good answer as to what is occurring in rev 14: 14, with jesus' reaping. It has been said that this is the reaping of the damned for the wrath, but that's clearly what the angel is doing  in the next few verses. As well, we see two clearly different items being harvested: one is called the 'harvest of the earth", while the other is called the 'clusters of the vine of the earth, grapes"

 

Also, and I know that we IFB's are loathe to do so, but if we look at the words translated 'ripe' in the two references, they are different words:  in Jesus' harvest, it is "xērainō", meaning dry or whithered-as in, ripe grain, wheat.

 

For the other harvest, it is "akmazō"  meaning to flourish, or be fully mature. Two different kind of ripening, two different heavests, two different harvesters, one is reaped, the ther is reaped and cast into the winepress of God's wrath.   Just can't see this being anything else but the cathcing up of the saints by Jesus in the clouds, just prior to the wrath of God falling.  But maybe that's just me.






The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500