SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : News and Current Events : the beginning of the birthpangs..?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
KeithLaMothe
Member



Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354


 Re:

Greetings bubbaguy, and welcome to our forums.

There's something of an edge to your tone; I don't mind terribly, but I thought I would mention it in case it was unintentional.

In any event, I have some sympathy with those that object to the prevailing idea that the end is near. There has undeniably been a large amount of irresponsible twisting of Scripture and current events to fit the eschatalogical theories (and, dare I say, desires) of various people. We ought be more discerning than to take every headline and attempt to shoehorn it and some verse or another out of Revelation or Daniel together into a halfway-plausible argument that the world is ending, at latest, next Tuesday.

But I think this latest "birthpang", as it were, does warrant consideration in light of Scripture. Though I think eschatalogical theories should take the back burner compared to our being tools of God in dealing with the situation: physically through obvious means of support and assistance, and spiritually through bringing the Word to those who may have not heard (this does open quite a window of oppurtunity into generally intensely Muslim areas, as well as generally unreached areas) and reminding others who may be shocked into a more receptive state by recent events.

And, for the record, there have been a number of people in the not too distant past claiming to be Christ, or Christ reincarnate, or some kind or another of Messiah. The fellow leading the "Heaven's Gate" group comes to mind, and so does another guy whose website I came across some time ago (http://www.strongcity.com/ , I don't think his previous website is still up), and I don't properly recall whether David Koresh made claims of that nature.

I agree, though, in that I get the impression from the text that the number and/or temporary success of these impostors will be somewhat greater than we have seen.

edit - of course, the Roman Catholic system of "impersonating" Christ has been exceedingly successful in terms of numbers; they have more than we do. But only a small percentage (or so I get the impression) really understands what Rome teaches on that.

 2004/12/31 23:27Profile
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re:

Welcome Bubbaguy,

And thanks Keith, well said. I think if you were to look around a bit here bubbaguy you would find a mixed reaction and yet I believe level headed.

One of the things that always comes up when these catastrophes happen is past history. We have had pandemics that have wiped out hundreds of thousands, wars, genocide, the holocoust... and for the bible believing I am sure that those who survived, lived through these things must have had similar thoughts, that this was the beginning of the end, if not the end.

One of the threads here related to recent events started off with the comment "I don't know and I don't think any of us knows" 'why' this happened.
So I don't think anyone is making the leap to a conclusion. The 'beginning of birth pangs' was a heading with a question mark and that possibility is just as likely as the opposite, being that the Lord Himself said this would happen.

So I did find this comment interesting;

Quote:
Ain't happening, and we are not going to see this for many ages, if ever. The end is not near!


What makes you so sure?

And more puzzling was;
Quote:
Don't put every world event in context of Revelations. It is a false trail. By means of its maleable and easily misconstrued words, [b]it (Revelations) is a deception in itself![/b]


Maybe you meant something different than I am reading it. The 'false trail' of narrating every event to specific prophecy, I could understand that point of view, but you are not saying that the book " The Revelation of Jesus Christ" is a deception are you?


_________________
Mike Balog

 2005/1/1 0:06Profile
no_stamp
Member



Joined: 2004/12/19
Posts: 19
Australia, Queensland, Brisbane

 Re:

[b][color=000099][font=Verdana]

Quote:
For many will come in My name, saying, “I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.

I see no sign of this happening. Who, exactly, besides the obviously insane, is saying "I am the Christ"?

[/font][/color][/b]

[b][color=000099][font=Verdana]The Mormon's, Jehovah Witnesses and other cults are teaching of a different Christ a different Gospel. Im sure they can be considered as false Christs.[/font][/color][/b]


_________________
Peter

 2005/1/1 0:36Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

hi bubbaguy
You don't know Mark Jacobson by any chance do you? He was a regular here for a long time and there is a remarkable similarity in your postings.

Anyway, 'the Christ' is a role as well as a person. Jesus of Nazareth was acknowledged by God as 'both Lord and Christ' but many before him and after him have claimed to be the 'uniquely authorised one'. The Bar Kochba rebellion of AD 135 was led by one who many regarded as The Christ. Anyone who says 'but I say unto you' and in so doing sets himself up as the authoratitive voice of God does the same. In this sense Muhammed was a 'Christ', so is the Papacy (as a system not as a person), atheistic communism is a 'Christ'. These all produce totalitarian authority systems.

Anyone who claims to be a self-contained authority without reference to the absolute authority of the scriptures is on the borderline. Many early Quakers were on the borderline, some crossed it.

I think you are reading the "I am Christ" to mean 'I am Jesus of Nazareth'. It may mean that and some have claimed it, but the real meaning is "I am God's uniquely authorised Leader". Sadly there have been very many of these.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/1 4:52Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

[b]Hi Jake[/b] aka bubbaguy

Quote:
from a personal email…[i]The problem for the scriptures here is that in order for "many" to be decieved by an imposter, returned "Christ" they have to be believers in God the Father in the first place. You cannot believe in the son of God without first believing in a Godhead. Those who put their faith in God, then will have to be willingly allowed by God to be decieved, when they have faith in God, and then be sent to the unquenchable fire!! God comes out being duplicitious in this affair, saving some who believe and casting others into the fire for being misled by a Satan created by God to do this job! He creates imperfect creatures (or those he knows will become imperfect through sin) and goes about judging them and sending them to hell. WHATAGUY![/i]

So I was right, I did recognise that voice! Well I think we have been around this circle often enough to know where it going to go, but personally I don’t mind your reappearance here. The problem is that your views are so distant from most of the folk here that there is just no point of contact, so we end up talking past each other. Your view of the Bible is one of ‘pick n mix’ and the Bible only used to confirm your own insights. Your final authority is yourself and your witness, ours is the inerrant word of God. We do not always understand it but when we don’t we don’t bin it, we bin our opinions.

The word 'Christ' had many definitions which is why Jesus was reluctant in using it. When He was asked ‘are you the Christ’ He hardly ever gave a straight answer. The reason was that His definition of The Christ and their definition had hardly any points in common. They thought in terms of military conquest and Israel’s domination of the world as a super-race. He thought in terms of substitutionary sacrifice of His own life to set the sinners free. To say ‘yes’ to the question ‘are you the Christ?’ would only have confirmed them in their folly.

False ‘Christs’ in this sense are those who say ‘God says’ when He hasn’t. People who submit to no external authority because they say they themselves are ‘christed’ and are equal in authority to the apostles and to Christ Himself. They arise inside churches and outside them. The belong to organisations or are independent. Their common characteristic is ‘autonomy’; self-authority. Some will claim to be ‘Jesus Returned’, some will deny He ever came in the flesh, the motto is ‘we will not have this man to reign over us’.

I’m not sure what your point is in this posting. I know that you reject Paul and the Book of Revelation. I know you only accept the occasional verses which fit into your own pre-formed notions. So I am not surprised to hear that you reject these words of Christ. Do you still think of yourself as a Christian?


Quote:
from the same personal email...[i]I am satisfied that Jesus lived to preach and demonstrate "love one another as I have loved you" and that if we follow after His example, loving and forgiving others as best we can, we are Christians. Beliefs about the literal or figurative Bible are all secondary and usually not fruitful. Jesus' message and examples shine clearly through the many translations and interpretations of of the Bible, and that, for me, is the only real test of its Truth.[/i]

This Jesus that you believe in who was not virgin born, and did not die as God’s substitute for all sinners, and who did not rise from the dead, is a figment of your imagination. You are putting your faith in the ‘Gospel according to Jake’, and I tremble for you.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/3 15:24Profile
KeithLaMothe
Member



Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354


 Re:

I'm not sure if Jake wants others to respond, or if we really want to walk these paths again, but a few questions I think would be helpful for me to understand exactly where he's coming from:

You (Jake) seem to affirm some of what the Bible teaches, particularly those parts concerned with humans loving one another as they love themselves. Do you believe Jesus actually existed, had a ministry, and taught that concept? Why do you affirm that men should love one another as they love themselves? By what standard do you judge such a concept?

On the other hand, you reject other parts of the Scripture, particularly those parts concerned with God creating beings and then damning some of them. Do you believe that Jesus, the prophets, and/or the apostles taught such concepts? By what standard do you judge these concepts as being wrong?

Why do you trust your standard?

Thank you,
-Keith

 2005/1/3 17:07Profile
Spider
Member



Joined: 2004/12/31
Posts: 1


 Re:

If you have no love for yourself you will not be able to show love to others. Let us define this "love." It is not an egotistical, self gratifying love, but one that is best illuminated in 1 Corinthians 13.

 2005/1/3 18:07Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
You are putting your faith in the ‘Gospel according to Jake’, and I tremble for you.



I agree. I think of II Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some,... The problem with these types of false teachings is that they are like leaven. The lies spread like a miasma, making excuse for those who oppose themselves and dispelling the fear of the Lord. It's the age old tactic of the Devil!

1) Undermine what God said with foolish questions

if that don't work

2) Undermine the penalty for sin

if that don't work

3) Make the penalty seem way distant in the future

There is no new thing under the Sun. Yet, for those of us who know better and have seen the same line up of evidence as those who don't believe God's word, there are those who are immediately taken off guard by this stuff. It makes new converts waver in the faith. Listen to this passage; But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. (II Peter 2:1) It would be a horrible thing to have to be judged of God in order to have God's word authenticated in your own eyes. Think of it, your judgment becomes the confirmation; yet, you can't take heed because you are gone. Personally, I would not want to be confirmation for someone else. Damnable heresy is about as serious of sin as it gets. If there is even a drop of fear of God- I pray it kicks in!


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/1/3 21:18Profile
markm
Member



Joined: 2004/11/4
Posts: 46


 Re:

Quote:
3) Make the penalty seem way distant in the future Yet, isn't that the most pertinent lesson of this disaster? Our life is but a vapor. On vacation one day and washed into eternity the next. Preparing a meal for your family one moment, and fighting to save your life the next. Will you have time to repent?

Even if I haven't figured out who the Antichrist is, I could be gone tomorrow. Jesus may not come next week, but you might go to Him.

There were present at that season some who told Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answered and said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.

"Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish." [url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2013;&version=50;]Luke 13:1-5[/url]

 2005/1/4 5:14Profile









 Re:

"Your final authority is yourself and your witness, ours is the inerrant word of God."

This is not so. My final authority is the Holy Spirit, available to each and every one of us in the here and now. The Holy Spirit is of Jesus Christ, so I know that Jesus lived and died for us.

The Bible is not inerrant. It is a collection of writings about God's people, the Jews, and the movement, Christianity, which grew out of it. Much of the new testament writings were recorded decades after the events described. You have to believe that God became present in each writer of the Old and New Testaments and all the subsequent interpreters for these writings to be literally true. But they aren't intended to be literally true. They are intended to covey a message of truth and love.

For example: Noah's Ark is a story about the destruction of the world by flood. It has definate truths to it, but they are not literal. Mankind is descended from one small clan. And we are responsible for the welfare and survival of all God's creatures. But any person honest with themselves will not argue that polar bears and penguins were on the Ark. The boat described in Genesis would not float with all those animals in it, nor would it have room for the necessary food. It would have required many sump pumps to keep out the water. So, a thinking person concludes that the story is about something not literal, but nevertheless very important. The real point of the story is that God's patience with sinners is not endless and that we are charged with taking care of the earth and creatures God made for us.

You are right about one thing, I couldn't care less whether Mary was a virgin. Kirshna is claimed to be born of a virgin as well. Big whuppdedo. His followers can exalt him with such superlatives all day long and it doesn't change a thing. I believe that Jesus was the son of God because of his righteous words and deeds conveyed through several witnesses in the Gospels. Not all of these witnesses need to be completely accurate for me to have an understanding of who Jesus was and what His purpose was. No, to argue against Jesus is to argue against love. and that is clearly foolishness. God bless you all.
Jake

 2005/1/4 12:20





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy