What Particular Faith Do You Subscribe To?

[GenX]

Specifics...for example, if you're a Christian, what branch of Christianity.

I'll start:



Catholic

[dancingqueen]

Agnostic

[Soundbear]

Catholic.

[sixgs]

Barry....the truth shall set you free.

[Soundbear]

That is the truth. It's Speedy who needs to be more specific.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Catholic. </div></div>

Funny how Barry avoids telling us what denomination he is, or if he is non-denominational.

Isn't it ironic the guys that love to pick apart Catholicism piece by piece are the exact same ones that are hesitant to tell us what their particular branch of Christianity is???

Now, for all those phantom 'lurkers' out there, the ones Barry hyperventilates over, this should tell you all you need to know /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

[Soundbear]

Oh, Speedy, how little you understand the words you use.

You say you are Catholic. Is that COMPLETELY true or should you maybe be a little more specific?? Maybe an "R" word is missing.

Now since Speedy wants to put us all in a little box, likely for no good reason, I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation.

Mind you, I would have no problem fellowhipping with many other denominations, because we are much more alike than different, in spite of what Speedy might like everyone to believe.

[GenX]

Barry, you should use small "c" catholic, that's what you are.

My brand of Catholicism is either Roman Catholic or Catholic. The media and everyone else but you seems to realize that upper case "C" Catholic refers to Roman Catholicism.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation. </div></div>

Okay, that's a start.

Now, what form of Baptist? Particular Baptist? General Baptist? Anabaptist?

[Babzz]

I was baptised in the united church.
Now I have no label.. spiritual

[GRUMPY]

rc or whatever is handy, after all its all the same guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation. </div></div>

Okay, that's a start.

Now, what form of Baptist? Particular Baptist? General Baptist? Anabaptist? </div></div>

Without looking on the web, Speedy, do you know what a particular or a General Baptist is?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Barry, you should use small "c" catholic, that's what you are.

My brand of Catholicism is either Roman Catholic or Catholic. The media and everyone else but you seems to realize that upper case "C" Catholic refers to Roman Catholicism. </div></div>

If you look very, very carefully, you will notice that my initial response was just one word.

It is a convention in the english language that the first letter of any sentence or paragraph, including this one word example, begins with a capital letter.

It is indeed true that the media and others indescriminatly use the word catholic to describe Roman Catholics. This is in fact inaccurate, because the true body of Christ is the universal or "catholic" church.

True believers ARE catholics(though they seldom use the term), but not necessarily Roman catholics.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation. </div></div>

Okay, that's a start.

Now, what form of Baptist? Particular Baptist? General Baptist? Anabaptist? </div></div>

I understand that there are over 300 separate Baptist groups in the USA.

Why don't we talk about actual beliefs instead.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Without looking on the web, Speedy, do you know what a particular or a General Baptist is? </div></div>

I sure don't!!

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation. </div></div>

Okay, that's a start.

Now, what form of Baptist? Particular Baptist? General Baptist? Anabaptist? </div></div>

Without looking on the web, Speedy, do you know what a particular or a General Baptist is? </div></div>

No, Aydeloof, that's why I asked.

I've seen them mentioned, but know little of the differences. I was hoping Barry would tell me.

Geez, you certainly are in a pissy mood today ,aren't you?

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will admit to being a long term member of a Baptist congregation. </div></div>

Okay, that's a start.

Now, what form of Baptist? Particular Baptist? General Baptist? Anabaptist? </div></div>

I understand that there are over 300 separate Baptist groups in the USA.

Why don't we talk about actual beliefs instead. </div></div>

That's what I am asking...can you trim away all the possibilities, and let me know which one you are?

I hope this question doesn't offend Aydeloof.

[The Berean]

Why should it?. Hes only pissy some of the time, unlike you.

[GenX]

I see you haven't told us what denomination you subscribe to. Either has Aydeloof.

Are you guys embarrassed to do so?

My name is known here and it wouldn't be too difficult to find me on the weeb. You know me from your RWGR days.

But if it will help others, I belong to a Christian church that belongs to a denomination called the Associated Gospel Churches, whose doctrinal statement of faith you can find here:
agcofcanada.com

You may check it out at your leisure.

Many evangelical churches have agreement when it comes to statements of faith.

Differences lie mostly in the area of church polity.
But Protestants, as yo know, have no central headquarters.
Most of them believe in the autonomy of the local church.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Many evangelical churches have agreement when it comes to statements of faith </div></div>

That does not in any way , shape, or form hide the fact there is still enough of a difference that denomination after denomination splits off at a rate of about one per week.

That's like saying "We have 80% of things in common...the other 20% can be papered over, or ignored"

Sorry, but with God it's 100%, or not at all. He didn't give us a choice; and he certainly didn't intend picking a denomination to be like perusing the vegetable section at the supermarket.

It's all or nothing. You simply cater to specific needs of the current day and age. You have a soft underbelly, and a foundation of sand. That is perfect for many people today, who want their religion to confirm them in their lifestyle, not admonish them if need be.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My name is known here and it wouldn't be too difficult to find me on the weeb </div></div> Is the "Weeb" like the Web, only for dweebs? /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You know me from your RWGR days</div></div>

You're angry, it's okay.

[GenX]

From your site:

"Statement on Pretribulation Rapture
The Associated Gospel Churches are free to admit persons to the ministry
of the AGC who may not hold to a Pretribulation Rapture. However, the
AGC does ask that all candidates hold and understand the belief that:
1. Christ’s return is imminent;
2. the historic position of the AGC is a pretribulation rapture;
3. this issue is not ever to become one of contention or division
in our churches."


There is NO biblical foundation for a "pretribulation rapture"

That presupposes that Christ will come TWICE to earth; once for the "elect", and once for all others. NOWHERE in the Bible does it say Jesus Second Coming is actually a second and Third Coming!

"The teaching of a secret pretribulation rapture is a doctrine that never existed before 1830. Did the pretribulation rapture come into existence by a careful exegesis of Scripture? No. The first person to teach the doctrine was a young woman named Margaret Macdonald. Margaret was not a theologian or Bible expositor but was a prophetess in the Irvingite sect (the Catholic Apostolic Church). Christian journalist Dave MacPherson has written a book on the subject of the origin of the pre-tribulation rapture. He writes: “We have seen that a young Scottish lassie named Margaret Macdonald had a private revelation in Port Glasgow, Scotland, in the early part of 1830 that a select group of Christians would be caught up to meet Christ in the air before the days of Antichrist. An eye-and-ear witness, Robert Norton M.D., preserved her handwritten account of her pre-trib rapture revelation in two of his books, and said it was the first time anyone ever split the second coming into two distinct parts or stages. His writings, along with much other Catholic Apostolic Church literature, have been hidden many decades from the mainstream of Evangelical thought and only recently surfaced. Margaret’s views were well-known to those who visited her home, among them John Darby of the Brethren. Within a few months her distinctive prophetic outlook was mirrored in the September, 1830 issue of The Morning Watch and the early Brethren assembly at Plymouth, England. Early disciples of the pre-trib interpretation often called it a new doctrine.”2

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), who was the leader of the Brethren movement and the “father of modern Dispensationalism,” took Margaret Macdonald’s new teaching on the rapture, made some changes (she taught a partial rapture of believers while he taught that all believers would be raptured) and incorporated it into his Dispensational understanding of Scripture and prophecy. Darby would spend the rest of his life speaking, writing and traveling, spreading the new rapture theory. The Plymouth Brethren openly admitted and were even proud of the fact that among their teachings were totally new ones which had never been taught by the church fathers, medieval scholastics, Protestant Reformers or the many commentators.

The person most responsible for the rather widespread acceptance of Pretribulationalism and Dispensationalism among Evangelicals is Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). C. I. Scofield published his Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible, which espoused the doctrines of Darby in its notes, became very popular in Fundamentalist circles. In the minds of many a Bible teacher, fundamentalist pastor and multitudes of professing Christians, Scofield’s notes were practically equated with the word of God itself. If a person did not adhere to the Dispensational, Pretribulational scheme he or she would almost automatically be labeled a modernist.

Today there is a whole plethora of books advocating the pretribulation rapture theory and the Dispensational understanding of the end times. Given the fact that among professing Christians the pre-trib rapture is still wildly popular, a comparison of this theory with scriptural teaching is warranted. We will see that the typical arguments offered in favor of this theory are in conflict with the Bible."

[GenX]

# It contradicts the plain teaching of scripture. The Second Coming, the rapture, and the resurrection of the dead occur at the same time, on the last day. 1 Th 4:14 -18, John 6:39 ff.

# The idea that the church will not go through the great tribulation ignores those Christians who have been martyred down through the ages and those Christians now undergoing persecution throughout the world. It is a doctrine that could only survive in an environment where the church is not currently undergoing persecution.

# If the pre-trib rapture doctrine is false then it means that many Christians will be unprepared for tribulation and persecution when it comes upon them. What makes the church in the West so special that it will not undergo persecution?

# It fosters complacency within the church and in the world. It gives those left behind a second chance and is less likely to encourage evangelism and missionary effort because the great commission will be fulfilled by the 144,000 and the two witnesses rather than the church. The job of the Great Commission belongs to the Church.

# It gives a false interpretation of the place of the church and Israel within the bible especially in the interpretation of the book of Revelation. Revelation is interpreted more from the point of view of Israel than the church (to whom it was written in the first place) see Rev 1:4, 22:16.

# Because this doctrine is a modern one invented by men (1830). It is not supported by the church fathers or any of the major creeds or confessions - The Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Westminster Confession of Faith etc. It is hardly the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints

LINK (http://www.apocalipsis.org/rap-rebut.htm)

Aydeloof, you have the AUDACITY to question Catholic teaching after one of your basic tenets is this mademade monstrosity?????

Unreal!!!!!!

So shall we list some essential RC doctrines that have no biblical support?

Read it once again. You'll see it is NOT a part of our statement of faith. It's what the denomination held to.

I won't get into it with you any further than that, Speedy. Because your arguments are not your arguments. You are simply parroting websites to argue by.

I can quote websites too.

[GenX]

You just said we can see your statements of faith on your site...this is taken right form your site.

And that "it's not in the Bible" line doesn't work. It is YOU, the "Bible Christian", who needs to have EVERYTHING you believe stated clearly and implicitly in the Bible. We Catholics believe in constant revelation, and as such are not held to the "It must be in the Bible" as clear as day-line as you.

Now, to all of Barry's infamous "lurkers" reading this, take notice how Aydeloof immediately went on the attack towards Catholicism, and did not in anyway attempt to support his church's views. And also remember, he's a pastor of a church.

All VERY telling, is it not?

He'll continue to assassinate my character to deflect attention, but keep in mind why he wants to do so.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Read it once again. You'll see it is NOT a part of our statement of faith. It's what the denomination held to.

</div></div>

From the website Aydeloof provided:

Statement on Pretribulation Rapture
The Associated Gospel Churches are free to admit persons to the ministry
of the AGC who may not hold to a Pretribulation Rapture. However, the
AGC does ask that all candidates hold and understand the belief that:
1. Christ’s return is imminent;
2. the historic position of the AGC is a pretribulation rapture;
3. this issue is not ever to become one of contention or division
in our churches.

.....
where's the beef?

[GenX]

Where is the biblical-ness of a pretrib Rapture?

Do your own research.

[GenX]

Remember, 'Lurkers', this is a pastor who is wholly incapable of backing up a key fundamental claim of his faith.

[Soundbear]

I would characterize a careful mis-quote as a lie.

[GenX]

Here is the story behind the person who formed a key tenet of Aydeloof's faith, Margaret Macdonald:

"The original rapture account from Margaret Macdonald:

It was first the awful state of the land that was pressed upon me. I saw the blindness and infatuation of the people to be very great. I felt the cry of Liberty just to be the hiss of the serpent, to drown them in perdition. It was just 'no God.' I repeated the words, Now there is distress of nations, with perplexity, the seas and the waves roaring, men's hearts failing them for fear - now look out for the sign of the Son of man.

Here I was made to stop and cry out, O it is not known what the sign of the Son of man is; the people of God think they are waiting, but they know not what it is. I felt this needed to be revealed, and that there was great darkness and error about it; but suddenly what it was burst upon me with a glorious light.

I saw it was just the Lord himself descending from Heaven with a shout, just the glorified man, even Jesus; but that all must, as Stephen was, be filled with the Holy Ghost, that they might look up, and see the brightness of the Father's glory. I saw the error to be, that men think that it will be something seen by the natural eye; but 'tis spiritual discernment that is needed, the eye of God in his people. Many passages were revealed, in a light in which I had not before seen them.

I repeated, 'Now is the kingdom of Heaven like unto ten virgins, who went forth to meet the Bridegroom, five wise and five foolish; they that were foolish took their lamps, but took no oil with them; but they that were wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.' 'But be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is; and be not drunk with wine wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit.' This was the oil the wise virgins took in their vessels - this is the light to be kept burning - the light of God - that we may discern that which cometh not with observation to the natural eye.

Only those who have the light of God within them will see the sign of his appearance. No need to follow them who say, see here, or see there, for his day shall be as the lightning to those in whom the living Christ is. 'Tis Christ in us that will lift us up - he is the light - 'tis only those that are alive in him that will be caught up to meet him in the air. I saw that we must be in the Spirit, that we might see spiritual things. John was in the Spirit, when he saw a throne set in Heaven. - But I saw that the glory of the ministration of the Spirit had not been known. I repeated frequently, but the spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fulness of Christ be poured into his body, and then shall we be caught up to meet him. Oh none will be counted worthy of this calling but his body, which is the church, and which must be a candlestick all of gold. I often said, Oh the glorious inbreaking of God which is now about to burst on this earth; Oh the glorious temple which is now about to be reared, the bride adorned for her husband; and Oh what a holy, holy bride she must be, to be prepared for such a glorious bridegroom.

I said, Now shall the people of God have to do with realities - now shall the glorious mystery of God in our nature be known - now shall it be known what it is for man to be glorified. I felt that the revelation of Jesus Christ had yet to be opened up - it is not knowledge about God that it contains, but it is an entering into God - I saw that there was a glorious breaking in of God to be. I felt as Elijah, surrounded with chariots of fire. I saw as it were, the spiritual temple reared, and the Head Stone brought forth with shoutings of grace, grace, unto it.

It was a glorious light above the brightness of the sun, that shone round about me. I felt that those who were filled with the Spirit could see spiritual things, and feel walking in the midst of the, while those who had not the Spirit could see nothing - so that two shall be in one bed, the one taken and the other left, because the one has the light of God within while the other cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven.

I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation, surrounded by nets and entanglements, about to be tried, and many about to be deceived and fall. Now will the wicked be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived. - This is the fiery trial which is to try us. - It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus; but Oh it will be a fiery trial.

Every soul will be shaken to the very centre. The enemy will try to shake in every thing we have believed - but the trial of real faith will be found to honour and praise and glory. Nothing but what is of God will stand. The stony-ground hearers will be made manifest - the love of many will wax cold. I frequently said that night and often since, now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth, and nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive - for it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work - he will have a counterpart for every part of God's truth, and an imitation for every work of the Spirit. The Spirit must and will be poured out on the church, that she may be purified and filled with God - and just in proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he - when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he.

This is particularly the nature of the trial, through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man. There will be outward trail too, but 'tis principally temptation. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will just increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept. I frequently said, Oh be filled with the Spirit - have the light of God in you, that you may detect satan - be full of eyes within - be clay in the hands of the potter - submit to be filled, filled with God.

This will build the temple. It is not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord. This will fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb. I saw it to be the will of God that all should be filled. But what hindered the real life of God from being received by his people, was their turning from Jesus, who is the way to the Father. They were not entering in by the door. For he is faithful who hath said, by me if any man enter in he shall find pasture. They were passing the cross, through which every drop of the Spirit of God flows to us. All that comes not through the blood of Christ is not of God. When I say, they are looking from the cross, I fell that there is much in it - they turn from the blood of the Lamb, by which we overcome, and in which our robes are washed and made white.

There are low views of God's holiness, and a ceasing to condemn sin in the flesh, and a looking from him who humbled himself, and made himself of no reputation. Oh! It is needed, much needed at present, a leading back to the cross. I saw that night, and often since, that there will be an outpouring of the Spirit on the body, such as has not been, a baptism of fire, that all the dross may be put away. Oh there must and will be such an indwelling of the living God as has not been - the servants of God seated in their foreheads - great conformity to Jesus - his holy image seen in his people - just the bride made comely, by his comeliness put upon her.

This is what we are at present made to pray much for, that speedily we may all be made ready to meet our Lord in the air- and it will be. Jesus wants his bride. His desire is toward us. He that shall come, will come, and will not tarry. Amen and Amen. Even so come Lord Jesus."

Now remember, Aydeloof is the guy that descries that fact he believes (wrongly) that much of Catholicism is not in the Bible.

So, we have Aydeloof basing his faith on this: First, the basic foundation is from the writings of a former 16th Century monk who took on translating the Bible his own way, and even admitted to adding some words. His secondary foundation is a young Scottish woman who had a 'vision' in 1830.

As such, nothing mattered from 33 AD until 1525. All that is needed in the 'true' Christian faith has come to light only in the last five hundred years.

God chose a lowly monk and a lowly Scottish girl to give his full revelation to. Strange these two people of such obvious importance are not mentioned in the Bible. The Bible doers predict future events, right? Strange it ignored these two seemingly critically important people.

[Larimar]

Is it really safe to post what i am? or will I be on trial, attacked? or harrassed for it?

[GenX]

No, go ahead, please.

You haven't been one of the holy-rollers in here who have impugned others' faiths (or lack thereof) while hiding the fact yours may have a lot to answer for.

[Chester Field]

I was baptised Anglican, confirmed in the United Church and married in an Anglican cathedral. I consider myself a Christian, and don't bother with other labels such as protestant or catholic. I tend to lean towards churches that are heavier on the Word and lighter on extraneous doctrine, though I have attended services at a number of different denominational churches including the above plus RC, Baptist, Evangelical, Pentecostal, Methodist and others. The differences really aren't that great when you consider the Message itself. Each organization tends to put its own spin on it, but ultimately people gravitate to what suits them. I'm not going to get bent out of shape if a fellow parrishoner believes in rapture because I don't feel that it changes the Message that we as Christians were given. We were all told how to conduct ourselves, but I have yet to find the scripture that tells us to belittle and berate our brethren.

[Larimar]

I was baptised Roman Catholic, but lived in a diverse Christian family. I was never taught religion -Yet, I was always a child who spoke about God and faith, Jesus, and I always had to have a bible near me. Out my window at night I could see a glowing cross in the sky-which now that I'm older I have come to realize it was never there. As a child I thought I was seeing a cross from a church-but none would be visible from that location.
There are many other reasons-however, because of my past I'll always feel a close connection with Jesus-however, I am not going to lable myself any longer under a Christian category. I can't. My faith has so much more to it then is in the bible.
I can only say that my faith is closest to that of the "spiritualist"
Though I don't always meet their criteria either-I'm rather not into lables and just call myself spiritual in the end, but not religious. I think lables place me in a box that I must believe certain things or else ...I'm not like that..

http://www.cassadaga.org/whatitis.htm

Spiritualism comes close to my beliefs-but not exactly, and so this link are to give a "gist" and not what I believe fully.

I walk my own path-and I do not like when I'm harrassed by others that I "must" be working with the devil-if I don't follow what another Christian does..I don't see the enlightenment in that at all..but to each his/her own.

Anyways, sorry to ramble on-I tend to do that /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
That's the best I can explain my faith.
I believe in God
I believe in walking a path to learn lessons and progress my soul-and myself as a human being.

I truly respect all religions and faiths that look up to a higher power and do good work in society-I have a lot to learn from all of them.

[GenX]

Thanks for the reply.

Now, I'll address what my issue is with this

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not going to get bent out of shape if a fellow parrishoner believes in rapture because I don't feel that it changes the Message that we as Christians were given </div></div>

The central message is of the utmost importance, I agree. And more often than not we all share the same basic views.

But when you swerve off the message as much as pre-tribulation (Pretrib) Rapture does, it can have very, very deep and potentially eternal effects.

Pretrib believes certain events must all unfold before Jesus returns. Central to this is a massive war that will take place in the valley of Megiddo, in the Mideast. There, it is said, is where the Battle of Armageddon will take place. This battle will be the final war that brings Jesus to earth. But before all this can happen Pretrib believes ‘the Church’ will be taken up to the sky to meet Jesus, thus saving them from the terrible seven years that are the reign of the ‘anti-Christ’.

Why should all this bother people who are not Pretrib?

Because many Pretrib people believe the events of the ‘End of the World’ are written in the back of the Bible, in the Book of Revelation; like it were some Hollywood script that just so happens to be unfolding in our time (how many other Christian sects in history have led millions astray, believing the end of the world is nigh?).

The Pretribs, in their desire for the Second Coming, look at the news of the day like it is some script written two thousand years ago in Palestine unfolding before our very eyes. They strongly desire for events to unfold as quickly as possible.

Think of the attendant problems here.

Those who believe these are the ‘last days’ want to hurry up those days. A potential war with Iran and the U.S.? Great! Syrian troops amassed at Israel’s border? Perfect, the time for Armageddon is near! Now think how dangerous this mindset is if a Pretrib person has some power in Washington, D.C.

Many people criticize Iranian president Ahmadinejad for his desire to start some kind of world conflict to usher in the reign of the Last Imam. Well, this is little different from those Pretrib people in seats of power in government and business who want to usher in the End Days. The difference is one thinks that final war will bring the Last Imam, while the other believes it will bring Jesus’ rapture of the Church sooner. But in the end, they both want the same thing, manipulating world affairs for a common goal.

Don’t believe me? Then simply ‘Google’ Hal Lindsey, a leading pretib spokesperson for the last three decades. Also look up Pat Robertson, another Pretrib believer.

Pretrib is not scriptural; it is nowhere to be found in the Bible. Yet it gives millions of people an unfounded hope that they will somehow escape worldly disasters, or wars. This is dangerous, not only for those who subscribe to this view that was nowhere to be found in Christendom for its first 1,800 years, but to others, also, for the reason explained above.

Are all Pretrib people like this? No, of course not. But ask yourself this: how many is too many?

[Larimar]

sorry for my ignorance on the matter-is the rapture in the bible? and is it like revelations? who even wrote revelations?
is revelations the word of god for christians? ..just curious

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DreamSpirit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">sorry for my ignorance on the matter-is the rapture in the bible? and is it like revelations? who even wrote revelations?
is revelations the word of god for christians? ..just curious </div></div>

The word “rapture” is not in the Bible, though one could say it is described as a concept in 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17, which states, "For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord."

(Many Greek scholars disagree on what "caught up in the air" meant in the original vernacular)

The key words are “caught up in the air”. That has led some to believe that means Jesus will “rapture” his Church in midair, before the calamities of the Last Days.

All Christians for 1,800 years believed there would indeed be times of great trouble and turmoil before Jesus’ return. It was in 1827 that a new belief caught on: that Christians would be taken out of the world before the time of tribulation. Not one single bit of evidence from past Church history up until 1827 talked of a pre-tribulation Rapture.

Of course one can certainly view the Last Day when Jesus comes as a “rapture”. But to believe Christians will be caught up in a miraculous cloud with Jesus right before the End Days is the stuff of a very active imagination.

Try to see how this view is overly-pro-Christian (and I say that as someone who is pro-Christian). We are saved the times and troubles of the End days, while all the rest of you (non-Christians) have to suffer. Sorry, but the God I know doesn’t work that way. We Christians have been granted a great, great grace due to the fact we are even able to be saved. With Jesus not only Jews but now “Gentiles” are of God’s family, and can be saved and live in Heaven for eternity. Are we, his ‘adopted’ people, so special that it is we, and only we, that are saved by the terrible troubles of the last days? Even God’s original Chosen People, the Jews have to go through these terrible times; but not us lucky Christians, according to Pretrib. (Though some people say the Jews will all be converted to Christianity by this time)

That reeks of Christian-centrism, to me.

As far as the Book of Revelations, it is by far the most cryptic and difficult to understand book in the entire Bible. As a Catholic, I believe it has nothing to do with what will happen in the future, like some glorified crystal ball. But I do not blame those that do, and they are many. For years I believed the same way. Heck, even Catholics with little eduati9on in their own faith believe this way, so powerful was the pull and attraction of this view, especially in popular culture (see Tim Lahaye’s “Left Behind” series, for example).

The Book of Revelation is indeed the word of God for Christians. Most Christians up until 1500 did not believe Revelation told of things to come, but rather of things that happened, specifically the trails and tribulations faced by the first Christians. It is a book highly- and deeply-saturated with symbolism and metaphor. But is it a crystal ball that just so happens to be fulfilling most predictions in our lifetime? Again, to believe so is to suffer from present-ism (the belief that no time in history is as important, etc, as the one you are currently in) and Christian-centrism.

To believe in Pretrib is to believe that the Book of Revelations had little or no meaning to people who died before Israel regained statehood in 1946. Again, how lucky we are; to think, this is all happening to us (presentism).

Do we know God’s ultimate plan? Do we know he does not have yet a lot of work to do to bring much of the world (not just North America) into his holy and eternal family? Remember, only about ¼ of the world is Christian. That leaves about 3.5 billion people who have not yet heard of God, or his savior son, Jesus. Who are we to decide God is done with his work, and is ready to begin eternity? Again, reeks of Christian-centrism, does it not?

The Bible says to God one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. Who are we to think he is about to make his grand, end of days move in our lifetime?

Now that doesn’t mean he will not, because the Bible says no one knows when the End will come, not even Jesus (yet Pretribs believe they will know, when certain events unfold). We should always be ready. But should we subscribe to views that the Church never even knew existed for the first 1,800 years of her existence?

Revelations is not some glorified Hollywood script. God is not playing ‘guess the date’ with us. To subscribe to Pretrib is to make Revelations fit your worldview.

[Larimar]

Thankyou for your post. It is interesting. Helps me understand a bit more.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DreamSpirit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thankyou for your post. It is interesting. Helps me understand a bit more. </div></div>

You're welcome, glad it helped a little.

My head hurts /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Larimar]

lol:)

[Soundbear]

"So, we have Aydeloof basing his faith on this: First, the basic foundation is from the writings of a former 16th Century monk who took on translating the Bible his own way, and even admitted to adding some words. His secondary foundation is a young Scottish woman who had a 'vision' in 1830."

This is garbage.

Re rapture. Our church has had pastors on both sides of the issue.

It's not a major theological issue or problem.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Our church has had pastors on both sides of the issue.

It's not a major theological issue or problem. </div></div>

I really couldn't have made the case for Catholicism better.

But I digress...

[Soundbear]

You can make the case for what the church supposedly teaches. But what the average Roman Catholic believes is often not exactly the same.

[GenX]

Again people, as you can see...mere cheap shots and un-verifiable assertions.

Practically nothing he says in quantifiable by this state of the game. It's pure emotion now.

That is, as you all know, proof he is running out of steam.

[Soundbear]

The Roman catholic who takes birth control pills. The priest who assures a grief stricken mother that her un-baptized child will NOT be condemned.
Anecdotal evidence is not usually quantifiable. But you're beginning to sound like the atheist who wants "scientific proof" for God first.

[Soundbear]

I know you've defended differences of opinion between Roman Catholics as concerning matters not laid out as things RC's MUST believe.

Too bad you don't seem to be able to allow Protestants the same courtesy. Especially as you would find that the major tenets of their doctrines are the same as your own.

[The Berean]

Ill just be a Christian, if you dont mind

[Chester Field]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those who believe these are the ‘last days’ want to hurry up those days. </div></div>

I'm not really too concerned about people trying to hurry up God, if you know what I mean. Things will unfold as they are meant to. Not that I'm dismissing any of this or simply taking a che sara sara attitude. I have been told how to conduct my life and believe that my time is better spent trying to do what is right, rather than arguing with someone that they are wrong. Some people in my study groups are pre-trib, others like myself are not.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Roman catholic who takes birth control pills. The priest who assures a grief stricken mother that her un-baptized child will NOT be condemned.
Anecdotal evidence is not usually quantifiable. But you're beginning to sound like the atheist who wants "scientific proof" for God first. </div></div>

So certain Catholics are lapsed!! That only works , Barry, if there is not such thing as a lapsed Protestant.

Seeing as there is, you're simply spitting in the wind, my friend.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm not really too concerned about people trying to hurry up God, if you know what I mean</div></div>

Of course God will not move upon our prompting or desire in these things.


But that doesn't mean a whole lot of troubles can be started by those who THINK they can prompt God into moving. Therein lies the issue of concern.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know you've defended differences of opinion between Roman Catholics as concerning matters not laid out as things RC's MUST believe.

Too bad you don't seem to be able to allow Protestants the same courtesy. Especially as you would find that the major tenets of their doctrines are the same as your own. </div></div>

Oh, what a different song you guys are singing now.

So concerned about ecumenism...so concerned about stressing similarities...

Please...

Your gang mentality will raise its ugly head soon enough, once all the dust settles from this latest issue.

[The Berean]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Roman catholic who takes birth control pills. The priest who assures a grief stricken mother that her un-baptized child will NOT be condemned.
Anecdotal evidence is not usually quantifiable. But you're beginning to sound like the atheist who wants "scientific proof" for God first. </div></div>

So certain Catholics are lapsed!! That only works , Barry, if there is not such thing as a lapsed Protestant.

Seeing as there is, you're simply spitting in the wind, my friend. </div></div>

I still havent seen that list of things that would define a lapsed Catholic.

We have discussed those differences of opinion here before. If you dont remember thats too bad.

I think Im not going to use or recognize yoour use of the word Protestant anymore. It includes too many that evne the Roman Catholic church would not consider "separated bretheren"

[The Berean]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know you've defended differences of opinion between Roman Catholics as concerning matters not laid out as things RC's MUST believe.

Too bad you don't seem to be able to allow Protestants the same courtesy. Especially as you would find that the major tenets of their doctrines are the same as your own. </div></div>

Oh, what a different song you guys are singing now.

So concerned about ecumenism...so concerned about stressing similarities...

Please...

Your gang mentality will raise its ugly head soon enough, once all the dust settles from this latest issue.
</div></div>

Thanks for this mornings laugh.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I still havent seen that list of things that would define a lapsed Catholic </div></div>

Becoming a Protestant.

That concise enough for you?

[kalam]

Hi Speedy,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Of course God will not move upon our prompting or desire in these things.

But that doesn't mean a whole lot of troubles can be started by those who THINK they can prompt God into moving. Therein lies the issue of concern. </div></div>

This will be a bit off topic, and may be considered high-jacking. I so, please let me know and I will remove. My question stems from a discussion I had brought up quite some time ago, regarding Godly intervention, free will etc. etc. You stated that God will not move upon our prompting or desire "in these things". Might God move upon our praying "in these things"? What I mean is, if many Christians prayed for God to return soon, could that sway when he returns, similar to the belief that if Christians prayed for God to intervene and help the sick and injured he may do so? Isn't that kind of like prompting God to "move"?

I am sorry if this makes little sense. I am hoping you (and others) understand what I am getting at. I believe when I first brought this up before, you were going by GenX.

KaL

[GenX]

Sure, God intervenes all the time, and our prayers certainly help. But we need to remember even when God doesn't intervene, even when we ask him to, he STILL is intervening (though our limited minds cannot comprehend it as so).

As far as human desires and prayers to speed up Armageddon, I don't think so. God has known since day one when that 'End Day' will be. All the human praying in the world won't hurry up that day; but I do believe praying for peace and other such things may delay the Last Day.

You see, when we pray for Armageddon to arrive quickly we are, in the depths of our soul, doing so simply for personal reasons. It's what 'we' want, what 'we' desire; and like I said, it is for self-centered reasons.

But because God is Love incarnate, he will look with favor upon our prayers and wishes that are made in love and compassion. Wanting world peace for altruistic reasons is love and compassion.

If man would truly repent then some of God's wrath can be muted. Part of that muting would be the delay of the terrible things that precede the Last Day.

But God will not hurry the Last Day just because people desire it to be so.

We all desire to be with Jesus for eternity. But in our minuscule minds and fallen nature we have no idea when that time should be. So we hope out of selfish desire.

The day will come, in due time...in God's time, not ours.

No one prays or longs for Armageddon-like events.
However, we do pray the words, "Thy Kingdom Come.. they will be done on earth as it is in heaven.."

And when warm fronts meet cold fronts, there will be a cosmic clash that is known as judgment. Judgment is inevitable.

It is natural and right to pray that God hastes the day when all things will be made right, and justice will rule the day.

Biblical authors would also say "maranatha" which means, "..even so, come Lord Jesus"

How that kind of prayer 'influences' God, I do not know.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> No one prays or longs for Armageddon-like events.</div></div>

Anyone that reads my posts on the issue can see I went out of my way to say people are not praying for terrible events, per se, but the outcome of those events, which is the return of Jesus; thus <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We all desire to be with Jesus for eternity </div></div>

Yes, it is natural to want things perfect and right. What is unnatural is the belief you can influence world events to usher in at a faster pace the Day of Judgment

You said: As far as human desires and prayers to speed up Armageddon, I don't think so. God has known since day one when that 'End Day' will be. All the human praying in the world won't hurry up that day.

[GenX]

Yes I did.

Armageddon is a means to an end.

Now, do you have a point?