Kingdom Now: We're Not Returning to Eden

News about humankind's turning from God.

Kingdom Now: We're Not Returning to Eden

Postby modres on Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:52 am

This is from the latest newsletter from Olive Tree Ministries (Jan Markell):

One of the fastest-growing false teachings in the church today is called by various names: Kingdom Now, Dominion Theology, Reconstructionism, and the Restoration Movement. It is also known as "liberation theology." It is an effort to use the church to make the world perfect for our Lord's return. It is embraced and taught in part or whole by the National and World Council of Churches, Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo, Earl Paulk, Bob Weiner, John Wimber, James Robison (who is called "the President's pastor").

There are many other names that are focusing on the Leftist social gospel in hopes that this will clean up the world and make it perfect for Christ's return. No more disease, war, poverty, AIDS, global warming, etc. Jesus will return when the church is unified, vibrant, forceful, spotless, and wrinkle-free. This is delusional and keeping people out of Heaven.

There is no Biblical support for this belief, for the Bible teaches just the opposite. In the end of days, bad things will wax worse and worse until the world calls out for a savior. They first pick the wrong one. And are the likely billions of saints in Heaven now there because they attained perfection or were a part of a movement to make the world perfect? The Bible says our works qualify us for rewards but not for Heaven itself. There is nothing we can do to hasten Heaven except preach the gospel and save the lost spiritually speaking.

This theology is borne out of the Manifest Sons of God movement and Latter Rain movement in about 1948. It also has ties to the positive confession movement. Major points of the theologies teach:

• Prophetic scriptures are denied or fulfilled in 70AD (as is also the belief of Preterism).

• The church is the new Israel.

• Armageddon is the ongoing battle between the forces of light and darkness.

• The Antichrist is a spirit, not a person.

• We are already in the Tribulation, but at the same time, we are in the Millennium. It doesn't get any stranger! It's one or the other.

• Rather than following traditional Bible prophecy, they follow "new revelations."

Modern-day prophets must be obeyed and not judged for their inaccuracy.

They want to restore the Edenic nature even though Eden is where sin began.

To add to the tragedy of this false doctrine is the fact that many churches who had this accurate are now switching to these false teachings.

This is not unique to just the Protestant world. Mother Teresa, who selflessly took care of 40,000 derelicts in Calcutta, basically stopped her ministry to them by providing them a clean bed and comfort. She did not share the gospel. She believed many faiths would get to Heaven so she only saw to the physical needs of the body--admittedly, no small task in India. The Buddhist Dali Lama believes the same. In other words, feed the body but not the soul just as today's social gospel "save the world" leaders are doing.

And unfortunately, those who hold to correct theology in this realm are deemed to be "fundamentalist-millennial-apocalyptic-crackpots."

The church is not in the business of taking anything away from Satan but the souls of men. The world is a sinking Titanic ripe for judgment, not Garden of Eden perfection. Jesus will take dominion of the cleansed earth. For men to speak of doing that before the judgment of this earth is spiritually arrogant. I encourage you to flee such false teachers.

God says in Isaiah 66:3-5, "I will choose their delusions." I believe that is the reason for so much confusion, false theology, and apostasy today. For some reason, likely with an end-time purpose, God is sending delusion. There is no other way to interpret those verses.

(emphasis in bold mine)
Blessings,
Fred
User avatar
modres
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:00 am

Postby Abbershay on Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:06 am

What a hatchet job filled with half truths and not any proof.
Abbershay
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:50 pm

Postby Sparrow on Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:26 am

Bill Koenig says that approximately 100 million American church goers believe this in one form or another.

http://www.watch.org/showart.php3?idx=6 ... j=1&mcat=1

Dominionism also comes from Catholicism and will fit in perfectly with it, as they believe they are the global kingdom of Christ on earth, with the Pope as the Vicar of Christ.

This is also core in the NAR movement; in which many of today's Christian leaders are involved in.


Good post, Fred.
Sparrow
 
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:46 pm

Postby modres on Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:35 am

My wife was raised a Catholic. She became a Christian one day in a Bible study led by an ex-Catholic. She said the words from Ephesians "By grace are you saved THROUGH faith, not of works..." jumped out at her and shocked her to her core. She all of a sudden understood that there was NOTHING she could do to earn salvation. It was a free gift from God.

She became a Christian shortly before she and I met and since she knows a great deal about Catholicism, the whole New Age phenomenon is pretty interesting to her. I find it very interesting myself that much of the New Age movement came through the Catholic church. Years ago, I was involved to an extent with the Charismatic movement and found out later, that it was introduced to mainline evangelical churches through the phenomenon that occurred in the Catholic church. Seems as though it's no different today, with many aspects of New Age experience finding their way to mainline denominations through Catholicism.
Blessings,
Fred
User avatar
modres
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:00 am

Postby Sparrow on Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:49 am

:shock:

Wow, Fred, your testimony is similar to my husband's and mine. I was raised in a Catholic family and God also used that Scripture to make the Gospel clear to me.

I used to drive a school bus for a public school down in Kansas [years ago] . This was when our son was a small baby and he had pneumonia. There happened to be an Assemblies of God pastor working a day job as a bus driver and he shared Isaiah 53:4,5 with me -- written on a slip of paper.


Is. 53: 4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.


At the time, I thought, "I don't need that" and through it away. I thought of the irony of that decision when our son was a baby and the situation we are in today with him. I have asked God to forgive me and to restore him.....anyway, back to my story.

My husband put into a transfer to another small Kansas town about 60 miles from where I was working, and unknown to us --- This pastor called the AG pastor of the community we were moving to ask him to pray for my salvation. [God had told him that He was seeking me out].

A year later we ended up in that church and that is how we got involved in Pentecostalism. Same ending also....God showed us that even though God still hears and answers prayer today, the whole movement was initially the result of Catholicism, so we left many years later, too.

Interesting how our testimonies are so similar.

Blessings,
Sparrow
Sparrow
 
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:46 pm

Postby modres on Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:30 pm

That IS interesting, Sparrow. Thanks for sharing.

You know, it's interesting but with this huge deception practically waltzing into the church today, I pray daily that God will keep me and mine from succumbing to it.

This whole "dominion" theology is absurd and yet, people - including some leaders - seem to be gobbling it up.

When you talk with these folks and try to gently steer them in the correct direction, man, talk about being on the defensive! "Something that feels this good HAS to be from God!" etc. Sheesh, wonder what the first century martyrs would have said to that...
Blessings,
Fred
User avatar
modres
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:00 am

Postby tuco22 on Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:54 pm

I'm a member of the Evangelical Free Church, and recently they changed their doctrinal statement from that of premillenial, pretrib to amillenial post trib. In a recent newsletter, my pastor blasted the premillenial pretrib belief, citing the Left Behind series, and said that national Israel is not destined to take physical possession of the promised land, citing a verse in Hebrews discussing how gentiles were now a part of "spiritual Israel" in that through Christ they have become the children of God. In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel. It sounded to me like replacement theology, without coming right out and saying so. I don't believe the passage he was using means what he says it means. Not to mention that he makes God out to be a liar to Abraham.
tuco22
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:01 am

Postby Abbershay on Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:05 pm

Pret tribbers are the ones that dont believe that the chruch replaces israel thats amillenial doctrine.
Abbershay
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:50 pm

Postby OBXBob on Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:19 am

Pret tribbers are the ones that dont believe that the chruch replaces israel thats amillenial doctrine.


Approximately 51% of Christians in the U.S. belong to denominations who prescribe to Replacement Theology. I'd read that 89% of Christians in the U.S. believe in pre-trib. Thus, apparently there are those who are pre-trib that also believe in Replacement Theology.

There are many on this board who are not pre-trib, and I don't know of any who prescribe to Replacement Theology (if they do, I can't recall where they have expressed this viewpoint). But of course, there could be some non-pretrib folks who subscribe to Replacement Theology. IMO Replacement Theology simply goes against what is written in the scriptures, but that is a topic best discussed in the debate forums should anyone want to go there.

YBIC,

Bob
Image
User avatar
OBXBob
 
Posts: 15257
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:37 am

Postby Lazarus43 on Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:24 am

The topic Remnant Theology may be relevant.

Blessings,
Lazarus43
Lazarus43
 
Posts: 1137
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 5:50 am

Postby Abiding in His Word on Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:36 am

Thanks for that link, Laz. I want to re-read the topic.
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 29258
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Postby Abbershay on Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:21 am

Bob those figures are not true at all. I beieve that they are just plain made up. For one thing there isnt 51% that even know enough about the subject to even have an idea. And if you go by doctrine catholics and lutherns are both amilenial .
Abbershay
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:50 pm

Postby OBXBob on Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:24 am

Abbershay,

Please re-read what I said...51% BELONG to denominations who prescribe to this. You are correct in that many within those denominations have no idea what their leadership is lobbying to Congress relative to wanting to withhold funding to Israel, etc.

YBIC,

Bob
Image
User avatar
OBXBob
 
Posts: 15257
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:37 am

Postby InHim on Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:12 pm

This whole "dominion" theology is absurd and yet, people - including some leaders - seem to be gobbling it up.


The premise assumes great power and importance to the leadership of the worldly churches, as it is not God at work, but them. Hard for the unregenerate ego to resist. Saint Bono, anyone? The devils greatest weapon is not sin, but pride.

If there is a percieved need for secular motivation and organization to perform charitable works in this age, it is more to the point that the church does not need to become something new, rather it needs to return to what it was. In the past the Christian life was a sacrifice in this one for the rewards and promises of the next one, and not loving their lives, even unto death, and being united with their masters heart, Christians crossed seas, built schools and hospitals, and transformed entire cultures bringing a message with power that brought true change to each individual from the inside out.

But now most Sunday sermons are little different in emphasis and motivation than Oprah's "The Secret", just with a few scriptures wrapped around it.

In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel.


Romans 11:4 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And so all Israel will be saved

I'd say that if we are not already there, we are real close to the time when the gentiles are full of it.

So how are we replacing them? To accept the idea that the church replaces Israel might make one or two passages of scripture read in favor of a humanistic gentile centric interpretation of the Bible, but it orphans and makes nonsensical too many other Biblical passages that have for the past, up until the 1800s anyway, enjoyed a far more cohesive consensus as to their interpretation (if you will allow me not to count the allegorical branch of interpretation).


Approximately 51% of Christians in the U.S. belong to denominations who prescribe to Replacement Theology. I'd read that 89% of Christians in the U.S. believe in pre-trib. Thus, apparently there are those who are pre-trib that also believe in Replacement Theology.


If that is true we have people out there who apparently do not think it important that all the ideas they carry about in their heads agree. I don't find that surprising considering the amount of television people expose themselves to on a weekly bases. You could write pages concerning that one aspect of the current modern mind set.
InHim
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:14 am

Postby geauxsaints on Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:08 pm

So the consensus here is that Israel will be saved regardless whether they accept Christ or not? I remember listening to John Hagee saying something about Israel not needing Jesus and found it quite disturbing.

Somebody throw some knowledge at me
geauxsaints
 
Posts: 545
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:19 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby InHim on Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:20 pm

I don't think that would be quite accurate.

Romans11:11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! 13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them. 15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in." 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:

"The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins."


Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.
InHim
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:14 am

Postby ChurchGirl on Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:28 pm

This theology is borne out of the Manifest Sons of God movement and Latter Rain movement in about 1948. It also has ties to the positive confession movement. Major points of the theologies teach:


I know why this started in 1948! :alrighty:
Image
Come Pray with Us @
Unequally Yoked Spouses Club
http://fulfilledprophecy.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=23327
Praise the Lord, my husband accepted Jesus on November 18, 2006! Happy Anniversary!!
User avatar
ChurchGirl
 
Posts: 2482
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:01 am
Location: Eagle River, AK

Here's some for ya!

Postby shieldwolf on Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:22 pm

geauxsaints wrote:So the consensus here is that Israel will be saved regardless whether they accept Christ or not? I remember listening to John Hagee saying something about Israel not needing Jesus and found it quite disturbing.

Somebody throw some knowledge at me


Zechariah 13:8,9
8 "And it will come about in all the land," declares the Lord, "that two parts will be cut off and perish; But the third will be left in it."
9 "And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, "They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God."

The setting here is the "Time of Jacobs Trouble", our end of the tribulation scenario. No, I will NOT go into the debate over 3 1/2 years vs. 7 years. Either scenario ends at the same time. 2/3's of Israel is destined for destruction. The reminant will be entirely a believing nation since at that time they will now believe in Jesus as their saviour and that He was the messiah sent at the proper time.

Hope that helps.

Wolf

(edited for clarification 28 Mar 07)
Last edited by shieldwolf on Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
shieldwolf
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:58 am
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Postby Passion on Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:15 pm

tuco22 wrote:I'm a member of the Evangelical Free Church, and recently they changed their doctrinal statement from that of premillenial, pretrib to amillenial post trib. In a recent newsletter, my pastor blasted the premillenial pretrib belief, citing the Left Behind series, and said that national Israel is not destined to take physical possession of the promised land, citing a verse in Hebrews discussing how gentiles were now a part of "spiritual Israel" in that through Christ they have become the children of God. In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel. It sounded to me like replacement theology, without coming right out and saying so. I don't believe the passage he was using means what he says it means. Not to mention that he makes God out to be a liar to Abraham.



:shock: :faint: I belong to an EFCA church, too, and I had no idea! But perhaps if our pastor would stop relating everything in the Bible to addictions/pop-psychology and preach on God's plan for the Church, I'd have had a clue........(and I've stopped reading the EFCA magazines in the lobby, which might have had that info, 'cause I've pretty much quit going there, anyway). This blows me away.

Oh well. I've been searching for another church, anyway.
"But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me. Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy. Though I fall I will rise; Though I dwell in darkness, the Lord is a light for me."

--Mica 7:7-8


Image
User avatar
Passion
 
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 1:02 pm

Postby ChurchGirl on Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:46 pm

tuco22 wrote:I'm a member of the Evangelical Free Church, and recently they changed their doctrinal statement from that of premillenial, pretrib to amillenial post trib. In a recent newsletter, my pastor blasted the premillenial pretrib belief, citing the Left Behind series, and said that national Israel is not destined to take physical possession of the promised land, citing a verse in Hebrews discussing how gentiles were now a part of "spiritual Israel" in that through Christ they have become the children of God. In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel. It sounded to me like replacement theology, without coming right out and saying so. I don't believe the passage he was using means what he says it means. Not to mention that he makes God out to be a liar to Abraham.


There is an EV Free around the corner from us. Can you please restate their doctrine. I'm confused.
Image
Come Pray with Us @
Unequally Yoked Spouses Club
http://fulfilledprophecy.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=23327
Praise the Lord, my husband accepted Jesus on November 18, 2006! Happy Anniversary!!
User avatar
ChurchGirl
 
Posts: 2482
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:01 am
Location: Eagle River, AK

Postby Abiding in His Word on Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:57 pm

geauxsaints wrote:So the consensus here is that Israel will be saved regardless whether they accept Christ or not? I remember listening to John Hagee saying something about Israel not needing Jesus and found it quite disturbing.

Somebody throw some knowledge at me


I think Jesus was pretty clear about salvation: He wouldn't contradict the Father.

John 14:6 Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.


Why else would Jesus have sent Paul to the gentiles and Peter to the Jews as witnesses of His death and resurrection and that salvation was through Him alone.
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 29258
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Postby Passion on Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:00 pm

ChurchGirl wrote:
tuco22 wrote:I'm a member of the Evangelical Free Church, and recently they changed their doctrinal statement from that of premillenial, pretrib to amillenial post trib. In a recent newsletter, my pastor blasted the premillenial pretrib belief, citing the Left Behind series, and said that national Israel is not destined to take physical possession of the promised land, citing a verse in Hebrews discussing how gentiles were now a part of "spiritual Israel" in that through Christ they have become the children of God. In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel. It sounded to me like replacement theology, without coming right out and saying so. I don't believe the passage he was using means what he says it means. Not to mention that he makes God out to be a liar to Abraham.


There is an EV Free around the corner from us. Can you please restate their doctrine. I'm confused.




I went to the EFCA website and saw that there is indeed a revision to their Statement of Faith. According to the website info, it is in it's third draft, and hasn't yet been approved by the Board. They claim that by changing the wording in this particular paragraph they do not intend to exclude the view that Jesus' Return will be in two stages, i.e. the Rapture, and then His bodily return to earth. On the other hand, they don't say what they do intend.

I'm not sure what to make of what I read in this statement, as it's a little vague; and what I'm wondering is; is it purposely so? If they left it vague on purpose, then what tuoco22's pastor said just might reflect what they really wanted to say in the SOF, but didn't dare. If so, shame on them! On the other hand, the vagueness may not be deliberate--and the fact that part of footnote #73 and all of #74 (which explain the new wording re. the return of Jesus) is missing may be an oversight, as well. I would hope so.....and this only a draft, not yet approved.....

But the best thing to do is see for yourself. Here's the link:
http://www.efca.org/about/media/sof_thi ... vision.pdf

The part that deals with what we're discussing is #9; then you can scroll down for the footnotes for this paragraph, which are supposed to be #68-74, but as I said, some is missing. If I ever go again to the EFCA church I've been attending for two years (and I don't want to--but my husband isn't yet ready to leave, so I may--sigh!), and if I can corral the pastor long enough (like trying to corral a flea on a hot griddle), I'll ask him point-blank.

Hope this helps.
"But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me. Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy. Though I fall I will rise; Though I dwell in darkness, the Lord is a light for me."

--Mica 7:7-8


Image
User avatar
Passion
 
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 1:02 pm

Postby InHim on Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:49 pm

Modern-day prophets must be obeyed and not judged for their inaccuracy


Does not sound like the new ones are as reliable as the old ones. Wonder why they prefer the new ones? :roll:
Last edited by InHim on Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
InHim
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:14 am

Postby Passion on Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:12 pm

Something to do with the words "....and wanting to have their ears tickled....." comes to mind.
"But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me. Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy. Though I fall I will rise; Though I dwell in darkness, the Lord is a light for me."

--Mica 7:7-8


Image
User avatar
Passion
 
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 1:02 pm

Postby mouserpg on Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:59 am

I don't believe we replaced Israel. I believe we, as Christians, are grafted into the same promises as Israel, however.
mouserpg
 
Posts: 1840
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:31 am

Postby DALLAS on Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:52 pm

Xxx
Last edited by DALLAS on Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
DALLAS
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:47 am

Postby Abiding in His Word on Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:56 pm

I can't speak to your request, Dallas, but I do want to welcome you to the FP board. Happy to have you with us.

:wavewelcome:
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 29258
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Postby DALLAS on Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:50 pm

Xxx
Last edited by DALLAS on Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
DALLAS
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:47 am

Postby OBXBob on Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:19 pm

:wavewelcome: DALLAS!

YBIC,


Bob
Image
User avatar
OBXBob
 
Posts: 15257
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:37 am

Postby hiswayonly on Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:31 pm

hiswayonly
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:31 pm

Postby hiswayonly on Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:34 pm

Bob what does YBIC mean please?
hiswayonly
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:31 pm

Postby Salty Skipper on Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:28 pm

Hi! I'm not Bob, but YBIC is short for "Your Brother in Christ." :grin: Welcome to the board, by the way, hiswayonly!!!

:wavewelcome:

:welcome: to Dallas, too!
Image
User avatar
Salty Skipper
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 18958
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:56 pm

Postby Passion on Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:17 am

:wavewelcome: Dallas and Hiswayonly!
"But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me. Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy. Though I fall I will rise; Though I dwell in darkness, the Lord is a light for me."

--Mica 7:7-8


Image
User avatar
Passion
 
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 1:02 pm

Postby Abiding in His Word on Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:58 pm

DALLAS wrote:I would like to see something to support the claims against James Robison. He is a member of my church, and though he does seem to boast about being close to the President, I know my pastor would set him straighter than straight on these issues.


I haven't read the entire article, but you may want to read this:

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exp ... eneral.htm
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 29258
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Postby DALLAS on Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:56 am

Xxx
Last edited by DALLAS on Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
DALLAS
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:47 am

Postby DALLAS on Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:48 am

Xxx
Last edited by DALLAS on Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
DALLAS
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:47 am

Postby Abiding in His Word on Wed Apr 04, 2007 1:47 pm

Dallas, I'm so happy you've joined us on the board. You are welcome to post as long-winded as you like. That hopefully means you feel comfortable and I have enjoyed reading your post.

I'm also happy you've found a church that you're happy with and that the Word is being taught there. You'll find as you continue fellowshipping and reading around the board that many have not been as fortunate as you in this regard. But they are still praying and searching and hopefully God will lead them to a good assembly.

I'm going to check out your church with the link you provided.

Thanks for sharing!
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 29258
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Postby DALLAS on Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:07 pm

Xxx
Last edited by DALLAS on Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
DALLAS
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:47 am

Postby Swayde on Fri Apr 06, 2007 12:03 pm

vintagetone wrote:
This whole "dominion" theology is absurd and yet, people - including some leaders - seem to be gobbling it up.


The premise assumes great power and importance to the leadership of the worldly churches, as it is not God at work, but them. Hard for the unregenerate ego to resist. Saint Bono, anyone? The devils greatest weapon is not sin, but pride.

If there is a percieved need for secular motivation and organization to perform charitable works in this age, it is more to the point that the church does not need to become something new, rather it needs to return to what it was. In the past the Christian life was a sacrifice in this one for the rewards and promises of the next one, and not loving their lives, even unto death, and being united with their masters heart, Christians crossed seas, built schools and hospitals, and transformed entire cultures bringing a message with power that brought true change to each individual from the inside out.

But now most Sunday sermons are little different in emphasis and motivation than Oprah's "The Secret", just with a few scriptures wrapped around it.

In other words, the church replaces national Israel as the recipient of God's promises to national Israel.


Romans 11:4 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And so all Israel will be saved

I'd say that if we are not already there, we are real close to the time when the gentiles are full of it.

So how are we replacing them? To accept the idea that the church replaces Israel might make one or two passages of scripture read in favor of a humanistic gentile centric interpretation of the Bible, but it orphans and makes nonsensical too many other Biblical passages that have for the past, up until the 1800s anyway, enjoyed a far more cohesive consensus as to their interpretation (if you will allow me not to count the allegorical branch of interpretation).


Approximately 51% of Christians in the U.S. belong to denominations who prescribe to Replacement Theology. I'd read that 89% of Christians in the U.S. believe in pre-trib. Thus, apparently there are those who are pre-trib that also believe in Replacement Theology.


If that is true we have people out there who apparently do not think it important that all the ideas they carry about in their heads agree. I don't find that surprising considering the amount of television people expose themselves to on a weekly bases. You could write pages concerning that one aspect of the current modern mind set.


You pretty much summed up the discussion I just had with my husband not 2 hours ago...
~Barbara
User avatar
Swayde
 
Posts: 2920
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:53 am
Location: Florida

Postby InHim on Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:00 pm

It would seem these points would inevitably come up. It does not seem like a tremendous excercise of logic to work this out.

I recently was listening to a sermon from SermonAudio.com about Bible prophecy, and something was off, the speaker kept making statements that were throwing me. I finally realized he really believed everything in prophecy had been fullfilled in 70 AD.

Aside from your being truly Born Again of His Spirit, and having the witness in your heart that the scriptures are true, what I don't get, just from a human standpoint of simple reason or logic about these people teaching everything was fullfilled in 70 AD is the following:

When the times of the Gentiles are fullfilled, then the tribulation period starts, a time of trouble greater than any that has ever been.

70 AD was bad, but we have since seen worse unless these guys are also into denying the Holocaust. And how was that the fullfillment or end of the times of the Gentiles?

My second question is this, and its just a logic problem: What are you going to do with John's Revelation, which everyone seems to date around 90 AD, if everything was fullfilled in 70 AD? Did Jesus come back then with the sound of the last Trumpet, raise the dead, rapture the saints, and judge those whose names were not written in the book of Life? Did Isreal look on Him whom they pierced and morn for Him as an only Son?

I just don't get it. Something seems really off, to the point where I don't see how it is possible for them to maintain anything of value in the Christian faith?

These people sound like they are intellegent, so I must be missing something in their aurgument.

If anyone can clear this up for me, at least so I can understand how someone can maintain such a position, I'd appretiate it.
InHim
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:14 am

Postby tuco22 on Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:08 pm

The main change was this:

Original statement: We believe in the personal and and premillenial and imminent coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and that this Blessed Hope has a vital bearing on the personal life and service of the believer.

Revised statement: We believe in the personal and glorious coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with His holy angels, when He will establish His kingdom fully and exercise His role as Judge of all. This coming of Christ at a time known only to God requires constant expectancy and should motivate the believer to godly living, sacrificial service, and energetic mission. This is our blessed hope.

The 2 words changed were premillenial and imminent, ostensibly because the EFCA membership is no longer made up of believers who are predominantly pretrib.
tuco22
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:01 am

Postby InHim on Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:22 pm

premillenial and imminent


Thats quite a differnece it seems to me.
InHim
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:14 am


Return to Apostasy Watch

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest