Featured The Calvinist hated the Ana-Baptists

Have you read this verse?

Write the things which thou hast seen,
and the things which are,
and the things hereafter.
Revelation 1:18

This is one scripture you can use to twist in to your theory.

The churches are the things which are, that is the present day at the time of the writing.

 

No, just you and those that hold to this theory without proof.

You do not even provide a single scripture verse that says, "the churches are seven historical ages."

 

An important side note. Ana-Baptist as an acused group dates to the 4th century.
http://www.evans.landmarkbiblebaptist.net/03-Baptist/Hosius Quote In Baptist Books Complete 2.pdf

 

"If this interpretation is not correct why all the ado?"

You said this?

That is like saying, "who cares if it is true or not, I don't, I just believe it and will spread it like butter."

Nothing again from the bible to say seven churches of Revelation 2-3 are seven historical periods.

Are you making up your "proofs"?

You should weep for twisting the bible to make "truth".

Ye therefore,
beloved, seeing ye know these things before,
beware lest ye also,
being led away with the error of the wicked,
fall from your own stedfastness.
2 Peter 3:17

 

You, personally may be attending a church similar to what Jesus said to the church at Laodicea. I don't know your church. I am quite sure that not all churches would be addressed by Jesus with the same words he gave to the Laodicean church. His word to my church would be different than any he said to the seven churches in Revelation. Although, I would likely observe a little bit of all the seven churches in my church if I knew everything that was going on. Churches are full of sinners who are justified by faith in Christ Jesus.
The bottom line is there is no church age historical lineup with the 7 churches of Revelation.

 

Do you recognize your own judgmental and accusatory spirit in your post? It is a "thus sayeth rockytopva" not a thus sayeth the Lord God.

 

Notice how he locked Calvin into a dead church and Arminus into one of the two churches that He had nothing negative to say about. So much for him being unbiased.

 

rocky, in Galatians 5, Paul is showing what sin brings as opposed to what the Spirit brings. It is a complementary passage to Paul's argument, worked out in Romans 3 - 8.

Indeed, this topic is not about the gospel, it is about your prejudice regarding a man who died nearly 500 years ago.

 

Rocky,

I hurt you.

Please accept my apology.

SGO

 

If you torture data (Book of Revelation) long enough, it will confess to anything.

 

In reading history we can see that all humanity, including redeemed Christians, fall short of the glory of God. Given an opportunity to have control, humans will exercise that control over those with whom they disagree. As I showed you, very radical Anabaptists attempted to gain control (the wicked prophets of Zwickau are one group), but they were defeated. Since all Anabaptists were lumped into one group, those pacifist groups, like those who followed Menno Simons, were caused to flee and wander.

Indeed, separation of church and state has been a blessing regarding freedom of religion. It has also allowed for thousands of intra-biblical cults to arise and lead millions to hell as they claim a false Christ.

Yes, you can present your case. Here at the BB your case may be thoroughly rejected and hated, but you will be prayed for. You are not Anabaptist unless you have a direct line to Menno Simons and his followers. Are you an historic Mennonite, Hutterite, or Amish?

You have presented your case. I see no legitimacy in your case. Instead, I see a prejudice that you were taught, which you will not examine and consider so as to change your mind.

May God grant you the capacity to review your own teaching and change when you see where you are wrong. I started out in a place similar to you. The 7 church age theory was what my church taught me. Free will theology/Arminian theology was my upbringing. I read my Bible and reread my Bible and found that my church had it wrong. I also found that there were others who understood the Bible as I did and that there was a long, long history of similar theology. I cannot go back to the old way, which seems like the law, apart from grace, to me. I cannot elevate my position in regard to salvation and claim a synergistic means of salvation. I must state that my redemption happened despite myself. It was all of God. I did not help God save me.

So, you get no pity party to claim victimhood. Rise up, read your Bible and change your views as God reveals where you are wrong.

 

It is as if the story of Gorge Washington relinquishing power never happened!! To claim it is only human to use compulsion to dominate others is to say Jesus was wrong as people cannot treat others as they want to be treated. Hogwash in defense of hogwash...

 

When are you going to stop with the ridiculous lie that DL Moody was somehow the first person to make money off of ministry?

 

You think Moody was Laodicean in spirit?
Wow.
Would God I were half as Laodicean as he was.

 

'The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.'
Ever since the time of KIng Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3:1-7), and probably before, rulers have felt that it is necessary for all their subjects to have the same religion for the sake of peace and order. When King Charles 1 appointed the Arminian William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633, he persecuted the Calvinists viciously. Today you may think not only of the Moslem countries but India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and maybe Russia.
The Anabaptists were the first people to propose the separation of Church and State, and for that they deserve our respect, even if their theology was generally pretty ropey.

The first people to combine sound theology with freedom of worship were the Independents and Baptists.