Pastor Qualifications.

Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning,

http://i32.tinypic.com/30a6dd1.jpg



Ex 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD:

http://i18.tinypic.com/66c6f51.jpg


When Jesus was here he said if his kingdom was of this world him/servants would fight, so he established the "SPIRITUAL KINGDOM" that is within you.

But notice what occurs when Jesus does return.

Zec 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives,

What was the reason Jesus said they would fight,

Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight,

Zec 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Zec 8:3 Thus saith the LORD; I am returned unto Zion, and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and Jerusalem shall be called a city of truth; and the mountain of the LORD of hosts the holy mountain.

4 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; There shall yet old men and old women dwell in the streets of Jerusalem, and every man with his staff in his hand for very age.

5 And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets thereof.


Mountain is a symbol representing "kingdom",
mountain of the LORD (Kingdom of the Lord)


There won't be any "OLD AGE" people on the "NEW EARTH".


The Bible.
http://i27.tinypic.com/zjxrox.jpg

 

How many hours in one day before Gen 1:6?

Gen 1:7-8a, " God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. God called the expanse heaven."

According to your theology isthe location of heaven, the expanse? If so where is hell located?

 

I see in this response the same arrogance I see in most dispensationalists. Anyone who does not agree with the dispensational error just doesn't believe the Bible.

No you don't believe it.

Then present and explain them.

You accuse me of rude remarks and then post the above. Of course you mean no disrespect but write "but I am not even sure you know what the questions are. It’s like you are cutting and pasting from someone you trust, but you don’t really understand what is being said."

I have had a couple other dispensationalists on this Forum accuse me of plagiarizm. I do cut and paste, when appropriate, from someone I trust, God! and I do understand what is being said in those things I post. I also am careful to give credit.

Dispensational doctrine is that Jesus Christ offered an earthly Messianic kingdom to the Jews, they rejected Him and He established the Church as a fall back position. I had a thread on this forum last fall where I asked someone anyone to show a single passage of Scripture where Jesus Christ made such an offer and the Jews rejected it. No one did!

I went back through this thread. I had made 23 posts, you had made 26. I had one post presenting the text of Scripture [my post #84] in response to a post, you had none. I had intended to present all those posts but could not since they constitute about half the responses. I believe that anyone reading these posts in an unbiased manner they will see that "snide" remarks are not restricted to me. My posts are numbers 24, 54, 55, 58, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 74, 79, 80, 81, 84, 92, 93, 98, 101, 109, 111, 113, 116, 117. Your posts are numbers 29, 37, 39, 42, 44, 46, 49, 51, 56, 59, 71, 75, 76, 83, 86, 89, 91, 96, 97, 99, 100, 108, 114, 118, 119, 120.

I have dealt with John 5:28, 29 on this Forum. The Greek word translated hour can mean a period of time. It can also mean a brief period of time as indicated by the admonition of Jesus Christ to the Apostles in the garden and at the crucifixion. There is absolutely no way it can mean 1007+ years

The clearest and most significant passage in all of Scripture regarding the general resurrection is a teaching by the Lord Jesus Christ, as recorded by the Apostle John:

John 5:28,29, KJV
28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Tthis passage is very straightforward with nothing to indicate that it is to be interpreted any way other than literally. The word translated ‘hour’ is from the Greek word "hora" and occurs 108 times in the New Testament. It is translated hour 89 times. The meaning of the word [from Thayer's Greek Lexicon] is as follows:

1. a certain definite time or season fixed by natural law and returning with the revolving year
1a. of the seasons of the year, spring, summer, autumn, winter
2. the daytime [bounded by the rising and setting of the sun], a day
3. a twelfth part of the day-time, an hour, [the twelve hours of the day are reckoned from the rising to the setting of the sun]
4. any definite time, point of time, moment

Two passages in the New Testament where the usage of the word ‘hora’ obviously refers to a brief period of time or a specific time are as follows:

Matthew 26:40, KJV
40. And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?

Matthew 27:45, KJV
45. Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

See also John 1:39, John 4:6, John 4:52, John 12:23, John 12:27 and others.

The teaching of John 5:28, 29 is that in the same hour, this brief, specific period of time, all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, And shall come forth. What else can this mean but a general resurrection, a resurrection that will include everyone, saved and lost, at the return of Jesus Christ and the end of the age. I am not alone in this belief. The vast majority of Baptist Confessions throughout Baptist history also contend for a general resurrection and judgment.

Your gracious demeanor really shines through here. I suppose you have become adept at that in your chosen profession. But there will be no next time.

 

How so? Telling you what I believe and what I believe it is somehow arrogant? So what is it when you tell me what you believe? Is that not arrogant as well? Why is espousing and defending one’s beliefs arrogant?

I haven’t said that. I think you have some issues. But as I have said, it about hermeneutics, what we believe about how words are used. At times, I have for a point of emphasis called it a matter of belief, and at those times I have probably overstated my case particularly given the rancor that you received it with. I think in another conversation with another person that probably would have been received without difficulty, but as I said before, I could have and should have put it a different way.

Just above you said it was arrogant for dispensationalists to say anyone who doesn’t agree with them doesn’t believe the Bible. But here, you say that because I don’t agree with you I don’t believe the Bible. Why can you do it?
As I said above and many times, this is not an issue of who believes the Bible, but an issue of hermeneutics … what we believe about how the words of the Bible should be handled.

I did. I devoted long posts in previous threads to Rev 20 which clearly talks about more than one resurrection, to 1 Cor 15 which clearly talks about more than one resurrection. So I have done this already, and cited sources that handle it in more depth than is possible in this forum. So you can search for them. In addition, there are much better documented and much better written books and articles that defend better than I can here.

Again, feel free to disagree, but to say that I haven’t dealt with the issues you have raised is just dishonest.

I don’t mean any disrespect. You don’t seem to understand a couple of things. First, we can disagree without it being personal. You go after me personally, and I don’t appreciate that. It doesn’t help, and it makes no sense. I am not your enemy. Second, you don’t seem to get that you might not be as fully aware of issues as you think you are. I know that there are many things, as I study, that I learn that I didn’t even know were questions. I learn more about what the issues actually are. I seriously don’t get the sense from here that you fully grasp what the issues that dispensationalists have are. You might, but it just doesn’t seem like it. Third, we can disagree about eschatology while both loving the gospel and believing firmly in the word, and looking for the return of Christ. No one here is denying the gospel of Christ.

I don’t think I have ever done that.

You raise this a few posts ago and I pointed out that we did answer the question. You just didn’t like the answer. It’s okay that you don’t like it. I am not bothered by that. But don’t say we didn’t give an answer because we did.

I think I have dealt with quite a bit of Scripture, either directly or indirectly, in response. But the point I am making is that I think I am honestly trying to defend what I believe with interaction. You are simply saying, “That’s not true” and not making any counterarguments to say why it isn’t true.

I interacted with this in depth elsewhere, as have others. No one is suggesting that we interpret it as anything other than literal. It is what the literal meaning is that is at stake. But again, does this issue rise to the level of vitriol you seem to have about it. I don’t think so. I have no fear that my exegetical case can stand up. It has for a very long time. You were wrong to accuse me of not believing the Bible because I differ with you about what it says. There are a number of explanations that adequately handle the text that disagree with you.

It can mean that there is a time of judgment coming when everyone will be raised and judged, and that time of judgment must be understood in light of the rest of Scripture which further explains the resurrection. You are placing too much weight on a verse that was not intended to be a comprehensive doctrine of the resurrection. You are, in effect, creating contradictions in the teaching of Jesus because other passages of Scripture clearly show more than a single-point-in-time resurrection.

If I have been anything less than gracious to you, I apologize. I think, with good conscience, that my comments have been directed at ideas, not at people. I think they have been as gracious as words on a computer screen can be. They certainly come from a heart that desires to show you grace even though we differ. You are very frustrating to be sure, as I probably am to you. But I responding to the ideas that you have put forth.

Not sure what that means. My chosen profession is to be a pastor. Do you really want to attack me for that?

No next time of me being a pastor?

 

I have many dispensationalist friends and do not find any of them to be arrogant. We do agree more than we disagree. As dispensationalism has changed we do agree more. I would stand with them any day if someone came against them. They are godly men.

I have found Pastor Larry to be direct but I am not sure arrogant is the right word to describe him.

Many years ago when I studied under one the best craftsmen in the world I learned a very good lesson. He has several of his pieces of work in the Smithsonian Institute and yet he has been called arrogant by some whose work is poor by comparison. I do not know of one person who studied under him would have called him arrogant but rather humble.

Imagine what the money changers said when Jesus turned over their tables.

Suppose you truly believe he is arrogant would it be godly to take the higher road and treat him with grace. Sometimes we learn more about that when others exhibit it with us.

 

You think dispensationalists are unbelievers and false teachers leading people to eternal hell?

 

Would you say the same thing about many Baptist churches? Most of them are the results of splits. Your assertion is much like sayinbg the SBC is rotten because of its division over the issue slavery.

I do not agree with much of dispensationalism but to attribute a modern day belief as directly connected to a particular history is not always wise. In fact dispensationalsim has changed a lot over the past 40 years. You have to take a lok at what people beieve today. Many of the early Baptists did not baptize by immersion at first. Many people among quite a number of denominations are not even Christians but certainly their beginning leaders were. Would you associate the beliefs and actions of the founders to the people today who are not believrs. I would hope not.

 

His view is something different than you are assuming. It is more line with his earlier post:

IOW - It was concocted by the Roman Catholic Church and instituted through the infiltrating Jesuit order that has been undermining the church for the last 1000 or so years.

 

Also he seems not to grasp that Covenant theology was not what was taught for 1800 years in the CHurch history. Premil was taught and the primary doctrine of the Church for the first 350+ years of Church history (which is the foundation of Dispensationism) and for 'nearly' 300 years it uncontested On top of that we have record that this teaching was considered as the orthodox doctrine of the CHurch as recorded by Justin Martyr own hand. The Covenant view did not become a mainline church view until Augustine brought it in at around 450'ish ad (give or take a few years).

 

My point is that the dispensationalism of today is very different than 50 years ago. It has undergone many evolutionary changes. Just because something has a history does not mean it is the same today.

 

This is a hateful, unsubstantiated, anti-Semitic post. I hope that you are able to back it up. I want you to prove, to demonstrate, to give actual sources for what you have said. Otherwise you have slandered a man and his ministry, and you need to retract what you have said.

Demonstrate that "Most of the ones...funding John Hagee are not believers."
Demonstrate that "Most of the ones..funding John Hagee...actually hate Christians and Christ."

Who are they then? Muslims?
What are your sources for such statements? I hope they are reliable. Don't just post your lame opinion. Give actual source material where you can demonstrate that unbelievers are funding John Hagee and that these ones hate Christians, and hate Christ.

If you can't do that then retract your post, apologize, and maybe refrain from posting. Be responsible in what you say.

 

Agreed!

What he said!!

(FTR, I am no fan of John Hagee, but that changes nothing.)

Ed

 

So you don't think dispensationalists are unbelievers but you think they will go to hell because they take the mark of the beast while waiting for the pretrib rapture. So how does someone who is a believer go to hell? That doesn't make sense.

 

The truth doesn't offend me; slander and lies do. That is what you have posted. I am not going to read all the links you have posted about your conspiracy theories, and the illogical fallacies that you have posted trying to reason that Jesus, John and Paul were anti-Semitic as well. You have much to learn. Have you ever looked up the word blasphemy? It's literal meaning is

To call Christ anti-Semitic, then is blasphemous.

Now I put the responsibility on you, and I hold you to it. Don't give me links, conspiracy theories, excuses, ideas, opinions, etc. I want the facts. I want concrete quotes, and then the links from where the quotes are taken from. Let's try again:

Demonstrate (using quotes) that those supporting John Hagees ministry are unsaved. Give your sources. Quote evidence. I don't want links to a conspiracy theory of any kind, or another's opinion. I want facts.

Demonstrate (using quotes) that those supporting John Hagees ministry hate Christians and hate Christ. I want sources that have such quotes in them. Prove your charges. Demonstrate these accusations or withdrawn them. If you can't do this and continue to spew out such garbage eventually you will find your posts before the administration and yourself under consideration of being suspended/banned.

Slander is not tolerated. False accusations are not tolerated.
The rules are at the bottom of every page. You agreed to abide by them when you registered.

[SIZE=-1]

 

Where has Tim LeHay ever suggested that Christians will willingly take the mark? I doubt you can back that accusation up. But, if so, please show us.