WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
THE GREAT TRIBULATION - PASTOR STEPHEN BOHR
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Who is the Antichrist?
By Anugrah Kumar,Pastor Greg Laurie of Harvest Church in Riverside, Calif., addressed the question Christians often ask, "Who is the antichrist?" The answer he offered, however, was not what we often get to hear.
Whenever something is popular, successful and effective, there will be imitations, Laurie, the lead pastor at Harvest Church, told the audience as he began the Sunday morning's message, part of a series called, "Revelation: The Next Dimension."
Satan is "the ultimate imitator," he said. "He has this cheap imitation of all things that are true." For instance, the pastor said, we have real Christians, and Satan has people who pretend to be believers but they are not. Similarly, we have real miracles, and "Satan has fake imitations of miracles."
Explaining about the antichrist, Laurie said, "God has His Son; His name is Jesus. And one day, Satan will have his son, not exactly in the way God's Son has come, because Jesus is God incarnate. But in a way, Satan will have his version … his imitation of Jesus… We have Jesus Christ, and Satan will have antichrist."
The pastor described the antichrist as "history's vilest embodiment of sin and rebellion." This coming world leader, however, will not be what we expect – he won't be dressed in black from top to bottom or bear a visible mark of 666, he said. On the contrary, the antichrist will be suave, intelligent, engaging, magnetic and charismatic.
"He [the antichrist] will do what no other man has been able to do. There will be global peace. He will solve the Middle East peace puzzle. He will rid the world of terrorism… He will be hailed as the greatest peace-maker… But behind that will be a satanic superman… the most evil man who has ever walked on the earth."
Laurie quoted historian Arnold Toynbee as saying a few years ago: "By forcing on mankind more and more lethal weapons and at the same time making the world more and more interdependent economically, technology has brought mankind to such a degree of disaster that we are ripe for the deifying of any new Caesar who might succeed in giving the world unity and peace." Toynbee's statement, the pastor said, "fits the biblical scenario."
The coming of the antichrist is getting closer every day, Laurie said, reading from Revelation 13:1-9. Hitler, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, all were "forerunners of who is to come, who will harness the economic and technological power of this world and bring about a one-world economy, a one-world government and a one-world religion."
Laurie said the antichrist will be a "fake Jesus," and many will believe in him. The antichrist is coming to deify Satan, the pastor said, quoting from Revelation 13: 4, "Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, 'Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?'" This is what Satan always wanted, to be deified, to be worshiped, Laurie said. And this is why Lucifer was thrown out of heaven.
The antichrist is also coming to take the place of Jesus, Laurie said, as he quoted Revelation 13:5, 6, "The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven."
The antichrist is coming to kill Christians, Laurie went on to say, and quoted verse 7, which says, "He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation."
We can already see anti-Christian mentality becoming more common in the world, including in the United States that was founded on Judeo-Christian values, the pastor remarked.
Laurie said the antichrist is coming also to dominate the globe. He will come as a man of peace; he will bring about temporary peace. "He will be so successful that many will think he is the messiah." He will deceive many.
The antichrist is not alone, Pastor Laurie added. He has with him the false prophet, referred to as the "second beast" in Revelation 13:13, 14: "And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people. 14 Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived."
This makes an unholy trinity, Laurie said, explaining that Satan is in God's place, the antichrist in Jesus' place, and the false prophet in place of the Holy Spirit.
While we resist only the things that appear to be evil on the surface, the devil can come as an angel of light, the pastor reminded the audience. He will come with religious deceptions. A sign of the end times is when people turn away from their Christian faith, and there are attempts to take people away from the Bible as the authoritative source of truth and the uniqueness of Christ, he added.
But who will the antichrist be? While this was the title of the message, "I have no idea who the antichrist will be, and nor does anyone else," Laurie told the congregation, advising them not to waste their time in speculating.
"The antichrist cannot even emerge until we are caught up to meet the Lord in the air," the pastor said. "We won't be around to find out who he is. Our job is not to be looking for antichrist; our job is to be looking for Jesus Christ."
A more important question, Laurie suggested, is to ask oneself, "Am I an antichrist?" – not "the" antichrist.
Quoting from 1 John 2:22, "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son," Laurie said there's a choice between believing in Jesus or in Satan. He reminded the audience that Jesus said, "You are either for Me or against Me."
Those who are with Jesus, Laurie added, have their names written in "the book on life," quoting Revelation 13:8, "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain." Laurie concluded by saying, "I can't think of anything more important than that."
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Monday, May 11, 2015
What Is Heresy?
By David J. Stewart
“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” —Ephesians 4:14
When you study the Scriptures you have a text and you have a context. You cannot take and make a text out of the context and separate the two. You have to keep them together if you want the correct interpretation. Many well-meaning false prophets have absolutely manipulated the Scriptures, wrestling the Bible and leading people into Hell.
We've all heard the saying: "Everyone has an opinion..." Interestingly, the word "heresy" in the Bible comes from the Greek word hairesis. Here is what VINE'S COMPLETE EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT WORDS (Page 303) states concerning the word "hairesis" ...
..."a choosing, choice"; (from haireomai, "to choose") then, "that which is chosen," and hence, "an opinion," especially a self-willed opinion, which is substituted for submission to the power of truth, and leads to division and the formation of sects...
SOURCE: VINE'S COMPLETE EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT WORDS; ISBN 0-7852-1160-8
The word "heresy" in the Bible simply means, "an opinion." Many of the doctrines circulating in today's churches are merely opinions, not based upon the Word of God. In John 5:39 Jesus commanded His disciples to... SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES!!! It is dangerous to form one's opinions apart from the Bible. People who express teachings not taught in the Scriptures are guilty of spreading heresy. There are sincere people in every church, who attempt to help others by offering unsought advice. Unfortunately, much of this advice is heresy, even damnable heresy.
Common Heresies (False Doctrines) Taught in Churches Today:
Infant Baptism
Baptismal Regeneration
Holy Sacraments
Speaking in Tongues
Baptism by Sprinkling
Holy Laughter
Miracle Anointing
Zionism
Prosperity Gospel
Faith Healing
Confessional Booth
Divorce for Adultery
Christian Rock Music Lordship Salvation
Perseverance of the Saints
Limited Atonement
Celibacy
Abstaining from Meats
Sabbath Keeping
Recognition of the Virgin Mary
Assumption of Mary
Perpetual Virginity of Mary
Immaculate Conception of Mary
Praying the Rosary
Ecumenicalism
Unity with Unbelievers Healing Services
Storehouse Tithing
Holy Miracle Water
Financial Seeds
Protestantism
Calvinism
Arminianism
Lifestyle Evangelism
Rapture
Transubstantiation
Universal Church
Women Pastors
Social Gospel
These are all manmade doctrines, opinions, which are NOT based upon the Scriptures.
There's nothing in the Bible about speaking-in-tongues as done in Charismatic churches today. Biblical speaking-on-tongues ALWAYS involved known, established, earthly languages; not the insane jibber-jabber that goes on in Pentecostal churches today.
Infant baptism began with the heretic Martin Luther, who plainly stated that water baptism could save a person, even without faith...
"Further, we say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does not become invalid...
"SOURCE: Martin Luther's Larger Catechism
Mr. Luther is a liar—a heretic who taught heresy! You can get water baptized all you want; but it means absolutely nothing if you have not faith in Jesus Christ... "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16). Salvation is by faith alone in the Savior (Ephesians 2:8,9); and not by water baptism in any capacity (1st Corinthians 1:17).
Some heresies, such as Zionism, have crept into our churches, causing believers to support unbiblical agendas. Zionism is of the Devil.
Lordship Salvation is one of the biggest lies in the world today. It is tragic that so many ministries, such as Chick Tracts, are promoting this heresy. Dr. John R Rice exposes the heresy of Lordship Salvation.
We ought to follow the teachings of God's Word; and avoid following men such as Arminius, Calvin, and Luther. All these men had flawed OPINIONS concerning the Scriptures. Psalm 118:8 states... "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." "Let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4).
Billions of Catholics are going to burn in Hellfire, because they are trusting the OPINIONS of men (i.e., the priests, the Pope, and the Vatican). In Mark 7:9 Jesus warned... "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." How sad and tragic that so many people today are relying upon their own opinions, or the opinions of others, instead of obeying the inspired Words of God.
I hear a lot of opinions from a lot of people; but I have no opinion apart from the Scriptures. An unsaved public schoolteacher recently asked me... "What is the basis upon which you form your opinions?" I told him without apology... "Everything I believe is based upon my faith that the Bible is God's inspired, infallible, preserved Word." I am as narrow-minded as the Bible. Every believer shouldn't want to hold any opinions in conflict with what the Bible teaches. Let us be diligent to study the Bible. Let us scrutinize every doctrine of men, to make certain that the truth of God's Word is upheld. The best way to expose darkness is to shine the Light of God's Word upon it.
Let us never forget that the word "heresy" in the Bible means "an opinion." Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that we form our opinions from the truths of God's Word; and not from the latest New York Times bestseller.
False prophets who “privily” bring heresies into the Church
Satan is subtle. 2nd Peter 2:1, "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who PRIVILY shall bring in damnable heresies..." The word “privily” here means “taking pains to avoid being observed; to lead aside.” This is the nature of false prophets. They are used by Satan to mislead people, going through pains to avoid being detected.
They are all ecumenical. They all pervert the Gospel message, requiring sinners to stop living in their sins to be saved. But that's not what God says. Lordship Salvation is a backdoor approach to Works Salvation. Instead of requiring people to do good works to be saved as the Catholic Church does, Lordship Salvationists require people to stop living in sin to be saved. The result is the same—self righteousness.
A liberal (also leftist) is someone who rejects logical and Biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons. There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing. Liberalism began as a movement for individual liberties, but today is increasingly statist and, as in Europe, socialistic. Liberalism has changed over the years and degenerated into corruption.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” —Ephesians 4:14
When you study the Scriptures you have a text and you have a context. You cannot take and make a text out of the context and separate the two. You have to keep them together if you want the correct interpretation. Many well-meaning false prophets have absolutely manipulated the Scriptures, wrestling the Bible and leading people into Hell.
We've all heard the saying: "Everyone has an opinion..." Interestingly, the word "heresy" in the Bible comes from the Greek word hairesis. Here is what VINE'S COMPLETE EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT WORDS (Page 303) states concerning the word "hairesis" ...
..."a choosing, choice"; (from haireomai, "to choose") then, "that which is chosen," and hence, "an opinion," especially a self-willed opinion, which is substituted for submission to the power of truth, and leads to division and the formation of sects...
SOURCE: VINE'S COMPLETE EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT WORDS; ISBN 0-7852-1160-8
The word "heresy" in the Bible simply means, "an opinion." Many of the doctrines circulating in today's churches are merely opinions, not based upon the Word of God. In John 5:39 Jesus commanded His disciples to... SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES!!! It is dangerous to form one's opinions apart from the Bible. People who express teachings not taught in the Scriptures are guilty of spreading heresy. There are sincere people in every church, who attempt to help others by offering unsought advice. Unfortunately, much of this advice is heresy, even damnable heresy.
Common Heresies (False Doctrines) Taught in Churches Today:
Infant Baptism
Baptismal Regeneration
Holy Sacraments
Speaking in Tongues
Baptism by Sprinkling
Holy Laughter
Miracle Anointing
Zionism
Prosperity Gospel
Faith Healing
Confessional Booth
Divorce for Adultery
Christian Rock Music Lordship Salvation
Perseverance of the Saints
Limited Atonement
Celibacy
Abstaining from Meats
Sabbath Keeping
Recognition of the Virgin Mary
Assumption of Mary
Perpetual Virginity of Mary
Immaculate Conception of Mary
Praying the Rosary
Ecumenicalism
Unity with Unbelievers Healing Services
Storehouse Tithing
Holy Miracle Water
Financial Seeds
Protestantism
Calvinism
Arminianism
Lifestyle Evangelism
Rapture
Transubstantiation
Universal Church
Women Pastors
Social Gospel
These are all manmade doctrines, opinions, which are NOT based upon the Scriptures.
There's nothing in the Bible about speaking-in-tongues as done in Charismatic churches today. Biblical speaking-on-tongues ALWAYS involved known, established, earthly languages; not the insane jibber-jabber that goes on in Pentecostal churches today.
Infant baptism began with the heretic Martin Luther, who plainly stated that water baptism could save a person, even without faith...
"Further, we say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does not become invalid...
"SOURCE: Martin Luther's Larger Catechism
Mr. Luther is a liar—a heretic who taught heresy! You can get water baptized all you want; but it means absolutely nothing if you have not faith in Jesus Christ... "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16). Salvation is by faith alone in the Savior (Ephesians 2:8,9); and not by water baptism in any capacity (1st Corinthians 1:17).
Some heresies, such as Zionism, have crept into our churches, causing believers to support unbiblical agendas. Zionism is of the Devil.
Lordship Salvation is one of the biggest lies in the world today. It is tragic that so many ministries, such as Chick Tracts, are promoting this heresy. Dr. John R Rice exposes the heresy of Lordship Salvation.
We ought to follow the teachings of God's Word; and avoid following men such as Arminius, Calvin, and Luther. All these men had flawed OPINIONS concerning the Scriptures. Psalm 118:8 states... "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." "Let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4).
Billions of Catholics are going to burn in Hellfire, because they are trusting the OPINIONS of men (i.e., the priests, the Pope, and the Vatican). In Mark 7:9 Jesus warned... "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." How sad and tragic that so many people today are relying upon their own opinions, or the opinions of others, instead of obeying the inspired Words of God.
I hear a lot of opinions from a lot of people; but I have no opinion apart from the Scriptures. An unsaved public schoolteacher recently asked me... "What is the basis upon which you form your opinions?" I told him without apology... "Everything I believe is based upon my faith that the Bible is God's inspired, infallible, preserved Word." I am as narrow-minded as the Bible. Every believer shouldn't want to hold any opinions in conflict with what the Bible teaches. Let us be diligent to study the Bible. Let us scrutinize every doctrine of men, to make certain that the truth of God's Word is upheld. The best way to expose darkness is to shine the Light of God's Word upon it.
Let us never forget that the word "heresy" in the Bible means "an opinion." Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that we form our opinions from the truths of God's Word; and not from the latest New York Times bestseller.
False prophets who “privily” bring heresies into the Church
Satan is subtle. 2nd Peter 2:1, "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who PRIVILY shall bring in damnable heresies..." The word “privily” here means “taking pains to avoid being observed; to lead aside.” This is the nature of false prophets. They are used by Satan to mislead people, going through pains to avoid being detected.
They are all ecumenical. They all pervert the Gospel message, requiring sinners to stop living in their sins to be saved. But that's not what God says. Lordship Salvation is a backdoor approach to Works Salvation. Instead of requiring people to do good works to be saved as the Catholic Church does, Lordship Salvationists require people to stop living in sin to be saved. The result is the same—self righteousness.
A liberal (also leftist) is someone who rejects logical and Biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons. There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing. Liberalism began as a movement for individual liberties, but today is increasingly statist and, as in Europe, socialistic. Liberalism has changed over the years and degenerated into corruption.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
THE SECRET RAPTURE LIE
www.babylonforsaken.com
Many honest Christians believe that Christ is going to come back to this earth in two ways--one being in secret, the other visible. The former will be silent in which Christ comes to secretly rapture or remove His followers from earth before the great time of trouble and tribulation occurs. Then after several years, the visible and literal appearing of Christ will take place in which those who were not ready during the time of the secret rapture will have a second chance to make themselves ready throughout the tribulation, after which Christ will come to save them.
There are many Bible texts regarding the second coming of Christ. But do any of these refer to a silent or secret return, or do they all speak about the same visible glorious event? Let us find out what the unerring Scriptures teach.
The apostle Paul reveals that the coming of Christ to this earth will be as follows:
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”
1 Corinthians 15:51-52 “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.”
Paul declared that when Christ should come, there would be a shout; a voice; a trumpet; the righteous dead would be resurrected, and along with the righteous living, would be caught up from the earth to meet the Lord in the clouds never to part again.
The apostle John reveals that the coming of Jesus to this earth will be as follows:
Revelation 1:7 “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him.”
John declared that when Christ should come, it would be with clouds, and every eye on the earth would miraculously see him, and all the kindreds of the earth who have rejected Him would wail. (The Old Testament prophets also spoke of the Coming of Christ see Psalms 50:3-5, Jeremiah 25:30-33.)
And Christ Himself reveals what His coming to this earth will be like:
Matthew 24:30-31 “...then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”
Christ declared that when He returns the second time, it would be with a sign; all people on the earth would see Him coming in the clouds of heaven and with power and great glory; the great majority of all the people of the earth would not be happy, but would mourn; there would be a great sound of a trumpet; and God would gather His obedient elect to Himself from every part of the world.
All of the above Scriptures are in complete harmony with each other regarding what it will be like when Christ comes back to this earth in the last days. Signs will occur just prior to His arrival. Every eye on the earth, every person of every nation and tribe will see Him return in power and great glory; there will be great noise, a shout, a heavenly voice, and a great loud trumpet will sound; the righteous dead will be resurrected from their graves, and together with the living righteous will be caught up into the air to meet their Lord in the clouds because they chose to sacrifice all to follow and obey God. While those who had rejected Christ's offer of salvation will be destroyed.
WHERE DID THE SECRET RAPTURE ORIGINATE?
It wasn't until the early or mid 1800's that there was any significant group of believers around the world that looked for a "rapture" of the Church prior to a seven-year tribulation period. The "secret rapture" teaching was NOT taught by the early Church, it was NOT taught by the Church of the first centuries, it was NOT taught by the Reformers, IT WAS NOT TAUGHT BY ANYONE (except a couple Roman Catholic theologians) UNTIL ABOUT THE YEAR 1830!
The Roman Catholic Church had to come up with a view of prophecy to counter the Historic view of prophecy that the Reformers had used to identify the Church of Rome as the ‘little horn’ and the Harlot of Revelation 17.
This new scheme of prophetic interpretation became known as FUTURISM.... It was a Jesuit priest named Ribera who, in the days of the Reformation, first taught that all the events in the book of Revelation were to take place literally during the three and a half years reign of the Antichrist away down at the end of the age.
Later, Emmanuel Lacunza, also a Jesuit priest, built on Ribera's teachings, and spent much of his life writing a book titled "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty." Lacunza, however, wrote under the assumed name of "Rabbi Ben Ezra," supposedly a learned Jew who had accepted Christ as his Saviour; he did this so that the unsuspecting Protestants would accept his book; for the Protestant world then wanted nothing from a Jesuit. His book was published in 1812.
Now enter the name of Edward Irving. Born in Scotland in 1792, Irving discovered Lacunza's book and fell in love with it, translated it into English, and it was published in London in 1827. Then Irving began to hold Bible Conferences throughout Scotland, emphasizing the coming of Jesus to rapture His Church.
Later, J.N. Darby then was introduced to the "secret rapture" doctrine by the Irvinites (Followers of Edward Irvin), as well as the famous book by Rabbi Ben-Ezra [Jesuit priest Emmanuel Lacunza]! Darby was himself a prolific writer and from that time a constant stream of propaganda came from his pen. His writings on biblical subjects number over 30 volumes of 600 pages each. Darby developed and organized "futurism" into a system of prophetic teaching called "dispensationalism."
The Secret Rapture teaching was introduced into the United States and Canada between the 1840's and 1870's. A Congregationalist preacher by the name of C. I. Scofield came under the influence of Darby and the Plymouth Brethren. Scofield became a strong promoter of the teaching that had been promulgated by Darby, whom he considered "the most profound Bible student of modern times." He incorporated this teaching into his SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE. Three million copies were published in the first 50 years! Through this Bible Scofield shrewdly carried the teaching of the Secret Rapture into the very heart of Evangelicalism.
There is one final link in the chain of the development and spread of the rapture theory that should be mentioned in passing. Scofield and Darby influenced D. L. Moody, and Moody influenced the early PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT. How? you ask. The Assemblies of God is today by far the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world. In 1914 they ordered their Sunday School and study materials from the Moody Press. So the Assemblies of God believed what the Moody Bible Institute taught, which included the "Secret Rapture".
ONE TAKEN ONE LEFT BEHIND?
But what about those Scriptures which talk of one being taken and the other being left behind (see Matthew 24:37-41); surely this backs up the belief in a secret rapture?
Matthew 24:37-39 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Now in the days of Noah, who was taken and who were left? The wicked were taken and the righteous were left.
He represented this also in Luke 13:35-36, “Two women shall be grinding together, the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left”.
Now some teach that those who are left will remain alive and experience 7 years of tribulation. In truth it is those who are taken that are receiving the "trouble". Those who are 'taken' are those who are not prepared to meet the Lord when he comes, and they are taken in death, just like the wicked were taken in death when the flood came.
The Apostles asked Christ where would those who were taken be?
"And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord?", then Christ answers "Wheresoever the body is thither will the eagles (Vultures) be gathered together" Luke 17:37.
Here Christ is clearly teaching that those who are taken, will be DEAD. Their bodies will be food for the birds.
Revelation chapter 19 depicts in graphic detail the return of Christ, with him calling for the birds of the air to “Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God…That ye may eat the flesh of the kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh OF ALL MEN, both free and bond, both small and great” Revelation 19:17-18.
When the Lord returns who will be removed from the earth, the wicked or the righteous? Matthew 13:41-43 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Also see Matthew 13:49).
Proverbs 10:29-30 ¶ The way of the LORD is strength to the upright: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity. The righteous shall never be removed: but the wicked shall not inhabit the earth.
Proverbs 2:21-22 For the upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain in it. But the wicked shall be cut off from the earth, and the transgressors shall be rooted out of it.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. (Also see Matthew 5:5, Psalms 115:16)
PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE?
But what about the belief that Christ would rapture all of His people off the earth before the time of trouble, tribulation, persecution, and the working of Satan with lying wonders?
The prophet Daniel declared that “there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was...And at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.” Daniel 12:1.
The apostle John declared that God's righteous people who were living when Christ returned to earth would be those “which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Revelation 7:14.
Matthew 24:29-31 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Did Jesus ask his Father to take us out of the world? Christ Himself prayed that His Father would not take His people “out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.” John 17:15.
Will the return of Christ happen before or after the revealing of Anti-Christ?
2 Thessalonians 2:3 "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; "
The Bible teaches us that those who think the Rapture will occur before the man of sin is revealed, are deceived. That day will not happen until the man of sin is come to power, and the great tribulation has come upon the earth.
2 Thessalonians 2:4-6 "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. "
Why would Paul warn the believers in this verse if they were supposed to be raptured up beforehand anyway?
2 Thessalonians 2:8 "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: "
Here we see the wicked one is revealed, and THEN the Lord comes. Notice the coming of Christ destroys the man of sin! Did you notice? It does not mention 7 years, and it doesn't mention anything about it being a "secret" rapture either.
POST-RAPTURE SALVATION?
Those who teach the lie of a pre-tribulation rapture, also teaches that during the 'tribulation period' while the saints are in heaven, there will be many people 'born again', and saved. Now this is truly a contradiction of terms. These teachers tell us that when the Church is removed, the restraining influence of the Holy Spirit is removed. Now if there is no preachers here, no convicting Spirit, how can anyone be saved???
What this false doctrine does is:
#1. It makes the Church unprepared for the time of trouble that it must enter.
#2. It teaches the sinful world that they can reject Christ, until all the Christians disappear, then they can accept his salvation.
But as we have seen, Those who have rejected Christ, will be destroyed when he comes.
Those 'virgins' who come knocking after the door is closed will be shut out! (Mat 25)
Christ taught that his coming is about as secret as a Nuclear bomb!
Luke 17:22 -27 "And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
"Just like in Noah's time?" Did Jesus lie when He said..."So shall it be..."? Don't these verses seem a bit obvious? The ones in the ark were SAVED. The ones that decided to ignore the warnings of Noah of world wide flood were DESTROYED. And they were destroyed UNEXPECTEDLY! For it says they "did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.."
The pre-tribulation preachers are bluntly stating JESUS LIED! Are they not? Is it any wonder some of them choose not to mention this passage "in context" from their pulpits? Common sense, it proves they are lying.
Luke 21:25-28 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Christ purchased us on the cross, he is going to receive his purchased possessions when he returns. He tells us when he comes to receive us it will be visible, and he tells us to LOOK UP! Which is completely contrary to logic, if there is a ‘secret rapture’.
SAVED FROM WRATH?
Some of the pretribulation preachers use the following verse to 'justify' their secret rapture doctrine.
Romans 5:9, "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
First the great tribulation is NOT the wrath of GOD. It is really the WRATH of Satan upon God's Church.
Revelation 12:12-13 ¶ Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
The wrath of GOD is contained in 7 Vials. Which is poured out upon the wicked at the time of Christ's coming.
Revelation 15:7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.
Now some teach that we must be 'raptured up' so that we will not suffer from the wrath of GOD. But that is not the teaching of the Bible.
The Bible teaches that GOD knows those who are his. He has sealed his people with the Holy Spirit of promise, He has purchased them, they are his servants and his name is upon their foreheads. And they are protected from his wrath.
Revelation 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
Just as the Jews were protected from the wrath that was poured out upon Egypt. Not by being 'raptured' off, but by having the blood applied, so do we.
Exodus 12:13 "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite
the land of Egypt."
The Lord protected His own in the Old testament, and He promises to protect us New Testament believers as well! And BOTH sets of believers show their faith by the BLOOD of Christ! The Old Testament believers had the blood of a Lamb upon the doorposts of their houses, we have the Blood of the Lamb upon the heart! Praise the Lord for His truth being so blunt and powerful even in the most graphic examples!
MORE ABOUT THE THIEF IN THE NIGHT SYMBOLISM
This next passage has to do with the "thief in the night" analogy that I spoke of earlier. ALL of the pre-trib preachers use the following passage to confirm and or validate their SECRET rapture theories. They will always do the following, they will read to you...
1 Thessalonians 5:2, "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."
AND THEY STOP!
Some refuse to read further, and rightly so. For if they read further a multitude of problems arise! For example, look a the next verse..
1 Thessalonians 5:3 "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape."
Again the "Thief" in the night symbolism, means UNEXPECTED, not SECRET (Also see 2nd Peter 3:9-10 to see how the analogy of the thief means unexpected not secret.) And notice that this coming brings SUDDEN DESTRUCTION UPON THE WICKED. This again proves the pre-tribulation theory FALSE!
1 Thessalonians 5:4 "But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief."
The "Secret rapture" preachers use the verses above this passage (verse 2) to say Jesus comes as a thief in the night for the Christians. But this verse (verse 4) proves they are bold faced liars. This verse is plain! It says clearly that Jesus does NOT come as a thief in the night to the Christians! And why doesn't the Christian have to worry about Jesus coming as a thief to them?
1 Thessalonians 5:5,6 "Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."
The pre-trib preachers declare Jesus comes as a THIEF in the night, and they define that event as being "in secret." However, the Bible says we as true Christians will NOT have Jesus coming to us as a thief. And the the Bible explains why. It's because we are "looking up" or "looking for" that great day.
NO MAN KNOWS THE DAY!
Think about this as well. If the seven, or three and half year theory were fact, then we would have to remove verse Matthew 24:36 from the Bible along with other references to the fact that. It PLAINLY says... "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." The reason being, if the Christians all of a sudden disappear from the face of the earth on a certain day, all one needs do is calculate three and a half years forward, or seven years forward to get the exact day and hour that Jesus would return! No, we will not know the exact day or hour years in advance! That is an out and out lie!
A PROPHETIC TWIST ON DANIEL 9
This seven year tribulation theory actually originates from a mis-understanding, or deliberate re-writing of the prophecy in the ninth chapter of the book of Daniel. Many take this prophecy out of context to explain a seven year,(Pre-Trib) or three and a half year, (Mid-Trib) time of great tribulation for the Christian believer. However, you will find by studying this prophecy that it does not speak of a time of tribulation at all. In fact, it speaks of a time that all believers both Old and New Testament alike hold very dear to their hearts. It is the prophecy that describes the coming of Jesus as the Messiah in 27AD, his death in 31 AD, and the Gospel going to the Gentiles in 34 AD.
It is sad that ‘pre-tribulation rapture preachers’, take the ‘he’ in Daniel 9:27, and say it is anti-christ, when it refers to Jesus Christ. Who confirmed the covenant of promises to the Jews by both his Preaching and the Apostles (Romans 15:8). Who by his death, caused the significance of animal sacrifices to cease, in fact the veil that separated the inner rooms of the temple was ripped into at his death. By Israel’s constant rejection of the Gospel and their abominations, the Jewish nation has been left desolate.
As we see friends, there is absolutely no reason to detach the last week and stick a 2000 year gap before it, nor is there any reason to apply it to Anti-Christ and the tribulation period.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Many honest Christians believe that Christ is going to come back to this earth in two ways--one being in secret, the other visible. The former will be silent in which Christ comes to secretly rapture or remove His followers from earth before the great time of trouble and tribulation occurs. Then after several years, the visible and literal appearing of Christ will take place in which those who were not ready during the time of the secret rapture will have a second chance to make themselves ready throughout the tribulation, after which Christ will come to save them.
There are many Bible texts regarding the second coming of Christ. But do any of these refer to a silent or secret return, or do they all speak about the same visible glorious event? Let us find out what the unerring Scriptures teach.
The apostle Paul reveals that the coming of Christ to this earth will be as follows:
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”
1 Corinthians 15:51-52 “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.”
Paul declared that when Christ should come, there would be a shout; a voice; a trumpet; the righteous dead would be resurrected, and along with the righteous living, would be caught up from the earth to meet the Lord in the clouds never to part again.
The apostle John reveals that the coming of Jesus to this earth will be as follows:
Revelation 1:7 “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him.”
John declared that when Christ should come, it would be with clouds, and every eye on the earth would miraculously see him, and all the kindreds of the earth who have rejected Him would wail. (The Old Testament prophets also spoke of the Coming of Christ see Psalms 50:3-5, Jeremiah 25:30-33.)
And Christ Himself reveals what His coming to this earth will be like:
Matthew 24:30-31 “...then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”
Christ declared that when He returns the second time, it would be with a sign; all people on the earth would see Him coming in the clouds of heaven and with power and great glory; the great majority of all the people of the earth would not be happy, but would mourn; there would be a great sound of a trumpet; and God would gather His obedient elect to Himself from every part of the world.
All of the above Scriptures are in complete harmony with each other regarding what it will be like when Christ comes back to this earth in the last days. Signs will occur just prior to His arrival. Every eye on the earth, every person of every nation and tribe will see Him return in power and great glory; there will be great noise, a shout, a heavenly voice, and a great loud trumpet will sound; the righteous dead will be resurrected from their graves, and together with the living righteous will be caught up into the air to meet their Lord in the clouds because they chose to sacrifice all to follow and obey God. While those who had rejected Christ's offer of salvation will be destroyed.
WHERE DID THE SECRET RAPTURE ORIGINATE?
It wasn't until the early or mid 1800's that there was any significant group of believers around the world that looked for a "rapture" of the Church prior to a seven-year tribulation period. The "secret rapture" teaching was NOT taught by the early Church, it was NOT taught by the Church of the first centuries, it was NOT taught by the Reformers, IT WAS NOT TAUGHT BY ANYONE (except a couple Roman Catholic theologians) UNTIL ABOUT THE YEAR 1830!
The Roman Catholic Church had to come up with a view of prophecy to counter the Historic view of prophecy that the Reformers had used to identify the Church of Rome as the ‘little horn’ and the Harlot of Revelation 17.
This new scheme of prophetic interpretation became known as FUTURISM.... It was a Jesuit priest named Ribera who, in the days of the Reformation, first taught that all the events in the book of Revelation were to take place literally during the three and a half years reign of the Antichrist away down at the end of the age.
Later, Emmanuel Lacunza, also a Jesuit priest, built on Ribera's teachings, and spent much of his life writing a book titled "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty." Lacunza, however, wrote under the assumed name of "Rabbi Ben Ezra," supposedly a learned Jew who had accepted Christ as his Saviour; he did this so that the unsuspecting Protestants would accept his book; for the Protestant world then wanted nothing from a Jesuit. His book was published in 1812.
Now enter the name of Edward Irving. Born in Scotland in 1792, Irving discovered Lacunza's book and fell in love with it, translated it into English, and it was published in London in 1827. Then Irving began to hold Bible Conferences throughout Scotland, emphasizing the coming of Jesus to rapture His Church.
Later, J.N. Darby then was introduced to the "secret rapture" doctrine by the Irvinites (Followers of Edward Irvin), as well as the famous book by Rabbi Ben-Ezra [Jesuit priest Emmanuel Lacunza]! Darby was himself a prolific writer and from that time a constant stream of propaganda came from his pen. His writings on biblical subjects number over 30 volumes of 600 pages each. Darby developed and organized "futurism" into a system of prophetic teaching called "dispensationalism."
The Secret Rapture teaching was introduced into the United States and Canada between the 1840's and 1870's. A Congregationalist preacher by the name of C. I. Scofield came under the influence of Darby and the Plymouth Brethren. Scofield became a strong promoter of the teaching that had been promulgated by Darby, whom he considered "the most profound Bible student of modern times." He incorporated this teaching into his SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE. Three million copies were published in the first 50 years! Through this Bible Scofield shrewdly carried the teaching of the Secret Rapture into the very heart of Evangelicalism.
There is one final link in the chain of the development and spread of the rapture theory that should be mentioned in passing. Scofield and Darby influenced D. L. Moody, and Moody influenced the early PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT. How? you ask. The Assemblies of God is today by far the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world. In 1914 they ordered their Sunday School and study materials from the Moody Press. So the Assemblies of God believed what the Moody Bible Institute taught, which included the "Secret Rapture".
ONE TAKEN ONE LEFT BEHIND?
But what about those Scriptures which talk of one being taken and the other being left behind (see Matthew 24:37-41); surely this backs up the belief in a secret rapture?
Matthew 24:37-39 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Now in the days of Noah, who was taken and who were left? The wicked were taken and the righteous were left.
He represented this also in Luke 13:35-36, “Two women shall be grinding together, the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left”.
Now some teach that those who are left will remain alive and experience 7 years of tribulation. In truth it is those who are taken that are receiving the "trouble". Those who are 'taken' are those who are not prepared to meet the Lord when he comes, and they are taken in death, just like the wicked were taken in death when the flood came.
The Apostles asked Christ where would those who were taken be?
"And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord?", then Christ answers "Wheresoever the body is thither will the eagles (Vultures) be gathered together" Luke 17:37.
Here Christ is clearly teaching that those who are taken, will be DEAD. Their bodies will be food for the birds.
Revelation chapter 19 depicts in graphic detail the return of Christ, with him calling for the birds of the air to “Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God…That ye may eat the flesh of the kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh OF ALL MEN, both free and bond, both small and great” Revelation 19:17-18.
When the Lord returns who will be removed from the earth, the wicked or the righteous? Matthew 13:41-43 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Also see Matthew 13:49).
Proverbs 10:29-30 ¶ The way of the LORD is strength to the upright: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity. The righteous shall never be removed: but the wicked shall not inhabit the earth.
Proverbs 2:21-22 For the upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain in it. But the wicked shall be cut off from the earth, and the transgressors shall be rooted out of it.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. (Also see Matthew 5:5, Psalms 115:16)
PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE?
But what about the belief that Christ would rapture all of His people off the earth before the time of trouble, tribulation, persecution, and the working of Satan with lying wonders?
The prophet Daniel declared that “there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was...And at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.” Daniel 12:1.
The apostle John declared that God's righteous people who were living when Christ returned to earth would be those “which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Revelation 7:14.
Matthew 24:29-31 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Did Jesus ask his Father to take us out of the world? Christ Himself prayed that His Father would not take His people “out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.” John 17:15.
Will the return of Christ happen before or after the revealing of Anti-Christ?
2 Thessalonians 2:3 "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; "
The Bible teaches us that those who think the Rapture will occur before the man of sin is revealed, are deceived. That day will not happen until the man of sin is come to power, and the great tribulation has come upon the earth.
2 Thessalonians 2:4-6 "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. "
Why would Paul warn the believers in this verse if they were supposed to be raptured up beforehand anyway?
2 Thessalonians 2:8 "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: "
Here we see the wicked one is revealed, and THEN the Lord comes. Notice the coming of Christ destroys the man of sin! Did you notice? It does not mention 7 years, and it doesn't mention anything about it being a "secret" rapture either.
POST-RAPTURE SALVATION?
Those who teach the lie of a pre-tribulation rapture, also teaches that during the 'tribulation period' while the saints are in heaven, there will be many people 'born again', and saved. Now this is truly a contradiction of terms. These teachers tell us that when the Church is removed, the restraining influence of the Holy Spirit is removed. Now if there is no preachers here, no convicting Spirit, how can anyone be saved???
What this false doctrine does is:
#1. It makes the Church unprepared for the time of trouble that it must enter.
#2. It teaches the sinful world that they can reject Christ, until all the Christians disappear, then they can accept his salvation.
But as we have seen, Those who have rejected Christ, will be destroyed when he comes.
Those 'virgins' who come knocking after the door is closed will be shut out! (Mat 25)
Christ taught that his coming is about as secret as a Nuclear bomb!
Luke 17:22 -27 "And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
"Just like in Noah's time?" Did Jesus lie when He said..."So shall it be..."? Don't these verses seem a bit obvious? The ones in the ark were SAVED. The ones that decided to ignore the warnings of Noah of world wide flood were DESTROYED. And they were destroyed UNEXPECTEDLY! For it says they "did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.."
The pre-tribulation preachers are bluntly stating JESUS LIED! Are they not? Is it any wonder some of them choose not to mention this passage "in context" from their pulpits? Common sense, it proves they are lying.
Luke 21:25-28 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Christ purchased us on the cross, he is going to receive his purchased possessions when he returns. He tells us when he comes to receive us it will be visible, and he tells us to LOOK UP! Which is completely contrary to logic, if there is a ‘secret rapture’.
SAVED FROM WRATH?
Some of the pretribulation preachers use the following verse to 'justify' their secret rapture doctrine.
Romans 5:9, "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
First the great tribulation is NOT the wrath of GOD. It is really the WRATH of Satan upon God's Church.
Revelation 12:12-13 ¶ Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
The wrath of GOD is contained in 7 Vials. Which is poured out upon the wicked at the time of Christ's coming.
Revelation 15:7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.
Now some teach that we must be 'raptured up' so that we will not suffer from the wrath of GOD. But that is not the teaching of the Bible.
The Bible teaches that GOD knows those who are his. He has sealed his people with the Holy Spirit of promise, He has purchased them, they are his servants and his name is upon their foreheads. And they are protected from his wrath.
Revelation 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
Just as the Jews were protected from the wrath that was poured out upon Egypt. Not by being 'raptured' off, but by having the blood applied, so do we.
Exodus 12:13 "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite
the land of Egypt."
The Lord protected His own in the Old testament, and He promises to protect us New Testament believers as well! And BOTH sets of believers show their faith by the BLOOD of Christ! The Old Testament believers had the blood of a Lamb upon the doorposts of their houses, we have the Blood of the Lamb upon the heart! Praise the Lord for His truth being so blunt and powerful even in the most graphic examples!
MORE ABOUT THE THIEF IN THE NIGHT SYMBOLISM
This next passage has to do with the "thief in the night" analogy that I spoke of earlier. ALL of the pre-trib preachers use the following passage to confirm and or validate their SECRET rapture theories. They will always do the following, they will read to you...
1 Thessalonians 5:2, "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."
AND THEY STOP!
Some refuse to read further, and rightly so. For if they read further a multitude of problems arise! For example, look a the next verse..
1 Thessalonians 5:3 "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape."
Again the "Thief" in the night symbolism, means UNEXPECTED, not SECRET (Also see 2nd Peter 3:9-10 to see how the analogy of the thief means unexpected not secret.) And notice that this coming brings SUDDEN DESTRUCTION UPON THE WICKED. This again proves the pre-tribulation theory FALSE!
1 Thessalonians 5:4 "But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief."
The "Secret rapture" preachers use the verses above this passage (verse 2) to say Jesus comes as a thief in the night for the Christians. But this verse (verse 4) proves they are bold faced liars. This verse is plain! It says clearly that Jesus does NOT come as a thief in the night to the Christians! And why doesn't the Christian have to worry about Jesus coming as a thief to them?
1 Thessalonians 5:5,6 "Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."
The pre-trib preachers declare Jesus comes as a THIEF in the night, and they define that event as being "in secret." However, the Bible says we as true Christians will NOT have Jesus coming to us as a thief. And the the Bible explains why. It's because we are "looking up" or "looking for" that great day.
NO MAN KNOWS THE DAY!
Think about this as well. If the seven, or three and half year theory were fact, then we would have to remove verse Matthew 24:36 from the Bible along with other references to the fact that. It PLAINLY says... "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." The reason being, if the Christians all of a sudden disappear from the face of the earth on a certain day, all one needs do is calculate three and a half years forward, or seven years forward to get the exact day and hour that Jesus would return! No, we will not know the exact day or hour years in advance! That is an out and out lie!
A PROPHETIC TWIST ON DANIEL 9
This seven year tribulation theory actually originates from a mis-understanding, or deliberate re-writing of the prophecy in the ninth chapter of the book of Daniel. Many take this prophecy out of context to explain a seven year,(Pre-Trib) or three and a half year, (Mid-Trib) time of great tribulation for the Christian believer. However, you will find by studying this prophecy that it does not speak of a time of tribulation at all. In fact, it speaks of a time that all believers both Old and New Testament alike hold very dear to their hearts. It is the prophecy that describes the coming of Jesus as the Messiah in 27AD, his death in 31 AD, and the Gospel going to the Gentiles in 34 AD.
It is sad that ‘pre-tribulation rapture preachers’, take the ‘he’ in Daniel 9:27, and say it is anti-christ, when it refers to Jesus Christ. Who confirmed the covenant of promises to the Jews by both his Preaching and the Apostles (Romans 15:8). Who by his death, caused the significance of animal sacrifices to cease, in fact the veil that separated the inner rooms of the temple was ripped into at his death. By Israel’s constant rejection of the Gospel and their abominations, the Jewish nation has been left desolate.
As we see friends, there is absolutely no reason to detach the last week and stick a 2000 year gap before it, nor is there any reason to apply it to Anti-Christ and the tribulation period.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Conspiracy Theorists Can’t Even Tell When They’re Being Trolled
 |
| Conspiracy theorist Bob Mitchell |
Read more at http://wonkette.com/579681/the-snake-oil-bulletin-lets-read-bible-prophecy-porn-together#1qjhboL0Wd8hC5wB.99
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Sunday, April 12, 2015
The Spiritual Ramifications for Australia over the Passing of Cricket Commentator Richie Benaud.
 |
| Cricket Commentator Richie Benaud |
Already the accolades have started to pour in over the life of a man who will be remembered as one of the true gentlemen of the game of cricket. In fact, even after the passing of one of the greatest Prime Ministers this land has ever known, Malcolm Fraser, there has not been as much sorrow, sympathy and out pouring of grief shown to the passing of any other man in living memory. Nonetheless, we still need to have a reality check on the passing of Richie Benaud. That is the main purpose of this article. Not so that we can treat the passing of Richie Benaud in a derogatory manner. Instead, so that we are able to analyse and place the passing of Benaud and the reaction that is has caused into a true perspective comparative to the spiritual state of the nation. Firstly, I have always been someone who has treated the passing on of anyone with the greatest deal of respect that each and every individual deserves. No matter how good or bad someone was in life, it is not up to us to judge the final destination of anyone. That is the job of God alone. Even though he was great in the eyes of diehard cricket fans. A true devotee and representative to the game itself. He was still just a cricket commentator. A cricket journalist of some repute. However, there matters of extreme spiritual prominence to the nation at play here other than the passing of one man. A man whose very existence and passing has been acknowledged by current and past Australian Prime Ministers alike. That is true if one man passes to his appointed place and in doing so he is treated as a demi God. A man who could do no wrong. As such, he will be given a state funeral. However, does a man who was nothing much more than a cricket commentator deserve a state funeral? There are so many others who have done so much for the community who are not treated in a similar manner? It is true, he was a good bloke. Then again, he also earned a good living and made a good life for himself out of cricket. However, what the current fanfare over the passing of indicates is that we as Australians are in a great deal of strife if we place one man and the game that he represents over and above God almighty himself. I have tested this analogy out and found it to be true in so many; if not all instances. Mention God to the average ham in the street and how they were put here, and what their final destination is going to be, and the majority are definitely none committal. However, mention the death of Benaud and strangely enough most of those of whom I have spoken to are quite willing and able to speak with a great deal of knowledge over the subject. This fact alone is a true indicator that we as a nation are well and truly on the road to being completely sports mad. Regrettably, to the exclusion of God almighty himself. For goodness sakes wake up Australia before it is too late. That sad and sorry state can only lead in one direction for the nation as a whole, eternal damnation. God’s richest blessings.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
The Great Money Crash is Right Around the Corner - Or is it?
At the moment all that we are dealing with in this is nothing much more than speculation? What this kind of talk reminds me of is the Y2K bug when there was so much media hype over something that never ever took place. Isn’t that always the plan of the Illuminati, to create the crisis and then find a solution to the crisis? There might be some form of a money crisis right around the corner. However, as this is talk only, just as it is about to hit someone will come forth with the solution to the problem. More than anything else there are certain scammers out there who see that the glass is half empty, as opposed to being half full. Then these same people come forth with these kind of scaremongering tactics so that the frightened little sheep rush out and buy their books. In the very least, they have solved the money crisis for someone, themselves, by selling masses and masses of books. If there is anything at all that arouses more interest than anything else it is money, or in this case of what the scammers are alleging is going to turn out to be a lack of spending power for the individual. According let’s just wait and see how all of this is going to pan out instead of taking too much notice of the likes of this fellow mentioned in the attached DVD.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Thursday, March 12, 2015
A little about my pet subject matter, the Mark of the Beast.
There can be no surer certainty that we are heading head on into the end times than the introduction of the Mark of the Beast over here in Australia/worldwide. Up until now this has been so subtle that there is hardly anyone at all who has come to realize what is really going on, other than the fundamentalist Born Again Christians.Those who have been saying that the Mark was a microchip implant under the skin may have been right along simply because the word of God quite clearly says IN the right arm or forehead and not ON the right arm or forehead. It is right there in the scriptures, go ahead and read it for yourself, Revelation Chapter 13, Verses 16 to 18.
However, there is still a problem with that particular analogy that needs to be looked at. Here is the clincher, the scripture also says OR the name of the Beast, OR the number of his name in addition to the Mark. When I went to school, about 45 years ago, the word OR meant “other than”. So the word OR is an alternative. In this instance it means other than what has generally been accepted as being the Mark of the Beast, the microchip implant.
As it is being introduced in Australia right now, the alternative in this case could mean a tattoo on the skin with the number 666 embedded onto it. Reading on further in Revelation Chapter 14, we are told in no uncertain terms that anyone who takes the Mark is going to Hell. (Christians included)
However, because there is going to be an alternative in the form of the tattoo, what that means is that when the Mark is around the Christians will still be able to operate in the world economy without being forced to take the Mark, and will not have any fear of eternal damnation by taking a tattoo on the skin, as it is the Mark of the Beast that is going to send the recipient to Hell, and not the alternative, the tattoo.
The Mark of the Beast is being introduced over here in Australia via the mobile phones. Smart phones have gone one step closer to the Mark with the introduction of a nano Sim-Card which will be about the same size as the actual mark of the beast, about the size of a grain of rice. Up until now we have had a regular size, a mini size, and now the nano size Sim-card for the mobile phones. It looks very much to me like we are seeing both of the aforementioned being introduced over here are the same time. As God has quite clearly said in his word we are going to be offered an alternative to the Mark in the form of a tattoo so that we will still be able to survive in a world ruled by the Antichrist right up until the return of the Lord Jesus Christ back onto the earth.
If those who have been saying that the Mark of the Beast is a microchip implant and that a tattoo has nothing at all to do with the equation how could an implant have 666 embedded onto it and be recognizable if it was under the skin. Is there anything at all that you, the reader, would like to add to this at all? More than likely not.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Monday, March 2, 2015
The Minimal Facts of the Resurrection
Written by Aaron Brake
“The evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. It’s outstandingly different in quality and quantity.”
—Antony Flew—
INTRODUCTION
The truth of Christianity stands or falls on the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. As Paul himself said, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”
[1] Here the Apostle provides an objective criterion by which to judge the legitimacy of the Christian worldview. Show that Christ has not been raised from the dead and you will have successfully proven Christianity false. Conversely, if Jesus did rise from the dead then His life and teachings are vindicated. The Christian faith, as it turns out, is falsifiable. It is the only religion which bases its faith on an empirically verifiable event.
[2]Christ Himself testified that His resurrection is the sign given to the world as evidence for His extraordinary claims: “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
[3] Furthermore, the resurrection was the central message proclaimed by the early church as most clearly demonstrated in the book of Acts.
[4] Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that an objective examination of Christianity focus on the most pivotal historical event of the faith: the Resurrection.
THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH
The approach I will take in this paper is commonly referred to as the “minimal facts approach.” This method “considers only those data that are so strongly attested historically that they are granted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.”
[5] It should be noted this approach does not assume the inerrancy or divine inspiration of any New Testament document. Rather it merely holds these writings to be historical documents penned during the first century AD.
[6]Though as many as 12 minimal facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Christ may be examined,
[7] the brevity of this paper limits our examination to four: the death of Jesus by crucifixion, the empty tomb,
[8] the post-resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. I contend that the best explanation for these minimal facts is that Jesus was raised bodily from the grave.
Finally, if these facts “can be established and no plausible natural explanation can account for them as well as the resurrection hypothesis, then one is justified in inferring Jesus’ resurrection as the most plausible explanation of the data.”
[9]A MATTER OF HISTORY
Before looking at the facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ it is important to identify a set of objective criteria by which the validity of historical events may be judged. In other words, what criteria may be used to establish the occurrence of an event with reasonable historical certainty? New Testament scholars Gary Habermas and Michael Licona list the following five criteria noting that “a historian who is able to apply one or more of the following principles to a text can conclude with much greater confidence whether a certain event occurred.”
[10]Historical claims are strong when supported by multiple, independent sources.
Historical claims which are also attested to by enemies are more likely to be authentic since enemies are unsympathetic, and often hostile, witnesses.
Historical claims which include embarrassing admissions reflect honest reporting rather than creative storytelling.
Historical claims are strong when supported by eyewitness testimony.
Historical claims which are supported by early testimony are more reliable and less likely to be the result of legendary development.
[11]Therefore, when inquiring into a historical event “the historian combs through the data, considers all the possibilities, and seeks to determine which scenario best explains the data.”
[12]Some sceptics argue that the resurrection of Jesus cannot be investigated historically. But this is mistaken. The facts surrounding the resurrection are of a historical nature and available for anyone to examine. Consequently, “the meaning of the resurrection is a theological matter, but the fact of the resurrection is a historical matter.”
[13] Thus either the bodily resurrection of Jesus actually occurred in history or it did not. Either the resurrection is the best explanation for the known historical data or it is not. Regardless, what we cannot do is simply dismiss it as “supernatural” or “miraculous” in an attempt to remove it from the pool of live options a priori. Moreover, we need to be careful not to confuse “the evidence for the resurrection with the best explanation of the evidence. The resurrection of Jesus is a miraculous explanation of the evidence. But the evidence itself is not miraculous. None of these four facts is any way supernatural or inaccessible to the historian.”
[14] So although the resurrection may be classified as a “miraculous event,” it is a historical event nonetheless and should be investigated as such. John Warwick Montgomery provides helpful insight:
The only way we can know whether an event can occur is to see whether in fact it has occurred. The problem of “miracles,” then, must be solved in the realm of historical investigation, not in the realm of philosophical speculation. And note that a historian, in facing an alleged “miracle,” is really facing nothing new. All historical events are unique, and the test of their factual character can be only the accepted documentary approach that we have followed here. No historian has the right to a closed system of natural causation….”
[15]Therefore, whether or not Jesus rose from the dead is really quite straightforward: “If Jesus was dead at point A, and alive again at point B, then resurrection has occurred: res ipsa loquitur.”
[16]FACT #1—THE DEATH OF JESUS BY CRUCIFIXION
Perhaps no other fact surrounding the life of the historical Jesus is better attested to than His death by crucifixion. Not only is the crucifixion account included in every gospel narrative.
[17] But it is also confirmed by several non-Christian sources. These include the Jewish historian Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, the Greek satirist Lucian of Samosata, as well as the Jewish Talmud.
[18] Josephus tells us that “Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us…condemned him to the cross…”
[19] From a perspective of historiography, Jesus’ crucifixion meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources including enemy attestation. John Dominic Crossan, non-Christian critical scholar and co-founder of the Jesus Seminar, states, “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”
[20]Objection #1: Jesus Didn’t Really Die (The Swoon Theory)
Some sceptics argue that Jesus may have been crucified but He did not actually die. Instead, He lost consciousness (swooned) and merely appeared to be dead only to later be revived in the cool, damp tomb in which He was laid. After reviving He made His way out of the tomb and presented Himself to His disciples as the “resurrected” Messiah. Thus the Christian religion begins. This theory is problematic for several reasons. First, the Swoon Theory does not take seriously what we know about the horrendous scourging and torture associated with crucifixion. As an expert team from the Journal of the American Medical Association concludes, “Accordingly, interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.”
[21]Second, Jesus faking His own resurrection goes against everything we know about His ethical ministry.
Third, a half-dead, half-resurrected “messiah” could hardly serve as the foundation for the disciples’ belief in the resurrection. German theologian David Friederick Strauss explains:
It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to his sufferings, could have given to the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror of death and the grave, the Prince of Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship.
[22]Fourth, this theory is anachronistic in postulating that the disciples, upon seeing Jesus in his half-comatose state, would be led to conclude that He had been raised from the dead within history, in opposition to the Jewish belief in one final resurrection at the end of time. On the contrary, seeing Him again would lead them to conclude He didn’t die!
[23]Fifth, Roman soldiers were professional executioners and everything we know about the torture and crucifixion of Jesus confirms His death, making this theory physically impossible.
Sixth, no early evidence or testimony exists claiming Jesus was merely wounded.
Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection.
FACT #2—THE EMPTY TOMB
Something happened to the body of Jesus. Of this we can be sure. Not only was Jesus publicly executed in Jerusalem but “His post-mortem appearances and empty tomb were first publicly proclaimed there.”
[24] This would have been impossible with a decaying corpse still in the tomb. “It would have been wholly un-Jewish,” notes William Lane Craig, “not to say foolish, to believe that a man was raised from the dead when his body was still in the grave.”
[25] The Jewish authorities had plenty of motivation to produce a body and silence these men who “turned the world upside down,”
[26] effectively ending the Christian religion for good. But no one could. The only early opposing theory recorded by the enemies of Christianity is that the disciples stole the body.
[27] Ironically, this presupposes the empty tomb. In addition, all four gospel narratives attest to the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea and place women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.
[28] Both of these are highly unlikely to be Christian inventions.
First, with regard to Joseph of Arimathea, Biblical scholar James G. D. Dunn explains that he
is a very plausible historical character: he is attested in all four Gospels… and in the Gospel of Peter…; when the tendency of the tradition was to shift blame to the Jewish council, the creation ex nihilo of a sympathizer from among their number would be surprising; and ‘Arimathea, ‘a town very difficult to identify and reminiscent of no scriptural symbolism, makes a thesis of invention even more implausible.’
[29]Atheist Jeffery Lowder agrees that “the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea has a high final probability.”
[30]Second, just as unlikely to be invented is the report of women followers discovering the empty tomb, especially when considering the low social status of women in both Jewish and Roman cultures and their inability to testify as legal witnesses.
[31] If the empty tomb account were a fabricated story intended to persuade skeptics it would have been better served by including male disciples as the primary witnesses. In other words, both the burial and empty tomb accounts demonstrate a ring of authenticity which lends credibility to the gospel narratives. As with the crucifixion, the account of the empty tomb meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources.
[32] including implicit enemy attestation as well as the principle of embarrassment. In addition, the reports of the burial and empty tomb are simple and lack theological or legendary development. Finally, there is no competing burial story in existence. Historian and skeptic Michael Grant concedes that “the historian… cannot justifiably deny the empty tomb” since applied historical criteria shows “the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.”
[33]Objection #2: The Disciples Stole the Body (The Fraud or Conspiracy Theory)
As mentioned above, the earliest recorded polemic against the empty tomb is the charge by Jewish authorities that the disciples stole the body. This is commonly referred to as the Fraud or Conspiracy Theory. This scenario posits that Jesus’ followers stole the body away unbeknownst to anyone and lied about the resurrection appearances, pulling off what has thus far been the greatest hoax in human history. There are several problems with this view. First, this theory does not explain well the simplicity of the resurrection narratives nor why the disciples would invent women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.
[34] This is hardly the way one gets a conspiracy theory off the ground. Second, this also doesn’t explain why the disciples would perpetuate a story that they stole they body (Matt. 28:11-15) if in fact they stole the body! Propagating an explanation which incriminates oneself is again at odds with a conspiracy theory. Third, as will be discussed below, this theory does not account for the fact that the disciples of Jesus had genuine experiences in which they believed they saw the risen Christ. So convinced were these men that their lives were transformed into committed followers willing to suffer and die for their belief. Liars make poor martyrs. Fourth, this theory runs opposite to everything we know about the disciples. As J. N. D. Anderson states, “This would run totally contrary to all we know of them: their ethical teaching, the quality of their lives, their steadfastness in suffering and persecution. Nor would it begin to explain their dramatic transformation from dejected and dispirited escapists into witnesses whom no opposition could muzzle.”
[35]Fifth, this theory is completely anachronistic. There was no expectation by first century Jews of a suffering-servant Messiah who would be shamefully executed by Gentiles as a criminal only to rise again bodily before the final resurrection at the end of time: “As Wright nicely puts it, if your favorite Messiah got himself crucified, then you either went home or else you got yourself a new Messiah. But the idea of stealing Jesus’ corpse and saying that God had raised him from the dead is hardly one that would have entered the minds of the disciples.”
[36] Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection.
FACT #3—THE POST-RESURRECTION APPEARANCES
In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul recounts what biblical scholars recognize as an early Christian creed dating to within a few years of the crucifixion. Notice the creedal nature and repetitive structure of this passage when broken down in the following form:
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, in which also you stand,
that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures,
and
that He was buried,
and
that He was raised on the third day
according to the Scriptures,
and
that He appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve.
After
that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time,
most of whom remain until now,
but some have fallen asleep;
then He appeared to James,
then to all the apostles;
and last of all, as to one untimely born,
He appeared to me also.
[37] Included in this creed are three of our minimal facts: the death of Jesus, the empty tomb, and the post-resurrection appearances. Furthermore, our fourth minimal fact (the origin of Christianity) is easily explained given the first thee facts. Paul not only mentions the multiple post-resurrection appearances but includes himself as having seen the risen Lord. Several indicators in the text confirm this to be an early Christian creed.
First, as shown above, the passage uses stylized wording and parallel structure common to creedal formulas. Second, the words “delivered” and “received” are technical terms indicating a rabbinic heritage is in view. Third, the phrases “He was raised,” “third day,” and “the twelve” are unusual Pauline terms making this unlikely to have originated with Paul himself. Fourth, the Aramaic term “Cephas” is used for Peter indicating an extremely early origin.
[38] New Testament scholar and skeptic Gerd Lüdemann assigns this passage a very early date stating, “the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years…the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in 1 Cor. 15:3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 C.E.”
[39]The early date of this creed rules out the possibility of myth or legendary development as a plausible explanation and demonstrates that the disciples began proclaiming Jesus’ death, resurrection, and post-resurrection appearances very early. Christian philosopher and theologian J. P. Moreland elaborates:
There was simply not enough time for a great deal of myth and legend to accrue and distort the historical facts in any significant way. In this regard, A. N. Sherwin-White, a scholar of ancient Roman and Greek history at Oxford, has studied the rate at which legend accumulated in the ancient world, using the writings of Herodotus as a test case. He argues that even a span of two generations is not sufficient for legend to wipe out a solid core of historical facts. The picture of Jesus in the New Testament was established well within that length of time.
[40]Again Lüdemann acknowledges, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.”
[41] There is no dispute among scholars that the disciples experienced something.
But there’s more. The disciples not only proclaimed that Jesus was raised but they sincerely believed the resurrection occurred as demonstrated by their transformed lives. Eleven early sources testify to the willingness of the apostles to suffer and die for their belief in the resurrection.
[42] For example, we know extra-Biblically that Jesus’ brother James was stoned to death by the Sanhedrin and that the apostle Paul was beheaded in Rome under Nero.
[43] Many people will die for what they believe to be true but no one willingly suffers and dies for what they know to be false. Again, liars make poor martyrs. This important point should not be confused by an appeal to modern-day martyrs who willingly die for their religious beliefs. Making this comparison is a false analogy: “Modern martyrs act solely out of their trust in beliefs that others have taught them. The apostles died for holding to their own testimony that they had personally seen the risen Jesus. Contemporary martyrs die for what they believe to be true. The disciples of Jesus died for what they knew to be either true or false.”
[44]As with the crucifixion and empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances meet the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources, as well as the testimony of a former enemy of Christianity: Saul of Tarsus. Nine early and independent sources testify to the disciples’ proclamation that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them.
[45] To list just one example of this, the appearance “to the twelve” mentioned by Paul above is also attested to in Luke 24:36-42 and John 20:19-20. “The evidence,” says William Lane Craig, “makes it certain that on separate occasions different individuals and groups had experiences of seeing Jesus alive from the dead. This conclusion is virtually indisputable—and therefore undisputed.”
[46]Objection #3: The Disciples Experienced Hallucinations (The Hallucination Theory)
The most popular theory offered by skeptics to explain away the post-resurrection appearances is that the disciples experienced hallucinations. This is the position taken by Gerd Lüdemann (quoted above) among others. However, appealing to hallucinations as an explanation simply won’t work for the following reasons.
First, the testimony of Paul along with the Gospel writers is that the appearances of Jesus were physical, bodily appearances.
[47] In fact, this is the unanimous consent of the Gospel narratives. This is an important point because if “none of the appearances was originally a physical, bodily appearance, then it is very strange that we have a completely unanimous testimony in the Gospels that all of them were physical, with no trace of the supposed original, non-physical appearances.”
[48]Second, hallucinations are private experiences (as opposed to group experiences). A group of people “may be in the frame of mind to hallucinate, but each experiences hallucinations on an individual basis. Nor will they experience the same hallucination. Hallucinations are like dreams in this way.”
[49] Therefore, hallucinations cannot explain the group appearances attested to in 1 Cor. 15, the Gospel narratives, and the book of Acts.
[50]Third, ironically, the Hallucination Theory cannot explain the origin of the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection! Just like in today’s modern world, “for someone in the ancient world, visions of the deceased are not evidence that the person is alive, but evidence that he is dead!”
[51] This is a crucial argument to grasp:
Hallucinations, as projections of the mind, can contain nothing new. Therefore, given the current Jewish beliefs about life after death, the disciples, were they to project hallucinations of Jesus, would have seen Jesus in heaven or in Abraham’s bosom, where the souls of the righteous dead were believed to abide until the resurrection. And such visions would not have caused belief in Jesus’ resurrection.
[52]In other words, a hallucination of the resurrected Jesus presupposes the proper frame of mind which the disciples simply did not possess. Finally, hallucinations cannot explain such facts as the empty tomb, the conversions of skeptics like Paul, nor the multiple and varied resurrection appearances which defy a purely psychological, naturalistic explanation.
[53] “To be perfectly candid,” concludes Craig, “the only grounds for denying the physical, corporeal nature of the postmortem appearances of Jesus is philosophical, not historical.”
[54]FACT #4—THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
No scholar denies the fact that the Christian religion exploded out of first century Israel. Within one generation of the death of Christ this movement known as “the Way” had spread to Europe, Africa, and Asia. Christianity is an effect that needs an adequate cause and explanation. Where exactly did the Christian faith come from and what best explains its origin? The most obvious answer to this question is that the disciples truly saw the resurrected Christ. Only an event of this magnitude could turn scared, scattered, and skeptical disciples, with no prior concept and expectation of a crucified and risen Messiah, into courageous proclaimers of the gospel willing to suffer and die for their belief that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. This is what Peter boldly declared: “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses… Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”
[55] The origin of the Christian faith is best explained by the disciples’ sincere belief that God raised Jesus from the dead.
Anyone who denies the resurrection itself as the explanation for the origin of Christianity must posit some other explanation. Only three possibilities seem to exist. If the resurrection did not occur, then Christianity was either the result of Christian, Jewish, or pagan influences.
[56] Obviously the disciples could not succumb to Christian influences since Christianity was not yet in existence. But just as unlikely is the idea that the disciples’ belief in the resurrection originated from Jewish influences. The Jewish conception of the resurrection was one final, general resurrection of all mankind (or all the righteous) occurring after the end of the world. Nowhere in Jewish thought do we find the idea of a single individual resurrecting within history never to die again.
[57]Objection #4: Christianity Borrowed From Pagan Religions (The Copycat Theory)
Perhaps then Christianity finds its origin in paganism. Popular internet movies such as Zeitgeist have made ubiquitous the belief that there really is nothing unique about the Christian Savior. Jesus is simply a conglomeration of past dying and rising “messiahs” repackaged for a first-century audience whose zealousness eventually grew into the Christian religion we know today. Despite the pervasiveness of this belief it suffers from numerous problems. First, pagan mythology is the wrong interpretive context considering that “Jesus and his disciples were first-century Palestinian Jews, and it is against that background that they must be understood.”
[58]Second, the Jews were familiar with seasonal deities (Ezek. 37:1-14) and found them detestable, making it extremely improbable that they would borrow mythology from them. This is why no trace of pagan cults celebrating dying and rising gods can be found in first-century Palestine.
[59]Third, the earliest account of a dying and rising god that somewhat parallels Jesus’ resurrection appears at least 100 years later. The historical evidence for these myths is non-existent and the accounts are easily explained by naturalistic theories.
[60]Fourth, the Copycat Theory begs the question. It assumes the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are false (the very thing it is intending to prove) and then attempts to explain how these accounts originated by appealing to supposed parallels within pagan mythology. But first it must be shown that the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are false! In other words, even if it could be shown that parallels exist, it does not follow that the resurrection of Jesus is not a historical event. The evidence for Jesus’ resurrection must be judged on its own merit because “the claims of resurrections in other religions do not explain the evidence that exists for Jesus’ resurrection.”
[61]Finally, to put to rest this outdated and unsubstantiated theory, the late Dr. Ronald Nash summarizes seven important points that completely undermine the idea that Christianity derived its doctrine from the pagan mystery religions:
1. Arguments offered to “prove” a Christian dependence on the mysteries illustrate the logical fallacy of false cause… Coincidence does not prove causal connection. Nor does similarity prove dependence.
2. Many alleged similarities between Christianity and the mysteries are either greatly exaggerated or fabricated. Scholars often describe pagan rituals in language they borrow from Christianity…
3. The chronology is all wrong. Almost all of our sources of information about the pagan religions alleged to have influenced early Christianity are dated very late. We frequently find writers quoting from documents written 300 years later than Paul in efforts to produce ideas that allegedly influenced Paul. We must reject the assumption that just because a cult had a certain belief or practice in the third or fourth century after Christ, it therefore had the same belief or practice in the first century.
4. Paul would never have consciously borrowed from the pagan religions…
5. Early Christianity was an exclusivist faith…
6. Unlike the mysteries, the religion of Paul was grounded on events that actually happened in history…
7. What few parallels may still remain reflect a Christian influence on the pagan systems…
[62]Nash offers this final word regarding the copycat theory: “Liberal efforts to undermine the uniqueness of the Christian revelation via claims of a pagan religious influence collapse quickly once a full account of the information is available. It is clear that the liberal arguments exhibit astoundingly bad scholarship. Indeed, this conclusion may be too generous.”
[63] Therefore, it is safe to conclude that “the birth and rapid rise of the Christian Church…remain an unsolved enigma for any historian who refuses to take seriously the only explanation offered by the Church itself.”
[64]CONCLUSION
If Jesus was dead at point A, and alive at point B, we have a resurrection. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the best explanation for the known historical data: His death by crucifixion, the empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. Furthermore, Jesus’ resurrection fits the context of his life, vindicating His teachings and radical claim to be the unique, divine Son of God. Paul says that Christ “was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead.”
[65] Naturalistic explanations (swoon theory, legendary development, fraud, hallucinations) fail to account for all the relevant data and in some cases (copycat theories) are outright false and ahistorical. Conversely, the Resurrection Hypothesis accounts for all of the known facts, has greater explanatory scope and power, is more plausible, and less ad hoc.
[66] Only if one is guided by a prior commitment to philosophical naturalism will the conclusion “God raised Jesus from the dead” seem unjustified.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
 |
| He is Risen |
“The evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. It’s outstandingly different in quality and quantity.”
—Antony Flew—
INTRODUCTION
The truth of Christianity stands or falls on the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. As Paul himself said, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”
[1] Here the Apostle provides an objective criterion by which to judge the legitimacy of the Christian worldview. Show that Christ has not been raised from the dead and you will have successfully proven Christianity false. Conversely, if Jesus did rise from the dead then His life and teachings are vindicated. The Christian faith, as it turns out, is falsifiable. It is the only religion which bases its faith on an empirically verifiable event.
[2]Christ Himself testified that His resurrection is the sign given to the world as evidence for His extraordinary claims: “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
[3] Furthermore, the resurrection was the central message proclaimed by the early church as most clearly demonstrated in the book of Acts.
[4] Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that an objective examination of Christianity focus on the most pivotal historical event of the faith: the Resurrection.
THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH
The approach I will take in this paper is commonly referred to as the “minimal facts approach.” This method “considers only those data that are so strongly attested historically that they are granted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.”
[5] It should be noted this approach does not assume the inerrancy or divine inspiration of any New Testament document. Rather it merely holds these writings to be historical documents penned during the first century AD.
[6]Though as many as 12 minimal facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Christ may be examined,
[7] the brevity of this paper limits our examination to four: the death of Jesus by crucifixion, the empty tomb,
[8] the post-resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. I contend that the best explanation for these minimal facts is that Jesus was raised bodily from the grave.
Finally, if these facts “can be established and no plausible natural explanation can account for them as well as the resurrection hypothesis, then one is justified in inferring Jesus’ resurrection as the most plausible explanation of the data.”
[9]A MATTER OF HISTORY
Before looking at the facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ it is important to identify a set of objective criteria by which the validity of historical events may be judged. In other words, what criteria may be used to establish the occurrence of an event with reasonable historical certainty? New Testament scholars Gary Habermas and Michael Licona list the following five criteria noting that “a historian who is able to apply one or more of the following principles to a text can conclude with much greater confidence whether a certain event occurred.”
[10]Historical claims are strong when supported by multiple, independent sources.
Historical claims which are also attested to by enemies are more likely to be authentic since enemies are unsympathetic, and often hostile, witnesses.
Historical claims which include embarrassing admissions reflect honest reporting rather than creative storytelling.
Historical claims are strong when supported by eyewitness testimony.
Historical claims which are supported by early testimony are more reliable and less likely to be the result of legendary development.
[11]Therefore, when inquiring into a historical event “the historian combs through the data, considers all the possibilities, and seeks to determine which scenario best explains the data.”
[12]Some sceptics argue that the resurrection of Jesus cannot be investigated historically. But this is mistaken. The facts surrounding the resurrection are of a historical nature and available for anyone to examine. Consequently, “the meaning of the resurrection is a theological matter, but the fact of the resurrection is a historical matter.”
[13] Thus either the bodily resurrection of Jesus actually occurred in history or it did not. Either the resurrection is the best explanation for the known historical data or it is not. Regardless, what we cannot do is simply dismiss it as “supernatural” or “miraculous” in an attempt to remove it from the pool of live options a priori. Moreover, we need to be careful not to confuse “the evidence for the resurrection with the best explanation of the evidence. The resurrection of Jesus is a miraculous explanation of the evidence. But the evidence itself is not miraculous. None of these four facts is any way supernatural or inaccessible to the historian.”
[14] So although the resurrection may be classified as a “miraculous event,” it is a historical event nonetheless and should be investigated as such. John Warwick Montgomery provides helpful insight:
The only way we can know whether an event can occur is to see whether in fact it has occurred. The problem of “miracles,” then, must be solved in the realm of historical investigation, not in the realm of philosophical speculation. And note that a historian, in facing an alleged “miracle,” is really facing nothing new. All historical events are unique, and the test of their factual character can be only the accepted documentary approach that we have followed here. No historian has the right to a closed system of natural causation….”
[15]Therefore, whether or not Jesus rose from the dead is really quite straightforward: “If Jesus was dead at point A, and alive again at point B, then resurrection has occurred: res ipsa loquitur.”
[16]FACT #1—THE DEATH OF JESUS BY CRUCIFIXION
Perhaps no other fact surrounding the life of the historical Jesus is better attested to than His death by crucifixion. Not only is the crucifixion account included in every gospel narrative.
[17] But it is also confirmed by several non-Christian sources. These include the Jewish historian Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, the Greek satirist Lucian of Samosata, as well as the Jewish Talmud.
[18] Josephus tells us that “Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us…condemned him to the cross…”
[19] From a perspective of historiography, Jesus’ crucifixion meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources including enemy attestation. John Dominic Crossan, non-Christian critical scholar and co-founder of the Jesus Seminar, states, “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”
[20]Objection #1: Jesus Didn’t Really Die (The Swoon Theory)
Some sceptics argue that Jesus may have been crucified but He did not actually die. Instead, He lost consciousness (swooned) and merely appeared to be dead only to later be revived in the cool, damp tomb in which He was laid. After reviving He made His way out of the tomb and presented Himself to His disciples as the “resurrected” Messiah. Thus the Christian religion begins. This theory is problematic for several reasons. First, the Swoon Theory does not take seriously what we know about the horrendous scourging and torture associated with crucifixion. As an expert team from the Journal of the American Medical Association concludes, “Accordingly, interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.”
[21]Second, Jesus faking His own resurrection goes against everything we know about His ethical ministry.
Third, a half-dead, half-resurrected “messiah” could hardly serve as the foundation for the disciples’ belief in the resurrection. German theologian David Friederick Strauss explains:
It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to his sufferings, could have given to the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror of death and the grave, the Prince of Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship.
[22]Fourth, this theory is anachronistic in postulating that the disciples, upon seeing Jesus in his half-comatose state, would be led to conclude that He had been raised from the dead within history, in opposition to the Jewish belief in one final resurrection at the end of time. On the contrary, seeing Him again would lead them to conclude He didn’t die!
[23]Fifth, Roman soldiers were professional executioners and everything we know about the torture and crucifixion of Jesus confirms His death, making this theory physically impossible.
Sixth, no early evidence or testimony exists claiming Jesus was merely wounded.
Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection.
FACT #2—THE EMPTY TOMB
Something happened to the body of Jesus. Of this we can be sure. Not only was Jesus publicly executed in Jerusalem but “His post-mortem appearances and empty tomb were first publicly proclaimed there.”
[24] This would have been impossible with a decaying corpse still in the tomb. “It would have been wholly un-Jewish,” notes William Lane Craig, “not to say foolish, to believe that a man was raised from the dead when his body was still in the grave.”
[25] The Jewish authorities had plenty of motivation to produce a body and silence these men who “turned the world upside down,”
[26] effectively ending the Christian religion for good. But no one could. The only early opposing theory recorded by the enemies of Christianity is that the disciples stole the body.
[27] Ironically, this presupposes the empty tomb. In addition, all four gospel narratives attest to the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea and place women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.
[28] Both of these are highly unlikely to be Christian inventions.
First, with regard to Joseph of Arimathea, Biblical scholar James G. D. Dunn explains that he
is a very plausible historical character: he is attested in all four Gospels… and in the Gospel of Peter…; when the tendency of the tradition was to shift blame to the Jewish council, the creation ex nihilo of a sympathizer from among their number would be surprising; and ‘Arimathea, ‘a town very difficult to identify and reminiscent of no scriptural symbolism, makes a thesis of invention even more implausible.’
[29]Atheist Jeffery Lowder agrees that “the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea has a high final probability.”
[30]Second, just as unlikely to be invented is the report of women followers discovering the empty tomb, especially when considering the low social status of women in both Jewish and Roman cultures and their inability to testify as legal witnesses.
[31] If the empty tomb account were a fabricated story intended to persuade skeptics it would have been better served by including male disciples as the primary witnesses. In other words, both the burial and empty tomb accounts demonstrate a ring of authenticity which lends credibility to the gospel narratives. As with the crucifixion, the account of the empty tomb meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources.
[32] including implicit enemy attestation as well as the principle of embarrassment. In addition, the reports of the burial and empty tomb are simple and lack theological or legendary development. Finally, there is no competing burial story in existence. Historian and skeptic Michael Grant concedes that “the historian… cannot justifiably deny the empty tomb” since applied historical criteria shows “the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.”
[33]Objection #2: The Disciples Stole the Body (The Fraud or Conspiracy Theory)
As mentioned above, the earliest recorded polemic against the empty tomb is the charge by Jewish authorities that the disciples stole the body. This is commonly referred to as the Fraud or Conspiracy Theory. This scenario posits that Jesus’ followers stole the body away unbeknownst to anyone and lied about the resurrection appearances, pulling off what has thus far been the greatest hoax in human history. There are several problems with this view. First, this theory does not explain well the simplicity of the resurrection narratives nor why the disciples would invent women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.
[34] This is hardly the way one gets a conspiracy theory off the ground. Second, this also doesn’t explain why the disciples would perpetuate a story that they stole they body (Matt. 28:11-15) if in fact they stole the body! Propagating an explanation which incriminates oneself is again at odds with a conspiracy theory. Third, as will be discussed below, this theory does not account for the fact that the disciples of Jesus had genuine experiences in which they believed they saw the risen Christ. So convinced were these men that their lives were transformed into committed followers willing to suffer and die for their belief. Liars make poor martyrs. Fourth, this theory runs opposite to everything we know about the disciples. As J. N. D. Anderson states, “This would run totally contrary to all we know of them: their ethical teaching, the quality of their lives, their steadfastness in suffering and persecution. Nor would it begin to explain their dramatic transformation from dejected and dispirited escapists into witnesses whom no opposition could muzzle.”
[35]Fifth, this theory is completely anachronistic. There was no expectation by first century Jews of a suffering-servant Messiah who would be shamefully executed by Gentiles as a criminal only to rise again bodily before the final resurrection at the end of time: “As Wright nicely puts it, if your favorite Messiah got himself crucified, then you either went home or else you got yourself a new Messiah. But the idea of stealing Jesus’ corpse and saying that God had raised him from the dead is hardly one that would have entered the minds of the disciples.”
[36] Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection.
FACT #3—THE POST-RESURRECTION APPEARANCES
In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul recounts what biblical scholars recognize as an early Christian creed dating to within a few years of the crucifixion. Notice the creedal nature and repetitive structure of this passage when broken down in the following form:
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, in which also you stand,
that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures,
and
that He was buried,
and
that He was raised on the third day
according to the Scriptures,
and
that He appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve.
After
that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time,
most of whom remain until now,
but some have fallen asleep;
then He appeared to James,
then to all the apostles;
and last of all, as to one untimely born,
He appeared to me also.
[37] Included in this creed are three of our minimal facts: the death of Jesus, the empty tomb, and the post-resurrection appearances. Furthermore, our fourth minimal fact (the origin of Christianity) is easily explained given the first thee facts. Paul not only mentions the multiple post-resurrection appearances but includes himself as having seen the risen Lord. Several indicators in the text confirm this to be an early Christian creed.
First, as shown above, the passage uses stylized wording and parallel structure common to creedal formulas. Second, the words “delivered” and “received” are technical terms indicating a rabbinic heritage is in view. Third, the phrases “He was raised,” “third day,” and “the twelve” are unusual Pauline terms making this unlikely to have originated with Paul himself. Fourth, the Aramaic term “Cephas” is used for Peter indicating an extremely early origin.
[38] New Testament scholar and skeptic Gerd Lüdemann assigns this passage a very early date stating, “the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years…the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in 1 Cor. 15:3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 C.E.”
[39]The early date of this creed rules out the possibility of myth or legendary development as a plausible explanation and demonstrates that the disciples began proclaiming Jesus’ death, resurrection, and post-resurrection appearances very early. Christian philosopher and theologian J. P. Moreland elaborates:
There was simply not enough time for a great deal of myth and legend to accrue and distort the historical facts in any significant way. In this regard, A. N. Sherwin-White, a scholar of ancient Roman and Greek history at Oxford, has studied the rate at which legend accumulated in the ancient world, using the writings of Herodotus as a test case. He argues that even a span of two generations is not sufficient for legend to wipe out a solid core of historical facts. The picture of Jesus in the New Testament was established well within that length of time.
[40]Again Lüdemann acknowledges, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.”
[41] There is no dispute among scholars that the disciples experienced something.
But there’s more. The disciples not only proclaimed that Jesus was raised but they sincerely believed the resurrection occurred as demonstrated by their transformed lives. Eleven early sources testify to the willingness of the apostles to suffer and die for their belief in the resurrection.
[42] For example, we know extra-Biblically that Jesus’ brother James was stoned to death by the Sanhedrin and that the apostle Paul was beheaded in Rome under Nero.
[43] Many people will die for what they believe to be true but no one willingly suffers and dies for what they know to be false. Again, liars make poor martyrs. This important point should not be confused by an appeal to modern-day martyrs who willingly die for their religious beliefs. Making this comparison is a false analogy: “Modern martyrs act solely out of their trust in beliefs that others have taught them. The apostles died for holding to their own testimony that they had personally seen the risen Jesus. Contemporary martyrs die for what they believe to be true. The disciples of Jesus died for what they knew to be either true or false.”
[44]As with the crucifixion and empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances meet the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources, as well as the testimony of a former enemy of Christianity: Saul of Tarsus. Nine early and independent sources testify to the disciples’ proclamation that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them.
[45] To list just one example of this, the appearance “to the twelve” mentioned by Paul above is also attested to in Luke 24:36-42 and John 20:19-20. “The evidence,” says William Lane Craig, “makes it certain that on separate occasions different individuals and groups had experiences of seeing Jesus alive from the dead. This conclusion is virtually indisputable—and therefore undisputed.”
[46]Objection #3: The Disciples Experienced Hallucinations (The Hallucination Theory)
The most popular theory offered by skeptics to explain away the post-resurrection appearances is that the disciples experienced hallucinations. This is the position taken by Gerd Lüdemann (quoted above) among others. However, appealing to hallucinations as an explanation simply won’t work for the following reasons.
First, the testimony of Paul along with the Gospel writers is that the appearances of Jesus were physical, bodily appearances.
[47] In fact, this is the unanimous consent of the Gospel narratives. This is an important point because if “none of the appearances was originally a physical, bodily appearance, then it is very strange that we have a completely unanimous testimony in the Gospels that all of them were physical, with no trace of the supposed original, non-physical appearances.”
[48]Second, hallucinations are private experiences (as opposed to group experiences). A group of people “may be in the frame of mind to hallucinate, but each experiences hallucinations on an individual basis. Nor will they experience the same hallucination. Hallucinations are like dreams in this way.”
[49] Therefore, hallucinations cannot explain the group appearances attested to in 1 Cor. 15, the Gospel narratives, and the book of Acts.
[50]Third, ironically, the Hallucination Theory cannot explain the origin of the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection! Just like in today’s modern world, “for someone in the ancient world, visions of the deceased are not evidence that the person is alive, but evidence that he is dead!”
[51] This is a crucial argument to grasp:
Hallucinations, as projections of the mind, can contain nothing new. Therefore, given the current Jewish beliefs about life after death, the disciples, were they to project hallucinations of Jesus, would have seen Jesus in heaven or in Abraham’s bosom, where the souls of the righteous dead were believed to abide until the resurrection. And such visions would not have caused belief in Jesus’ resurrection.
[52]In other words, a hallucination of the resurrected Jesus presupposes the proper frame of mind which the disciples simply did not possess. Finally, hallucinations cannot explain such facts as the empty tomb, the conversions of skeptics like Paul, nor the multiple and varied resurrection appearances which defy a purely psychological, naturalistic explanation.
[53] “To be perfectly candid,” concludes Craig, “the only grounds for denying the physical, corporeal nature of the postmortem appearances of Jesus is philosophical, not historical.”
[54]FACT #4—THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
No scholar denies the fact that the Christian religion exploded out of first century Israel. Within one generation of the death of Christ this movement known as “the Way” had spread to Europe, Africa, and Asia. Christianity is an effect that needs an adequate cause and explanation. Where exactly did the Christian faith come from and what best explains its origin? The most obvious answer to this question is that the disciples truly saw the resurrected Christ. Only an event of this magnitude could turn scared, scattered, and skeptical disciples, with no prior concept and expectation of a crucified and risen Messiah, into courageous proclaimers of the gospel willing to suffer and die for their belief that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. This is what Peter boldly declared: “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses… Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”
[55] The origin of the Christian faith is best explained by the disciples’ sincere belief that God raised Jesus from the dead.
Anyone who denies the resurrection itself as the explanation for the origin of Christianity must posit some other explanation. Only three possibilities seem to exist. If the resurrection did not occur, then Christianity was either the result of Christian, Jewish, or pagan influences.
[56] Obviously the disciples could not succumb to Christian influences since Christianity was not yet in existence. But just as unlikely is the idea that the disciples’ belief in the resurrection originated from Jewish influences. The Jewish conception of the resurrection was one final, general resurrection of all mankind (or all the righteous) occurring after the end of the world. Nowhere in Jewish thought do we find the idea of a single individual resurrecting within history never to die again.
[57]Objection #4: Christianity Borrowed From Pagan Religions (The Copycat Theory)
Perhaps then Christianity finds its origin in paganism. Popular internet movies such as Zeitgeist have made ubiquitous the belief that there really is nothing unique about the Christian Savior. Jesus is simply a conglomeration of past dying and rising “messiahs” repackaged for a first-century audience whose zealousness eventually grew into the Christian religion we know today. Despite the pervasiveness of this belief it suffers from numerous problems. First, pagan mythology is the wrong interpretive context considering that “Jesus and his disciples were first-century Palestinian Jews, and it is against that background that they must be understood.”
[58]Second, the Jews were familiar with seasonal deities (Ezek. 37:1-14) and found them detestable, making it extremely improbable that they would borrow mythology from them. This is why no trace of pagan cults celebrating dying and rising gods can be found in first-century Palestine.
[59]Third, the earliest account of a dying and rising god that somewhat parallels Jesus’ resurrection appears at least 100 years later. The historical evidence for these myths is non-existent and the accounts are easily explained by naturalistic theories.
[60]Fourth, the Copycat Theory begs the question. It assumes the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are false (the very thing it is intending to prove) and then attempts to explain how these accounts originated by appealing to supposed parallels within pagan mythology. But first it must be shown that the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are false! In other words, even if it could be shown that parallels exist, it does not follow that the resurrection of Jesus is not a historical event. The evidence for Jesus’ resurrection must be judged on its own merit because “the claims of resurrections in other religions do not explain the evidence that exists for Jesus’ resurrection.”
[61]Finally, to put to rest this outdated and unsubstantiated theory, the late Dr. Ronald Nash summarizes seven important points that completely undermine the idea that Christianity derived its doctrine from the pagan mystery religions:
1. Arguments offered to “prove” a Christian dependence on the mysteries illustrate the logical fallacy of false cause… Coincidence does not prove causal connection. Nor does similarity prove dependence.
2. Many alleged similarities between Christianity and the mysteries are either greatly exaggerated or fabricated. Scholars often describe pagan rituals in language they borrow from Christianity…
3. The chronology is all wrong. Almost all of our sources of information about the pagan religions alleged to have influenced early Christianity are dated very late. We frequently find writers quoting from documents written 300 years later than Paul in efforts to produce ideas that allegedly influenced Paul. We must reject the assumption that just because a cult had a certain belief or practice in the third or fourth century after Christ, it therefore had the same belief or practice in the first century.
4. Paul would never have consciously borrowed from the pagan religions…
5. Early Christianity was an exclusivist faith…
6. Unlike the mysteries, the religion of Paul was grounded on events that actually happened in history…
7. What few parallels may still remain reflect a Christian influence on the pagan systems…
[62]Nash offers this final word regarding the copycat theory: “Liberal efforts to undermine the uniqueness of the Christian revelation via claims of a pagan religious influence collapse quickly once a full account of the information is available. It is clear that the liberal arguments exhibit astoundingly bad scholarship. Indeed, this conclusion may be too generous.”
[63] Therefore, it is safe to conclude that “the birth and rapid rise of the Christian Church…remain an unsolved enigma for any historian who refuses to take seriously the only explanation offered by the Church itself.”
[64]CONCLUSION
If Jesus was dead at point A, and alive at point B, we have a resurrection. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the best explanation for the known historical data: His death by crucifixion, the empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. Furthermore, Jesus’ resurrection fits the context of his life, vindicating His teachings and radical claim to be the unique, divine Son of God. Paul says that Christ “was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead.”
[65] Naturalistic explanations (swoon theory, legendary development, fraud, hallucinations) fail to account for all the relevant data and in some cases (copycat theories) are outright false and ahistorical. Conversely, the Resurrection Hypothesis accounts for all of the known facts, has greater explanatory scope and power, is more plausible, and less ad hoc.
[66] Only if one is guided by a prior commitment to philosophical naturalism will the conclusion “God raised Jesus from the dead” seem unjustified.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)