From here:
So ya, I get a little pissy when people decide that the Church invisible is only made of of one small denomination or narrow tradition. It’s cutting parts out of the body of Christ… parts that you need, parts that need you. The proselytizing of your fellow saints makes no since what so ever! Sure, lets talk and argue Theology. That is good for us to keep striving to think correctly and better about God, salvation, and life. Chances are, I think your Theology is wrong somewhere. And there is an even better chance of my Theology being wrong in places. But, let’s remember even if my Theology changes to match yours or your’s changes to be more like mine, we’re still not any more a part of the one true Church than we were before.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, May 11th, 2008 at 9:49 am and is filed under Linked Articles.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
76 Comments(+Add)
There are many evangelical church members who one day discovered they were not saved. And like hundreds of thousands of others, my Roman Catholic mother-in-law was prayed for and witnessed (bugged) to for two year before becoming a born again Christian 50 years ago. She then realized that no one can be saved by works and church membership which is taught in the Roman Catholic Church.
To suggest that we should leave them alone, and in fact believe that people who attend an unscriptural church, is…well…unscriptural. Talk to many people who have been saved and come out of the Roman Church which will give you a more balanced view that this man who has gone into it. As can be gleaned from his testimony, he had a searching soul which eventually “led” him to find the serenity of liturgical worship.
He also fails to make the connection when he objects to evangelizing others from different denominations is that is what he actually did in reverse. Some theology is not as important as others, but the Roman Church teaches salvation by works and that sincere Muslims, Buddhists, etc. are going to heaven by God’s grace without believing in Christ while alive.
Paul sure wasted his time with so much theology if it insignificant.
And just for clarification I do not refer to the RCC as the Great Whore nor do I hold anything but love for its parishoners. I bought Pope Benedicts book “Jesus of Nazareth” which I guess indicts me by GBA. I reveal that secret not to recommend the RCC, but to show you I am not prejudiced against the church however I do not believe they teach New Testament Christianity.
A minor excerpt from Vatican II –
Even the unbeliever gets to heaven by the strength of his own works.
I’m inclined to agree with Rick on this one (in so far as the RCC is concerned).
Tim, you wouldn’t want to share some of your own thoughts on this would you?
But I do agree with the quote as presented here.
I would not only agree with Rick that the RCC in no way represents Christianity, but many churches outside of the RCC are also in darkness to a large degree.
To simply state that if someone claims to have a believe in Jesus, he is on safe ground is foolhardy at best and completely unscriptural.
A few examples…
Hymaneus and Philetus believed in Jesus, the only problem was that they had this small issue in that they believed the resurrection was passed already. Paul told Timothy their words (teaching/doctrine) has overthrown the faith of some and that it would actually eat away like a cancer.
REMEMBER, Paul also said that many withstand the faith in the same way that Jannes and Jambres (in the days of Pharoah) withstood Moses. How is this so? Moses through his rod down, it became a snake. They threw their rod down and it became a snake. To the undiscerning eye, there was no difference – let’s all just get along.
It’s nice and cuddly to believe that everyone who claims Jesus is Lord is indeed saved, but that is not what scripture declares. Rather it is full of warnings about apostacy, false teachers, wolves in sheeps’ clothing, etc…
Apostacy has never been so rampant as it is today. We are not to condemn others, but pray and speak the truth in love as the Lord grants opportunity.
My thoughts are that this post reveals the hearts of the commentors here than anything else.
I don’t think the issue is whether or not there are false teachers – I think most people will admit there are. The issue is why some people think they have the right to pass judgement from their ivory towers to the church at large. It seems to me that it’s a matter of ignoring the plank your own eye for the sake of the speck in everyone else’s.
I don’t believe that everyone who claims Christ is a true Christian, but, fortunately, it is not in my job description to separate the wheat from the tares. I can certainly evaluate teachings against Scripture, but beyond that, it quickly becomes passing judgement.
As far as apostacy being more rampant today than before, how in world could you even say? There’s always been errors that have affected the church – some with disastrous and deadly consequences.
Phil – I would agree that we can easily dip down into condemnation.
Amazingly, Jesus commending the church in Ephesus (Rev 2) in that they were able to discern between true preachers and false apostles – bluntly referred by our Lord as ‘liars’.
What criteria were they using to draw these conclusions?
Were they judgmental, overly harsh, critical? By today’s standards, the answer would be yes. But when you consider what’s at stake (eternal life) we can’t afford to be so wishy-washy as some would have it.
The quote that started this post is essentially saying that as long as someone claims to be a Christian, that’s good enough (whether Catholic or whatever) and should be off grounds for further witnessing since they’re already OK. This is FALSE – plain and simple.
When I say apostacy is more rampant today that ever before, it is because rather than “in-your-face” apostacy, it has become much more subtle, yet takes more captives and renders truth (ie: discipleship, holiness, fellowship with Christ)more unpalatable than ever before in my view.
Whatever.
Every generation has its movements and differences and is the “most apostate”, “on the verge of downgrade”, etc., etc. What pompous, arrogant pride and foolishness to always ascribe this to the current generation. The church – across all branches of the faith: Catholic, Protestant, Greek Orthodox, Calvinist, Arminian, Emerging, etc. – for better or worse is the Bride of Christ. Certainly there are a whole lot of things to disagree on – legitimately – and certainly the Bride has been a whore many times over, probably in ways you would agree and disagree with such characterization. It seems, though, particularly whenever a whiff of the RCC exists, that the amputation knives come out, ready to perform self-mutilation prior to the arrival of the bridegroom…
For the author to insinuate that we should not witness to Roman Catholics is especially unscriptural. The New Testament commands us all to “examine yourselves” which is in essence witness again to ourselves.
We should witness to Catholics, Baptists, Arminians, Calvinists, and everyone. Who among us would be offended if someone witnessed to us? We would gladly give testimony to the glorious born again experience of the Holy Spirit in our lives. We don’t need to witness less but more!
There are two connotations to ‘witness’, Rick, and you’re mixing them here. One is ‘proselytize’ and the other is to ‘give example to’, and the constant ‘proselytization’ within the universal Church is rather wasteful (”I was once a Catholic, but now I’m a Christian”, “I used to go believe in the god of Wesley, but now I believe in Christ”, etc., etc.) We should always bear witness (give example to) to all men, but we become prideful and condescending when we slice off a portion of the church that we disagree with and then “evangelize” them as non-Christians.
Paul,
I don’t disagree that the church needs to be aware of false teachers and the like. I think there’s sort of irony in all of this. I see a lot of people attracted to the Emergent movement and the like because they come from churches where things have been watered down or they have lost their bearings in some way. They have neglected a lot Christ’s teachings, and turned the Gospel into a few statements to which one agrees to. It’s not really something life-changing.
So it’s interesting that to me that in the Church in Ephesus that you pointed out, Christ says he knows them for their deeds as well as their perserverance. Having the right statement of faith wasn’t enough. It seemed they put it into action, too.
Chris L,
I think what Rick is saying is (and please correct me if I am wrong), if, when we are witnessing to someone and they say “Oh, I’m a Catholic” or “Oh, I go to the Baptist Church,” that does not necessarily end the matter. We should not just pack up our bags at that point and assume they are born again.
Chris L – I think the issue here is that you think differences are simply a “matter of disagreement” as in:
“I disagree with my uncle Jim regarding how spicy we should make the chicken wings, but we’re all in the same family.”
How much false doctrine is acceptable? Why was the early church so dead-set against false doctrine and we are so willing to wink at it?
Why was virtually every epistle – whether written by Paul, Peter, James, John, or Jude – so focused on ensuring that false concepts didn’t creep into the church and undermine faith?
Again, why did Jesus commend the Ephesians for being able to discern a true preacher from a liar in the pulpit?
John – exactly. I have many times witnessed to Catholics and Baptists alike who said they were of that denomination. Upon further, loving and heartfelt, sharing I have found sometimes that they were not born again. Some are serving Christ this very day.
I would not argue with a born again Catholic (I have met some) about why they stay in that church. Even if they should leave perhaps God will use them to witness to Catholics. I completly disagree with a born again person willingly going into the RCC, that person is probably tired of the bickering and the many faceted and confusing eveangleical landscape and I can understand that.
However, in the end, he is deceived.
BTW, I was a Catholic (the Christmas and Easter kind) before becoming a born-again Christian. I was Catholic because I was born Catholic – baptized, confirmed, etc. I know God has His own timing in everything, but it’s amazing that not once was I witnessed to (as far as I’m aware) about the good news of Jesus Christ while I was part of Catholicism.
Upon reading the bible (Matthew 5,6 & 7 to be exact) for the first time, at the age of 20, I remember saying out loud to myself, “How come no one ever told me there was another way to live?”
Paul – while in Bible school I witnessed to a young man who worked with me at a restaurant. When I showed him in the Bible that Jesus had brothers and sisters, he said the same thing as you. He became interested and gave his life to Christ. I had to talk him out of going to rebuke the priest!
Paul,
I think we have to consider the fact that the church was in its infancy when those epistles were written. Any error could be deadly for it, and it needed to be dealt with quickly and sometimes harshly.
It’s not that I’m against discerning false teaching. I’m just against it coming from people who really only care about proving themselves right more than anything.
If these “discerners” put as much time and energy into building the church up as they did tearing it down, it would be one thing. Right now, though, there just busybodies at their computers who are just causing division.
Phil – that’s faulty logic mainly because the church did not know it was in its infancy. For all they really knew, Jesus would be coming in their lifetime.
Sure, I agree with you on the motives part. That’s very dangerous when I start feeling superior and begin to look down on others harshly. In fact, that puts me in a worse position than them in many respects.
What I take issue with is that so often on this site (ie: Chris L’s comments about me being “pompous, arrogant…”) is that anyone who thinks that truth should not be softened in favor of fellowship and unity is labeled as a Pharisee.
Rick makes a good point: Jesus had brothers and sisters? Mary does not actually possess God-like status on par with Christ? Praying to saints in actually idolatry? Infant baptism is not OK? The list goes on… When people find out the truth it is liberating.
For us to be so weak as to suggest we’re all in the same family, and therefore are not in need of being witnessed to, is the worst we can do for others?
I’m glad that wasn’t the response someone showed to me. Thanks be to God.
Well, what do you mean by “fellowship”? Treating a person with respect? Attending a multi-faith gathering? Praying at the White House? I wouldn’t really consider any of those things “fellowship”. I think fellowship is a much more intimate thing, and I don’t see that having firm beliefs gives anyone permission to be jerks or slandering their brothers and sisters.
You see, Paul, we have a fundamental disagreement. You see people like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, and Doug Pagitt as the dangerous false teachers in the church. I see Ingrid’s and Ken’s views as the real danger. They are the type of people that literally split churches. They are the type that will take half the congregation with them if the pastor doesn’t do what they want. I’ve seen it again and again.
Phil,
I think you have Ingrid confused with Rick Warren on splitting the church issue especially if we are judging quantity and not quality.
Phil – while I have heard a few excerpts from interviews with Pagitt (which I honestly thought were quite embarrassing), I have never read a single word about McLaren or Bell. And, as a result, you will not have seen me comment about them one way or the other.
The post we are discussing here was simply the quote above. That’s what I’ve commented on.
The fundamental difference that I see is that some of us see doctrine and truth as “nice to haves” or areas where we can afford to be at opposite ends of the spectrum based on how it suits us, while others see the undermining and diminishing of these things as dangerous.
Please don’t create a false dichotomy (being proactive here). I still believe in the fruit of the Spirit. But that doesn’t mean we simply wink at gross error (ie: the RCC as an example) that leads people down the wrong path altogether.
The scriptural basis we have speaks for itself: from Jesus, to Paul, to Peter, to Jude, to James… all worked diligently to ensure that the faith was not watered down. Millions died because of what they believed in during the dark ages. But now, we’ve grown so mature and wise I guess.
And chances are you had fundamental disagreements with thos millions who died because of what they believed. Probably to the point that you’d either refuse or be refused communion at their churches.
Pretending like you’re bearing the TRUE doctrine that was passed down unbroken from the apostles to you is… well as silly as the RCC claiming the exact same thing. The reality is there has a lot of disagreement within Christendom on fundamental issues, pretending like we’re undoing the perfect doctrine that was preserved until now while you’re fighting under the seal of Peter and Paul is just silly. Chances are if you were to show up at Geneva while Calvin was in charge you’d have been imprisoned, exiled or murdered. So who’s the heretic who doesn’t give a crap about doctrine? You, or Calvin?
Tim – is it easire for you to accept the RCC because of your view on baptism? I ask because their view is one of the reasons I believe they are false.
Rick,
I never mentioned the RCC.
As I said before, the comments on this thread reveals more about the commentors than the OP.
Tim – the link you provided does bring up the RCC. Your one sentence snipe reveals more about the sniper than the snipees! It also let’s you avoid the question in leu of a personal swipe at those pesky commentors.
The thing is that none of these men were just working so we could be right. The errors that Paul and the others were refuting were things that dealt with the very nature of Christ. They weren’t talking about the mechanisms of salvation, the hows of divine foreknowledge or other things. They were talking about Christ being crucified and risen, and the truth of the resurrection. All the other stuff fades without that.
Christianity isn’t about who has the most correct doctrine. It’s about experiencing Christ.
Considering the high likelihood that there were no ‘pulpits’ in the Ephesian church… I would go back to Phil’s observation of the combination of right belief and right action.
Also, this sentence:
was directed toward this statement I wrote just prior to it:
So, yes, your comment that Apostacy has never been so rampant as it is today. would be a subset of what I was describing. This is not to suggest that your character is ‘pompous, arrogant’, etc., but that such a statement is – and has been – for at least 1700 years, give or take.
When trying to decide what is saddest in the ‘discernmentalist’ mindset, what seems to gall the most is the constant idea that these are the last days (cue the ominous music), the great apostasy, the ‘falling away’, etc. While most churches have stopped ‘date setting’ for the end of days, all this really is is just ‘date setting’ for cowards – kind of like teens ‘dry humping’ instead of ‘going all the way’, and somehow feeling good about themselves for it.
Apostacy has never been so rampant as it is today.
Bull. Pick an era – almost any one – and you’ll hear the same thing, whether it’s Spurgeon and the Great Downgrade, Luther and the RCC or whatever – almost every generation has a subset which seems to think it is the last and worst one, and uses this mindset as a tool of fear, control and forced submission to its view.
We are charge to walk today with Christ – a statement that is as much about action as it is about mental adherence to a set of abstract propositions. We do not know what tomorrow will bring – tomorrow belongs to God. Whether the end is today, tomorrow, next year or two thousand years from now isn’t our business, and using it as anything more than an admonition to ‘always be ready’ is just an ill attempt at control or false piety (or both).
It is no wonder that fundamentalism, as demonstrated in this simple mindset ‘picture’, is seen as irrelevant – worthy of inducing eye-rolling cynicism from the secular world. It used to be that a church would set a date as XX/YY/ZZ will be the day Christ returns, and when it didn’t happen, they would be (justifiably) ridiculed. Now, because we’ve become gutless, we just say ‘the signs are there – this is the most apostate generation – this is the beginning of the great tribulation – so-and-so is the False Prophet of the Anti-Christ – etc.’ without giving a date so that we won’t be revealed to be the power-tripping frauds that we are…
Sorry for the rant, but that one-sentence comment touched a nerve in where I have seen evidence of the church forsaking its duty and acting as the psycho with the sandwich board (”THE END IS HERE”) instead of being salt and light…
Tim – you sound quite angry. No one’s trying to be clever here or make the claims you are insinuating. All I’m trying to do is illustrate that in our temperate Christian climate we someone feel we are afforded the ability to waterdown whatever we like. Others in the past didn’t have that luxury – often on pain of death. Still, they didn’t back down from what they believed in. A fairly simple illustration, I thought, that highlights the gravity of what your post undermines.
Not everything that claims Jesus is of Jesus. What’s so difficult with that?
Phil – using your logic then, you’re saying that as long as we don’t mess with the core message, it’s OK to be way off-base with other things. That’s how you get things like the mess of the RCC. Who determines what’s “critical” and what “we can let slide”?
Infant baptism? Seems rather harmless. Under the rug it goes. Veneration of Mary? She was the mother of our Lord after all. Worship of the saints and praying TO them? Well, they were fine people who earned their titles.
I know it’s not about who has the “cleanest doctrine” – it gets much deeper than that. Yet, the two elements of doctrine and living your faith aren’t diametrically opposed. Paul’s doctrine was correct, as was his walk.
Chris L – a little far-reaching in my view (got a good chuckle out of the Sandwich Board illustration).
Seeing as Apostacy is progressive (ie: snowball effect), I see no problem with pointing out the fact that it is worse now than before. Again, scripture does point to this as well.
As for your reference to cowardice of not pointing to a specific date… well, that’s just silly. Perhaps you’re reading a little too much into my single sentence. Like you said, the admonition is to always be ready. No one went so far as to mention the false prophet or the great tribulation.
Paul,
I’m not saying I think things like infant baptism or praying to saints are right. I could give good arguments against those things. I’m just saying that it is possible for someone to believe in those things and still be a Christian.
I’m not saying that it’s something we just say “oh well” about, but those don’t matter at all if we can’t agree on who Jesus is.
Chris – it may not be the last days, but that view does not have no evidence.
*There are thousands of cults that have surfaced in the last 200 years
*There are thousands of men who claim to be Christ today
*There are what some consider signs in the heavens
*There are some weather related signs that may or may not be pertinent
*There are disease, famine, and war signs that may or may not be pertinent
You may be correct, Chris, but I contend that some of us have another view based upon things that may or may not ultimately prove supportive. My eschatology isn’t just made up from nothing.
Phil – that’s my point. How can someone believe in Christ and still engage in (watered down) idol worship. What’s the difference between someone who prays to St Peter for safety while driving and a Hindu worshipper who prays to Kali for protection while driving?
Peter would roll over in his grave if he knew this type of nonsense was happening! The Father and Son are exclusive in the sense that They alone should get the glory.
What about Mary WORSHIP – yes worship? Where does it end Phil. I admire your desire to be inclusive and non-offensive, but it comes to the point where you erode the entire foundation in your efforts. It’s better to stand on the truth. Sure, you’ll be maligned a little, but when it comes to eternal things the Dale Carnegie approach just doesn’t work.
And there were just as many – if not more – in the first centuries A.D. in the Roman Empire. As a percentage of the population, though, we don’t hold a candle to the Roman Empire…
There were a large number of Messiahs in first century Israel (most killed by the Romans), and a number of deities in Asia Minor who were messiah figures, a number of which, like Cybele, were said to have been miraculously born and resurrected.
As there were upon Julius Caesar’s death, which led to the deification of Caesars, and during the reigns of Nero and Domitian Caesar.
There were a number of famines and there were a statistically huge number of devastating earthquakes (like the one that utterly destroyed Laodicea, Collosae and Heiropolis and much of the Roman world in Asia Minor around 60 AD) in the first century A.D.
The famine and disease incurred in the city of Jerusalem during the seige in 69-70 A.D. was so bad that Josephus records:
But an eschatology (the way things end) isn’t the way of living – the end belongs to God, and the only thing we have power to do is in living obediently through Christ today, depending on his grace throughout.
Wow, take off for a few hours and the accusations fly.
Paul C,
Not sure why you think I’m angry, because I”m not, but your argument includes in it the unstated assumption that everything was fine before what’s going on now which has undone the work of Peter, Jude, James and Paul. You’ve already backed off that claim leaving no basis for your conclusion.
Rick,
I only mentioned the RCC negatively, in that they hold to the idea that they have true doctrine via apostolic succession as Paul tried to claim about the church at large, or at least the bits of the church he agrees with.
Tim said: Not sure why you think I’m angry, because I”m not, but your argument includes in it the unstated assumption that everything was fine before what’s going on now which has undone the work of Peter, Jude, James and Paul. You’ve already backed off that claim leaving no basis for your conclusion.
Huh? I’m confused. How has my “claim” changed at all?
“But an eschatology (the way things end) isn’t the way of living – the end belongs to God, and the only thing we have power to do is in living obediently through Christ today, depending on his grace throughout.”
I do not see many people selling all and moving to the mountains. I know many sweet and committed “Left Behinders” as I do others. I think your caricature of how people live who espouse my general eschatology is flawed.
Like I said, and knew the statistics you presented, the things today may or may not be pertinent in an end times discussion. Only God knows if they are or they are not. But the New Testament is filled with admonitions to look for His coming. Some of us take those literally.
Paul C,
When you wrote:
You knocked the legs out from under your argument that things are somehow fundamentally different than they’ve been in the past. If you’re not claiming that things are different, and that you don’t have something special received from Jesus, Paul, James and Jude, then there’s nothing left for you to claim.
Furthermore, to try to claim that somehow we are insulting those who died while simultaneously holding to doctrine that they would find apostate, is at the least a bit dishonest.
No, but you do see ODMs who’s paranoia that we’re in the end times and so there’s a great falling away has lead them to believe that pretty much everyone other themselves are apostate.
Echoing Chris – that situation has been reflective throughout church history, so relax. And anyway, Tim, the growth continues to occur disproportionately in the group which includes the “apostates”. So there doesn’t seem to be much damage being done by guys like me who cannot be anyless obscur!
Except that John Calvin also believed in infant baptism.
Luther covered that one…
.
Don’t confuse praying TO and saying the prayer OF. I suppose we could start having issues with the Apostles Creed or the Nicene or the memorization of the Heidelberg, or etc…
Not arguing just pointing out that your “flavor” of christianity may not be all that different, historically, than the RCC or Reformed or Lutheran.
Well the Nicene Creed affirms baptismal regeneration which means the vast majority of American denominations will have problems with it.
Uless they refer to the baptism of the Spirit into Christ. I am sure they don’t mean that but the wording is nebulous enough to have widespread interpretation.
Baptism: I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
I Cor.12:13 – For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body…
Same word.
I am a little late for this discussion.
But Rick,
Doesn’t the bible say to be aware of the times we live in? Also doesn’t the bible say when Israel becomes a nation ( 60 years ) to look because the coming of the king is near? Does mathew 24 happening now or was that soemething that was going to happen throughout history?
So if I feel the end is near I shouldn’t say anything and just keep living my christian life? or should I be aware?
I am a bit confuse on what cris is trying to imply.
Oscar,
It sounds as if you’ve been influenced by Dispensationalist theology as well. There’s all sorts of stuff written on the subject, but I would say that a lot of Dispensationalism is applying a hermaneutic that ignores a lot of the cultural and historical context of Scripture.
I think the return of Christ is a source of hope for Christians, but I don’t know if it should be used as an evangelistic tool, per se. Standing on the corner with a sandwich board proclaiming “the end is near” is a good way to get ignored.
Oscar – Chris L was (disguisingly) making light of people who believe we are living in the last days before the return of Christ. Many things point to His soon return, but of course, people will also refute these things and say it’s always been as bad or worse. Some even claim things are getting better, which is not the case.
A believe that Jesus could return within one’s lifetime has seldom done any harm (sure, there’s the example of Jonestown or David Koresh) but has served to solidify one’s convictions and steadiness in Christ. How many parables does Jesus warn us to be prepared for His coming?
Some will automatically make the association to the “sandwich board Christian” mentality, but that’s not accurate.
Peter sums it up nicely: “They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.”
How can you even make a quantitative analysis of this. If you’re of African decent and in America, things have generally gotten better for you in the last 150 years. Generally, people are living longer. Diseases that killed people 50 years ago can now be treated.
On the other hand, there are parts of the world that could still be described as hell on earth. The earth is a war zone, both literally and spiritually, and it’s messy. It’s always been that way, and it will until Christ does return.
The signs Jesus talks about in Matthew 24 were describing the state of Jerusalem before it’s destruction in 70 AD. For Jews in the city at the time, it was an apocolypse. The unthinkable was happening.
Phil,
So i guess you are in the covenant theology side on this.
But iI wasn’t talking about standing on a corner yelling ” Repent the End is near ”
A couple of questions.
1. Do you beileve Jesus is going to return? Are the times we live now the same as the days of Noah? or that passed us already in history?
Paul I agree, what I dont understand is should we be prepared for the End or should we just leave up to God to handle it? Should i just live my life as Jesus wants me to without worrying what surrounds me?
Should we eliminate the book of revelations all toguether?
or is this just another way God showing his ” Love “?
For the record there is no S on the end of the book Title.
Phil – just a footnote, but I am black (though not American, I am in Canada). Sure, slavery has been outlawed (in most parts of the world) and racism is downplayed somewhat (socially frowned upon).
Your comment reminds me of the stories I heard after the 2004 Tsunami that killed 250,000 people. When the waters receded hundreds of feet out into the ocean you had 2 scenarios:
TOURISTS: “Ooooh look – let’s run out and collect all those shells!!”
ANIMALS: there are accounts of elepants breaking loose of their tethers and heading for higher ground, along with other livestock who sensed something wasn’t quite right.
You pick a few things out and say, “Look, we’re moving in the right direction.”
That’s on the surface. In other areas, we have better and more fuel efficient cars, there’s the Internet allowing us to communicate like this, childbirth in the West is less of a killer than it was 100 yrs ago. We could go on.
Even a few unsaved people I’ve talked to have an uneasy sense about things.
Anyways, I’m not a “date-setter” but I do believe that we are living at a critical time in history in which Christ could return. Many signs point to this possibility.
Oscar,
I’ve never quite understood the whole “days of Noah” argument. In Matthew 24:37-39, Jesus says,
What is so sinful about eating, drinking, marrying, etc? It seems like Jesus is saying that people in Noah’s time were given a warning but they ignored it. There was no specific sign. This is what Jesus is saying the fall of Jerusalem will be like for the Jews. There will be some warning signs, but no specific sign, so people should live ready.
I do believe Jesus will return, but I don’t think it will be in the “Left Behind” way. I believe it will be physical return, and the resurrection of the dead will occur. God will set things right once and for all. Heaven and earth will come together and God’s dwelling will be with man. So, yes, I believe what the Revelation says, I just think that for the most part it’s referring to the persecuted Church of the first century.
From where I am standing ( New York City ) I dont see this getting better.
Maybe a visit to the guettos of new york may change your mind about what’s getting better.
Sure science has made great strides, but the condition of the humans has gotten worse.
Sorry bout ” revelationS”
Phil,
Who is the ” Son of man ” mathew 24:37 talks about?
Oscar – good point. Not sure where Phil’s living or what his background is, but from where I stand and where I’ve been and the people I’ve talked to, to say that things are getting better speaks of blindness or privelege. Not judging you Phil, but just saying that you can weigh things on the surface (we’ve been to the moon, we can get someone across the world in less than a day, we have new cures, etc) and miss the entire degradation of society on a whole (though some pockets have improved slightly).
Regarding Matthew 24, though there might be some references to AD70, I believe it is referring to Jesus physical return to the Earth when He comes to establish His kingdom.
The question posited by His disciples: Tell us what will happen at YOUR COMING and the END OF THE AGE.
In vs 37, you’re correct Oscar – that’s Jesus.
Also, the book of Revelation talks about the “Appearing” (the definition of Revelation) of Jesus Christ – when He returns. Very clear.
Well, tell that to people in Europe during the time of the Blubonic Plague when somewhere between 30-60% of the population was wiped out.
Tell it to the families of the millions who have died in wars.
Good or bad is a very subjective term depending where and when you live. The problem I see with having a “Left Behind” mindset is that it innoculates people into thinking that things have to be bad. I believe in a way it can prevent us from trying to end suffering.
I’m not saying things are getting better or worse. I’m saying people are generally the same, and their capacity to do evil and have evil done to them has remained pretty constant through the years. Jesus came to earth to strike the death blow against this evil, but we are still under its influence until Christ’s Kingdom reigns for good.
I suggest everyone read N.T. Wright’s new book, Surprised by Hope. It’s a good handling of the subject.
$4 gas prices, Foreclosure, Tornadoes in the midwest, Cyclone iny mymmar, Earthquake in china, Volcano eruption in Chile, Avian FLu Virus, Aids, Poverty, Increase in food prices making you more poor, Haitians eating mud for food, the “normalcy of homosexuality “, pushing the envelop in entertainment ( more sex the better ) to our kids, etc..etc..
Is it constant througout history?
The only argument that people have presented to me that things are not getting worse is the “they’ve been this bad a lot before in history” argument. I am not sure man has ever had the capability to destroy the planet before.
I choose to figure in the most recent weather related events and earthquskes into my eschatology. 250,000 killed in one sunami may also be a record for a two hour period. Approximately 80,000 people died in 20 seconds in Hiroshima, that may be a record. Almost 2 million die every year of Aids in Africa alone and another 2 million of malaria, that may be a record.
There are approximately 500,000 rapes a year in Africa alone as deceived men try and rape little virgin girls (as young as 5) to get cured of AIDS. Half of all marriages in the “civilized” world end in divorce, and half of the other marriages that stay together suffer infidelity.
Child pornography is beyond belief and is piped right into the comfort of your home, as well as traditional family pornography. In Manhattan there are double digit number of sex clubs where women dress as nurses and provide enemas to devient men. You can imagine the number of other bizarre clubs as well (actually you cannot imagine).
Incest is widespread and even accepted in some underground clubs. The southeast asian countries specialize in sex slave trade, and snuff films are made throughout the year worldwide. Drug – must I need say more? Alcohol – must I need say more?
I offer my humble opinion, not inherent, that things are really bad and getting worse. And even though I believe Christ is coming soon (I know others have believed that as well), I still think He may not come for 100 years. So I cannot fold up my tent and wait on a mountain. I still haven’t met that tribe.
Oscar,
Well, show me a time in history when there haven’t been those things. There have always been very horrible things.
The only thing I can say is that maybe these will inspire the Church at large to get off its @ss and stop spending 90% or more of its money on itself. Maybe it will inspire Christians to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and heal the sick.
If you go to some Christian forums you will literally see people rejoicing over the bad news. I don’t think Jesus rejoices over such things. I believe He suffer with those who suffers, and I believe He wants us to do what we can to help those in need.
Phil – a question: do you believe that the world will ultimately get better, so much so, that it ushers in God’s Kingdom on earth?
OR
Do you believe that Jesus Christ’s physical return and establishment of His everlasting Kingdom on this earth is the only hope for a dying world?
I am not asking these questions to somehow absolve us of our responsibility, but I’m curious as to how you see things unfolding ultimately.
Paul – I am somewhat murky as to how some of these guys understand the second coming, but I do believe some do not see the events as literally as do I do.
I would say that’s somewhat of a false dichotomy. I know what you’re getting at, and, no I don’t believe that we will progress toward utopia.
I do believe that as Christians we live in the now/not yet tension. We are to both proclaim and demonstrate Christ’s kingdom. When Christ was on earth, He brought restoration to the broken. He didn’t just tell people to repent so they could go to heaven. He influenced their lives in the here and now. I believe we should follow His example.
I believe that what we do in Christ’s name will have a lasting effect. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says,
So somehow, the stuff we do for Christ’s Kingdom now matters. It will last.
Phil – not sure how this is a false dichotomy. Especially since I made clear that your response would not give us license, one way or the other, to fold up our tents and run off to the hills.
I agree that we are to be salt and light in this present, evil world (Gal 1:4). We are to shine as lights in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation (Phil 2).
Rick – I get the same sense. Somehow, it seems very foggy when it should be one of the clearest elements underpinning our faith.
I want to be clear that I’m not arguing just for the sake of arguing here. I feel like this is an issue that has really affected my life. You see, I grew up hearing the same stuff Paul and Oscar are saying. I was pretty much convinced that the Rapture was going to happen before I got out of junior high or whatever. I heard dozens of sermons giving “evidence”, and I was told that the world was getting worse and worse, and just make sure my butt was on it’s way to heaven.
Well, then, you know I started to question some of that stuff. I started doing some research and found that the Rapture was pretty much made up, and that a lot of the stuff I grew up hearing wasn’t necessarily true. I’m not bitter about it, I just don’t want to pass on the same mistakes I heard. I don’t want to tell the people I teach that things are hopeless in the world, and that they shouldn’t bother trying to change things. I want to inspire them to use the gifts God gave them to change the world. I don’t want to manipulte them through fear and guilt.
I would say my issue is with your use of the word “only” in your second choice. I would rather use the word “ultimate”.
Phil,
I do agree with you on the state of the church and their lavish spending on themselves.
I also see your point where people are rejoicing over the bad things, but the way they see it is because they know God is coming sooner rather then later. The Bible does say to rejoice because he is near. And how do I rejoice? by going and helping those less fortunate, clothing the naked and feeding the hunger.
We are not running up to mountains to await the return. Actually it gives us more motivation to go and spread the gospel ( good news not condemnation ) that God so loved the world.
Do you think Jesus spoke of restoration and not much on condemnation because he knew that they would not be living in the times we live now?
Phil – thanks for clarifying your viewpoint. I also appreciated the personal insight you shared about your experience with the rapture mentality. Sometimes our prior experiences get painted into interactions like ours today.
Let me be clear though: I don’t believe in the rapture in the sense it’s promoted in mainstream religion (ie: Left Behind or John Hagee are way off the mark).
I simply believe that Jesus Christ will be returning to establish His everlasting Kingdom on earth (as opposed to us all making our home in heaven). I do believe He’s returning soon, but that could be in 5 yrs, a decade, 50 yrs, 100 yrs… God only knows. I still save for retirement, work to pay off my home, save for my kids’ university and so forth. I don’t think Oscar or Rick have a distorted view either.
I would only suggest not becoming so hardened (based on your bad experience in the past) to the fact that Jesus couldn’t possibly return in our lifetime. Again, that’s warned about in scripture in numerous areas – especially by Jesus Himself. God bless you.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by this statement.
Jesus did talk of condemnation, too, fo course. But it was mainly to the Jewish leadership who had lost the point of their true calling. There were different groups who were into self-preservation or power grabbing to various degrees, and Jesus condemned for forgetting that they were chosen to be a blessing to other nations. They had neglected to care for the poor, the widows, and the orphans.
So Jesus brought good news for the oppressed and marginalized, but He spoke of judgement for the religious unless they repented. I think that message is the same today. The Church can be content being wealthy and powerful, or it can give sacrificially to a lost and dying world.
Our hope is in the fact that Christ is working with us to reach the world, and the eventually things will be made right when He returns.
I guess as far as eschatology goes, we can view the earth as a burning building where we need to rescue as many people as possible before it collapses, or we can view it as a country that has been invaded by an enemy force that has taken people captive. I see it as the latter. Christians are to go about setting people free, and we know that the ultimate victory will be consummated when Christ returns.
Paul,
I do believe He could come back at any moment as well. I just don’t think we should necessarily point to headlines as specific signs.
I probably should have stated that sooner!
Blessings to you as well.
Hey, Joe Martino,
Next time I get into one of these discussions, I think I’m going to steal your short answer, and just say “love wins”…
Phil,
Would you consider the restoration of Israel as a nation a sign?
Could it then be pointing to something?
hey joe:
because the Lord disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son.
Hebrew 12:6
Yes! Love wins.
I say both.