Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: I RECANT.
Source:
Chuck Baldwin / Facebook
URL Source: https://www.facebook.com/permalink. ... 69863063938&id=226997970644468
Published: Apr 5, 2015
Author: Chuck Baldwin
Post Date: 2015-04-15 02:15:42 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 58596
Comments: 178
I'm using this Facebook post to make a couple of personal confessions. In one way or another, we are all victims of our past. I was schooled in certain persuasions that have taken 3/4 of a lifetime to overcome. But when I made a conscious decision to pursue and follow truth--no matter where it led me--many years ago, my mind and heart have been liberated with the illumination of truth time and time again. I personally believe that only people who, in their hearts, are sincerely open to truth will ever find it. I will not make these issues a test of fellowship with those who disagree with me (although, I'm sure many of them will). I, myself, believed differently for all of my adult life. And these conclusions have not been made overnight. It has taken years of study and research to bring me to the conclusions I am sharing with you in this post. Obviously, this forum will not allow me to go into detail about the conclusions I'm going to share. That must be reserved for another day and another forum. But, for the sake of the folks--especially those Christian folks--who follow my work, I believe I need to be honest and straightforward regarding these conclusions. So, here we go: 1. I recant the dogmatism of a belief in a pre-millennial rapture. That doesn't mean that I DON'T believe in a Rapture. It just means that I am no longer dogmatic about it; and neither do I think that it matters to a tinker's dam regarding my personal duty to God. The Lord is going to fulfill His divine will regarding prophetic events in His time. Quite frankly, I am convinced that, for the most part, it is not for us to know the things God has reserved unto Himself. (Acts 1:6, 7) For too long, many of our pre-millennial friends have been using a belief in the Rapture as an excuse to sit back on their blessed assurance and do nothing. Even if the doctrine is true, the way it is being used as an excuse to not engage the liberty fight is downright shameful. 2. I recant the position that the modern state of Israel is the same as the prophetic Israel of the Bible. The nation of Israel rejected their Messiah and God destroyed their nation, their capital city, and their temple in 70 AD. Spiritually, the children of Israel have been in a state of blindness ever since. With the advent of the New Testament Church, we are NOT Jews or Gentiles, Greeks or Barbarians, etc.: we are all ONE IN CHRIST. God's people today are the blood-washed saints of all races, ethnicities, nationalities, etc. Again, we are ONE IN CHRIST. Accordingly, I am convinced that the modern state of Israel is NOT the prophetic fulfillment of the future redeemed nation of Israel. NOT IN ANY SHAPE, MANNER, OR FORM. I further conclude that the misapplication of applying prophetic scriptures to the modern state of Israel is producing nothing but perpetual war, the demise of liberty at home, the rise of a Police State, and the facilitation of a devilish New World Order. So, there you have it. I RECANT.
Poster Comment: I wonder if he's getting ready to run for president again? I voted for him when Ron Paul endorsed him in '08, and I just might again in '16.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 51.
#6. To: hondo68 (#0)
Chuck, You're right about the modern state of Israel. As far as the "Rapture" goes, it doesn't exist at all, but I'm glad that at least you no longer give it importance.
Sure it does. Literally in the Latin. More clearly in the Greek "caught up." Now when it happens, I agree it is debatable as it is not clear in Scriptures. That is what he means by not being 'dogmatic.' Some theologians say 'it will happen before, during or after' some events. It is not clear and the scripture reference from Acts 1 from Baldwin is sage advice. I took that advice from Jesus Christ own words a few years ago. Personally? All I need is the Upper Room discourse. Jesus told His followers if they love Him He will come for them. On Israel? Who knows. Baldwin should have stopped with saying "I don't know" like he did for rapture. Because none of us do know. What do we know God will do with a multitude of 'physical' Jews/Israelites gathered in the same geographic location? We don't know. Perhaps as St Augustine believed that in the end a remnant of Jews would convert to Christ for the Glory of God. Should we support the only democracy in the ME from a secular standpoint? Seems reasonable. Should we care for the well being of Jewish people who still need their Messiah. Yes we should. Should we side with them when they disobey the laws of God...No. From the perspective of Baldwin I agree...One's Christian faith should not influence politically and militarily a certain secular state. If Christians truly loved the people of Messiah and His apostles, they would provide Christian based support. If the US government values a democratic partner in the ME then they should pursue the government of Israel as an ally. I do await Baldwin's expanded comments on Israel. Somehow he links wars we fight with Israel's existence. Is he suggesting Israel not govern themselves and surrender to Arab Muslim nations? I don't think so, but he sees some connection with all the wars America fights with Israel 'just being there.' That is a bit concerning.
Did they get "ruptured"?
You make jokes, however I pointed out the word 'caught up' is clearly in Scriptures.
[...] Proponents of the doctrine of a pre-Tribulation Rapture claim that it rests on Scripture and has always been a part of Christian teaching. The truth is that it dates from about 1830 and was largely the creation of John Nelson Darby, a one-time Anglican priest and founder of a sect called the Plymouth Brethren. He contributed much to the dispensationalist scheme, and in particular he was the first to include the Rapture among the catalogue of phenomena of the last times. The Rapture’s recent origin is one of the things which should make us skeptical. Neither the Apostles nor the Fathers expounded any such teaching (nor, for that matter, did any of the notorious heretics of the past). Even Darby’s circle, although they claimed to find support for their teaching in the Bible, did not maintain that they had arrived at this doctrine through study of the Scriptures, but that they had received it through a revelation. According to its supporters the pre-Tribulation Rapture is an extremely important part of the Christian message. Yet it was unknown before 1830. The Rapture’s supporters derive their opinions ultimately from a single Scripture verse [...] When we look at verse 17 in context, it is easy to see that is does not really support the doctrine of the Rapture. There is no reference to a Great Tribulation or to any other events preceding Christ’s Return. The verse refers to something that will happen as part of the Lord’s Coming. The course of events St. Paul presents is simple and straight-forward. At the time of the Second Coming, the dead will be raised, and all the faithful (the dead now restored and those still alive now transfigured) will ascend to be with Him as He comes down. This is the universal interpretation of the Fathers who see the verse as referring to the last days. [...]
Thanks for the propaganda. Please explain how 'harpazo' does not show up in the Greek? It's there. If you were paying attention to my posts, you would not have posted what you did.
Huh? Did I say anything about "harpazo"? BTW the word in Greek is arpagisometha.
Which means...exactly what I posted earlier 'caught up' or 'taken away.' The same use as in Acts 8:39. harpazo (transliteration) I. to seize, carry off by force II. to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly III. to snatch out or away harpazM Tense: Second Future Voice: Passive Mood: Indicative * The Second Future Passive Indicative verb form occurs 26 times in the New Testament.
BTW the word in Greek is arpagisometha. Which means...exactly what I posted earlier 'caught up' or 'taken away.' The same use as in Acts 8:39. harpazo (transliteration) I. to seize, carry off by force II. to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly III. to snatch out or away harpazM Tense: Second Future Voice: Passive Mood: Indicative * The Second Future Passive Indicative verb form occurs 26 times in the New Testament. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Peter 1:3) The Greeks, who speak and read Greek, having been Greek and Christian for 2 milleniums never read these Greek lines and came up with the Rapture theory until some Protestant Englishman understood it that way.
I guess English reading comprehension not withstanding. We were discussing the claim "Rapture is not in the Bible" statements of others. Yes it is. I don't care who Darby is (he was Irish BTW) or any theories. I was addressing the term 'rapture' (English) is the 'caught up' of 'harpazo.'
The term has a specific meaning and it is based on Darby's thesis. No Greek ever read the line or lines in question and thought they would be blinked up or flown up into heaven while alive before the anti-christ comes. The Greek Fathers actually talk about being on earth to endure the torture of the anti- christ as being something to prepare as a way to test the believer for his worthiness to be in heaven.
[...] it is possible to trace the development and transmission of these ideas right back to John Nelson Darby. John Nelson Darby has been called the “father or dispensationalism.” While he was not the first to explicate the idea of dispensationalism, it was he who expanded on and developed the complicated theory of salvation history, which identifies a series of epochs following one another in a linear fashion. He was also the first to solidify the concept of the rapture of the church, based on 1 Thessalonians 4:17. Darby had significant influence on Cyrus Scofield’s beliefs during the Bible Prophecy Conference movement throughout North America at the end of the nineteenth century, and there is no doubt that Scofield borrowed copiously from Darby while writing his annotated Reference Bible. Where does the trail lead from there? Scofield became a close friend and colleague of Lewis Chafer, who went on to found the Evangelical Theological College, which would eventually become the Dallas Theological Seminary. Chafer taught at Dwight L. Moody’s Northfield School in Massachusetts from 1902-1910. During this time, he came into contact with Scofield, who, fresh from the Bible Prophecy Conference movement of the late 1800s, encouraged Chafer’s development as a theologian and preacher. Chafer explicates in an article in Sunday School Times, published in March, 1923, that Scofield was profoundly instrumental in his adoption of his dispensationalism. In 1924 Chafer, founded the Evangelical Theological College. In 1936 it underwent a name-change to become Dallas Theological Seminary and Graduate School of Theology, finally becoming simply the Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) in 1969. Its first students were a small group of only thirteen that were taught under the guidance of Chafer, who presided over the school from 1924 until 1952, at which point John Walvoord took over as president. Walvoord and Chafer were like-minded colleagues that shared many similar ideas. In 1926, Chafer wrote one of his most significant publications, Major Bible Themes, of which Walvoord revised and updated in 1974. During Walvoord’s presidency at DTS, who else but Hal Lindsey attended the institute, and it was here, under the direction of Walvoord and his staff that Lindsey solidified his pretribulational, premillennial dispensationalism. The final link in this chain is Tim LaHaye. While LaHaye never credits Lindsey for any of his ideas, it is clear that he has relied on large parts of The Late Great Planet Earth for his writing of Left Behind. While reading The Late Great Planet Earth, there are clear similarities between the two authors’ work: from Lindsey’s account of modern warfare during the Tribulations and LaHaye’s description of World War Three, to the words of LaHaye’s main protagonist, Rayford Steel, on his learning of his wife’s disappearance in the rapture – “Rayford had to direct people to the Bible… he had begun taking [his wife’s] Bible everywhere he went, reading it wherever possible;” compared with Lindsey’s, “I’m going to find myself a Bible and read those very verses my wife underlined. I wouldn’t listen to her when she was here…” Compare Lindsey’s account of a football game, “It was the last quarter of the championship game…only one minute to go and they fumbled – our quarterback recovered…when – zap – no more quarterback – completely gone, just like that!” with LaHaye’s soccer game, “most of the spectators and all but one of the players disappeared in the middle of play, leaving their shoes and uniforms on the ground.” Though these similarities may seem coincidental, when reading the two books simultaneously, the parallels between the books are striking, especially in the depictions of the events that occur during the Tribulations. Although neither Lindsey nor LaHaye ever explicitly deny that their ideas stem from this tradition, they are both self-deceived in their belief that the ideas they profess are merely interpretations of “the plain sense” of the biblical text. [...] https://dunedinschool.wordpress.com/2009/09/29/j-n-darbys-end-times-family/
I do not think that these pastors were committing fraud. They just trusted and believed their teachers or friends, so they developed and spread a mistaken doctrine over a few generations.
www.youtube.com/embed/QqpUoivzvv8 Pax Vobiscum.
There are no replies to Comment # 51. End Trace Mode for Comment # 51.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#14. To: Vicomte13, BobCeleste, Don, hondo68, liberator (#6)
As far as the "Rapture" goes, it doesn't exist at all
#19. To: redleghunter (#14)
Jesus told His followers if they love Him He will come for them
#28. To: A Pole (#19)
#36. To: redleghunter (#28)
#37. To: A Pole (#36)
#38. To: redleghunter (#37)
Please explain how 'harpazo' does not show up in the Greek? It's there.
#39. To: A Pole (#38)
BTW the word in Greek is arpagisometha.
#40. To: redleghunter, A Pole (#39)
(Edited)
#41. To: Pericles (#40)
The Greeks, who speak and read Greek, having been Greek and Christian for 2 milleniums never read these Greek lines and came up with the Rapture theory until some Protestant Englishman understood it that way.
#47. To: redleghunter (#41)
(Edited)
I was addressing the term 'rapture' (English) is the 'caught up' of 'harpazo.'
#48. To: Pericles (#47)
#49. To: A Pole (#48)
#50. To: VxH (#49)
#51. To: A Pole (#50)
Replies to Comment # 51.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]