I have always held to the belief that it is extremely dangerous to approach a particular scriptural matter, or phrase, as a "Schematist," that is to say, one who forms an opinion, or concludes a matter concerning a thing in a specific manner, and then seeks to make everything else that has been written concerning it to conform to their preconceived views, or beliefs.
For instance, should one embrace a belief in the flawed teachings about a "triune God," then that individual will attempt to make every passage of the Bible which refers to the Godhead in such a way that it lends support to their biased views, all the while failing to recognize the deficiency of their understanding. I fear that this is the manner in which many have attempted to interpret the words of our Lord as found recorded in Matthew 24.
Should one approach the specific issues raised by the questions which I have tendered here for discussion in such a manner (as some, such as ApostolicTexas and Brother Mike Blume have done), and in so doing have concluded that the things spoken about by Jesus have already taken place, and in like manner apply this same manner of interpreting the contents of the scriptures to the contents of Exodus 20, then it might also be concluded that the commandments listed there were applicable ONLY to those Israelites who were alive during that period wherein they were given.
Is it proper to conclude that because the LORD God used such words as "you," within the 10 commandments that we must conclude that such were applicable, or restricted, ONLY to those in attendance at the time they were uttered? Of course not! In fact, it is sheer folly and absurdity to even imagine that such were the case. If one followed this pattern of interpreting the contents of the scriptures, and go through the Bible eliminating all of the places wherein such words are found (based upon the flawed belief that in such instances the things referred to did not apply to this present generation), then that which would remain would become so confusing as to render it void and utterly useless.
Why do some fail to recognize the implications of the words of Romans 4:17, wherein we are told that because God is eternal, and therefore not restricted to the limitations of time as we mortal humans are, that He is able to "...calleth those things which be not as though they were"?
Why do some tenaciously embrace the flawed belief that simply because our Lord used words such as "you, ye, thee," etc., within the record of the response which He uttered in response to the inquiry of the chosen apostles regarding the specific "sign" (singular), that would be indicative of the immenincy of His "coming" and "the end of the age," that such things were to apply ONLY to them and the people who were living during their generation? If such a concludion were indeed true, then I would be inclined to question why it was even necessary that this matter be made an integral part of the Bible, for what relevancy would it bear upon we who are alive today?
IMHO every passage of the sacred Writ must be considered to be applicable to the people of every generation, else it is applicable to none! A strong statement, huh? Indeed! for if such were the case then mankind is in a much greater state of distress than one could even imagine.
I tend to agree with the above post...
However I am not a Bible teacher and much of this stuff seems so complicated to me. I have been so busy lately I haven´t had much time to post but I do think a lot along these lines...It is very serious and I do pray that God prepares us all for whatever might be ahead.
__________________
Monies to help us may be sent to P.O. Box 797, Jonesville, La 71343.
If it is for one of our direct needs please mark it on the check.
Facebook Janice LaVaun Taylor Alvear
I have always held to the belief that it is extremely dangerous to approach a particular scriptural matter, or phrase, as a "Schematist," that is to say, one who forms an opinion, or concludes a matter concerning a thing in a specific manner, and then seeks to make everything else that has been written concerning it to conform to their preconceived views, or beliefs.
For instance, should one embrace a belief in the flawed teachings about a "triune God," then that individual will attempt to make every passage of the Bible which refers to the Godhead in such a way that it lends support to their biased views, all the while failing to recognize the deficiency of their understanding. I fear that this is the manner in which many have attempted to interpret the words of our Lord as found recorded in Matthew 24.
Should one approach the specific issues raised by the questions which I have tendered here for discussion in such a manner (as some, such as ApostolicTexas and Brother Mike Blume have done), and in so doing have concluded that the things spoken about by Jesus have already taken place, and in like manner apply this same manner of interpreting the contents of the scriptures to the contents of Exodus 20, then it might also be concluded that the commandments listed there were applicable ONLY to those Israelites who were alive during that period wherein they were given.
I am completely for the thought of ensuring we do not approach something with preconceived notions. And the issue I have with Matt 24 is not at all an outcropping of preconception. Neither is it a result of reading words like "YOU". You did not read my posts in order to say what you did here.
In fact, I believed full-blown futurism for many years until I noticed some timetexts in the Gospels concerning the words of judgment. Matt 16 ends speaking to disciples and saying they shall not taste death until they see the son of man coming in the clouds. That limits the issue to those people. Matthew 23 spoke to the people of that day, as the translations attest, when referring to that generation, and distinguished them from their ancestral fathers, letting us know he is specifying a particular people and in that context.
Matthew 24:34 KJV Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Jesus said all those events, not some of them, would occur in one generation. And the temple destruction that was included in the ALL THESE THINGS list.
Jesus carried His cross as the women wept for him, and he told them they should weep for themselves and their children since they would cry fro rocks and mountains to fall on them, and that is the sixth seal of Rev 6.
Over and over again TIMETEXTS were introduced into the discussions by Jesus. And that makes the issue entirely different than what you are proposing. One has to be unaware of those references in order to say the events were not to occur in their lifetimes only.
Quote:
Is it proper to conclude that because the LORD God used such words as "you," within the 10 commandments that we must conclude that such were applicable, or restricted, ONLY to those in attendance at the time they were uttered? Of course not!
I agree! However, it is not just a matter of YOU, but rather TIMETEXTS that are involved int he discussions of Matt 24 and elsewhere. Unfortunately, tradition will now cause the reader of my post to twist the timetext statements and carry them away into rather unreasonable extents, since that is the real culprit we are dealing with in the differences of beliefs here. Not the pronouns YOU etc.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Isaiah 66:3 "He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations."
Seems to me (for 30+ years now) that the continuation of offering sacrifices after the crucifixion was the abomination that made Jerusalem desolate.
It is also interesting to note that nearly all students of prophecy neglect to compare Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark 13 to their listening audience and note they are OUT OF SEQUENCE proving they are NOT written in chronological order.
Jesus was simply answering 3 questions.
1. When shall these things be?
2. What shall be the sign of thy coming?
3. What shall be the sign of the end of the world?
The sign of his coming and the end of the world (cosmos: present system) is the same sign e.g. the destruction of the Temple.
Matthew 24:2 "And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
Matthew 24:3 "And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
Mark 13:4 "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?"
Luke 21:7 "And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?"
The disciples asked Jesus 3 questions, the entire discourse are the answers to these 3 questions.
How they were skewed to mean some time 2000 years later is beyond sound reasoning.
That they wanted to know and Jesus said for THEM to take heed should tell the reader WHO is the intended listeners.
Luke 21:22 "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."
That the prophets did not make all prophecies to Israel, Nor to Judah has messed up the study of prophecy because nearly all "Prophecy Teachers" lump all prophecies together as though the tribes were never divided.
There were prophecies to The Northern Tribes of Israel and specific prophecies to Judah, neither of which were to be fulfilled in the other.
paying simple attention to these glaring details makes reading the bible a new and different book to those who are interested in rightly dividing the word when studying the subject of prophecy.
Isaiah 66:3 "He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations."
Seems to me (for 30+ years now) that the continuation of offering sacrifices after the crucifixion was the abomination that made Jerusalem desolate.
It is also interesting to note that nearly all students of prophecy neglect to compare Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark 13 to their listening audience and note they are OUT OF SEQUENCE proving they are NOT written in chronological order.
Jesus was simply answering 3 questions.
1. When shall these things be?
2. What shall be the sign of thy coming?
3. What shall be the sign of the end of the world?
The sign of his coming and the end of the world (cosmos: present system) is the same sign e.g. the destruction of the Temple.
Matthew 24:2 "And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
Matthew 24:3 "And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
Mark 13:4 "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?"
Luke 21:7 "And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?"
The disciples asked Jesus 3 questions, the entire discourse are the answers to these 3 questions.
How they were skewed to mean some time 2000 years later is beyond sound reasoning.
That they wanted to know and Jesus said for THEM to take heed should tell the reader WHO is the intended listeners.
Luke 21:22 "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."
That the prophets did not make all prophecies to Israel, Nor to Judah has messed up the study of prophecy because nearly all "Prophecy Teachers" lump all prophecies together as though the tribes were never divided.
There were prophecies to The Northern Tribes of Israel and specific prophecies to Judah, neither of which were to be fulfilled in the other.
paying simple attention to these glaring details makes reading the bible a new and different book to those who are interested in rightly dividing the word when studying the subject of prophecy.
Ron.
Bro. Harvey,
In your opinion, how would my post#11 differ from this one.
I can agree that it is NOT a salvational issue..and I respect your feelings but at the same time I believe the scriptures speak for themselves.Go to any bookstore in America and you will see the shelves for "end times"just full and about every author and their uncle has wrote a book about what they think will happen.What you will not find is a book on what DID happen and what is found in Matthew 24.Those personal pronouns {YOU's} are hard to ignore and many people have been taught to slide themselves into those verses instead of allowing those scriptures to speak for themselves..I respect anyone who disagrees but it is not me they are disagreeing with it is in their own bible as well..The scriptures had an original audience and we fail to look through the eyes of that 1st century church.I cannot say I am total agreement with Elder Blume but we do see some things the same..
Your ministry will be in my prayers.God Bless
While, M. Blume does a good job on this subject, I also recommend a book by John L. Bray called "Matthew 24, Fulfilled" one of the most authoritative on the subject. It is however now out of printed, but is soon to be reprinted, you might find one on the internet.
__________________ For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God. (Romans 14:11- NASB)
While intending no disrespect whatsoever because of the publication of this statement, I feel compelled to state that I am greatly grieved every time I witness such being stated by a proponent of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism. And this is based upon my understanding of the following significant passages of scripture:
"...Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." (Ephesians 5:25-27)
"Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you." (II Corinthians 13:11)
"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3)
"Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth." (Luke 11:17)
I ask - should we conclude from statements such as these that it is permissable for God's chosen people to embrace beliefs concerning a particular matter which stand in opposition to another, or contradicts the sound principles found contained in His written word?
Would you be willing to drink a glass of water taken from a well in which someone had emptied a container of raw sewage, although the presence of such corruption might not be detectable either by smell or taste? I think not, albeit anyone might partake of such water while yet ignorant of the presence of such contaminants?
As for me I simply refuse to "go along with the crowd" with regards to that which the majority has accepted and embrace as truth concerning any matter, unless, of course, such beliefs can be unquestionably authenticated by a multiplicity of sound biblical passages pertaining to that particular matter. Following more than 48 years of being deceived through the subtle tactics of false teachers while a member of the "mainline professing Christian community," I have learned to prayerfully, and carefully examine the words of others before allowing the things which they assert as truth to become an integral element of my fundamental beliefs.
Just some thoughts about this matter that I have felt led to express. While, as stated, I mean no disrespect to Sis. Falla for her statement regarding this matter, I stand adamantly opposed to embracing such a position when it comes to anything pertaining to the sound principles of God's written word. In essence, we MUST all speak the SAME thing, and this so that there will be NO divisions among God's chosen people, His church. Only by adhering to this can we truly become the UNIFIED body which He intends for His bride to be!
Yes, but the Holy Spirit will eventually straighten her out. Or you. I guess.
Best post of the day!!!! Amen!
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Linear Mode
