Irvin Baxter On Daystar

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Revelationist

In 1993 he made the same statement... that we were seven years from the tribulation.... sent out a special End Time addition to warn the world....

I have heard Bro. Baxter quite a few times, and most of what he teaches are theories, suppositions & possibilities. Rarely have I heard him make a definitive, absolute statement. Furthermore, he tries to understand and interpret existing prophecies--he doesn't claim to be a "prophet." Big difference.

There is nothing wrong with looking into interesting aspects of prophetic scripture and trying to match them up with current events. I don't agree with all of his theories, but I think he's a very smart, interesting man, and I've never found any reason to disparage him.

His publications are similar in tone to his teaching.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Right. He said IT COULD BE the treaty back years ago. He is always careful like that.

I haven't really followed him for quite some time so I can't really comment on anything of his that is current. However, the careful approach of qualifying the "predictions" is generally a practice of most endtime evangelists. This obviously protects them from the inevitable failure of the theories the were discussion.

I question the whole program. While it's good to throw around ideas and investigate mysteries, when the thrust of an evangelitic appeal is based upon doomsday scenarios then it seems that people end up getting cynical and burned out with the whole thing.

The apostles warned of a judgement to come and Jesus Himself made very specific predictions that in fact appear to have at least partially come to pass in the first century (disclaimer- I'm no Preterist). But the overall thrust of their think and living was centered around what Jesus had done for us all.

We can find examples where some prophecies have been fulfilled repeatedly. This is one reason that I have come to the conclusion that the Bible is intended to tell us what happens more than what will happen.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I haven't really followed him for quite some time so I can't really comment on anything of his that is current. However, the careful approach of qualifying the "predictions" is generally a practice of most endtime evangelists. This obviously protects them from the inevitable failure of the theories the were discussion.

I question the whole program. While it's good to throw around ideas and investigate mysteries, when the thrust of an evangelitic appeal is based upon doomsday scenarios then it seems that people end up getting cynical and burned out with the whole thing.

The apostles warned of a judgement to come and Jesus Himself made very specific predictions that in fact appear to have at least partially come to pass in the first century (disclaimer- I'm no Preterist). But the overall thrust of their think and living was centered around what Jesus had done for us all.

Everyone agrees AD70 fulfilled prophecy, to some degree.

However, I agree with your general thoughts. The early church never served God out of fear for doom. What weak faith do we have if we cannot serve God unless we're scared He may come with doom any minute?

We can find examples where some prophecies have been fulfilled repeatedly. This is one reason that I have come to the conclusion that the Bible is intended to tell us what happens more than what will happen.

My only words about that are Matt 24:21 where Jesus said trib such as never was nor ever would be. That discounts repeated fulfillment.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Good job, Micheal. Good job!

Thanks Bro!

[Revelationist]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I have heard Bro. Baxter quite a few times, and most of what he teaches are theories, suppositions & possibilities. Rarely have I heard him make a definitive, absolute statement. Furthermore, he tries to understand and interpret existing prophecies--he doesn't claim to be a "prophet." Big difference.

There is nothing wrong with looking into interesting aspects of prophetic scripture and trying to match them up with current events. I don't agree with all of his theories, but I think he's a very smart, interesting man, and I've never found any reason to disparage him.

His publications are similar in tone to his teaching.

He did use the could be word, but he also used it to bring in extra revenue because he wanted to make more mail outs to warn the world... I'm sure the 93 scare helped to finance his move and new facilities...

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mfblume

My only words about that are Matt 24:21 where Jesus said trib such as never was nor ever would be. That discounts repeated fulfillment.

Good point. There will be an eschaton, or a "last thing(s)." Until that time I think that we can see some of the same patterns occurring repeatedly.

The New Testament writers didn't appear to always have a literalist view of prophecy and its fulfilment. One example is Matthew 2:15. The "prophecy" Matthew cites isn't really a prophecy at all. In fact these are the words of Hosea (Hosea 11:1) exhorting Israel to remember her history.

Some critics of the Bible have pointed to this as a gaff on the part of Matthew who must not have been paying attention when the Hosea scroll was read. I would disagree. Matthew had identified recurring themes in God's dealings with Israel. He was using one of those themes as part of his polemic to show that Jesus is the Messiah.

Much of Bible prophecy works this way. Just as God repeatedly called his sons (and Son) out of Egypt, so also can we see a cyclical pattern to prophecy and prophetic fulfillment. Jesus may not call His church home today, but if He called me home- that would pretty much be my own eschaton as far as this world is concerned.

The Bible was written to give hope to all believers. I think most of us agree that it was never intended to be a "Wait until your father gets home!" kind of threat.

[mfblume]

Amen, Pelathais.

I have noticed one thing about repeated prophecy. There is usually a situation of fulfillment before the cross and one after, in repeated fulfillments. Solomon, David's son, was said to be a son of God and God would establish his kingdom forever. This was fulfilled in Solomon partially and real fulfillment is in Jesus. But it was always before the cross and perfect fulfillment after the cross.

I see Revelation as a pattern dealing with individuals. But I see particular and primary fulfillment in Israel's rejection and crucifixion of Jesus. God works in certain ways with everyone.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Revelationist

He did use the could be word, but he also used it to bring in extra revenue because he wanted to make more mail outs to warn the world... I'm sure the 93 scare helped to finance his move and new facilities...

And because of the fact that the world could end tomorrow they have discounted most of their older stock 50% so that you can get this material before it's too late!

[Revelationist]

Originally Posted by pelathais

And because of the fact that the world could end tomorrow they have discounted most of their older stock 50% so that you can get this material before it's too late!

More likely because if it's not sold soon, the events will be so far behind us that they'll look silly... like the teachings of Hitler, Kissinger and others that were suppose to be the anti-christ... better to get something now, than to be worthless later.

[QueenEsther]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Why why not just report it so we can know too? We are not omnipresent or omniscient.

Thank you

Hmmmm, I think somebody is cranky!