Leaderboard

I have been studying eschatology for more than 30 years now. Originally I believed in a pre-tribulation rapture because frankly it was the only view I had ever heard. One day I was listening to the radio and heard a man mentioning the fact that there were other views on the topic. This got my curiosity up and I decided to study the Bible myself and see if I could discover what the Bible itself actually taught about these things. I was really serious about it. The method I chose to employ was to read the Bible from Genesis through the Book of Revelation and write down every verse or passage that I believed spoke to the issue of the timing of the sequence of the Rapture of the Church with respect to the Great Tribulation. This took me eight months to accomplish. Once I had all of my notes, I copied them onto Post-it notes so that I could arrange them in a chronological sequence if something in the verse or passage had a clue about the order in which it fit with respect to the other verses and passages. This was done on a 4' x 8' sheet of particleboard laid out on a folding table. I tell you this in case you want to try this yourselves sometime to let you know what it takes and what you will be in for. My wife died recently and I myself am aging and have had some recent health issues. This has brought into focus the fact that my own time on earth may be limited. Actually this is true of every one of us, no one knows the time of their own death. You could have a stroke, or be in a car accident tomorrow. In Eschatology, the study of the last things, we usually think in terms of things prophesied in the Bible that are yet to come. Things like the Rapture of the Church, the Great Tribulation, the Second Coming of Jesus, Armageddon, the Millennium, these sorts of things. While many of us believe that Jesus could come at any moment, few of us really live as though we expect that to happen. We understand that it has been about 2000 years so far, and that casts some doubt our hearts and minds about whether he will really come today or tomorrow or even in a week or this year. Though I have always realized intellectually that my personal time on earth, my own life, could end in a moment, it is the events of this last year but it made me thoughtfully confront the reality of my limited time. What this means then is that no matter how delayed Jesus second coming might be, I will likely be face-to-face with Jesus within 10 or 20 years. Eschatology is then therefore not limited to the study of the last things predicted in the Bible, but we each have our own personal last days which are contained within our natural lifespans. Some people say that if it is true that Jesus will not be coming back until after the great tribulation that that removes the motivation to live as we should so that we will be found doing what we should be doing when he does return. I want to say to you that if that is what you think: "Shame on you!" The motivation to live correctly should not be a concern to not be caught failing to live as we should be living when Jesus comes at the end of the age. Jesus suffered and died on the cross for our sins. Gratefulness for our undeserved salvation should be more than enough motivation to live within the will of God without concern of the question of when Jesus will return. When we are not living correctly, we have already been 'caught'. The Holy Spirit is inside us if we are believers. God is omnipresent. Whatever we do, we drag Jesus with us. Nothing we do, nothing we say, nothing we think, goes unnoticed by God. So I think then, that for those of us who think that a pre-tribulation rapture of the church is a motivation to live rightly, with that thinking we are inclining ourselves to living wrongly. Rather than to live holy lives out of the gratitude we have for what Jesus has done for us - rather than live as dedicated servants who owe him everything - rather than realize that we are not our own but have been purchased - some of us shamefully take his grace as a license to sin because we know we have been forgiven. We live worldly lives because we think in our hearts that our master is delaying his return, even while we say with our lips He might return at any moment. Those of us who think and act in this manner are self deceived and we are hypocrites. In June of 2014, a couple months ago as I write this, I had the great privilege of delivering a sort of eulogy at my wife's memorial service. Gathered there were friends and family some of whom are believers, some who were not, and some who think they are believers and don't even understand what the difference is. It had been on my wife's heart for years that many of her family were likely destined to suffer in eternity. I know that like me, she was dissatisfied with the fact that it is easy to avoid speaking of spiritual things with loved ones because it feels awkward. Personally I feel shame that I have too often avoided that awkwardness and instead of demonstrating love by informing people of their peril, I have been willing to risk their eternal destiny for the sake of my temporary comfort . This is a great sin and I confess that as such and am attempting to repent of it. The eulogy I gave was the first significant step in telling people to re-examine their hearts and their lives and their need of salvation from their sins . This had been on my mind for years but having so many people as a captive audience at a time when the temporary nature of life was so obvious, was an opportunity that could not be passed up. What I was saying then was not just a recap of my wife's life, it was an expression of things that she had left unsaid. Confronting the fact that no matter how long it is before Jesus returns, it is true that we all have limited time left. So I realized that there are two kinds of the end times. There is the near-term end time which is represented by our limited lifespans, and there is the end times for mankind itself which began while Jesus still walked the earth and which we are in today as well. Both types of end times carry the same implications. Time is short, and there is a dying world out there that needs to understand that. Jesus himself near the end of his life told us to go out into the world and to preach the gospel to everyone. This was not a suggestion. Not just a nice idea. It's not optional. It is a command to every believer. Failing to do this is disobedience. It is sin. It is unloving. Penn Gillette, a self-professed atheist, said to the effect: "How much do you have to hate someone to believe that eternal life is possible and then not tell them how to obtain it?" I think those are pretty profound words on the topic for an atheist. It is too bad so many Christians don't get it. I have been one of them. So, in these last days of my own life I have determined to try to improve in a lot of things, but most specifically two things. The first is to be more active, perhaps even aggressive or at least assertive in evangelism. People need to understand that they are sinners. People need to know that their sin separates them from God. People need to understand that unless Jesus saves them from their sins, that separation from God is a permanent condition. They need to understand that that separation from God is a separation from everything good. Imagine if you will, what it would be like to spend eternity apart from good. Where there is no good, only evil remains. I believe that this concept of hell is accurate. I don't even like to think about it. When I try to imagine it, what I imagine is an eternity of suffering and pain, a despondent existence, a type of suffering worse than anything we have yet experienced in our lives while all the time knowing that this condition will be never ending and could have been avoided. What if life was so bad, that you never wanted to awaken, and you could never fall asleep again? If I really consider this all I can do is loathe my own evil and selfish heart, and at the same time feel an indebtedness and gratitude for the Savior who spares me from the eternity that I deserve and am apparently willing to let others earn for themselves. So, evangelism it is. I have to tell people. If I don't, I am a morally hideous monster. We do not need to have any special calling on our life to be ministers of the gospel. Where are all supposed to be evangelists. We do not have to wait for a leading of the Spirit to talk to a person about these things. We have already been told to just do it. Thing is when we realize what is at stake, we should not even have to be told. So then, the most important task that I have in my last days, the thing that I really want to be found doing when Jesus returns or when I go to be with Him if His return is delayed, it is to be telling others about God's love for them in the person of Jesus Christ who suffered and died for their sins to spare them from an eternity separated from God's love and goodness and filled with despair. When Jesus told us to go out into the world and preach the gospel to every creature he did not say to limit ourselves to evangelism. The purpose of evangelism is to make disciples, to make other followers of Jesus, and to teach them everything he taught us. One of the areas that Jesus taught about, that His apostles taught about, and that both Testaments of the Bible speak about frequently, are the end times and especially about warnings not to be deceived in them. So, because I have spent so much of the last three decades studying this area of Scripture, and because there are so many warnings not to be deceived, I feel a special responsibility to obey Jesus and tell other disciples about this topic because some are underinformed while others are deceived. I may at times sound arrogant due to the confidence I have in my understanding of eschatology, the study of the last things. I admit it, I am opinionated, passionate, and confident. When you put those three things together in one person, you have qualities which others may consider to be arrogance, maybe it is. Nevertheless I cannot in good conscience fail to attempt to pass on what I believe I have learned. I have been preparing questions for a trivia game on the topic of eschatology. While doing this I have been studying and reading the writings of others whose views are different than my own. There is one theologian in particular widely regarded as the foremost scholar on his particular viewpoint of eschatology. I have always had great respect for this man even though I disagree with him. He does deserve respect for his love of the Savior and his hard work and dedication to study. This is true of a lot of ordinary Christians as well. However after just having reviewed one of his books, I am finding so many unfounded presumptions, and faulty exercises and logic, that although I may respect his hard work, I have to reject his conclusions. Maybe I really am arrogant. However, even though I know this is redundant, I have to follow my convictions and make disciples, teaching them everything that Jesus taught his first disciples to teach other disciples in an ongoing chain until his return. Perhaps with this you can understand my focus. I hope that you can be patient with me while I am living out my faith and while the process of my own sanctification continues. I urge you, to also consider the shortness of time and make efforts to reach out to those you come in contact with and make a few disciples yourselves. Thanks for listening.

The question I want to ask is, “When is it permissible for the secular sciences to inform our reading of Scripture?” Or negatively, "Why should secular science NOT influence our reading of scripture?" I should stress at the outset that the question is NOT “When should Scripture yield to Scientific claims?” This is not about a contest between infallible Scripture and fallible science, or of God’s word vs. Man’s. Rather it is the issue of man’s exegesis of Scripture and its relationship to what I call man’s exegesis of nature; or, between scholarship and physical science. The difference may be subtle but it is important and has been missed or ignored too often on these forums. There is much in the Bible that is plain and requires no great amount of learning to exegete. But I think no one here is so confident (or arrogant) to claim a perfect grasp of Scripture from start to finish. Everyone will admit hard passages to which they can give their “best” explanations; which means they admit the possibility of “better” explanations. And most here will acknowledge certain tools which will help refine or correct those “best” explanations: whether it be better handling of the Greek or Hebrew, better understanding of the historical context etc. Sometimes a discovery, like that of the Dead Sea Scrolls, prompts scholars to reexamine traditional readings of Scripture. Should secular science be allowed the same force? Obviously the example that looms largest here is cosmology and its influence on our reading of Genesis. The scientists tell us that the earth is very old, much older than the sum of years mentioned in Genesis would lead us to believe. This has led some to question the intended meaning of the creation account (s). On the other hand it has been maintained on this forum by many that the abandonment of a literal 6-day reading of Genesis 1 in response to scientific claims made about the earth’s age constitutes nothing less than the abandonment of God’s Word as revelation. I struggle to see why. Granted there have been sloppy attempts to reconcile the two: I find it very difficult to cram an epoch into the Hebrew for “day”. But I am not here concerned with this or that maneuver but with the general condemnation of even searching for alternative readings. For it seems to me that many on this forum are not even willing to entertain alternative readings that are prompted by scientific claims: they are regarded wrong a priori, and that simply because behind them lies the influence of secular disciplines. This baffles me. Why the prejudice? Once more, I do not advocate the immediate abandonment of traditional readings of scripture the second some conflicting claim has been made public by the sciences. That is irresponsible. But I think it also highly irresponsible not to acknowledge these claims and reexamine what we think we know about Scripture. Perhaps we find nothing: in which case the alternatives are clear—either abandon inerrancy, or wait for the sciences to abandon their claim. But what if we do find something? What if we find evidence that not only reconciles the text to scientific claims but (and more significantly) illuminates numerous other areas of sCripture hitherto obscure? Does the fact that it was a secular discipline which initiated the initial search vitiate those finds? Is secular science such a vulgar catalyst that nothing good can come from it, however attractive and (I must say) invigorating results? clb

Er, I happen to be of Welsh decent, if you're making anything of it. lol laugh N throws a jar of mint sauce.

Please understand my plight here. I must reconcile all scripture to accept beliefs of things. This verse says very plainly that Melchizedek had no father or mother or family tree. No beginning of days or end of life. When Abraham was 58 years old Noah died. Noah was Shems father, Shem was still alive when Abraham died, and lived 35 years longer than Abraham, but he did die. He also has a family tree back to Adam himself. I simply can not accept that Melchizedek could be Shem with that many parts of his description being so off.

Are the trumpets of 1 Cor. 15:52 and Rev. 11:15-18 the same event? The answer is "no." The fact that the seventh trumpet of the seven trumpet series in Revelation is the last mentioned trumpet in the book (Rev. 11:15-18) and that Paul indicates the rapture will occur at the last trumpet (1 Cor. 15:52) does not a priori mean that the same event is cited. A grammatical and lexical study demonstrates that 1 Corinthians 15:52 denotes the actual blasting of a trumpet. The idea is that of a last blast of a particular trumpet. At the last blast of a trumpet, the dead will be raised. The name of this trumpet is not "the last trumpet." This is not what Paul is indicating here. Rather, the focus is on the sound of the trumpet. This passage gives no clue what trumpet is blown. Only that when the last blast occurs, the dead will be raised. Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 that this trumpet is the trumpet of God. This is the actual name of the trumpet which will be blown at the rapture, the last blast of which will signal the time of resurrection for dead saints. The first time the trumpet of God appears in Scripture can be traced back to Exodus 19:10-20:21. There the trumpet not only served to alert the people to the coming of God into man's domain, but also to warn the people of the seriousness of the moment. This will be the case again at the rapture of the church when God the Father comes with Jesus to deliver the righteous and begin the punishment of the wicked. The seventh trumpet of Revelation is but one of seven trumpets that introduces judgment against the world. These trumpets do not introduce one example of deliverance. They are clearly the judgment of God against those who dwell on the earth. The sequences demands that the church be removed before the first trumpet because the wrath of God is involved. Isaiah 27:13 states, "It will come about also in that day that a great trumpet will be blown; and those who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship the LORD in the holy mountain at Jerusalem." This passage indicates that the seventh trumpet of Revelation is not the last trumpet to be blown in human history. This trumpet called the "great trumpet" will call Israel back to the land after the Seventieth week of Daniel ends. Thus we can conclude correctly that Paul's trumpet blast and the trumpets of Revelation are not the same. Dscapp. There are only seven trumpets.There is no 8th trumpet. At the coming Jesus will come with his armies in heaven and Micha'el as chief of the army. He will sound the last trumpet. At the coming. jesse. Jesse, do you imagine that God will send angels to collect every trumpet in the universe, then remove the memory of trumpets from every human so that no other trumpet can EVER be sounded? I don't think so! I fully suspect that trumpets will be sounded in the millennial reign. Therefore we must qualify "last trump" to mean the last trump OF A SERIES. There are different series of trumpet blasts in the bible, such as the many trumpets sounded at the feast of trumpets, and the series given in Revelation. If you will note, these 7 in Revelation are all sounded by angels. Michael is NOT one of these seven angels with trumpets. If you knew Revelation chronology you would know that the 7th trumpet will sound to mark the exact midpoint of the 70th week. However, more than 3 1/2 years BEFORE that 7th trumpet will sound, Paul's "last trump" will be sounded. It is GOD's trump. No angel will sound that one. Jesus Himself will blow that one. Paul's "last trump" is the last trump of a DIFFERENT SERIES. Paul did not mean the last trumpet ever to sound. Sorry, but that theory is just plain silly. Next, if you study the bible carefully, you will see there are TWO MORE comings of our Lord Jesus; first to GET His bride, and last to come WITH His bride. These two comings are over 7 years apart, and they are DIFFERENT. AT His next coming FOR His bride, He will only come to the air, then escort His bride back to heaven, to the mansions He has prepared. He will not touch down onto earth until AFTER the 70th week has ended - and no one will now how long after. LAMAD

i believe the passage is talking about polygamy also. polygamy was a common practice at the time, and God was specific that some 'offices' should not be held by those who had multiple wives.

I am not sure what the question is; the text doesn't seem to speak to your status as a divorcee. I doubt the text means an overseer has to be a husband--after all Paul encouraged singleness and was single himself; rather, if he is a husband, he must be so of only one wife. This doesn't mean that polygamy was a neutral issue for laypersons; it just means that it is absolutely essential for leaders of the church. There may have been persons with multiple spouses before they converted. They were ineligible for these kinds of leadership. Only singles and those married to only one wife could be leaders in the official sense. As far as apostles and prophets the response above is correct: Apostles were first and foremost those who witnessed the Resurrected Christ. There are Christians with the gift of prophecy but this is quite distinct from the Prophet. That era is done. There are no more Prophets; God has spoken His last major word through Jesus. clb

Well in the first place I don't believe Prophets or Apostles are even operating today. Pastors Bishops, Deacon's, positions like that need to be the husband of only one wife. It is what the scripture says and there is a reason for it. If they are to have such a position in the church they need to be orderly and if they can't keep order in their own homes how are they going to keep order in the church. As for others things God desires that as believers we be married only once, "tell death do us part" After that if someone wishes to remarry that is fine. But as I said God has these rules for a reason. And I honor Him in that,

The ancient Rabbinical teaching, I hear say, has him as Shem. FOUND IT: The Rabbis identify Shem with Melchizedek, King of Salem, who is termed "a priest of the Most High," and who came to meet Abraham after the latter had defeated the four kings led by Chedorlaomer (Gen. xiv. 18-20). According to this account, Shem, as a priest, came to Jerusalem (with which Salem is identified by the Rabbis), of which city he became king, it being the proper place for the establishment of the cult of Yhwh. He went to meet Abraham to show him that he was not angry with him for having killed the Elamites, his descendants (Midr. Agadah on Gen. l.c.). Shem, however, forfeited the priesthood by mentioning in his blessing Abraham's name before that of God, so that God took his office from him and gave it to Abraham (Ned. 32b; Pirḳe R. El. xxvii.). According to the Midrash Agadah (l.c.) Shem himself asked God togive the priesthood to Abraham, as he, in his prophetic capacity, knew that he (Shem) would have no children eligible for the sacerdotal office. Contrary to the Pirḳe R. El. and Gen. R. (xliii. 10), the Midrash Agadah explains that it was Shem who gave tithes to Abraham, showing that he recognized him as priest (see Gen. R. xliii. 7). The Rabbis point out that in certain cases Shem ranked as the equal of Abraham; so that the latter was afraid lest Shem might be angry at him for having slain the Elamites and might curse him (Gen. R. xliv. 8; Tan., Lek Leka, 19). In another instance God made a compromise between Shem and Abraham, namely, with regard to the name of the Holy City, the place of the Temple, which Abraham had called "Jireh" (Gen. xxii. 14; see Jehovah-jireh) and which Shem had called "Salem." God united both names; and thus arose the name "Jerusalem" (Gen. R. lvi. 16). http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13541-shem

God`s word is about Christ. The `Tree of Life,` is symbolic of Christ. There is no other or thing that has life except it is from Christ.

I'm convinced per the Ezekiel 39 chapter that it is the same timing and battle as Armageddon. Direct parallels drawn between the end of Rev.16 & 19 with Ezekiel 39. And one of the strongest clues is the gathering of the house of Israel, which is to only occur at Christ's second coming.

A simple search of scripture would answer your question if the tree of life died. Revelation 22:2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

In addition to the above replies... Matthew 7:1-2 Also means to not Judge in your present mortal life or you will be judged back the same in your current mortal life, as it says in the following verses of Matthew 7: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. See...when you judge someone and yet you yourself aren't free of personal imperfections (which we all aren't) we are judged back by others in the same way. How can we know? By observation of the consequences of our words and actions...

Hi everyone, I'm new to forum so I am just checking out some of the posts on here. I did a little write up on this very subject a few days ago and if you all don't mind I'll just copy and paste it in here. There are many Christians who say we can't judge. The bible does state you are not to judge in the below verse. This seems to be the verse Christians use to claim we aren't allowed to judge anyone. Matthew 7:1-5 7 “Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? In this verse it doesn't necessarily say not to judge, but when you do judge you will also be judged by the same degree you judged someone. And if you are also in sin then get your act straight before you cast blame on someone else. I will use the following verses to support my claim that Christians can judge. John 7:24 "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” This verse is talking about righteous judgement. What is right judgment? In the KJV says righteous judgement and NASB does as well. Righteous judgment is Biblical Judgment. Judge a person according to what the Word of God says. 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you. The first part of this passage tells us not to associate with certain people who are in sin. To find out who is in sin we must judge them. It also states we aren't here to judge outsiders (non Christians) but judge members of the Church. God judges the non Christians and we judge fellow Christians. It also states to get rid of the evil people among us. NASB says to get rid of the wicked among us. So here it says we are to get rid of wicked members of the church. To find out if someone in the church is wicked we must judge them. Romans 12:9 Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. This passage tells us to Abhor evil. To abhor evil we must judge the person first to find the evil. James 5:19-20 19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. God wants us to confront brothers and sisters in Christ and let them know of their sinful ways therefore judging them. If we don't let other Christians know that they are walking the wrong path then we are allowing them to possibly face death (hell). This is a good thing to do this. The following are examples of where Apostles judging others. 2 Timothy 2:16-17 16 But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, 17 and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus 2 Timothy 4:14-15 14 Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. 15 Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message. 1 Timothy 1:19-20 19 holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, 20 among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme. Paul in these verses is judging and telling other Christians about things others have done. 3 John 1:9-10 9 I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. 10 So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church John is telling others of something Diotrephes has done. Again we see judgement from a Christian telling other Christians. 1 Timothy 5:20 20 As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. Here it tells us we are to confront Christians in sin (judge) and do this in front of other Christians and this is to make other Christians think twice about entering into sin. James 4:17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. Here it tells us we are to do the right thing and that right thing is to judge other Christians, not out of hate or anger, but to help them see that what they are doing is wrong and also to help other Christians see this before they act on it. My position is we can judge other Christians but we need to do it out of love and not pride or anger. I don't think Christians wanted to kick others out of the Church but it happened. Can this be abused like anything else? Yes! We need to trust in the Holy Spirit and let Him guide us.

We are not to judge one another so as to condemn another to hell. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to restore a Christian that we see is sinning but we must do it in a spirit of compassionate meekness and gentleness. Christians whose lifestyles are in great error, who refuse to repent after many efforts to reason with them, should be reluctantly avoided. We should also judge ourselves so that we won't need to be chastened by God later. 1 Cor 11:31-32 We are supposed to renew our minds daily in the Word so that we may be able to prove by it what is God's will. Rom.12.:2 Someday we are to judge the angels. So we are to judge a lot of things. But we are to condemn no one. The world is already condemned.

yes, repentance and salvation should always be preached first and foremost. sadly though i've never heard olsteen preach on either of those subjects. i've heard a lot of motivational speaking and a lot of talk about what God will do for you, as though He were a genie in a bottle, but i've never heard one word from him on sin, its consequences, or salvation through Christ alone. if you have, i hope you'll share it here! i wasn't sue from what you posted whether you were supporting his preaching or not. you are right though about phil 1:18. that's a verse i've needed to have handy many times, and it always seems to escape me when i need it! I am against his preaching for the sake of the cross because repentance and salvation are the heart and seed of the gospel. If there is a watered down and diluted message of the cross this preaching is certainly it. I am concerned that he leads many astray as cults do...However, I am reminded of this scripture is why I wrote it and hopefully some come to Christ through it. In interviews he clearly skews the gospel and compromises it with no denial.

Agreed. Wanted to add that Osteen stated in his Larry King interview that he won't deal with sin as well as Jesus being the only way to the Father. The interview can be found on YouTube for those interested, although it may already have a link in the Video section.

Jesus did say in Matthew 7:1-2 Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. Obviously, we will be held to the same judgment that we judge other with. Yet, He is not saying we should never judge, for Jesus then tells us in John 7:24 Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment. When we do have to judge, and we will be in that situation more than once, we need to judge righteously. The only way I know how to do this is to pray and wait for His guidance.

Jesus states we shouldnt judge others or we will be judged. On the other hand his whole bible speaks of holy men of God going to people, calling them to repent and to believe. So it is good to set things straight and to tell someone when they are doing wrong. It is wrong it judge someone with no motive for love. If you have a motive of love for the person, then you will set them on the walking path, and not leave them to their own crooked devices. Judge your own heart first before you judge another person.

The bible does tell us to avoid false teachers. The bible does tell us to leave milk behind and get on meat. Osteen is milk only, at best. He preaches a false prosperity doctrine and will not openly say that one needs Jesus to be saved. To me, that crosses the line between minor doctrinal differences to a major doctrinal error. One that can cost folks salvation. After all, if he refuses to say one needs Jesus, then how will folks know they need Him to be saved?

To the Church in Laodicea 14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. 15I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. 17You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. 18I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see. 19Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. 20Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me. 21To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

Be very careful with what you present as truths. Unless you have a transcript of everything he has said, the terms "never" and "always" should not be in your postings. They are blanket statements, which often are proven wrong, making the statement a lie. After watching many speaking from Joel, I have come to the conclusion that he is a motivational speaker, trying to raise the confidence of the audience. I do not see him as a biblical teacher or preacher.

when Aaron was approached as to what happened, here is what he said: I would think that since God didn't seem to confront him about making the calf. So in my mind I can see him putting the gold into the fire and then taking his tools to put adding touches on the calf. So to answer your question I'd say that it was something from the dark side at work... That calf was hand graven, with tools, like that Exodus 32:4 verse says. It didn't happen from magic of just throwing gold in the fire. They learned about that kind of calf worship from the Egyptians (research the Apis bull of the pagan Egyptians). ..... and I would say that the tools used in Exodus 32:4 were applied after the calf was created in the fire as Aaron explained to Moses.... you focus on one verse and that's ok for you, but I need to reconcile all of the scripture together to make up my mind. What it's suggesting is a mold for the base shape the gold is poured into. your mind is suggesting that..... Aaron said he put the gold in the fire and the calf came out. It seems that you don't buy into any supernatural things..... Because the Scripture I quoted involved tools, fashioning it with a "graving tool", that's enough to know that it was consciously made, and not something that popped out like the Pillsbury dough boy. Can you find a 2nd Bible witness to your idea of a graven idol being made without a graving tool?

Adam is the only one in that line that is the son of God, for he was created directly by God..... Jesus is the only begotten son of God for God himself caused Mary to conceive. I would have to disagree that Seth would be considered a son of God in the Bible, when it plainly says that he is the son of Adam. I am familiar with what you believe, but I just can't see it that way..... but I guess that's ok too. I have lots of friends that we disagree on a few things....

I didn't reject this historical/operational concept outright, I listened to the argument for why we should consider it and it doesn't hold water. According to your logic, the folks at the ancient aliens studio have just as good a story as anyone else [on whatever topic] because "hey, none of us were there right?". Do you believe that Pluto has ever made a complete orbit around the Sun? Do you think it's reasonable to suggest that it hasn't because "we haven't personally observed it"? I'm not saying that any or all scientific claims of the past are equally supported by evidence. We agreed that the extinction event that killed off the dinosaurs is not entirely agreed upon by the scientific community for example. Radio decay however is something that can be measured, calibrated and verified [supernovae]...so it's not an interpretation but a solid measurement. But your "competing explanation" is "We weren't there". You're holding an empty sack Tristen. By your logic, any murderer would go free unless we had video footage of the actual murder! What claims are consistent with the facts?! You weren't there right!? It's funny how creationists will criticize mainstream science by saying that they sometimes adjust their views on something in light of new evidence [which is used to cast doubt] and yet ALSO feel perfectly fine in suggesting that scientists only go where their preconceived notions dictate to them. Neat how that works isn't it? The thing is, scientists doubt based on scientific evidence, not holy books. The article is in response to AIG, a creationist organization and their suggestion that there's this distinction between operational science and historical science. So even within the Christian community this argument is rejected. This argument made by creationists is attempt to make a literal view of Genesis seem to be just a valid model as any other. If we come across scientific evidence that contradicts an early earth [radio decay measurements] you sit there and say "You weren't there".

If I want to know about miracles, all I have to do is open up my Bible and read Matthew straight on through to the end of Acts. Any miracle that doesn't point to Jesus is at best a distraction and a waste of time.

Perhaps if there were not such an anti science bias among the religions, and such an anti religious bias among the sciences, the two might come closer in understanding. However, everything in the Bible that I have previously doubted has been proven to me to be true. So I tend to believe that a 7-24hr day creation might someday also be validated. One thing is sure. It will all be made clear when we someday ask Him in heaven. Meanwhile, I do respect your knowledge of these things. But I also highly suspect the basis of dating done by paleontologists.

That's a bit of a turn around Not a turn around, only a consideration of how God often uses events in OT history to point to future events, like He did with linking the Book of Daniel events with the events of the last days in His Revelation, even with the idea of an idol abomination setup as per Rev.13... Rev.13:15 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. Come to think of it, that kind of thing happened once before in Daniel's days, didn't it? And a similar thing happened in Jerusalem in 165 B.C. by Antiochus IV, didn't it? God reveals historical events used as patterns for future prophecy in His Word, for those who pay attention. No new thing under the sun, like Solomon said. Apostle Paul said the same kind of thing too, didn't he? Yes, in 2 Cor.11 about the OT events serving as "ensamples" for those upon whom the ends of the world have come.

I find it interesting how all other scriptures you've posted, you have always attached a double fulfillment to them yet with Isa 10:6-15 you refuse to. Lets pick and choose right? In the deeper analysis, the things conveyed by Daniel and Isaiah concerning the anti-Christ's intrusions into nations are the maneuvering's of a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Such a beast does not require a peace deal to capture its victims, but overwhelms them by war and yes by politics, but the politics are ultimatums accept my rule or die...so for your notion of no physical destruction, is complete nonsense, No, I actually believe the coming Antichrist will come upon Jerusalem out of the north, like the king of Assyria did upon Jerusalem per Isaiah 10. Yet I also believe the reason why that Assyrian didn't conquer Jerusalem there is to show how God will destroy the Gog/Magog armies that come out the north upon Israel on the last day. I realize what you're pointing with the movements in the Dan.11 chapter. It's still too early to know for certain what all those movements are about, though we can find historical parallels that seem to fit already (like Antiochus). But the parts of Dan.11 that we should know for certain, are the parallels our Lord Jesus attached to them in His Olivet Discourse and in His Book of Revelation. In Daniel, and Ezekiel, our Heavenly Father does not explicitly show us what event it is that will worry the Antichrist to seek to destroy Israel in final. But in other Scripture I think He points to it, which is not about physical armies in war, but he and his kingdom being bruised by the bruisers (Chittim means what? remember Gen.3 prophecy about the bruising of the head of the serpent). I think it easy to misinterpret events that use the idea of war as physical while forgetting that the main war for the tribulation timing is about spiritual warfare through deception. Does that mean that spiritual warfare can't be literal or physical? No, but there is a difference our Lord Jesus showed us about it, for His servants that remain faithful will not fight the beast with physical weapons of literal war, but with the Power of The Holy Spirit by their Testimony for Christ (Mark 13:9-13). Like He showed in Rev.13:8, all that dwell upon the earth in that time will worship the dragon, except those in Christ who have their names written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. So like Jesus showed in Rev.13, who is like the beast? who can make war with him? This is why He also showed in Rev.13:10 that those in that time that kill with the sword must be killed with the sword. That reveals some will try... to fight that beast and dragon, but will not be able to win.