Nearness of the Rapture

[Bible2]

OneLight said:

So ... how near IS the rapture?

It could be at least some seven years away, because it won't occur until after the tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27) of Revelation chapters 6-18, which hasn't started yet, and which could take some seven years to transpire.

OneLight said:

Nice to see this thread headed in the OP's direction again.

Yes.

But it was also good that OSNAS came up so that when the rapture turns out to be not as near as pre-tribbers think, the fear of ultimately losing their salvation can help to keep them (as also us post-tribbers) from getting so mad at God over our and our loved ones' awful sufferings during the coming tribulation (cf. Isaiah 8:21-22, Matthew 24:9-13, Matthew 13:21) that we wrongly employ our wills to depart from the faith (1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Timothy 4:4, 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Luke 8:13, Matthew 24:9-13), to the ultimate loss of our salvation (Hebrews 6:4-8, John 15:6, 2 Timothy 2:12, Mark 8:35-38, Colossians 1:23, Hebrews 3:6,14, Hebrews 10:38-39).

Also, it was good that OSNAS came up so that when the rapture turns out to be not as near as pre-tribbers think, the fear of ultimately losing their salvation can help to keep them (as also us post-tribbers) from getting complacent and thinking that we can commit unrepentant sin until the rapture does happen, at the second coming, to the ultimate loss of our salvation (Matthew 24:48-51, Hebrews 10:26-29, 1 Corinthians 9:27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Romans 8:13, 1 John 5:16, James 5:19-20).

Also, it was good that OSNAS came up so that when the rapture turns out to be not as near as pre-tribbers think, the fear of ultimately losing their salvation can to help keep them (as also us post-tribbers) from getting complacent and thinking that we can become utterly lazy until the rapture does happen, at the second coming, to the ultimate loss of our salvation (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a, Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 7:21, James 2:24, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, Revelation 22:14, Hebrews 5:9, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14).

No matter how near or far the rapture is, until it occurs we must all continue to "Watch" (Mark 13:37, 1 Thessalonians 5:6, 1 Corinthians 16:13, Acts 20:31), meaning that we must all continue to "Stay awake", spiritually, and not fall into any unrepentant sin, or into unrepentant laziness, or into apostasy, to the ultimate loss of our salvation at the rapture and judgment of the church at the second coming (Matthew 24:48-51, Matthew 25:26,30, Mark 8:35-38).

Edited September 20, 2010 by Bible2

[Bold Believer]

Bold Believer said:

Works prove faith. No one can dispute that.

Works not only prove a living faith, they keep it alive, like breathing keeps a body alive (James 2:26).

Bold Believer said:

James tells us that.

James tells us that ultimate salvation requires works, and not faith only (James 2:24), just as Paul tells us that ultimate salvation requires works, and not faith only (Romans 2:6-8).

Bold Believer said:

Yet Paul tells us in Titus that salvation is NOT of works which we have done.

Titus 3:5 means that initial salvation is by faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4). But Paul tells us elsewhere that both faith and continued works of faith (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Galatians 5:6, Titus 3:8) are required in order to obtain ultimate salvation (Romans 2:6-8, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, Philippians 3:11-14), just as others tell us that (James 2:24, Matthew 7:21, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 5:9, Revelation 22:14, Hebrews 6:10-12, Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

Bold Believer said:

John tells us that salvation is NOT of the will of man.

John tells us that initial salvation, being born again, isn't of the will of man (John 1:13).

Initial salvation, being born again (John 3:3,7, 1 Peter 1:23-25, 1 Peter 2:2), is both present salvation and a contract for ultimate salvation, just as the birth of an infant is both present life and a contract for life as an adult. Just as children can know that they are actually alive, so initially saved people can know that they are actually saved. But just as there's no assurance that children will reach adulthood, so there's no assurance that initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation. Just as there are conditions placed on children, like not running into traffic and not drinking the Drano under the sink, if they're to reach adulthood, so there are conditions placed on the born-again, the initially saved, if they're to obtain ultimate salvation:

(Extreme baloney deleted)

In a nutshell: I CALL BS! You are full of meadow muffins and have no CLUE what you're talking about. You burn strange fire. You insert 'initial' and 'ultimate' into the conversation wherever it suits your ridiculous and frankly CULTIC concept of salvation. You violate sabbath by demanding we work to keep our salvation. Enough of your lies! Perhaps YOUR Jesus can't keep you BUT MINE CAN.

[wyguy]

Bold Believer, Bible2 reminds me of other people who also believe salvation is maintained through works:

1. Roman Catholics

2. Mormons

3. Jehovah's Witnesses

4. Holiness Pentecostals

David Pyles wrote:

"The case of Adam also proves salvation cannot be maintained by works. There are some who teach salvation can be preserved only if the saved individual adheres to a works system. However, one must conclude that if salvation can be lost, then it most definitely would be lost, because Adam lost his blissful state in a works system that had practically no demands whatsoever. It must therefore be concluded that salvation is both obtained and maintained by grace."

It makes no sense for the Bible to state that nobody can be saved by works, but then say after you are saved you must do works or you won't be saved anymore.

If your works won't save you initially, they won't keep you saved either.

What Bible2 is teaching is nothing but the old lies of self-righteousness and legalism. It is God who declares us righteous due to the merits of the cross, (Romans 4:5, 5:19). But Bible2 thinks he can maintain his righteousness by his works.

The Hymn of the Legalist

Written by Stephen Altrogge

Jesus Paid It Some

I hear the Savior say,

“You’re not doing enough;

Work your fingers to the bone,

I will save those who are tough.”

Jesus paid it some

I will do the rest

Sin had left a crimson stain

Now I will give my best

For now indeed I’ll try

To earn your love and grace

I’ll add the works I have

To complete the price you paid.

REFRAIN

And when before the throne

I’ll give my deeds to you,

I’ll hope I’ve done enough

To make you let me through.

REFRAIN (3x just to be sure)

Bible2, do me a favor and list every scripture that proves if we don't do works, we will lose our salvation. You don't need to type out the whole scripture, just list chapter and verse, please.

PS: What denomination are you?

[Bible2]

PaulT said:

No, you blew it on this one. "Straw man" refers to a particular logical fallacy, i.e. a flaw in one's reasoning. It does not refer to a person.

Note that it doesn't have to be either/or, but can be both/and, in that the "man" part of a "straw man" can be seen as a person, in that it's saying that one's opponent has said something that he hasn't, and by refuting the straw "man", one is (supposedly) refuting one's opponent.

[Bible2]

Bold Believer said:

In a nutshell: I CALL BS! You are full of meadow muffins and have no CLUE what you're talking about. You burn strange fire.

Note that works of faith aren't BS/meadow muffings or strange fire. Instead, works of faith are Biblical (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Galatians 5:6, Titus 3:8).

Bold Believer said:

You insert 'initial' and 'ultimate' into the conversation wherever it suits your ridiculous and frankly CULTIC concept of salvation.

In the Bible, the difference between initial salvation and ultimate salvation is that initial salvation isn't based on works (Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5, Romans 4), whereas ultimate salvation is based on works (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Matthew 7:21, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14, Hebrews 5:9, Revelation 22:14). Also, in the Bible, the difference between initial salvation and ultimate salvation is that initial salvation is the salvation that Christians have now (Ephesians 2:5) in their temporary bodies, whereas ultimate salvation is that salvation which is ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Peter 1:5) and is always drawing nearer (Romans 13:11), that salvation which Christians are still hoping for (1 Thessalonians 5:8, Romans 8:23-25) and which Jesus will bring to Christians at his second coming (Hebrews 9:28), when he will resurrect or change their temporary bodies into eternal bodies (1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53, 1 Thessalonians 4:16) just like the body he obtained at his resurrection (Philippians 3:20-21, Luke 24:39, 1 John 3:2, Romans 8:23-25).

How has this or OSNAS been proven ridiculous or cultic?

It's the Bible itself that shows that initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only "if" they continue in the faith unto the end (Hebrews 3:6,14, Colossians 1:23), and there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Matthew 24:9-13, John 15:6, Hebrews 6:4-8, 2 Timothy 2:12, Mark 8:35-38, Hebrews 10:38-39, Hebrews 3:12, 2 Timothy 4:3-4).

Also, even if they do continue in the faith, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they also patiently continue in good works and obedience unto the end (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Matthew 7:21, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, Hebrews 5:9, Revelation 22:14, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14), and there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

Also, even if they do continue in faith and good works, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they also continue to repent from every sin that they might commit unto the end (Hebrews 10:26-29, 1 Corinthians 9:27, Matthew 7:22-23, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21), and there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Matthew 24:48-51, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Romans 8:13, 1 John 5:16, James 5:19-20).

Also, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they help Christians in need (Matthew 25:34-40), and there's no assurance that initially saved people will always choose to do that (3 John 1:10).

Also, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they provide for their families (1 Timothy 5:8), and there's no assurance that initially saved people will always choose to do that (1 Timothy 5:8).

Also, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they don't commit the unforgivable sin, which is blaspheming the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:29). An example of blaspheming the Holy Spirit is saying that an act performed by the power of the Holy Spirit is performed by Satan (Mark 3:22-30). There's no assurance that initially saved people will never choose to say that (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:39, 1 Thessalonians 5:19).

Also, initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they don't remove words from the text of the book of Revelation, and then publish the altered text as if it were the original, without repentance (Revelation 22:19). There's no assurance that initially saved people will never choose to do that (cf. 2 Corinthians 4:2).

Initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they continue in God's goodness unto the end (Romans 11:20-22), and there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Luke 12:45-46). Initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation only if they overcome unto the end (Revelation 3:5, Revelation 2:26), and there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Revelation 21:7-8).

Bold Believer said:

You violate sabbath by demanding we work to keep our salvation.

Do you mean the Old Covenant Sabbath? If so, Christians aren't to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Sabbath, because they've been delivered from the letter of the entire Old Covenant law (Romans 7:6). They keep the spirit (Romans 7:6) of all commandments in loving others (Romans 13:8-10). Saying that Christians have to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Sabbath is just as wrong as saying that Christians have to keep the letter of the Old Covenant circumcision (Acts 15:1-11). If Christians keep the letter of the Old Covenant Sabbath thinking that they have to in order to be saved, they're as fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4) as those Christians who keep the letter of Old Covenant circumcision thinking that they have to in order to be saved (Galatians 5:2).

Or did you mean Jesus' New Covenant Sabbath rest (Matthew 11:28-30), which all Christians enter into by faith (Hebrews 4:3-4)? If so, it doesn't mean that Christians don't have to patiently continue in good works and obedience unto the end if they want to obtain ultimate salvation (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Matthew 7:21), and not in the end lose their salvation for unrepentant laziness (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a). Instead, Jesus' New Covenant Sabbath rest means that Christians, every day of the week, cease from their own works (Hebrews 4:3,10), as in any works done apart from Jesus, and take upon themselves the easy/restful yoke/cross/work of Jesus, every day of the week (Luke 9:23, Matthew 11:29-30, Titus 3:8).

Bold Believer said:

Enough of your lies!

What has been proven to be a lie?

Bold Believer said:

YOUR Jesus can't keep you BUT MINE CAN.

Note that it hasn't been said that Jesus' can't keep saved people, if they remain willing to be kept. For God doesn't take away the free will of saved people, turning them into robots, or into macabre flesh puppets, mere marionettes whose strings God pulls to make them dance across the stage. Thank God that, instead, he leaves all saved people as his real children with free wills. And because he leaves them with free wills, they themselves have to choose each and every day for the rest of their lives to deny themselves, to take up their crosses themselves, and to continue to follow Jesus (Luke 9:23) unto the end. But there's no assurance that they will choose to do that (Matthew 25:26,30, Matthew 24:48-51, Luke 8:13).

Edited September 21, 2010 by Bible2

[Bible2]

wyguy said:

Bold Believer, Bible2 reminds me of other people who also believe salvation is maintained through works:

1. Roman Catholics

2. Mormons

3. Jehovah's Witnesses

4. Holiness Pentecostals

Note that it's the Bible itself which says that Christians have to patiently continue in good works and obedience unto the end if they want to obtain ultimate salvation (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Matthew 7:21), and not in the end lose their salvation for unrepentant laziness (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

wyguy said:

David Pyles wrote:

"The case of Adam also proves salvation cannot be maintained by works. There are some who teach salvation can be preserved only if the saved individual adheres to a works system. However, one must conclude that if salvation can be lost, then it most definitely would be lost, because Adam lost his blissful state in a works system that had practically no demands whatsoever. It must therefore be concluded that salvation is both obtained and maintained by grace."

How does it follow logically that because Adam lost his immortality due to disobedience that every Christian must necessarily lose his salvation due to disobedience?

When people become Christians, they break off their connection with disobedient Adam and instead become connected to the second Adam, Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:45, Romans 5:14-21), who is perfectly obedient, and who makes it possible for Christians to also be perfectly obedient unto their ultimate salvation (Hebrews 5:9).

The Bible says that it's not difficult for those who are in Christ to perfectly obey everything that is required of them (1 John 5:3, Matthew 11:30, John 14:15,21, Matthew 5:48, Revelation 3:2, 2 Timothy 3:16-17, Colossians 1:28, Philippians 3:15, 1 Corinthians 2:6, 2 Corinthians 13:11).

Also, the Bible shows that some Christians will obtain ultimate salvation because of their obedience (Matthew 25:21, Romans 2:6-8, 2 Peter 1:10-11). It's only some Christians who will in the end lose their salvation due to wrongly employing their free will to become utterly lazy without repentance (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a), or due to wrongly employing their free will to commit unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29, 1 Corinthians 9:27, Matthew 24:48-51), or due to wrongly employing their free will to commit apostasy (Hebrews 6:4-8, 2 Timothy 2:12, John 15:6).

wyguy said:

It makes no sense for the Bible to state that nobody can be saved by works, but then say after you are saved you must do works or you won't be saved anymore.

If your works won't save you initially, they won't keep you saved either.

What has been said is that just as we didn't have to do any works to be physically born, so we didn't have to do any works to be born again, initially saved. But while initial salvation is by faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5, Romans 4), both faith and continued works of faith (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Galatians 5:6, Titus 3:8) are required in order to obtain ultimate salvation (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, Matthew 7:21, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 5:9, Revelation 22:14, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14, Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

How doesn't this make sense?

Initial salvation, being born again (John 3:3,7, 1 Peter 1:23-25, 1 Peter 2:2), is both present salvation and a contract for ultimate salvation, just as the birth of an infant is both present life and a contract for life as an adult. Just as children can know that they're actually alive, so initially saved people can know that they're actually saved. But just as there's no assurance that children will reach adulthood, so there's no assurance that initially saved people will obtain ultimate salvation. Just as there are conditions placed on children, like not running into traffic and not drinking the Drano under the sink, if they're to reach adulthood, so there are conditions placed on the born-again, the initially saved, if they're to obtain ultimate salvation (these conditions were listed in the prior post).

wyguy said:

What Bible2 is teaching is nothing but the old lies of self-righteousness and legalism.

There can be no self-righteousness, because apart from Jesus everyone is desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9) and can't do anything good (Romans 3:12, John 15:5b).

Regarding legalism, it's the Bible which shows that saved people must patiently continue to obey the New Covenant law of Christ (Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21, Jeremiah 31:31-34, Matthew 26:28), for it's only in keeping the New Covenant/New Testament commandments of Christ (John 14:15, 1 Thessalonians 4:2, 1 Corinthians 14:37) that saved people can be sure that they're truly loving God (1 John 5:3, John 14:23-24), and that they're remaining in God's love (John 15:10, John 14:23, Jude 1:21). Saved people must fear being ultimately cut off the same as unbelievers if they don't continue in God's goodness (Romans 11:20-22, Luke 12:45-46).

wyguy said:

It is God who declares us righteous due to the merits of the cross, (Romans 4:5, 5:19).

Amen. That refers to initial salvation, which is by faith apart from any works (Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5). But, as was pointed out earlier, the Bible elsewhere shows that both faith and continued works of faith (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Galatians 5:6, Titus 3:8) are required in order to obtain ultimate salvation (Romans 2:6-8, James 2:24, Philippians 2:12, 2 Corinthians 5:9, Matthew 7:21, 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 5:9, Revelation 22:14, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14, Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

wyguy said:

But Bible2 thinks he can maintain his righteousness by his works.

It's the Bible which shows that people must actually continue to do righteousness in order to continue to be righteous (1 John 3:7).

wyguy said:

The Hymn of the Legalist

Written by Stephen Altrogge

See what was said earlier regarding legalism.

wyguy said:

Jesus Paid It Some

Jesus paid it all.

But faith in Jesus' sacrificial blood only remits sins that are past (Romans 3:25), as in sins which have been repented from and confessed to God (1 John 1:9, 1 John 1:7). Jesus' sacrificial blood doesn't remit unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29). So a saved person can in the end lose his salvation if he wrongly employs his will to commit unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29, 1 Corinthians 9:27, Matthew 24:48-51, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Romans 8:13, 1 John 5:16, James 5:19-20, Hebrews 5:9).

wyguy said:

I hear the Savior say,

[Bible2]

(Continued)

wyguy said:

Jesus paid it some

I will do the rest

Sin had left a crimson stain

Now I will give my best

See the reply above to the previous "Jesus paid it some".

wyguy said:

For now indeed I

[Fraught]

I take it you are new to online teaching. People read from many different places where a bible is not available.

If they have access to come to worthy forums then they have access to online bibles.

Time yourself, for this is what I was referring to. Look at the post I referred to with over 100 references. First, time yourself while reading the post, then time yourself while doing both the reading and then looking up the references. While you are doing this, ask yourself if you would have a better understanding if the scripture was provided. Is it the point of the writer to bring understanding or to show how many verses a person to point to? Which is more important? Discuss one point at a time while quoting scripture itself if that is what it takes to bring understanding to the reader. As I stated, all I am reading is a cometary, not a piece of writing where I could gather understanding, unless the understanding I was seeking is how bible2 thinks.

You also have so many references that in order to look them all up, one would forget the reason why they are looking, yet, to read them in your posts would keep the flow of your words moving. If His words are important enough to reference, then they will be far more effective to read. Cut and paste.

Bible2 puts a lot of information in to his post with bible references. It would not be ineffective for him to post each scripture but easier to post a reference and then you do your own homework as you should. If people are too lazy to look up the reference then that's their own fault, but at least he gives biblical references while others only post opinion.

Ah, you call someone lazy for not taking the time, which a lot of readers probably don't have, to look up 100+ references. How sad of you to make such a judgment! If someone was reading his posts as part of a college course, then they would expect to have to do the research, but this is not a college and bible2 is not a professor passing out assignments. It is a forum where thoughts and understanding is shared.

In the post above this one, all I see is your cometary, not His words. You reference over 100 verses while you make a couple of statements.

And what is wrong with backing up what you say with bible references at least he uses references while others post no references but only their opinion? Sounds much like the kettle calling the pot black scenario.

You are full of verbal cut just for pointing out a better way to bring a point across. Why is that? My reasoning for pointing this out is so those who read the posts of bible2 would have a better understanding of what the post was talking about. Tell me, what is wrong with helping someone to have a better understanding? I'll ask you the same thing, which brings you more understanding?

"Matthew 4:4"

OR

"But He answered and said, "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.'""

Put yourself in the shoes of many who are here to read posts to gather understanding and don't have the time to look up 100+ bible references. Which is truly doing His work? Show me one incident where scripture was written in such a manner where the writer references bible verses and does not quote the scripture. The idea is to teach, not assign work.

I have seen so many people "assigning" overwhelming work to others instead of supplying the scripture themselves. I believe it is just as easy to cut and paste Gods words as it is to cut and past teachings that lack His words. I have notices this is bible2's style on another forum also, which are exact copies of what is posted here.

Rest assure that I am not speaking against what bible2 is talking about, but the style in which bible2 is discussing.

i kinda like it. picture me: it's early morning, just enough light outside to read by. i am on my front porch swing with a cup of coffee, bible in one hand & a stack of paper in the other, but boy is my printer getting a workout LOL

[Fraught]

Bible 2 speaks as 'one with authority'. Also, Bible2, you have given us a huge feast to dig into. I shall soon see if it is all digestible. Love to you all on this thread. Keep it comin' !

[Fraught]

Time yourself, for this is what I was referring to. Look at the post I referred to with over 100 references. First, time yourself while reading the post, then time yourself while doing both the reading and then looking up the references. While you are doing this, ask yourself if you would have a better understanding if the scripture was provided. Is it the point of the writer to bring understanding or to show how many verses a person to point to? Which is more important? Discuss one point at a time while quoting scripture itself if that is what it takes to bring understanding to the reader. As I stated, all I am reading is a cometary, not a piece of writing where I could gather understanding, unless the understanding I was seeking is how bible2 thinks.

You also have so many references that in order to look them all up, one would forget the reason why they are looking, yet, to read them in your posts would keep the flow of your words moving. If His words are important enough to reference, then they will be far more effective to read. Cut and paste.

Whisper: You don't have to look up every reference.

The references are there if you don't understand something and you want to research it a little deeper. Besides no one is forcing you to look up those references or read his post for that matter, but if you so happen to, then you have that option. He provided those references to help you understand what he was saying, if you so happen to not understand something he said. It's entirely up to him of how he wants to make his post.

Figured I would clue you in.

agreed. i would imagine that we all know most of these, so they serve as reminders only.