Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | MJH | 214124 | ||
John, First off, while I generally shy away from end time’s debates, I appreciated your admitting you are not all together sure. Me neither. I enjoyed a speaker at a pastors' convention awhile back who told this story, "God is up in Heaven sitting with Jesus to his right. Before God are laid out all of the end times charts. He puts His arm on His Son's shoulder and says, 'You know Son, I'm going to send you back down there just as soon as I can figure these things out." Needless to say, it broke the tension of a bunch of staunch Christians holding different views on many things. That all being said, I recently wondered if those "taken away" were the Righteous or the Wicked. In Matt. 24:40-41 the two men and women, one is taken and the other left, the Text does not say which was which. If fact, in all cases where "one is taken" the Text doesn't specify which. We assume the good person is taken because of what we bring to that particular Text and not because of what the Text actually says. When I studied the first century understanding, I found that the Greek's believed the dead “good” were taken away to some heaven, but the Jewish faith believed the dead wicked were taken away to judgment. The Jews always saw Earth—and Jerusalem in particular—as the final place for the righteous. So, if Jesus is speaking to a Jewish world about someone being "taken away" and then He does not say who gets taken away; it would make sense that his audience assumed what Jews in that day assumed. Jesus doesn't overtly challenge that thinking. (Nor does he confirm it....it's not mentioned who is taken.) When I looked at this idea closer, I found that all throughout the Old Testament, those who are "taken away" are taken away to judgment, or because of judgment. At this time (first century), Israel’s identity is that She was taken away to Babylon as judgment for her sins. (Lamentations, Jeremiah) The only Text that does not fit this mold, (that the ones taken away are those taken away for final judgment) is 1 Thes. 4:17. Yet even here, the dead rise and the living meet the Lord in the air....but the Text even here does not mention if they float away to some heavenly place, or return triumphant with the Lord. They are not “taken away” per se, but rather gathered to the Lord. Any thoughts? This is one of my, “kept it under my hat” thoughts. MJH |
||||||
2 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | stjohn | 214128 | ||
Hi MJH You know, friend, I've thought about that too. And for the very same reasons, I agree with you. I think it was an old Calvinist preacher by the name of J. Vernon Mcgee who first brought that to my attention. I still listen to him on the radio or MP3 from time-to-time, and it's like hearing the kindly voice of an old friend. It will be nice to meet him, some golden day. John |
||||||
3 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | Val | 214131 | ||
Dear John, What makes you say Dr. McGee was a Calvinist? Just wondering. Sincerely, Val | ||||||
4 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | stjohn | 214135 | ||
Hi Val, Well, I heard Mcgee say it himself... One day, while I was listing; whether it was his daily Bible study or the once a week Q and A, I don't remember which, he said: "In case you haven't noticed yet, I'm a Calvinist." I think we'd be okay to take that as pretty solid evidence. I think one would find, too, if listened to, or read carefully, his doctrine reflects it. John |
||||||
5 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | Val | 214138 | ||
Dear John, Thats interesting since his website says it holds to the doctrinal statement of the Dallas Theological Seminary where Dr. McGee obtained some of his education. I have never heard him say that and I listened to him for about 20 years. I would like to know the context of the passage he was discussing when he said that. I have his volumne of the whole bible commentaries. I know there are the tulip points. I wonder if he held to the five points. Many people agree with three points. I don't know if people call them calvinists. I know many people hold to the sovereignty of God but do not label themselves calvinists. Just wondering. Thanks, Val | ||||||
6 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | stjohn | 214196 | ||
Hi Val Well, :-) that would be a very tall order! I have about 700 MP3 files on McGee, not to mention many commentaries and short articles, and I surly don't remember where or when he said that. But I'm sure he did. Sorry, Val, but it would take quite some time to find it. John |
||||||
7 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | jlhetrick | 214197 | ||
Came in early for a meeting that was canceled so I had a few minutes (my home computer is still at Sony getting the hard-drive replaced). John, I believe you heard Mr. McGhee make the John Calvin Statement in the "Through the Bible" radio show. I'm not sure that he referred to himself as a "Calvinist" but I remember him indicating he is more in agreement with that camp. He did frequently comment regarding his assurdness that none have it all right indicating that he was not a follower, per se, of any man. While he pastored Prsbyterian churches he did not appear to place his faith in any denomination (my observation). A study of his work though, will clearly show his theology and that of Calvin to be very close in agreement. One of the most blessed theologins of modern times (in my opinion) he refused to mince words and stood very boldly on the foundation of Christ and God's holy word. Few, in my opinion, have been better able to articulate the sovereignty of God, the salvation of grace through faith in Christ, and the unquestionable and sole authority of Scripture. I don't know that the man ever referred to himself as a "Calvinist" (though he may have) but I would hesitate to hang any lable on him myself as in my observation of him he seemed to shun that sort of thing. I believe he understood the warning of Paul in 1 Corinthians. |
||||||
8 | Rapture | Rev 20:1 | stjohn | 214206 | ||
Amen brother, Jeff, the man didn't like hanging denominational labels on himself, or anyone else for that matter. If memory serves, he did qualify the statement (which I'm sure he said) with that very sentiment. And he often said he didn't like to hang those kind of labels on anyone. But as far as doctrine he did go along with Calvinistic doctrine. Not "Hyper" Calvinism, by the way, as so many unfortunately think is what Calvinists really are all about. And I agree with you, I think he was one of the finest theologians of the last century, and a wonderful, faithful expositor of God's holy Word. He had a no nonsense, common sense, easy to understand approach to teaching the Bible, thats for sure! :-) John |
||||||