Will the Rapture Happen Tomorrow?

Will the Rapture Happen Tomorrow?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Total voters
    7
abcaines said:
What happens when one changes their mind? Do they not turn from their sin?
Click to expand...
“You can’t tell me you can trust Christ as Savior and live like the Devil and still go go heaven. Yes I can tell you that. That’s what the Bible says. If you don’t come to that conclusion that yes, you can trust Christ as your Savior and live like the Devil, and still go heaven when you die, you don’t get grace because that is the exact truth. I do not have to change my life. I don’t have to stop one sin.” Yankee Arnold

There are multitudes of people in churches across America that believe they are saved because they “believe” in Jesus but their hearts have never been changed. There has never been a work of grace that makes them hate sin and love Jesus. The apostle Paul makes it clear that those who practice sinful lifestyles will not go to heaven (1 Cor 6:9-11). There is a reason Paul told those in the Corinthian church to examine themselves as to whether they were in the faith, except they be reprobates (2 Cor 13:5).

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
abcaines said:
What happens when one changes their mind? Do they not turn from their sin?
Click to expand...

What Ryrie taught was that the repentance Peter preached at Pentecost was a change of mind concerning Christ: salvation came from recognizing him as the Messiah. Turning from one's sins is not in itself salvific.
 
illinoisguy said:
"In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." -Matthew 3:2

"Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel." -Mark 1:14-15

"And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand." - Matthew 10:7

The principles of dispensationalism, if ...
"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." - Matthew 16:28. My question for dispensationalists who believe in the "deferred kingdom" and the 2000- year "parenthesis" in God's plan, forced on Him by mere mortal men - give us the names and current locations of those who heard Christ's word in Matthew 16:28 and who never died and are still alive today - presumably in old folks' homes somewhere.
Click to expand...
Snark much? Lol. I hope your conversations with people who disagree with you aren't as condescending as they come across on this forum. 😊

The passages in question you cite about the kingdom and people still being alive has its answer in the fact that the reference could contextually be to the transfiguration, which those that were present with Jesus made those statements would have actually witnessed.
 
Ransom said:
It's claimed that Jesus would have established the Kingdom in the first century (thus fulfilling prophecy), but the Jews rejected him, thus requiring that a prophecy intended to be fulfilled in that event was delayed to some distant, indefinite future.

This is nonsense. If a prophet gets all the details right in his prophecy, except the timing (because he didn't foresee the Jews rejecting Christ), then his prophecy is wrong, and he is a false prophet.

If God would have done one thing if not for circumstances, and those circumstances caused a prophecy's fulfillment to be delayed into the indefinite future, how does that differ from open theism--saying God didn't see the circumstances coming?

Of course, Jesus did not come to establish a temporal kingdom in the first century. The Jews tried to crown him king at one point, and he ran away. When he said to Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world, he was telling Pilate that he wasn't horning in on his turf. Then the Dispensationalists came along and insisted that yes, it was in fact that kind of temporal kingdom.
Click to expand...
And keeping things brief, this is why I asked the question earlier about partial, or dual fulfillment.
 
Ransom said:
What Ryrie taught was that the repentance Peter preached at Pentecost was a change of mind concerning Christ: salvation came from recognizing him as the Messiah. Turning from one's sins is not in itself salvific.
Click to expand...
I heard an illustration from J Vernon McGee that I thought summed up the whole repentance thing perfectly. (Forgive me, I'll probably butcher it...)

When you turn to Christ, you must turn your back on sin. I can no more turn the palm of my hand towards me without turning the back of my hand towards you than a sinner can turn to Christ (repent) without turning his back to sin.
 
For onlookers/lurkers watching this thread, regarding the notion of postponed matters in Scripture (in addition to the examples I've given like Hezekiah)...

Postponement
 
biscuit1953 said:
I used to have a Ryrie Study Bible. He was opposed to Lordship salvation and believed repentance was strictly a change of mind, not turning from sin. Just do a quick search on the subject. He may not have been as extreme as Zane Hodge though.
Click to expand...

He did believe repentance was only a change of mind but did not deny that a changed life must happen by necessity. Here's his note on Galatians 5:21...

The tense indicates habitually practicing these sins, exhibiting a lifestyle that shows an unsaved condition.

So he was not strictly profess only like Zane Hodges and Bob Wilkin.
 
Ransom said:
That would be works, you see.
Click to expand...

It isn't works if the Holy Spirit is the one conforming us to be more like Christ because all the credit goes to Him. It would be works if it's by my own efforts.
 
abcaines said:
Or what Johnny Mac would say, "easy believism".
Click to expand...

I don’t know if you’ve ever had a chance to read “So Great Salvation” by Charles Ryrie. It is a rebuttal to John MacArthur’s “The Gospel According to Jesus.”

Even though Ryrie comes a little too close to free grace theology at times and makes category errors of biblical terms, he will admit that a genuine faith will result in a changed life. He and MacArthur come to the same conclusion but have different ways to get there.
 
Creed said:
It isn't works if the Holy Spirit is the one conforming us to be more like Christ because all the credit goes to Him. It would be works if it's by my own efforts.
Click to expand...
On The sermon on the mount, Jesus showed us the spiritual nature of the Law. Here is a short summary by Ray Comfort.

Matt 5:3 The unregenerate heart isn’t poor in spirit. It is proud, self-righteous, and boastful (every man is pure in his own eyes – Prov 16:2).
Matt 5:4 The unsaved don’t mourn over their sin; they love the darkness and hate the light (John 3:19).
Matt 5:5 The ungodly are not meek and lowly of heart. Their sinful condition is described in Rom 3:13-18.
Matt 5:6 Sinners don’t hunger and thirst after righteousness, instead, they drink iniquity like water (Job 15:16).
Matt 5:7 The world is shallow in its ability to show true mercy. It is by nature cruel and vindictive (Gen 6:5).
Matt 5:8 The heart of the unregenerate is not pure; it is desperately wicked (Jer 17:9).

The righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees was merely outward, but God requires truth in the inward parts (Psa 51:6). A Christian doesn’t keep the law for the purpose of working his way to heaven, but because he has been born again and has a strong desire for righteousness and to live right from a changed heart. God grants repentance unto life (Acts 11:18). It isn’t something that comes from within the human heart.

“If your sorrow is because of certain consequences which have come on your family because of your sin, this is remorse, not true repentance. If, on the other hand, you are grieved because you also sinned against God and His holy laws, then your are on the right road.” Billy Graham
 
Creed said:
It is my understanding that Charles Ryrie was very Calvinistic in his soteriology.
Click to expand...
Based upon what I have read in his "Biblical Theology" book, I would have to agree. I disagree with him regarding dispensationalism but nothing regarding his soteriology.

Since he (Ryrie) did come from a Calvinistic point of view, he would also be able to approach the "Free Grace" issue from a proper perspective.

Zane Hodges and Bob Wilkin are both Anti-Calvinist loonies who make absolute clowns of themselves whenever they try to argue either Calvinism or "free grace." In all fairness though, John MacArthur did exaggerate their errors somewhat in his book "The Gospel According to Jesus."

They are correct though in stating one does not have to repent IN ORDER TO be saved (actually, you do but who or what is it that "brings" you to repentance in the first place?) but their view of giving mere "mental assent" to the Gospel message is quite troublesome and they find themselves in such a quandary because of the fact that they are "free-willies" who believes that Calvinism is of the debil!

The correct position is that biblical salvation BRINGS FORTH REPENTANCE and a Calvinist typically comes to such a conclusion based upon the premise that regeneration precedes faith. Repentance and faith are two sides of the same coin and both must be evident in the life of one who professes Christ. I believe that this was MacArthur's position. The main topic for argument is therefore now "What is it that brings forth repentance and faith?"
 
Ransom said:
What Ryrie taught was that the repentance Peter preached at Pentecost was a change of mind concerning Christ: salvation came from recognizing him as the Messiah. Turning from one's sins is not in itself salvific.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to comment on this for a moment. Ransom is absolutely right. Repentance will not save anyone. If someone goes to court and tells the judge he should be forgiven and set free after he murdered a man because he was sorry and would never do it again, he would be laughed out of court, not only by the judge but by everyone who has a sense of justice.
The heart of the gospel is the substitutionary atonement whereby someone pays the penalty for our sins that we have no way of paying for. Repentance in itself does redeem us from the curse of the law. Those who use the Ten Commandments as a way to earn their way to heaven will find themselves wanting on Judgment Day. The second verse of At Calvary goes like this.

By God’s Word at last my sin I learned;
Then I trembled at the Law I spurned,
Till my guilty soul imploring turned to Calvary.
Mercy there was great, and grace was free;
Pardon there was multiplied to me;
There my burdened soul found liberty at Calvary!

www.gotquestions.org

What is the substitutionary atonement? | GotQuestions.org

What is the substitutionary atonement? What does it mean that Jesus Christ died as our substitute?
www.gotquestions.org
 
biscuit1953 said:
I just wanted to comment on this for a moment. Ransom is absolutely right. Repentance will not save anyone.
Click to expand...

Please don't tell me I'm "absolutely right" when I'm quoting someone who is absolutely wrong.

What Ryrie meant was that "repentance" meant only a change of mind about Jesus. I quoted that very thing from Ryrie, and you even quoted it back to me. How could you have missed it?

By contrast, he believed that "repentance" in the sense of moral reform, having sorrow for one's sins and resolving to turn away from them, plays no part in salvation. And that is unbiblical. "Godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation" (2 Cor. 7:10). Godly sorrow over sin produces repentance of sin, which leads to salvation from judgment for sin. It has everything to do with salvation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top