Distinctives of conservative evangelical faith

Posted by Stan Wayne in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

One distinctive tenet of conservative evangelical faith is the belief that Jesus can come at any moment. The founding fathers of the Assemblies of God included this doctrine in our Statement of Fundamental Truths as nonnegotiable. Not only is this belief in our foundational statement of faith — alon…

25 Comments

  • Reply September 8, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    Nope

  • Reply September 8, 2016

    Stan Wayne

    I believe Paul believed it and Jesus believed it and Peter believed it. And that it is a sign that it is very imminent that so many Pentecostals don’t believe it:

    “They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.””
    ‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:4‬ ‭ESV‬‬

  • Reply September 8, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    2Thessalonians 2 explains to us that jesus wont return until after the great falling away and the antichrist is revealed. Matthew 24, luke 21, and mark 13 follow the same pattern as revelation 6 which we know is in daniel’s70 th week but gets ignored.

  • Reply September 8, 2016

    Stan Wayne

    So you actually believe that dispensationalism ignores 2 Thess 2?

  • Reply September 8, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    Perry stone sure does.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Morry Deed

    The early Christians may have seen the ” entire world” by their own limited estimation. Yet Jesus when He says “to the ends of the earth” knew better and meant far beyond the reality of the day’s knowledge.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Stan Wayne

    Morry – I agree – I think also that if prior to reaching the ends of the Mediterranean it was not imminent it undercuts his argument but I still do think the Rapture is imminent

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    How can the rapture be imminent if “that day” wont happen till the antichrist is revealed?

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    2 Thesslonians 2 seems to disagree with you

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    Absolutely not! First off not with me but with pre-trib theology. Second, we’ve discussed and resolved this verse in favor of pre-trib theology every time you’ve presented it. And finally, Paul is one of the major NT authorities on pre-trib rapture so again no disagreement with 2 Thess. 2 🙂

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    What usually goes unnoticed too is how matthew 24 and its parallels describes “false christs, wars, famine, earthquakes and death as signs preceding the rapture while revelation 6 lays out those same signs in the same order as the first four seals.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    Well I hope you dont think the Holy Spirit will be taken off earth?

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    No. I believe the hinderer of lawlessness is Michael the archangel

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    which has absolutely no biblical foundation… I’d rather go with being the Body of Christ as Dake explains than go out on an angelic limb like Todd and the Emma female miracle angel David Lewayne Porter

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    Michael is a better fit. Especially if you want say the church is the bride.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    You could argue that from Daniel but it is way far fetched. Especially Pauline eschatology differs greatly from Johannine and lacks the Daniel, Ezekiel and Zachariah symbolism. Furthermore, the church is not the bride – the Heavenly Jerusalem is according to Rev. 19. The Body of Christ is always refereed as masculine in the NT so it is a proper and rightful Biblical for any 2 Thes. 2 pre-trib interpretation. One way or the other, 2 Thes. 2 does not in any way proof beyond a shadow of a doubt mid-trib or post-trib Rapture. On the contrary, the more you dig in it and apply to Pauline theology the more convinced you become of the reasonable doubt in any other interpretation of 2 Thess. 2 except pre-trib rapture. Happy to address your Mt. 24 and Lk. 21 concerns if you express them in a separate thread for clarification 🙂

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    Pauline theology is that the “day of the lord” is an event not just one literal day. It begins with the rapture and ends when jesus subjugates the world.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    True but again does not exclude pre-trib rapture. On the contrary if anything what you just said approves pre-trib rapture via Pauline theology

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    No because paul says “that day” shall not come till there is a falling away and the wicked one is revealed.

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    Again most obviously “that day” and “day of the lord” is the parousia and not the rapture. No brainer 🙂 BTW very very weak argument you are presenting today on 2Thes.2 I thought you’ve had this one down to a science

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Stan Wayne

    Because Ricky Grimsley you don’t understand the subtleties of 2 TH 2 my friend

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Ricky Grimsley

    The subject is both the second coming and our gathering to him both being the day of the lord or of christ. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 KJVS
    [1] Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, [2] That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. [3] Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come , except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

  • Reply September 9, 2016

    Charlie Robin

    Apostasia is only used twice in the New Testament. In addition to 2 Thessalonians 2:3, it occurs in Acts 21:21 where, speaking of Paul, it is said, ” that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake (apostasia) Moses.” The word is a Greek compound of apo ” from” and istemi ” stand.” Thus, it has the core meaning of ” away from” or ” departure” and defines apostasia first as ” defection, revolt;” then secondly as ” departure, disappearance.” The verb may mean to remove spatially. There is little reason then to deny that the noun can mean such a spatial removal or departure.

    When taking apostasia as a physical departure, then —hee apostasia— of which Paul is speaking, precedes the revelation of Antichrist in his true identity, and is to —katechon— that which holds back his revelation (2:6). The hee apostasia, therefore, cannot be either a general apostasy in Christendom which does precede the coming of Antichrist, nor can it be the particular apostasy which is the result of his activities in making himself the alone object of worship.

    The fact that apostasia most likely has the meaning of physical departure is a clear support for pretribulationism. Then it means that a clear prophetic sequence is laid out by Paul early in his Apostolic ministry. Paul teaches in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the rapture will occur first, before the Day of the Lord commences.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.