Pentecostal Prophecies Delay Christ's Return

[JoeHardy07]

So, there once came a missionary to the UPC church I go to who in the heat of his sermon walked to the window pulled the blinds and said, in effect, "I see bulldozers! God is gonna grow this church! A mighty revival starts here!" He was undoubtedly referring to the new building this church is saving for.

What puzzles me is how we teach that Jesus could return at any moment, and yet hold fast to prophecies like this one that are "no doubt" from God. How could Jesus return at any moment if God is planning on giving this church a new building? It seems like Jesus' any-moment return is put on hold until this prophecy is fulfilled.

So, Christ wont return until we at least see bulldozers in the lot, right?

Think about any prophecy you've heard and compare it to the idea that Christ return is soon. Anybody else wonder about the trustworthiness of these kinds of prophecies?

[Sam]

I think we need balance. The way I understand the Bible Jesus could come and catch away His Bride at any moment we should anticipate that and be prepared. However, if He doesn't come until next week, or next month, or next year, we should plan for that also.

[KeptByTheWord]

I don't believe "prophesies" in the sense that Paul was writing about it in 1 Cor. 14 has anything to do with "future" events, or foretelling. Paul says in 1 Cor. 14:3 "But he that prophesieth speath unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort."

There are three criteria here to prophesying:
1. Edification.
2. Exhortation.
3. Comfort.

There is nothing here about foretelling future events.

So, first of all, under the above criteria outlined by the Apostle Paul, I would not consider what that missionary said as "prophesy". Now, if he had said, God wants to encourage this congregation to reach out to sinners who have not yet come into the fold... or something of that nature... (just an example) that to me, would be more in keeping with prophesying, because it is edifying, exhorting, and comforting the body of Christ, all in the same time, without foretelling a future event.

Now, if you look at the gift of the word of knowledge... that may be more in keeping with the words spoken by the man you quoted. Of course, all words of knowledge are subject to scrutiny for their truthfulness. Only God could foreknow if such an event were to take place, and if it doesn't, then the word of knowledge was false.

I Cor. 12:8 "For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit."

Just my thoughts...

[Sam]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I don't believe "prophesies" in the sense that Paul was writing about it in 1 Cor. 14 has anything to do with "future" events, or foretelling. Paul says in 1 Cor. 14:3 "But he that prophesieth speath unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort."

There are three criteria here to prophesying:
1. Edification.
2. Exhortation.
3. Comfort.

There is nothing here about foretelling future events.

So, first of all, under the above criteria outlined by the Apostle Paul, I would not consider what that missionary said as "prophesy". Now, if he had said, God wants to encourage this congregation to reach out to sinners who have not yet come into the fold... or something of that nature... (just an example) that to me, would be more in keeping with prophesying, because it is edifying, exhorting, and comforting the body of Christ, all in the same time, without foretelling a future event.

Now, if you look at the gift of the word of knowledge... that may be more in keeping with the words spoken by the man you quoted. Of course, all words of knowledge are subject to scrutiny for their truthfulness. Only God could foreknow if such an event were to take place, and if it doesn't, then the word of knowledge was false.

I Cor. 12:8 "For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit."

Just my thoughts...

I agree that prophecy is to edify (build up), exhort (stir up) and comfort (lift up or cheer up) but we have an instance where a man prophesied the future in Acts 11:27-30 and where that same man and others did also in Acts 20:22-24 and 2:10-14

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Sam

I agree that prophecy is to edify (build up), exhort (stir up) and comfort (lift up or cheer up) but we have an instance where a man prophesied the future in Acts 11:27-30 and where that same man and others did also in Acts 20:22-24 and 2:10-14

True, yet it could have been prophesy with a word of knowledge/wisdom.

Paul is the only writer in the NT who speaks of these things, and actually labels them, and gives directions concerning them. No other writer in the NT takes on the gifts of the spirit, tongues, and prophesying in a deeper study, as does Paul. And it is only to the Corinthians that we receive any insight at all. The rest of his books deal very little with the gifts of the spirit, prophesying, and tongues.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

So, there once came a missionary to the UPC church I go to who in the heat of his sermon walked to the window pulled the blinds and said, in effect, "I see bulldozers! God is gonna grow this church! A mighty revival starts here!" He was undoubtedly referring to the new building this church is saving for.

What puzzles me is how we teach that Jesus could return at any moment, and yet hold fast to prophecies like this one that are "no doubt" from God. How could Jesus return at any moment if God is planning on giving this church a new building? It seems like Jesus' any-moment return is put on hold until this prophecy is fulfilled.

So, Christ wont return until we at least see bulldozers in the lot, right?

Think about any prophecy you've heard and compare it to the idea that Christ return is soon. Anybody else wonder about the trustworthiness of these kinds of prophecies?

The secret to a good prophet is to use as much symbolism as possible as well as packing in a ton of of these same symbols into the prophecy itself. The reason is is that symbols can ALWAYS be interpreted after the fact to mean what actually took place and by making it detailed people remember the accidentally 'hits' while conveniently forgetting the misses.

[Monterrey]

I heard a man recently say.....


We are living in the last of the last of the last days!

Then turned around and began to talk about the next generation and the church of tomorrow!

No consistency!

[samuelofisrael]

Originally Posted by Sam

I think we need balance. The way I understand the Bible Jesus could come and catch away His Bride at any moment we should anticipate that and be prepared. However, if He doesn't come until next week, or next month, or next year, we should plan for that also.

Yes. Expectations of the events that preceed the arrival of Messiah to Israel and the world in His corporeal visible parousia of which the Bible speaks should at all times be stressed. And too, there is the factor of the "unknown" arrival of Yeshua in which we must live, work and continue in Godliness witnessing to a lost and dying humanity.

It is interesting that it was the political Roman Catholic Church who postulated the errant "replacement theological" point of view that stripped national Israel of the Promises awarding them to the gentile church body, namely, themselves. With this self promotion they also posited the designation: "bride of Christ" to themselves, a notion that has absolutely no support in the Pauline Epistles.

Paul as the Apostle to the gentiles and without controversy the greatest NT exegete, never addresses the BODY of Christ, the "elect" ... the "church," as "bride." It is a presupposition. And with this presuppositon came the much later theory of Darby and the "three comings of Christ." A theory that was popularized by one of his disciples, Scofield of the Scofield Bible notes. The notes are not inspired nor is the eschatology of Scofield. They are the human conclusions of the 19th century Plymouth Brethern.

It is not a salvational issue only that Paul is silent concerning a "gentile bride," or the "secret any moment" rapture prior to the arrival of Messiah. It is gentile conclusionism.

Yes, there is a catching away. Yes, it is a secret concerning the arrival of Messiah. Yes there will be a meeting in the "air." Yes, the saints will be gathered to the Lord and ever be with Him. What is not a conclusive fact is the timing, the events and the order of these eschatological occurrences.

The most beloved verse in Holy Writ is [likely] John 3:16. A close second conviction by Christians today is the "any moment secret rapture of the bride."

But does Paul teach Darby's Theology? Or did Darby "mix and match?"

Plainly stated, there is no record of a "gentile bride." There is a record of gentile "engrafts," gentile members of the BODY of Christ. Gentiles among the election. Gentiles among the saints of God. Gentile remnant. Gentile five fold ministry.

Paul reports in Eph. 5:30 that we are [not shall be] but are now members of His BODY.

And yes, Paul also pens that he "has" espoused us to One Husband. A husband is not a suitor, a bridegroom or one who is yet waiting vital union with the intended. A "husband" as with a "wife" [not a bride] share "one body" in the eyes of God. To 'espouse' is to join together, a union, a marriage. It falls into the "done deal" catagory. With the regenerated person, it is NOW consumated. But with those of whom it is not consumated, it awaits a joining together.

Is the born again Christian waiting for vital union with the HUSBAND? Are you [they, me, them] confessing we are NOT of the BODY of Christ, that we are yet in the bridal chamber waiting to be joined to the Head?

Not me. I claim vital union. I am NOW a member of the BODY of Christ. Bride has absolutely no application to me. The term bride does however favor another company PROMISED to the Son.

Yes, that is correct. The BRIDEGROOM was sent NOT but to the House of Israel. And yes, He was rejected by the bride but not forever, not eternally. The bride of the Bible awaits her marriage with the DIVINE BRIDEGROOM and so it is promised in Holy Writ.

I know this is radically unpopular with the gentile church and understandably so. But if they would see the implications of the truth of the Scriptures they would rejoice. One is in a NOW union. The other [national Israel] is yet in the ante chamber awaiting their restoration.

Further saying, this error of designation will never disappear from Christian folklore as a sentimental doctrine of the church. And in that it is not a damaging heresy, just incorrect. Paul never taught what Darby concluded. It is strictly gentile theology long after the Inspired Record was closed.

Shalom.

[renee819]

Sorry folks, I hate to break the bad news, but there is no “ immanent return” of Jesus.

We will have to go thru a Religious Persecution, which is forming against us right now. As well as the start of the Great Tribulation, which I don’t believe we will have to endure very long. No where in the Bible does it tell us how long the GT lasts, except that the time will be shortened.

I hate to put this on here and run, but I have to get ready to be gone for about 2 weeks. I will take my laptop with me, and hopefully I can use it.

The Rapture is, The First Resurrection, and this is after the Persecution. I wish that I was wrong on this, but I have studied this for over 50 years, and I see no way around the Persecution facing us. Which will come from the One World Religion.

[renee819]

I just read Samuel's Post, and yes "the innenent return," came from Darby and a girl named McDonald, that had a dream or a vison.