When the rapture happens will the passengers in cars, trains, airplanes, buses, and so on die in a crash if the driver is raptured? Book, Chapter, and verse please. All so I would like to hear your thoughts on the above,
I like you also think that the babies and children would go in the rapture. The impact on the people left behind would surely convince millions to repent and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. God does not do anything such as the rapture unless it has a positive impact on bringing souls into His kingdom for eternity. The mercy and love of God is seen even to the end of the age.
Truth for most part yet the world has a lot to do with our kids behavior these days then you think. We can not stop them from what they experience at school which, to me, is way more dangerous then a movie. Thank God all 3 of my kids have Jesus yet even then my eldest still likes modern music, my daughter likes Marvel movies & my youngest is so scared of the world he wont do anything except eat, sleep & work. Satan & his minions have to much control of this earth & I wish I could do more then pray for everyone. Keep enemies close and JESUS closer.!
Amen and if everyone relied more on Him as we should instead of believing all the worldly evil, things wouldn't be so bad. Prayers for you and yours. He is the only way, truth and life!
SO, THE QUESTION IS.What is it that those, who believe in the natural immortality of the soul, do not understand?
AN ANSWER.They do not understand, how God created man, a living soul, it they did there would be no problem understanding what returned to God, at death.
A common view of the meaning of the spirit that goes back to God, says that it refers to the breath of life. That would agree with King Solomon's statement in Ecclesiastes 3:21 where he said, "the breath of man ascends upward" at death. It is important to know that the Hebrew word that is translated as "breath" in Ecclesiastes 3:21 is the same Hebrew word that is translated as "spirit" in Ecclesiastes 12:7. So, this Hebrew word ruach can be translated as "breath" or "spirit."
It is important to know that Genesis 2:7 translates ruach as "breath." So it says, "breath of life."
The word "ruach" can be translated as "breath" or "spirit." It is translated in the "Old testament," (90) times as "wind" and (28) times "breath"
Hello Kathleen. I'm unsure why you think that the Books of the Maccabees were removed from the Bible; as far as I know, they, alongwith the other apocryphal books, were never in the Bible.
These apocryphal books, as also the great number of other writings & manuscripts, have been around throughout history and particularly in the inter-testamental period (i.e. after Malachi's prophecy & the entrance of Jesus Christ at Bethlehem). Some of these writings were known to the Jews, but ultimately they only accepted the Word revealed through Moses (i.e. the Torah: the five Books of Moses); the Nevi'im (or, the Prophets), and the Ketuvim (or, the Writings). They never accepted any of the other books. And within those broad divisions, we get our Bible (i.e. the same books as in the Tanakh (the Jewish Bible), but variations in order of appearance, & other minor changes).
So, the Jews rejected the apocrypha & other spurious writings as being the Word of God, from God, & likewise, when the NT Canon was brought together, similar rules were applied, where authors, textual examination, falsehoods, etc., were reasons for post-New Testament writings being rejected. Now some Churches, e.g. the Roman Catholic & orthodox, do accept the apocryphal books as valid, but in mainstream Christianity, we believe that what we have now is God's Word, and that to fully accept these other writings, severely prejudice the Truth, as revealed to us.
Grace is the love of God toward mankind! We have been redeemed by the precious blood of the lamb. Even so, you and I are justified by faith. We must have faith ! I saw a picture of the sheep that was lost and his wool had grown to 70 pounds! He was lost for a while! After he was shaved, He had new life. A new beginning if you will! Not unlike the parodical son, or the lost sheep!
We will fail, we will fall, but we must get up and do it all over again! This is His will that we might know the forgiveness in the shed blood of the savior! Cleansed always in the sight of the Father!!!
You shall know them by there works! They shall say in the last days ,lo He is here ,or he is there! The power of the Holy spirit is the sanctifying power given unto the children, we are all the same in Christ. Satan has no power over the "apostles" who are His instruments, going forth doing His will! Even so you will see more as the days go by! Repent and be Baptised
It it okay to respectfully disagree. Reading through your comment, I agree with almost everything you are saying. But do you realize that I am not talking about water baptism?
I agree that we are not saved by works. But is believing alone enough for salvation? I think believing is an important part of salvation, but what about acting upon that belief and surrendering one's life to Jesus Christ and being born of His Spirit?
I notice you did not mention those things. The demons also believe, but will they be saved?
When I said it was Jesus' ministry to baptize people with His Spirit, it had nothing to do with water baptism. Jesus baptizes people with His Spirit. Unless a person receives Christ, and is born from above (Spiritual birth from above), that person cannot be saved.
You have my attention: can you please elaborate on what you mean by "You don't have to go to church.keep the commandments-nor be baptized"
I understand the not going to church part, but not keeping His commandments, nor being baptized?
And again, I am referring to Spiritual baptism, not water.
What do you mean? Elijah gave more power and wisdom to Elias. Elijah's name means "Yahweh is my God" and is spelled Elias in some versions of the Bible. Please explain why this time in scripture is the same today!
I respectfully disagree with Jesse's answer. The Bible is clear on salvation. One must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. John 3:16. It is by faith Ephesians 2:8. The question was asked how to be saved.. answered in Acts 16:30 ."Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved". Every Word of God is true.in Mark. 16:16 it says "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned". It does not say if you don't believe and are not baptizedyou shall be. Damned only that if you don't believe. Another proof that there is no need for baptism to be saved is that when Jesus was on the cross the thief said to Jesus in Luke 23:42. 42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." So clearly the thief was not baptized prior to his death and it was his belief alone that saved him. It is not of any works.lest any man boast. You don't have to go to church.keep the commandmentsnor be baptized . There's no amount of works or anything you can do to save yourself. It is the free gift of God. All these things are good .. but we all fall short.. and the reason God sent Jesus. Ephesians 2:8. 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. It is easy to be saved that is why even a small child can be saved.
Was Peter preaching the same gospel in Acts 2 & 3?
Yes! Peter was preaching the gospel of God's grace to the Jews and the many that had come from other nations to celebrate the feast of Pentecost. Was it tailored to those that where there because of what they had just done in crucifying Jesus? Of course. But it is still the one same gospel. He didn't mention the blood of Christ but he certainly spoke powerfully about the death and resurrection of the Lord, and their need to repent and receive forgiveness from God. ( Acts 2:22-38) It is true that God revealed other 'mysteries' through Paul later (as Acts 2 is only 50 days on from the resurrection of the Lord) but this is simply bringing focus and revelation to the one true gospel. It isn't changing to a new gospel.
The church began in Acts 2 - at Pentecost. This is when believers were baptised in the Holy Spirit into one body. And though the Church began in Jerusalem, the commission to go into all the nations had already been given by the Lord Jesus to all the disciples even before this point. See Mt. 28:16-20; Mk. 16:14-16; Lk. 24:45-49. So later when Paul and others went to the Gentiles, they were simply doing what Jesus had already said to do when He was with the disciples on earth. It isn't something new.
I hope this helps. These arguments have been going on for many decades. The well-loved Bible teacher H.A Ironside wrote a great booklet called 'Wrongly dividing the word of truth' in 1938 that speaks to many of the errors in hyper-dispensationalism. If interested in reading more, you can find that here:
Now let me answer our critics who say that we who hold the dispensational view of Scripture teach that there are two or more ways of being saved. No, God has never had more than one basis on which He saves men, and that basis is the Cross of Christ. Every offering before Christ came looked forward to the Cross of Christ, and every commemoration since He has come looks back to the cross of Christ.
Is the gospel of the circumcised and uncircumcised ( Gal 2:7) different?
No.
Please be clear on this. There is not one gospel for the circumcised (Jews) and another for the uncircumcised (Gentiles). Look at the Galatian passage mentioned:
Gal 2:7-9 But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised (8) (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), (9) and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
This whole passage is NOT speaking of different gospels but simply who, among the Apostles, was to go to whom. James, Peter and John recognised the grace and position that God had given to Paul and agreed that he should go to the Gentiles while they concentrated on the Jews. They didn't have a different gospel to tell. They simply went to different people groups to proclaim the one gospel.
When Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom, He was announcing His coming as King of the Jews and explaining the terms of admission into His kingdom. His miracles showed the wholesome nature of the kingdom.
This 'gospel of the Kingdom' is again preached in the last days during the tribulation as stated by Mathew:
Mat 24:14 "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
Again - this is not a new or different gospel. It is the good news of what Jesus did on the cross and the need to personally believe and accept God's incredibly gracious offer of salvation through faith. There is only one gospel. But there will be an emphasis during the proclamation of this gospel in the coming tribulation that Jesus is King, not the antichrist, and that there is a need to repent and turn to Him because God's judgment is here and the Lord's Kingdom is coming soon! (For example, Rev 14:6-7, 9-10) J.Vernon McGee writes on Mat 24:14
The gospel of the Kingdom is what John the Baptist preached-"Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mat_3:2). And the Lord Jesus began His ministry with that message-"From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mat_4:17). Also, He sent His apostles out with that message (see Matt. 10). But in Mat_11:28, we saw that our Lord's message changed to "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." And in Mat_20:28 He said that He had come to give His life a ransom for many. But during the Tribulation period the gospel of the Kingdom will again be preached. It is not for our day, because we are to preach the gospel of the grace of God. Is the gospel of the Kingdom another gospel? No, my friend, it is not. It is the same gospel with a different emphasis...
However not to say that it is right, hopefully others who truly understands have more to add.
Part 1.
there is an element of truth in this but you have to be very careful where you tread here. We definitely need 'to rightly divide the word of God' as scripture tells us but it is easy to go too far and move past scripture and into our own thoughts. There is a whole movement within Christianity that consider themselves 'right dividers' or 'right division' that, unfortunately, leads to a lot of error and division. Instead of 'classical dispensationalism' it often leads to 'hyper-dispensationalism' where people teach that Paul and Peter had a different gospel and/or the Church didn't begin until midway through the books of Acts... or at the very end of Acts like 'ultra-dispensationalism'. Some say only Paul's letters are for the Church! Hyper and ultra-dispensationalism are not true and should be avoided. So to your specific questions...
Are there two gospels, the gospel of the Kingdom and the gospel of grace?
In short, no. There is only one gospel. But there are different aspects that are emphasized depending on when the message is given. Mat 4:23 has the first mention of 'gospel' in the New Testament. William MacDonald in the Believers Bible Commentary writes well on this stating:
While there is only one gospel, there are different features of the gospel in different times. For instance, there is a different emphasis between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God. The gospel of the kingdom says, "Repent and receive the Messiah; then you will enter His kingdom when it is set up on earth." The gospel of grace says, "Repent and receive Christ; then you will be taken up to meet Him and to be with Him forever."
Fundamentally, they are the same gospel-salvation by grace through faith-but they show that there are different administrations of the gospel according to God's dispensational purposes.
yes Adam, but in that it says "tent" and references to Ps 19:4 which says: Their 1/line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a 2/tabernacle for the sun. both meaning tent & if you've ever gone camping they have (dome) an end. Just saying, I can totally see the confusion.! Making it completely understandable why so many have trouble understanding much less believing the bible. Its confusing as ever. Hebrew & Greek meanings are different then English to boot. Beings we all agree that the most and really only important thing is to *Love God w/all our being, our neighbor as ourselves, to keep Jesus in our hearts & live accordingly*, lets leave it at that. Its becoming to much time & I for one, not to be rude, really don't care.! p.s. that was said with a smile by the way.! :) continue in prayer and peace be with everyone.!
To me this more strongly suggests the earth is round than any reference people have to creatively interpret in order to claim it means the earth is flat.
What's very strange about this argument is that you can fly around the world and end up in the same place. People are doing this every day. Plus its night in some places and day in other places at the same time and is obviously a shadow of the sun. It's just a very odd argument because its so easily proven that the earth is a globe.
We are living in times where people disagree on what the truth is. Nearly everything is debated and disagreed on these days. People habitually lie and our society seems to be collapsing, as people prefer lies over truth and are using it to commit evil. For example, I think companies like Pfizer and JnJ have become rich off of killing people. A lie was told that something was "safe and effective" and people believed it. A for profit company with one of the worst track records of corruption and scandals was suddenly 100% believed without question, and anyone who doubted their motives or the safety of the product was called derogatory names.
AN ANSWER.They do not understand, how God created man, a living soul, it they did there would be no problem understanding what returned to God, at death.
A common view of the meaning of the spirit that goes back to God, says that it refers to the breath of life. That would agree with King Solomon's statement in Ecclesiastes 3:21 where he said, "the breath of man ascends upward" at death. It is important to know that the Hebrew word that is translated as "breath" in Ecclesiastes 3:21 is the same Hebrew word that is translated as "spirit" in Ecclesiastes 12:7. So, this Hebrew word ruach can be translated as "breath" or "spirit."
It is important to know that Genesis 2:7 translates ruach as "breath." So it says, "breath of life."
The word "ruach" can be translated as "breath" or "spirit." It is translated in the "Old testament," (90) times as "wind" and (28) times "breath"
These apocryphal books, as also the great number of other writings & manuscripts, have been around throughout history and particularly in the inter-testamental period (i.e. after Malachi's prophecy & the entrance of Jesus Christ at Bethlehem). Some of these writings were known to the Jews, but ultimately they only accepted the Word revealed through Moses (i.e. the Torah: the five Books of Moses); the Nevi'im (or, the Prophets), and the Ketuvim (or, the Writings). They never accepted any of the other books. And within those broad divisions, we get our Bible (i.e. the same books as in the Tanakh (the Jewish Bible), but variations in order of appearance, & other minor changes).
So, the Jews rejected the apocrypha & other spurious writings as being the Word of God, from God, & likewise, when the NT Canon was brought together, similar rules were applied, where authors, textual examination, falsehoods, etc., were reasons for post-New Testament writings being rejected. Now some Churches, e.g. the Roman Catholic & orthodox, do accept the apocryphal books as valid, but in mainstream Christianity, we believe that what we have now is God's Word, and that to fully accept these other writings, severely prejudice the Truth, as revealed to us.
Jesus is Lord!
Jesus is Lord!
God bless you.
We will fail, we will fall, but we must get up and do it all over again! This is His will that we might know the forgiveness in the shed blood of the savior! Cleansed always in the sight of the Father!!!
It it okay to respectfully disagree. Reading through your comment, I agree with almost everything you are saying. But do you realize that I am not talking about water baptism?
I agree that we are not saved by works. But is believing alone enough for salvation? I think believing is an important part of salvation, but what about acting upon that belief and surrendering one's life to Jesus Christ and being born of His Spirit?
I notice you did not mention those things. The demons also believe, but will they be saved?
When I said it was Jesus' ministry to baptize people with His Spirit, it had nothing to do with water baptism. Jesus baptizes people with His Spirit. Unless a person receives Christ, and is born from above (Spiritual birth from above), that person cannot be saved.
You have my attention: can you please elaborate on what you mean by "You don't have to go to church.keep the commandments-nor be baptized"
I understand the not going to church part, but not keeping His commandments, nor being baptized?
And again, I am referring to Spiritual baptism, not water.
Part 4.
Was Peter preaching the same gospel in Acts 2 & 3?
Yes! Peter was preaching the gospel of God's grace to the Jews and the many that had come from other nations to celebrate the feast of Pentecost. Was it tailored to those that where there because of what they had just done in crucifying Jesus? Of course. But it is still the one same gospel. He didn't mention the blood of Christ but he certainly spoke powerfully about the death and resurrection of the Lord, and their need to repent and receive forgiveness from God. ( Acts 2:22-38) It is true that God revealed other 'mysteries' through Paul later (as Acts 2 is only 50 days on from the resurrection of the Lord) but this is simply bringing focus and revelation to the one true gospel. It isn't changing to a new gospel.
The church began in Acts 2 - at Pentecost. This is when believers were baptised in the Holy Spirit into one body. And though the Church began in Jerusalem, the commission to go into all the nations had already been given by the Lord Jesus to all the disciples even before this point. See Mt. 28:16-20; Mk. 16:14-16; Lk. 24:45-49. So later when Paul and others went to the Gentiles, they were simply doing what Jesus had already said to do when He was with the disciples on earth. It isn't something new.
I hope this helps. These arguments have been going on for many decades. The well-loved Bible teacher H.A Ironside wrote a great booklet called 'Wrongly dividing the word of truth' in 1938 that speaks to many of the errors in hyper-dispensationalism. If interested in reading more, you can find that here:
By J Vernon McGee.
God bless.
Part 3.
Now let me answer our critics who say that we who hold the dispensational view of Scripture teach that there are two or more ways of being saved. No, God has never had more than one basis on which He saves men, and that basis is the Cross of Christ. Every offering before Christ came looked forward to the Cross of Christ, and every commemoration since He has come looks back to the cross of Christ.
Is the gospel of the circumcised and uncircumcised ( Gal 2:7) different?
No.
Please be clear on this. There is not one gospel for the circumcised (Jews) and another for the uncircumcised (Gentiles). Look at the Galatian passage mentioned:
Gal 2:7-9 But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised (8) (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), (9) and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
This whole passage is NOT speaking of different gospels but simply who, among the Apostles, was to go to whom. James, Peter and John recognised the grace and position that God had given to Paul and agreed that he should go to the Gentiles while they concentrated on the Jews. They didn't have a different gospel to tell. They simply went to different people groups to proclaim the one gospel.
Please see part 4.
Part 2.
When Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom, He was announcing His coming as King of the Jews and explaining the terms of admission into His kingdom. His miracles showed the wholesome nature of the kingdom.
This 'gospel of the Kingdom' is again preached in the last days during the tribulation as stated by Mathew:
Mat 24:14 "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
Again - this is not a new or different gospel. It is the good news of what Jesus did on the cross and the need to personally believe and accept God's incredibly gracious offer of salvation through faith. There is only one gospel. But there will be an emphasis during the proclamation of this gospel in the coming tribulation that Jesus is King, not the antichrist, and that there is a need to repent and turn to Him because God's judgment is here and the Lord's Kingdom is coming soon! (For example, Rev 14:6-7, 9-10) J.Vernon McGee writes on Mat 24:14
The gospel of the Kingdom is what John the Baptist preached-"Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mat_3:2). And the Lord Jesus began His ministry with that message-"From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mat_4:17). Also, He sent His apostles out with that message (see Matt. 10). But in Mat_11:28, we saw that our Lord's message changed to "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." And in Mat_20:28 He said that He had come to give His life a ransom for many. But during the Tribulation period the gospel of the Kingdom will again be preached. It is not for our day, because we are to preach the gospel of the grace of God. Is the gospel of the Kingdom another gospel? No, my friend, it is not. It is the same gospel with a different emphasis...
See part 3.
Here's what I believe in.
However not to say that it is right, hopefully others who truly understands have more to add.
Part 1.
there is an element of truth in this but you have to be very careful where you tread here. We definitely need 'to rightly divide the word of God' as scripture tells us but it is easy to go too far and move past scripture and into our own thoughts. There is a whole movement within Christianity that consider themselves 'right dividers' or 'right division' that, unfortunately, leads to a lot of error and division. Instead of 'classical dispensationalism' it often leads to 'hyper-dispensationalism' where people teach that Paul and Peter had a different gospel and/or the Church didn't begin until midway through the books of Acts... or at the very end of Acts like 'ultra-dispensationalism'. Some say only Paul's letters are for the Church! Hyper and ultra-dispensationalism are not true and should be avoided. So to your specific questions...
Are there two gospels, the gospel of the Kingdom and the gospel of grace?
In short, no. There is only one gospel. But there are different aspects that are emphasized depending on when the message is given. Mat 4:23 has the first mention of 'gospel' in the New Testament. William MacDonald in the Believers Bible Commentary writes well on this stating:
While there is only one gospel, there are different features of the gospel in different times. For instance, there is a different emphasis between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God. The gospel of the kingdom says, "Repent and receive the Messiah; then you will enter His kingdom when it is set up on earth." The gospel of grace says, "Repent and receive Christ; then you will be taken up to meet Him and to be with Him forever."
Fundamentally, they are the same gospel-salvation by grace through faith-but they show that there are different administrations of the gospel according to God's dispensational purposes.
See Part 2.
To me this more strongly suggests the earth is round than any reference people have to creatively interpret in order to claim it means the earth is flat.
What's very strange about this argument is that you can fly around the world and end up in the same place. People are doing this every day. Plus its night in some places and day in other places at the same time and is obviously a shadow of the sun. It's just a very odd argument because its so easily proven that the earth is a globe.
We are living in times where people disagree on what the truth is. Nearly everything is debated and disagreed on these days. People habitually lie and our society seems to be collapsing, as people prefer lies over truth and are using it to commit evil. For example, I think companies like Pfizer and JnJ have become rich off of killing people. A lie was told that something was "safe and effective" and people believed it. A for profit company with one of the worst track records of corruption and scandals was suddenly 100% believed without question, and anyone who doubted their motives or the safety of the product was called derogatory names.