Eternal Gospel vs the Gospel of Grace

Originally posted by divegeester

To accept this premise one presumably has to accept the rapture teach and the millennial reign teaching?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To me those are not the most difficult premises to presume.

What is difficult for me is that the Bible would say some enter into eternal life yet might be tested latter only to fail and follow Satan to destruction (Rev. 20:8,9)

If I was arguing against this interpretation I think that would be my strongest objection.

I apologize for saying you were being lazy. It was unnecessarily mean.

But some of these things do require having collected many puzzle pieces.

All the suffering in verses 35 through 39 will come upon the believers who are left to be tried in the great tribulation (Rev. 3:10; Matt. 24:21) .

Antichrist will wear out the saints of the Most High. I do not want to be on earth under his persecuting hand in those days.

Here we see Antichrist will not only kill some saints but even worse, wear some down to near exhaustion.

"And he will speak things against the Most High and wear out the saints of the Most High; ... " (Dan. 7:25a)

You have already seen how the law of the US land has been changed to allow same sex marriage. Antichrist in Europe will change even more bedrock customs.

" ,,, His intention will be to change the times and the law; and they will be given into his hand for a time and times and half a time." (Dan 7:25b)

A time and times and half time is three and one half years.
The Lord's brothers down to even the least of them will be so mistreated by the government of the Antichrist.

He will also destroy Christiandom - particularly the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant denominations too will be under this destruction as well as all Judaism. The polarization will be so severe that a clear cut distinction must emerge between those following God and those following Satan and his Antichrist.

The hostility against Christianity is rising in temperature now as we speak in Europe.

I believe that the wilderness spoken of in Revelation is probably inclusive of places people will flee from the "old world" to get away from the Antichrist, if they can.

At this time I think the North American continent would be included in what John viewed as the wilderness in the day he wrote Revelation.

Some peoples will be absolutely hostile against the Christians and the Jews. And some people have to heed the supernatural calamities befalling the planet and realize that God is judging.

By that time it may be hard for some to know that there is a New Testament. To wear out the saints of the Most High is too terrible to imagine how the church passing through the tribulation will be persecuted.

But God sovereignly uses this to ripen His crop of believers to be the Harvest raptured in Revelation 14:14-16.

"And I saw, and behold, there was a white cloud, and on the cloud One like the Son of Man sitting, having a golden crown on His head and a sharp sickle in His hand.

And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, Send forth Your sickle and reap, for the hour to reap has come because the harvest of the earth is ripe.

And He who sat on the cloud thrust His sickle upon the earth, and the earth was reaped." (Rev. 14:14-16)

This is the latter rapture of the majority of the saints spoken of in 1 Thess. 4:17 .

The suffering saints are spiritually RIPENED in the heat of the three and one half year great tribulation.

Will Africa and Australia also be the wilderness to which refugees from Antichrist will flee ?

Possibly yes. But the kingdom of the Antichrist will mainly be in Europe and seek to engulf the land of Middle East and the land of Israel.

Who are the brothers of the One sitting on the throne of His glory? He examines nations as sheep and goats to see how they treated these down to the least of His brothers.

These are Christians and Jews who are ill treated by the man of sin when he puts down every object of worship and all that is called God and proclaims himself to be God in the temple in Jerusalem.

I know some of these things happened in the past too.

" ... the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition,

Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth, saying that he is God." ( 2 Thess. 2:3b,4)

At this time "an eternal gospel" preached by the angel in the air will warn the peoples on the planet that the Creator of the universe is coming to judge.

This announcement does not negate or render wrong the Gospel of the grace of God. But it is an extraordinary measure as a final warning before conclusion of this wicked age and the beginning of the millennium.

Originally posted by sonship

In 2Corinth. 5:10, you make the word "bad" sound as it is used in modern English.
It is more closely aligned with "loss".
In my opinion, I think it means loss, not punished or unhappy. I believe every believer will be blessed and thankful to partake in the Kingdom, regardless of position or reward.

So you think the servant in the warnin ...[text shortened]... g and gnashing his teeth in happiness ?

I think he is unhappy at the loss he suffers there.

I don't think Matt 24 refers to the Age of Grace Christians. This was written during the Law. You are interchangeably confusing different Dispensations are you not?

Originally posted by divegeester
Sonship claims their are two "different" gospels. In your opinion how is this second gospel "different" from the first gospel? I mean in terms of the atonement, resurrection etc.

Completely different. The Age of Grace will have ended, and I believe there will be different requirements than today. I am not well schooled on this topic, since I have enough to deal with the here and now.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Completely different. The Age of Grace will have ended, and I believe there will be different requirements than today. I am not well schooled on this topic, since I have enough to deal with the here and now.

I am only really concerned with the time from Christ to the time he returns. Scripture relating to after this time is muddled and open to interpretation and much bias. It's not something I get drawn into, as like you, I prefer the here an now practicality.

Originally posted by sonship
[b] To accept this premise one presumably has to accept the rapture teach and the millennial reign teaching?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To me those are not the most difficult premises to presume.

What is difficult for me is that the Bible would say some enter into eternal life yet might be tested latte ...[text shortened]... nnecessarily mean.

But some of these things do require having collected many puzzle pieces.[/b]

I don't mind you calling me lazy; I call you long-winded..it's no big deal really.

I'm not a rapturist nor a millennialist.

Originally posted by divegeester
I am only really concerned with the time from Christ to the time he returns. Scripture relating to after this time is muddled and open to interpretation and much bias. It's not something I get drawn into, as like you, I prefer the here an now practicality.

I prefer the here an now practicality.
So do I, but I am also interested in all the scripture has to say..
I have a vested interest because I am not sure my father was born again. I don't know if he gets a time to make a final decision. Because of a language barrier I had a difficult time translating the Gospel or (Good News) to him.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[b] I prefer the here an now practicality.
So do I, but I am also interested in all the scripture has to say..
I have a vested interest because I am not sure my father was born again. I don't know if he gets a time to make a final decision. Because of a language barrier I had a difficult time translating the Gospel or (Good News) to him.[/b]

You don't believe in the eternal suffering teaching do you?

Sonship, I noticed you mentioned my POV about hell earlier. It occurred to me that you may have been seeking God on that matter, is that correct? If so, is this 2nd gospel teaching an outcome of that inquiry and are you sort of suggesting that people get a second chance?

Straight forward question btw.

Originally posted by divegeester
You don't believe in the eternal suffering teaching do you?

No... I have told you this before

Originally posted by checkbaiter
No... I have told you this before

I thought so, just checking. It's suddenly very important when one has lost someone who you feel was unsaved. I have little knowledge about this second chance teaching, but if that is the point sonship is making I'd be interested in trying to understand if there is any scriptural veracity in it.

Originally posted by divegeester
Sonship, I noticed you mentioned my POV about hell earlier. It occurred to me that you may have been seeking God on that matter, is that correct? If so, is this 2nd gospel teaching an outcome of that inquiry and are you sort of suggesting that people get a second chance?

Straight forward question btw.

On second thought concerning the book I said might help:

I need to read something carefully first before I recommend it.

Divegeester,

I suggest you obtain G. H. Lang's book The Last Assize.

Read chapter 10 first perhaps, called "Death and Afterwards." But you have to read the entire chapter.

I had to refresh my memory. And it is as good as I recall on some matters which I have not yet a firm opinion. But his arguments are excellent on some nuances of God's judgment as he sees them in Scripture.