I have been listening to a load of sermons the past few weeks. I've pretty much finished listening to Mike's Sunday School messages. I've been getting a ton from this. I've been learning a ton about the ministry of the Holy Spirit and how my interaction should be with other believers in the Body of Christ.
I've been taking in a lot of Piper... kind of a Piperpalooza. I can't get enough. I'm sitting there engrossed, hands sweating, nearly in tears (nearly... remember, I'm sitting at my desk at work. That would look really odd.), in a fear of God through Pipers presentation of God's holiness and God's righteous self-centeredness. And it's in a way only Piper has been blessed to present it. But I'm also sitting there wanting to throw my hands in the air and shout praise to God.
In his presentation of 2 Thess and 1 John, he has been drilling in the idea: no outward evidence, no assurance. I can't lose my salvation, but if I'm not living out my salvation with fear and trembling, then I don't get the peace either. A true believer will persevere and grow.
He has also, in his 2 Thess study, made me start to question pre-trib theology... this is where I could use everyone's input. Paul comforts the believers that Christ hasn't returned by telling them the son of perdition must be revealed and then the falling away. Why would he comfort them by telling them that it hasn't happened yet, when they would miss it anyway if there was really a pre-trib rapture? I talked to Joey Hill earlier. He tried to say that the son of perdition can be revealed but they just don't know it's him. That's a stretch at best. It seems like a wild grasp for something to fit the presupposed theology than a theology fashioned around that specific passage.
Thoughts?
2 comments:
I appreciate the suggested material. I just spent the last 15 minutes or so perusing through them. It is interesting material to say the least.
I cannot, however, necessarily discredit pretribulationalism because there are men out there who either couldn't reproduce documents without error or even fail to give credit to others when borrowing from their work. I'm looking for evidence in the Word of God to change my theology, not a theological tabloid created to tear down theologians holding to an apposing view.
If my theology must change based on the facts that there are those out there who have had flaws in their character at points in their lives, what would I have left to believe? Even the vilest of theologians, going as deep as the Roman papacy holds to some similar theological stands (ex.:the Trinity). Do I then reject it because a man with questionable character holds to it? I, myself, often have questionable character. Boy am I in trouble if so! I'm sure that even Mr. Macpherson has done things in the past to call question to his character. Also, are we going to write off those (my pastor, for instance) who are of the most upright character and hold to pre-trib stand?
Frankly, I was disturbed by his failure to just simply call errors to light (might I point out here that Mr. Ice, who was torn down by Mr. Macpherson, wrote an article in reaction to Macpherson's claims). Instead, He tears down other believers because they are vocal on their steadfastness to pre-trib rapture. Maybe that, if nothing else, is his the debilitating character flaw: a lack of regard for Romans 2:1-2.
Dave,
I appreciate your attitude towards theological bullying and mudslinging. There's no call for any believer to slander Christ, which is what he does when he tears doen another believer. No corrupt communication... only what builds up.
As to eschatology, it's interesting you should bring that up, since I've been stumping my way through a personal study in Revelation this summer to prepare for some courses next fall and spring.
Ever since undergrad I have been unable to find any real biblical warrant for a pre-trib rapture. The strongest arguments are more like logical deductions from an extremely sharp distinction between the Church and Israel. At this point I would have to classify myself as post-trib, pre-mil, but I still have to do some millenarian study. It is simply a reality that we have to deal with that some good, intelligent, spirit-filled men are mistaken in some areas, and we have many blindspots ourselves. The Church is much bigger that our private doctrinal statements often allow.
I have to give a hand to your friend Dave. Sproul is right on. And our purpose in studying eschatology should not be primarily to figure out the schedule of future events. It is to lift up Christ, to shore our hearts up in Him in the face of hardship, and to make our lukewarm hearts run to Him. Whatever we are unsure of, this we know - He is coming quickly!
Post a Comment