Progressive Dispensationalism

[bearbear]

Many of us who came out of the LCs hold to a traditional dispensational theology which WL inherited from Nee and Darby and which also is the predominant theology in evangelicalism. In this view Israel and the church are viewed as distinct so God's covenants with the Church and Israel are also separate. In most versions this extends even to the New Testament where some would say the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) which contains Jesus' teachings on the second coming applies to Israel and not the church. This always bothered me because Jesus' audience during this sermon are his followers and not unbelieving Jews. Traditional dispensationalists would agree that Messianic Jews like Jesus' disciples who are his audience in Matthew 24 who put their faith and trust in Jesus would presumably be raptured before God's wrath, yet somehow they redirect the Olivet discourse to unbelieving Jews forming a clear contradiction.

In recent decades, a view coined as "progressive dispensationalism" has been gaining ground. Similar to Commonwealth theology this view treats Israel and the Church as distinct but not separate inheriting One New Covenant with an ongoing partial fulfillment and a future complete fulfillment for Israel. I believe this view is closer to what the early church believed. They were premillenialists yet they believed all of Jesus' teachings were applicable to themselves and not unbelieving Israel. Unfortunately Augustine introduced the heresy of preterism and replacement theology into the church around 400AD and the view the early church fathers held faded away until 1400 years later when teachers like JN Darby eventually discovered that the church has not replaced Israel and God's promises still apply to Israel. However I believe he swung the pendulum too far by overly dividing the church and Israel.

In progressive dispensationalism, the Olivet discourse and all of Jesus and the apostles teachings can be interpreted to apply to his followers which compose the Church. Wikipedia has more information on this view and can probably explain it better than I can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progre...pensationalism

Progressive dispensationalists, like Blaising and Bock, argue for one new covenant with an ongoing partial fulfillment and a future complete fulfillment for Israel. Progressives hold that the new covenant was inaugurated by Christ at the Last Supper. Progressives hold that while there are aspects of the new covenant currently being fulfilled, there is yet to be a final and complete fulfillment of the new covenant in the future. This concept is sometimes referred to as an "already-but-not-yet" fulfillment...
..
These differences between traditionalists and progressives show up in how one views the Old Testament texts and promises in the New Testament and how they are handled by the New Testament writers. For traditionalists, who perceive the present dispensation as a parenthesis, the standard approach has been to view Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as applications rather than fulfillment. If an Old Testament quotation is said to have a fulfillment role in the New Testament (outside of the gospels), then that may imply that the present dispensation is no longer a parenthesis, but has a relationship or connection with the prior dispensation. In contrast, progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and grammatical-historical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. An Old Testament quote in the New Testament might turn out to be an application, but it also might be a partial fulfillment or a complete fulfillment or even something else.
...
For example, in Jeremiah 31:31–34, the original recipients of the new covenant were Jews—i.e., "the house of Israel and the house of Judah." Progressives hold that in Acts 2, believing Jews first participated in the new covenant based on Jer 31:31–34. Gentiles were not named as original participants. However, additional revelation came in Acts 9–10 concerning believing Gentiles where God (through Peter and Cornelius) formally accepted believing Gentiles as co-heirs with the Jews. In other words, God used additional New Testament revelation to further expand the participants of the new covenant to include believing Gentiles. God did not replace the original recipients or change the original meaning of the new covenant, He simply expanded it...

This theology is relevant to the second coming because it then allows for a simpler literal reading of Jesus' teachings on his coming which I believe is consistent with the prewrath rapture view. I will introduce the prewrath rapture view in another thread here: https://localchurchdiscussions.com/v...380#post113380

[bearbear]

Out of all the premillennial views, the prewrath rapture may be the most easy to understand in light of scripture with little to no mental gymnastics required. In this view, the rapture happens before God’s wrath and after the tribulation. More specifically it takes place after the sixth seal is opened in Revelation 8:1. During this time there is a silence in heaven, perhaps caused by Jesus and his angels leaving heaven to gather the elect from the four winds of the earth (Matthew 24:31).

Some say that all the seals are part of God’s wrath but if we look at the opening of the fifth seal, the tribulation martyrs ask God “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” (Revelation 6:10). Hence, this fifth seal and the ones prior to it cannot be part of God’s wrath because the martyrs are not blaming their trials on God but instead they are asking God to begin his wrath and avenge their deaths.

God then fulfills his promise to the martyrs during the next sixth seal by beginning the day of the Lord as prophesied by the OT prophets (Jer 46:10, Isaiah 13:9-11). The mighty men of the earth escape to hide themselves in caves and call “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (Revelation 6:16-17).

Since the church is not appointed to “wrath” (1 Thess 5:9), God takes away the church before he pours his wrath on earth. On the other hand, Jesus promises his disciples (who are the church by way of believing in the Messiah) that they will be persecuted unto death before his return (Matt 24:9).

Here’s the clincher, in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13 the disciples ask Jesus for signs of his coming. If you read the signs that Jesus gives, they line up almost perfectly with the first six seals and none of them match any of the trumpets or bowls!

(Matt 24:5-6) False christs & wars -> 1st seal; white horse & conquesting antichrist (Rev 6:2)

(Matt 24:6-7) Nation vs nation & kingdom vs kingdom -> 2nd seal; red horse & no peace (Rev 6:4)

(Matt 24:7) famines & earthquakes -> 3rd seal; black horse & food inflation (Rev 6:5-6)

(Luke 21:11) disease & pestilence - 4th seal; pale horse & death, plague; (Rev 6:8)

(Matt 24:9) saints persecuted unto death - 5th seal; altar of souls who were slain; (Rev 6:10)

(Matt 24:29) sun & moon darkened - 6th seal; celestial signs; (Rev 6:12)

(Matt 24:30) son of man appears & angels gather elect - 7th seal; silence in heaven; (Rev 8:1)

7a (Luke 21:28) - “... straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

Jesus said he has told us these things in advance so we could be on guard (Mark 13:23) and not fall away. If this view is correct the church may not be prepared to face the antichrist and many may end up taking the mark of the beast and betraying one another after hopelessness and disappointment set in because they have been taught that the church will be raptured before this persecution takes place (Matt 24:9). Paul warns of a great falling away during this time (2 Thess 2:3) echoing Jesus’ warning that many of his followers will fall away and end up betraying one another (Matt 24:10). This would mirror the children of Israel’s apostasy after they became impatient from believing that Moses had died after he took longer than they expected to return from Mount Sinai.

Paul said the rapture would be the blessed hope (Thess 4:13-18) as a comfort to the Thessalonians who were bereaved by the death of their loved ones. In this view the rapture will still remain a blessed hope since it will be a way of escape for Christians suffering the greatest persecution the world has ever known (Matt 24:21).

We also know from church history that all the church fathers up until 250AD who wrote about the end times starting with the Didache (dated to 50 to 90AD, a manual for believers in the early Church) and including Iranaeus who was a 2nd degree disciple of Apostle John, had an understanding that the church would face the antichrist (Joey Schimmel describes this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQoR16TQXVU). It wasn’t until 400AD when Augustine popularized a preterist view of scripture that the understanding of end times prophecy started getting fractured in the church.

For those that want to do more research, Dr. Alan Kurschner also expounds on the prewrath view more here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx6gYJBBSek

[WitnessMe]

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

I agree that traditional dispensationalism is flawed however the early church fathers held to a form of it that is similar to progressive dispensationalism which blends covenant theology with traditional dispensationalism. Augustine was the first to popularize Preterism in the church. Prior to that the early church was premillenial.

Irenaeus, disciple of Polycarp, disciple of the Apostle John wrote about premillennialism and the progression of divine covenants in "Against Heresies".

On Premillennialism

Book V, Chapter 33, Paragraph 3:
"For the Lord said, 'Behold, I make the last as the first.' Hence, the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day sanctified by the restitution of all things, which the prophets have announced."

Book V, Chapter 34, Paragraph 1:
"And therefore, when the end of the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, 'There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.'"

Book V, Chapter 35, Paragraph 1:
"The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom when the righteous shall rise from the dead and reign, when creation, renewed and freed from bondage, shall produce a wealth of food of all kinds from the dew of heaven and the fertility of the earth."

On Divine Covenants and Progressive Revelation

Book IV, Chapter 32, Paragraph 1:
"Thus, then, the promise of God, which He made to Abraham, remains steadfast. For through the law, men were continually taught to look forward to the coming of Christ, who, as the fulfilment of the law, accomplished by Himself the salvation of those who obeyed Him."

Book IV, Chapter 33, Paragraph 7:
"Therefore, the law is both Moses' and Christ's; but the points prefigured in it, which were to be fulfilled in Christ, were His alone. For this reason, He exclaimed, 'I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.'"

Book IV, Chapter 34, Paragraph 4:
"For this cause also, Paul declares, 'And so all Israel shall be saved,' but it is not in this present time that they are established, but when the gathering of the Gentiles shall come in."

Justin Martyr explicitly defended the doctrine of a literal thousand-year reign of Christ in Jerusalem, arguing against those Christians who spiritualized or allegorized this belief.

Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) - Dialogue with Trypho
"But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare."

Quotes from other church fathers:

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60-130 AD)
"There will be a period of a thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth."

Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD) - Against Marcion
"But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem."

[bearbear]

Covenant theology teaches that the church replaces Israel and takes over its covenant and promises. Traditional dispensationalism teaches that the Church and Israel are separate and governed by separate covenants.

Progressive dispensationalism, however, modifies the traditional dispensational view by emphasizing the continuity between Israel and the Church. It says that both entities share in the same redemptive plan of God, which unfolds progressively through biblical covenants. While retaining the distinction between Israel and the Church, progressive dispensationalism suggests a partial fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel in the present Church age, with complete fulfillment expected in the future millennium. This view seeks a middle ground, asserting that God’s covenantal promises to Israel extend to the Church without negating the future national restoration of Israel and the millennial kingdom where Christ reigns.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

Specifically Jesus said He did not know “the day nor the hour.”

But once Daniel’s 70th week begins, we CAN know the month and year of His return to earth.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Covenant theology teaches that the church replaces Israel and takes over its covenant and promises. Traditional dispensationalism teaches that the Church and Israel are separate and governed by separate covenants.

Progressive dispensationalism, however, modifies the traditional dispensational view by emphasizing the continuity between Israel and the Church. It says that both entities share in the same redemptive plan of God, which unfolds progressively through biblical covenants. While retaining the distinction between Israel and the Church, progressive dispensationalism suggests a partial fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel in the present Church age, with complete fulfillment expected in the future millennium. This view seeks a middle ground, asserting that God’s covenantal promises to Israel extend to the Church without negating the future national restoration of Israel and the millennial kingdom where Christ reigns.

All systems of theology fail us. Obviously there are both dispensations and covenants in scripture which are true, and which will be fulfilled. Personally, I do not embrace “systems” but rather the scriptures.

Recently I read Philip Schaff’s legacy work on church history regarding the time Revelation was written. Schaff is a well respected 19th century theologian and historian, a contemporary of Darby, Govett, Spurgeon, Etc. Later in life he changed his view from ~69 to ~95 AD. This created monumental changes in his end time eschatology. Basically he reverted to Preterism, considering that all the prophetic events in Revelation were fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70AD. For example he mentions instruction to John to “measure the temple” (11.1) as his leading item. His thought was that the Temple must still be erected to be “measured.” But John was exiled on Patmos, so this could NOT be literal.

Hence, I do think all systems of interpretation are flawed, and as the Day approaches the church’s understanding of the future will constantly be corrected and fine-tuned. If and when the Temple is rebuilt, Preterist thinking automatically must perish. If Christians then remain on the earth, then Darby pre-trib Dispensationalism must likewise be exposed as false. Unfortunately, and I do says this with great fear for my brothers and sisters in Christ, if this long-promised Great End-times Revival does NOT occur, many Christians will be set up for “The Apostasy” mentioned in 2 Thess 2.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

All systems of theology fail us. Obviously there are both dispensations and covenants in scripture which are true, and which will be fulfilled. Personally, I do not embrace “systems” but rather the scriptures.

Progressive dispensationalism could have flaws but I think it's much less flawed than the two other competing systems because it allows for a more literal reading of scripture.

For example covenant theologians and preterists need to force end times teachings in scripture to match their theology. When they see references to the millennial kingdom they have to allegorize it because it doesn't fit their system.

Traditional dispensationalists also often force problem passages to match their understanding by declaring that those passages apply to different audiences, which is convenient because then if they aren't in that audience, they don't have to obey.

Pretrib dispensationalists will say that the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 applies to unbelieving Israel and gentiles who miss the rapture when the audience is clearly Jesus' followers.

Extreme free grace dispensationalists will also often use this system to declare that passages like Ezekiel 18 apply to "those under the law":

Ezekiel 18:24
But when a righteous person turns away from his righteousness and does injustice and does the same abominations that the wicked person does, shall he live? None of the righteous deeds that he has done shall be remembered; for the treachery of which he is guilty and the sin he has committed, for them he shall die.

Yet both Jesus and the apostles often preached that one had to turn away from sins or perish in the New Testament. And when extreme free grace dispensationalists see these same quotes, they will apply it to a different audience such as "the nations", when the clear context of the audience is Jesus' followers who are the church. This is quite dangerous because it won't allow the word of God to enter their heart so that they can obey.

Acts 3:19 (NLT)
Now repent of your sins and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped away.

Acts 3:26 (NLT)
When God raised up his servant, Jesus, he sent him first to you people of Israel, to bless you by turning each of you back from your sinful ways.

Luke 13:2-3 (NLT)
Do you think those Galileans were worse sinners than all the other people from Galilee?” Jesus asked. “Is that why they suffered? Not at all! And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God.

Under progressive dispensationalism, there's no get out of jail free card for passages that are hard to obey. In this sense the salvation theology of progressive dispensationalists will be more similar to covenant theology which teaches that the same covenant of grace extends throughout the Old and New Testament starting with Moses and that the OT saints were saved by faith in God just as the NT saints were (Hebrews 11) though the sacraments differed.

Progressive dispensationalists will acknowledge we are under the New Testament age of grace but will take the entire scripture into account to interpret this dispensation and not throw out the "problem passages" using Jesus as their guide to determine what is carried over to the New Covenant from the Old.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hence, I do think all systems of interpretation are flawed, and as the Day approaches the church’s understanding of the future will constantly be corrected and fine-tuned. If and when the Temple is rebuilt, Preterist thinking automatically must perish.

One can also argue that Preterism should have died with the establishment of the nation of Israel and Jerusalem in addition to Israel's ability to miraculously defend itself against enormous odds in the wars that followed which was a miracle. Unfortunately many in the Preterist camp have hardened their hearts and given themselves over to anti-semitism in spite of fulfilled prophecy.

If Christians then remain on the earth, then Darby pre-trib Dispensationalism must likewise be exposed as false. Unfortunately, and I do says this with great fear for my brothers and sisters in Christ, if this long-promised Great End-times Revival does NOT occur, many Christians will be set up for “The Apostasy” mentioned in 2 Thess 2.

I lean towards the Great End-times revival not occurring according to scripture. In addition to Paul warning of the great falling away in 2 Thess 2:3, Jesus says that when he comes back, he will find little faith on earth.

Luke 18:8
... Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

Even at the end of the 1000 year kingdom of the old creation, the people rise up to rebel against Jesus and the saints. This is both incredibly sad and interesting and speaks to the depravity of human nature. Even when Jesus physically reigns on earth which is what we are all hoping for, the people choose not to join Christ's kingdom in their hearts. The kingdom of God is not only physical but it is inside us.

Revelation 20:8-9
... their number is like the sand of the sea. And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them,

Throughout the bible God has always had to take matter into his own hands and preserve a remnant to be saved. This is true in the NT as well when Jesus confirmed that few are saved and will find the narrow way that leads to life. This could also be true in the millennial kingdom which may get off to a great start when the Jews put their faith in Jesus after "seeing the one whom they pierced", but subsequent generations then regress and rebel against God just like the in OT starting with the overcoming Joshua generation who entered the promised land and arguably like in the NT after the early church got off to a great start and regressed over time.

[Zezima]

What was mind altering for me regarding theological frameworks was the fact there are other frameworks that are different than the one used in the Lord’s Recovery.

I always thought all Christian’s believed in the rapture as presented in the LR or that every Christian thought the geopolitical state of Israel was the same as Israel in the Bible.

However there are large amounts of Christian’s that don’t share those beliefs and that a minority of Christian’s actually hold those beliefs. What was even more eye opening is that, a lot of those beliefs are isolated to western evangelicals and geographically isolated to the west.

That doesn’t discredit the beliefs themselves, but understanding that there are legitimate alternative frameworks to interpret the Bible from that aren’t held by a small fringe group but by the majority really help me unpack the beliefs I grew up following without question.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Zezima

That doesn’t discredit the beliefs themselves, but understanding that there are legitimate alternative frameworks to interpret the Bible from that aren’t held by a small fringe group but by the majority really help me unpack the beliefs I grew up following without question.

My mind was blown in a similar manner as well though it more towards different soteriologies (salvation theology). After leaving the LCs I thought all Christian believed that you are saved after saying the sinner's prayer and professing belief in Jesus and it also blew my mind that other serious Christians believed differently and they had a lot of scripture to back up their views which were largely ignored in the LCs.

Since there are a plethora of theologies out there I've decided to align my views closer to the early church since they were handed the faith directly from the apostles. And we know from church history starting from Acts there was a core of believers who held onto the faith closely and took Jesus at his word and practiced the sermon on the mount lifestyle.

Jude 1:3 "Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints."

What is interesting is that the early church practices and beliefs match almost no major mainline denomination today. I believe Jesus prophesied this in some of his parables and teachings that many churches would eventually experience leaven. Yet there are still true believers in churches that have leaven.

David Bercot, an early church historian has a lot of videos on his youtube channel on what the early church believed according to the writings of the church fathers and how it differs from Evangelicals, Catholics and Orthodox today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzqDV91AFPo

[aron]

Originally Posted by Zezima

That doesn’t discredit the beliefs themselves, but understanding that there are legitimate alternative frameworks to interpret the Bible from that aren’t held by a small fringe group but by the majority really help me unpack the beliefs I grew up following without question.

Originally Posted by bearbear

Since there are a plethora of theologies out there I've decided to align my views closer to the early church since they were handed the faith directly from the apostles. And we know from church history starting from Acts there was a core of believers who held onto the faith closely and took Jesus at his word and practiced the Sermon on the Mount lifestyle.

Jude 1:3 "Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints."
What is interesting is that the early church practices and beliefs match almost no major mainline denomination today. I believe Jesus prophesied this in some of his parables and teachings that many churches would eventually experience leaven. Yet there are still true believers in churches that have leaven.

My own admittedly cursory view is that there are multiple factors that deeply color the Christianity that most of us have experienced, in the Local Church and beyond it. I will here enumerate two of them.

First was the East-West Schism. No, I’m not talking about the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic divide, I’m talking about one centuries earlier and perhaps much more fundamental in dividing the doctrine of the Church from its original Galilee/Palestine/Judea base. At that time, many churches left. I’m referring to what became the Ethiopian, Syrian, Armenian and others. If you look at documents with the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, when they reconnected with the West in the 19th century, many were Palestine-Jewish/Christian like the Didache, and Enoch, which offered perspectives that were known, even if not universally held, in the early church, and even were cited in the NT.

So, I’m thinking there was a Great Divorce and a lot of early Christian thinking, rightly or wrongly, got set aside. But the point is that the original generation was gone, a new generation rose up, which clearly held different source documents as referential. So the interpretive matrix changed.

The second event was even more pronounced in effect. It was after Martin Luther, when interpretation no longer rested with the collective. Any individual could get a revelation and go into business. Think of how many followed the Protestant Reformation: Jessie Penn-Lewis, Watchman Nee, Aimee Semple McPherson. They got their revelation directly from God, not from man. Look at WL's appelation for WN: "Seer of the Divine Revelation". Not the Darby Revelation or the Calvinist; no it was from God. Nee was free to pick & choose.

Think about it this way: How many heterodox quasi-Christian cults, and how many quasi-orthodox Christian personality cults have come out of the Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Church? Answer: none that I know of. And then, how many came out of the Protestant Reformation? Hundreds, maybe thousands. You see, anyone in the EOC who claimed direct revelation, that upended, challenged or superseded collective hermeneutic tradition, would not get well received. But today, we in the Protestant & post-Protestant worlds always have had itching ears for something new. (and I’m not EOC nor Syrian Orthodox. I heard the gospel in a [Western] Bible Church. But my perspective on that gospel that I heard has been informed by a sense of history)

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by aron

Think about it this way: How many heterodox quasi-Christian cults, and how many quasi-orthodox Christian personality cults have come out of the Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Church? Answer: none that I know of. And then, how many came out of the Protestant Reformation? Hundreds, maybe thousands. You see, anyone in the EOC who claimed direct revelation, that upended, challenged or superseded collective hermeneutic tradition, would not get well received. But today, we in the Protestant & post-Protestant worlds always have had itching ears for something new. (and I’m not EOC nor Syrian Orthodox. I heard the gospel in a [Western] Bible Church. But my perspective on that gospel that I heard has been informed by a sense of history)

The 1800s was an insane period of time for cults to emerge. Mormons, Jehovah Witness and I would argue Seventh Day Adventists who believe Ellen G White is a true prophet all arose during this century. May God have mercy on us Protestants.

After studying the early church and their beliefs I actually considered joining Eastern Orthodoxy. Unlike Catholics, Orthodox Christians emphasize personal relationship with Jesus and not having a mechanical faith. Ultimately I could not stomach praying to saints and Mary and the spiritual pride of some factions which declare everyone outside of EOC to be a heretic and damned. I believe these are leaven that crept in after the council of Nicea yet I still listen to some Orthodox or Syriac teachers such as Sam Shamoun and Mar Mari and spit out what I think are the bones.

David Bercot decided that Anabaptists were closest to the early church. Yet from what I observe, some factions like the Mennonites tend to be overly legalistic and portray God as angry and out to get us.

I settled on the fact that no church is perfect and believe God led me to where am I today at the evangelical church with Baptist theology from Dallas Theological Seminary. Ultimately we are saved through knowing Jesus Christ (John 17:3) and baptists emphasize personal relationship and loving Jesus. Perhaps that's what really matters.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

The 1800s was an insane period of time for cults to emerge. Mormons, Jehovah Witness and I would argue Seventh Day Adventists who believe Ellen G White is a true prophet all arose during this century. May God have mercy on us Protestants.

After studying the early church and their beliefs I actually considered joining Eastern Orthodoxy. Unlike Catholics, Orthodox Christians emphasize personal relationship with Jesus and not having a mechanical faith. Ultimately I could not stomach praying to saints and Mary and the spiritual pride of some factions which declare everyone outside of EOC to be a heretic and damned. I believe these are leaven that crept in after the council of Nicea yet I still listen to some Orthodox or Syriac teachers such as Sam Shamoun and Mar Mari and spit out what I think are the bones.

David Bercot decided that Anabaptists were closest to the early church. Yet from what I observe, some factions like the Mennonites tend to be overly legalistic and portray God as angry and out to get us.

I settled on the fact that no church is perfect and believe God led me to where am I today at the evangelical church with Baptist theology from Dallas Theological Seminary. Ultimately we are saved through knowing Jesus Christ (John 17:3) and baptists emphasize personal relationship and loving Jesus. Perhaps that's what really matters.

I believe Paul’s admonition to “work out your own salvation” forces us to journey on the search for Christ and the truth. This describes my early contacts with brothers in the church in Cleveland. With them it was “Christ, only Christ” and struggling to “return to the pure word of God.” My life was turned upside down.

Time, however, seems to deteriorate every church. The church is a war-zone between God and His enemy. The 7 Revelation epistles enumerate the many ways which are used to degrade His house, His family, His people. Growing up in Catholicism, all I knew was a couple millennia of such decay. I watched it happen in the Recovery. It all starts with corruption at the top.

Our walk with the Lord began with our relationship with Him. Our journey is to remain in that relationship. When leaders depart from that, so should we.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Growing up in Catholicism, all I knew was a couple millennia of such decay. I watched it happen in the Recovery. It all starts with corruption at the top.

There's a video that makes a good argument for studying pre-Nicean Christian writings and asserts that most of the leaven crept in after the council of Nicea due to the church becoming friends rather than enemies with the Roman empire through emperor Constantine and being influenced by it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJA-wIRctmE

Our walk with the Lord began with our relationship with Him. Our journey is to remain in that relationship. When leaders depart from that, so should we.

One of the interesting subjects from the early church fathers was their belief in apostolic succession since they believed the teachings of the apostles had to be strictly handed down from generation to generation. They also believed in church unity and attempted to agree to disagree on non-essentials like when to celebrate Easter.

Yet many of the early church fathers would probably cringe at the leaven in Orthodox and Catholic churches today.

Eusebius even wrote against the usage of icons to Constantia, Emperor Constantine's sister, in the fourth century:

“To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error”

If the Catholic church had remained faithful to the word of God and the original apostle's teachings I would be Catholic in a heartbeat.

[bearbear]

Coming back to progressive dispensationalism, one point I forgot to mention is the historical argument for why progressive dispensationalism is a good improvement on traditional dispensationalism.

Under traditional dispensationalism we are currently in the 70th week of Daniel which is viewed as the "parentheses" where God pauses his timeline of dealing with Israel to focus on the church in the "church age". Yet God has been busy fulfilling prophecy with the nation of Israel progressively during this time.

Here's a timeline of progressively fulfilled prophecy concerning the nation of Israel in recent history, it is pretty astonishing when you look at the entire list. All this happened after John Darby passed away so it's possible that if he was still alive he would have changed his view towards progressive dispensationalism due to the staggering amount of biblical prophecy concerning Israel being fulfilled during the "church age".

1. Biblical Prophecies About Restoration
Amos 9:14-15 (ESV):
"I will restore the fortunes of my people Israel, and they shall rebuild the ruined cities and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and drink their wine, and they shall make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant them on their land, and they shall never again be uprooted out of the land that I have given them, says the LORD your God."

Ezekiel 36:24 (ESV):
"I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land."

2. Late 19th to Early 20th Century - Zionist Movement
Isaiah 11:12 (ESV):
"He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth."

3. Balfour Declaration (1917)
Jeremiah 31:10 (ESV):
"Hear the word of the LORD, O nations, and declare it in the coastlands far away; say, 'He who scattered Israel will gather him, and will keep him as a shepherd keeps his flock.'"

4. United Nations Partition Plan (1947)
Ezekiel 37:22 (ESV):
"And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. And one king shall be king over them all, and they shall no longer be two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms."

5. Declaration of the State of Israel (1948)
Isaiah 66:8 (ESV):
"Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things? Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be brought forth in a moment? For as soon as Zion was in labor, she brought forth her children."

6. Jerusalem Reunification (1967)
Zechariah 8:7-8 (ESV):
"Thus says the LORD of hosts: Behold, I will save my people from the east country and from the west country, and I will bring them to dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. They shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness."

7. Jerusalem as Capital (1980)
Psalm 122:3-5 (ESV):
"Jerusalem—built as a city that is bound firmly together, to which the tribes go up, the tribes of the LORD, as was decreed for Israel, to give thanks to the name of the LORD. There thrones for judgment were set, the thrones of the house of David."

The implication of this is that there is no rule that forces God to rapture the church in order continue his timeline with Israel since God has shown he can fulfill prophecy with both Israel and the church simultaneously. This ties back to the pre-wrath post where the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 can be read to apply to believers and followers of Jesus who were his audience and not unbelieving Israel.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

If the Catholic church had remained faithful to the word of God and the original apostle's teachings I would be Catholic in a heartbeat.

Don't know what to make of this statement, bearbear.

Catholics would claim lineage back to Peter the first bishop of Rome and steadfast, faithful adherence to the scriptures.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Don't know what to make of this statement, bearbear.

Catholics would claim lineage back to Peter the first bishop of Rome and steadfast, faithful adherence to the scriptures.

Catholics reject Sola Scriptura however don't they? The apostolic churches like Catholics and Orthodoxy are so leavened that staying in them is dangerous. However, if they had prevented leaven from entering the church starting from the council of Nicea then I would be Catholic. I think God's original intention was there to be one church and there are certain advantages of this that Protestants overlook.

For example if someone is in an adulterous affair and that person receives church disciplines via ex-communication in Protestantism, that person can just find another Protestant church to attend and take communion and no one would be the wiser. However, in the early church, the elder would let the bishop know and that person would be prevented from taking communion until they repent for the sake of their own soul.

Something like this was formalized for the "lapsi" who under extreme persecution by the Roman empire would break down and deny the faith via sacrificing to pagan gods to save their own life. There was a great controversy in the early church whether or not the lapsi could be forgiven and take communion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapsi_(Christianity)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Catholics reject Sola Scriptura however don't they? The apostolic churches like Catholics and Orthodoxy are so leavened that staying in them is dangerous. However, if they had prevented leaven from entering the church starting from the council of Nicea then I would be Catholic. I think God's original intention was there to be one church and there are certain advantages of this that Protestants overlook.

For example if someone is in an adulterous affair and that person receives church disciplines via ex-communication in Protestantism, that person can just find another Protestant church to attend and take communion and no one would be the wiser. However, in the early church, the elder would let the bishop know and that person would be prevented from taking communion until they repent for the sake of their own soul.

Something like this was formalized for the "lapsi" who under extreme persecution by the Roman empire would break down and deny the faith via sacrificing to pagan gods to save their own life. There was a great controversy in the early church whether or not the lapsi could be forgiven and take communion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapsi_(Christianity)

Obviously I left Catholicism due to "leaven." I was about 13-14 when I decided that I would never again enter that dark Confessional box. And btw the Whole Lump of Christianity has been leavened to a certain degree. None exempted. (Mt 13.33)

The Council at Nicea was as crucial as the Jerusalem Council in AD 50. The latter demanded that the whole church be circumcised according to Moses. The former demanded that Jesus, the Only Begotten Word of God, was neither God nor eternal. This does not mean that everything at Nicea was positive, and for that matter not everything in Acts 15 was positive.

Your concept of "one church" is an organizational one to prevent sin and heresy from entering the church and spreading. This has ALWAYS been their justification. The true oneness of the church, however, is not physical or organizational, but rather invisible and spiritual.

Using a political analogy, if local officials are corrupt, citizens can get redress at a state level, and if state officials or laws are corrupt, citizens can get remedy at the federal level. But what happens when the Feds, or in our case when church leadership at headquarters is corrupt, where do the saints find justice or righteousness? Did I not just explain every "storm" in LC history? Supposedly, whether the MOTA or the Pope or whoever "misaims," the Head of the body would step in to correct things. Obviously from church history things never happened that way.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Coming back to progressive dispensationalism, one point I forgot to mention is the historical argument for why progressive dispensationalism is a good improvement on traditional dispensationalism.

Under traditional dispensationalism we are currently in the 70th week of Daniel which is viewed as the "parentheses" where God pauses his timeline of dealing with Israel to focus on the church in the "church age". Yet God has been busy fulfilling prophecy with the nation of Israel progressively during this time.

Here's a timeline of progressively fulfilled prophecy concerning the nation of Israel in recent history, it is pretty astonishing when you look at the entire list. All this happened after John Darby passed away so it's possible that if he was still alive he would have changed his view towards progressive dispensationalism due to the staggering amount of biblical prophecy concerning Israel being fulfilled during the "church age".

The implication of this is that there is no rule that forces God to rapture the church in order continue his timeline with Israel since God has shown he can fulfill prophecy with both Israel and the church simultaneously. This ties back to the pre-wrath post where the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 can be read to apply to believers and followers of Jesus who were his audience and not unbelieving Israel.

Good points here, bearbear.

I tend to eschew labels. Though I do see the value of teaching "dispensations," to be branded as "dispensationalist" seemed to bring added baggage which I am not willing to embrace.

It is my view that the 70 weeks of Daniel's prophecy had everything to do with the Temple and sacrifices. That is from the decree of Cyrus, 7 weeks (49 years) were for the rebuilding of the Temple, and resumption of sacrifices. The 69th week terminated when Messiah was "cut off" and the Veil in the Temple was rent from top to bottom. It was at this point the Temple was obsoleted by God. The final 70th week begins with the rebuilding of the Temple and sacrifices initiated once again.

Obviously the things you enumerated had to happen before this. I found the Zionist movement in northeastern (Ashkenazi) Europe of the late 19th century to be altogether of the Spirit of God, similar to Genesis 1.2. Initially Zionism was totally not religious, and actually was anti-religious. It was born out of a connection to their Homeland in order to obtain self-determination for their own destiny. This explains the kibbutzim. Initially Zionists forsook every personal comfort in order to work the land of their forbears.

What they arrived to was mostly a barren desert that no one wanted. After all the work they have done, now the world says it all belongs to the "oppressed people" of Hamas.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your concept of "one church" is an organizational one to prevent sin and heresy from entering the church and spreading. This has ALWAYS been their justification. The true oneness of the church, however, is not physical or organizational, but rather invisible and spiritual.

Using a political analogy, if local officials are corrupt, citizens can get redress at a state level, and if state officials or laws are corrupt, citizens can get remedy at the federal level. But what happens when the Feds, or in our case when church leadership at headquarters is corrupt, where do the saints find justice or righteousness? Did I not just explain every "storm" in LC history? Supposedly, whether the MOTA or the Pope or whoever "misaims," the Head of the body would step in to correct things. Obviously from church history things never happened that way.

Yea it does breakdown and introduce a single point of failure if the leadership becomes corrupt. I think it could have been within God's perfect will to have a universal church and such an organization seems to have done pretty well up until Nicea, but God also foreknew that leaven would throw a wrench into everything and I think the parables he gave hinted at that.

Matthew 13:33
He told them another parable. “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.”

I lean towards a more negative interpretation of this parable since Jesus says when he comes back he will find little faith on the earth.

Luke 18:8
"... Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

Yet Jesus also said the gates of hades will never prevail against the church (Matt 16:18) so there will always be a remnant of true believers from generation to generation up until his second coming.

[bearbear]

ChatGPT-4o on progressive dispensationalism and prewrath rapture

Q: Why does progressive dispensationalism imply a prewrath rapture of the church?

Progressive dispensationalism implies a prewrath rapture of the church for several reasons, rooted in its interpretative framework and theological principles:

1. Integration of Dispensations: Progressive dispensationalism attempts to bridge the gap between classic dispensationalism and covenant theology. It sees a more continuous and integrated plan of God throughout different dispensations. This leads to a belief that the church will experience part of the tribulation to refine and prepare it, rather than being entirely exempt from it.
   
2. Recognition of the Church's Role: Unlike classic dispensationalism, which often sharply distinguishes between Israel and the church, progressive dispensationalism acknowledges a closer relationship between the two. This theological stance suggests that the church might share in some of the end-times experiences traditionally associated with Israel, including some aspects of the tribulation period.
   
3. Biblical Interpretation: Progressive dispensationalists interpret certain key passages (such as Matthew 24, 1 Thessalonians 4-5, and Revelation) as indicating that the rapture occurs after significant tribulation events but before the outpouring of God's wrath. They see the wrath of God as distinct from the general tribulation and believe the church will be raptured just before this wrath is unleashed.
   
4. Focus on the 'Day of the Lord': The prewrath position emphasizes the distinction between the tribulation (a period of human and satanic wrath) and the 'Day of the Lord' (a period of divine wrath). Progressive dispensationalists, like prewrath proponents, see the church being raptured before the 'Day of the Lord' begins, aligning with their understanding of God's protection of the church from His wrath but not necessarily from tribulation.
   
5. Scriptural Harmony: Progressive dispensationalists strive for an interpretation that harmonizes various scriptural texts without forcing an artificial separation between them. The prewrath rapture fits this approach by considering the overall narrative of scripture regarding end-times events and God's dealing with His people.

In summary, progressive dispensationalism implies a prewrath rapture due to its integrated view of God's redemptive plan, the nuanced understanding of the church's role in the end times, and a careful interpretation of biblical texts that supports the church experiencing some tribulation but being spared from God's wrath.

[bearbear]

ChatGPT-4o on 2 Thess 2 and the pre-wrath rapture

Q: Show how the rapture and the day of the Lord is a single event based on 2 Thess 2:1
To show how the rapture and the Day of the Lord can be understood as a single event based on 2 Thessalonians 2:1, we need to closely examine the verse and its immediate context.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 (ESV)
"Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come."

Key Points from 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2

• The Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ: This phrase refers to the return of Jesus.
• Our Being Gathered Together to Him: This is generally understood as the rapture, where believers are gathered to Christ.
• The Day of the Lord: Paul mentions that some were alarmed thinking the Day of the Lord had already come.

Integrating the Rapture and the Day of the Lord
The construction of Paul's argument in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 suggests that he views the rapture and the Day of the Lord as interconnected events. Let’s delve deeper into this relationship:

The Coming of Our Lord and Our Gathering

• 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 (ESV):
  "For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord."

Here, Paul describes the rapture, which is part of the "coming of the Lord."

The Day of the Lord

• 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 (ESV):
  "For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, 'There is peace and security,' then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape."

The Day of the Lord is characterized by sudden destruction and judgment.

Synthesis of the Concepts
When Paul speaks of the coming of the Lord and our gathering to Him in 2 Thessalonians 2:1, he is likely referencing a single complex event that includes both the rapture and the subsequent Day of the Lord. The two concepts are intertwined in Paul's eschatology:

1. Single Event Perspective: Paul's warning in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 about not being deceived into thinking the Day of the Lord has already come implies that the gathering to Christ (rapture) and the onset of the Day of the Lord (judgment) are closely linked. They are not separate events with a significant gap in between.
   
2. Sequential Nature: While the rapture (gathering) is the deliverance aspect for believers, the Day of the Lord that follows immediately is the aspect of judgment for unbelievers. This sequential nature still ties them into a unified eschatological event.
   
3. Immediate Context: In 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, Paul elaborates that certain events (rebellion, revelation of the man of lawlessness) must occur before the Day of the Lord, reinforcing that these events, including the rapture, are part of the same end-times framework.

Conclusion
The structure of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 supports the idea that the rapture and the Day of the Lord are parts of a single, closely connected event. Paul’s concern that the Thessalonians might be misled into thinking the Day of the Lord had already come implies that the rapture, as part of the coming of the Lord, is intertwined with the onset of the Day of the Lord. This suggests that the rapture and the Day of the Lord are sequential events within the same eschatological timeframe.

Q: Show how 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 reveals that the rapture cannot take place before the middle of the tribulation. Use other verses and quote them.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 is a key passage in the discussion about the timing of the rapture relative to the tribulation. Let's examine this passage and how it suggests that the rapture cannot take place before the middle of the tribulation by correlating it with other relevant scriptures.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 (ESV)
"Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God."

Key Points from 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4

1. Rebellion (Apostasy) Must Come First: The verse indicates that there will be a significant falling away from the faith before "that day" (interpreted as the Day of the Lord) arrives.
2. Revelation of the Man of Lawlessness: The antichrist (man of lawlessness) must be revealed.
3. Antichrist's Self-Exaltation: The antichrist will exalt himself, taking his seat in the temple of God and proclaiming himself to be God.

Correlation with Other Scriptures
To further support the claim that the rapture cannot take place before the middle of the tribulation, we can look at other scriptures that align with these events.

Matthew 24:15-21 (ESV)
"So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be."

• Abomination of Desolation: Jesus refers to the abomination of desolation, which is the event where the antichrist desecrates the temple, aligning with the man of lawlessness taking his seat in the temple of God.
• Great Tribulation: This event marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation, indicating a midpoint in the tribulation period.

Daniel 9:27 (ESV)
"And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator."

• Midpoint of the Week: Daniel speaks of a "week" (seven-year period), with the abomination occurring in the middle, reinforcing that the antichrist’s actions are a midpoint event.

Revelation 13:5-7 (ESV)
"And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation."

• Forty-Two Months: The beast (antichrist) has authority for 42 months (3.5 years), which corresponds to the second half of the tribulation, suggesting his revelation and blasphemous acts occur at the midpoint.

Conclusion
Combining these scriptures, we can see a consistent pattern indicating that key events, such as the revelation of the antichrist and his desecration of the temple, occur at the midpoint of the tribulation. Since 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 states that the Day of the Lord will not come until these events happen, it implies that the rapture cannot occur before the midpoint of the tribulation. This interpretation aligns with the prewrath view, where the church is present through the first half of the tribulation but is raptured before the outpouring of God's wrath in the Great Tribulation.

[UntoHim]

bearbear,

We all have the Internet, and thus we all have access to ChatGPT. This is a discussion forum, and I don't see how posting massive amounts of ChatGPT is fostering discussion regarding this subject.

If anyone has any interest on how this all ties into the teachings and practices in the Local Church, then I'm all for continuing the thread....otherwise let's wrap this one up. bearbear you can give a concluding note.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

bearbear,

We all have the Internet, and thus we all have access to ChatGPT. This is a discussion forum, and I don't see how posting massive amounts of ChatGPT is fostering discussion regarding this subject.

If anyone has any interest on how this all ties into the teachings and practices in the Local Church, then I'm all for continuing the thread....otherwise let's wrap this one up. bearbear you can give a concluding note.
-

I, for one, disagrees with the "teachings" of some "Computer" Christian.

Once the church is reduced to AI, we no longer need shepherds, ministers, and teachers.

Does ChatGPT have the Spirit of Jesus Christ indwelling it/her/him?

[bearbear]

Sorry I got carried away. It is scary how good AI is getting. I feel like it is doing a better job than I ever could.

It's been fascinating asking it questions about the beliefs of early church and analyzing and recounting histories of theologies and theologians. This is something that was much harder to do via Googling.

Instead of viewing it as a minister or teacher, you can treat it as a "research assistant" by asking ChatGPT to includes quotes and references to make it easier to verify the information.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Sorry I got carried away. It is scary how good AI is getting. I feel like it is doing a better job than I ever could.

It's been fascinating asking it questions about the beliefs of early church and analyzing and recounting histories of theologies and theologians. This is something that was much harder to do via Googling.

Instead of viewing it as a minister or teacher, you can treat it as a "research assistant" by asking ChatGPT to includes quotes and references to make it easier to verify the information.

It’s becoming one more way, and possibly/probably a far more insidious way at that, to disconnect us from the Word of God, and “color” our sight. For years on this forum, many have cited the removal of their “rose-colored glasses” upon leaving the LC. I fear that AI will be used to pollute the truth. Today it appears neutral and “helpful” in order to gather users. But the algorithms will be manipulated by the ungodly. Caveat emptor!

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It’s becoming one more way, and possibly/probably a far more insidious way at that, to disconnect us from the Word of God, and “color” our sight. For years on this forum, many have cited the removal of their “rose-colored glasses” upon leaving the LC. I fear that AI will be used to pollute the truth. Today it appears neutral and “helpful” in order to gather users. But the algorithms will be manipulated by the ungodly. Caveat emptor!

I view AI as a tool that just magnifies the capabilities of the person behind it. An evil person can use AI to propagate more evil and vice versa for a good person. As more people use ChatGPT, it could actually be a useful tool to free people from bondage to lies in the LCs. The LC exerts it's control by putting up a wall of information and their control will be lost when they can no longer control the narrative.

For example, LCers can ask ChatGPT about esoteric doctrines and compare and contrast them with more mainstream ones and see which ones are more biblical based on scripture. In the LCs you are only presented with one interpretation which is often flawed and people are not aware that other interpretations have much better scriptural basis and arguments.

However, all this did make me think last night what is my purpose if AI can do everything better than I can including my job? And the easy answer is that AI can never love since it doesn't have a soul or free will but God created us uniquely in his image and gave us the capability to love Him and one another through his Spirit.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

For example, LCers can ask ChatGPT about esoteric doctrines and compare and contrast them with more mainstream ones and see which ones are more biblical based on scripture. In the LCs you are only presented with one interpretation which is often flawed and people are not aware that other interpretations have much better scriptural basis and arguments.

This definitely was NOT true during the early days of the Recovery, especially in greater Ohio where I am. I was introduced to many gifted and well-respected authors. Many brothers in the LC’s had huge libraries NOT purchased from LSM.

I’m not saying things were “perfect” everywhere, but definitely there was a negative inflection point post-Life-Study-period beginning with the horribly exclusive “New Way” in 1985.

Neither am I uplifting TC as a “defender of free speech” since there is a lengthy trail of discarded brothers who were too “independent” for his liking. TC would never tolerate “rivals” in his kingdom.

[bearbear]

John 6:66
After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.

Isn't it a crazy coincidence that John 6:66 describes the apostasy of disciples who later fall away. This possibly foreshadows The Great Apostasy of self professed believers who take the mark of the beast which is associated with the number 666 to save their own life.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NASB)
Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.

Matthew 24:10
And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another

Revelation 14:9-11
And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, 'If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God's wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.

Daniel's friends were also faced with the same predicament and they chose to face death instead of bowing and worshipping Nebuchadnezzar's image of gold. This story could be a warning and lesson for believers to be faithful unto death when such a test of faith is presented with us during the tribulation.

Revelation 2:10
"Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life."