Does Your Church Teach About the Rapture(Catching up) Heaven, Hell, Prophecy?

[Taken]

Yup - "picking and choosing" what you want to believe instead of the WHOLE Word is called "Cafeteria Faith".
"I'll take a little of this and a little of that - but I'll have NONE of that over there!"

That's not true faith - that's a salad bar . . .

Scripture IS full of Knowledge and Examples of what men can Pick and Choose and the consequences For Their Choices.

In Scripture it does not matter ones status... naturally born a Jew, a Gentile, a Greek, a Roman, wealthy, Poor, High IO, Simple, Famous, Unknown......

It all hinges on what one individually Chooses To Trust and Believe and Commit To.

You want to Choose the path To WAIT for your Salvation....there IS A Path, A WAY. provided FOR Jews To Do THAT!

You want to Choose to Follow after what Judas did, Follow and Believe "For awhile" but Never Commit...and then Reject Him....you can.

You want to Choose to Reject everything About God, you can.

You want To Choose To Believe, Trust.....And Commit To God Only FOREVER, You can.

For Whichever A Man Picks and Chooses....
The Scriptures Reveals The Consequences FOR HIS CHOICE!

So Absolutely... I made my own Choice...
And Absolutely... I discover IN Scriptures what IS the Applicable Consequence For My Choice.

I see You as the Salad Bar....Trying to Scour the Scriptures for Anything that sounds "good" and deciding That and the Consequences Apply To You...And anything that sounds "bad" and the consequences Applies To a Protestant or Atheist.

You say WITH you mouth You have Chosen and Committed To Jesus Christ, While also saying with you mouth, your Parents made that choice For you, and you do not remember that day.

Then you preach that The Consequences (for your parents choice/your choice supposedly) IS the Same Consequences That Apply To a Jew, Who believes In God....but NOT, That Jesus IS Their Christ Messiah.

AND.....You Attempt To Pick and Choose Consequences For others, THAT do NOT APPLY To Them!

Your Pick and Choose argument intended As A derogatory slam against Protestants IS a Fail.

Scripture itself teaches:
TO Choose your Own Standing (belief And Commitment)
AND
Learn how to Pick and Choose WHICH Consequences Apply To you "For" "Because" of Your Choice....By DIVIDING the Word of Truth!

Your salad bar is: YOU attempt to make All the Godly Consequences Apply To You...A Gentile supposedly SUBJECT To Jewish Law Consequences.......And other men Wrong IF THEY DO NOT Agree with YOU and play the silly notion that what you Decide supersedes
What The Lord has decided and revealed.

I highly doubt you will have the slightest inkling of what I have just said...and because you can not comprehend will come back with some pat SNARKY comment.

You are taught and programmed .... Catholicity IS always Right and Protestants are Always Wrong and it is "your good service To your Church" To teach that at every opportunity.

Sorry bubs...it squarely rests on what a man Chooses and what Applies To that man For His Choices.....According To God....not men....
Regardless of what organized Church he chooses to be affiliated with.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Scripture IS full of Knowledge and Examples of what men can Pick and Choose and the consequences For Their Choices.

In Scripture it does not matter ones status... naturally born a Jew, a Gentile, a Greek, a Roman, wealthy, Poor, High IO, Simple, Famous, Unknown......

It all hinges on what one individually Chooses To Trust and Believe and Commit To.

You want to Choose the path To WAIT for your Salvation....there IS A Path, A WAY. provided FOR Jews To Do THAT!

You want to Choose to Follow after what Judas did, Follow and Believe "For awhile" but Never Commit...and then Reject Him....you can.

You want to Choose to Reject everything About God, you can.

You want To Choose To Believe, Trust.....And Commit To God Only FOREVER, You can.

For Whichever A Man Picks and Chooses....
The Scriptures Reveals The Consequences FOR HIS CHOICE!

So Absolutely... I made my own Choice...
And Absolutely... I discover IN Scriptures what IS the Applicable Consequence For My Choice.

I see You as the Salad Bar....Trying to Scour the Scriptures for Anything that sounds "good" and deciding That and the Consequences Apply To You...And anything that sounds "bad" and the consequences Applies To a Protestant or Atheist.

You say WITH you mouth You have Chosen and Committed To Jesus Christ, While also saying with you mouth, your Parents made that choice For you, and you do not remember that day.

Then you preach that The Consequences (for your parents choice/your choice supposedly) IS the Same Consequences That Apply To a Jew, Who believes In God....but NOT, That Jesus IS Their Christ Messiah.

AND.....You Attempt To Pick and Choose Consequences For others, THAT do NOT APPLY To Them!

Your Pick and Choose argument intended As A derogatory slam against Protestants IS a Fail.

Scripture itself teaches:
TO Choose your Own Standing (belief And Commitment)
AND
Learn how to Pick and Choose WHICH Consequences Apply To you "For" "Because" of Your Choice....By DIVIDING the Word of Truth!

Your salad bar is: YOU attempt to make All the Godly Consequences Apply To You...A Gentile supposedly SUBJECT To Jewish Law Consequences.......And other men Wrong IF THEY DO NOT Agree with YOU and play the silly notion that what you Decide supersedes
What The Lord has decided and revealed.

I highly doubt you will have the slightest inkling of what I have just said...and because you can not comprehend will come back with some pat SNARKY comment.

You are taught and programmed .... Catholicity IS always Right and Protestants are Always Wrong and it is "your good service To your Church" To teach that at every opportunity.

Sorry bubs...it squarely rests on what a man Chooses and what Applies To that man For His Choices.....According To God....not men....
Regardless of what organized Church he chooses to be affiliated with.

Another verbose rant.
Learn how to whittle down your thoughts into a concise and cohesive response instead of blathering on every thought that comes into your head . . .

Regardless of what YOU might think - there is only ONE way to salvation and that is through Christ.
It's not simply "believing" in Him but OBEYING Him - and obeying ALL that He commands us to do not just some of it. That's what a true follower of Christ does. That's why HE refers to it as "picking up our cross DAILY" to follow Him (Luke 9:23).

As for your last comment i RED - it's just more nonsense. Catholics and Protestants agree on MUCH more that you think - but you're too blinded by your anti-Catholicism to realize it.

Finally - picking and choosing may work for a salad bar - but NOT for a servant of Christ.
When it comes to true faith - the salad bar is CLOSED.

 

[Taken]

Another verbose rant.
Learn how to whittle down your thoughts into a concise and cohesive response instead of blathering on every thought that comes into your head . . .

LOL predictable!

Regardless of what YOU might think - there is only ONE way to salvation and that is through Christ.

LOL - since you can not comprehend What is being said to you you consistently arrive at a false conclusion.

I said Nothing whatsoever that Salvation Was Not through Christ!

You should have learned....Salvation is Always
RECEIVED unto a man When the man is alive in his Own Blood.

You should have learned...
Gentile's Are the primary ones Accepting and Committing to Christ's Offering and Receiving His Offering Now, and Excepted out of the Trib.

They are already accomplished in Christ and are called Up to meet Him

While the rest of the World finishing Choosing their standing...with or without Him. Particularly the Jews but also Any Gentile....during the first half of the Trib.

The Last half of the Trib is satan His followers and

Then Jesus with Power And His Saints Descend ON the earth.

Pretty hard for Jesus and His Saints to descend and set foot on the earth if... like you say they were never lifted up to begin with.

It's not simply "believing" in Him but OBEYING Him - and obeying ALL that He commands us to do not just some of it. That's what a true follower of Christ does. That's why HE refers to it as "picking up our cross DAILY" to follow Him (Luke 9:23).

I am fully aware of Gods Precepts and a Converted mans command to strive to follow them.....

But you implication IS .... IF a man DOES NOT obey the Precepts He will Lose His Salvation...which Is False.

As for your last comment i RED - it's just more nonsense. Catholics and Protestants agree on MUCH more that you think - but you're too blinded by your anti-Catholicism to realize it.

I was not giving my perspective but rather your perspective per your own words Protestant ... Wrong
Protestant.....anti catholic
Protestant.....Wrong, Wrong,Wrong

One only needs to observe your posts to see your endless accusations of your great differences that you are right and they are wrong.

That's your perspective you own it.

Finally - picking and choosing may work for a salad bar - but NOT for a servant of Christ..

I disagree and so does Scripture.
2Tim2:15

 

[H. Richard]

I put my faith in Christ and the teachings of His Church - because He gave that Church Supreme Authority on earth - that WHATEVER it ordains on earth shall also be ordained in Heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

He didn't give ANY of your man-made Protestant sects one iota of Authority.

As for the coming Tribulations - I find the SAME solace that the Early Christians found when THEY were being slaughtered because I have Christ and the hope of everlasting life with Him.

***

Really??? Everyone in a religion puts their faith in their religion and that includes you. But according to the scriptures we are to place out Faith In God, not a religious church ran by men who can deceive themselves.

Ps 2:12
12 Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.
NKJV Him not a church

Ps 5:11-12
11 But let all those rejoice who put their trust in You; Let them ever shout for joy, because You defend them; Let those also who love Your name Be joyful in You.
12 For You, O Lord, will bless the righteous; With favor You will surround him as with a shield.
NKJV God blesses the righteous (those made righteous by the Holy Spirit)

Ps 9:10
10 And those who know Your name will put their trust in You; For You, Lord, have not forsaken those who seek You.
NKJV A child of God trusts in Jesus not a man ran religion

Ps 36:7
7 How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God! Therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Your wings.
NKJV You place your trust under the CC.

Prov 30:5-6
5 Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.
NKJV Your church has added a lot of things. But the child of God place their faith in Him.

If you had Christ you wouldn't need your church. You put your church between you and God and that will not get you into heaven. Only faith in the work of Jesus on the cross will save you. But what I see is that your faith is in your church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

LOL predictable!
LOL - since you can not comprehend What is being said to you you consistently arrive at a false conclusion.

I said Nothing whatsoever that Salvation Was Not through Christ!

You should have learned....Salvation is Always
RECEIVED unto a man When the man is alive in his Own Blood.

You should have learned...
Gentile's Are the primary ones Accepting and Committing to Christ's Offering and Receiving His Offering Now, and Excepted out of the Trib.

They are already accomplished in Christ and are called Up to meet Him

While the rest of the World finishing Choosing their standing...with or without Him. Particularly the Jews but also Any Gentile....during the first half of the Trib.

The Last half of the Trib is satan His followers and

Then Jesus with Power And His Saints Descend ON the earth.

Pretty hard for Jesus and His Saints to descend and set foot on the earth if... like you say they were never lifted up to begin with.

I see you STILL haven't learned the meaning of "concise" - or "cohesive" . . .

Your asinine statement above in RED is Scripturally unfounded as salvation is open to EVERYBODY - not just Gentiles - and not "primarily" Gentiles.

Needless to say - all of your little invented fairy tales about what is going to happen during the coming tribulations are also man-made . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

***

Really??? Everyone in a religion puts their faith in their religion and that includes you. But according to the scriptures we are to place out Faith In God, not a religious church ran by men who can deceive themselves.

Ps 2:12
12 Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.
NKJV Him not a church

Ps 5:11-12
11 But let all those rejoice who put their trust in You; Let them ever shout for joy, because You defend them; Let those also who love Your name Be joyful in You.
12 For You, O Lord, will bless the righteous; With favor You will surround him as with a shield.
NKJV God blesses the righteous (those made righteous by the Holy Spirit)

Ps 9:10
10 And those who know Your name will put their trust in You; For You, Lord, have not forsaken those who seek You.
NKJV A child of God trusts in Jesus not a man ran religion

Ps 36:7
7 How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God! Therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Your wings.
NKJV You place your trust under the CC.

Prov 30:5-6
5 Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.
NKJV Your church has added a lot of things. But the child of God place their faith in Him.

If you had Christ you wouldn't need your church. You put your church between you and God and that will not get you into heaven. Only faith in the work of Jesus on the cross will save you. But what I see is that your faith is in your church.

spoke like a person who doesn't have the first CLUE as to what Christ's Church actually is.
Allow me to educate you . . .

- Jesus established ONE Church (Matt. 16:16-19). He prayed fervently that this Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23). There is NO other.

- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).

- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).

- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).

- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).

- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).

- Jesus gave the Church supreme Authority on earth and whatever it ordains on earth is also ordained in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23).

It's not a choice between Christ OR His Church, my ignorant friend.
He and His Church are INSEPARABLE . . .

 

[Taken]

Your asinine statement above in RED is Scripturally unfounded as salvation is open to EVERYBODY - not just Gentiles - and not "primarily" Gentiles.

LOL. My statement is About those ACCEPTING His Offer.......

Why are you trying To Change WHO Accepts To WHO is Offered?

I already showed Scripture Eons ago that establishes WHO His Offering Is for.
....John 6:51.

Lol

 

[BreadOfLife]

LOL. My statement is About those ACCEPTING His Offer.......

Why are you trying To Change WHO Accepts To WHO is Offered?

I already showed Scripture Eons ago that establishes WHO His Offering Is for.
....John 6:51.

Lol

It's for EVERYBODY - not "primarily" the Gentiles, Einstein.

Oh . . . ummmm, "LOL" . . .

 

[Taken]

It's for EVERYBODY - not "primarily" the Gentiles, Einstein.

Oh . . . ummmm, "LOL" . . .

Oh Good grief...

No one said it IS for primarily Gentiles!!!!!!

Can't you Read?

What I Said Is ... It is Gentiles Primarily ACCEPTING His Offer!

 

[epostle1]

000000

"It would take a lifetime to read them all." That many, hmmm. Maybe I will not spend that kind of time on them...no real desire to...I'd rather spend that kind of time studying scripture!

Patristics is the name given to the study of ECF. It includes, and not limited to, testimony of how the early Church interpreted Scripture, the complicated process of discerning the canon of Scripture, the development of church government, how the doctrine of the Trinity (accepted by all Christians) was clarified in the face of heretics. Advanced study of Patristics is for academiacs. I like to refer to Protestant patristic scholars like J.N.D. Kelly because they are less threatening to Protestants. But by all means, stick with the Scriptures.

 

[Naomi25]

yes, the same religious definition we were all given. My premise is that this def is used so that the real "convicted" may be hidden from the wise. But i'm not sure how to illuminate it. When someone is convicted, truth is revealed to the witnesses first; even if the convicted maybe learn a lesson too, later
note that both of those are now "internal" operations? you do them all by yourself? But we can convict a criminal in absentia even. Granted, they do share a synonym, yes, don't get me wrong

Well...I want to perhaps qualify that. Yes, they might be internal operations, but they are not done all by ourselves. The work of the Spirit is heavily involved in conviction. One could argue that without the Spirit one cannot be alive and awake enough to be convicted at all, and thus it has almost nothing to do with us...unless we factor in the sinful behavior that required the convicting in the first place.

We only briefly touched on this before anyway, and i didn't pursue it bc they didn't--gee i wonder why--but i'll say that it wouldn't surprise me a bit to learn that our usage for this word changed about the same time that "talents" did, if that means anything to you.

i am convinced, but i might also be convicted without being convinced at all right; except in a congregation. i suggest that this was done so that the spiritual lesson might be obscured when believers are actually convicted, which happens without their consent. Or a person might be convinced of all kinds of whatever, yet be convicted of something entirely different. So the lesson would only come down the road for them anyway--if at all--but imo we can see a scenario in which the lesson is obscured for the witnesses to the conviction here, which i checked to see if the point was made when we touched on this and it was, it's in there, but i didn't belabor the point at the time so as to spare feelings, plus it was something minor anyway that i just blew up to make the point prolly, and i'm not sure i made that clear at the time. So my point there is even if you find it i would not be comfortable verifying who was convicted--since it's in code, kinda--but as i recall they were actually a good sport about it tho

i'd have to check but i don't think the term convicted is used for those who confess; legally speaking

So...i was having trouble figuring out what you were getting at (surprise!), so I decided to hit the dictionary, to give me a point of reference.

Convinced: completely certain about something, firm in one's belief with regard to a particular cause or issue.
Convicted: declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.

Sometimes, it doesn't help at all...this time...maybe? It seems to me that the definition of conviction describes both what I said, and what I think you are, at the same time, in a way. So...I said that to be convicted, one feels the weight of sin, and a sorrow for it. The Spirit, working within us, convicts us (declares us) guilty of a particular sin. We know, of course, that Jesus takes the weight of this sin, but true repentance means we should turn from that sin.
I think what you are saying is that there are times when a person has not yet acknowledged a sin to themselves, but the Church around them has. This is where they lovingly rebuke a brother or sister, hoping for repentance and growth. In this way the body may convict a person before that person is themselves convicted by the Spirit. Which...I suppose is not surprising. People can be very stubborn, and we tend to love our sin, even knowing the harm it can do, and the distance it can put between ourselves and God.

Is this what you are talking about...or have I completely missed the mark again?

 

[bbyrd009]

The Spirit, working within us, convicts us (declares us) guilty of a particular sin.

arg i know what you mean, but imo this could be put better, i say this bc imo the Spirit does not condemn in the manner that this might be read. i say this bc to my ear you are now about a half-step away from an Angry God, Who needs to be appeased, etc

The work of the Spirit is heavily involved in conviction.

but see how the work of satan is heavily involved in conviction too, see; the conviction that the guilty experience iow.
this is why imo the work of the Spirit might be better characterized as convincing

One could argue that without the Spirit one cannot be alive and awake enough to be convicted at all

this is kinda why i dislike the confounding of the terms, bc one can be convicted w/o their consent or even awareness, and i would use the term convinced up there instead

 

[bbyrd009]

Sometimes, it doesn't help at all...this time...maybe? It seems to me that the definition of conviction describes both what I said, and what I think you are, at the same time, in a way. So...I said that to be convicted, one feels the weight of sin, and a sorrow for it.

but you did not come to this def until you came to church, see

 

[bbyrd009]

I think what you are saying is that there are times when a person has not yet acknowledged a sin to themselves, but the Church around them has.

now they have been convicted imo. this might seem irrelevant, but at other vv this understanding will clarify what would otherwise be a moot verse, i forget the specific example at the moment, might come to me though

 

[Enoch111]

Patristics is the name given to the study of ECF. It includes, and not limited to, testimony of how the early Church interpreted Scripture...

Christians need to be aware that while the ECF had much that was edifying and sound in their writings, they also introduced several errors into their teachings, since they were not writing by divine inspiration, neither did any of them claim to be prophets. Scripture should be the final word on any teaching. This is what the Reformers insisted upon, and this is what the Catholic Church resisted.

 

[Naomi25]

arg i know what you mean, but imo this could be put better, i say this bc imo the Spirit does not condemn in the manner that this might be read. i say this bc to my ear you are now about a half-step away from an Angry God, Who needs to be appeased, etc

Well...there is quite a difference between convict and condemn...that's why they're different words! To be made sure of something is different to be judged guilty of something, wouldn't you say?

but see how the work of satan is heavily involved in conviction too, see; the conviction that the guilty experience iow.
this is why imo the work of the Spirit might be better characterized as convincing

I have to disagree here. Satan is involved in condemnation, not conviction. When we feel guilty over something, that is Satan. When we feel convicted..."sure, made aware of, impressed upon" a certain behavior that we need to change (but are not under judgement for), that is all the Spirit.
I do see that the word "convinced" can be used in certain instances in place of conviction, but I do wonder at it's totality in replacing it. To me, convinced is a mindful affirmation. That I have be convinced completely through reason and logic. Conviction, however, seems to me to speak of a mind/spirit melding. We feel the sin and the grief upon that behavior coming from the Spirit and his prompting in our own spirit. That then leads to an affirmation of the mind to repent.

this is kinda why i dislike the confounding of the terms, bc one can be convicted w/o their consent or even awareness, and i would use the term convinced up there instead

True, other Christians may "convict" a brother or sister of a sin, without their consent, but I think, perhaps, in this context...or in biblical context, they just call that "rebuking a brother over sin". I still think, as I stated above, that the conviced/convicted difference comes down to mind...mind/spirit. But...that could just be my understanding of how the bible addresses it.

but you did not come to this def until you came to church, see

Well, no, not immediately. Probably because I think that 'conviction' does just fine for its purposes, considering that's the word the bible uses. I think, biblically, that in that larger, church setting, it can mean what you are saying. I suppose I'm struggling to find the reason you have to need to change it. You worry it might be "close" to condemnation...but it isn't condemnation. Likewise, it isn't, exactly, convinced, either. It's something else...don't we need to let it be what it is?

 

[bbyrd009]

Well...there is quite a difference between convict and condemn...that's why they're different words! To be made sure of something is different to be judged guilty of something, wouldn't you say?

when convict is used as "to be made sure of," yes, but to the one in court who has been convicted, no. And Scripture even supports your pov, at least in English, so i'm not sure what my problem is there lol.

this is kind of a thing that is emerging to me as we speak, and i really have spent zero time on it so far, but if you will see how the word convict is used here, 2 Samuel 14:13,
The woman said, "Why then have you devised a thing like this against the people of God? When the king says this, does he not convict himself, for the king has not brought back his banished son?

even though it is NIV, and the Lex does not (quite) support "convict" there maybe, see how the king has "convicted himself" yet he was not "convicted" in the sense that you mean?

1651 elégxō – properly, to convince

is kind of what i am trying to get at here, but i'll have to spend some time on this to clarify my point i guess. My premise is that convict has been appropriated for convince to obscure actual conviction, and i''ll try to spend an hour today looking at it, but past experience tells me that the most likely scenario is there will be no definitive answer, and it will be a thing that can and does happen, but not universally.

church ppl nonetheless use the word convict when they really mean convince, and church ppl (along with all ppl) may also be convicted without even being aware of it, so there is like a sleight-of-hand verbal dichotomy going on there that strikes me as deceptive, self-deceptive. I'll try to arrange my thoughts here a little better, but i'd like to leave you with the illustration of an evangelist or preacher who has some failing that many had already convicted them of long before, preaching about how they are "convicted" about something comparatively irrelevant, if that makes any sense. Swaggart or Bakker both come to mind. The irony of hearing them say they are "convicted" about something irrelevant when they have already been convicted about something that really matters...just presents as a huge hypocrisy, and a dichotomy that to me indicates a lack of understanding. Which might be my lack of understanding lol

 

[Naomi25]

when convict is used as "to be made sure of," yes, but to the one in court who has been convicted, no. And Scripture even supports your pov, at least in English, so i'm not sure what my problem is there lol.

this is kind of a thing that is emerging to me as we speak, and i really have spent zero time on it so far, but if you will see how the word convict is used here, 2 Samuel 14:13,
The woman said, "Why then have you devised a thing like this against the people of God? When the king says this, does he not convict himself, for the king has not brought back his banished son?

even though it is NIV, and the Lex does not (quite) support "convict" there maybe, see how the king has "convicted himself" yet he was not "convicted" in the sense that you mean?

1651 elégxō – properly, to convince

is kind of what i am trying to get at here, but i'll have to spend some time on this to clarify my point i guess. My premise is that convict has been appropriated for convince to obscure actual conviction, and i''ll try to spend an hour today looking at it, but past experience tells me that the most likely scenario is there will be no definitive answer, and it will be a thing that can and does happen, but not universally.

church ppl nonetheless use the word convict when they really mean convince, and church ppl (along with all ppl) may also be convicted without even being aware of it, so there is like a sleight-of-hand verbal dichotomy going on there that strikes me as deceptive, self-deceptive. I'll try to arrange my thoughts here a little better, but i'd like to leave you with the illustration of an evangelist or preacher who has some failing that many had already convicted them of long before, preaching about how they are "convicted" about something comparatively irrelevant, if that makes any sense. Swaggart or Bakker both come to mind. The irony of hearing them say they are "convicted" about something irrelevant when they have already been convicted about something that really matters...just presents as a huge hypocrisy, and a dichotomy that to me indicates a lack of understanding. Which might be my lack of understanding lol

Well...I think if we look through scripture the word is actually used in a few different ways. For the unsaved it is used in a condemned sort of way. For the saved it is used in a few different ways. It seems to be used as a way to point sin out in others, as you pointed out, but also of the work of the Spirit within us to make sin known to us. But he also makes righteousness known to us as well, and truth. And it almost seems like that the initial conversion is a type of conviction, where a person either "gets it" or not...they are either convicted of their sin, and repent, or they harden their hearts and walk away.

So...I am completely unsurprising that it is hard nailing down an actually meaning for this word...it seems to cover so much!

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Have fun!!!====I did my duty!!! I sounded a warning and gave you God's Word 1 Thess. 4:16-18

Yeah you quoted 1 These.4:16-18, then agreed with a private interpretation on this scripture. I believe people who use this scripture among other scriptures to prove the rapture have taken these scriptures out of context to try to prove or teach a private interpretation. I don't agree with taking scripture out of context to prove anything.I believe the scriptures people use to try to prove the rapture are scripture talking of the resurrection not a rapture.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

And all Roman Catholic teachings are man-made inventions from the 4th century. Do you see the irony?

The Rapture cannot be a man-made invention if Christ revealed it to His apostles BEFORE His crucifixion (John 14:1-4):

1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. [BELIEVE MY WORDS BECAUSE I AM GOD]

2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. [THERE IS A PLACE FOR EVERY SAINT IN THE NEW JERUSALEM]

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. [THIS IS THE FIRST MENTION OF THE RAPTURE]

4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. [CHRISTIANS MUST KNOW THE TRUTH]

Where is it written down in John 14:1 BELIEVE MY WORDS BECAUSE I AM GOD? This is just your among others private interpretation of John 14:1. I believe what is written down at John 14:1 not your or anyone else interpretation of what is written down.