Thirty–Six Pre-Trib Rapture Texts

By Daymond Duck

---

1) There are no passages in either the Old Testament or the New Testament that say the Church will go through the Tribulation Period.

2) The Tribulation Period is called the “Time of Jacob’s Trouble” [The time of unbelieving Israel’s Trouble], but it is never called the time of the Church’s Trouble (Jer. 30:7).

3) Gabriel told Daniel, “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people [Daniel’s people are the Jews] and upon thy holy city” [The Holy City is Jerusalem] (Dan. 9:24). There is no mention of the Church.

4) The Church had no part in the first sixty-nine weeks and it will have no part in the seventieth week [the Tribulation Period] (Dan. 9:24).

5) In the Book of Revelation, the Rapture occurs at Rev. 4:1 which is before the Tribulation Period described in Rev. 6:1-19:21. In the sequence of events, the Rapture is before the seal, trumpet and bowl judgments.

6) The Church is mentioned more than twenty times in the first three chapters of Revelation, but the Church is never mentioned in the description of the Tribulation Period between Rev. 4:1 and Rev. 19:1.

7) The Tribulation Period is called a Day of Wrath in the Bible (Zeph 1:15), but the Bible says, “God hath not appointed us [the Church] to wrath” (I Thess. 5:9).

8) The Tribulation Period is called a Day of Wrath in the Bible (Zeph. 1:15), but the Bible says, Jesus has “delivered us from the wrath to come” [delivered the Church from the Tribulation Period] (I Thess. 1:10).

9) The Tribulation Period is called the Day of the Lord in the Bible (Zeph. 1:14). The Bible says, “the day of the Lord [the Tribulation Period] so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they [the unbelievers] shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them [upon the unbelievers], as travail upon a woman with child; and they [the unbelievers] shall not escape” (I Thess. 5:2-3). It clearly teaches that the Tribulation Period will come upon unbelievers, but it does not include believers.

10) Concerning the Rapture, the Bible says, “Comfort one another with these words” (I Thess. 4:18). There’s no comfort in the teaching that the Church will go through part or all of the Tribulation Period.

11) Jesus told the Church at Philadelphia, “Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation [the Tribulation Period], which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth” (Rev. 3:10). God promised to keep the obedient Church members out of the Tribulation Period.

12) According to the Bible, the marriage of the Lamb will take place in heaven before Jesus comes back to fight the Battle of Armageddon at the end of the Tribulation Period (Rev. 19:7-21). This means the Church will go to heaven [be Raptured] for the marriage of the Lamb before the Second Coming.

13) The end of the age will be like the days of Noah (Matt. 24:37). Noah and his family were removed from the earth [got on the ark] before the flood. Some believe this means that the Church will be removed from the earth before the judgment of God [Raptured before the Tribulation Period] (Gen. 7:23).

14) The end of the age will be like the days of Lot (Luke 17:28). Lot and his family were removed from Sodom before the judgment of God [before the fire and brimstone fell] (Gen. 19:16). Some believe this means that the Church will be removed from the earth before the judgment of God [Raptured before the Tribulation Period].

15) Jesus was talking about the Tribulation Period when He said, “Pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass” (Luke 21:36). It seems unreasonable to believe Jesus would tell the Church to pray for something He is unwilling to grant.

16) The Bible says, “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming” (II Thess. 2:7-8). The most common interpretation of this is that the Antichrist can’t be revealed until the Restrainer [who most commentators say is both the Holy Spirit and the Church] is removed. If the Restrainer is the Church only, this means the Church will be removed before the Antichrist is revealed [that’s the Pre-Trib. Rapture]. If the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit only so that the Holy Spirit is removed without the Church, this means believers will cease to be indwelt with the Holy Spirit. It also means the Church will be left behind to go through the worst time the earth has ever seen [the Tribulation Period] without the help of the Holy Spirit. This would contradict the teaching of Jesus when He said, “I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever” (John 14:16). And, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee” (Heb. 13:5).

17) Isaiah wrote that God said, “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain” (Isa. 26:19-21). Notice, that the dead rise first [that’s the Rapture], next God’s people are summoned to enter into His chambers for a short while until the indignation [a name of the Tribulation Period is past]. God will raise the dead and summon His people because He intends to punish the inhabitants of the earth [send the Tribulation Period].

18) Malachi wrote that God said, “They shall be mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him. Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not” (Malachi 3:17-18). Pre-Tribulation teachers believe God is saying He will come for His Church [the Rapture] and then He will return with His Church [the Second Coming] to judge between the righteous and wicked.

19) In the Rapture, Jesus comes for His Church (I Thess. 4:16-17; John 14:3). When He comes at the end of the Tribulation Period, He will come with His Church (I Thess. 3:13; Rev. 19:14).

20) Concerning the Second Coming, Jesus said, “But of the day and the hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (Matt. 24:36). But if the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, some will know the day because it will be seven years from the signing of the seven-year covenant. Some will know the day because it will be 1260 days from the day the Antichrist defiles the Temple (Rev. 12:6).

21) Concerning the Antichrist, many scholars believe the Bible teaches he won’t be revealed until after the Church is gone (II Thess. 2:6-8), but if the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, some will know who he is because he will sign the seven-year covenant (Dan. 9:24-27), he will head up the world government (Rev. 13:1-10), he will try to force multitudes to worship him, and to receive his mark, receive his name or his number (Rev. 13:15-17). Many of those who are here and being forced to worship him and take his name or die will know who he is.

22) The Antichrist is not supposed to be revealed until after the Church is gone (II Thess. 2:6-8), but if the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, the Church will know who the Antichrist is because he will put a statue of himself in the rebuilt Temple (Dan. 11:31; Dan. 12:11; Matt. 24:15).

23) If the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, the Church will know who the Antichrist is because he will head up the world government and receive a deadly wound to his head that will be healed (Rev. 13:3). Some think he will be raised from the dead or at least fake the resurrection.

24) If the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, the Church will know who the Antichrist is because he will head up the world government and be supported by the head of the world religion called the False Prophet (Rev. 13:11-18).

25) If the Church goes through the Tribulation Period, the Church will know who the Antichrist is because he’s the one that will kill the Two Witnesses (Rev. 11:7).

26) Many people don’t think the Church will go through the Tribulation Period because of verses of Scripture that say things like, “The Lord preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked he will destroy” (Psa. 145:18-20). Many believe God will preserve the Church from the Tribulation Period or keep the Church out of the Tribulation Period not destroy the Church in the Tribulation Period.

27) There are verses of Scripture that say things like, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it” (Deut. 4:2; Prov. 30:5-6; Rev. 22:18-19). Some believe people have to throw away verses of Scripture to believe the Church will go through the Tribulation Period.

28) In the seven letters to the seven churches, Jesus said, “He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches” seven times (Rev. 2:7,11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22). When we get to the Tribulation Period, Jesus said, “If any man have an ear, let him hear” (Rev. 13:9). He left out, “what the Spirit saith unto the churches” because there are no churches on earth to go through the Tribulation Period. The Church will be in heaven.

29) When the Rapture happens the Church goes up to meet Jesus in the air (I Thess. 4:13-18), but at the end of the Tribulation Period the Church will come down to the earth with Jesus to witness what He does at the Battle of Armageddon (Rev. 19:14-21).

30) The Pre-Tribulation Rapture is more consistent with God’s grace, love, mercy, compassion, etc. The Mid and Post-Tribulation Rapture is more consistent God’s wrath.

31) If the Rapture takes place at the end of the Tribulation Period, and all the wicked are removed from the earth at that time (Matt. 13:24-30, 47-50; 25:41), no one will be left to re-populate the earth during the Millennium. If all of the saved are Raptured and all the lost are removed from the earth at the end of the Tribulation Period, no one will be left to re-populate the earth.

32) The Antichrist will prevail against the saints during the Tribulation Period, but the gates of hell won’t prevail against the Church (Rev. 13:7; Matt. 16:18). Therefore, the Church won’t go through the Tribulation Period.

33) The twenty-four elders [representatives of the Church] will be in heaven before the seven-sealed scroll is broken (Rev. 4:4; 6:1-17).

34) Jesus was talking about the Tribulation Period when He said, “Pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass” (Luke 21:36). He didn’t say, “Pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to endure some or all of these things that shall come to pass.”

35) There are no signs of the Rapture, but if the Rapture takes place during the Tribulation Period, it would have to be after the seven-year covenant is signed by the Antichrist, and perhaps after several other things depending upon what a person believes about Mid-Trib, Post-Trib, etc.

36) Jesus said, “When these things [the signs] begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads for your redemption draweth nigh” (Luke 21:28).He didn’t say, “After all these things have happened your redemption draweth nigh.” He said, “When these things begin to come to pass it’s close.”

Prophecy Plus Ministries
Daymond & Rachel Duck
daymondduck@bellsouth.net
rachelduck@bellsouth.net

Roger Oakland - On deception in the Church. Part 2.

Prime Minister of Israel Christmas and New Year wishes

French TV star fired after call for Muslims' deportation to avoid ‘chaos & civil war’

Published time: December 22, 2014 15:53

Get short URL

French journalist Eric Zemmour (Reuters/Jacky Naegelen)

A top French TV presenter has been sacked for saying that Muslims should be deported to avoid “chaos and civil war.” His comments have sparked a heated debate, with some on the right defending him and leftists denouncing him as a racist.

Eric Zemmour was dropped from the iTELE channel from the chat show he has been a participant of for over a decade. This followed remarks he made, published in Italy’s Corriere della Sera, where he said, “Muslims kept themselves to the suburbs” and the “French were forced to move out,” The Local reported. He also stated that the 5 million or so Muslims living in France “should be deported to avoid chaos and civil war.”

 The TV station’s decision to fire Zemmour, born to Jewish parents in Algeria who emigrated to France in the 1950s, was welcomed by the journalists union SNJ, who said the move was a “strong decision” and was also supported by the anti-racism watchdog SOS Racisme.

The channel's director, Celine Pigalle, told French newspaper Le Figaro, where Zemmour was also a columnist, “We are very careful to respect freedom of expression.” Meanwhile, Bruno Le Roux, who is the leader of the Socialist Party, said Zemmour’s thinking seemed to date back 70 years to the period around World War II.

Reuters/Youssef Boudlal

“It's time for TV shows and newspaper columns to cease harboring such statements,” Le Roux wrote on his blog. “Islamophobia is racism and is not part of the Republic.”
The interview with Corriere della Sera was conducted two months ago, but the scandal only came to light when it was translated by the left-wing politician Jean-Luc Melenchon, who used to be France’s Education Minister. 

READ MORE: 'Shut your trap, Merkel!' French MEP slams German Chancellor over call for more cuts
 
Melenchon published the interview on his blog in French in which he said Zemmour was calling for the “deportation” of Muslims in France, even those who had been born in the country.
In its report, The Independent noted that the word “deportation” has a dark history in France, as it is associated with the sending of hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Second World War to death camps across Europe. 

Zemmour says that he never used the word in this context. Meanwhile, the Italian journalist who conducted the interview said the TV star did not mean that Muslims should be deported, but repatriated. 

The censorship of Zemmour by i-Tele is louthsome
The TV personality was supported by the far-right National Front leader, Marine Le Pen, who said the move to fire Zemmour was “loathsome censorship” in a tweet. 

Zemmour is also well known for his bestselling book, “The French Suicide,” which has sold in excess of 250,000 copies. It touched on problems in French society, which he believes stem from increased immigration, feminism and homosexuality.

A policewoman collects evidence on December 21, 2014 in Dijon on the site where a driver shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great") ploughed into a crowd injuring 11 people, two seriously, a source close to the investigation said (AFP Photo / Arnaud Finistre)

The TV star’s sacking came a day before a mentally unstable driver, shouting “Allahu Akbar,” deliberately crashed into a crowd of pedestrians in the French city of Dijon, which left two people in seriously injured in hospital. 

On Saturday, a French man armed with a knife stormed a police station at Joue-les-Tours near the city of Tours and stabbed three police officers, also reportedly shouting “God is great” in Arabic. The attacker was shot dead by police.

O come, all ye faithful - Celtic woman

The little drummer boy - Pentatonix

Israel’s gas dream – the end is nigh

Reblogged from http://www.ensec.org via Caroline Glick onm Facebook

Tuesday, 23 December 2014 05:38 Gal Luft

In the five years since the discovery of the Tamar and Leviathan natural gas fields off the coast of Israel, the Israeli energy discourse has focused on questions like what to do with the gas, how much of it to export and to whom, and what the fairest distribution of profits would be among the gas partners, headed by Noble Energy and Delek Energy, and the Israeli public. But after years of delays and billions of dollars spent, a new and increasingly likely scenario should be considered – the premature – and tragic – death of the Israeli gas dream. I alluded to this option in an August 2013 article titled “Israel’s Zero Gas Game” in which I warned that Israel has become so busy dividing the pie that its leaders forgot it must first be baked and that due to the failure of the  government to present a clear vision for the country’s energy sector, articulate the rights and responsibilities of foreign investors and most importantly set rules and stick to them, “the gas will be left in the ground and the startup nation will be more worthy of the title ‘shutdown nation’.” Perhaps that sounded crazy at the time. Today, with the decision of the Israeli Anti-Trust Authority to revoke an arrangement permitting Noble-Delek partners to develop Leviathan, declaring them a cartel - a move that will require the separation of Leviathan from Tamar and the sale of Leviathan to a new partnership, effectively postponing the development of Leviathan indefinitely - the scenario of “zero gas” - and perhaps even the withdrawal of Noble from Israel altogether - should be considered seriously.

 In deciding to enter Israel Noble has taken a huge financial, regulatory and geopolitical risk.  However, the size of the discoveries, the potential of finding oil under the gas layers and the doubling of the company’s market capitalization made the move easy to justify to its shareholders. But the Texas company, the only international energy company that was willing to set foot in Israel, was welcomed with no red carpet. Instead it was ushered through a Via Dolorosa of bureaucratic torture which eliminated any chance for gas production before the end of 2018 – ten years from the beginning of exploration. A ten year lead time from discovery to production is a lot to ask of a  publicly traded company which has to satisfy quarterly thinking and profit hungry shareholders. But in light of Noble’s recent stock performance, dropping from $80 in the summer to $50 today, the decision of the Israeli government provides an impetus to the company’s leadership, not to mention the new CEO David Stover, to reconsider the commitment to Israel and begin to seek greener pastures.
The Israeli government’s ruling has huge implications for the future of the region as it means that at best the supply of gas from Leviathan will be delayed into the 2020s. At worst it will not happen at all. 

The government’s concern about a gas monopoly is a legitimate one, especially during an election campaign when issues of cost of living dominate the local political discourse. But its hopes that the hot potato called Leviathan can somehow be sold to new partners require a lot of faith. There are many people with money who may be tempted to buy into a partnership in a 22 trillion cubic feet (tcf) field, but owning a stake in a gas field without an operator at hand is like owning a gold mine on the moon. There are very few oil and gas companies who have both the experience of drilling in deep waters and the willingness to associate themselves with Israel, especially in light of Noble’s experience. With falling energy prices worldwide, the chance of a Noble-like operator popping out of nowhere is slim. This means that in its desire to avoid the creation of a monopoly, Israel is taking the risk that Leviathan, the world’s largest offshore gas discovery of the past decade, will not be developed for many years to come - if ever. The losers will first and foremost be the Israeli people who will lose not only billions of dollars in tax revenue and the main engine of growth of their economy but also the prospects of securing their energy supply for generations. The scenario is equally bad for Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority who are counting on Leviathan gas for their economic well-being and which have all signed letters of intent to buy Israeli gas despite local opposition from their respective Israel-hating Islamists.  Europe will also be a casualty since a portion of Leviathan was aimed for two LNG terminals in Egypt from where it would have been shipped to European countries aspiring to become less dependent on Russia’s gas.

Other than the handful of lawyers who will earn millions litigating the dispute between Noble and the Israeli government in international courts, the biggest winner will be Cyprus. In December 2011 Noble announced the discovery of 7 tcf in a field northwest of Leviathan called Aphrodite (block 12). Other blocks have been opened for bids since attracting interest from a handful of large oil and gas companies including Total of France, Kogas of South Korea, ENI of Italy and Petronas of Malaysia. But with all eyes on Leviathan, Cyprus became an uninteresting side show. This may soon change. Cyprus may not be a paragon of regulatory stability and certainly not an investors’ haven and its tense relations with Turkey pose some geopolitical risk, but the fatigue from Israel’s energy shenanigans could bring about a shift from Israel to Cyprus as the new center of gravity in the East Mediterranean energy play.

There is no polite way of saying this. Israel’s latest decision is tantamount to nationalization of the kind seen in Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and Russia. All of those governments sugarcoated their decision invoking the need to protect the public interest. The investment community and global oil industry got the message and wrote off those countries. With this miserable decision, Israel has just lodged itself into this notorious club. The price will be paid in spades – and sooner than most Israelis realize.
Gal Luft is co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS) and senior adviser to the United States Energy Security Council.

 

Syrian rebel Yarmouk Brigades ditch US and Israel allies, defect to ISIS

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report December 17, 2014, 6:07 PM (IDT)

The Syrian rebel militia Al Yarmouk Shuhada Brigades, backed and trained for two years by US officers, mostly CIA experts, in Jordan, and supported by the Israeli army, has abruptly dumped these sponsors and joined up with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, debkafile’s exclusive military and counter-terrorism sources reveal.

The sudden defection of this 2,000-strong anti-Assad force leaves IDF defense formations on the Golan, US and Jordanian deployments in the northern part of the kingdom, and pro-Western rebel conquests in southern Syria in danger of collapse.

The Brigades’ jump into the radical jihadi camp was negotiated in the last two weeks by its commander Mousab Ali Qarfan, who also goes by the name of Mousab Zaytouneh. He was in direct contact with ISIS chief Abu Baqr Al-Baghdadi, whom our sources report has recently relocated from Iraq to his northern Syrian headquarters at al-Raqqa.

Unlike the Sinai Islamists, Ansar Beit al Maqdis, the Yarmouk Brigades did not pledge allegiance to ISIS. The ir pact was forged as an operational alliance, which is just as grave a peril for the rebel militias’ abandoned allies.

For Israel, in particular, the new development is fraught with three dangers:
1. The Yarmouk Brigades are strung out along Israel’s Golan border with Syria, from the UN peacekeepers camp opposite Kibbutz Ein Zivan (see map) in the north, down to the Israeli-Syrian-Jordanian border junction in the south. The Brigades therefore sit along 45 of the total 76 kilometers of the Syrian-Israeli border. This means that a long stretch of Israel’s Golan border with Syria has fallen under the control of the Islamic State.
2.  This militia also commands sections of the Syrian-Jordanian border, as well as districts of the southern Syrian town of Deraa. Therefore, the link between Jordan and southern Syria, which served American strategic interests, is now under military threat.
3.  Islamic State forces are preparing to take advantage of their new asset with a buildup near the Druze Mountains (see map) for a rapid push south towards the town of Deraa, where they will join forces with their new ally. 

EU Backs Palestinian Dictatorship

by Khaled Abu Toameh
December 18, 2014 at 5:00 am

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4965/eu-palestinian-dictatorship

These European parliaments are also turning a blind eye to the fact that, under the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there is no respect for the rule of law, free speech, transparency or accountability.

These Western parliamentarians are in fact acting against the interests of the Palestinians, who are clearly not hoping for another corrupt dictatorship in the Arab world.
"The situation in Palestine does not conform at all with democracy or the rule of law... Wake up and see the loss of rights, law and security." — Freih Abu Medein, former Palestinian Authority Justice Minister.
"Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] wants to concentrate all authorities in his hands and the hand of his loyalists. He's acting in a dictatorial way and wants to be in control of everything, especially the finances." — Yasser Abed Rabbo, Secretary General of the PLO.
By turning a blind eye to human rights violations, as well as assaults on freedom of expression, the judiciary and the parliamentary system in the Palestinian territories, Western parliaments are paving the way for a creation of a rogue state called Palestine.

European parliaments that are rushing to recognize a Palestinian state are ignoring the fact that the Palestinians have been without a functioning parliament for the past seven years.

The Palestinian parliament, known as the Palestinian Legislative Council [PLC], has been paralyzed since 2007, when Hamas violently seized control over the Gaza Strip and expelled the Palestinian Authority [PA].

These European parliaments are also turning a blind eye to the fact that, under the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there is no respect for the rule of law, free speech, transparency or accountability.

This week, the European Parliament also adopted a resolution recognizing Palestinian statehood in principle. A total of 489 MEP's voted in favor, while 88 were against.

Ironically, the EU Parliament vote coincided with an unprecedented crackdown by the Palestinian Authority leadership on the Palestinian Legislative Council and its secretary-general, Ibrahim Khraisheh, in Ramallah.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the arrest of Khraisheh for allegedly criticizing PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah. Following strong protests by leaders of various Palestinian factions, who described the decision as a flagrant breach of freedom of expression, Abbas was forced to backtrack.

But for Abbas, this was not the end of the story. After canceling the arrest order against Khraisheh, Abbas dispatched policemen to the parliament building in Ramallah to prevent the top official from entering the compound. The presence of the policemen at the main entrance to the parliament building drew sharp denunciations from many Palestinians.

The Palestinian Legislative Council building in Ramallah. (Image source: Alaraby)

Khraisheh was removed from his job because he dared to criticize the Palestinian government for arresting Bassam Zakarneh, head of the public employees' union in the West Bank. Many Palestinians have also denounced the arrest of Zakarneh as an assault on workers' rights and an attempt to intimidate them.

But the EU Parliament and other parliaments that voted in favor of recognizing Palestinian statehood did not see a need to comment on Abbas's measures against the PLC and one of its senior officials.

EU parliamentarians who voted in favor of Palestinian statehood are most likely unaware of what the former PA Justice Minister, Freih Abu Medein, had to say about the rule of law and order in the Palestinian Authority.

Abu Medein drew a bleak picture of what the future Palestinian state would look like. In a damning article he published last week, Abu Medein wrote: "The situation in Palestine does not conform at all with democracy or the rule of law, because the Palestinian mentality is too coarse to cope with transparency of the law and its regulators and provisions."

Abu Medein's scathing attack, which is directed first and foremost against Abbas, ended with an appeal to Palestinians to "wake up and see the loss of law, rights and security" in the areas controlled by the PA and Hamas.

The former Palestinian Authority justice minister is not the only prominent Palestinian who seems to understand that a Palestinian state under the current circumstances would be anything but democratic.

Yasser Abed Rabbo, the secretary-general of the PLO who until recently was considered one of Abbas's top confidants, was quoted last week as strongly condemning the Palestinian Authority president's "dictatorial" rule.

Referring to Abbas by his nom de guerre, Abed Rabbo said: "Abu Mazen wants to concentrate all authorities in his hands and the hands of his loyalists. He's acting in a dictatorial way and wants to be in control of everything, especially the finances. I don't know what this man wants and why he's behaving in this way. What will happen after Abu Mazen's departure?"

The parliament members of Sweden, Britain, France and Portugal who voted in favor of recognizing Palestinian statehood do not seem to care about their Palestinian colleagues, who have been deprived of carrying out their parliamentary obligations as a result of the power struggle between Hamas and Abbas's Fatah faction.

Nor do they seem to care if the Palestinian state would be another corrupt dictatorship where there is no room for the rule of law, transparency or freedom of speech.

Obviously, Western parliamentarians see no wrongdoing or evil in the actions of the Palestinian leadership and Hamas. They are prepared to vote in favor of a Palestinian state even if it does not appear to be headed toward democracy and transparency.

These Western parliamentarians are in fact acting against the interests of the Palestinians, who are clearly not hoping for another corrupt dictatorship in the Arab world. By turning a blind eye to human rights violations, as well as assaults on freedom of expression, the judiciary and the parliamentary system in the Palestinian territories, Western parliaments are paving the way for the creation of a rogue state called Palestine.

The Lordship of Jesus Christ

Dr. Charles Bing
GraceLife Ministries

Jesus is Lord. No one who believes the Bible denies that. But what does that mean and how does Christ's lordship apply to our salvation and our Christian life?

The Meaning of Lord

The word usually translated Lord in the New Testament is the Greek word Kyrios. It is sometimes used as a title of respect, much as we would call someone sir. We see this in Acts 16:30 when the Philippian jailor addresses Paul and Silas as "Sirs" (the plural, kyrioi).
Lord is also commonly used as a title with the name Jesus Christ. As a title, it not only shows respect, but also reflects who Jesus is. He is the Lord. When the Hebrew Bible was translated into the Greek Septuagint, the Hebrew name for God, YHWH, was usually translated Kyrios, or Lord. YHWH conveyed first of all deity, but implied all the other aspects unique to deity such as Creator, Owner, Ruler, Judge, Redeemer, and Savior.

The Lordship of Christ in Salvation

The Lordship, or deity of Jesus Christ, is essential to our salvation. Consider some of the things that Jesus did for our salvation only because He is the Lord God:

• He became the perfect sacrifice for our sins, without spot or blemish.
• He gave His life as a sacrifice for all mankind—past, present, and future.
• He rose from the dead to live and offer us eternal life.
• He promises, provides, and secures the eternal life of all who believe in Him.

It is only because Jesus is in the position of Lord God that He can save us and gives us eternal life. While Lord speaks of His position of deity, the name Jesus speaks of His humanity and role of Savior, because Jesus means Savior. In the name Jesus Christ, Christ means Messiah, the One anointed or chosen by God to be the Savior and King.

So Lord is a title that primarily conveys Jesus' deity. What this means for salvation is that Jesus has the power and authority to save sinners because He is God. What this does not mean is that sinners can only be saved if they submit to Him as the Ruler of their lives. Ruler is only one subset of deity, and it is arbitrary to make that one divine function and position into a subjective demand. As the word implies, salvation requires a Savior. Jesus came to save sinners (1 Tim. 1:15; 4:10) and He can because He is God. Sinners need a divine Savior.

It is one thing to say that to be saved a sinner must acknowledge the divine authority that Jesus has as God or as the Son of God. It is quite another thing to say that to be saved a sinner must submit to Jesus as the Ruler of his life. The first acknowledges Jesus' objective position and power as God, the second demands a person's subjective response to Him as Ruler. The Bible has examples of unsaved sinners who addressed Jesus as Lord without submitting to Him (e. g., John 4:11, 15, 19; 9:36). 

To further illustrate, we could say that during World War II General Douglas MacArthur saved the Philippines. He was able to save them because he had the position and power of a four star general of the United States Army. To the people of the Philippines, however, MacArthur was not their general, nor were they required to submit to him as their general. They only needed to accept the "salvation" that he offered them.

The View Called Lordship Salvation

There is a view that teaches a sinner must submit to Jesus as Ruler of his life in order to be saved. Proponents of this view call it Lordship Salvation, though it should be called Commitment Salvation or Submission Salvation since it emphasizes the unbeliever's subjective response to Jesus Christ as Ruler. Lordship Salvation confuses the objective position of Jesus as Lord with the subjective response to one aspect of His lordship—rulership. Not only does this view reflect poor theological method—soteriology should not be built merely on titles, but it contradicts the Bible's teaching of salvation by grace through faith. 

The grace that saves us is the free, unmerited, unconditional gift of God. Making a sinner's submission to Jesus as the Ruler of his life a condition for salvation destroys the grace of God which makes salvation a free gift that can only be received through faith (Rom. 4:4-5; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9).

Lordship Salvation is also arbitrary because it only emphasizes rulership in the divine title Lord Jesus Christ. To be consistent, they should require sinners to accept Jesus as the Creator, Sustainer, Judge, Prophet, Priest, and King, because all these and more are aspects of His deity. Furthermore, they should demand acceptance of all that the name Jesus means, and all that the title Christ means.

Teachers of Lordship Salvation often derogatorily refer to those who believe in the freeness of grace in salvation as no-lordship, or non-lordship. Of course, this is incorrect and deliberately misleading. Their error comes from confusing the objective position of Jesus as the Lord with one's subjective response to Jesus as their Lord and making it a requirement for salvation.

Those who believe in the freeness of grace believe that Jesus must be the Lord (God) to be Savior. The response required of an unbeliever is simply to believe the gospel—who Jesus is, what He has done for our salvation, and what He promises us. There is no lexical or biblical basis for defining believe as submit. Believe simply means to be convinced of something or persuaded that it is true. There are even biblical examples of those who had submitted to Jesus as their Ruler but were not saved (Matt. 7:21-23), and those who were saved when not submitted to Jesus as their Ruler (Acts 5:1-10; 19:18-19).

We are not saying a person who comes to Jesus as Savior deliberately rejects the rulership of Jesus Christ. We are saying that to demand a sinner to submit to Him as Master is simply not the issue in salvation, much less is it reasonable to demand this of one who is spiritually dead.

The Lordship of Christ and Sanctification

While we reject Lordship Salvation and its requirement that sinners must submit to Jesus as the Ruler of their lives, we enthusiastically embrace the term Lordship Sanctification or Lordship Discipleship because submitting to Jesus as our Ruler is what the Christian life is all about. Once we know Jesus as Savior, we must learn to relate to Him as our new Master.
Many passages admonish us who have believed in Jesus as Savior to now relate and submit to Him as Lord. 

The point of Romans 6 is that now that we have a new Master in Jesus Christ, we should submit ourselves to Him. Romans 12:1 urges us to present ourselves as "living sacrifices." We live and die to the Lord (Rom. 14:8-9). As believers we are told to "sanctify the Lord God" in our hearts (1 Peter 3:15) and to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 3:18). Such admonitions would not be needed if we had already done all that in order to be saved.

Conclusion

We cannot make Jesus Lord; He is the Lord! We can only submit to Him as servants. As our divine Savior He saves us; as our divine Master He sanctifies us. To keep the grace of the gospel free we must not confuse the faith required of an unbeliever for justification with the many aspects of submission required of believers for sanctification.

Related Links

---

• Grace Baiting: Twenty Ways Lordship Faith Advocates Mischaracterize Free Grace Theology • Free Grace Alliance (Bruce Bauer)
• Lordship salvation is Biblical? Think again! • MechaWingZero
  
• What Is Wrong with Lordship Salvation? • BPB (Andy Woods)
• Why Lordship Faith Misses the Mark for Salvation • GraceLife (Charlie Bing)
• Lordship Salvation for Dummies • Grace in Focus (Bob Wilkin)
• The Three Tenses of Salvation • BPB (Andy Woods)

Read more: http://thelightseed.blogspot.com/#ixzz3MCwHBJHy