pretrib rapture and dispensational theology IS BIBLICAL TRUTH.

And what would you propose, bro. Gordon, that the truth is? Maybe that the Lord wants to put us all through a 7-year trib; and/or that we all should become "spiritual Jews," get back under the Law, and have the same promises as the Nation of Israel? and/or that all the earthly Kingdom promises made to Israel will never be fulfilled just because current Israel is apostate, and the Lord has supposedly abandoned them forever? and/or that Revelation was totally "fulfilled" via the RCC over the past 1800 years? and the Pope(s) are antichrist? and/or that we are to 'allegorically' interpret scripture and prophecy rather than literally? Probably whatever your "interpretation" is, is something most of us have already "been there, done that," and the Lord has led us forward to the total Pauline Grace Gospel. Is your position a "mixture" of Law AND Grace? Or that of Reformed, Calvinist? Or Evangelical? Or Charismatic? See what I mean? I would bet that most of those who appreciate Les Feldick and others like him have already "been there, done all that" as described above. But please explain, we're all curious, rather than just make blanket statements -- which, btw, is nothing new but more like a "broken record" of the same old anti-dispensation movement. The apostle Paul speaks of the administration (or dispensation) of the Mystery. So what might be your objection to that? Blessings...

Hey brothers & sisters, Please remember what the apostle Paul taught...that we are to approch others meekly. I, too, feel that Gordon is mistaken in his beliefs; however, striking out at him isn't the correct way. Instead, we should point using scriptures (as would Les and the apostle Paul) to show him where, in his confusion, his beliefs differ with ours. For example: Zechariah 14:4-9 clearly prophizes & explains the 2nd coming of Christ when He will STAND ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES, all the saints (believers) with Him, where He will fight the final battle following the Tribulation. However, I Corinthians 15:51-54 and I Thessalonians 4:13-18 speak of the Rapture of the Church where all believers (those both dead & alive) will meet the Lord IN THE AIR. This is prior to the Tribulation. Gordon, if you are at all interested in opening your mind to other explanations, there are many other examples which serve as "proofs" that Les can point out. Go to the Home page @ www.lesfeldick.org & do a search for "the Rapture". A Sister in Christ to all believers in the Pauline Gospel, KB

On 4/8/08 at 1pm, I tried four different browsers trying to reply to Gordon, IE, FireFox, Safari, Shiira, and Opera, but NONE of them would WORK, it kept showing an error msg. So today is 4/14/08 and I am trying again... I saved what I wrote the other day and here goes... ----------------------------------------- http://www.rateitall.com/i-240788-.aspx Thanks for the reply Gordon. As for the pre-trib rapture, I'm really not too interested in debating it. It's something you would have to come to faith in, yourself. However, if you want to stay here for the trib, be my guest ;-) (Frankly, I think people that fight so vehemently against the pre-trib rapture, that there is just something wrong with that attitude, but each to his own. You can stay here for Armageddon along with the JWs and the WTBTS, lol, who also are vehemently against it. They also teach that "prince" - small 'p' in Daniel 9:26 is Jesus, same as you think). ------------------------------- As for the Mysteries in the Pauline epistles, they are nicely listed here: http://withchrist.org/pauldisp.htm - scroll down to where it starts with the large heading, PAULINE MYSTERIES (some translations say SECRET, same thing). Oh, and btw, I do not have a Scofield Bible, never have. No "Scofield notes" either. Never seen nor read a word of them. ------------------------------------ As for the 3rd temple, Paul says that the MAN OF SIN will sit in THE TEMPLE and declare himself to be GOD: --------------------------------- "3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first [apostasia, "departure away first"], and that MAN of SIN be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God SITTETH IN THE TEMPLE OF GOD, shewing himself that he is God." - 2nd Thess. 2 - KJV --------------------------------- Paul definitely wrote "MAN" there in that verse, not Satan, angel, demon, spirit, Jesus, God, etc., and not Judas Iscariot either. Are you supposing this "sitting of the Man of Sin in the Temple" takes place in Heaven or something? --------------------------- If God didn't let the Jews build a Temple in 362 AD, it's obviously because it wasn't HIS TIME yet for it to occur. ------------------------------------- Mary and the RCC are nowhere my cup of tea whatsoever, lol. -------------------------------------- Continued in Part 2...

Part 2, continued... Well Praise the Lord, my comment posted this time, still using IE for Mac... ;-) Continuing... ---------------------------- Gordon, if you don't agree that Daniel 9:26 speaks of the antichrist, then how about the above verse by Paul? ---------------------------------- Or how about when Jesus said: "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: IF ANOTHER SHALL COME IN HIS OWN NAME, HIM YE WILL RECEIVE." - John 5:43/KJV. The Lord was speaking specifically to "his own people" there, Israel. This is yet to be fulfilled. ------------------------------------------- Or how about Zech. 11? "15 And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd. 16 For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, [which] shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces. {cut off: or, hidden} {feed: or, bear} 17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword [shall be] upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." - KJV -------------------------------------- As for Daniel 9:26, read it again - SLOWLY: In the KJV it reads, in part: ------------------------------ "and the PEOPLE OF the prince that shall come..." In the prior verse 25 which spoke of "Messiah the Prince" speaking clearly of Jesus, Prince was capitalized, but here in verse 26 it is not. -- ALSO and MORE importantly, it says "THE PEOPLE OF the prince that is to come" are the ones that destroy the temple. So by your way of reckoning, that would mean that JESUS' PEOPLE were the ROMANS (who were the ones who destroyed the 2nd temple). And we know the Romans were NOT Jesus' people. So your interpretation that "prince" in vs. 26 was Jesus does not make sense. ------------------------------------------ Continuing with Daniel 9:26: ------------------------------- "... shall destroy the city and the sanctuary..." -- Did Jesus' PEOPLE/Israel destroy their own CITY AND the sanctuary? No. It was the ROMANS who did. ----------------- Continuing Daniel 9:26 and include 27: ------------------------------ "... and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. {but...: or, and shall have nothing} {desolations...: or, it shall be cut off by desolations} . 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. {the covenant: or, a covenant} {for the...: or, with the abominable armies} {the desolate: or, the desolator} ." - KJV --------------------------- So WHO is/was the "desolator"? JESUS? No. He foretold the destruction of the 2nd temple (your house will be abandoned to you) but he didn't fulfill it, neither did HIS OWN PEOPLE, but the ROMANS did. Ditto for the "final chastising" of Israel (tribulation) during which the STRANGER/THIEF/ROBBER/FALSE SHEPHERD will come IN HIS OWN NAME and Israel WILL RECEIVE HIM. And he will fool them for one-half of the "week", until he SITS in the TEMPLE OF GOD declaring that HE HIMSELF is God. But since you [so far] don't believe any of that anyway, no need for me to continue. But you should re-read Daniel 9:26 slowly. It's the PEOPLE OF [the prince that is to come]. If this "prince" (small 'p' in verse 26) is Jesus, then as stated, that would mean the PEOPLE OF Jesus would be the Jews/Israel who destroyed their OWN city and temple, and as you know, that is not what happened. Take care/ag

BTW, Gordon, whatever happened to your FIRST original comment re: Les' teachings, which is the one I first replied to back on 2-4-08? --- On this current page is your reply to me re: a reply I had made to your FIRST ORIGINAL comment, but I can't find your ORIGINAL comment anywhere. Did you erase it? /ag

Abbagail, You are correct, the people of the prince who is to come are the Romans, ie, the gentiles, the people of the prince. What you are not understanding is that Jesus is using these Romans, these unbelieving gentiles, to destroy Jerusalem. You make mention of the fact that the word prince is not capitalized. This may very well mean that if prince was capitalized then the Roman army would be saved gentiles, since the word prince is not capitalized it may possible mean that the Roman army is an army of unsaved Romans. Abbagail, I may be incorrect, but I don't think so. I believe that Jesus destroyed Jerusalem using the Roman army to do so. If you fully discover the depth of Matthew, you will find the understanding of Revelation enlighting. As a matter of fact if you fully discover the deeper meanings of the four gospels, you will truly be open to understanding the bible in a much clearer manner. If you read Matthew 22:7 and the associated verses you will see the analogy of the destruction of Jerusalem by Jesus Christ via the Roman army. "But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city". The king mentioned here is a reference to Jesus Christ. Abbagail, you can also check out John 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. If you understand the Parable of the Marriage Feast, then you should not have any misunderstanding of my first post. Beasley, I was a pre-trib believer for most of my sixty-eight years until I finally understood Matthew 24 and then I recognized the error of my belief in the pre-trib rapture dispensational theory. I hope that you can understand this post. Gordon

Abbgail, I don't know what happened to the first post. I have been trying to find it and I can't find it either. Gordon

Abbigail, I read a bit of the website that you recommended, but I don't think I want to get involved with Diane & Dan Smedra's biblical philosophy. They are promoting J. Miles Stanford, another dispensationalist and a Pauline philospher. Gordon

Hi again Gordon, thanks for the replies. This website truly is a "mystery" - lol - in that comments go missing often it seems. Did you re-post your long one again today, that's appearing on the front page, dated today 4/15? It was previously from like a few weeks ago. Another "mystery." ;-) Also I notice that people keep commenting as time goes by, yet the # of comments never goes beyond 130+. Does Rate-it-All drop off the old ones? Is any one subject (such as Les) only allowed a certain # of posts and then the older ones are dropped? -- Well, anyway, I've always had a hard time with the mechanics of this site, browser/posting-wise. ----------------------------- As for Miles Stanford, heehee, well, we'll have to agree to disagree. I love the way he writes. A straight shooter. I remember when I first read one of his articles, it was like WOW, the scales fell off re: the clarity of distinction between Paul's letters and the Gospels, etc. And on Dan's site, I absolutely LOVE that cross with the "flash player" VINE that grows all over it. Awesome. -- I have read at Dan's site in his "Journal" that he does not agree with Les F. re: the mid-Acts position. Dan, and I assume the deceased Miles, took the Acts 2 position. -- As for Matthew 24, believe me, I LIVED IN that chapter during my 11 years as a JW. in the 1980s. Live THRU Armageddon, and the whole works. Sorry my friend, I can't go backward. What is the Blessed Hope if it isn't that the Lord intends to come for his Gentile Bride (believing Jews included, of course)? The EPITOME of GRACE is just that, the catching away of the saints. I already lived under Matthew 24 and the belief system that we are all supposed to go THRU the Trib, etc. but the Trib is not for the church. Sorry, I just can't "believe backward." ------------- As for the small-p-prince and the Romans, gotcha, agree, totally. I don't have a problem w/the fact that the Lord allowed, or even "made" the Romans destroy the "house" and city of Israel. It wasn't the first time their "house" and city were destroyed because of their stiff-necked-rebellion. But, imho, that doesn't mean God broke his eternal covenant to save a REMNANT of faithful Israel. That's what the Trib is all about, Matthew AND Revelation (and Daniel) are all prophetic books that apply to ISRAEL and not the Gentile Church, -- And Matt. 22 you mentioned, neat, I agree, but again it refers to Jesus dealing with Israel, the church is not involved in God's dealing/chastising/punishing the NATION of Israel. Yet whom the Lord loves he chastises, so I don't think because He is letting them go thru "H" means He intends to break his promise that a 1/3 remnant will be saved. -- Thanks again! Blessings/ag

Abbigail I accidentally found my first post while looking for something else and I put it back where it belonged. BTW, I found something that may interest you. Here it is. It is a PDF file that seems to explain a bit about Paul's writings and I believe that it is viable. http://l.b5z.net/i/u/6053592/i/Pauline_Corruption_o f_Biblical_Analysis.pdf I have always had trouble with understanding Paul because he seemed, at times, to place his knowledge above the teachings of Jesus. (Les uses this to his advantage but he has no idea that Pauline Doctrine is corrupted) Now I think I know why. It was not Paul, it was the various inteperters that left this and that out of the original scripture and placed Paul in an arkward position that few realize. Gordon

I support the PAN TRIB theory, and in doing so I quelch any and all debate.... No matter when he is coming, as long as I fix my eyes on Jesus, it will all PAN out for good!

Gordon is mixing law and grace. He is putting us today under the law of Israel that we were never under. I pray that his eyes will be open to the truth of right division.

It is just unbelief to think that Paul's epistles are corrupted. Just another attempt to explain away the differences between what Jesus taught and what Paul taught. The Lord is the author of ALL scripture is of God (in the KJV) and not just what's in red. He inspired EVERYTHING that Paul says. It's both Him but to two different audiences. One (Israel) had their chance to accept their King and the kingdom and refused it. Jesus had a plan that was NOT made known until Paul. Same God, different spokesmen and different programs. Both are God's plan, one for the earth and one in the heavenly places. Study to show yourself approved!