View Single Post
Old 04-03-2009, 05:24 PM
George's Avatar
George George is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Posts: 891
Default Re: "Dr. Greg Estep's Daniel's 70 Weeks"

Dear crusty old curmudgeon,

I've not taken any offence whatsoever. I did ask for comments on Peacock, but that was just a side-note.

I realize that I may be coming across as looking to men for revelation, and in a certain way I am, but only in that they show me whats in the Book that I havn't found before. My final authority is still and always will be God's pure and preserved Word. It is scriptural that we should take advantage of learned teachers, they are there for our benefit, but that we should be like the Bereans and search out their techings to see if they be true.
I continue to to read my Bible daily, and try to learn it as best I can, but expository teachers are valuable too.
I know, I know, I shoud just study more, the Holy Spirit can and will guide me, but then why do we go to church to listen to a preacher? To learn more on top of what God reveals to us personally.

As for Estep, He may have other wrong doctrines or not, but I am more curious about this teaching on the 70th week being paused, and about the rapture occuring on the Jewish feast of trumpets (no year or minute predicting, just times and seasons). Its this theory I'm interested in, not Estep.

Estep. He looks a little creepy anyways But this particular theory might be right.
I've learned to chew the meat and spit out the bones as it were.

I will continue reading the article about submission etc. As I'm spot-reading it at work, I agree there could be some bent toward excessive pastoral authority, but some of the other comments seem like they might have been taken out of context, I dunno. I'll comment more on that once I've read it completely and thoroughly.”
Aloha brother BornAgainBibleBeliever514,

I appreciate your gracious reply and I am pleased that you weren’t offended. However I have some concern with some of the things that you said in your reply. And so at the risk of going from being a “crusty old curmudgeon”, (which I admit to being ), to becoming a “crotchety” old curmudgeon (which I hope that I am not) I will expound.

Your quote:
It is scriptural that we should take advantage of learned teachers,
Your statement is only partially true. God surely has called men to be teachers of His Holy word; and Christians can learn from teachers (however every Christian has an obligation to “study” on his own – 2Timothy 2:15). You said: “we should take advantage of learned teachers”, to which I shall add a “scriptural requirement”: - ONLY IF those teachers are FAITHFUL!

[2 Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to FAITHFUL MEN, who shall be able to teach others also.]

Webster's 1828 Dictionary:

1. Firm in adherence to the truth and to the duties of religion.

[Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. Rev. 2.]

2. Firmly adhering to duty; of true fidelity; loyal; true to allegiance; as a faithful subject.

3. constant in the performance of duties or services; exact in attending to commands; as a faithful servant.

4. Observant of compact, treaties, contracts, vows or other engagements; true to one's word. A government should be faithful to its treaties; individuals, to their word.

5. True; exact; in conformity to the letter and spirit; as a faithful execution of a will.

6. True to the marriage covenant; as a faithful wife or husband.

7. Conformable to truth; as a faithful narrative or representation.

8. Constant; not fickle; as a faithful lover or friend.

9. True; worthy of belief. [2Tim. 2.]
With this Scriptural admonition (command) [2Timothy 2:2] in mind then – the very FIRST thing that a Christian should do when seeking out the truth is to make sure that the person doing the teaching is FAITHFUL. And if they are NOT – it shouldn’t be:I've learned to chew the meat and spit out the bones as it were”; according to the Scriptures it should be: "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." [Galatians 5:9]

I can think of no Scriptural precept or principle which teaches that there is an EXCUSE for teaching FALSE DOCTRINE or HERESY! And I can not think of a single Scripture where we are encouraged to chew the meat and spit out the bones as it were”. WHY is this premise accepted today? WHAT is so “hard” about teaching the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

This is the “danger” in listening to men (who you don’t know) and trying to glean the truth from what they say; why bother, IF the truth is mixed in with error, false doctrine or heresy? (The Roman Catholics and ALL Cults have SOME truth, would you listen to them? Then WHY would you listen to a man (who you don’t know) simply because he claims to be a Baptist or a Fundamentalist, or an “Evangelical”? You would be far better off getting a set of CD’s of the Holy Bible (read by Alexander Scourby) and listen to the pure Scriptures, than having to constantly SIFT through the leaven that is being taught in so many so-called “Fundamentalist” circles today.

LEAVEN is LEAVEN – no matter WHO is teaching it. And the Bible clearly teaches that leaven CORRUPTS, there are NO IFS, ANDS or BUTS about it.

[Proverbs 19:27 Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.]

Your quote:
It is scriptural that we should take advantage of learned teachers
Can you give me the “Scripture” to support your statement? I scanned the entire Bible with Swordsearcher and could not find a single place in the entire Bible where the term “learned teachers” shows up. God is concerned with and requires FAITHFUL teachers, NOT just “learned” teachers. The modern day churches are FULL of “learned” teachers – the problem is that not many of them are FAITHFUL!

You said:
“I know, I know, I should just study more, the Holy Spirit can and will guide me, but then why do we go to church to listen to a preacher? To learn more on top of what God reveals to us personally.
Brother I am not trying to “strain at gnats” here, but Christians shouldn’t be going to church to “listen to a preacher”. We should be going to church to worship God first and second to “listen” to the word of God – NOT “listen to the preacher”. There’s far too much emphasis on “the preacher” (men) today and far too little emphasis on The Lord and His Holy words.

In your Post #10 you said:
I am NOT advocating his submission doctrine, but I did note that saying a word isn't found in the Bible makes a doctrine false, is a weak argument. Trinity? Rapture?”
For the record, here is what we said at the beginning of our critique of Estep’s “Doctrine of Submission”:

Our Quote:
“At the beginning of Tape #1 Greg Estep states the doctrine of Submission is: “the most important doctrine in the Bible.” The word “submissioncannot be found in the Bible! How can this be the “most important doctrine” in the Bible when you can not find a single occurrence of the word in the entire Bible?

“Mr. Estep then recommends two books that are the basis of his doctrine. 1: “The Tale of Three Kings” and 2: “Spiritual Authority”. Estep goes on to say that this is The most important doctrine in the Christian life”. As (A.V.) King James Bible believing Christians we believe that a Christian’s Doctrine must be based on the Bible and on the Bible alone. Again and for the record: the word “submissioncannot be found in the entire Bible!”
For the record - You said: “saying a word isn't found in the Bible makes a doctrine false, is a weak argument.” If that is all we said, you would be correct. But we produced 50 (81/2” by 11”) type written pages proving our allegations! And the FACT remains – IF someone (a “Bible” teacher) is going to “claim” that the “doctrine” that they are teaching is the most important doctrine in the Bible.” they should at least base that “doctrine” on words that can be found in the Holy Scriptures – or they might be guilty of ADDING to the Holy words of God. {I will deal with the words “Trinity” and “Rapture” in a little while}

You will note that I pointed out the same “problem” (ADDING to God’s word) in my Posts on Calvinism. In each of the “Five Points of Calvinism (T.U.L.I.P.) Calvinists USE WORDS that cannot be found in the Holy Bible to either “prove” their false doctrine or “prop” it up. WHY would the Lord Jesus Christ say: “. . . It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” [Matthew 4:4] IF it is appropriate for us to ADD to those words when we are teaching “doctrine” – especially IF it is the most important doctrine in the Bible.”?

The following are my quotes from the beginning of each of the Posts that I made on Calvinism:
The very first thing to note is: The wordsDEPRAVE”, “DEPRAVED”, orDEPRAVITYcannot be found in the Holy Bible. This is always a “Red Flag” for me, since so much of False Doctrine (Psychiatry/Psychology for example) is associated with “wordsnot found in the Bible.

{The word “election” is Scriptural - The Phrase “UnconditionalElectioncannot be found in the Bible! As a matter of fact – the words “conditional” and/or “unconditionaldo not appear one time in Scripture!}

The fact that the word “LIMITED” only shows up once in the Scriptures, and the only use of the word in that one single verse being peculiarly anti-Calvinistic [Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.] should have given John Calvin (or some of his followers) at least pause in using it to describe the “Atonement”. {A VERSE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT IS A PRETEXT!}

Once again we are presented with another Calvinist doctrine which is established with the aid of another additional word that cannot be found in the Holy Bible, i.e. “Irresistible”. In the course of studying the five (5) major tenets (premises) of Calvinism, it has become perfectly clear that Calvinists enlist “catch words” that are foreign to the Holy Scriptures, (i.e. “Total;Depravity”; “Unconditional”; “Irresistible; “External”; “Internal) “catch words” that are cleverly used to influence an inquirer, in order to establish their doctrines. Shouldn’t the use of these extra- Biblical words (by Calvinists) be considered ADDING to the Holy words of God? If not – what should it be called?

To begin with, the words “persevere” and “perseveredcannot be found in the Holy Bible. The word “perseverance” shows up only once in the Bible [Ephesians 6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;] and has absolutely nothing to do with the Calvinist doctrine of the so-called “Perseverance of the Saints”.
I never made the claim that Calvinism is “false” based solely on the fact that all or part of the doctrine uses words NOT found in the Holy Bible. I simply pointed out the fact of the ADDITIONAL words and said that the use of words that cannot be found in the Bible to “prove” a “Bible” doctrine raises “a Red Flag” for me, since the Roman Catholic Church and ALL Cults do exactly the same thing!

Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Since the preceding verses are true {and there are lots more that I could use} - when teaching Scripture, “Bible teachers” should be using “Bible words” as much as possible in teaching “Bible doctrine”.

As for the word “Trinity” - I personally do not use it when teaching the Scriptures or witnessing. The Bible word that I use (instead of the Roman Catholic word “Trinity”) is the “GODHEAD” [Acts 17:29; Romans 1:20; Colossians 2:9]. I learned this when I used the word “Trinity” in witnessing to A COUPLE OF Jehovahs Witnesses back in 1973, and they pointed out to me (quite correctly) that the word “Trinity” was NOT in the Bible, and that it was a “Roman Catholic word”. You should have seen the expression on the faces of the next pair of “Witnesses” that came to my door when THEY USED the word “Trinity”, and I pointed out to THEM that the word “Trinity” was NOT in the Bible, and that it was a “Roman Catholic word” - they were speechless! (Since they are pre-programmed to ask certain questions and answer according to the Watchtower Babble, they couldn’t deal with the “tables being turned”.)

And as for the word “rapture”, that Christians use to describe the translating of the saints, I try to avoid its use in teaching and witnessing also (although I may have to explain to people why I don’t use the term). The only place in the Bible where we have a clear “picture” (type) which describes what is going to happen to those saints that are alive at Christ’s gathering His body to Himself, is the example of Enoch:

Genesis 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years:
24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was TRANSLATED that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had TRANSLATED him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

In teaching and witnessing about those Christians that are alive at the time The Lord comes for His saints, I always use the word “TRANSLATED” - Why not use “Bible words” to describe a “Bible doctrine”? Personally, I don’t understand why it is so difficult for Bible teachers to refrain from ADDING to; or SUBTRACTING from; or CHANGING God’s Holy words. If a person is a genuine Bible believer, then he ought to have a natural love for God’s word and a high enough regard for it, NOT to MESS with it!

Also in your Post #10 you said:
I do agree he is a bit arrogant, but plenty of other, correct preachers are even more so (A certain favorite name probably pops into one's mind right about now.”
Without going into any of the dirty details, there is no comparison between Gregg Estep’s mean spiritedstyle” of preaching and teaching and “someone” who shall go unnamed. I read over 80 books by “someone” and listened to hundreds of hours of his preaching and teaching between 1968 through 1988, and I can tell you that, with the exception of Bible CORRECTORS, I have never heard the kind of malicious, hostile, hateful, and malevolent remarks that come out of Mr. Estep’s lips, ever spoken by “someone”. “Someone” saves his vitriol, sarcasms, and harsh remarks for Bible CORRECTORS – NOT ordinary Christians. Why some where’s in the four tape series Estep brags about KICKING OUT HIS OWN DAD OUT OF “HIS” (ESTEP’S) CHURCH!!!

We live in the age of apostasy; where there is so much FALSE TEACHING and so many FALSE TEACHERS in the churches that the only way for a Christian to have pure and “sound doctrine” is to keep their eyes and ears on God’s word and stop sifting through the chaff looking for diamonds.

Like I told brother Tonybones recently:
“At this point in my life (at 68 years old), other than preaching the Gospel (which ALL Christians should be doing – not just “pastors”) - I have four basic concerns: WORSHIPPING THE LORD (“in spirit and in truth”); SOUND DOCTRINE (I am a “moderate” Dispensationalist); CHRISTIAN LIVING {Concerning our conduct towards the brethren and the lost); and DEFENDING THE BIBLE (A BOOK that I can hold in my hands).”
At my age, I don’t have time to speculate about just exactly HOW God created the world (“Gap” or no “Gap”); and while prophecy is of interest to me, I don’t have time to try to figure out all of the details about the Great Tribulation, The Millennium, Eternity, etc.; and I don’t have time to work out all of the details about Hell or Heaven.

I just BELIEVE ALL of what I read, and accept it ALL as being TRUE; AND IF I DON’T UNDERSTAND IT ALL, OR IF God isn’t showing me something, I just let it be – there’s too much to do about those four concerns (the WEIGHTIER MATTERS) to spend time on things that God will surely straighten out for me when I meet Him face to face.