[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

Aloha brother George!

Originally Posted by George

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.]

I fully agree with you, as well as with the additional scriptural requirement that the teacher be faithful. To that I will add that the faithfulness I demand is in what is being taught. Find me a single pastor who is 100% correct, and lives it 100% correctly, so that I can trust their teaching implicitly. Might be hard to find. Rather, like the Bereans, I will receive the word with all readiness of mind, and then search the scriptures daily to see if those things are so. Those Bereans were checking out what Paul taught them then. Had they gone back and dug up what he had been teaching as Saul, they would have been foolish to reject what he was teaching as Paul.

I know you posted some stuff about another tape Estep had done much earlier, and I'll be honest with you, I didn't get all the way through it yet. That day at work got really busy, and then that night by PC blew up, so I haven't been able to check it out thoroughly, but how do you know that God didn't deal with Estep over that submission thing before he did the 70 weeks sermon?
Some people think that Kent Hovind shouldn't be listened to because of the tax scandal, but does that change anything he taught about evolution, creation, salvation or the Truth of the Book?

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]

Touche, Galatians 5:9 is a very good point, and I've oft noted the leaven effect with the blatantly heretical folks out there.
However, I honestly don't detect any heresy in the 70 week time line theory (yet?)
Your point is well taken, and I am watching for it whenever I listen to that sermon again. It still doesn't disprove the theory though. Even used car salesmen can clean up their act and tell the truth once in a while.

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?

I agree fully, there is no excuse for teaching heresy, but there is scriptural precedent of God taking an heretick and converting him to the truth, then being used by God to preach that truth. Find me a modern-times KJO person who didn't have to arrive at that conviction of truth by the hand of God, who didn't at first believe otherwise. On that note, it IS hard to teach the whole truth, 100%. We are fortunate to have men of God who come real close, but we will never have one at 100% on everything. There isn't a preacher living in the world that God is done dealing with on some area or another.
Fortunately, we have the ability and requirement to test a teaching against the Word of God.

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.

This is very good advice, thank you. I agree, I went out on a limb with Estep, whom I don't know. It came recommended by a good Christian KJO friend, so I gave it a listen.
As a rule, I don't go around listening to everything and anything, trying to glean. I read the label, then try it out. Just like a grocery store, if the label agrees with what you are generally looking for, you give it a shot, but once you open it up and test it, if its not good, you don't buy it again.
I also don't personally know much about Ruckman, Gipp, Grady, Hovind, Cloud, Spurgeon, or any other. But I tried them based on the label, and upon having tested what I heard from them, decided to benefit from what they expounded. None of us would be able to pick a local church, or listen to any preacher at all if we weren't able and willing to do a bit of sifting along the way.

And NO, I wouldn't listen to a cultist, because their heresy is proven. But if a JW shows up at my door and says it a beautiful day outside, I can agree. Or if he says that God created the universe, I can agree until he says God first created Jesus in order to create the world, THEN my sift-o-meter starts beeping and I disagree.

But I appreciate the admonition to 'Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees'.
What I want to know is: Is the Daniel's 70 week time line theory leaven or not?

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![/FONT]

I agree fully. My choice of words for learned teachers wasn't accurate, even misleading. Makes you think of a dusty old scholarly Bible-corrector, doesn't it?
I guess I meant capable, faithful preachers.

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.

I agree fully: Worship and the Word of God are the exact reasons I go to church.
A good preacher will always point the hearer TO Worship and the Word of God. That's kind of why I'm more interested in what the Word of God says about the 70 weeks, rather than who or when I heard about it from. Just like countless other subjects I hadn't yet clued into until a preacher talked about it, then my spurred curiosity sends me to the Word to search out the matter.


George, I LOVE your answers on Bible words versus words not found in the Bible. I especially loved the anecdote about the JWs and 'Trinity'. I will SO use that the next chance I get. Your points are well taken on this matter, but for goodness' sake, let's not get off onto calvinism in this thread too, hehe. Please, nobody hijack this thread onto the calvinism debate :P
I think your practice of using actual Bible words is terrific, and I will try to employ that myself.


As for the comparisons between a certain 'someone' and Estep:
I love that certain 'someone' and in no way am I against him. When he calls 'em like he sees 'em, one can't really argue, if he's right about the topic. I haven't had the privilege of covering as much of his material as you have, but I have covered some, and my impression is that the vitriol is aimed at anyone who is against the Word of God as he understands it. That includes Bible-correctors, unsaved sinners needing to repent, saved Christians who are still sinning, and anyone who doesn't agree with his stances. That last one isn't necessarily a consistent rule of thumb, but I did hear Kent Hovind's account of meeting him and how he started attacking Hovind over the gap theory, without proving it. I wasn't there, I don't know what really happened, but I know at least one good Christian who Ruckman was mean to over a non-doctrinal, non-Bible-correcting topic. Anyways, in the particular sermon I linked to for this thread, I didn't detect anything at all like the stuff you objected to in the submission doctrine tapes.

If the thing about Estep kicking his dad out of his church is true, and done without just cause, then that's pretty bad. But since I don't know the scenario, I will have to reserve judgment on it until I know more about the situation. Perhaps its in that other post you gave about the tapes you reviewed, I apologize that I didn't get through it all yet. From my current standpoint on that, not knowing WHY he got kicked out, I must give benefit of the doubt that there was a good reason, until proven otherwise. Like, maybe the dad was arguing for a heresy, or causing a disruption, or having an affair or something, I just don't know. But whatever the reason was, good or bad, I don't think its something to be bragged about, if indeed it was bragging.
Look, I'm not defending Estep, how can I? I'm just being neutral until given just cause to move either way.
I understand that Estep is a hot button for you, given your past experiences with him, but please remember, I'm really more interested in the 70 weeks, and I sincerely hope this thread can get back to discussing that.
For any other discussions about Estep, 'certain someone', or others mentioned in this thread so far, I'm open to having private emails on that, but I don't want this thread to be all about Estep, but rather the 70 weeks.

I agree with your statements about not having the time to try to figure out all the details, its logical. But I had been in prayer to learn how to counter the tongues and healing movement in order to help get some people close to me out of that nonsense, and a few months later, this 70 weeks theory comes along my path, so I'm looking into it, since they are very much related, and the people in my life I'm concerned about, didn't respond to the usual proofs against that movement...yet.

I owe you a thoughtful response on your voiced concerns, since I know you are doing it out of a sincere loving care for me, your brother, desiring that I not be deceived. Thanks, George. I'll let you stand in front of me in the lineup for the tree of life, and you can hang out in my mansion whenever you like - unless your mansion is even cooler, or unless we'd both rather spend all our 'time'? worshiping our Saviour, for it is Him we are worshiping in our efforts to seek truth here on earth.


Thanks once again, and sorry for the ridiculously long post.
Time for bed!

In Christ,
Brian