https://youtu.be/yOhIHUtBCOM
What is God's Plan for Israel?
Re: What is God's Plan for Israel?
The discussion/debate was more eschatological in the topic unless finding a future physical temple as being ecclesiological.
I thought SocalPreston was really off track when emphasizing what the Jews wrote in the Apographa more than the accepted scriptures. I agree with Steve to some degree concerning Israel in Rom 11:26-27, namely on Israel being completely saved already. (I think I have a different take from Steve on Paul's argument in Rom 9-11 though.)
I also like Steve's repeated question to SoCal Preston concerning why the temple has to be physical. Preston kept referring to the Apographa to defend that while not recognizing that the temple is the body of Christ consisting of believers. To miss that is to miss Christ as the temple that is restored.
Okay. Now I get a bit sarcastic. Next time Steve does a debate on this topic of God's plan for Israel, make sure the other side is there to make a real argument.
I thought SocalPreston was really off track when emphasizing what the Jews wrote in the Apographa more than the accepted scriptures. I agree with Steve to some degree concerning Israel in Rom 11:26-27, namely on Israel being completely saved already. (I think I have a different take from Steve on Paul's argument in Rom 9-11 though.)
I also like Steve's repeated question to SoCal Preston concerning why the temple has to be physical. Preston kept referring to the Apographa to defend that while not recognizing that the temple is the body of Christ consisting of believers. To miss that is to miss Christ as the temple that is restored.
Okay. Now I get a bit sarcastic. Next time Steve does a debate on this topic of God's plan for Israel, make sure the other side is there to make a real argument.
Please visit my youtube channel -- http://youtube.com/@thebibledialogues
Also visit parablesofthemysteries.com
-
alaskazimm
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:06 am
Re: What is God's Plan for Israel?
I'm just now listening to this debate. Through the first three topics, Preston keeps bringing up a distinction between 400 years vs 430 years as if that is of great importance. I never heard any explanation of why this distinction is important; or maybe I just missed it. Can anyone who understands what he is getting at help me out here?