Sean I would answer your questions again but Ive already done that .Just read Romans 11 and its pretty clear that we havent replaced Israel. Paul even said so...Your theological eschatology ( preterist) by neccessity has to do away with Israel or else your whole view falls apart. Revelation hasnt been fulfilled and God does have a plan for His people Israel in the last days. Remember Paul said they are the root and we are just a branch...When did we replace the root Sean? Watch what Ezekiel says..
Over 2600 years ago, the prophet Ezekiel point blank asked God if he had cast off the nation of Israel forever. He asked of God, "wilt thou make a full end of the remnant of Israel?" Ezekiel's question points to the heart of God's election of Israel. God responds that although he has cast them to the far corners of the earth, that He will gather them back into their own land in the Last Days. God further pledges to Ezekiel that He will change the heart of Israel, and that he will become their God again,you can read it here Sean.
" Ezekiel 11:13-20 And it came to pass, when I prophesied, that Pelatiah the son of Benaiah died. Then fell I down upon my face, and cried with a loud voice, and said, Ah Lord God! wilt thou make a full end of the remnant of Israel? Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession.
Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord God; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come. Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord God; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the detestable things thereof and all the abominations thereof from thence. And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
Sean in these Last Days, when Israel is being re-gathered to its own land, Israel will come under the most intense time of trouble the world has ever known. This era is known as the time of Jacob's Trouble. Jesus alluded to this period in his Olivet Discourse, and promised his elect nation that they would be saved.
" Matthew 24:21-22 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's (Israel) sake those days shall be shortened."
Then shall the peace of Israel will become the peace of the whole world. The word elect, and the idea of the election of Israel comes from the Hebrew word, "ekletos." It means chosen. Through God's election of Israel, peace is accorded to all who may "elect" to accept Jesus Christ (the King of the Jews) as their Savior and Lord.
I am glad weve been grafted in Sean Im sure you are also...but we havent replaced the root...What you have is commonly and rightly called replacement theology.
Looking for the Blessed hope
Crusader
"Until the TIMES of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled.&qu
Sean,
You have done an excellent job of defending the truth. In fact it ought to be put in a booklet form for all to read. Crusader is the poster child of reading but not comprehending. This is not a slam against Crusader but he/she is a good representative of the Dispensational Zionist movement which has swept across North America. It is on its last legs though since more and more is being disproven simply by virtue that future is becoming history each day. There simply is no reasoning with individuals who are bent on listening to preachers of like dispensational pursuasion instead of following the accounts of God's Word.
The Gospel is simple - believe, repent, be baptized - but the deeper things are hidden from those not yet ready. Thanks for being ready Sean and thanks Steve for presenting in simple terms your verse by verse lectures.
You have done an excellent job of defending the truth. In fact it ought to be put in a booklet form for all to read. Crusader is the poster child of reading but not comprehending. This is not a slam against Crusader but he/she is a good representative of the Dispensational Zionist movement which has swept across North America. It is on its last legs though since more and more is being disproven simply by virtue that future is becoming history each day. There simply is no reasoning with individuals who are bent on listening to preachers of like dispensational pursuasion instead of following the accounts of God's Word.
The Gospel is simple - believe, repent, be baptized - but the deeper things are hidden from those not yet ready. Thanks for being ready Sean and thanks Steve for presenting in simple terms your verse by verse lectures.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
And yet, Crusader you still do not understand the plain language of who the remnant is. Denial of this will only keep you from understanding even deeper issues.Over 2600 years ago, the prophet Ezekiel point blank asked God if he had cast off the nation of Israel forever. He asked of God, "wilt thou make a full end of the remnant of Israel?" Ezekiel's question points to the heart of God's election of Israel. God responds that although he has cast them to the far corners of the earth, that He will gather them back into their own land in the Last Days. God further pledges to Ezekiel that He will change the heart of Israel, and that he will become their God again,you can read it here Sean.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Hi
Allyn
If I were you I would just cut Romans 11 out of your Bible..I definetly beleive its probably a Chapter you dont read to much...I realized I have entered into a preterist stronghold when I post here...and Im ok with that...I am not going to be beligerant or provoked here either...Ive been reading a lot about you guys lately and frankly I find it facinating...that you beleive most of Revelation has occurred. I think it must irritate you all to some degree that every day the Bible predictions keep making headlines and appear in the news. The european common market and confederacy they have formed? Israel always in the headlines everday? It must make it hard for you to watch the news. So I love this discussion and feel its very productive. People no longer will be able to just hear the side you present and maybe be provoked to actually check out what the Bible says. Youve been pretty cautious here Allyn, I wonder if those deeper truths you think Im blinded too, may be that you beleive Jesus returned on the clouds in 70 AD, that there was a ressurection then also??? Anyway its been a great discussion but Im going to side with Paul and Jeremiah and Ezekiel and Jesus on this one...Replacement theology is very interesting...yet very very dangerous...One thing I learned is that R.C.Sproul beleived it so I chucked his book in the garbage today...Allyn today Im going to read a little more about what you guys believe...yes I actually do that!!!! and have a great and awesome day doing some fun stuff...May the Lord Jesus richley bless you and JD and even Sean...Hes coming soon bro....the signs are everywhere....the huge vacuum left when the Church is taken will leave such a confusing mess it will be ripe for a world leader to emerge....but Im not to be Left Behind....Im leaving.
Maranatha ( Hes coming soon)
Crusader
If I were you I would just cut Romans 11 out of your Bible..I definetly beleive its probably a Chapter you dont read to much...I realized I have entered into a preterist stronghold when I post here...and Im ok with that...I am not going to be beligerant or provoked here either...Ive been reading a lot about you guys lately and frankly I find it facinating...that you beleive most of Revelation has occurred. I think it must irritate you all to some degree that every day the Bible predictions keep making headlines and appear in the news. The european common market and confederacy they have formed? Israel always in the headlines everday? It must make it hard for you to watch the news. So I love this discussion and feel its very productive. People no longer will be able to just hear the side you present and maybe be provoked to actually check out what the Bible says. Youve been pretty cautious here Allyn, I wonder if those deeper truths you think Im blinded too, may be that you beleive Jesus returned on the clouds in 70 AD, that there was a ressurection then also??? Anyway its been a great discussion but Im going to side with Paul and Jeremiah and Ezekiel and Jesus on this one...Replacement theology is very interesting...yet very very dangerous...One thing I learned is that R.C.Sproul beleived it so I chucked his book in the garbage today...Allyn today Im going to read a little more about what you guys believe...yes I actually do that!!!! and have a great and awesome day doing some fun stuff...May the Lord Jesus richley bless you and JD and even Sean...Hes coming soon bro....the signs are everywhere....the huge vacuum left when the Church is taken will leave such a confusing mess it will be ripe for a world leader to emerge....but Im not to be Left Behind....Im leaving.
Maranatha ( Hes coming soon)
Crusader
Last edited by Jill on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
And may the Lord bless you and keep you Crusader. I can tell you love the Lord and when we all see Him on His 2nd coming may we rejoice at that future event.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Hi
Yeah I took a day for fun today and since quail and dove season is done around here..I went and shot my .44 magnum and .40 H&K my son went to ...he's 13 ....hes a good shot and hunts with me...I needed som fun time.
Last edited by Jill on Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Antichrist Update:
A local CC pastor said on the radio Friday that the Antichrist may be an Italian. I'm not kidding.
If anyone is watching the Winter Olympics, be on the lookout for him in the stands. Grant Jeffrey says the Bible codes indicate the man of sin is a big fan of curling.
Regards,
JD
A local CC pastor said on the radio Friday that the Antichrist may be an Italian. I'm not kidding.
If anyone is watching the Winter Olympics, be on the lookout for him in the stands. Grant Jeffrey says the Bible codes indicate the man of sin is a big fan of curling.
Regards,
JD
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Christopher
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:35 pm
- Location: Gladstone, Oregon
Crusader wrote:
Would you please elaborate on what you mean by "dangerous".Replacement theology is very interesting...yet very very dangerous
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:31-32
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:31-32
Crusader,
You didn't answer Christopher with a question. You just asked another question without answering. Are you hoping to gain respect for your position with this kind of evasion? Why not simply answer a question directly? It was an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer. Sean and others go to the trouble of answering your questions. Why can't you return the same courtesy?
I too am curious to know what you think is dangerous about "replacement theology." Questions about AD 70 are irrelevant to the matter, since replacement theology is not directly related to any particular views about AD 70. Preterists believe that many prophecies were fulfilled in AD 70. However, what you call "replacement theology" is not the view only of preterists, but also of all Christians, from the first century until the nineteenth century—even those who had no particular interest in, and made no issue of, anything related to AD 70.
You are confusing preterism with replacement theology. The reason you don't know the difference between these concepts is that you only read about them from others who also don't know what they are—like Tommy Ice.
The way to understand the viewpoints of those who disagree with you is not by reading others who agree with you against the position, but by reading or listening to those who hold the position you are against, so that you can evaluate and critique it intelligently. You have admitted that you do not do any such thing, and that you do not intend to—and you have demonstrated this commitment to ignorance in every one of your posts at this long and tedious thread.
The reason no one is impressed with your arguments is that you actually provide no arguments. You just say, "Read this passage again," and illustrate your ignorance of the fact that many here have read the passages you are quoting more times than have you, and some have memorized them. You have no idea why they don't accept your opinions about the passages—you just think they have not read them as intelligently as you have.
Since you have appointed yourself as a crusader for an eschatological viewpoint, given your level of integrity and irresponsible methods of approaching a subject of controversy, I have to honestly say that I am glad your current crusade is supporting a view other than my own.
You indicate that you are filling an important role at this forum, in that you are giving the people here an opportunity to hear another viewpoint. Are you unaware that the "other viewpoint" that you are presenting is in fact the only viewpoint that most people have ever heard in recent decades, and that you are simply following the institutional party line of the modern pop Christian culture?
The people here are not learning anything new about eschatology from your posts. They are simply getting a demonstration of the weakness of your position and of the desperate, blind, doctrinaire, steam-roller-type approach that people who refuse to hear more than one viewpoint use to defend their indefensible theologies. What you bring to this forum, thus far, is nothing more than the "same-old same-old" that we hear everywhere else, and have all been hearing for the past 35 years in the pop-theology world.
Most of us were dispensationalists for years. You are not telling us anything that we are unfamiliar with. I taught what you teach (but considerably more responsibly, and, thus, more convincingly) for many years, Even today, I could present the same scriptures you use, and hundreds besides, which one can twist to convince the undiscerning of the views you are defending here. The reason I no longer do so is that the policy of taking verses out of context and ignoring other verses that explain them is repugnant to me.
There are dispensationalists that I can respect. Tommy Ice is not one of them—not because he disagrees with me, but because he is agenda-driven, and does not try very hard to understand or fairly represent those whose views threaten his professional ministry (which is built entirely upon the need to defend dispensationalism, not Christianity). You have given abundant reason for me to think of you as I do of him.
You are mistaken in saying that anyone here "has to get rid of Israel" because of their doctrinal commitments. The reason you are wrong is that you don't even understand what the doctrinal commitments are of those who disagree with you. This could be remedied very easily, but you are not looking for a remedy to your ignorance. You are simply sure you are right.
You didn't answer Christopher with a question. You just asked another question without answering. Are you hoping to gain respect for your position with this kind of evasion? Why not simply answer a question directly? It was an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer. Sean and others go to the trouble of answering your questions. Why can't you return the same courtesy?
I too am curious to know what you think is dangerous about "replacement theology." Questions about AD 70 are irrelevant to the matter, since replacement theology is not directly related to any particular views about AD 70. Preterists believe that many prophecies were fulfilled in AD 70. However, what you call "replacement theology" is not the view only of preterists, but also of all Christians, from the first century until the nineteenth century—even those who had no particular interest in, and made no issue of, anything related to AD 70.
You are confusing preterism with replacement theology. The reason you don't know the difference between these concepts is that you only read about them from others who also don't know what they are—like Tommy Ice.
The way to understand the viewpoints of those who disagree with you is not by reading others who agree with you against the position, but by reading or listening to those who hold the position you are against, so that you can evaluate and critique it intelligently. You have admitted that you do not do any such thing, and that you do not intend to—and you have demonstrated this commitment to ignorance in every one of your posts at this long and tedious thread.
The reason no one is impressed with your arguments is that you actually provide no arguments. You just say, "Read this passage again," and illustrate your ignorance of the fact that many here have read the passages you are quoting more times than have you, and some have memorized them. You have no idea why they don't accept your opinions about the passages—you just think they have not read them as intelligently as you have.
Since you have appointed yourself as a crusader for an eschatological viewpoint, given your level of integrity and irresponsible methods of approaching a subject of controversy, I have to honestly say that I am glad your current crusade is supporting a view other than my own.
You indicate that you are filling an important role at this forum, in that you are giving the people here an opportunity to hear another viewpoint. Are you unaware that the "other viewpoint" that you are presenting is in fact the only viewpoint that most people have ever heard in recent decades, and that you are simply following the institutional party line of the modern pop Christian culture?
The people here are not learning anything new about eschatology from your posts. They are simply getting a demonstration of the weakness of your position and of the desperate, blind, doctrinaire, steam-roller-type approach that people who refuse to hear more than one viewpoint use to defend their indefensible theologies. What you bring to this forum, thus far, is nothing more than the "same-old same-old" that we hear everywhere else, and have all been hearing for the past 35 years in the pop-theology world.
Most of us were dispensationalists for years. You are not telling us anything that we are unfamiliar with. I taught what you teach (but considerably more responsibly, and, thus, more convincingly) for many years, Even today, I could present the same scriptures you use, and hundreds besides, which one can twist to convince the undiscerning of the views you are defending here. The reason I no longer do so is that the policy of taking verses out of context and ignoring other verses that explain them is repugnant to me.
There are dispensationalists that I can respect. Tommy Ice is not one of them—not because he disagrees with me, but because he is agenda-driven, and does not try very hard to understand or fairly represent those whose views threaten his professional ministry (which is built entirely upon the need to defend dispensationalism, not Christianity). You have given abundant reason for me to think of you as I do of him.
You are mistaken in saying that anyone here "has to get rid of Israel" because of their doctrinal commitments. The reason you are wrong is that you don't even understand what the doctrinal commitments are of those who disagree with you. This could be remedied very easily, but you are not looking for a remedy to your ignorance. You are simply sure you are right.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve