Is the land restoration to the nation of Israel found in the new covenant?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Since the Temple Institute in Jerusalem, has decided that Fort Antonia is the site, it looks like you are mistaken.

They have lied about what Josephus said to make their site work.

I have heard them make the claim that Josephus said Fort Antonia was "razed to the ground", when in reality he said no such thing.

(Time 29:00 in the video below.)

The Romans did attack the foundation of the fort in order to break through and gain access to the fort.
We see below, on the day the temple was burned Fort Antonia was still standing.

The man in the hat claims to be a Christian, who is helping with the rebuilding of the temple.






From War of the Jews, by Josephus, Book 6, Chapter 4, sections 4-5.

"4. Now it is true that on this day the Jews were so weary, and under such consternation, that they refrained from any attacks. But on the next day they gathered their whole force together, and ran upon those that guarded the outward court of the temple very boldly, through the east gate, and this about the second hour of the day. These guards received that their attack with great bravery, and by covering themselves with their shields before, as if it were with a wall, they drew their squadron close together; yet was it evident that they could not abide there very long, but would be overborne by the multitude of those that sallied out upon them, and by the heat of their passion. However, Caesar seeing, from the tower of Antonia, that this squadron was likely to give way, he sent some chosen horsemen to support them. Hereupon the Jews found themselves not able to sustain their onset, and upon the slaughter of those in the forefront, many of the rest were put to flight. But as the Romans were going off, the Jews turned upon them, and fought them; and as those Romans came back upon them, they retreated again, until about the fifth hour of the day they were overborne, and shut themselves up in the inner [court of the] temple.

5. So Titus retired into the tower of Antonia, and resolved to storm the temple the next day, early in the morning, with his whole army, and to encamp round about the holy house. But as for that house, God had, for certain, long ago doomed it to the fire; and now that fatal day was come, according to the revolution of ages; it was the tenth day of the month Lous, [Ab,] upon which it was formerly burnt by the king of Babylon; although these flames took their rise from the Jews themselves, and were occasioned by them; for upon Titus’s retiring, the seditious lay still for a little while, and then attacked the Romans again, when those that guarded the holy house fought with those that quenched the fire that was burning the inner [court of the] temple; but these Romans put the Jews to flight, and proceeded as far as the holy house itself. At which time one of the soldiers, without staying for any orders, and without any concern or dread upon him at so great an undertaking, and being hurried on by a certain divine fury, snatched somewhat out of the materials that were on fire, and being lifted up by another soldier, he set fire to a golden window, through which there was a passage to the rooms that were round about the holy house, on the north side of it. As the flames went upward, the Jews made a great clamor, such as so mighty an affliction required, and ran together to prevent it; and now they spared not their lives any longer, nor suffered any thing to restrain their force, since that holy house was perishing, for whose sake it was that they kept such a guard about it."

All of this provides tremendous evidence that the Dome of the Rock is the true location of Fort Antonia.


If at least part of Fort Antonia remained on the day the temple was destroyed, where is that part of Fort Antonia now?


Watch the YouTube video… The “Temple Mount” is Roman Fort Antonia, by Leeland Jones, to see the truth with your own eyes.
.



This is much ado about very little. The exact location of the Temple mount has been debated. If these men you have cited are wrong, then the actual site itself will be revealed and the Temple will be built in the correct location.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: keras
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You simply don't see how the Jewish State of Israel will be gone after the Day of the Lord's fiery wrath. Just as Jeremiah 12:14-16 says: Only the Christian Jews will be allowed back. As Ezekiel 20:34-38 proves.

The enmity between Judah and Israel continues today.
The Jews hate Christians, they are not allowed to become citizens and those that are face abuse and persecution.
Christian people are in the main; descendants of the ten Northern tribes. If you and others who like to think the Jews are all of Israel deny this truth, then you deny the success of Jesus' mission. Matthew 15:24




While I agree that only "Christian Jews" will inherit the promised land (Rom. 9:27, Zech. 13:9) and the regathering of all the people of Israel to their homeland will be completed by the Messiah Himself, they will still be the Jewish state of Israel, but rather a remainder of the nation we see today. But the enmity that took place between the Israel and Judah was when Israel was a divided into two nations. Now, no longer. Christianity is a faith comprised of people from all walks of life, nationalities, ethnicities, and languages but it, in and of itself, was not created from a bloodline like the nation of Israel was.

The current relationship between Christians and the unbelieving Jews is not so much described as a total enmity as it is a love/hate relationship. One the one hand, many of them do despise the Gospel message having been blinded to its truth, but on the other hand, they see the Christians who recognize their historic and scriptural claim to their homeland and their right to exist as a nation and people, and who want to see them live in peace and prosperity, as their allies.

The Jews who are the most hostile to the Gospel are the ones who are the most religious. The less religious of the Jews tend to be more tolerant of it. There are many other people who actually hate us more than the Jews do.

If you think that Jesus failed in His mission if the Jews happened to be all of Israel, then it is you who has demonstrated a poor understanding the mission of Jesus. If the Gospel is being preached throughout the world to all people, then there is no failure.



Re; Isaiah 30:26a, this prophecy plainly states that the sun will suddenly shine 7 times brighter. Paralleled by Psalms 50:1-3, Malachi 4:1
You think this wouldn't be destructive to us on earth? I am in wonderment at your naivety and denial. Also that verse is in the context of earthly punishments by fire. Isaiah 30:30....His arm descends in fierce anger with devouring flames of fire.



The world will be a different place when the sun shines brighter than it does today and due to the changes that will take place when Christ returns, the sun will not be the destructive instrument in that day that it would otherwise be. It seems that in your mind, God must be limited in His power as you seem to think that the present laws of nature are going to be the same then as they are now.
 
Upvote 0

Danoh

Newbie
Oct 11, 2011
3,064
310
✟40,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
...

If He has said that all of Israel would eventually enter into the New Covenant, that is what will happen....

Again, Rom. 11:26's "all Israel" is in light of Rom. 9:6's "...they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

This is the same model as Romans 11's...

11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

Verses 3, for example, depicts a model of
Rom. 9:6's "...they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

Things that differ are not...the same, 2 Tim. 2:15-18.
 
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,563
2,480
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟290,794.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The Jews who are the most hostile to the Gospel are the ones who are the most religious. The less religious of the Jews tend to be more tolerant of it. There are many other people who actually hate us more than the Jews do.
We Christians are 'tolerated; by the Jews because of the false belief they are still the chosen people of God. We have many organizations that help the Jews and they receive millions in aid from us, billions from the USA govt, thru the pro Israel lobby.
If you think that Jesus failed in His mission if the Jews happened to be all of Israel, then it is you who has demonstrated a poor understanding the mission of Jesus. If the Gospel is being preached throughout the world to all people, then there is no failure.
Your reply here is anomalous and doesn't address the issue.

I know Jesus was successful; I am an example of it.
I also know that I have an Israelite ancestry, thru my Scottish/English heritage. But the fact of the ten tribes being still scattered among the nations, is hidden from all who believe false theories and doctrines.
Many prophesies prove their continued separation, which was for a decreed time period, Ezekiel 4:4-6, not yet completed and the fact of the Promises to them when they do rejoin, not being fulfilled yet. Ezekiel 37:21-18

The world will be a different place when the sun shines brighter than it does today and due to the changes that will take place when Christ returns, the sun will not be the destructive instrument in that day that it would otherwise be. It seems that in your mind, God must be limited in His power as you seem to think that the present laws of nature are going to be the same then as they are now.
The Lord's terrible Day of fiery wrath, is an event years before the Return.
The 3 main prophesies that describe the Return; Zechariah 14:3, Matthew 24:30, Revelation 19:11, do not say He comes then in fire.

The prophecy of Isaiah 30:26 does not say or infer, that the sun will change permanently, just a flash as it explodes out a huge mass that will strike the earth and literally fulfil all the graphic prophesies about that Day.
The Laws of nature will not be changed, why should they be? Just to suit your peculiar beliefs?
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is much ado about very little. The exact location of the Temple mount has been debated. If these men you have cited are wrong, then the actual site itself will be revealed and the Temple will be built in the correct location.

One of us is very confused if you think God wants men to rebuild a temple in the modern city of Jerusalem, so that animal sacrifices can be renewed.

Why would you think God is going to make sure lost Orthodox Jews are going to build a temple in the original location?


.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
One of us is very confused if you think God wants men to rebuild a temple in the modern city of Jerusalem, so that animal sacrifices can be renewed.

Why would you think God is going to make sure lost Orthodox Jews are going to build a temple in the original location?


.


Christ will be ruling from a Temple and as for the animal sacrifices, they, as we know it, will be short-lived.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Christ will be ruling from a Temple and as for the animal sacrifices, they, as we know it, will be short-lived.

Can you show any scripture from the New Testament which says Christ will be ruling in the future from a temple made with human hands?

Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,


The New Covenant temple is described below, by Peter.


1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Can you show any scripture from the New Testament which says Christ will be ruling in the future from a temple made with human hands?

Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,


The New Covenant temple is described below, by Peter.


1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

.


The millennial reign is found only in Revelation chapter 20 and other than its length of time and the resurrection of martyred saints who will reign with Christ, plus the imprisonment of Satan for that thousand years, admittedly, nothing else is said. The most that you read about events relating to this era is in the Old Testament. Ezekiel chapters 40-47 make it very clear that a King will be ruling from a Temple on earth; nothing that Ezekiel has described in those chapters has yet taken place as they take place at a time that Christ is ruling from the earth.

Often times, in order to gain adequate insight and understanding into any given matter, both Old and New Testament scriptures must be consulted.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
We Christians are 'tolerated; by the Jews because of the false belief they are still the chosen people of God. We have many organizations that help the Jews and they receive millions in aid from us, billions from the USA govt, thru the pro Israel lobby.


The Apostles still regarded them as a chosen people of God despite the persistent unbelief of most of them. (Acts 3:25-26, Rom. 11:28-29) in the sense that God, because of promises made to their forefathers, chose them to be a blessing to the rest of the world, the greatest blessing being Christ through whom salvation and the forgiveness of sins is offered, but they have also been an instrument of blessing in many other ways of we are largely unaware and for which they are not given the credit due to them.

The Apostles never counted them as being a people cast away by God and neither should we lest we find ourselves boasting against the branches of the tree into which we have been grafted. (Rom. 11:18-24)


I know Jesus was successful; I am an example of it.
I also know that I have an Israelite ancestry, thru my Scottish/English heritage. But the fact of the ten tribes being still scattered among the nations, is hidden from all who believe false theories and doctrines.
Many prophesies prove their continued separation, which was for a decreed time period, Ezekiel 4:4-6, not yet completed and the fact of the Promises to them when they do rejoin, not being fulfilled yet. Ezekiel 37:21-18


Anyone who has accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior serves as a testimony and an example of the ongoing success of His mission, but Anglo Saxon Heritage, in and of itself, does not make you a descendant of Israel. I have Anglo-Saxon blood in me myself, but that does not make me an Israelite by descent. What would make me an Israelite by blood would be if any of my ancestors were Jewish but to the best of my knowledge that is not in my history. Further verification would be if my DNA contained any genes unique only to Jews or those of Jewish descent.



The Lord's terrible Day of fiery wrath, is an event years before the Return.
The 3 main prophesies that describe the Return; Zechariah 14:3, Matthew 24:30, Revelation 19:11, do not say He comes then in fire.

The prophecy of Isaiah 30:26 does not say or infer, that the sun will change permanently, just a flash as it explodes out a huge mass that will strike the earth and literally fulfil all the graphic prophesies about that Day.
The Laws of nature will not be changed, why should they be? Just to suit your peculiar beliefs?


We do know that the seven year tribulation, which is the period during which the entire world will face judgment is years before the return of our Lord, but the worst of His wrath will not be years before His return but just prior. There will be no doubt in anyone's mind that when the worst of His wrath comes, that the cataclysms that are to take place are His doing.

As for Isaiah 30:26, the change in the sun described, and not only the sun, but the moon also, does infer a permanent change. Just as the world before the great flood was not the same as it presently is today, the world, under Christ, will not be the same as it is now.

But if we attempt to determine how things were in the past and are going to be the future by how things are presently, then we really do place a limit on the power of God in our thinking and apparently, you must think that God is unable to reshape all that would be required to protect the earth from the destructive affects of a sun seven times brighter than it is today while empowering it to benefit from its positive affects.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The millennial reign is found only in Revelation chapter 20 and other than its length of time and the resurrection of martyred saints who will reign with Christ, plus the imprisonment of Satan for that thousand years, admittedly, nothing else is said.

The above is a good, honest statement of the truth.
I greatly appreciate that.

If we can prove the Book of Revelation is not in chronological order, and we accept the writings of the other New Testament passages like the following...

Matthew 25:31-46

2 Thessalonians 1:7-10

2 Timothy 4:1

2 Peter 3:10-13

Revelation 11:18

Revelation 16:15-16

then the Premill interpretation of the Old Testament cannot be correct.

At one time I believed the Premill doctrine to be correct. The problem was I could not get it to agree the the passages found above. Then I knew something was wrong with what I believed.
The only way I could get the doctrine to work was by ignoring the passages found above.

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Again, Rom. 11:26's "all Israel" is in light of Rom. 9:6's "...they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

This is the same model as Romans 11's...

11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

Verses 3, for example, depicts a model of
Rom. 9:6's "...they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

Things that differ are not...the same, 2 Tim. 2:15-18.


I am afraid the model is not the same in the sense that Romans chapter 9 makes a contrast between the Israel of the flesh (by lineage) and the Israel by adoption (the Church) Not all who are of Israel are Israel in the sense that they have not placed their faith in Christ the way Abraham placed His faith in God for that which was promised to him, yet we are made the children of Abraham by adoption because we have placed our faith in Christ the same way that Abraham placed that very faith in God which He credited to Abraham for righteousness. (Jas. 2:23)

Thus the entire point made in Romans chapter 9 is that being a Jew by blood, in and of itself, does not gain favor with God. It never has. But it is sincere faith that obtains favor with God.

Romans chapter 11 is simply about the preservation of Israel as a people and nation and their eventual salvation. (Rom. 11:26) Those who have and are turning to Christ presently are that remnant within the nation and people according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5) but are not presently the nation as a whole.

That chapter also goes on to explain that they can be reconciled to God again if they do not continue in unbelief which is why we are warned not to magnify ourselves against the branches that were broken off (Rom. 11:18-24) and that if their diminishing and casting away of them was used for the salvation of the rest of the world, how much more so if the Jews are reconciled to God and have bestowed upon them the fullness that they are destined to have? (Rom. 11:12
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The above is a good, honest statement of the truth.
I greatly appreciate that.

If we can prove the Book of Revelation is not in chronological order, and we accept the writings of the other New Testament passages like the following...

Matthew 25:31-46

2 Thessalonians 1:7-10

2 Timothy 4:1

2 Peter 3:10-13

Revelation 11:18

Revelation 16:15-16

then the Premill interpretation of the Old Testament cannot be correct.

At one time I believed the Premill doctrine to be correct. The problem was I could not get it to agree the the passages found above. Then I knew something was wrong with what I believed.
The only way I could get the doctrine to work was by ignoring the passages found above.

.


When I said that we do not have any information about the Millennial reign in the New Testament other than what is written, I also mentioned that there is more relating to Christ's reign upon the earth throughout the rest of the scriptures, most of which are found in the Old Testament but what characterizes the Millennial reign is a subject best discussed and debated on another thread.

What gives Premills the cause to believe that Christ will reign in a Temple is Ezekiel chapters 40-47 which speaks of a Temple of a size and description previous temples do not match and of a time on earth that has not taken place and which can only be tied to the reign of Christ.

The challenge for the Preterist is to prove that everything described in those chapters has already been fulfilled. Attempting to call symbolic what the context of those chapters have not called or implied to be symbolic will not get you anywhere.

Another challenge, as it appears you yourself have admitted, that another challenge is to prove that the book of Revelation is not in chronological order, but from a contextual stand point, it is presentd in a chronogical order in its overall format, but not in a linear fashion.

For example, Revelation chapter 11:18 announces the time of God's wrath and the judgment of the dead, but contrary to Preterist claim, there are other things that must take place before the time of wrath which are the events described in chapters 12 and 13. After the events of chapter 12 and 13, the rest of the chapters up until chapter 19 are about the wrath of God being poured out upon the earth and this present world system.

Revelation is not the only portion of scripture where we see this happen. But not only does it have to be proven that the book of Revelation does not follow a chronology, it has to be proven that the entire book of Revelation is symbolic and not literal.

The Premil will agree with you that there is symbology in the book of Revelation where the context declares or implies it. But they will not declare symbolism where the context does not allow; at least I do not.

As for the passages you cited which you believe to be problematic for Premil doctrine, most of those passages do not pose a challenge to Pre-millennialism as you claim. From an objective standpoint, the only passage that appears to be the most challenging for Premillennial adherents is 2 Peter 3:10-13 but at the same time, scriptures such as Revelation chapter 20 are just as challenging to Preterists, especially since the resurrection of the martyred saints and the unbelievers do not take place on the same day. As is written in Revelation 20:5, the rest of the dead do not face judgment.

What is made clear is that before this present earth is burned up and replaced with a new earth, the final judgment must take place, thus making it appear to place the fulfillment of 2 Peter 3:10-13 at the end of the thousand year reign.

Were Peter and John contradicting one another? That is unacceptable as such would destroy the inerrancy of the scriptures and thus place their degree of divine inspiration in question.

Was John told more than Peter? That is not out of the realm of possibility since one portion of scriptures have been known to go into more detail about a certain subject than others and unfulfilled prophecy is no exception which is why if we are to obtain an adequate understanding of what has come to pass and what hasn't, we need to consult the scriptures from beginning to end concerning anything having to do with the end times.

I have done that with a number of different subjects and when the full counsel of scripture is consulted, greater clarity is received.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What gives Premills the cause to believe that Christ will reign in a Temple is Ezekiel chapters 40-47 which speaks of a Temple of a size and description previous temples do not match and of a time on earth that has not taken place and which can only be tied to the reign of Christ.

The challenge for the Preterist is to prove that everything described in those chapters has already been fulfilled. Attempting to call symbolic what the context of those chapters have not called or implied to be symbolic will not get you anywhere.

First of all you need to know you have not been talking to a "Preterist".

I am a "Parital-Preterist", in the same way that Christ was a "Partial-Preterist" in the Olivet Discourse.

This means I am also a "Partial-Futurist".

It is my understanding that most of the Book of Revelation has not yet been fulfilled.

There is one certain way to get the New Covenant temple in 1 Peter 2:4-10 to agree with the description of the temple in the Book of Ezekiel.
If you put all of the Christians in the world shoulder-to-shoulder, how big of a temple would it make?

Peter said Christ is the cornerstone in that temple and I believe him, because Christ said the same thing in Matthew chapter 21.
Peter also said we are stones in that temple.
The Old Testament temple was the shadow, or type, of the New Covenant temple.

In Colossians 2:16-17 Paul reveals the fact that the foods, feasts, and sabbaths were a "shadow" of Christ.

He is our Sabbath rest every day of the week, in the New Covenant.

The New Covenant has made the Old Covenant "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13.

Why would we think God would go back to a weaker, obsolete covenant, in an Old Covenant temple, during a future time?
What do the verses below say?


Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.


Heb_10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
First of all you need to know you have not been talking to a "Preterist".

I am a "Parital-Preterist", in the same way that Christ was a "Partial-Preterist" in the Olivet Discourse.

This means I am also a "Partial-Futurist".


When I address Peterism, I address all forms of it but if you thought I was lumping you in with full-Preterists, then I apologize.


There is one certain way to get the New Covenant temple in 1 Peter 2:4-10 to agree with the description of the temple in the Book of Ezekiel.
If you put all of the Christians in the world shoulder-to-shoulder, how big of a temple would it make?


That temple is still being added to, but the Temple described in Ezekiel is given measurements, dimensions, features, and borders that cannot be applied to people and that is where reconciling the cited passage in Peter with Ezekiel chapters 40-47 meets its challenge.


The Old Testament temple was the shadow, or type, of the New Covenant temple.
The New Covenant has made the Old Covenant "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13.
Why would we think God would go back to a weaker, obsolete covenant, in an Old Covenant temple, during a future time?




The Temple was meant to be a place for God to dwell among His people. It was never initially meant to pass away with the Old Covenant albeit a change in its function was required by the New Testament.

Ezekiel chapters 40-47 make it clear that the Lord will be ruling from the Temple described. It would take a detailed study to go over what the functions of this Temple will be in comparison to the temples before as such would be required to better address the issues surrounding this Temple which would best be done in another setting for which more space could be afforded to do so.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Temple was meant to be a place for God to dwell among His people. It was never initially meant to pass away with the Old Covenant albeit a change in its function was required by the New Testament.


Either you are confused, or the New Testament authors are confused below, if you think God now dwells in temples made by human hands.

The New Covenant temple is found below. Believers can easily see the New Covenant temple, by looking in the mirror.
Your Bible says the same thing.



1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?


Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.


Some of us cannot tell the difference between the Old Testament types and shadows, and the New Testament reality.

Are we now required to circumcise our male children?

Do we now offer animals for our sin, in a manmade temple?

Does a Levitical priest now offer a sacrifice for us?

Must we do no work sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, or be stoned?

Why did the Apostle Paul compel the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage" in Galatians 4:24-31?
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Either you are confused, or the New Testament authors are confused below, if you think God now dwells in temples made by human hands.

The New Covenant temple is found below. Believers can easily see the New Covenant temple, by looking in the mirror.
Your Bible says the same thing.



1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?


Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.


Some of us cannot tell the difference between the Old Testament types and shadows, and the New Testament reality.

Are we now required to circumcise our male children?

Do we now offer animals for our sin, in a manmade temple?

Does a Levitical priest now offer a sacrifice for us?

Must we do no work sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, or be stoned?

Why did the Apostle Paul compel the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage" in Galatians 4:24-31?


But from where does a King who walks among men rule? Upon where does He place His throne?
 
Upvote 0

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The holy city and the land of Israel had been under Gentile jurisdiction until 1948 and in 1967, Israel had taken full control of Jerusalem from the Arabs. That is far longer than the 42 months the Gentiles are foretold to trample on Jerusalem. There is historically no way that the Gospel of Luke and Revelation 11 are talking about the same event.

In order for the 42 months of Gentile control to take place, the Jews must presently have control over Jerusalem, which they do.

Jesus stated, in regards to the temple destruction, that Jerusalem would be trampled by the gentiles until the times of the gentiles was fulfilled (luke 21:24).

Revelation states Jerusalem is trampled by the nations for 42 months (revelation 11:2).

Paul states the earthly Jerusalem represents the old covenant, while the heavenly Jerusalem represents the new covenant. Paul adds the those of the earthly Jerusalem will never inherit with those of the heavenly Jerusalem (galatians 4:24-31).

From the time of the initiation of the Jewish Roman war (66ad) until the destruction of the temple (70ad) was a total of 3.5 years (42 months). The earthly old covenant Jerusalem was forever cast out.

Under the new covenant, we no longer come to the earthly Jerusalem which was cast out in 70ad, we come to the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22). And as Jerusalem under the new covenant is no longer the earthly one, it can no longer be trampled.



With the blood clearly belonging to the people outside of the city rather than inside the city.

And this is related how to land restoration?

And yet it is you who has stated that prophets speak in riddles and symbolic visions; the full picture of which we do not get until the fulfillment thereof. There is no contradiction in rendering scripture according to its given context and the context of Romans 9:23-26 gives no evidence that Paul is calling the people of the ten northern tribes Gentiles. He is simply telling us that God was calling not only Israel back to Himself but is also calling the Gentiles to Him as well. That is what the context of Romans 9:23-26 is telling us about Hosea 1:10.

Correct, I did state the prophets speak in riddles and symbolic visions as attested by scripture (numbers 12:6-8, hosea 12:10).

There seems to be a misunderstanding based on your response. It is not the gentiles as a whole that Paul is calling the 10 northern tribes, that is not what I meant and that would be incorrect.

Paul quotes hosea 1:10 and 2:23, which is about the northern kingdom of Israel, as being fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles with the Jews in the vessels of mercy. How is that possible?

1.) the divorced, exiled, and scattered northern kingdom became "not my people" (hosea 1:9). Thus they became as the gentiles, which were already not God's people

2.) By God including the gentiles, of whom some, but not all, descended from the exiled and divorced northern kingdom of Israel, with the Jews in the vessels of mercy, he fulfills his promise to the northern kingdom (hosea 1:10)

God's relationship with mankind involves a covenant. Those in the covenant are his people, those outside of the covenant are not his people. Currently God is relationship with his people through the new covenant. Those not in this covenant are not His people.

I was not talking about what was prior to the Assyrian exile but afterward.

So the northern kingdom was mixing with the nations prior to the exile (hosea 7:8), and then all of the sudden started mixing less after their deportation and resettling throughout the Assyrian empire?

The same thing could be asked concerning the few godly people who were left throughout Israel during the seventy year captivity carried out by Babylon.

Can you elaborate on this?

There is no reason to believe that the 144,000 are symbolic.

This again assumes that revelation 7 is literal and not a symbolic vision.

But not to be punished and that is the difference. There is a reason why neither Jesus or any of the Apostles reference the wandering as a picture or a shadow of Christ being tested in the wilderness. Whenever the wandering of the Israelites in the wilderness is looked back upon, it is cited as an example of what not to be and as a warning to not put God to the test like the people of Israel did.

You are also attempting to draw an equivalency where there is none. I at least have presented scriptural evidence from both the Old and New Testament for "land restoration" being implied which you have rejected and won't even consider. So be it. Yet on the other hand, you claim the promises and prophecies of land restoration was cancelled and lost to the Jews forever without any scriptural evidence to back it up. You have nothing more than an assumption.

You have also made the claim that the wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness were a foreshadow of the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness when the Apostles cite their wanderings as a warning to us and an example of what not to do.

I have no disagreements with Israel's wandering in the desert for 40 years prior to entering the promise land foreshadowing 1st century Israel's 40 year time period (30ad-70ad) entering into God's Sabbath rest.

Hebrews 3:16-19 For who were the ones who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? And with whom was God angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did He swear that they would never enter His rest? Was it not to those who disobeyed? So we see that it was because of their unbelief that they were unable to enter.

Hebrews 4:8-11 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath rest for the people of God. For whoever enters God’s rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from His. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following the same pattern of disobedience.

However, we also know that the nation of Israel foreshadowed Christ. For Just as Israel was called out of Egypt, so was Christ.

Hosea 11:1-2 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. But the more I called Israel, the farther they departed from Me.

Matthew 2:14-15 So he got up, took the Child and His mother by night, and withdrew to Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called My Son.

I'm simply stating that the nation of Israel foreshadowed Christ, with the BIG difference in where the the nation of Israel failed, Jesus fulfilled in every way.

Jesus was called out the Egypt, so was Israel
Jesus was tested in the wilderness, so was Israel
Jesus was under the law, so was Israel
Jesus became the curse of the law, Israel received the curse of the law
Jesus rose again, Israel (those who believed) was made alive through Christ

These parallels are known as types and antitypes. The new testament is full of these parallels.

However, the NT does not make one mention of land restoration.


Understand that I am not saying that those who are Preterist or adhere to Preterist leanings question the faithfulness of God, but you need to be made aware that there are ramifications to the doctrines and beliefs that we hold to in regards to how we view God, the inerrancy of scripture, and ultimately the Gospel and which in turn affect the course of our very lives.

God has declared that He does not change. (Mal. 3:6, Heb. 13:8) He has declared His standards of holiness and righteousness from Genesis to Revelation and they are final. They are not going to be changed or made void. The standard by which He judges the world is the same today as it was when the world began. But we can also be sure that His love and mercy will never fail as well and that His grace will never cease.

When man sinned, God's plan to redeem us was the same when sin entered into the world as when Christ came to redeem us through His death on the cross an His resurrection. His nature and attributes today are the same as they have always been. On any given subject that you read about in the Bible, from beginning to end, there is an unfailing consistency.

And because God is unchanging, He is also faithful in keeping His promises and fulfilling all that He has said. (Heb. 10:26)

If God has declared that He will not make a full end of Israel, even if every other nation ceases to exist, (Jer. 30:11) they will continue to abide as a nation and people.

If God has declared that Israel is to exist as long as He maintains control over all of creation,
(Jer. 31:35-37, 33:20-26) then they have, as a people and nation, granted something that no other people or nation has ever been given. Eternal existence.

If God has declared a time that Israel would be re-established as a nation and never to be removed from their homeland again, (Ezek. 37:25, Am. 9:15) then we can expect that they will never be uprooted from their land.


This is why Paul said that God was not going to cast Israel off (Rom. 11:5)
This is why he said that if their diminishing, blindness, and being cast away could be used to draw other nations unto God, how much more so when the nation of Israel is reconciled to God and fully restored. (Rom. 11:12, 15)
This is why he said that if they did not continue in unbelief, they could be grafted back into the tree from which they were broken off. (Rom. 11:23-24)
This is why he said that we are not exalt ourselves against the people or nation of Israel and think that we are some how better or more favored then they are or that God has cast them off forever. (Rom. 11:18-22, 25)
This is why God said that all of Israel would be saved (Rom. 11:26) though only a remnant of the nation would be remaining when they finally receive Christ. (Rom. 9:27)
This is why they were still counted for the seed. (Rom. 9:8)
This is why he still called them "beloved for the fathers' sakes" despite their enmity towards the Gospel. (Rom. 11:28)
This is why he said they still possessed the "gifts and calling of God" in spite of their unrepentance. (Rom. 11:29)


If Paul had no basis in declaring that God would not cast away Israel and that all of Israel would be saved and be restored to the full, he would have counted them forever cast out of God's sight.
If it were not for these following passages, (Jer. 30:11, 31:35-37, 33:20-26, Ezek. chapter 37 and Am. 9:15) I would lack a basis for stating that Romans chapter 11 implies land restoration to still be in effect. If Israel did not have such a central role in the book of Revelation, no one could ever say that they still have a significant role in history that is yet to be played out.


If God is faithful in keeping the least of His promises and fulfilling the least of all prophecies, we can have confidence in the greater.

God's people are not those outside of the new covenant. In fact, those outside of the new covenant inherit nothing with those of the new covenant

Galatians 4:30 But what does the Scripture say? “Expel the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.

Paul states only a remnant of natural Israel would be saved.
Romans 9;27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the Israelites is like the sand of the sea, only the remnant will be saved.

We already know that the land promise made to Abraham and his offspring was to Jesus. The land promise is found fulfilled in Christ having all authority over and ON EARTH, for the earth is his and the fullness there of.

Galatians 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many, but “and to your seed,”g meaning One, who is Christ.

So please show where in the NT that land restoration is for those in the new covenant.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But from where does a King who walks among men rule? Upon where does He place His throne?

Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, it cannot be upon this rotten, sin-cursed, world, which will be burned up on "the day of the Lord", when He, "comes as a thief".

What did Paul say in Galatians 4:25-26?

What did the author of the Book of Hebrews say in Hebrews 12:22-24?

What did Jesus tell the woman at the well, when she said earthly Jerusalem is the place to worship, in John 4:20-24?


Peter, Paul, the author of Hebrews, and Jesus, all agree, but they do not agree with you.

.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Jesus stated, in regards to the temple destruction, that Jerusalem would be trampled by the gentiles until the times of the gentiles was fulfilled (luke 21:24).

Revelation states Jerusalem is trampled by the nations for 42 months (revelation 11:2).
From the time of the initiation of the Jewish Roman war (66ad) until the destruction of the temple (70ad) was a total of 3.5 years (42 months). The earthly old covenant Jerusalem was forever cast out.


As far as holding jurisdiction over Jerusalem is concerned the time of the Gentiles came to an end in 1967 when the Jews took full control of the city. Before then, the Gentiles occupied Jerusalem for far longer than the 42 months you equate with the four year Jewish/Roman war, and if the earthly Jerusalem is forever cast out, why does it continue to exist?


Paul states the earthly Jerusalem represents the old covenant, while the heavenly Jerusalem represents the new covenant. Paul adds the those of the earthly Jerusalem will never inherit with those of the heavenly Jerusalem (galatians 4:24-31).

Under the new covenant, we no longer come to the earthly Jerusalem which was cast out in 70ad, we come to the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22). And as Jerusalem under the new covenant is no longer the earthly one, it can no longer be trampled.


But the heavenly Jerusalem has not yet come to us and until it does, we will be going to the earthly Jerusalem to await the heavenly Jerusalem which we will not see until after the new heavens and the new earth are created and again, if the presently existing Jerusalem was cast out in 70 A.D., why does it continue to exist still?


And this is related how to land restoration?


How else could Jerusalem have a central role in this forthcoming event?


There seems to be a misunderstanding based on your response. It is not the gentiles as a whole that Paul is calling the 10 northern tribes, that is not what I meant and that would be incorrect.

Paul quotes hosea 1:10 and 2:23, which is about the northern kingdom of Israel, as being fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles with the Jews in the vessels of mercy. How is that possible?


He draws no relation between the ten northern tribes and the Gentiles at all and while the cited passage of Hosea appear to be about the ten northern tribes, Paul has told us that it is not. What He does say is that the Gentiles have now been included with the Jews in the vessels of mercy and cited Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 as evidence that God had the Gentiles in mind before hand.


1.) the divorced, exiled, and scattered northern kingdom became "not my people" (hosea 1:9). Thus they became as the gentiles, which were already not God's people.

By God including the gentiles, of whom some, but not all, descended from the exiled and divorced northern kingdom of Israel, with the Jews in the vessels of mercy, he fulfills his promise to the northern kingdom (hosea 1:10)


But they did not become Gentiles and what Gentiles descended from them?


So the northern kingdom was mixing with the nations prior to the exile (hosea 7:8), and then all of the sudden started mixing less after their deportation and resettling throughout the Assyrian empire?


Is the Assyrian empire the only empire and kingdom throughout which they were dispersed?


Can you elaborate on this?


Did not the Babylonians leave some people behind after taking the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem into captivity?


This again assumes that revelation 7 is literal and not a symbolic vision.


How could Revelation 7 be anything but literal?


I have no disagreements with Israel's wandering in the desert for 40 years prior to entering the promise land foreshadowing 1st century Israel's 40 year time period (30ad-70ad) entering into God's Sabbath rest.


How could the forty year wandering in the desert be foreshadowing 1st century's 40 year time period which ended with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple?


However, we also know that the nation of Israel foreshadowed Christ. For Just as Israel was called out of Egypt, so was Christ.

Hosea 11:1-2 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. But the more I called Israel, the farther they departed from Me.

Matthew 2:14-15 So he got up, took the Child and His mother by night, and withdrew to Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called My Son.

I'm simply stating that the nation of Israel foreshadowed Christ, with the BIG difference in where the the nation of Israel failed, Jesus fulfilled in every way.

Jesus was called out the Egypt, so was Israel
Jesus was tested in the wilderness, so was Israel
Jesus was under the law, so was Israel
Jesus became the curse of the law, Israel received the curse of the law
Jesus rose again, Israel (those who believed) was made alive through Christ

These parallels are known as types and antitypes. The new testament is full of these parallels.


Israel's exile from Egypt is only regarded as a foreshadow of Christ returning from Egypt after a brief exile because of a threat on His life, but only because the Gospels say so. As for the rest, they do not qualify as foreshadows because they are never called foreshadows. If anything at all they are contrasts between the failures of Israel and the successes of our Lord.


God's people are not those outside of the new covenant. In fact, those outside of the new covenant inherit nothing with those of the new covenant


Yet it is because of their eventual receiving of the New Covenant that the Jews retain their inheritance.


Paul states only a remnant of natural Israel would be saved.



That remnant being large enough to continue abiding as a viable people and nation. (Zech. 13:9)



We already know that the land promise made to Abraham and his offspring was to Jesus. The land promise is found fulfilled in Christ having all authority over and ON EARTH, for the earth is his and the fullness there of.


Does He also not have joint-heirs?


So please show where in the NT that land restoration is for those in the new covenant.


Land restoration pertains to Israel only. No other nation or people are given such a promise.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, it cannot be upon this rotten, sin-cursed, world, which will be burned up on "the day of the Lord", when He, "comes as a thief".

What did Paul say in Galatians 4:25-26?

What did the author of the Book of Hebrews say in Hebrews 12:22-24?

What did Jesus tell the woman at the well, when she said earthly Jerusalem is the place to worship, in John 4:20-24?


Peter, Paul, the author of Hebrews, and Jesus, all agree, but they do not agree with you.

.


If the reign of Christ were to be established upon the earth today, it would not be nearly as rotten and sin cursed as it is now.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.