THE TRUE "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY/SUPERSESSIONISM" OF THE BIBLE

[nolidad]

I personally never called Hagee or anyone else a false brother.

However, my bro Paul mentioned being in danger from false brothers in 2 Corin 26....

John 8:44
`Ye out of a father the Devil are and the desires/epiqumiaV <1939> of the father of ye, ye are willing to be doing.

Luke 21:12
“But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons<5438>.
You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name’s sake.

2 Corinthians 11
22 Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I. 23 Are they servants of Christ? I am speaking like I am out of my mind, but I am so much more:
in harder labor,
in more imprisonments,[Revelation 2:10]
in worse beatings,
in frequent danger of death.
24 By Judeans five times forty minus one.
25 Three times I was beaten with rods,
once I was stoned,
three times I was shipwrecked. I spent a night and a day in the open sea.
26 In my frequent journeys, I have been in dangers of rivers
and to dangers of bandits,
in dangers from fellow race,
from the Gentiles,
in city and in wilderness,
in danger on the sea
and to dangers in false brothers,
27 in labor and toil and often without sleep,
in hunger and thirst,
and often without food, in cold and exposure.
==================================
Revelation 2:10 "tribulation 10 days"

Revelation 2:10
No yet one thou be fearing! which-things thou are being about to be suffering
Behold! the Devil is being about to be casting ye into a prison<5438> that ye may be being tried. [John 8:44 Luke 21:12 2 Corinthians 11:22]
And ye shall be having Tribulation<2347> of ten days,
Be thou becoming faithful until death! and I shall be giving to thee the crown of the life.

Well as you did jnot cite who said it- you either wrote it yourself or approve of it!

So you do believe Hagee is not a Christian I guess.

BTW still waiting for you to show me the fulfillment of the seals, bowls and trumpets by 70AD.

 

[BABerean2]

But Preterism of any shade requires a God of limited power to make its theology work and also requires ignoring the full counsel of scripture.

Mat 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the temple, and his disciples came near to show him the buildings of the temple,
Mat 24:2 and Jesus said to them, 'Do ye not see all these? verily I say to you, There may not be left here a stone upon a stone, that shall not be thrown down.'

Is the second Jewish temple still standing in Jerusalem?
If it is not, Christ was a "Partial-Preterist" in the Olivet Discourse.

.

 

[BABerean2]

Well you do a lot of dancing and implying but do not hit the truth at all. Replacement theology as practiced by covenant theologians for the most part rejects that god will have anything to do in th efuture with the nation of Israel (as a people), and that all the covenant promises made to Israel apart from the Mosaic Covenant (Old Covenant) are now allegorically given to the church!

Most covenant theologians forget that the Abrahamic, Palestinian and Davidic Covenants are exclusive apart from the Mosaic covenant and that two of these were made over 400 years prior to the Old Covenant.

Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.



“The Prophecy of Daniel 9” by Dr. Kelly Varner.

.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.
“The Prophecy of Daniel 9” by Dr. Kelly Varner.

.

Agree...............

 

[Contenders Edge]

Mat 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the temple, and his disciples came near to show him the buildings of the temple,
Mat 24:2 and Jesus said to them, 'Do ye not see all these? verily I say to you, There may not be left here a stone upon a stone, that shall not be thrown down.'

Is the second Jewish temple still standing in Jerusalem?
If it is not, Christ was a "Partial-Preterist" in the Olivet Discourse.

.

And a third temple would prove that Christ is not a partial-preterist but has more in common with Dispensationalists; the re-establishment of Israel clearly setting the stage for a third temple.

 

[jgr]

The intended point was that in order to determine what the established consensus, if any, was on any given doctrine in any generation, the stated positions of many people within the Church would have to be examined, not just one or even two and while that would be a worthy undertaking, it would be a time consuming process.

It matters not how many people are consulted or how much time is consumed, for there was virtually undisputed unanimity across the centuries, from the second to the eighteenth, that the Church is the New Testament Israel of God.

From the aforecited ECFs Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, to the post-Reformation's

John Wesley:

Galatians 6
16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

And as many as walk according to this rule — 1. Glorying only in the cross of Christ. 2. Being crucified to the world. And, 3. Created anew. Peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel, that is, the Church, of God - Which consists of all those, and those only, of every nation and kindred, who walk by this rule.

The message was clear, consistent, unfailing, and unanimous.

Even those known to be historical defenders of the faith did not agree with one another regarding certain doctrines and that the firm establishment and mainstream acceptance of what is identified as Preterist doctrine was accredited to Origen and to a greater extent Augustine, gives clear indication that doctrines similar to those associated with Dispensationalism were still accepted and taught by many within the Church beforehand. Dispensationalism is nothing new nor recent within Church history but was suppressed and out of the mainstream for several centuries.

There was no disagreement regarding the identity of the Church.

Among recognized defenders of the true faith, from the second century to the eighteenth, it was unfailingly declared to be, and is, the true Israelitic race (Justin Martyr), the seed of Abraham (Irenaeus), and the New Testament Israel of God (Wesley).

Amen.

 

[jgr]

Well you do a lot of dancing and implying but do not hit the truth at all. Replacement theology as practiced by covenant theologians for the most part rejects that god will have anything to do in th efuture with the nation of Israel (as a people), and that all the covenant promises made to Israel apart from the Mosaic Covenant (Old Covenant) are now allegorically given to the church!

Most covenant theologians forget that the Abrahamic, Palestinian and Davidic Covenants are exclusive apart from the Mosaic covenant and that two of these were made over 400 years prior to the Old Covenant.

How many Old Testaments are there?

My Bible contains one. Yours?

Why are the Abrahamic, Palestinian and Davidic Covenants not separate individual Old Testaments as well?

Because they are encapsulated as multiple bequests to the one Heir of the one Old Testament, in the same way as your own one last Will and Testament contains multiple bequests to your heir(s).

Who is the one Heir of all of the Old Testament bequests?

Scripture leaves no doubt.

2 Corinthians 1
20 For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

Hebrews 1
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds.


Get with the covenant program.

 

[Contenders Edge]

It matters not how many people are consulted or how much time is consumed, for there was virtually undisputed unanimity across the centuries, from the second to the eighteenth, that the Church is the New Testament Israel of God.

It does if you want to prove that there was unanimity and three sources across the several centuries are not enough to settle the matter; not when there are other sources to examine and there are many.

And as many as walk according to this rule — 1. Glorying only in the cross of Christ. 2. Being crucified to the world. And, 3. Created anew. Peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel, that is, the Church, of God - Which consists of all those, and those only, of every nation and kindred, who walk by this rule.

This may very well have been the prevailing view of the day, but the text out the cited passage from Galatians itself does not say that the Israel of God is the Church. That is an interpretation that has been imposed upon the text and just because a certain doctrine may have been a prevailing doctrine at a certain time in history, that does not mean that doctrine was sound.

That is why the text itself has the final say, not a mere interpretation of it, for the text was designed to speak for itself and be its own interpreter.

 

[jgr]

It does if you want to prove that there was unanimity and while on the surface there may appeared and three sources across the several centuries are not enough to settle the matter; not when there are other sources to examine and there are many.





This may very well have been the prevailing view of the day, but the text out the cited passage from Galatians itself does not say that the Israel of God is the Church. That is an interpretation that has been imposed upon the text and just because a certain doctrine may have been a prevailing doctrine at a certain time in history, that does not mean that doctrine was sound.

That is why the text itself has the final say, not a mere interpretation of it, for the text was designed to speak for itself and be its own interpreter.

We await the name of a recognized historical defender of the true faith who imposed a dispensational interpretation which contradicted the interpretation of the cited defenders.

 

[BABerean2]

This may very well have been the prevailing view of the day, but the text out the cited passage from Galatians itself does not say that the Israel of God is the Church.

Either the author of the Book of Hebrews is confused in Hebrews 8:6-13, or you are confused, if you think the Church and Israel can be kept separated.


Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.

.

 

[Contenders Edge]

We await the name of a recognized historical defender of the true faith who imposed a dispensational interpretation which contradicted the interpretation of the cited defenders.

We could probably find some by taking the time to research, but that you only cited two names from that century tells me that you are no expert on that period of time yourself.

 

[jgr]

We could probably find some by taking the time to research, but that you only cited two names from that century tells me that you are no expert on that period of time yourself.

Awaiting.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Either the author of the Book of Hebrews is confused in Hebrews 8:6-13, or you are confused, if you think the Church and Israel can be kept separated.


Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.

.

The Apostles kept the two separate from a literal standpoint which is the Church is almost never called Israel as far as the scriptures are concerned and we are almost never called Jews. There is no declaration in scripture of the Church ever replacing Israel as a nation and people. The only time those titles were applied to us was for the purpose of making clear that it took more than just being Jewish by blood to be saved. One had to be a Jew in spirit and that only happens by faith.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Awaiting.

I admit that I am no expert on Church history but I do know this: Origen, and to a greater extent, Augustine have been credited making what is called replacement theology and other tenets of Preterism the prevailing view for several centuries. Why would that be the case if the debate over whether or not the Church replaced Israel as a nation and people had already been settled? Why weren't Justin Martyr and Ireanius given credit for that?

 

[jgr]

How many figures from the second century can you actually name yourself? You have yet to prove your expertise. I will admit that I am not.

I've named two.

You've named none.

Awaiting.

 

[BABerean2]

The Apostles kept the two separate from a literal standpoint which is the Church is almost never called Israel as far as the scriptures are concerned and we are almost never called Jews. There is no declaration in scripture of the Church ever replacing Israel as a nation and people.

The word "almost" in your post above reveals the truth.

You are very well aware that Peter addressed the crowd as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost.
You are also very well aware that about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant on that day.
They were a part of the "remnant" of Israel found in Romans 9:27, and Romans 11:5.

The ultimate fulfillment of Israel is found in Matthew 1:1, and Luke 24:25-27, and Galatians 3:16.


.

 

[Contenders Edge]

I've named two.

You've named none.

Awaiting.

You still haven't told me why Origen and Augstine were given credit for establishing the doctrine of replacement theology and the two sources you cited were not.

 

[jgr]

You still haven't told me why Origen and Augstine were given credit for establishing the doctrine of replacement theology and the two sources you cited were not.

Awaiting.

 

[Contenders Edge]

The word "almost" in your post above reveals the truth.

You are very well aware that Peter addressed the crowd as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost.
You are also very well aware that about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant on that day.
They were a part of the "remnant" of Israel found in Romans 9:27, and Romans 11:5.

The ultimate fulfillment of Israel is found in Matthew 1:1, and Luke 24:25-27, and Galatians 3:16.


.

They were a part of the remnant of Romans 11:5 which is the remnant within the nation, but not Romans 9:27 which is applied on a national scale; that remnant being what is left of the nation when they are saved (Zech. 13:9) and the ultimate fulfillment has to fulfill everything that the scriptures have said about Israel which includes permanent land restoration, (Ezek. 37:25, Am. 9:15) an everlasting existence, (Jer. 30:11, 31:35-37, 33:20-26) their spiritual transformation, (Rom. 11:26) full restoration of blessings, (Deut. 30:1-10) and status of prominence above all other nations. (Is. 54:3, Zech. 8:19-23)

 

[Contenders Edge]

Awaiting.

Awaiting an answer as to why the sources you cited are not given credit for making the doctrines of Preterism the prevailing view in the Church for several centuries instead of Origen and Augustine who lived during the third and fourth centuries.