temple destroyed??

Originally posted by GTX
Parts of the temple still stand and is being rebuilt as we speak. When the temple is completely rebuilt Christ will return. The events of 70 AD are minor and do not represent Christs return.

Click to expand...

GTX, They can knock themselves out and build all the temples they want because it has absolutely nothing to do with prophecy! Is a new re-built temple supposed to impress Christ or something? Or are they buliding this new temple to house the one world boogy man, THE ANTI-CHRIST! Oh my, run for the hills y'all! You futurists are so wrapped up in the physical just like the first century Jews, you are making the same major mistake they are making by looking for your puny little physical kingdom that is nowhere to be found in scripture! Why don't start taking Jesus at His word, "the kingdom of God is within you" ? Or is it in you? Jesus is either in you or He is not in you! If He is in you? Guess what? His kingdom is with us while we are still in our physical bodies! The apostle's rejoiced in that, so why can't we do the same?
And all of God's people said, aaaaaaamen!!!!

Originally posted by gwyyn
Yea, I'm saved by Jesus's death on the cross. However who did he come for in the first place. Wasn't he THE messiah, that the Jews ignored. So I still hold firm to the belief that God has not forgotten his promises to Abraham, Moses, David ect.

Click to expand...

gwyyn, from your comments I can't say how often you ever read the book of Hebrews. Yes we are saved by Christs death, burial, and resurrection and salvation was completed at His Parousa or second appearing, presence, contrary to what we have been traditionally taught the bible never says anything about a 'second coming' it refers to 'the day of the Lord' meaning judgement, and judgement is what God poured out on Jerusalem in AD70. Sorry to get off subject slightly, but yes you can say the Jews ignored the many warning Christ gave to the Jews during the Olivet Discourse and God gave national Israel plenty of time to repent (40 years) and accept Christ as their Messiah but they continued to reject Him even to this very day! They are no longer considered God's chosen people, just look at some of the writings of Paul Rom2:28-29; Gal3;28-29 to name a few..... We are the true Israel the bible is referring to. There is only one gospel not two! The dispensational teaching is that there is a separate gospel for the the Jews to be saved and it is called Zionism and that my dear sister is a false gospel! If Paul walked on this earth today he would be considered an anti-semetic for what he says in Rom2:28,29 ...... I hope this helps to shed some light on the subject and I don't claim to have all the answers and I was in the same postition you are in when I was holding to the futuristic views of that man made doctine that is nowhere to be found in scripture..... Blessings sister....

But what about Romans 11. Israel's rejection is not total.

"I say then Hath God cast away his people? God forbid For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
God hat not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of El-li-as? how me maketh intercession to God against Israel,saying."

Also
Romans 11:11
I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

These verses TO ME show that God still has a purpose for the Jews, they are not forgotten.

Click to expand...

Hi Gwyyn, good scriptures.

You mentioned that Israel's rejection was not total. I agree, but in the very same letter Paul declares that "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel". He also states that "They which are the children of the flesh, THESE ARE NOT the children of God: but the children of the promise ARE counted for the seed."

To be counted as a part of "Israel" according to Paul was on the condition of faith, whether Jew or Gentile. Gwyyn, a child "of the flesh" of Abraham did not mean they were a child "of the promise", as Paul clearly states in Romans 9.

God's purpose for the Jews was that they were to be the ones who proclaimed the Messiah to the rest of the fallen world, as Peter, John, Paul and many other Jews did, and as Gentiles we are grateful for their sacrifices. That was their purpose. God did not reject all Jews, obviously because the first members of the Church were Jewish. But not all Israel was of Israel, and only those who have faith in Christ are considered "Israel" because they are the only children "of the promise", as Paul declares in Romans 9.

Once again, the Children of Abraham in the flesh are NOT "children of God" according to Paul, but the "children of the PROMISE" are, and they become so through faith in Christ, not physical lineage(Romans 9:8)

So Gwyyn, do you understand that Romans 9 and 11 go hand in hand; God did not cast away all Jews (like Paul, Peter, John, etc - Romans 11), but only those with faith in Christ are considered "Israel" and "children of the promise".

In Christ,

Acts6:5

Originally posted by gwyyn
yea the Kingdom is in us spiritually, but the Kingdom will also be here physically. Or have ya'll totally threw out the battle of Armegeddon, Gog and Magog,ect

Click to expand...

I fight those battles every day, but I can't possibly win them on my own. Thank God that Jesus won the ultimate battle at Calvary!

BTW, the Megiddo valley, near the plain of Esdraelon, has been the sight of numerous battles throughout history, including Pharaoh Tuthmosis III in 1468 B.C.; Israel under Deborah and Barak against the Philistines (Judges 4-5); Ahaziah during the revolt of Jehu (2 Kings 9); and Pharaoh Neco and King Josiah (2 Kings 23:28ff). More recently, Lord Allenby's army fought there during World War I.

To the original readers of Revelation, "Armageddon" would have been a familiar image (as would Gog and Magog), calling to mind a place of decisive encounter between good and evil.

Gwynn,

Acts and franklin have answered you properly...the way I look at it is that a jew, muslim, moorman, hindu, etc. etc. can all be part of what the Bible calls children of the promise by (and only by) excepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior...

Hey Acts and franklin what do you think of the verses(don't have my bible with me...but) that talk about how the taking away of the promise from the "physical jews" for the good of the Gentile's, but that the coming back into the fold by the Jews will be glorious...has this happened in your opinion...

Ok the Jews of those day's were punished by God's wrath with the revolt/war before 70 AD. So what about today??

Click to expand...

Hi Gwyyn,

I'll try to answer this as simply as I can. Any Jew today (a child of Abraham after the flesh) is a "child of the promise" if he or she has faith in Christ. Any Jew today that does not have faith in Christ is not a "child of the promise". All Israel is not of Israel. Only those with faith in Christ, whether Jew or Gentile, are Israel and only those with faith in Christ are children of the promise and children of God. The scriptures I gave you in Romans 9 is a good place to start.

Realize that in that chapter, Paul teaches that the"children of the flesh" of Abraham are NOT the "children of the promise". He states that being of the "seed"(lineage) of Abraham does not make one a "child" of Abraham(v.7). Can a seed of Abraham become a child? Yes, certainly! But does being a seed of Abraham demand that God view him as a child of Abraham? No, and that's according to the Word of God through Paul.

Hope this helps.

Jenlu, the reference is vaguely familiar but I can't recall it offhand. I could easily see it fulfilled in the 1st Century, but I'd have to find it to make sure.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

Originally posted by gwyyn
yea the Kingdom is in us spiritually, but the Kingdom will also be here physically. Or have ya'll totally threw out the battle of Armegeddon, Gog and Magog,ect

Click to expand...

gwyyn, I dont mean this the wrong way but you are making the most common mistake that all futurists make and that is removing the scriptures completely out of it's historical setting! The Bible says absolutely nothing about a battle of Armegeddon that is so traditionally taught by end times, end of the world pundits like Hal Lindsey and others! When your reading those chapters in Rev and when it talks about Armegeddon you have to know a little bit about Jewish history before making wild judgements within the context of these passages! The Roman armies that John the revelator is referring to here gathered their troops at Armegeddon before they surrounded Jerusalem which totally lines up with the words of Christ in the Olivet Discourse, the scriptures never contradict itself! To say this is thousands of years future from when it was written is a total contradiction of scripture. It all has to do with the final judgements on national Israel in AD70 which include Christ's Parousia. Blessings sister.....

Originally posted by gwyyn
So I guess I'm still gonna be asking the same question??


Ok the Jews of those day's were punished by God's wrath with the revolt/war before 70 AD. So what about today??

I mean this may seem really stupid to you, but I see God's hand in the nation of Israel today. I mean what has kept Isreal from being wiped off the face of the map already. How many allies does she have, hmmmm one for sure that I can think of. I mean is it totally ignored that today's events are all also lining up with prophecy?

Click to expand...

As long as the people who follow the Jewish religion and claim to be descendants of Abraham "according to the flesh" continue in their disobedience (that is, their denial of Jesus' Messiahship), God will continue to deal with them in the same way: in judgment. Why do you think the land over which they struggle with the Palestinians never seems to have any rest from bloody conflict? Simple answer: the Israelis (Jews) and the Palestinians (Muslims) are both under God's judgment for rejecting Christ.

The final outcome of history is the victory of Christ and his Church over all his enemies. I fail to see how an ongoing battle between two groups of infidels somehow "lines up with prophecy," except to serve as a vivid and horrible reminder of the divinely decreed consequences of rejecting God's Messiah: death and destruction in both this world and the next.

Acts...I'll find it when I get home and get back to you on it...may start a thread with it...unless, franklin, Parousia, etc...have an answer and can quote it now...

Ok if we read the bible as a historical document, then aren't we not reading the bible as the Living Word.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the questions, Gwyyn. No buzzer of wrongness here! Just answering your questions, that's all.

Just because prophecies were fulfilled in the past does not make the Word of God "dead", in my opinion. Plenty of prophecies in the Word have been fulfilled, and yet all of God's Word is living. To me, the scriptures are "living" because of the life changing power of God that speaks through them by Christ and the Holy Spirit, no matter how long ago they were written or fulfilled (whether it's the book of Genesis or the book of Revelation).

A great deal of the OT IS historical narrative in fact (Genesis, the books of Law, 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, etc.) We can consider those portions of scripture to be "living" and "life changing", even though they are historical narratives, can't we? "Fulfilled" or "historical" scripture does not equate "dead" scripture, or else half of the OT would be dead words. As a matter of fact, most of the scripture the 1st Century church had was the OT. The scriptures that the Apostles quoted from were the OT.

The OT and NT can be the "living Word of God" for us even though it is fulfilled, just like the fulfilled, historical narratives in much of the OT was still the "living Word of God" to the 1st Century Church.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

Acts: I found it...

"Because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make Israel jealous. Now if their transgressionmeans riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much more riches will their fullness be!...For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" I believe it Romans 11...

What ya think...

Originally posted by gwyyn
Ok if we read the bible as a historical document, then aren't we not reading the bible as the Living Word.

Click to expand...

Yes, and if we want it to be a truly "Living Word" for us today, it is imperative that we understand how it was a "Living Word" for its original readers. In other words, we have to identify with the worldview of those to whom the Scriptures were first written. We cannot impose a 21st century American/Western worldview upon a book written against the backdrop of a 1st century Greco/Roman/Hebraic culture. To do so would be to deny that the Bible is indeed the "Living Word." It was as much a "Living Word" to its original hearers as it was to the Church Fathers as it was to the Reformers as it was to the Wesleys as it is to us today. The Bible was not written to lay dormant for thousands of years until "we" came along and found ourselves in a "unique" position to "finally" understand what Jesus, Peter, John, Paul and James were talking about.

Yet, that is exactly what we assume if we look to people like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey to "interpret" the Scriptures for us. Nearly two thousand years of interpretive tradition precede such modern-day "commentators" and the overwhelming majority (if not outright unanimity) of that tradition is diametrically opposed to their modern-day speculative musings. I am far more confident in Chrysostom, Athanasius, Ambrose and those who follow in their tradition such as Aquinas, Luther, Calvin and Wesley than I am in these contemporary pretenders.

Hey Jenlu!

"Because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make Israel jealous. Now if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much more riches will their fullness be!...For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" I believe it Romans 11...

What ya think...

Click to expand...

Hmmmm, good one. First off, let's look at verses 11-12. Compare the "fulness" of Israel in that passage to the "fulness" of the Gentiles in verse 25. "Fulness" does not imply "everyone, but only a "multitude, or full number" of Jews. Just like there was to be certain number of elect Gentiles, there was to be a certain number of elect Jews, and this constituted "Israel". At the time Paul wrote Romans (around 57AD), some Jews had embrassed the faith, while others were to come in the near future.

To support my "fulness does not mean ALL" argument just look at the preceeding verses that lead up to verses 11-12. Verse 2 states that "God hath not cast away his people which He foreknew". Paul then uses biblical history as an example of this by describing the story of Elijah. In Elijah's day, who were the people that God "foreknew" and did not "cast away"? Was it the entire nation of fleshly Jews, based on their lineage? No - God's "people" that He "foreknew" only consisted of the "remnant according to the election of grace(v.5)". Not the entire nation, but a multitude of 7,000. The rest were not God's people.

So in verses 11-12, God declares that there was to be a "fulness" of the Jews, composed of the remnant elect and those who had once been blinded. But again, the "fulness" of the Jews does not mean ALL Jews, in the same way that the fulness of the Gentiles does not mean ALL Gentiles. There was to be a certain number of both at that time, and from a preterist perspective, God accomplished His purposes through the elect, both Jewish and Gentile, within the 1st Century.

Now, verse 15 continues the train of thought in verse 12. But read verse 14: "If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save SOME of them". Paul certainly did not believe "all" would, only that "some" would be saved. Verse 23 shows that Jews being "graffed" back in depends on their "belief" or lack thereof. If they do not believe they will not be graffed. The condition for graffing is belief, not their status as the "seed of Abraham".

That's my take on it anyway.
______________________________________________________________________________


PS: The objections I read to posts like mine basically say that Jews are "God's chosen people" and that God "has a purpose" for physical Jews. Biblically, the Jews were "chosen" for the purpose of bringing salvation to the world. Well, Christ has paid for our salvation, and the Church (filled with both Jews and Gentiles) have spread the Gospel all over the earth for the last 2000 years.

So my question is, now that salvation has been offered to all people, what exactly is this "purpose" for fleshly Jews you keep talking about? If it isn't spreading the messege of salvation (which born-again Jews are doing right now anyway) then what is this "purpose" you think hasn't occurred yet?

In Christ,

Acts6:5

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. "

2 Timothy 3:16,17

If we truly believe what the Bible teaches, then we are to believe all of the scripture. We can't pick and choose what to believe and what not to believe. If all scripture is the word of a living God, then I don't see how those words could be called dead? That would mean that they weren't useful for anything.

"So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ."

Romans 10:17

Obviously from this passage faith comes from hearing the word of God - that alone would prove that the Bible isn't a dead work, for how can your faith come from something that's dead?

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
Yet, that is exactly what we assume if we look to people like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey to "interpret" the Scriptures for us. Nearly two thousand years of interpretive tradition precede such modern-day "commentators" and the overwhelming majority (if not outright unanimity) of that tradition is diametrically opposed to their modern-day speculative musings. I am far more confident in Chrysostom, Athanasius, Ambrose and those who follow in their tradition such as Aquinas, Luther, Calvin and Wesley than I am in these contemporary pretenders.

Click to expand...

I don't believe that you should let anyone interpret the scriptures for you and decide what you should believe. Are they going to be held accountable for what you believe when you stand before God facing your judgement? No, you will - the only person who is responsible for what you believe is you. So I think that if you are looking for someone else to interpret the Bible for you - no matter when they did - that you're not doing what they Bible tells you to do:

"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth."

2 Timothy 2:15

This says that we are to be diligent in our study of the word of God - not diligent in someone else's. Now I don't think that means hearing what others have to say is wrong, for the Bible tells us to build up and edify one another also - you just have to read and make sure that you really believe what the Bible says, not what someone else has taught you. I don't know if that's what you meant by your comment or not - but either way I feel that this is important enough to be said.

I'd be interested in hearing from some of you concerning this question I asked on my #56 post:

The objections I read to posts like mine basically say that Jews are "God's chosen people" and that God "has a purpose" for physical Jews. Biblically, the Jews were "chosen" for the "purpose" of bringing salvation to the world. Well, Christ has paid for our salvation, and the Church (filled with both Jews and Gentiles) have spread the Gospel all over the earth for the last 2000 years.

So my question is, now that salvation has been offered to all people, what exactly is this "purpose" for fleshly Jews many of you think hasn't been fulfilled yet? If it isn't spreading the messege of salvation (which born-again Jews are doing right now anyway) then what is this "purpose" you think only a nation of born-again, fleshly Jews has yet to fulfill?
In Christ,

Acts6:5

Hi all!

Hmmm...Well we (DW, myself & DaBoyz) had a very nice Shabbat (i.e. the Sabbath, which for us, runs from sundown on Friday to nightfall on Saturday). We went to synagogue, slept , ate , etc.

Now lessee here...Acts6:5, as one of those "fleshy Jews" (Hmm, I do have a few extra pounds 'round my midsection which qualify me as "fleshy" ) you referred to, I would respectfully submit that our purpose is what is has always been: to be a light unto the nations by virtue of our being a kingdom of priests & a holy nation (running a few Tanakh verses together there) which we will be if we adhere to the Torah which God gave to Moses our Teacher. We must sanctify the Name of God in the world. Our "purpose" is not "fulfilled" nor will it ever be even after the Messiah comes.

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv