THE TRUE "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY/SUPERSESSIONISM" OF THE BIBLE
- Thread starter LittleLambofJesus
- Start date
- Status
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
What Jesus was saying is that it would no longer matter where someone decides to worship God as long as they did so in spirit and in truth. Whether or not a Temple is present does not in any way change that except in the minds of those who do not have faith in the finality of the Words of Christ. After Christ rose from the dead, His followers were not required to worship at the Temple when it was standing, nor did its destruction affect their ability to worship God.
And if we were to witness the erection of another Temple today, we would still worship Christ in the same way as we have always done: In spirit in truth no matter where we are at.
And this divine punishment is going to affect the entire world and not only that, man in his wickedness, at a time when evil is least restrained, is going to be carrying out death and destruction of his own which is why if Christ does not return, all life will perish. That is why it is written in Daniel 12, and in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark that there will be distress such as never been experienced in the world at any time before nor after.
No, it does not contradict my position but it does pose problems for yours in that Jesus did not return to rule over the kingdoms of the world. If He did, then I am very disappointed in how He is ruling because of the evil, unbelief, and suffering that is increasingly rampant in this world because the scripture tells us that during His reign upon the earth that the evil and unbelief that we see today will be almost non-existent then in comparison to now. In fact there will be such peace that even the animals will not be killing one another, but that is not the world that we live in.
Plus the account of Luke 21 and Revelation 11 cannot be the same event for several reasons; John foretells of happenings in Revelation 11 that were neither foretold in Luke nor took place in 70 A.D.
That is not what Christ was talking about. He was talking about His return for His Church and to reign upon the earth. Christ still has not returned as the scriptures said that He would and whether or not John is still alive and kept in obscurity to this day is anyone's guess, but scripture leaves room for that possibility except in the minds of those who think God is limited in His ability to fulfill prophecy exactly as He said that He would.
If whether the besieging armies and the AOD are the same is up for debate, then so is the timing of the appearance of the AOD since there is no record of a man in 70 A.D. doing the things in the Temple that the man tied to the AOD will do.
Only the building was meant to be a permanent throne room for God on the earth. The tabernacle was only a temporary dwelling place.
Paul was using an analogy rather than an interpretation and we know this when we read the verses preceding the ones you cited which state "Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers", (2 Cor. 6:14) going on to tell us why.
The NT tells us how to interpret the OT visions and parables when it explains them and once again, the presence of another Temple would not contradict the words of Jesus in that He was simply saying that the place of worship does not matter so long as the worship is done in spirit and truth. It was true before the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., it is true today, and it will remain true even if we should see another Temple erected.
The New Testament does not tell us everything about the Millennial reign which is why it is important to see what the full counsel of scripture says about any given matter and that requires searching out both the Old and the New Testament scriptures.
You just mentioned that the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to the merchant seeking precious pearls. If you know that much, then the lesson of that parable should not be so hard to understand.
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
If the reformers had, they would have known that he had not yet come upon the scene but that Rome was but an institution and an authority within whom that spirit was at work.
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
We are not debating the rapture. I was just providing you with references to start out with and from which you might able to locate the primary sources or at least sources as close to the primary you can find.
Upvote
0
And the Reformers did.
Samples:
Martin Luther (1483 - 1546)
"nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)
John Calvin (1509 - 1564)
"Though it be admitted that Rome was once the mother of all Churches, yet from the time when it began to be the seat of Antichrist it has ceased to be what it was before. Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt .. I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol.3, p.149)
Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Works by Cranmer, vol.1, pp.6-7)
If you disbelieve, provide contrary quotes.
By recognized Reformers, of course.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
claninja
Well-Known Member
I see where Jesus stated the time "is coming, and now is" for worshiping in spirit in truth. I do not see where Jesus state the time "is coming, and now is" where worshipers will no longer worship in Jerusalem, to substantiate your claim.
John 4:21-24 Believe Me, woman,” Jesus replied, “a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him. God is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.”
From the book of acts we can see that worshipers who believed in jesus were zealous for the law and continued to worship in Jerusalem and the temple until it was destroyed.
Gentiles however, were not required to follow all aspects of the law according to the Jerusalem counsel.
The divine judgment I am talking about is 70 ad, when Israel was leveled to the ground for not recognizing the time of God's visitation and for all the righteous blood shed on earth
Matthew 23:34-36 Because of this, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and others you will flog in your synagogues and persecute in town after town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I tell you, all these things will come upon this generation.
Luke 19:43-44 For the days will come upon you when your enemies will barricade you and surround you and hem you in on every side. They will level you to the ground—you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation from God.d ”
It does contradict your position, the trampling of Jerusalem in luke 21 ends with the coming of Christ. the trampling of Jerusalem in revelation 11 ends with the coming of Christ. thus they are the same event. If 42 months is literal, as you say it is, it contradicts your position.
Jesus is already the ruler over the kings of the earth.
revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
Jesus reigns while his enemies exist.
1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
Just because you don't like how Jesus reigns, doesn't mean He doesn't reign.
So you disbelieve the words of Jesus? You literally state Christ has not returned as the scriptures said he would.
Incorrect. If the AOD was a sign for those to flee Jerusalem and the armies surround Jerusalem were a sign to feel Jerusalem, then they occurred around the same time, IF they are not the same thing.
If I told you that when you see the fireworks exploding in the sky, the festival has begun, but another friend told you that when you see a man lighting the fireworks, the festival has begun, your logic is to assume that these signs are about 2 completely different events?
The earthly building was only a copy, not the true reality.
Hebrews 9:23-24 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Paul shows that we are the temple of God. Paul quotes from Ezekiel to show its true fulfillment in the body of Christ. You are free to reject it, but should at least support your counter argument with NT scripture that shows a future earthly temple will be rebuilt for believers to worship in.
Paul applies the Ezekiel temple to the body of Christ, and yet you still reject it, thus showing your eschatological bias.
Do you believe, true believers of Christ will worship in earthly Jerusalem in a temple building in the future?
The NT nor OT mention anything of a physical 1,000 year reign on earth of Christ from a physical temple.
Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to a man who sows Good seed.
Did Jesus define the wheat, tares, harvest servants of that parable? yes
Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to merchant searching for fine pearls.
Does Jesus define the pearl of that parable? No
Thus according to your own interpretative rule, because there is no explanation of the pearl, it must be taken literally.
unless you can post specific scripture that shows where Jesus explains the pearl? you continue to avoid doing this.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
What the Bible says about the Anti-Christ is contrary to what the reformers thought he was. That should be enough. What is not up for debate is that the same spirit behind the forthcoming Anti-Christ was also the same spirit at work within the imperial Papacy.
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I didn't say the second century Church was in agreement with modern day dispensationalism on every point, I only said that their eschatology agreed more with modern day dispensationalism than it ever did with post-Augustinian eschatology which we know to be Preterism.
As for what we are debating, you tell me. I just know the rapture is not one of those topics being debated on this thread nor was this thread intended to address that particular topic.
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
Correction:
"What dispensationalism says about antichrist is contrary to what the Reformers believed, declared, and experienced..."
Whom to believe?
1. Historical Reformers who sacrificed their lives by the thousands to liberate the true Church from spiritual oppression.
2. Armchair futurist dispensationalists who understand nothing of such sacrifice, but denigrate the Reformation as being an "error".
Easy decision.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
According to which Scripture?ContendersEdge said:
The times I can think of where words are translated to "all the world" - the original word used was oikoumené ~ Strong's Greek: 3625. οἰκουμένη (oikoumené) -- the inhabited earth
Some examples:
A census of the "whole world" was ordered by Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1)
Paul said the faith of the Romans was proclaimed throughout the whole world. Their faith was the Gospel of the kingdom that Jesus spoke of. At the end of Romans Paul said that the Gospel has been made known to all nations (Romans 16:25-26)
Paul taught this same idea when he wrote to the Colossians (Colossians 1:5-6)
Then he goes on in verse 23 to say:
if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister. ~ Colossians 1:23
Upvote
0
If they weren't in agreement on the pretrib rapture, what were they in agreement with?
Sources and quotes, please.
You said we aren't debating the pretrib rapture. If you don't want to debate anything else, then neither do I.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Feb 24, 2002
- 15,534
- 4,827
- 57
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Peter makes no such claim.
In fact Peter's claims support mine:
“…salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” (I Peter 1:5)
“He …has appeared in these last times for the sake of you.” (I Peter 1:20)
“They shall give account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.” (I Peter 4:5)
“The end of all things is at hand; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer.” (I Peter 4:7)
"For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God.” (I Peter 4:17)
“…as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is about to be revealed.” (I Peter 5:1)
“We have the prophetic word …which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the Day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.” (II Peter 1:19)
“Their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.” (II Peter 2:3)
Peter Instructed His flocks to be ready for the Judgment "about to be revealed" for "the end of all things was at hand"
Was He wrong to exhort them this way? Was He mistaken?
was He applying a double standard?
Upvote
0
Contenders Edge said:
Parousia70 said:
Exactly! And let's not forget that Jesus also had some things to say about what was to be "soon" in His day, when He said (recorded in Matthew and Mark):
"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place" (Mark 13:30; Matthew 24:34)
"When the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine-growers?' '....He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers, who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons.' '....Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it.' ....When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them." (Matt. 21:40-41,43,45)
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
Take a look at this other verse from Peter's letter:
2 Peter 3:14 ~ And so, dear friends, while you are waiting for these things to happen, make every effort to be found living peaceful lives that are pure and blameless in his sight.
Was Peter mistaken and leading his followers on - causing them to believe those things would happen during their lifetime?
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The time of which Jesus spoke when people would no longer be required to worship God in a specific place was the time after His death and resurrection by which the New Covenant was established and so it became, even while the Temple was still standing and will continue to be so even if another one were to be erected.
But that is not what Daniel, Matthew and Mark were talking about. They were talking about a time to come that would affect the entire world, but the judgment upon Jerusalem was not that judgment because its punishment did not threaten to destroy all life on earth and never could have, but we are living in a time where that is possible.
Christ specifically stated that when He did return, everyone would seem returning. That did not happen in 70 A.D. and if you have ever taken the time to notice, Luke's accounts shifts from the judgment and distress to come upon Jerusalem to that which is to come upon the entire world before the return of Christ. Therefore, my position is in no way contradicted.
When Christ does return, He returns not just in judgment, but also to reign upon the earth. If we had already entered into that era, the world would be an entirely different place than it is now; it would be a far better place, but I suppose you must be perfectly content with living in a world where Christ is not physically present on the earth where death reigns, sins runs rampant, where demonic activity and influence abounds, and where Satan is permitted to commit various act of evil through countless different means and cause a variety of chaos and destruction.
That is the world I presently see and it does not reflect the period of Christ's rule upon the earth that I read about.
That is because it has not yet happened as the scriptures said that it would. Jesus was very specific about all that would precede His return which never happened in 70 A.D.
Just because the people of God are instructed to flee in both cases does not necessarily mean that the AOD came on the scene in 70 A.D. No such man came on the scene in that day whose actions were consistent with the Abomination of Desolation.
Then you really don't understand the purpose of the Temple. It was not just a mere place of worship. It was built to serve as throne room for God on the earth and that is exactly what the forthcoming Temple in Ezekiel's vision will serve.
The Old Testament actually talks more about the forthcoming rule of God on earth than the New Testament does which really does not tell us much except that it will be a thousand years, after which this earth is replaced by a new heavens and a new earth where Christ not only reigns, but the Father with Him.
Apparently you do not know the difference between interpretation and an analogy. Just as there can be no harmony between the Temple of God and anything sinful, so there can be no harmony between us in whom God lives and those things that are sinful either and because the Bible does say that God will reign on the earth in a literal Temple, and while people will not be required to worship Him there on a regular basis, the prophet Zechariah does foretell a time when everyone will be required to come to Jerusalem and pay homage to the King at certain times of the year and if they don't, consequences will follow. (Zechariah 14:16-21)
That you even acknowledge that Jesus compared the Kingdom of Heaven to the merchant searching for fine pearls leads you a step closer to understanding the lesson the parable is conveying. Now, if you know what the merchant did when he discovered the pearl of great price, you will be even closer to understanding the lesson of that parable.[/QUOTE]
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
2 Peter 3:8-9: Peter understood that Christ might not return in his lifetime. Otherwise what would be the point of claiming that the Lord does not count slowness as men might count slowness? At the same time, in verse 14, Peter understood that Jesus very well could return in his life time. He was not misleading anyone or declaring a date for the return of Jesus and knew that the Lord would return at a time unexpected. (2 Pet. 3:10) He also said that there would come a time when men would deny the return of the Lord. (2 Pet. 3:3-4) This present age reflects those passages more than any other.
Upvote
0
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Yes he does: 2 Pet. 3:8-9
Peter knew that Jesus could return at any given time and wanted his flocks to also be ready in case Christ did return in their life time, just as we need to be ready and about our Father's business in case He returns in our life time.
But because the Kingdom did not come in Peter's lifetime and this present world has continued to persist and the evil thereof has not yet face judgment, are you going to accuse Peter of lying?
Peter says that God does not count slowness the way we might count it. (2 Pet. 3:8-9) Are you going to accuse him of contradicting himself? If God doesn't count slowness the way we count it, then neither does He count the end of all things being at hand the way we do.
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
- May 13, 2019
- 2,615
- 370
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
And yet that generation did pass away without all things being fulfilled or so it seems. If all things were supposed to be fulfilled in that generation but were not, then we have a serious problem because such a declaration contradicts the numerous passages that state that we cannot know when our Lord is going to return unless we read John 21:21-23 which suggests the possibility that the Apostle John might be made to abide on the earth until the return of our Lord.
If one or even a small number of that generation among whom Jesus walked were kept alive until His return, that is one way in which the words of Jesus could be fulfilled without contradicting His admonitions that the time of His return cannot be known.
But only small minded people who think that God is limited in His power and ability to fulfill prophecy exactly as declared would ever reject such a possibility.
Upvote
0
- Status
