THE TRUE "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY/SUPERSESSIONISM" OF THE BIBLE

Davy said:

Sometimes the word "hell" in the KJV is about Hades, which is about the abode of the wicked in Paradise, like what our Lord Jesus showed in Luke 16 where the "rich man" was carried to. Other times it's from the Hebrew word for Hinnom which is about the valley of Hinnom, a burning garbage pit outside Jerusalem in the Old Testament where Judah at one time fell to false worship in burning their children in the fire (see Jeremiah 7:31-32). Our Lord Jesus used that Hinnom as an symbol for the future "lake of fire" of Revelation 20:14.

Click to expand...

The rich man in Paradise? The wicked in Paradise? Paradise has never been nor will ever be a place of torment. If it were a place of torment, how could it ever be called Paradise? And what would be the point of placing the wicked in a place called Paradise just to have them cast into the Lake of Fire? That doesn't make sense.

keras said:

Don't be a preterist and think it all happened in the past.

Click to expand...

Nebuchadnezzar coming upon Jerusalem was... past history. And you're trying to apply those sections of OT Scripture as not past history??

Isn't it obvious to you and anyone, that there is soon to happen some kind of dramatic change to the untenable situation in the Middle East?
The Bible prophets tell us quite plainly what will happen there and to the world. It will happen unexpectedly to unbelievers, but should not take us unawares. 1 Thessalonians 5:1-6

Click to expand...

You need to look to Ezekiel 38 & 39 for that enemy nation alignment for the last days, for that is yet to happen and is where we are at today. And also remember that Ezekiel went with the captives to Babylon and was contemporary with Daniel, so he saw the destruction of Jerusalem too. So you have to remember to separate those Ezekiel sections he wrote about that were historical from the prophecies he wrote that are still future.

Contenders Edge said:

The rich man in Paradise? The wicked in Paradise? Paradise has never been nor will ever be a place of torment. If it were a place of torment, how could it ever be called Paradise? And what would be the point of placing the wicked in a place called Paradise just to have them cast into the Lake of Fire? That doesn't make sense.

Click to expand...

Read what Jesus showed in Luke 16 and you'll find out. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Davy said:

Nebuchadnezzar coming upon Jerusalem was... past history. And you're trying to apply those sections of OT Scripture as not past history??

Click to expand...

No. What I am saying is that we have historical records from both sides of the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 586 BC.
But the Bible narrative speaks of things that didn't occur in 586 BC, esp the cosmic events. These events are all associated with the many prophesies about the terrible Day of the Lord's fiery wrath, a worldwide disaster that is yet to happen.

Yours and many peoples view that we won't experience anything nasty now, is just 'head in the sand' attitude.
It is glaringly evident to any thinking person, that the world faces imminent dramatic changes.
Why shouldn't we Christians know about what the Lord has planned and be prepared for it?

Contenders Edge said:

First of all, I don't recall reading in scripture that specifically stated that anything that Paul said was just for the first century or came with an expiration date. And secondly, Nero did not do all the things that the foretold Man of Sin will do and there have been those who have come after him who have persecuted Christians more severely than him.

Click to expand...

Really? So when Paul says, for example:

"Paul and Silvanus and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ":

Does that mean he wasn't writing to a 1st century church which he started???

I also rhink you might want to read up on Nero and his actions against the church.

ebedmelech said:

Really? So when Paul says, for example:

"Paul and Silvanus and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ":

Does that mean he wasn't writing to a 1st century church which he started???

I also rhink you might want to read up on Nero and his actions against the church.

Click to expand...

Where does it say that what he was writing applied only to the first century? Where is the expiration date?

And when did Nero stand in the Temple of God and demand the Jews worship him as such?

Davy said:

Read what Jesus showed in Luke 16 and you'll find out. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Click to expand...

Contenders Edge said:

Where does it say that what he was writing applied only to the first century? Where is the expiration date?

Click to expand...

This isn't about application...this is about who Paul wrote it to. Of course much of it applies to today however, one has to discern that.

Contenders Edge said:

And when did Nero stand in the Temple of God and demand the Jews worship him as such?

Click to expand...

Paul makes it very clear believers are the temple of God...therefore, Paul isn't concerned with a building. It is Paul who says believers are being "built into a holy temple in the Lord". When Paul spoke on the "man of sin" he was warning the Thessalonian believers about him...not us today.

Contenders Edge said:

What we see is that the rich man was taken to a place torment which is called Hell whereas Lazarus, the poor man was taken to a place called "Abraham's Bosom" but also known as Paradise (Lk. 23:43) and a place of comfort where the righteous were taken to after death before the establishment of the New Testament.
​

Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the difference between the earthly dimension and the Heavenly dimension where God's abode is. The abode of the wicked called 'hell' (haides) is IN... the Heavenly dimension.

There are ONLY 2 different dimensions of existence written of in God's Word, this earthly one we live in, and the heavenly one where God and the angels live, including the abode of the wicked. This is why God's Word uses the idea of a heavenly prison, because it represents a place of separation in the heavenly dimension away from God, just like we have prisons of separation in our own earthly dimension here on earth.

Isa 42:7
7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
KJV

1 Peter 3:18-19
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
KJV

Rev 20:2-3
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
KJV

Rev 20:7
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
KJV

ebedmelech said:

This isn't about application...this is about who Paul wrote it to. Of course much of it applies to today however, one has to discern that.


Paul makes it very clear believers are the temple of God...therefore, Paul isn't concerned with a building. It is Paul who says believers are being "built into a holy temple in the Lord". When Paul spoke on the "man of sin" he was warning the Thessalonian believers about him...not us today.

Click to expand...

Contenders Edge said:

It is not just about who Paul wrote it to. All of scripture is just as applicable and relevant today as it was when it was first written and compiled and in that particular passage, the Temple of which Paul speaks is a literal Temple and not presented in a metaphorical context.​

Click to expand...

All of scripture is not applicable today. For instance the Old Covenant Laws of ceremony are fulfilled in Christ and we no longer observe them. Other parts of scripture are historical. That which applies is evident, as Jesus commanded the Lord's Supper to be observed along with church discipline, or leadership...but no, all of it is not applicable. I hold scripture as Paul instructed... "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"

It's your choice to follow that line of thinking you heed. When Jesus gave up His spirit on the cross scripture says the veil of the temple was ripped from top to bottom. Do you understand the significance of that? God would no longer appear in the Holy of Holies to the high priest because Jesus became our High Priest. That's one example.

Also...keep waiting on that temple.

Contenders Edge said:

It is not just about who Paul wrote it to. All of scripture is just as applicable and relevant today as it was when it was first written and compiled and in that particular passage, the Temple of which Paul speaks is a literal Temple and not presented in a metaphorical context.​

Click to expand...

Since Scripture interprets Scripture, in what instances does Paul refer to a literal temple?

jgr said:

Since Scripture interprets Scripture, in what instances does Paul refer to a literal temple?

Click to expand...

In 2 Thessalonians 2:4.
Also seen by John in Revelation 11:1.

What is your objection to another Temple? God wanted Temples before and prophesies like Haggai 2:9 say the final Temple will be greater that all of the former ones.

keras said:

In 2 Thessalonians 2:4.
Also seen by John in Revelation 11:1.

What is your objection to another Temple? God wanted Temples before and prophesies like Haggai 2:9 say the final Temple will be greater that all of the former ones.

Click to expand...

You failed to answer the question, so here it is again:

Since Scripture interprets Scripture, in what instances does Paul refer to a literal temple?

Note the "s" at the end of "instances".

That "s" means that there need to be a least two instances where Paul refers to a literal temple, so that either instance can interpret the other.

What are those (at least two) instances?

keras said:

In 2 Thessalonians 2:4.
Also seen by John in Revelation 11:1.

What is your objection to another Temple? God wanted Temples before and prophesies like Haggai 2:9 say the final Temple will be greater that all of the former ones.

Click to expand...

Ouch!

Dan 9:24
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
KJV

Zech 6:12-13
12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:

13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
KJV

That's about our Lord Jesus in the future.

ebedmelech said:

All of scripture is not applicable today. For instance the Old Covenant Laws of ceremony are fulfilled in Christ and we no longer observe them. Other parts of scripture are historical. That which applies is evident, as Jesus commanded the Lord's Supper to be observed along with church discipline, or leadership...but no, all of it is not applicable. I hold scripture as Paul instructed... "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"

It's your choice to follow that line of thinking you heed. When Jesus gave up His spirit on the cross scripture says the veil of the temple was ripped from top to bottom. Do you understand the significance of that? God would no longer appear in the Holy of Holies to the high priest because Jesus became our High Priest. That's one example.

Also...keep waiting on that temple.

Click to expand...

The Old Covenant scriptures still bear relevance in the sense that they bear witness to the New Testament to which Christ appealed to make the case for His Messiahship, and to which the Apostles also appealed to make their case for the Gospel Christ has commanded to be preached. They bear relevance in their historical importance and in the righteous and moral laws that the were not declared obsolete and were carried over into the New Testament. And the scriptures Paul said were "inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" are just as much so today as they were in his day.

None of the scriptures, be they of the Old or the New Covenant, should be treated as being any less relevant than the rest. They are all equally inspired and therefore all equally irrelevant. The Old Covenant no doubt expired upon the death and resurrection of our Savior; scripture clearly attests to that, but I will place no expiration dates on any of the scriptures where none have manifested themselves.

jgr said:

Since Scripture interprets Scripture, in what instances does Paul refer to a literal temple?

Click to expand...

2 Thessalonians 2:4. The context clearly depicts a literal Temple as being the place where the Man of Sin will demand to be worshipped as God.

Contenders Edge said:

2 Thessalonians 2:4. The context clearly depicts a literal Temple as being the place where the Man of Sin will demand to be worshipped as God.

Click to expand...

You failed to answer the question, so here it is again:

Since Scripture interprets Scripture, in what instances does Paul refer to a literal temple?

Note the "s" at the end of "instances".

That "s" means that there need to be a least two instances where Paul refers to a literal temple, so that either instance can interpret the other.

What are those (at least two) instances?

Davy said:

Zech 6:12-13
12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:

13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
KJV

That's about our Lord Jesus in the future.

Click to expand...

Plainly; His Throne will be in the new Temple.
You left out Zechariah 6:15 Men from far away will come and build the Temple of the Lord.....

In verse 12-13 saying Jesus will build the Temple is like saying the President built the White House.
It seems that you and jgr have a pathological aversion to a new Temple. I guess it will be a nice surprise for you to come and worship the Lord, as per Zechariah 14:20-21

keras said:

Plainly; His Throne will be in the new Temple.
You left out Zechariah 6:15 Men from far away will come and build the Temple of the Lord.....

In verse 12-13 saying Jesus will build the Temple is like saying the President built the White House.
It seems that you and jgr have a pathological aversion to a new Temple. I guess it will be a nice surprise for you to come and worship the Lord, as per Zechariah 14:20-21

Click to expand...

Awaiting your instances of Paul's literal temple.