4 Reasons John was writing a gospel sermon about suffering under Rome
- Thread starter eclipsenow
- Start date
- Status
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,293
- 1,735
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
First of all Keras, I asked you to prove where the 2000 years is in the book of Revelation when John clearly said it was soon, the time was near, HE shared in THEIR TRIBULATIONS (hint hint!) and finally HE wanted THEM to hear and OBEY his message. You haven’t only failed to justify destroying John’s imperative command to his generation (and all generations following) to hear and obey his message, but have butchered a number of other verses in the attempt to justify the oh-so-popular futurist games with Revelation. The burden of proof is on you. You’re using the obscure to reinterpret the clear and easy, where real bible scholars do things the other way around. The clear and easy instructions on how to read Revelation are in Chapter 1. You reinterpret them by the most obscure methods with irrelevant verses from other books in the bible that have nothing to do with what you are trying to prove!
You’ve butchered 2 Peter 3:8. “But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.” According to futurists the second half of this verse doesn’t exist. Rather than showing the different ways God can zoom in on time, from viewing the overarching grand progress of history over millennia to zooming in on each and every single day like he had a thousand years to study it, futurists are just wanting an excuse to install their timetables randomly over any parts of the bible that refer to days. It’s their excuse to justify their futurist presuppositions and charts. So why not listen to the 2 Peter 3:8 time-flip and do it the other way? Because it’s catastrophic to your argument. So you ignore it! 2020 years is about 737,300 earth day’s which multiplied by 1000 would equal 737.3 MILLION heavenly years! Um, what to do with that? Futurists just ignore the flip and chop out the second half of the verse. They’re too busy preparing their Revelations timetables to even double check their own presuppositional verses!
Now it looks like I was wrong about Hosea being a resurrection type. Rather, it’s plain old number symbolism – a Hebrew counting pattern. Just as repeating something adds emphasis, and saying it 3 times means unimaginably so like the threefold “Holy, holy, holy!” - so to is counting a Hebrew number pattern. See Amos 1:2-26.
“Thus says the Lord:
“For three transgressions of Damascus,
and for four, I will not revoke the punishment,[a]
because they have threshed Gilead”.
This counting theme is repeated through the next few chapters of Amos, showing God’s judgement.
But in Hosea the message is that if Israel repents (“admits” in verse 15), then God will not delay his forgiveness. It will come quickly and surely. It’s actually far less gospel-type than I thought, and vastly less metaphorical than you thought. It’s concrete – actually applies to the overall message of Hosea’s time and generation and message – and means what it says!
“Come, let us return to the Lord;
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will raise us up,
that we may live before him.
3 Let us know; let us press on to know the Lord;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth.”
If Israel repents, God won’t delay but will forgive! It’s a message to their generatikno, just as Revelation is a message to that generation centuries later. Your argument is not even an argument – it’s special pleading from the total silence of the passage on anything to do with the last days at all. I’m actually appalled I have to spell this out! I mean, imagine if I came to you with Genesis 1 and said that's why we knew the Lord would return in the year 7000AD!
You’ve butchered 2 Peter 3:8. “But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.” According to futurists the second half of this verse doesn’t exist. Rather than showing the different ways God can zoom in on time, from viewing the overarching grand progress of history over millennia to zooming in on each and every single day like he had a thousand years to study it, futurists are just wanting an excuse to install their timetables randomly over any parts of the bible that refer to days. It’s their excuse to justify their futurist presuppositions and charts. So why not listen to the 2 Peter 3:8 time-flip and do it the other way? Because it’s catastrophic to your argument. So you ignore it! 2020 years is about 737,300 earth day’s which multiplied by 1000 would equal 737.3 MILLION heavenly years! Um, what to do with that? Futurists just ignore the flip and chop out the second half of the verse. They’re too busy preparing their Revelations timetables to even double check their own presuppositional verses!
Now it looks like I was wrong about Hosea being a resurrection type. Rather, it’s plain old number symbolism – a Hebrew counting pattern. Just as repeating something adds emphasis, and saying it 3 times means unimaginably so like the threefold “Holy, holy, holy!” - so to is counting a Hebrew number pattern. See Amos 1:2-26.
“Thus says the Lord:
“For three transgressions of Damascus,
and for four, I will not revoke the punishment,[a]
because they have threshed Gilead”.
This counting theme is repeated through the next few chapters of Amos, showing God’s judgement.
But in Hosea the message is that if Israel repents (“admits” in verse 15), then God will not delay his forgiveness. It will come quickly and surely. It’s actually far less gospel-type than I thought, and vastly less metaphorical than you thought. It’s concrete – actually applies to the overall message of Hosea’s time and generation and message – and means what it says!
“Come, let us return to the Lord;
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will raise us up,
that we may live before him.
3 Let us know; let us press on to know the Lord;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth.”
If Israel repents, God won’t delay but will forgive! It’s a message to their generatikno, just as Revelation is a message to that generation centuries later. Your argument is not even an argument – it’s special pleading from the total silence of the passage on anything to do with the last days at all. I’m actually appalled I have to spell this out! I mean, imagine if I came to you with Genesis 1 and said that's why we knew the Lord would return in the year 7000AD!
Upvote
0
keras
Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
- Feb 7, 2013
- 13,677
- 2,491
- 82
- Country
- New Zealand
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Married
The 2000 year Church era is not stated in Revelation. The 1000 year Millennium is.
We have had the [nearly] 2000 years Church era, that is a historical fact. It was the third 2000 year period in God's Plan for mankind. The Millennium will complete His 7000 year time decreed for mankind.
John, all the Apostles and the ECF's never knew there would be 2000 years of the Church era. Therefore they preached 'soon', which was not a bad thing; it kept the Church on its toes! God obviously allowed it for that reason.
Your theory on Hosea 6:1-3, makes it meaningless to us today. What else in the Bible is useless for us today?
I reject your explanation as a lot of Hosea does apply to us now, as Paul quoted in Romans 9:24-26.
Now, have a go at Luke 13:32. Show your bias and demonstrate how to twist and make scripture mean something entirely different from what is said.
I would ask anyone here to look seriously at Luke 13:32-33. What was Jesus telling us?
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,293
- 1,735
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
NOTE: I (eclipse) edited this post to change the tone of the writing.
Except that it's not actually a NUMBER but a SYMBOL! Let me substitute with gazillion to help you out.
"The Lord owns the cattle on a gazillion hills."
“But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a gazillion years, and a gazillion years are like a day.”
The gazillion in Revelation. See? It's a symbol, and it not really representing 1000 unless it is specifically counting troops amassed for certain battles, etc.
Which is absolutely and utterly irrelevant to the texts we are discussing.
I comprehend what you are trying to say but I'm trying to help you see there is no rational reason to say it! When an Amillennial asks you guys to slow down and justify all your timetable drawing, the rationale for the whole thing evaporates in a puff of smoke.
Except that I'm a Theistic Evolutionist and this whole 7000 year business is as bunk as ripping 2 Peter 3 and Hosea 6 out of context, mixing them up, and serving them all over Revelation. That's just no way to do hermeneutics or read the original texts authentically.
So you admit that even John DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S IN THE TIMETABLE HE'S MEANT TO HAVE CONSTRUCTED?
Can you see how much you're importing and whacking all over the text? How many assumptions and paradigms and 'timetables' that just don't belong there?That's the worst, most patronising nonsense of all. Poor John didn't actually KNOW he was meant to be writing a futurist timetable you could debate for years, so you have to help HIM understand HIS book do you!?
You also have NEVER explained how his readers were meant to hear and obey him. He wanted them to - as he said it a few times!
Oh wow. So let me get this straight. You want the bible to be ABOUT you specifically so you can GET something from it? Look up at the big red words. Can't you see the irony here? You've proved how John's generation couldn't get much out of Revelation if it wasn't about them but was about people 2000 years later. We, on the other hand, can get heaps out of all manner of books not written to us or about us, but recorded for our instruction. By your logic we would throw out 90% of the bible because it wasn't about us or directly to us. It was written to Israel to warn her about God's holiness and the consequences of disobeying his law. It was written to the Romans to understand how Christians are not under law, but under grace. To the Galatians to learn how we are saved by grace through faith. To the Corinthians to understand church order and practices and a glimpse of the new world.
Reformed Covenant theologies see it all for us, even though it applies to them at their times. We learn from Hosea's message to them, about them, in the context of how it all fits together in the whole of the bible. What does the chapter say, and where does it fit in the book? What themes does it cover to it's own peoples and times? How does that fit in the context of it's chunk of the bible? How does it fit into the whole Biblical Theology of the Old Testament?
I don't have time to unpack the whole bible for you but I suggest you read Gospel and Kingdom by Grame Goldsworthy if you genuinely don't think Hosea meant anything to Hosea's generation, and then how to get from that message to them to a message to us today.
NOTE: I (eclipse) edited this post to change the tone of the writing.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 9,316
- 568
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
I am not a futurist any more than you can find evolution in the Bible. However, if you accept evolution, there is no point in discussing anything. Most people accept change over time, even when it comes to breeding animals. Moses wrote about it in Genesis. You are worse than a futurist, because you theorize, in virtual reality. Since your theology is not even based in the Bible, but math, and science. I am surprised you even venture into eschatology, but finding people to argue about the theory of evolution is becoming scarce. I have tried to discuss the Bible at biologos, and people do not even want to discuss some verses, because they go against a certain mind set.
To pick and choose what we want to view as literal just to argue with people seems petty to me. Why do evolutionists not take history as a literal event? Eschatology is not confined to just the Bible. Since you cannot prove evolution from the Bible, why would eschatology have to just use the Bible as it's only proof? I am more literal than you, because you fall back on virtual reality, while I view the spiritual as being just as physical as the physical world. It is one creation. Science has only recently breached the gap in physics, and God only allowed that to compound Satan's deception.
I am then accused of turning Scripture into science fiction. Some science fiction is more literal than science fact. Yet even to me seeing creation as mere science turns spiritual into a mundane "brush one's teeth" activity. It takes the mystery out of the unknown. That is because it is foreign to the carnality of the flesh. However evolution and virtual reality is like watching your favorite marvel comics show or movie, because evolution is just another view of life like the ancient religious pantheons. It now has a technological flare to it. But it appeases the carnal appetite. It is pretty easy to turn Scripture into just a mundane life of a forgotten ancient culture. Why would anyone with a virtual reality view of their life want anything mundane from God’s Word?
I am by no means attacking the theistic evolution position. Perhaps they can witness to evolutionist on their level. They will not fool any athiest though. Telling people that Satan has deceived the whole world is a bitter truth. Most people are out to be skeptical of people's beliefs, even if they do not realize it. I would hate to be the one who turned people away from God.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2006
- 6,762
- 1,269
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Well your lack of understanding grammar notwithstanding, yu believe Peter, acting under teh Inspiration of the Holy Spirit was actually thinking he was addressing the WHOLE house of Israel when he was speaking to several thousands?
Or do you believe that just teh crowd assembled is what God considered the WHOLE house of ISreal? or like is the normal natural understanding of that phrase, Peter was addressing a crowd as but a portion of the WHOLE house of Israel and that the words he was preparing to speak was not just for that crowd assembled, but for all Jews everywhere (which on planet earth would constitute the WHOLE house of Israel)
As for the entire passage of Jeremish 31:
31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Being fulfilled in the first century?
The promise was made to every Jew (the house of Israel and Judah) and that all the house of Israel and Judah will know the Lord from the least to the greatest!
I await your historical evidence to prove this was fulfilled in the first century as written.
Upvote
0
Are you ignoring the word "remnant" in the verse below, in order to make your doctrine work? Are you trying to claim every Orthodox Jew will be saved?
Rom 9:27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: "THOUGH THE NUMBER OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BE AS THE SAND OF THE SEA, THE REMNANT WILL BE SAVED.
The author of the Book of Hebrews quoted the text of Jeremiah 31:31-34, and began the passage with the word "now", in Hebrews 8:6-13.
How much more proof do you need?
However, it you need more proof it is found in Hebrews 10:16-18, where once again the author quotes directly from Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Heb 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
Heb 8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH—
Heb 8:9 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
Heb 8:10 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
Heb 8:11 NONE OF THEM SHALL TEACH HIS NEIGHBOR, AND NONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST OF THEM TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
Heb 8:12 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2006
- 6,762
- 1,269
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Not in the least! But are you ignoring that Peter was addressing all Israel and not just the several thousand gathered?
In every generation there has always been a faithful remnant!
But in the end of the 70th week of Daniel AKA the tribulation; God says this:
Zech 13:
8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.
So unless you have actual reliable history to show a time when two thirds of all Jews were killed and the one third left ALL call upon the name of the Lord and get saved- this is future and this is the literal (not allegorical) fulfillment of the promise God made to the House of Israel and Judah as well as the fulfillment (literal and not allegorical) of what Paul wrote under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit that ALL Israel will be saved!
Romans 11:25-29
King James Version
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
(the remnat of each generation)
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
(These are real Jews and not an allegorical Israel)
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
(as promised in Jeremiah 31 to the house of Israel and the house of Judah)
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
(God keeps His promises to those whom He makes them to)
but as for you rrefusal to understand teh Hebrews passage:
1. Just because a covenant goes into effect, does not mean everything happens immediately.
2. The covenant is made with all Israel and not just the remnant of each generation!
3. It is to happen "after those days" 33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord
4. You demand "those days" be after the death and REsurrection of Jesus.
5. You demand that all of Israel does not mean all of Israel.
6. YOu demand that the Church has replaced Israel as Israel!
But teh Bible demands that ALL Israel will be saved, all Israel will have their sins forgiven and God will write His laws in ALL their hearts not just a remnant, and then in Zechariah defines ho wmuch of Israel comprises the ALL Israel "after those days".
I accept God at His Word not god at your mystical reinterpretation of His Word aka Replacement Theology.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2006
- 6,762
- 1,269
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Well I can't speak for other futurists and what they believe (unless they tell me or write it down) I can only speak for this futurist!
I do not confuse the return from the Babylonian exile (written in great detail in Ezra and Nehemiah),with the rebirth and beginning of the return of Israel to her promised land in 1948 as spoken of throughout many books of the OT!
What preterists and partial preterists err with is taking passages that all things are not fulfilled in, and call them close enough and assign them a historic date and fulfillment.
And no they do nopt poiont to teh return from exile from Babylon, based simply as what is written! But let me ask you one thing, why should I take your words literally, when you refuse to take Gods Prophecies as literal?
So you are a physical believing descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob then? Or was the woriters writing mystically and we had to wait until Augustine to learn that Israel doesn't mean Israel anymore but the church!
Yes teh church are partakers of teh blessings of teh New covenant, but we are not taker overs of that covenant!
God made it to Israel through Jeremiah, and reconfirmed that proise to Israel through the writer of Hebrews and Paul in Romans! The church is not the House of Israel and Judah!
Romans 11:
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
If the church is Israel now, who are the gentiles? And what is yoru proof God changed the definitions?
I think you need to be careful about becoming wise in your won conceits!
If Israel is the church then part of the church is blinded!
Who is
this Jacob that God will turn ungodliness away from ?
Once again as concerning Romans 11 and the Hebrews passage, these verses still govern the meanings:
Jeremiah 31:31-37
King James Version
31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
35 Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name:
36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.
37 Thus saith the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.
Zechariah 13:8-9
King James Version
8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.
God keeps His promises as He declared them, and not as men have attempted to retranslate them to mean!
We Gentiles have been partakers of the blessing of the new covenant to Israel, but God will still keep His Word to the covenanted nation!
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,293
- 1,735
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
It's about recognising what genre of writing certain chunks of the Bible are. We don't read Jesus parables as literally true but us literary truths. We're getting way off the topic of Revelation - but perhaps not? Perhaps American Christians need a huge education into how to recognise basic categories of writing? Because, after all, I believe Genesis is true! But trying to argue that the only serious way to accept parts of the bible as true is by taking the whole bible literally is as absurd as saying that the only way to take love poetry seriously is by taking it literally. There's literal writing, then there's literary. And I have to break it to do: heaps of the bible is literal, but heaps of it is not. It's literary! Genesis 1 to 11 is a unique genre of literature not common in the modern world. But it is literature, and it is literary.
It's more like reading Shakespeare than Darwin. Would Richard Dawkins read Shakespeare's line "But soft, what light through yonder window breaks? It is the east, and Juliet is the sun." and complain "What nonsense! There's no way any truth is being conveyed in this nonsense because Juliet is obviously not a giant ball of fusing hydrogen millions and millions of miles across!" Sorry, but truth can be conveyed in poetry - and sometimes is the *best* genre to explain certain truths!
Here's a taste of the evidence for the creative literary narrative in Genesis.
Dr John Dickson unpacks in the link below: "In Genesis 1, multiples of seven appear in extraordinary ways. For ancient readers, who were accustomed to taking notice of such things, these multiples of seven conveyed a powerful message. Seven was the divine number, the number of goodness and perfection. Its omnipresence in the opening chapter of the Bible makes an unmistakable point about the origin and nature of the universe itself. Consider the following: The first sentence of Genesis 1 consists of seven Hebrew words. Instantly, the ancient reader’s attention is focused;
The second sentence contains exactly fourteen words. A pattern is developing;
The word ‘earth’—one half of the created sphere—appears in the chapter 21 times;
The word ‘heaven’—the other half of the created sphere—also appears 21 times.
‘God’, the lead actor, is mentioned exactly 35 times.
The refrain ‘and it was so,’ which concludes each creative act, occurs exactly seven times;
The summary statement ‘God saw that it was good’ also occurs seven times;
It hardly needs to be pointed out that the whole account is structured around seven scenes or seven days of the week.
The artistry of the chapter is stunning and, to ancient readers, unmistakable. It casts the creation as a work of art, sharing in the perfection of God and deriving from him. My point is obvious: short of including a prescript for the benefit of modern readers the original author could hardly have made it clearer that his message is being conveyed through literary rather than prosaic means. What we find in Genesis 1 is not exactly poetry of the type we find in the biblical book of Psalms but nor is it recognizable as simple prose. It is a rhythmic, symbolically-charged inventory of divine commands." https://www.publicchristianity.org/the-genre-of-genesis-1-an-historical-approach/ More at his podcast. Six Days
In the same way when we come to Revelation we've got to ask ourselves what kind of genre is it, what other writing is like it, and how does the author want us to read it.
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
If you had not cut out Romans 11:23-24 you would have found the "manner" in which all Israel that is Israel (Romans 9:6-8), will be saved by being grafted back into the Olive Tree through faith in Christ.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
You say all Israel will be saved, and then you turn around and say one third will be saved. This is double-talk.
You have taken the covenant confirmed by the blood of Christ at Calvary in Romans 11:27, and have converted it into a future covenant with the modern State of Israel. Are you trying to say all sin was not taken away at Calvary?
As for "Replacement Theology"...
Who has replaced the one seed with the many seeds in Galatians 3:16?
Who has replaced the children of the promise, with the children of the flesh in Romans 9:8?
You ignore two different groups of Israelites in Romans 11:28, just as there are two different groups of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5.
There is a group of "they", who have rejected Christ and are the enemies of God.
There is another group of "they" who are the "election" who have accepted Christ.
Based on Luke 21:24-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ.
Your Dispensational reading of Romans 11 has been presented here many times.
.
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,293
- 1,735
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
That's pedantic quibbling and not the focus of the passage. Hebrews interprets Jeremiah for you - not Zechariah.
The overall shape of God's kingdom as it moves between the covenants is an hourglass. It starts off with the covenant given to Abraham, then refined a little with Moses, and then Israel is gradually disciplined and pruned and shrinks as it heads into exile. The remnant shrinks and shrinks. It all heads towards one man - the serpent crusher Jesus. He fulfils the promise of Eve's offspring to crush the serpent's head. Jesus steps up and lives the perfect life Israel could not, keeping God's commands perfectly. Then after Jesus his kingdom is those who trust in him, whether Jew or Greek. This next article explains it well.
Recently I had a question asking whether “covenant theology” is so-called “replacement theology.” Those dispensational critics of Reformed covenant theology who accuse it of teaching that the New Covenant church has “replaced” Israel do not understand historic Reformed covenant theology. They are imputing to Reformed theology a way of thinking about redemptive history that has more in common with dispensationalism than it does with Reformed theology.
First, the very category of “replacement” is foreign to Reformed theology because it assumes a dispensational, Israeleo-centric way of thinking. It assumes that the temporary, national people was, in fact, intended to be the permanent arrangement. Such a way of thinking is contrary to the promise in Gen. 3:15. The promise was that there would be a Savior. The national people was only a means to that end, not an end in itself. According to Paul in Ephesians 2:11-22, in Christ the dividing wall has been destroyed. It cannot be rebuilt. The two peoples (Jews and Gentiles) have been made one in Christ. Among those who are united to Christ by grace alone, through faith alone, there is no Jew nor Gentile (Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11).
At least some forms of dispensationalism have suggested that God intended the national covenant with Israel to be permanent. According to Reformed theology, the Mosaic covenant was never intended to be permanent. According to Galatians 3 (and chapter 4), the Mosaic covenant was a codicil to the Abrahamic covenant. A codicil is added to an existing document. It doesn’t replace the existing document. Dispensationalism reverses things. It makes the Abrahamic covenant a codicil to the Mosaic. Hebrews 3 says that Moses was a worker in Jesus’ house. Dispensationalism makes Jesus a worker in Moses’ house.
Second, with respect to salvation, Reformed covenant theology does not juxtapose Israel and the church. For Reformed theology, the church has always been the Israel of God and the Israel of God has always been the church. Reformed covenant theology distinguishes the old and new covenants (2 Cor. 3; Heb. 7-10). It recognizes that the church was temporarily administered through a typological, national people, but the church has existed since Adam, Noah, and Abraham; and it existed under Moses and David; and it exists under Christ.
Third, the church has always been one, under various administrations, under types, shadows, and now under the reality in Christ, because the object of faith has always been one. Jesus the Messiah was the object of faith of the typological church (Heb. 11; Luke 24; 2 Cor. 3), and he remains the object of faith.
Fourth, despite the abrogation of the national covenant by the obedience, death, and resurrection of Christ (Col. 2:14), the NT church has not “replaced” the Jews. Paul says that God “grafted” the Gentiles into the people of God. Grafting is not replacement, it is addition.
It has been widely held by Reformed theologians that there will be a great conversion of Jews. Some call this “anti-Semitism.” This isn’t anti-Semitism, it is Christianity. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). The alternative to Jesus’ exclusivist claim is universalism, which is nothing less than an assault on the person and finished work of Christ. Other Reformed writers understand the promises in Rom. 11 to refer only to the salvation of all the elect (Rom. 2:28) rather than to a future conversion of Jews. In any event, Reformed theology is not anti-semitic. We have always hoped and prayed for the salvation, in Christ, sola gratia et sola fide, of all of God’s elect, Jew and Gentile alike.
Covenant Theology Is Not Replacement Theology
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,293
- 1,735
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Good point!
Yes, the moment one starts to fracture the OT promises and try to have 2 kingdoms of God, all sorts of things get messed up.
Yes, I see what you're saying and it's true - but just try going back to my previous post above where I quote a lengthy article. It deals with the accusation that Covenant Theology is 'Replacement' theology - a word some people try to say is anti-semitic. In my guts "replacement" does seem to be the way I've described how the Old and New Testament fit together for a good chunk of my life, but it's more subtle than that. It's not that one kingdom replaces another, it's that it was always the one kingdom! It's nice having you in the thread!
Upvote
0
How is your "all Israel" identified?
1. By their Abrahamic DNA?
2. By their pharisaic talmudic religion?
3. By their kosher culture?
4. By their Israeli domicile?
5. By something else?
Upvote
0
keras
Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
- Feb 7, 2013
- 13,677
- 2,491
- 82
- Country
- New Zealand
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Married
It isn't up to me to do that. Every individual must think and understand for themselves.
Obviously you have decided that Revelation is not something you need to be worried about. This may result is some future difficulties for you.
I await your careful and erudite dissertation on the meaning of the two verses in Luke 13:32-33
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
Acts 1
6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
Dispensational eisegesis:
Scriptural exegesis:
Jesus' response to the disciples' question is instructive. He refers to times and seasons.
Exegetically, times and seasons are associated with the day of the Lord, which is the final end of all things temporal.
Paul clarifies it.
1 Thessalonians 5
1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
Peter completes it.
2 Peter 3
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
There is not the slightest hint of a restored Israelitic kingdom.
Such is another dispensational eisegetical fantasy and fallacy.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2006
- 6,762
- 1,269
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Well I thought that was a given for both of us! I do not teach that unsaved Jews will be grafted back on! That is why I posted Zechariah13! It is the 1/3 that is left in teh land that will get saved as God declared!
Then you need to take that up with God Himself!
Zechariah 13:8-9
King James Version
8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.
The 1/3 is the ALL Israel for the 1/3 are all that are left!
Which shows you to be a very sloppy reader of my posts! For I never said this! All sin was paid for at Calvary, but if one rejects the payment of Jesus blood- they are required ot pay for their sin in the lake of fire forever!
What I did say is that the New Covenant went into effect, but not all components! That is common in nearly all of the other 7 covenants God has made with man of Israel! Right now we are in teh mystery form of the kingdom with the gentiles being called into the covenant with the remnant of Israel throughout the church age! But as Paul wrote, once that full number of Gentiles is ome in (and I am not trying to determine the when of that) then after that all Israel will get saved! That confirms Zechariah, Matthew< Ezekiel, Isaiah etc.
Don't know of anyone who has replaced Christ with many seeds.
Romans 9:8 is speaking directly about Ishmael and Isaac not natural Israel and spiritual Israel. Context matters.
No I do not ignore the two groups in Rom 11. Right now the nation as a nation has been set aside! The remnant is still being saved and we are in the time of the in gathering of the gentiles.
And you ignore the entire context of Romans 11 it is about the nation and the remnant. Right now the nation is hated for the gentiles sake, but as to touching the election of Israel as Gods covenanted nation as spoken of throughout the OT? They are beloved for the Fathers sakes. Teh Fathers in context being Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob!
The time of the Gentiles comes to an end at Jesus return! It started with Nebuchadnezzar and teh first kingdom and first beast and ends with the defeat of the Antichrist at Jesus' return.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2006
- 6,762
- 1,269
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
It is sadly ironic that REvelation is the only "book" of the bible that has a promise of blessing for those who read and heed and yet so many do not heed it, because they have accepted an allegorical rewrite of REvelation and read and heed that!
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
You claimed Jeremiah 31:33-34 has not come into effect, and when you were shown Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and 1 John 2:27, which proves otherwise, you ignored it.
Like all false doctrines, modern Dispensational theology is not revealed by the scripture quoted by its proponents, but rather by the scripture they must ignore to make it work. You have just confirmed this fact.
.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
