If Amils are right and we are in the Millennium "Kingdom" now, what other verses back this up?
- Thread starter eclipsenow
- Start date
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,312
- 1,736
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Then you are conceding all the points made here and we all agree.
The church is the only kingdom of God now.
Excellent.
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,312
- 1,736
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Except we are the only true Israel now. There is only ONE way to the father, ONE body, ONE kingdom. There simply is no fudging the undeniable fact that ALL the OT promises to "Israel" now belong to the church. The law was fulfilled in the true Israel - Jesus - who lived the perfect life, died the perfect sacrifice, acted as the perfect mediator between God and man - the perfect temple - and so fulfilled all OT law we are now no longer under law but under Christ.
Completely! ALL Scripture is God breathed and useful for correcting the person of God. Not some bits to some, some bits to others. Not some to Christians, some to Jews. There IS NO Jew or Greek - only your relationship to Christ.
Where is your evidence that there is more than one Kingdom of God?
Try explaining it to me from Peter.
1 Peter 2: 9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
These are the terms for God's exclusive people.
There is no other.
Upvote
0
sovereigngrace
Well-Known Member
- Dec 9, 2019
- 9,042
- 3,450
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, exactly. This is the only people of God on the planet until eternity. They are the true children of Abraham. They are the children of promise. They are true Israeli citizens. They are the circumcision. They are the spiritual Jews.
Upvote
0
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Can you tell me how you interpret this passage:
Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.
Do you think Romans 9:6 is referring to one Israel? If so, that would mean it's saying not all who are descended from national Israel are national Israel (natural Israelites), which makes no sense whatsoever. It's clearly referring to two different Israels there. Why deny that?
Verses 7 and 8 describe the differences between the two Israels.
The Israel of which "not all who are descended from Israel" are part is comprised of those who are reckoned or called through Isaac (read Galatians 4:22-31 to find out what that means), are "God's children", are "children of the promise" and regarded (counted) as Abraham's offspring (seed). And being part of that Israel has nothing to do with who someone physically descended from. So, that can't possibly be referring to the nation of Israel. Being part of that Israel is entirely based on one's spiritual status.
The other Israel is comprised of those who are naturally, physically descended from the nation of Israel. Paul specifically says that those who physically descend from Israel are not God's children. He's not saying that none descended from Israel are God's children, but he is saying that the fact that they are descended from Israel does not make them God's children.
Upvote
0
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Do you believe that something can be clearly taught in scripture even without being explicitly spelled out for us? Such as the concept of the Trinity even though the word Trinity isn't explicitly used? If so, then that is how some of us feel about the concept of spiritual Israel. We see it as being clearly taught in scripture. Is "clearly" a more acceptable word to you than "explicitly"?
Upvote
0
sovereigngrace
Well-Known Member
- Dec 9, 2019
- 9,042
- 3,450
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Exactly. Amils do that because they recognize there is the natural and spiritual designations being employed in the inspired pages. The questions I have been asking are this:
1. The Bible says we have been grafted into 'an Israeli tree' (Romans 9-11). Is that an ethnic or spiritual tree?
2. The Bible says we who were once aliens from the "citizenship of Israel" have now been brought in through the blood of Christ to that privileged place (Ephesians 2). Is that ethnic or spiritual Israel?
3. The Bible says that Jew and Gentile alike, have now been graciously merged together into "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:15-16). Is that ethnic or spiritual Israel?
4. The Bible says we are 'Jews' and we are "the circumcision" today (Romans 2:25-29; Philippians 3:3 and Colossians 2:11). Is that ethnic or spiritual Jews?
5. The Bible says we are "the children of Abraham" (Romans 4:11; 4:13-15; 4:16-18; 9:6-8; Galatians 3:7-9; 3:12-14; 3:16 and 3:26-29) today. Are we the ethnic or spiritual "children of Abraham"?
6. The Bible says we now reside and abide in "Jerusalem" and "Mount Zion" (Matthew 21:42-46; John 3:3; Romans 9:33; 11:26; Ephesians 1:3; Ephesians 2:4-6; Philippians 3:20; Hebrews 12:22 and 1 Peter 2:5-10). Is that natural physical earthly "Jerusalem" and "Mount Zion" or is that spiritual heavenly "Jerusalem" and "Mount Zion"?
They have to admit these are spiritual designations relating to the redeemed international Church.
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
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
LOL. Why is that something anyone needs to acknowledge? Anyone can see that the phrase "spiritual Israel" isn't there in scripture, but so what? The question is whether the concept of a spiritual Israel is taught in scripture or not and some of us believe it clearly is.
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,312
- 1,736
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
This is a nice summary - can I add it to my library? I'd like to copy and paste now and then.
Upvote
0
Guojing
Well-Known Member
As I said, I am perfectly fine if you stated "that is what I believed"
But then if you really meant that, then when someone disagrees with your belief, one should also cease from saying things such as
- You are disagreeing with God
- You are disagreeing with what scripture says
Upvote
0
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
What do you think, that James, Peter and John disagreed with what Paul taught and taught things that contradicted what Paul taught? Peter thought very highly of Paul's teaching.
2 Peter 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
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
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Of course it's what I believe. Did I say it was a proven fact?
When did I say anything like that?
When did I say that?
I don't feel any obligation to cater to Randy's desires as long as he continues to insist on making false accusations towards Amils like saying we believe in replacement theology when we don't.
Upvote
0
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Why didn't you answer my question? You are coming across as if you believe there are things Paul taught that Peter, James and John disagreed with. Is that what you believe? Peter did not teach anything which would contradict anything Paul taught. Do you agree?
Upvote
0
- Dec 17, 2010
- 8,312
- 1,736
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes - I'm guilty of articulating my beliefs as "replacement theology" in the past. How would you define it more subtly? I have an article I'm thinking of - but I'm interested how you would summarise it in a short elevator pitch. (30 seconds - 2 paragraphs)
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
- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
That took a lot of courage to admit that the word "trinity" isn't in the Bible. Wow, you are really brave.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
