Honoluluwindow
Well-Known Member
He can think that if he wants to. I'll give him a job in the kingdom.
Upvote
0
Prophetic promises to Israel
- Thread starter Biblewriter
- Start date
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. No more than your teachers and you have to post videos of them.
2. I read more than just them and I have studied on my own.
3. Now you give your list of dispensationalists that don't teach the New Covenant whether TV evangelists or the church you went to. Put up or be silent!!!!!!!!!!Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
Honoluluwindow
Well-Known Member
You can believe in replacement theology if that's your thing. And I get it how you've arrived at such a conclusion. It requires the allegorical hermeneutic. Plain simple. At least I have the ability to recognize how Augustine and his ilk came up with replacement theology. You should acknowledge that. And if you are intellectually honest you would make the observations about the Israelologists having made our doctrine on the logical conclusion from a strict literal hermeneutic.
Upvote
0
I am not the one who has...
Replaced the One Seed(Christ), with the many seeds in Galatians 3:16.
Replaced Israel of the Promise, with Israel of the Flesh in Romans 9:8.
Replaced the word "so", with the word "then" in Romans 11:26.
Ignored the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled in Hebrews 8:6-13, and is specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:18-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.
Claimed that the "Age of Grace" will come to an end and then God will go back and deal with the modern nation of Israel under the now "obsolete" (Hebrews 8:13) Old Covenant system. The New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20. God is not going to replace the New Covenant with the Old Covenant during a future time.
I have not replaced the understanding of the Church for 1800 years, with that doctrine brought to America by John Nelson Darby about the time of the Civil War.
.
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
Honoluluwindow,
1. baberean2 cannot rebut properly because he goes by what a scripture appears to him.
Perception can be deceptive if context is not understood. Even plain statements have contexts such as the example of the word "eternal life" is what we receive when we get saved.
It is true but doesn't mean that it supports UES because of the difference between an eternal substance and the possession of it.
This is his perception and one definition only causing a one track mindset ending in tunnel vision to his wrong hermeneutics and wrong understanding of the real truth.
2. His dissing dispensations is because of some bad experience growing up and yet he seemingly cannot provide any proof of a dispensationalist that didn't teach the new covenant.
One could find one that may not have preached a sermon but he won't find that that preacher doesn't believe in the New Covenant.
3. Augustine had slants of Gnosticism and fatalism. These have to be taken in consideration to use him as an authority on the word of God.
4. baberean2, has to go back to his mantra because that is his only chance to make it sound like he knows what he is talking about.
5. His replacement theology is according to his hermeneutics and not biblical hermeneutics.
6. When he is faced with the real truth and cannot answer it he dodges and he will talk about something else to deflect and destract.
7. One of the worst things he does is to accuse dispensationalists believing and saying things that dispensationalists don't believe or say.
8. He is more interested in dissing true biblical history and upholding secular opinion of wrong history.
9. I have told him his post and are a posting contradiction.
10. It is one thing to debate biblical views but dodging, deflecting, and deceiving and using backhanded techniques to say one is not telling the truth is more than unfair.
It is not right to keep putting words in our mouth or presenting dispensationalism falsely. It is hypocritical and wrong and yet he continues to do it. Why and why is he allowed to do it? Thinking out loud. Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
And that Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, must also be a terrible person just like me, because he also had some problems with modern Dispensational Theology...
.
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. I didn't say Spurgeon was a terrible person.
Spurgeon was a wonderful Christian in many ways and a very intense and somewhat articulate speaker.
2. Just because I disagree with another Christian's view or has a problem with the biblical view I hold doesn't mean their a terrible person.
I am of an opposite view that I believe is biblical so am I a terrible person too?
3. I don't think your a terrible person personally, because I don't know really know you.
I have a problem with your view because it doesn't hold weight according to the scriptures when you take all the scriptures into account on the subject.
It is only right in your context and one sidedness of the scriptures that you use resulting in manipulation of the scriptures whether you mean to or not.
4. The worse thing is that because of your one-sided collection of scriptures causes you to be one track.
With your one definition only of a scripture without taking in consideration of the context you can only come to one conclusion which is somewhat wrong.
You are correct about Jeremiah 31 that the New Covenant was inaugurated at Calvary for the church of believing Jews and Gentiles because Jesus died for the whole world John 3:16.
You forget the other half of Jeremiah about not having to be taught about the Lord which is talking about the whole nation of Jews who will believe not believing Jews of the church age saints in the church age.
Not having to been taught did not happen in the early church because Peter didn't get the vision of the clean and unclean till 7 or 8-10 years after the Day of Pentecost Acts 10.
Paul left the Jews because they would not listen to the truth Acts 28.
Romans 9-11 was about the grafting in of Gentiles into the olive tree with believing Jews to make the nation of Israel jealous for God that they will return to fulfill their gifts and callings. Romans 11:29.
This was the reason for the Jewish remnant of grace in Romans 11:1-11.
God had not forgotten the nation of Israel and their gifts and callings Romans 11:29;25-29.
These gifts and callings are things like rulership in the KoH reign Isaiah 2:2-4 with Christ as the head over the world from Jerusalem.
Israel will be a believing nation under the New Covenant Ezekiel 37:15-28 in the KoH reign.
There would have been no reason for making a big deal about unbelieving Jews individually or as a nation in Romans 11 because there is no Jew, Gentile, man, woman etc. This means all are equal in Christ. So your argument is irrelevant and invalid.
5. Worse than this is you continue to falsely accuse and stereotype what a person believes, which in this case is dispensationalists all because you hold onto your wrong deducement of dispensational thought or make the perception that some dispensationalists that you supposedly had experience with or TV preachers said or didn't believe etc., which you cannot even name, that they are the majority when they are the minority.
Such is the case when you say dispensationalists don't preach or believe in the NC.
That is unfair and your position is a walking contradiction of the word of God.
6. You know that Israel will be a believing nation in the KoH on earth Ezekiel 37:21-28, Revelation 1:7.
You know that David will be their King Ezekiel 37:24.
You know Christ and his saints will rule with a rod of iron Psalms 2:9; Revelation 2:26-27 and yes Israel Isaiah 2:2-4;9:6-7.
I have to go but you need to bow to the truth and quit believing your Berean teachers that you post and yet want to make me out like a Darby-ite when I don't post anything by him or hadn't really studied him thoroughly. Quit posting hypocritical posts. Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
Those in the New Covenant do not need teachers because we have our own internal teacher, as revealed by the words of Christ found below.
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.
Jeremiah 31:31-34 must already be fulfilled, because the same text is found fulfilled in Hebrews 8:6-13.
.
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
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. John14:26 was speaking directly to the disciples of what he revealed to them in his ministry that they didn't understand fully.
2. The Holy Spirit is to lead and guide us in our lives if we cooperate with him.
3. To say there is no need for teachers for New Covenant believers is ridiculous and unscriptural.
Paul shows in 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1st Apostles; 2nd prophets; and third teachers.
This is for the body of Christ verse 27.
Paul said Ephesians 4:11; And he gave some apostles, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers.
Verse 12; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.
Verse 13; Till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of Fod unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.
If you think that this was just for the church then and not now you didn't get that from the Holy Spirit.
4. Jeremiah 31:31-34-36 and Hebrews 8:6-13 has not been fulfilled with Israel and you have already been shown where you err so quit trying to keep your false belief alive by sounding a tinkling cymbal that has no true love for the truth. Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
Act 2:22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know—
Act 2:36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?"
Act 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Act 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."
Act 2:40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, "Be saved from this perverse generation."
Act 2:41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.
Either you are wrong or Peter was wrong when he addressed the crowd as Israelites on the Day of Pentecost.
.
Upvote
0
If it is "ridiculous and unscriptural" why did the old Bible scholar Albert Barnes say the same thing in his commentary found below.
.........................................................................
Hebrews 8:11
And they shall not teach every man his neighbor ... - That is, no one shall be under a necessity of imparting instruction to another, or of exhorting him to become acquainted with the Lord. This is designed to set forth another of the advantages which would attend the new dispensation. In the previous verse it had been said that one advantage of that economy would be, that the Law would be written on the heart, and that they who were thus blessed would be regarded as the people of God. Another advantage over the "old" arrangement or covenant is here stated. It is, that the knowledge of the Lord and of the true religion would be deeply engraved on the minds of all, and that there would be no necessity for mutual exhortation and counsel. "They shall have a much more certain and effectual teaching than they can derive from another." "Doddridge." This passage does not refer to the fact that the true religion will be universally diffused, but that among those who are interested in the blessings of the new covenant there would be an accurate and just knowledge of the Lord. In some way they would be so taught respecting his character that they would not need the aid to be derived from others. All under that dispensation, or sustaining to him the relation of "a people," would in fact have a correct knowledge of the Lord. This could not be said of the old dispensation, for.
(1) Their religion consisted much in outward observances.
(2) It was not to such an extent as the new system a dispensation of the Holy Spirit.
(3) There were not as many means as now for learning the true character of God.
(4) The fullest revelations had not been made to them of that character. That was reserved for the coming of the Saviour, and under him it was intended that there should be communicated the full knowledge of the character of God.
Many mss., and those among the best, here have πολίτην politēn - "citizen;" "fellow-citizen," instead of πλησίον plēsion, "neighbor," and this is adopted by Griesbach, Tittman, Rosenmuller, Knapp, Stuart, and by many of the fathers. It is also in the version of the Septuagint in the place quoted from Jeremiah. It is not easy to determine the true reading, but the word "neighbor" better agrees with the meaning of the Hebrew - רץ rēà - and there is strong authority from the mss. and the versions for this reading.
And every man his brother - Another form of expression, meaning that there would be no necessity that one should teach another.
Saying, Know the Lord - That is, become acquainted with God; learn his character and his will. The idea is, that the true knowledge of Yahweh would prevail as a characteristic of those times.
For all shall know me - That is, all those referred to; all who are interested in the new covenant, and who are partakers of its blessings. It does not mean that all persons, in all lands, would then know the Lord - though the time will come when that will be true; but the expression is to be limited by the point under discussion. That point is not that the knowledge of the Lord will fill the whole world, but that all who are interested in the new dispensation will have a much more full and clear knowledge of God than was possessed under the old. Of the truth of this no one can doubt. Christians have a much more perfect knowledge of God and of his government than could have been learned merely from the revelations of the Old Testament.
Any interpretation that differs from modern Dispensational Theology is likely to be labeled as "ridiculous and unscriptural", by the proponents of that system. It is the way the system has defended itself since John Darby made a personal attack upon Benjamin Newton, when Newton would not accept the "Secret Rapture" of the Irvingites or the division of scripture into that for the Church and that for Israel. This is confirmed by Brethren Historian F.R. Coad in the article below.
PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean 2,
1. The House of Israel was all those from Jesus ministry.
2. Peter didn't really understand the totality of the answer that Jesus gave about the KoH reign was not to be of concern for them concerning when it would happen.
Peter understood the physical KoH reign had to have the whole nation of Israel to repent for them to fulfill their gifts and callings according to the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants for they were eternal Genesis 12:1-4; 2 Samuel 7:5-16; 1 Chronicles 28:4-8.
He also understood the signs which some happened as the Holy Spirit falling on them and them repenting Joel 2 despite the prophecy of the Holy Spirit by Jesus Matthew 3:11.
In Joel there had to be a restoration of the land and Peter understood this in Acts 3:18-21. But there was no restoration of the land and no full fulfillment of Joel's prophecy.
3. The message on the Day of Pentecost was about Israel being the reason Christ was killed and even when Stephen gave his speech of the history of Israel and how they rejected Christ and still was rejected him and they stoned him to death.
Paul was concerned about the nation of Israel for he was a Jew and he understood the covenant promises of the gifts and callings Romans 11:25-29.
4. Your argument about Peter addressing the nation of Israel doesn't support your spiritual Jew theory or your theory God is through with the nation of Israel and replaced by the Church of today. I have already proved you wrong and yet you have the gaw to ignore it and deflect to perception of a plain statement which doesn't gel with the correct context.
You wouldn't be very good on a debate team.
You keep thinking if you keep peddling your wrong position it will come true and people will believe it. You are wrong as always and for those who can see through that deceptive posting are not fooled. You need to quit this unfair tactic. Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. There is a difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and knowing the Lord and not having to be taught of any man.
2. Barnes was a dispensationalist and knew this was would not happen with Israel till the future tribulation and not at the Cross or in the church age.
3. Barnes could have made it plainer but you are misunderstanding his main point about the knowledge of the NC.
4. With that said it would have been advantageous to point out that Paul said we see through a glass darkly till we see him face to face. This was for the church at the rapture but it will not be for the nation of Israel which will be after the church age saints are raptured and the millennial kingdom age begins after they have repented and they become a nation born in one day Isaiah 66:6-9; Revelation 1:7 etc.
So it is your wrong understanding is why you make false accusations. Jerry kelso
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
Not if you read his commentaries on Dan. 9 and 2 Thes. 2. Consistent with the Reformers, he believed in an unpostponed 70th week; and in the papacy as antichrist. Not too dispensational.
Upvote
0
How does the "church age" end before the Second Coming of Christ, when the New Covenant is found to be "everlasting" in the verses below?
Heb 13:20 Now may the God of peace who brought up our Lord Jesus from the dead, that great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
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.
Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
.
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
Do you ever think for yourself? Or are you so blinded by your denominational view you can't see the forest for the trees? Doesn't sound like a biblical Berean to me.
1. The law was to be forever but not under the Old Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-34 proves this and this is why they could not behold the abolishment of that Old Covenant 2 Corinthians 3:13.
2. The NC came in at the Cross of Christ and his resurrection.
Galatians 3:17; And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Verse 18; For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it by promise.
Verse 19; Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of of a mediator.
3. The promises in the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants for Israel and not the church Genesis 12:1-4-15; 2 Samuel 7:4-16; 1 Chronicles 28:7-8; Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7; 66:6-9; Ezekiel 37:24; 15-28; etc.
These scriptures show and prove that Old Covenant couldn't prevent the New Covenant taking its place, the New Covenant couldn't prevent the eternal promises of the gifts and callings of the nation of Israel when they repent Romans 11:25-29.
4. The church age saints being raptured cannot prevent the gospel being given to the nation of Israel or Gentiles because they will realize how much they messed up when we are gone.
God will use the prophetic videos left behind of the prophecy teachers that preach the pre-tribulation rapture Revelation 4:1.
Revelation 19:11-15 shows saints coming out of Heaven with Christ and not the rapture of 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 where the Lord is descending out of Heaven with only dead saints with a shout to rapture his earthly saints.
Revelation 19:11-15 Christ is coming out of Heaven with his saints to make war not rapture his saints.
Revelation 19 shows no shout from Heaven at all, but out of his mouth goes a sword to smite the nations and will rule with a rod of iron over the earth.
5. You go to seed with the spiritual Jew theory. This extreme is why you take the scripture out of context and steal the nation of Israel's gifts and callings and attribute them to the church.
All saints will have rulership positions but even the church age saints will not have the exact positions in the KoH reign.
Israel's covenants are eternal and no matter how much they sin they will have a remnant of grace there will be a generation who will believe in Christ and take their rightful place in the KoH reign at the head of the nations Isaiah 2:2-4 where the law will go out of Zion. Zion will be the capitol of the earth and in the land of the nation of Israel.
Ezekiel 37 shows the promise of the land and the KoH reign and Joel 2 of the restoration of creation and Acts 3:19 are all tied into the restoration of all things that started when Adam and Eve sinned and lost the physical and spiritual rule.
6. Because the church age involves the timing of the NC, and includes the mystery of the church of Jew and Gentile in one body alike you assume that the church has to be present in the tribulation to provoke Israel to jealousy?
The church of Jews and Gentiles provoke the nation today but they haven't got the clue because they are still blinded just like in Paul's day in 2 Corinthians 3:14.
If Paul believed in your spiritual Jew to the extreme theory there would be no reason to say that all individual Jews will be saved when the time of the Gentiles come in and Christ will take away their sins connected to the election and their gifts and callings. why and what are you saying?
One, he is talking about the nation of physical Israel because Christ comes back to not only take the kingdoms of the world Revelation 11:15; and save Israel who will be encompassed by the nations of the world Zechariah 14:1-4; 1:1-21.
Two, the true church is not backslidden or trodden under the foot of men for the gates of hell should not prevail against it Matthew 16:18.
Third, unbelieving Jews can be enemies to the church, but as touching the election (Jewish remnant)? they are beloved for the father's sake.
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
These last two scriptures make no sense if Paul is talking about only unbelieving Jews and not the nation of Israel.
Why? Because the unbelieving Gentiles are just as important as the unbelieving Jews for they all need to be saved.
7. Your spiritual Jew extreme theory is assumption, wrong deducing, non-recognition of proper contexts, impossible to reconcile with all the scriptures on the subject and not to mention the nation of Israel's gifts and calling is without repentance which means it is eternal conditioned on obedience which will happen in the tribulation.
There is no logic in your view humanly or Heavenly speaking according to the scriptures.
Your unfairness in exegesis which I have already proved you do you continue to ignore the truth and continue to ask questions or say anything to keep the conversation going to try and show your position is somewhat relevant when it isn't. Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law.
.
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
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. That context was specific to the Levitical priesthood being changed to the Melchizedek Priesthood.
2. The Old Covenant of Moses was done away at the Cross and the New Covenant took its place.
3. For a Jew in the tribulation the law will be written in their hearts.
Jerry kelso
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Locked
