THE TRUE "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY/SUPERSESSIONISM" OF THE BIBLE

[jgr]

But the apostate papacy was not the foretold Anti-Christ and the reformers never put much emphasis on eschatology any way.

Dispensationalism's futurism and futurized antichrist originated directly from the apostate papacy's counter-reformation, and the counterfeit production of the Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Recognition of the papal antichrist was a foundational doctrine of the Reformation, and indispensable to its ultimate success, by God's grace and mercy.

The Reformers knew and understood more about the associated eschatology than any before or after.

Your and my spiritual liberties are directly attributable to their prophetic faith, vision, and sacrifice.

We would not be on this forum today without them.

Recognition of the apostasy in and of itself was what was foundational to the reformation movement and indispensable to its ultimate success in that it set a precedent in drawing the Church back to relying upon the sufficiency of the scriptures for its doctrine and trusting the scriptures to be their own interpreter, and while it could be argued the papacy was governed by an antichrist spirit, the reformers still erred in thinking that it was the Anti-Christ.

They may have left a corrupt and spiritually oppressive apostasy behind, but they did not leave its every vestige behind which is why they were not able to fully live up to the principle of Sola Scriptura, not even Martin Luther who was credited with the turn, but in spite of their shortcomings, they still set for future generations a good precedent to be followed and built upon. Unfortunately, much of the Church has failed to maintain that precedent.

Yet I would agree that we still owe our spiritual liberties to their accomplishments and anyone who has a Bible written in their native tongue owes that to men like John Wycliffe, Jan Juss, William Tyndale, the Geneva Bible translators, and even Martin Luther; a fact that Catholics refuse to appreciate and acknowledge.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Dispensationalism's futurism and futurized antichrist originated directly from the apostate papacy's counter-reformation, and the counterfeit production of the Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera.

No, it originated long before that.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Read his quote again.

I have. Where does he say that Israel would no longer be restored as a nation?

 

[jgr]

the reformers still erred in thinking that it was the Anti-Christ.

They did not err. That was a God-given recognition which was fearlessly proclaimed, often to the death, and which was indispensable to the success of the Reformation.

Yet I would agree that we still owe our spiritual liberties to their accomplishments and anyone who has a Bible written in their native tongue owes that to men like John Wycliffe, Jan Juss, William Tyndale, the Geneva Bible translators, and even Martin Luther; a fact that Catholics refuse to appreciate and acknowledge.

I commend your acknowledgement of their contributions.

 

[jgr]

No, it originated long before that.

Note that I said "dispensationalism's futurism".

Dispensational elder Clarence Larkin :

"The "Futurist School" interprets the language of the Apocalypse "literally," except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet "future" and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of "Daniel's Seventy Weeks." This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the "Antichrist," and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as foreshadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the "Type" of those great "Anti-Types" yet future, the "Beast" and the "False Prophet." The "Futurist" interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book."

 

[jgr]

I have. Where does he say that Israel would no longer be restored as a nation?

The word "nation" does not appear in conjunction with Israel in Sermon 72.

Only a dispensationalized interpretation of Israel would have led Augustine to believe in its restoration as a nation.

Augustine was not a dispensationalist.

If you can locate any evidence that Augustine believed in Israel's restoration as a nation, please provide it.

 

[Contenders Edge]

They did not err. That was a God-given recognition which was fearlessly proclaimed, often to the death, and which was indispensable to the success of the Reformation.

There was God-given recognition of the corruption and apostasy that desperately needed to be corrected, but the Anti-Christ is a man, not an institution with a succession of Papal Caesars and this Anti-Christ to come will exceed in his wickedness even that of the heretical Papal empire and already throughout history, there have been men whose evil would have made the medieval Popes appear godly in comparison.

And unlike the reign of the Papal emperors which carried on for centuries, the reign of the forthcoming Anti-Christ will be short lived. And had the eyes of the Reformers been open to the plain sense meaning of the prophecies, they would have realized that the Anti-Christ had not yet appeared upon the scene, though they still might have viewed the Catholic Church as an entity that would pledge its allegiance to him.

And though you might like to think the Reformers as being doctrinally infallible, in spite of the good that they did do from which we benefit, they still carried with them some vestiges of the apostate Church they sought to reform or leave behind and committed doctrinal errors of their own...

I appreciate your acknowledgement of their contributions.

...but at least we can agree one thing in that we benefit from the good things that they did accomplish. And by the way, do you know what day of the year was set aside to celebrate the Reformation?

 

[Contenders Edge]

Note that I said "dispensationalism's futurism".

Dispensational elder Clarence Larkin :

"The "Futurist School" interprets the language of the Apocalypse "literally," except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet "future" and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of "Daniel's Seventy Weeks." This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the "Antichrist," and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as foreshadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the "Type" of those great "Anti-Types" yet future, the "Beast" and the "False Prophet." The "Futurist" interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book."

The source you cite only proves my point in stating that the Jesuits did not invent the basis for Dispensationalist doctrine but in an ironic twist, may have had a hand in reviving futurist eschatology which had been suppressed by a corrupt and wicked Papacy.

 

[jgr]

There was God-given recognition of the corruption and apostasy that desperately needed to be corrected, but the Anti-Christ is a man, not an institution with a succession of Papal Caesars and this Anti-Christ to come will exceed in his wickedness even that of the heretical Papal empire and already throughout history, there have been men whose evil would have made the medieval Popes appear godly in comparison.

The papal antichrist was a collection of men, even as the man of God is a collection of men. (2 Timothy 3:17)

And unlike the reign of the Papal emperors which carried on for centuries, the reign of the forthcoming Anti-Christ will be short lived. And had the eyes of the Reformers been open to the plain sense meaning of the prophecies, they would have realized that the Anti-Christ had not yet appeared upon the scene, though they still might have viewed the Catholic Church as an entity that would pledge its allegiance to him.

Unlike modern dispensational futurized speculators and presumers, the Reformers by God's help accurately diagnosed the signs of their times, sacrificed themselves unconditionally, and delivered the true Church from spiritual darkness, of which efforts all of us today are beneficiaries.

And though you might like to think the Reformers as being doctrinally infallible, in spite of the good that they did do from which we benefit, they still carried with them some vestiges of the apostate Church they sought to reform or leave behind and committed doctrinal errors of their own...

No one is infallible. But God uses us, and used the Reformers, to accomplish His purposes.

 

[jgr]

The source you cite only proves my point in stating that the Jesuits did not invent the basis for Dispensationalist doctrine but in an ironic twist, may have had a hand in reviving futurist eschatology which had been suppressed by a corrupt and wicked Papacy.

o·rig·i·nate
/əˈrijəˌnāt/
verb
have a specified beginning.
"the word originated as a marketing term"
Similar:
arise
have its origin
derive
begin
start
stem
spring
emerge
develop
grow
rise
flow
emanate
issue
create or initiate (something).
"he is responsible for originating this particular cliché"
Similar:
invent
be the inventor of
create
initiate
devise
think up

 

[Contenders Edge]

The word "nation" does not appear in conjunction with Israel in Sermon 72.

Only a dispensationalized interpretation of Israel would have led Augustine to believe in its restoration as a nation.

Augustine was not a dispensationalist.

If you can locate any evidence that Augustine believed in Israel's restoration as a nation, please provide it.

Israel has always been called a nation, even when they were not a recognized sovereign nation. There is nothing in the cited quote from Augustine that would suggest that he believed otherwise. Like others in his generation before, he believed that the Church only temporarily replaced Israel and that Israel would eventually receive Christ as their Savior and with that repentance, would come restoration as a nation.

Granted there were some who believed that Israel would never be restored as a nation, but the cited quote does not suggest that Augustine was among that number. Augustine may not have been what we might call a dispensationalist, but he definitely was not a Preterist in the strictest sense.

 

[jgr]

...but at least we can agree one thing in that we benefit from the good things that they did accomplish. And by the way, do you know what day of the year was set aside to celebrate the Reformation?

Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenberg church door Oct. 31, 1517.

I did look it up.

 

[jgr]

Israel has always been called a nation, even when they were not a recognized sovereign nation. There is nothing in the cited quote from Augustine that would suggest that he believed otherwise. Like others in his generation before, he believed that the Church only temporarily replaced Israel and that Israel would eventually receive Christ as their Savior and with that repentance, would come restoration as a nation.

Granted there were some who believed that Israel would never be restored as a nation, but the cited quote does not suggest that Augustine was among that number. Augustine may not have been what we might call a dispensationalist, but he definitely was not a Preterist in the strictest sense.

You're making the claim about Augustine and national restoration, so you need to provide the evidence.

 

[Contenders Edge]

The papal antichrist was a collection of men, even as the man of God is a collection of men. (2 Timothy 3:17)

Arguably, does that not go to show that Satan is always attempting counterfeit, imitate, and impersonate the things of God? Just as he is capable of creating a counterfeit church, why not a counterfeit Christ which is the Anti-Christ. Christ is not confined to a collection of men. He is a man and manifested Himself as a man. Should it not then be expected that Satan has and will still continue to be hard at work to raise up a man who will serve as a counterfeit Christ?

Unlike modern dispensational futurized speculators and presumers, the Reformers by God's help accurately diagnosed the signs of their times, sacrificed themselves unconditionally, and delivered the true Church from spiritual darkness, of which efforts all of us today are beneficiaries.

At least the Dispensational futurists are aware of the times in which they live. The Preterists on the other hand do not seem to be as concerned and act as though things will simply continue on as they have been.

No one is infallible. But God uses us, and used the Reformers, to accomplish His purposes.

To that I can agree.

 

[Contenders Edge]

Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenberg church door Oct. 31, 1517.

I did look it up.

I knew that too. I was just curious as to whether or not you knew that. Reformation day has been a forgotten day, even by much of the Church.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Contenders Edge said: ↑
To better rephrase the question, where did he state that they would never again become a nation?

Read his quote again.

I have. Where does he say that Israel would no longer be restored as a nation?

What sayeth the Scriptures:

Acts 1:6 Restore Kingdom to Israel/10 KINGS One Mind Reve 17

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of God shall be being taken-away from Ye[Judean Rulers of the Southern Kingdom of Judah], and it shall be being given to a Nation[Northern Nation of Israel/Gentiles] doing the Fruits of it.

I take this as being the NC spiritual Kingdom/Temple as opposed to the OC Mosaic Temple worship system, which as we all know was destroyed about 40yrs later in 70AD

Luke 21:31 "Thus also ye, whenever ye may be seeing these-things becoming, ye are knowing that nigh is the Kingdom of the God."'
===========================
Now let's look at this verse concerning the Apostles asking Jesus about restoring the Kingdom to them........Did they realize that the OC Kingdom of Judah/Jerusalem would be decimated in order for them not to have to worship in Jerusalem or Temple?

Acts 1:6 The-ones indeed then coming together, asked Him saying, `Lord!, if in to-the time, this, Thou are restoring the Kingdom to the Israel?'
========================
Now look at Revelation and the 10 Kings without a Kingdom yet......anyone see any similarity between this and Acts 1 and Matthew 21:43??

Revelation 17:
12 And the ten horns which you saw are being ten kings, who any a-Kingdom not-yet received, but authority as kings one hour they are receiving/ with the wild beast,

16 And the ten Horns which thou saw and the Beast, These shall be hating the harlot,
and They shall be making Her desolate and naked, and the fleshes of Her they shall be eating and shall be burning Her in fire

This must be the house of Judah in 1st century Jerusalem

Revelation 18:
19They cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and mourning, saying, 'Woe, woe, the great city, in which all who had their ships in the sea were made rich by reason of her great wealth!'
For in one hour is she made desolate.
=======================

 

[Contenders Edge]

You're making the claim about Augustine and national restoration, so you need to provide the evidence.

The quote I cited ought to be sufficient enough.

 

[jgr]

I knew that too. I was just curious as to whether or not you knew that. Reformation day has been a forgotten day, even by much of the Church.

Certainly true.

 

[Contenders Edge]

What sayeth the Scriptures:

Acts 1:6 Restore Kingdom to Israel/10 KINGS One Mind Rev

What sayeth the Scriptures:

[URL='https://www.christianforums.com/threads/acts-1-6-restore-kingdom-to-israel-10-kings-one-mind-reve-17.8075581/']Acts 1:6 Restore Kingdom to Israel/10 KINGS One Mind Reve 17

What is meant by the kingdom of God in this verse? The 1st century OC Temple and the Sanctuary [Supposedly where God's presence was]?

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of God shall be being taken-away from Ye[Judean Rulers of the Southern Kingdom of Judah], and it shall be being given to a Nation[Northern Nation of Israel/Gentiles] doing the Fruits of it.

I take this as being the NC spiritual Kingdom as opposed to the OC Mosaic Temple worship system, which as we all know was destroyed about 40yrs later in 70AD

Luke 21:31 "Thus also ye, whenever ye may be seeing these-things becoming, ye are knowing that nigh is the Kingdom of the God."'
===========================
Now let's look at this verse concerning the Apostles asking Jesus about restoring the Kingdom to them........Did they realize that the OC Kingdom of Judah/Jerusalem would be decimated in order for them not to have to worship in Jerusalem or Temple?

Acts 1:6 The-ones indeed then coming together, asked Him saying, `Lord!, if in to-the time, this, you are restoring the Kingdom to the Israel?'
========================
Now look at Revelation and the 10 Kings without a Kingdom yet......anyone see any similarity between this and Acts 1 and Matthew 21:43??

Revelation 17:
12 And the ten horns which you saw are being ten kings, who any a-Kingdom not-yet received, but authority as kings one hour they are receiving/ with the wild beast,

16 And the ten Horns which thou saw and the Beast, These shall be hating the harlot,
and They shall be making Her desolate and naked, and the fleshes of Her they shall be eating and shall be burning Her in fire

This must be the house of Judah in 1st century Jerusalem

Revelation 18:
19They cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and mourning, saying, 'Woe, woe, the great city, in which all who had their ships in the sea were made rich by reason of her great wealth!'
For in one hour is she made desolate.
=======================

e 17[/URL]

What is meant by the kingdom of God in this verse? The 1st century OC Temple and the Sanctuary [Supposedly where God's presence was]?

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of God shall be being taken-away from Ye[Judean Rulers of the Southern Kingdom of Judah], and it shall be being given to a Nation[Northen Nation of Israel/Gentiles] doing the Fruits of it.

I take this as being the NC spiritual Kingdom as opposed to the OC Mosaic Temple worship system, which as we all know was destroyed about 40yrs later in 70AD

Luke 21:31 "Thus also ye, whenever ye may be seeing these-things becoming, ye are knowing that nigh is the Kingdom of the God."'
===========================
Now let's look at this verse concerning the Apostles asking Jesus about restoring the Kingdom to them........Did they realize that the OC Kingdom of Judah/Jerusalem would be decimated in order for them not to have to worship in Jerusalem or Temple?

Acts 1:6 The-ones indeed then coming together, asked Him saying, `Lord!, if in to-the time, this, you are restoring the Kingdom to the Israel?'
========================
Now look at Revelation and the 10 Kings without a Kingdom yet......anyone see any similarity between this and Acts 1 and Matthew 21:43??

Revelation 17:
12 And the ten horns which you saw are being ten kings, who any a-Kingdom not-yet received, but authority as kings one hour they are receiving/ with the wild beast,

16 And the ten Horns which thou saw and the Beast, These shall be hating the harlot,
and They shall be making Her desolate and naked, and the fleshes of Her they shall be eating and shall be burning Her in fire

This must be the house of Judah in 1st century Jerusalem

Revelation 18:
19They cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and mourning, saying, 'Woe, woe, the great city, in which all who had their ships in the sea were made rich by reason of her great wealth!'
For in one hour is she made desolate.
=======================

That did not mean that the they would be forever bereft of the Kingdom of God as is made clear in Romans chapter 11. Even Jesus has still left open to them an opportunity to repent. (Mt. 23:37-39)