Third Temple comes from Ezekiel 40-47

[gospelfer]

Ezekiel 40-47 describes a temple never yet built. What Ezekiel gives us, in fact, is an architectural plan.

Note that at this point Joseph (the northern kingdom) is destroyed. And the land boundaries have not existed as he describes them either in his time or since then. So this has to be a future temple.

Furthermore Ezekiel spends a great deal of space to do so. The only other real equivalent to these Ezekiel chapters are the detailed instructions for the construction of the ark and its environs. The idea that this is some kind of symbolic representation when it is so brutally practical is not tenable.

Ezekiel, all by himself, in 7 short chapters, eviscerates preterism. Ezekiel 40-47 cannot be explained by preterism; it can only be explained away.

 

[Jipsah]

So that means that Christianity is just a temporary arrangement until the beginning of the next dispensation, when temple Judaism starts up again as though nothing had happened. I reckon that also must mean that our Lord's sacrifice on the Cross was also only efficacious for a limited period of time so God has us revert back to the blood of cattle and sheep to atone for sins.

Sorry, dude, but that's an abomination. You can believe that if you like, but I personally consider it blasphemous.

Do you people ever read the New Testament at all (apart from Matthew 24 and Revelation)?

 

[gospelfer]

So that means that Christianity is just a temporary arrangement until the beginning of the next dispensation, when temple Judaism starts up again as though nothing had happened. I reckon that also must mean that our Lord's sacrifice on the Cross was also only efficacious for a limited period of time so God has us revert back to the blood of cattle and sheep to atone for sins.

Sorry, dude, but that's an abomination. You can believe that if you like, but I personally consider it blasphemous.

Do you people ever read the New Testament at all (apart from Matthew 24 and Revelation)?

Well, Matt 24 and Revelations are the only part of the NT that are prophetic, and this is an eschatology forum ...

Beyond that all your arguments are straw men.

Christians already follow significant parts of the Law. Presumably, this is not an insult to Christ. Presumably it does not abrogate the new covenant.

No dispensationalist thinks there will be meaningful animal sacrifice in the new temple. Why should there be? Either it will not happen, or its meaning will be new. Christ's sacrifice took care of our sins: why pretend that the dispensationalist thinks otherwise?

Preterists simply ignore prophecy that doesn't fit their scheme, as in this case, Ezekiel 40ff. That looks like a pretty big insult thrown at God. The ancient Jews ignored prophecy not fitting there scheme, and they got turned into road pizza. There is a lesson there.

Dispensationalists believe that, as prophecy says, God can save the Jews. And he can do it without insulting himself, or abrogating Christ's work. Somehow they will still be a people, they will be in the land, and they will be saved. Nearly all prophecy proclaims this. I think God can do what his book says he will do. Call me crazy ...

 

[BABerean2]

Well, Matt 24 and Revelations are the only part of the NT that are prophetic, and this is an eschatology forum ...

Beyond that all your arguments are straw men.

Christians already follow significant parts of the Law. Presumably, this is not an insult to Christ. Presumably it does not abrogate the new covenant.

No dispensationalist thinks there will be meaningful animal sacrifice in the new temple. Why should there be? Either it will not happen, or its meaning will be new. Christ's sacrifice took care of our sins: why pretend that the dispensationalist thinks otherwise?

Preterists simply ignore prophecy that doesn't fit their scheme, as in this case, Ezekiel 40ff. That looks like a pretty big insult thrown at God. The ancient Jews ignored prophecy not fitting there scheme, and they got turned into road pizza. There is a lesson there.

Dispensationalists believe that, as prophecy says, God can save the Jews. And he can do it without insulting himself, or abrogating Christ's work. Somehow they will still be a people, they will be in the land, and they will be saved. Nearly all prophecy proclaims this. I think God can do what his book says he will do. Call me crazy ...

The New Testament could not be any clearer.

All of the promises are fulfilled in Christ.

Being a physical descendant of Jacob does not bring any kind of salvation.

In many ways Dispensationalists are being Judaisers when it comes to Jews.

Two Israels: Israel of the Flesh and Israel of the Promise


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
(The promise was made to only one seed, Christ.)


Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

Gal 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.



………………………………...................



Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
(God does not judge by one’s DNA.)

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
(All of Jacob's descendants are not included in Israel of the Promise.)

Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
(Being a descendant of Jacob does not make one a child of God.)
..........................................................

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(The New Covenant has replaced the Old Covenant.)

Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
(He took away the first covenant to establish the second.)

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
(There is no need for renewed animal sacrifices. Christ was the ultimate sacrifice. He was God‘s one and only son.)

Heb 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.


..............................................................

Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. (God is no longer a respecter of persons based on DNA.)

Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
(Paul was not cast away, because of his faith in Christ.)

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
(During Paul's time there was a remnant of Jacob's descendants, who believed in Christ.)



Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
(Those broken off, has to be a reference to the unbelieving Jews.)

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.
(They can only be grafted back in, through faith in Christ.)

Rom 11:26 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:
("so" is an adverb of manner indicated by the Greek. It is not an adverb of time.)
(Many modern Bible scholars have changed the “so” to the word “then” which completely changes the intended meaning of the verse.)
G3779
οὕτω
houtō
hoo'-to
Or, before a vowel, οὕτως houtōs hoo'-toce.
From G3778; in this way (referring to what precedes or follows): - after that, after (in) this manner, as, even (so), for all that, like (-wise), no more, on this fashion (-wise), so (in like manner), thus, what.

This could also be written, “And in this manner all Israel shall be saved…” which refers back to verse 23. They can be grafted back in through Faith in Christ. Many people say this means all of the Jews will be saved at some future point in time. However, multiple verses in Romans 9, 10 and 11 say the opposite. This has been clearly demonstrated by the words of the Apostle Paul.
One verse cannot change all of the other verses that come before it. ………………………………..........................................................






Eph_2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
(God is no longer a respecter of persons. Christ has broken down the wall of separation between all peoples.)

The descendants of Jacob can only be grafted back into faithful Israel by faith in Christ. This is the "so", manner of their salvation.

The Church is not a parenthesis in God's plan. The Church is the Plan.

If we truly love the Jewish people we must tell them the truth.

.

 

[duolos]

Preterists simply ignore prophecy that doesn't fit their scheme, as in this case, Ezekiel 40ff. That looks like a pretty big insult thrown at God. The ancient Jews ignored prophecy not fitting there scheme, and they got turned into road pizza. There is a lesson there.

So without a doubt you would call G.K. Beale a preterist and so his 29 page "broad sketch" of what Ezekiel 40ff is about which he admits is not a full treatment of the passage because of the constraints of the book, is by all means ignoring the text.


For reference what I'm talking about is chapter 11 of The Temple and the Church's Mission: A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God.

 

[gospelfer]

Barean spills a lot of ink accusing dispensatinalists of thinking Jews have some salvation apart of Christ.

This accusation is entirely false. Doesn't seem to matter how many times dispensationalists assert there is no salvation apart from Christ; preterists always return to this make-believe opponent. Beating the stuffing out of a straw men is both easy and fun!

Barean also asserts that dispensationlists believe there is some kind of spiritual difference between Jews and Gentiles. He brings a lot of pointless scripture to the table to support the assertion that spiritually there is no difference between the believing Jew and believing gentile. I say "pointless" because he is arguing against something no dispensationalist believes. I might as well pretend preterists believe that the earth sits atop an elephant -- it would have the same accuracy.

Dispensationalism merely asserts is that God is going to return the Jews to the land and see that they get the New Covenant. This also happens to be what all prophecy says. This is also why dispensationalists believe it.

Preterism requires throwing out half of prophecy. Dispensationalism allows us to keep of all of it.

Paul looked forward to the fullness of the Gentiles, when the Jew would be grafted back in (as all prophecy says). The preterists deny scripture, deny God vision, and deny God his victory over the nation of Israel (which will be to their benefit too). When God saves the Jewish nation, He will be showing the world a burning example his shinning mercy, grace, power, and the power of his book.

The saving of national Israel is a historical event, like the Gospel going to Ireland. Except in Israel's case, the Jew will be moving to the land of Israel. Why is so hard to accept? Why is that so objectionable?

Paul looked forward to this prophetic event. We should be able to also.

 

[duolos]

Barean spills a lot of ink accusing dispensatinalists of thinking Jews have some salvation apart of Christ.

Well that's what it looks like for me as well, they say that the Church and Israel are distinct, yet my reading of descriptions of the Church in the New Testament make it clear that salvation through Christ does not come to anyone who is not joined into that body.

This accusation is entirely false. Doesn't seem to matter how many times dispensationalists assert there is no salvation apart from Christ; preterists always return to this make-believe opponent. Beating the stuffing out of a straw men is both easy and fun!

My question is why does salvation through Christ look different for Israel than it does for the Church and on what basis?

Barean also asserts that dispensationlists believe there is some kind of spiritual difference between Jews and Gentiles. He brings a lot of pointless scripture to the table to support the assertion that spiritually there is no difference between the believing Jew and believing gentile. I say "pointless" because he is arguing against something no dispensationalist believes. I might as well pretend preterists believe that the earth sits atop an elephant -- it would have the same accuracy.

Except of course when such texts as Rom 11:25 are used to justify the distinction between the Church and Israel which leads me to question whether you do believe that Gentiles who believe == the Church, and Israel is Israel, and I can't understand such an application of the text, when it forces me to believe that what Paul is talking about is the restoration of Israel back into the Church which is faithful to Yahweh.

Dispensationalism merely asserts is that God is going to return the Jews to the land and see that they get the New Covenant. This also happens to be what all prophecy says. This is also why dispensationalists believe it.

I find such a declaration to not mesh with (as Jipsah has pointed out) the book of Hebrews which says that the New Covenant has already been founded in the Sacrifice of Christ.

Preterism requires throwing out half of prophecy. Dispensationalism allows us to keep of all of it.

I would disagree, Dispensationalism throws out half if not all of the New Testament's application of Old Testament Prophecy in search of something smaller than the heightened fulfilment in Christ.

Paul looked forward to the fullness of the Gentiles, when the Jew would be grafted back in (as all prophecy says). The preterists deny scripture, deny God vision, and deny God his victory over the nation of Israel (which will be to their benefit too). When God saves the Jewish nation, He will be showing the world a burning example his shinning mercy, grace, power, and the power of his book.

So, are Israel going to be part of the Church? If this is what you believe then you're not a Dispensationalist.

The saving of national Israel is a historical event, like the Gospel going to Ireland. Except in Israel's case, the Jew will be moving to the land of Israel. Why is so hard to accept? Why is that so objectionable?

Because going back to Hebrews, in chapter 3-4 we see that the promise of rest, even in the land is something that is fulfilled in Christ, and it's objectionable to insist on a literal reading of Ezek 40ff and inserting it into the New Testament vision of the redemption of Israel because that part is already dealt with in the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ, and to suggest a literal reading is to hold Christ up to contempt.

Paul looked forward to this prophetic event. We should be able to also.

Quite often we do, we just have very different understandings of what it is going to look like.

 

[gospelfer]

The other matter to notice about Barean's post is that he simply doesn't address Ezekiel. I don't want to seem too hard on Barean -- this is typical of preterist argument. The dispensationlist brings forward some prophecy which has clearly not yet happened, and which God says will surely happen. The preterist response is to argue about other things.

The effect of this tactic is to subtract from the Bible. In this case, Ezekiel 40-47 has been redacted from scripture. The preterists perform this surgery with a so bold an insouciance that it may be a while before you realize what they have done -- if you realize it at all. In short the, preterists have their own private bible, in which all offending prophecy has been excised. They will not say this, of course, but it is true nonetheless. Ezekiel 40ff cannot be placed in past history; therefore the preterists banish it to the same oubliette the rabbis hide Isaiah 53 and Daniel 9. And this is the sure sign of their error.

 

[gospelfer]

Doulos:
The church and Israel will not be spiritually distinct. Nobody ever said they would be.

Everyone will be grafted into the root -- Christ. This is true of the "natural" and "wild" branches. Thus, salvation does not look different for gentiles and Jews. Furthermore, there is nothing in this vision to stop there being a nation of Israel in the land. Why would it? How would it?

Isaiah (28 I think) says that in the latter days Syria and Egypt would be saved alongside Israel, all three a blessing in the earth. Is this possible in preterist vision? Can the Egyptians be saved and in their own Land? If the Egyptians can, why can't the Jews?

Preterists continually fail to draw a distinction between what scripture says of Israel as a historical matter versus what is says as a spiritual matter. Israel is going to be historically reconstituted as a believing nation. It will be a part of the spiritual Israel, which all that which is attached the spiritual root of all men: Christ. If this is what you mean by the Jew being in God's assembly (or church), then we can agree.

If we draw this distinction, we can see a future where Ezekiel 40ff comes to pass. Ezekiel 40ff is way too concrete and long to be symbol. Making it a symbol is an unworthy escape -- it is what rabbis do with the suffering servant in Isaiah 53.
But it is what we are forced to do if we consent to preterism. Same thing with Moses. Moses prophecizes for Israel a period of "blessing", "curse", and "return". The curse is a long suffering, wandering, exile in which Israel is hated. The "return" is a return to the land and a return to God's favor. If we take the symbolizing route, what do we do? The curse is real, but the return is symbolic. The absurdities start piling up quickly.

It's easier and more consistant to go with what prophecy says will happen. Come up with some sort of returned national Israel in the land that you can accept. God says it will happen, and I believe him ...

 

[duolos]

It's easier and more consistant to go with what prophecy says will happen. Come up with some sort of returned national Israel in the land that you can accept. God says it will happen, and I believe him ...

Where post Ezra does he say it will happen? I see a seismic shift from promises of return to the land to promises of God reigning as King in the post-exilic prophets.

 

[gospelfer]

Where post Ezra does he say it will happen? I see a seismic shift from promises of return to the land to promises of God reigning as King in the post-exilic prophets.

I think I could find pretty good evidence in Zechariah. But I don't feel particularly obligated too. Our God's prophecies do not go wrong. It doesn't matter if they arrive in Genesis, Psalms, Isaiah, Zechariah, or John: they all come true. Going down the road you suggest requires believing that Isaiah is correct about the Messiah, but wrong about Israel's regathering (Isaiah 11, etc, etc). I said before that the preterists end up by throwing out large chuncks of scripture. Your prospective solution would seem to be a confirmation of what I warned against.

Like I said, you should come up with a national Israel in the land you can accept. It is much easier, and involves no disruption to scripture.

 

[duolos]

I think I could find pretty good evidence in Zechariah. But I don't feel particularly obligated too. Our God's prophecies do not go wrong. It doesn't matter if they arrive in Genesis, Psalms, Isaiah, Zechariah, or John: they all come true. Going down the road you suggest requires believing that Isaiah is correct about the Messiah, but wrong about Israel's regathering (Isaiah 11, etc, etc). I said before that the preterists end up by throwing out large chuncks of scripture. Your prospective solution would seem to be a confirmation of what I warned against.

Like I said, you should come up with a national Israel in the land you can accept. It is much easier, and involves no disruption to scripture.

Isn't it clear that I see pre-exilic and exilic promises of coming back to the land as having their fulfillment in Ezra-Nehemiah and the coming of Christ? This is why I asked for post-exilic prophecies, I don't see need to seek for a new fulfilment as I see them gearing towards Christ the King of the Jews, national Israel is the Church, it's just that as pursuiant with other promises and prophecies the Nations are also added into the faithful community and the longing becomes the rest of God which is greater than the rest of the land. I'm not dismissing the prophecies, but in concordance with the New Testament hermeneutic see the prophecies being given and fulfilled in larger terms than what the Old Testament prophets thought or dreamed of. Or more plainly the Old Testament prophecies are shadows of the New Testament realities and second coming of Christ.

 

[Biblewriter]

Those who reject a literal fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies are always claiming that Dispensationalists imagine that Israel will be saved outside of Christ.

This is simply, totally, and absolutely false. The scriptures indeed say that all Israel will be regathered in her ancient homeland. And they explicitly give many details that no one can rationally even pretend were ever fulfilled. But that is not the current point.

The scriptures very clearly say that two-thirds of all those in the land will be killed. And after that event, they explicitly say that all the rest of Israel will be brought back. But they explicitly say that as they return, all the rebels will be purged out. And they just as explicitly say that all the rest will repent and turn to Christ with a whole heart. So, although they explicitly say that all Israel will be saved, they just as explicitly say that this will come about through faith in Christ.

 

[BABerean2]

Barean spills a lot of ink accusing dispensatinalists of thinking Jews have some salvation apart of Christ.

This accusation is entirely false. Doesn't seem to matter how many times dispensationalists assert there is no salvation apart from Christ; preterists always return to this make-believe opponent. Beating the stuffing out of a straw men is both easy and fun!

Barean also asserts that dispensationlists believe there is some kind of spiritual difference between Jews and Gentiles. He brings a lot of pointless scripture to the table to support the assertion that spiritually there is no difference between the believing Jew and believing gentile. I say "pointless" because he is arguing against something no dispensationalist believes. I might as well pretend preterists believe that the earth sits atop an elephant -- it would have the same accuracy.

Dispensationalism merely asserts is that God is going to return the Jews to the land and see that they get the New Covenant. This also happens to be what all prophecy says. This is also why dispensationalists believe it.

Preterism requires throwing out half of prophecy. Dispensationalism allows us to keep of all of it.

Paul looked forward to the fullness of the Gentiles, when the Jew would be grafted back in (as all prophecy says). The preterists deny scripture, deny God vision, and deny God his victory over the nation of Israel (which will be to their benefit too). When God saves the Jewish nation, He will be showing the world a burning example his shinning mercy, grace, power, and the power of his book.

The saving of national Israel is a historical event, like the Gospel going to Ireland. Except in Israel's case, the Jew will be moving to the land of Israel. Why is so hard to accept? Why is that so objectionable?

Paul looked forward to this prophetic event. We should be able to also.

We are having a difficult time figuring out what Dispensationalists teach, because they cannot seem to agree themselves.

Pastor John Hagee teaches that the Jews do not need Christ, because they are still under the Old Covenant.

Dr. Tommy Ice says that John Darby discovered Dispensationalism and the pretrib doctrine while recovering from a riding accident in 1827.
Biblewriter says he got it from others, who wrote about it earlier.

Clarence Larkin and Lewis Sperry Chafer said that God has two separate peoples with two separate plans.
They said the Church was a "parenthesis" in the plan whose destination was heaven, while the Jews were God's earthly people.

Some teach that after the pretrib rapture of the Church, the age of Grace ends and the Jews will go back to the system of Law Keeping.

Most Dispensationalists claim that God now holds some special status with those who are descendants of Jacob.
However, when questioned about how this bloodline is to be determined, they have not been able to give an answer.

Even though Christ and the other New Testament writers fail to mention the land promise or a rebuilt manmade temple, Dispensationalists claim it is required based on the Old Testament.

Some Dispensationalists also claim, when it comes to the Jewish people, it is not finished.

Joh_19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYTEwt0oAd0


If you figure out what Dispensationalists really teach, please let the rest of us know.

.

 

[Straightshot]

"We are having a difficult time figuring out what Dispensationalists teach, because they cannot seem to agree themselves"


.... and neither do preterists .... and a multitude of other religions claiming to be Christian

2000 years of mostly disconnected apostasy .... and not biblical


I have a suggestion for you

Read the Bible for your own understanding and ask the Lord to lead you into all truth .... this is possible

You have not done this .... what I see you doing is reading everything else from other books of men .... this will never bring you to the truth, especially in today's world of professing Christianity which is for the most part in a state of extreme apostasy

Older manuscripts were also written by those who either did not understand what they thought they understood, or just as apostate for self gain

You appear to be on a road with many detours. potholes, and dead ends

There is only one source for truth .... and one Author that has revealed the same

.... and there is a road that leads to eternal life .... but He said few will ever find it .... believe this

If you do not seek and receive His Word and His revelation alone, you will be sorely confused by those who think they know

You would be wise to return to your drawing board and start over

Your Bible is the only thing you have ..... and there is no confusion, dead ends, or contradictions therein

.... and the Interpreter who gives the commentary is Jesus Christ

 

[BABerean2]

"We are having a difficult time figuring out what Dispensationalists teach, because they cannot seem to agree themselves"


.... and neither do preterists .... and a multitude of other religions claiming to be Christian

2000 years of mostly disconnected apostasy .... and not biblical


I have a suggestion for you

Read the Bible for your own understanding and ask the Lord to lead you into all truth .... this is possible

You have not done this .... what I see you doing is reading everything else from other books of men .... this will never bring you to the truth, especially in today's world of professing Christianity which is for the most part in a state of extreme apostasy

Older manuscripts were also written by those who either did not understand what they thought they understood, or just as apostate for self gain

You appear to be on a road with many detours. potholes, and dead ends

There is only one source for truth .... and one Author that has revealed the same

.... and there is a road that leads to eternal life .... but He said few will ever find it .... believe this

If you do not seek and receive His Word and His revelation alone, you will be sorely confused by those who think they know

You would be wise to return to your drawing board and start over

Your Bible is the only thing you have ..... and there is no confusion, dead ends, or contradictions therein

.... and the Interpreter who gives the commentary is Jesus Christ

Your dart was not a straight shot and missed the mark.

I do not believe that Christ returned in 70 AD.

I believe the events in the Book of Revelation lie in the future.

You will have to throw your "preterist" remarks at someone else.

I had to reject Dispensational Theology, because I could not get it to agree with what was written in my Bible.

Former Plymouth Brethren member George Mueller and his wife became famous for building an orphanage that cared for thousands of young people.

Mueller said he had to choose between following his Bible or John Darby.

He made he same choice that many others have made.

It is ironic that someone who has promoted the unbiblical doctrine of soul-sleep is lecturing others on Biblical truth, when the very words of Jesus himself show that it is a false doctrine.




Mat_10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

.

.

 

[Biblewriter]

We are having a difficult time figuring out what Dispensationalists teach, because they cannot seem to agree themselves.

Pastor John Hagee teaches that the Jews do not need Christ, because they are still under the Old Covenant.

Dr. Tommy Ice says that John Darby discovered Dispensationalism and the pretrib doctrine while recovering from a riding accident in 1827.
Biblewriter says he got it from others, who wrote about it earlier.

Clarence Larkin and Lewis Sperry Chafer said that God has two separate peoples with two separate plans.
They said the Church was a "parenthesis" in the plan whose destination was heaven, while the Jews were God's earthly people.

Some teach that after the pretrib rapture of the Church, the age of Grace ends and the Jews will go back to the system of Law Keeping.

Most Dispensationalists claim that God now holds some special status with those who are descendants of Jacob.
However, when questioned about how this bloodline is to be determined, they have not been able to give an answer.

Even though Christ and the other New Testament writers fail to mention the land promise or a rebuilt manmade temple, Dispensationalists claim it is required based on the Old Testament.

Some Dispensationalists also claim, when it comes to the Jewish people, it is not finished.

Joh_19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

If you figure out what Dispensationalists really teach, please let the rest of us know.

.

I have never heard John Hagee say that, but have not listened to him very much. If he did say it, he is the only well known dispensationalist that has been known to utter such heresy.

As to what Tommy Ice said, it was a simple historical error, something that is wholly insignificant. And all dispensationalists teach that Israel and the church are two separate peoples, for which God has two separate plans.

But no dispensationalist (other that John Hagee, if your accusation is true) teaches that any Jew can be saved outside of Christ.

Your complaint about the lack of a New Testament confirmation of the land promises is wholly insignificant. God said it, so it is sheer unbelief to deny it.

And your claim about a lack of a New Testament confirmation of a rebuilt temple is simply false. Neither the New Testament nor the Old Testament specifically say this future temple will be built by humans, but both testaments plainly refer to a future temple.

 

[random person]

Those who reject a literal fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies are always claiming that Dispensationalists imagine that Israel will be saved outside of Christ.

This is simply, totally, and absolutely false. The scriptures indeed say that all Israel will be regathered in her ancient homeland. And they explicitly give many details that no one can rationally even pretend were ever fulfilled. But that is not the current point.

The scriptures very clearly say that two-thirds of all those in the land will be killed. And after that event, they explicitly say that all the rest of Israel will be brought back. But they explicitly say that as they return, all the rebels will be purged out. And they just as explicitly say that all the rest will repent and turn to Christ with a whole heart. So, although they explicitly say that all Israel will be saved, they just as explicitly say that this will come about through faith in Christ.

Why do you dispensationalists keep ignoring Matt. 21:43; Eph. 2:14-16; & Col. 3:11?

And Heb. 8:7,13; 9:8; & 10:9,11 for that matter too?

 

[BABerean2]

I have never heard John Hagee say that, but have not listened to him very much. If he did say it, he is the only well known dispensationalist that has been nown to utter such heresy.

As to what Tommy Ice said, it was a simple historical error, something it wholly insignificant. And all dispensationalists teach that Israel and the church are two separate peoples, for which God has two separate plans.

But no dispensationalist (other that John Hagee, if your accusation is true) teaches that any Jew can be saved outside of Christ.

Your complaint about the lack of a New Testament confirmation of the land promises, that fact it wholly insignificant. God said it, so it is sheer unbelief to deny it.

And your claim about a lack of a New Testament confirmation of a rebuilt temple is simply false. Neither the New Testament nor the Old Testament specifically say this future temple will be built by humans, but both testaments plainly refer to a future temple.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
However, it is my understanding that many Dispensationalists teach that the age of Grace ends at the pretrib rapture and the Jews then go back to Law keeping.

Since none but Christ has ever kept the Law, how are they going to be saved without Grace?

It is my understanding, based on the New Testament, that Christ is the Temple.
We are also the temple, because the Holy Spirit dwells inside of us.

.

 

[gospelfer]

We are having a difficult time figuring out what Dispensationalists teach, because they cannot seem to agree themselves.

Pastor John Hagee teaches that the Jews do not need Christ, because they are still under the Old Covenant.

.

Hagee has gone loco, totally off the reservation. His views do not represent what one finds in the Messianic, and as far as I can tell, do not represent dispensationalists generally.

In any case, nobody here seems to be arguing his position.