That's about as misguided an understanding of what those chapters teach as your "Mid Acts Perspective" Danoh.Dougg, per passages like John chapter one, Mark chapter one, Matthew chapters ten, fifteen, and sixteen, Luke chapter one, chapter two, and chapter twenty-four, believing Israel is Messianic Christian,not Body of Christ Christian, 2 Corinthians five.
Those Jews in the Body were after Israel's temporary blinding.
I understand, Daniel. I can plainly see that Dispensationalists are like those children in the marketplace. Not surprisingly, their beliefs are/were virtually the same: an earthly kingdom for Israel.
One day you will come to realize that the kingdom of Christ is "not of this world" (John 18:36.)
.
When I wrote the Jews of today - I was referring to the Jews who's religion is Judaism. They are looking for the messiah to be the promised great King of Israel.Dougg, per passages like John chapter one, Mark chapter one, Matthew chapters ten, fifteen, and sixteen, Luke chapter one, chapter two, and chapter twenty-four, believing Israel is Messianic Christian,not Body of Christ Christian, 2 Corinthians five.
Those Jews in the Body were after Israel's temporary blinding.
When I wrote the Jews of today - I was referring to the Jews who's religion is Judaism. They are looking for the messiah to be the promised great King of Israel.
Nothing happened in 70AD or first century that was fulfillment of the end times prophecies.Both of these quotes show the mistake of 2P2P at work. Danoh thinks it is in the NT on purpose. Doug has taken the position of modern pre-Christian Judaism.
Why does the latter need to happen all over again Doug, if there already was a major catastrophic event in Israel in which they tried to realize a messianic victory over an earthly oppressor, a divine war of 'light' (Judaism) vs 'darkness', at complete odds with what the NT Gospel and mission was about?
You think that is setting up all over again, but it already happened. You break the 70th week off and insert X000 years, but it already happened.
I guess that's why in the bible God did not promise the land to Israel.Doug,
God did not abandone promises to Israel. They never were about the land anyway, heb 11.
Inter is preterist view, not historist. The historist view came out of the reformation, mainly by a group called the Waldensians, who thought because of the persecution by the Pope on them breaking away, as the office of Pope being the Antichrist. The view is flawed, but it is not the preterist view. I think the Presbyterians and maybe the Methodists (not sure about them) hold the historist view.According, to Inter's reading into other's words, including HIS reading into GOD'S Promise TO HIMSELF on this issue, the land promise is Israel's delusion, and the Antichrist will snare them by that delusion.
The "Historicist" view = "Yea hath God said?"
Dougg, as I don't subscribe to any view that views as fulfilled what is yet to be, they are all the sane.
I distinguish between them when I read them, but after that they are all the same "historicist"replacement" error regardless of their offshoot distinctions.
Doug just pasted enough verses to show his inability to allow scripture to interpret itself....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?