Amillennialism and Dispensationalism are both Anti-Semitic in their core ideology

[the rookie]

While the adherents to amillennial and dispensational viewpoints may not personally be anti-Semitic - and care deeply about the future of the Jewish race and God's plan for Israel, the ideologies expressed through both viewpoints are inherently anti-Semitic.

For the amillennial viewpoint (again, not the humans who hold to the view), the future of the individual Jew is of real concern - expressing the heart of Paul for the salvation of the Jews individually in Romans 9-11. This is admirable. The weakness of the viewpoint, however, is the redefinition of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants in a way that was not intended by the ratification of the New Covenant. Thus, while the concern for the individual is admirable and scriptural, the removal of God's corporate and covenantal plan represents a serious deficiency in the amillennial view. While not being "emotionally" or purposefully anti-Semitic, the amillennial viewpoint removes from the Jewish people God's stated and pre-ordained (and irrevocable) future from them and is therefore "anti" God's heart and plan for the Jewish people in the future.

For the dispensational viewpoint (again, not the humans who hold to the view), the future of Israel and God's promises are a real concern - expressing the heart of Paul for the salvation of the Jews corporately in Romans 9-11. This is admirable. The weakness of the viewpoint, however, is the faulty extra-biblical system of interpretation applied to the scriptures that ignores the real changes the New Covenant introduced into the Mosaic covenant in particular. This extra-biblical system places too much emphasis on the future causing a unbiblical sentiment about the nation and the politics of the Israeli state - overlooking the focus of God's present plan for Israel related to the Jewish remnant of believers Paul himself referenced (and counted himself a part of). Present, individual, Jewish salvation is irrelevant to the dispensational scheme and has produced extreme views that are anti-Semitic in nature (dual covenant theology being one end of the spectrum, non-evangelizing of Jews and an unbiblical focus on funding the present Israeli state to "bring her into her prophetic destiny" of Jacob's Trouble on the other end) is therefore "anti" God's heart and plan for the Jewish people in the present.

So there. Now you groups that can't stop biting at one another with thinly veiled bitterness and offense can redirect your barely hidden venom towards me. Fire away - I'm happy to absorb your attempts at masking your anger with light insults mingled with Christianese.

[quiet dove]

While the adherents to amillennial and dispensational viewpoints may not personally be anti-Semitic - and care deeply about the future of the Jewish race and God's plan for Israel, the ideologies expressed through both viewpoints are inherently anti-Semitic.

For the amillennial viewpoint (again, not the humans who hold to the view), the future of the individual Jew is of real concern - expressing the heart of Paul for the salvation of the Jews individually in Romans 9-11. This is admirable. The weakness of the viewpoint, however, is the redefinition of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants in a way that was not intended by the ratification of the New Covenant. Thus, while the concern for the individual is admirable and scriptural, the removal of God's corporate and covenantal plan represents a serious deficiency in the amillennial view. While not being "emotionally" or purposefully anti-Semitic, the amillennial viewpoint removes from the Jewish people God's stated and pre-ordained (and irrevocable) future from them and is therefore "anti" God's heart and plan for the Jewish people in the future.

For the dispensational viewpoint (again, not the humans who hold to the view), the future of Israel and God's promises are a real concern - expressing the heart of Paul for the salvation of the Jews corporately in Romans 9-11. This is admirable. The weakness of the viewpoint, however, is the faulty extra-biblical system of interpretation applied to the scriptures that ignores the real changes the New Covenant introduced into the Mosaic covenant in particular. This extra-biblical system places too much emphasis on the future causing a unbiblical sentiment about the nation and the politics of the Israeli state - overlooking the focus of God's present plan for Israel related to the Jewish remnant of believers Paul himself referenced (and counted himself a part of). Present, individual, Jewish salvation is irrelevant to the dispensational scheme and has produced extreme views that are anti-Semitic in nature (dual covenant theology being one end of the spectrum, non-evangelizing of Jews and an unbiblical focus on funding the present Israeli state to "bring her into her prophetic destiny" of Jacob's Trouble on the other end) is therefore "anti" God's heart and plan for the Jewish people in the present.

So there. Now you groups that can't stop biting at one another with thinly veiled bitterness and offense can redirect your barely hidden venom towards me. Fire away - I'm happy to absorb your attempts at masking your anger with light insults mingled with Christianese.

I am responding to this part simply because ... that's what people call me...

While I do believe the Bible teaches God has yet a future purpose with a national Israel, a nation; I have not found any scritpure that says God ever commanded followers of Christ to be busy bringing that purpose about.(prophetically speaking-not speaking about a land as it is now in terms of a country/state) What He did command followers of Christ to do, is proclaim the name of Christ. Period. Be that follower a Jew or Gentile, and of course proclaiming that message to both

(Don't get me wrong, I would think it Christian like to help any people live, helping meet their needs as best we can, but I am speaking in regards to prophetically)

So while I do believe that God is not finished with what I only know to call a 'national' Israel. I fully believe also that my concern is not to be trying to accomplishing His purposes for Him. I do not believe He commanded Christians to do so. He commanded those in Christ Jesus to proclaim the Gospel. I simply don't know where God ever told Christians to attempt to MAKE His purposes come about-in regards to any future prophecies regarding a nation-Israel. He told believers in Christ Jesus to preach the Message of eternal life.

It seems misleading to me in that Jewish people see Christian focus on rebuilding the system of Mosiac Law, in an effort to bring about prophetic fulfillment. I find it misleading because the Christians claim to want the Messiah, and the Jews claim to want the Messiah, which both claims are true, but not necessarily honest, because they are not on the same page with what all that means.

Personally speaking. I find the concept difficult, helping a group of people, that I am supposed to care about, rush on into the Day of the Lord- the time of Jacobs trouble.

"Woe to the man who desires the Day of the Lord ...... for it will be darkness"

[sheina maidle]

I am responding to this part simply because ... that's what people call me...

While I do believe the Bible teaches God has yet a future purpose with a national Israel, a nation; I have not found any scritpure that says God ever commanded followers of Christ to be busy bringing that purpose about.(prophetically speaking-not speaking about a land as it is now in terms of a country/state) What He did command followers of Christ to do, is proclaim the name of Christ. Period. Be that follower a Jew or Gentile, and of course proclaiming that message to both

(Don't get me wrong, I would think it Christian like to help any people live, helping meet their needs as best we can, but I am speaking in regards to prophetically)

So while I do believe that God is not finished with what I only know to call a 'national' Israel. I fully believe also that my concern is not to be trying to accomplishing His purposes for Him. I do not believe He commanded Christians to do so. He commanded those in Christ Jesus to proclaim the Gospel. I simply don't know where God ever told Christians to attempt to MAKE His purposes come about-in regards to any future prophecies regarding a nation-Israel. He told believers in Christ Jesus to preach the Message of eternal life.

It seems misleading to me in that Jewish people see Christian focus on rebuilding the system of Mosiac Law, in an effort to bring about prophetic fulfillment. I find it misleading because the Christians claim to want the Messiah, and the Jews claim to want the Messiah, which both claims are true, but not necessarily honest, because they are not on the same page with what all that means.

Personally speaking. I find the concept difficult, helping a group of people, that I am supposed to care about, rush on into the Day of the Lord- the time of Jacobs trouble.

"Woe to the man who desires the Day of the Lord ...... for it will be darkness"

I agree 100%. I am dispensational, pre-millennial and futurist. There will be a literal 1,000 year millennium with Christ reigning from David's throne in Jerusalem, and Satan will be bound in the bottomless pit during that 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-3). That will occur AFTER the time of Jacob's Trouble (Jeremiah 30:7).

In the meantime, Christians are to be about sharing Christ with the lost (to the Jew first, and also to the Greek-Romans 1:16).

I am also an ethnic Jew...born again and washed in the blood of the Lamb.

[Diggindeeper]

I used to be dispensational, pre-millennial and futurist, but not for years now. I do see your preferences coming through, the rookie, although thanks for trying to be neutral.

I do think it is misleading to say this:

...the redefinition of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants in a way that was not intended by the ratification of the New Covenant. Thus, while the concern for the individual is admirable and scriptural, the removal of God's corporate and covenantal plan represents a serious deficiency in the amillennial view. While not being "emotionally" or purposefully anti-Semitic, the amillennial viewpoint removes from the Jewish people God's stated and pre-ordained (and irrevocable) future from them and is therefore "anti" God's heart and plan for the Jewish people in the future.

Actually, I think we can all agree that the Old Testament can really be defined by the New Testament. (Or do we? To me, that is SO logical there is no argument about it. But I am aware that many try to define the New by the Old.)

We don't redefine anything. We just simply allow the NEW TESTAMENT to define the Old.

Back when I was a dispensational premillennialist, I regarded the Old Testament prophesies given to Israel under the old covenant as having a literal fulfillment in a coming/future millennium. But this view absolutely requires a return to the Old Covenant, including:

1. Jerusalem as capital city of the kingdom!
2. Jesus sitting on an actual 'throne' in the city of Jerusalem!
3. The temple rebuilt!
4. A reestablished priesthood!
5. Animal sacrifices again offered!
6. Christ entering the temple each Sabbath by the eastern gate while the priests offer sacrifices! (Ezekial 46)
7. Observing dietary laws!
8. Circumcision!

But, I've learned that the Old Testament sacrifices, feasts, and ceremonies are ALL done away with and now obsolete because of coming of Christ and his total sacrifice.

Hebrews 8:13 screams plainly that the old covenant was obsolete and passing away! Therefore the dispensational view of Ez 40-48 as a reinstitution of temple sacrifice is impossible!

And here is why:
Hebrews 8:1-5
1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.

4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

No need for another EXAMPLE. WE HAVE THAT, in the Old Covenant in the Old Testament. (I'm putting it that way to make it easy to understand.)

WHY would NOT the promised land, Jerusalem, the temple, and the nation of Israel point the way as an example, pointing toward the NEW covenant... just as all the other things did under the Old Covenant??

The fact is, all of the Old Testament sacrifices, feasts, and ceremonies were ALL pointing to the New Testament, to the NEW covenant. Once the NEW came to pass in its fullness, the OLD (which was a shadow, type and example of the new to come)...passed away. No more, no more ever again, will these OLD covenant sacrifices, feasts, and ceremonies be acceptable to God! Why would they, when Jesus did all that was ever to be needed or worthy of acceptance?

[Amos_with_goats]

[COLOR="#000080"]I used to be dispensational, pre-millennial and futurist, but not for years now. I do see your preferences coming through, the rookie, although thanks for trying to be neutral.....

The labels can be misleading, but 'futurist' IMCU (In My Current Understanding) refers to the belief in a future return of Christ. The opposite of 'futurist' is pretrist.... am I missing something here?

[TrustGzus]

The labels can be misleading, but 'futurist' IMCU (In My Current Understanding) refers to the belief in a future return of Christ. The opposite of 'futurist' is pretrist.... am I missing something here?

There are two types of preterists:

• Full preterists (or radical preterists) that believe all prophecy has been fulfilled
• Partial preterists (or moderate preterists).

Partial preterists believe in a future: coming (parousia) of Christ, the day of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the living, the final judgment, the end of the Jewish age, the end of history.

[Diggindeeper]

The New Testament actually interprets the Old and in the New. In the NEW, we see CHRIST is the SEED of Abraham! Here is one example that Jesus Christ IS the seed of Abraham.
Galations 3:16
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.

Old Testament prophesies are interpreted by the New Testament and refer directly to Christ. (One example is seen in Acts 8:27-35)

You see, CHRIST, not physical Israel, is Abraham's seed! And we, in Christ, are heirs of Abraham and heirs to the promises.

Galations 3:7
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.
(Romans chapter 4 goes into this quite well and quite simply also.)

In reality, not a one of the Amillennialist are removing the Jewish people. To me it is simply understanding the New Covenant, which puts the seed of Abraham where it was put there by Christ! No longer can the two be divided. We are ALL 'children of Abraham'!

HENCE, WE WHO ARE IN CHRIST (along WITH Christ!) ARE THE TRUE ISRAEL (This included the Jews!)
Galations 3:28-29
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.

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
(The verse above sums it all up nicely.)

Romans 2:29
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.

The Old Testament could not see how its own prophesies were to be fulfilled. They could NOT see it or understand it, before Christ. But after Christ the New Testament authors were able to interpret the Old Testament in the light of His coming and the new covenant that He instituted. So should we.

THE LAND OF PROMISE was a type (or example) of the new heaven and the NEW EARTH

LITERALISM must say that the Jews were promised the land of Canaan ONLY!
Genesis 17:7-8
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Amillennialism does not ignore or do away with the prophesies regarding the restoration and renewal of Israel. Instead, it places them in the context of the new heaven and earth, which we are all promised by faith, ALONG WITH our Father Abraham.

Galations 3:7-9
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

[Diggindeeper]

The labels can be misleading, but 'futurist' IMCU (In My Current Understanding) refers to the belief in a future return of Christ. The opposite of 'futurist' is pretrist.... am I missing something here?

I see 'futurist' putting lots off into the future. I agree that the second coming is definitely FUTURE.

Some things they put into the 'future' are:
Jesus sitting on an actual 'throne' in the city of Jerusalem
The temple rebuilt
A reestablished priesthood
Animal sacrifices again offered
A 1,000 year reign of Christ, where there will be SO many ruling with him, there can't be many to RULE over. (I think its called 'too many chiefs and not enough Indians.')

[Amos_with_goats]

I see 'futurist' putting lots off into the future. I agree that the second coming is definitely FUTURE.

Some things they put into the 'future' are:
Jesus sitting on an actual 'throne' in the city of Jerusalem
The temple rebuilt
A reestablished priesthood
Animal sacrifices again offered
A 1,000 year reign of Christ, where there will be SO many ruling with him, there can't be many to RULE over. (I think its called 'too many chiefs and not enough Indians.')

I though as much (I know you are not pretrist)

Just more of the confusion that can arise from those pesky labels.

[Diggindeeper]

Actually, I wonder why EVEN a Jewish person would want all that OLD stuff reinstated! I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. (Not even on a witch of a mother-in-law!)

[jeffweeder]

Actually, I wonder why EVEN a Jewish person would want all that OLD stuff reinstated! I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. (Not even on a witch of a mother-in-law!)

All of those old covs were shadows of the ultimate restoration under a new cov.All nations would flow into it creating one new man.

It was suggested to me the other day that i was being antisemitic because i call the Messiah Jesus and not Yeshua....wow

[Diggindeeper]

All of those old covs were shadows of the ultimate restoration under a new cov.All nations would flow into it creating one new man.

It was suggested to me the other day that i was being antisemitic because i call the Messiah Jesus and not Yeshua....wow

I guess we could just call him 'Christ'.....

[sheina maidle]

I guess we could just call him 'Christ'.....

"Christ" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Messiah, meaning anointed, and refers to Jesus as the Messiah promised in O.T. Scripture.

[sheina maidle]

It was suggested to me the other day that i was being antisemitic because i call the Messiah Jesus and not Yeshua....wow

When I was attending a Messianic congregation about 15 or so years ago, I actually got chastised for saying "Jesus Christ" instead of "Yeshua HaMashiach". It was about that time that the Lord began to lead me out of Messianic Judaism.

[arc111]

When I was attending a Messianic congregation about 15 or so years ago, I actually got chastised for saying "Jesus Christ" instead of "Yeshua HaMashiach". It was about that time that the Lord began to lead me out of Messianic Judaism.

While I was attending mainstream church about 10 years ago I was told that if I did not accept amil teaching that I was calling Jesus a liar. It was about that time that the Lord began to lead me out of mainstream churches.

It sounds quaint, but it is absolutely true. And, btw, I attend a Hebraic/Messianic assembly on the Sabbath and I attend a non-denominational church on Sunday. The Lord led me into both at the same time. Interestingly, they very often teach the same principle from different perspectives- one from a 'Torah-based' perspective, the other from a 'faith-based' perspective. It sometimes blows my mind, as the two assemblies are over 150 miles apart in different states.

My point is not to lump all MJ's together. I am learning that not all amils are the same either.