Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 78

Thread: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    One of the great difficulties Amils have with Premil is their literalizing of symbolic passages and their symbolizing of literal passages. This is demonstrated in their approach to Revelation. Amils see the spiritual application of Rev 20 relating to a symbolic dragon, chain, key and prison representing the spiritual restraint of Satan in our day. What is more, this is supported with much NT Scripture. Premil have nothing to support their idea of Satan being literally chained in a physical prison for 1,000 years after the second coming, followed by his release to wreck havoc on the millennial earth. That is because their approach is non-corroborative and conflicting to much clear and repeated Scripture that shows the curtailment of Satan whilst his territory [the Gentiles] is invaded.
    The use of "symbols" does not invalidate the literal rendering of the passage. "Thousand years" is not a symbol. A "key" is. The "key" is symbolic of literal truth. The "binding of Satan" may not be with literal "chains" but they are "chains" of a sort nonetheless. Satan is literally "bound." To use earthly symbols of spiritual realities does not negate the literal truths represented.

    Your argument that the use of obvious "symbols" like "keys" and "chains" negates a literal rendering is therefore not valid. You would have to prove that the use of a "thousand years" is equally symbolic. Literal prophecies often used "symbols" in the OT. That never made the entire prophecy "symbolic." Those were prophecies that literally came true just as they were prophesied. For example, when Daniel foretold 70 Weeks of years he used a symbol--"weeks"--and yet they were literally a period of 490 years (perhaps less 3.5 years).

    So your claim that the use of symbols in a prophecy renders the entire prophecy symbolic is invalid. There is no apparent reason to disqualify the use of "thousand years" as symbolic. And once again, the content of the prophecy has indeed been corroborated. Your repeated claim that it hasn't been corroborated I will prove again and again false. The Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant asserted repeatedly that Israel must be saved forever. That has not happened in the current age of Jewish Diaspora. Christ will come again to restore the Kingdom of David for Israel. The Prophets have said this, the NT authors said this, and the book of Revelation said this. This amounts to "corroboration!"

  2. #47

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The use of "symbols" does not invalidate the literal rendering of the passage. "Thousand years" is not a symbol. A "key" is. The "key" is symbolic of literal truth. The "binding of Satan" may not be with literal "chains" but they are "chains" of a sort nonetheless. Satan is literally "bound." To use earthly symbols of spiritual realities does not negate the literal truths represented.

    Your argument that the use of obvious "symbols" like "keys" and "chains" negates a literal rendering is therefore not valid. You would have to prove that the use of a "thousand years" is equally symbolic. Literal prophecies often used "symbols" in the OT. That never made the entire prophecy "symbolic." Those were prophecies that literally came true just as they were prophesied. For example, when Daniel foretold 70 Weeks of years he used a symbol--"weeks"--and yet they were literally a period of 490 years (perhaps less 3.5 years).

    So your claim that the use of symbols in a prophecy renders the entire prophecy symbolic is invalid. There is no apparent reason to disqualify the use of "thousand years" as symbolic. And once again, the content of the prophecy has indeed been corroborated. Your repeated claim that it hasn't been corroborated I will prove again and again false. The Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant asserted repeatedly that Israel must be saved forever. That has not happened in the current age of Jewish Diaspora. Christ will come again to restore the Kingdom of David for Israel. The Prophets have said this, the NT authors said this, and the book of Revelation said this. This amounts to "corroboration!"
    It is a dragon that is chained in the symbolism. It represents the spiritual restraint of Satan from the 1st Advent. The "thousand yrs" (not 1000 as you contend) represents a long indeterminate period of time in between the 2 comings of Christ. There is no other thousand yr age elsewhere in Scripture. That is because it is a symbolic number & period.

    As for your future Davidic kingdom, you have nothing. It will never happen.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    It is a dragon that is chained in the symbolism. It represents the spiritual restraint of Satan from the 1st Advent. The "thousand yrs" (not 1000 as you contend) represents a long indeterminate period of time in between the 2 comings of Christ. There is no other thousand yr age elsewhere in Scripture. That is because it is a symbolic number & period.

    As for your future Davidic kingdom, you have nothing. It will never happen.
    I understand you believe that, and that's okay. Lots of great Christians down through the years have believed that. However, the reason I don't believe that is because it doesn't actually say that. You really have to read that into the passage. You may say that about Premil as well, and that's also okay. I just happen to think the more literal rendering is Premil. I can easily see why someone might want to render a thousand year period symbolic. But I don't really see a need for it, and just take it as it is (in my view). Many, many people do recognize that the Premil view is more natural to the passage, if not viewed as symbolic.

    The fact that a thousand year period is only mentioned once does not, in my thinking, negate the possibility that this is a literal thousand year period. If you think so, that's okay. You're entitled to your own view, as you wish to view it.

    When you say the Davidic Kingdom will never happen you are also just expressing your opinion. It doesn't add any weight for me personally that you assert that with conviction. Sorry! As to whether I have "nothing" with regard to the Davidic Kingdom, I have given you much. Don't agree with you that I have given you nothing.

  4. #49

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I understand you believe that, and that's okay. Lots of great Christians down through the years have believed that. However, the reason I don't believe that is because it doesn't actually say that. You really have to read that into the passage. You may say that about Premil as well, and that's also okay. I just happen to think the more literal rendering is Premil. I can easily see why someone might want to render a thousand year period symbolic. But I don't really see a need for it, and just take it as it is (in my view). Many, many people do recognize that the Premil view is more natural to the passage, if not viewed as symbolic.

    The fact that a thousand year period is only mentioned once does not, in my thinking, negate the possibility that this is a literal thousand year period. If you think so, that's okay. You're entitled to your own view, as you wish to view it.

    When you say the Davidic Kingdom will never happen you are also just expressing your opinion. It doesn't add any weight for me personally that you assert that with conviction. Sorry! As to whether I have "nothing" with regard to the Davidic Kingdom, I have given you much. Don't agree with you that I have given you nothing.
    We will have to agree to disagree. (1) Your failure to acknowledge the hyper symbolic location of Rev 20, and force a hyper-literal meaning on it is troubling. Also, (2) your lack of concern at zero corroboration for this thousand yrs elsewhere in the sacred text highlights the major exegetical gap between Amil & Premil. Amil has countless Scripture that proves a climactic coming of Christ. (3) What is more, you have no second coming passage that teaches another sin-cursed age to come. Christ or none of the NT writers mentioned it. They always saw it as perfect and eternal. The Premil debacle of the age to come descending into anarchy at the very apearance of Satan is frankly both fanciful & offensive to truth. This has caused many to abandon the theory in recent years.

    (4) You have no second coming passage that supports your populating of the future kingdom with countless mortals & countless wicked. (5) Your inabilty to identify the huge Premil theory of a Davidic kingdom, Christian reigning on earth and the exalting of Israel to a place of racial supremacy anywhere in Rev 29 exposes the extra-biblcal nature of Premil.

    Until you prove these I reserve the right to reject it as a man-made doctrine. I recommend every objective Bible student to do the same.

  5. #50

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    We will have to agree to disagree. (1) Your failure to acknowledge the hyper symbolic location of Rev 20, and force a hyper-literal meaning on it is troubling. Also, (2) your lack of concern at zero corroboration for this thousand yrs elsewhere in the sacred text highlights the major exegetical gap between Amil & Premil. Amil has countless Scripture that proves a climactic coming of Christ. (3) What is more, you have no second coming passage that teaches another sin-cursed age to come. Christ or none of the NT writers mentioned it. They always saw it as perfect and eternal. The Premil debacle of the age to come des ending into anarchy at the very apearance of Satan is both fanciful & offensive to truth.

    (4) You have no second coming passage that supports your populating of the future kingdom with countless mortals & countless wicked. (5) Your inabilty to identify the huge Premil theory of a Davidic kingdom, Christian reigning on earth and the exalting of Israel to a place of racial supremacy anywhere in Rev 29 exposes the extra-biblcal nature of Premil.

    Until you prove these I reserve the right to reject it as a man-made doctrine. I recommend every objective Bible student to do the same.
    I too recommend every objective Bible student to do the same !

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    We will have to agree to disagree. (1) Your failure to acknowledge the hyper symbolic location of Rev 20, and force a hyper-literal meaning on it is troubling. Also, (2) your lack of concern at zero corroboration for this thousand yrs elsewhere in the sacred text highlights the major exegetical gap between Amil & Premil. Amil has countless Scripture that proves a climactic coming of Christ. (3) What is more, you have no second coming passage that teaches another sin-cursed age to come. Christ or none of the NT writers mentioned it. They always saw it as perfect and eternal. The Premil debacle of the age to come descending into anarchy at the very apearance of Satan is frankly both fanciful & offensive to truth. This has caused many to abandon the theory in recent years.

    (4) You have no second coming passage that supports your populating of the future kingdom with countless mortals & countless wicked. (5) Your inabilty to identify the huge Premil theory of a Davidic kingdom, Christian reigning on earth and the exalting of Israel to a place of racial supremacy anywhere in Rev 29 exposes the extra-biblcal nature of Premil.

    Until you prove these I reserve the right to reject it as a man-made doctrine. I recommend every objective Bible student to do the same.
    1) The insertion of a "millennium" does seem odd, but it does not follow that it is "hyper-symbolic." It could be taken literally, much as the "70 Weeks prophecy" can be taken literally--and there is no corroboration for that either.
    2) Your evidence for a "climactic coming of Christ" does not negate a Millennial period. You would have to define how an eschatological "climax" is at odds with the introduction of a Millennium following judgment. I can easily see how, for example, a WW3 can lead into a time of peace, much as WW1 and WW2 led to a League of Nations or a United Nations.
    3) When Jesus discussed the Kingdom of God to come he mentioned that his 12 apostles would "rule" as "judges" over the 12 tribes of Israel (Matthew 19.28). Jesus in this passage assumes that his disciples know what is being discussed. It is evident from OT prophecies that there will be judges in the Messianic Kingdom bringing sinners into submission to God's laws. For example, Isa 2:

    2 In the last days

    the mountain where the Lord’s temple is located will be famous.
    It will be the highest mountain of all.
    It will be raised above the hills.
    All the nations will go to it.
    3 People from many nations will go there. They will say,

    “Come. Let us go up to the Lord’s mountain.
    Let’s go to the temple of Jacob’s God.
    He will teach us how we should live.
    Then we will live the way he wants us to.”
    The law of the Lord will be taught at Zion.
    His message will go out from Jerusalem.
    4 He will judge between the nations.
    He’ll settle problems among many of them.
    They will hammer their swords into plows.
    They’ll hammer their spears into pruning tools.
    Nations will not go to war against one another.
    They won’t even train to fight anymore.

    The reason you do not have much on the Millennial Kingdom in the NT is because Jesus said we are to proclaim it, but not focus on *when* it will take place. So obviously we should know, from OT prophecies, what the Kingdom of God is. After all, Jesus told his disciples to proclaim it without going into a lot of detail about what it will be. But as to its timing Jesus said we are to be concerned rather with simply proclaiming it, to prepare the nations for it. See Acts 1.

    4) The idea of mortal humanity populating the Millennial Earth during the Kingdom of Christ is assumed, and not something that has to be taught. It is always assumed that mankind is born in sin, ie we have a sin nature. When Christ comes we are told that the Church is glorified. We are not told that all humanity is glorified. So my assumption is that mortal humanity continues in sin long after Christ returns. Peace reigns on earth because the Church rules in some way--perhaps by the suppression of sin by angels, or possibly by direct administration on earth. I don't know...

    5) I don't know why you say I haven't provided evidence of a Davidic Kingdom? It has been well-documented, is easily available, and I have offered some of it to you personally. Even if you don't interpret it the same way I do, these passages are commonly taken to be future prophecies of the Davidic, or Messianic Kingdom, which Christians generally view as the Kingdom of Jesus during the Millennium. For example:


    Eze 37.12 I will bring you into the land of Israel… 25 They will live on the land that I gave to Jacob My servant, in which your fathers lived; and they will live on it, they, and their sons and their sons’ sons, forever; and David My servant will be their prince forever.

    Hos 3.4 For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or household gods. 5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the Lord their God and David their king.

  7. #52

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    1) The insertion of a "millennium" does seem odd, but it does not follow that it is "hyper-symbolic." It could be taken literally, much as the "70 Weeks prophecy" can be taken literally--and there is no corroboration for that either.
    2) Your evidence for a "climactic coming of Christ" does not negate a Millennial period. You would have to define how an eschatological "climax" is at odds with the introduction of a Millennium following judgment. I can easily see how, for example, a WW3 can lead into a time of peace, much as WW1 and WW2 led to a League of Nations or a United Nations.
    3) When Jesus discussed the Kingdom of God to come he mentioned that his 12 apostles would "rule" as "judges" over the 12 tribes of Israel (Matthew 19.28). Jesus in this passage assumes that his disciples know what is being discussed. It is evident from OT prophecies that there will be judges in the Messianic Kingdom bringing sinners into submission to God's laws. For example, Isa 2:

    2 In the last days

    the mountain where the Lord’s temple is located will be famous.
    It will be the highest mountain of all.
    It will be raised above the hills.
    All the nations will go to it.
    3 People from many nations will go there. They will say,

    “Come. Let us go up to the Lord’s mountain.
    Let’s go to the temple of Jacob’s God.
    He will teach us how we should live.
    Then we will live the way he wants us to.”
    The law of the Lord will be taught at Zion.
    His message will go out from Jerusalem.
    4 He will judge between the nations.
    He’ll settle problems among many of them.
    They will hammer their swords into plows.
    They’ll hammer their spears into pruning tools.
    Nations will not go to war against one another.
    They won’t even train to fight anymore.

    The reason you do not have much on the Millennial Kingdom in the NT is because Jesus said we are to proclaim it, but not focus on *when* it will take place. So obviously we should know, from OT prophecies, what the Kingdom of God is. After all, Jesus told his disciples to proclaim it without going into a lot of detail about what it will be. But as to its timing Jesus said we are to be concerned rather with simply proclaiming it, to prepare the nations for it. See Acts 1.

    4) The idea of mortal humanity populating the Millennial Earth during the Kingdom of Christ is assumed, and not something that has to be taught. It is always assumed that mankind is born in sin, ie we have a sin nature. When Christ comes we are told that the Church is glorified. We are not told that all humanity is glorified. So my assumption is that mortal humanity continues in sin long after Christ returns. Peace reigns on earth because the Church rules in some way--perhaps by the suppression of sin by angels, or possibly by direct administration on earth. I don't know...

    5) I don't know why you say I haven't provided evidence of a Davidic Kingdom? It has been well-documented, is easily available, and I have offered some of it to you personally. Even if you don't interpret it the same way I do, these passages are commonly taken to be future prophecies of the Davidic, or Messianic Kingdom, which Christians generally view as the Kingdom of Jesus during the Millennium. For example:


    Eze 37.12 I will bring you into the land of Israel… 25 They will live on the land that I gave to Jacob My servant, in which your fathers lived; and they will live on it, they, and their sons and their sons’ sons, forever; and David My servant will be their prince forever.

    Hos 3.4 For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or household gods. 5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the Lord their God and David their king.

    You are claiming & dumping last days passages into your imaginary future age corrupted by sin, Satan, war and terror, death and funerals.This proves it is extrabiblical. This reveals how impotent your position is & how devoid it is of support. The last days relates to the intra-Advent period. The last day is when Jesus comes. Various Scripture proves this. Your quarrel is with the sacred text.

    It seems like no age or text is safe with your mode of hermeneutics. Your obsession with an age that does exist causes you to misplace countless clear & explicit Scripture.

    Maybe you would do a comparison of Isa 2 & Rev 20. Show the correlation. .I won't hold my breath.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    You are claiming & dumping last days passages into your imaginary future age corrupted by sin, Satan, war and terror, death and funerals.This proves it is extrabiblical. This reveals how impotent your position is & how devoid it is of support. The last days relates to the intra-Advent period. The last day is when Jesus comes. Various Scripture proves this. Your quarrel is with the sacred text.

    It seems like no age or text is safe with your mode of hermeneutics. Your obsession with an age that does exist causes you to misplace countless clear & explicit Scripture.

    Maybe you would do a comparison of Isa 2 & Rev 20. Show the correlation. .I won't hold my breath.
    Your method of "proof" mystifies me? You seem to think that your interpretation of eschatological passages, namely Amil, is "proof" that you are right! Since when is your "spin" on a biblical passage "proof?" I might as well say that my Premil "spin" on the same passages are proof of my position!

    So we cannot use our interpretation as proof, but rather, the passages themselves. And you are not doing that. You are simply proclaiming various passages "intra-Advent" and "last day passages" without offering real proof! I don't think you even realize what constitutes real proof at all, if this is your approach?

    What I'm suggesting is that you look at the actual passages to see if it can legitimately fit into a Premil mindset. But you refuse to do that. You just declare these are Amil passages because you "say so," and then declare that as "proof positive," and Premil positions "illegitimate" and "mindless." You are hardly debating anything when you do this!

    So if you look at Isa 2 and realize that nations are moving towards Jerusalem to learn of God's laws you must surely realize that nations are being converted to the God of Israel. Well, the God of Israel has not been with Israel for a long time, and certainly not today, in terms of "spiritual blessings." God has only been with Israel out of mercy, for the sake of their forefathers, the Patriarchs.

    And so, if the nations are moving towards the God of Israel in terms of *spiritual blessings,* then Israel has been converted to Christ. If this is before Christ's 1st coming, the nations would not be coming to the God of Israel. If this is "intra-Advent" then nations would not be moving towards the God of Israel, since Israel has not yet accepted Christ as a nation.

    Go ahead and hold your breath. But when you want to honestly analyze, then please suspend judgment until you have actually considered something outside of your own preconceived views.

    Isa. 2.2 In the last days

    the mountain where the Lord’s temple is located will be famous.
    It will be the highest mountain of all.
    It will be raised above the hills.
    All the nations will go to it.
    3 People from many nations will go there. They will say,

    “Come. Let us go up to the Lord’s mountain.
    Let’s go to the temple of Jacob’s God.
    He will teach us how we should live.
    Then we will live the way he wants us to.”
    The law of the Lord will be taught at Zion.
    His message will go out from Jerusalem.
    4 He will judge between the nations.
    He’ll settle problems among many of them.
    They will hammer their swords into plows.
    They’ll hammer their spears into pruning tools.
    Nations will not go to war against one another.
    They won’t even train to fight anymore.

  9. #54

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Your method of "proof" mystifies me? You seem to think that your interpretation of eschatological passages, namely Amil, is "proof" that you are right! Since when is your "spin" on a biblical passage "proof?" I might as well say that my Premil "spin" on the same passages are proof of my position!

    So we cannot use our interpretation as proof, but rather, the passages themselves. And you are not doing that. You are simply proclaiming various passages "intra-Advent" and "last day passages" without offering real proof! I don't think you even realize what constitutes real proof at all, if this is your approach?

    What I'm suggesting is that you look at the actual passages to see if it can legitimately fit into a Premil mindset. But you refuse to do that. You just declare these are Amil passages because you "say so," and then declare that as "proof positive," and Premil positions "illegitimate" and "mindless." You are hardly debating anything when you do this!

    So if you look at Isa 2 and realize that nations are moving towards Jerusalem to learn of God's laws you must surely realize that nations are being converted to the God of Israel. Well, the God of Israel has not been with Israel for a long time, and certainly not today, in terms of "spiritual blessings." God has only been with Israel out of mercy, for the sake of their forefathers, the Patriarchs.

    And so, if the nations are moving towards the God of Israel in terms of *spiritual blessings,* then Israel has been converted to Christ. If this is before Christ's 1st coming, the nations would not be coming to the God of Israel. If this is inter-Testament then nations would not be moving towards the God of Israel, since Israel has not yet accepted Christ as a nation.

    Go ahead and hold your breath. But when you want to honestly analyze, then please suspend judgment until you have actually considered something outside of your own preconceived views.

    Isa. 2.2 In the last days

    the mountain where the Lord’s temple is located will be famous.
    It will be the highest mountain of all.
    It will be raised above the hills.
    All the nations will go to it.
    3 People from many nations will go there. They will say,

    “Come. Let us go up to the Lord’s mountain.
    Let’s go to the temple of Jacob’s God.
    He will teach us how we should live.
    Then we will live the way he wants us to.”
    The law of the Lord will be taught at Zion.
    His message will go out from Jerusalem.
    4 He will judge between the nations.
    He’ll settle problems among many of them.
    They will hammer their swords into plows.
    They’ll hammer their spears into pruning tools.
    Nations will not go to war against one another.
    They won’t even train to fight anymore.
    It is you that is ripping this text from its expressed location in "the last days" in the here-and-now and dumping it into an extra-biblical age in the future. In reality, this relates to Christ now and the nations being brought into the kingdom and experiencing true peace.

    When do you think the last days began/begins & when do they end?

    When is the last day?

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    It is you that is ripping this text from its expressed location in "the last days" in the here-and-now and dumping it into an extra-biblical age in the future. In reality, this relates to Christ now and the nations being brought into the kingdom and experiencing true peace.

    When do you think the last days began/begins & when do they end?

    When is the last day?
    Some good questions from you! The "last days" as used in the passage refer to the end-game of Israel in history, which is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Promise to produce Israel and her eternal inheritance in her land. That is in "the last days."

    We often think of the "last days" or "endtimes" in terms of this current age. But in context the "last days" here refer to the final state of Israel on the old earth. And that has to do with her final possession of her land as a nation, never more to be uprooted from it.

    Not saying you have to agree with it. I'm just hoping you understand how I view it. The "last day" of this current age is in a different context than these "last days" of Israel's inheritance. You may disagree, but that's okay. As I said above the context for me *demands* a Christian Israel along with a multitude of nations coming to the God of Israel. That has never happened in history because Israel has never been Christian, and therefore nations have never come to Israel to learn about Christ.

  11. #56

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Some good questions from you! The "last days" as used in the passage refer to the end-game of Israel in history, which is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Promise to produce Israel and her eternal inheritance in her land. That is in "the last days."

    We often think of the "last days" or "endtimes" in terms of this current age. But in context the "last days" here refer to the final state of Israel on the old earth. And that has to do with her final possession of her land as a nation, never more to be uprooted from it.

    Not saying you have to agree with it. I'm just hoping you understand how I view it. The "last day" of this current age is in a different context than these "last days" of Israel's inheritance. You may disagree, but that's okay. As I said above the context for me *demands* a Christian Israel along with a multitude of nations coming to the God of Israel. That has never happened in history because Israel has never been Christian, and therefore nations have never come to Israel to learn about Christ.
    It seems like you are inventing another age to facilitate a faulty concept on unfulfilled prophecies regarding natural Israel. You fail to see that these were fulfilled literally in Christ. We (the redeemed Church) ) are the children of Abraham - the children of promise. The children of the flesh are not that (Rom 9.6-7). You dont seem to get that. You are considering this with an old covenant perspective rather than a new covenant one. This is where you err. The fact that neither Christ or any NT taught this stuff shows it is wrong. In fact they taught the opposite. The old is gone forever (ptl) and the new is here. Your views are regressive and unbiblical.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    It seems like you are inventing another age to facilitate a faulty concept on unfulfilled prophecies regarding natural Israel. You fail to see that these were fulfilled literally in Christ. We (the redeemed Church) ) are the children of Abraham - the children of promise. The children of the flesh are not that (Rom 9.6-7). You dont seem to get that. You are considering this with an old covenant perspective rather than a new covenant one. This is where you err. The fact that neither Christ or any NT taught this stuff shows it is wrong. In fact they taught the opposite. The old is gone forever (ptl) and the new is here. Your views are regressive and unbiblical.
    I understand that is your pov. At the heart of it all is "replacement theology," which you adhere to. I don't believe Israel consists of "children of the flesh." Certainly not as you describe it. They are indeed the "natural children" of Abraham, with lots of admixture from non-Hebrews through intermarriage.

    Paul describes Israel as a "people" and a "race," as the "people of Israel." And Paul's argument is that they are *not* disqualified from "adoption as God's children," from "God's glory," from "the covenants," the "Law," the "temple worship," the "promises," the "Patriarchs," the "nation," and the "Messiah." And yet this is precisely what you are doing! You are denying Israel, as the natural children of Israel, status as God's nation, status as recipients of the eternal covenants of Abraham and Moses, and status as heir to the promises given to Abraham concerning a nation in their own land. You call them derisively "children of the flesh!"

    Not only is your quote of Romans 9 illegitimate and backwards, but you position your "replacement theology" in the place where Paul reasserts Israel's place in terms of NT hope! And you consider me "regressive" for teaching precisely what Paul teaches in this very passage!

    That being said I recognize that many legitimate and genuine Christians believe as you do. I just wish you were more congenial with others who assert the literal thing that Paul is teaching here!

    Beyond this let me add--I am not "inventing another age," the Millennial Age, to provide for the fulfillment of my view of OT prophecies. On the contrary I am using an age described in Rev 20 as a place where these promised things can take place. All these things were said to take place when "David" takes his throne as the final hope of Israel. That "David" has yet to take his throne, and Israel has yet to obtain her hope. It is completely logical to see the Millennium of Rev. 20 as the place where this will take place because it is positioned in the Revelation right after the coming of Christ. At the end of this 1000 year period the nations again rebel against God and come up against God's city, which I assume to be Jerusalem in Israel. It seems very, very likely to me that Israel has come to Christ since Jerusalem is at that time considered to be the "city of God."

  13. #58

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I understand that is your pov. At the heart of it all is "replacement theology," which you adhere to. I don't believe Israel consists of "children of the flesh." Certainly not as you describe it. They are indeed the "natural children" of Abraham, with lots of admixture from non-Hebrews through intermarriage.

    Paul describes Israel as a "people" and a "race," as the "people of Israel." And Paul's argument is that they are *not* disqualified from "adoption as God's children," from "God's glory," from "the covenants," the "Law," the "temple worship," the "promises," the "Patriarchs," the "nation," and the "Messiah." And yet this is precisely what you are doing! You are denying Israel, as the natural children of Israel, status as God's nation, status as recipients of the eternal covenants of Abraham and Moses, and status as heir to the promises given to Abraham concerning a nation in their own land. You call them derisively "children of the flesh!"

    Not only is your quote of Romans 9 illegitimate and backwards, but you position your "replacement theology" in the place where Paul reasserts Israel's place in terms of NT hope! And you consider me "regressive" for teaching precisely what Paul teaches in this very passage!

    That being said I recognize that many legitimate and genuine Christians believe as you do. I just wish you were more congenial with others who assert the literal thing that Paul is teaching here!

    Beyond this let me add--I am not "inventing another age," the Millennial Age, to provide for the fulfillment of my view of OT prophecies. On the contrary I am using an age described in Rev 20 as a place where these promised things can take place. All these things were said to take place when "David" takes his throne as the final hope of Israel. That "David" has yet to take his throne, and Israel has yet to obtain her hope. It is completely logical to see the Millennium of Rev. 20 as the place where this will take place because it is positioned in the Revelation right after the coming of Christ. At the end of this 1000 year period the nations again rebel against God and come up against God's city, which I assume to be Jerusalem in Israel. It seems very, very likely to me that Israel has come to Christ since Jerusalem is at that time considered to be the "city of God."
    Who are we supposed to have replaced?

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Who are we supposed to have replaced?
    I was assuming you are teaching "replacement theology?" Are you asking me what that means?

  15. #60

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I was assuming you are teaching "replacement theology?" Are you asking me what that means?
    Who do you think that I think we have replaced? You are the one hurling the charges.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion Two judgments, two resurrections
    By DurbanDude in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: Mar 12th 2010, 09:28 PM
  2. Colbert takes on Bart Ehrman (video link to "debate")
    By A820djd in forum Christian Fellowship
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Apr 12th 2009, 06:55 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •