Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 143

Thread: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

  1. #106
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,800
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Reese View Post
    Literal and it can be a temple without bricks. Jesus works out of the temple in heaven now, we see it not but its true. I base my understanding of this being two nations. They stand before the god of this Earth that god is satan. Jesus is walking sees a fig tree a far off this fig tree represents Israel. It bears no fruit God was not mad at this fig tree. More to come
    How can the Beast sit in a non-literal temple? How can he be seen, remember that his objective was to be seen as God?

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Incredible. So Apostle John lived over 1000 years then?
    Of the first century

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,437

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Some of the passages you quoted above have nothing in common with inheriting the land, e.g Rom 9:7 actually refers to the faithful. If you won't accept that for a Jew to partake from the land promise, he must first be saved and in the NT, it means faith in Christ - not adherence to the Law, then you're obviously lost. For a mature Christian like you, I don't need to give you scriptures on this.
    Well, lets set the rules of engagement. Whatever my state of Christianity is, I request scriptural documentation for any statement where you lay forth a doctrine. I'm surprised that you think that Romans 9:7 "refers to the faithful". I thought it referred to "seed". You know, Dan and Korah and Saul and Ahab. How could it refer to "the faithful" when this "seed" is "concluded by God to ALL be in UNBELIEF (Rom.11:32)? That's just the meaning of "Promise". There are NO conditions to fulfill except circumcision. Or have you spotted more in the Covenant of Promise. Or maybe your Bible says something different to mine, which, concerning the "calling" of God, "... are without repentance" (Rom.11:29). When EVER was the gaining of the Good Land subject to belief in Christ? See why I request scripture? In this case you cannot produce one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    1. Dan 12:2 speaks of 2 conditions for those that resurrect. (1) one to everlasting life and the other to everlasting contempt. Are you telling me you don't recognise that everlasting contempt is the lake of fire?

    2. The Outer Darkness is away from the kingdom of heaven. And NO Jew outside the Kingdom will partake from the land promise.
    No. Daniel 12:2 is a PROMISE by PROPHECY. Many WILL be resurrected, but SOME of the MANY to everlasting life and SOME of the MANY to everlasting contempt. Grammar ... !

    The Outer Darkness IS away from the Kingdom of Heaven. But the Kingdom of Heaven is TAKEN from Israel (Matt.21:43). For them it revolves around the "Kingdom of Israel". Our Lord Jesus is BOTH King of the Jews and King of kings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    What I meant by saying your argument is 'positionally wrong' is that your case for inheriting the land doesn't factor salvation/eternal life FIRST. You believe that fleshly circumcision is the key. But you couldn't be wrong if you tried. If your idea of "solid exegesis" is writing 1000+ words with often passages that are irrelevant to the discourse, then you win the gold. I prefer to go straight to the point and that sometimes doesn't require a lengthy rhetoric.
    Agreed. Then all I ask is for a couple of verses that say God's Promise that the "seed" of Isaac will get Canaan for "an everlasting possession" is, as you say, subject to belief in Christ. Thanks. I await in anticipation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Again our difference is your erroneous belief that every Jew (saved and unsaved) will inherit the land. I used Matt 8:11-12 to explain that those outside the kingdom will not receive anything, but you dismissed it. How can a Jew in outer darkness or one who resurrected into eternal contempt receive the land promise?
    Because God PROMISED IT with an OATH. If Korah or Ahab or Judas were seed of Isaac, and they were circumcised, then they are restored to their Land when Christ returns. It is just that they cannot enjoy it. Any alternative is to make God, and His OATHS untrue (perish the thought).

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    1. FYI, restoration of Israel in the MK STILL requires them to accept Jesus.
    Scriptures please. It saves, as you said, a thousand words.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Those who continue to reject him will be slaughtered by the Beast (Zech 14:2).
    Who cares when there is resurrection (Dan.12:2). Since Assyria deported the ten northern Tribes, how many of Isaac's seed you think have been slaughtered? Your problem is that you don't believe in resurrection.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Those who believe will escape into the desert where they will be divinely protected and succoured until Jesus returns to restore them to the land.
    And what of all the "seed" of Isaac who died in Egypt before Moses came? Your view of the SEED of Isaac is so stunted. You only think about the SEED that is living at the end. But the Promise is made to ALL SEED of Isaac.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Your belief that a Jew living in the NT age doesn't need Jesus, but only circumcision to inherit the land, is akin to what Judaism believes since Christ has no place in their doctrine.
    Absolutely correct. The Jew believes the Covenant of PROMISE to Abraham. He has more faith than you who rejects it. Just about the whole Old Testament deals with Israel's recovery, and not a single verse demands belief in Christ. Huge sections of the New Testament (e.g. Romans 9 to 11 and the Book of Hebrews) address this problem, and NEVER is belief in Christ predicted. If it was, you would have posted the verses long ago. It os GOD, not me, "Who has concluded ALL Israel in unbelief" (Rom.11:32). Israel's recovery is by MERCY on God's side and a return to the Law on their side (Rom.11:32; Deut.30:1-5).

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    2. In Zech 12:10 God said he will pour out the spirit of supplication upon the House of Israel, yet not all will believe!
    You should train yourself to read the words. See that phrase "LOOK UPON ME". Hebrews 11:1 says that FAITH is the substance and hope of THINGS UNSEEN. You say; "yet not ALL will BELIEVE". Scripture says; the BELIEF for salvation is founded on NOT SEEING!

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Rev 1:7 doesn't say they will be saved by seeing him.
    Nor did I. Go back and read my posting ACCURATELY.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    3. It's good that you cited Romans 2:8-13. I want you to really ponder v-13 but the doers of the law shall be justified.. Question is, if they (Israel) couldn't keep the law in the OT age, what makes you believe they will in this age when the temple and sacrifices are no more? Aren't you clutching at straws?
    I am really beginning to think that English is not your mother tongue. Who said, AND where, that Israel could keep the Law in THIS AGE? I have REPEATEDLY said that they CANNOT because even if they wanted to there is NO TEMPLE - an integral part of the Law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    4. For what it's worth, my focus is Israel in the NT age (that's why I said that the law and its attendant rituals have no more value), not those that lived and died in the OT. Hope you understand where am coming from so we don't argue at cross-purposes?
    OK. That may be. So let me be clear. Israel are (i) "ALL concluded by God in UNBELIEF in this age" (Rom.11:32), and (ii) under chastisement for TWO DAYS (Hos.6:2). David's House - that of the king of COMBINED ISRAEL will only be raised up AFTER this age (Act.15:13-16). Except for the visible curses of the Law being played out on them, they are, for the purposes of THIS AGE, out of the picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    5. So your bible didn't speak about a rebirth for Israel? I don't suppose you've read what Paul said about being grafted back into the olive tree in Rom 11 should they believe?
    It is given to a man to be true to God's WORDS. "REBIRTH" is an additional BIRTH. "GRAFTED IN" is when a Husbandman takes a branch lying at the side of a tree, cuts and incision into the tree and pushes the branch into the stem in the hope that the life juices of the stem will find their way into the dead or dying branch. They are two totally different concepts. And REBIRTH is by FAITH (Jn.1:12-13) and being GRAFTED IN is an ACT by the husbandman irrespective of the wishes and beliefs of the wayward branch.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    6. 1 Peter 2:9 described the church, (composition of all believing Jew and Gentile) as a chosen generation, a royal priesthood etc. Claiming that believing Israel is separated from the Church shows how far off the mark you are.
    Trivalee says; "believing Israel"
    God says; "ALL Israel is concluded in unbelief" (Rom.11:32)

    Trivalee says; "the composition of the Church is by believing Jew and Gentile"
    God says; "In the New Man, those IN Christ, ARE NO JEWS NOR GREEKS (Gal.3:28; Col.3:11)

    Trivalee says; "believing Israel is part of the Church"
    God says; "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (2nd Cor.5:17). Israel is of OLD. So is Greece. So is bond-slave and so is free. For those IN Christ the whole past is erased.

    Trivalee says; "believing" but still Israel.
    God says; "Believe" and you are a New Creature!

    You have INVENTED things that do not appear in scripture. You have RETAINED things that God abolished. You have ADDED to scripture. May I, in the friendliest terms, ask; "who is off the mark?"

    If you could once jump over your beliefs, see if this fits;
    1. The Nations are UNBELIEVERS. They rule the earth NOW but will be replaced by Christ and the Overcomers in the NEXT AGE
    2. The Nation of Israel are UNBELIEVERS. They are scattered and under the heavy hand of God NOW. They will be restored AS A NATION in the NEXT AGE. Christians - the Twelve Apostles, will rule them THEN
    3. The New Man - the Church, ARE BELIEVERS. They are being built up NOW and the Overcomers of the Church will RULE the earth with Christ in the NEXT AGE

    1. The Nations are UNBELIEVERS NOW. They will see Christ when He returns. They REMAIN the Nations.
    2. The Nation of Israel are UNBELIEVERS NOW. They will see Christ when He returns. They REMAIN Israel but are blessed as the leading Nation with Emmanuel living physically in their midst. They REMAIN ISRAEL.
    3. The Church are BELIEVERS NOW. They do NOT SEE CHRIST BUT BELIEVE. They experience the New Birth NOW. They are a New Creature NOW. They possess eternal life NOW. They are the House of God NOW. They are the TESTIMONY of God NOW. They have no political rights NOW. They are in TRAINING NOW. They will be co-kings with Christ when He returns. They STAY THE CHURCH

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,800
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Of the first century
    But you said he saw the visions in the 60s, which I presume to be 1960. Did I get you wrong?

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,257
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    But you said he saw the visions in the 60s, which I presume to be 1960. Did I get you wrong?
    Marty has a real chronology issue. He has John see the visions in the 60s, but when you try to pin him down as to which year he seems quite evasive.
    This is because Nero started persecuting the Christians after Rome burnt in July 64.
    Now John could not be in exile until AFTER that event, as there was no Roman persecution to send him there.
    Further the persecution was basically localised to "ItalY".
    Now if we assume it was actually more widely spread then someone must have been told to exile the Christians rather than crucify them or put them in the Colosseum, or personally was a secret Christian.
    There needs to be time for this to be sent from Rome to Asia Minor and elsewhere.
    Now 4 years later Nero is dead.
    This means the final 3.5 years must ALL occur IMMEDIATELY without any time for John to be taken, transported or given the vision, and then for him to write it and send it out.
    Further according to Revelation the events of chapters 2 and 3 occur BEFORE the rest.
    This means there is NO previous prophecy about the 5 months of the locusts - except He makes that be about Jerusalem AFTER Nero is dead, and yet Nero is the 666 and the one who fulfilled the role of AC.
    As soon as you explore it with any reality it burst apart at the seams, but then it is bot supported by the ECFs as being a correct time.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,800
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    Marty has a real chronology issue. He has John see the visions in the 60s, but when you try to pin him down as to which year he seems quite evasive.
    This is because Nero started persecuting the Christians after Rome burnt in July 64.
    Now John could not be in exile until AFTER that event, as there was no Roman persecution to send him there.
    Further the persecution was basically localised to "ItalY".
    Now if we assume it was actually more widely spread then someone must have been told to exile the Christians rather than crucify them or put them in the Colosseum, or personally was a secret Christian.
    There needs to be time for this to be sent from Rome to Asia Minor and elsewhere.
    Now 4 years later Nero is dead.
    This means the final 3.5 years must ALL occur IMMEDIATELY without any time for John to be taken, transported or given the vision, and then for him to write it and send it out.
    Further according to Revelation the events of chapters 2 and 3 occur BEFORE the rest.
    This means there is NO previous prophecy about the 5 months of the locusts - except He makes that be about Jerusalem AFTER Nero is dead, and yet Nero is the 666 and the one who fulfilled the role of AC.
    As soon as you explore it with any reality it burst apart at the seams, but then it is bot supported by the ECFs as being a correct time.
    Thanks for showcasing the absurdity of the claim out. I've found that once a head is stuck out of the turret on the Board, it seldom withdraws.

  7. #112

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    A temple was a place of prayer and worship. Can be as small as your heart, your church, your city, your country, your planet, your cosmos. I believe its literal. 8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

    9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

    10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

    satan is god of earth. satan stands before these two nations and gets mad and attacks them. That is what these verse are saying. The beast you speak of please explain. I understand the beast in Revelations and Ezekiel.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?


  9. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?


  10. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?


  11. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?


  12. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?


  13. #118
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,367
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    But you said he saw the visions in the 60s, which I presume to be 1960. Did I get you wrong?
    Yes I meant of the first century

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,800
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Well, lets set the rules of engagement. Whatever my state of Christianity is, I request scriptural documentation for any statement where you lay forth a doctrine. I'm surprised that you think that Romans 9:7 "refers to the faithful". I thought it referred to "seed". You know, Dan and Korah and Saul and Ahab. How could it refer to "the faithful" when this "seed" is "concluded by God to ALL be in UNBELIEF (Rom.11:32)? That's just the meaning of "Promise". There are NO conditions to fulfill except circumcision. Or have you spotted more in the Covenant of Promise. Or maybe your Bible says something different to mine, which, concerning the "calling" of God, "... are without repentance" (Rom.11:29). When EVER was the gaining of the Good Land subject to belief in Christ? See why I request scripture? In this case you cannot produce one.
    When Paul said that "All are in unbelief" it is the same as Rom 3:23 "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. What this implies is that we are all sinners, nevertheless, those who have accepted Jesus Christ are no more part of this category. From the 1st century till today, there have always been believing Jews who are excluded from those in unbelief.

    And I repeat again, circumcision is not all it takes to be saved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    No. Daniel 12:2 is a PROMISE by PROPHECY. Many WILL be resurrected, but SOME of the MANY to everlasting life and SOME of the MANY to everlasting contempt. Grammar ... !The Outer Darkness IS away from the Kingdom of Heaven. But the Kingdom of Heaven is TAKEN from Israel (Matt.21:43). For them it revolves around the "Kingdom of Israel". Our Lord Jesus is BOTH King of the Jews and King of kings.
    Not sure whether you even understand what you're saying because you make no sense? Dan 12: 2 pertains to both Jew and Gentiles and couldn't possibly refer exclusively to the "Kingdom of Israel". Secondly, it looks like you don't know what the Outer darkness means?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Agreed. Then all I ask is for a couple of verses that say God's Promise that the "seed" of Isaac will get Canaan for "an everlasting possession" is, as you say, subject to belief in Christ. Thanks. I await in anticipation.
    1. To possess the land, a Jew MUST first enter the Kingdom of God and that means to be saved. In Heb 11 a few names of the OT saints who through faith, await the resurrection to everlasting life. They will enjoy the land promise.
    2. A wicked Jew (whether he lived in the OT or NT) will end up in the lake of fire and will not inherit. In Gal 3:24 Paul revealed that the Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, hence when Christ came the Jew and Gentile are now ONLY saved by faith in Jesus Christ. See Acts 4:12, Gal 2:16, Eph 2:8-9

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Because God PROMISED IT with an OATH. If Korah or Ahab or Judas were seed of Isaac, and they were circumcised, then they are restored to their Land when Christ returns. It is just that they cannot enjoy it. Any alternative is to make God, and His OATHS untrue (perish the thought).
    To claim that wicked Jews e.g. Korah, Ahab, Judas Iscariot etc will inherit the land promise is as spurious as there is a white elephant. How can they be "restored to their land" when they are in the lake of fire?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Scriptures please. It saves, as you said, a thousand words.
    Acts 4:12, 2 Tim 2:5, Gal 2:16

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Who cares when there is resurrection (Dan.12:2). Since Assyria deported the ten northern Tribes, how many of Isaac's seed you think have been slaughtered? Your problem is that you don't believe in resurrection.
    I wonder how you say such a bold-faced ignorant lie that "I don't believe in the resurrection"? Would you care to quote anywhere I denied the resurrection? The Jews that the Beast will slaughter in Zech 14:2 are clearly alive and not dead. Therefore, their status has nothing to do with resurrection.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    And what of all the "seed" of Isaac who died in Egypt before Moses came? Your view of the SEED of Isaac is so stunted. You only think about the SEED that is living at the end. But the Promise is made to ALL SEED of Isaac.
    For those who lived and died in the OT age, their fate is sealed until the resurrection. But since life continues in the NT age, the requirement to be saved and partake of the Land Promise is now not limited to bodily circumcision alone. It requires that of the heart as well and, that comes by faith in Jesus (Rom 2:28).

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Absolutely correct. The Jew believes the Covenant of PROMISE to Abraham. He has more faith than you who rejects it. Just about the whole Old Testament deals with Israel's recovery, and not a single verse demands belief in Christ. Huge sections of the New Testament (e.g. Romans 9 to 11 and the Book of Hebrews) address this problem, and NEVER is belief in Christ predicted. If it was, you would have posted the verses long ago. It os GOD, not me, "Who has concluded ALL Israel in unbelief" (Rom.11:32). Israel's recovery is by MERCY on God's side and a return to the Law on their side (Rom.11:32; Deut.30:1-5).
    To claim that Israel in the NT doesn't require Jesus Christ is ludicrous and laughable, shows you don't know your Gospel. I'm beginning to wonder the wisdom is discussing this important subject with you, given that your understanding is incredibly out of line with scripture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    You should train yourself to read the words. See that phrase "LOOK UPON ME". Hebrews 11:1 says that FAITH is the substance and hope of THINGS UNSEEN. You say; "yet not ALL will BELIEVE". Scripture says; the BELIEF for salvation is founded on NOT SEEING!
    You seem to forget that you initially cited Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

    How quickly you backtrack when your blunder is brought to the light!

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,800
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    I am really beginning to think that English is not your mother tongue. Who said, AND where, that Israel could keep the Law in THIS AGE? I have REPEATEDLY said that they CANNOT because even if they wanted to there is NO TEMPLE - an integral part of the Law.
    So let me clarify for other readers.

    Here you agree that Israel cannot keep the law in the NT age, yet you insist they don't need Christ? FYI - I have you on record, won't be surprised if you deny again you never said so. Explain how Israel without Christ and the Law will be saved? O I forgot, by circumcision as you claimed!

    Let other readers judge for themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    OK. That may be. So let me be clear. Israel are (i) "ALL concluded by God in UNBELIEF in this age" (Rom.11:32), and (ii) under chastisement for TWO DAYS (Hos.6:2). David's House - that of the king of COMBINED ISRAEL will only be raised up AFTER this age (Act.15:13-16). Except for the visible curses of the Law being played out on them, they are, for the purposes of THIS AGE, out of the picture.
    I hear you loud and clear. If this is true, then please explain where the apostles and the numerous unnamed Ist century Jewish believers and Christ belong? And for good measure, throw in the today's messianic Jews? If in your understanding, they are supposedly out of the way, where do you place them, then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    It is given to a man to be true to God's WORDS. "REBIRTH" is an additional BIRTH. "GRAFTED IN" is when a Husbandman takes a branch lying at the side of a tree, cuts and incision into the tree and pushes the branch into the stem in the hope that the life juices of the stem will find their way into the dead or dying branch. They are two totally different concepts. And REBIRTH is by FAITH (Jn.1:12-13) and being GRAFTED IN is an ACT by the husbandman irrespective of the wishes and beliefs of the wayward branch.
    I really worry for you. You seem to read your bible given the scriptures you quote, but you sadly don't appear to understand it. The red highlight above sums up how mistaken you are. There is NO scripture that says that Jesus will "graft in" an unbelieving Jew into the vine! Jesus said expressly "I stand at the door and knock and if any man hear my voice and open the door I will come in and sup with him... Rev 3:20".

    Nothing in my Bible says Jesus will force and unbeliever "irrespective of his wishes and beliefs"...

    Trivalee says; "believing Israel"
    God says; "ALL Israel is concluded in unbelief" (Rom.11:32) What about the disciples, apostles and all Jewish converts, including messianic Jews?

    Trivalee says; "the composition of the Church is by believing Jew and Gentile"
    God says; "In the New Man, those IN Christ, ARE NO JEWS NOR GREEKS (Gal.3:28; Col.3:11). Clearly you are confused because Gal 3:28 & Col 3:11 agree with me that the Church comprises of BELIEVING JEW AND GENTILE.

    Trivalee says; "believing Israel is part of the Church"
    God says; "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (2nd Cor.5:17). Israel is of OLD. So is Greece. So is bond-slave and so is free. For those IN Christ the whole past is erased. Sigh Sometimes I wonder whether am discussing with a 10 year old? Hello, "Israel" is an ethnic people - the same you and I agree with inherit the land promise, remember?

    Trivalee says; "believing" but still Israel.
    God says; "Believe" and you are a New Creature! When we believe, we become "a new creature" spiritually speaking. It doesn't affect our physical appearance - a Chinese, Jewish or an African believer remains what they are outwardly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    You have INVENTED things that do not appear in scripture. You have RETAINED things that God abolished. You have ADDED to scripture. May I, in the friendliest terms, ask; "who is off the mark?"

    If you could once jump over your beliefs, see if this fits;
    1. The Nations are UNBELIEVERS. They rule the earth NOW but will be replaced by Christ and the Overcomers in the NEXT AGE
    2. The Nation of Israel are UNBELIEVERS. They are scattered and under the heavy hand of God NOW. They will be restored AS A NATION in the NEXT AGE. Christians - the Twelve Apostles, will rule them THEN
    3. The New Man - the Church, ARE BELIEVERS. They are being built up NOW and the Overcomers of the Church will RULE the earth with Christ in the NEXT AGE

    1. The Nations are UNBELIEVERS NOW. They will see Christ when He returns. They REMAIN the Nations.
    2. The Nation of Israel are UNBELIEVERS NOW. They will see Christ when He returns. They REMAIN Israel but are blessed as the leading Nation with Emmanuel living physically in their midst. They REMAIN ISRAEL.
    3. The Church are BELIEVERS NOW. They do NOT SEE CHRIST BUT BELIEVE. They experience the New Birth NOW. They are a New Creature NOW. They possess eternal life NOW. They are the House of God NOW. They are the TESTIMONY of God NOW. They have no political rights NOW. They are in TRAINING NOW. They will be co-kings with Christ when He returns. They STAY THE CHURCH
    Reference to your question about "how is off the mark," I'll leave it to other readers to judge, especially who "invented" stuff that isn't in scripture and who "retained" what God has abolished.

    1. What's the relevance here?
    2. The Twelve Disciples (not the Apostles who are numbered more than 12) will rule. But as you usual, you forget that the 12 disciples are also Jews whom you claimed that ALL ARE IN UNBELIEF. How so?
    3. The New Man - the Church is a composition of both faithful Jew/Gentile in the NT age (1 Peter 2:9).
    4. CORRECTION: The Church doesn't "possess eternal life now". Eternal life will be given at the resurrection and rapture.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. How literal are you?
    By DavidC in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: Aug 1st 2017, 09:00 PM
  2. A literal temple of God?
    By The Lion and his lamb in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: Apr 14th 2015, 06:32 PM
  3. Replies: 143
    Last Post: Jul 6th 2010, 07:46 PM
  4. how literal....
    By ilovemetal in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Aug 1st 2009, 05:37 PM
  5. Discussion A Literal Temple?
    By ZAB in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 125
    Last Post: May 26th 2009, 11:18 PM

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
  •