Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Mr Azam....I am understanding Pentecost correctly ...is he arguing that Jesus needs to return to fulfill the salvation part of the covenant?
No, He is not saying this. This is not true

And no person I have ever met or read in any book believes this also.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
So what is he stating?
What I stated

That because of the sin of Isreal. They have been blinded in part

And us as the gentile church should heed the warningn and not boast and think we know it all. And understand the mystery

The BLINDNESS in part has happened to Isreal UNTIL the fullness of the gentiles has been completed.

AT that period of time, ALL Isreal will be saved,

The deliever will come out of zion (jesus return) and turn away the godliness of jacob (Isreal)

The new covenant, or removal of sin that he spoke about is the sin of unbelief and rejection of the messiah, Isreal will repent at that time.

Now what many differ on is what the meaning of fullness of the gentile is.. There are a few different views. But we all agree, that is when Christ returns, and Isreal repents.
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
Again the falacy in your argument is clear

1. Paul said this was future tense. Christ had already died
2. The ones redeemed were non believing or blind isreal
3. It spoke of Israel rejection of god and her physical salvation not the same covenant Jesus paid for all on the cross


I must agree with DP on this one.
Yes he said it was future tense, but there is no mention of the "millennium", neither is the "millennium" in Isaiah where Paul quotes from. The question then becomes when does the redeemer come out of Zion? The answer is given by Christ:

(Mat 24:15 Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),

(Mat 24:16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. )

(Mat 24:30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. )

(Mat 24:31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. )

(Mat 24:34 “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. )

The elect are gathered during the time of the destruction of the temple that the disciples pointed to and asked about the signs in connection with its destruction in Matt 24:2-3.

They are not told to look for the "abomination" of/in a destruction of a future temple.

(Mat 24:2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” )

(Mat 24:3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” )

Therefore the "2nd" coming was in the 1st century AD. The whole context is 1st century.
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
Mr Azam....I am understanding Pentecost correctly ...is he arguing that Jesus needs to return to fulfill the salvation part of the covenant?
Hard to say, on the one hand we have the remnant in Romans saved when Paul wrote (under which covenant are they saved?) and according to Dwight Pentepest all Israel being saved in the made up future millennium).
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
So what is he stating?
What I stated

That because of the sin of Isreal. They have been blinded in part

And us as the gentile church should heed the warningn and not boast and think we know it all. And understand the mystery

The BLINDNESS in part has happened to Isreal UNTIL the fullness of the gentiles has been completed.

AT that period of time, ALL Isreal will be saved,

He is not talking about the salvation of people all over the world. He is talking about the turn of Isreal from her sin of rejecting God and finally receiving him.

Thats why it is not the same covenant
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Hard to say, on the one hand we have the remnant in Romans saved when Paul wrote (under which covenant are they saved?) and according to Dwight Pentepest all Israel being saved in the made up future millennium).
That makes no sense.. I know many Jews who have become Christian...what happened to their blindness?

Why should God want to save all Jews in the future when He died for all people's sins. Jesus words against the Jews was pretty strong and look what they went through under the Romans....obviously God had a strong reaction to how they treated their sent Messiah.....but he is going to save them all in some future millennium?

I agree, It would seem to me that this is speaking Jews who would later go through the siege of AD 70
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Hard to say, on the one hand we have the remnant in Romans saved when Paul wrote (under which covenant are they saved?) and according to Dwight Pentepest all Israel being saved in the made up future millennium).
Its not hard to say at all. If you remove your preterist blinders. And read all of what paul said.

Why is there a remnant in the first place? If God is done wiht Isreal. There is no need of a remnant.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Yes he said it was future tense, but there is no mention of the "millennium", neither is the "millennium" in Isaiah where Paul quotes from. The question then becomes when does the redeemer come out of Zion? The answer is given by Christ:
So it is future tense, But it is not what some call the “millenium” which comes from the passage in reveation which says Jesus will reign for 1000 years.

Do you realize what you just did?

(Mat 24:15 Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),

(Mat 24:16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. )

(Mat 24:30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. )

(Mat 24:31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. )

(Mat 24:34 “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. )

The elect are gathered during the time of the destruction of the temple that the disciples pointed to and asked about the signs in connection with its destruction in Matt 24:2-3.
No,

The abomination of desolation is not a destruction.

Sorry dude, We have historical precidence which proves this wrong,

By the way, Why did you not answer the question concerning what the greeks did?

They are not told to look for the "abomination" of/in a destruction of a future temple.
They were told to look for an abomination of desolation period.

It never occured in 70 ad. The people of the prince who is to come destroyed the city,

They were not told to look for the destruction. They were already told it would happen.



(Mat 24:2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” )

(Mat 24:3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” )

Therefore the "2nd" coming was in the 1st century AD. The whole context is 1st century.
2nd comming was in 1st century?

When did the mount of olives split in 2

Why is jesus not ruling with a rod of iron

Why is satan not bound

Why did the eagles not eat the carcasses because the armies surrounding Isreal were killed

Why ...... (I can go on and on and on)

One nice thing about our conversation. You are helping me grow my faith in what I believe, thank you
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
That makes no sense.. I know many Jews who have become Christian...what happened to their blindness?

Why should God want to save all Jews in the future when He died for all people's sins. Jesus words against the Jews was pretty strong and look what they went through under the Romans....obviously God had a strong reaction to how they treated their sent Messiah.....but he is going to save them all in some future millennium?

I agree, It would seem to me that this is speaking Jews who would later go through the siege of AD 70
Many jews

Blindness in part MEANS that many jews will be saved. It means that continues today, Just like paul said it would.

It means NOT ALL will be saved UNTIL an event happens. Which we see is still true today

Its not hard to understand.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
You asked for proof. You got it.

Next!!

LOL I can't find it where is it?

I received proof of your opinion .Grace has nothing to do with time .Scripture defines scripture.

Ephesians 3:2if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,

Simply you heard I was saved when he met Jesus At that time he recived grace .Mot Christianity . it the same grace given to them .

He was not asking them to back in time to another dispensation .

Grace in any way shape or form is not a time sensitive word.

I would offer... The verse is simply saying at the time grace was given to Paul. The same grace given to us. As Paul stated.. Which was given to Him for us through the gospel in Christ.

No dipensation. Rather new creation. God purying hearts by a work of his faith in any time period under the sun.
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
Why should God want to save all Jews in the future when He died for all people's sins.
Paul is not saying all Israel would be saved, if he is then he would be contradicting himself in the same letter:

(Rom 9:6-7 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called. )

Paul's ALL saved is the WHOLE remnant that would come to believe during the apostles ministry.

Christ said he would gather out of his those Jews/Israelites that did not believe:

(Mat 8:11 “And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.

(Mat 8:12 “But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” )

We know from history that the above came true when the Jews were destroyed and expelled and cast out of the land in the war of 66-70AD.

So to claim that Paul is saying ALL Israel is saved is a direct contradiction of Jesus and Paul's letter to the Galatians:

(Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” )

And dispensationalism is in contradiction to Isaiah's "only a remnant" will be saved (Isa 10:22) and in total contradiction to:

(Isa 65:15 You shall leave your name as a curse to My chosen; For the Lord GOD will slay you, And call His servants by another name )


I agree, It would seem to me that this is speaking Jews who would later go through the siege of AD 70
Yes.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
You could have asked rather than assumed.



Here is what David said, ..."Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered." (Rom 4:7)

Here is what you say..."David cannot be talking about himself because, as I have stated, God took away his Son after he sinned."

here is what Nathan the prophet said, "2 Samuel 12:13 (KJV) And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die."

David was under the same grace as us while he walked by faith and not by law.. as you seem to think.

I think you need to put away your MAD Systematic Theology books and pick up the Scriptures instead.
If you read my post properly before you made the accusation that I put words into your mouth, you would have noticed the question mark I have placed.

I see, so you interpret that Roman passage as David was talking about himself?
And its fascinating you either were unaware or you deliberately left out verse 14 of 2 Sam 12 to make your point. Do you not know that David's son was taken away by God because of his sin?

13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said unto David, The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.

14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

When Paul quoted David saying Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin , shall not impute sin is a very strong term, it means "as if the man NEVER sinned". How can David be talking about himself there when his sin was imputed to him, thru the death of his son?

As I have concluded, the way you interpret scriptures tells me you subscribe to Covenant Theology. Unlike you, I believe that is one way to interpret scripture and I see no need to arrogantly claim that yours is wrong and mine is correct. As the apostle Paul stated to us in Romans 14:5

One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.

Cheers and God bless.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
Yes it is there also lets look at Matthew 24:22 and Matthew 24:9 where it says "my names sake" and why is you are looking for it's fulfillment,,,, in ad66-70 how many of the Jews involved died for Jesus names sake? You see 1.1millon Jews died by ad70 in the revolt but none of them believed that Jesus was the Messiah and so none of them died "for his names sake" right?

He died or suffered unto death for the namesake of the father. The father and Son working together to bring us the peace of God that does surpass human understanding.

Some of the Jews that did have the Spirit of Christ believed as anchor to the soul .It was the time of Jacob for them that did not believe. A time for them unlike any before or ever again. Many unconverted Jews died in a false hope hoping their flesh had something to do with salvation.

The reformation came the government of God was restored to another time period. The use the flesh of Jew had finished its work to, represent faith and unbelief of mankind .It was never about their flesh which could never profit . The Son of man. JESUS confirmed that by saying his own flesh profited for Zero

The veil is rent signaling Christ did come once in the flesh for a outward demonstration of the inviable work of the father striking the son with the wage of our sin .(Isaiah 53) Not in the year 70 AD. All of the shadows became sight or substantive at the time of reformation.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,742
3,670
113
And its fascinating you either were unaware or you deliberately left out verse 14 of 2 Sam 12 to make your point. Do you not know that David's son was taken away by God because of his sin?
Sin still has it's consequences, regardless of the dispensation.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Sin still has it's consequences, regardless of the dispensation.
Yes, if you murder someone, you may get the death penalty in some countries, and life imprisonment in others. If you commit adultery, your marriage is likely to end with a divorce.

But the key feature about this grace dispensation we are living in now, is that there will be no consequences from God, because you are forever imputed with Jesus's righteousness. This is what King David envied about us now.
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
He died or suffered unto death for the namesake of the father. The father and Son working together to bring us the peace of God that does surpass human understanding.

Some of the Jews that did have the Spirit of Christ believed as anchor to the soul .It was the time of Jacob for them that did not believe. A time for them unlike any before or ever again. Many unconverted Jews died in a false hope hoping their flesh had something to do with salvation.

The reformation came the government of God was restored to another time period. The use the flesh of Jew had finished its work to, represent faith and unbelief of mankind .It was never about their flesh which could never profit . The Son of man. JESUS confirmed that by saying his own flesh profited for Zero

The veil is rent signaling Christ did come once in the flesh for a outward demonstration of the inviable work of the father striking the son with the wage of our sin .(Isaiah 53) Not in the year 70 AD. All of the shadows became sight or substantive at the time of reformation.

Your meaning Isaiah 1:26 ? If so who do you see as the judges and Councillors who are ruling in the earth, Pope Francis,Joel Olsteen,Benny Hinn?
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
Paul is not saying all Israel would be saved, if he is then he would be contradicting himself in the same letter:

(Rom 9:6-7 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called. )

Paul's ALL saved is the WHOLE remnant that would come to believe during the apostles ministry.

Christ said he would gather out of his those Jews/Israelites that did not believe:

(Mat 8:11 “And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.

(Mat 8:12 “But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” )

We know from history that the above came true when the Jews were destroyed and expelled and cast out of the land in the war of 66-70AD.

So to claim that Paul is saying ALL Israel is saved is a direct contradiction of Jesus and Paul's letter to the Galatians:

(Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” )

And dispensationalism is in contradiction to Isaiah's "only a remnant" will be saved (Isa 10:22) and in total contradiction to:

(Isa 65:15 You shall leave your name as a curse to My chosen; For the Lord GOD will slay you, And call His servants by another name )

Yes.
I would offer the word Israel must be defined. It is used no differently then the word Jealous as the name of God it speaks of a attribute. God is Jealous he alone owns all the eyes see. . He is saying all of Israel will be saved or as many souls as the Father gave the Son. They alone will come if the Father is drawing them. God is said of being of one mind, and always does whatsoever his soul pleases ( Job 23) .Or as we are informed in Philippians 2. It is God working in us, yoked with us our Emanuel, to both will and strengthen us to perform His good pleasure our imputed righteousness.

The Bible defines the word Israel. Notice it does not say; all of Jacob will be saved.

Jacob, whose name means deceiver as a metaphor represents natural uncovered mankind under the deceiver the father of lies as the god of this world . The generation of Adam, or evil generation.... that have no faith by which they could beleive God not seen.

As a picture of the gospel it would appear a theophany as a manner of prophecy was used in order to bring a new name as a way of identifying a particular belief system. (Jacob, un-belief )

Genesis 32:27 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.Genesis And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.

Natural man, signified by the name Jacob does wrestle against flesh and blood .This shows they have no faith needed to beleive God not seen needed to reason by . Christians do not wrestles against flesh and blood they have a new Israel born again spirit

There God did something to do the hollow of his thigh. I would think the marrow of the bone some call the purifying factory for blood. It would seem prematurely He caused a limp .Which I think might of been a reminder to walk by faith in represent the new name to identify a belief/faith system

Genesis 32:28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but
Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, "and hast" prevailed.

Interestingly the use of the word prince in that verse above represents Christ, the first born as us who follow according to His Spirit of holiness that works in us . Jacob was never prince of God .You could say his name as a metaphor represent prince of lies. Together they speak of the new creation

Exodus 4:22And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

Genesis 32:29 And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee,
thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

The last phrase; "and my life is preserved" defines the new name Isreal again to represent a belief system. Those who have power with God and with that power not of themselves "and has" prevailed. Which he promised in isaiah to give the fianl name to his bride in respect to all the nations of the world ,Christian named in Acts. . A word that literally with no other meaning aded defines resisdent of the city of Christ .the city coming down prepared as his bride on the last day.

We know God who is not a man as us... He has has no literal face as a crestion.The phrase face to face always represents reveled knowledge as it is written to the same or faith to faith We have the complete. with no knowledge missing. f

Genesis 32: 31And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew that shrank.


Unto this day outward Jews according to the flesh use this cerimony as as form of idol worship or oral Kosher tradition of men .

 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,742
3,670
113
But the key feature about this grace dispensation we are living in now, is that there will be no consequences from God, because you are forever imputed with Jesus's righteousness. This is what King David envied about us now.
There are consequences to sin. Period.

I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
(Rom 6:19-22)

Galatians 6:7-8 (KJV) Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
There are consequences to sin. Period.

I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
(Rom 6:19-22)

Galatians 6:7-8 (KJV) Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Especially when nails are driven into our Lords hands and feet,,,there defiantly is a consaquence to sin...