-
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.
Originally Posted by valiant
Lol Dan will judge his people simply means that Dan will judge Dan.
Israel's judge is God and He has determined that with the coming of the Messiah Israel will be limited to believers in the Messiah. That is no reason for the name of Dan to be omitted. Whenever the twelve tribes are named after the early days one tribe is omitted. The twelve was symbolic of the thirteen
Israel's judge is God and He has determined that with the coming of the Messiah Israel will be limited to believers in the Messiah. That is no reason for the name of Dan to be omitted. Whenever the twelve tribes are named after the early days one tribe is omitted. The twelve was symbolic of the thirteen
But even you must recognise that over all it was God who was Israel's judge? Or don't you?
Yes I realise that understanding Scripture is demanding. But you will come to it gradually.
Pity you don't read before you write. The sands of the seashore are the people of the world (rev 13.1).
The 12 x 12 x 1000 is using numbers pictorially. 12 x 12 represents Israel and the Apostles (rev 21). The 1000 is an undetermined large number (as in rev 20). Thus it represents the whole church which to men are without number. It tells us that to God they are numbered. You have to interpret Scripture by Scripture.
Or do you really think that the bride of Christ is 144,000 cubits high? Some bride.
whenever in the OT the 12 tribes (missing one) are cited the idea is of the whole of Israel, that is, the thirteen tribes. If you can't see that then you'd better leave discussion to others.
G
From my understanding, He is saying that Deut 30 is the future restoration of Israel and that restoration is the church and started at Pentecost and will end when the last stone is laid. And He also claims that we are under the new covenant in this restoration.
If we are Israel and we are under the new covenant and God describes this restoration (the church being Israel)........why does God command this of the church..................
4“If your outcasts are at the ends of the earth, from there the LORDyour God will gather you, and from there He will bring you back. 5“The LORD your God will bring you into the land which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it; and He will prosper you and multiply you more than your fathers. 6“Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. 7“The LORD your God will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. 8“And you shall again obey the LORD, and observe all His commandments which I command you today. 9“Then the LORD your God will prosper you abundantly in all the work of your hand, in the offspring of your body and in the offspring of your cattle and in the produce of your ground, for the LORD will again rejoice over you for good, just as He rejoiced over your fathers; 10if you obey the LORD your God to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of the law,
If we are Israel and we are under the new covenant and God describes this restoration (the church being Israel)........why does God command this of the church..................
4“If your outcasts are at the ends of the earth, from there the LORDyour God will gather you, and from there He will bring you back. 5“The LORD your God will bring you into the land which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it; and He will prosper you and multiply you more than your fathers. 6“Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. 7“The LORD your God will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. 8“And you shall again obey the LORD, and observe all His commandments which I command you today. 9“Then the LORD your God will prosper you abundantly in all the work of your hand, in the offspring of your body and in the offspring of your cattle and in the produce of your ground, for the LORD will again rejoice over you for good, just as He rejoiced over your fathers; 10if you obey the LORD your God to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of the law,
You described my belief correctly.
Again, Israel had a vail over their eyes: they could not see. They could not have understood what you are suggesting, plus it would have undermined their obligation to keep the very covenant that they had just been given.
Plus you need to consider that those who were first restored at Pentecost were devout Jews doing the very things described in verse 10.
Again, Israel had a vail over their eyes: they could not see. They could not have understood what you are suggesting, plus it would have undermined their obligation to keep the very covenant that they had just been given.
Plus you need to consider that those who were first restored at Pentecost were devout Jews doing the very things described in verse 10.
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Acts 2:5
Originally Posted by kaylagrl
As [others have] said this theology has been the cause of antisemitism down through church history.
Rubbish. It was to do with 'the Jews having crucified Christ', although even then it was inexcusable.
Was it not GOD Who said that the unbelieving Jews would be cursed? (although its not our job but His). And they have certainly been cursed since 70 AD during their long period of great tribulation. That has nothing to do with out view of Israel.
Every cult, including yours, thinks it will receive blessings.
No one today is justifying their attitude but I fail to see how the behaviour of a demon possessed megalomaniac can be blamed on them . I doubt if he read them
It was Jesus Christ Who taught that the true Israel would continue on in those who believed in the Messiah, and it was confirmed by Paul and Peter. Sounds pretty good authority to me
I doubt if it was taught very much at all. Show me examples of where the church said it was replacing Israel. That is modern jargon invented to set up straw men.
well if they look back to the middle ages they should show more sense. I doubt if there are Jews who reject Christ because of past history, although they may make it an excuse. They reject Him through bigotry.
You seem to revel in the past. Why not come and live in the present.?
What an absurd statement. Whilst I do not accept replacement theology, which is mainly an invention of its enemies, it is absurd to suggest that because I believe that Israel = all true believing Christians I am supporting anything other than that teaching. Paul also taught that the true Israel, what he called the Israel of God, was made up of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Indeed they are the 'all Israel' who will be saved.
well I think your view is heresy so we are equal
Last edited:
Originally Posted by valiant
But you will come to it gradually.
This is not true. We all can put the blinders on and stay in one spot.
Iv'e seen 90 year olds that are still stuck on the church being Israel.
Iv'e seen 90 year olds that are still stuck on the church being Israel.
And by the way the true believing church IS Israel. That was the teaching of Jesus, Paul, Peter and James.
Good job the 90 year old has it right. Maybe when you are 90?
The crucifixion of Christ has been the cause of anti-seminism throughout history.
Acts 4:27-28 (KJV)
27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.
Well there you go. The gospel foretold. That falls in very nicely with Acts 2 in which devout Jews who were doing the things mentioned in Deuteronomy 30:10, believed the gospel.
However, Israel was blind in Joshua's day and could not see the gospel in Deuteronomy 30:11. It took Paul thousands of years later to open our eyes.
However, Israel was blind in Joshua's day and could not see the gospel in Deuteronomy 30:11. It took Paul thousands of years later to open our eyes.
Originally Posted by valiant
The crucifixion of Christ has been the cause of anti-seminism throughout history.
But I like your quote. 'the people of (unbelieving) Israel' are paralleled with the other enemies of God's anointed showing that they are seen as one of them. These people did not see them as the true Israel Indeed they saw themselves as the true Israel,
K
Quote "The crucifixion of Christ has been the cause of anti-seminism throughout history. Are you suggesting that we remain silent about the crucifixion of Christ?"
Actually thanks to you and herose taking over the thread I hadnt gotten that far yet. Of course you're not going to remain silent about the cross. But if you blame the Jews,the entire Jewish population for killing Christ then yes,I have a problem with that. Jesus disciples were Jews,he had Jewish followers so if you believe every Jew is culpable in Jesus death then yes,that is wrong. Jesus said of His life "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again."
Quote "Rubbish. It was to do with their having crucified Christ, although even then it was inexcusable."
Your opinion. History books have been written on the subject. Jules Issac who lost his family in the Holocaust wrote Jesus and Israel, discussing the subject. The Catholic church changed their dealings with Jews based on Issac speaking to the Pope. The Catholic church,along with others,denounced the replacement theology in light of the Holocaust.
Quote "Was it not GOD Who said that the unbelieving Jews would be cursed? (although its not our job but His). And they have certainly been cursed since 70 AD during their long period of great tribulation. That has nothing to do with out view of Israel.
Every cult, including yours, thinks it will receive blessings."
You ignore verse after verse to support your theology. God will decide who is in fact part of a cult. I'll err on the side of blessing His chosen people. You do what you do. The Jews have been cursed but also been blessed,but you think it belongs to you. Gods called them the apple of His eye,he made promises He intends to keep.You can think they belong to you all you want,it wont change Gods everlasting promise.
Quote "No one today is justifying their attitude but I fail to see how the behaviour of a demon possessed megalomaniac can be blamed on them . I doubt if he read them"
Your opinion. Hitler put them in ghettos, made them wear a yellow star and set restrictions on them the church had already pronounced years before. He hardly came up with it on his own.
Quote "It was Jesus Christ Who taught that the true Israel would continue on in those who believed in the Messiah, and it was confirmed by Paul and Peter. Sounds pretty good authority to me"
NO that is your theology! And you can put words in Christs mouth all day long and BOLD ALL YOU WANT it doesnt make replacement theology right or any less antisemitic.
Quote "I doubt if it was taught very much at all. Show me examples of where the church said it was replacing Israel. That is modern jargon invented to set up straw men."
Already showed you with quotes from the church fathers.Im having a discussion with posters not trying to argue back and forth with you. You have your theology and Im not spending 24 pages saying "I know you are but what am I" with you! We all know what you believe,I'll leave you to it.
Quote "well if they look back to the middle ages they should show more sense. I doubt if there are Jews who reject Christ because of past history, although they may make it an excuse. They reject Him through bigotry."
Though past church history may play a part they reject him because they're blinded until the Gentiles have come in.But God will still hold us responsible for how we treat His chosen people.
Quote "You seem to revel in the past. Why not come and live in the present.?"
I am in the present thats why I started the thread. The past and the present are connected.Why dont you live in the present and leave behind an old theology that most church have already repented of? If the RCC did,you can to!
Quote "What an absurd statement. Whilst I do not accept replacement theology, which is mainly an invention of its enemies, it is absurd to suggest that because I believe that Israel = all true believing Christians I am supporting anything other than that teaching."
I believe that Israel = all true believing Christians...Umm that IS replacement theology!
Quote ". Paul also taught that the true Israel, what he called the Israel of God, was made up of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Indeed they are the 'all Israel' who will be saved."
Nope you're twisting what he said. Read Romans 11.
Quote "well I think your view is heresy so we are equal"
Well ! Finally something we can agree on! While I disagree 100% with you thanks for answering my post point by point and keeping sarcasm and name calling to a minimum.
Actually thanks to you and herose taking over the thread I hadnt gotten that far yet. Of course you're not going to remain silent about the cross. But if you blame the Jews,the entire Jewish population for killing Christ then yes,I have a problem with that. Jesus disciples were Jews,he had Jewish followers so if you believe every Jew is culpable in Jesus death then yes,that is wrong. Jesus said of His life "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again."
Quote "Rubbish. It was to do with their having crucified Christ, although even then it was inexcusable."
Your opinion. History books have been written on the subject. Jules Issac who lost his family in the Holocaust wrote Jesus and Israel, discussing the subject. The Catholic church changed their dealings with Jews based on Issac speaking to the Pope. The Catholic church,along with others,denounced the replacement theology in light of the Holocaust.
Quote "Was it not GOD Who said that the unbelieving Jews would be cursed? (although its not our job but His). And they have certainly been cursed since 70 AD during their long period of great tribulation. That has nothing to do with out view of Israel.
Every cult, including yours, thinks it will receive blessings."
You ignore verse after verse to support your theology. God will decide who is in fact part of a cult. I'll err on the side of blessing His chosen people. You do what you do. The Jews have been cursed but also been blessed,but you think it belongs to you. Gods called them the apple of His eye,he made promises He intends to keep.You can think they belong to you all you want,it wont change Gods everlasting promise.
Quote "No one today is justifying their attitude but I fail to see how the behaviour of a demon possessed megalomaniac can be blamed on them . I doubt if he read them"
Your opinion. Hitler put them in ghettos, made them wear a yellow star and set restrictions on them the church had already pronounced years before. He hardly came up with it on his own.
Quote "It was Jesus Christ Who taught that the true Israel would continue on in those who believed in the Messiah, and it was confirmed by Paul and Peter. Sounds pretty good authority to me"
NO that is your theology! And you can put words in Christs mouth all day long and BOLD ALL YOU WANT it doesnt make replacement theology right or any less antisemitic.
Quote "I doubt if it was taught very much at all. Show me examples of where the church said it was replacing Israel. That is modern jargon invented to set up straw men."
Already showed you with quotes from the church fathers.Im having a discussion with posters not trying to argue back and forth with you. You have your theology and Im not spending 24 pages saying "I know you are but what am I" with you! We all know what you believe,I'll leave you to it.
Quote "well if they look back to the middle ages they should show more sense. I doubt if there are Jews who reject Christ because of past history, although they may make it an excuse. They reject Him through bigotry."
Though past church history may play a part they reject him because they're blinded until the Gentiles have come in.But God will still hold us responsible for how we treat His chosen people.
Quote "You seem to revel in the past. Why not come and live in the present.?"
I am in the present thats why I started the thread. The past and the present are connected.Why dont you live in the present and leave behind an old theology that most church have already repented of? If the RCC did,you can to!
Quote "What an absurd statement. Whilst I do not accept replacement theology, which is mainly an invention of its enemies, it is absurd to suggest that because I believe that Israel = all true believing Christians I am supporting anything other than that teaching."
I believe that Israel = all true believing Christians...Umm that IS replacement theology!
Quote ". Paul also taught that the true Israel, what he called the Israel of God, was made up of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Indeed they are the 'all Israel' who will be saved."
Nope you're twisting what he said. Read Romans 11.
Quote "well I think your view is heresy so we are equal"
Well ! Finally something we can agree on! While I disagree 100% with you thanks for answering my post point by point and keeping sarcasm and name calling to a minimum.
Good day Gr8grace,
As the amil's do the same with the literal number of "a thousand years" they also do with the 144,000, that is, they ignore the literal number and instead change it into an unknowable number, using man's wisdom. Whenever we see consistency in the word of God, a good rule of thumb is to believe the literal meaning. Here we have John saying, "I heard the number of those who were sealed, 144,000," then, that 144,000 is broken down into 12,000 per tribe (12 x 12,000 = 144,000).
By the way, as you know, Joseph's son Manasseh is replacing Dan in the line up. Though there are many attempts to explain why Dan is not there, the truth is that there is no direct scripture that would support, (that I have found anyway), as to why the tribe of Dan is not in the list, just speculations. And the fact that Dan is missing also does not negate the fact that this scripture is speaking in regards to the literal first fruits who are selected out of literal Israel (gives birth to) those who recognize Yeshua as their Messiah.
Now getting back to consistency, after John gives the number and a detailed account is given of the 144,000, then we find in Rev.14 that the number once again remains consistent, citing 144,000. Therefore, to ignore that number after all of those references would be to simply ignore scripture. Same thing goes with the number of "a thousand," as it is consistently mentioned 6 times within Rev.20:1-7.
Suffice to say, the burden of proof is on those who have changed the literal meaning of these number and that because we can read them in plain print. John also says that he hears the number of mounted troops as being 200 million. Should we do away with that number as well? What about when those demonic being who are commanded to torment for 5 months, should we make this 5 month an indefinite number as well? Four angels bound at the Euphrates, a third of the sun, moon and stars darkened, the Lamb has seven horns and seven eyes, twenty four elders, the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written on the gates, the twelve apostles written on the foundations, 1,260 days, forty-two months, etc., etc., etc. Should we change these numbers as well making them unknowable as well?
The fact is, and I am not saying this to you as much as I am saying this to Valiant, Bowman and Cassian, is that God through John has already demonstrated that he meant these numbers to be literal and that because he already made a distinction with the great tribulation saints of chapter 7 when he referred to them as "a great multitude that no one could count." Therefore, we know that God is capable of differentiating between an actual literal number and an vast unknown number.
Conclusion: God means what he says! If the literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense.
As the amil's do the same with the literal number of "a thousand years" they also do with the 144,000, that is, they ignore the literal number and instead change it into an unknowable number, using man's wisdom. Whenever we see consistency in the word of God, a good rule of thumb is to believe the literal meaning. Here we have John saying, "I heard the number of those who were sealed, 144,000," then, that 144,000 is broken down into 12,000 per tribe (12 x 12,000 = 144,000).
By the way, as you know, Joseph's son Manasseh is replacing Dan in the line up. Though there are many attempts to explain why Dan is not there, the truth is that there is no direct scripture that would support, (that I have found anyway), as to why the tribe of Dan is not in the list, just speculations. And the fact that Dan is missing also does not negate the fact that this scripture is speaking in regards to the literal first fruits who are selected out of literal Israel (gives birth to) those who recognize Yeshua as their Messiah.
Now getting back to consistency, after John gives the number and a detailed account is given of the 144,000, then we find in Rev.14 that the number once again remains consistent, citing 144,000. Therefore, to ignore that number after all of those references would be to simply ignore scripture. Same thing goes with the number of "a thousand," as it is consistently mentioned 6 times within Rev.20:1-7.
Suffice to say, the burden of proof is on those who have changed the literal meaning of these number and that because we can read them in plain print. John also says that he hears the number of mounted troops as being 200 million. Should we do away with that number as well? What about when those demonic being who are commanded to torment for 5 months, should we make this 5 month an indefinite number as well? Four angels bound at the Euphrates, a third of the sun, moon and stars darkened, the Lamb has seven horns and seven eyes, twenty four elders, the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written on the gates, the twelve apostles written on the foundations, 1,260 days, forty-two months, etc., etc., etc. Should we change these numbers as well making them unknowable as well?
The fact is, and I am not saying this to you as much as I am saying this to Valiant, Bowman and Cassian, is that God through John has already demonstrated that he meant these numbers to be literal and that because he already made a distinction with the great tribulation saints of chapter 7 when he referred to them as "a great multitude that no one could count." Therefore, we know that God is capable of differentiating between an actual literal number and an vast unknown number.
Conclusion: God means what he says! If the literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense.