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

[azamzimtoti]

This makes no sense

When was the church promised that it would be a nation, given the land of cannon, and made people who would continue forever.

It never was, your focused on the wrong covenant man, thats why you can’t see it.

What makes no sense is the dispensational attempt at bifurcation of the eternal purpose of God

(Eph 3:9 -10 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ, to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places )

(Eph 3:11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord )

(Eph 3:14 -15 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named )

Dispensationalism claims the church will be "raptured" from the planet and replaced by the physical nation, whereas Paul states the church, "the whole family" of God will praise him on earth for all generations to come:

(Ep 3:21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Dispensationalism claims the church will be "raptured" from the planet and replaced by the physical nation, whereas Paul states the church, "the whole family" of God will praise him on earth for all generations to come:

(Ep 3:21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.)

First of all, I've said we ("the Church which is His body") return WITH [G4862] Him (when He "returns" to the earth, FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom, aka "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER").

Secondly, Ephesians 3:21 says, "to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to [eis - unto] all the generations of the age [singular] of the ages [plural]. Amen." What's not true about that [that sentence], or inconsistent with the viewpoint I've put forward?


[* "age [singular]" being connected with earthly time/history (unlike the phrase "the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" referencing "eternity/eternal")]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ EDIT: [* "age [singular]" being connected with earthly time/history (unlike the phrase "the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" referencing "eternity/eternal" and usually translated into English as "forever and ever"... but the wording here is "of the age [singular] of the ages [plural]")]

 

[garee]

Yes, my view is that James the Brother of Jesus, did not agree with Paul about the gospel of grace. He believes that the Jews should continue under the gospel of the kingdom, which requires faith and works.

However he did agree that gentiles are fully under the gospel of grace as acts 21 indicated. That is the context of Galatians 2

It has nothing to do with the corrupted flesh and blood of nations. Paul and James are in perfect agreement It was the words God put on their lips not of their own selves but the mind and will of God not seen . Its all the same one work of one faith .(faith as the plan. pronouncing it "let there be"... the work of executing the faithfulness of our Faithful Creator.. The Father and Son working together in perfect harmony and submission to one another to bring the peace of God that does surpass our understanding.

The idea of pitting one prophet against another is not rightly dividing by which we could receive the approval of God. The idea of seeking the approval of men is of another gospel.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

In Ephesians 3:15, I don't see a definite article ("the") like I do in Matthew 8:32, for example (using this same word G3956 "all"/"whole"... or "every"):

https://biblehub.com/text/ephesians/3-15.htm "every family"


https://biblehub.com/text/matthew/8-32.htm "all the herd [or, you could say, "the whole herd"]"

 

[azamzimtoti]

G3588 ho ho, including the feminine he hay, and the neuter to to

in all their inflections;

the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom).

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

So, "every family in [en] [the] heavens [plural] and on [/upon - epi] earth" (as it shows at link) sounds just as plausible [if not more so ] as what you are suggesting, so I guess we are at an impasse.

 

[garee]

azamzimtoti said:


Dispensationalism claims the church will be "raptured" from the planet and replaced by the physical nation, whereas Paul states the church, "the whole family" of God will praise him on earth for all generations to come:

(Ep 3:21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.)

God purifies the hearts of all men by a work of His faith in every generation .There will be no replacement of corrupted flesh by the corrupted flesh and blood of nations. No longer Jew and gentile male and female. with no way to procreate. Certainly not going to have some who have no idea of the things in the past running around with creatures (flesh and blood) they have no idea as where they come from a picture of Dispensationalism

Corruption does not put on the incorruptible as a rebuilt or reconditioned . But a new creation.

Tn the next generation, beginning or Genesis .The former things of earth will not be remember or ever come to mind forever and ever.. There will be no light coming from the two temporal timers keepers that were put in the sky on day four when corruption began. No more night. The glory of the Lord will be the light The holy place becomes sight

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

 

[azamzimtoti]

No, your premise is based on hair splitting on the difference between "the whole family" and "whole family", which in fact, there is no difference in meaning or intent in Paul's statement.

The fact is Paul said there is one hope, not two hopes, one for the church and one for the cast off nation which rejected Christ:

(Eph 4:4 here is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. )

(Acts 28:20 “For this reason therefore I have called for you, to see you and speak with you, because for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.”)

The hope for Israel was/is the same hope for the church which is one and same. Israel is the church and the church is Israel comprised of many among the nations.

(Acts 3:22 “For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. )

(Acts 3:23 ‘And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’)

It's just too bad dispensationalists prefer their doctrines over the actual scripture.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

No, your premise is based on hair splitting on the difference between "the whole family" and "whole family", which in fact, there is no difference in meaning or intent in Paul's statement.

No, that's ^ not what I said.

I said, with no definite article ("the"), then [for it to say] "every family in [en] [the] heavens [plural] and on [/upon - epi] earth" (as it shows at link) makes perfectly good sense. No need to change it in order to have it say what you suggest.


[and had said (showing the distinction, here--one WITHOUT a definite article, and one WITH a definite article)]


https://biblehub.com/text/ephesians/3-15.htm "every family"


https://biblehub.com/text/matthew/8-32.htm "all the herd [or, you could say, "the whole herd"]"

 

[dcontroversal]

Yes, my view is that James the Brother of Jesus, did not agree with Paul about the gospel of grace. He believes that the Jews should continue under the gospel of the kingdom, which requires faith and works.

However he did agree that gentiles are fully under the gospel of grace as acts 21 indicated. That is the context of Galatians 2

This is as heretical as it comes.........the bible is not pitted against itself and if you want to go that ignorant route....PAUL was taught by direct revelation from JESUS and JAMES was not even a believer until after the resurrection.....

It is a sad day indeed when a SUPPOSED believer openly states that JAMES disagreed with PAUL.....not only does this reek of complete ignorance, but also is a view that GOD would not lead a believer to espouse....very Satanic.....!!

 

[Guojing]

This is as heretical as it comes.........the bible is not pitted against itself and if you want to go that ignorant route....PAUL was taught by direct revelation from JESUS and JAMES was not even a believer until after the resurrection.....

It is a sad day indeed when a SUPPOSED believer openly states that JAMES disagreed with PAUL.....not only does this reek of complete ignorance, but also is a view that GOD would not lead a believer to espouse....very Satanic.....!!

7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

I suggest you read Galatians 2 and Acts 21, before you conclude. You can interpret them differently based on your pre-conceived notions of course. There is no need to claim those who interpret the text plainly as heretical.

 

[Guojing]

It has nothing to do with the corrupted flesh and blood of nations. Paul and James are in perfect agreement It was the words God put on their lips not of their own selves but the mind and will of God not seen . Its all the same one work of one faith .(faith as the plan. pronouncing it "let there be"... the work of executing the faithfulness of our Faithful Creator.. The Father and Son working together in perfect harmony and submission to one another to bring the peace of God that does surpass our understanding.

The idea of pitting one prophet against another is not rightly dividing by which we could receive the approval of God. The idea of seeking the approval of men is of another gospel.

Try to read Galatians 2 and Acts 21 properly, before you conclude that Paul and James are in "perfect agreement".

I felt it was most interesting that, when Paul was under so much trouble from the zealous Jews in Acts 22 onward, none of the elders and James ever came and spoke up for him.

 

[Guojing]

I said 'believing Jews', meaning Jews who believe ALL THEIR Scriptures (they wrote the NT as well) in which both testify to their One Messiah.

So you are talking about Messianic Jews?

Okay, I was talking about Jews who are into Judaism, the majority of the Jews, the Jewish nation as a whole. Do you agree that they believe its faith and works that will save them?

 

[dcontroversal]

7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

I suggest you read Galatians 2 and Acts 21, before you conclude. You can interpret them differently based on your pre-conceived notions of course. There is no need to claim those who interpret the text plainly as heretical.

Listen Gong show....I have studied through all of them numerous times and JAMES does not disagree with PAUL, nor does he contradict PAUL....NO ONE was ever saved or made righteous before the throne by faith plus works.......both O.T. saints, NEW TESTAMENT saints, JEWS, GENTILES and GREEN aliens if there was such a thing were ALL saved by or would be saved by faith and faith alone.........

I suggest two words.....HONESTY and CONTEXT...so far your conclusion of JAMES disagreeing with PETER proves you have missed BOTH in your application.......

HERE try context....

PAUL -->FAITH alone justifies before GOD
JAMES -->THE ABOVE FAITH seen BY MEN based upon WORKS

NOW...open your eyes to the truth

 

[crossnote]

So you are talking about Messianic Jews?

Okay, I was talking about Jews who are into Judaism, the majority of the Jews, the Jewish nation as a whole. Do you agree that they believe its faith and works that will save them?

Yes, the Rabbinical Jews believe they are saved by faith + works, yet all they have is works and no faith. Even their works are unacceptable apart from the Sacrifice of Christ...which they reject.

 

[Guojing]

Yes, the Rabbinical Jews believe they are saved by faith + works, yet all they have is works and no faith. Even their works are unacceptable apart from the Sacrifice of Christ...which they reject.

True, but we are speaking from hindsight as Gentiles who believed in the Gospel of Grace.

If I put myself in their shoes, I can understand why they would think differently. But as Paul said in Romans 9-11, they are temporary blinded so that the full measure of the Gentiles can be grafted into the Abraham's covenant.

 

[Guojing]

Listen Gong show....I have studied through all of them numerous times and JAMES does not disagree with PAUL, nor does he contradict PAUL....NO ONE was ever saved or made righteous before the throne by faith plus works.......both O.T. saints, NEW TESTAMENT saints, JEWS, GENTILES and GREEN aliens if there was such a thing were ALL saved by or would be saved by faith and faith alone.........

I suggest two words.....HONESTY and CONTEXT...so far your conclusion of JAMES disagreeing with PETER proves you have missed BOTH in your application.......

HERE try context....

PAUL -->FAITH alone justifies before GOD
JAMES -->THE ABOVE FAITH seen BY MEN based upon WORKS

NOW...open your eyes to the truth

You are definitely someone who finds it very difficult to agree to disagree, and to understand the other person's point of view.

Do you recall Obi wan's advice to Luke that many of the truths we hold are only true from a "certain point of view"?

 

[crossnote]

True, but we are speaking from hindsight as Gentiles who believed in the Gospel of Grace.

If I put myself in their shoes, I can understand why they would think differently. But as Paul said in Romans 9-11, they are temporary blinded so that the full measure of the Gentiles can be grafted into the Abraham's covenant.

You can talk about the Gentiles if you want to, no difference, both Jew and Gentile are found guilty under God's standard of righteousness. It takes faith in Jesus in both cases. Even in the OT, both Jew and Gentile were saved the same way...by faith in the living God, whether it was Abram or Rahab the harlot.

 

[Guojing]

You can talk about the Gentiles if you want to, no difference, both Jew and Gentile are found guilty under God's standard of righteousness. It takes faith in Jesus in both cases. Even in the OT, both Jew and Gentile were saved the same way...by faith in the living God, whether it was Abram or Rahab the harlot.

Well, according to Hebrews 11, if Rahab had faith in God only, but did not hide the spies, do you think she would still have been saved?