Replacement theology? Yes or No.

[OMC]

Here, let me help you:
Can you think of any of the many discourses of Jesus' that DO inherently and intentionally speak to eschatology?
Then compare and contrast to John 6 and tell us if you detect.....substantial and fundamental differences.
Oh and don't forget, Jesus wrote the OT and NT.

I commend @2ndTimeIsTheCharm to do the same. Perhaps then the light of day will begin to dawn and dispel these awful clouds of despair and doubt. It must be a wretched existence to be a post-tribber. I would not wish such a dismal state upon anyone.

You’re trying to rescue your pre‑trib system by turning “find the eschatology discourses” into a scavenger hunt that magically excludes John 6, as if Jesus only talks about the end in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 17–21, and every other “big” discourse—but somehow not when He repeatedly says “I will raise him up on the last day” in a passage explicitly about who comes, who believes, who is kept, and who is raised.
Yes, the Olivet Discourse is overtly eschatological—signs, tribulation, coming, judgment—but John 6 is overtly soteriological with eschatological guarantee: the Father gives, the Son keeps, and the resurrection happens on the last day, not “on the last day plus a secret earlier church‑only extraction.
” The “substantial and fundamental differences” you’re fishing for aren’t in the text; they’re in your charts.
Jesus “wrote the OT and NT,” as you say, which makes it even worse that your system needs Him to mean “last day for Israel, but earlier days for the Church” when He never says that.
And as for post‑trib being a “wretched existence”—the only despair here is watching a system so fragile it has to turn clear promises of one resurrection at the last day into coded hints for a two‑stage escape plan.

 

[God-fearing]

The reason your chain of verses doesn’t prove a first‑century fulfillment is because you’re merging two different “comings” that Jesus Himself keeps separate:
Matthew 16:28 refers to the preview (the Transfiguration), while
Matthew 16:27 and Revelation 22:12 refer to the consummation (the final return with angels and judgment), and
John 18:36 refers to the nature of His kingdom (not sourced from earthly power), not the timing of His appearing;
The NT never collapses preview, consummation, and kingdom‑nature into one event, and your question “And this all happened when…?” only sounds forceful because you’re assuming they must all happen together, but Jesus explicitly distinguishes them — He gives the preview six days later (Matt 17), He promises the consummation at the end of the age (Matt 24:30–31), and He defines the kingdom’s origin as heavenly rather than geopolitical (John 18:36); so yes, the glorious day is coming, amen, but the texts you’re stitching together do not describe one single moment — they describe three different categories, and the apostles never treat them as simultaneous.

Sorry my friend that's your assumption.

 

[OMC]

Sorry my friend that's your assumption.

Calling my argument “an assumption” doesn’t magically turn your verse‑pile into a coherent eschatology; Jesus Himself separates preview (Matt 16:28 → Transfiguration), consummation (Matt 16:27; Rev 22:12 → final return with angels and judgment), and kingdom‑nature (John 18:36 → not earthly, not geopolitical), and the apostles never collapse those categories into one event no matter how loudly you insist they must.
You’re treating your own stitched‑together reading as if Jesus forgot to clarify His timeline, but He literally gives the preview six days later, promises the consummation at the end of the age, and defines His kingdom as not of this world—which means your “this all happened when?” claim isn’t a bold correction of insight, it’s just ignoring the distinctions Jesus already made. If you want to call that “my assumption,” fine—but you’ll have to explain why preview, consummation, and kingdom_nature suddenly become one event only after entering your system, because the NT never treats them that way.

 

[God-fearing]

Jesus Christ came into this world as the lamb of God.
As a willing sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin. Not only to cover sin but to remove it.
His resurrection was proof of the truth for the law of death could not hold him.
Unless sin was dealt with there would be no future prophecies fulfilled for the prophecies all pointed to the salvation of all those that believed in the son of God.
This is all the work of God as a gift to mankind, for it was not by power nor of strength but by the Spirit says the Lord.
Mercy triumph over judgment. Judgment comes from the perfect law of God which being a school master points to a need of a savior.
Jesus being that savior. Making the law of no effect to those that believe.
The law is not abolished for if one rejects the gift offered (Jesus) they too shall perish. God judges by his law.
The blood covering (sacrifices) given to Israel are made obsolete for Christ himself was the perfect sacrifice accepted by God the Father once and for all. For those that believe shall have everlasting life. Washing sin away not covering. Amen.

The great tribulation has not happened yet which sets the course for a world leader to arise....anti-Christ.
The land of Israel today is not desolate but restored. If God were to regather those he scattered into the land he promised their fathers, never to be uprooted again when did that happen? Promise their fathers is talking ethnic not spiritual. Fathers plural.

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

You confuse ego with a breezy, ebullient confidence.

This, hilarious and true at the same time. lol

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

Whew. Nasty.
Of course they are. But they are FIRST.
So they are a subset of the greater set.

[Rom 1:16 KJV] 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
[Rom 2:10 KJV] 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

He has already made it so clear that He does not want the horrible old slut?

Which is who in your mind?

 

[cv5]

Textural warrant for AD70 in Revelation was given.
The AD95 theory comes from sources outside the Bible.
John 18:36 is understood rightly as far as I know at this time.
Satan "bound"does not mean disabled, it means limited to allow the gospel to reach all nations.
A dog that is tethered can bite very hard.
Here is the event of Satan becoming "bound" in Revelation 12, the chapter that takes us back in time:

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Satan is no longer an accuser in heaven, as he was in the book of Job.

Yes, Jesus was personally involved in the destruction of Jerusalem, the kingdom of His enemies.
He will be personally involved with the destruction of the whole world, and that also will be associated with Christ glorious return.

I know that none of this sits comfortably with you,
But it is the millennial earthly reign theory that was forced into the scriptures without warrant.
This doctrine does nothing to accommodate any everlasting promise in scripture, but after the imaginary interval is over we are just back to the original schedule.
You may want Jesus to take earthly Jerusalem as a second temporary wife, but Jesus is already married,
How will you persuade Him when He has already made it so clear that He does not want the horrible old slut?

Fortunately, those with the gifts of knowledge and wisdom can aptly harmonize these verses with the entire compendium of Scripture. No sweat.

Whereas you seems to be perpetually struggling with the most basic concepts.
Cognitive dissonance is my diagnosis. Among other maladies.

Jhn 1:21
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

Mat 17:11
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

 

[OMC]

esus Christ came into this world as the lamb of God.
As a willing sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin. Not only to cover sin but to remove it.
His resurrection was proof of the truth for the law of death could not hold him.
Unless sin was dealt with there would be no future prophecies fulfilled for the prophecies all pointed to the salvation of all those that believed in the son of God.
This is all the work of God as a gift to mankind, for it was not by power nor of strength but by the Spirit says the Lord.
Mercy triumph over judgment. Judgment comes from the perfect law of God which being a school master points to a need of a savior.
Jesus being that savior. Making the law of no effect to those that believe.
The law is not abolished for if one rejects the gift offered (Jesus) they too shall perish. God judges by his law.
The blood covering (sacrifices) given to Israel are made obsolete for Christ himself was the perfect sacrifice accepted by God the Father once and for all. For those that believe shall have everlasting life. Washing sin away not covering. Amen.

The great tribulation has not happened yet which sets the course for a world leader to arise....anti-Christ.
The land of Israel today is not desolate but restored. If God were to regather those he scattered into the land he promised their fathers, never to be uprooted again when did that happen? Promise their fathers is talking ethnic not spiritual. Fathers plural

Your entire closing paragraph is a perfect example of how your system keeps trying to force the OT to overrule the NT: you affirm Christ’s once‑for‑all sacrifice, the obsolescence of the blood coverings, the end of the law’s condemning power for believers — all of which Hebrews explicitly teaches — but then you immediately pivot to a future tribulation, a future Antichrist, a future ethnic regathering, and a future land‑promise fulfillment that requires the very covenantal structures you just admitted Christ rendered obsolete. The NT says the new covenant is already inaugurated, the old covenant is obsolete (Heb 8:13), the true Israel is defined in Christ (Gal 3:7; Rom 9:6–8), and the regathering is already happening through the gospel (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not through a geopolitical return to a parcel of land. The land today being “restored” doesn’t prove prophetic fulfillment; it proves modern nation‑states exist. And your “never to be uprooted again” promise is fulfilled in the people_of_God who are united to Christ, not in an ethnic census. You keep trying to stitch together a future kingdom where Mosaic categories return, Israel is exalted, Gentiles serve, and land promises materialize, but the apostles already told you how to read those promises — in Christ, not in a revived ethnic theocracy.

 

[God-fearing]

Your entire closing paragraph is a perfect example of how your system keeps trying to force the OT to overrule the NT: you affirm Christ’s once‑for‑all sacrifice, the obsolescence of the blood coverings, the end of the law’s condemning power for believers — all of which Hebrews explicitly teaches — but then you immediately pivot to a future tribulation, a future Antichrist, a future ethnic regathering, and a future land‑promise fulfillment that requires the very covenantal structures you just admitted Christ rendered obsolete. The NT says the new covenant is already inaugurated, the old covenant is obsolete (Heb 8:13), the true Israel is defined in Christ (Gal 3:7; Rom 9:6–8), and the regathering is already happening through the gospel (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not through a geopolitical return to a parcel of land. The land today being “restored” doesn’t prove prophetic fulfillment; it proves modern nation‑states exist. And your “never to be uprooted again” promise is fulfilled in the people_of_God who are united to Christ, not in an ethnic census. You keep trying to stitch together a future kingdom where Mosaic categories return, Israel is exalted, Gentiles serve, and land promises materialize, but the apostles already told you how to read those promises — in Christ, not in a revived ethnic theocracy.

And this is what separates you from me (us) .
You say the land restoration is not prophecies fulfilled. Please explain this before we go any further.

 

[OMC]

And this is what separates you from me (us) .
You say the land restoration is not prophecies fulfilled. Please explain this before we go any further.

The reason I say the modern land restoration is not prophetic fulfillment is because the Bible never treats twentieth‑century geopolitics as the mechanism by which God fulfills His covenant promises — the NT says the promises are fulfilled in Christ, not in a modern nation‑state with an air force, a parliament, and a GDP; Hebrews calls the old covenant obsolete (Heb 8:13), Paul says the true children of Abraham are those who are in Christ (Gal 3:7), and Jesus says the kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), which means your attempt to turn the 1948 UN partition into Ezekiel’s eschatology is the theological equivalent of confusing a weather report with the book of Revelation.
The prophets weren’t predicting a secular government, mandatory military service, contested borders, or a state that exists by international diplomacy; they were pointing to the people_of_God gathered in Christ, which is why the NT applies regathering to the gospel (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not to a geopolitical return.
The land today being “restored” proves exactly one thing: modern nation‑states exist. It does not prove covenant fulfillment, because covenant fulfillment is Christological, not cartographical.

 

[cv5]

The reason I say the modern land restoration is not prophetic fulfillment is because the Bible never treats twentieth‑century geopolitics as the mechanism by which God fulfills His covenant promises — the NT says the promises are fulfilled in Christ, not in a modern nation‑state with an air force, a parliament, and a GDP; Hebrews calls the old covenant obsolete (Heb 8:13), Paul says the true children of Abraham are those who are in Christ (Gal 3:7), and Jesus says the kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), which means your attempt to turn the 1948 UN partition into Ezekiel’s eschatology is the theological equivalent of confusing a weather report with the book of Revelation.
The prophets weren’t predicting a secular government, mandatory military service, contested borders, or a state that exists by international diplomacy; they were pointing to the people_of_God gathered in Christ, which is why the NT applies regathering to the gospel (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not to a geopolitical return.
The land today being “restored” proves exactly one thing: modern nation‑states exist. It does not prove covenant fulfillment, because covenant fulfillment is Christological, not cartographical.

"the Bible never treats twentieth‑century geopolitics as the mechanism by which God fulfills His covenant promises"

Patently false statement. In fact there is no passage anywhere prophibiting this present time frame. And plenty that confirm that these are the "latter day" geopolitical events are in fact those spoken of prophetically in great quantity and pathos.

 

[OMC]

"the Bible never treats twentieth‑century geopolitics as the mechanism by which God fulfills His covenant promises"

Patently false statement. In fact there is no passage anywhere prophibiting this present time frame. And plenty that confirm that these are the "latter day" geopolitical events are in fact those spoken of prophetically in great quantity and pathos.

Your claim that “plenty of passages confirm twentieth‑century geopolitics are the latter‑day fulfillments” is exactly the problem: you’re not reading prophecy, you’re reading headlines and then retrofitting them into the prophets as if Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah were writing commentary on the UN, the IDF, and modern borders; the Bible never treats any specific modern century as a prophetic mechanism, and your insistence that “nothing prohibits this time frame” is just you confusing absence of prohibition with presence of prediction, which is the theological equivalent of saying the prophets foresaw the internet because they didn’t forbid Wi‑Fi.

 

[God-fearing]

The reason I say the modern land restoration is not prophetic fulfillment is because the Bible never treats twentieth‑century geopolitics as the mechanism by which God fulfills His covenant promises — the NT says the promises are fulfilled in Christ, not in a modern nation‑state with an air force, a parliament, and a GDP; Hebrews calls the old covenant obsolete (Heb 8:13), Paul says the true children of Abraham are those who are in Christ (Gal 3:7), and Jesus says the kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), which means your attempt to turn the 1948 UN partition into Ezekiel’s eschatology is the theological equivalent of confusing a weather report with the book of Revelation.
The prophets weren’t predicting a secular government, mandatory military service, contested borders, or a state that exists by international diplomacy; they were pointing to the people_of_God gathered in Christ, which is why the NT applies regathering to the gospel (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not to a geopolitical return.
The land today being “restored” proves exactly one thing: modern nation‑states exist. It does not prove covenant fulfillment, because covenant fulfillment is Christological, not cartographical.

Point taken and this proves that according to your theology God is limited to his only supernatural power?
This is why one of the worse things to do is to separate the old and new testament.
Israel has been built and then again restored by the hands of man inspired by the will of God.
Resources from even other lands. Other people's. Yet your saying because of this Israel that was known in one day as prophecy says is not of God's making.
Geography the wars that take place and the route that the enemies take point to this Israel in the end times.
This ethnic Israel modern fordge Israel has taken a lot of heat as a imposter.
Surely one day there will be a new Jerusalem a new earth and heaven, this we can agree upon.
Ill tell you what my friend....if this Israel is defeated and thrown down I'll not only agree with your theology I'll promote it to the core.
Jesus wants jew and gentile to unite as one why do many separate their selves

 

[OMC]

Point taken and this proves that according to your theology God is limited to his only supernatural power?
This is why one of the worse things to do is to separate the old and new testament.
Israel has been built and then again restored by the hands of man inspired by the will of God.
Resources from even other lands. Other people's. Yet your saying because of this Israel that was known in one day as prophecy says is not of God's making.
Geography the wars that take place and the route that the enemies take point to this Israel in the end times.
This ethnic Israel modern fordge Israel has taken a lot of heat as a imposter.
Surely one day there will be a new Jerusalem a new earth and heaven, this we can agree upon.
Ill tell you what my friend....if this Israel is defeated and thrown down I'll not only agree with your theology I'll promote it to the core.
Jesus wants jew and gentile to unite as one why do many separate their selves

Your reply still assumes that if God doesn’t fulfill prophecy through modern Israel’s geopolitics, then He must be “limited,” but that’s just you confusing what God can do with what God said He would do; the NT explicitly redirects the promises to Christ and His people, not to a twentieth‑century nation‑state, which is why regathering is applied to the gospel_ingathering (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not to the UN partition.
Saying “Israel was restored by the hands of men inspired by God” is just providential storytelling — nations rise and fall constantly — and reading “born in one day” as 1948 is newspaper hermeneutics, not exegesis.
Geography, wars, and enemy routes don’t prove prophetic fulfillment; they prove modern politics exists.
And your final line — “If Israel is defeated, I’ll adopt your theology” — shows your eschatology is tied to current events, not to the Israel_in_Christ the apostles say inherits the promises. Jesus unites Jew and Gentile in Himself, not in a modern geopolitical project.

 

[Beekeeper]

Which is who in your mind?

That is a reference to the pharisees and their followers.
It is also a reference to old covenant national Jerusalem, typified as a harlot and adulterer in the first century.
It is not a reference to those citizens that repented and followed Jesus.
They will have all the blessings and promises of Abraham.

 

[Beekeeper]

The great tribulation has not happened yet which sets the course for a world leader to arise....anti-Christ.

Is this character anti-Christ somebody mentioned in the book of Revelation?
Which one is he in your understanding?

 

[Beekeeper]

if this Israel is defeated and thrown down I'll not only agree with your theology I'll promote it to the core.

If Israel is defeated why not continue in the belief that you have now?
If that is where your faith is invested why walk by sight?
I would have thought that you guys would be advocating for more bloody wars to rebuild it again.

 

[God-fearing]

Your reply still assumes that if God doesn’t fulfill prophecy through modern Israel’s geopolitics, then He must be “limited,” but that’s just you confusing what God can do with what God said He would do; the NT explicitly redirects the promises to Christ and His people, not to a twentieth‑century nation‑state, which is why regathering is applied to the gospel_ingathering (John 11:52; Eph 2:14–19), not to the UN partition.
Saying “Israel was restored by the hands of men inspired by God” is just providential storytelling — nations rise and fall constantly — and reading “born in one day” as 1948 is newspaper hermeneutics, not exegesis.
Geography, wars, and enemy routes don’t prove prophetic fulfillment; they prove modern politics exists.
And your final line — “If Israel is defeated, I’ll adopt your theology” — shows your eschatology is tied to current events, not to the Israel_in_Christ the apostles say inherits the promises. Jesus unites Jew and Gentile in Himself, not in a modern geopolitical project.

O.m.gosh.......you seem to have a answer for everything but refuse to accept what is happening before your very eyes.
And that's what prophecy is all about....seeing...watch.... are key words which points to a physical manifestation to happen.
The first war of modern Israel is for the land....is that happening???
The second is for its wealth....yet to come.
Israel is partially blinded to the truth the climax of what is to come.
Don't know about you but if I see a person who's vision is impaired I'd offer assistance not criticism.

 

[God-fearing]

If Israel is defeated why not continue in the belief that you have now?
If that is where your faith is invested why walk by sight?
I would have thought that you guys would be advocating for more bloody wars to rebuild it again.

Because dear sir they will not be uprooted again