Revolution in Iran

[ZNP]

Nobody is suggesting that a Gentile is a "son of Jacob", that definition refers to a specific ethnic group. But the "Israel of God" or "the elect of God" or "the Church, Body of Christ", these are all One and the same. There are no Jews or Gentiles in "the Israel of God". We're all One race.
Galatians 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.
Gentile believers are part of the spiritual "Israel of God". We have been grafted into the olive tree of God's covenant people (Romans 11), making us part of the true Church, which is seen as the continuation and fulfillment of Israel, rather than a separate entity.
Gentile believers are not a "new" entity but are grafted into the existing olive tree, which represents the covenant people of God.
There is only one covenant of grace spanning the Old and New Testaments. Gentile believers are deemed heirs to the promises made to Israel, having been brought near through the blood of Christ (Ephesians 2:11-22).

The Church has not replaced Israel, but it is the fulfillment of Israel—the true Israel of God, comprised of all believers, regardless of ethnicity.

There is not going to be a future time when ethnic Israelis, repent. Those who die in their sin will go to hell, just the same as everyone else who is outside of Christ. Ethnic Israelis don't have any special privileges or exemptions, they are the same covenant as everyone else.

Yes Acts 1:6-7 confirms that God will restore "spiritual Israel". We will rule the world, with our Lord Jesus.

I don't agree with your Greek interpretation of Acts 1:6-7 because the Lord Jesus did not come to conquer the world by sword or force. He came to establish spiritual Israel.

Once again, everyone knows that the Israel of God in the New Testament refers to the church. That is not what the debate is about.

The debate is about Israel on Earth, not the heavenly Israel.

Genesis 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

Believers are as the stars in heaven. The Jews on earth are as the sand upon the sea shore.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

In the Book of Hebrews the Lord says through Paul the Jews are beloved of the Father.

Which is why he has always left a remnant of them who believe instead of casting them all off forever. The disobedient and unbelieving are not beloved

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Yeah when they watch the liberal news networks and hear all the lies and deceptions they just assume all 'Mericans are liars.

All they have to do is watch how the US betrays its allies and treaties and every other norm of international relations.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Yeah all the liberals are praying to the devil that US troops fail.

I don't want US troops to get harmed. If their military leaders order them into a battle they are not ready for then the leaders are guilty of malfeasance and should be relieved of command, minimum. US troops haven't experienced FPV warfare yet; it's a meat grinder.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Once again, everyone knows that the Israel of God in the New Testament refers to the church. That is not what the debate is about.

The debate is about Israel on Earth, not the heavenly Israel.

Genesis 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

Believers are as the stars in heaven. The Jews on earth are as the sand upon the sea shore.

Israel failed through its disobedience to become as the stars of heaven or the sand of the seashore. That's why the bible says that only a remnant is saved. The remaining fullness was to be filled with believers out of every nation. That is why Jacob prophesied that the seed of Israel would become a fullness of gentiles.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Only a remnant is ever saved

For if the people of Israel should become as the sand of the sea, the remnant of them shall be saved. Isaiah 10:22​

​

But Isaiah cries over Israel, saying, If the number of the sons of Israel should be as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved. Romans 9:27​

The remaining fullness is completed by the gentiles

And [Jacob] his father refused and said, I know, my son, I know. [Manasseh] also shall be a people, and he shall become great. But his younger brother [Ephraim] shall become greater than he, and his seed will become a fullness of gentiles. Genesis 48:19​

 

[HeIsHere]

One liner Bible tweets rendering an obtuse opinion that defy Scripture are conclusive proof that you are dead wrong.

BTW, the many proofs that I have already posted you have yet to successfully refute at any point.
Not a one of them.

I could literally post hundreds of similar nature. Enough to make your eyes bleed.

The words of Jesus the Christ refutes your eschatology completely that is why I do not need to go any further.

Plus no point talking about scripture allover the Bible when you have an error filled hermeneutic, hermeneutic first, then exegete

Tell us what is exactly is your hermeneutic?

 

[ZNP]

The words of Jesus the Christ refutes your eschatology completely that is why I do not need to go any further.

Plus no point talking about scripture allover the Bible when you have an error filled hermeneutic, hermeneutic first, then exegete

Tell us what is exactly is your hermeneutic?

Good point,
Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

So then explain to us how every word from these prophets has been fulfilled.



Zechariah 12:2-3 — Jerusalem made a "cup of staggering" to surrounding peoples; all nations gather against it.

• If Jerusalem means "the church," which surrounding peoples were besieging the church in Zechariah's day — and why would a spiritual community need a literal Mount of Olives splitting in two just chapters later to provide an escape route?
• The text specifies Judah separately from Jerusalem — if both are spiritualized into "the church," why does the prophecy treat them as two distinct entities needing reconciliation?

---

Zechariah 12:9 — God will destroy nations that come against Jerusalem.

• Which literal nations will God destroy if the target city is metaphorical — and does it make coherent sense for real geopolitical armies to wage war against a spiritual abstraction?

---

Zechariah 12:10 — Israel looks on "him whom they have pierced" and mourns.

• Paul quotes this same piercing language in Romans 11:26 and applies it to ethnic Israel's future salvation — if the mourners here are the church, why would the church need to discover they pierced their own Messiah as a future event?
• The mourning is described clan by clan — the house of David, the house of Nathan, the house of Levi (v.12-13) — why would the Holy Spirit specify recognizable Israelite tribal lineages if the referent is a multinational spiritual body?

---

Zechariah 14:1-21 — Nations gather, city is taken, Lord's feet stand on the Mount of Olives, which physically splits.

• The Mount of Olives is a specific, named, surveyed geological feature northeast of Jerusalem. If this is symbolic, what is the symbol of — and why would symbolism require such precise topographical detail including compass directions (splitting east to west, halves moving north and south)?
• Verse 16 describes the survivors of attacking nations coming annually to Jerusalem to worship and keep the Feast of Tabernacles. Which feast does the church keep that fulfills this, and which church members were previously attacking Jerusalem?

---

Joel 3:2 — God gathers nations to the Valley of Jehoshaphat for judgment because they scattered Israel and divided the land.

• The stated reason for judgment is the scattering of a specific people and the partition of a specific land. If Israel is the church, which nations scattered the church into exile and divided its territory — and when did the church possess a land that could be geographically divided?

---

Isaiah 11:12 — God assembles the banished of Israel and gathers the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

• The text distinguishes "Israel" from "Judah" as two separate groups being reunited — a distinction that maps precisely onto the historical Assyrian and Babylonian deportations. What theological event in the church's history produced two distinct spiritually-dispersed factions needing separate regathering?
• The word nidchey (נִדְחֵי, "banished/outcasts") carries the specific legal meaning of forcible exile. Can the church, which has never been nationally exiled, be the referent of a term with that precise juridical weight?

---

Isaiah 66:8 — "Shall a nation be born in one day?"

• This verse was routinely cited by Christian Zionists before 1948 as predicting Israel's rebirth as a nation. If it refers to the church, on what specific calendar date was the church "born in one day" — and why does the text use the Hebrew goy (nation-state) rather than qahal (congregation/assembly)?

---

Ezekiel 36:24 — "I will take you from the nations... and bring you into your own land."

• The antecedent of "your own land" is specified in the surrounding context as the mountains of Israel (36:1), the land given to the fathers (36:28), with its cities rebuilt and fields cultivated (36:33-35). Can a church composed of every ethnicity on earth be "brought back" to a land it never possessed — and how does spiritual Israel plant literal vineyards (v.35)?

---

Ezekiel 38-39 — Gog of Magog leads a coalition (including Persia/Iran, Cush, Put) against Israel.

• Persia, Cush, and Put are unambiguously literal nation-states in every other use in the Hebrew Bible. By what interpretive rule do they remain literal while Israel alone becomes symbolic within the same sentence?
• The aftermath describes seven months of burying the dead in Israel and seven years of burning weapons (39:9,12) — what spiritual community buries spiritual corpses for a literal seven-month period on a literal piece of geography called "the Valley of Hamon-Gog"?

---

Luke 21:24 — Jerusalem trampled by Gentiles "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

• The word until (ἄχρι) implies a terminus — a point at which Gentile domination of Jerusalem ends. If Jerusalem is the church, what does it mean for Gentiles to stop trampling the church — and hasn't the church always been predominantly Gentile?
• Jesus is answering a question about a specific physical temple his disciples could point to (v.5) — at what point does literal architecture become a metaphor within the same discourse?

---

Daniel 9:27 — The Antichrist makes a covenant, then ends sacrifice and offering at the midpoint.

• "Sacrifice and offering" (הַזֶּבַח וּמִנְחָה) are the precise technical terms of the Levitical sacrificial system. For this prophecy to be fulfilled spiritually, does the church need to first re-establish a literal sacrificial system — and if not, what exactly is being stopped?

---

Romans 11:26 — "All Israel will be saved."

• Paul has spent three chapters (Romans 9-11) carefully distinguishing ethnic Israel from Gentile believers, explicitly grieving that his own kinsmen according to the flesh (9:3) are currently enemies of the gospel (11:28). If "all Israel" here means the church, who are the enemies-of-the-gospel branches that get re-grafted in (11:23-24)?

---

Genesis 15:18 — Land covenant from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates given to Abram's offspring.

• This covenant has never been fulfilled in its full geographical extent in any period of Israelite or church history. If "offspring" means spiritual children by faith, which Gentile Christians are currently in legal possession of the territory between the Nile and the Euphrates — and does real estate transfer spiritually?

We got questions, why do you refuse to answer them?

 

[HeIsHere]

Zechariah 12:2-3 — Jerusalem made a "cup of staggering" to surrounding peoples; all nations gather against it.

• If Jerusalem means "the church," which surrounding peoples were besieging the church in Zechariah's day — and why would a spiritual community need a literal Mount of Olives splitting in two just chapters later to provide an escape route?
• The text specifies Judah separately from Jerusalem — if both are spiritualized into "the church," why does the prophecy treat them as two distinct entities needing reconciliation?

No point going through all of them really,
But here you go....
Cup of Reeling (v. 2)
This was fulfilled during the Roman siege (AD 66–70).
Jerusalem became a "cup of wrath" that intoxicated the Jewish rebels and the surrounding nations, leading to the "madness" and self-destruction of the city.

Heavy Stone (v. 3)
Jerusalem became the "burden" that wounded the Roman Empire. While the city was destroyed, the "siege" eventually led to the internal collapse and wounding of the Roman political structure.

History mate, read Josephus and use a the OATH hermeneutics, works perfectly.

 

[HeIsHere]

Genesis 15:18 — Land covenant from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates given to Abram's offspring.

• This covenant has never been fulfilled in its full geographical extent in any period of Israelite or church history. If "offspring" means spiritual children by faith, which Gentile Christians are currently in legal possession of the territory between the Nile and the Euphrates — and does real estate transfer spiritually?

Why does everyone says this.

Oh wait I know, because without it the entire dispensationalists doctrine falls apart.

To be continued...

 

[ZNP]

No point going through all of them really,
But here you go....
Cup of Reeling (v. 2)
This was fulfilled during the Roman siege (AD 66–70).
Jerusalem became a "cup of wrath" that intoxicated the Jewish rebels and the surrounding nations, leading to the "madness" and self-destruction of the city.

Heavy Stone (v. 3)
Jerusalem became the "burden" that wounded the Roman Empire. While the city was destroyed, the "siege" eventually led to the internal collapse and wounding of the Roman political structure.

History mate, read Josephus and use a the OATH hermeneutics, works perfectly.

Well hold on, you are saying in this verse Jerusalem refers to Jerusalem on the earth, not in the heavens? Jesus ascended to the heavens approximately 40 years before 70AD, Ephesians which is a bulwark to your doctrine says that the church is seated together with Christ in the heavenlies and that when He was made head over all it was to the church (Ephesians 1:17-23).

Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:



That was about 40 years prior to this event. Since Galatians says the church is the Jerusalem which is above, how can this verse be referring to the Jews and still work with your doctrine?

Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

 

[ZNP]

Why does everyone says this.

Oh wait I know, because without it the entire dispensationalists doctrine falls apart.

To be continued...

We quote it because it is the word of God.

 

[ZNP]

No point going through all of them really,
But here you go....
Cup of Reeling (v. 2)
This was fulfilled during the Roman siege (AD 66–70).
Jerusalem became a "cup of wrath" that intoxicated the Jewish rebels and the surrounding nations, leading to the "madness" and self-destruction of the city.

Heavy Stone (v. 3)
Jerusalem became the "burden" that wounded the Roman Empire. While the city was destroyed, the "siege" eventually led to the internal collapse and wounding of the Roman political structure.

History mate, read Josephus and use a the OATH hermeneutics, works perfectly.

Just to be clear, you are saying that this prophecy about "Jerusalem" refers to the Jews, it does not refer to the church, even though the church was born close to 40 years prior to this event.

 

[HeIsHere]

Well hold on, you are saying in this verse Jerusalem refers to Jerusalem on the earth, not in the heavens? Jesus ascended to the heavens approximately 40 years before 70AD, Ephesians which is a bulwark to your doctrine says that the church is seated together with Christ in the heavenlies and that when He was made head over all it was to the church (Ephesians 1:17-23).

Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:



That was about 40 years prior to this event. Since Galatians says the church is the Jerusalem which is above, how can this verse be referring to the Jews and still work with your doctrine?

Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Conversation ended and this is why there is no point.

Here you go...

 

[Charlesiii]

Conversation ended and this is why there is no point.

Here you go...

View attachment 286993

Yes. Too many liars and false prophets, and there's never any punishment for being wrong. In the Old Testament, all it took was one false prophesy in the name of God "Thus saith the Lord" or "God said this" to justify a stoning for said false prophet.

Not saying we should stone these people today, but people are dying in a godless war that is being pushed by ignorant Christians using God's name in vain - blaspheming - and those who are pushing it will go unpunished. So evil.

 

[ZNP]

Conversation ended and this is why there is no point.

Here you go...

View attachment 286993

Yes, I am looking for a doctrine that is not based on one or two verses in the Bible but aligns with every verse in the Bible and you are using trivial garbage to throw against the wall and hope something sticks. That is why the conversation ends. I asked you straight up questions about your doctrine, I wanted you to explain how it fits with all these other verses and it doesn't. You claim that church is the true Israel based on verses in the New Testament and that the covenant with the Jews is ended, replaced with the New Testament. Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Old Covenant but to fulfill it. You claim that verses about Jerusalem and the Jews were fulfilled in 70 AD and yet, the church was, according to your doctrine, was the one and only true Israel at that point and so the prophecies should have been referring to things happening to the church, not the Jews which were no longer "the true Israel".

You pull out one verse and try to apply it to 70 AD even though it doesn't fit. They were not a burdensome stone to all nations and all peoples at that time, only to the Romans. Instead, when Iran has tried to close the straight of Hormuz, that did effect all nations, and you could say this was over Israel, not the church.

 

[HeIsHere]

Yes. Too many liars and false prophets, and there's never any punishment for being wrong. In the Old Testament, all it took was one false prophesy in the name of God "Thus saith the Lord" or "God said this" to justify a stoning for said false prophet.

Not saying we should stone these people today, but people are dying in a godless war that is being pushed by ignorant Christians using God's name in vain - blaspheming - and those who are pushing it will go unpunished. So evil.

Agree.

I listened to UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese in her presentation, she spoke about the colonialist project, she described what is happening there "unprecedented criminality."

Would God really give them the land by torturing children with cigarettes.

What is wrong with people who believe this is of God.
Where is the prophet, nowhere because it is not of God.

 

[HeIsHere]

Yes, I am looking for a doctrine that is not based on one or two verses in the Bible but aligns with every verse in the Bible and you are using trivial garbage to throw against the wall and hope something sticks. That is why the conversation ends. I asked you straight up questions about your doctrine, I wanted you to explain how it fits with all these other verses and it doesn't. You claim that church is the true Israel based on verses in the New Testament and that the covenant with the Jews is ended, replaced with the New Testament. Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Old Covenant but to fulfill it. You claim that verses about Jerusalem and the Jews were fulfilled in 70 AD and yet, the church was, according to your doctrine, was the one and only true Israel at that point and so the prophecies should have been referring to things happening to the church, not the Jews which were no longer "the true Israel".

You pull out one verse and try to apply it to 70 AD even though it doesn't fit. They were not a burdensome stone to all nations and all peoples at that time, only to the Romans. Instead, when Iran has tried to close the straight of Hormuz, that did effect all nations, and you could say this was over Israel, not the church.

Hermeneutics.
That is all there is to it...Scofield literalist approach is not how to read the Bible.

And no one teaches replacement theology, we preach fulfilled theology in Christ Jesus.

 

[Charlesiii]

Agree.

I listened to UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese in her presentation, she spoke about the colonialist project, she described what is happening there "unprecedented criminality."

Would God really give them the land by torturing children with cigarettes.

What is wrong with people who believe this is of God.
Where is the prophet, nowhere because it is not of God.

Amen. They make the same mistake as did the Sadducees and the Pharisees, when John the Baptist corrected these.

Matthew 3:7 - 10
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

 

[Charlesiii]