Featured Any Dispensationalist in the house?

And what does that uncircumcision represent?

Those outside of relationship with God.

You completely ignore everything I said and continue with an argument that ignores the intent of circumcision and it's intent.

Again, there is no reason to see Jews continuing in their heritage in the Millennial Kingdom. There is no reason to think men will not be circumcised in that day.

And one not circumcised according to heritage and tradition, which has no salvific connotation, coming into the Temple...speaks of one who definitely should not be there. That is the issue, Tom.

Those who allow them to come in will also be considered out of relationship with God. That is the issue, Tom.

You are imposing significance to external services or traditions which fit within the framework of Israel but are not salvific in nature.

The argument you are creating does the opposite of what is actually in view in that instead of understanding Paul in Galatians as he addresses the error of Judaizers...you impose something not in Paul's teaching.

Let me explain: Paul is not forbidding men to be circumcised. What he is saying is if one believes they can only be in relationship with God if they are circumcised then they err.

Your train of reasoning is as erroneous as the Judaizers, except you are doing the exact opposite of what they were doing. If you are correct, then many are an abomination unto the Lord.

And the intent is to speak of those not in relationship with God.

This text and the Law does not impose salvific quality to circumcision, which was a sign of the circumcision of the heart, which was relationship with God in truth.

The point is "You have allowed infidels into My Temple." Which shows the disregard they had for God.

And the simple point is that will not be the case when Israel is restored.

I don't see Paul saying it is an "abomination."

What I do see is the simple point of "I am not preaching the Covenant of Law."

The "Circumcision" deals with legalistic false teachers. They were contrary to the Gospel.

Nothing in this forbids Jews from being Jews. Nothing in this forbids circumcision. It is believing circumcision and keeping the Covenant of Law has to be maintained in order to be saved which is the error Paul is dealing with.

You need to understand Paul is not teaching "Don't be circumcised!" lol

That completely obscures his teaching here, and the only reason to do that is to support your eschatological position. So we see the importance of eschatology and how it can impact our views, and how we present important lessons taught.

The only one seeing that done is you.

Because you see Paul forbidding circumcision.

You do understand the audience was not exclusively Jewish, right? And there is a distinction drawn in instruction for a distinctly Hebrew audience (hint hint, lol), right?

Can you show me in Hebrews where Jews are forbidden to maintain their heritage as Jews? Rather than the exhortation to leave the Covenant of Law and progress to the New Covenant?

On the contrary, it should invoke the exact opposite: those who were not in relationship with God.

It is not the "Circumcision" of Galatians in view, it is those in disobedience to the Word and will of God in that Age. And it was in that Age they came under rebuke for allowing those not in relationship to have a part in a Covenant relationship which was disobedience.

Now, speaking of some "sinking in,": here are your proof-texts:

Who is rebuked?

What Age does this rebuke occur in?

Where does it say no-one will be circumcised in Israel in the Kingdom promised?

All we see is that these errors on the part of Israel will not be repeated.

It is just a basic concept of that time when Israel is restored:



Hebrews 8:10-11

King James Version (KJV)

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

The promise of the New Covenant was made to divided Israel. Gentile Inclusion was a Mystery.

Neither lose their heritage, as a Jew is still a Jew, and a Greek still a Greek.

And in that day we will not see the error of Israel in regards to the Temple and it's services.


Continued...

 

It's a false premise: Paul is not forbidding the physical rite of circumcision.

That is the basis of your argument.

And abomination in Galatians is imposed into the text by you, and the circumcision in view, that Paul addresses...has salvific value.

That is the abomination, Tom.

Not simply the physical rite. That is simply a sign of the relationship, and it is not forbidden in Scripture. Nowhere are Jews told to shed their heritage.

It is when heritage is given salvific value that error occurs. We see Christ address this error several times. They thought they had Abraham as their father, for example.

That is when heritage becomes the abomination addressed in Scripture.

And funny we have an Apostle who does not say, "No, I can't do this, because it denies Christ!"

Paul goes along with it. Perhaps this was error on Paul's part, and this is why he went into custody. God judged him. I would cede that as a possibility.

But we are not given that impression in Scripture, but that the Early Church was still observing their heritage, and nothing negative is said about it.

And in Hebrews, we see the same underlying issue with those Jews, who were ascribing salvific quality to the sacrifices of the Law.

So the Early Church was in disobedience to God? Funny way to establish the Church, don't you think?

It is not really that much different than our modern problem of people thinking that it is going to Church that saves.

But was the problem of Judaizers over? We still have that same error today, with those who merge and blend the Covenants, and create a legalistic abomination which is contrary to the Gospel and New Covenant relationship.

Nothing wrong with circumcision, until someone attributes salvific value to it. and that is precisely the false argument that underlies your reasoning.

Let me ask you this: did the command to observe Passover take away sins in Israel's History? Or was it a memorial to the Event in which deliverance occurred?

Would you condemn those of Israel who kill a lamb and observe that memorial today?

Do you think it is impossible that those of Israel could observe it in the Millennial Kingdom (and I realize you do not recognize that kingdom as I do, so this is just hypothetical on your part)/ In other words, would they be imposing salvific value into that observance? Does the Jew who rejects Christ today, who celebrates Passover...

...equate that to salvation in the Messiah they await?

The answer to that one is no, they do not. They did not equate that celebration and that redemption with the redemption they longed for, and many still long for.

As long as you impose salvific value to the sacrifices said to take place in that Restored Kingdom, you will continue to use a false argument to support your rejection of that Kingdom.


God bless.

 

Not exactly...

What Paul is teaching against is the teaching of Judaizers who demanded men be circumcised or...they could not be saved.

That does not preclude maintain the heritage of circumcision nor support a rejection of sacrifices being carried out as memorials in light of the traditional ceremonies and celebrations.

Paul is not forbidding circumcision, he is forbidding circumcision unto righteousness, or, circumcision performed as a means of salvation and covenant relationship with God.

And the point is clear...they have confidence in the flesh.

That is what Paul is teaching against.

Not circumcision altogether.

The argument is imposed into the text and it is erroneous.


God bless.

 

So what about this 'Hebrew Roots' movement that appears to be picking up steam? Harmless? OK with you?

Would you call this an abomination?:

...the blasphemy of them that say they are Jews, and they art not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Rev 2:9
...the synagogue of Satan, of them that say they are Jews, and they are not, but do lie... Rev 3:9

 

Don't know anything about and don't want to unless I speak directly with someone in that movement.

When we get caught up in that sort of thing it distracts us from what we should be investing our efforts in...the Word of God.

In the last days we are going to see a reconciliation of sorts between those of Israel and other groups. It is not surprising that a group of Jews would emerge that was popular, or at least, not vilified as Israel is, often.

While our eschatology differs, I will say that I believe Antichrist will form a covenant/pact/treaty with what is viewed as National Israel, which implies an "acceptance" of some sort, as least in part, from the world community.

Whatever this group you present may be, a Jewish movement is not contrary to my views of what will occur in the last days.

So I can't say it is an abomination or not, because I really don't have a desire to remove focus from Scripture to particular groups, which have been popping up since Christ returned to Heaven. I would not view, for example, an orthodox Jewish surge as abomination from a temporal perspective, because I do feel God gives grace to Jews as well as Gentiles, and that an orthodox Jew has a better chance of coming to understand the truth of the Gospel as any Gentile. Kind of like someone who is mistakenly convinced they are saved going to Church, where, at least they have exposure to the Word of God.

I will say that any method of salvation other than Christ is an abomination on it's most basic level. And that is what the Galatians are being taught...the Law will not save, circumcision will not save, only Christ saves.

Absolutely.

And this is what Paul is teaching against, and what is abhorrent to God in Ezekiel.

It is the matter of people professing relationship with God based on erroneous premise, here...that heritage is salvific.

This group would represent people who believe themselves in relationship with God but are not.

And this is no different than Israel in her past (when rebellious), perhaps the greatest example being the religious rulers of Christ's day.


God bless.

 

It doesn't alarm you at what they're doing to 'the Word of God'? Or that the movement appears to be catching on?

Dispy doublespeak, for the simple reason dispies relegate the book of Revelation to the future.

 

No more than what you do to the Word of God.



Your movement has already caught on, and since you are within my sphere I am quite content not to go looking for antagonists I may never have a chance to speak to.

You, on the other hand...I can try to help.

Sorry, no. I am not a Dispensationalist, regardless of whether my views can be seen to correlate. I am simply a Christian Bible Student who happens to also be an Independent Baptist.

The Scriptures make it clear that Antichrist will confirm a Covenant, and the only logical Covenant he could confirm would be the Covenant of Law.

This will allow Israel to resume Levitical Services, I believe, and this creates the Tribulation Temple which he will make desolate.

That prophecy is taught in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament by both Christ and Paul in specific terms. Ignore that Prophecy at your own risk, and it will show in your Theology.

And Dispensationalists do not relegate Revelation to the Future...Revelation does that.

So in other words...God does that.

Gotta go. I know you will miss me, but Lord willing I will be back.




God bless.

 

At the very beginning of the book we're told:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev 1

At the very end of the book we're told:

6 And he said unto me, These words are faithful and true: and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angels to show unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass.
7 And behold, I come quickly. Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book.
10 And he saith unto me, Seal not up the words of the prophecy of this book; for the time is at hand.
12 Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each man according as his work is.
20 He who testifieth these things saith, Yea: I come quickly. Amen: come, Lord Jesus Rev 21

What you do is IGNORE the word of God that doesn't fit your fabrications.

 

It is hard to know just when to call it quits on these discussions. It is like making your bed. No matter how well you did it yesterday you have to do it again. :laugh:

We just cannot get around the fact that "soon" in Rev. means just. And, by contrast, the "seal the prophecy" passage in Daniel did not have "soon".

 

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel; for the words are shut up and sealed till the time of the end. Dan 12

Six centuries later:

10 And he saith unto me, Seal not up the words of the prophecy of this book; for the time is at hand. Rev 21

 

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Write the things which:
1. Thou hast seen (he just saw Christ).
2. The things which are (chapters two and three--the seven churches)
3. The things which are to come (from chapter four onward.)
--A very simple outline.

 

And just like you deny Christ "setting foot on terra firma," even so here you build your abbreviated doctrine with part of what is taught:

Revelation 1:19

King James Version (KJV)

19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

And the obvious conclusion is that the Lord has not yet fulfilled this:


Revelation 19:11-15

King James Version (KJV)

11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

So when did this occur, KR?

Is Christ ruling the Nations today?

When was this...

Revelation 11:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


...fulfilled?

When was this..


Zechariah 14:1-4

King James Version (KJV)

14 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

3 Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

...fulfilled?

This is why we call it revelation, KR. This is what is revealed to men.

The Prophecy of Daniel is revealed, not to those Prophets, simply by them. But to us it is revealed. And what we see occurring is the Lord's Return.

The Lord will come swiftly when He returns:

Revelation 22:18-20

King James Version (KJV)

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

But, not until all is fulfilled.

You nullify the entire Book of Revelation with a few verses.

Is Satan bound today?

Does Christ rule the Nations with a Rod of Iron?

Did Christ Return?

Please explain.

Please show how you understand Christ to have returned in fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah and Revelation.

All I have to do is post the Scripture. They speak for themselves.

I am not the one who has to try to make one of the most significant events in human history fit some historical event which even a small child would see just doesn't quite fit what is written.

So tell me, why is Zechariah wrong? Why do you see the Bible as mistaken in it's Prophecy? How does your conscience allow you to nullify Scripture at your convenience?

Please explain.


God bless.[/QUOTE]

 

Again, this is why it is called the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

What you are overlooking is that it is called...prophecy.

When did Christ Return after this writing, KR?


God bless.

 

It shouldn't be that way, Tom, not when it comes to Scripture. Not among believers earnestly seeking to understand apart from bias.

First, I would ask you to clarify if you are referring to this...

Revelation 1

King James Version (KJV)

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:


Do we see it mean soon in these verses...


Luke 18:8

King James Version (KJV)

8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?


Romans 16:20

King James Version (KJV)

20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

(see link)

The first is a teaching specific to Christ's return, and the actual return is not in view, but what takes place at that return.

In the second Paul tells them "And the God of Peace shall bruise Satan under their feet shortly," does that mean that those first century recipients saw that fulfilled? Does not the "bruising" draw up the imagery of Genesis 3:15? And when is that fulfilled? Has it been fulfilled at this time?

We cannot look to Christ's death as the fulfillment in view, because at the time of this writing...that had already been accomplished.

So I would have to take issue with your statement...

"Soon" does not mean it has to be fulfilled soon, but speedily, and when we see it from a perspective that not all of the Prophecy can be said have been fulfilled...we can dismiss this argument as very weak.

For one thing, within the Revelation of Jesus Christ is also the Prophecy of the Eternal State.

Was that also fulfilled...soon?

If you say the events described were fulfilled, then are you not forced to also say that Prophecy was fulfilled as well? After all, soon means just that. When you make it mean that, that is.

This is easily understood: it was not meant for men to understand the Prophecy apart from the revelation provided to us in the New Testament. Even Christ spoke of the Abomination of Desolation, and no-one within hearing of His teaching understood it at that time.

We see in Prophecy a general principle of progressive revelation, which I am sure you would agree with, Just as the Gospel of Christ was a Mystery, though prophesied in Scripture in explicit detail, not one person can be found to put that prophecy in the context it should be in, as we can based on New Testament revelation. It is no different in understanding the Prophecy of Daniel, which was sealed up in that day, but revealed to us by the Holy Ghost. This revelation is though the Word of God, and we balance all Prophecy to get the big picture.

So I ask again, if you enforce a "soon" fulfillment to the events of Revelation...why not also force a fulfillment of the new heavens and earth and the Eternal State?


God bless.

 

I will read the abpve when I canbut answer will have to wait till I get to my laptop at home.. still in chengdu. *tom

 

R

I was referring to the long article. As I have time in about a week I will get back to this topic. I hate this thumbtyping. Later

 

Not very long, actually, take about two minutes to read.

And I can relate to the thumb typing. When we go out of town I use to try to use the phone, then got a tablet, which was a little better, but, still aggravating and you don't have the functions you do on a computer. IT's kind of like having one hand tied behind your back, lol.

So take your time, and be safe.

God bless.