OK, I'm Now Post-Trib (you convinced me)

Just a side-note: if you are for or against something because of your view, that doesn't necessarily mean someone with an opposite view has the opposite opinion about that something. For example, if you are against legalizing marijuana because you are a Christian, that doesn't necessarily mean non-Christians are by default for it. Some non-Christians are for it, some are against it (for different reasons than you may be), and some are indifferent.

Thus, many posttribbers may not respond to your question. Even though I am posttrib (and understand your question better now), your question isn't really directed at me.

[ June 14, 2003, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

The period of peace and safety would have to come before the great tribulation. I'm not so sure there is such a period, or if there is one, if it is as idyllic as some tend to describe it. I personally think that Ezekiel 38, which talks about peace and safety in terms of unwalled villages, takes place at the end of the millenium. So I think that's one place where people get the prophetic views mixed up.

That aside, the event that clearly ushers in the great tribulation is when the abomination of desolation is set up and man of sin is revealed. Once the great tribulation begins it sure doesn't sound like peace and safety to me -- it sounds like people better get outta town as fast as possible.

(emphasis mine, of course)

 

Aha! Now I understand WHY you are asking the question. What I don't understand is why anyone would accuse you of being against the road map because you're pre-trib. That makes as little sense to me as assuming the majority of post-tribbers must be for the road map because they're post-trib.

I simply don't see the connection. I figure God is fully capable of executing His plan and precisely on His time schedule whether the road map succeeds or fails. So I'm against it on principle, and however that fits into the great tribulation is irrelevant.

 

Eschatology is not exactly the issue behind the criticism. It is not that one is pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib in my opinion. The real issue is replacement theology. If you think that Jews because of disobedience have been replaced by Christians in God's promises, then you might be saying that someone who believes that God's promises to the Jews are eternal is someone against the road map. The problem with the road map, or Oslo leftovers microwaved, is that it has no mechanism to enforce Arab compliance.

 

Very simple. One who wants to see the Israelis and Palestinians live in peace, especially for the children's sake, would want to see the Road Map for Peace be blessed with great success by God, irregardless of one's eschatological viewpoint. Most people who have an opinion on the Road Map for Peace worldwide don't even have an eschatological viewpoint.

 

Replacement theology is incorrect. The church has not replaced Israel. Rather, Gentiles and Jews are included in the church.

 

KenH, if you had continued quoting what I said I said that replacement theology is Christians took the place of Jews. You then replied that both Jews and Gentiles were Christians, so that was not correct. That is a twisting of the facts because I never defined Christians because it goes without saying that some physical Jews are now Christians. (It seems to me that fact that you allude to physical Jews suggest that you recognize that there are still physical Jews.) But the point still stands that the major difference is replacement theology.

By the way, you should abandon CRI. They have been abandoned by Walter Martin's friends and family. This is referenced at www.waltermartin.org/cri.html

 

Yes, and you didn't answer it then either. One is left wondering why?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

It has everything to do with the curent situation. It is morally inconsistent to condemn Arab terrorism and not do the same wih Israeli/ Jewish terrorism. If you are unwilling to comdemn the latter, you ae in no position to condemn the former.

So...I'm still waiting

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

1)As I stated, I do not believe in Replacement Theology. Period.

2)I have nothing to do with CRI and know nothing about CRI. If this has to do with the "Bible Answer Man" radio show with Kim Riddlebarger as the guest, my only interest was in those two shows. Beyond that, as I said, I know nothing about CRI.

 

Matt,

You may have noticed as I have that it appears that dispensational premillennialists do not defend their position. It appears that they operate under the assumption, de facto, that their position is correct and anyone who disagrees is a liberal and anti-Semitic and believes in Replacement Theology. Apparently, they see those as the only two options in discussing eschatology.

 

Anyone with knowledge about apocalyptic literature knows it is composed of symbols. So what's the point of your statement?