Posted on 02/22/2014 10:53:16 AM PST by PhilipFreneau
He who would understand the prophets had better begin with Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, where he will find that the Church is one in the Old Testament and New, and the New Testament Church is the fulfillment of all prophecy, the very last phase of God’s redemptive work on earth.
He will discover in Galatians who the true Israel is, to whom the promises are made and that there is no other Israel, and no further fulfillment of prophecy.
The problem of the Galatian believers was the conspiracy to impose upon them Jewish interpretations of prophecy, and to claim over them a Jewish priority or privilege. Paul repulses this conspiracy with unparalleled severity...
(Excerpt) Read more at graceonlinelibrary.org ...
>>>It’s already been established that you are a partial Preterist who reads and promotes a self confessed partial Preterist...<<<
I am a postmillennialist. A partial preterist is like being partially pregnant. It is a nonsensical statement. One thing I am not, nor will ever be, is a judaizer disguised under the pseudoname of dispensationalist.
>>>>I am not a full-preterist nor any of the other things you teach<<<
I have never taught “full” preterism. I would recommend you quit making stuff up about me. It is unbecoming.
Philip
Phil I believe your title alone disqualifies this thread as “ecumenical.” Ecumenical threads to my knowledge are a low flame environment and by attributing “error” to an opposing view tells me one cannot argue their view on its own merits. I have seen your posts and others from the prederist view and as with other groups you can only point out alleged errors of others to present parts and pieces of your own views.
If you cannot present your case without comparison or multiple web links to the ideas of others then why bother? I have yet to see a prederist lay out their view without starting with why futurists are wrong. Perhaps your ecumenical thread should cover your prederist theory.
In all honesty when you post you use the same approach the JWs use to “prove” the trinity wrong. They find out of context verses, switch hermeneutics within a passage from literal to symbolic to allegory and back to literal again to stuff their arguments neatly in the kit bag. Yet when asked for their unadulterated view in opposition all they give is more “proof” why the other view is wrong. This goes on for hundreds of posts and you never find out what they stand for other than they think the other side is in error. Frankly that is your approach as well.
So my advice is to present your case for prederism and see if it can stand without trying to compare it to other views. That would be a first. But I don’t think it can be done. The theory relies on so many shifting hermeneutics within passages and denials of centuries of historic external evidence.
Truly replacement theologians by erasing a literal Israel have to fill loads of gaps in prophecy fulfillment. An easy way to do this is to state all prophecy is fulfilled. Makes it neat and tidy.
When was Revelation 19 fulfilled?
It's probably not a coincidence that he actually denies the Trinity too.
>>>>If you cannot present your case without comparison or multiple web links to the ideas of others then why bother? I have yet to see a prederist lay out their view without starting with why futurists are wrong. Perhaps your ecumenical thread should cover your prederist theory.<<<
First, I am not a preterist, so I will not be able to explain that theory in a manner like a preterist might do. About the only thing I know about the doctrine of the preterist is that they believe all prophecy—old and new testament—was fulfilled by about 70 A.D. I have no idea how they came to that conclusion. I personally cannot see it. I can only see the old testament prophecy as being fulfilled, as is written.
I would recommend you browse back through my posts and you will find my doctrine is defined by the scripture I post.
Philip
>>>When was Revelation 19 fulfilled?<<<
I believe about A.D. 70.
>>>Phil I believe your title alone disqualifies this thread as “ecumenical.” Ecumenical threads to my knowledge are a low flame environment and by attributing “error” to an opposing view tells me one cannot argue their view on its own merits.<<<
I see what you mean. Labeling the other guy a heretic is so common on this forum I assumed it would be a popular topic. My mistake.
Philip
That was the Lord's way of saying that the old nation of Babylon, that had held Israel captive at one time, had seen its last days. LOL!
I disagree...It means God was going to stop off at the Dairy Queen on his way home from the Hockey game...
If God didn't mean what he says, we can make up anything we want, can't we???
That’s exactly what he does with most of scripture.
.
Hardly anything to hang one’s hat upon!
>> “who easily smashes to bits the doctrine of the Judaizers lurking under the cloak of dispensationalism.” <<
.
Where can we find these “Judaizers lurking under the cloak of dispensationalism?”
That would be quite an interesting combination, no?
.
Messianics are hardly known for their embrace of dispensationalism, nor the pre-trib rapture.
>>>I disagree...It means God was going to stop off at the Dairy Queen on his way home from the Hockey game...<<<
Lol! Maybe in some circles. But in Isaiah 13 God is talking about the permanent destruction of Babylon by the Medes. That is history.
>>>If God didn’t mean what he says, we can make up anything we want, can’t we???<<<
Isn’t that what dispensationalists do? Have you not read any of Hal Lindsey’s false prophecies, err, novels? Have you not joined his “Antichrist of the Month” book club? LOL! Just kidding.
I didn’t write the books so I don’t know why God wrote them that way. I do know the Jews completely misinterpreted the Old Testament prophecies by taking them too literally, and they are continuing to make the same mistakes. It is also worth noting that Jesus spake in parables, and his sheep “heard his voice,” but many others didn’t.
Philip
No but God rained fire and Brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah. There are “black and white” stone cold realities that Revelation says God will perform.
And don’t knock the use of symbolism as something that is not to be taken as seriously as “real” time language. God uses symbolism as he does to communicate to our spirits higher deeper realities that can not be contained in mere spoken words. God was certainly behind the Assyrians, who were known for the fierce swiftness, blitz krieg like in their military assaults...”like a swift cloud”, when they attacked Egypt. Habbakuk mentions the Chaldeans that were being raised up “as a scourge”. No they weren’t one giant “whip”...but God wielded the Chaldeans like a scourge to punish Israel. The symbolism merely describes the intrinsic reasoning behind why God allows Israel’s enemies to attack her for the punishment of her sins.
God did not use symbolic language when he decreed that Israel would again be a nation, in the latter days...though in one passage it is said he symbolically “hisses” for his people and they would come back to Israel from all the lands that they had been dispersed to.
But taking a mark is taking a mark and beast(yes a symbolic term for the son of perdition) worship is beast worship and the described spiritual punishment for doing so is stark in its effect upon the reader. Nothing like that can be shown to have happened yet in history.
The two witnesses display God’s full judgment power, there is no antecedent event yet noted in history that shows two men so reviled by all in the Earth that they rejoice, giving presents to each other when the witnesses are killed. That is not symbolic use of language the revelator uses in describing that event but rather a “dragnet style” just the facts madam account of a future event.
Now you can still try to poo poo my assertions but I suspect that you have a personal issue simply accepting the prophesied issues as laid down in bold black and white. Revelation has some strong scary things to say about the future on men upon the earth and one’s first reaction is to try to bury Revealation’s stark prophecy under a lot of preterist fluff about symbolic metaphors and snarky commentaries about contemporary emperors that existed at the time of John. I get it...God’s judgment will be fierce...what man could stand before it!
I can make distinctions between black and white assertions verses the use of symbolic similes. Indeed, I would pay more attention(as opposed to simple assertions of fact) to the reality God is trying to convey via the use of simile especially God’s beloved Son...The Logos made Flesh!
>>>Hardly anything to hang one’s hat upon!<<<
Wow, this is a tough crowd! Lol!
>>>Where can we find these “Judaizers lurking under the cloak of dispensationalism?”<<<
Isn’t that what dispensationalism teaches: that Jews have a separate path to salvation?
>>>Messianics are hardly known for their embrace of dispensationalism, nor the pre-trib rapture.<<<
Nor are they “real” Jews, in a manner of speaking. They have committed the unpardonable sin by recognizing the divinity of Christ.
>> “The author may have been implying ‘all Old Testament prophecy.’ “ <<
.
Hardly a significant distinction!
Has Israel been subject to thermonuclear attack yet?
Zechariah’s “flying roll with an evil fire in a lead epah” is clearly predicting that event.
“All things which are written” are vastly short of fulfillment, both old and new testament.
Have the bride of Yeshua been resurrected yet?
Have the events of Yehova’s wrath upon “those that took the mark” taken place? - hardly!
>> “Not to be confused with dual-covenant hogwash” <<
I don’t go there either, so I’ll leave that to someone so deluded.
.
>> Nor are they “real” Jews, in a manner of speaking. They have committed the unpardonable sin by recognizing the divinity of Christ. <<
.
Only a small percentage of genetic Israel is “Judah.”
That flimsy assumption is the heart of dispensational error.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.