Skip to comments.
DISPENSATIONALIST "CHRISTIAN" ZIONISM -- Is there now "neither Jew nor Gentile", or not?
KennethGentry.Com, "Dispensational Distortions" ^
| 2004
| Kenneth Gentry (and OP)
Posted on 08/10/2006 12:22:56 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 1,041-1,060 next last
To: 1000 silverlings; P-Marlowe
You didn't even read the thread before firing that off, did you?
121
posted on
08/10/2006 10:54:35 PM PDT
by
Buggman
(http://brit-chadasha.blogspot.com)
To: jude24; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Alex Murphy
Sure. Scofield Reference Bible, for starters.Well, actually in it's more mature form, you're correct. The genesis of this 'axiom' begins with Mary Campbell and Margaret McDonald in the congregation of Edward Irving, a defrocked, and disgraced Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) minister in the 1830's. From there the doctrine was picked up and refined by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Bretheren. THEN Schofield picked it up.
In it's most recent incarnation much of the excesses have been removed.
That said, British Israelism was most recently popularised by Herbert W. Armstrong and the World Wide Church of God. The basic story is that a daughter of Zedechaiah named Tea Tephi was brought to Ireland by the Prophet Jeremaiah, where she married a "King Herramon" of Ireland. The Line of David supposedly continues through Herramon's offspring, to Scotland, and with the Stuart/Stewart kings. Armstrong claimed that the throne of Britain IS the throne of David. BTW, Armstrong claimed to be a descendent of King Herramon.
Oddly enough, King Herramon himself was a mythological Character, and probably never really existed.
EVEN IF the story is true, it would still not be the throne of David. If one reads the Old Testament, (s)he would realise that Zedechaiah was a usurper put in place by Nebuchadnezzar, and was not the true king. The true king was in Babalonian captivity. (see II Kings 24 through chapter 25). The British Israelites have not a single iota of factual evidence for their claims.
122
posted on
08/10/2006 11:02:13 PM PDT
by
Calvinist_Dark_Lord
(I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper)
To: Buggman; 1000 silverlings
You didn't even read the thread before firing that off, did you? Objection, counsel is badgering the witness.
Sustained.
Please rephrase the question counselor.
This is kinda fun. :-)
123
posted on
08/10/2006 11:06:22 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: Buggman
I read every post as it is my wont to do.
124
posted on
08/10/2006 11:06:28 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: P-Marlowe; Buggman
Yes, all I did, which apparently ired him, was to introduce into evidence, more of Romans 10.
125
posted on
08/10/2006 11:22:28 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: 1000 silverlings; Buggman; OrthodoxPresbyterian
Yes, all I did, which apparently ired him, was to introduce into evidence, more of Romans 10.Objection, non responsive. No question pending. Answer is argumentative.
Sustained.
BTW as a point of order, we are talking about the "Absolute Law" interpretation of Galatians 3:28. If we are going to argue ALL of Romans 10, we are going to need to start a new thread.
Carry on.
126
posted on
08/10/2006 11:28:14 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: 1000 silverlings; P-Marlowe
Yes, all I did . . . Then why did you simply repeat an opening statement, instead of making a counter-argument to what has already been presented? It seems a horrible waste of everyone's time to me.
127
posted on
08/10/2006 11:29:22 PM PDT
by
Buggman
(http://brit-chadasha.blogspot.com)
To: Buggman; 1000 silverlings
It seems a horrible waste of everyone's time to me.Objection, argumentative.
Sustained.
Everything after the word "presented" shall be stricken.
Carry on gentlemen.
Does anyone have a gavel I can borrow?
128
posted on
08/10/2006 11:33:30 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: P-Marlowe
Seems to me the latest post was on whether or not Prince William is the next David, but whatever.
129
posted on
08/10/2006 11:34:48 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: 1000 silverlings; Buggman
Seems to me the latest post was on whether or not Prince William is the next David, but whatever. That's a side thread. I'm not presiding over that court. It's just the walls are really thin in this building. You can overhear all kinds of stuff going on next door.
Now if the court reporter could read back the last question...
130
posted on
08/10/2006 11:37:47 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: Buggman; OrthodoxPresbyterian
Does that change the fact that we know that he is not the Messiah described in Scripture, and that we are right to disobey his followers, even to the point of death? Jesus is fully the Messiah described in scripture.
131
posted on
08/10/2006 11:41:25 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: P-Marlowe; OrthodoxPresbyterian
I see. I guess I somehow thought Orthodox P started the thread and the topic had something to do with Israel. Perhaps someone appointed you to be the judge over us.
132
posted on
08/10/2006 11:46:00 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: 1000 silverlings; Buggman; blue-duncan; OrthodoxPresbyterian
I see. I guess I somehow thought Orthodox P started the thread and the topic had something to do with Israel. Perhaps someone appointed you to be the judge over us.That would be me.
And I believe that OP has left the building.
I have issued a bench warrant.
133
posted on
08/10/2006 11:51:29 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: P-Marlowe; OrthodoxPresbyterian
Very well then, I will ring up the Dog to catch him and then see if there's any bail money in the chorus fund.
134
posted on
08/10/2006 11:54:40 PM PDT
by
1000 silverlings
(why is it so difficult to understand?)
To: 1000 silverlings; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Buggman; blue-duncan
Very well then, I will ring up the Dog to catch him and then see if there's any bail money in the chorus fund.You rang?
135
posted on
08/10/2006 11:57:23 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Because, often as not, I don't even wear underwear. Unfortunately, most of us Calvinists are so blessed, we have to go commando. It's just one of our burdens.
Often as not, I have taken to wearing underwear. Commando is fine but it's not always more hygenic or practical.
I thought I'd address this dispensationalism with a peculiar Baptist position. Well, a position of some peculiar Baptists that is cogent here.
The Baptist Bride is a doctrine that teaches that only Baptists will live in the New Jerusalem after the Rapture. They maintain that True Baptists
TM are and have always been the true bride of Christ. Any Baptists who object to this doctrine are, what else, Protestants in disguise.
Just wait until you read about the Alien Baptisms and the Twelve Baptist Preachers in the Book of Revelation!
It serves to illustrate just how silly and selfish and sectarian people can become over dispensationalism. These Baptist Briders are reduced to arguing who is going to get to live next door to Jesus. It's a little insane. Oops, now the Briders will
know I'm just a Protestant in disguise.
So here are a bunch of dispensationalist who manage to shove all Jews and Protestants and, well, non-Baptists out of New Jerusalem. Oh, yeah, and at the Marriage Supper, you guys will only be guests of the groom, the Bride!
As far as your remarks on Christ-Rejecting Jews, I grasp your intent is to inflame the dispensationalists. But every heart that is not redeemed by Christ is at enmity with God. This includes many who are false Christians who hold unsound doctinre.
It is not a particularly surprising notion to me that I was an enemy of God before He gave me grace and mercy. Certainly, the same applies to others who are not in Christ. It is a most fair and accurate assessment. One might want to be tactful but there is no kind way to tell people this particular doctrinal truth.
The world, until the end of the present age, shall always hate Christ and the true doctrines of His scripture and teachings. Just as He warned us to expect. The unbelievers and even some Christians deserve a warning of their peril to be certain their own hearts are not at enmity with God.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; Buggman; jude24; xzins; Dr. Eckleburg
British-Israelism, Christian Identity, Dispensationalism, doesn't matter -- DO NOT PASS GO,...
I find this page on Christian Identity to be most helpful. It's from Nizkor, a Jewish hate watch group.
Nizkor Project:
Christian Identity: A Religion for White Racists
The page mentions Arthur Murray and Shepherd's Chapel prominently. Murray's doctrines include the most antisemitic variation of Serpent Seed doctrine (Kenites), Gap theory and preexistence of the spirits of all mankind, and forbidding racial intermarriage. Something that I found interesting is that Murray is also a modalist heretic.
You might think modalism and monarchianism as heresies are unrelated. As background, we should recall Branhamism. Branham was a Oneness Pentecostal preacher who taught Serpent Seed doctrine and insisted that Jesus was the only God in the Bible. Notice here that the Trinity of orthodox Christianity is eliminated. More importantly to this topic, he also eliminated the Jehovah of traditional Judaism.
I think we're all familiar enough with the British-Israelism of Armstrongism (Worldwide Church of God), regardless of which of the hundred or so splinter groups claim the leadership role at present.
Murray is strikingly similar to Branham but has made his Serpent Seed doctrine more antisemitic and even more unbiblical. Murray's notions that Cain's descendants survived the Flood and then killed Jesus and are presently in Israel is perverse and pernicious. Murray is also anti-Rapture in many of his sermons. Drawing from Armstrongism, Murray finds the "true Israel" living mostly in Britain and America as Christians. Because Murray teaches the modalist view that the Father became the Son then became the Holy Spirit, again the Jews are left with no Jehovah, strictly speaking.
In a sense, what these people are driving at is not merely that Jews are not saved in Christ. It is that they never really had a covenant with Jehovah at all because they didn't know who God really was.
There is a grouping of these heretics in the last century and they feed off dispensational enthusiasms, from promoting antitrinitarian heresy. And they teach in one way or another doctrines that are hateful toward Jews.
These folks are close to being to Jews what Westboro Baptist is to homosexuals. Not merely hateful but an active impediment to evangelizing them.
...Do not Collect Tithes and Offerings from the Faithful.
Whoa! Now you've gone too far. Fleecing the flock with dispensational sensationalism is a sure path to riches. Write a Beast book, say a Prayer Of Jabez
TM and you're on your way.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Your ideas about what the Catholic Church Teaches are as accurate as your ideas about a hateful God.
Supersessionism is not Catholic Doctrine. Never has been. Never will be.
Your odd ideas about theology are in no way attributable to Catholic Doctrine nor are they to be found in Catholic Doctrine. You have no idea about what constitutes Catholic Doctrine.
Your odd and irrational claims can not be found in any Ecuemnical Council Document, any Papal Encyclical, any Catechism, any Catholic Encyclopedia, or any Catholic Dictionary.
Will that stop you from making your claims? Of course not. You will take any sentence from, say, Decree for the Jacobites and misuse it to your own ends, not understanding the idea about the Develoment of Doctrine.
I am just setting the record straight for those interested in the facts.
The New Covenant in Christ - in which you refuse to participate in the New Covenant Sacrifice and New Covenant Heavenly Banquet - fulfills all prior Covenants. God does not revoke His Covenants.
Please stick with your own community and do not presume to speak for the Church established by Jesus.
To: Buggman; jude24; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Alex Murphy; P-Marlowe; xzins; blue-duncan
Putting a wall, any wall, between a person and the Messiah is not an act of Christian love, but the ultimate act of hatred. Amen.
139
posted on
08/11/2006 4:41:59 AM PDT
by
Corin Stormhands
(HHD: Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
140
posted on
08/11/2006 4:52:38 AM PDT
by
xzins
(Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 1,041-1,060 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson