Is a “Cashless Society” a Sign of the End?

American Vision ^ | July 20, 2009 | Gary DeMar

[Lee N. Field]

We have been over that before.

Yes we have. Somehow you don't get around to answering questions.

I'll rephrase my question: how do you square the plain meaning of Galatians 3:29, that we Christians are heirs of Abraham, with dispensationalism's rigid two peoples of God axiom?

[Quix]

OF COURSE Christians are joint heirs with Abraham’s seed—GOD SAYS SO. THAT SETTLES IT.

That also has NOTHING TO DO WHATSOEVER

with God’s EVERLASTING promises to Abraham’s seed.

It’s silly and UNBIBLICAL to think otherwise.

Seems exceedingly obvious to millions of us.

[Frumanchu]

Given that you were pinged on the Religion Moderator's admonition, and the fact that you employed singular personal pronouns in several of your more insulting statements, it stands to reason that the language of your posts was indeed "personal."

Please do not ping me to any more posts in this thread as I have no desire to be subjected to further insult, whether directly or by necessary implication.

[Alex Murphy]

Please do not ping me to any more posts in this thread as I have no desire to be subjected to further insult, whether directly or by necessary implication.

Been there, done that.

[topcat54]

“Buying and selling, properly understood, are worship-related rituals ( Isa. 55:1–2). “This is established in [ Revelation] 3:18 (and compare 21:6). When those who refuse the mark of the Beast are not allowed to buy and sell, it means that they are expelled from the synagogue and Temple.” ...

I’ll stick to the interpretation in the normal sense, ...

People tend to ignore the Scripture and believe what they wish to believe, adopting mantras like "normal sense" which really makes no sense when compared to the Bible.

[Lee N. Field]

OF COURSE Christians are joint heirs with Abraham’s seed—GOD SAYS SO. THAT SETTLES IT.

That also has NOTHING TO DO WHATSOEVER

with God’s EVERLASTING promises to Abraham’s seed.

You are stubborn, aren't you.

I can quote many, many passages, warning Israel "according to the flesh" not to count of physical descent, many, many passages clearly showing that believing Gentiles are in while unbelieving physical descendants of Abraham are cut off, that believing Gentiles are grafted in, not planted alongside, and you wouldn't see it. Dispensationalism is more important.

A memetic virus is what it is.

Abraham and his seed will be heirs of the world.

[Quix]

WRONG.

SCRIPTURAL TRUTH

IS MORE IMPORTANT

THAN ANYONE’S NONSENSE ASSUMPTIONS AND BIASES ABOUT IT.

NON-SEQUITUR SCRIPTURES AND SILLY PONTIFICATIONS BASED THEREON

have no influence on Dispensational Scriptures whatsoever.

GOD ALMIGHTY

is the one who said that

HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES TO ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB

ABOUT GOD ALMIGHTY’S PROMISES TO ABRAHAM RE HIS SEED WOULD BE IN FORCE AS LONG AS THERE WERE STARS etc.

NONE of the rest of Scripture trumps that one on that issue.

Mangling the whole rest of Scripture into NONSENSE REPLACEMENTARIANISM would not phase God in the least on the matter.

Nor would it fool thoughtful well read Dispensationalists either.

[Quix]

The REPLACEMENTARIAN, preterist, a-mil etc. perspective(s) would

REQUIRE

[in terms of GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISE remaining in effect to the children of Jacob AS LONG AS THERE ARE STARS . . .]

That ALMIGHTY, ALL KNOWING GOD

just dropped the ball and didn't realize He'd have to negate such EVERLASTING PROMISES because

the children of Jacob would turn out to be

horribly . . .

wellllll . . . uhhhhhhh

human . . .

Throwing all GOD'S EMPHATIC EVERLASTING PROMISES TO ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB out the window

because omniscient ALMIGHTY GOD just happened to have a bad day on every day He made such erroneous promises.

Yet y'all call me UNBIBLICAL!!!!??????????

What a sick joke!

I doubt God's laughing about it, however.

[Quix]

What a splendidly well done violation of the rules.

[Religion Moderator]

Leave the thread.

[Cvengr]

Since we are asking about Gal 3:29, let’s also consider Gal 3:28. For those who have been baptized in Christ, there is no Jew nor Greek(Gentile), ....nor is the male or female.

If one is able to discern God still has humans on Earth who are discernibly male and female, perhaps the verses are only referencing spiritual issues, but do NOT change the eschatology with different plans for Israel from the Church.

[Cvengr]

My question pertained to the Word of God, not simply the Bible.

In the Millenial Kingdom, He will write His instruction on the hearts of Israel and there will be no more need for teaching.

Jer 31:31-34 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; (32) not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; forasmuch as they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, saith the LORD. (33) But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the LORD, I will put My law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people; (34) and they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying: ‘Know the LORD’; for they shall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.

The Church today doesn’t fit with this description.

If one asserts a New Covenant exists today for both believing Israel and Greek alike in the Church, then there is no need to teach. Since we do have need for teaching and God provides pastor-teachers as a spiritual gift, one cannot consistently take the stance we are in either the Millennial kingdom, nor that the Church has the same inheritance as Israel in that age.

There are also some well argued points regarding Israel as the wife of Christ, while the Church is the bride of Christ, but not the same person.

[Quix]

EXCELLENT POINT.

THANKS BIG. WELL DONE.

##########################

But don’t ya know . . . the male and female differences are only figurative.

Anything beyond the figurative meaning of

maleness

and

femaleness

is purely dispensationalist hogwash based on absolutely no tangible reality at all.

. . . though quite a number of non-dispensationalist REPLACEMENTARIAN couples on their honeymoons have been rumored to beg to differ.

This convoluted line of irrational pontification has been brought to you by your local preterist, a-mil, post-mil REPLACEMENTARIAN Rubber Bible Society.

/s
/hb [humor break]

[Quix]

It is sooooo wonderful to see some refreshing new

VERY BIBLICAL POINTS on these threads.

Thanks enormously.

[topcat54]

I started the thread and you’ve permitted it to be hijacked by a name-calling whiner. I have no problem with others of differing opinions to share in the exchange, and so I do not hide behind the “caucus” designation. But I loathe that a certain whiner is allowed to spew pathetic, vacuous comments so freely.

It’s time for a thread designation where only substantive, thoughtful comments are allowed. Not multi-colored multi-font gibberish.

[Religion Moderator]

There are no exemptions or justifications for name-calling.

[Frumanchu]

With all due respect, topcat started the thread and has since been subject to constant assault by particular posters. This has continued despite your clear admonition to adhere to the rules. This poster chose to follow that up with what essentially amounts to their own exemption based on the technicality of levying their insults at "groups" instead of "persons" (as though groups are not themselves made up of persons). In this case, we're talking about a consistent track record of badgering people and making intensely hostile posts.

I am not presuming to tell you how to do your job, I am simply asking you to take a fresh look at the circumstances, an in particular the posting in this thread.

[raynearhood]

I missed the comment (don't repeat it), but seriously? You made, what, three comments the whole thread and got bumped off after the first one addressing the very annoyance from which invective drivel spews.

Off your own thread?!?!

Funny, I remember being called a Naysayer, a demon, a satanist, a hater of God, as well as being told I'm on the fast track to a place of Sulfur and suffering... all said without so much as a warning...

...and you make ONE comment and are booted off your own thread.

I agree. [Irenic Conversation] tag is due. Only people with something intelligent to say allowed.

Oh, yeah... and topcat54, Lee N., and I get to define what "irenic" means. I mean it's only fair, right? Goes along with the limiting of company on the [Rapture] threads.

[Religion Moderator]

For a statement to be "making it personal" on the Religion Forum it MUST be speaking of another Freeper, personally.

It is common when a group of believers spawns from another that both groups condemn each other in the harshest terms, e.g. cult, anathema, Satanic, heretic, apostate. Such condemnations often become part of official documents and are therefore subject to "open" debate on the RF.

It is also common for one group of believers to speak harshly of - or even ridicule - another group's religious authorities whether deities, leaders or doctrines. That should be expected on "open" threads, e.g. personal attacks addressed to Joseph Smith, Billy Graham, Popes or ridiculing beliefs, rites, doctrines.

And it is not uncommon (sadly) for believers to hate other believers for what they believe or how they behave.

But they must not let that hate surface on the Religion Forum. Personal attacks must not be addressed to other Freepers, personally.

Don't call each other liars, devils, monsters, etc. That is clearly trouble-making and incites flame wars.

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.