Posted on 09/08/2009 1:55:45 PM PDT by Nikas777
I won't challenge your view but I will state - whatever your view is - that the theory of the rapture is a new one only made up in the early part of the 19th century.
As for the replacement theory - it is a western Christian concept which limits my vocabulary because eastern Christians use different language and understandings. Per Galatians 3:29: "And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise." So that sounds like both a continuation of the covenant through Christ. A new covenant is more like the wording I would use rather than replacement and no special place is put in there for people based on ethnicity.
And the interpretation of the nation of Israel in end times prophecy was viewed as the sum of Jews (or replaced by the church), not a literal physical nation of Israel, because it didn't exist for ~2000 years...until 1948. So, please explain, what does the recent time of understanding have to do with the value of the interpretation?
As an example, the Bible says that the WHOLE WORLD will see Jesus return. Until the advent of satellite televison and the Internet, such a thing seemed hardly plausible. Now, with technology we have a possible new understanding. Does the newness of the understanding invalidate the possible interpretation?
Didn’t know there was such a thing. Sure!
Interesting. Does your copy of The Bible contain the 11th chapter of Romans?
The New Testament speaks of 'grafting' therefor that is the term I prefer to use rather than the Protestant/Western Christian invented terms like 'replacement'.
Regarding wolly's statement about the validity of modern interpretations - the rapture heresy did not come about because of a new understanding about science, etc. The rapture came about because as this Scottish lass was reading the New Testament and she found an interpretation that no other Christian in 1,800 years ever saw.
If those that wrote the New Testament passage in question In Greek and those that spoke Greek as their primary language did not interpret that passage in such a way I don't get why a Scottish girl's version of it would be taken as authority replacing the previous interpretation.
Sorry, I did not mean we debated each other. I meant we have both debated these issues on FreeRepublic as you now find yourself with woollyone and tang-soo. I have grown weary of this banter about God's word. But feel free to defend your position.
Not really. I am new hear - I doubt I ever discussed this before.
::laughing::
I’m so glad we have uber-scholars such as yourself to tell us what is CLEAR and what is HERESY in scripture.
Good day
proverbs 18:2
So yea, I am not a scholar and no offense was meant to you but I rather stick with my authorities over yours.
OK sorry, my mistake. I assumed you may have debated these rapture issues before. Are you a Finn?
Finn? Like from Finland? No.
I did not mean to get personal or pry. I just recall us once discussing Finland Sweden and Russia here on FR. Have a good night!
Pinging another Orthodox FReeper to see if this is a common idea in the Eastern Orthodox church.
The first time I heard of it was when I visited Roswell, NM a few years ago (I was working two hours north of there).
“Pinging another Orthodox FReeper to see if this is a common idea in the Eastern Orthodox church.”
I’ve never read or heard of such things. Looks like a bunch of Russian nonsense to me.
The part where Moss describes the views of those early churchmen is fascinating. The later part where he tries to do the same for our time is indeed Russian ROCOR high strangeness.
The ‘instead’ of Jesus will not be born of woman.
Didn’t know they were known for nuttiness.
I did not use the word nuttiness. I used the word “strange” by which I mean “unusual, extraordinary” of ROCOR.
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.