Posted on 11/07/2001 6:38:28 PM PST by crystalk
The Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem is an act of hate and of hate speech by Muslims against Jews and Christians. Neither the US nor Britain would ever allow such an object to be created, nor such a collection of slander to be publicly displayed.
Remember, every bit of that oh-so-pretty Arabic arabesque script on this little shrine dating from AD 691, is a slander-in-stone, posing as a sermon-in-stone, against Christianity which had ruled Jerusalem for centuries under Byzantium prior to the Islamic takeover in the AD 638-40 era. "God has no Son. It is Blasphemy to Say He has Taken a Son." would be the least of what is written there. This Dome is not a mosque, and it is an artifact of pure hatred against Christianity.
It also is an artifact of pure hatred against Judaism, for it occupies and stands upon the holy precincts of the Temples of Solomon and of Herod (first and second Temples)...a dog in the manger as it were, which neither itself worships, nor allows the Jews to worship, God as He ought to be. This building is preventing the Jews from re-establishing the Temple and its sacrifices for the good of all mankind and the peace of the world.
As I understand it, the Dome itself stands over the area reserved solely for Jewish men (court of Israel) in the time of Jesus, including the area of the altar of sacrifice and the "holy" (as opposed to Most Holy) place of the Temple (Bet ha Mikdosh) itself. I believe that the place of the Ark of the Covenant in the Most Holy, however, stands on the western steps leading up to the octagonal Dome structure...
Called by Daniel the "Abomination of Desolation" (loathsome thing), this structure was stated in Dan. 11 and 12 to stand until the indignation (wrath) of God against Israel for its sins was over, but that was to end in 1290 or 1335 years from the construction of same in 691. Thus, its fall is up in 1981 or in 2026, and I think the 1981 date referred to the finding of the Ark in that year...
Since in our liberal times, Westerners are called upon to accomodate every nuance of the sensiblilities of Muslims here in our homelands, perhaps Muslims in return would be willing to see this insult and injury to Judaism and Christianity removed and made away in our day. Perhaps it could be disassembled stone by stone and set up in Mecca, a city only Muslims are allowed to visit, and thus it could do less harm there.
The New Covenant provides, of course, that sincere and earnest believers and followers, hearers AND DOERS of Messiah(Christ)'s will, are REBORN in soul, and as such are (spiritually) a part of the World to Come (olam ha-ba) despite continued flawed lives in this imperfect world.
WHAT THEN DID THE OLD COVENANT PROVIDE? It did not, and never had, provided that if the Jew did enough good works, and mitzvahs, he would be saved (have a part in olam ha-ba). EVERY JEW BORN AS SUCH, together with legal proselytes, would have a role in olam ha-ba no matter how flawed his life...by God's grace and the forgiveness of sins. Purgatory would never last longer than one year, for even the worst sinner, most flagrant mitzvah-ignorer, within Israel. The covenant was a deal between Israel and its God. A person born into Israel can never lose his "salvation," his having a role in olam ha-ba. Every Jew is saved by grace alone, without regard to his deeds, just as surely as any Baptist in America!
WHAT GOES BY WORKS, is the nation's right to live in its land, in peace, here in this world, and to have the messiah come speedily. We are told in scripture that the nation failed in this, WHICH CAN NEVER CAUSE THEIR FINAL REJECTION AND REPLACEMENT BY THE CHURCH OR ANYONE ELSE, but only an extended period of delay and suffering slated to end, in our own days, as the prophecies of Daniel and others say, including in numeric terms!
The Christian church, that is so sure it standeth, and so sure of its divine election, had better look after its own feet of clay, Yardstick! Paul said if God was willing to remove some of the natural branches, how much sooner he would remove some of those artificially grafted in contrary to nature. AND, the Church age was not to last forever!
The Times of the Gentiles would end, someday, said Jesus, and Israel would be restored, praise God! The Gentiles would not tread down the holy city forever, Rev. 11. The Woman would not forever remain in exile, Rev. 12, 13.
These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. Preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.'" (Mt 10:5-7)
The Jews knew the word of God?
Then Paul and Barnabas answered [the Jews] boldly: "We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. (Acts 13:46)
I am concerned about the salvation of Jews because my Lord was concerned about the salvation of the Jews. Salvation comes from acknowledging that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and accepting His blood as atonement for our sin -- something Jews do not do. This grieved our Lord, and it should grieve us. It should also motivate us to lovingly bring our wayward Jewish brothers back to their Savior and Messiah, who came for them first.
Boo!
Can you provide scriptural support for the existance of pergatory, and where do you find the fact that Jews may be subject to no more than one year there?
Have you studied the Talmud, by chance? I ask because the year-in-pergatory thing sounds like something that might be found there.
Ariel Sharon, in other words, is saved by the same method that Abraham, or David, was and that has to do with God's overall plan for this world....
Of course that O.C. cannot save ME, because I was neither born to a Jewish mother nor halakhically made a member (proselyte) to the Israeli nation. In an earthly sense I am still just a Southern American anglo, not an Israeli, and I still speak English and prefer a hamburger to felafel. But by faith that New Covenant enables me to share the ETERNAL destiny of Israel, and I have a share in olam ha-ba. Praise God!
However, the New Covenant does not convey a naturalization in THIS world to Israel, and Christians do not by it obtain any share in this world's land of Israel (Eretz Yisroel) or otherwise have any right to take anything away from Israel in THIS world!
Muslims, on the other hand, believe they have replaced Israel both in this world and the next, and all the Jews lands and possessions are belong to THEM! Talk about Replacement Theology! Muhammad INVENTED it! In This World and the Next! Thats why those disgusting Pallies walk around Jerualem like they owned the place, while Christians know they are just pilgrims and strangers, foreigners if you will...
Now the trouble with you paleo Christians is you are so used to looking BACK 2000 years for your Messiah (Christ) that you have forgotten how much nearer HE s if you look FORWARD! You are like someone living in L.A. who is trying to get to Jesus by going eastward, when He is slipping up on you from the West and is already approaching Catalina. Better do a 180.
I also am afraid you think you have REPLACED Israel in the World to Come, and they will not be there. For you, it will be just one big L.A. Country Club, which (historically at least) admitted no Jews nor anyone involved in the Entertainment industry! But I bring bad news, the Jews are in the club, there goes the neighborhood, matzahs on the tables with the captains wafers, hammantashen among the valentine candy.
Many have suggested I write a book, looks like I already have! But how will I ever copyright it when it is already posted here on Freep for all to see?
PS No, I have not studied the Talmud but have a beginner's grasp of standard Hebrew theology. I am not sure what the origin of the one-year max in purgatory is, but I know that no matter how closely related a person is to a decedent, one is not to pray for their soul in that way for more than 11 months, for that would be to presume that God had not yet released them for purgatory. Thus one can end one's mourning period and prepare for the first Yortzeit etc.
I am told the Christians think they will be there for millions of years, but surely that is just one of those slanders. I am a Christian too, and I don't think so, I think a year would be fair for us too. Except in the very worst cases maybe, and even then not longer than one's life had been.
But, who am I, the Answer Man?
Not one word in the New Covenant says born Jews have to do anything more to obtain MERE salvation, just a place in olam haba.
Paul and Barnabas lamented that the particular Jews in that place seemed uninterested in their eternal salvation, but DID NOT DENY THAT THOSE JEWS DID HAVE IT! In other words, if the Jews were satisfied (like so many Christians including maybe YOU) with just knowing their own potty little personal salvation was assured, ...why then maybe, says Paul, we will have to preach to the Gentiles for whom it is NOT yet assured...in order not to waste our breath. Some people care nothing for the world, or God's plans, as long as their own butt is secure.
But now, once more and more Christians realize how much nearer Jesus is if we look AHEAD, than if we look back, suddenly our outlook and worldview again becomes the same as that of Israel, we find in Israel not an enemy or competitor but a brother in the faith of the soon coming Messiah.
Some Christians think God has said nothing since 33 ad, done nothing, and never will. That means they have set themselves outside Israel, can not be reconciled. Peter foretold that, when he said that in the last days scoffers would come, saying "Where is the promise of His coming, for since our church fathers fell asleep all things continue just the same, as from the beginning..." The stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph are soon to become one in the hand of the coming King.
Personally, I think Elijah may organize a showdown between YHWH and Allah, similar to what he staged in antiquity between YHWH and the god then fashionable among the Canaanites, just as Allah is now...
This is in response to your assertion that there's nowhere in the New Testament where it says the Jews lack salvation:
Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved, for I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes....But what does the [righteousness that is by faith] say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile -- the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in" And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard" And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? (Rom 10:1-14, 5-7 omitted)
And:
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to [the Jewish elders in Jerusalem]: "Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. He is 'the stone you builders rejected, which has become a capstone.' Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
Paul was himself a Jew -- a zealous law-abiding Jew, if fact -- yet he, along with Peter, clearly taught that salvation was through Christ alone and that the Jews needed to be saved. According to Paul, that would mean believing in their hearts and confessing with their mouths that Jesus is Lord.
Jesus said to the Jews:
"I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."It is clear that when Jesus spoke to the Jews about their salvation, he meant their personal salvation -- as in whether or not they would have eternal life -- and not their collective fate as a nation."if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins"
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (3:16)Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. (3:18)
Let me restate: this is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, speaking to Nicodemus, a Jew.
However, for what audience we have, I must remind you that just as science has to make its theories agree with its observations, NOT ITS OBSERVATIONS BE FUDGED TO FIT ITS PRECONCEIVED THEORIES!--
even so does Christianity (if it were to be intellectually honest) have to make its theologies and theories agree with the facts, not squeeze the facts until somehow they are less embarrassing to the theology!
The fact is, that the prophecies of God's continuing love and concern and restoration and return of Israel have long been now, and are still daily being, fulfilled. You are clinging to theory, to the theory that the church replaced Israel, aka replacement theology, long after events themselves have shown your theory to be wrong.
I would like to remind you that 150 years ago, perhaps 1 or 2% of Christians in America held my view, and 98-99% your view. But many have been convinced, ie forced, ie mugged, by the facts to admit what they should have seen all along, from the prophecies and from the fact that the OLD COVENANT IS STILL IN FORCE; it never ceased to be! And now, I don't think there is any doubt that a majority of Christians agrees with me, certainly in America at the very least!
Therefore, when you make the New Covenant out to be something that would abrogate or invalidate the Old--ie is INCONSISTENT WITH IT--you are by definition wrong.
Any interpretation of the New Covenant that is in violation of, or would do violence to, the Old original covenant of God with Abraham and Moses, is by definition false and falls of its own weight, and in the very unlikely event that the "proof-texts" you give do mean what you say (surely they would have been Hitler's very favorite New Testament passages!)--then that would only show that the NT is itself flawed, and the authors of those passages were simply short-sighted, mistaken, giving their own rather sour personal opinions after some synagogue somewhere didn't give them the welcome they thought they deserved.
When Jesus tells Nicodemus, a Pharisaic Jew, that the only way he may "see the kingdom of God" is by being "born again... of the water and Spirit", and that if Nicodemus doesn't "believe in the name of God's one and only Son" he "stands condemned" and will perish, the issue is settled -- Jews, even Pharisees who meticulously keep the law, must believe in Jesus to be saved. This is not mere theory; there is not other way to interpret this.
That a majority of Christians hold to an interpretation of Old Testament prophecy that flagrantly contradicts the clearly-understood words of Jesus Christ doesn't change the truth. I will choose the truth spoken by the Son of God over the truth spoken by men any day of the week.
In regard to Old Testament prophesies being fulfilled: yes, it does appear as though the prophesies are being fulfilled with head-spinning speed these days. Pre-millenialist, dispensationalist Christians are almost giddy over this. The problem is -- and this is a BIG problem -- that when you place the pre-millenialist interpretive framework over the Old Testament, then Jesus Christ and the apostles end up looking like liars, and you end up having to assume these counter-rational interpretive postures in order to expain away the unmistakable meanings of their words.
The proof of this is that you, and those of your ilk, won't accept verses like John 3:16 as proof that believing in Jesus is the only way a person may be saved. The only way you can read this verse and not comprehend its meaning is by making a conscious choice not to comprehend it. And I think this is precisely what you're doing, because if you didn't -- if you chose instead to accept the profoundly obvious truth that Jesus Christ is the only salvation -- you'd have to abandon your whole eschatological/interpretive model.
It is better to interpret that which is unclear in the light of that which is clear, and it is better for that which is of secondary importance to be understood in the light of that which is of primary importance. We can debate whether the temple is physical or spiritual until our faces turn blue, but in the end, the position that is inconsistent with the words of Jesus Christ must be abandoned. Similarly, we can argue about how Jews and Gentiles ultimately fit into God's plan, but the position that is inconsistent with our Lord's teaching must be recognized as false and cast aside. We are in grave error when we reverse this, casting aside the words of Jesus when they conflict with our position.
I abandoned the pre-millenialist position fairly recently for this very reason. I believed in the temple being rebuilt, and in the pre-tribulation rapture, Gog and Magog, and the bloody triumpal return of the Messiah. But now that I know the truth, that Jesus established his kingdom in the hearts of believers, and that he is the Messiah NOW, I am much happier. Abandoning all the dramatics that come with the pre-mil position was tough, and watching Jack Van Impey isn't nearly as fun now, but I am amazed and delighted with how the Old and New Testaments complement each other now, where before they seemed to be in conflict.
I see now that Jesus did indeed fulfill most Old Testament messianic prophecy 2000 years ago, and that what remains will be fulfilled when he returns the second time, at the Final Judgement, after the Church has fulfilled the Great Commission and presents the harvest of nations to its Lord. That the Church will not fail in carrying out the Great Commission (the pre-mil obviously predicts the Church's failure to do so) gives me a new optimism. And knowing that our Messiah is with us now and that his spiritual kingdom is in place -- not in the future or in the past -- gives me a new sense of peace and joy. I look forward to Christ's ultimate return, but I know there is much work to be done before he does return.
Regarding your comments about Hitler, I'd say Hitler would rather go to hell than spend eternity in the presence of Jews, and I doubt he felt there was even a possibility of salvation for them. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus died for both Gentiles and Jews, and God obviously cared for them enough to send his Son to the Jews first. Since it's obvious that God desires salvation for the Jews, and salvation comes through believing in Jesus, then we Christians should have sharing the gospel with our Jewish brethren as a high priority.
This is not replacement theology -- this is simply the reality of the message spoken by Jesus Christ. If anything, the New Covenant is an amplification of the quintessentially-Jewish elements of the Old Covenant -- you've got Jesus, a high priest in the order of Malchizedek, interceding in the perfect heavenly temple, with his own blood as the atoning sacrifice, before Yahweh, the God of the Jews. It's all the same, but better.
But yes, we are poles apart in our beliefs it seems. We have a Savior in common, though, and that's a good thing. Thanks again for your thorough and thoughtful replies.
I do not believe that when salvation was extended to you and me, it was at the expense of the Jewish nation. All the texts quoted by you including John 3:16 were written many decades later when Gentiles were flocking into the Christian church, and everything you are saying is true with respect to them/us.
YOUR POSITION MUST NECESSARILY SAY THAT SOME PERSONS (Jews) WERE HURT, not helped, by Jesus coming. There is not a scrap of evidence for this in the NT.
Unless you will admit that everyone the OC ever did save, still is, and will be, saved, you are in effect saying that the effect, if not the purpose, of Jesus coming was to shut out (reject) the very nation that God had selected to carry out his object lesson, his passion play, before the world.
I just don't buy it, and to quote Cromwell, "Will not the gentleman, in the bowels of Christ, think he might at least POSSIBLY be wrong?"
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.