Posted on 11/26/2011 3:33:54 PM PST by Iggles Phan
My problem with the 'Rapture' (pre-millenial; pre-tribulation) teaching is that it forces its adherents to actually REVERSE the Person of Jesus Christ to the Devil.
That's correct.
In the 'Rapture' (or Dispensational) scheme the believer is asked to take the Person of Daniel's 70th Week (Who is Jesus Christ at the Cross) described in Chapter 9, verse 27a:
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, ..."
... and reverse this 'he' to mean a 'future Antichrist'.
Are you confused?
Is this Jesus Christ or Antichrist?
1. The Historic View.
This view is typified by the 1599 Geneva Bible notes. These are the notes of John Calvin, Miles Coverdale, and John Knox to name a few.
1599 Geneva Bible Notes on Daniel 9:27a:
"By the preaching of the gospel he confirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles. Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection."
It's pretty clear that the Reformers believed that Christ was the Person of Daniel's Great 70th Week.
2. The Modernist View (Dispensational).
In contrast however, compare this historic view to the Dispensational view typified in the Ryrie Study Notes (1978). Look who the modernists assign to this very same Person in Daniel 9:27a:
"The prince of verse 26, the Antichrist previously introduced in 7:8, 24-26, who will make a pact with many (of the Jewish people) at the beginning of the tribulation period. But in the middle of the week (i.e., 3 1/2 years later) Antichrist will break his covenant and desecrate the Temple by demanding worship of himself in it."
The difference couldn't be farther apart.
Historic Christianity says that Jesus fulfilled the 70th week AT THE CROSS, but Rapture Christianity (Dispensationalism) says that the Devil fulfills it in a 're-built' temple.
Therefore, Dispensationalism is no less than a frontal assault on the Cross of Christ. It reverses Jesus Christ to the Devil. It is malicious and a pernicious doctrine.
Remember, this Dispensational view was NEVER known until 1830. That's why it is a Modernist view. It was invented by JN Darby and popularized by CI Scofield, two con-men to Christianity.
In the 20th century, carpetbaggers such as Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, Jack (and Rexella) Van Impe, John Hagee and others have made fame and fortune off of this con game. They have marketed this 'Rapture' theology like a cheap box of laundry detergent on TV and radio, and with videos and books.
My hope and prayer is that the Church starts to wake up out of its slumber and starts challenging its pastors, ministries, and teachers. The Cross of Christ is at stake here!
For the Glory of Christ Jesus. Amen.
Are you REALLLLLLLLY !!!!THAT!!!! !UNAWARE! of Christ's own words in Matthew 5:18????
Boggles the mind . . . or would, if a Proddy said such ignorant things.
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle [tiny punctuation marks] shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
New International Version (©1984)
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
New Living Translation (©2007)
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.
English Standard Version (©2001)
For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
Perhaps if RC's spent less time kissing the toes of their Ashteroth-Mary-Goddess statues, rosaries etc and instead read more of the WORD OF GOD, such absurd posts would lessen.
Only perhaps, though. Most things rational are a hazardous bet with that group.
THAT has NEVER been rescinded and NEVER will be!
Nor has it been exclusively transferred to The Church. The Church has been ALLOWED to be grafted-in--to the same Abrahamic blessings. That gives us NO excuse to try and arrogantly elbow--kick out of the nest the original Covenant Chosen people of God Almighty.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD.
BLESSED BE THE LORD OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB.
PREPARE FOR THE RETURN OF THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Thx dear Sister for your kind words and work for His Kingdom.
Not much has changed; has it! ;^)
SIGH.
INDEED.
BIG SIGH.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
Has the other side gotten busy . . . or
come up empty in terms of meaningful replies . . . as usual . . . or
just wimped out?
or roaming about.... ;)
THANKFULLY,
the one who roams about
is NO match for the
LION OF JUDAH.
LOL!!!
Act 11:26 and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.
BTW-these are also some of the verses I would use to illustrate that there is no such thing as "free will". God hardens the hearts of those who He so chooses. If there was such a thing as "free will", then God could not harden the hearts of the Jews. But that's a different subject.
This sounds like you're splitting semantic hairs. The Jewish disciples welcomed being called Christians (Acts 11:26) to be identified with Christ.
As far as claiming Jesus Christ is no longer Jewish you have this exactly opposite. Christians are the true Jews according to scripture.
Rom 2:28-29 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.
I wouldn't disagree with that. The issue is who is Israel? Paul stated that believers were Israel.
Gal 6:15-16 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.
In another spot you stated that "our being GRAFTED INTO the same or similar role to Israel's service as a nation of priests". What you're saying is that we are part of Israel's priesthood. Are you saying we are grafted in with the Levites? (not all Jews are priests).
Evidently you are forgetting that The LION of JUDAH is JEWISH! LOL.
Tsk, tsk. And you're forgetting that the tribe of Judah were not priests. ;O)
IT's just that God has His own timing and route for each individuals and certainly for the Nation of Israel as to how to get there AS A NATION.
I believe I agreed on one of my posts that god raise and let falls ALL nations. The simple fact that Israel exist shows that it is within His divine purpose. And there may be tribulations. But that does not mean that He blesses them any more than He blesses anyone else.
I am reminded of the midwives of Moses' day who lied to Pharoah to protect the Israelites' babies from being killed. The scriptures tells us that God blessed the midwives although they were non-believers.
But I think it's a stretch to think we understand the plan of God and how the end will come about. I'm under the personal believe that it's just going to be a big "POP" and that's it.
“YOUR mangling of the Daniel 9 verses to insist that verse 26 b is still talking about the Messiah; the Anointed one when it is clearly talking about the END TIMES and the Anti-Christ.
Insisting that the Anti-Christ spoken of in the last part of v26 is Jesus the Messiah, is one of the most blasphemous things I’ve ever read on here.”
Answer:
I do not believe that Jesus is the person of 26b or 27b. I do not know what you are talking about (???).
In fact this is my whole point for Scriptural consistency.
26a = Jesus (A)
26b = people of the prince (B)
27a = Jesus (A again)
27b = people of the prince (B again)
Notice the consistency, an A-B, A-B Scriptural verse pattern.
Now, let’s look at the Dispensational scheme.
26a = Messiah (A)
26b = people of the prince; ie. Antichrist’s people (B)
27a = Antichrist (B)
27b = Antichrist (B)
Notice the inconsistenty, an A-B, B-B pattern.
Dispensationalism clearly imputs the person of the Devil into the Person of Jesus Christ in Daniel’s 70th Week.
In fact, I will attach the original reply to you, which clearly showed this. Are you deliberately trying to confuse the issue?
Dear Dispensationalist,
Unfortunately, you only reference other Modernists.
Your basic argument says that the ‘he’ for verse 27 is the same throughout the entire verse, and since the second half of this verse deals with the ‘overspreading of abominations’, then this must be the ‘antichrist’.
However, such an argument excludes context. If one were to apply that same logic to the previous passage, verse 26, then one would have a conflict, because the first half of the verse is clearly the Messiah, and the second half of the verse is the ‘people of the prince’.
Let’s look at this:
26: And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah (A) be cut off, but not for himself: ... and .... the people of the prince (B) that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
NOTICE THAT THE SUBJECT CHANGES AFTER THE CONJUNCTIVE!!!
27: And he (A) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he (A) shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, ... and ... for the overspreading of abominations he (B) shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
LIKEWISE, THE SAME PATTERN IN THIS VERSE!!!
Note that both of these verses, 26 and 27, are CONJUNCTIVE (e.g. two complete sentences, with two different subjects, joined together by the conjunctive ‘and’) in their construct.
So, the first half of the conjunctive deals with the Messiah (A), and the second half of the conjunctive deals with a completely different subject, e.g. the ‘people of the prince’ (B).
Therefore to be consistent, one would expect each verse to resemble an A-B, A-B construct.
Dispensationalism violates this Scriptural pattern by using an A-B, B-B construct!
This is one Scriptural reason why Jesus, not Antichrist, fulfills the 70th Week.
However, even on a more basic Scriptural level, we can look at the Purposes of the Great 70 Weeks (Daniel 9:24):
a) to finish the transgression,
b) to make an end of sins,
c) to make reconciliation for iniquity,
d) to bring in everlasting righteousness,
e) to seal up the vision and prophecy,
f) and to anoint the most Holy.
Are you actually going to stand there with a straight face and say that the Devil fulfills these Great 70 Week Purposes?
Again, who is the REAL Replacement Theologian here?
Jesus fulfilled the first 69 Weeks (we both agree with that). Why would God be so flippant so as to change the 70th Week to the Devil ... to finish transgressions and to end sin?
That makes no sense at all, even on the face of it.
You have REPLACED Jesus for the Devil. Shame on you!
Dear Dispensationalist, repent of your dipensational sin.
“It’s interesting how the REPLACEMENTARIANS decline to deal with these verses much at all and certainly never well.”
Answer:
The only ‘replacement theology’ comes from Dispensationalists whereby they REPLACE Jesus with the Devil in Daniel’s 70th Week.
As far as Jerimiah 31 goes, that Covenant was confrimed in the midst of the 70th Week, just like Daniel prophecied in 9: 27a. This could hardly be called a ‘replacement theology’.
A better term for it would be Fulfillment Theology. Christ fulfilled the 70 Weeks in total.
Moreover, Saint Paul goes on to say in Galatians 3, that those in Christ are Abraham’s seed, and that there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ.
Therefore, according to the New Testament, there is neither Jew nor Greek in Abraham’s seed.
It is a Gospel of Grace, not race.
Unfortunately, you have created a false idol based on man’s DNA, instead of Christ’s Blood.
My prayer is that you repent of your Dispensational sin.
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.