Posted on 08/24/2014 10:55:16 AM PDT by wmfights
Ah, now the truth is leaking out through emotional outbursts in caps, sort of like when the word "homey" slipped out. Why the subterfuge ? Why was it so difficult for you to admit you are not Catholic ?
look up Law of the Gospel or New Law in the catechism. FYI - caps are for emphasis not shouting or as you say emotional outbursts.
the word “homey” slipped out, what does that tell you?
You are encouraged??? Look, Pharaoh, we don't need yet another diversion lesson about the gospel. Avoiding the REAL question is indicative of NOT having an answer. So, what DO those passages mean? Who is being spoken to here and why does God say what He said to them? It's pretty obvious that the wife of Jehovah and the bride of Christ are NOT both the "church". One is an unfaithful wife who was put away for adultery and the other is a spotless, pure, virgin. Do you at least get that?
>> “Revelation is very symbolic and needs to be interpreted...” <<
.
Spoken like a true nicolaitan!
Nothing in Revelation is symbolic, it is John’s representation of what he saw, some of which he had no way of identifying but saying what the closest thing to it he had ever seen in his life was.
None of God’s word is to be “interpreted.”
To interpret is to change, which is forbidden.
It is to be read and heard.
.
>> “ It’s pretty obvious that the wife of Jehovah and the bride of Christ are NOT both the “church”. One is an unfaithful wife who was put away for adultery and the other is a spotless, pure, virgin” <<
.
Hosea says that the adulterous wife that was put away is to be taken back! (But he couldn’t explain how)
This was the “mystery” that Paul had to explain in Romans 7.
The husband of the adulterous wife died!
If her husband dies, she can re-marry.
The adulterous wife was who Paul spent his days ministering to, the “strangers” dispersed across the north shore of the Mediterranean. The lost sheep.
I am glad to hear you say that, many on here I am afraid would not agree with that statement.
Far far far fewer than you seem to imagine, and against which we have contended, if you mean they think Jews now do not need to be saved. But if you deny that the Jews as a total group can be called Israel then it is you who are being unScriptural.
what do you mean “ full inclusion of the Jews” and a special turning to the Lord by them? I don’t see that any where in Scripture.
If you cannot see it then see here , but it is time for you to start answering if you deny that the Lord's return cannot happen because a hardening has come upon part of Israel, the Jews, until the full number of the Gentiles take part in salvation, resulting in the full inclusion of the Jews in the Lords salvation, so that all Israel will be saved, as the remaining natural branches come to faith and become part of spiritual Israel.
For as by Israel's rejection the Gentiles were spiritually grafted into the olive tree planted by God, joining true Jews, so the acceptance of Christ by the natural branches will mean life from the dead.
I have previously linked to and quoted the Catholic Catechism regarding observance of the Ten Commandments (which you deny), and and the portion about "all Israel" (which you also deny). That tells me you are not an observant Catholic, so we are at an impasse, not that there is a lack of a supersecessionist sects that reflect your comments. I just don't want the Catholic label applied to them when they are clearly outside and contrary to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The slang may be a dialect learned In training, as it were.
I will ask again. Where in Matthew 24 or 25 do we get the finality of 2 Peter 3:10.
I pointed this out several times for a reason. As in the literal, not symbolic, accounts of Revelation 19-21. The second coming and Day of The Lord are recorded in chapter 19. We agree those are literal yet to occur events. In chapter 20 we have the literal first and second resurrections separated by a 1,000 years and then the GWT judgment. Then we have in chapter 21 the literal passing of the old creation for the new. That is where Peter’s passage comes to be.
I will also point out Revelation is an unveiling, thus the name and is credited by John in chapter one as coming directly from Christ. We cannot ignore that fact.
I also encourage you to look at all the NT and OT passages on The Day of The Lord.
I see there are some postings I am anxious to respond to, but am caught at the office tonight. will try to respind tomorrow night, if not, certainly this weekend. I think this is an important dialogue.
I will ask again. Where in Matthew 24 or 25 do we get the finality of 2 Peter 3:10
___________
the two chapters begin with the question posed to Jesus by his disciples “ what will be the sign of your coming AND THE END OF THE AGE”
you can’t get any more final than the end of the age! please note, the disciples connected the second coming with the end of the world. further in v29 we read “after the tribulation of those days”, so this tells us the Church is still on earth during the tribulation, “ THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED”....this is another point of the FINALITY of this day, no life can be sustained on the earth without the heat and sunlight generated by the sun. but since this is JUDGEMENT DAY, the need for the sun is finished.
v30 tells us this is the second coming as the Son of man returns with power AND GREAT GLORY.
fast forward to Chapter 25 v31, “when the Son of man comes in his GLORY....”. this shows us Matthew 24 and 25 are both describing the SAME DAY, the Day of the Lord, the end of the world.
of course this line up perfectly not only with 2 Peter 3:10, but also 1 Corinthians 15:23-24 “ Christ the first fruits, THEN AT HIS COMING, those who belong to Christ. THEN COMES THE END.....”
THE End..... can’t get any more final than that.
the problem that those who oppose historical Christianity have is they can’t reconcile their teaching with ALL THE SCRIPTURES. of course, the Church has the advantage of 2,000 years to harmonize all the Scriptures with the Faith received orally from all the Apostles.
no one can find any 1,000 literal earthly reign in Matthew 24-25.
no one also can find the second coming in Revelation 19.
please see Revelation 20:9, the Church ( the camp of the saints and the beloved city ) is still on earth. If the second coming had already occurred, the SUN would be dark and the judgement would have happened already.
the second coming happens at Revelation 20:9 and extends thru the judgement to v15.
the second coming at Revelation 20:9 matches perfectly with what Paul says will happen at the second coming in 2 Thessalonians 2:8.
I will ask again, where do you find the 1,000 year millennial reign in Matthew 24-25? You must concede Matthew 25:31 is the same as Revelation 20:11, which in your mind happens after the 1,000 year reign. so somewhere between 24:29 and 25:31 is the millennial reign...can you tell me where it is?
The only conclusion you can come to is to either ignore Revelation 20:1-10 or discount Revelation as inspired scriptures. What did Peter say prior to verse 10? What is a day to God? How long might be the Great Day of The Lord?
2 Peter 3:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Going to Isaiah 61 which outlines the first and second advents.
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,...(KJV)
The above Jesus read as we see in Luke 4. He stopped reading at this point:
Luke 4:
16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,[j]
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
19 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”[k]
20 Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”(KJV)
Jesus stopped there, where we record as Isaiah 61:1-2b.
Here’s the rest of the Isaiah passage depicting the second coming:
Isaiah 61:
...and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.
4 And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations.
5 And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers.
6 But ye shall be named the Priests of the Lord: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.(KJV)
See verse 4. Verse 6 is a match for Revelation 20:6.
Then following this we have Isaiah 62 which continues the same prophesy:
Isaiah 62 King James Version (KJV)
62 For Zion’s sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth.
2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name.
3 Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God.
4 Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called Hephzibah, and thy land Beulah: for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married.
5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
6 I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention of the Lord, keep not silence,
7 And give him no rest, till he establish, and till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth.(KJV)
Please keep reading the following chapters. It is not until chapter 65 do we see mention of new heavens and new earth. Loads going on during the Day of the Lord. With God a day can be a thousand years. Peter states so before 2 Peter 3:10.
I read the article you linked to and was shocked at how it utterly misstates the historical Christian doctrine.
the article says it is a “response to a doctrine that holds the Church has wholly REPLACED Israel as the inheritor of all the promises....”
I know of no one that teaches that the Church REPLACED Israel....for the 1,000th time it seems like, here is the doctrine:
The Church IS Israel.
I am going to say it again:
THE CHURCH IS ISRAEL.
Jesus Christ Himself is Israel.
Those who are in a COVENANT RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ, are GOD’S PEOPLE, Israel.
in the OT, the old covenant was with the physical descendants of Abraham, the Jewish people. but the old covenant was unable to bring salvation, and God in Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel promised a new, everlasting covenant would be made with Israel.
this new covenant, sealed by the blood of Jesus was superior to the old one it replaced in that it was able to bring salvation to those covered by it. whereas the old covenant was with the physical descendants of Abraham, the new covenant would be with the descendants of Abraham in faith.
both the old and new covenant were made WITH ISRAEL. but since national Israel ( physical Jews ) REJECTED Jesus for the most part, God turned to the Gentile nations and invited them to this covenant relationship as well any believing Jews and together the believing Jews and believing Gentiles comprise ALL OF ISRAEL.
Jesus pointed to this future change in the composition of Israel in the parable of the wedding feast in Matthew 22 and the one shepherd one flock in John 10.
or as Paul says in Romans 9:8 “ this means it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants”
Romans 9-11 to clearly shows there are two Israels -
physical or national Israel, who we would refer to as Jews today.
spiritual Israel, those in Christ or what we would refer to as the Church today.
Romans 11 is written to make the point that physical Israel is not cursed, that they can be saved ( grafted back in ) , but the only way this can happen is the same way the Gentiles were grafted in, that is acceptance of the Gospel.
but the point is made that any physical Jew that rejects the Gospel, is cut off and is not part of the olive tree ( Israel )
the olive tree is based on faith, not flesh.
the article twists “Israel” so, that when it comes to v26 “and so all Israel will be saved”, you had to put in parenthesis ( what is left of it ) huh?
all means all, not what is left of it.
again, the problem with false doctrine always comes back to not harmonizing all the Scriptures and also the rejection of the historical Faith.
I am curious to know if you believe Jeremiah 31:31-34 and 32:37-41 have been fulfilled or not and if they have been fulfilled, when did this happen?
maybe we can make a little progress if we leave the silly insults aside and have a discussion.
since you deny the wife of Jehovah is the same as the bride of Christ, can you point to me anywhere in the NT, the wife of Jehovah is dealt with?
what happens to this wife?
as I thought, you didn’t deal with Matthew 24-25, which is specifically about the second coming and end of the world.
the historical faith doesn’t ignore Revelation 20:1-10, it describes the period in history we are in now - from the cross to the second coming.
2 Peter is dealing with scoffers in latter days, saying when is Jesus coming? Peter is merely saying Jesus will keep his promise and return in due time, after all to the Lord a day is like a 1,000 years.
but that doesn’t change v10, that when the day of the Lord does come, THE HEAVENS WILL PASS AWAY AND THE EARTH WILL BE BURNED UP. matches perfectly with Matthew 24-25 and 1 Corinthians 15.
Assuming this is correct, then Moses was seriously overlooked in the Catholic book of saints. He does not even have feast day and youngsters are not using Moses for confirmation names. And St Moses the black does not count different man.
I'm sure Moses passes the holy living and miracles criteria. So if the church is Israel then you need to pony up and recognize the OT saints.
good point, write the Pope and maybe he will correct this oversight.
here is a question for you -
how is life sustained on earth during the millennial reign if the sun is not giving it’s heat or light? this is an impossibility as any scientist will tell you.
Wow already finished with 5 chapters of Isaiah. Here’s a thought. Jesus told all assembled in Luke 4 the portions of Isaiah 61:1-2b were fulfilled in their presence. Are we to conclude the remainder of the prophecy stretching for four chapters will be. Unfulfilled or dismiss it. The first 1.5 verses of the prophecy were literally fulfilled as announced by Christ Jesus.
Already been there, done that. RE-read the posts, maybe you’ll get it.
Your "argument by outrage" is spurious, and once again avoids the questions asked of you. Why do you continually do so? Can you at least affirm or deny that the Lord's return awaits His recognition by all living Israel/Jews upon whom a hardening has come? Meanwhile, it is not all clear what you are objecting to.
I know of no one that teaches that the Church REPLACED Israel....for the 1,000th time it seems like, here is the doctrine: The Church IS Israel.
You are using outrage over a semantic term that sees variation, and if you are saying the church is a continuation of Israel but not a replacement is largely a distinction without a difference, as if all the promises to Israel now only belong to the church, not to the physical descendants of Abraham, then in essence the church has replaced Israel. And it seems in your past arguments that you objected to including Jewish people in the definition of Israel.
Catholicism is seen as holding to a form of "supersessionism " which designates the belief that the Christian Church has replaced the Israelites as God's chosen people. As can be seen, this includes different degrees of replacement theology. I am refuting the premise that this means the church has wholly replaced Israel as the inheritor of all the promises.
Do deny that a hardening toward Christ by natural Israel has come?
And that the Lord's return awaits recognition by all of natural Israel, resulting in the full inclusion of the Jews in the Lords' salvation, which will occur when the full number of the Gentiles enter into the body of Christ?
And that a false Christ will arise before the Lord can return, with persecution coming upon the people of God?
Those who are in a COVENANT RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ, are GOD’S PEOPLE, Israel. in the OT, the old covenant was with the physical descendants of Abraham, the Jewish people. but the old covenant was unable to bring salvation, and God in Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel promised a new, everlasting covenant would be made with Israel.
That is not in dispute, yet the physical descendants of Abraham are yet "beloved for the fathers' sakes," (Rm. 11:18) and are dealt with as a distinct people, Israel. And whose overall rejection of Christ meant the inclusion of the Gentiles, until the full number of the Gentiles are saved, at which time the veil of blindness shall be removed, and so all Israel shall be saved, with all natural Jews believing and joining saved Gentiles and Jews.
What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (Romans 11:7)
Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? (Romans 11:12)
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (Romans 11:25)
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (Romans 11:26)
Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. (Romans 11:31,32)
Romans 11 is written to make the point that physical Israel is not cursed, that they can be saved ( grafted back in )
If that is all it is teaching then it renders much of the chapter superfluous, as what it contextually teaches is a special judgment of blindness being placed upon Jews, and which is taken away when the full number of the Gentiles are entered into the spiritual kingdom of Christ.
but the only way this can happen is the same way the Gentiles were grafted in, that is acceptance of the Gospe
This is not in dispute, but that the Lord's return awaits His recognition by all Israel upon whom a hardening has come, seems to be the problem.
the olive tree is based on faith, not flesh.
True, but in the historical sense the Gentiles as a wild tree are grafted into the valid olive tree that God planted, and thus when Jews believe then they are grafted into their own olive tree.
Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. (Romans 11:18)
For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? (Romans 11:24)
the article twists “Israel” so, that when it comes to v26 “and so all Israel will be saved”, you had to put in parenthesis ( what is left of it ) huh? all means all, not what is left of it.
All does mean all, all that remains of the natural branches after the persecution of the "mystery of iniquity," with its deceiving alter-Christos. The only twisting is done by you if you try to switch the Israel of v. 25, which refers to the natural branches, into simply referring to some of the living Jews believing as they do now, rather than a reversal of the blindness resulting in all of this Israel being saved, joining the Gentiles in the one new man, the church. The Israel of v. 26 is that of v. 25, and which "all" is speaking of.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so [houtō=in this way, fashion] all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (Romans 11:25-26)
But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. (2 Corinthians 3:15-16)
Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness ? (Romans 11:12)
again, the problem with false doctrine always comes back to not harmonizing all the Scriptures and also the rejection of the historical Faith.
Indeed, with historical Faith being that of the NT church as per Scripture, which is what denial of what i described constitutes.
I am curious to know if you believe Jeremiah 31:31-34 and 32:37-41 have been fulfilled or not and if they have been fulfilled, when did this happen?
Jeremiah 31:31-34 is fulfilled in Christ, having been instituted with His own sinless shed blood, (Heb. 9:16,17) praise God, and thus souls are saved by effectual belief, "purifying their souls by faith." (Acts 15:9) And as it is distinctly "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers" under the New Cov. believers, these constituting the "house of Israel," are not bound to literal observance of the typological ceremonial law.
Yet as with salvation itself which this pertains to, the full realization of this is yet to come, such as in no longer teaching every man his neighbour to Know the Lord, and how much one does, and which Jeremiah 32:37-41 also pertains to. And in which i believe there is a literal as well as a spiritual realization of the land of Israel being possessed, after the Tribulation and in the literal 1k reign of Christ. But which gets into an extended study, which sincere Christians can disagree on.
And as one Catholic site states,
Catholic theology is not at all fully developed in this area. That is why there is no dogma about this yet. Even the Early Church Fathers were divided about the future of the Jewish people who as a group rejected Christ. The discussion is still very much active with the Church. We are on a pilgrimage of faith and that includes our understanding the full depth of our relationship with the Jewish people. - http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/replacement_theology.php
If you want to point to a particular verse(s) in Isaiah that you feel make your point, please do so. I am not seeing a literal 1,000 year reign in Isaiah, Matthew, Peter, Corinthians or Revelation.
btw, under the literal historic method of interpretation, wouldn’t a day be a day and 1,000 years a 1,000 years?
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.