Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

tanakh

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2015
4,635
1,041
113
77
All through the OT it is only a remnant saved not the whole nation. Same with the Gentiles, not all saved.
There is only one way to salvation and that is faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. At present most Jews reject Christ as Lord and Saviour that situation may change but if it doesn't only those who do accept him will be saved
 

tanakh

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2015
4,635
1,041
113
77
Sad you have discounted many of those from Reformed Tradition as being non believers as well as many independent Baptist churches and all those who have escaped dispensational teachings infused into American churches by Nelson Darby

I venture you probably never done a single day of deep research (primary sources) of the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD and the years beyond, nor have you studied Convenantal Theology

Someone with this view is not someone I will have any type of discussion with, nor do I want not to read their words, I guard my heart against such dogmatism which invariably leads to making statements like the bolded one above .... a very sad statement indeed, probably one of the most tragic I have read on CC in a long time ...yet perhaps indicative of someone with tremedous uncertainity of their own position since the schema has to fit together in a "oh so perfect" fashion.
Farewell.
It appears from the many posts I have read that those who knowingly or unknowingly follow the Darby theology do believe that
only they are really saved. I have challenged them on this point and find I either get a denial or in some specific cases no reply at all.
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
It appears from the many posts I have read that those who knowingly or unknowingly follow the Darby theology do believe that
only they are really saved. I have challenged them on this point and find I either get a denial or in some specific cases no reply at all.

It's a curious thing that many say things like "I was saved when I was 23..." or "I was saved in 1972..." which is of it's self to deny the Cross where they were actually saved. I once thought they confuse when they accept Jesus in it's place but no they think one of their own works are what saved them and not the Cross. lol, I was in that misery about 30 years until I realized he was telling me he saved me but I didn't believe it yet and so I begged him to save me because I denied it.

Then there are the replacement saviors who come and ask "have you been saved yet?" as if they know nothing about the Cross. They come with full intention of saving the ones they don't believe Jesus saved,worker bees they are,denying the blood of the Cross with their works. Instead they should have ask if they knew Jesus saved them on the Cross and explained to them how,but they deny it their own selves and so seek the thing they believe they don't have.

It's that simple one man denies the blood and begs God to save him because he don't understand the Cross and the other believes it was done at the Cross and has no need to to ask for what he has been given and so can thank the Lord for it instead. The only ones who seek salvation are those who deny salvation,those who see salvation,have salvation and rest from their own works. One begs God for it,the other thanks God for it,,,no one can say "thank you Lord" unless they believe they have it.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Which covenant is this?
Many call it the palestinian covenant.

Gen 15:17 And it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces. 18 On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— 19 the Kenites, the Kenezzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.”

Gen 17: And I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly.” 3 Then Abram fell on his face, and God talked with him, saying: 4 “As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of [b]many nations. 5 No longer shall your name be called [c]Abram, but your name shall be [d]Abraham; for I have made you a father of [e]many nations. 6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you. 7 And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8 Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”


1. This is a covenant between God and abraham and his descendants (through Isaac)
2. It is said to be ETERNAL in nature (never ending)
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
In regards to "all Israel" will be saved we need to look at what Paul is sourcing in his letter to the Romans:

(Isa 26:21 For behold, the LORD comes out of His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; The earth will also disclose her blood, and will no more cover her slain. )

In the above the prophet is predicting vengeance for the shedding of "innocent blood" as per Jesus' claim against the Jews.

(Isa 27:9 Therefore by this the iniquity of Jacob will be covered; and this is all the fruit of taking away his sin: When he makes all the stones of the altar like chalkstones that are beaten to dust, wooden images and incense altars shall not stand. )

(Isa 27:10 Yet the fortified city will be desolate, the habitation forsaken and left like a wilderness; there the calf will feed, and there it will lie down and consume its branches. )

(Isa 27:11 When its boughs are withered, they will be broken off; the women come and set them on fire. For it is a people of no understanding; therefore He who made them will not have mercy on them, and He who formed them will show them no favor. )

In the above "Jacob" is purged by judgement, the fortified city (1st century Jerusalem) is destroyed, the unbelieving Jews/Israel are showed no mercy or favor and destroyed (cast out of the kingdom - Matt 8:12).

(Isa 59:3 For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue has muttered perversity. )

(Isa 59:20 The Redeemer will come to Zion, And to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,” Says the LORD. )

(Isa 59:21 “As for Me,” says the LORD, “this is My covenant with them: My Spirit who is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your descendants, nor from the mouth of your descendants’ descendants,” says the LORD, “from this time and forevermore.” )

(Rom 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob)

(Rom 11:27 For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”

Paul in Rom 11:26-27 is conflating Isa 27:9 and Isa 59:20-21.

Isa 59:20 clearly states that only those "who turn from transgression in Jacob" are included in the "all saved", the rest are destroyed/cast out of the kingdom. This occurred in the generation that heard him along with the destruction of the "fortified city" in 70 AD.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113
Isa 59:20 clearly states that only those "who turn from transgression in Jacob" are included in the "all saved", the rest are destroyed/cast out of the kingdom. This occurred in the generation that heard him along with the destruction of the "fortified city" in 70 AD.
All Israel was saved back in 70AD???
Where does this fit in?

For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward.
(Zec 14:2-4)
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
the gentile church replaces Israel', that is what 'replacement theology teaches' -
the problem is, the scripture never 'backs-up' this 'claim', because it is an
'invention of men', and NOT the TRUTH of God'...
 

tanakh

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2015
4,635
1,041
113
77
It's a curious thing that many say things like "I was saved when I was 23..." or "I was saved in 1972..." which is of it's self to deny the Cross where they were actually saved. I once thought they confuse when they accept Jesus in it's place but no they think one of their own works are what saved them and not the Cross. lol, I was in that misery about 30 years until I realized he was telling me he saved me but I didn't believe it yet and so I begged him to save me because I denied it.

Then there are the replacement saviors who come and ask "have you been saved yet?" as if they know nothing about the Cross. They come with full intention of saving the ones they don't believe Jesus saved,worker bees they are,denying the blood of the Cross with their works. Instead they should have ask if they knew Jesus saved them on the Cross and explained to them how,but they deny it their own selves and so seek the thing they believe they don't have.

It's that simple one man denies the blood and begs God to save him because he don't understand the Cross and the other believes it was done at the Cross and has no need to to ask for what he has been given and so can thank the Lord for it instead. The only ones who seek salvation are those who deny salvation,those who see salvation,have salvation and rest from their own works. One begs God for it,the other thanks God for it,,,no one can say "thank you Lord" unless they believe they have it.
I am trying to untangle your comments. Up until I was 24 I was not a Christian of any flavour. In fact I was verging on Atheism
I had only a sketchy knowledge of the Bible from RE classes at school. In 1971 I met a group of baptist Christians and was invited to their meetings. I was opposed to their beliefs but was attracted to some of them'(The girls in particular) but after some time I came to realise that what they believed about Christ was true. To cut a long story short I eventually asked Christ into my life and underwent Baptism in water on Easter Sunday 1972. I have been a believer ever since. My point is there has to be some time in a persons life when they receive salvation. I have yet to meet a Christian who keeps asking to be saved but I've met plenty who doubt another's salvation because of their Denomination or whether they believe in their version of the rapture or not. Only God knows who are his and who isn't
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
the gentile church replaces Israel', that is what 'replacement theology teaches' -
the problem is, the scripture never 'backs-up' this 'claim', because it is an
'invention of men', and NOT the TRUTH of God'...
The "ekklesia" is not a gentile church ...it is spiritual Israel
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
UG,
hub and I agree with you, it is Spiritual Israel, we were using 'others beliefs' as a starting point to our post'...
:):)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,923
2,118
113
As for the "1577 ekklésia"... there is a distinction amongst the following three usages:

--Acts 7:37,38,39-43 "the church [1577 ekklésia] in the wilderness" (see this whole passage and its details)

--Acts 19:32,39,41 "the assembly [1577 ekklésia]" (gathered there; and not referring to "believers")

--Ephesians 1:20-23 [note when]; Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 5:23 "the Church [1577 ekklésia] which is His body" (other passages correlate with this, which speak of "His body" or the "one body" etc)
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
Where does this fit in?

For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall...
(Zec 14:2-4)
It fits in with 70 AD, read the full context and try not to read it in a wooden literal sense:

(Zec 14:8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur. )

The living waters were flowing at Pentecost, but the prophet is saying that the fullness of the event was only at the destruction of Jerusalem/whore of Babylon when the hindering Jews were taken out of the way and John stated:

(Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. )
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
I am trying to untangle your comments. Up until I was 24 I was not a Christian of any flavour. In fact I was verging on Atheism
I had only a sketchy knowledge of the Bible from RE classes at school. In 1971 I met a group of baptist Christians and was invited to their meetings. I was opposed to their beliefs but was attracted to some of them'(The girls in particular) but after some time I came to realise that what they believed about Christ was true. To cut a long story short I eventually asked Christ into my life and underwent Baptism in water on Easter Sunday 1972. I have been a believer ever since. My point is there has to be some time in a persons life when they receive salvation. I have yet to meet a Christian who keeps asking to be saved but I've met plenty who doubt another's salvation because of their Denomination or whether they believe in their version of the rapture or not. Only God knows who are his and who isn't

It's just a coincidence about the age and year I used as examples,I wasn't speaking of you personally. My point is that Jesus saved you/me ect. in the first century not at any point after we were born. At some point between the time we were born we either believe that or not. Some don't ever believe that and say instead a date or an age during their lifetime where they think they decided to be saved instead of the Cross. That means though then that they don't see that they were saved at the Cross by Christ and that they see to do or say something to get saved during their lives instead.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113
It fits in with 70 AD, read the full context and try not to read it in a wooden literal sense:

(Zec 14:8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur. )

The living waters were flowing at Pentecost, but the prophet is saying that the fullness of the event was only at the destruction of Jerusalem/whore of Babylon when the hindering Jews were taken out of the way and John stated:

(Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. )
Zechariah 14:2-4 ESV
[2] For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. [4] On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward.

If you say Zech 14:2-4 was fulfilled in 70AD, then there is no discussion, because by taking a 'non literal' approach you can make the text say just about anything you want it to.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
So it's ok to chuck the Epistle of James since it only applies to the pre- Acts 9 Jewish believers?
Poor Holy Spirit if only He knew better...like our contrived systems of theology.
All scripture is written for our learning, but not all scripture is written TO us.

You don't build an ark now even though in Genesis, God commanded Noah to build one. Are you chucking the book of Genesis then?
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
lol, the whole world was concluded as dead to sin not just Paul and Jesus loved us all while we were yet sinners. Saul was walking down the road to Damascus with a letter in his hand giving him permission to arrest those who followed Jesus Christ. Saul did not believe Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ(denied it at that time),,He was not in the middle of repenting,being baptized,confessing Christ when Jesus Christ appeared to him.

In Matthew 12:32 Jesus stated that in the age thy were in this would not be forgiven nor in the one coming are you saying one ended and another came and it also ended and we are in it? If so you are not MAD/A9D if you are saying this then you are preterit instead. It's your choice though,lol.
One straightforward way to interpret Matt 12:32 is this: This age refers to the age of the law. The age to come refers to the tribulation after the rapture of the church. Thus in those 2 ages, there will be the blasphemy of the HS.

But the current age of the church now is the age of grace, where this sin cannot be committed.
 
Apr 3, 2019
1,495
768
113
If you say Zech 14:2-4 was fulfilled in 70AD, then there is no discussion, because by taking a 'non literal' approach you can make the text say just about anything you want it to.
"you can make the text say just about anything you want it to" - hardly.

It's a matter of interpretation and understanding apocalyptic language.

When John as Elijah appeared as "the voice" was there any major mountain and hill reworked, any highway in the desert?

(Isa 40:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the LORD; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.)

(Isa 40:4 Every valley shall be exalted and every mountain and hill brought low; The crooked places shall be made straight and the rough places smooth )

How is a literal interpretation going to work for you in the above?
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113
All scripture is written for our learning, but not all scripture is written TO us.

You don't build an ark now even though in Genesis, God commanded Noah to build one. Are you chucking the book of Genesis then?
I wish I had a nickel for every time I've heard that party line.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113
"you can make the text say just about anything you want it to" - hardly.

It's a matter of interpretation and understanding apocalyptic language.

When John as Elijah appeared as "the voice" was there any major mountain and hill reworked, any highway in the desert?

(Isa 40:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the LORD; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.)

(Isa 40:4 Every valley shall be exalted and every mountain and hill brought low; The crooked places shall be made straight and the rough places smooth )

How is a literal interpretation going to work for you in the above?
I like how subtly you excised the Zechariah passage to introduce another question...

Zechariah 14:2-4 ESV
[2] For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. [4] On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward.

So all nations came against Jerusalem, the women raped,and the Lord came anf fought against those nations, standing on the Mt. of Olives, splitting the Mt. in two all in 70AD?