I didnt interpret the word of God that way. The Jews who wrote the NT did.
-
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.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
now you have gone from spiritualizing to outright lieing.
I did not ignore it I answered your question. maybe nit the way you wanted, but I did
either way, thank you for showing you need to resort to strawmen arguments to try to get your view across.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
I could care less what they think
my purpose is to see what the Bible says and what God thinks
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Nope
they did nit think this at all. Paul did not (Romans 11). Matt and mark did not when they wrote jesus words about the end, and John did not when he wrote revelation
like most people I know who think as you do, they true to take 2 promises God made to abraham and make them into one single promise,
as I showed earlier he actually made three seperate promises to abraham, when interpreting the word concerning those promises, you must take each into context to determine what is being said
Paul himself said gentiles were without hope in time past in Ephesians 2:11-12.
I ask you again, did Paul meant what he said there?
Your premise of where you think "replacement" theology came from.
This is the same exact argument that Judaizers use to try and make it seem as if Sunday worship didn't start with the early Christians. They say Sunday was commanded by a pagan ruler and it was meant to worship the sun.
Now you say "replacement" theology came from racist, anti-semite, jew haters.
First of all the term you use is faulty. But you use it on purpose as a "cancelling" term. There has been no replacement. The promises of God have always been to Gods People. Gods People have never been a physical nation. Gods People are a spiritual people.
Romans 9:6-8
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
These scriptures didn't come from jew hating, racist, anti-semites. They came from Paul who was a semite, he loved the jews and he wasn't racist. (Galatians 3:28)
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
They were
did that mean they could not be saved?
was ninevah saved?
I have asked you this multiple times now, yet you keep ignoring that question, I know why you don’t as I am sure others do,
the question is, can you humble yourself to understand the true reason you have not once even responded to that question?
I've been saying all along. The God hating, enemies of the gospel Jews are not, never have been, and never will be God's chosen people.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
His system
i agree
basic dispensationalism is not confusing at all.
it’s when people try to make it something it is not that makes it confusing
we can say this about many doctrinal truths
K
kaylagrl
Guest
Oh I didn't post his quotes. His were just as bad and worse. He wrote "On the Jews and their Lies." Since you asked here are a few...
"First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools … This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians …"
I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.
I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb …"
I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside …"
I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them …
I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe... into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow … But if we are afraid that they might harm us or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc., … then let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., … then eject them forever from the country …"
Of the Jews Luther said they were "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth."[14] They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine."[15] The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..."
They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[17] afforded no legal protection,[18] and these "poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. "[w]e are at fault in not slaying them"
They are our public enemies. They do not stop blaspheming our Lord Christ, calling the Virgin Mary a whore, Christ, a bastard, and us changelings .... If they could kill us all, they would gladly do it. They do it often, especially those who pose as physicians—though sometimes they help—for the devil helps to finish it in the end.
Many Christians do not know that Luther was so anti-Jew. And then we ask how German Christians sat back and let the Holocaust happen. Why did the Nazi party come to be. Kristallnacht, was a page straight out of Luthers own writings. Many Nazi literature pamphlets had quote from Luther in them. Did Luther make it to heaven? I'm not his judge. But how could he with such hatred and bitterness in his heart toward a race of people? From here the seeds of Replacement Theology were born. The Jews get all the curses, the church gets all the blessings. Don't mistake me, Jews must come through the cross like all of us. But they are still God's chosen and the apple of His eye.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
You keep missing the point
replacement theology states the following
1. God is done with the jews
2. The gentiles have replaced the jews as partakes of specific promises only given to them
3. that the promises given to the nation of Israel is salvic in nature, the physical promises is replaced by the spiritual promises
hence the term replacement
I already stated the answer numerous times in this thread.
In time past, gentiles had to become Jews in order to be included in the covenant God made with Israel.
Just because it goes against your axiom, it does not mean an answer was not given.
K
kaylagrl
Guest
God declares otherwise. Israel was the nation born in a day. If all the Jews there are God hating and beyond hope, why did God allow them to return to their homeland?! If He is against them, why didn't He just let them all die in the Holocaust? Why would He allow them on His land? They are there because that is exactly what was prophesied.
Context. What did the Ephesians have no hope of attaining in times past? Prior to Christ's sacrifice, the Ephesians like everyone else had no hope in leaving off sinning.
The context is straightforward.
Once God made a covenant with the nation Israel, Gentiles could not be saved as gentiles in time past.
The only way they could be saved then was to join the nation of Israel.
That is why the gospel of grace given to Paul (Ephesians 3) is very good news for all gentiles now.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
@Grandpa, @Journeyman, @tribesman i have a few questions
God in Gen 12 told abraham to leave his family and go to a land
God in Gen 15 made a covenant agreement (abraham was put to sleep. so in effect, God made a one way “I will” covenant, or what many call an unconditional covenant meaning the one party said “I will do this”, yet did not make Abraham or his party agree to do anything, it is not binding on abraham or his party to keep their side of the agreement, because none was given, ie it is unconditional (as apposed to the mosaic covenant which was conditional) or what we consider a 2 party covenant, where one party agrees to do this, and return the second party agrees to do that, if one party failed to live up to their obligation, the covenant is broken, and deemed cancelled. The other party is thus no longer required to do what it promised,
this agreement, was to give them land, it was an unconditional covenant,
in Gen 17, God said again, I give you this land, through the one seed (Issac) and not any other seed (not Ishmael or any other of his children)
in the last two cased, he said this covenant was eternal, forever.
my questions are as follows
1. since this part of the covenant was only through one bloodline (abraham-Issac) where children born to them saved because of this covenant,
2. were they automatically granted eternal life because they were born through this seed? later when the covenant was passed ONLY to Jacob (not esau or any other) and his 12 sons (called Israel). Weher they saved automatically because they were born into this family?
3. was their salvation special? Did they have a better more pure salvation then Gentiles who would be saved with them?
4. Was salvation only given to them based on this LAND promise of Gen 12, 15, 17?
God in Gen 12 told abraham to leave his family and go to a land
God in Gen 15 made a covenant agreement (abraham was put to sleep. so in effect, God made a one way “I will” covenant, or what many call an unconditional covenant meaning the one party said “I will do this”, yet did not make Abraham or his party agree to do anything, it is not binding on abraham or his party to keep their side of the agreement, because none was given, ie it is unconditional (as apposed to the mosaic covenant which was conditional) or what we consider a 2 party covenant, where one party agrees to do this, and return the second party agrees to do that, if one party failed to live up to their obligation, the covenant is broken, and deemed cancelled. The other party is thus no longer required to do what it promised,
this agreement, was to give them land, it was an unconditional covenant,
in Gen 17, God said again, I give you this land, through the one seed (Issac) and not any other seed (not Ishmael or any other of his children)
in the last two cased, he said this covenant was eternal, forever.
my questions are as follows
1. since this part of the covenant was only through one bloodline (abraham-Issac) where children born to them saved because of this covenant,
2. were they automatically granted eternal life because they were born through this seed? later when the covenant was passed ONLY to Jacob (not esau or any other) and his 12 sons (called Israel). Weher they saved automatically because they were born into this family?
3. was their salvation special? Did they have a better more pure salvation then Gentiles who would be saved with them?
4. Was salvation only given to them based on this LAND promise of Gen 12, 15, 17?
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
E