Love Dr. Vlach! One of my favorite professors during my MTS!

Excellent! I loved watching thank you ,God bless you Dr.Michael Vlach 🙏

Reading Romans 9 to 11 is so clear as to the future promised fulfillments for Israel 🇮🇱. Other passages of Scripture certain speak with clarity on this issue. Even Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is the future confession of Israel and we see that in Revelation 7! Praise the Lord that He is faithful to His promises

@snelson2418

3 жыл бұрын

Yet I know a pastor who refuses to preach on these 3 chapters because he doesn’t understand them as he says they can’t mean what they seem to say...He’s a replacement theologian. Stubborn.

@minutemaidlemonwithice9359

2 жыл бұрын

@@snelson2418 and same with the book of Revelation

@SpotterVideo

Жыл бұрын

Romans Chapter 11: In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period can be found in Matt. 10:5-7, and Acts 10:36-38, and Gal. 1:14-18. Many try to claim God never gave the Jews a chance to accept Christ, so there must be some Plan B of salvation before or during the Second Coming of Christ. Romans 1:16 proves they are wrong, since Paul said the Gospel went "first" to the Jews. Many ignore the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", and as "men of Israel", and as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. The Gentiles were not grafted in until several years later. This passage proves Paul was right about the Gospel being taken "first" to the Jews. Paul reveals two different groups of Israelites in Romans 9:6-8. There is an Israel of the promise, and an Israel of the flesh. This is part of the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks about the "remnant" of Israel in Romans 9:27. This is also part of the context of Romans 11. Paul starts Romans 11 with two different groups of Israelites. In verse one Paul reveals he is still an Israelite, even after his conversion. Then Paul refers to two different groups of Israelites during the time of Elijah. There were the Baal worshippers, and there was the faithful "remnant". In verse five Paul says there is also a faithful "remnant" of Israelites during his time. This must be the Israelites who have accepted Christ, as on the Day of Pentecost. Paul uses the two olive trees as a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of believing Israelites, and believing Gentiles grafted together into the same tree. The unbelieving Israelites have been broken off but can be grafted back in through faith in Christ in verses 23-24. Verse 26 is the problem for many modern Christians. What does the verse actually say, and how is it changed by many in the modern Church. I have heard two of our nations famous preachers say the following. "And then all Israel will be saved..." I have heard another say the following. "And all Israel will be saved..." What does God's Word, recorded by the Apostle Paul actually say? Rom 11:26 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: The English word "so" is translated from the Greek word "houto", which is an adverb of manner, instead of an adverb of timing. Some have changed the word from "so" to "then", in order to change the meaning of the verse. How will all of the "remnant" of Israel from Romans 9:27 be saved? The answer is found in the verses that precede verse 26 and are found below. Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. Rom 11:24 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? Paul quoted from the OT in referring to the Deliverer coming out of Sion to pay for sin. Did this happen at Calvary, or will Jesus die again for His people in the future? Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Verse 28 can only be understood by looking at how Paul started the passage. He started with two different groups of Israelites and he ends the passage in the same way. There are two different groups of "they" in verse 28. One group of "they" reject Christ and are the enemies of God, and another group of "they" are the election which accept Christ through hearing the Gospel and faith. Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. Based on Luke 21:24b-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ. This agrees with what Paul said in Romans 1:16 about the Gospel going "first" to the Jews. There is no Plan B of salvation outside the New Covenant Church found in the New Testament. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;; New Covenant Whole Gospel: Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him. He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth. Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by husband unto them, saith the LORD: Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart. Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36) We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24. 1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. 1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. 1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. Watch the KZread videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.

So incredibly clear, concise, this is excellent.

He quoted one church father that used the term replacement. If you asked any of the leading scholars in the amillenial and post millennial camp, none of use agree with Vlachs definition of replacement theology. Michael Vlachs pressupositions are preventing him from accurately representing the opposing views