Exciting to see this early in the am , made my day !

Christian Zionism is a seriously misguided ideology. Conflating Judaism with political Zionism is a serious error. If one criticizes Israeli policy, he or she are labeled “anti-Semitic” if you look at the history of Zionism, it started in the late 1800s resulting in the Resulting in the Belfour declaration in 1917. As far as ethnic Israel is concerned, the majority of those living in the land now or not original original Hebrew. They came from Eastern Europe. You are correct in stating that many dispensational evangelicals have influenced President and others in high positions. Keep in mind, the Israeli lobby has a stranglehold on Congress. At present, the majority of those that live in Israel are secular and the religious ones for the most part are Kabbalistic,Rabbinic & Talmudic. There are of course messianic Jews there are barely tolerated and even spit on in the streets if they try to evangelize. That’s not to say that the Lord will not do a work there and with Jews, worldwide, I’m just saying that the blind support and worship of Israel by the western church is a serious error.

@biblehistoryscience3530

3 ай бұрын

Is it possible that anyone's covenant theology beliefs ever influenced their political decisions?

@dias2627

2 ай бұрын

According this People are prophets like Ezekiel and Jeremiah and Isaiah and Elijah also Antisemites because of critisizing Israel Maybe God self is Antisemite according this fools 😂

I thought preachers were predicting the return of Israel in the 1850's.

@biblehistoryscience3530

3 ай бұрын

During the Reformation, some were predicting the return of the state of Israel, and they were correct. Some also talked about escaping the great tribulation. Jesus did too in Luke 21, where he warned everyone to repent from sin, to watch and pray always to be accounted worthy to _escape_ all the things that are coming to pass and stand before him.

⁠Well, since you brought it up . . . 1. IF that was applied to the church, it would be the only instance in over 2300 uses where it's applied to anyone other than Israel the man, Israel the nation, or Israel the land. I don't like those odds at all. 2. So do you read that verse, Galatians 6:16 KJB, "And as many as walk according to this rule (the church) peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God (also the church)"? So, to the church be peace on them, and mercy, and to the church? So, to the church and to the church be peace and mercy? I think the safest, clearest and most accurate (and only) reading is that as many as walk according to this rule AND the Israel of God are two different groups. We'll find out some day. ; ) Peace, Brother.

Were there more than 7 churches in Asia. Yes. This was the 7 churches that were types. They were actual churches, but not the only ones. 12 tribes of OT and 12 apostles of NT represent all believers of old and new. 12 number of complete fulfilled body. 7 number of God and completion. 3 number of Triune God. 1000 number of untold large number. 144,000 12 x 12 x 1000 is all of the old and new believers before Christ and post Resurrection. 4 is all the earth.

Respectfully, as the gentleman in the center says, you guys read the Bible and judge it by man's tradition (historic confessions, catechisms, creeds, etc.), making the word of God of none effect by your tradition. I care not what the "historic" positions have been. Things started to go crazy while Paul was still alive -- see Acts 20:29, "after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you," and I Cor 11:19, wherein Paul warned of heresies being present, while Paul is still alive. Just because a position is old doesn't mean it is accurate, godly or spiritual. I am perfectly capable of reading the Bible on my own, and then shaping my doctrine based on that. If at a later time I begin to notice something that doesn't fit my doctrine, then I change my doctrine, but I hope I never change the Word or an honest interpretation of the Word to fit creed or tradition. Grace. : )

@mpprod6631

2 ай бұрын

maybe clarifying my position might help a little. I do believe in a tribulation, a literal person anti Christ, a mass conversion of elect ethnic Jews in the future in fulfillment of Zechariah, a literal binding of Satan, and a literal kingdom on earth in fulfillment of all the promises (but for Jews and Gentiles). I do not believe in a rapture because I do not believe scripture supports it. Most importantly, I do not believe scripture gives us a literal play by play by which we can “predict” future events. Scripture says the opposite in fact. He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. (Acts 1:7, ESV) Scripture gives us a brief overview, and is not meant to make us “prophets” of the end times. I do not believe all the numbers and times and events are meant to be taken literalistic, but are meant to be interpreted rightly as they were intended. Everything is true, but not necessarily something we will be able to predict like with a crystal ball. Does the kingdom have to be a literal 1000 years? I’m not sure, but I believe there will be a kingdom. I believe that dispensational theology too much stretches scripture to look forward instead of relying on God, and understanding He’s got this. That’s what revelations is about. God is in control. Also I did not address the 70th week of Daniel before in my last comment. I believe the 70th week has been fulfilled in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem. Just my opinion, but I believe it’s scripturally sound. God bless brother.

Ezekiel 16:48-59 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. 51 Neither hath Samaria committed half of thy sins; but thou hast multiplied thine abominations more than they, and hast justified thy sisters in all thine abominations which thou hast done. 59 For thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even deal with thee as thou hast done, which hast despised the oath in breaking the covenant. Matthew 21:42-43 Jesus *said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone; THIS CAME ABOUT FROM THE LORD, AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES'? 43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it. Galatians 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham AND TO HIS SEED. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," MEANING ONE PERSON, WHO IS CHRIST. Matthew 3:9-10 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire

I have enjoyed your teachings on free grace theology for salvation. But on this subject I absolutely disagree with this view that has no regards for looking at the book of Revelation as prophetic. That would result in multiple variations in interpretation of that book. God bless.

@ElloSheerio

4 ай бұрын

How do you read the book? If taken literal, then yes I'd agree with you. However, we know the book is highly symbolic. I grew up dispensational and was deeply set it in. However, when you read Revelation in its proper context... having a dispensational view is extremely hard to keep. I had to ignore truths I saw because I held more to what I grew up believing and holding firm.

@persiandrum9871

4 ай бұрын

@@ElloSheerio Agreed. It eventually dawned on me (thanks to the working of God's Spirit) that many of my presuppositions were not biblically derived, but shaped by mens' traditions and, specifically, the Darby-Scofield heresy. Truly, there does seem to be an eschaton in our time, an unveiling of sorts, in which the past century of the Zio-Dispensationalist cult is coming to its end. The fullness of Christ's salvific work is being shown once again, just as it was revealed in scripture, and confirmed with the vanishing away of the old system in AD 70. Christ is the temple, he is the lamb, he is the land and kingdom in which we reside, he is our Sabbath rest, he is our High Priest. He is the Israel of God. All glory to God.

@hereticus40

4 ай бұрын

@@ElloSheerio Respectfully, Brother, what is it in Revelation that makes it hard to keep a dispensational view?

@biblehistoryscience3530

3 ай бұрын

​@@ElloSheerio, what do you do with the fact that Rev 19 shows glorified saints at the marriage supper of the Lamb in Heaven and behind closed gates before the second coming?

Dispensationalists do not believe that Israel will restart the Temple sacrifices, AND God accepts it. They only say that Israel will perform the Temple services, and the Jews are preparing to do just that. So Dispensationalists were right about Jews rebuilding the nation of Israel, and they will be right about the Temple services, when that comes to pass.

@mpprod6631

2 ай бұрын

18 And He said to me, "Son of man, thus says the Lord GOD, 'These are the statutes for the altar on the day it is built, to offer burnt offerings on it and to sprinkle blood on it. 19 You shall give to the Levitical priests who are from the offspring of Zadok, who draw near to Me to minister to Me,' declares the Lord GOD, 'a young bull for a sin offering. 20 You shall take some of its blood and put it on its four horns and on the four corners of the ledge and on the border round about; thus you shall cleanse it and make atonement for it. 21 You shall also take the bull for the sin offering, and it shall be burned in the appointed place of the house, outside the sanctuary. 22 'On the second day you shall offer a male goat without blemish for a sin offering, and they shall cleanse the altar as they cleansed it with the bull. 23 When you have finished cleansing it, you shall present a young bull without blemish and a ram without blemish from the flock. 24 You shall present them before the LORD, and the priests shall throw salt on them, and they shall offer them up as a burnt offering to the LORD. 25 For seven days you shall prepare daily a goat for a sin offering; also a young bull and a ram from the flock, without blemish, shall be prepared. 26 For seven days they shall make atonement for the altar and purify it; so shall they consecrate it. 27 When they have completed the days, it shall be that on the eighth day and onward, the priests shall offer your burnt offerings on the altar, and your peace offerings; and I will accept you,' declares the Lord GOD." (Ezekiel 43:18-27, NASB) This is the passage you are referring to. Verse 27 is the straw that breaks the camels back. God accepts the nation of Israel and their sacrifices. But Christ is the only acceptable sacrifice. 1 For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. 2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. (Hebrews 10:1-4, NASB) So either we have a major contradiction or there’s something else going on. I know this is a hated word in dispensational theology, but could this not be symbolic of the new covenant and the temple that is the body of Christ? God bless brother.

@biblehistoryscience3530

2 ай бұрын

@mpprod6631 , I believe the sin offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings of the Mosaic Covenant only covered sin, but they looked forward to the Cross to teach everyone about how Jesus takes away sin, and they protected national Israel from God's wrath. That Mosaic sacrificial system was still being performed when Paul wrote Jewish believers to say that Jesus had fulfilled the Mosaic covenant as the actual final sacrifice for sin, so there aren't any more sacrifices there. Ezekiel described God's Temple at Jerusalem during the Lord's Millennial Kingdom on earth, for which the Mosaic Temple was a dim shadow. And like before, the sin offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings don’t take away sin but look back to the Cross to teach everyone about sin, and they will protect all the nations from God's wrath, which Rev 20 shows will be poured out when they rebel against his law. You see, the Lord will establish a full set of laws for his earthly Kingdom because fallen humans need explicit laws, which is another similarity with the Mosaic age. And he promised to give glorified saints responsibilities to rule and reign with him during this future time (Rev 2, 20), which is also similar to the Mosaic age.

"All the numbers in Revelation are symbolic." Did he mean to say that? And if so, do the other two gentlemen agree? Rev 1:4 says "John to the SEVEN churches which are in Asia," and then he lists the seven churches in vs 11. So that's not symbolic, is it? When he opens the SEVEN seals, he recounts what happens when he opens those SEVEN seals. So that's not symbolic, is it? Seven meant seven. In chapter 7, when he lists the 12,000 sealed from each of those 12 tribes listed there, is that symbolic? He sure spends a lot of time and ink listing the 12,00 from each tribe one at a time. CAN that be literal? Is it impossible that it is literal? He mentions seven seals, and then proceeds to list actually SEVEN different seals. So that seven is not symbolic, is it? Again, seven is clearly seven and not some mystical or symbolic other number. And I know how strongly you guys hate this one, but chapter 20 mentions the "thousand years" six times. I take that as a literal time period of 1,000 years, but I suspect you claim it just means a long period of time. Does that make any sense to you that God would say "THE THOUSAND YEARS" only to have it mean a long period of time? Again COULD it be an actual 1,000 years? Is it impossible for it to be an actual 1,000 years? Why? And please don't argue, "Well, God says he owns the cattle on a thousand hills ..." Seriously? If you read both of those in a non-religious book, you would know exactly how to read them, but this is religion so you shape it to mean something mystical rather than just believe the words that are on the page. Grace. : )

@mpprod6631

2 ай бұрын

I do not mean to be controversial, but can there not be symbolism in the Bible without the accusation of it not being taken seriously? Is Jesus a literal lamb? Does He actually sit at a door and knock on the churches that have thrown Him out? Is the number of converts who no man can number actually 144,000? No one claims revelations should not be taken seriously. The question needs to be asked does the language used imply it needs to be taken in a literal fashion. As far as the 1000 reign, I do believe that Christ will reign on Earth (as does every Christian) the question I would ask you could it possibly be in the new heavens and new earth? and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end." (Luke 1:33, NASB) So which do you take literally? Is it the 1000 years or the claim that Christs reign will never end? Because 1000 years sounds like a pretty finite amount of time in the grand scheme of things. How many times was Christ prophesied to be a king for ever and be on the throne of David? More times than I can list. Could that really only be a 1000 year period? Is that really at the heart of what God had promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the patriarchs, Moses, and David? No His kingdom is everlasting. So either you take that literally and say Christ is king now and will restore the universe one day or you limit it to some physical existence of 1000 years some day in the future. Again don’t mean to be a contrarian just want some give and take. Both of us spiritualize some things. 😊

@hereticus40

2 ай бұрын

​@@mpprod6631 Thank you for the reply, Brother, and you do not seem like you are trying to be controversial or argumentative, so we're good there. I will try to briefly address each issue you bring up. Of course there is symbolism in the Bible. The issue is how much and which parts. I do have to question your arguments and/or reasoning here a little; do you seriously think anyone has ever read the Bible and had an image in their head of Jesus being a lamb or a loaf or bread? or thought Herod was a fox on a throne with a little fox crown on his head (Luke 13:32)? or that some group of pharisees could physically be mistaken for whited sepulchers? Just read the Bible like any other book, take it literally if it can be taken literally, and understand what are metaphors or other figures of speech. It's really not that complicated, IMHO. Can the 144,000 literally be 144,000? Then why not assume it is just exactly as they words on the paper say? 12,000 from each of 12 tribes is 144,000. And are you saying that John didn't understand the difference between a specific number like 144,000 and a group no man can number? I'm not sure he would be qualified to write 5 books of the Bible if that were true. Finally, the 144,000 and the multitude no man could number are two different groups. That's why they have different numbers. I take them both literally! There is no choice between them. The thousand years takes place first, and separate from eternity. For God and Israel, the thousand years just roll right into eternity, but for the nations, they have a hard time of it when Satan is loosed for a little season, before entering eternity. Also, in the millennium there is still death and sin and sickness and Jesus ruling the nations with a rod of iron. Such things will not be in eternity. They are two different time periods. 1,000 years is 1,000 years; eternity is eternity. And I spiritualize very little. I just believe the words on the paper, AS THEY ARE WRITTEN, without explaining them away. No, Jesus is obviously not a loaf of bread, and yes, there will be literal locusts upon the earth that have power as scorpions have power and they will not kill men but torment them for five months. I don't look for another meaning if it can be literal, and there is no reason that can't be taken literally. Because it sounds crazy or unusual? So do the ten plagues God used to free Israel from Egypt. Do you believe those were literal? Then why can't the things in Revelation be literal? Respectfully. : )

@mpprod6631

2 ай бұрын

@@hereticus40 thank you for the response brother! So I will attempt to go point by point as you did. The Bible needs to be understood not in a 2024 context, but in the context to which it was written and to whom it was written. That is hugely important because the people of that day write differently then we do today. It’s just a fact of history. Now the Holy Spirit is the ultimate author, but that does not mean he over rode people’s own language and writing style. He incorporated that into His plan in the Providence of God. So you can not read the Bible like any other book. You have to read it like a book written over 1500 years ago. 144000 we have no disagreement on. I do simply ask is God going to make a big line and count of 144,000 people and say “nope, no more can be saved we met our quota.” I think that’s silly personally. I think the number means completion but of course I could be wrong. If the kingdom is the fulfillment of God’s promise to David of a kingdom, how can it be only 1000 years? If eternity is separate from the kingdom, how can God keep His promise for Christ to rule forever? 1000 years is not forever. In fact, in the grand scheme it’s a small amount of time. Also I’m not sure your assertion of the kingdom having death is true. I don’t see scripture to prove that the fulfillment of the kingdom of God will have death. This is why I think the kingdom of God is concurrently going on with a future fulfillment. Let me give you an assertion that you may have to spiritualize if you hold to your literalistic interpretation: 32 "From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (Matthew 24:32-34, ESV) So did Christ mean that? If you believe (as many dispensational theologians say) that this is all future, then Christ was a liar. That generation did pass. So what is it? I think this is literal. That generation did not pass away until that was fulfilled. I do believe in miracles. It’s not that I think it’s hard to believe that it could not happen. God can do anything He wants. However, the language of the books is hugely important. There’s a main difference between exodus and revelations. One is narrative and one is apocalyptic literature. You have to read them differently. Otherwise you will miss the point. God bless!

@hereticus40

2 ай бұрын

@@mpprod6631 ​​⁠Sorry, quick response while trying to get to work. You are correct, the Kingdom of God (KoG) does not have death, while "the Kingdom of heaven (KoH) suffereth violence and the violent take it by force." (Matt 11) Also, have you considered Isaiah 65:20 KJB - There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. In the *millennium*, lifespans will be increased again, at a hundred years old one will still be a child, but it's not talking about eternity yet because it still mentions death and someone being accursed. So we have what life is like now, next will be a time when Genesis-like lifespans return but there is still death and curses, and then we have eternity with no more tears or cursing or death. IMHO, of course. Grace. : )

@mpprod6631

2 ай бұрын

⁠​⁠@@hereticus40I see no exegetical reason to separate the kingdom of heaven to the kingdom of God. They are used interchangeably in the gospels and often in the Synoptics in the account of the same parables one or the other is used. Examples: Matt. 11:11-12; Luke 8:10; Matt 13:11; Mark 4:11. The violent taking the kingdom is similar to Jesus saying strive to enter the narrow gate. This is not saying that one will have death and one will not. The kingdom is an already, but not yet. We are still waiting the fulfillment. But Christ IS King now. As far as Isaiah 65:20, have you read Isiah 65:17? "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind. (Isaiah 65:17, ESV) This is talking about the New Heaven and New earth. So is there death in the New heavens and New earth? Again, this is the issue with taking the text literalistic and not how it is meant to be read. This is poetic language. I would say this is symbolic of the completion of the age and absence of sin. If you take it literalistic (and not literally how the author intended it to be), then you leave room for death to be in the final age IMHO. God bless!

Ya the arguments against dispensationalism was bad passive aggressive and toxic. mysticism, mystery, greek philosophy Aristotle Metaphysics vain Imagination is the god of Reformed Calvinism, Nothing to do with Scripture

@davidgobart3849

4 ай бұрын

I read Ryrie on Dispensationalism. That's when I realized, I was not, never was and never would be a Dispensationalist. I agreed with the Covenant, Reformed theologians. That's when I started my study towards covenant and reformed theology.

Dispensationalist are Cursed according Saint Paul

All Christian churches have errors in their theology, including reformed theology. Teaching that works and baptism are not a percentage of the salvation process. The smart people that teach this nuance confuse normal people. Especially when compared to the explicitly obvious book of James. Works is a part of the whole salvation chain. Confidence in Christ, the ACT of Water baptism in the NAME of the Father Son and Holy Spirit, and the ACT of following Christ's commands. The saints asleep in body but are spiritually in the presence of the Lord in the throne room of God as in the Book of Revelation, praying for us.