tailgator
Well-Known Member
I've already showed you before and you didn't understand it.
It's a prophecy about the time of the end which you say took place in 70 ad when you say all that is written was fulfilled.
The wine of God's wrath in the cup of His indignation
- Thread starter Stewardofthemystery
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It's a prophecy about the time of the end which you say took place in 70 ad when you say all that is written was fulfilled.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
The Dome of the rock is not the gentiles that occupy Jerusalem for 42 months while the two witnesses smite their enemies.
The gentiles occupying Jerusalem at that time are the man of sins armed forces he gives to the Israeli government to save Israel from its enemies.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
The gentiles occupying Jerusalem before Christs coming in Luke 21 are the same gentiles occupying Jerusalem before Christs coming in revelation 11.
The signs in the heavens in Luke 21 is the cloud ascending into heaven in revelation 11.
The earthquake mentioned in Luke 21 when nation comes against nation is the same earthquake in revelation 11.
Luke 21
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Revelation 11
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
Last edited:
There has always been a remnant of Israel that has been redeemed according to election, yes. But this prophecy is yet future…
19 So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him.
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.
21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever.
The Gentiles have been trodden on Gods people (the holy city) for a couple thousand years.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
For whatever reason, you didn't show what book and chapter that's from. For the benefit of anyone following along, that passage is from Isaiah 59. How can that only have a future fulfillment when Paul references it in relation to people's sins being taken away (Romans 11:26-27), which only occurs under the new covenant? The sins of Jews have been taken away for almost 2,000 years now by way of the new covenant that was established by the blood of Christ.
Is there any other covenant besides the new covenant by which people's sins are taken away (forgiven)? I don't believe so.
That is where Paul is pulling that prophecy from, Paul didn’t come up with it. Paul confirms that prophecy happens AFTER the fulness of the Gentiles comes in, which is still yet future.
Romans 11:24-27
King James Version
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?25 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.
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:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Of course.
No, it happens while the fullness of the Gentiles is coming in for the past almost 2,000 years.
Again, what other covenant is there by which people's sins are taken away besides the new covenant? Please answer this question. I only see that the new covenant, which was established by the blood of Christ long ago, is the covenant by which people's sins are taken away. There were 3,000 Jews saved under the new covenant on the day of Pentecost alone and there were another 5,000 Jews saved on another day shortly after that (Acts 4:4). More Jews have been saved and had their sins taken away ever since under the new covenant and that will continue to be the case until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
No that is not what it says….”that blindness in part is happened to Israel, UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”
So the blindness happens up unto the UNTIL
The fulness of the Gentiles comes in.
And it doesn’t say it is a different Covenant other then the New Covenant. But it shows WHEN God shall make this future Covenant with Jacob.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying otherwise. Allow me to explain my view of this.
Israel was blinded in part in Paul's day, right? As Paul indicated here:
Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. 7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
So, for Israel to be "blinded in part" means part of Israel (the remnant according to the election of grace) was saved and "the rest were blinded"? Agree?
Has not that been the case ever since? It has, right? So, Israel has been blinded in part and will continue to be blinded in part "UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles comes in". Right? So, I'm not disagreeing with Paul when he said "that blindness in part is happened to Israel, UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” Can you see that?
Now, what I think happens at that point (when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in) differs from what you believe will happen at that point, and maybe we'll never agree on that. But, I just wanted to show that my view agrees with Paul saying "that blindness in part is happened to Israel, UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in".
So, you agree that it's referring to the new covenant. Was the new covenant not established by the blood of Christ long ago already? It clearly was, right (Hebrews 8:6-7)? So, why are you acting as if it's a covenant that God will make in the future when it's a covenant that God made with Jacob long ago already and has resulted in the salvation of many Jews for the past almost 2,000 years? Again, there were 3,000 Jews saved on the day of Pentecost alone (Acts 2:41) and then 5,000 more shortly after that (Acts 4:4). And they were saved under the new covenant and had their sins taken away. If that wasn't the beginning of the fulfillment of Isaiah 59:20-21, then I don't know what is.
I’m not acting, I’m telling you plainly what is written is the Truth. We are told WHEN ungodliness is to be removed from Jacob, and that is AFTER the fulness of the Gentiles comes in.
Did the fulness of the Gentiles come in when Jesus died on the cross and brought into force the New Covenant? Of course not!
So why try to force a meaning that is not there? It is because of that “Amil” doctrine you cling to that is making you try to force a meaning that is contrary to this future prophecy.
You need to dump that Amil false doctrine and reboot with Christ. A little of that false doctrine leaven can leaven the whole lump.
Matthew 16:12
Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
tailgator
Well-Known Member
Yes you did.
I quoted the verse and you said it was fulfilled in 70 AD.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
Stewardofthemystery
Active Member
Jul 22, 20247261584361TennesseeFaithChristianCountryUnited States
That prophecy is about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ad. Her time of warfare is nearly over.
Isaiah 40:2
Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the Lord's hand double for all her sins.
Next up the destruction of this wicked world.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
You said this prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD.
You are wrong.
Jerusalem has about ,4 years remaining till it is made desolate.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I disagree. I believe it says that ungodliness is removed from Jacob while the Gentiles are coming in right up until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. We can see from Romans 11:26-27 that ungodliness being removed from Jacob equates to the people of Jacob having their sins taken away and believing Jews have had their sins taken away under the new covenant for a long time already, including 3,000 of them on the day of Pentecost long ago (Acts 2:41) and 5,000 more in one day shortly after that (Acts 4:4).
Is that what I'm saying? Of course not! Please address my belief and not some straw man's belief instead. Both Jews and Gentiles have been getting saved for the past almost 2,000 years since the new covenant went into effect. After Jesus's death unbelieving Jews were cut off of the natural olive tree and believing Gentiles were grafted in (Romans 11:17-24). Back then Paul said there was a remnant of saved Jews and the rest were blinded (Romans 11:5-7). So, Israel was blinded in part. However, the ones who were blinded were not blinded permanently. As Paul indicated in Romans 11:11-14, he hoped to help save "some of them" who had been blinded. He indicated that they had stumbled, but did not fall. And he indicated that God blinded some of them (blinded in part) so that the Gentiles would provoke them to jealously so that some of them also would want to be saved just as the Gentiles were.
I never said that the fullness of the Gentiles came in when Jesus died on the cross. You are arguing with a straw man. I believe that, obviously, Gentiles have been getting saved by faith in Christ for the past almost 2,000 years and the fullness of the Gentiles has not yet come in since Gentiles are still getting saved. Obviously. Nowhere did I say anything to indicate that I believe the fullness of the Gentiles came in at the cross. That's complete nonsense. Your lack of attention to what I'm actually saying says a lot about you. Do you also interpret scripture as recklessly as you read my posts? Please read what I say more carefully so that you don't misrepresent what I believe.
There are Premils who see this the way I do as well, so this is not an Amil vs. Premil issue, it's an idealist vs futurist issue. There are even Amils who are futurists and see this as you do in terms of the nation of Israel being saved after the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. There are premils who recognize, as I do, that Paul was describing an ongoing process that started after Christ's death and resurrection where the salvation of Gentiles provokes Jews to jealousy which leads to their salvation as well. It's not as if that is something that only happened in Paul's day, as he described in Romans 11:11-14. That has been happening ever since then as well.
Nonsense. You need to stop being ignorant about what others believe while making it as if everything we disagree about is just because of my Amil belief rather than understanding that in this case I disagree with your futurist perspective of Romans 11 and it has nothing to do with Amil vs. Premil.
Premil is a false doctrine, as I've shown. It denies the current reign of Jesus Christ. It denies that all of the dead will be resurrected at the same time, as John 5:28-29 indicates. It denies that all people will be judged at the same time, as passages like Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50 and Matthew 25:31-46 indicate. It denies that all unbelievers will be killed when Jesus returns as passages like Matthew 24:35-39, Luke 17:26-37, 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12 and Rev 19:17-18 indicate. Premil has no answer for any of these passages. You noticeably run away or try to change the subject any time I try to get you to discuss any of those passages in detail.
LOL. How nice that you foolishly lump Christians in with unbelievers like them. Did the Pharisees teach that Jesus is God and the He is the King of kings and Lord of lords now as Amils do?
Tell me what Amils teach that is in common with what the Pharisees and the Sadducees taught? I'll tell you one thing that Premils believe that was in common with what they taught. Like you, they expected the Messiah to reign like a dictator over an earthly kingdom. They lacked understanding of the nature of the kingdom of God, as do you. It does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36). It "is not is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Romans 14:17).
And that is the problem. You cannot SEE it as a future prophecy because of the leaven of the false doctrine you follow.
A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Similar threads
