Why Old Eschatologies Should Be Updated

[covenantee]

Oh my memory comes and goes. I'll tell you what you did, though. You wanted to know who the promises were made to? You say the Church, and I said the context demands that we acknowledge that Abraham and his Seed refer to Abraham and his descendants, as they are congregated in Christ spiritually.

So you don't school me, and you can't use the Scriptures to school me. You're just arrogant. You divert and won't answer the questions. Who was Abraham's Seed, to whom the promises were made? It was Abraham and his descendants, Israel. And Paul noted that the singular use of "Seed" indicates the true descendants would have to be representative of Christ.

The promises that God made are irrevocable because God cannot fail to perform His word. He says what He means, and what He says goes. How's that for "poor memory?"

Still haven't got Romans 11:29 figured out even after a plethora of Scripture, have you.

Still can't understand "irrevocable" even after a plethora of Scripture, can you.

Which to believe?

Your Scriptureless opinions
or
A plethora of Scripture

Do you need a hint?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Still haven't got Romans 11:29 figured out even after a plethora of Scripture, have you.

Still can't understand "irrevocable" even after a plethora of Scripture, can you.

Which to believe?

Your Scriptureless opinions
or
A plethora of Scripture

Do you need a hint?

Like I said, you're an arrogant man. Do you really think you're ministering to me while you think you're using Scriptures to "school me?" It obviously isn't that I haven't figured out Rom 11:29. I had most of Romans memorized back in the early 70s. It's just that when someone disagrees with your take you want to insult them by claiming they "don't understand," or are "terribly ignorant." Maybe you can learn to be more polite, and then use Scriptures the way they were meant to be used?

Rom 11.28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

I was talking about God's Word and Promises being "irrevocable." And here you're talking about something different but related.

Yes, both God's promises and His Word are irrevocable once put into use. God said He would have Christians among the Jews, but He also said He would have a Christian Israel.

This is the context, and it suggests that the heirs of Abraham's promise are Israel. This requires the national deliverance of Israel from destruction, resulting in the entire nation embracing the Christian religion...

Rom 11.26 and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

 

[covenantee]

Like I said, you're an arrogant man. Do you really think you're ministering to me while you think you're using Scriptures to "school me?" It obviously isn't that I haven't figured out Rom 11:29. I had most of Romans memorized back in the early 70s. It's just that when someone disagrees with your take you want to insult them by claiming they "don't understand," or are "terribly ignorant." Maybe you can learn to be more polite, and then use Scriptures the way they were meant to be used?

Rom 11.28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

I was talking about God's Word and Promises being "irrevocable." And here you're talking about something different but related.

Yes, both God's promises and His Word are irrevocable once put into use. God said He would have Christians among the Jews, but He also said He would have a Christian Israel.

This is the context, and it suggests that the heirs of Abraham's promise are Israel. This requires the national deliverance of Israel from destruction, resulting in the entire nation embracing the Christian religion...

Rom 11.26 and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

You're hallucinating again.

Provide a link to just one post in which I used the description "terribly ignorant".

Just one post.



Two Israels.

Romans 9
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.

1. Of Israel:
Not all Israel
The children of the flesh
Not the children of God
Not the children of the promise
Not counted for the seed

2. All Israel:
Not of Israel
Not the children of the flesh
The children of God
The children of the promise
Counted for the seed

Only one of these two Israels shall be saved.

Romans 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:

Only the faithful obedient spiritual "all Israel", comprised of the believing elect beloved remnant from Israel (Romans 9:27; Romans 11:1-5,26,28), and believers from among the Gentiles (Romans 11:11), shall be saved.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Two Israels.

Romans 9
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.

1. Of Israel:
Not all Israel
The children of the flesh
Not the children of God
Not the children of the promise
Not counted for the seed

2. All Israel:
Not of Israel
Not the children of the flesh
The children of God
The children of the promise
Counted for the seed

Only one of these two Israels shall be saved.

Romans 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:

Only the faithful obedient spiritual "all Israel", comprised of the believing elect beloved remnant from Israel (Romans 9:27; Romans 11:1-5,26,28), and believers from among the Gentiles (Romans 11:11), shall be saved.

All you seem to be saying brother is that some individual Jews get saved and some individual Jews don't get saved. That is how "Israel" is being used--not to indicate there are "two Israels," but rather, to indicate that *some* in Israel will not be saved even though they are Israelis.

The passage distinguishes between children of the promise and children of the flesh. It does *not* say there are "two Israels." That is patently absurd.

When you think you need to school me, basically you're calling me "terribly ignorant." Not the exact words. Why don't we discuss this in a better spirit, as fellow Christians? Are your pet doctrines so important to you that you have to be rude?

 

[covenantee]

The passage distinguishes between children of the promise and children of the flesh. It does *not* say there are "two Israels." That is patently absurd.

I thought that everyone would recognize that it is a coined figurative expression. Obviously I was wrong.

When you think you need to school me, basically you're calling me "terribly ignorant."

Scripture and the Holy Spirit do the schooling. What do you think they call you?

 

[covenantee]

All you seem to be saying brother is that some individual Jews get saved and some individual Jews don't get saved. That is how "Israel" is being used--not to indicate there are "two Israels," but rather, to indicate that *some* in Israel will not be saved even though they are Israelis.

The meaning of "all Israel", which is frequently misinterpreted in Romans 11:26, is explained in Romans 9:6-8.

Did you recognize it?

 

[Randy Kluth]

I thought that everyone would recognize that it is a coined figurative expression. Obviously I was wrong.

Scripture and the Holy Spirit do the schooling. What do you think they call you?

You're obviously incorrigible. No sense trying to be sensible with you.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The meaning of "all Israel", which is frequently misinterpreted in Romans 11:26, is explained in Romans 9:6-8.

Did you recognize it?

If you'd like to discuss anything at all, learn to act like a Christian. What you *know* doesn't make you a good Christian. But in this case, I don't think you even "know."

Rom 9.6-8 says just what I told you it says. There are not "two Israels." Whether you call it a "figurative expression" or not, saying it is misleading.

And why are you saying it at all? You don't even present an argument--just point me to Scriptures that confirm what I've been saying all along.

Not for your sake but for anybody who may be listening, you were asking who God's promises were to? I told you they were given to Israel. And then you make the meaningless claim that not all Israelis are true children of God. That goes without saying. But it does not disprove that God's promises were made to Abraham and to Israel.

God's promise concerning Israel is irrevocable. You inferred that I was ignorant and needed to be schooled by Scriptures on this. And yet, you've only proven my point, that Israel is the recipient of God's irrevocable promises, some children of the flesh notwithstanding.

Israel is only in a temporary state of backsliding as a nation. There is in existence a remnant of believing Christians, and there always has been. The time will come when the wicked will no longer control the religion of the nation, and it will convert to Christianity. God's word is good on that.

 

[ewq1938]

The time will come when the wicked will no longer control the religion of the nation, and it will convert to Christianity.

So, since Jacob and his sons until the second coming, what percentage of all the people of the tribes of Israel will be saved and what percentage are unsaved? Exact percentage number is only known to God but go ahead and take a rough guess.

God's word is good on that.

I would use "silent" in place of good in that sentence.

 

[covenantee]

What you *know* doesn't make you a good Christian. But in this case, I don't think you even "know."

What don't you think I even know?

Rom 9.6-8 says just what I told you it says. There are not "two Israels." Whether you call it a "figurative expression" or not, saying it is misleading.

It isn't misleading to those who recognize figurative expressions.

And why are you saying it at all? You don't even present an argument--just point me to Scriptures that confirm what I've been saying all along.

Arguing isn't necessary. I cited several Scriptures. You'll have to point yourself to them.

Not for your sake but for anybody who may be listening, you were asking who God's promises were to. I told you they were given to Israel.

I showed from Scripture that they are given to the Church. I believe that over what you told me.

 

[Randy Kluth]

So, since Jacob and his sons until the second coming, what percentage of all the people of the tribes of Israel will be saved and what percentage are unsaved? Exact percentage number is only known to God but go ahead and take a rough guess.


I would use "silent" in place of good in that sentence.

No, I think the fact God made irrevocable promises *to Israel* are unmistakable and in fact, ubiquitous.

I don't have to guess. As soon as Jews convert to Christianity they are "disowned" by their Jewish brethren. The majority of Jews are dominated by those who adhere to Rabbinic Judaism, or to nothing at all. Christian Jews are considered apostates, and in fact an oxymoron. Being "Jewish" is thought to be born of a Jewish Mother, a follower of Rabbinic Judaism, but if you're a convert to Christianity, you're an apostate.

So it's scarcely recognizable when there are real Jews who have become Christians. They're virtually forced out of the Jewish community. But in the state of Israel I suppose you can be whatever you want to be. Certainly Messianic Judaism would not receive any degree of recognition, so what are we looking at--1 % or less?

The "tribes of Israel" don't exist any longer. The only reason I mention them is because it was promised that from all 12 tribes would come the nation Israel. At first they were divided between two kingdoms, Israel and Judah. But eventually, following the Babylonian Captivity, they merged into one.

The tribe of Judah, being the dominant tribe in the former Kingdom of Judah, was nevertheless the recipient of all of the other tribes, among those who wished to engage in proper religious orthodoxy. Acceptable worship was to be in Jerusalem, which was in the territory of Judah.

So the "Jews" today are the product of all 12 tribes, in accordance with God's promise, to make the nation out of all 12 tribes. But they cannot possibly be 12 tribes any longer, nor can they ever be again. That day has passed. Some people just can't seem to understand how to translate all this into NT terms, but I won't fight over it. This is just my opinion.

 

[ewq1938]

No, I think the fact God made irrevocable promises *to Israel* are unmistakable and in fact, ubiquitous.

I don't have to guess. As soon as Jews convert to Christianity they are "disowned" by their Jewish brethren. The majority of Jews are dominated by those who adhere to Rabbinic Judaism, or to nothing at all. Christian Jews are considered apostates, and in fact an oxymoron. Being "Jewish" is thought to be born of a Jewish Mother, a follower of Rabbinic Judaism, but if you're a convert to Christianity, you're an apostate.

So it's scarcely recognizable when there are real Jews who have become Christians. They're virtually forced out of the Jewish community. But in the state of Israel I suppose you can be whatever you want to be. Certainly Messianic Judaism would not receive any degree of recognition, so what are we looking at--1 % or less?

The "tribes of Israel" don't exist any longer. The only reason I mention them is because it was promised that from all 12 tribes would come the nation Israel. At first they were divided between two kingdoms, Israel and Judah. But eventually, following the Babylonian Captivity, they merged into one.

The tribe of Judah, being the dominant tribe in the former Kingdom of Judah, was nevertheless the recipient of all of the other tribes, among those who wished to engage in proper religious orthodoxy. Acceptable worship was to be in Jerusalem, which was in the territory of Judah.

So the "Jews" today are the product of all 12 tribes, in accordance with God's promise, to make the nation out of all 12 tribes. But they cannot possibly be 12 tribes any longer, nor can they ever be again. That day has passed. Some people just can't seem to understand how to translate all this into NT terms, but I won't fight over it. This is just my opinion.

None of this answered my question.

 

[Randy Kluth]

None of this answered my question.

Then I guess you have to answer it for yourself. That was my answer. Less than 1% of Jews saved. 99% unsaved, but still eligible for salvation. The Jewish leadership does not make it easy to convert to Christianity if you're a Jew.

 

[Randy Kluth]

What don't you think I even know?

I don't think you know what you claim I don't know.

It isn't misleading to those who recognize figurative expressions.

On the contrary, what you said wasn't obviously figurative. You were saying there were "two Israels." How is the figurative sense different from the literal sense?

Arguing isn't necessary. I cited several Scriptures. You'll have to point yourself to them.

Anybody can throw Scriptures into the mix. But making sense of them is what's important.

Scriptures are used like a magical word. They are just thrown out there and expect it to confirm whatever a person presumes it says.

But to discuss it with those who disagree requires a certain amount of nobility--something I've yet to see from you.

I showed from Scripture that they are given to the Church. I believe that over what you told me.

What I said does not necessarily conflict with that idea--it depends. I believe the promises are fulfilled in Christ, and applied to Christians. Israel will convert to Christianity in the future, and a significant number of Jews within that state will become true born again Christians. That is, they will become part of the international Church.

The problem I most often encounter with those who disagree with me on this is their belief that Israel cannot, as a nation, convert to Christianity. When I point out that England became a Christian nation, that the US became a Christian nation, that Russia became a Christian nation, these are cast off in the same way Israel is cast off, as delegitimized by national apostasy.

Well yes, national apostasy does disqualify, but the whole idea of grace is that fallen nations can rise again. So I believe that is what will happen for Israel at Christ's return. And he will restore many fallen Christian nations as well.

When I say that God will restore "entire nations," I'm not saying that every individual in those nations will get saved. I'm differentiating between the survival, politically, of whole nations, as opposed to just a small segment of the nation being spared destruction.

Entire nations will be restored, replete with needed resources and room to grow. When God restores He restores whole nations, and not just halves of nations!

And so I distinguish this national salvaging from evangelical salvation, because the two are not the same. This has been the main confusion in this whole concept Paul had of "all Israel" getting saved. He was referring to Israel's political salvation as a nation for the express purpose of allowing Jews to freely convert to Christ and so comprise a great endtime harvest of souls within Israel. It never had a thing to do with every individual getting saved in an evangelical sense.

 

[covenantee]

On the contrary, what you said wasn't obviously figurative. You were saying there were "two Israels." How is the figurative sense different from the literal sense?

It is common knowledge that there are not two literal states of Israel. That is the first clue that "Two Israels" is to be understood figuratively.

I then expand upon the two Scriptural expressions "all Israel" and "of Israel", which obviously do not mean two literal states of Israel. That is the second clue that "Two Israels" is to be understood figuratively.

So what's the problem?

 

[Keraz]

The tribe of Judah, being the dominant tribe in the former Kingdom of Judah, was nevertheless the recipient of all of the other tribes, among those who wished to engage in proper religious orthodoxy. Acceptable worship was to be in Jerusalem, which was in the territory of Juda

This is not correct, Biblically or historically. Even Josephus knew the 10 tribes of Israel were separate people to the House of Judah.
Those few, maybe a thousand or so, Israelites who did join with Judah after they split, became Jews, As some deceived people still do today.

But they cannot possibly be 12 tribes any longer, nor can they ever be again.

Your beliefs contradict the Bible, Jesus will divide His faithful Christian peoples into 12 divisions, each called after a son of Jacob. Rev 7:1-9, 14:1-5

a significant number of Jews within that state will become true born again Christians.

This assertion is totally unsupported by scripture. It is entirely the false teaching of the 'rapture' believers, who need the Jews to face the Great Trib, while they sit and watch from heaven. An incredibly pretentious idea, that can never happen.

The apostate, atheistic and Jesus rejecting Israelis, face judgment and punishment and only a remnant will survive. Romans 9:27

 

[Truth7t7]

I don't think you know what you claim I don't know.

On the contrary, what you said wasn't obviously figurative. You were saying there were "two Israels." How is the figurative sense different from the literal sense?

Anybody can throw Scriptures into the mix. But making sense of them is what's important.

Scriptures are used like a magical word. They are just thrown out there and expect it to confirm whatever a person presumes it says.

But to discuss it with those who disagree requires a certain amount of nobility--something I've yet to see from you.

What I said does not necessarily conflict with that idea--it depends. I believe the promises are fulfilled in Christ, and applied to Christians. Israel will convert to Christianity in the future, and a significant number of Jews within that state will become true born again Christians. That is, they will become part of the international Church.

The problem I most often encounter with those who disagree with me on this is their belief that Israel cannot, as a nation, convert to Christianity. When I point out that England became a Christian nation, that the US became a Christian nation, that Russia became a Christian nation, these are cast off in the same way Israel is cast off, as delegitimized by national apostasy.

Well yes, national apostasy does disqualify, but the whole idea of grace is that fallen nations can rise again. So I believe that is what will happen for Israel at Christ's return. And he will restore many fallen Christian nations as well.

When I say that God will restore "entire nations," I'm not saying that every individual in those nations will get saved. I'm differentiating between the survival, politically, of whole nations, as opposed to just a small segment of the nation being spared destruction.

Entire nations will be restored, replete with needed resources and room to grow. When God restores He restores whole nations, and not just halves of nations!

And so I distinguish this national salvaging from evangelical salvation, because the two are not the same. This has been the main confusion in this whole concept Paul had of "all Israel" getting saved. He was referring to Israel's political salvation as a nation for the express purpose of allowing Jews to freely convert to Christ and so comprise a great endtime harvest of souls within Israel. It never had a thing to do with every individual getting saved in an evangelical sense.

Randy you have been shown biblical truth to your error "Several Times" over the past 4 months +++, you are rebellious towards God's truth presented, "Sad & Scary"!

 

[Truth7t7]

Well yes, national apostasy does disqualify, but the whole idea of grace is that fallen nations can rise again. So I believe that is what will happen for Israel at Christ's return. And he will restore many fallen Christian nations as well.

When I say that God will restore "entire nations," I'm not saying that every individual in those nations will get saved. I'm differentiating between the survival, politically, of whole nations, as opposed to just a small segment of the nation being spared destruction.

Entire nations will be restored, replete with needed resources and room to grow. When God restores He restores whole nations, and not just halves of nations!

Your belief is is joke!

You continued claims of "National Political Salvation" is a "Farce" Randy, found no place in scripture

You will closely note you provide no scripture to support your claims, because it's Randy's Zionist Sci-Fi dream, found no place in scripture, a fact!

It's amazing how in rebellion to biblical truth you cling to these false claims

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[ewq1938]

Then I guess you have to answer it for yourself. That was my answer. Less than 1% of Jews saved. 99% unsaved, but still eligible for salvation.

Since the formation of Israel? How can you die unsaved and yet still be eligible for salvation?

 

[Davy]

Per Daniel 12 we know that spiritual and secular knowledge will increase in the latter days yet many of us cling to millennia and centuries old eschatologies even though there is no real modern scriptural basis for them. Beliefs like amill, postmill, preterism and historicism need to be upgraded because we should be no longer bound to generations that didn’t have the scientific and spiritual insights that God has granted us in these latter days.

That kind of thinking is totally ABSURD, and is against The Word of God.

Secular Humanists reason like what you have posted. It is they... that think The Bible is an outdated document. And that kind of thinking means THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD.

So thank you... for revealing to us who you REALLY are. Jesus said those of us in Christ would know folks like you by your 'fruit'.