Dispensationalism versus Hyper-Dispensationalism

  • 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!

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
I never said sin wasn't sin. I said the Church is under no law. I never said it is ok to commit sin because we are not under law. Sin is always sin and when we sin we confess it before God and move on. The law has no power or authority over us to condemn us. We do not try and now keep the law of God so as not to sin. We walk in the Spirit. If we walk in the Spirit we will not sin. If you try and obey the law, your sins will multiply.
If there is no law, there can be no sin;

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Since you agree that believers still sin, there must be a law we are breaking.

OK, so you're part of the Church...you just don't like your name. You're the one claiming before you were not Christian, not part of the Church. I was just going by what you said.
No, that is what you said because you are the one that requires me to be a Christian in order for me to be part of the Church. One need not be a Christian to be a believer. One need only put their faith in Messiah Yeshua as their Lord and Savior.

Concerning (James 2:8-12), James is speaking to Jewish Christians concerning having the faith in Christ with respect of persons. And he goes on to use the example of accepting a rich man and not a poor man into your assembly. We know the Jerusalem Church was especially prone to to have the faith in Christ with respect to the Jews and not the Gentiles. And, that they were prone to try and force circumcision on the Gentiles. And they were prone to keeping the law.

So James is showing these Jews that respect of persons is a sin just as adultry is a sin, just as murder is a sin, thus they have broken the whole law, because when you break one law, you have broken the whole law. The law to the Jews is like a pacifier. They need to be taken back to it to prove what is sin and what is not.
If a believing Jew has respect of persons, then he has broken the whole law. I agree. Thus, it is established that the whole law still exists in order for it to be broken.

Well, if you don't like the term Easter, and don't know that Easter should mean passover and represent the feast of passover, then find you a Bible that doesn't have it there. Concerning the word ' 'LORD' even the 'Tanakh' uses the word LORD God, and God, and Lord. You are making a big deal over nothing.
Truth is a big deal, especially when it is cast down to the ground by error. You obviously have a very lackadaisical attitude toward truth.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If there is no law, there can be no sin;

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Since you agree that believers still sin, there must be a law we are breaking.


No, that is what you said because you are the one that requires me to be a Christian in order for me to be part of the Church. One need not be a Christian to be a believer. One need only put their faith in Messiah Yeshua as their Lord and Savior.


If a believing Jew has respect of persons, then he has broken the whole law. I agree. Thus, it is established that the whole law still exists in order for it to be broken.


Truth is a big deal, especially when it is cast down to the ground by error. You obviously have a very lackadaisical attitude toward truth.

No, where no law is there is no transgression. Sin is still present. You do understand the difference don't you? Sin is not imputed doesn't mean there isn't any sin. You do understand the difference don't you? Yes, sin is the transgression of the law. But where no law is, there is no transgression.

Even where there is no law, sin still exists. Sin doesn't need the law to exist. It needs the law to make it a transgression.

No, you're the one who said you were not a Christian. Don't be crawfishing on me.

The believer in Christ is not under any law. The Jew always returns to his pacifier, the law, so James must use the law to show the Jewish Christian he is breaking the law. Just like I had to show you.

Then why does the Tanakh use the words 'Lord' and 'LORD' and 'LORD God'. Are they not Jewish enough for you? You are making a big deal over nothing to present yourself as something closer to God than anyone else.

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
No, where no law is there is no transgression. Sin is still present. You do understand the difference don't you? Sin is not imputed doesn't mean there isn't any sin. You do understand the difference don't you? Yes, sin is the transgression of the law. But where no law is, there is no transgression.
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
1Jn 3:3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
1Jn 3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

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.
John is writing to believers (the sons of God). He says we must purify ourselves (from sin) as Yeshua is pure (sinless). He then tells us that when we sin it is because we transgressed the law. Yeshua took away our sins resulting from breaking the law. Now that we have had our sins (transgressions of the law) taken away, we should no longer abide in sin (we should no longer continue transgressing the law that you say does not exist). We avoid transgressing the law by keeping keeping YHWH's commandments (commandments that you say no longer exist).

No, you're the one who said you were not a Christian.
Yes, I said I was not a Christian. You said I was not part of the Church because I was not a Christian.

The believer in Christ is not under any law. The Jew always returns to his pacifier, the law, so James must use the law to show the Jewish Christian he is breaking the law.
Spare me your twisted interpretations. James said we do well if we fulfill the royal "law" and he says we should behave as those who will be judged by the "law" of liberty. In James 1:25, he tells us to continue in the perfect "law" of liberty. In James 4:11, he says, "Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge." Yet you say the believer in Christ is not under "any law".

Then why does the Tanakh use the words 'Lord' and 'LORD' and 'LORD God'. Are they not Jewish enough for you?
Because the Jews have such an over zealous reverence for the Name and fear of blaspheming it that they invented a man-made law saying no one is permitted to say the Name. So they use all sorts of substitutions like "LORD", "HaShem", " " ", "Adonai", "kurios", etc., to avoid saying it. The fact the inspired Scriptures show that the patriarchs all spoke the Name tells me the Jews are wrong.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
1Jn 3:3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
1Jn 3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

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.
John is writing to believers (the sons of God). He says we must purify ourselves (from sin) as Yeshua is pure (sinless). He then tells us that when we sin it is because we transgressed the law. Yeshua took away our sins resulting from breaking the law. Now that we have had our sins (transgressions of the law) taken away, we should no longer abide in sin (we should no longer continue transgressing the law that you say does not exist). We avoid transgressing the law by keeping keeping YHWH's commandments (commandments that you say no longer exist).


Yes, I said I was not a Christian. You said I was not part of the Church because I was not a Christian.


Spare me your twisted interpretations. James said we do well if we fulfill the royal "law" and he says we should behave as those who will be judged by the "law" of liberty. In James 1:25, he tells us to continue in the perfect "law" of liberty. In James 4:11, he says, "Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge." Yet you say the believer in Christ is not under "any law".


Because the Jews have such an over zealous reverence for the Name and fear of blaspheming it that they invented a man-made law saying no one is permitted to say the Name. So they use all sorts of substitutions like "LORD", "HaShem", " " ", "Adonai", "kurios", etc., to avoid saying it. The fact the inspired Scriptures show that the patriarchs all spoke the Name tells me the Jews are wrong.

All are good verses you give. I agree we are to purify ourselves. And, I understand what sin is as described by John. None of which place us under law. The way to quit sinning is to abide in Christ; to walk in the Spirit....not to keep the law. The law always finds you guilty.

If you're not a Christian you're not part of the Church. If you're part of the Church then you're Christian.

I have to put up with your interpretations so you get to hear mine. Read again in post # (122) what I said of James and the Law. Nothing wrong with the Law. But the believer is not under the Law.

Yes, yes, yes, everyone has got the name wrong but you. You are the 'holy one'. What about the name of Jesus Christ? Did anyone get that right?

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
All are good verses you give. I agree we are to purify ourselves. And, I understand what sin is as described by John. None of which place us under law. The way to quit sinning is to abide in Christ; to walk in the Spirit....not to keep the law. The law always finds you guilty.
You keep using the phrase "under the law". I do not teach we are "under" law as it was under the OC. We have the same law/Torah written in our hearts. When we abide in Messiah and walk in the Spirit, we obey those laws. There are millions of Christians that abide in Christ and who have the Spirit, but they do not quit sinning. When they choose to sin, the law remains to point out that sin so they can confess and repent. Because you and others teach Christians there is no law for them to obey, they do not repent.

If you're not a Christian you're not part of the Church. If you're part of the Church then you're Christian.
My case rests. You built your little salvation box and exclude those who don't fit in your mold.

I have to put up with your interpretations so you get to hear mine. Read again in post # (122) what I said of James and the Law. Nothing wrong with the Law. But the believer is not under the Law.
What you said of James was wrong which is why I quoted him further.

Yes, yes, yes, everyone has got the name wrong but you. You are the 'holy one'. What about the name of Jesus Christ? Did anyone get that right?
There are many believers around the world that are restoring YHWH's and Yeshua's name to the Scriptures, not just me. If you choose to continue walking in error, so be it. Yeshua has taught me to love truth.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You keep using the phrase "under the law". I do not teach we are "under" law as it was under the OC. We have the same law/Torah written in our hearts. When we abide in Messiah and walk in the Spirit, we obey those laws. There are millions of Christians that abide in Christ and who have the Spirit, but they do not quit sinning. When they choose to sin, the law remains to point out that sin so they can confess and repent. Because you and others teach Christians there is no law for them to obey, they do not repent.


My case rests. You built your little salvation box and exclude those who don't fit in your mold.


What you said of James was wrong which is why I quoted him further.


There are many believers around the world that are restoring YHWH's and Yeshua's name to the Scriptures, not just me. If you choose to continue walking in error, so be it. Yeshua has taught me to love truth.

Yes, you are trying to put the Church under the Law. You can say you are not all you want, but when you are trying to obey the Law, you are under the Law. The Law doesn't point out sin so you can confess your sins. The law points out your sin and condemns you. You have broken the Law.

Do you need the Law to tell you when you sin? Please. Let me see...should I murder this man or not. Let me go see what the law says. O gee, that is a sin. I better not. Or if I do, I better repent. Sounds silly doesn't it? That is because it is. Grow up.

It is not my mold. Scriptures are clear that if you are a Christian then your part of the Church. You can't have it any other way.

Well, you can quote (James) till the cows come home. Your use of (James) to try and place the Church under Law is what is wrong.

Yes, I know. I have run into many types that claim they have the correct name, and of course they are the only ones who have the correct name. It is a good thing there are many names given God throughout Scripture. And you didn't answer my question. How about Jesus Christ, did we get His name right? Or do you have some special Hebrew and Greek play on words that reveal the 'real' name?

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Yes, you are trying to put the Church under the Law. You can say you are not all you want, but when you are trying to obey the Law, you are under the Law. The Law doesn't point out sin so you can confess your sins. The law points out your sin and condemns you. You have broken the Law.
I am trying to teach believers to keep YHWH's commandments as the remnant does in Revelation 12:17 and Revelation 14:12. The law condemns no one. The breaking of the law (sin) condemns. Under the OC, sin brought forth death. Yeshua paid that price for all. So now, under the NC, the law condemns no one that fulfills it through walking in the Spirit. However, if we walk in the flesh and live sinful lives yielding to the lusts of the flesh, we will not inherit the Kingdom.

Do you need the Law to tell you when you sin? Please. Let me see...should I murder this man or not. Let me go see what the law says. O gee, that is a sin. I better not. Or if I do, I better repent. Sounds silly doesn't it? That is because it is. Grow up.
Your fictional scenario is based on what a man might think BEFORE sin. "By the law is the knowledge of sin" refers to what takes place AFTER sin is committed. Under the NC, the Spirit will reveal to us that we have broken the law written on our hearts.

It is not my mold. Scriptures are clear that if you are a Christian then your part of the Church. You can't have it any other way.
I was referring to the other part of your comment; "If you're not a Christian you're not part of the Church". This mold demands that one be a Christian in order to be part of the Church. Using your terminology of "Church", I am part of the Church, but I am not a Christian. Deceived Christianity will not allow me to be a Christian unless I accept the trinity and deity of Christ. That is another mold I must fit into which is NOT Scriptural.

Yes, I know. I have run into many types that claim they have the correct name, and of course they are the only ones who have the correct name. It is a good thing there are many names given God throughout Scripture. And you didn't answer my question. How about Jesus Christ, did we get His name right? Or do you have some special Hebrew and Greek play on words that reveal the 'real' name?
You may choose to believe God has many names, but the fact remains that the name we are discussing is the Tetragrammaton which you have no problem removing from our Bibles as the translators did. You agree that the diminishing of the Word and the adding to it is acceptable, contrary to Deuteronomy 4:2, but, then again, that is OC law which you do not have a problem transgressing.

As for "Jesus Christ", everyone who uses that name has his name WRONG. Do not try to tell me that "Jesus Christ" is his name in English. His name used to be "Iesus" in the 1611 KJV English Bible until the letter "J" was invented. Then they changed his name to "Jesus". People like you have no problem with such a change because you approach Scripture carelessly. People like me restore truth because we know our Father loves truth.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am trying to teach believers to keep YHWH's commandments as the remnant does in Revelation 12:17 and Revelation 14:12. The law condemns no one. The breaking of the law (sin) condemns. Under the OC, sin brought forth death. Yeshua paid that price for all. So now, under the NC, the law condemns no one that fulfills it through walking in the Spirit. However, if we walk in the flesh and live sinful lives yielding to the lusts of the flesh, we will not inherit the Kingdom.


Your fictional scenario is based on what a man might think BEFORE sin. "By the law is the knowledge of sin" refers to what takes place AFTER sin is committed. Under the NC, the Spirit will reveal to us that we have broken the law written on our hearts.


I was referring to the other part of your comment; "If you're not a Christian you're not part of the Church". This mold demands that one be a Christian in order to be part of the Church. Using your terminology of "Church", I am part of the Church, but I am not a Christian. Deceived Christianity will not allow me to be a Christian unless I accept the trinity and deity of Christ. That is another mold I must fit into which is NOT Scriptural.


You may choose to believe God has many names, but the fact remains that the name we are discussing is the Tetragrammaton which you have no problem removing from our Bibles as the translators did. You agree that the diminishing of the Word and the adding to it is acceptable, contrary to Deuteronomy 4:2, but, then again, that is OC law which you do not have a problem transgressing.

As for "Jesus Christ", everyone who uses that name has his name WRONG. Do not try to tell me that "Jesus Christ" is his name in English. His name used to be "Iesus" in the 1611 KJV English Bible until the letter "J" was invented. Then they changed his name to "Jesus". People like you have no problem with such a change because you approach Scripture carelessly. People like me restore truth because we know our Father loves truth.

You are trying to place believers back under the law. (Rev. 12:17) pertains to Israel, not the Church. See (Rev. 12:1-6) (Rev. 14:12) speaks to the saints of the Tribulation which is after the Rapture of the Church. Foolish statement. The Law condemns everyone. That is it's purpose. (Rom. 4:15) "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."

The scenario I presented parallels what you have been trying to preach. But now you say it takes place after sin. Ok. So, I go and murder someone. Gee, was that wrong or right? Let me go to the law and find out. Oh gosh. It was wrong. Good thing I had the law there to tell me, as I was so stupid that I did not know. Please, grow up.

Again, a Christian is part of the Church. If you're not Christian then you are not part of the Church. Just that simple. If you don't want to be Christian, that's fine.

I knew it. Even the name of Jesus Christ is wrong to you. What a Pharisee. Tell me then what the real name of Jesus Christ is, oh holy one.

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
You are trying to place believers back under the law.
And you are trying to keep believers living in sin.

(Rev. 12:17) pertains to Israel, not the Church. See (Rev. 12:1-6) (Rev. 14:12) speaks to the saints of the Tribulation which is after the Rapture of the Church.
The remnant of the woman's seed has "the testimony of Yeshua Messiah". Israel does not have that testimony. The remnant consists of those that "are alive and remain" after the resurrection takes place in Revelation 12:5. They are part of the "Church" and they will be keeping YHWH's commandments.

The Law condemns everyone. That is it's purpose. (Rom. 4:15) "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."
The law worked wrath under the OC and only when broken. Under the NC, it no longer works wrath. Paul said the law is good if it is used lawfully. He also said believers must "strive lawfully". That is pretty hard to do if there is no law.

The scenario I presented parallels what you have been trying to preach. But now you say it takes place after sin. Ok. So, I go and murder someone. Gee, was that wrong or right? Let me go to the law and find out. Oh gosh. It was wrong. Good thing I had the law there to tell me, as I was so stupid that I did not know.
We know murder is wrong because the law is in our hearts and minds. What law is in your heart and mind? No law.

I knew it. Even the name of Jesus Christ is wrong to you. What a Pharisee. Tell me then what the real name of Jesus Christ is, oh holy one.
Why do you feel it is necessary to resort to mocking and name calling? You can't just discuss an issue without allowing your carnal nature to rise up? And you tell me to "grow up"?

I have already proven that "Jesus" is NOT our Savior's name. It is a man-made conglomeration of errors over three different languages. His name is "Yeshua" meaning "he will save" (Matthew 1:21).
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And you are trying to keep believers living in sin.


The remnant of the woman's seed has "the testimony of Yeshua Messiah". Israel does not have that testimony. The remnant consists of those that "are alive and remain" after the resurrection takes place in Revelation 12:5. They are part of the "Church" and they will be keeping YHWH's commandments.


The law worked wrath under the OC and only when broken. Under the NC, it no longer works wrath. Paul said the law is good if it is used lawfully. He also said believers must "strive lawfully". That is pretty hard to do if there is no law.


We know murder is wrong because the law is in our hearts and minds. What law is in your heart and mind? No law.


Why do you feel it is necessary to resort to mocking and name calling? You can't just discuss an issue without allowing your carnal nature to rise up? And you tell me to "grow up"?

I have already proven that "Jesus" is NOT our Savior's name. It is a man-made conglomeration of errors over three different languages. His name is "Yeshua" meaning "he will save" (Matthew 1:21).

Concerning (Rev. 12:5) there is no resurrection there. The woman in (Rev. 12:1) is Israel. You have only to compare it to (Gen. 37:9-10) "And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold,I have dreamed a dream more; and behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me....What is this that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?"

The woman, Israel, delivered the child, Jesus. (Rev. 12:2) The dragon, satan, attempts to destroy the child, Jesus. He Jesus, is caught up to Heaven, the ascension. (12:4-5) The woman, Israel flees into the wilderness during the last half of the Tribulation. (12:6)

So, this is Israel all the way. The Church has been gone since the end of (Rev. 3). Note that when speaking to the churches, Christ would end by saying "He that hath and ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches". (Rev. 2:7, 2:11, 2:17, 2:29, 3:6, 3:13, and 3:22) But later when that statement is made to those who hear, it is stated thus, (Rev. 13:9) "If any man have an ear, let him hear." No more to the churches. The Church is gone.

The law works wrath wherever it works. You can't keep it. You broke it. It condemns you and finds you guilty.

The law is written on our hearts so that we do not need the law. We have the Spirit of God and Jesus Christ. What you are saying is the law is written on our hearts and we still need to follow the law. Ridiculous. All you are doing is following the law and trying to get others to follow the law.

Yes, I tell you to grow up. The Law is for children. Slap their hand when they do wrong. Pat them on the head when they do right. You are trying to live under a program designed for teaching children. (Gal. 3:24)

And just like with God there are many names attributed to Jesus Christ. You present yourself in the Pharisee tradition of a holy one who knows the correct name. Everyone else has the names wrong. Foolish. And none of us knows His new name...unless you are telling me you know that also? I sure hope you get it right.

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Concerning (Rev. 12:5) there is no resurrection there. The woman in (Rev. 12:1) is Israel. You have only to compare it to (Gen. 37:9-10) "And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold,I have dreamed a dream more; and behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me....What is this that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?"

The woman, Israel, delivered the child, Jesus. (Rev. 12:2) The dragon, satan, attempts to destroy the child, Jesus. He Jesus, is caught up to Heaven, the ascension. (12:4-5) The woman, Israel flees into the wilderness during the last half of the Tribulation. (12:6)

So, this is Israel all the way. The Church has been gone since the end of (Rev. 3). Note that when speaking to the churches, Christ would end by saying "He that hath and ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches". (Rev. 2:7, 2:11, 2:17, 2:29, 3:6, 3:13, and 3:22) But later when that statement is made to those who hear, it is stated thus, (Rev. 13:9) "If any man have an ear, let him hear." No more to the churches. The Church is gone.
Verse 5 is usually misunderstood to mean Yeshua because Revelation 19:15 states that Yeshua will rule with a rod of iron. However, Revelation 2:27 states that the saints that overcome will also rule with a rod of iron. This means we need more evidence to prove the identity of the male child. "Caught up" comes from the Greek word "harpadzo" meaning to seize, to snatch away, to carry off (suddenly and by force). This forceful seizure of the child needs to be done because Satan is ready to devour it. In Luke 24:51 Yeshua is said to be "carried up into heaven." The Greek for "carried" is "anaphero" not "harpadzo" and it means to take up; to bear upwards. It is not a forceful carrying away. It is a slow, victorious ascent. However, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 it does mean a forceful snatching. This would put more evidence in favor of the child representing the resurrected saints than Yeshua.

A similar occurrence of the birth of a male child takes place in Isaiah 66:7-10, "Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. Who hath heard such a thing? Who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? Or shall a nation be born at once? For as soon as Zion travailed , she brought forth her children. Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith Yahweh: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy mighty one. Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her": Here we see Jerusalem or Zion giving birth to a son before her labor pains came (vs. 7). Then in verse 8 we see her delivering children after having labor pains. We know these births are speaking about a resurrection because verse 8 says, "shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day?" Then we can say, "Shall a nation be born (or resurrected) at once?" What nation is referred to here?

1 Peter 2:9 says the believers are "a holy nation." When all believers are resurrected they will form a holy nation that dwells together all in the same place, not as we do now, each from different nations. Who is the mother of this nation of believers? Galatians 4:22-28 says that "Jerusalem which is above" is our mother. In the very next verse Paul quotes Isaiah 54:1 proving that the barren woman, Jerusalem or Zion, would be the mother of a great nation of children. The first child she had that was born or resurrected was Yeshua. He is the male child that is spoken of in Isaiah 66:7 who was delivered before labor pains. In Isaiah 66:9 we see that after Yeshua was born into the kingdom of heaven, Zion's womb was left open because another birth had to occur after labor pains began. Those labor pains symbolize the great tribulation.

The prophets often compare the suffering of judgment and war with the pain and anguish that accompany childbirth (Jeremiah 6:24,25). So if labor pains equate with the great tribulation, which ends before the seven trumpets of Revelation sound, then the birth in Rev.12 occurs after the woman's labor pains start. In Revelation 12:2 the woman is in labor which means she cannot be in labor with Yeshua because he was born without labor pains or before the great tribulation. Chapter 12 is a picture of the saints being caught up into heaven at the coming of Yeshua after the seventh trumpet sounds. It is not a picture of Yeshua's earthly birth.

Yes, I tell you to grow up. The Law is for children. Slap their hand when they do wrong. Pat them on the head when they do right. You are trying to live under a program designed for teaching children. (Gal. 3:24)
And you are like a little child who refuses to obey his father's rules. As an adult, I still obey my father's rules. I do not need to be constantly reminded of them. They are always in my mind. I obey them naturally without having to see them written down on paper.

And just like with God there are many names attributed to Jesus Christ. You present yourself in the Pharisee tradition of a holy one who knows the correct name. Everyone else has the names wrong. Foolish. And none of us knows His new name...unless you are telling me you know that also? I sure hope you get it right.
No, I don't know his new name just as you do not know his old/original name.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
gadar perets

That the saints rule with a rod of iron with Christ proves nothing. The Church will rule and reign with Christ. I have no problem with that. And either way, whether Christ was caught up into Heaven or ascended into Heaven, He still went to Heaven. In other words, the child in (Rev. 12:5), Jesus, went to Heaven and the throne of God.

Concerning (Is. 66:7-10) Israel is the nation referred to.

Concerning (1 Peter 2:9), the believers, the Church are a holy nation. No problem there. But not all believers are of the same nation.

Concerning (Gal. 4:22-28), the comparison made is between law and grace. (Gal. 4:21) "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?" A verse you should pay close attention to, I might add. Paul gives an allegory of the free woman and the bond woman as represented by Jerusalem below and Jerusalem above. (4:24-26) All the children of promise come from the Jerusalem which is above. This means though the children of promise are part of Israel or part of the Church, they are all from above. (4:28) Nothing here makes the Church and Israel the same body of believers.

The Church is already gone by (Rom. 12) as I showed you.

If you obey them naturally then you don't need them. But you're the one saying you need them. Thus you still need your building blocks. Again, grow up.

His name at this time is Jesus Christ. That wasn't hard.

Stranger
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
And you are trying to keep believers living in sin.
Guess what the law does,,,,,,

1Co_15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

so im sure you can explain to Christ how you love to keep people in the bondage of sin,..... as all teh lawyers do.

1Ti_1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

which is why wherever you find the law you will find sinners chasing after it.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
gadar perets

That the saints rule with a rod of iron with Christ proves nothing. The Church will rule and reign with Christ. I have no problem with that. And either way, whether Christ was caught up into Heaven or ascended into Heaven, He still went to Heaven. In other words, the child in (Rev. 12:5), Jesus, went to Heaven and the throne of God.

Concerning (Is. 66:7-10) Israel is the nation referred to.

Concerning (1 Peter 2:9), the believers, the Church are a holy nation. No problem there. But not all believers are of the same nation.

Concerning (Gal. 4:22-28), the comparison made is between law and grace. (Gal. 4:21) "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?" A verse you should pay close attention to, I might add. Paul gives an allegory of the free woman and the bond woman as represented by Jerusalem below and Jerusalem above. (4:24-26) All the children of promise come from the Jerusalem which is above. This means though the children of promise are part of Israel or part of the Church, they are all from above. (4:28) Nothing here makes the Church and Israel the same body of believers.

The Church is already gone by (Rom. 12) as I showed you.

If you obey them naturally then you don't need them. But you're the one saying you need them. Thus you still need your building blocks. Again, grow up.

His name at this time is Jesus Christ. That wasn't hard.

Stranger

Question. Where does the Bible ever call the Church a nation?

Honestly, the name thing it's annoying at times. Living in America we are not, do not speak or Greek, so pretending to be either is neither basic biblical or impressing anyone.

Christ did not exist in the OT nor did he have a name. He was prophesied as the coming Savior, Messiah, King in a couple of other names I probably forgot.

If you really want to get technical Jesus name in English should be Joshua.

But it is Jesus because the Greek is translated into Latin which was translated into archaic English and stayed with us today as Jesus. So thank that Catholics for that.

I have no trouble or see a problem with calling him Jesus or Christ or Jesus Christ.

But again, trying to be OT Israel is really dishonest or deceived I believe.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Question. Where does the Bible ever call the Church a nation?

Honestly, the name thing it's annoying at times. Living in America we are not, do not speak or Greek, so pretending to be either is neither basic biblical or impressing anyone.

Christ did not exist in the OT nor did he have a name. He was prophesied as the coming Savior, Messiah, King in a couple of other names I probably forgot.

If you really want to get technical Jesus name in English should be Joshua.

But it is Jesus because the Greek is translated into Latin which was translated into archaic English and stayed with us today as Jesus. So thank that Catholics for that.

I have no trouble or see a problem with calling him Jesus or Christ or Jesus Christ.

But again, trying to be OT Israel is really dishonest or deceived I believe.

I believe (1 Peter 2:9-10) identifies the Church as a nation. "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people....Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God:....."

I recognize Peter is writing to Hebrew Christians, but his statement here of them in the Church is true of all in the Church. The only distinction I believe between the Jew and Gentile in the Church is that the Jews are the 'remnant' of Israel at this time. (Rom. 11:5) "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."

I am unsure what exactly you mean by saying Christ did not exist in the Old Testament. He did not exist as the Man we know as Jesus Christ, but He certainly existed as the Son.

I certainly believe those who hold to the Church as Israel are mistaken. But they will say the same of me and worse. We all who are believers study to understand the Scriptures, and in the process make mistakes and correct them later on down the road. Sometimes it's hard to say whether one is deceived or mistaken. For me the Dispensational, Premillennial view answers more questions and seems consistant in the natural flow of revelation.

Stranger
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Guess what the law does,,,,,,

1Co_15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

so im sure you can explain to Christ how you love to keep people in the bondage of sin,..... as all teh lawyers do.
The law is not sin (Romans 7:7). Nor is a bondage to obey it (1 John 5:3)

1Ti_1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

which is why wherever you find the law you will find sinners chasing after it.
No, sinners chase after sin (breaking the law) and YHWH's children embrace the law under the NC.
 

gadar perets

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2018
1,928
306
83
70
Raleigh, NC
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Question. Where does the Bible ever call the Church a nation?

1 Peter 2:9-10

Honestly, the name thing it's annoying at times. Living in America we are not, do not speak or Greek, so pretending to be either is neither basic biblical or impressing anyone.
I do not use the names I do to impress anyone, but to please my Father who wants me to walk in truth.

Christ did not exist in the OT nor did he have a name.
I totally agree.

He was prophesied as the coming Savior, Messiah, King in a couple of other names I probably forgot.
Those are not names, but titles.

If you really want to get technical Jesus name in English should be Joshua.

But it is Jesus because the Greek is translated into Latin which was translated into archaic English and stayed with us today as Jesus. So thank that Catholics for that.

I have no trouble or see a problem with calling him Jesus or Christ or Jesus Christ.
You may choose to do as the Catholics do and continue using "Jesus", but I will reject error and embrace truth whenever it is presented to me.

But again, trying to be OT Israel is really dishonest or deceived I believe.
Where am I trying to be OT Israel?
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I believe (1 Peter 2:9-10) identifies the Church as a nation. "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people....Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God:....."

I recognize Peter is writing to Hebrew Christians, but his statement here of them in the Church is true of all in the Church. The only distinction I believe between the Jew and Gentile in the Church is that the Jews are the 'remnant' of Israel at this time. (Rom. 11:5) "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."

I am unsure what exactly you mean by saying Christ did not exist in the Old Testament. He did not exist as the Man we know as Jesus Christ, but He certainly existed as the Son.

I certainly believe those who hold to the Church as Israel are mistaken. But they will say the same of me and worse. We all who are believers study to understand the Scriptures, and in the process make mistakes and correct them later on down the road. Sometimes it's hard to say whether one is deceived or mistaken. For me the Dispensational, Premillennial view answers more questions and seems consistant in the natural flow of revelation.

Stranger
The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number:
1484 Browse Lexicon
Original Word
Word Origin
e[qnoß probably from (1486)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Ethnos 2:364,201
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
eth'-nos Noun Neuter
Definition
  1. a multitude (whether of men or of beasts) associated or living together
    1. a company, troop, swarm
  2. a multitude of individuals of the same nature or genus
    1. the human family
  3. a tribe, nation, people group
  4. in the OT, foreign nations not worshipping the true God, pagans, Gentiles
  5. Paul uses the term for Gentile Christians

I meant a country, as Israel being a country.

Jesus Christ the man did not exist in the OT.

The second person of the Trinity was not and is not Jesus. His spirit is God, not his flesh.