Search results

What has replacement theology replaced? Has it replaced Israel's physical DNA? No. Has it replaced Israel's opportunity to accept Christ and be saved? No. So what has replacement theology replaced?

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...

Daniel prophesied it. The Jews today confirm that it happened. No sign involved. You quoted them, so you agreed with them. But now you don't. Make up your mind. We can see who has no clue. :laughing:

Luke isn't Daniel. Stupid indeed.

What Scripture in Daniel refers to such a sign?

What beatings? :laughing: Point out the word "hyperbolically" in the following: "When the Romans razed the Second Temple, they left one outer wall standing. They probably would have destroyed that wall as well, but it must have seemed too insignificant to them since it was not part of the...

The Jews unambiguously refute that. Don't you believe your chosen people?

You should try telling these Jews that "its period of fulfillment is yet future". Tell us what they say. :laughing: Not to mention every other Jew throughout history who has accepted Christ and His New Covenant. Beginning with His own disciples. The claim that "its period of fulfillment is...

Who is the Israel that "the new covenant guarantees a converted heart as the foundation of all her blessings". By what does God identify them? 1. Their race 2. Their religion 3. Their culture 4. Their domicile 5. Their faithfulness and obedience to God and His Son ? Tip: God is not a...

The JVL, which you quoted, confirms that the Romans destroyed the physical city and sanctuary. The temple was destroyed. Only the western "wailing" wall was left standing. "When the Romans razed the Second Temple, they left one outer wall standing. They probably would have destroyed that wall...

I'll take Paul's bumf over yours. :laughing: Every time.

Paul was consistent in distinguishing between spiritual and physical temples. Paul's temples: "naos" spiritual: 1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations Greek 1 Corinthians 3:17 If...

The people of the prince who destroyed the city and sanctuary were the Romans, so the prince was the prince of the Romans. Who do think the prince was? It happened in 70 AD. Nothing future about it.

You've been telling us that it's the Romans, who destroyed the city and sanctuary.

We know who the people of the prince are. But you don't know who the prince is?

Let's continue exploring your futurized fantasies and fallacies. Who is the prince in Daniel 9:26?

You disbelieve the rabbis, the elite of your chosen people? For shame. :laughing: Before succumbing to delirious ecstasy about hyperbole, be aware that it originates with a nucleus of truth. Sorry to puncture your bubble.

Yes, the Jews never damaged so much as one square micrometer of Jerusalem, because they knew that the dispens would be claiming such. :laughing: You were saying? :laughing: The Wars of the Jews Book VI However, the cloister was full of those that were gone up the ladders; at which time...

Yes, according to the dispenarrative, Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed, but not one Jew went hungry. They all had three squares every day. :laughing: More dispenitis. As for your delusion that Jews were not responsible for the destruction of the city and temple: "In later...

Were Jews destroyed when their fellow Jews starved them to death? And drove them to cannibalism? Obviously you consider their destruction inconsequential compared to the temple. Typical dispenitis. :laughing: