The Rapture

[lawrance]

I wonder if Mr. Rosenberger is aware how his Christian ancestors pushed Aboriginal tribes out of their lands in Australia? Or how American's created the doctrine of Manifest Destiny - a mandate from God to push West to the coast of America - displacing Native Americans whenever we encroached on their lands?

We Aussies have looked after the saved generation and all the other abos pretty well, they are very lucky that the Poms came hear first.

The problem is the idiots that run around spinning a whole load of rubbish feeding hatred and never doing anything really truly helpful to help the people into a direction for them people to help themselves as they like to feed them like chickens in a cage and the people who do this are mainly atheist left wing trash. doing the work of the Devil.

Sure there were people treated badly as that happens every where.

The majority of people who came hear treated the abos well.

And two of my old school mates were of the saved generation and they grew up in a nice Church home and had a fine start to life. but the trash media never do shine a light on the part of the people who went to all the effort helping them people but gess what they are just ridiculed for it. and guess who by, some slob that never lifted a hand to help out, but only ran around slandered them people that helped out and slandered the good peoples hard loving work.

Sensationalist media love doing the work of Satan. and the Socialist rat bags who are slandering my forefathers names by saying a in censer half baked crocodile tears sorry. By a moron prime minister running around trying just to score brownie points.

My forefathers never did go out of there way to do anything wrong by the abos and i know it for a fact. and i have every right to say so.

 

[lawrance]

Well it depends.. Lets say that I was given a home by my father. And I went away from it for a long time. And while I was gone, my neighbor just moved in and made themselves at home. Let's say that I was away for a very long time, a couple of years. Now during this time, my neighbor has paid the utilities, mowed the yard, and lived there, for all intents and purposes, this was their home, since it was where they were living for the past two years. Well after I have been gone for that long one day I show up...

Don't you think I might not really care if I disrespect the people that are living in MY HOUSE!, and claiming it for themselves. I would tell them to get out, and if they didn't move fast enough, I would throw them out. I wouldn't care about why they were there. I wouldn't really care that they don't have any other place to go. This is MY House.. Get out.

Well Israel is THEIR land. Given to them by God himself. The Palanstinians have no right, nor claim on that land, and they never have. So what if they have been living there a long time. It is still God's land and he gave that Land to Israel and their descendants. The Palenstinians draw their linage from Ishamael. The Israelites draw their from Issac.

This attitude is one of the exact reasons that I reject this whole lost ten tribes. I believe that it was started to support the British right of Monarchy, as well as justification for denying or reclaiming the Land that rightfully belongs to Israel.

Joshua David

You don't even know why they lost it do you. (Idolatry)
They don't come back as just lost nasty strife. (chaft) Why this lot reject Jesus Christ you clown ! wake up ! they are not true Israel.
God owns everything and we only are the tenants.
O'h the golden calf boys again rejecting Holy Moses to dare i say.
It was God who kicked them out bro. and yes do you know why.
Why would someone support someone who rejects the true God.
Jesus tells the story of the vineyard.

 

[avoice]

You don't even know why they lost it do you. (Idolatry)
They don't come back as just lost nasty strife. (chaft) Why this lot reject Jesus Christ you clown ! wake up ! they are not true Israel.
God owns everything and we only are the tenants.
O'h the golden calf boys again rejecting Holy Moses to dare i say.
It was God who kicked them out bro. and yes do you know why.
Why would someone support someone who rejects the true God.
Jesus tells the story of the vineyard.

1 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.




2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.

3 Then said the LORD unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil.

God is comparing these figs to the people of Judah some are very very good and some are very very evil

4 Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,

5 Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good.

God has said he will acknowledge these good figs And he will bring them back to the land of Israel, He will build them up, plant them and Not pluck them up
Now its important to remember here we are only talking of Judah/Jews not Israel look at any anceint map you will see Israel and Judah are seprerate......,

6 For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up.

Now not pluck them up ..as they are permantly planted this obsiouly did not happen after babylon sense the entire nation was later uprooted and scattered .....so its not talking about then but now ...ever hear of the parable of the fig tree .... The fig has represened Israel and her people always.....

7 And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart.

 

[aspen]

You know, Joshua David is one of the more informed persons on this board........the last word I would use to describe him is 'clown'

At the very least I can understand his posts.....and I cannot say the same about Mr. Rs posts.

 

[lawrance]

You know, Joshua David is one of the more informed persons on this board........the last word I would use to describe him is 'clown'

At the very least I can understand his posts.....and I cannot say the same about Mr. Rs posts.

Informed ?
As you are a Catholic that believes that pure communism is good, i think you dear aspen should look into what the Catholic Church has to say about that and i hope and pray for you that you will be informed and enlightened.
If only communism was not corrupt ? is that what you believe. i think that all systems are corrupt and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding them selves.
I get downhearted with people who push simpleton religion views. sorry.

 

[aspen]

Informed ?
As you are a Catholic that believes that pure communism is good, i think you dear aspen should look into what the Catholic Church has to say about that and i hope and pray for you that you will be informed and enlightened.
If only communism was not corrupt ? is that what you believe. i think that all systems are corrupt and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding them selves.
I get downhearted with people who push simpleton religion views. sorry.

I am a Catholic Christian
I believe that pure communism can only be successful within small Christian organisations; specifically, monasteries.
Once again, your post is unclear.

I am not sure what you mean by 'downhearted', nor have I seen Joshua either 'push religion' or promote any idea that is simplistic.

 

[veteran]

Neither can we take two separate words and automatically assume that they are talking about the exact same event. My belief in the pretribulation rapture is not created entirely on the basis of two different words. I was just showing how the word gathering does not necessarily mean the rapture.

Can if it's about the same group of people at the same point of time and to the same place. In 1 Thess.4 Apostle Paul taught a detail of 'how' the saints are gathered to Christ Jesus. In 1 Thess.5, and in 2 Thess.2 he gave details of the 'when'. That's the main difference between the two Scriptures. In 2 Thess.2 Paul was reminding them about the same subject of Christ's coming.

II Th 2:1-2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
(KJV)

II Th 2:5
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
(KJV)

But you infer, that maybe Apostle Paul didn't know what he himself was talking about, since you say that word for "gathering together" is not about the same event of 1 Thess.4:17. Yet it is the same event he was speaking about back in 1 Thess.4, the main difference in 2 Thess.2 was timing and another warning about the coming Antichrist like my Lord Jesus gave on the Mount of Olives.

And I agree with the statement that the book of Acts shows how the early church was made up of both believing Israelites and Gentiles, as I have stated in my other reply, which is one major proof that this dispensation is vastly different than the dispensation of Law, where there was a distinction. And yet even though Paul tells us that Israel has been set aside temporarily because of their unbelief, he makes it very clear that God is not through with Israel.

Christ didn't preach that He came to do away with the law, but to fulfill. The basic meaning of the word torah means to point, like an arrow. The law was given to point to Christ. Apostle Paul revealed the law is not dead as many think. Only for those in Christ who walk by The Spirit is the law dead (Galatians 5). Paul also taught the law was not made for the righteous, but for the unrighteous, for murderers, the ungodly, the unholy and profane, etc. (1 Timothy 1:9). In other words, it is still very much in effect today, for the unrighteous and rebellious. Only the followers of the devil want the law to go away so their evil acts won't be dealt with today.

So what you actually mean, whether you realize it or not, is that view of Dispensationalism per the New Testament is actually about the change away from the Old Covenant and bringing in the New Covenant through Christ Jesus. That's the actual change that has been made in God's Salvation Plan when Christ died on the cross for the remission of sins past for those who believe on Him. With that change came a change with ritual and religious ordinances, not the heart of God's laws which He originally gave. That's why Christian nations in the west incorporated God's laws into their judicial systems. The history of the old Blue laws in the U.S. is especially telling about that.

What that actually shows about the western Christian nations is how closely allied to God's Word they started out as, pointing to an original Israelite culture. Benjamin Franklin even wanted to put Moses and the Red Sea parting on the Great Seal of The United States. The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. has engraved wooden images with Moses holding the Ten Commandments. It's only the past couple of younger generations in the west that haven't realized this history about the western Christian nations, which is exactly how Christ's enemies want them to be, dumbed down.

Rom chap 11 makes this very clear. Right now. Israel has been cast aside until the fullness of the gentiles have come in. Right now, within the church there is no distinction. There is no Jew, there is no gentile, there is only the Bride.

Guess you forgot what else Apostle Paul said...

Rom 1:16
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
(KJV)

Christ's Salvation is for all peoples that believe, but it was given to Israel first. Then through the Israelite remnant God preserved, The Gospel went to the Gentiles, in that order. And that had nothing to do with unbelieving Judah. Israel was to be the original caretakers of The Gospel, and they were, and still are. And once again, that has nothing to do with unbelieving Judah. Thus Israel has NOT been set aside as you try to say. That's how some Gentiles would like it to be, even the servants of the devil would like nothing more. Those cut off are simply unbelievers of 'any' peoples, not just some of Israelite heritage. In Romans 9-11 Paul is declaring Israel's place in The Gospel Salvation Plan. Only towards the last part of Rom.11 does he speak of unbelievers of Israel, so it's kind of ignorant for us believers to dwell on the last part of Paul's message there while forgetting his first part.

Gal 3:27-29 27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

But what you've missed from God's Word is what the Promise which Abraham believed contains. It cannot be learned just by reading what Apostle Paul said about it. Paul didn't go into detail of what all that Promise to Abraham contains. It contains many other promises from God too. I guess Paul figured he didn't need to go into detail about that again, since it is written in the Old Testament Books, starting with Abraham in Genesis.

Again, I do not believe dispensationalism because someone named John Darby wrote it in a book. I believe it because I see it portrayed out in the scriptures.

Dispensationalism is a very limited understanding of God's Salvation Plan. It's foundation tries to separate Paul's preaching of the 'mystery' of The Gospel going to Gentiles apart from the OT prophecies, even while Paul quoted directly from OT Scripture when he preached The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Dispensationalism serves men's doctrine in attempting to divide God's Salvation Plan from His Witness in the Old Testament Books. It obviously comes from a gross lack of understanding of how He chose Israel as His chosen nation to take The Gospel to all other nations and peoples.

Yes I am sure this is the exact justification that the people that came up with Replacement Theology started with. But is this idea bibical. IF Israel just means the people of God, then this is how it should be portrayed in the scriptures all the time, especially in the New Testament. Wouldn't you agree? Let's check the scriptures to check this out.

'Replacement Theology' ramblings is man's thing in trying to scientifically categorize God's Plan of Salvation. Any Christian that has read all of God's Word should well know God's Salvation Plan through His Son was first prophesied of in the Old Testament Books, with Christ's first coming as the pivot point, then with the New Covenant being the start of its ultimate fulfillment. The idea then is Progression, for God's Salvation Plan is still on-going today, all the way up to the end with the great white throne judgment. That's why one can go into the OT prophets and read prophecy that His Salvation was to include the believing Gentiles also. The Book of Isaiah (means Yah is Salvation) is a primary OT witness to that.

Rom 11:1 1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

So are "His people" here talking about the church, as you are claiming? No.. it not, for Paul distinctly says that he is an Israelite, from the tribe of Benjamin.

Rom 11:6
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 is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
(KJV)

Yes, that remnant of Israel is about Israelites within Christ's Church. That's why Paul is giving that message about that "grace", a grace which is not of works, but is a gift from God according to His election. Have men's doctrines of Dispensationalism deceived you so that you now turn around what you yourself admitted about Christ's Church in the Book of Acts being made up of both believing Israelites and Gentiles?

Rom 11:7 7What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

Is Paul saying that the Church was blinded? No of course not. He is talking about Israel here, not the church. Now is there a Remnant, a spiritual Israel, that accepts Jesus as their messiah? Yes. But Israel in this sense is still national Israel, which is the exact opposite of how you claim that Israel is referred to in the New Testament.

What? That "remnant according to the election of grace" is not saved by Christ Jesus? Not part of His Church? How is it that you missed what Paul said there with, "but the election hath obtained it"? Who is that "election" Paul was talking about there in the previous Rom.11:1-5 verses, Martians or something? He was speaking of the Israelite "remnant according to the election of grace", i.e., a remnant of the seed of Israel.

Have you ever wondered why Paul associated those in Christ as being the "children of Abraham" in Gal.3? Why did Paul associate The Gospel with Abraham, from which Israel came?

Rom 9:6-8
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.
(KJV)

The idea of 'spiritual Israel' is about all those 'counted' as the children of the promise (like "children of Abraham" remember?). It applies to both believing Israel AND believing Gentiles together under Christ Jesus. They are not just Israelites as you've said. It's about Christ's Church, the no difference between Jew nor Gentile idea.

Rom 11:15 15For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?


So who was cast away? The Church? Would Christ cast away his bride? Of course not.

Nor was all of Israel cast away either, which is what you're trying... to prove, but it won't work. Got to stay with what Paul said there. And just who was Paul speaking of back at Rom.11:7 about the part of Israel that was blinded? Did that mean the "election" he mentioned too? NO! The "election hath obtained it", remember? That's Paul's whole point, that "remnant according to the election of grace" obtained it, while the rest of Israel was blinded. It's that simple.

Paul himself is represented by that "remnant according to the election of grace", for what was Paul doing on the way to Damascus before Christ struck him down and converted him? Paul (called Saul then) even had a letter of authority from the unbelieving Pharisees to go hunt down Christians and bring them in for trial! Yet Christ converted him, and even said that Paul was His "chosen vessel"! (Acts 9). How can that be missed from Scripture? What irony, modern Dispensationalists try to separate the believing remnant of Israel from Christ's Church WHILE using the preaching of an Israelite like Apostle Paul! Amazing!

So there you have it. Clear, unambiguous evidence that Israel is not the Church. Now I will admit that since the formation of the church, the church is made up of both Israelites and gentiles. And the bible clearly teaches that there are no distinctions in the church. I don't understand why this is so hard for some people to grasp. The church is NOT Israel, Israel is NOT the church. Within the age of Grace, there are no distinctions. In the OT around the time of Abraham, God mainly dealt with one family, the Family line of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, and their descendants. That is not to say that no one outside of that family was saved, just that he primarily dealt with just one family. We see this same type of focus when we get to the Tribulation. We see Israel, not referred to as just Jews, but as all twelve tribes. The Tribulation period is called the Time of Jacob's trouble. Does this mean that only Israelites are saved during the tribulation? Of course not. Just as God saved people in the Old Testament who were not Israelites, he will save gentiles in the Tribulation who are gentiles. These are the Tribulation Saints. I see this clearly shown in the scriptures, at least, I see this a lot clearer than I see Israel is the church, which just isn't the case.

So far, we have nothing from you that proves your points, and especially nothing to prove a pre-trib rapture of the saints. I'm sorry brother, but you need a whole lot more Bible study. But as for me proving from Scripture that Israel IS connected with Christ's Church, all I have to do is say... "the children of Abraham."

As for your idea there are no distinctions in Christ's coming Kingdom, that's a misapplication of the Jew nor Gentile statement by Paul, for Paul was speaking of Christ's Salvation for all believers, not specific offices He gives in His Kingdom. Didn't our Lord Jesus promise His Apostles they would sit upon 12 thrones judging over the 12 tribes of Israel in His Kingdom? If Israel is not part of Christ's Church, then why does the New Jerusalem have 12 gates with the names of the 12 tribes upon them? (Rev.21) Christ said many are called, but few are chosen. Only the worthy will be priests and kings in His Kingdom. Bowing in false worship to the first messiah that shows up working miracles and wonders will not be a way to be found worthy to sit at His table in His coming Kingdom. Lot of believers are going to fall to the false messiah which will prevent them from being in His direct Presence when He comes. That's why He said He'll say to those, 'depart from Me, I never knew you'.

Let me say this. It is not that I am opposed to being an Israelite. Quite frankly, I would love to know one day that I was to be so blessed. All I am saying is that I do not find any biblical reason to assume that distinction. Imagine that we were all at a banquet, and Jesus gave the Israelites seats of honor at this banquet. I would have no problem giving the seat of honor to an Israelite, and taking a seat further away. Now you would have no problem taking one of the seats of honor for yourself, because you believe that the church is Israel. Am I right?

Being of Israelite descent means a chosen duty for ALL OTHER peoples in The Gospel. It is a responsibility to be born an Israelite, not to be seen as a privilege. This is why our Lord said for those given much, much is expected. Obviously, many of Israelite heritage never learned this and were blinded. But the 'remnant according to the election of grace' learned it, for The LORD showed them, because He 'sent' them into the world for that purpose (John 17). Thus your 'honor' reasoning is skewed, and even shows a bit of jealousy against one born of Israel. You might want to think about dealing with jealousy in another manner, for God is Who chose Israel for His Purpose, and His Purpose cannot be applied in the way you're doing.

If Christ sees fit to include me in His Kingdom that'll be good enough for me, even if I don't get to sit with Him at His table. That means I don't expect to be exalted like you do. That kind of thinking you have really doesn't even enter into my mind. If one dwells on how humble they 'think' they will be, it's usually a sign they're not humble at all. Oh, and by the way. I'm not Jewish.

 

[veteran]

I personally believe that it was God's plan to have 'troubling verses' in the bible. For no matter how much I study, I am always finding verses that prove that I do not know it all. That encourages me to dig deeper, learn more, study harder. It is when you think that you have everything figured out that you start to run into trouble. Because if you have everything figured our already, then why would you continue to study?

Well, those kind of verses still are not really troubling as long as they reveal a need for more Bible study. Instead, they are teaching verses.

I disagree. Now are we considered to be spiritual sons of Abraham? Yes. But that does not give us right to claim the promises that God gave Israel. Let me ask you this. Do the Palestinians, who draw their linage all the way back to Ishmael, do they have any claim to the lands that God gave Israel? No they do not. But aren't they son's of Abraham? And God said he would bless Ishmael and his lineage.

Well, then you haven't yet understood what Paul meant when he declared those promises to the Gentiles, their being included in them by the Blood of Christ Jesus (Ephesian 2 for example). You're question example about Palestinians doesn't fit the subject, simply because as a people the majority of them still refuse the Promise of Christ's Salvation, so those who refuse Christ are not 'counted' as the seed of Abraham anymore, even though they were literally born of Abraham. Have you forgotten Rom.9 about the idea of spiritual Israel?

If you were to do an honest Bible study just on following God's promises to Israel, to find out what they are and the path they took, you'd be surprised where you'd find them since Christ died on the cross. One of the reasons why many pastors think God cast Israel away is because of their not being able to find those promises manifested in the holy land anymore. Many of them even think God ended them because they can't find them among the Jews in Jerusalem anymore. He did not end them. They're simply looking in the wrong place. And one of those promises is the throne of David on earth, unto all generations. With that, they've put David's earthly throne in abeyance until Christ's return, or, moved it to Heaven with Christ, when God's Word declares its existence on earth when Christ returns (2 Sam.7; Gen.49:10).

Gen 17:19-21

[sup]19[/sup] Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. [sup]20[/sup] And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. [sup]21[/sup] But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.”

In the same way that Ishmael and his descendants do not have claim on the blessings that God specifically gave Issac and Jacob, neither can we claim those blessings, just because we are "Son's of Abraham."

Gal 3:29
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
(KJV)

Paul disagrees with you on that. He said this to Gentile believers...

Eph 2:11-13
11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
(KJV)

It's simple what Paul said there. Gentile believers are made nigh by the blood of Christ, but nigh to what? To the "commonwealth of Israel", and "the covenants of promise".

The Promise God first gave to Abraham includes His promises to Israel. Otherwise, the Promise Abraham believed would not be the same Promise we have believed, which is through Christ Jesus. The inheritance with Abraham is about Christ's inheritance, which is Israel, more properly now since that includes believing Gentiles like Paul said, the "commonwealth of Israel", which is the idea of many nations in a commonwealth. Where did Paul get this idea from? He got it from the OT prophets, like Isaiah 54 which says Israel will have to enlarge the tent to included the Gentiles.

This is why OT Bible study is important too...

Ezek 47:21-22
21 So shall ye divide this land unto you according to the tribes of Israel.
22 And it shall come to pass, that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you, and to the strangers that sojourn among you, which shall beget children among you: and they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.
(KJV)

That's for AFTER Christ's return. Those strangers represent the believing Gentiles. They will inherit with Israel.

I totally disagree. Let's take the issue of the Salvation plan by the savior being transfered from Abraham to Issac, to Jacob, to Joseph, to Ephraim and Manasseh. If this was the case, then Jesus would have been born from the tribe of Ephraim and Manasseh. He wasn't, he was born from the Tribe of Judah. Again this is just more erroneous justification to assume promises that don't belong to us.

Uh, uh, don't be so quick to say that. For the true king lineage for Israel was to be of the tribe Judah, by God's ordaining. This is why Gen.49:10 says what it does about Christ inheriting David's throne from Judah when He returns. It is why our Lord Jesus was born of the tribe of Judah, and not another tribe of Israel.

God's promises wound upon Ephraim and Manasseh because of how Solomon sinned in allowing Israel to fall away. The king over the ten tribes which God setup was Jeroboam of the tribe of Ephraim (of Joseph), as head over the other nine tribes. And then Ephraim and Manasseh were scattered with the other northern tribes, never to return to the holy lands as a people. In Gen.48, Jacob in transferring the promise to Ephraim said his seed was to become "a multitude of nations". That means Israelite nations, since Jacob's name Israel which God gave was to be named upon Ephraim and Manasseh per that transfer of the promise. In final, the promises go back to all Israel, and believing Gentiles with them. But right now, they are still with Ephraim and Manasseh, just like the Scripture points to. I can't help it if most pastors cannot see how that "multitude of nations" from Ephraim is manifested, along with God's promises, and is directly connected with Christ's Church, even today.

Now let's take the issue of Galatians 3.

Gal 3:7-9 [sup]7[/sup] Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. [sup]8[/sup] Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” [sup]9[/sup] So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

Paul was talking about the Gentile nations. There is no mention of scattered Israelites, none. We are blessed because through faith, we have become a son of Abraham, but more importantly, through the shed blood of Jesus, we have become a Son of God. And as in my previous answer, being a son of Abraham, does not make you automatically an Israelite.

Oh, that's a very weak statement, "no mention of scattered Israelites". Remember Paul's "commonwealth of Israel" when he was preaching to Gentiles in Ephesians 2? Like it or not, Paul made a direct link to the promises to Israel with that term applied to believing Gentiles. The Book of Isaiah makes those kind of connections in Christ's Salvation also. The Book of Hosea, which Paul quoted in Romans, also makes the connection with Gentiles and Israel in God's Salvation Plan. Hosea is especially to the "house of Israel" with Ephraim as its head, about the scattering and return.

Hosea 1:10
10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, "Ye are not My people", there it shall be said unto them, "Ye are the sons of the living God."
(KJV)

Rom 9:24-26
24 Even us, whom He hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
25 As He saith also in Osee, I will call them My people, which were not My people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, "Ye are not My people"; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
(KJV)

I guess this shows you've never gone back to study the Book of Hosea where Paul was quoting from. In case you haven't got the gist of those two Scripture examples yet, by Paul quoting that from Hosea, which was given to the children of Israel, and his INCLUDING the believing Gentiles in it per Rom.9, that is solid Biblical proof of Christ's Church meaning Israel joined with believing Gentiles.

Now to the issue of the so called 'lost 10 tribes'. Let's see what the bible says.

2 Chronicles 11:16-17 [sup]16[/sup] Those from every tribe of Israel who set their hearts on seeking the LORD, the God of Israel, followed the Levites to Jerusalem to offer sacrifices to the LORD, the God of their ancestors. [sup]17[/sup] They strengthened the kingdom of Judah and supported Rehoboam son of Solomon three years, following the ways of David and Solomon during this time.

When the Kingdom divided, the faithful from every tribe of Israel, those who set their hearts on seeking the Lord, followed the Levites to Jerusalem, where they strengthened the Kingdom of Judah. The Assyrians conquered the LAND of the 10 Northern Tribes, and carried away the unfaithful who lived there. At this point, it doesn't really matter what happened to the ones that were left, because God has maintained a remnant within the LAND of Judah. After Babylon those who returned came back to the LAND of the southern Kingdom from which they had been taken, and that’s why it was called Judah, not because only the southern tribes lived there. Since according to 2 Chronicles 11, there were faithful of all 12 tribes in Judah, when Babylon took them, there were 12 tribes there then they returned. There were 12 tribes there when Jesus was there, and I believe there are 12 tribes in Israel today. Not because they all came from the tribe of Judah, but because when they returned from Babylon captivity, they resettled in the land of Judah.

I suppose you forgot about this...

IKing 12:16-17
16 So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, the people answered the king, saying, "What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David." So Israel departed unto their tents.
17 But as for the children of Israel which dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them.
(KJV)


IKing 12:20-21
20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.
21 And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son of Solomon.
(KJV)


IKing 12:24
24 Thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel: return every man to his house; for this thing is from Me. They hearkened therefore to the word of the LORD, and returned to depart, according to the word of the LORD.
(KJV)

The Israelites that were already dwelling in the lands of Judea in the south stayed there under king Rehoboam of Judah at Jerusalem. There was a small portion of northern tribe Israelites, and by no means the majority of them, otherwise the "house of Israel" making up the northern Israelite kingdom separate from Judah in the south would not have existed. God's Word is clear it did exist. God's Word has a WHOLE LOT MORE to say about both kingdoms of Israel after this point. It makes up the rest of the Book of 1 Kings and a majority of the Book of 2 Kings. The "house of Judah" (Judah, Benjamin, and portions of Levi) warred against the "house of Israel" (ten northern tribes).

Ezra 1:5
5 Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised, to go up to build the house of the LORD which is in Jerusalem.
(KJV)

Funny that you say all 12 tribes returned from the 70 years Babylon captivity, for only the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi are even mentioned. NONE of the northern ten tribes are mentioned as returning in the Book of Ezra. It's because the ten tribes who had already been removed around 120 years prior to Judah's Babylon captivity, were STILL in captivity, and never returned. The same small remnants of the ten tribes that dwelt in the cities of Judah prior to the split of 1 Kings 12 were the only ones among Judah. Assuming all 12 tribes returned with Ezra is a falsehood, especially since God's Word gives exactly how many and who did return to Jerusalem, while the MAJORITY of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi REMAINED IN BABYLON and were further scattered through the nations (the Jews have their own Diaspora history that agrees with this).

The notion of 10 lost tribes is one of the many myths surrounding Israel that simply can’t be supported Biblically. It began as an attempt to support the divine right of rule for the British monarchy and continues among those who believe that even though God gave the land to Israel forever, most of the Jews living there today aren’t the people He gave it to. It is this desire to rob the Israelites of their land that is the heart of Replacement Theology. So until you can prove biblically where the faithful returned to the Northern Kingdom, then I just don't accept this whole notion of the 'lost 10 tribes' and I consider it Heresy.

Joshua David

IKing 11:29-32
29 And it came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and they two were alone in the field:
30 And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces:
31 And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, "Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee:
32 (But he shall have one tribe for My servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel
(KJV)

Then you deny God's Word as written.

Ezek 37:15-28
15 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?
19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in Mine hand.
20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.
21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be My people, and I will be their God.
24 And David My servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in My judgments, and observe My statutes, and do them.
25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob My servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and My servant David shall be their prince for ever.
26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.
(KJV)

 

[veteran]

The Lost ten Tribes lost their heritage link because they turned against God. And when they did that they were cut off from their people, just as God said they would be. But again 2 Chron 11 proves that God has always maintained a faithful remnant. You totally treat the bible as if that verse was not even in it.

That's a false accusation about my views on the Book of Chronicles. You must have gotten that from an argument you had with someone else, since I don't think you wrote this before I had chance to respond to 2 Chron.11. The problem I have is in holding myself back from covering a whole chapter, because a verse here and there seldom covers the bigger picture God gives in His Word.

2 Chr 11:12-16
12 And in every several city he put shields and spears, and made them exceeding strong, having Judah and Benjamin on his side.
13 And the priests and the Levites that were in all Israel resorted to him out of all their coasts.
14 For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem: for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off from executing the priest's office unto the LORD:
15 And he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.
16 And after them out of all the tribes of Israel such as set their hearts to seek the LORD God of Israel came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the LORD God of their fathers.
(KJV)

Those who left the northern ten tribes to worship at Jerusalem (the proper worship at that time) by no means affected Jeroboam's kingdom in the north over the house of Israel. The Levites left the north because of Jeroboam setting up false calf worship, and common priests of the people. Thus the house of Judah at Jerusalem then became made up of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.

2 Chr 13:1-3
1 Now in the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam began Abijah to reign over Judah.
2 He reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Michaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam.
3 And Abijah set the battle in array with an army of valiant men of war, even four hundred thousand chosen men: Jeroboam also set the battle in array against him with eight hundred thousand chosen men, being mighty men of valour.
(KJV)

After Rehoboam died, Abijah was setup as king over the southern kingdom of the house of Judah at Jerusalem. Note he mustered a 400,000 man army, whiile Jeroboam of the house of Israel mustered 800,000, double. Judah defeated Israel by God's Hand at that battle, but the point is how the Scripture shows the ten tribed kingdom under Jeroboam at Samaria was still the majority of the people of Israel.

So you don't like my definitions? No problem, give it a shot. Who are the sheep, who are the goats, and who are the brethern? The brethern can not be the sheep, because he is talking to the sheep in the first part and to the goats in the second part. So if they are not the Israelites, who are they?

How you tried to prove a point using the word 'brethren' simply doesn't work. I gave clear Biblical proof of how our Lord Jesus Himself referred to those who believed on Him as His brethren, regardless of nationality. The sheep are all... believers on Christ Jesus, for He is not just The Shepherd of the Israelites, but of believing Gentiles too. I don't know why you would even try to argue this point, since there's so much written evidence of what I'm saying. The goats of course, are the wicked, regardless of nationality also. The place of separation at that time is called the "outer darkness", which is outside the gates of the Holy City per Rev.22:14-15 during Christ's Millennial reign.

I have been maintaining that Israel is separate as a nation from the church. I am not the one seeking to destroy Israel as a nation, you are the one who claim that all Christians are Israelites, are you not? What I said, was that within the church, and during the church age, there is no distinction, and this is clearly taught in the bible. Between the two of us, I am the one who is seeking to maintain Israel as a nation. Did you not say earlier...

Here you're making another false claim. I never said, nor even inferred all Christians are Israelites. You must be dreaming about someone of the past you had a debate with.

When Christ told His Apostles they would sit upon 12 thrones judging over the 12 tribes of Israel in His Kingdom, that means what it says. And those definitely are 'distinctions' in His coming Kingdom. The Zadok priests will be the ones that will serve Christ at His table, and live in dwellings near the temple for His thousand years. But in Isaiah 65, for the new heavens and a new earth, God says His people will build houses and plant vineyards. Can you not see a division of peoples between those who serve as priests and kings then compared to those who will work the lands? I know, this idea from Scripture is far... away from the fairy-tale idea many have about living up in the clouds walking on vapor. God created this earth to be inhabited, as written. I play guitar, so I'd like to play the harp, God willing, but if I'm there, it's up to The LORD as to what duty I'm assigned. Many are called, but few are chosen. Those who seek to exalt themselves will probably be lowered.

So which is it? Do we maintain Israel as a nation, or is it a mistake to do so? You can't have it both ways.

Now you're asking me a political question that's been going around on the forum. What makes you think I care to participate in that? Since Paul taught from the OT prophets that God is going to eventually turn Israel back to Him, then that means there's hope for unbelieving Israelites. But as for Israel as a nation, it's not just one but 'two' nations, or did you miss what God said in Ezek.37:22? You know about one of them, it's up to you to find out who the other one is. Suffice it to say that the house of Israel needs to support the house of Judah, for they are still brethren. But it is true, some who claim to be of Israelite bloodline today really are not, and many who think they are Gentiles really are of bloodline Israel.

Also I will look over the thread on the lost 10 tribes, but if they fail to deal with 2 Chron 11, then to me it doesn't really matter what 'evidence' they have.

That really sounds more like you're giving yourself an 'out', trying to narrow your stance just on 2 Chron.11.

 

[veteran]

Well it depends.. Lets say that I was given a home by my father. And I went away from it for a long time. And while I was gone, my neighbor just moved in and made themselves at home. Let's say that I was away for a very long time, a couple of years. Now during this time, my neighbor has paid the utilities, mowed the yard, and lived there, for all intents and purposes, this was their home, since it was where they were living for the past two years. Well after I have been gone for that long one day I show up...

Don't you think I might not really care if I disrespect the people that are living in MY HOUSE!, and claiming it for themselves. I would tell them to get out, and if they didn't move fast enough, I would throw them out. I wouldn't care about why they were there. I wouldn't really care that they don't have any other place to go. This is MY House.. Get out.

Well Israel is THEIR land. Given to them by God himself. The Palanstinians have no right, nor claim on that land, and they never have. So what if they have been living there a long time. It is still God's land and he gave that Land to Israel and their descendants. The Palenstinians draw their linage from Ishamael. The Israelites draw their from Issac.

This attitude is one of the exact reasons that I reject this whole lost ten tribes. I believe that it was started to support the British right of Monarchy, as well as justification for denying or reclaiming the Land that rightfully belongs to Israel.

Joshua David

I'm forced to agree on the holy land of promise to Israel. It is by God's choice, not man's.

But there's more to it, which I don't know how many here will understand. In Isaiah 19 God said Egypt and Assyria will each be a third with Israel in His future Kingdom on earth, and there will be a Highway from Egypt to Assyria. So Christ's Salvation was never meant to be ONLY for Israelites, but Gentiles too. We are ALL God's children.

But the real matter about the sons of Ishmael (Arab peoples), is their religious leaders STILL hold the grudge of the Birthright being given to Isaac, when Ishmael claims it by right of the firstborn of Abraham. With them in that are the sons of Esau (Edom=red) who was a firstborn, and also is jealous of the same thing with his brother Jacob receiving the Birthright. Both are allied together against Israel over the same jealousy. And both are being used by Christ's real enemies, which I won't name, but they are servants of the devil, and know it, which ought to be close enough.

It's not that Ishmael and Esau don't have enough lands of their own already. It's of how blessed they see God has made His chosen ones. Christ's enemies make them want something they cannot have. It's because Christ's enemies are out to destroy all of God's people, for the one they serve, the devil, wants the whole planet, and especially God's Place in Jerusalem where He has chosen to dwell forever.

I agree with your post. Well said.

Apparently the argument isn't over title deed to the land, but squatter's rights. I didn't know that God's word had a provision in it for that. If it does, will someone please enlighten me.

IMO the European, American and Arab political influences in the area do not serve any of the people there well.
Ideally, all should step back and let the folks there deal with one another as neighbors, squatters or whatever.
That isn't likely to happen, but it's a thought.

Here's something else not many may understand. Look at the river flowing out of Eden in Gen.2. Look at where that river is per Ezek.47 and Rev.22. That river that flowed out of God's Garden of Eden in Gen.2 fed 4 other rivers upon the earth, two of them we still know where their location is. Where that Eden was is where God's dwelling place on earth was before, of old. So it's HIS DWELLING PLACE that is actually in question, not just Israel's.

 

[Joshua David]

Aspen,

[font="tahoma][size="2"]You know, Joshua David is one of the more informed persons on this board........the last word I would use to describe him is 'clown'[/size][/font][font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[size="3"][font="tahoma][size="2"]At the very least I can understand his posts.....and I cannot say the same about Mr. Rs posts.[/size][/font]

[/size]


Thank you my brother. Your kind words made my day.

[font="tahoma][size="2"]We Aussies have looked after the saved generation and all the other abos pretty well, they are very lucky that the Poms came hear first.[/size][/font][font="tahoma] [/font][/color]
[size="2"][font="tahoma][size="2"]The problem is the idiots that run around spinning a whole load of rubbish feeding hatred and never doing anything really truly helpful... [/size][/font]

[/size]

Do you mean like coming on to Christian Forums, and instead of adding to the debate, you just stink up the whole thread by being insulting, like calling people clowns, throwing a verbal jab at Aspen by talking about communism ( even thought that had absolutely nothing to do with the discussion) and pretty much being an altogether bitter and disagreeable person to anyone who sees things a little bit different than you?

If you are a sterling example of the attitudes that your forefathers had, then I can see where people might have gotten the wrong impression about how they treated the aboriginal tribes.

[font="tahoma][size="2"]You don't even know why they lost it do you. (Idolatry)[/size][/font][font="tahoma][size="2"]They don't come back as just lost nasty strife. (chaft) Why this lot reject Jesus Christ you clown ! wake up ! they are not true Israel.
God owns everything and we only are the tenants.
O'h the golden calf boys again rejecting Holy Moses to dare i say.
It was God who kicked them out bro. and yes do you know why.
Why would someone support someone who rejects the true God.
[/size][/font]
[font="tahoma][size="2"]Jesus tells the story of the vineyard.[/font]

[/size]

Actually I am very well aware of why they lost it, and yes I realize that the majority of them have rejected Jesus Christ. But I disagree with you that they are not true Israel. Even if the Jews are only from the Tribe of Judah, which I don't believe, but for the sake of argument, lets say this is so. That still gives them more claim on the land than any Palestinian. God told Israel that he was going to scatter them. And the same God told them that he would one day gather them back. Or do you just ignore one of the most prophesied events in the bible?


You ask why would I support someone who rejects the true God? Because I follow the bible. Allow me to explain.

Rom 11:28-32 [sup]28[/sup]As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.
[sup]29[/sup]For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
[sup]30[/sup]For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
[sup]31[/sup]Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
[sup]32[/sup]For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.


God's love for the Jewish people is not based on their acceptance or rejection of Him. God loves them irregardless. So who am I to despise someone that God loves? I pray for Israel. I pray that God will open their eyes to His love, and to the Salvation that His Son Brings.


Veteran,

But you infer, that maybe Apostle Paul didn't know what he himself was talking about, since you say that word for "gathering together" is not about the same event of 1 Thess.4:17. Yet it is the same event he was speaking about back in 1 Thess.4, the main difference in 2 Thess.2 was timing and another warning about the coming Antichrist like my Lord Jesus gave on the Mount of Olives.

No I am saying that Paul knew exactly what he was talking about, we just differ in what we believe Paul is saying here. Let me try to explain. There are two different ways that things are listed in the bible, there is chronologically, and then there is by importance. For instance, let's say that there were two reporters covering a presidential news conference.

One reporter writes, "The door opens and the Presidents Chief of staff walks through and checks to make sure that everything is ready. The Vice President walks into the room, as he is talking to the Senator from Texas, while a few of the other Senators take their place behind the speaking podium. Finally the President walks into the room and everyone stands.

Another reporter writes, "The president arrived to the news conference, being accompanied by the Vice president, his chief of staff and other assorted Senators."

Now both reporters are describing the exact same event. One is describing the event Chronologically, and the other is by Importance. This style of listing things by importance is very common in the bible. It is the exact reason that some of the gospels lists things happening in a different order than other gospels.

We both agree that Paul is talking about the second coming ( by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ ) and the rapture ( and by our gathering together unto Him ). Where we differ is that You believe that Paul is listing things chronologically, Christ returns at the end of the tribulation, and then the rapture happens, and I believe that he is listing the events by importance, with the second coming being listed first, even though the rapture happens first chronologically. Now I will admit that this is one of the 'troubling verses' for me. And between the two of us, with this argument alone, I would have to agree that you have the stronger argument. I am just trying to explain how I see the verse.

Christ didn't preach that He came to do away with the law, but to fulfill. The basic meaning of the word torah means to point, like an arrow. The law was given to point to Christ. Apostle Paul revealed the law is not dead as many think. Only for those in Christ who walk by The Spirit is the law dead (Galatians 5). Paul also taught the law was not made for the righteous, but for the unrighteous, for murderers, the ungodly, the unholy and profane, etc. (1 Timothy 1:9). In other words, it is still very much in effect today, for the unrighteous and rebellious. Only the followers of the devil want the law to go away so their evil acts won't be dealt with today.

I believe that we differ in how we see the law. I do not see the law as being dead, but I too see the law as being fulfilled. It does not point toward Jesus by teaching us what all we must do in order to be like him. The Law was never meant to do that. The Law was given for one purpose, and one purpose only, to open our eyes that we are sinners. And because we are sinners, we need a Savior. It is in that sense that the Law points to Jesus. Once we come to this conclusion, then the Law has fulfilled the purpose in which it was made. That is the reason that the Law was not made for the righteous, but for the unrighteous. The Righteous already know that they are sinners, and that they need a savior, and have accepted Jesus Christ as God's only provision as that Savior. That is what makes us righteous. We are not righteous because of how closely we follow the Law. If you are trusting the Law to make you Righteous, then you are beholden to the entire Law. And to break one part of the Law means that you have broken all of the Law. But when we accept Jesus' sacrifice as the BASIS of our righteousness, then we are freed from the Law because it has accomplished what it was created to do.

Christ's Salvation is for all peoples that believe, but it was given to Israel first. Then through the Israelite remnant God preserved, The Gospel went to the Gentiles, in that order. And that had nothing to do with unbelieving Judah. Israel was to be the original caretakers of The Gospel, and they were, and still are. And once again, that has nothing to do with unbelieving Judah

Ok I did not mean cast aside as in God was completely done with them. And after rereading what I wrote, I should have chosen different words than cast aside, but what I meant was that they as a nation are experiencing a blindness, a hardening of their heart, until the fullness of the gentile nations have come in. I believe that God has preserved a remnant and that remnant is right now in the church, but within the body of Christ there are no distinctions. A person born of the tribe of Judah is no more special than a person born of the tribe of Levi. A person born of the tribe of Benjamin is just the same as a gentile born in the United States. A rich man is just as important as the poor man. A man is just as important as a woman. A white man is just as important as a black man, who is just as important as an Indian. We are all in one body. That is what I was talking about. But there is coming a time when Israel's blindness will be lifted, and this will happen after the fullness of the Gentiles have come into the church.

Dispensationalism is a very limited understanding of God's Salvation Plan. It's foundation tries to separate Paul's preaching of the 'mystery' of The Gospel going to Gentiles apart from the OT prophecies, even while Paul quoted directly from OT Scripture when he preached The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Dispensationalism serves men's doctrine in attempting to divide God's Salvation Plan from His Witness in the Old Testament Books. It obviously comes from a gross lack of understanding of how He chose Israel as His chosen nation to take The Gospel to all other nations and peoples.

I don't see this at all, at least based on my understanding of Dispensationalism. Perhaps you could go into further detail why you believe this to be the case.

'Replacement Theology' ramblings is man's thing in trying to scientifically categorize God's Plan of Salvation. Any Christian that has read all of God's Word should well know God's Salvation Plan through His Son was first prophesied of in the Old Testament Books, with Christ's first coming as the pivot point, then with the New Covenant being the start of its ultimate fulfillment. The idea then is Progression, for God's Salvation Plan is still on-going today, all the way up to the end with the great white throne judgment. That's why one can go into the OT prophets and read prophecy that His Salvation was to include the believing Gentiles also. The Book of Isaiah (means Yah is Salvation) is a primary OT witness to that.

And I see Dispensationalism in perfect alignment with God's plan of Salvation.

Yes, that remnant of Israel is about Israelites within Christ's Church. That's why Paul is giving that message about that "grace", a grace which is not of works, but is a gift from God according to His election. Have men's doctrines of Dispensationalism deceived you so that you now turn around what you yourself admitted about Christ's Church in the Book of Acts being made up of both believing Israelites and Gentiles?

So which is it, is the church Israel, or is the Remnant of Israel a PART of the church? I believe that the church right now is made up with both Israelites and gentiles. All I have said is two things, 1) there are no distinctions in the church, and 2) Israel is not the church, nor is the church Israel.

Being of Israelite descent means a chosen duty for ALL OTHER peoples in The Gospel. It is a responsibility to be born an Israelite, not to be seen as a privilege. This is why our Lord said for those given much, much is expected. Obviously, many of Israelite heritage never learned this and were blinded. But the 'remnant according to the election of grace' learned it, for The LORD showed them, because He 'sent' them into the world for that purpose (John 17). Thus your 'honor' reasoning is skewed, and even shows a bit of jealousy against one born of Israel. You might want to think about dealing with jealousy in another manner, for God is Who chose Israel for His Purpose, and His Purpose cannot be applied in the way you're doing.
If Christ sees fit to include me in His Kingdom that'll be good enough for me, even if I don't get to sit with Him at His table. That means I don't expect to be exalted like you do. That kind of thinking you have really doesn't even enter into my mind. If one dwells on how humble they 'think' they will be, it's usually a sign they're not humble at all. Oh, and by the way. I'm not Jewish.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? How in the world do you read into what I read that I expect to be exalted? You're not Jewish? Wow, guess what neither am I. I am not an Israelite either, and yet you claim to be one. I am not the one claiming to be an Israelite. I am claiming that while there are Israelites and gentiles in the church, just because you are in the church, this does not make you an Israelite. You are claiming that it does. You are the one claiming promises that were never given to you. Do I consider myself a spiritual child of Abraham? Absolutely, but you know Arab are children of Abraham too, does that mean that we all have access to the promises that God only gave to Israel?

Get off your high horse, and actually read what I am writing. I don't expect to be exalted, and that is my entire point. Do I exalt Israel? Yes I do, because they are beloved by the Father. Salvation came from God to Abraham, to Issac, to Jacob, to Judah, to David, to Jesus Christ. Through Judah, not Ephraim, or any of the other 'lost tribes'. Judah! Let me say this again, so that I am clear. JUDAH! Jesus is the Lion of JUDAH! Jesus was a JEW! This is why I exalt Israel and especially the Jews. Am I glad that God extended his Salvation to me? Absolutely. Do I realize that there was NOTHING that I did to deserve that? You bet. But out of the two of us, there is one of us that considers himself to be part of Israel, with all the rights and privileges that was promised them, and one who does not. Which one are you?

Joshua David

 

[avoice]

My question to you Aspen and Joshua David is why do you play into it MR R. he obviously thinks he can only make a point by calling names and insulting others .... So you end up doing the same by your protests even if justiefied ... This is your community report him to management .... You cant expect Hammerstone to read every post and know every issue if you dont help him by reporting to him ...

 

[Joshua David]

But the real matter about the sons of Ishmael (Arab peoples), is their religious leaders STILL hold the grudge of the Birthright being given to Isaac, when Ishmael claims it by right of the firstborn of Abraham. With them in that are the sons of Esau (Edom=red) who was a firstborn, and also is jealous of the same thing with his brother Jacob receiving the Birthright. Both are allied together against Israel over the same jealousy. And both are being used by Christ's real enemies, which I won't name, but they are servants of the devil, and know it, which ought to be close enough.

I agree with just about everything that you said, but I am confused when you mention Christ's real enemies, and then mention the devil, IF the Devil is not Christ's real enemy then who is, and why won't you name them?

How you tried to prove a point using the word 'brethren' simply doesn't work. I gave clear Biblical proof of how our Lord Jesus Himself referred to those who believed on Him as His brethren, regardless of nationality. The sheep are all... believers on Christ Jesus, for He is not just The Shepherd of the Israelites, but of believing Gentiles too. I don't know why you would even try to argue this point, since there's so much written evidence of what I'm saying. The goats of course, are the wicked, regardless of nationality also. The place of separation at that time is called the "outer darkness", which is outside the gates of the Holy City per Rev.22:14-15 during Christ's Millennial reign.

So then the brethren are the sheep? That doesn't make any sense, at least to me. He did not say for as much as you have one to one of the least of yourselves, my brethren, you have done to me. The very grammar of the verse is different than what you say. He is talking to the sheep, and then refers to their actions toward "Least of These, my brethren" At least this is how I see it.

Here you're making another false claim. I never said, nor even inferred all Christians are Israelites. You must be dreaming about someone of the past you had a debate with.

Oh really? Are you not the one who claimed...

Israel is the Salvation name for Christ's Salvation, and it's linked with the Beth-el which Jacob then named the pillar, which God also called Bethel (which means 'House of God'). And God's House in the NT is His Church, the Body of Christ, the Church of God, the congregation of believers on His Saviour Jesus Christ, of all peoples and nations that believe.

So instead of being busy trying to throw away the name Israel which God gave to Jacob within His Birthright Promise about His Salvation Plan through Christ, those in Christ need to embrace it as a label for His True Church throughout His Word.

If you are of Israel then you are an Israelite. I am of America, and I am an American. Did I misread you?

But in Isaiah 65, for the new heavens and a new earth, God says His people will build houses and plant vineyards. Can you not see a division of peoples between those who serve as priests and kings then compared to those who will work the lands? I know, this idea from Scripture is far... away from the fairy-tale idea many have about living up in the clouds walking on vapor. God created this earth to be inhabited, as written. I play guitar, so I'd like to play the harp, God willing, but if I'm there, it's up to The LORD as to what duty I'm assigned. Many are called, but few are chosen. Those who seek to exalt themselves will probably be lowered.

Well I totally agree with you on God created this earth to be inhabited. I do not believe in the whole living in the clouds idea.

That really sounds more like you're giving yourself an 'out', trying to narrow your stance just on 2 Chron.11.

Not really, since I couldn't find any threads, I started one, and eventually got some good information to study.. still haven't made my mind up on it so far, but I am looking into it.


Joshua David

 

[veteran]

Veteran,

No I am saying that Paul knew exactly what he was talking about, we just differ in what we believe Paul is saying here. Let me try to explain. There are two different ways that things are listed in the bible, there is chronologically, and then there is by importance. For instance, let's say that there were two reporters covering a presidential news conference.

One reporter writes, "The door opens and the Presidents Chief of staff walks through and checks to make sure that everything is ready. The Vice President walks into the room, as he is talking to the Senator from Texas, while a few of the other Senators take their place behind the speaking podium. Finally the President walks into the room and everyone stands.

Another reporter writes, "The president arrived to the news conference, being accompanied by the Vice president, his chief of staff and other assorted Senators."

Now both reporters are describing the exact same event. One is describing the event Chronologically, and the other is by Importance. This style of listing things by importance is very common in the bible. It is the exact reason that some of the gospels lists things happening in a different order than other gospels.

I think what you're talking about some scholars (like Bullinger) call alternation. A declaration is given in summary fashion, and then alternates to specifics, while going back and forth to mention the main declaration again. But that's within a Bible chapter.

The difference with Scripture like 1 Thess.4 and 1 Cor.15 is about the 'how' of an event. But Scripture like 1 Thess.5 and 2 Thess.2 is about the timing of events that reveal the 'when'. There are also chapters in God's Word covering the same subjects as those, but cover the 'where' part, which is what portions of Zech.14 and Acts 1 does. Then there's the 'why' and 'who' parts, covered some in those Scriptures also, but a lot more in other chapters, like the Rom.9 thru 11 chapters for example. The target is to be able to put all those together in the mind to get the full topic from God's Word, the who, when, why, how and where.

We both agree that Paul is talking about the second coming ( by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ ) and the rapture ( and by our gathering together unto Him ). Where we differ is that You believe that Paul is listing things chronologically, Christ returns at the end of the tribulation, and then the rapture happens, and I believe that he is listing the events by importance, with the second coming being listed first, even though the rapture happens first chronologically. Now I will admit that this is one of the 'troubling verses' for me. And between the two of us, with this argument alone, I would have to agree that you have the stronger argument. I am just trying to explain how I see the verse.

It's very simple with the 1 Thess.4, 1 Cor.15, and 2 Thess.2 examples that Paul was giving specific events in a certain order as to when they occur, and how they occur. In 2 Thess.2 he is very, very specific about the time order of events. Also in 1 Thess.5 is given a specific time order, since he links Christ's coming as a thief in the night with the day of The LORD events. Those are revelations very much about a time order of events; no way to get away from that order but by denial only. That timing Paul gave is to be heeded, otherwise the main 'warnings' given along with it would be meaningless.

So to sum up what I'm saying, using the time event order given in the 2 Thess.2 Scripture as an example, that is there so we would NOT get the event timing of Christ's coming and our gathering to Him out of order. It is very... strong in that respect. Same with the order of events our Lord gave in His Olivet Discourse about the gathering to Him being after that tribulation. Likewise with the 3 woe periods He gave in Rev.8 through 11. Those 3 woe periods lock the last three trumpet's time order. They cover events just prior to the tribulation, then through the tribulation, and then to Christ's coming and our gathering.

I believe that we differ in how we see the law. I do not see the law as being dead, but I too see the law as being fulfilled. It does not point toward Jesus by teaching us what all we must do in order to be like him. The Law was never meant to do that. The Law was given for one purpose, and one purpose only, to open our eyes that we are sinners. And because we are sinners, we need a Savior. It is in that sense that the Law points to Jesus. Once we come to this conclusion, then the Law has fulfilled the purpose in which it was made. That is the reason that the Law was not made for the righteous, but for the unrighteous. The Righteous already know that they are sinners, and that they need a savior, and have accepted Jesus Christ as God's only provision as that Savior. That is what makes us righteous. We are not righteous because of how closely we follow the Law. If you are trusting the Law to make you Righteous, then you are beholden to the entire Law. And to break one part of the Law means that you have broken all of the Law. But when we accept Jesus' sacrifice as the BASIS of our righteousness, then we are freed from the Law because it has accomplished what it was created to do.

I only claim to see God's law in the purposes He gave it for, per His Word, of which Paul explained to Timothy in the verse I quoted, that the law was not made for the righteous man, but for the unrighteous, the unholy and profane, for murderers, etc., i.e., the wicked and rebellious. As for how John defined sin by pointing to transgression of the law, I believe that too. In this world we can never be perfect in it, and as Paul said, we were all concluded under sin so that Salvation would only be by Faith on God's promised Saviour Jesus Christ, Who was without sin. And I never inferred that we as Christians are saved by the law, nor that we are to trust in it.

But can God's law still affect the Christian believer? YES. Or did you miss what Paul said in Galatians 5 about walking by our flesh vs. walking by The Spirit? Only under one of those conditions are we freed from the law, and that is IF we walk by The Spirit. The reason for that is very simple. IF we walk by The Spirit, listening to Him, then we won't break the law. To walk by The Spirit means not doing anything that's against the law. It truly is that simple.

So what if the Christian forgets that, falls away to walk by their flesh, and commits a sin that is still punishable today in the law, like thievery? They can wind up in jail, or prison if it's serious, even when they are a Christian believer on The Saviour Jesus Christ.

In reality, what a lot of preachers teach about the law at the pulpit is more aligned with religious philosophy than actual reality per God's Word. A Christian believer who learns this difference won't have to ask their pastor why they got arrested for stealing because they were told by him the law is now dead for those in Christ Jesus.

Our Lord Jesus did not fulfill the law by giving us license to sin. Nor did He fulfill it by freeing us from its consequences, for we know even His saints can get in trouble with it today with walking by their flesh instead. What our Lord Jesus fulfilled was the spirit of God's law, for by The Holy Spirit God promised to write His law in our hearts and in our minds. When we receive an inkling by The Holy Spirit to not do a certain thing, that's what that writing in our hearts and minds is about.

Ok I did not mean cast aside as in God was completely done with them. And after rereading what I wrote, I should have chosen different words than cast aside, but what I meant was that they as a nation are experiencing a blindness, a hardening of their heart, until the fullness of the gentile nations have come in. I believe that God has preserved a remnant and that remnant is right now in the church, but within the body of Christ there are no distinctions. A person born of the tribe of Judah is no more special than a person born of the tribe of Levi. A person born of the tribe of Benjamin is just the same as a gentile born in the United States. A rich man is just as important as the poor man. A man is just as important as a woman. A white man is just as important as a black man, who is just as important as an Indian. We are all in one body. That is what I was talking about. But there is coming a time when Israel's blindness will be lifted, and this will happen after the fullness of the Gentiles have come into the church.

Well, only a PORTION of Israel is experiencing spiritual blindness today, which is a more accurate statement per God's Word and history. Just because believing Israelites are part of Christ's Body today does not mean God ended His promises to them. That's the anchor point. To understand this one must align their thinking to what God's Word testifies about it. I don't position the people of Israel to any other place than where God places them. So it's not about what men's doctrines say how Israel fits among Christ's Salvation, it's about what God's Word says how they fit.

God did say He chose Israel to be a peculiar people unto Himself, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. Apostle Peter repeated this very idea in 1 Peter 2 as applied to Christ's Church.

1 Pet 2:9-10
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of Him Who hath called you out of darkness into His marvellous light:
10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
(KJV)

Exod 19:6
6 And ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
(KJV)

If you recall the Hosea 1 Scripture Paul quoted in Rom.9 to Gentiles, there it is again being quoted by Peter.

That is a direct comparison of Christ's Church to chosen Israel that God always intended for Himself. And if that working aligns now more with Christ's Church, then 'who' really is God's Israel per His viewpoint? It's Christ's Body of believers. What then of God's promises to Israel? They NOW belong to Christ's Body of believers. If the unbelievers of Israel want to be part of God's original ordaining in that for Israel, then they must turn to Christ Jesus and become part of His Body to regain their chosen place which God originally presented to them. But alas, the Israelite "remnant according to the election of grace" were already a given in that Plan, and were never... cut off like the unbelieving Israelites have been. Thus, Israel as a holy nation, a kingdom of priests, has always been manifested unto God, starting with the elect seed of Israel, even into the New Covenant through Christ Jesus, and still today, and forever.

But the world's view? Well, they think only one born of the seed of Israel is the only qualification for God's true Israel. Does this align with some of what you're saying? Yes, but to a much, much deeper point, because the promises to Israel have remained manifested, but only among Christ's Body after our Lord was crucified. It's not difficult to prove either, if one knows what those promises per God's Word are about. I'll even go so far as to say that today, if a Christian believer understands what those promises are, and what they contain, and can recognize them among Christ's Body, they will then wonder how it is that some within Christ's Body are busying trying to give those promises away to Christ's enemies.

I don't see this at all, at least based on my understanding of Dispensationalism. Perhaps you could go into further detail why you believe this to be the case.

And I see Dispensationalism in perfect alignment with God's plan of Salvation.

Could be that we're not talking about the same doctrines of Dispensationalism. I suppose I refer more to what some call Hyperdispensationalism, extremist views of E.W. Bullinger and C.R. Stam about Paul's Epistles being the only valid Scripture for Christ's Church. They also include extremist separations between Israel and Christ's Church. I'd say you have a mixture of that doctrine in your Dispensationalist view. I'm not interested in discussing the history of Dispensationalism really, it's only a doctrine of men. Better to stick with God's direct Word and let the chips fall where they will.

So which is it, is the church Israel, or is the Remnant of Israel a PART of the church? I believe that the church right now is made up with both Israelites and gentiles. All I have said is two things, 1) there are no distinctions in the church, and 2) Israel is not the church, nor is the church Israel.

Well brother, Israel is Christ's Church and visa versa. It's because of how God sees His Israel, not how man wants to think it is. It's because of what God's Word shows the name 'Israel' represents way beyond... the mere idea of flesh seed. Apostle Paul gave that very idea in Rom.9:6 when he said, "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel. If you truly see no distinction between Israelite and Gentile in Christ's Body, then you should also be able to see how that applies to the way God sees His Israel, like Paul and Peter showed, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests, of all peoples counted for the seed.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? How in the world do you read into what I read that I expect to be exalted? You're not Jewish? Wow, guess what neither am I. I am not an Israelite either, and yet you claim to be one. I am not the one claiming to be an Israelite. I am claiming that while there are Israelites and gentiles in the church, just because you are in the church, this does not make you an Israelite. You are claiming that it does. You are the one claiming promises that were never given to you. Do I consider myself a spiritual child of Abraham? Absolutely, but you know Arab are children of Abraham too, does that mean that we all have access to the promises that God only gave to Israel?

Sorry if I offended you, but that's what it sounded like, jealousy against the chosen of Israel. I never said I wasn't an Israelite; I said I was not Jewish. There is a difference. Now think about what you're saying with: just being part of Christ's Church does not make one an Israelite. Then consider this: what did Apostle Paul mean when he said, "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"? (Rom.9:8)

Didn't you know that if you are a member of Christ's Church, then you are "counted for the seed"? Counted for which seed? The seed of Israel. So yes, even Gentile members in Christ's Body ARE spiritual Israelites, "counted for the seed" of the Promise. That Promise was first to Abraham, then to his son Isaac, and then to his son Jacob whom God named Israel. There it is.

This why God is called The God of Abraham, and The God of Isaac, and The God of Jacob, by our Lord Jesus in The Gospel, because of His Promise of Salvation through His Son.

And how has believing Israel been represented in that Promise per God's Word? It's about the idea of 'election' from God's choosing. All His OT prophets were of Israel, and all His Apostles were of Israel. That's what Paul was covering in Rom.11 about that elect group of Israelites that were chosen by God, by His election. It also is why Paul taught later in Rom.11 about the unbelieving ones of Israel still being beloved for The Father's sake, because of His chosen election. It's about ownership, before they were even born (also covered by Paul in Rom.9 about Jacob and Esau). This is why Christ could already announce rewards ordained for His Apostles, that they would sit upon thrones judging over the 12 tribes of Israel.

Get off your high horse, and actually read what I am writing. I don't expect to be exalted, and that is my entire point. Do I exalt Israel? Yes I do, because they are beloved by the Father. Salvation came from God to Abraham, to Issac, to Jacob, to Judah, to David, to Jesus Christ. Through Judah, not Ephraim, or any of the other 'lost tribes'. Judah! Let me say this again, so that I am clear. JUDAH! Jesus is the Lion of JUDAH! Jesus was a JEW! This is why I exalt Israel and especially the Jews. Am I glad that God extended his Salvation to me? Absolutely. Do I realize that there was NOTHING that I did to deserve that? You bet. But out of the two of us, there is one of us that considers himself to be part of Israel, with all the rights and privileges that was promised them, and one who does not. Which one are you?

For even a Gentile believer in Christ's Body that fails to claim God's promises to Israel, they then cast off being part of the "commonwealth of Israel" Paul mentioned in Ephesians 2. To deny those promises, is to deny being "counted for the seed."

Not only that, but it would mean denial of being part of Christ's vineyard per the parable of the husbandmen in Matthew 21, where He said the vineyard would be taken from unbelieving Israel, and instead given to another nation that would bring forth its fruits, meaning fruits in The Gospel. I mean, there's so many pointers in God's Word that His Israel was moved to mean His Church through Christ, it would take days to list all of them. But love of men's doctrines have bewitched you from understanding all of them it would appear.

 

[veteran]

I agree with just about everything that you said, but I am confused when you mention Christ's real enemies, and then mention the devil, IF the Devil is not Christ's real enemy then who is, and why won't you name them?

The devil is Christ's real enemy (singular), but Christ's enemies (plural) are those which the devil sowed. Can you name them?

So then the brethren are the sheep? That doesn't make any sense, at least to me. He did not say for as much as you have one to one of the least of yourselves, my brethren, you have done to me. The very grammar of the verse is different than what you say. He is talking to the sheep, and then refers to their actions toward "Least of These, my brethren" At least this is how I see it.

His sheep hear His voice. And that's all true believers on Him, of all nations, not just of flesh born Israel. You're not on the Hyperdispensationalist views that Books like Matthew is meant only for Israel, are you?

Well then, this following Scripture ought to really confuse you...

John 10:24-26
24 Then came the Jews round about Him, and said unto Him, "How long dost Thou make us to doubt? If Thou be the Christ, tell us plainly."
25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep, as I said unto you."
(KJV)

Oh really? Are you not the one who claimed...

Surely you're smart enough to know the difference between the idea of Gentiles in Christ's Church being 'spiritual Israelites' per Rom.9 vs. actual flesh born Israelites?

If you are of Israel then you are an Israelite. I am of America, and I am an American. Did I misread you?

You're speaking in the flesh sense only. I noticed the meaning of 'spiritual Israel' you gave is applied very differently in your doctrine than it is by Paul in Romans 9. And you know what? A flesh born Israelite can be an American too!!! So what.

Well I totally agree with you on God created this earth to be inhabited. I do not believe in the whole living in the clouds idea.

Good. Because there's mountains written about it in the OT prophets.

Not really, since I couldn't find any threads, I started one, and eventually got some good information to study.. still haven't made my mind up on it so far, but I am looking into it.

Why not start a Bible study at 1 Kings 11, and go get it all? The Books of Chronicles is a repeat, with a bit more details as to the 'why' of events in the Books of Kings.

 

[lawrance]

I am a Catholic Christian
I believe that pure communism can only be successful within small Christian organisations; specifically, monasteries.
Once again, your post is unclear.

I am not sure what you mean by 'downhearted', nor have I seen Joshua either 'push religion' or promote any idea that is simplistic.

I am not getting angry with anyone but i do agree with what veteran is saying totally and i do say that what our Joshua is saying is totally off with the pixies and i have people like him pushing that work of the Devil all the time and i don't want to be disrespectful at all but why can't i say what i think, with out being bullied.
I have a mate just like our Joshua who talks the same exact things and my mate shows total lack of respect to other people be they the mossies living in the land. Now he and Joshua are out of line with God when they think they can treat their brother just like Cain did. and i am worried for their Soul.

Dear aspen i love a lot of what you have said on this forum but i can not stand by and have someone say communism is something worthy in the Catholic Church. i hope and pray you find the correct word for it.

 

[Joshua David]

I am not getting angry with anyone but i do agree with what veteran is saying totally and i do say that what our Joshua is saying is totally off with the pixies and i have people like him pushing that work of the Devil all the time and i don't want to be disrespectful at all but why can't i say what i think, with out being bullied.
I have a mate just like our Joshua who talks the same exact things and my mate shows total lack of respect to other people be they the mossies living in the land. Now he and Joshua are out of line with God when they think they can treat their brother just like Cain did. and i am worried for their Soul.

Dear aspen i love a lot of what you have said on this forum but i can not stand by and have someone say communism is something worthy in the Catholic Church. i hope and pray you find the correct word for it.

I do not have a problem with you disagreeing with me in the least. It was not the fact that you disagreed with me that offended me, it was the attitude that you showed toward me. (ie calling me a clown) If you want to be able to come on here and not be 'bullied' as you put it, might I suggest that, especially when you disagree with someone, that you treat them with some common cutesy and respect. I try my best to be respectful to everyone, whether I agree with them or not. I am not saying that I am always successful, but I at least don't barge into conversations and start insulting someone, as you did.

One other thing. The conversation was not about communism, it was about the Rapture, and specifically the conversations had reached a point where we were discussing the difference, if any of the Church and Israel, and how that relates to the Rapture.

When you come into a thread and start talking about a totally different topic, that is called hijacking the thread, which again is extreamly disrespectful, not only to the participants having the conversation, but also to the person that started the thread.

Joshua David

Why not start a Bible study at 1 Kings 11, and go get it all? The Books of Chronicles is a repeat, with a bit more details as to the 'why' of events in the Books of Kings.

Well I think we have reached the point in the conversation that we have pretty much said everything that we both wanted to say. I wanted to thank you for the very insightful and passionate debate. I promise you, I will look over 1 Kings 11, as I am always studying. Thank you again Veteran. If I allowed my passion to get the better of me, in this debate, and I said anything that offended you, then I do apologize. I may not agree with you, but I do respect your knowledge of the Word, and your passion for our Lord.


Joshua David

 

[veteran]

Well I think we have reached the point in the conversation that we have pretty much said everything that we both wanted to say. I wanted to thank you for the very insightful and passionate debate. I promise you, I will look over 1 Kings 11, as I am always studying. Thank you again Veteran. If I allowed my passion to get the better of me, in this debate, and I said anything that offended you, then I do apologize. I may not agree with you, but I do respect your knowledge of the Word, and your passion for our Lord.


Joshua David

Same goes for me, if I have said anything that offended you, please forgive me. Peace in Christ to you brother.

 

[aspen]

I am not getting angry with anyone but i do agree with what veteran is saying totally and i do say that what our Joshua is saying is totally off with the pixies and i have people like him pushing that work of the Devil all the time and i don't want to be disrespectful at all but why can't i say what i think, with out being bullied.
I have a mate just like our Joshua who talks the same exact things and my mate shows total lack of respect to other people be they the mossies living in the land. Now he and Joshua are out of line with God when they think they can treat their brother just like Cain did. and i am worried for their Soul.

Dear aspen i love a lot of what you have said on this forum but i can not stand by and have someone say communism is something worthy in the Catholic Church. i hope and pray you find the correct word for it.

Well Mr. R.

I do understand the dangers of communism when it is applied to government - without God, it always leads to dictatorship. So I understand your concern. I simply believe that true communism, which is sharing the wealth with each other is a good thing - it is our fallen nature, which makes it into an evil.

 

[lawrance]

Well Mr. R.

I do understand the dangers of communism when it is applied to government - without God, it always leads to dictatorship. So I understand your concern. I simply believe that true communism, which is sharing the wealth with each other is a good thing - it is our fallen nature, which makes it into an evil.

I am not allowed to converse with you on the subject hear now.

Clowning around with the word of the Bible using worldly direction is what i would call a clown. no offence. but as i see it as a direct offence to God.
Devils know the Bible very well and use it to their ends, and they are happy to use any evil as a tool to push their own desires.
My mate up the road recons that salvation comes from the Jews twisting this meaning to say streight out blasphemy.