Two particular problems with dispensationalism...

[Jay Ross]

Naomi,

Certainly, Romans 11:25 is a key passage in understanding what Paul is saying. Unfortunately, I don't think this is translated well in many Bibles and therefore is a bit misleading. The word in question here is πλήρωμα. Many translations give this word a numerical connotation, (full number, full completed number, etc) but is talking about the full spiritual blessing that is now being poured out upon the Gentiles in Christ. This same word is used in similar contexts in passages like John 1:16, Rom 15:29, and Eph 3:19.

In fact, I think Paul is basically restating what he has already said in verses 11 & 12 when he writes:

11 So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. 12 Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!

The word translated "full inclusion" is also this word πλήρωμα. So, clearly Paul here is not talking about a numerical quantity of Israelites but the fullness of God's mercy and invitation to them to find life in Christ. In the same way, in verse 25, Paul is saying that God hardened Israel until the fullness of his blessing has εἰσέρχομαι (arrived, come, come in) for the Gentiles. So again, the point here is not (as many Dispensationalists put it) that God has a church age where he saves Gentiles and then turns off that valve of grace (perhaps in the rapture) so he can turn on the valve of grace to save all of national Israel. The point is that God has hardened Israel for a time and has chosen this time to fully include the Gentiles in his grace and mercy so as to make Israel jealous. As a result of this full blessing poured out on the Gentiles, God aims to use that as a means to pour our his full blessing and inclusion on Israel as well.

So, you may disagree, but I still maintain this is not about eschatology, but about God's current plan in Paul's day to save both Jews and Gentiles.

To answer your question, "No, I don't believe there will be a time when God is done with the Gentiles." According to Paul, those walls are now broken down. God's people are no longer the result of flesh and blood or genealogy. God sees his children as those of faith. Those who have the faith of Abraham are children of Abraham and there is no longer Jew or Greek. We are all one in Christ. That is why the dispensaiontalist system is particularly bothersome to me. It seems they want to erect walls of division based on flesh when Christ has intentionally torn down those wall so that "true Israel" are those who are born of the Spirit, not born of flesh. I think that is the overarching thrust of Paul's teaching in Romans 9-11, and yet some has used these passages to teach quite the opposite of what Paul was trying to communicate! Paul is talking about God's sovereign choice to make a person's faith the means by which he designates his children, and people have used these chapters to teach predetermination and God's special focus on a people based on their flesh, not their faith! Very disappointing in my mind.

I agree with you that Romans 11:25-26 is badly translated.

The Gentiles mentioned in verse 25 are the heathen Gentiles, and not the "Christian Gentiles" as many assume the case to be.

Paul is telling the Christian Gentiles when Israel will be redeemed/saved.

A better translation of the Greek text is: -

Romans 11:25-26: - 25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel, ἄχρι (until the fullness with respect to time) οὗ (That) τὸ (the) πλήρωμα (fulfilling) τῶν (of the) ἐθνῶν (heathen gentiles {trampling the sanctuary for 2,300 years}) εἰσέλθῃ, (is completed,) 26 after which all Israel will be saved, . . .

This is confirmed by Luke 14:31-32.

Also "

ἐθνῶν​

" can be traced all the way back to Genesis 10 and the formation of the Heathen Gentile nations.

The above paraphrasing of Romans 11: 25-26a is a far better understanding of what Paul wrote than the forced "Gentile Church" understanding of the translators and the subsequent adopted tradition of 'the fullness in numbers of the "Gentile Christian" coming into the church.' If Paul was referring to the Christian Gentiles in verse 25 then he would have used the Greek word "ἔθνεσιν" which he uses to address the Christian Gentiles such as in Romans 11:11 and 13 etc..

It is certainly much food for thought.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

<snip>

In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. - Hebrews 8:13

<snip>

Just a very small point, it is not a "Brand new {Covenant}" but rather a "refurbished {Covenant}" where the word "Covenant" has been added to the English translation. Since Jesus came to speak of/about the Salvation Covenant with the nation of Israel and that He was going to refurbish the redemption process by which it operates, we need to be careful of which covenant is being referred to in Hebrews 8:13. I do not think that Paul was referring to the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant which Christ did not mention at all in his first advent although he may have referenced the "law" of the Salvation Covenant which is also found recorded in the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant.

This is where we can tie ourselves all up in knots. God requires us, the Saints of God, to take the Salvation Covenant message to all the nations of the earth. He does not require us to take the specific Israelite covenant of a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the Nations, to the nations as this covenant is not applicable to any other nation than those who are of Israel.

Hebrews 12:22-24: - 22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the newer covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

Does not verse 24 also speak of the newer form of the Salvation covenant.

And yes it is also true that Jesus is the mediator of the newer Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant, but verse 24 above makes reference back to Abel where Abel "sacrificed a lamb from his flock" to God in his understanding of the Salvation Covenant which has been in place since the creation of Adam and Eve.

Someone is causing this confusion among the saints and it is not God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit. I wonder if it is Satan.

Shalom

 

[Willie T]

Just a very small point, it is not a "Brand new {Covenant}" but rather a "refurbished {Covenant}" where the word "Covenant" has been added to the English translation. Since Jesus came to speak of/about the Salvation Covenant with the nation of Israel and that He was going to refurbish the redemption process by which it operates, we need to be careful of which covenant is being referred to in Hebrews 8:13. I do not think that Paul was referring to the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant which Christ did not mention at all in his first advent although he may have referenced the "law" of the Salvation Covenant which is also found recorded in the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant.

This is where we can tie ourselves all up in knots. God requires us, the Saints of God, to take the Salvation Covenant message to all the nations of the earth. He does not require us to take the specific Israelite covenant of a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the Nations, to the nations as this covenant is not applicable to any other nation than those who are of Israel.

Hebrews 12:22-24: - 22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the newer covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

Does not verse 24 also speak of the newer form of the Salvation covenant.

And yes it is also true that Jesus is the mediator of the newer Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant, but verse 24 above makes reference back to Abel where Abel "sacrificed a lamb from his flock" to God in his understanding of the Salvation Covenant which has been in place since the creation of Adam and Eve.

Someone is causing this confusion among the saints and it is not God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit. I wonder if it is Satan.

Shalom

You have a lot of work ahead of you to try and sell THAT one.

 

[Jay Ross]

You have a lot of work ahead of you to try and sell THAT one.

Yes I know that is true, but that is the problem with traditions in that people want to hold onto them as if they are sacrosanct and should not be cha.

 

[Naomi25]

Just a very small point, it is not a "Brand new {Covenant}" but rather a "refurbished {Covenant}" where the word "Covenant" has been added to the English translation. Since Jesus came to speak of/about the Salvation Covenant with the nation of Israel and that He was going to refurbish the redemption process by which it operates, we need to be careful of which covenant is being referred to in Hebrews 8:13. I do not think that Paul was referring to the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant which Christ did not mention at all in his first advent although he may have referenced the "law" of the Salvation Covenant which is also found recorded in the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant.

This is where we can tie ourselves all up in knots. God requires us, the Saints of God, to take the Salvation Covenant message to all the nations of the earth. He does not require us to take the specific Israelite covenant of a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the Nations, to the nations as this covenant is not applicable to any other nation than those who are of Israel.

Hebrews 12:22-24: - 22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the newer covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

Does not verse 24 also speak of the newer form of the Salvation covenant.

And yes it is also true that Jesus is the mediator of the newer Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations Covenant, but verse 24 above makes reference back to Abel where Abel "sacrificed a lamb from his flock" to God in his understanding of the Salvation Covenant which has been in place since the creation of Adam and Eve.

Someone is causing this confusion among the saints and it is not God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit. I wonder if it is Satan.

Shalom

I'm sorry, but I can't see where you're getting any of this from.

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. - Jeremiah 31:31–32

Even if we don't look at the Hebrew, just the plain reading of the text suggests to us that what God is about to introduce is new, and not like the one he made with their fathers. The inference of 'covenant' is clear, as is 'new' (clearly implied by the "I will make"), rather than 'refurbished'.
But, let's look at the Hebrew in case:

חֲדָשָֽׁה׃ (new),
בְּרִ֥ית (a covenant)
וְכָרַתִּ֗י (that I will make)

And here's the whole verse:
הִנֵּ֛ה יָמִ֥ים בָּאִ֖ים נְאֻם־יְהוָ֑ה וְכָרַתִּ֗י אֶת־בֵּ֧ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה בְּרִ֥ית חֲדָשָֽׁה׃


Again we find mention of a new, not 'refurbished' covenant, in the NT.

And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. - Luke 22:20

καινὴ (new),
διαθήκη (covenant)

καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ὡσαύτως μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι, λέγων Τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη ἐν τῷ αἵματί μου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυννόμενον

Is there any doubt that Jesus is speaking of the same new covenant that Jeremiah was? The one where God declares:
I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” - Jeremiah 31:33–34

It is the book of Hebrews that really wraps it up, and makes it difficult, I think, for you to prove your thesis of a 'refurbished' old covenant. New means new, and we are told why God makes a new covenant.


For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. - Hebrews 8:7
πρώτη (first [one])
δευτέρας (for a second)
εἰ γὰρ ἡ πρώτη ἐκείνη ἦν ἄμεμπτος, οὐκ ἂν δευτέρας ἐζητεῖτο τόπος.

The author of Hebrews then quotes the Jeremiah passage, then goes on to say this:


In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. - Hebrews 8:13

Wow! This is pretty clear!

Καινὴν (new),
πεπαλαίωκεν (he has made obsolete)
τὴν πρώτην· (the first)
παλαιούμενον (growing old)
ἐγγὺς (is near)
ἀφανισμοῦ. (vanishing)

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "refurbished" covenant, but I am extremely sure its not something we find in scripture. Do forgive me if I've completely misread your point, though.

 

[Jay Ross]

I'm sorry, but I can't see where you're getting any of this from.

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. - Jeremiah 31:31–32

Even if we don't look at the Hebrew, just the plain reading of the text suggests to us that what God is about to introduce is new, and not like the one he made with their fathers. The inference of 'covenant' is clear, as is 'new' (clearly implied by the "I will make"), rather than 'refurbished'.
But, let's look at the Hebrew in case:

חֲדָשָֽׁה׃ (new),
בְּרִ֥ית (a covenant)
וְכָרַתִּ֗י (that I will make)

And here's the whole verse:
הִנֵּ֛ה יָמִ֥ים בָּאִ֖ים נְאֻם־יְהוָ֑ה וְכָרַתִּ֗י אֶת־בֵּ֧ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה בְּרִ֥ית חֲדָשָֽׁה׃


Again we find mention of a new, not 'refurbished' covenant, in the NT.

And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. - Luke 22:20

καινὴ (new),
διαθήκη (covenant)

καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ὡσαύτως μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι, λέγων Τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη ἐν τῷ αἵματί μου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυννόμενον

Is there any doubt that Jesus is speaking of the same new covenant that Jeremiah was? The one where God declares:
I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” - Jeremiah 31:33–34

It is the book of Hebrews that really wraps it up, and makes it difficult, I think, for you to prove your thesis of a 'refurbished' old covenant. New means new, and we are told why God makes a new covenant.


For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. - Hebrews 8:7
πρώτη (first [one])
δευτέρας (for a second)
εἰ γὰρ ἡ πρώτη ἐκείνη ἦν ἄμεμπτος, οὐκ ἂν δευτέρας ἐζητεῖτο τόπος.

The author of Hebrews then quotes the Jeremiah passage, then goes on to say this:


In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. - Hebrews 8:13

Wow! This is pretty clear!

Καινὴν (new),
πεπαλαίωκεν (he has made obsolete)
τὴν πρώτην· (the first)
παλαιούμενον (growing old)
ἐγγὺς (is near)
ἀφανισμοῦ. (vanishing)

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "refurbished" covenant, but I am extremely sure its not something we find in scripture. Do forgive me if I've completely misread your point, though.

Read the parable of the neo wine being put into kainous wine skins. Even neo wine skins if they have not been used straight away will harden such that if you put neon wine into them they will burst. They too need to be kainous/refurbished, made like new again before the neon wine can be safely put into the younger wine skins.

Likewise with respect to the Jeremiah 31:31 verse ḥă·ḏā·šāh has the meaning of fresh again or like new again. When Israel is redeemed in our near future, God will remake the covenant that they rebelled against within 40 day of entering into it.

Exodus 19:5-6: - 5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6 And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'

Embedded within this covenant is also the Salvation covenant from the time in the Garden of Eden.

God intends to renew His Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation covenant with the Israelites and make it like new again.

Shalom

 

[bbyrd009]

ha Tomorrow People are insane lol

 

[Jun2u]

Jay Ross and I discussed this very same word “refurbish” in the past. For some reason, he is stuck on the word “new” to mean refurbish. At that time, we were discussing about how God will create a new heaven and a new earth. Obviously, the result is also seen on this thread, as he also adamantly said not “new“ heaven and earth but a “refurbished” heaven and earth. When people change the meaning of a word in Scripture, without knowing they really are saying, they know more than God.

For what it’s worth, and whether in the Old or New Testament, there is only ONE covenant. That is to say, only one Gospel.

In the Old Testament, to atone for their sins, the Jews had to sacrifice a lamb. In the New Testament, Jesus fulfilled that sacrificial lamb as the ultimate sacrifice. He was the Lamb slain before the foundations of the world. A better sacrifice, one covenant, one Gospel.

To God Be The Glory

BTW, your Scripture reference at the bottom of your posts should refer to Ephesians 2:8-9.

 

[Jay Ross]

@Jun2u

No I am not stuck on the poor English translation of G2537 as "new" as you have suggested above.

Christ came in His first Advent to bring the Salvation Covenant message to the Nation of Israel. He did not come to bring or preach on the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the Nations Covenant as Israel was not in a place to receive such a message since they had turned so far away from God. Because of their continual idolatrous worship, God caused them to be scattered to the four compass points of the earth for two ages or for most of that time period.

The fullness in time of this 2 age period has not yet been reached, but it should be completed within the next 30 or so years from now.

I am not stuck in my understanding, but it seems to me that you want to hold on for dear life to the false traditions of men.

Shalom

 

[Jun2u]

@Jun2u

No I am not stuck on the poor English translation of G2537 as "new" as you have suggested above.

Christ came in His first Advent to bring the Salvation Covenant message to the Nation of Israel. He did not come to bring or preach on the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation and God's possession among the Nations Covenant as Israel was not in a place to receive such a message since they had turned so far away from God. Because of their continual idolatrous worship, God caused them to be scattered to the four compass points of the earth for two ages or for most of that time period.

The fullness in time of this 2 age period has not yet been reached, but it should be completed within the next 30 or so years from now.

I am not stuck in my understanding, but it seems to me that you want to hold on for dear life to the false traditions of men.

Shalom

Are you saying when God said "new" He did not mean it but meant to say "refurbish?" WOW...

You accused me of holding on for dear life to the false traditions of men. Where, I pray tell, in my discussions with you in other threads have I not offered Scripture references?

You say Christ did not come to preach on the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation as Israel was not ready to receive the message because of their continued idolatrous worship of other gods? FYI, this worship of other gods by Israel was the reason God had divorced them!

Are you saying there will be a time God will save Israel? And, will the 2 age?? come to fruition in 30 years? Please elaborate.

To God Be The Glory

 

[Jay Ross]

Are you saying when God said "new" He did not mean it but meant to say "refurbish?" WOW...

You accused me of holding on for dear life to the false traditions of men. Where, I pray tell, in my discussions with you in other threads have I not offered Scripture references?

You say Christ did not come to preach on the Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation as Israel was not ready to receive the message because of their continued idolatrous worship of other gods? FYI, this worship of other gods by Israel was the reason God had divorced them!

Are you saying there will be a time God will save Israel? And, will the 2 age?? come to fruition in 30 years? Please elaborate.

To God Be The Glory

You read the scriptures and tell me where I have held onto my "false" understanding. Also please tell me that you have confirmed the translation that you are referencing is also correct in its translation through your own scholarship, as it seems to me that we are both using the same scriptural passage to support the defence of our understanding.

It was Paul who said that God will save/redeem all of Israel after the time of the judgement of the kings of the earth at Armageddon when the trampling of the sanctuary in time comes to its completion.

As to the present age coming to fruition in around 30 or so years time, this understanding is confirmed by the Parable of the Fig Tree Budding as define in just Verse 32. But to come to this conclusion requires you to use your laughing matter other than for a mallet to drive home your views.

 

[Naomi25]

Read the parable of the neo wine being put into kainous wine skins. Even neo wine skins if they have not been used straight away will harden such that if you put neon wine into them they will burst. They too need to be kainous/refurbished, made like new again before the neon wine can be safely put into the younger wine skins.

Likewise with respect to the Jeremiah 31:31 verse ḥă·ḏā·šāh has the meaning of fresh again or like new again. When Israel is redeemed in our near future, God will remake the covenant that they rebelled against within 40 day of entering into it.

Exodus 19:5-6: - 5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6 And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'

Embedded within this covenant is also the Salvation covenant from the time in the Garden of Eden.

God intends to renew His Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation covenant with the Israelites and make it like new again.

Shalom

I cannot agree that the parable that speaks of the wine skins means what you say it does. There is nothing that suggests this 'refurbishment' that you keep focusing on.
It is generally acknowledged that Parables have only a central, decisive point. Those who try and find meaning in every little detail within every parable do not have the backing of the majority of Orthodox scholars. So I don't think trying to rest your point on the fact that, in reality, if a new wine skin had been left sitting too long before being filled with new wine, it too would have burst, is a strong argument. This is not Jesus' point for the parable at all, and to try to focus on it is only a red herring.

I...cannot agree completely with you, but, I think I know where you are coming from. There is a sense in scripture that God will "make all things new", not just in a 'wipe it all out and start from scratch' sense, but more from a, building on a broken seed sense. Like us. We are told that our new, glorified bodies will be out of the 'kernel' of our old, broken bodies. They will still have the sameness about them, in that, it will be us, but we will be made new. There is no doubt of our 'newness', there will be no sin left, and that is a massive change.
As for the covenants. I don't think the old and the new are the same, but I think one had to come before the other, almost in a foundational sense. The grace we have as Christians now? We have that because Christ lived the old covenant, fulfilled and completed it. That's why we're told it's passing away. It had fulfilled it's purpose in the world...to bring the new. It did not need refurbishing...it needed upgrading. And no matter how 'refurbished' the old could be, it would still be reverting back to type and shadow, would it not?

 

[Jay Ross]

I cannot agree that the parable that speaks of the wine skins means what you say it does. There is nothing that suggests this 'refurbishment' that you keep focusing on.
It is generally acknowledged that Parables have only a central, decisive point. Those who try and find meaning in every little detail within every parable do not have the backing of the majority of Orthodox scholars. So I don't think trying to rest your point on the fact that, in reality, if a new wine skin had been left sitting too long before being filled with new wine, it too would have burst, is a strong argument. This is not Jesus' point for the parable at all, and to try to focus on it is only a red herring.

I...cannot agree completely with you, but, I think I know where you are coming from. There is a sense in scripture that God will "make all things new", not just in a 'wipe it all out and start from scratch' sense, but more from a, building on a broken seed sense. Like us. We are told that our new, glorified bodies will be out of the 'kernel' of our old, broken bodies. They will still have the sameness about them, in that, it will be us, but we will be made new. There is no doubt of our 'newness', there will be no sin left, and that is a massive change.
As for the covenants. I don't think the old and the new are the same, but I think one had to come before the other, almost in a foundational sense. The grace we have as Christians now? We have that because Christ lived the old covenant, fulfilled and completed it. That's why we're told it's passing away. It had fulfilled it's purpose in the world...to bring the new. It did not need refurbishing...it needed upgrading. And no matter how 'refurbished' the old could be, it would still be reverting back to type and shadow, would it not?

Empty words expressing your opinion, with no scriptural references to point a person to, let us say what the point Jesus was trying to make in telling this parable, and help them understand what you are scripturally basing your argument on.

Was not Jesus' main message to the people of Israel, "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand."

Now since Jesus was born into the Nation of Israel, He was under the covenantal requirements of the Covenants God first entered into with the People of Israel, and then because they rebelled, he was also subject to the Mosaic Covenant that God entered into with Moses.

But his prominent message was based around the unwritten Salvation Covenant, which God also included within the Kingdom of Priest and a Holy Nation Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant for the People of Israel.

Now if something needs upgrading then it is being refurbished in that upgrading process.

Now start presenting referenced scriptures to back up your expressed opinions otherwise you are just an empty jar with noting of substance to say.

 

[Naomi25]

Empty words expressing your opinion, with no scriptural references

Well said. And can be said in return quite easily. Shall we start trading verses? To what end?

 

[bbyrd009]

As to the present age coming to fruition in around 30 or so years time, this understanding is confirmed by the Parable of the Fig Tree Budding as define in just Verse 32.

why not just give us a date like the rest of them do and get it over with

 

[Jay Ross]

why not just give us a date like the rest of them do and get it over with

A great question to ask of me and here is my response: -

My research into the chronology of the bible timeline suggests a particular year but the errors associated with story telling and the rounding off of numbers in the story telling process of the biblical account historically does not help, and makes it impossible to say which exact year the next age will begin in. Also some of the sign post events which can be used to establish the year when certain end time events will take place have not been precisely defined within the Bible as to which year in the reign of a particular king they have occurred in and so there is a range of possible years in which the future events will unfold.

An example of this can be found in the Revelation 16:12-16 account of the nations gathering to be judged at Armageddon. We saw the three evil and foul frog like spirits work their signs and wonders in 2001, to begin the process of drawing the nation to gather at Armageddon but we are not told how much time will pass between when the three evil and foul frog like spirits work their signs for the whole world to see and when the nations gather at the place known as Armageddon where they will be judged.

Another example can be found in Daniel 8:13-14 where we are told that the Sanctuary in Jerusalem will be trampled by the Heathen Gentiles for a period of 2,300 years, but we are not given any sign post to indicate when the trampling of the sanctuary in Jerusalem began in the Bible. It possibly began around 70-80 years after Alexandra the Great Died, probably some time between 260 and 250 B.C..

Another issue in considering time lines and when events will take place is that Ussher's Chronology of the Old Testament has an error of around 100 years as to when Adam was created. His time line of the Old Testament is 100 or so years short in its overall time span.

Yet another issue that clouds the waters of clarity is the 360 day year that has been adopted in calculating biblical prophecies time spans and converting them into Solar years. An example of this is the 490 years described in Daniel 9:24. The theologian who came up with this "brilliant" concept did not take into account the fact that around 19 solar years is equivalent to 19 Jewish years because of the additional month added every few years to take into account when the bailey crop was ripening in that year and the new moon was first sighted. The Daniel 9:24 prophecy specified the number of sacrifices that would be acceptable to God to cover their iniquities against their God, before the yearly sin sacrifice would no longer be acceptable to Him.

After the 490 years had passed, God tells us that He was going to instigate another means of atonement for a person's iniquities.

All these things do not help us to be able to say with clarity that such and such a year is the year when this present age will end. The Matthew 24:32 prophecy of the Fig tree budding clearly tells us that time span between when the Fig tree begins to bud and the start of the Summer Harvest season, i.e. the beginning of the next age, is not precisely known because of the early or late spring weather patterns that naturally occur that dictate when the fig tree will bud new leaves. In this prophecy, we now know that 1948 is the sign post marker for the start of this prophecy but as to its duration, we are uncertain because of the early or late spring weather that impacts on this prophecy with respect to the beginning of summer season.

It is for all of the above reasons that I tend to give a range as to when I expect to see the beginning of the Millennium Age start.

The Judgement of the Kings of the earth at Armageddon is certainly a sign that the end of the age is very imminent, but at present it is in our near future, probably within the next 20 to 30 years.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

Well said. And can be said in return quite easily. Shall we start trading verses? To what end?

YES WE SHOULD START TRADING VERSES AND FIRST OFF CONFIRM IF THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE RESPECTIVE VERSES INTO ENGLISH IS CORRECT.

If we can start trading the respective verses that we believe backs our respective theories, then the ensuring conversation will help both of us to refine what we believe.

Shalom

 

[Jun2u]

As to the present age coming to fruition in around 30 or so years time, this understanding is confirmed by the Parable of the Fig Tree Budding as define in just Verse 32. But to come to this conclusion requires you to use your laughing matter other than for a mallet to drive home your views.

I’m afraid you have a wrong understanding of the Parable of the Fig Tree. Indeed the Fig Tree represents National Israel. Yes, it was prophesied they were to be scattered in the four corners of the world, and one day would return as a nation once again. Contrary to your suggestions, however, the prophecy already came to fruition when Israel became a viable nation once again amongst the nations of the world in 1948.

1948 is the sign given in verse 33, “when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.” The word “it” is referring to verses 30, 31 and 32.

God’s promises to National Israel have all been completed! Their divorce was finalized when the curtain of the temple was rent in two that signaled their separation, as Jesus hung on the cross.

There is no budding of Israel in 30 years as you’ve suggested.

If I may borrow the words of Jesus as He spoke to Nicodemus, “Art thou a Jew and knowest not these things?” (paraphrased).

To God Be The Glory

 

[bbyrd009]

The Judgement of the Kings of the earth at Armageddon is certainly a sign that the end of the age is very imminent, but at present it is in our near future, probably within the next 20 to 30 years.

you'd think the legions of the confused that have taken that same path would be a guide, yet we witness no lack of ppl assuring us that we need to worry about tomorrow, huh.

 

[bbyrd009]

1948

oh, jeez, did i wander into the eschatology section again? lol

keep an open mind there, ok, i doubt 1948 has anything whatsoever to do with Fig Tree Budding
and ppl assuring you that they know that is true should be all the hint one needs