Bible Discussion Thread

Hi Gigi. This is in response to your recent enquiry (directed to Lbooth1955) stating: "I have asked dispensationalists I converse with these questions repeatedly, asking for where the Scriptures explicitly, plainly and literally teach these things. I hope that you can show me such Scriptural proof". This was in regards to why 'dispensationalists' understand the Scriptures the way they do. I will try to do so now in several pages, since no other responses were given to you. As well, I'm not attaching my response to your original question (because of this Site's new format of only allowing one page of discussions to appear).

Also, I won't answer your questions you posed directly, but I trust that what I will share now, will answer most of them anyway (at least the foundational basis for those with 'dispensational' leanings); though will certainly take any questions if you so wish. Now to my understanding of the Word on this matter of the relevancy of ethnic (or, national) Israel as being separate from the Church.

Scripture does clearly show that with Israel's rejection of Jesus, God moved focus from them to another 'nation' (the Church) so that salvation would come to the gentiles as well as the Jews who would believe. However, "God is not a man that He should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" ( Numbers 23:19). The current rejection of national Israel giving favor and focus on His Church, doesn't mean rejection of Israel forever. God doesn't change His mind concerning the things He has promised (or else, what should we (or, can we) believe & accept of His other Promises & Covenants, if they are subject to change? - and those certainly include the things promised to the nation of Israel. As you know, I do not hold to 'replacement theology' at all, as when taking Scripture in totality & in context, I read it very differently. So to my reasons: On Page 2.

Gigi,

(2 of 2)

Jesus was to be the Saviour of the whole manking so he testified before both Judah Iscariot and the nation of Israel He was the Word become flesh and what is the Word, it is the 'thy word' and sanctify them with thy word.( Jn 17.17). When God tells Moses of the ten spies who brought the evil report He says, ' and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my voice' Here is another ten:" and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life'(Rev.2.10) Tribulation creates martyrs, from Abel onwards till the time God in his wrath judges the world. "All these things must be accounted for(Mt.23.35). Why God in his power and wisdom seen His fulness resting in his Son is avenged. "Before Abraham was I am." So Ten Commandments were given as a mark of condemnation. Again when David is presentedas a man after my own heart, it is given in multiples of Three to coincide with the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. "David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years./In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months: and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty and three years over all Israel and Judah." (2 Sam.5.4-5)Rev.7 relates to 144,000 who shall stand in place as martyrs as Seth did in order to replace Abel.

Finally these heretics who conveniently avoid the text in order to make Israel as blessed from Abraham forget the text:"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,"(Gen.2.4) 'In the beginning' refers to the day God decreed for his Son.(Ps.2.) The generation mentioned here refers to Jesus Christ who is before all things and by him consist.(Col.1.17-19) When Jesus says," Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation," he is referring to his Alpha Omega aspect. His fulness having fulfilled his ministry is on the right hand of God.

Baptism

So many theologies I'm learning I think I'll wait a few more years and, above all, seek to understand what God wants me to do.

I talk to many friends who are already advanced in the teachings of the Lord and have already been baptized.

One of them told me that she felt the Lord was asking her to do it again.

Note: she gave me permission to share this testimony.

This particular friend said that, the second time, something changed - the atmosphere became peaceful.

She said that when the pastor asked, "Do you accept Jesus.?", she, while speaking to Jesus, replied, "No, I want to do it!" and began to tremble.

Because she heard the question in a different way: "Do you accept to make videos and share your testimonies?"

Today, she is making the videos and, each day, continues more steadfastly, reaching other people and knowing Jesus more deeply in her life.

God knows exactly what He is doing with each of His children.

Thanks for writing in Willow and sharing that rather different testimony by your friend whilst she was in the baptism waters; that she heard her pastor's question to her in such a different way.

Anyway, as you mix more with Christian friends, whether in person or online, attend Church or Bible studies, the amount of information coming to you to digest will be both great & at times conflicting in your heart. When Scriptures are given to support the belief or teaching, note those portions and study them including the Book and chapters the verses are in, asking the Spirit to help you understand. It's only the LORD God with His Own Word that can show you what you need to know & how to apply those Truths in your life. And this understanding sometimes takes time as the Spirit leads you in your reading more of the Word & your readiness to learn what He has to say to you. Every blessing in your earnest desire and walk with the Lord Jesus.

[Comment Removed]

Page 2.

a) Replacement Theology (RT) goes against the NT teaching concerning this.

Paul lays it all out very clearly in Romans chaps 9 to11 (chapters you know very well). He writes of Israel's previous position as God's chosen people, their current position as those blinded and in unbelief, and as 'branches that were broken off'. But Paul certainly doesn't leave it there as though that is how it will be forever. Consider these specific references of his:

Romans 11:11-12: Did they, the nation of Israel stumble & fall beyond recovery? Not at all. Rather, because of their fall, salvation has come to the Gentiles, to provoke Israel to envy. But if their fall meant riches for the world, and their loss meant riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will Israel's fullness (restoration) bring. This is Paul writing, not as a learned Jew but under revelation in the NT economy, where the Promises of God still await fulfilment. So Israel's current position of having stumbled isn't a fall that they won't recover from. At present, their transgression (rejection of Jesus) has led to grace now offered to the world, but Paul anticipates a time when greater riches shall flow from their fullness, when they are restored and God's promises are fulfilled for them, most likely after they shall see & know the one "they have pierced" ( Zechariah 12:8-10).

Continuing in Paul's letter, Romans 11:23 states, "And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again". Israel can be grafted into the Olive tree and will happen to those who believe amongst them. And lest believing gentiles should, in pride, think that Israel has been rejected forever, he wrote: "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in". To Page 3.

Page 3.

This blindness and hardening is temporary until the appointed number of gentiles are saved. After this, God will again return to fulfil His Promises to them as a nation; even as Paul writes, "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins" ( Romans 11:26,27). Isaiah 59:20,21 and Jeremiah 31:31-37 are further assurances by God that what He has decreed will come to pass upon His Elect (Israel).

Even after Jesus' resurrection, the disciples still wanted to know when the kingdom would be restored to Israel ( Acts 1:6-7). Jesus COULD have told them, 'do you still not understand, God has rejected Israel because of their unbelief & rejection of Me - and only those who believe on Me will be with Me in My Kingdom'. Rather, Jesus said, "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." It was not a question of when this would happen but that in God's Time, it would happen when the remnant of Israel would one day see, be convicted and believe, & the kingdom would be restored, with Jesus truly as her King & Savior.

b) RT goes against Old Testament prophecies concerning the nation of Israel.

Consider the prophecies in Ezekiel chapters 36 and 37. In these passages, Ezekiel foresaw the following:

Israel's sinfulness and apostasy (36:16-18); Israel's dispersion amongst the nations (36:19-21); Israel's re-gathering back into the land of Israel (36:22-24); God's blessing of Israel under the new covenant (36:26-27); God would make his name known amongst the nations through His kindness and fulfilled promises to the nation of Israel (36:23,36). Onto Page 4.

Page 4.

Then Ezekiel chap 37 shows that the nation of Israel will be gathered back into the land in a state of unbelief first of all and after that, God will give them spiritual life. These prophecies and many others are literal prophecies concerning Israel alone. The nation of Israel was dispersed amongst all the nations starting in AD 70. They were literally being re-gathered and once again became a nation again in AD 1948. Prophecies will continue to be fulfilled where Israel will continue as a nation & one day come under the New Covenant and the Kingdom that they were always promised.

Other prophecies such as Zechariah chapter 12 and 14 cannot mean anything other than Israel. And these passages, which have not been fulfilled yet, show that God is going to protect, cleanse, and install his Kingdom there.

c) RT goes against New Testament prophecy.



Prophecy such as Matt chap 24 and the Book of the Revelation show that the nation of Israel plays a key role in the end times. God has not finished with them but will fulfil his prophecies and be faithful to His Own Name & Word.

d) RT goes against the very Character of God.



Paul wrote it well in Romans 3:1-4: "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

This is a very important point: if we believe that God will not fulfil His promises to the nation of Israel; or to say, that God has taken away His promises & Israel's position and given them to another people, this must cast great doubt over both the Character and Sovereignty of God. To Page 5.

Page 5.

This belief says that He will not do what He promised to His people, or possibly He cannot do what He promised. Both of which are untrue.

To repeat Ezekiel 36:22-24: "Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land."

You may believe that because of Israel's sin and unfaithfulness, God has forever removed their place & position, replacing them with the Church and that God will not fulfil His promises to them as a nation. But consider what God says here: It isn't for Israel's sake, but for God's Holy Name & Honor that compels Him to fulfil His Promise to Israel & show His Power to the heathen. Therefore, all the prophecies that went before pertaining to Israel and their future, including Jesus' Own teaching on their future trials & tribulations and restoration, as well as the Apostle Paul's & what was given to John the Revelator, show that God hasn't finished with His Elect. Sure, most will die still in unbelief and be judged & punished accordingly, as with all unbelievers, but the remnant who will believe at Christ's coming will know the fulfilment of prophecies concerning Israel and together with the Church form Christ's Kingdom on Earth. To page 6.

Page 6.

So the question may be asked, 'if the Church (of believing Jew & Gentile) is with Christ in His Kingdom, why the need or mention of Israel?' As given earlier, the prophecies have to be fulfilled & Israel will see the fulfilment of them in those days. As well, Israel will once again be seen by all that God is true to His Word, that His people have not been forgotten and they have now joined His Church having their faith in the Messiah of God.

So believers in Replacement Theology who cannot accept this, must then also provide Scriptures to show that Israel as a nation is now removed from God's Plan, that they will not figure in the last days & in Christ's Kingdom & that only the Church (comprising of saved Jew & Gentile) is now the only focus & concern of God.

I realize that this response may not answer all your questions you gave earlier, but more importantly just to answer one of your questions, I believe that Christ still had to die for the sins of all people, even if the Jews of His day received Him and believed on Him. That death may have been wholly conducted by the Roman judicial system & determination without Jewish compelling them to do so. Blessings.

Chris,

Hello again,

As to all the other information you gave to me, I do not wish to discuss anything else in your posts.

Also, you did not address any of my questions to Lbooth and that is what I am looking for as I have yet to receive answers that prove that those things are directly, explicitly, and plainly taught in Scripture.

I such proof exists, I truly do want dispensationalists to share these with me.

Thanks for your speedy reply Gigi (& apologies, this comment of mine here went to the wrong post - so repeating it now), with a clarification of your position. You're right that I did not directly respond to the questions you posed at the first, but felt that I needed to state my understanding of the foundational Truths that undergird this matter of the future state of national Israel (if at all) at the coming again of Jesus into Jerusalem in that coming day.

I did fortunately save your questions (which one must do if we need to go back to specific posts), so I shall try to address them now as a 'dispensationalist', with what I shared earlier as the foundation to those questions. You asked:

a) Where does Scripture teach that we are to definitely and always keep ethnic Israel and the Church separated from each other?

I believe that I dealt with this in those earlier pages, that both the prophecies that spoke of Israel's future, the Lord Himself & at least Paul (in depth), referred to Israel as a continuing separate entity to the Church. But if you're referring to those of Israel who have turned from sin trusting in Christ for salvation, then I see them as most definitely a part of Christ's Church and should not be differentiated in any way, but as one and complete in Christ.

b) Where does Scripture teach that we are to chop up Scripture, delineating specific Scriptures as being strictly for Israel and other specific Scriptures as being strictly for the church?

Again, we aren't taught to "chop up or delineate Scriptures to apply to Israel or the Church", for the Scriptures themselves reveal the separation. Clearly in the OT, it was all about Israel. When we get to the NT, whether the Gospels or apostolic teaching, the differences and separation are still consistent; only when Paul speaks of the mystery of both believing Jew & Gentile into the one Body, do we see the Word revealed that for this group all subsequent Scripture is relevant and applies. Onto Page 2.

Page 2.

c) Where does Scripture teach that ethnic Israel will inherit eternally an earthly life and the Church will inherit a heavenly life?

I can't speak for those who might believe this, since I don't see it this way. But I understand that both believing Israel and believing Gentile will share together eternally with Jesus in His 1000 year reign ( Revelation 20:4-6), & then at some future date, in the New heavens & New Earth ( Isaiah 66:22; 2 Peter 3:12,13).

d) Where does Scripture teach that the church came into being because the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah?

The Scripture that comes to mind is Acts 13:46-48, "Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed". And Paul also shared this in Romans 11:11. I realize that these accounts speak generally of the Jews who stood against the message of the Cross; some no doubt, would have believed and brought into the Church. To Page 3.

Page 3.

e) Where does Scripture teach that Jesus would have gone on to establish His kingdom on earth if the Jews would have accepted Him as their Messiah?

This question of course is tied in with your next question: f) "If (the above question) is true, where does Jesus sacrifice for sin enter into such a history? Would it have been set aside if the Jews accepted Him as their Messiah prior to the cross?

Your first question is hypothetical, as it assumes that there may not have been a need for Christ's Sacrifice for sin if He was accepted by the Jews, thus He would then remain on Earth & establish His Kingdom rule. But we know that Christ had to suffer and die, even as Paul preached in Acts 17:1-3; there was no avoiding the Cross, even for the gathering in of the Gentiles. If the Cross was absent, then could sinners (of Jews, even maybe Gentiles) even figure in such a kingdom of Christ on Earth? To me, that would be absurd. As also, if only the Jews believed on Jesus while He was on Earth, then He died, rose from the dead, & needed to return to His Father. There would still need to be a gap where the Gospel would have to reach into all the world, for all sinners needed to hear of God's great Love and be saved.

So, I'm unsure whether these were the sort of answers you were looking for - maybe something else. In any case, will leave this with you.

Dear Chris,

Getting back to you on this response. Question e is a belief that many dispensationalist state is true. It is not an hypothetical question in their view if they believe it to have occurred if the Jews had received Jesus as their Messiah in his lifetime.

I am trying to understand where in Scripture this belief is taught. If you are not able to answer this question, that's o.k. with me. And if you do not believe this dispensational belief as true, please tell me.

Saying it is hypothetical seems to me to be a bit evasive or dismisses of my question. Please understand that I am desiring to gain answers to my questions that are clear and to the point.

I do thank you for taking the time to attempt to help me out here. I always appreciate your inpu.

Hello everyone,

The Old Testament consistently foretold a literal, earthly kingdom promised to Israel, rooted in God's covenants with Abraham and David. These prophecies described Messiah coming to reign from Jerusalem over all nations, bringing peace, justice, and restoration. Key passages ( Gen. 13:14-15; 2 Sam. 7:12-16; Isa. 2:2-4; Jer. 23:5-6; Dan. 2:44; Zech. 14:9) spoke of Messiah's rule on earth-not a spiritual or heavenly kingdom.

In the OT, there was no teaching about a second coming or a rapture. The Jewish expectation was that when Messiah appeared, He would immediately establish this promised kingdom. They looked for deliverance from Gentile rule, the regathering of Israel, the throne of David restored, and the world blessed through Israel, all in a single advent of the King.

n the Old Testament, the earthly kingdom promised to Israel is a central theme of prophecy-rooted in God's covenants with Abraham, David, and reiterated by the prophets. These passages consistently describe a literal kingdom on earth, centered in Jerusalem, where Messiah reigns over Israel and the nations.

Amen Lbooth1955!

I agree and thanks for those scriptures and all that you do.

God bless!

Hi GiGi. Just to state that my reference to that question being hypothetical, was purely my understanding not anyone else's belief, since I definitely wouldn't agree to it; I don't see any Scriptural support that teaches Jesus would have gone on to establish His kingdom on earth if the Jews would have accepted Him as their Messiah at His first coming. There would be too much else to contend with especially in regards to the sin question, if Jesus was to be installed as King without Sacrifice, since He was "the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world".

Hello GiGi,

You are correct. The Bible does not teach multiple raptures and returns of Christ. Nor does it teach that Christ will return to establish an earthly kingdom on this sin-cursed earth; that was the mistake that the Nation of Israel made 2000 years ago and that those that teach this idea make today.

We must keep in mind that if we have come to any Truth from the Bible, it is only by God's mercy and grace. We can take no personal credit for this in any way.

Faith cometh by Hearing and Hearing by the Word of God, ie Christ Himself.

May we walk very humbly before God, praying that He might lead us into Truth as we search the Scriptures, using the principles that God Himself has set forth in His Word. Praying also that He might give us an earnest desire to be obedient to that Truth.

We could all benefit by reading Romans 9 very carefully. Applying the principle that Christ spoke in parables and without a parable spake He not.

Dear Bible Alone,

I do agree with you that these Scriptures both speak of the Lord's return in glory at the end of this age. I do not believe that the Thessalonian passage speaks of a rapture prior to His one and only second coming, also.

Thanks for sharing.

Hello GiGi,

I'm a little bit confused by your response. Perhaps I wasn't clear.

There is only one rapture and bodily resurrection of true believers, and that occurs when Christ returns to wrap up his judgment and salvation program. In other words at the end of this world.

If you understand something different, please explain.

Thank you.

Dear Bible Alone,

I am sorry if my post confused you. I believe as you do, that the saints (elect) will be gathered (raptured) when Jesus comes on the clouds with a shout, trumpet, very visible second coming (not as the dispensationalists teach-a rapture of saints before the tribulation which entails a gap of years before Jesus comes to earth.

Thank you GiGi.

Amen!

Thanks again, Chris.

I asked those questions specifically because these are what many dispensationalists believe. I realize that there are

among dispensationalists a range of degrees of thought from classical dispensationalists, such as Darby, Scofield, Shafer and others along a continuum towards progressive dispensationalists, which most likely you fit into.

There are those who follow the teachings of Clarence Larkin. Those, like Lbooth, which identify as Mid-Acts dispensationalists and those who have positions as End of Acts dispensationalists.

I was addressing what I have read as tenets of these groups in my questions, many of which have made statements attesting to what my questions address on this site.

I have many other questions to ask dispensationalists as to Scriptural support of their beliefs, but I started with the ones I posted because they speak to how dispensationalists attempt to interpret Scripture in general.

I thank you for the time you have taken to address my questions.

Wow GiGi. You've really studied this subject in quite some depth. I did not even realize that there were so many different degrees of "dispensationalism" (& that I might even fall into the 'progressive' category). Not sure if I should pat myself on the back for being found into that maybe elite category. Seriously though, my only exposure to dispensationalism was from a ginormous book of charts by Clarence Larkin. Have never read through it, but have since learned that my dividing the Bible into different epochs of God's dealing with Israel & others, I share similar beliefs to him. And to be clear, I don't believe that affirming these seven (or, more) epochs (dispensations) is necessary for understanding the Bible, but something that I see as evident and of course useful to new Bible readers who are seeking a very general overview of this great mysterious book called the Bible.

So thanks for that GiGi; I would be eager to read, in time, what other questions you might have on this subject, that would stir my understanding at least on the eschatological aspects of it.

Chris,

I wish you well this evening.

I was not trying to peg you into any specific "ism" in dispensationalism. I am sorry if you thought I was.

Lbooth admitted that he was "mid-acts dispensationalist' which teaches many of the questions I asked him to prove by Scripture. He has not responded to my questions, which saddens me because I really want to know how such people Scripturally justify their beliefs on these matters.

If you wish to seriously answer my questions with specifics, I will be happy to read your ideas. God bless you.

Not at all GiGi. I was simply impressed by how conversant you are in this subject. My understanding of dispensationalism is very basic, only now learning that its implications delve into the area of eschatology as well. If I have not answered your earlier questions well, please let me know; I was simply awaiting any further ones you had for me (or for us).

John 18:36 "Jesus answered, MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."

John 18:33-38 "Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? 35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? 36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. 38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault [at all]".

Hebrews 11:13-16 "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of [them], and embraced [them], and confessed that they were STRANGERS AND PILGRIMS ON THE EARTH. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they SEAK A COUNTRY. 15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that [country] from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. 16 But now they desire a BETTER [country], that is, an HEAVENLY: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath PREPARED FOR THEM A CITY"

Read 2 Peter 3. "12...wherein the HEAVENS being ON FIRE shall be DISSOLVED, and the ELEMENTS shall MELT with FERVENT HEAT? 13 Nevertheless we, ACCORDING TO HIS PROMISE, look for NEW HEAVENS AND A NEW EARTH, WHEREIN DWEALLETH RIGHTEOUSNESS."

Thank you Bible Alone for those worthy reminders about how we should treat God's Word. Only correct biblical hermeneutics, without personal feelings & inclinations entering in, will reveal the Truth and richness of God's Word. And yes, comparing Scripture with Scripture is essential, and again we need care that Scriptures compared are indeed very relevant to the matter being revealed.

Also, I appreciated your quoting John 18:33-38. I think you were directing our thoughts to Christ's coming Kingdom - that His Kingdom was not of this world. A couple of things came to mind here: Jesus' Mission was not to conquer and subdue His enemies, thus installing a premature kingdom, but to first give His Life for our sins that when He comes again to reign in Jerusalem it will be a Kingdom based on fulfilled prophecy & righteous rule when sin & its despicable author will be chained for a long time & prevented from causing havoc in human hearts.

And this should also remind us that it was never in God's Plan that His children would attempt by force to bring about His Kingdom on Earth (it simply is not our job to do), rather that we should lead holy blameless lives before all, standing sure & being vocal against the rampant sin around us, be instant in sharing the Gospel, and to await the coming of Jesus Who alone will rule and judge righteously. GBU.

Hello Chris,

Curious to know how the following passage fits into your idea of an earthly kingdom with Christ ruling from Jerusalem.

Clearly, those spoken about in Hebrews 11 were not looking for an earthly kingdom of any kind.

I suspect part of your misunderstanding stems from the fact that you want to understand "Israel" as always speaking about either Israel the man or National Israel the Jewish nation.

God very clearly defines Israel in many different ways, depending on the context. Remember that Christ spoken parables and without a parable, spake He not.

The Israel, that God is concerned about from a covenant salvation perspective, is the Israel made up of all true believers, both from the nation of Israel, and from every other nation.

These are God's elect. Whom Christ has chosen from before the foundations of the world and fully paid for their sins. These are the elect. God's elect, whom God has applied or will apply salvation to their life by giving them a new resurrected soul, have no interest in an earthly kingdom with Christ ruling from Jerusalem. They seek an heavenly kingdom as talked about in Hebrews 11. But thank you again for your response.

Hebrews 11:13-16 "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of [them], and embraced [them], and confessed that they were STRANGERS AND PILGRIMS ON THE EARTH. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they SEAK A COUNTRY. 15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that [country] from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. 16 But now they desire a BETTER [country], that is, an HEAVENLY: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath PREPARED FOR THEM A CITY"

May God in his mercy lead us into truth, as we compare scripture with scripture using the principles that God has laid down in his word.

Page 1.

Hi Bible Alone and thanks for your input. You have shared from Hebrews 11:13-16 as those 'faith heroes' who had their hope to be delivered from the limitations of this Earth, even of life itself, and to look forward to that heavenly city, that city "which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God". That is so true and should be for all who name the Name of Christ, where we should long to be free from sin's effects on us & the evil in the world around us, and be "with Christ which is far better".

And to refer to Matthew 13:34, Jesus indeed spoke to the people in parables, but where He gave them these earthly stories, they came with a heavenly/spiritual meaning & application. We cannot then use that verse to interpret everything seen in the Bible as a parable & thus give our own interpretation to them. It just generates confusion. So yes, there is the "true Israel of God", but we also have to note where national Israel is referred to and why there is a demarcation between the two.

So, if we are to believe that there can be no coming reign of Jesus in Jerusalem, simply because of the verses showing that we ought to be looking for that heavenly city, then we have a major problem with many Scriptures, viz. various Psalms (2, 22, 47,67, 89, 110, 132), Isaiah 9:6,7; Jeremiah 3:17; Micah 1:4-7; Zechariah 14:1-5, & from other prophets, and Revelation chaps 19 & 20). What do you suggest we do with these? Discard them or maybe, reinterpret them? All prophecies coming from a God-appointed prophet will come to pass verbatim, and if not, then both the prophet & prophecy are false. Onto Page 2.

Page 2.

The prophecies, for even the LORD God Himself has declared that Israel will continue forever ( Genesis 12:1-7; Genesis 13:14-17), show that there must be not only a continuation of Israel in their God-appointed land, but that in those days when Christ comes to war against His enemies and reign in Jerusalem, the remnants of Israel will believe and share in His Kingdom.

So bearing in mind what you have written about the true elect of God residing in a Heavenly Kingdom, what do you do with those Scriptures (and many more) that I've cited to show at least an earthly reign by Jesus for a limited time? And those are prophetical utterances and not parabolic in nature which must be taken & believed as given. And remember Jeremiah 31:31-36 is very telling about Israel's continuance.

Hello Chris,

The discussion here between you and GiGi bears on the fundamental question as to "how are we to approach the Bible to obtain Truth?" If we have the wrong approach, we will be unable to come to Truth. And of course, we must always recognize that even if we approach the Bible correctly, it is God Himself that must open our understanding and apply that Truth to our Mind and Heart.

First and foremost, we must recognize that God Himself, is the AUTHOR of the ENTIRE Bible in its original languages...not Paul or Luke or Jeremiah or Moses. These were scribes recording exactly the words and phrases that God Himself chose to use to write the Bible.

This is why we are COMMANDED to "compare scripture with scripture" throughout the WHOLE Bible because God is the Author of the WHOLE Bible. This means that the Bible is its OWN INTERPRETER and its OWN DICTIONARY. God Himself is the determiner of how He may use a specific Word or Phrase in its Immediate and Whole Bible context to convey the Truth He is Teaching. So that we MUST NOT isolate verses from either their Immediate or Whole Bible context in coming to Truth. Every conclusion we come to can and must be tested with anything and everything God declares about that conclusion throughout the ENTIRE BIBLE. There are no contradictions whatsoever in the Word of God.

A second Key principle as to how we are to understand the Bible is expressed in Mark 4. Christ, God Himself spoke in parables and "...without a parable spake He not...and when they were alone, He expounded all things to His disciples." This concept is not understood by many that seek to understand the Scriptures. But when we understand that God is the AUTHOR of the WHOLE Bible and wrote the Bible not only to reveal Truth but also to hide Truth, this principle becomes clear.

Every Bible passage has a Spiritual significance and is teaching us something about the Nature of God's Judgment and Salvation program.

We must follow God's Hermeneutic and not our own.

Hi Bible Alone. Thanks again for sharing this also. I won't write anymore, as bro. S. Spencer has conveyed my thoughts very clearly. GBU.

Matthew 11:25 "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."

Luke 18:17 "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."

Blessings

Amen The Bible Alone.

You have to compare scripture with scripture" throughout the WHOLE Bible using proper hermeneutics.

You'll get definitive answers.

You can't study past writings to settle theology or doctrine disputes.

I've read some of Gigi's questions and they're answered in most the scriptures!

When we build a doctrine, there's 2 ways to do it.

1) We look for what's definitive,

2) We have to use proper hermeneutics and interpret scripture.

When you ask for a definitive answer to a doctrine and seek to find it in one scripture, you leave off from studying and interpreting scripture.

You can't ignore the whole counsel of God.

You cannot hang everything on one scripture.

If you use scripture in its proper context and collaborate the whole counsel of God it gives a definitive answer. Of course hermeneutics is important.

The issue I have is when people set aside the scripture and wants to deal with theology or doctrine without giving their own ( Scriptural ) reasons for their rebuttal.

(THEIR OWN SCRIPTURAL REBUTTAL!)

That's the only way I see to bridge the disconnect.

I need to see Gigi's present a Scriptural definitive reasons she declines these questionable doctrines.

For instance, She says she doesn't see any Scriptural proof of the rapture in the Bible.

You find it here in 1 Thessalonians 4:17

"Then we which are alive and remain shall be "CAUGHT UP" together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. ( It's also found in other places)

The Latin word "rapturo," which translates to the Greek "harpazo," meaning "caught up.

It means to snatch away!

Whether it's pre-trib or post-trib. there is a definite removal of saints according to that verse.

If not what does it mean?

You shouldn't reject ones interpretation without giving your own!

What does it mean and provide Scriptural proof of your own if you don't accept the dispensationalist interpretations.

Blessings

Dear S. Spencer.

I am genuinely wanting to have my questions answered with Scripture. I do hope that one who holds to dispensational beliefs will do so.

Then I can make determinations as to the verses given do indeed affirm the dispensational beliefs I've encountered on this forum and other sources.

As to the issue of the Rapture, though I did not ask about this in my post to Lbooth, but I do want to get definitive Scriptural proof that it will occur the way Dispensationalism teaches that has Jesus returning twice, once in a rapture and with a passage of years, Jesus coming to bring this age to an end.

When I read the Thessalonian passage you have given, I agree that our gathering to the Lord will be quick after the sounding of the trumpet and the appearing of Jesus, which is why the term harpazo is used. But I believe that this passage is speaking of the second and only return of Jesus at the end of the age. Dispensationalists speak of the Rapture being "secret". This verse speaks of the gathering of the saints as a loud, visible event. Dispensationalists are inferring something in this text that I do not see taught elsewhere in Scripture.

If you or any other dispensationalist can give me Scriptural verses that explicitly, plainly, and directly say that Jesus will return twice, once for His church, and once more at the consummation of the age, I would appreciate that.

I know you expect me to defend my position with Scripture, and I would be glad to do so, but how can I do so if I do not get a straight answer from dispensationalists about the verses where their beliefs are taught explicitly, plainly, and directly in such a way that do not contradict other teachings of Jesus concerning His second coming.

So, for now. I would hope that one who is dispensationalist would answer my questions with Scriptural support so that I can consider properly what a dispensationalist is claiming to be biblical teaching.

Respectfully, GIGI

Thanks responding Gigi.

There has been plenty of discussions on the rapture topic and the proof has been presented.

The rapture isn't what we call the second coming.

You said you agree that our gathering to the Lord will be quick after the sounding of the trumpet and the appearing of Jesus, which is why the term harpazo is used. But I believe that this passage is speaking of the second and only return of Jesus at the end of the age.

Thanks, that gives me something to build off of.

I will attempt to show why I don't believe that it speaks of the second coming.

Give me some time because I am in the middle of preparing for my work week.

And as for your question "e" "Where does Scripture teach that Jesus would have gone on to establish His kingdom on earth if the Jews would have accepted Him as their Messiah?

I also don't believe in that.

I believe that the cross was necessary to atone for the sins of the world.

In Matthew 26:39-44 Jesus prayed 3 times "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

If it was any other way like the Jews accepting Christ as savior the Father didn't answer that prayer.

That would be totally against all of scripture clear back to Genesis!

And we would be still under the Levitical priesthood and the old covenant!

That would also be against what is mentioned throughout the book of Hebrews!

Especially Hebrews 9:15-17.

I also don't recall ever seeing that viewpoint being presented on this site.

I also don't see how that fits into a dispensationalists theology or viewpoint.

Thanks and God bless.

Dear S. Spencer,

Everything I have presented as questions to Lbooth have been put forward on this site. And, as I have read up on mid-acts dispensationalism, these beliefs I posed in my questions are found in this as well as other dispensational sub-groups. So, even if you do not believe all that I presented, that does not mean that my questions do not represent dispensationalism. You can do your own research on these beliefs within dispensationalism if you would like to do so.

Please know I am truly trying to get serious, precise, and clear answers to my questions.

I do have many others about dispensationalism and how its tenets are proved by Scripture.

And, you know I do not adhere to dispensationalism, but that should not prevent me from asking such questions. And since I am the one asking for clear answers I do not think it is up to me to refute these beliefs from Scripture at this time. I feel that those who believe these tenets should prove them correct by Scripture. I am not asking these questions in order to refute them. I just want to know how dispensationalist prove their view.

Perhaps down the road I will feel led to present my view on such ideas with Scriptural support, but at this time, that is not my aim nor the lead of the Holy Spirit.

I thank you for giving me time to interact with me in this thread. I hope your work week goes very well.

I am sure we will have many future conversations together and I look forward to those as long as they remain respectful and gracious even when we disagree.

May God give you peaceful sleep tonight and good focus on your work this week. May He bless you in your quiet times with Him in prayer and in the Word. May you grow in grace and knowledge of Jesus as I ask the Lord to cause me to do as well.

Thanks Gigi.

That may explains why I never saw those questions before until you posed them to Lbooth.

I came along late in that thread with Lbooth.

I thought you told him you have asked these questions before and no one gave you answers.

I was saying that is the first time I've seen them.

However I thought Brother Chris gave you direct great answers! I couldn't improve on them!

However when time permits I will give you how I come up with my interpretation that leads me to my beliefs.

God bless.