KINGDOM OF MESSIAH

[Guest shiloh357]

The Bible does not say that God rejected Israel.

False assumption. God rejected that nation determining to scatter them as dust. Jesus clearly states that God shall take the kingdom away from national Israel because of their unbelief and the kingdom would be given to a

[lekh l'kha]

Jesus used the wicked husbandmen to represent the Pharisees. The Vineyard represented Israel. Jesus was speaking to the wicked Pharisees when He said that the Kingdom was being taken away from them.

Jesus was not saying that Kingdom was being taken away from national Israel. That would not be consistent with the object He had in view in that parable. The authority and leadership was being taken away from the corrupt Jewish leadership of the 1st century and being transferred to His own disciples. They became God's appointed leaders of the Jewish community.

Anti-Semitic theology typically applies any criticism of the Pharisees to the entire Jewish nation, which is both unfair and outside the pale of competent hermeneutic treatment of the text. Jesus' remarks to the Pharisees cannot necessarily be projected on to the Jewish people.

Thanks, Shiloh! I've learnt something today. It's once again sloppy but convenient theology to project the parable onto the entire elected nation which was eternally elected by God.

[lekh l'kha]

Thanks, Shiloh! I've learnt something today. It's once again sloppy but convenient theology to project the parable onto the entire elected nation which was eternally elected by God.

Oh, the amillenial/replacement theology crowd has been doing that for a long time, even though it's obvious that Jesus is addressing the Pharisees and telling them in no uncertain terms that the religious leadership is now going to be removed from them.

Let them run with their ball. They are in store for way bigger problems than trying to intimidate us into buying their doctrine. If God' Word will not convince them of their error, what else is there?

James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

You know what their theology has led to in the past many, many times - and what has it led to today?:

1. "The church is Israel"

2. God is finished with the Jews.

3. Therefore we can sacrifice them on the altar of evil in an attempt to appease and pacify our enemies, the Muslims, by showing them how "fair and just" we are supporting their evil cause.

[Axxman]

I don't have a dog in this fight...but I've read the whole thread as a person who doesn't quite understand what the beef is. I just wanted to say that I can see the point Horizoneast is trying to make alot easier than the point the other side is attempting to prove. Every point he makes "seems" crystal clear in light of the scripture he provides. Now, I understand that several of you claim that he is using that scripture out of context, but you really aren't offering proof of that. Who knows, maybe I'm biased because I'm a gentile.

Again, I'm only throwing that out there because after reading 10 pages I thought you all might be interested in knowing how someone on the outside of the convo is seeing it. Overall, I just don't see what the big deal is...I don't see how it effects me and/or my Christian walk either way.

[Guest shiloh357]

I just wanted to say that I can see the point Horizoneast is trying to make alot easier than the point the other side is attempting to prove.

That's not surprising. I would expect about as much from you.

Now, I understand that several of you claim that he is using that scripture out of context, but you really aren't offering proof of that.

Adequate proof has been provided, but nothing can be proven to anyone who doesn't want to be convinced anyway. Horizoneast is the one who cannot provide any proof. He cannot provide ONE passage where Gentiles are included in "Israel." He has ONE verse that imposes that view on, but of the 71 times "Israel" is used in the NT, it is never applied once to Gentiles. Horizoneast has been asked to provide one verse to that affect, and he has not.

Horizoneast took a Matthew 21:43-44 out of context, and I proved it. Evidently, you did NOT read through the entire thread or you have a selective memory.

Overall, I just don't see what the big deal is...I don't see how it effects me and/or my Christian walk either way.

Well, it's really simple. If God cannot be trusted to keep His promises to Israel to restore them as a nation, if God's Word cannot be trusted in one area, it cannot be trusted where His promises concerning salvation are concerned.

[Guest shiloh357]

Thanks, Shiloh! I've learnt something today. It's once again sloppy but convenient theology to project the parable onto the entire elected nation which was eternally elected by God.

Oh, the amillenial/replacement theology crowd has been doing that for a long time, even though it's obvious that Jesus is addressing the Pharisees and telling them in no uncertain terms that the religious leadership is now going to be removed from them.

Let them run with their ball. They are in store for way bigger problems than trying to intimidate us into buying their doctrine. If God' Word will not convince them of their error, what else is there?

James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

You know what their theology has led to in the past many, many times - and what has it led to today?:

1. "The church is Israel"

2. God is finished with the Jews.

3. Therefore we can sacrifice them on the altar of evil in an attempt to appease and pacify our enemies, the Muslims, by showing them how "fair and just" we are supporting their evil cause.

You will find that the lion's share of Christians who side with "The church is Israel" theology, are usually anti-Israel and overwhelmingly support the Palestiians. Since they reject Israel's biblical and prophetic right to the land, they are able to more easily embrace the Palestinian claim that the Jews should not be there and that Israel is an illegitamite nation. It makes it easier to blame the Jews as the source of the problems in the Middleast.

It's all anti-Semtism, no matter how you slice it.

[Axxman]

Evidently, you did NOT read through the entire thread or you have a selective memory.

Wow...I offer my unbiased opinion...on a topic I don't really get the fuss over...and you go right to attacking me. Sorry....

It's all anti-Semtism, no matter how you slice it.

lol...

[lekh l'kha]

Thanks, Shiloh! I've learnt something today. It's once again sloppy but convenient theology to project the parable onto the entire elected nation which was eternally elected by God.

Oh, the amillenial/replacement theology crowd has been doing that for a long time, even though it's obvious that Jesus is addressing the Pharisees and telling them in no uncertain terms that the religious leadership is now going to be removed from them.

Let them run with their ball. They are in store for way bigger problems than trying to intimidate us into buying their doctrine. If God' Word will not convince them of their error, what else is there?

James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

You know what their theology has led to in the past many, many times - and what has it led to today?:

1. "The church is Israel"

2. God is finished with the Jews.

3. Therefore we can sacrifice them on the altar of evil in an attempt to appease and pacify our enemies, the Muslims, by showing them how "fair and just" we are supporting their evil cause.

You will find that the lion's share of Christians who side with "The church is Israel" theology, are usually anti-Israel and overwhelmingly support the Palestiians. Since they reject Israel's biblical and prophetic right to the land, they are able to more easily embrace the Palestinian claim that the Jews should not be there and that Israel is an illegitamite nation. It makes it easier to blame the Jews as the source of the problems in the Middleast.

It's all anti-Semtism, no matter how you slice it.

It's all coming to an ultimate dividing between those who take God at His Word the way Abraham did (and the way Isaac, Jacob, Moses, the prophets and the apostles did); and those who do not believe the Word of God which came to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and the prophets - just like they did not believe the Word of God which came to Noah - and just like first Eve and then Adam did not believe the Word of God regarding the tree of knowledge of good and evil - because they had to disbelieve that God actually meant what He said in order to believe the lie of the devil.

It's no wonder the West is in so much trouble with Islamic terrorism and Muslims demanding shariah law in the West and demanding the international outlawing of "blasphemy against Islam". Not only the world but also "the Church" is siding more and more with those who have a demonic hatred of God's chosen nation and their right to live in His land.

It all depends on whether or not we BELIEVE the Word of God which came to Adam, to Noah, to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and the prophets. The apostles believed it. But a great part of the Church does not.

Go figure.

[Guest shiloh357]

Evidently, you did NOT read through the entire thread or you have a selective memory.

Wow...I offer my unbiased opinion...on a topic I don't really get the fuss over...and you go right to attacking me. Sorry....

It's all anti-Semtism, no matter how you slice it.

lol...

I didn't attack you. I corrected your selective memory with two examples of how Horizoneast has taken things out of context and that such things had been pointed out to him. You and he both just gloss over them as if they had not even been addressed although they have been addressed more than once.

[lekh l'kha]

I don't have a dog in this fight...

Well, you posted, and stated that the one who has proved his intellectual dishonesty by consistently ignoring the bulk of Biblical texts that disprove his pet theology, has proved his point, whereas the bulk of Biblical text disproving his pet theology have proved no point at all.

Now I dunno but I would say you gave yourself "a dog in this fight"