Millennial Sacrifices

1. Memorial. Just like the Lord's supper.

2. Is this even serious? They could not atone and remove guilt and sin. THESE SACRIFICES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION.

3. Memorial.

4. Yes.

5. He did, in his word.

6. Now we are getting somewhere.

7. Only for you I guess.

8. It is better to agree with God's word.

 

Gunther disagrees. While I am a New Covenant theology advocate, it still doesn't do away with the text of Scripture. Stop making words meaningless.

Gunther, a believer in the New Covenant also and still a dispy.

 

1. Are we really being scolded by a primitive baptist?

You know, you actually have to deal with the Scripture (which you haven't done). Stop forcing your view upon the Scripture.

2. Again, the shame is on those who refuse and/or cannot deal with Scripture.

I believe Scripture is the final authority. I suppose we will have to convince you of that before this discussion can continue.

The Lord's supper is UNTIL HE COMES.

Um, in the millenium, the Lord has already come. Nice.

Gunther, an actual Baptist and therefore a dispy

 

Glen, you apparently don't know what we believe and don't give enough of a care to understand it before you empty your guns toward our position. I would recommend learning so that your rounds aren't actually blanks.

The sacrifices were a stench because lost people were trying to go around God's plan that was realized in Christ.

During the millenium, it will be because of him, not in place of him.

Now, stop before your arguments get any worse.

Gunther, a Christian, and therefore a dispy.

 

Gunther... Still disagree... Again I reply why?... Your body is the living sacrifice in fellowship and service... You still have not solidified your position by scripture but then again we will wait and see... I see no memorial because of Christ in a millennium!... Then again I am not a Jewish Christian Baptist Dispy!... Btw I didn't call you that you labeled yourself... Brother Glen

 

Gunther's quote "The sacrifices were a stench because lost people were trying to go around God's plan that was realized in Christ."

Think about that phrase "realized in Christ". We have the real thing in Christ. So let's go back to the shadows and types???? Read Hebrews.

Gunther's quote "During the millenium, it will be because of him, not in place of him."

Gunther, that is pure dispy babble. You have no scripture to back that statement up.

Gunter's quote, "Now, stop before your arguments get any worse."

Ditto.

Gunther's quote,"Gunther, a Christian, and therefore a dispy."

I do appreciate your tongue-in-cheek humor.

A believer in the better covenant (and all it's theological ramifications),

Tim

 

For those who are intent on disregarding the OT, let me remind you that the prophecies of Christ were fulfilled as the appeared in the OT. There is no reason to think that other prophecies will be fulfilled any differently. This is a case that illlustrates your convenient hermeneutic ... literal when it fits our system--figurative when it does not. Unfortunately, you have imbibed too long at the fountain of those who are unsatisfied with what God said and have to arrange it to fit their system.

You know, I can be distasteful and cutting too ... but it is unnecessary for me just as it is for Glen. Glen, you should know better than to come in here with that kind of vitriole. You know good and well that our views make good sense of the text of Scripture and that we love God and his word as much as you do. For you to spout the kind of stuff that you have is unbecoming for you. To call us Jewish Christian Baptists (or whatever the exact phrase is) is a lame attempt to slam someone who disagrees. It is simply not appropriate, especially for you my friend.

For those who talk about AD70 and the cutting off of sacrifices because they were a stench, I encourage you to read Isaiah 1, where some 700 y ears prior to that the sacrifices were a stench. And why??? Because they were not offered out of true worship and submission to God.

Tim, We are OT literalists becvause Christ and the apostles were. We believe in the NT jsut as Christ and the apostles did. We can make a clear and convincing case that you do not believe the OT becuase you are so intent on rewriting many of its promises and theology. We do not share that conviction that it needs to be rewritten. For us, it is good the way it stands. We will stand with Christ and the apostles in believeing that God meant what he said in the OT. We will not change it to fit a system. You comment to Gunther that he has no Scripture to back up this "memorial" view. Yet you seem to have forgotten that not only do you have no Scripture to back up your Ezek 40-48 is really only kidding view, you actually have to say that God was lying to make your view work. My friend, God is the one who said the sacrifices would be there. If you have an issue, it is not with us dispensationalists. It is with God. Every reference to the OT in the NT confirms for us that a normal hermeneutic is what we should use. As dispensationalists, we use that hermeneutic (most of us do anyway; there are some others out there that do not). While condemning Gunther for having no Scripture, you condemn yourself because you have no Scripture. You in fact have to fly in contradiction to Scripture to get your view off the ground.

[ September 09, 2003, 09:59 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

1. It has already been pointed out in Ezekiel. You read it, exegete it, and we will then examine your theology in light of God's word.

2. Tongue-in-cheek humor?

 

I have one question for you all then I shall be on my way... If you are saying that during the millennium we will offer to God as a memorial for what Christ has done a bloodless sacrifice I can buy that... I have no argument there!... But if you are implying a sacrifice of blood where life is taken then you are in error as I read my Bible... Then you better move to Texas and invest in cattle because the Jews are looking for the Red Heifer as they believe the millennium is just around the corner if you haven't heard... Brother Glen

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~adamgosp/heifer.htm

 

The Bible talks about "slaughtering the burnt offering" so the Bible leads us to believe that blood will be shed. I think the burden of proof is on you to show that memorial sacrifices have to be bloodless. I don't see anything in my Bible that contradicts what Ezek says.

As for what people in Texas or the Jews do, I am not particularly worried. I don't make my investment decisions by trying to read the signs of the times, nor do I make my theological decisions that way.

 

Pastor Larry, we've talked about this before (perhaps ad naseum), but it simply is not accurate to say that all prophecies of the O.T. were fulfilled literally. Easiest case in point, the last one in the O.T., Malachi's prophecy of the coming of John the Baptist. If you claim that was literal or "normally" understood, you are disagreeing with Jesus Christ himself. So obviously, yes, there is room for figurative interpretation if Jesus did it.

My point about Ezekiel 40-48, is not to say that God didn't say it, but rather that God didn't say it was about a future millenium--it's nowhere in the text--that is simply your system's interpretation of that passage. Don't put your interpretation into God's mouth!

We won't get into your selective non-literalism when it doesn't fit Dispensationalism. Please get off your soap box and be a little objective.

In Christ,

Tim

 

I give Tim's reply a hearty Amen ... You dispy's are entitled to your opinion and interpretation as we are to ours!... All I can say is we will all know when that day comes... When Jesus returns!... I don't know about the rest of you but there is a home waiting for me in heaven and I will be spending my millennium not on this earth... When the 1,000 years are up I will wait for the rest of you to join me and those of us who have gone before to our eternal home ... Brother Glen

 

Gunther says that the Scripture NEVER says we will be in heaven forever. The Scripture does say that we will rule as kings ON THE EARTH.

I realize in many circles, earth is code for heaven. But I believe words actually have meaning.

 

edit

 

One question Bro. Glen. Would you explain the proper interpretation of Eze. 40-48?

You have railed against what the dipsy's say, yet you refuse to give the proper interpretation. Seems like you are unable or unwilling to answer a simple scriptural question.

 

In Bro. Glen's defense--one is not required to explain the correct meaning of a difficult passage in order to criticize a wrong interpretation of that passage. We all can see errors in many other belief systems as they misinterpret passages so they do not mesh with other scriptures--but sometimes we still have trouble understanding the passage ourselves.

Tim

 

Tim, if someone does not know the right interpretation, how do they know that the one they are criticizing is not the correct one.

 

Terry,

For example: Give me a difficult passage (any one where Bible believers differ on the meaning)--if someone says it means that salvation is by works, for instance, I know that's wrong because clear scriptures in other places would not support that. The Bible cannot contradict itself.

Thus it is often possible to dismiss a wrong interpretation before arriving at the right one.

Tim

 

Amen, Pastor Larry! Amen!

 

She E.,

Though I appreciate your zeal, it's a little scary when people get all excited about proclaiming those they disagree with to be infidels, apostates, etc.

If you knew me you might even like me!

In Christ,

Tim