OK, I'm Now Post-Trib (you convinced me)

1) Lots of people, myself included, believe Bible prophecy without being a dispensational premillennialist. You know, SheEagle9/11, you are really starting to sound exclusivistic toward whom you believe to be a Christian based on eschatology alone.

2) I am post-trib.

 

There will always be an England! I am all but an Anglophile with a full-blown case of Anglophilia and my surname is Anglo-Saxon, etc., but I would not want to discuss England's role in Israel under the League of Nations mandate because of the terrible discredit done to England by England.

 

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
Why don't we let the apostle Paul with this passage from Galatians ch 4 settle this argument. If you are a pre-trib dispensationalist you have no hope of understanding the passage. THERE IS NO INHERITANCE FOR ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE BODY OF CHRIST. ONLY THOSE THAT ARE OF FAITH ARE THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, BE THEY JEW OR GENTILE.

 

I am for the Road Map because at the moment it is the only option of hope to find a way to at least curtail the violence, especially for the children of the Israelis and Palestinians. It may not come for fruition but as a follower of the Prince of Peace I am praying that it will. I believe it is what Jesus wants me to do.

My support has absolutely nothing to do with eschatology.

 

I would respectfully disagree. I'm against it because the land was given to Israel by God. I say conform to what God has ordained, and let God worry about the violence.

Same here. I don't see how one's position on this relates to pre-mid-post-anything-else-trib, although I imagine some people do form their opinions that way.

 

I reckon we will have to respectfully disagree on what we each believe God has ordained. As has been explained elsewhere, in two different places in the Old Testament it is stated that God gave to the descendants what He had promised Abraham He would give them. They lost it due to unfaithfulness. I find no further promise to restore them to the physical land once the promised return of Judah from Bablyon was completed.

Further, the Jews were only promised the land based on faithfulness to God. Why do you support the idea that they have any right to the land while they remain unfaithful? After a massive conversion of Jews to Christ took place, your idea would have more validity, IMHO.

Finally, salvation is what matters, not real estate for a few years.

 

Maybe it's because dispensational premillennialists on this board have this tendency to explain their opposition based upon their eschatology.

Just look the arguments in the threads about the Road Map and Middle East peace.

 

And it will be a very LOUD trumpet, not an eschatological dog whistle that only Christians hear.

 

The road map is bad politics, that's all. It is little more than Oslo, or a dozen other peace plans that have been floated around. There is no mechanism to make the Arabs comply. Bush responded to political pressures to do something and he felt powerful because of his military situation in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, as the news is revealing, the war is still being fought and our troops are still fighting. So the military news is not all that good.

Secondly, now US Senator Richard Lugar (of Indiana), a foreign policy expert, has suggested that perhaps American troops should be used to destroy the military capacity of Hamas. This is very bad news because there is no need to spend American blood and lives doing what Israel can do better for herself. A good case could be made that the Israeli army is better than the American army. To tell the truth, I think Lugar may only be trying to illustrate that Hamas must be destroyed. No matter what, the USA is floundering on the Israeli question and the Bush road map is a bad plan.