Featured Question for covenantalist regarding the new covenant.

I know where his website is, Icon. I can go there myself if I so desire. Why not post your own material; your own thoughts, instead.

 

I know what kind of church he pastors. That is enough for me to stay away from his works.

You have just demonstrated in two quick posts how you post material of others instead of trying to come up with some original thinking.

But we know that is not the case don't we. At least you know that if you read my posts.

I hope you are not confused on this.
I have always believed that it was possible to be a carnal Christian, for that is what 1Cor.3:1-3 teaches: "You are yet carnal..." They were carnal and had to be fed with milk. There is such a thing as a carnal Christian. I hope we understand each other here.

From teaching. I was clear in my last post but you didn't read it.
Icon, I wasn't raised in a "Christian" home. I was speaking after my salvation, as I made quite clear. I wasn't saved until I was 20. I was a Catholic before that and never heard the gospel in the Catholic Church. I wasn't raised in "fundamentalism." It was through an inter-denominational organization that works on the campuses of universities by which I was saved. The place was a campus of a nearby university. They didn't put any emphasis on the local church so I still went to the Catholic Church for a year after that. Besides, I was still going to college, and living at home.

I didn't come into contact with a fundamental church until two and a half years after I was saved. That is where I was baptized. That is where I began to learn about the importance of the local church. Before that time I had associated myself with my work or interdenominationalism. I was a member of that church for only about six months when the Lord led me to go to Bible College.
Out of the first ten years of my Christian life seven of those years were under the preaching and teaching of various preachers and teachers who spoke in chapel every day. There was a good variety of them. Some of them are and were very well known. Many of them have passed on to glory. In my third year I was called to the ministry, so from that time onward much of the preaching was my own, whenever I got home. I became the assistant pastor and did half of the preaching and teaching.

Legalism is defined in Acts 15 and spoken of in the letter to the Galatians.
When someone adds to salvation (like the law and circumcision, or baptism and tongues), that is legalism. If you say that you have to be baptized to be saved that is legalism. Most people do not know what legalism is. It appears you don't know either.

Sometimes people in a church make a personal decision to live a holy life. If that decision involves dressing more modestly, listening to more conservative music, abstaining from alcohol, then who are you to judge your brother? If you are offended by those that are trying to be more like Jesus, trying to live a holy life, then you are the weaker brother.

Why?
This is a debate forum. I came to debate those who are members here. Kit Culvert has his own website. If I wanted to communicate with him I can go to his website and get in contact with him. If I wanted to read his material I can go there and read it.
I am posting here so I can debate you; not Culvert.

What are your thoughts on this subject.
I don't care what Culvert's thoughts are. He is probably out to lunch any way. The debate is between you and the other posters here. If Culvert joins the board then he can speak for himself. You don't have to be a spokesperson for him.

 

DHK

And if you did look you would know that these sermon notes were not posted there.They were sent to me in 3 PDF files. So you "going there yourself " would not help you now , would it.

[/QUOTE]

.
Spoken like a true fundy....You must separate from all churches that do no say IFB...lol...sad DHK.
I do not even know him that well, but have heard about 120 of his sermons and he offers good thought provoking teaching and many verses.I am sure I have some different ideas on somethings, but not to where I must"stay away from his works"

1] I have and do post my own thoughts and material sometimes.
You error when you assume because I cut and paste I do not agree with, or have never come to the same conclusions as those I cut and paste.
I have taught these same ideas...although not as in as much detail for the past 30 years.I have my own lessons, and handmade transparencies illustrating these things before I was a member of BB.

2] You, Winman, Thomas 15,and a few others complain about my links,and cutting and pasting good links but this is disturbing on many levels.
And yet.....when we examine the "original posts" of Thomas 15, or Winmans, or your posts....we discover that one or two paragraphs from pastor Culver contain more helpful and useful study material than all of you combined.

Thomas 15"s posts are useless, completely useless...90% of the time.
Can you name the last time T-15 posted anything that you wanted to give a thumbs up to? Just little rude remarks mostly. I think I have seen him offer a handful of scriptures once or twice in like two years.

Winman offers unbiblical novelties that he trumpets as "original ",and as we have all seen they are quite unique:thumbs: as no one else in Church history believes most of his ideas.

You at least post solidly concerning the trinity, against those who want to add new revelation, and support the biblical sufficency of scripture. You go off the rails with some of your dispy/fundy ideas, which is where I come after you DHK.

When you correct catholics in the other demnominations board I have been supportive of your efforts,as well as your stand for cessationism.
I will support your posts when I can, and I will oppose them when they need to be opposed.

.

Like I said already I have my own ideas and anyone who has met me can tell you as much. I do not feel my ideas are so unique that when I see other more gifted persons offering what I believe in a clearer ,better written presentation,...or when I read something that is just flat out good I offer it for others.
I have not seen you offer anything along the lines of the scholarship that most of the links I post offer.If you can perhaps you might want to turn some it loose before the rapture!

I am not confused on this at all;

20 He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed

These sermons and links to books and catechisms link me to wise men.
They are my companions. I see what you three post on here.they are words on my computer screen. I read what Puritans and reformers wrote in a book..they are words on a page.Their words contain more wisdom than you three men-despite- your "original thinking"

The fact is , not one time have any of you taken any quote or link and biblically showed why it was not so...which if you could would be helpful.

Even on this thread...you commented on Pastor Culver personally, his church is small, they meet in the wrong building, you do like the kind of church he has, he is no authority, etc.....all physical ,outward and fleshly comments.

I am quite sure that several of the ideas he put forth you have never thought of or considered as biblical, even though they are. Because you did not Think any original thoughts on these issues
you find it easier to just make broad general dismissive statements about the Pastor...who you say you must avoid, as you do with many other pastors who could teach you many things.

This is defective unsound thinking contrary to this verse in proverbs.

You do not engage the links because they shred your defective ideas and that quite openly.

I know what your position is and why it is wrong and denies the Spirit's work in progressive sanctification. I offered you the correct links to correct teaching and you decline and still do...so that is on you.

of course I read it...why would I not read it?

You have to always include this kind of statement...it appears I don't know. Well I do and here in your next statement you try to disguise it but your inner fundy/legal obedience just has to express it self-

His name is Culver by the way. I posted a bit for others who enjoy getting a look at some good teaching.Obviously you do not care to partake in it...that is your choice....

Did you ever notice how the Apostle Paul......CUT AND PASTE..... much from Hoesa, Isaiah, and the psalms????

25 As He says also in Hosea:


“I will call them My people, who were not My people,
And her beloved, who was not beloved.”[h]
26 “And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them,
‘You are not My people,’
There they shall be called sons of the living God.”

27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel:[j]


“Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
The remnant will be saved.
28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness,
Because the Lord will make a short work upon the earth.”[k]

29 And as Isaiah said before:


“Unless the Lord of Sabaoth[l] had left us a seed,
We would have become like Sodom,
And we would have been made like Gomorrah.”[m]
Footnotes:
a.Romans 9:3 Or relatives
b.Romans 9:7 Genesis 21:12
c.Romans 9:9 Genesis 18:10, 14
d.Romans 9:12 Genesis 25:23
e.Romans 9:13 Malachi 1:2, 3
f.Romans 9:15 Exodus 33:19
g.Romans 9:17 Exodus 9:16
h.Romans 9:25 Hosea 2:23
i.Romans 9:26 Hosea 1:10
j.Romans 9:27 Isaiah 10:22, 23
k.Romans 9:28 NU-Text reads For the Lord will finish the work and cut it short upon the earth.
l.Romans 9:29 Literally, in Hebrew, Hosts
m.Romans 9:29 Isaiah 1:9
n.Romans 9:31 NU-Text omits of righteousness.
o.Romans 9:32 NU-Text reads by works.
p.Romans 9:33 Isaiah 8:14; 28:16


He wrote some "original thoughts as the Spirit moved upon Him, but looks as if he cut and paste quite a bit from this one chapter alone:thumbs:

really....then you should man up and show where and how that would be the case....he would eat your lunch in a debate,lol

 

Constant cat & dog fighting....when you going to get together and provide an edifying forum that all could learn from?

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear” (Eph. 4:29)

 

You can learn from the discussion of the op.

You can learn by looking up the verses listed along with the links, cut and pasted into the thread.

You can learn by seeing who opposes the verses and why.

 

Almost no one learns that way.
Almost no one is going to take a long list of references and look them up.
Take just a few references, post the actual Scripture and explain your take on it. Then people will respond.

Almost no one is going to respond to a long lengthy copy and paste job like your two posts from Culver. You say they enjoy them. They don't. The average person does not like a long lengthy post. They skip right over them and go to the next post. That is why no one has responded to those two posts. They don't bother to read them.

Give short posts. Make them succinct and to the point, preferably in your own words. Just get to the point and say what you have to say. Then more people will respond.

 

DHK

If anyone comes on a theology forum and is too lazy to read a few paragraphs, or look up scripture ,it demonstrates a pathetic attitude and lack of respect for God's word.
Anyone I know looks forward to looking at the scriptures and searching them out.If anyone does not care to they show a willful ignorance and most likely are completely ineffective in Kingdom work:thumbs:

I have done it both ways and what I see is that many of the men who agree with the link or post just read it and move on.
Those who do not agree...because they are lazy as you describe....they want to speak against the posts but cannot because they are undisciplined in their walk.

.
Those who are trying to grow in grace will take the challenge and either agree or disagree after considering the material.
Those who are here for wrong reasons, ignore it like you say then usually make some really stupid comment...looking for a laugh , or the approval of the others who do the same way.
The concepts in Culvers quotes are a good base for serious study.

Some have remarked that they do like the quotes and scripture.
Those are who I am concerned with. Others will not welcome anything I post but that is between them and God.

.

Some threads lament the sad condition in many churches today. It starts with the sluggish lazy attitude you just described. If they do not want to study theology...they should go to the entertainment forum , or food forum and learn how to bake cookies:thumbs:

I do both ....it depends on the topic. No one forces anyone to read the posts...I like to offer scripture and posts that are thought provoking to those who are serious.

 

Then you wonder why he endears himself. :laugh:

 

OK, let's try and wade through some of it.

1. I have no idea what the text is.
2. Israel never repented. In fact Israel rejected the kingdom when Christ offered it to them. Instead they took Christ, handed him over to Pilate, and demanded him to be crucified. The innocent God-man come in the flesh was taken by the Jews, after rejecting the kingdom and put to death. There was NO repentance.

But there was no repentance. The kingdom was rejected.
John 1:11 "He came to his own, and his own received him not."

But that never happened did it? The kingdom was rejected. There is no Christ sitting on the throne of David in Jerusalem. Not now, and not in the time of Christ. And all the nations of the earth do not now, nor did they then, come and worship him. His kingdom was never set up. They did not repent. They rejected both the King and the kingdom. There was no "inauguration."

The promise of Immanuel had nothing to do with a kingdom, but rather a Savior; something the nation of Israel was blind to.

Unless more clarity is given the two are separate events. Remember that aside from the Book of Psalms, Isaiah is the longest book in the Bible--66 chapters, and full of prophesies. It prophesies the birth of Christ, the life of Christ, the death of Christ, the second coming of Christ, the Millennial Kingdom of Christ and His reign, as well as many other things.

When Christ came the first time he came as a suffering servant.
We are still waiting for his second coming, when he comes in his glory.

This type of allegorization is wrong.
The liberal Christ-denier presents Christ as an ideal, not a person.
What is the difference here?

More error. There is no such thing as "the covenant Father" or "the covenant Son" in Scripture. The Bible speaks of our Heavenly Father, "the only begotten Son. Why the man-made language? Only to fit into a man-made system of theology, correct?

1. There is no one on this board who denies that Christ is the God-Man.
2. The "Servant of the Lord" represents Christ.
3. Christ WILL come to inaugurate his kingdom sometime in the future. It will be called the Millennial Kingdom and will last one thousand years. He will reign as king from Jerusalem. The curse on this earth will then be lifted. It is not lifted now, is it?
4. Just before that time. "All Israel (the remnant) will be saved. "They aren't now, are they?

Perhaps a new doctrine?? "Messianism"?
--Actually the word simply means "the coming of a Messiah. He came in the first century. The Jews rejected him, and then they crucified him.
--The kingdom was refused.
There are many prophecies all relating to his first coming as Messiah, but the Jews rejected him. He will come again and they will receive him as their Messiah when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

Christ IS the Son of David.
Christ is not Melchizedek but is after the order of Melchizedek.

The awesome day of the Lord has not yet come. Both Peter and Paul speak of that day as a future event. That was in the 60's A.D. He has not come yet. His kingdom is not yet set up. Paul died before 70 and John wrote well after 70 (ca. 98 A.D.). He will come as a thief in the night when man is least expecting it.

 

DHK,
Thank you for taking the time to begin to look at the issues raised ,and our differences.
This is what I am looking for in terms of biblical interaction.I am not asking for a superficial agreement to keep peace. To examine the teaching to see if it holds up is where we can all benefit.
It can show where we do agree.It can show where we differ.It is thought provoking in that we are forced to examine our Lord's work in detail which should be the goal of every christian.
I will respond more in detail this afternoon...I have two deliveries to do today.
i did want to thank you however for this post and how you are inter-acting with the offered link! I come against you on many of these issues when You do not respond biblically...so i want to commend you when you offer a substantial post like this one

I want to work through it and see what we agree on ,and where we differ and why, but it will take some time for me to type that out.....thanks again...later

 

DHK

Okay..let's look...

It is speaking of John the Baptist....
13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.

14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth.

15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.

16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.

17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

The nation as a whole did not repent...inviting the covenant curses upon themselves. God however speaks of this through Paul quoting Isa 1 in romans9

29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

You are assuming that the rejection of these covenant breakers somehow delayed the Kingdom ,or as you would teach made a parenthesis in God's program so the kingdom was not inaugurated.

However...the Nt writers indicate that Israels rejection and misunderstanding of scripture did not stop the kingdom from coming.

From KC-

20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

I believe scripture teaches Jesus as King came to the earthly Zion and Jerusalem as King...the elect remnant received him, but most did reject Him.
This rejection results in Jesus being put to death, then buried AND RAISED, THEN TO ASCEND.... To the throne of his Kingdom .

The rejection led to most being cut-off in fulfillment of the Song of Moses..the curses listed in Deut.and Lev.
45 Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:

46 And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever.

47 Because thou servedst not the Lord thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things;

Peter preached differently;
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said

they do come now to worship.....To the Heavenly Zion and Jerusalem;


Isaiah 2

King James Version (KJV)

2 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

Sure there was...it is seen here from the heavenly perspective in Dan. 7;

13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
that the people rejected Him was taught by Jesus ;

11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.

12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.


part 2 on the way-

 

The promise of God with us fulfilled in The God -man who was Prophet, Priest, and King .The fact that we are described this way in REV 1 indicates otherwise;
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

The difference is this view is not held by Christ denying liberals.It is held by bible believing Christians. The scripture points to this very thing.

Now this is a majn reason why many do not see these ideas and needs to be thought out carefully. you say;

Before i go into more detail...answer me a few questions...

Why does God refer to the whole nation as His Son, His firstborn Son????
22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

23 And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.

God had Moses use this language.....Moses was not "allegorizing"...
If israel was spoken of as "MY SON"...that speaks of God saying He is Father , correct?

A son has a Father. God is known as a Covenant keeping God. So why would you say that the bible does not speak of these teachings.Why would you claim it is "man made ideas" rather than biblical teaching??? because it does not in any one verse use the
exact phrase....Covenant Son??....The language employed b y God is to be fulfilled in Jesus.
Explain why ex 4:22 means anything else....before I proceed beyond this point.

That is Good!

Jesus is the Servant of the Lord.

.
I believe he has in Mt 21.

You object to the terms Covenant Father, Covenant Son...yet you name a future kingdom The Millenial Kingdom...how is this different, and as you say...man made terms

the earth has not been physically renewed yet.

What this all Israel means is almost a different discussion.

It was refused by some, but then given to a nation bringing forth the fruit thereof.
Mt21:43

 

You do err.
Revelation was written ca. 98 A.D., well after His ascension into "glory."
Before that he came from the glories of heaven, and lived 33 years on this earth in anything but glory. He was born in a manger (not glory). He testified, "But the son of man hath no place to lay his head for rest (not glory). He sat down by the well, weary and thirsty and asked for water to drink (not glory). He went to the cross, was crucified as a common criminal, scourged until he was no more recognizable, and hung there until he died (not glory).
His glory was not a continuous "forever and ever." John was speaking from the point of his writing onward, which is after his ascension into heaven.

This view of allegorizing scripture was never held by historic Christianity and is not now. The first person to allegorize Scripture was a heretic, Origen. Even the Catholic Church considered him a heretic. But the one to popularize the method was Augustine, one of the fathers of RCC. It is a heretical method of interpretation, one that the Christ-deniers use to do away with a literal Christ.
One of the basic principles of hermeneutics is to take the Bible literally unless the context indicates otherwise. This is the problem that the preterist has. He goes against basic hermeneutical principles.

--That there is no "Covenant Father" and no "Covenant Son"??
You don't even try to refute this, neither can you give any Scripture to defend yourself. You just assert your opinion as if it is fact! Give me one good reason why I should believe your opinion over what the Bible says?

No, it does not prove allegorization as a method of interpretation. It proves that words have different meanings. I talk to Muslims this way when I explain the trinity to them. I use the example of either your nation or their nation. Who are the founding Fathers of America? If I look in a history book I will find that two of them are George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, correct? If they are your "fathers" then who are their sons? Obviously "father" has more than one meaning, as does "son." It is not always "physical" or "sexual," is it?

In the Psalm 87 David is called "the firstborn." Why?
In the NT, Christ is referred to as "the firstborn." Why?
The word "firstborn" refers to "pre-eminent" most important.
David was born last, not first, but in the family was the most important.
Jesus was not born at all. He was not a created being. But he was pre-eminent, important.

God chose Israel. They were pre-eminent among all the other nations. They were to be a witness to them, as they were to Rahab.
--This is not language that demands "a covenant Father." There is no such thing. It is not in Scripture. It is man-made. You are making it up, or someone else is and you are just believing it without studying your Bible.

That is in answer to this statement of mine:

3. Christ WILL come to inaugurate his kingdom sometime in the future

In his kingdom:
--All nations will come and worship him.
Isaiah 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Isaiah 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
Ezekiel 11:17 Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel.
--These are just a few of the verses that describe the Kingdom. Nothing like this has happened, has it?

They are not man-made terms, but Biblical terms.
From Wikipedia:
The word "Millenia"

The Millennial Kingdom is a kingdom of a thousand years by definition.

Revelation 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
--It will be a thousand years when Satan will be bound, and Christ will rule the earth in perfect peace.

Revelation 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
--Satan cannot, during this period of one thousand years deceive the nations.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
--The saints, believers in Christ, will reign with Christ for that thousand year period.
Revelation 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
--The unsaved, who died before that period will wait until the second resurrection which takes place after the rapture, after the thousand year period, at the Great White Throne Judgment, described a little later in verses 10-15.
--A thousand years is a thousand years and cannot be allegorized away.
It is the Millennial Kingdom and is yet to come. What will take place are those things already described in Isaiah, and also in many other places in Scripture.

No, it hasn't.
But it will be renewed when Christ comes again.
It will be renewed at the time when Christ sets up His Kingdom.
It will be renewed during the time of the Millennial Kingdom; for His Kingdom has not yet come.

Paul dogmatically stated in Romans 11 that "all Israel shall be saved" speaking of the remnant. Has that happened? If so, when?
Paul prayed, both in Romans 9:1ff and 10:1ff, that Israel as a nation would be saved. Has that happened? If so when?
John, in ca. 98 A.D. stated that Christ would come and Israel would see him and mourn for him (whom they had pierced). Has that happened yet? If so when?

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

It was refused by the entire nation of Israel:
"Crucify Him! Crucify Him! Let his blood by upon our hands, and the hands of our children." They took responsibility for his death and their rejection of the Messiah.

1 Peter 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
--He has not called out Israel. He is still calling out another nation.

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
--All who believe are a chosen generation...a holy nation. This has nothing to do with Israel
Israel has been set aside for a season. But Israel still exists in this world today.

 

DHK

Or....I have it correct and you cannot see it yet.Time will tell.

,

This is disputed as you know,and in itself is a significant issue however we cannot branch out to far and stay focused on this issue.

Okay....

Understanding scripture as written does not automatically become allegorizing. I was correct to pause when i did.This issue must be faced to come to truth...let me try again DHK_

No one is defending ORIGEN.....nobody..
No one is defending liberals...nobody.
No one is defending the RC church...nobody..
No one is defending Christ deniers...nobody..

Is that clear enough ? I know it would be easier for you to defend against that....but no one is suggesting anything along that line...so let's get back to the issue at hand.:wavey:

This is standard premill response DHK....you want to reserve the right to take something as -non literal- and yet when a partial preterist does the same you cry foul!

Why would I try to refute this? The teaching is there quite plainly.Your lack of explanation for Ex.4:22 does not change or improve the issue..let's look at that again...we must work this out....Your explanation about the founding fathers is weak, exceedingly weak. It does not begin to answer the verses offered here....
I have no problem with what you say about the term.."firstborn" as preminent...the question was...why and how was the nation spoken of as his SON....
DHK...you may use commentaries or any link that you want to explain these verses and i will consider them....but....YOU MUST ADDRESS THIS...clearly
I will restate it;

The nation is called God's SON ex4:22
Hosea 11:1 is quoted in Mt 2:15 out of Egypt have I called my SON

Do you believe the Covenant of redemption exists?

Do you believe the Covenant of grace exists?

Do you believe God is a covenant making God?

Do you believe God is a covenant keeping God?

Do you believe other words can be used to express or make reference to the Covenants of God?

Words like .....OATH....Promise...? for example this language is the essence of the Covenant;

as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.


This does not have the actual word...covenant in it....but it speaks of the covenant relationship of God with His people...Do you agree here or not...

This is a false charge once again....Let me try again...

The bible nowhere uses the term....MILLENIAL KINGDOM....no where DHK.

When you use this term, I know what you mean....i know that the latin term for 1000 leads to our word millenial....yes.I know that.
No where in the bible does it speak of a millenial kingdom ....
the term 1000yrs is found in rev 20 yes.....it does not say kingdom there,it does not say anything in revelation 20 about being on the earth....
What verse in rev 20 says they reign with Jesus physically on earth????

the scene is the throne in heaven...they live and reign with Christ for a thousand years[whatever that refers to] and yet ..no where does it say the reign physically on earth...what verse says that, as I know you want to be biblical and tell me to study the bible...so my bible is open...show me where the earth is mentioned in rev 20..as far as a physical reign on earth from physical earthly Jerusalem,as opposed to reigning with Christ for a period of time spoken of as "a thousand years"

Also show me anywhere in the bible where the kingdom of God, or the Kingdom of heaven is spoken of as.....the millenial Kingdom....which using your definition is a man made title.

I am sitting here with my bible open ...show chapter and verse please as you chide me that the teaching of Covenant is not biblical....





That is in answer to this statement of mine:

3. Christ WILL come to inaugurate his kingdom sometime in the future

I believe it has and will continue to happen until the last day.

Okay...well wikipedia is not in the bible...so the term ..."is man made" show me in the bible as I have requested...you say it is a biblical term ,and yet you appeal to wikipedia.....

he does rule the earth from heaven right now
Revelation 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
--Satan cannot, during this period of one thousand years deceive the nations.

Okay...just show chapter and verse that speaks of the term....MIllenial Kingdom....I am waiting for this, but I suspect i will have to wait longer than 1000 literal years to see any such proof

there is the already,and the not yet....

Paul is describing how all Israel that is going to be saved...is going to be saved...after this manner...all Israel will be saved...not every single Israelite throughout time....there will be many before the last day.

This is why i now reject dispensationalism. Physical Jews are a part of the Holy Nation being called as Jesus is the true Israel....God has one eternal people and they are found IN CHRIST .that is what is in dispute in this thread.

 

DHK....I am reading what you or anyone else who wants to join in posts about this.I am also reading what Pastor Culver, and others ...Findley Edge, Vos, Edwards, etc say about it...and what they say seems much more .....BIBLICAL....than what you offer as a denial.
I am not saying that to put you down, it is just that you keep chiding me of my need to be biblical, and yet i see these men offering dozens of verses that look to fit well into this teaching.
I give you credit in that you are responding and standing for your view.I have not seen anyone else here even jump in and offer on this teaching either pro , or con.

Now if it is wrong, I need to be convinced by scripture of that. I am still learning and working through these ideas.I hold them as true and look to improve upon them both in my understanding of the teaching itself,and what it means to me and those in the local church.
To deny this form of teaching is what i consider to be in error....


This servant figure is then introduced in chapter 49 as Yahweh’s true Israel in whom He would save a remnant of Israel and Judah along with the nations of the earth (49:1-6).

This global salvation was to be effected through the Servant’s work of vicarious
atonement (53:1-12) and, as a result of it, Zion (symbolizing Yahweh’s covenant wife
who bears children for him – ref. 50:1; also Hosea 2:1-23) would be restored from her
desolation. In her restoration she would then gather in the innumerable “children” of the
covenant Lord secured for Him by the atoning work of His Servant (54:1-17).

Here is Hosea 2;
23 And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God.

here is isa 54:
54 Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord.

2 Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes;

3 For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.

4 Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed: neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.

5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

This is covenant language of gentile inclusion in the Covenant ...sons and daughters of the living God.You contention that there is no Covenant father, or covenant Son...does not seem consistent with the scriptural testimony.

Jesus revealed the Father to us. He is the Covenant Son...
6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

Through His Servant, Yahweh would vanquish the curse and usher in a
new creation (cf. 65:1-25, 66:5-24 with 11:1-10).

An even worse conclusion is that John was preparing the people for the coming of
the messianic kingdom by calling them away from their bad behavior. Luke’s
account especially has been used to support this understanding (ref. 3:10-14). But
a closer examination shows that John was revealing to the multitudes that the
emerging kingdom calls for an entirely new way of thinking about and
approaching life. The kingdom of God, soon to be inaugurated in the messianic
Servant, is an otherworldly kingdom that operates according to a radically
different set of principles. It is a heavenly kingdom rather than an earthly one

In particular, Isaiah associated the eschatological coming of Yahweh with the coming of His Servant. Importantly, this Servant is presented in unique terms as both the fulfillment of Israel (Isaiah 49:1ff) and the presence of Yahweh (cf. Isaiah 40:1-11 with 42:1-16; also Zechariah
2:10-11). In this way the text indirectly indicates that, in this one individual, there is some sort of conjoining of the covenant Father and son; both parties to the covenant are represented in him.
While Christians commonly recognize that the Isaianic “Servant of the Lord” represents Yahweh Himself in His coming to inaugurate His kingdom, it is far less common for them to find in this individual the fulfillment of Israel, Yahweh’s covenant son. The result is that they miss a crucial aspect of Christ’s identity and role as the God-Man.

 

In his kingdom:
--All nations will come and worship him.
Isaiah 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Isaiah 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
Ezekiel 11:17 Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel.
--These are just a few of the verses that describe the Kingdom. Nothing like this has happened, has it?

That quote was your response to the above Scripture.
Now go verse by verse and explain the above Scripture as you "believe it has and will continue to happen until the last day."

 

Isaiah 11 is quoted in the NT.
11 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;

3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:

4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth: with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.

9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.

10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
Paul in Romans is describing what life is like ...IN the kingdom of God...not what it will be someday in the future....but what it is for Christians now;
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.

19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
the passage from Isa11 is quoted here speaking of the very topic of gentile inclusion in the Covenant promises ,
it is quoted here in romans 15;
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

10 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.

11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people.

12 And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.

13 Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.

14 And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.

he is speaking of it in the church.

notice in verse 1 of isa11...it mentions a rod, a stem ,and a branch and roots,yet none of that language is speaking of a literal plant, or tree, but a person.
vs 4 speaks of the earth being smitten...with the rod of His mouth and the breath of His lips.....looks like it might be descriptive language to describe literal events...Do you agree????

You do not take this literally as written.....he is Clothed with righteousness and faithfulness.....figurative descriptive language of the characteristics of His reign.....

So when the peaceful characteristic of the kingdom is described in figurative language...you determine that this figurative language must be literally fulfilled in a different kingdom than the one Paul has been describing????

Paul says...quoting from isa.....In that day the gentiles seek him...that day has been since the apostolic days DHK....gentiles included in the promises.
To say this is quoted looking past paul's day is not supported anywhere but in the premill writings of men...
Still waiting for your scriptural reference that I asked for...on the term Millenial Kingdom...still waiting for you to respond to the questions that i asked for about the terms and teaching of Covenant in the bible....take your time...i will wait!:thumbsup:

 

Messiah, Christ, Anointed.

Anointed what?

He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: Luke 1:32 KJV
Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne; Acts 2:30 KJV I put the there for it is in the Greek.

Is the throne of his father David the same throne to be sat upon concerning the kingdom of God?

Consider. And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. --- Now while he was in the far country he had called and given instructions to his servants. Does this calling and equipping with gifts of the Holy Spirit equate to Acts 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name and 8; And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us;?

If the answer is yes; Does Acts 15:16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: Equate, with returning from the far country having been given the kingdom of God and to sit on the throne of his father David?

Was Jesus the anointed king of the kingdom of God and sitting on the throne of his father David the day Mary brought forth her first born son?
Was Jesus on that same day anointed priest forever after the order of Melchisedec?

And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? Luke 2:46-49

When do you think he was anointed, the prophet, like unto Moses?

Should we understand the words of Jesus, in red, as prophesy?

 

Nothing in the passage says it is figurative. It is just your denial of Scripture. It means what it means. It is written that way to tell us that some day in the future the earth will return to its pre-Adamic state, that is, before Adam fell. When Christ comes he will lift the curse. It is a literal description of the earth without the curse.

I didn't quote Paul. I quoted Isaiah.
But very obviously if this position is written in premill works then it ought to be taken seriously. You know it is not just "my" position.
These things have not happened yet. They mean something.
Words have meanings. Explain the verses Icon.
Allegory or not, they still have meaning. Explain the verses, and stop beating around the bush!!!!!
Still waiting for your scriptural reference that I asked for...on the term

The covenants are given to Israel.
Millennial means a thousand.
Kingdom means kingdom.
Put it together.

But first give me an answer to the Scripture I gave from Isaiah.

 

This is quoted explaining that gentiles were included in the promises made to the Fathers...it is fulfilled now in the new christian Israel with Jesus ruling on the heavenly throne. God has made one new man...gentiles and Jews on equal footing....now.