Ann Graham Lotz says we are the last generation of Luke 21

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

My objection focuses on........the offense of Israel.....and the consequential results as spoken of by Paul in Romans 11. The destruction of the temple was still in the future when Paul wrote his letter. He was speaking of what had already occurred and the results.

The offense of Israel caused a major change between Israel and the system of this world......and.....he is speaking of a future event of them being...."filled" which will result in yet another change.

Joel

Well that's curious - you weren't talking about any of that stuff in your previous message to which I was responding.

Romans 11 needs to be read in light of the rest of Romans, as well as the rest of the Bible. Your theories and speculations about national Israel "being set aside" don't have any foundation in Scripture as far as I can tell. You have built your theories on the dispensational doctrine about a distinction between "Israel" and the "Church" which seems obviously wrong since the Church was founded upon the faithful remnant of Israel. There were no "Gentiles" in the original Church - it was entirely "of Israel" in the beginning and every member was obviously true and faithful "Israel" as opposed to those who rejected Christ. The Israelites who rejected Christ were "of Israel" but not "Israel" (Romans 9:6). We will never make sense of Romans 11 as long as the identity of the Church (the People of God) as a continuation of Israel is not understood. There are not two distinct "Peoples of God." There is no such teaching in the Bible.

All the best,

Richard

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Richard,

My objection focuses on........the offense of Israel.....and the consequential results as spoken of by Paul in Romans 11. The destruction of the temple was still in the future when Paul wrote his letter. He was speaking of what had already occurred and the results.

The offense of Israel caused a major change between Israel and the system of this world......and.....he is speaking of a future event of them being...."filled" which will result in yet another change.

Joel

Hi Joel,
Concerning Romans 11, please review some of the word definitions of that chapter from this thread here. http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1991

The 'filling of the nations' in Romans 11 is not the same as the times of the gentiles trampling Jerusalem. "Filling" or Pleroma has a NT usage of the filling of the Spirit of God. The filling and indwelling of the nations with the Spirit of Christ began with Cornelius. It was prophesied in Duet 32 that some of the last generation Israel [who originally disbelieved] would be made jealous unto faith by the filling of this spirit of God among individuals in the Gentile nations [all nations, languages, tongues] who were from the jews perspectives NOT a People of God. THAT jealousy unto faith is the mystery that Paul doesn't want his 55 AD first century Roman believers and readers to miss.

But the times of the gentiles or nations trampling of Jerusalem would have been completed with the flood of the Roman armies in @70-73 AD. [Dan 9:26,27; and unto the end of the war (end of the enemy coming in like a flood; Is 49) desolations are determined....... for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate]

The 'offense' of Israel in leaving the land area BROKE the mosaic covenant and insured the ending of the nation that was established by that conditional, inferior covenant. The end and 'latter end' of the nation was prophesied right in the giving of the covenant.

(see Deut 4:26,27; 31:29; 32:20;29)

There is something which continually confuses me.....reference is made to the "end of the mosaic age". And, the supposed end to this age is to have occurred in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed.

This is often cited as a pivotal event.......the end of one age, and the beginning of another.

I believe this distinction causes alot of confusion.....at least for me.

There is no phrase in the scriptures that marks the "end of the mosiac age". There is, however, reference to the "the times of the Gentiles", and, the "diminishing of Israel" (Romans 11:12).

In the post titled 20 questions connecting Deuteronomy and Daniel we find these two questions. I hope these reply to your statements that there was not phrase in scripture that marked the end of the mosaic covenant age. You can also review the first 5 questions in that post for clarification of context.

6. Was an "END" or 'latter end' of the mosaic covenant and conditional national entity prophesied to occur after the promised return (Duet 30:1-4) from Babylonian captivity and after the individualized change of heart and (see Deut 4:25,26; 31:29; 32:20;29)

7. Was the mosaic national covenant prophesied to have a beginning (Deut; 1:3; 5:2,3; 9:1; 27:9; 29:1) and an end and destruction? (Duet 4:25,26; 31:29; 32:20:29) Was the latter end and destruction to be administered in the time of the new words of LIFE of the 'new prophet'? Deut 18:15ff; John 5:46; Acts 3:22-24 Did Peters statement in vs 24 affirm that the new prophet and the end of the mosaic covenant law to be in their days?

John 1:17; For the [conditional, corporal] Law came by Moses, but unconditional Grace and Truth by Christ Jesus.

For the list of the questions and some of the answers, click here.

Likewise, Daniels 'time of the end' are thought and taught to refer to the 'end of time'. But the question below shows the connection of Daniels 'latter days' and latter end with the 'latter days' and 'time of the end' of the mosaic covenant as prophesied in Deuteronomy and fulfilled in the first century generation.

9. Does Dan 10:14 appear to have any similitude to Deut 31:29?

Daniel, in his prayer in chapter 9 focused on Deut 30:1-5 in making a confession required to return from the Babylonian captivity. He would have known and understood of the 'latter end' prophesied within that book. Thus, also, the 'time of the end' as spoken to Daniel would have referred Daniel to the time of the 'end' of the mosaic covenant nation and the fulfillment and restoration of the everlasting covenant of individualized Love, friendship and Mercy from the Creator.

The 'latter days' of the influence and God's ministry through of the sons of Israel are also foretold in Gen 49 and would be until Shiloh would come.

[TheForgiven]

Well that's curious - you weren't talking about any of that stuff in your previous message to which I was responding.

Romans 11 needs to be read in light of the rest of Romans, as well as the rest of the Bible. Your theories and speculations about national Israel "being set aside" don't have any foundation in Scripture as far as I can tell. You have built your theories on the dispensational doctrine about a distinction between "Israel" and the "Church" which seems obviously wrong since the Church was founded upon the faithful remnant of Israel. There were no "Gentiles" in the original Church - it was entirely "of Israel" in the beginning and every member was obviously true and faithful "Israel" as opposed to those who rejected Christ. The Israelites who rejected Christ were "of Israel" but not "Israel" (Romans 9:6). We will never make sense of Romans 11 as long as the identity of the Church (the People of God) as a continuation of Israel is not understood. There are not two distinct "Peoples of God." There is no such teaching in the Bible.

All the best,

Richard

Will Goooollly, as Gohmer would have said It's about time you poked your head in this neck of the woods. And by the way, your post was spot on. Those who separate the Church from Israel are gravely mistaken. The Church was formed/created/built/established by Israel (Jesus said, "For salvation is of the Jews), and the Gentiles (foreigners) they witnessed too were grafted into the kingdom of the Israelite's; the Church/Assembly of God. I still fail to understand how or why Dispensationalist's treat the Church as though it were a Gentile kingdom.

Some of them are still insistent that the "Fig Tree" or Israel of the 1948 rebirth (so called) is still experiencing a divine hardening. Yet they have no scripture to back this up. At the same time, I've proven with scripture that the divine hardening ended in 70AD, just as Isaiah says:

Isaiah 6:11
Then I said, 'Lord, how long?' [Time of hardening/stupor] And He answered: ' Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant, The houses are without a man, The land is utterly desolate,

The spirit of stupor would last until all of the cities in Israel were laid wasted, and the stump left over from the tree being chopped down, was the only thing that remained; the stump was the "Holy Seed" whom we call Jesus. Jesus became the new tree of life that grew much larger than the original tree. John the Baptist testified against the natural branches, "The ax is already laid at the root; do not say to yourselves that we have Abraham as our forefathers..." Thus, Dispensationalist's seem to be teaching that all direct descendants of Abraham, because of their ancestry, will receive special salvation in the future (within our generation since 1948) because God will restore them as the secular power of the world. This would mean that being a Jew by flesh still matters. But then why does the Church say it doesn't matter? In the Church, there are no Jew or Gentiles, but God warrants special favors to those with traces of Jewish blood within them? Not a chance. That time has long since passed, and was fulfilled/completed by 70AD. The spirit of stupor was lifted by the end of God's wrath upon the stiff necks who continued to reject Him. Since that time, the world has become filled with children of God all over this inhabited world.

OK, I rambled on a bit.

Great post Ram. AND DON'T BE A STRANGER.

Joe

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

1) Those married to Christ/God should not consider themselves as 'sinners' in the New Covenant AGE. If you think that you are a sinner then and also think that you are a believer in Christ, you teach two different 'gospels' at the same time and by that are dead....

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:8-10

[TheDivineWatermark]

Say what?!!!

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:8-10

Here is what I posted on another thread (but is pertinent here):



Also, there is a distinction between "sinS" and "Sin":

Romans 1:1-Romans 5:11 ---> "sinS" ("sinS" we commit [or "sinS" of omission]) ---> can be "forgiven"

Romans 5:12-Romans 8:39 ---> "Sin" ("the [Adamic] Sin principle" [aka "the body of this death"] IN us) ---> never forgiven, it is "condemned"

/Quote


The two should be distinguished when studying Scripture.
.

[Brother Les]

Brother Les
1) Those married to Christ/God should not consider themselves as 'sinners' in the New Covenant AGE. If you think that you are a sinner then and also think that you are a believer in Christ, you teach two different 'gospels' at the same time and by that are dead

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:8-10

When you quote a scripture you need to know the timeline of that scripture and not just pull something out of context. Read my statement again.... The context of 'your' text is within the Mosaic Old covenant world Law, that was waxing old and fading away TO The New Creation. Death reigned as long as the Mosaic Temple Stood. Sin reigned because there had been NO New Coveant Marriage...YET.... at the time of 1John 1:8-10. You may not have a clue of what I am talking about, do you. Your Churchanity has Taught you that 'Sinning' continues for those in Christ after they are 'Married' to Christ. You, are most likely 'confused' about The Church Being Married to Christ in THIS New Covenant Age.... If you are not Married to Christ then you are a Sinner and your lot is being apart from God/Christ forever. The Betrothal Period of The Church was for a defined period of Time... one generation. Then The Marriage. Once the Bride is Married to Christ, The Members of the (Resurrected) Body Can Never Sin..... The Members of The Body Can and Do, Do Evil, For the Hearts of Man are to do Evil Continuely (yes, that is part of a Bible verse). There is a Big difference between Sin and Evil. Find out what that difference is and come into The Body as a Child of The Bride. The verses below come After your verse and they speak of the Ending of The Mosaic Age. The Mosaic Age did not End at The Cross.... it Ended at The Holocaust of it's World.

'The darkness is passing away, and the true light is already shining.' (I Jn. 2:8)

'The world is passing away, and its desires.' (I Jn. 2:17)

'It is the last hour.' (I Jn. 2:18)