Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!sun-barr!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: kamphau@oktext.sbc.com (Mark Kamphaus) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Looking at prophecy (was Re: Iraq - Prophecy fulfilled?) Message-ID: Date: 18 Oct 90 07:24:26 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Southwestern Bell Lines: 86 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu > In article kamphau@oktext.sbc.com (Mark Kamphaus) writes: > > > >Claiming that certain events are fulfillment of prophecy > >can be dangerous. It is not, however, nonsense. If > >prophecy says that there will be a reestablishment of > >a nation called Isreal ... To which Tom Albrecht responded: > If is says that, fine. But it doesn't. Then what does the Ezekial's vision of the valley of dry bones represent. Something different than the interpretaion that was given to him? The bones are the whole house of Isreal that are to be regathered in the last days. > Political Isr*AE*l is long > gone. History. And the middle-east is my imagination? What does "political" Israel mean? That there is no such nation? That there is no such government? Maybe that they don't have an army? Howabout a UN seat? OR do you just mean something rhetorical so that you can say that it doesn't exist. Sound's immpressive but has little substance. > The new Israel and the new Jerusalem are the > established divine agency. It's called the Church (Gal. 6:16; Heb. > 12:22; Rev. 21:2,9,10). Gal 6:16 " As for those who follow this rule in their lives, may peace and mercy be with them - with them and with all God's people." [TEV] sorry, this seems to be a misquoted proof-text. It doesn't say anything about the Church nor Israel nor Jerusalem. Heb. 12:22 " Instead you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem with its thousands of angels." [TEV] This is Pauls contrast to Mt. Sinai and figurative of Grace and the Law. It doesn't mention the Church at all. Another out of context proof-text. The last quote fairs even worse in context. Maybe thats why it needs to be abbreviated to leave out the middle as well as the prefacing comments. I'm not sure how far back I need to supply the context. Rev 20:7-10 tells how after the 1000yr reign that satan is bound and thrown into the lake of fire. Rev 20:11-15 concerns the great "white throne" judgement with the destruction of death and hades occuring in verse 14. Rev21 1-10, concerns the "heavenly" Jerusalems decent from heaven to the earth where all things have been made new and there is no more death, tears, unhappiness. see v4. Again this fails to show any relationship to the Church being the substitute Israel or Jerusalem. For me, since I still see death, I have to conclude that this is a future event that will occur after the dead are rasied and judgement passed. And finally, what are we to do with Romans 9-11? Paul the apostle to the gentiles doesn't jump on your band wagon and say "look, all these promises that God gave the Jews now belong to Church because the Church is now Israel. In fact he says quite the opposite. Maybe 11:25 "... The stuborness of the people of Israel IS NOT PERMANENT, but will last only until the complete number of gentiles come to God." Looks like when God says Israel, thats what he meant. > Date setting has always been popular. It's what got the Millerites, > Jehovah's Witnesses, and others in trouble during the last century. [ rest of straw man deleted ] I would hasten to add that that includes 70AD as well. See the paragraph you quoted of mine above. > Tom Albrecht mark