Anyone want to take a crack at answering John MacArthur here?

[Wannabee]

From a post perspective, what ushers in the millennium? I'm not familiar with postmillennialism from a millenniaristic perspective.

 

[DonP]

I won't argue much on the millennium. I think God intentionally made this as it is. Not so clear. It is vision language. Do you think Issiah's vision or Ezekiels Wheels are exactly what we will see one day or were they the interpretations of one peering into something indescribable the best they can? I see Revelation this way. It was a vision, not the reality. Do you think Christ is a wounded lamb and also has a sword coming out of His mouth?
If there is anywhere we are not to be literal certainly it is the vision.

But where in any of this are the Jews ???

You are off into millennial views, but whether a historic pre mil or a mil or post mil there is no need for dispensationalism in any of these.

Also remember there is only one Last Day, only one Last Trump and one Second coming. And it is loud and noisy with trumpets and everyone will know when it is here.
Though we do not know when it will come as far as timing, it is as a thief in the night. We don't know when he will come. But once he busts your door down and takes things you know he is here.
When it is here it is no silent secret rapture. It is the Last day.

when he disciples asked about the Last Day or the Coming of the lord there is no 2 comings or one in the air and 2 on the land etc. This is the teaching we should use on the Last Day and Coming of Christ. We should answer as the inspired authors did, not as Darby and Scofield did.
1 Thess 4:15 we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words. NKJV

John 11:24 Martha said to Him,"I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." NKJV

John 6:54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. NKJV

1 Cor 15:51 We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed — 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. NKJV

2 Thess 2:1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, NKJV

2 Thess 1:7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe,
NKJV

Where is a 2nd and 3rd coming and a secret catching of part of the body then a later rapture of another part of the body, maybe those jews, or do they live right into the new Jerusalem that descends from above onto the earth where we all live?

Gen 1:1 - Deut 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
NKJV

 

[MW]

From a post perspective, what ushers in the millennium? I'm not familiar with postmillennialism from a millenniaristic perspective.

The historicist version speaks of a spiritual advent of Christ as marking the beginning of the godlen age in which Christ overcomes antichrist with the spirit of His mouth; this is the angel which binds Satan a thousand years and resurrects the church. There are varying interpretations with respect to the Jews, some speaking as literally as Justin while others recognising OT prophecies as spiritual blessings couched in earthly forms. The idealist version simply holds to a progress within history which leads to the conversion of the nations.

 

[Peairtach]

There is a thread here on Palmer Robertson's treatment of Romans 11, in which he argues against a future national conversion of the Jews, but only for an ongoing remnant.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f45/palmer-robertson-romans-11-a-51401/#post662822

 

[LawrenceU]

rat brains!

 

[DonP]

Could the something greater be the Jews currently being saved. As Paul was converted and uses the example that this is the proof God has not cast them off.

I would suggest, Paul had no idea of a later mass gathering or he would have said this.

He did say this:

Verse 5, "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."

Verse 12, "Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness."

The remnant was the result of the partial blindness of the nation, and led to the salvation of the Gentiles; their fulness is envisaged as something future which will bring even greater blessing to the world.

Yes, their fullness is those being saved at this present time. It is the full, complete number of all of them who get saved at this present time and going forth in this same manner.

Come on now
Nothing here about masses later.

Fullness does not mean a one time mass number.
It does not mean all living in Jerusalem at some time.

It simply means:
So much more when their complete number has entered just as the fullness of the gentiles has entered.

So does fullness of Gentiles mean some later masses of Gentiles conversions??

Don't you feel the need to be consistent here with the meaning of fullness?

Still hoping to see someone explain the difference in the word Fullness as used here.

Rom 11:25 until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Why use in one place it is a varying number coming in over a period of 2000 years but when used for Jews it doesn't mean this same thing it now means a whole lot at once time.

Can someone better in the languages, and grammar help me here as to why the word intrinsically have have opposite meanings?
Thanks.
If it can't, can we all rationally go back to seeing this verse does not teach a large number at once, that has to be forced on it by a preconceived belief. The stop using this verse and go find somewhere else to support the idea?

Also note that he says, the fullness of the Gentiles coming in is how All Israel shall be saved. They are the LAST part of the promise to Abraham.

Rom 11:25 until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
"The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins."
28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. NKJV

And regarding the gospel they are enemies.
The only way they are beloved are those who are elect.

PS what is "die" and "Rat Brains"?

 

[Herald]

rat brains!

Rat brains?

 

[DonP]

Here is a link to an excellent post and thread on the church not replacing Israel that addresses some of this subject

http://www.puritanboard.com/f56/israel-has-not-been-replaced-church-50717/http://www.puritanboard.com/f56/israel-has-not-been-replaced-church-50717/

 

[Herald]

rat brains!

Rat brains?

rat brains!

Is this a southern thing?

 

[DonP]

Reflecting on the classical Dispensationalists view of Jews I wonder how they can think there can be a future for Jews who admittedly are mostly if not all mixbreed now in light of this scripture
John 4:9
How is it that You, being a Jew, ask me for a drink since I am a Samaritan woman?" (For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.) NASB
Mix Breeds were not considered Jews.
So who are the Jews that will come at the end times? Sons of Ishmael?
Sons of Esau or just sons of Judah? And will mix-breed sons be counted or are they not Jews?

And Was Jesus teaching Judaism or Christianity? Did he teach Old covenant Judaism or new covenant Judaism?
The new covenant with the House of Israel ? Or was He teaching for the church?

I say there is only one truth and Christ taught truth, the same truth. He taught the gospel Abraham got with the promises and taught the New covenant Judaism which is was the Gentiles get grafted into.
"I will declare Your name to My brethren; In the midst of the assembly I will praise You. You who fear the LORD, praise Him! All you descendants of Jacob, glorify Him, And fear Him, all you offspring of Israel!" (Psalm 22:22,23)

I am an intended descendant of Jacob, I am a descendant of Israel by promise and faith, one whom the promises of Abraham have come to

John 4:21-23
"Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall you worship the Father. 22 "You worship that which you do not know; we worship that which we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 "But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. NASB

Jesus taught that No Longer will men worship in Jerusalem. That is done. Now we worship anywhere in Spirit.

To hold out a hope for Jerusalem is to oppose the clear teaching of Christ.

 

[busdriver72]

I believe that "Israel" has a future, and that it is somehow connected to historic/national Israel.
While I do not dare to claim such profound wisdom as to exactly how it will all come about, I do like the statement that Israel will be part of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Apart from their Messiah, there is no salvation.
If there is no future for something called Israel, then much of Scripture makes no sense at all.
MAT 19:28 And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

This statement by Jesus is, of course, future. But if there is no "Israel" after the regenration, then Jesus' statement makes no sense.
ACT 1:6 ¶ And so when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?"

Now, of course, the answer was "no," but there was some understanding or expectation that it would come....and notice Jesus never says it will not happen, just that it is not for us to know the times and seasons.
I kinda wish He HAD said a bit more, but He knows all and knows best.
I hear some dismiss so many references to Israel in tne N.T. as being the church, but that is not being honest with the context. For example, in GAL 6:16 "And those who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God." The context here does suggest that this is a spiritual reference to the church, but not all N.T. references to Israel should be handled that way. (I'm not saying that anyone on this board does.)
In Romans, starting at chapter 9, the context makes it clear Paul is not referring to "Israel" in a generic manner. In v.3 he says "my kinsmen according to the flesh"...(V.4) who are Israelites..".
From that point he doesn't break context or flow.
In chapter 11:1-2 He says that God has not rejected His people, and then he clarifies what he means by referring to himself as an Israelite of the Tribe of Benjamin.
Later, he speaks about them being "grafted in again," of course, this will not happen apart from faith in Christ.
In 11:25 he mentions a "partial hardening" of Israel has happened, then he says "until," pointing toward the future, suggesting that the "partial" hardening will soften after the "fullness" of the Gentiles has come.

REV 7:4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred and forty-four thousand sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:
REV 21:12 It had a great and high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels; and names were written on them, which are those of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel.

These references to Israel are interesting as well, especially that Israel proper is inscribed on New Jerusalem itself.
I'm not claiming to have real understanding of exactly what all this involves, but I don't buy into what I hear so many fellow Baptist say "God is through with Israel."

 

[A2JC4life]

Thank you, Ralph. You said what I was not able to say, given that my ultimate understanding of my eschatological beliefs is so fuzzy.

 

[tcalbrecht]

I believe that "Israel" has a future, and that it is somehow connected to historic/national Israel.

While I do not dare to claim such profound wisdom as to exactly how it will all come about, I do like the statement that Israel will be part of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Apart from their Messiah, there is no salvation.

If there is no future for something called Israel, then much of Scripture makes no sense at all.

MAT 19:28 And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.


This statement by Jesus is, of course, future. But if there is no "Israel" after the regenration, then Jesus' statement makes no sense.

Is it your view then that there will be a reconstitution of the physical twelve tribes of Israel prior to the Second Coming?

ACT 1:6 ¶ And so when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?"


Now, of course, the answer was "no," but there was some understanding or expectation that it would come....and notice Jesus never says it will not happen, just that it is not for us to know the times and seasons.

The problem with that argument is that it somewhat ignores the context, since Jesus goes on to explain how the Kingdom will be established and enlarged. Jews and gentiles are included in that process. A physical manifestation of the kingdom to just one nation is not in keeping with the entire tenor of the new covenant.

But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth. (v. 8)

I do believe it is significant that the apostles never again spoke in the NT of the kingdom being restored to physical Israel, although the opportunities were there (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:24). It’s hard to image that if the kingdom wrt physical Israel was important the apostles would have made that point clear, esp. to their Jewish audience. But they never do that. In fact, they continually downplay the significance of genetics/lineage in the kingdom of God.

 

[A2JC4life]

They downplay the distinction between male and female, too, but, as has been pretty well established in other threads on the board, the fact that we are equal with regard to salvation does not inherently make us equal in all other ways. There is "no male or female," and yet we have different roles within the church and within our families. So I don't think that this line of reasoning is necessarily effective.

And I'm not the author of that post, but I do agree with it, and my personal answer would be, "I don't know." I don't understand how all of that interrelates, nor do I pretend to. But the Bible seems to make it clear that there is a place for physical Israel, even while also making it clear that there is one people of God. I can't fully wrap my mind around it any more than I can fully wrap my mind around the fact that we have complete free agency and God's sovereignty and predestination are still fully at work.

 

[tcalbrecht]

They downplay the distinction between male and female, too, but, as has been pretty well established in other threads on the board, the fact that we are equal with regard to salvation does not inherently make us equal in all other ways. There is "no male or female," and yet we have different roles within the church and within our families. So I don't think that this line of reasoning is necessarily effective.

And I'm not the author of that post, but I do agree with it, and my personal answer would be, "I don't know." I don't understand how all of that interrelates, nor do I pretend to. But the Bible seems to make it clear that there is a place for physical Israel, even while also making it clear that there is one people of God. I can't fully wrap my mind around it any more than I can fully wrap my mind around the fact that we have complete free agency and God's sovereignty and predestination are still fully at work.

No one here denies there is a place for physical Israel within the kingdom of God. The question is, using the male/female analogy, what is the unique role of physical Israel within the kingdom over and distinct from gentiles?

 

[busdriver72]

Is it your view then that there will be a reconstitution of the physical twelve tribes of Israel prior to the Second Coming?

I don't know how it will all work out. We'll see.

A physical manifestation of the kingdom to just one nation is not in keeping with the entire tenor of the new covenant.

Good point...the kingdom referring to the Kingdom of God, not the Kingdom of Israel. Good point.

do believe it is significant that the apostles never again spoke in the NT of the kingdom being restored to physical Israel, although the opportunities were there (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:24). It’s hard to image that if the kingdom wrt physical Israel was important the apostles would have made that point clear, esp. to their Jewish audience. But they never do that. In fact, they continually downplay the significance of genetics/lineage in the kingdom of God.

Okay, I see what you're saying. You know, I don't think there will be two seperate "Kingdoms," just one, the Kingdom of God made up of all true believers in Christ be they Jew or Gentile.
Yet, somehow Israel remains recognized somehow in it all.
The Kingdom will not be restored to Israel, but Israel is restored to the Kingdom of God through Christ (their Messiah)?