Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Escoffier Gab refugee (escoffier@poa.st)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 12:57:09 JST Escoffier Gab refugee

   • Bread up, Bro
   On the subject of dispensationalism i only have one question: is there even one example of the word Judaizers being a good thing?
   
   RT: https://poa.st/objects/8d6da3cf-bb12-4ee2-a36a-d75f80548e4f
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 12:57:08 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to
     @Escoffier no, I don't think so
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 13:03:20 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to
     @Escoffier that's the whole "different covenant" stuff, yeah
   • Embed this notice
     Escoffier Gab refugee (escoffier@poa.st)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 13:03:21 JST Escoffier Gab refugee

     in reply to

     • Bread up, Bro
     @sickburnbro A guy was trying to defend it to me and I explained that John Hagee was basically the Pope of dispensationalism and ole' John has declared that Jews do not require Jesus to be saved. He couldn't believe it but looked it up and lo and behold.
   • Embed this notice
     EssentialUtinsil :njp: (essentialutinsil@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 30-Jan-2025 04:08:06 JST EssentialUtinsil :njp:

     in reply to

     • Bread up, Bro
     • James_Dixon
     @James_Dixon @Escoffier @sickburnbro the temple veil tearing in two at the moment of Jesus' death is also pretty clear
     Bread up, Bro likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     James_Dixon (james_dixon@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 30-Jan-2025 04:08:07 JST James_Dixon

     in reply to

     • Bread up, Bro
     @Escoffier @sickburnbro > and ole' John has declared that Jews do not require Jesus to be saved.
     
     Without Christ's sacrifice no one could be saved. If John believes otherwise he's not even remotely a Christian.
     
     That said, an argument could be made that a jew who actually upheld the original covenant would still be saved by Christ's sacrifice, even if he didn't accept Christ as the Messiah. There's only one problem: There is no longer a Temple at which to make the required sacrifices. Whoops.
     
     Why does Hagee think God allowed the Temple to be destroyed? He probably has no idea. The answer is that he did so to make it clear that the original covenant was no longer available as an option.
   • Embed this notice
     James_Dixon (james_dixon@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 30-Jan-2025 04:08:17 JST James_Dixon

     in reply to

     • Bread up, Bro
     • EssentialUtinsil :njp:
     @EssentialUtinsil @Escoffier @sickburnbro > the temple veil tearing in two at the moment of Jesus' death is also pretty clear
     
     The traditional meaning of that event is that with Christ's death the payment for our sins was made and that God could once again dwell with man.
     
     The veil was what separated the inner temple where God dwelt from the portion accessible to everyone. Only the priests who had been ritually purified of their sins could enter past the veil.
     
     Once Christ paid the price of our sins for us, we all became acceptable in the eyes of God and the veil was unnecessary.
     Bread up, Bro likes this.