The time of Jacob’s Trouble

[armylngst]

You're flattering yourself. I never offered to flatter you.

I do not flatter myself, and I request that you stop.

The one God divorced? Have you forgotten the divorce? His bride played the harlot.

I see you deny all of the "Thus saith the Lord" in the Old Testament. I mean, when you hate Israel, when you hate God's people, why not? You indirectly hate God.

Maybe not easy but it does burn.

It burns easy.

There is no Israel without faith. Doesn't exist. There was Jacob and there was Israel. Jacob changed. Faith changes people.

You forget about the elect of Israel, whom God told of to Elijah, and whom Paul said remained to his day, and remains to today. However, when you decide that God's words have fallen to the floor long ago, it's easy to get lost.

"King of kings" is a distinction brought about through the Persian Empire. It is a Gentile distinction. Jehovah never desired or even sought to be a king among Israel.

You do know what a Theocracy is, right? You know that God was their KING until they denied Him, and so He gave them Saul, right? I mean, really? There is a reason why Jesus is of the seed of Daivd, heir to His throne, as well as the throne of Melchizedek. The prophecies of Zechariah show a priest king, which is impossible in Israel. God will not have it. When Uzziah tried, God struck him with leprosy. He took the throne from Saul. However, Jesus will be both High Priest and King, and this is seen in the prophecies of Zechariah, where the high priest is washed, cleansed, and dressed up as a king. A prophecy of Christ.

So when you speak of "King of Kings" you're alluding beyond Judah. Pay attention to what you're saying. I'm not your enemy but you're casting abroad. You're promoting promises without faith. I can't allow that. You're preaching Calvinism among Jews. Jews were the first Calvinists.

I don't need such a book. I know the subject better than you do. If you want to arrange a debate with the author of the book, I will gladly participate.

You know nothing next to the author of the book.

YOU added the word "RETURN". You said that. Pay attention to what you say. It is why I asked you what I asked you. I know the verse you reference above. I probably knew it before you ever knew it. That verse doesn't say anything about "return" the kingdom.

I see, that's what your problem is. Reading comprehension/language. Perhaps English isn't your first language?

So again. Tell me how the Father lost a kingdom.

He didn't lose the Kingdom. He put it under His Son. And as His Son was subservient to the Father, that, as Paul takes the time to explain, means that the Father is excepted from being under His Son. So please expain to me, how, when properly handling the English language, did you get the idea that ANYTHING was lost? It was given/placed with the Son, until the Son brings all His enemies under His feet. Once He defeats the final enemy, death, the Father takes up the Kingdom again.

There is no rank among the Holy Trinity relative to "title". Such is preposterous. Coequal, CoEternal.

Ah a heretical modalist. The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. Separate, yet coexisting/equal. If you believe it is something to easily comprehend/understand, your God is small. We have no experiential knowledge of such an existence, and we express using shared experience. What does that food taste like? It takes like chicken. If you have never eaten chicken, then you have no idea what it tastes like. There is no information sharing/exchange because you haven't got a clue what chicken tastes like.

Subjection isn't about "rank". You think like a man seeking to rule another.

It sort of is, but, as I said, we don't have the knowledge/experience necessary to comprehend. That is why Paul took the time to explain and said that the Father was excepted from subjection to the Son. Sounds like rank to me. Jesus sitting at the right hand of the Father, in the position of power, sounds like rank to me. However, that isn't how to understand it. It is again, an analog that can be used to try an understand, and fall flat on your face while doing it.

1Co 15:24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

You do know to deliver the kingdom to the Father is the same as returning, right? It is to GIVE the kingdom to God the Father.

The work of the Son isn't complete because of US. Not national Israel, but because of the entire world. The last enemy still claims our "brothers" in Adam all around us. It is OUR responsibility as ambassadors for Christ to stop this world from claiming our brothers for themselves.

The last enemy is DEATH. We cannot stop that. Only Jesus can/will.

God saves the willing. You're preaching an irrevocable promise of purposed redemption for an exclusively ethnicity just like Calvinism teachings for the "elect".

There is an elect in Israel, just as there is in the Gentiles. Prior to the final redemption of Israel, they enter the church, just like the Gentiles. However, with the final Great Tribulation, it will be God dealing with Israel and the world, with the focus on Israel. At the end of Revelation 19, Jesus returns to Jerusalem, to Israel, and saves His people. (See Zechariah, which you buried along with all the other prophecy you apparently marked as... lies.) They will be saved as we are, but their experience will be as Saul. Jesus will present Himself to them, they will recognize Him, and it will break them, like it broke Saul. And they will all mourn as for an only Son. And God will open fountains of regeneration, repentance, forgiveness in Israel, for His people. If you read Zechariah, 1/3 of the population will be purged and cleansed, saved/redeemed. Again, prophecies you have decided God did not say.

Such is evil and doesn't exalt Christ at all.

The correct answer lies between you and Jeremiah1five. You know... where I am. I am not saying I am right, but I am in the ballpark. You are on another planet. He is in another universe. The answer is inbetween.

Messiah is the 'anointed one' as Saul and David were 'anointed ones', that is "kings". Jesus is of the line of David, and, according to scripture, the line of Melchizedek. A High Priest/King. Some triva... Salem, the capital city of Melchizedek's kingdom is said to be in, or is... Jerusalem.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I do not flatter myself, and I request that you stop.

You mentioned the word. I dealt with it. If you stop mentioning it. I will. Otherwise, I will respond accordingly. Your choice. Don't put this on me.

I see you deny all of the "Thus saith the Lord" in the Old Testament. I mean, when you hate Israel, when you hate God's people, why not? You indirectly hate God.

I don't hate Israel. I have been talking very fondly of Jacob. Who is the head of the family? I'm dealing with him. Not who you want to claim Israel is now. Most of your Rabbi's called Israel/Jacob a deceiver.

He wasn't. What does that say about the people you trust?

 

[praise_yeshua]

You do know what a Theocracy is, right? You know that God was their KING until they denied Him, and so He gave them Saul, right? I mean, really? There is a reason why Jesus is of the seed of Daivd, heir to His throne, as well as the throne of Melchizedek. The prophecies of Zechariah show a priest king, which is impossible in Israel. God will not have it. When Uzziah tried, God struck him with leprosy. He took the throne from Saul. However, Jesus will be both High Priest and King, and this is seen in the prophecies of Zechariah, where the high priest is washed, cleansed, and dressed up as a king. A prophecy of Christ.

I know this much better than you do.

God never called himself a king. Never. That is a title used by men. It is what the kingdoms of the earth want to be. A ruler.

I reject the context of a Theocracy. God has never wanted to "rule" mankind. When someone "rules" another. It is an indication that they are not cooperating.

I'm going to stop right here. I insist that you deal with what I have said before we move on.

You need to establish the very context of God intent in Israel to "rule" them.

 

[armylngst]

You mentioned the word. I dealt with it. If you stop mentioning it. I will. Otherwise, I will respond accordingly. Your choice. Don't put this on me.



I don't hate Israel. I have been talking very fondly of Jacob. Who is the head of the family? I'm dealing with him. Not who you want to claim Israel is now. Most of your Rabbi's called Israel/Jacob a deceiver.

He wasn't. What does that say about the people you trust?

Where does this idea of trust come from? The point I have is the same that Paul does. Has God rejected His people Israel. Paul's rsponse? May it never be. Israel is special. Chosen by God to be His people through whom He would send His Son into the world. God has not forgotten Israel. They will always be His people. (It will be a little different once this world comes to an end and we enter the eternal.) Israel is the bride of God. He has never rejected her, and never will. One day He will redeem her. The church is the bride of Christ His Son. Up to eternity, two different paths that converge before the end. Why? God's promises to Abraham and to Israel. They were not made to the Gentiles. The Gentiles are blessed by these promises, but they are not for them.

If one looks at the prophecies in the Old Testament as literal and not allegory/spiritual/symbolic, that is not to say there is no symbolism or figurative speech used, and then look at Revelation in the same way, a clear picture of the redemption of the world and Israel becomes clear. One point brought out is that the term "nation against nation and kingdom against kingdom" points to WW I and II. It speaks of famines. The largest famines in history occurred after WW II. In Russia alone, many millions of people starved to death. And there were famines in other places resulting in many more millions dying to starvation. As for earthquakes, there are five recorded in history from the time of Jesus to 1000AD. The frequency of earthquakes has been constantly increasing with hundreds of thousands in the 20th century. There were less in the 19th century, and then less as one keeps going back from there.

So 1948 is seen as God gathering Israel back to the land for JUDGEMENT. However, there are two gatherings in scripture, one for judgment, and one for redemption.

God has a plan for Israel still, which is the final redemption of His elect in the secular nation of Israel. They were there in Paul's day, and they are still there today. Under the partial blinding and hardening of God, until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. As Paul says, after that time, God will turn back again towards Israel, and all Israel will be saved. To be technical, all who are still alive at the time of Christ's visitation, His coming into the Kingdom (the rock not hewn by human hands that destroys Nebuchadnezzar's statue, that is the four great Gentile Empires), will be saved. The 1/3rd of Zechariah's prophecies.

Following the Millennial Kingdom where God's promises to King David and Solomon are fulfilled, the world will end, and all the first things will pass away, and all will be one. (All who belong to God. Universalism is a heresy.)