This is a downloaded record of postings on the MORIEL forum. I (Ian Day) was posting as "Covenanter". Following this I was banned, so I briefly appeared as "guest" before the threads were removed.

It was downloaded by a premil contributor who appreciated my contributions & invited me onto another forum, also hosted by premils.

I have edited it slightly.

Someone else had started the discussion about Fructenbaum.

------------------

May 2002

Guest

Registered: Not Yet

Location:

Posts: N/A

I have just had a look at Fructenbaum's Q & A section. Its fantastic (& I mean fantastic.) http://www.ariel.org/qaframe.html

I looked up "the bride of Christ" & learned that Israel is the Father's wife, while the Church is Jesus' bride,

I learned that Elijah is coming back to restore the Jewish family relationships broken by Jesus' ministry (despite Jesus assuring us that John was Elijah,)

and that the 144,000 will be Jewish evangelists who will flee to Petra half way through the tribulation to wait for the Lord there.

He is teaching all the dispensational doctrines which rob the living believer of his Bible, putting it all into the supposed future millennium. Separating all the metaphors which the Word uses to express the relationship of God with his people is just "wrongly dividing the Word of truth."

My hope is in Jesus, & his return to judge the world in righteousness, after which I, as a member of the Church, the New Jerusalem, will live with him, as his bride, the wife of the Lamb, in glory in the New Heaven & New Earth. (Rev. 21)

 ------------------

Member

Registered: May 2002

Location: near Norwich, England

Posts: 23

I don't believe Arnold F. is non-Biblical as you suggest, Covenanter

Yes, those who are born-again and are the True Bride of Christ will be with Him for ever in the Millennium Kingdom. God also has a place for the Jews whom He chose before 'us' (Gentile believers) - We are grafted into the Olive tree and should not become proud of our position in Christ but grateful for our position in Christ . Would write more but time is short at the moment.

Romans 11:24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!

Bless you.

Amanda

  -----------------------

Re: I don't believe Arnold F. is non-Biblical as you suggest, Covenanter

This shows a degree of confusion. Many dispensationalists teach that the church, the bride, is raptured during the millennium, while Jesus is ruling on earth, in Jerusalem, sitting on David's throne, while the church, the bride is in heaven.

And surely the "millennial kingdom" only lasts 1000 years, NOT for ever.

I am contributing to this forum to try to show that the Scriptures are for all believers, and that Jew & Gentile are ONE IN CHRIST. Many would rob the present, suffering church of the Revelation written to encourage us, (Rev. 1:1-3) and instead claim it is only for so-called "tribulation saints".

It is probably better to continue this discussion on the "Prophecy & Last Days" section, which specific questions are discussed.

I'm not a conference speaker, & I have no reputation to maintain. I am simple a believer for over 40 years, and church secretary of a small church in an Asian area.

 --------------

Member

Registered: Apr 2002

Location:

Posts: 22

Amillenialism is absolutely unbiblical, alien both to scripture and to the position held by the apostolic and early post apostolic church.

Such views rejecting millenial eschatology are the inventions of incipient Roman Catholicism masnufactured by Augustine after Constantine for political reasons pseudo christianized The Roman Empire - a distortion also adopted by Calvinists, who like The Papacy derive from Augustine, not the bible. Here we would warmly recommend Dave Hunt's new book on the error of Calvinism "WHAT LOVE IS THIS"?

If there is no millenium Jesus cannot be the Messiah of The Jews, and if He is not The Messiah of The Jews neither can He therefore be The Christ of The Church.

For an explanation we refer those interested to out tape @One Messiah, Two Comings".

Arnold Fruchtenbaum's dispensational views mentioned in this dialogue are essentially quite correct.

What is not biblical or correct is Covenant theology, a gross distortion of scripture by Calvinism downplaying the

New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31 and inaugerated by Jesus. This twisted error void of any scriptural support states that God only made two covenants - One with Adam and one with Abraham.

In order to accomodate such an unbiblical paradigm hermeneutically , those subscribing to this error must , like the hyper charismatic Vinyard Movement, engage in the gnostic practice of "spiritualizing texts out of context" where

biblical teaching on the millemnial reign of Jesus must be spiritulized and instances of Israel in the bible spiritualized to mean 'the Church' (Replacement theology or supercessionism) .

We have already warned that Post Millenial Reformed Covenant theology and its Reconstructionism is as much a pillar of Dominionism/Kingdom Now/ Latter Day Reign- Joel's Army lunacy as is charismania and its pseudo spiritual mysticism.

If Satan is bound, I want to know who keeps letting him go?

Amillenialism is almost , but not quite, as daft.

 --------------------

Jacob, My replies in bold, in loc.

 Originally posted by Jacob Prasch

JP/ Amillenialism is absolutely unbiblical, alien both to scripture and to the position held by the apostolic and early post apostolic church.

-------------------

Member

Registered: Apr 2002

Location: UK (Derbys)

Posts: 9

For reference

One Messiah Two Comings can be found here in article form (concise), or here in glorious Real Audio .

 --------------------

Repton, Thanks for the article info. I've read as much as I could stand.

Its totally unjustified ALLEGORIZING to treat Jesus as son of Joseph in the way the author does. Is there any Scripture which explicitly speaks of the Messiah as the son of Joseph ?

I'm happy to see Joseph as a type of Christ but such treatment of Scripture must be guided by Scripture & not used as the basis for doctrine.

Scripture sees Jesus as the son of David at his FIRST coming.

Luke 1: 31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."

And he ascended to the throne of David at his resurrection & ascension:

Acts 2:29 "Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32 God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.

 quote: [One Messiah - two comings]

 ------------------

Member

Registered: Apr 2002

Location: UK (Derbys)

Posts: 9

If you have Real Player, you may like to listen to the audio version of this message, it goes into much more depth than the article.

--------------------

If you have Real Player, you may like to listen to the audio version of this message, it goes into much more depth than the article.

 --------------------------

Member

Registered: Apr 2002

Location:

Posts: 22

Allegorization is the gnostic practice of Roman Catholicism (sensus pleniore) and Reformed Calvinistic believers in the unscriptural error of Covenant theology which degrades the New Covenant falsely teaching that Goid only really ever made two covenants: One with adam and One with Abraham.

A-millenial & Post Millenial Covenant theology is based on gnostic allegortization. every tiume they see 'Israel' they alklegorize it to the mean "the church" and allegoprize the millernium into something spiritual.

The audio message 'One Messiah, Two Comings" speaks for itself. Unlike the Covenant theology invented by Calvinists (which is no biblical theology at all) the twin concepts of a suffering servant Messiah at first rejected, then accepted (in the character of Joseph who typifies Him) is utterly bibliocal as per Isaiah 52 & 53 etc. and a Davidic Messiah in the Kingly character of David are both quite biblical and are doctrines accepted even by the staunchest of the Calvinistic Reformed Covenant believers - the Puritan Fathers.

Satan is not bound, and to pretend otherwise is too ludicrous a proposition to deserve serious comment.

Views other than premillenialism are alien to the apostolic and early patristic pre-Nicean church. Covenant theology and Amillenialsm and post millenialism are inventions of incipient Roman Catjolicism to justify the papacy and church as a temporal power.

Calvin admits he got his rubbish beliefs from Augustine (the arch doctrinal founder of Roman Catholicism). Once Augustine said the millenium was fulfilled in the reign of the church - in the year 999 AD people began to give their properties and money to the cjurchbecause Jesus was comingback at the end of the millenium. No body got their money or land back.

Premillenialism is taught in the bible in Revelation 20. If A Mill & Post Mill are true, where are they in the bible, and why did the Early Church taught by the apostles not believe it? The answer is that they aren't in the bible - so Covenant people have to allegorize other scriptures to invent a supposed biblical; basis for it.

Moriel is not a heavy Dispensationalist ministry, but we simply state that Dispensationalism in its moderate form is mainly correct and closer to the biblical truth than Covenant theology.

But we would not be Dallas Seminary Dispensationalists nor much l;ess hyper dispensastionalists. For us the Old and New Covenants are both continuouis and discontinuous, both evolutionary and revolutionary. Heavily dogmatic Dispensationalists overstate the 'discontinuous' while Covenant theology not only overstates the 'continuous' but fabricates the nonsense that God only made covenants with Adam and Abraham, down playing the centrality of the New Covenant and mixes this with the rest of the Calvinistic muck.

The initial formulators of Dispensationalism (who defined it as a systematic theology against the A mill & post mill Covenant theology manufactured by Calvinists in imitation of Rome), were largely men like Schofield (of whom I am not a big fan) and The Plymouth Brethren (whom I have a higher regard for in many respects). The suggestion that the framers of dispensationalism could be Roman Catholic however is totally preposterous. Rome like Calvin is Augustinian in its view, while imperfect, dispensationalists are at least biblical in theirs.

the tapes are avaiulable and Iwill not likely comment further on this issue at the present time.

Every Blessing In Jesus,

Jacob Prasch

 -------------------

Jacob, Thanks for your "reply".

I have sought to discuss these matters courteously & Biblically.

You reject my contribution without reference or Scripture quotation. You clearly do not understand Amillennialism or Covenant Theology.

I know its your message board, & that my position is at variance to yours, but I am here seeking to maintain fellowship even though we disagree.

I am seeking to show that Amillennialism & Covenant Theology are soundly based on Scripture, needing no reference to Augustine or Calvin, so that different views on these subjects is no barrier to fellowship.

Biblical discussion should lead to greater understanding of each other as servants of our Lord, even though we may still disagree. (See Romans 14) If my errors or yours are corrected by such discussion, so much the better.

Your postings on this subject, & your attitude to Christians with whom you disagree are lacking in grace.

[Such words as "daft, ludicrous, muck" referring to the beliefs of other evangelical Christians are quite inappropriate.]

Your brother in Christ,

Ian

 ---------------

Moderator

Registered: Apr 2002

Location:

Posts: 27

On the contrary

Yakov understands "Covenant Theology" and "Amillennialism" all too well. Birthed in Gnosticism using allegory to estabish doctrine and make void the promises of God. Thr fruit of the antisemtism and replacment theology of the Church Fathers, Amillennialism is understood only too well. After 1700 years of Church promoted persecution, masscres and hatred culminating in the liquidation of 6,000,000 -all of which can be traced ultimately to this bitter toot - a twisted interpretive system introduced by a known heretic. Despite its claims to scriptural support all amill and CT is doing is simply reading the replacementism, antisemitism and hyper-spiritualisation back into the Scriptures it claims for support. Using the intepretive methods of Origen and Augustine you can make ths Scriptures say justa bout anything you want. Sad but true. The Scriptures are not against allegory or spiritual application per-se but it is never used to establish doctrine in the same way that Amill does. Only as an illustrative device.

The gnostic interpretive system that makes Amill docriinally possible is so utterly foreign to Scriptural thought that sooner or later it will produce a barrier to fellowship as does all error.

Sad but true.

======================================