Menu

Philip Mauro

P
proudpapa

A Short Biography of Philip Mauro

(1859-1952)
As far as twentieth century Christian figures are concerned, Philip Mauro stands out as one of the most captivating. After coming to a saving knowledge of the Lord in 1903, at the age of forty five, Mauro, a member of the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States and one of the foremost patent lawyers of his day, began his "Testimony" of what was to him the most important event in his life.

His repeated successes in courts of law, coupled with his legal briefs, could not but gain recognition, for they were "models of accuracy, conciseness, and literary finish." As such, they were "frequently used by judges in the text of their decisions." Perhaps one of the most important occasions where his legal work was requisitioned was in connection with the famous Tennessee-Scopes trial in 1925. The brief or argument which Bryan used, and thereby won the case, was prepared by Philip Mauro.

His early twentieth century was a period of great expansion for many errors, such as Dispensationalism and Anglo Israelism. Rising to the forefront of Christianity's great struggle against these foes, he applied the preparation God had given him, and scored great victories for sound doctrine. As a result of his body of work, the following generations have been able to pick up weapons at the spot where he fell and continue the struggle for Truth, as it is to this day.

The very fact that a materialistic, scientific lawyer of such high reputation as Mr. Mauro had become such an earnest Christian and such an able advocate of Christianity, both by his pen and public addresses, caused him to be sought for increasingly as a speaker at Bible conferences and in Christian circles generally.

Perhaps one of the most important occasions where his legal help was requisitioned was in connection with the famous Tennessee-Scopes trial in 1925.

True, William Jennings Bryan, the "silver-tongued" orator, thrice Democratic nominee for President of the United States, devout Christian and popular Bible teacher, was retained by the State of Tennessee to defend its law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in its public schools. The brief or argument which Bryan used, however, and thereby won the case, was prepared by Philip Mauro. This was a great victory inasmuch as the defense attorney was none other than Clarence Darrow, the brilliant and successful criminal lawyer.

And if others did not forget Mauro's legal ability, neither did he forget his former business and legal associates. These he had faithfully and personally witnessed to after his conversion and fervently prayed that they, as he had been, might be brought out of darkness into light. One of the most famous of these was Thomas A. Edison.

As successful patent counsel for the Columbia Phonograph Company, Philip Mauro had repeated encounters with this wizard, who was regarded as "one of the company's most formidable antagonists," in the extensive litigation involving patents. Despite the fact that Mr. Mauro was Edison's legal opponent and invariably his victor, Edison evidently retained his respect for him personally as well as for his intellect, for when in 1926 Mr. Mauro wrote Edison, "giving him a personal testimony as to the peace of mind and conscience that had come to him through trusting in Jesus Christ, the result was an invitation to visit Mr. Edison at his laboratory in Orange, New Jersey." When the two met on October 29, 1926, they had not seen each other for about twenty years.

The story of their interview is best told be Mr. Mauro himself as printed in The Last Hour, edited and published by himself. "Mr. Edison is now in his eightieth year; but his mind is evidently as keen as ever. All his life his attitude regarding things not seen- God, the human soul, life hereafter, etc.- has been severely skeptical. But now, in the sunset of his days, he has undertaken the investigation of those great matters, with a desire to know the truth, but with insistence upon PROOF. 'I want FACTS,' was the way he expressed the attitude of his mind. Owing to Mr. Edison's deafness, it was difficult for the editor to speak to him. But it was better so; and the promise was given that he would read attentively a short letter on the matter discussed." This Mr. Mauro wrote "the day following the interview."

"Dear Mr. Edison,

"It was a real pleasure to see you and hear your voice again. Moreover, the matters touched upon in our conversation of yesterday gave me much to think about.

"You want facts. So do I. A reasonable man's belief should rest upon nothing less substantial than well-attested facts. So here is a fact for you:
"God (whom you reverently call "the Supreme Intelligence") loves you and wants your love in return. My visit to you and this letter are evidence of it, though, of course, not sufficient to prove to your satisfaction either that God is, or that He cares for Thomas Edison. But wait.

"Another fact: God is Light.
"How do I know? I know only in the way that light can be known- by experience. For the nature of light is such that it admits of being known only in the way of experimental knowledge. I am saying this to the man who has had more to do with the development of artificial light than any other who ever lived in this dark world, and who probably knows more about light, in a practical way, than any other. How then could the existence and the nature of light be demonstrated to one who had been shut up all his life in a dark cell? It could be done only in some way such as by opening a window; and then the light would enter, and prove itself.

"This I say, because you are seeking a solution of the mystery of life and the soul by the way of analogies form nature. Very good. Much truth can be got in that way; as Butler, in his famous Analogy has abundantly shown. I hope you will continue your investigation, and in your customary thorough-going fashion; for it is the most important you ever undertook. And in this connection I call you attention to a clear and pertinent analogy; the point of which is that the proof you demand can be had only by experiment. For myself, I know that God is Light, and that He sheds light in the heart that is opened to Him, because I put the matter to the test of experience twenty-three years ago, and have enjoyed the consciousness of spiritual light ever since. Moreover, my experience is that of millions of others.

"Let me remind you that light will not force its way into a place that is tightly closed; but that, if only a tiny chink be opened, in it comes, proving itself.
"Likewise Christ, who is 'the true Light,' does not force Himself into the chambers of the soul against the human will. For the nature of the matter is such that, like the smell of a violet, the color of a sunset, or the taste of honey, it can only be known by experiment. The 'Good Book' that you asked me not to quote, says, 'Come and see,' 'Taste and see.' Is not that strictly scientific?

"You have been truly doing God's work in helping to enlighten the darkness of nature. But there is a spiritual darkness too. So follow the analogy, and it will lead you straight to the truth, and to the solution of the whole mystery of human existence.

"With sincere affection and respect,
(Signed) Philip Mauro."

Philip Mauro was a prolific writer. His works includes God's Pilgrims, The Church, the Churches and the Kingdom, The Hope of Israel, Ruth, the Satisfied Stranger, The Wonders of Bible Chronology, The Last Call to the Godly Remnant, More Than a Prophet, Dispensationalism Justifies the Crucifixion, Speaking in Tongues, and Things Which Soon Must Come to Pass. Many of these works may be obtained through Schoettle Publishing Company, Inc.


http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/biographies/pmauro.htm

S
sermonindex

I recently discovered Phil Mauro and his writings PP. They have been like an oasis of truth in a barren desert.

I did not know about that story regarding Thomas Edison.

P
proudpapa

Hi Julius here is a full bio :
http://www.philipmauro.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/CHAMPION-Of-THE-KINGDOM.pdf

P
proudpapa

"Philip Mauro loved the Lord Jesus Christ above all else and he loved the Scriptures just as much.
For me the most striking fact about him is that from the moment he was saved in 1903 at age 45, he never again consulted a doctor until his death at age 93 on April 7, 1952. He trusted only God for his health and physical well-being. That is an incredible testimony.
As he grew in stature as a believer, his views on certain subjects changed as he received more light and revelation from God. He chose to acknowledge his mistakes and to retract his opinions rather than to seek the approval of man by clinging to his previous position. He become a prolific writer, sharing the new light he had received. As a result, many friends turned against him, labeling his views "revolutionary” yet he remained undeterred.
With his motto, "Scripture interprets Scripture”, and a subsequent significant library of writings as his greatest legacy, Philip Mauro is the ideal Christian role model ”“ a "simple soul” who took God at his Word and lived the Word.

S
sermonindex

Here we go again with another preterist agenda based false doctrinal presentation. Most Christians reject this nonsense and 100% of them who have the Holy Spirit in them absolutely deny this false and erroneous twisting of God's Word.
This ungodly doctrinal heresy is posted by the same gang of 4 here on a regular basis . Can't understand why the same characters alway bring this garbage up even when they have been told repeatedly by Greg not to do so.

"Question: "What is the preterist view of the end times?"

Answer: According to preterism, all prophecy in the Bible is really history. The preterist interpretation of Scripture regards the book of Revelation as a symbolic picture of first-century conflicts, not a description of what will occur in the end times. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning "past.” Thus, preterism is the view that the biblical prophecies concerning the "end times” have already been fulfilled””in the past. Preterism is directly opposed to futurism, which sees the end-times prophecies as having a still-future fulfillment.

Preterism is divided into two types: full (or consistent) preterism and partial preterism. This article will confine the discussion to full preterism (or hyper-preterism, as some call it).

Preterism denies the future prophetic quality of the book of Revelation. The preterist movement essentially teaches that all the end-times prophecies of the New Testament were fulfilled in AD 70 when the Romans attacked and destroyed Jerusalem. Preterism teaches that every event normally associated with the end times””Christ’s second coming, the tribulation, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment””has already happened. (In the case of the final judgment, it still in the process of being fulfilled.) Jesus’ return to earth was a "spiritual” return, not a physical one.

Preterism teaches that the Law was fulfilled in AD 70 and God’s covenant with Israel was ended. The "new heavens and new earth” spoken of in Revelation 21:1 is, to the preterist, a description of the world under the New Covenant. Just as a Christian is made a "new creation” (2 Corinthians 5:17), so the world under the New Covenant is a "new earth.” This aspect of preterism can easily lead to a belief in replacement theology.

Preterists usually point to a passage in Jesus’ Olivet Discourse to bolster their argument. After Jesus describes some of the end-times happenings, He says, "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” (Matthew 24:34). The preterist takes this to mean that everything Jesus speaks of in Matthew 24 had to have occurred within one generation of His speaking””the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was therefore "Judgment Day.”

The problems with preterism are many. For one thing, God’s covenant with Israel is everlasting (Jeremiah 31:33”“36), and there will be a future restoration of Israel (Isaiah 11:12). The apostle Paul warned against those who, like Hymenaeus and Philetus, teach falsely "that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some” (2 Timothy 2:17”“18). And Jesus’ mention of "this generation” should be taken to mean the generation that is alive to see the beginning of the events described in Matthew 24.

Eschatology is a complex subject, and the Bible’s use of apocalyptic imagery to relate many prophecies has led to a variety of interpretations of end-time events. There is room for some disagreement within Christianity regarding these things. However, full preterism has some serious flaws in that it denies the physical reality of Christ’s second coming and downplays the dreadful nature of the tribulation by restricting that event to the fall of Jerusalem."

S
sermonindex

PP,

I am still working on The Hope of Israel (not a superficial book, many scriptures), and it is undeniably clear that he has a deep love for Jesus Christ.

1 John 3:14

S
sermonindex

Which jesus? Oh yes the jesus who returned in 70 AD in an ethereal spiritual body and is now reigning over the spiritual world both unseen and invisible. The jesus who returned to set up his invisible eternal kingdom and even now is manifesting his rule over the whole sum of everything that was, is and was to come and came already,
You can keep that jesus,.

S
sermonindex

PP, does Mauro believe Jesus came back physically in 70AD?

Is that the hallmark of preterism? Believing that Jesus came back in 70AD?

How can anyone believe that? That would have become part of human history.

Not having studied Preterism, I just don't know what defines it.

P
proudpapa

p. 600 of "Things which soon must come to pass.

"It is truth of immenence interest and importance that the second coming of Christ will be coincident with ":the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men" and that it is for that reason alone that His coming again has been so delayed....."

add : "It is most needful we should clearly understand that of those whose blessed privilege it is to live in this day of salvation all who do not "come to repentance" ere He returns,will perish v.9.
In fact, the substance of the whole passage is this : the Lord's second advent is delayed for no other reason than that it means judgment for all who are not in Christ and God is not willing that any should perish.


add : He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

S
sermonindex

I think that is pretty clear. Thanks PP.

I once posted this from Jim Fowler's website Christinyou dot net. I see he has a dot com now, too. Just search "Revelation Series" if you want to find it.

When I posted this I said that the Triumphalist interpretation makes the most sense to me when you let scripture interpret scripture. The only thing I know about Preterism is what Jim says below.

Varying Interpretations
It will be instructive to consider some of the varying interpretations of Revelation and the interpretive methods they employ. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of varying interpretations of the Revelation, but some of the broader schools of interpretation might be identified as follows:

(1) Preterist interpretation. This label is derived from the Latin word praeter, meaning "past." This interpretation views the pictures of Revelation as referring to what was happening in the past, in the first century. They see the images as representing governmental persecution during the reign of either Nero or Domitian. Most understand Revelation chapters 21 and 22 as referring to the future, but there are some who "spiritualize" and put all 22 chapters of Revelation back in the past of the first century.

(2) Historicist interpretation. This interpretation stretches out the images of Revelation to refer to the history of the Western church. For example, the "fifth trumpet" has been interpreted as the Mohammedans in the 7th century; the "sixth trumpet" has been viewed as the invasion of the Turks. Chapter 10 allegedly refers to the "strong angel" who announces the Reformation when the "little book" was found, i.e. the Bible. The "seven thunders" are against the Pope. Revelation 11 and the measuring of the temple is interpreted as the Reformation determination of the true church, and the two witnesses have been interpreted as Luther and Calvin against Rome. The ultimate victory is the overthrow of the Roman papacy.

(3) Futurist interpretation. Revelation 1-3 is recognized to be in the past, but 4-22 are regarded as the record of future events in the seven-year tribulation, leading to the second coming and the millennium. Ryrie, for example, takes 1:19 as the structural "key" for Revelation: (1) "things seen" - 1:9-20 (2) "things which are" - 2:1-3:22 (3) "things which shall take place" (4:1-19:21 in the tribulation; 20:1-15 in the millennium, etc.)

(4) Triumphalist interpretation. Sometimes called the idealist or symbolic interpretation. This interpretation usually sees the images of Revelation as explaining the conflict of good and evil, God and Satan, throughout all of time.

S
sermonindex

Being a Lawyer allowed Mauro to be very effective in his doublespeak.
One sentence this, another the complete opposite when speaking to
same topic.

"Mr. Mauro's system of dispensational teaching can only produce confusion and reduce the Word of God to chaos in the minds of his readers. In the following quotation he throws overboard the whole teaching of Scripture as to our Lord being specially the King of the Jews. He says: "Specially is it to be remembered that the true Israel was never at any time, in the purpose of God, an earthly nation or kingdom.
This being recognized, it will be clearly perceived without any further help from the Scriptures, that the whole rabbinical doctrine of an earthly Kingdom over which the Messiah,' the son of David, was to reign and, to which all the nations of the world were to be tributory, was from top to bottom a work of their carnal imaginations" (The Gospel of the Kingdom, p. 123). Here we are told that the idea that the Lord shall be King over Israel is simply a rabbinical idea, that it is not taken from Scripture in any shape or form. We are aghast at such a contradiction of Scripture.

Let us quote a few scriptures to prove this.
When the angel came to Mary with the news of the high honor that was to be put upon her, he said to her: "Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God. And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call His name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David: and He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever: and of His kingdom there shall be no end" (Luke 1:30-33).
Surely this is explicit enough for anyone. Christ is to sit on David's throne, and reign over the house of Jacob. Mr. Mauro says this is a rabbinical conception, from top to bottom.

If this is so, how was it that the wise men of the east came to Jerusalem, asking, Where is He that is born King of the Jews? They had seen His star in the east, and had come to worship Him. When Herod heard of this he was troubled, and called the chief priests and scribes and demanded to know where Christ should be born. How did they reply? Was it rabbinical conception, or did they appeal to Scripture? They appealed to Scripture, and there is no appeal from this surely. They quoted from Mic. 5:2: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be RULER in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Here our Lord is to be RULER in Israel. It could not be more explicit.

Take another scripture from Isa. 9:6, 7: "For unto us is born a Child, unto us a Son is given: and the GOVERNMENT shall be on His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, AND UPON HIS KINGDOM TO ORDER IT, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever." Surely this is as plain as possible.
We all remember the wonderful entry of our Lord into Jerusalem, riding on the colt of an ass in fulfillment of the prophecy: "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, THY KING cometh unto thee: He is just and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass" (Zech. 9:9). Other Scriptures might be adduced to prove that Christ is the King of the Jews. He Himself acknowledged to Pilate that He was King. His cross bore the superscription, "THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Matt. 27:37).
Enough has been given in the way of proof texts.

We ask then, Has Christ sat on the throne of His father, David, in Jerusalem and reigned in righteousness and peace? We know this has not taken place as yet. Scripture awaits its fulfillment. Christ is to be King over Israel yet.

One more passage, however, we quote to show how the King is going to reign: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. "In His days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is His name whereby He shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
"Therefore the days come, saith the Lord, that they shall no more say, The Lord liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt: but, The Lord liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land" (Jer. 23:5-8).
Two or three things are prominent in this passage. First, a King is to be raised up unto David. Second, that the King is JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS, identifying Him with our blessed Lord Jesus Christ. Thirdly, the children of Israel are to be gathered from the north country whither the Lord has driven them, and they are to dwell in their own land. The teaching that the Jews are to be gathered to their own land in unbelief, that according to Zechariah the spirit of grace and of supplications will be granted to them, and they shall look upon their Messiah whom they have pierced, and mourn for Him as a man mourns for his only son, falls into line with the whole scheme of prophecy concerning Israel. It cannot be said that anything like this has ever taken place.
To try, as Mr. Mauro attempts, to prove that this was fulfilled when a matter of scarcely 50,000 Jews returned from Babylon in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah is simply the despair of exegesis. That was "a trickling stream" compared to what is happening at this present time.
That the Jews will go back in unbelief is clear from Scripture. It was the believing Jews that went back to Jerusalem in the days of Ezra, men whose spirit God had raised to go up to build the house of God at Jerusalem, as we read in Ezra 1:5. Scripture, however, clearly shows that in the future the Jews will return to their own land in unbelief: "I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. THEN [not before] will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean... a new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you.... I will put My Spirit within you.... Ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers.... I will also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the wastes shall be builded... the heathen that are left round about shall know that I the Lord built the ruined places, and plant that that was desolate: I the Lord have spoken it and I will do it" (Ezek. 36:24-36).
Surely it speaks of blindness as to what is happening under our very eyes, to question what is developing at the present time. The Jews ARE going back in unbelief, but in no "trickling stream." The wastes ARE being builded. Tel Aviv, for instance, is built on the desolate sand-dunes of a few brief years ago. "

S
sermonindex

One thing that I liked about Jim Fowler's study on Revelation is the following:

"These varying interpretations are not issues to fight over. There is value in each of them. From the preterist we can learn that Christianity is contextually rooted in the past, and so is the Revelation. From the historicist we can learn that Christianity is continually timely, and so is the Revelation. From the Futurist we can learn that Christianity is confidently hopeful for the future, and so is the Revelation. From the Triumphalist we can learn that Christianity is constantly recognizing Christ's victory, and the book of Revelation certainly reveals such.

Regardless of which interpretive method one employs, one has to admit that there is symbolism in Revelation that pictures the triumph of Christ; the letter was first written to historical churches in Asia in the past, back in the first century; it is a revelation that has had some message for Christians throughout history; and Revelation does speak of the ultimate victory of Christ at the end of time in the future.

In this study we will employ a Christocentic or Christological interpretation that would probably be a sub-category of the Triumphalist or Symbolic interpretation.

The reason I employ the Christocentric-Triumphalist interpretation of Revelation is because it seems to me to provide the best consistency with the interpretation of the rest of the Scriptures. The Bible is consistent in its message from beginning to end, and the Bible is the best commentary on the Bible. The consistency of this interpretation is seen from its:"

S
sermonindex

"The reason I employ the Christocentric-Triumphalist interpretation of Revelation is because it seems to me to provide the best consistency with the interpretation of the rest of the Scriptures. The Bible is consistent in its message from beginning to end, and the Bible is the best commentary on the Bible. The consistency of this interpretation is seen from its:"

When will Jim Fowler begin to interpret the Bible this way?

And why do you, Julius keep pretending that you are not a preterist when you continually betray yourself by your words and the authors you continually quote?

What is your agenda to continually bombard this place with this heretical nonsense?

S
sermonindex

Brothers I Marvel at the complexities of theology. And what men will employ to convince us of doctrines that are simply not taught in the New Testament.

Our Presbyterian brethren develop a complicated theology called The Covenant of Grace to justify the baptism of infants.

The cessionists develop a strange theology based on the canonization of scripture at the end of the first century. They do this to say that spiritual gifts are no longer in operation in this day in age. That is the same gifts of the prophetic gifts.

Others will come along to distort the scriptures to say that hell is not eternal.

And they're at those that are distorting the scriptures that seek to justify same-sex marriage.

And the praeterist comes along and develops a complicated theokigy to say that all prophetic events were fulfilled in 70 AD.

It's interesting in the doctrines above that one must appeal to a complicated theology to prove these doctrines true.

A simple reading of the New Testament will show that only believers in Christ are baptized.

A simple reading of the New Testament will show that the sign gifts are still in operation and have never ceased.

A simple reading of the New Testament was show that hell is eternal.

A simple reading of the New Testament will show that marriage is between a man and a woman.

A simple reading of the New Testament will show that Christ has yet to return.

William Tyndale who gave us the English Bible had only one goal in mind. He wanted to give a Bible where the ploughboy and the milkmaid could get truth directly from God and not from the priest of the Roman Catholic Church. Or any other ecclesiastical authority or theologian.

We have the Holy Spirit and the word of God today. I don't need to read a complicated theology book to see their preatetism is lacking. As a matter of fact praetetism is simply not taught in the scriptures. And that Christ is yet to return.

My thoughts.

Brother Blaine


S
sermonindex

Thank you for your thoughts, as always Bearmaster. No one is shouting you down or preventing you from having a conversation.

If we have the truth, what is there to fear? The Bereans were good listeners and also had a teachable heart, yet, searched the scriptures diligently to see if the things Paul told them were true. So many things that Paul said are being rejected, today.

Blessing to you, dear brother.

S
sermonindex

Bro don't feel like I'm being shouted down. Having a conversation. Have searched the scriptures. Don't find praeterism to be true. As well as the other doctrines I mentioned in my previous post.

Respectfully.

Bro Blaine

S
sermonindex

Well said Blaine.

There's no fear Julius. I have listened to the arguments & they just don't "smell right" (discern something not quite right). Even some of the pre-tribbers (the real dispensationalists) can make a decent argument if you follow the rabbit trail with tunnel vision glasses on. But if you know the whole/full counsel of scripture, you know it ain't the truth. Preterism is like that too. I have Sam Storms' book called "Kingdom Come" & in fairness plan on reading it after I finish reading Joel Richardson's book I'm reading now, "When a Jew Rules the World". But I know the scriptures & I don't think you should need a preterist teacher with charts & prethought specific usages of scriptures to explain God's intent on so great a subject. And really, as I have said before, what jumped off the page to me was in Acts where before Christ's ascension the disciples asked, "when will come to restore the kingdom to Israel" & he just said, "it is not for you to know the times or seasons, only my father." Jesus in many other places corrected wrong understanding in the disciples' statements. If Preterism is true & there is no coming restoration of Israel where all Israel will be saved, why didn't he correct their ignorance? Or as preterists like to say, "was God trying to just confuse them?" (When twisting scripture references to make their point).

Anyways, I have heard & read the arguments, & I don't fear them. I just don't buy them. Sorry.

S
sermonindex

Hey Blane, I don't find preterism to be true either.

P
proudpapa

The excerpt that Rev__Enue posted was written by Algernon J. Pollock 1864-1957. A Plymouth Brethren * minister. and a dispensationalist.
The entire critique can be found at : http://bibletruthpublishers.com/a-brief-examination-of-mr-philip-mauros-later-views-on-dispensational-truth/a-j-pollock/lbd15072

another excerpt from the same artical Algernon J. Pollock writes :

"Mr. Mauro weakens his whole position by the virulence of his attack on the well-known Scofield Bible. In his introduction to his volume, "The Gospel of the Kingdom," he writes: "Through an incident of recent occurrence I was made aware of the extent-far greater than I had imagined-to which the modern system of dispensationalism* has found acceptance among orthodox christians; and also of the extent-correspondingly great-to which the recently published 'Scofield' Bible (which is the main vehicle of the new system of doctrine referred to) has usurped the place of authority that belongs to God's Bible alone" (p. 5). Now this seems to us to be a really bitter and virulent attack. We are not able to subscribe to every note in the Scofield Bible, but we are bound to admit that Dr. Scofield has got together a large number of very helpful notes, explanatory of the text of Scripture, and remarkable in their combination of clarity, conciseness and general correctness.
(*Throughout this pamphlet we reproduce extracts from Mr. Mauro's works exactly as they are. Italics and capitals in every case are his.)
In this note Mr. Mauro charges Dr. Scofield with usurping the place of authority which belongs to God's Word alone. Can he substantiate this charge? Does not Dr. Scofield print in the Bible which bears his name, the authorized text from Genesis to Revelation without the alteration of a single word? Dr. Scofield's notes are distinct from the text. They are explanatory and helpful. They do not claim to be inspired.
His notes are on a par with a servant of the Lord who stands up, reads a portion of Scripture, and then seeks to expound it to his hearers to the best of his ability. The one does it by word of mouth; Dr. Scofield does it by writing. How unjust it would be to denounce every servant of the Lord who stands up to give an exegetical address, as usurping the place that belongs to God's Bible alone! The so-called Scofield Bible is GOD'S Bible, whatever Mr. Mauro may say. It is within his province to express his opinion as to the wisdom of the explanatory notes or otherwise, but he has clearly gone beyond the bounds of fair criticism in this case.
Mr. Mauro returns to the attack: "It is a matter of grief to me that a book should exist wherein the corrupt words of mortal man are printed on the same page with the holy Words of the living God; this mixture of the precious and the vile being made an article of sale, entitled a 'Bible,' and distinguished by a man's name" (The Gospel of the Kingdom, p. 6). To write off the notes in the Scofield Bible in this sweeping fashion as "corrupt" and "vile" is going far too far. One's moral sense is shocked by such utterly unfair treatment.
It is true that Mr. Mauro makes a frank acknowledgment of a very unchristian state of mind that marked him when he held the views he now attacks. He says: "It is mortifying to remember that I not only held and taught these novelties myself, but that I even enjoyed a complacent sense of superiority because thereof, and regarded with feelings of pity and contempt those who had not received the 'new light,' and were unacquainted with this up-to-date method of 'rightly dividing the word of truth.'... Yet I was among those who eagerly embraced it (upon human authority solely for there is none other), and who earnestly pressed it upon my fellow-Christians" (The Gospel of the Kingdom, p. 6.).
All honor to Mr. Mauro for this frank acknowledgment. It would have been out of good taste to have referred to it in this pamphlet, if it had not been that he is committing the same fault in the book we are reviewing. Proverbs tells us, "Whoso confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall have mercy." We may well ask in the light of the extracts we have just given, Has Mr. Mauro forsaken, as well as confessed, the wrong attitude he took towards those he differed from? It does not look like it. The virulence of his attack on the Scofield Bible, the recklessness of his accusations, are surprising in a lawyer, and above all in a Christian teacher. We wonder if he does not even now view with "pity" and "contempt" those who hold the views he once held and pressed, but which he has now renounced.
Here is a statement, referring to the Scofield Bible, that far exceeds the bounds of common fairness: "There is no doubt whatever that it is mainly to this cleverly executed work that dispensationalism owes its present vogue. For without that aid it doubtless would be clearly seen by all who give close attention to this doctrine, that it is a humanly contrived system that has been imposed upon the Bible, and not a scheme of doctrine derived from it" (The Gospel of the Kingdom, p. 21).
Mr. Mauro cannot complain of these extracts being reproduced, seeing he has written them himself, and wishes for their widest circulation. It is only just and right to take account of the way he treats the notes in the Scofield Bible and its Editor. Dr. Scofield's editorship refers solely to the notes and comments on the Bible that bears his name, and not to the Bible itself.
Back to top
Dispensation or Era
Mr. Mauro sets off by describing the dispensational teaching presented in the notes in the Scofield Bible as Modernism, ancient Rabbinism, and even akin to Russell-ism. And yet he once firmly believed it, and found support in the Word of God for it, but now has no terms too strong in which to denounce it.
What is meant by the dispensational teaching that is particularly engaging our attention? Briefly, it began with the preaching of John the Baptist, that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand, followed up by our Lord and His apostles proclaiming the same truth. That consequent on the rejection of our Lord by the Jews, the Kingdom of Heaven is in mystery; that is, it is not in display; that when the present Church period is closed by the rapture, the Jews, gathered to their own land in unbelief, will pass through unparalleled judgments, culminating in the Great Tribulation, as foretold by our
Lord, followed by His coming as the Messiah to reign over His ancient people and over the world as King of kings and Lord of lords, the Kingdom lasting for 1,000 years, commonly called the Millennium, the Kingdom in manifestation in all its splendor, no longer in mystery. Then "the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea" (Hab. 2:14).
This dispensational teaching was in vogue on both sides of the Atlantic long years before the Scofield Bible saw the light. It was taught by such spiritual giants' as J. N. Darby, W. Kelly, C. E. Stuart, C. H. Mackintosh, W. Trotter, F. W. Grant, Walter Scott, etc., and cannot be rightly described as "a humanly contrived system that has been imposed upon the Bible."

S
sermonindex

Amazing! proudpapa, believe it or not, my first Bible when I got saved overseas was the Scofield bible. From that time as a young man in my early 20's, I grew up in the Lord on the KJV and I memorized scripture without even thinking about it. I used to read all of Scofield's notes convinced that if they were in the Bible they were accurate. After awhile, devouring the Word and tuning my spiritual ears to the voice behind the Word, I realized that Scofield's notes were another voice and "another voice His sheep will not follow". At that time I knew nothing about nothing, just knew that Scofield's notes were not jiving with what I was reading in God's word. So, I got the Thompson Chain Reference and have had that one ever since. I felt no animosity towards Scofield, it was the beginning of my education where I was to learn that even author's of Bibles, Lexicons and study aids can be wrong. And no one, has all the truth. I go back to what Jim Fowler said about something can be learned from all the eschatological positions.

And this was a transition for me out of dispensationalism of Scofield, that took a long time because in my early days in the Lord, I was much too busy as an evangelist and did not get into serious study of Revelation until later. Like Philip Mauro, I have sympathy for others who line up with Scofield. How could I not? I like what you said about "light" in your piece about Mauro and Thomas Edison. Light does not force it's way in, it waits for an opening and then it cannot help but come in. I have found that to be true in my own life.

P
proudpapa

"It will be remembered that Mr. Mauro was converted in the church of which A. B. Simpson was then pastor. Now Dr. Simpson, who had been healed of an incurable heart condition himself, not only proclaimed divine healing but also prayed for the sick with outstanding results. Unquestionably, Mr. Mauro had became acquainted with the teaching and ministry of divine healing through this mighty man of God, and it is not surprising that Philip Mauro’s second book, Salvation and the Mortal Body, dealt with this theme and was published by the Alliance Press and copyrighted, 1905, by A. B. Simpson."

"Upon Mr. Mauro’s return to the United States in the fall of 1904, he completed the first of some forty or so books he was to write, From Reason to Revelation. This was in part autobiographical, but only in a small part, for in all his writings Mr. Mauro was very reticent about speaking of himself. This treatise was an attempt to speak to his many reasoning associates and to show them that man by wisdom knows not God but only by the revelation of God’s Spirit. A. B. Simpson introduced this new author to the Christian public by writing the preface to this small volume."

"Published in the same year (1905) as Salvation and the Mortal body was Philip Mauro’s third book, The World and Its God, also brought out under the auspices of A. B. Simpson. "The purpose of this volume,” said the author in his preface, "is to make an application of the philosophic or rationalistic test to the Bible account of Creation, and particularly to that portion of the account which deals with the Origin of Evil in human nature.”


S
sermonindex

Hey brother Julias, here is your two most recent replies to two different threads.

"You prepare for tomorrow by overcoming today and not being anxious or fearful about tomorrow."

And then you say to bro Blaine

"If we have the truth, what is there to fear?"

Blaine's reply had nothing to do with fear as in the other thread that had nothing to do with fear, I am just wondering why you keep throwing the fear thing around when commenting and responding to people you disagree with? I am sure you understand that just because folks disagree with you or have different conclusions to you own, this does not make them " fearful," of your opinion. I just find it a little strange since the fear thing has no context to the subject at hand...............bro Frank

S
sermonindex

Hey brother Julias........ I am just wondering why you keep throwing the fear thing around when commenting and responding to people you disagree with?

because he has been SENT here!.....Faith is of God, fear is of ..........?

P
proudpapa

Philip Mauro

Those whom are familiar with Hans R. Waldvogel will recognize the bread of life Mag. and the Ridgewood Pentecostal Church, Brooklyn, NY as being the church of which Waldvogel pastored.

Bread of Life magazine
June 1959, volume 8, number 6
Published by Ridgewood Pentecostal Church, Brooklyn, NY
Posted with the kind permission of Tessie Knaupp and the Ridgewood Pentecostal Church.
Abridged and edited by Timothy Trower

Champion of the Kingdom

The Story of Philip Mauro

How an Internationally Famous Patent Lawyer Was Converted to Christ and Then Devoted His Life to "Persuading the Things Concerning The Kingdom of God”

By Gordon P. Gardiner

Part VI

When Philip Mauro left New York on the S.S. Carpathia, April 11, 1912, bound for Genoa, Italy, he had been converted to Christ for almost nine years. Mr. Mauro was still carrying on a limited legal practice, but his main occupation was ministering the Word of God from pulpit and by means of the printed page. It was through a disarrangement of their personal plans that he and his daughter Margaret, now returning to their home in Rapullo, Italy, had been forced to take passage on the Carpathia and thus, by the providence of God, were on the ship which rescued the survivors of the ill-fated Titanic.

"The Titanic has gone down with every one on board!” This was the first word to read the ears of the crew of the Carpathia when it reached the position of that now sunken vessel and had dropped anchor just at dawn, about four a.m. of Monday, April 15, 1912. The world’s largest ship which had been pronounced as unsinkable had gone down about an hour and forty minutes before the rescue ship arrived.

Philip Mauro, always an early riser, very soon learned why the Carpathia was at a standstill. Immediately he went to Margaret’s cabin and awakened her. With little or no explanation he told her to dress and come to the deck immediately. Hurriedly he then proceeded to the scene of action.

"The scene that greeted our eyes when we went on deck . . . yesterday (Monday) morning is indescribable,” wrote Mr. Mauro to his daughter, Isabel. "We were lying a few thousand yards from a perfect continent of ice, which stretched as far as the eye could reach, with here and there huge ice peaks sticking up into the air. And all around us in the sea were detached icebergs glistening in the sun. It was a perfect, polar scene, and although it was only yesterday, and although we remained for hours skirting along the icefield looking for boats and bodies, it seems already like a dream””so unreal and strange does it appear. Surely the hand of God is most manifestly appearing in the affairs of men.”

This "vast continent of ice” was, according to subsequent measurements, from seventy to ninety miles long. Of the Titanic’s passengers and crew of upwards of 2,300, there were only "about 745 persons in all, mostly women,” who survived the tragedy and were taken aboard the Carpathia. "After remaining on the spot until the prospect of further rescues was extinguished, the Carpathia headed for New York.”

(This rightabout-face of the Carpathia had special interest for Margaret. For personal reasons she had not desired to leave New York when she did. There had seemingly been no other course to pursue, however, but still she was unreconciled. Therefore, when she had gone to bed the previous night, her sleeping thought had been: God is so wonderful that He could turn this ship around and head it back to New York. Now that sleeping thought was being actually fulfilled!)

"You can imagine the depression and discomfort pervading this boat, with such a cargo of concentrated abjectness and misery added to the rather full passenger list that we had at the start,” Mauro continued in his letter to Isabel. "There are more Titanic passengers than Carpathians, and, of course, there are no accommodations for them in the ordinary sense.

"I gave up my room which has four bunks and spent the night in a steamer chair. Do not expect to take any clothes off till we reach New York. The first- and second-class dining rooms and the writing room were filled with women lying on the floors, tables, and sofas. The smoking rooms were allotted to the men. I tried one but could not stand it. Possibly by tonight things will be better arranged.

"Margaret has given away most of her things (underwear, etc.). There has been [no great demand] for masculine apparel””but I quickly parted with some stockings, pajamas, and handkerchiefs, besides the nice, felt slippers my dear Charlie gave me. The dozen toothbrushes I had were most acceptable. Of course the people had absolutely nothing but what was on their persons””not even hand togs. They were told up to the last few moments that there was no danger of the ship’s going down.”

The next day Mr. Mauro continued his narrative letter of the events of those momentous days:

"Wednesday. The opportunities are opening out. A splendid one was offered this morning before breakfast. A young man, Albert A. Dick, was saved with his wife (married less than a year ago). The Lord put him in my way. He has made money (three quarters of a million, he told me) and is about quitting business, meaning to devote the rest of his life to ‘doing good.’ Said he was not a Christian, but had been reading the Bible trying to find out if there were a God. Was quite ready to listen, and I gave him the truth for some hours. He was in a state similar to that of the Ethiopian treasurer. I am sure the Lord sent him to me and that He gave me the word for him. He lives way off in Calgary, Alberta. Pray that the Lord may bring him clearly into the light and supply the ministry he needs. Also that his wife may also be saved. She seems disinclined to hear or to allow him to hear. When she appeared, he said ‘My dear, this gentleman is telling me how he came to be a Christian, and I mean to be one too.’

"Margaret has been very busy, ministering in the second cabin and steerage. And all that she has been doing is being discussed, and so is turning into a testimony. The whole shipload (with few exceptions) will have received the testimony of a living Christ.

"Among the rescued passengers is a child of God, a young man named Collett, author of Scripture Truth. Has considerable light.

"Thursday. We are expecting to reach New York this evening. The opportunities that have opened for ministry have been simply wonderful. Most of them care to Margaret. Such a day as she had yesterday! Hope she may be able to write you some of the marvelous doings of the Lord. Now I want you to send a copy of the World and Its God to A. L. Solomon, 345 Broadway, New York. . . . He is a Jew, but his heart is quite tender just now. It might be good to send him The Shepherd of Israel. It’s only 7 a.m. now; but I have already spend more than an hour with another Jew””a wealthy London merchant.

"Thursday night. Another busy day. We are quite fatigued but rejoicing that the Lord is working in His own irresistible way. We are about landing and are told we shall leave again early tomorrow.

"Charlie’s letter was much appreciated. Dearest love to my precious ones and comforting greetings to all the saints. Father”

The Carpathia "docked about nine o’clock . . . Thursday evening. A dense crowd, filling the streets leading to the dock, and estimated at 25,000 persons, awaited the arrival of the vessel in the hope of merely catching a glimpse of some of the survivors.”

Unknown to Mr. Mauro and Margaret, among that vast multitude were Isabel and Charles French, who had come from Boston to meet their own loved ones. As they waited on the wharf, they witnessed the impressive sight of two [sic] little lifeboats (all that remained of the mighty Titanic, whose very name was "a savor of arrogance and presumption, being rowed and moored in a separate place””"). It was all a tremendous object lesson of "what becomes of the great and strong things of man when God puts his finder on them!” Then as survivors and mourning relatives and friends were reunited they witnessed the heart-breading by elegant display of mourning by elaborately crepe-dressed women. They also saw and heard J. Bruce Ismay, the president of the White Star Line, booed and hissed as he came off the ship because he had allowed himself to be rescued instead of going down with the Titanic.

Once the Mauros and Frenches got together, they unitedly praised God that in His providence He had so ordered the steps of Mr. Mauro and Margaret, "through a disarrangement of their own plans”””even against their personal wishes, that they were on the Carpathia and thereby had been given such an unparalleled opportunity "for testimony to the Name which is above every name,” for thereby many of the wealthy and great of this world, who otherwise might not have had a chance to hear the Gospel, had Christ preached unto them. "The unparalleled experiences of the last four days,” wrote Margaret as the boat was nearing New York, "have left me without words to write.””One fact stands forth with luminous clearness: Christ has been glorified.”

As soon as the Carpathia could be gotten in readiness, it once again set forth from New York for Genoa, Mr. Mauro and Margaret aboard. Mr. Mauro finished his work on his book, God’s Pilgrims. . . . Later Mr. Mauro did write two tracts dealing with this world-shaking event: The Life-Boat and the Death-Boat and The Titanic Catastrophe and Its Lessons. . .

http://www.titanichistoricalsociety.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=144&t=332

P
proudpapa

Mr. Mauro’s ministry in these Rapallo years was not confined to the printed page nor to the public platform on his various trips to the United States and England. As always was their custom, so in Rapallo the Mauros opened their home for meetings which Mr. Mauro conducted. The fact that he did not know the Italian language he considered no excuse or deterrent from his bringing the Light to those around them who were sitting in darkness. To accomplish this, he employed an interpreter.
One Lord’s Day Mr. Mauro decided, in an attempt to interest and to please his hearers, that he would memorize a few words of this unknown language and venture to repeat them at the beginning of his talk. Then he planned to continue his address, as usual, by means of the interpreter. Accordingly he quoted his memorized sentence! Then, to his surprise, another word in Italian came, and another, and another, until he had delivered his whole talk in Italian. He did not use his interpreter. What is more ”“ he did not use him again. So supernatural was this that Mr. Mauro always regarded it as similar to what happened on the Day of Pentecost when the believers spoke in tongues and "every man heard them speak in his own language . . . the wonderful works of God.”

P
passerby

samuel hinds wilkinson son of the founder of mildmay mission to the jews in the late 1800s john wilkinson wrote the book "israel promises and their fulfillment to counter "the hope of israel" written by philip mauro. john wilkinson wrote "israel my glory" to expose the error of preterism and replacement theology.

these are good books to read which will really strengthen our hope in the faithfulness of the holy one of israel.

S
sermonindex

excellent book
and an even better book that annihilates the satanic preterism and replacement scripture mangling theology is called, THE BIBLE.

S
sermonindex

Thanks passerby. I think it is always good to read and consider other views.


PP, those are some really interesting testimonies regarding Philip Mauro. I have never read a biography on him so did not know about these things.

S
sermonindex

you got it right rev, satan always apposes the work of the LORD GOD, even in this place. Cunning and crafty as they are
they fool men but not the Spirit of the LORD

P
proudpapa

RE: ///Thanks passerby. I think it is always good to read and consider other views. ///

I agree, That was a very mature and noncontetious way of entering into this discussion.

At this time of the discussion though, we are more looking at the life, associates and testimoney of Philip Mauro.

First we want to establish his character.

RE: ///PP, those are some really interesting testimonies regarding Philip Mauro. I have never read a biography on him so did not know about these things.///

Absolutely fascinating.

There has been a strong force opposing this thread, miscontrued representations and obnoxious interruptions that are clearly not from the Lord.

edit: changed wording from "evident in" to "opposing "

S
sermonindex

Sigh...just stay in the "foxhole" and let the missles go by, PP. Be encouraged, your thread is very interesting. I am enjoying it. He really seemed like a true servant of the Lord.

I have always been interested in other views PP. I think that is why I have grown as a Christian and I have been corrected many times and had to adjust my thinking. So, I know the fruit of having a teachable spirit is a good thing.

S
sermonindex

So true notdarkyet
This agenda has to be stopped. When these people post this non biblical anti-God stuff all it does is promote strife and discord in these forums. And yet they never stop, never let up but try to keep stirring the pot and pushing their deviation
of the clear word of the Lord regarding Israel and the second coming of Jesus.
There are no alternate views to be considered for the vast majority of Christians.
It is not negotiable to us who believe the Word of God. They should not allowed to continually create confusion and havoc here by constantly posting the opinion of those who clearly deviate cleverly from Gods word.

P
proudpapa

"How a man conducts himself in controversy and persecution reveals his true measure. If a man preaches but does not practice the Sermon on the Mount, that man’s religion is vain. Judged by such a standard, Mr. Mauro more than passes the test. If he sometimes appears to speak sharply, his own words, written in his most controversial work, should be remembered: "Let it be understood at the outset that my controversy is solely with the doctrine itself; and not at all with those who hold and teach it, or any of them. Indeed I was myself one of their number for so long a time that I can but feel a tender consideration and profound sympathy, likewise, for all such.”
Personal insults and attacks he utterly disregarded. As for bringing any man’s name into any discussion, it was never for any personal reason but solely because of some doctrine with which his name was inextricably united. That he bore no personal animosity to his bitterest enemies at whose hands he suffered cruelly is abundantly testified by those who visited him repeatedly in his home, sometimes for several days or weeks at a time. Never was there heard from his lips an unkind or critical word of his foes. When he felt it necessary to disagree with someone, he spoke the truth as he saw it but in the love of Christ."

S
sermonindex

So smooth, so lawyer like . Just like a friendly snake when injecting the venom.
The Jehovah Witness people are also so polite, so nice and proper, just like these apostates, pleasant on the outward appearance when presenting their doctrines of demons.

P
proudpapa

Gordon P. Gardiner wrote Philip Mauro's bio

Gordon P Gardiner was the editor for the Ridgewood Pentecostal Church, "Bread of Life Magazine" of which Hans Waldovagal (a very respected preacher of SI) was pastor.
http://breadoflifemagazine.com/

Gordon P Gardiner writes :

"It was my privilege, as a boy of thirteen, to hear Philip Mauro for the first time at a Bible conference in Boston. (My mother felt that I should hear a man of his experience and reputation.) His message left a deep impression upon me, but more impressive was the man himself. As an autograph-seeker, I approached him after the service. I had done the same with other famous Fundamentalist speakers of the day and had been received with reactions from indifference to impatience. In marked contrast to all of them, Philip Mauro received me as a gracious gentleman. Sitting down, he talked to me leisurely and acted as though I were conferring an honor upon him in making my request.
About seven years later, I found his book, God’s Pilgrims, which I read to great profit. And when I told one of my Bible teachers, Martha Wing Robinson, about it, she expressed delight that I had "found” Philip Mauro and urged me to study his books on the Kingdom, saying, "If you read his books on the Kingdom, they will ground you.”
This is precisely what these books did for me. More than that, they led to a correspondence with their author which ripened into a close friendship resulting in repeated invitations to spend extended visits in his home. During these times of blessed fellowship I gathered much autobiographical information which has been incorporated in this sketch...."

S
sermonindex

Brother,

we have removed over 5 website links to the same PDF booklet. We have done this because we do not want to condone and allow repeated postings of materials on the forums. It is fine to start a discussion about a brother who is not on SermonIndex or his messages shared, but to do so in a way to overly promote and try and force this speaker on the community is not a right motive.

My suggestion is for brethren to not try and convince strongly people to their opinions or favourite speaker. We must ultimately focus on Jesus Christ, He is the centre and unity for all of us.

In an statement of faith for millions in the underground house churches in China they simply have this to say about the end times:

7. The Last Days

We believe Christ will return, but no one except the Father knows the date of His return. On the day when Christ returns, He will come in glory and power on the clouds with the angels. On that day, the angels will blow the trumpet, and those who were dead in Christ will rise first. After that, all born again Christians who are still alive will also be transformed. Their bodies will all be glorified, and they will all be caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

The saints will then reign together with Christ for a thousand years, during which Satan will be cast into the Abyss. When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released temporarily and will go out to deceive the nations until he is finally thrown into the lake of burning sulfur. After that, Christ will sit on the great white throne to judge man from each nation, tribe and people. Everyone will rise from the dead and be judged before the throne. If anyone’s name is not found written in the book of life, he’ll be thrown into the lake of fire. The former heaven and earth will be consumed by fire. Death and Hades will also be thrown into the fire.

Those whose names are found written in the book of life will enter into the new heaven and the new earth, living there with God forever. We believe that while waiting for the coming of the Lord, believers should serve the Lord with great diligence, preach the Word of life, and bear abundant fruits in their words, actions, faith, love and holiness. We also believe that those who do this shall receive all kinds of rewards.

As for whether the rapture happens before, during or after the great tribulation, we recognize that each denomination has its own conviction, and therefore there is no absolute conclusion in regard to this. The duty of each Christian is to be alert and prepare himself for the coming of the Lord.

My point is that they have a simple belief and are not demanding others fit into their exact thinking. May we have grace for each other and rather encourage each other to know Jesus more and be found pleasing to Him when He soon comes.

As James 5 says, he is "at the door".

James 5:8

P
proudpapa

RE: brother Greg wrote : ///we have removed over 5 website links to the same PDF booklet. We have done this because we do not want to condone and allow repeated postings of materials on the forums.///

I had wondered if that was an issue ? , but was not aware of a specific rule that stated that it was not allowed.

edit: I removed this portion, layed in my bed felt very uneasey about it. Bro Greg can in the most gentle way possable rebuke and it cuts sharp.


RE: brother Greg wrote : ///My point is that they have a simple belief and are not demanding others fit into their exact thinking.///

I can certainly agree with this,
At this point when it comes to eschatology I can only think of two people whom teach on the subject that seem to me, not to be superfical or just repeating ,everyone else,
and that is Philip Mauro, and just recently I have been listning to a little of Art Katz.

Brother Greg, thank you for not locking the thread immediately, as to give me a chance to explain where I am coming from.
I will try to apply your exhortation in my future post.


edit : changed "the future" "my future post"

E
Elibeth

How can I say this to Proudpapa,and not offend you Greg,...I do not want to offend.

But I am so greatful for the oppertunity to read this man,Mr. Philip Mauro,s bio.
I had never heard of him,..and appreciate a good testimony,...want to read more.

I wanted to say,thank you,..to both of you.


___________________
elizabeth

S
sermonindex

I missed copying those links, proud papa. Can you give me a hint how too find them? Maybe someone who has them can email me. I find Philip to be very Christ centered.

S
sermonindex

I missed copying those links, proud papa. Can you give me a hint how too find them? Maybe someone who has them can email me. I find Philip to be very Christ centered.

the link is on the first page of this thread (the 3rd post) for the full bio of Philip Mauro.

Blessings.

S
sermonindex

Thanks so much, Greg.

Blessings to you, too.

S
savannah


Read online:

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Mauro%2c%20Philip%2c%201859%2d1952

S
sermonindex

That is good, too. I actually just bought the 4 dollar DVD (download) of 80 booklets from philipmauro.com.

I think I'm good for awhile.

Thanks Greg, and Savannah.

S
sermonindex

Yes let us keep this mans doctrine at the top of the forum by continuing to promote him and links to his interpretations even after Greg specifically said not to.
Sly and crafty way to do it eh?

S
sermonindex

Julius and PP

Many thanks for the recommendation. I am enjoying Philip Mauro's writings very much and had never heard of him before now.

S
sermonindex

:-)

Brenda, it will be good to have someone else who loves Jesus and his word to review Phil's works. I trust you will be edified (me too, I have only read one so far and it was welcome light).

S
sermonindex

Thanks J. An educated man who loved Jesus and could write beautifully. Aaaaaah!

I have just started Life in the Word which is supposed to be his best.

S
sermonindex

Ok. I'll read it too!

S
sermonindex

Thus Mr. Mauro's appeal to Jeremiah to sustain his contention that our Lord Jesus Christ is now reining over the earth as a spiritual king, executing judgment and justice in the earth; that He is reigning as a Melchisedec king and priest; above all, that He is reigning over a spiritual Israel, made up of Jews and Gentiles, falls to the ground. One is amazed that in the light of the plain world of the prophet any human mind could have imagined what Mr. Mauro so seriously has imagined about them.
It seems fitting here that I should recall Mr. Mauroís own summary of the scheme of teaching with which he is seeking to invade the Christian Church. On page 89 of his book, he says: ìI have sought to show in the preceding pages that the kingdom of God which was the subject of Christís preaching and teaching is just what all Christians have understood it to be until recent times, that is, a purely spiritual realm.
He takes this concept, like a huge iron roller, and passes it remorselessly over every promise of God, which contradicts his theory.
Thus, promise after promise, which stands up in its beauty and directness and testifies in unqualified clearness to the progress of Godís eternal purpose to make this a perfect, sinless world, are so emptied of their literal content, that they lie at last like trampled grass or withered flowers upon the sacred page.

The promises of a kingdom of righteousness and peace, in which human life is worth while, where hope never fails with a broken wing, these all fall in difference to his scheme. The hope of a glowing earth, where, in varied degree, even as one star differs from another in glory, all men, the members of a new, immortal race, (now being created through the Gospel and the Spirit) shall be divine; and where all shall be sons of God and where God shall be all in all, this hope is gone. These radiant promises which are to find their culmination in Him who is not only the fullness of the Godhead bodily, but eternally, the covenant Son of David, and king of a kingdom whose sphere is an abiding and eternal earthóthese promises under the incessant roll of Mr. Mauroís spiritualizing method are now emptied of their content and true meaning.

This concept leads him to break over all bounds and make a statement to which I have already referred and upon which I have commented, a statement, which, even because of its calm and incidental manner, is simply appalling. You will recall that on page 152, he wrote: ìWhen the sword of judgment was sheathed in the bosom of the Son of David (as though that death of our Lord were the culmination of the prophet Nathaniel's prophetic warning against the house of David); by that stroke the house of David was cut off, and cut off forever as an earthly thing.

t seems impossible that it could be put into English; but I refer to it again that I may emphasize to the reader all that Mr. Mauro says in making that terrible statement. This is what he said:
He said the death of Christ put an end to the Jewish kingdom, put an end to the Jewish nation, as a nation, in the sight and favor of God. He contradicted the prophecy that Christ should sit upon the throne of David forever; that He should so actually, personally, visibly, bodily, dwell in Jerusalem and that the city should henceforth be known by a new name, Jehovah Shamme The Lord is there.

Then, as usual, Mr. Mauro misapplies Scripture and misapplies it in the interests of his theory. He refers to the fact that, although the house of David was cut off by the nail and spear of the Cross, that tragedy enabled Him to open a fountain for sin and uncleanness wherein by Godís ìamazing grace, sinners of all nations may be cleansed from their sins.î

But, Scripture tells us that this fountain is yet to be opened. That is to say, there is a time coming when the blood of the Cross is to be made effective to a special class, and that class is the house of David. It is to be made effective to them when the Lord comes the second time. As it is written: ìIn that day (when He shall come and ìthey shallî as He says, ëlook upon me whom they have piercedí), there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.î
This is a flat contradiction of Mr. Mauroís application of that fountain and a specific denial that ìthe house of David was cut off, and cut off forever as an earthly thing.î
When the Lord comes again that fountain will be opened for the Jews as a nation, the grace of the Cross will be applied to them as natural Jews just as the grace of God is applied through faith to the natural man today.
In that great day of His Coming to Zion; as it is written, ìto turn away ungodliness from Jacob,î He will personally tell them how, on a Roman Cross outside the gates of Jerusalem, He died for them as a nation, as one of their number had foretold."

P
passerby

@ rev_enue,

I've read that thing about joel osteen, but this one is more disheartening.

S
sermonindex

Passerby

this was written in 1928. Sound exegesis by a baptist pastor I.M. HALDEMAN, D.D.
It absolutely shreds the nonsensical views of those such as Mr Mauro that hold these spurious and private interpretations of God's Word and work.

Heres the link
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1928_haldeman_kingdom.pdf

P
proudpapa

From how to study the Bible : The second Coming and other Expositions by Isaac Massey Haldeman p.31-32

I.M. HALDEMAN writes : "...The similarity is impressed upon the average mind by the word Gospel. But however the word Gospel may make for similarity it is a mistake to imagine that the word covers one subject. On the contrary the several designations of the Gospel are of themselves the indications of marked distinctions which the Spirit impresses on us to observe.
The Gospel of the Kingdom is the good news of the kingdom to be set up in Israel with Jersalem as the Capital, when the Lord Jesus shall come the second time as Messiah, as Son of David. It is therefore in the nature of the case a Gospel that cannot be preached untill after this particular age or dispensation is passed, not till after the rapture or translation of the Church."

That seems to be the essence of the difference,
Mauro seemed to believe that the 'Gospel of the Kingdom' was the Gospel not a seprate Gospel for a different dispensation.

http://www.gospeltruth.net/gospel_of_the_kingdom/gotk_ch16.htm

From Rev__Enue link : Isaac Massey Haldeman Writes :
"I have no hesitation in committing myself to the unreserved statement that if every
member of every genuine Christian Church possessed a Scofield Bible, read the footnotes,
studied and searched prayerfully the Scripture to which Dr. Scofield directs them,
the Christians in that church would be a unit in the faith once for all delivered, with joy in
the Bible as the sure Word of God, and constituting a church with the “hearing ear;” a
church in which the preacher would find himself in an atmosphere, an environment, that
would compel him to bring forth all he knew of the divine theme, and to give the best of
which his mind was capable in transmitting the Word of Life." - I.M. HALDEMAN, D.D.

S
sermonindex

I probably would read neither Philip Mauro's book nor Haldeman's. It is good to get a bit of feedback on both.

If we would really understand that we are "in the days of Noah " again then we probably wouldn't spend so much time on non essential topics.

Rev; in another thread you wrote:
"However we have to realize some people get their information second hand, not by the Holy Spirit's illumination of the Word of God. That's why they are so confused about almost everything because the source material they use is corrupt and is corrupting them in turn."
But here you are quoting Haldemann, in another thread you are quoting Henry, Pulpit, Gil's - all second hand information.

Quote: "They can turn to God however in humility and HE will teach them HIS way." - True !!

May we all seek the Lord more in these dark days that we are living in !

He is the Way the Truth and the Life !

S
sermonindex

This book available free online, is one of the best reads I have had for a long time and said to be his most popular and best writings. I only wish that I had known about it before, so that I could have used it in my evangelism.

It explains why the Bible is so special in such beautiful prose. I have not read a writer where I appreciated his litery skills as much since CS Lewis.

There is not much here to divide readers. I am not in agreement with him over sanctification, but it does not stop me from appreciating and learning from his vast knowledge, excellent education, and razor sharp mind. I highly recommend it. Thanks for the leads.

T
TMK

Quote: "When the Lord comes again that fountain will be opened for the Jews as a nation, the grace of the Cross will be applied to them as natural Jews just as the grace of God is applied through faith to the natural man today"

Rev- does this happen "automatically" for all Jewish people? What if someone is only 10% Jewish? 1%?

Do they have to repent and believe? Or are they "saved" merely on the basis of their Jewishness?

It has always been my understand that when Jesus returns he is coming in Judgment; there will be no second chances. But I would like to hear where you are coming from?

S
sermonindex

Todd

Thank you for your question. Many Jewish people will repent and be saved
as they see him and believe. The light will be turned on so to speak and the veil will be removed. They will look on him who was pierced for them and understand,
As stated before seeing Jesus in the flesh does not necessarily bring repentance. However God says they will see and understand and believe.

S
sermonindex

Aren't we saved by faith? Faith is not needed if you see someone. Many saw him physically when He was on earth 2000 years ago and did not believe. After Jesus resurrected, many turned to Him by faith through the preaching of the Gospel. In fact thousands of Jews were saved and made up the majority of the Church for the first 10 years until God started to bring in the Gentiles through the revelations given to Peter (sheet from heaven) and Paul, apostle to the Gentiles.

When you say, "many Jewish people will repent and be saved", that was speaking of what took place in the book of Acts. You think they will look "upon him who is pierced", is speaking physically. We look upon Him in faith and see Him with our spiritual eyes. When He comes again, it is all over.

This is what the Bible says will happen when Jesus comes again:
Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

We are saved by grace through faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen.

What you consistently fail to tell the Jews and the Christians on SI, is that you believe 2/3 of Jews will be destroyed when Jesus comes back. What Jewish person is going to embrace that theology after what the nation of Israel went through in 70AD and the past 2000 years? If anything is anti-Jewish, telling the Jews that they will have no choice but to repent when Jesus comes and by the way, 2/3 of you will be destroyed, then I don't know what is.

This is a great quote from Philip Mauro, almost 100 years ago, regarding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, its significance in relation to Bible prophecy, and how popular beliefs on Bible prophecy speak to the people of Israel today:

"It is greatly to be regretted that those who, in our day, give themselves to the study and exposition of prophecy, seem not to be aware of the immense significance of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which was accompanied by the extinction of Jewish national existence, and the dispersion of the Jewish people among all the nations. The failure to recognize the significance of that event, and the vast amount of prophecy which it fulfilled, has been the cause of great confusion, for the necessary consequence of missing the past fulfillment of predicted events is to leave on our hands a mass of prophecies for which we must needs contrive fulfillments in the future. The harmful results are two fold; for first, we are thus deprived of the evidential value, and the support to the faith, of those remarkable fulfillments of prophecy which are so clearly presented to us in authentic contemporary histories; and second, our vision of things to come is greatly obscured and confused by the transference to the future of predicted events which, in fact, have already happened, and whereof complete records have been preserved for our information.”

"Yet, in the face of all this, we have today a widely held scheme of prophetic interpretation, which has for its very cornerstone the idea that, when God’s time to remember His promised mercies to Israel shall at last have come, He will gather them into their ancient land again,only to pour upon them calamities and distresses far exceeding even the horrors which attended the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This is, we are convinced, an error of such magnitude as to derange the whole program of unfulfilled prophecy.”

”“Philip Mauro, "Seventy Weeks and the Great Tribulation,” 1921

How must the people of Israel today feel about Christian theology that teaches 2/3 of all Jews in Israel will be destroyed? How must they feel that Christian theology has transferred the cataclysmic events of of 70AD to yet another future era? That God will gather Israel, yet again into their land only to destroy them. This is what has happened because Christians have failed to recognize the prophecies have already come true about Israel, so they create yet another dispensation that will come about after the Church age. So, the Church, is just a parentheses until the next age on earth? There is going to be yet another chance for a select people? How about Gentiles, will there be another chance for them? Why didn't Jesus just come back and stay the first time?

The Lord is coming again, and when He does, it will be too late for everyone.

Now, is the day of salvation!

S
sermonindex

Julius,
Would you be willing/open to reading something in the "opposing view" that states facts/quotes/viewpoints other than your own (Phillip Mauro's & others really)? I know you'll say, "I was trapped in dispensational thinking for years......", but I will almost GUARANTEE you there are thinks you have not read, are not aware of, etc. I know you will say (because you have), "I don't need to read anything, we have the Word", but I would contend the same thing (only through a different lens/paradigm), but you have quoted MUCH from Mauro (& others) & I have read their stuff, & bought Sam Storms' book, "Kingdom Come, The Amillineaul Alternative" because I am not scared to hear out the full opposing argument. Anyways, if you're not scared to look fully into the opposing side, look at the quotes & fruit of Replacement Theology/Supercessionism (not opinions, but direct quotes & facts), I would like to kindly ask you to at least read 1 book. It's not some huge extensive library volume & it's an easy read. I humbly ask you to be willing to at least look at something I pretty much know 95%+ of the people in your view are TOTALLY unfamiliar with. It's called, "When A Jew Rules The World" from Joel Richardson. I'm not saying it will totally convert your eschatology or you'll agree with everything, but will present you with facts you probably undoubtedly are not aware of.

S
sermonindex

Of course I will, Jeff! How do you think I learn anything, by staying closed and spewing hatred to others and trying to ban free and open thought and exchange of ideas regarding God's Word?

I'm ready! Send me the links and let's hold everything up to the Scriptures.

P
proudpapa

RE: ///"When A Jew Rules The World" from Joel Richardson.///

Last year alot of people where really worked up by predictions that Johnathan Cahn, Mark Biltz, etc. where making. one of the real indicators to me that these men where off, was whom they bumped shoulders with and whom promoted there countless books and videoes men like Jim Bakker etc.
Joel Richardson is running in the same circle.

S
sermonindex

"Thank you for your question. Many Jewish people will repent and be saved as they see him and believe. The light will be turned on so to speak and the veil will be removed. They will look on him who was pierced for them and understand,
As stated before seeing Jesus in the flesh does not necessarily bring repentance. However God says they will see and understand and believe."

Rev don't you realize that we are not meant to take anything literally in the Bible that referees to the seed of
Abraham and his physical descendants? What are you suggesting?
That God means what he says and says what he means?
Don't be ridiculous.

S
sermonindex

ProudPapa,
Be careful what you mock/scoff at, lest you find yourself coming against and accusing God's people in ignorance. And guilt by association? Really? And many things were attributed to/assumed of what these things were shared that these men never even said (others took what they did say, added their own assumptions, & then SLEW them for what wasn't said). I'm not going to get into what all happened last year during this timeperiod in God's clear & plain sight & what it set in motion that is still happening now (in world economies, in the Middle East wars, in currency wars, etc.). You wouldn't believe it though it were told to you, would add to it, & scoff at it anyways. God bless,
Jeff

Julius,
The book is called "When a Jew Rules the World". You can find it if you're looking. If your looking to win an argument or prove yourself right, youll likely find what you're looking for (I can find "insufficient answers" in both stances - no Amil/Supeecessionist can fully explain what is said in Romans 11 without twisting obvious meaning/intention or why Jesus didn't correct them in Acts 11:6-7 if he wasn't trying to be confusing/disingenuous? I have asked multiple times & you have never answered?). Anyways, just read with an open heart & see if you aren't surprised. I'm not trying to trap you or prove myself right. I just bet there are things you either aren't aware of or have closed willfully blind eyes to. A tree is known by its fruit is in context about false teachers/teaching.
God Bless,
Jeff

S
sermonindex

Anyone who says the first of Romans 11, Romans 11:11-24, Romans 11:25-29, etc. are NOT LITERAL, is seeing everything through their lenses of a predetermined supposition argument to stay "right" in their own eyes. This is CLEARLY talking about ISRAEL & not some Atherial, spiritual Israel as in Romans 9 & elsewhere (& Paul is CRYSTAL CLEAR about this in the text), but actual, physical, national Israel. They will be humbled again & will turn to the Messiah (there's actually already a revival taking place in Israel in just the last couple/few of decades or so of MANY Jews coming to Christ! Praise God!

P
proudpapa

RE: ///Be careful what you mock/scoff at, lest you find yourself coming against and accusing God's people in ignorance.///

good advise Jeff

S
sermonindex

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/4/3 20:20:09

Anyone who says the first of Romans 11, Romans 11:11-24, Romans 11:25-29, etc. are NOT LITERAL,

You mean "Natural" Israel as opposed to Spiritual Israel? Can we use Bible talk? Paul distinguishes between Natural and Spiritual Israel not Literal and Spiritual Israel.

1. You do agree that Paul teaches in Galatians of a natural Israel, Jerusalem and Zion and a spiritual counterpart of each one, too. Right?

Yes or No?

And who is talking about Romans 11? But since you are talking about it, yes it is referring to Natural Israel and the Deliverer in Roman 11:26 has come out of Zion (Jesus, when He resurrected). And He took away their sins (11:27) and turned many away from ungodliness (thousands in the 1st century church were initially all Jewish). And many Jewish people through the last 2,000 years.

Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Are you trying to say Romans 11 is a futurist prophecy that is fulfilled after the Church Age?

I need to know this if we are to move on.

S
sermonindex

Fair enough, we will use all Biblical terminology so neither of us gets off track/confused from miscommunication.

Actually, Paul speaks of "spiritual Israel" (although that term isn't actually used eitherin the Bible at all), but you know what I'm speaking of (because you used the term) back in Romans 9:6-7. Yes, in that passage/context (& elsewhere) he speaks of "the Israel of God".

However, in Romans 11, it's nothing of the sort whatsoever. In fact, Paul is so repetitive & so specific, that you have to play "metaphorical twister" to think in Romans 11 he is speaking of anything but "his (Paul's) kinsmen in the flesh". In verse 1 he makes that clear. And then he uses clear & plain language in verse 11-12. Then he goes on later in chapter 11 & explains that we as Gentile's were grafted in as a wild olive shoot & are told "do not be arrogant toward the branches". The Greek word used there is "katakauchōmai". It means - "to boast or rejoice against". Then he goes on to CLEARLY be discussing those within "natural Israel" who were cut off for unbelief, but even says, "and even in they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree." (Verses 23-24). CLEARLY not talking about "spiritual Israel" only, but "natural Israel" (the "national/natural Israel that would become "spiritual Israel" at their repentance & coming to faith in Christ returning to their place in the everlasting Kingdom")

Then, in the next verses he goes on to say starting in verse 25:

25xLest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: xa partial hardening has come upon Israel, xuntil the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
x"The Deliverer will come xfrom Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27
"and this will be my xcovenant with them
xwhen I take away their sins.”
28As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake. But as regards election, they are xbeloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29For the gifts and xthe calling of God are irrevocable. 30Just as xyou were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. 32For God xhas consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

33Oh, the depth of the riches and xwisdom and knowledge of God! xHow unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34
"For xwho has known the mind of the Lord,
or xwho has been his counselor?”
35
"Or xwho has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
36For xfrom him and through him and to him are all things. xTo him be glory forever. Amen.

Now he CLEARLY is speaking of "Natural Israel" still here (consistent with the rest of chapter 11). Otherwise, you have to twist the obvious plain text that says "a partial hardening has come upon Israel.." WAIT, if that's "spiritual Israel", you mean God has allowed a partial hardening on His own people in "spiritual Israel"? That doesn't make sense & you must do confusing & imbalanced exegetical gymnastics with Chapter 11 to get it to say something other than what it is CLEARLY saying.

And great spiritual preaching & exegetical men in the church down through the ages like John Bunyan, JC Ryle, Charles Spurgeon, George Muller, Horatious Bonar, Robert Murray McCheyene, etc. all took the plain text at its clear meaning (look at the fruit of these men's ministries), but men like Luther, Calvin & others who advocated & incited violence & genocide against the Jews (even if they were Israel's enemies in their eschatology, what happened to "love your enemies"? What has been the fruit of that eschatology by which they are recognized for 1800 years?).

Also, in Acts 1, if there was going to be no restoration of the Kingdom to Natural Israel (what the apostles were clearly asking) after "All Israel shall be saved" (not in lost unbelief, I'm not advocating that so please don't compare what I'm saying to John Haggee's unBiblical Dual Covenant heresy), then why didn't Jesus correct their misunderstanding? Look back in the Synoptic Gospels. He always did that. He said, "why are you still so dull of hearing?", "Why do you still not understand?", etc., etc. He always corrected their ignorance & not always softly, but often direct as you can get. But now in Acts 1, he has died & rose again, exists bodily in some form, has ministered for days with the disciples in Jerusalem, is about to ascend to the Father, & He fails to correct their false understanding (in your view)? That doesn't make sense. And not only that, but He further confuses & solidifies their ignorance by not only not correcting it, but saying it wasn't for them to know the times or seasons the Father put in place? What?

"6So when they had come together, they asked him, "Lord, xwill you at this time xrestore the kingdom to Israel?” 7He said to them, x"It is not for you to know xtimes or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive xpower xwhen the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and xyou will be xmy witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and xSamaria, and xto the end of the earth.”9And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, xhe was lifted up,...."

But why did he not explain Amillinealism & all of the hidden truths of Supercessionism to them before He left? Wouldn't that be disingenuous? Was Jesus trying to leave them intentionally "off"? Did he do that at other times or did He correct their ignorance? Why did he actually stabilize & reinforce their total stupidity?

S
sermonindex

Jeff, see my response here.

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=56599&post_id=391467&order=1&viewmode=flat&pid=0&forum=36#391467

S
sermonindex

That's not a response. You didn't answer 1 of my questions not explain Acts 1 or Romans 11 in their context? If you don't answer these (because you can't), why do you keep "letting it die" when cornered with plain scripture, only to resurrect the issue (lately in a coy, clever way), say "it's all about the scriptures" & then back away from explaining these VERY CLEAR, VERY PLAIN TOUNDERSTAND ones? That's disingenuous brother. I'm not mad at you or trying to be unkind/unloving, but that's what I see you doing continually. You want to stand and say "it's all about the scriptures", but then send articles by Phillip Mauro longer than the constitution everyone should read, but then back away from explaining Romans 11 & Acts 1 in context (after lumping me in with Haggee's Heretical "Dual Covenant Theology", etc.). If you're not open to looking at the scriptures I am referring to that aren't "matephorical"/prophetic ones, but plain & direct spoken ones, seriously brother, quit bringing what I am becoming more convinced is actually your "agenda" (the gospel of Amillinealism/Supercessionism) up. And quit saying, "this has nothing to do with Israel" & then clearly arguing for that EXACT purpose. And quit posting Phillip Mauro over and over and over, which anyone who knows anything about him knows he is the "Supercessionist" spokesman of the most recent generations (after Luther, Calvin, Augustin, etc.). And to say you came to all these Amil/Supercessionism points on YOUR OWN (& use their exact forms of argument, avoidance, etc.) is well...frankly hard to believe. I have looked at this issue in scripture both ways & after praying & seeking the Lord for what is really true, the Lord made Romans 11 & Acts 1 stick out like red flags the size of the Titanic. Then I decided to pursue it further & do some reading/listening to those who promote both sides.

And seriously brother, if the truth is what matters to you & not being right & sharing Supercessionism with the world, just at least check out the 1 book I recommended. I have read Mauro. I have Sam Storms book on Amil to read. If you really aren't afraid of the "truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth", be open (& humble) & let me know if after you read "When a Jew Rules the World" if you were shocked by what you read? I was. Totally. If that's the fruit of Supercessionism down through the last 1,800+ years, I gotta say that I'm Leary of following the Amil/Supercessionism down their rabbit-hole with their tunnel vision lens on. But I will do it to test all things. I am not saying "I have it all figured out". Which is why I'm asking you to properly explain/exegete Romans 11 & Acts 1 in their context. Help convince/persuade me.

S
sermonindex

Too many threads. See the other thread regarding Acts 1.

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=56599&forum=36

That is what I believe. But, you don't accept that so what is the point? By the way, I am not a supercessionist.

S
sermonindex

Sorry, but quoting excerpts from 2 commentators doesn't explain it. We can Al generally find commentators who agree with us if we look long enough. Predetermined Suppositinal Argument.

S
sermonindex

Double standard? You quote others and just provided a litany of authors that you believe the same things as they. This is why I need to bow out. What is "good for the goose is obviously not good for the gander". Sigh...

P
proudpapa

RE: ///Sorry, but quoting excerpts from 2 commentators doesn't explain it. We can Al generally find commentators who agree with us if we look long enough. Predetermined Suppositinal Argument.///

But the question remains can you find any Christian/christian source within the first 1,000 years of Christianity that agree's with your eschatology ?

Did anyone Christian/christian interput the scriptures conserning Physical Israel the way that yo do, before the time of Moses Maimonides ?

S
sermonindex

by proudpapa on 2016/4/4 10:25:56

RE: ///Sorry, but quoting excerpts from 2 commentators doesn't explain it. We can Al generally find commentators who agree with us if we look long enough. Predetermined Suppositinal Argument.///

But the question remains can you find any Christian/christian source within the first 1,000 years of Christianity that agree's with your eschatology ?

Did anyone Christian/christian interput the scriptures conserning Physical Israel the way that yo do, before the time of Moses Maimonides ?

PP, I have seen you ask this question over and over (going back over a year) and no one has ever provided an answer.

S
sermonindex

I didn't quote any of them actually. I just said if I'm ignorant, I'm in good company & listed other famous, well known, Gospel-Centric, respected, Pre-Mils who were men of God that also believe there is yet more in God's Timeline for national/Natural Israel. I don't quote all their reasons/explanations. I didn't use them to answer direct questions about specific passages of scriptures.

Look Julius, I don't care if you don't want to talk eschatology/Israel. I'm ok with that & will still treat you as a brother with love, kindness & respect. But if you keep resurfacing this issue & then painting the opposing side to your view as "not being of the Word" or "not understanding scripture" & then when someone like me (who isn't attacking/maligning you or slandering your intent As others may have done) brings what you say you want: a discussion on the text of scripture, & then you refuse to answer (I believe because you can't - it's not your fault. You're not alone. No Supeecessionist/Amil has a good explanation on these passages because I have searched & looked high & low realizing maybe I am wrong & open to it), and then you want to "drop it" when you're the one who keeps bringing it up?

Can you not see how that is not beneficial. At least be honest/humble & say, "I have no idea. I don't have an explanation for Romans 11 within my view". I'd respect that a lot more personally (not that you have to answer anything to me, but I'm being honest). If you don't have an agenda, stop getting around to the same issue, being dishonest of your intentions, etc. only to start the fire & then run when someone spends ALL THE TIME to have the discussion with you. I'm not attacking you. I'm just being honest about a NOW LONG STANDING Pattern with you on this issue.

And as for others: yes, I agree. Those who have attacked, slandered, spoke harshly/proud towards you, etc. should themselves repent. No argument from me there. But I'm not doing that & you're actually avoiding my questions & now wanting to run from a firestorm you recreated in the threads. And the fact is, after THIS MUCH from the other viewpoint has been splattered on the forums publicly day & night, at some point when I have time, I am going to build the full case against Supercessionism on a thread too. It's only right/fair since the other view & men like Mauro are quoted lately more then the prophets, apostles or Jesus Himself. But I have not one iota of ill will in my heart towards you brother. God as my witness I don't.
God Bless you brother,
Jeff

S
sermonindex

Yeah, the apostle Paul in Romans 11. Is that a reliable source enough for the Supercessionist?

P
proudpapa

RE:///Yeah, the apostle Paul in Romans 11. Is that a reliable source enough for the Supercessionist?///

Romans 9-11 is one continueing thought, Paul went into great detail in his introduction of the topic in explaining that :'they are not all Israel, which are of Israel' That is, : They which are the children of the flesh,these are not the children of God : but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.

Whom are the children of the promise ? Galatians 4:28
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

S
sermonindex

by proudpapa on 2016/4/4 11:05:20
Romans 9-11 is one continueing thought, Paul went into great detail in his introduction of the topic in explaining that :'they are not all Israel, which are of Israel' That is, : They which are the children of the flesh,these are not the children of God : but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.

Whom are the children of the promise ? Galatians 4:28
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.


Ditto, PP. Agreed.

Not all Israel is Israel is referring to natural and spiritual Israel (the children of the promise by faith in Jesus Christ).

Another words, Israel by flesh is not part of Israel by the Spirit (Spiritual Israel). Circumcision of the flesh means nothing in relation to the New Covenant. You only become part of spiritual Israel (Zion above) by faith in Jesus Christ (Jew and Gentile, alike).

So, natural Israel is never replaced. Natural Israel (below) and Spiritual Israel ("Zion above", "Israel of God") are two completely different entities. One is above, spiritual and one is below, natural. Paul clearly makes this distinction in Galatians. This is standard Bible 101, that I thought everyone understood and accepted.

M
MrBillPro

Yep! I could tell from all the replies, another thread that's ending up in strife.

S
sermonindex

That's horrible exegesis of the passages in Romans 11 in their context. Paul specifically mentions "his kinsmen in the flesh", specifically mentions Natural Israel in Romans 11. Context matters. This is like those who say, "there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male nor female.....all are one in Christ" to actually nullify passages on Male/Husband leadership in the home/church. Because after all, it says elsewhere "there is neither male or female,,,,all are one in Christ". But elsewhere in less vague, less metaphorical speech it PLAINLY says "I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man...." And "the husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the church..." & "woman came from man, not man from woman...who are you? Did the Word of God come to you ofirst or you only? If anyone claims to be a prophet or spiritual let them first acknowledge the Words I speak to you are from God & not from man.."

There's no contradiction because man & woman are EQUAL IN VALUE/SALVATION, but not necessarily in "ROLES/FUNCTIONS". Similarly, in Romans 9, Paul speaks of EQUALITY IN VALUE on faith in Christ, but in Romans 11 CLEARLY discusses God's purposes for natural Israel & a ROLE difference, especially in the end.

S
sermonindex

And he specifically mentions Gentile's as wild olive branches grafted in to natural Israel. And in that same context he specifically says branches were broken off for unbelief ("spiritual Israel" believers aren't broken off), & that these "natural branches" will be grafted back in by belief. This isn't hard to follow plainly in context & exegete unless predetermined suppositions (& maybe pride/ignorance?) prevent/blind someone.

And that doesn't even go into the last 8-9 verses of Romans 11 clearly talking about a natural restoration/revival that will happen. That couldn't be referring to 70 AD, because natural Israel did not see a wholesale restoration, but destruction.

S
sermonindex

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/4/4 11:20:55

And he specifically mentions Gentile's as wild olive branches grafted in to natural Israel.


Wow! Whoa! Wait a minute! Spiritual believers are grafted into "Israel below"??? "Jerusalem above is merging with "Jerusalem which now is" (Jerusalem below)?

Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

So that is the problem!! Is that a widespread view that spiritual believers are grafted into Israel after the flesh?

You missed the whole transition in the NT of the physical kingdom of Israel to the spiritual kingdom of Christ (Zion above) which is now, "not of this world".

Paul says, "We are not children of the bondwoman" which is natural Israel. Natural Israel is under the law and you are saying we are grafted into them!?

Please read the following verses, very closely. And can you provide references for others that believe spiritual believers are grafted into natural, fleshly Israel? I think this is your roadblock and I don't believe I have ever read about anyone believing that.


Gal 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Gal 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Gal 4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.


S
sermonindex

Jeff

Nice post. You will get nowhere with these individuals as others and myself have learned in these forums. They do have an agenda to promote this nonsense. Its like debating with a Jehovahs witness I have learned, They delight in upsetting believers and then accuse you of not playing nice, Pointless.

S
sermonindex

What do the scriptures say about who a true "Jew", is?

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that CIRCUMCISION, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

What is the "Israel of God" as Paul talked about? These are companion verses with Rom 2:28-29.

Gal 6:13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you CIRCUMCISED, that they may glory in your flesh.
Gal 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
Gal 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

I see our "friends" have returned. I am off for the day. You have plenty to think about.

S
sermonindex

Again Julius, I agree with what you are saying in Galatians. I am saying a RESTORATION is still to come with NATURAL Israel where they "See Him whom they Pierced" & turn to Christ. That the love & Grace & fervency of the Gentile Church "provokes them to jealousy" & they turn in even more massive numbers than have already begun. I'm not talking following the Law! You don't follow well & make assumptions based on other peoples extremes. If a temple is rebuilt & animal sacrifices are resumed for atonement, it is not pleasing to God! It's an affront to the Gospel! But it's through that very process that the nations that surround Israel (All Islamic - FYI) turn & fight against her, bring her to her knees UNTIL Jesus returns & fights against them Himslef, they turn to Messiah, etc. Again, you are mixing theological issues (I thought not doing that was Bible 101?).

Keeping the OT Law given to Israel for salvation is one thing (why Galatians was written). But the restoration of the nation of Israel to finally turn to their Messiah is another & it's coming (why Romans 11 was written). I do not have what Reggie Kelley & Art Katz called a "satanic sympathy" for natural Jews who reject Jesus affirming them in their unbelief. I have a Biblical & prophetic view that sees the day Israel has ALL THE NATIONS come against her, & when she almost entirely annihilated (again), they look on Him whom they pierced, the fullness of the Gentile's is brought into the kingdom, the love of Gentile's for each other &!towards Jews provokes them to jealousy, & they FINALLY turn to Jesus wholesaledly & Christ restores & fulfills all the promises God made to them IN SPITE OF THEIR HARDNESS & UNBEIEF (ooohhhh, that's got an election message embedded in it , doesn't it?), for "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable"

S
sermonindex

I don't disagree with the Biblical idea of "the Israel of God" or "not all Israel is Israel". I get it. But Romans 11 is a prophetic set of passages future still to come that speak CLEARLY of NATURAL ISRAEL BECOMING THE ISRAEL OF GOD & taking a place in the earth not because of their greatness, eloquence, etc. but PURELY ELECTION DESPITE their hardness, obstinance & pride. And I as a Gentile believer grafted into "Spiritual Israel" don't want to exlplain away & ignore Paul's warnings in Romans 11 not to boast against or be arrogant towards the natural branch, but praying & believing for the revival that grafts them back in restored once & forever more! How glorious are God's Ways! Man I can sense joy in God's Spirit within me even as I write this! Praise God! Halelujah!

S
sermonindex

And the scriptures also say, "there is neither male nor female, (along with neither Jew nor Gentile)..." But are you an "Asexual" being now? Does your role as a man, a husband, & a father mean nothing anymore because there is no male? We are "male nor female" from above? Context & proper application mean EVERYTHING (Hermaneutics 101).

S
sermonindex

What that means is that you cannot be righteous in God's sight by virtue of being born a Jew in the flesh and keeping the law. One must be circumcised in heart and keep the "law of Christ" (Gal 6:2), and that pertains to both Jew and Gentile. "Male and female" is talking about a different subject.

So what is it Jeff? Believers are grafted into natural Israel or unbelieving Jews by faith in Christ become part of the "Israel of God?", Which is Jerusalem above. I think you misspoke and more than willing to make that allowance.

"All Israel will be saved", obviously means all Jews and Gentiles that trust in Christ will be saved. "All", does not mean every living unsaved natural Jew, it means all that trust in Christ. Many will not.

D
docs

A TWOFOLD WITNESS TO THE AUTHENTICITY OF BIBLE PROPHECY

"Let it be noted that the fulfilment of these prophecies demanded the continued existence of both the city and the people, though sundered the one from the other, to the very end of the gospel era; and it demanded also that the city should be in the hands of strangers, and the people should be in the lands of strangers, during all that great stretch of time. Here then is a two-fold and a conclusive test of the Divine authorship of the prophetic Scriptures. For if, in the course of these "times of the Gentiles," either the city or the people had passed out of existence, or if the city had come into Jewish hands again or the Jewish people as a whole had changed their characteristic attitude towards Christ and His gospel, the prophecies would have been falsified and the entire New Testament discredited. On the other hand, seeing that none but God could have declared how it would fare with the city and people throughout this long age, these prophecies, by their fulfilment, furnish an unimpeachable witness to their Divine authorship, and hence to the Divine origin of the Book whereof they are an integral part." (P. Mauro - "Gospel of the Kingdom" - ch 12))

From the quote,

"or if the city had come into Jewish hands again or the Jewish people as a whole had changed their characteristic attitude towards Christ and His gospel, the prophecies would have been falsified and the entire New Testament discredited."

Well, the city of Jerusalem did come again into Jewish hands after Mr. Mauro passed in 1927. And there are nearly 400 Jewish Messianic synagogogues in the world today and in the days of Mr. Mauro this was unthinkable. Even in Israel the gospel has begun to have a freer and more open proclamation in Israel itself so Jewish unmbelief as a whole has been greatly impacted by the workings of the Holy Spirit during recent decades. What would be Mr. Mauro's explanation today I wonder regarding the New Testament being discredited if these things wqere to happen? If one can say write condfidently that if Jerusalem came into Jewish hands again before the times of the Gentiles will have ended then the New Testament will have been discredited then Mr. Mauro obviously placed a awful lot of stock in his opinion here. But since actual literal events in the world have shown Mr. Mauro to be wrong then it's viable proof Mr. Mauro's views were foundationally lacking in proper understanding and were wrong. It's just as simple as that. His own words that heplaced so much stake in (the credibility or non credibility of the New Testament) prove it.

Jerusalem is in Jewish hands again. Has the New Testament therefore been discredited?

S
sermonindex

docs, I don't see how that invalidates all of his other truths. No man is perfect, not even the ones you agree with.

P
proudpapa

RE: ///Well, the city of Jerusalem did come again into Jewish hands after Mr. Mauro passed in 1927.///

Mr. Mauro died in 1952.

D
docs

I guess I likely had in mind 1927 in mind for some reason. Was "The Gospel of the Kingdom" published then? Thanks for the uh...adjustment. I'm human. Let me check a bit on some info. Be right back.

Yes he did pass when you say. I had 2 bits of info in my mind and mixed the two. Yet no matter when he died literal concrete time and spave events proved him wrong at a very foundational level in what he esposed as a permamant dissolving of Isarel in 70 AD. Respectuflly to him, Too bad he ist around us any longer to give his take now on present circumstances and what he wrote then.

S
sermonindex

Julius, I agree with your first paragraph 100%.

Again, I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, but there is a specific, prophetic, elective in gathering of natural Israel in the end by God's Soveriegnty which it adds "the gifts & callings of God are irrevocable."

And you still can't get the plain meaning of the texts concerning natural Isreal & "boast against" the natural branches (some translations say "do not be arrogant towards"...). Why the warning there from Paul in your paradigm/lens? Fact is, supercessationists have eventually let to "boasting against", "being arrogant towards.." And ultimately approving, inciting, or even participating in (while constructing doctrines of demons theology to "support it) the murder of, annihilation/genocide of, driving out from their lands/home/property, etc. TOTALLY UNCHRISTIAN behaviors that were the fruit of these teachers lives, ministry, & teachings (by their fruit you I'll know them). Not saying you have this heart!! Totally not saying not implying that. Honestly. Just saying if that's been the wholesale fruit of 1800+ years of Supercessionism Theology, is that maybe an indicator to the church of something about the whole framework (Remember, Jesus even said about false teachers, "you will know them by their fruit", not even, though this matters, "you will know them by their framing of scriptures").

Again, I'm open to the long list of Premillinael teachers (I have named many who are WELL respected across all spectrums/denominations concerning faithfulness to the Gospel, doctrine, their ministries & the fruit they bore) who were murderous, treacherous, genocidal, etc. But no such list exists. Only among Supercessionists does it exist. Not saying that's the one and only litmus test and dictates all things, but if the filter can't tell the difference between "kill these useless rat Jews" and "love your enemy", why would I not put their doctrines under closer scrutinization/question? Discerning good and evil spirits? Murder, and in the name of Christ, is the most evil of spirits (of the sons of thunder, Jesus said, "you know not what spirit you are of"), so that already has my discernment antennae on high position. But Romans 11 & Acts 1 are major issues as well (not even getting into the OT prophets cause they get explained away, but just looking at these two NT passages).

P
proudpapa

And to this time, the Jewish establishement has not "as a whole had changed their characteristic attitude towards Christ and His gospel,"

S
sermonindex

Good point Doc. This guy Mauro, "THE MODERN GO TO GUY" concerning Supercessionism: his entire paradigm of how he interprets all those scriptures led him to make statements and it turns out they were TOTALLY WRONG after Israel's re establishment. So, his whole method of getting to that paradigm by interpreting everything through that lens falls apart (or at the very least has holes like the Titanic after hitting Iceberg!). That's why modern Supercessetionism teachers have had to reinterpret even more, go back on original thought/statements, or just totally avoid that inconvenient truth altogether & "stay the course" (like Julius is apparently perfectly comfortable doing).

S
sermonindex

It's not the end yet PP. we are getting closer (& seeing the initial seeds of this I believe), but it's not fully done yet. It's coming...it's coming....and Christ is also coming on the clouds!!!! That's not in 70 AD, but on that great & terrible Day of the Lord yet to come. Maranatha, Come Lord Jesus!

S
sermonindex

Good point, PP. I read over that too fast.

D
docs

/And to this time, the Jewish establishement has not "as a whole had changed their characteristic attitude towards Christ and His gospel,"

But Jerusalem came again into Jewish hands before the times of the Gentiles is to end. Mr Mauro wrote that if that happened the entire New Testament would be discredited.

Personally, and I'm assuming a whole lot of other believers also, still believe in the absolute crebibility of the New Testament.

P
proudpapa

RE: ///And you still can't get the plain meaning of the texts concerning natural Isreal & "boast against" the natural branches (some translations say "do not be arrogant towards"...). Why the warning there from Paul in your paradigm/lens?///

If boasting against the natural branches means that we are to support the Jewish establishement,

Why did Jesus, Stephen, Paul etc. speak so strongly against the Jewish establishement.


D
docs

/"his entire paradigm of how he interprets all those scriptures led him to make statements and it turns out they were TOTALLY WRONG after Israel's re establishment. So, his whole method of getting to that paradigm by interpreting everything through that lens falls apart (or at the very least has holes like the Titanic after hitting Iceberg!)."

That's the obvious point and it comes from his own writings. His views were based on his belief that God has irrevocably dissolved the Jewish nation in 70 AD and it would therefore never again becomea nation again and regain possession of the land and Jerusalem. So huis whoole method of coming to these views was WRONG.

D
docs

I'm not necessarily speaking of all the other truths he espoused. I'm speaking of his views that he advocated regarding Isarel suppposedly being ireevocably dissolved in 70 AD so as to never become a nation again or come again into the land and regain possession of Jerusalem etc. Obviously he was monumentally wrong so it seems safe to assume that whatever view or method he used to come to his conclusions was wrong. It doesn't matter which year he passed in. His methods and views and the way he arrived at them were shown by actual literal events to be WRONG.

S
sermonindex

by proudpapa on 2016/4/4 13:19:18

RE: ///And you still can't get the plain meaning of the texts concerning natural Isreal & "boast against" the natural branches (some translations say "do not be arrogant towards"...). Why the warning there from Paul in your paradigm/lens?///

If boasting against the natural branches means that we are to support the Jewish establishment,

Why did Jesus, Stephen, Paul etc. speak so strongly against the Jewish establishement.

I always thought that "Boasting against the natural branches would be saying that all is lost for them and they can never be part of the "commonwealth of Israel", again. There are no commandments from God to support a physical kingdom or even believe in one.

Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Obviously, the COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL here is spiritual Israel, not natural Israel because Christ reigns over a spiritual kingdom.

A few verses prior:
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places (spiritual kingdom) in Christ Jesus:

Eph 2:6 goes agrees with "My kingdom is not of this world".

So, to boast would mean that we would take the position that Jews have been cut off forever never to return to the Israel of God and that the Gentiles took their place. That would be wrong and not scriptural and very arrogant.

Boasting, however does mean that one does not believe in the physical kingdom of natural Israel being reestablished by God.

S
sermonindex

I'm not saying "not boasting (or being arrogant) against the root" is WHOLESALEDLY & NONQUESTIONINGLY SUPORTING THE MODERN NATION STATE OF ISRAEL IN ALL THINGS WICKED/SECUKAR OR OTHERWISE. Never have. But the fact that God is going to Soveriegnty save & restore Israel to a place of leadership among the nations after Christ returns & they are all saved REALLY bothers some peopl. Their reactions & resulting theologies become a "boasting against the root" in the same way that people who hate any form of Soveriegn Election "recoil" against the whole ideA.

I gotta stop brethren. I'm out.
God Bless,
Jeff

P
proudpapa

RE: ///That's the obvious point and it comes from his own writings. His views were based on his belief that God has irrevocably dissolved the Jewish nation in 70 AD and it would therefore never again becomea nation again and regain possession of the land and Jerusalem. So huis whoole method of coming to these views was WRONG.///

Mr Maro views where based on : 'the Kingdom of heaven belongs wholly to this present age, occupying that long period of time which extends from the first coming to the second coming of Christ.'


unlike modern Christianity in which shapes its views of the Kingdom based on its view of eschatology.

D
docs

/Mr Maro views where based on : 'the Kingdom of heaven belongs wholly to this present age, occupying that long period of time which extends from the first coming to the second coming of Christ.'


/unlike modern Christianity in which shapes its views of the Kingdom based on its view of eschatology.

And these views of Mr. Mauro led him in a foundational way to write that if Jerusalem came into Jewish hands again before the times of the Gentiles ended then the prophecies and the ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT WOULD BE DISCREDITED.

So won't the Kingdom of God be present also in the next age after the second coming of Christ when the dead in Christ have been resurrected and nature has been restored etc? Do you believe the Kingdom of God will not be present after Christ comes and the age to come has begun? Wow!

S
sermonindex

"And these views of Mr. Mauro led him in a foundational way to write that if Jerusalem came into Jewish hands again before the times of the Gentiles ended then the prophecies and the ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT WOULD BE DISCREDITED."

Wow! Which tells me that the one who needs to be discredited is Mr Mauro himself not the New Testament.

P
proudpapa

RE: ///And these views of Mr. Mauro led him in a foundational way to write that if Jerusalem came into Jewish hands again before the times of the Gentiles ended then the prophecies and the ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT WOULD BE DISCREDITED.///


The View that : 'the Kingdom of heaven belongs wholly to this present age, occupying that long period of time which extends from the first coming to the second coming of Christ.' in which shaped Mr. Mauro's eschatology did not cause him in a foundational way to make such an assertion, (actually just the opposite) the commonly held view of his day as to what was being implied by Lu 21:24 is what caused him to make such a strong assertion.

We must remember that Mr. Mauro as with many of us started out being indoctrinated by dispensationalist, often times we do not fully recognize the degree of our preconcieved views.

C.I. Scolfield on The :
"times of the Gentiles" is that long period beginning with the Babylonian captivity of Judah, under Nebuchadnezzar, and to be brought to an end by the destruction of Gentile world power by the "stone cut out without hands" (Dan 2:34) 35,44) ie the coming of the Lord in glory (Rev 19:11,21)(((( untill which time Jerusalem is politically subject to Gentile rule (Luke 21:24)"))))

So we can not blame Mr. Mauro's misunderstanding of Lu 21:24
on the view that : 'the Kingdom of heaven belongs wholly to this present age, occupying that long period of time which extends from the first coming to the second coming of Christ.'

add: the blame is on the preconcieved view that 'Jerusalem is politically subject to Gentile rule' untill 'the coming of the Lord in glory' (that luke 21:24 is a prophecy about that)a view that Mauro probably unawarely picked up when he was under the influence of Scolfield

edit : removed the subject heading
add : for clarity

D
docs

I think those are really just a ty and set of excuses to help get around Mr. Mauro's obvious colossial blunder proved so by actual literal events occuring in the world. He hammers dispensationalism in his writings so he knew the errors there as well within the Scofield Bible. His views were not just something left over inadvertently from perhaps his days as a dispensationalist.

Meanwhile, how much stock can be placed in a Christian author and theologian who believes the kingdom of God is to occur ONLY in this present age? That's colossial error added to his other colossial error. It's not me, it's his writings that demonstrate the real depth of his error. I have enjoyed reading a bit of his works and his love for the Lord is obvious. No problem. Yet his eschatology is celebrated by Preterists and his Israel has been replaced view is obviously Augustinian and Roman Catholic in its origins. That can easily be demonstrated. The Reformers continued the eschatology of the Roman Catholic church. They got sola fide, sola scriptura etc. corect but they left wrongful Roman Catholic Augustinian eschatology in place.

But it doesn't matter so very much to me to make these points any longer because I'm soon to be out of this debate.

S
sermonindex

Wow. This is "the most revered/respected leader of that theological construct, Dude made statements statements saying that if Israel came together again as a nation then we can chuck the whole New Testament, but don't worry folks, it's not his fault. It's someone else's. So if he right he's credited. If he's wrong, the other views influence on him are to blame? And he's made a clear statement that was wrong (about Israel not again being a nation) in which he said the whole New Testament is discredited, but he gets a pass? Wow. Now that's devotion to a man & his teaching.

P
proudpapa

My answer came out of prayer, mock it if you like

S
sermonindex

I'm not mocking. But if the guy was dead wrong in a teaching he said would invalidate the whole New Testament. That's a problem. A big one. Then to blame that on the opposing viewpoint how he got so off? Sorry brother, I have to test what you're saying (what this teacher, mr Mauro said), not just what you heard in prayer. If you heard something in prayer that was God, the truth/facts should line up with it.

S
sermonindex

Wow, just popping in and lot of ridicule going on. You say you are not mocking Jeff (and docs) but c'mon. We make allowances for all kinds of preachers and teachers, yet you are taking a very hard line here.

If we disregard all the truths that were revealed to men because of one error/mistake then SI will have to delete all their sermons/authors. Does anyone here know any man that has perfect teaching (outside of the NT)?

I didn't think so.

S
sermonindex

I'm not mocking.

"these views of Mr. Mauro led him in a foundational way to write that if Jerusalem came into Jewish hands again before the times of the Gentiles ended then the prophecies and the ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT WOULD BE DISCREDITED."

Who else is respected here on SI that has made such a statement? Who was wrong?

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
1 of 112 posts

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate