***********************************Is it possible that more of the early church fathers would have been more inclined to Dispensationalism had they seen Israel become a country again?
Is it POSSIBLE? Maybe. Is it PROBABLE? Not at all. We shouldn't interpret the Bible through the lens of the newspaper. Such a hermeneutical method is deplorable. (This has been the habit of many Dispensationalists. Men like Hal Lindsey--who've made so many awful "predictions" and are the major purveyors of end times madness--have little or no shame. They've been proven wrong time and again yet they keep cranking out books and updated theories...and Dispensationalists keep buying them. They're not much different than the neo pagans who are all a flutter about 2012 and the Mayan calendar.)
How do you explain Satan’s use of Hitler?
I do not see anything in the Bible pertaining to Hitler. Do you have a verse or passage which teaches “Satan used Hitler…” No. Therefore, to speak of such things is nothing more than speculation. (You know…the Pat Robertson technique.) Such speculation is very common among Dispensationalists. I do NOT presume to speak for God apart from Scripture.
When [do] you feel that the book of Revelations was written? Pre or Post 70 AD?
I believe Revelation was written prior to 70AD. An EXCELLENT and scholarly treatment of this subject is a book by Ken Gentry, “Before Jerusalem Fell.”
What about the 12,000 sealed out of each tribe of Israel in Revelation 7? If this is the church, which tribe are you in? And why is the tribe of Dan omitted?
I’ve no idea which “tribe” I’m in. But I’m almost positive…it’s not yours. Just kidding! Yes, why is Dan omitted? While we’re at it…why is Ephraim omitted? Also, what is this “tribe of Joseph” (Rev 7:8)?? I don’t recall any tribe of Israel being known as the “Tribe of Joseph.” Do you? Can you show us in the Old Testament where the tribe of Joseph lived? What they did? Anything? (Be sure to NOT “allegorize”…I want to see in the Old Testament the LITERAL tribe of Joseph.) Happy hunting!
Replacement Theology grew to maturity in the Catholic church, which denies assurance any way. Interesting, eh?
First of all, "Replacement Theology" is a pejorative term. No Covenantalist refers to himself with this inaccurate moniker.
More importantly, this is known as the logical fallacy of "poisoning the well." You are attempting to discredit historic eschatology by associating it with the Roman Catholic church. (I am assuming you mean "Roman Catholic" because "Catholic" means "universal." I belong to the Catholic church but not the Roman Catholic Church.) Because you know that Protestants tend to negatively react to the Roman church, you are attempting to associate the views which oppose yours to the Roman church, and thereby skew opinions.
The other logical fallacy present here is known as the "genetic fallacy." This is the irrational idea that says a position must be wrong because of its origin. You suggest that because historic eschatology "grew to maturity" in the Roman church--it must be wrong. Of course, this is fallacious reasoning. I wonder if you would apply this "standard" to other doctrines with roots in the Roman church--like the doctrine of the Trinity, for example?
On Matthew 24, do you believe this entire passage to have taken place with Titus in 70 AD?
Yes. I lean towards a Preteristic understanding of this passage.
Why were only 1.1million killed in 70 AD but 6million in the holocaust?
[Note: This was asked with reference to Matthew 24:21 which supposedly supports the idea of a yet future “Great Tribulation.”]
I probably wouldn't word it as "only" 1.1 million. Nor would I be anticipating even more than 6 million Jews being slaughtered in the future. (Again, I marvel at the Dispensationalists who label those who disagree with them as being anti-Semitic!)
But, how are we to understand Mtt 24:21? Like any other verse in the Bible, CONTEXT is essential to interpretation. Thus, we should ask ourselves: From the context of the verse, what is the universe of these remarks?
It is abundantly clear that the universe of Mtt 24:21 is 1st Century Judea. Why do I say this? Well, because Mtt 24:16 reads: "then let those who are in JUDEA flee to the mountains." In other words, this verse has NOTHING to do with the Holocaust, located mostly in Europe, of the 20th Century.
[What sense would it make to "warn" Jews--2000 years in the future and living in Germany--to "flee" into the "mountains" from "Judea"?? Dispensationalists are supposed to be LITERALISTS, remember?]
Notice also, these Jews are fleeing Judea and hiding in the mountains. And, from the context, this running from Judea is LITERALLY "running." They seem to be fleeing on foot. (Thus Christ speaks of "woe" to the nursing/pregnant women and of "winter" and "Sabbath.")
If this "great tribulation" [always shown as "Great Tribulation" in Dispensational literature] is world wide--why the reference for folks to save themselves by fleeing JUDEA to the mountains? [Josephus' account, however, accords quite nicely with Jesus' prophecy.]
If this "great tribulation" is world-wide and in the 21st Century [or later?], why are they fleeing on foot? How will this running to mountains save them from mechanized warfare? [Here, some Dispensationalists will argue that perhaps the world is no longer "mechanized" and has reverted back to primitive ways/means. Of course, this kind of end times madness is based more upon Hollywood movies than scripture.]
In summation: The universe of Mtt 24:21 [according to the immediate context] is limited in its scope to Jews living in Judea. And if we're going to interpret the context LITERALLY, it is obvious that it deals with ancient ways/means of warfare and transportation. Thus, it would be wrong to infer that Jesus is claiming that there would be no greater [in the sense of "worse"] wars/loss of life, ANYWHERE in the world at ANY time of history. Rather, we interpret Christ within the limited context of His own words.