If you want to attract an honorable lady, be an honorable man.

Saturday, July 28, 2012

The Winner Is.......

Ok, so you all asked some good questions. First answer is going to Rachael.

What's your favorite period of history and why?

That, actually, is rather an easy one. The Revolutionary war era, and the late 1800's to early 1900's.
I like the Revolutionary era due to the nature of the political upheaval, and the way it was dealt with in the founding of our nation. Flooring. That, sadly, was also where our nation started down the wrong path. I intend to do a post on that someday....
The late 1800's and early 1900's were the old west and westward expansion days. From cowboys and Indians to cowboys and bank-robbers, to cowboys and.......Yeah, I like cowboys. That was the era of real cowboys. Most weren't saved, but the ones that were were, I believe, the toughest and best men this world has seen in a long time. I also like the clothes, tack, and weapons from that era. A Colt peacemaker with a five and a half inch barrel is still one of the best weapons ever to exist. Hats, boots, horses, snakes, guns, crooks, and all that sheebang - I love them all.


Well, that was nice and easy. Let's get down to a more gritty subject.

Sadie asked what my position on Replacement Theology was. This is a rather interesting topic. From what I understand, Replacement Theology states that Israel is no longer God's people, but the church as a whole is.
From what I understand of scripture, I don't agree with that. Granted, I don't believe every Jewish person that is alive today will be saved, but the Jewish people as a whole have not been chucked by the wayside. I think Paul made that very clear. Part of the whole reason stated that the Gentiles were let in was to make the Jews jealous and drive them back to God.
Granted, not all "Jews" today are really full-blooded Israelites, and I would say that those who weren't would - I guess - be classified under gentile.
That is my opinion as of right now. I did a minimal amount of study at one point, and came to this conclusion after some talks with some friends over this topic. Interesting subject though.

Aaaaannnnnnnnnd, one more for good measure.

Corey P. asked what was my all time favorite fiction book, and why.

Hmm. I haven't read a whole heap of really good fiction books. Most "good" books I have read have been books on particular interesting topics. The vast majority of fiction that I have read, falls under one author  - G.A. Henty. I have read all of his historical fiction pieces, and a few of his straight fiction ones. Of his straight fiction, I would have to say that "A Final Reckoning" was the best.  It is a tale of a British chap, who, after getting blamed for something he didn't do, heads to Australia for a rough, tough life as a sheriff in the bush, keeping down renegades ranging the open bush of Down Unda.  The book ends in a showdown between himself and the British renegade who got him there. 

So! That's all for now! Thanks for swingin by and readin!  


  1. David, just to let you know the reason why I asked is because we have some friends who sadly do believe in Replacement theology, and I was hoping that you all didn't. I am glad you feel the same way as we do. Keep standing firm!

    1. Aha. Gotcha. Well, at least I don't think I believe that way, although it is a little bit of a sticky topic. Lots of interesting ins and outs to it.
      Thanks for moseying this direction!

  2. Ha! Spelled my name wrong ;) Don't sweat, I'm used to it (Daddy almost always asks me to spell it for him when writing my name!) (It's 'e-a-l' not 'a-e-l'.)

    Both Wars for Independence are my favorite periods of history...and WW2 :) I like cowboys too...in fact I'm scratching around with an idea for a TV-style Western. I wear my hat and boots about everytime I go outside :)

    Replacement Theology...The Church universal (i.e. the elect) is, according to my understanding, Israel. Romans 9:6-8 "But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, 'In Isaac your seed shall be called.' That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed." I of course, don't doubt that many blood Israelites will be saved, but I'm not sure I quite understand your position. From what I said, do we agree or disagree? Just curious...

    1. Ooops, sorry. I went looking for how to spell you name when I typed it up, and must have got it wrong. *Sorry* :D
      Well, it's sorta a hard point. I don't think God has turned his back on Israel and made them just like one of us. Then again, we are his people now as well (gentiles I mean). So, It's almost a both-and. I think it would be safest to say, in one official statement, that God will save the elect Israelites, and the elect gentiles. That is the safest answer I can come up with.
      So, I hope that is what you meant! Thanks for commenting!

    2. It's okay :D

      Yes...and no. Certainly God saves the elect among the blood-decendents of Abraham as well as of the gentiles (wouldn't it be interesting to know whether or not we had Abraham's blood in us?) I would say that God was through with national Israel as His special people at the conclusion of the Old Covenant (culminating with the distruction of Jerusalem in AD 70). The Church has taken their place as God's special people.

      I'm afeared that whenever I hear someone seem to put emphasis on Isreal/the Jews as being particularly special in addition to the church that 'dispensationalism' screams in my mind--even if it is unjust--which I believe is the case here. So I just wanted to understand a little better what you meant. I think we pretty much agree here...with this vague difference I'm having trouble grasping.

    3. No, no, no! Rachael, I know that I am not apart of your conversation, and I do hate debates, but I must disagree with you! The church has NOT taken the place of God's chosen people. God chose Abraham, He chose Moses, He chose David, He chose Mary to be the mother of Jesus. The Jews are His chosen or "elect" people. And after they had rejected and rejected Him, He grafted us in. But He didn't just throw them out. They are still His elect. They are not an addition to the church, WE are the addition.

      I am sorry for butting in, but I really felt that that needed to be said.

    4. Yeah, that's more what I am aiming for, but still taking into account that some "Israelites" today probably aren't really, due to bloodlines etc. In Romans it refers to us being "grafted in" to the branch. The Jews weren't entirely cut off, we just got into the party with them.
      So, to make it simple, since there is that whole "real Jew" deal, it is probably safest to say the elect Jews will be saved, and the elect Gentiles will be saved, and who those are with which bloodlines are God's business. I would have to agree with Sadie though that God hasn't whole-heartedly turned his back on the Jews, from what I understand of scripture.
      Thanks for the dialog though! I enjoy these things. keep it up, and don't feel bad about butting in Sadie, it was everyone's conversation.

    5. Well...I disagree, but I don't think is something to get our knickers in knot over. Anyway, if it all works out the same (i.e. all the elect--whatever branch they are--are saved), it doesn't really serve any purpose to wrangle over it, does it?

      Don't mind your 'butting' in Sadie, not at all :) Just for the record though--I don't disagree that God chose Abraham, Moses, David, Mary, etc. Nor that the OT Israelites were the 'chosen' people of God. They aren't an addition to us, nor are we an addition to them--we are the continuation of Israel; just under a different dispensation of the covenant. That's how I see it, but somehow I think you are going to disagree with me :) Either way, the elect of God will be saved...no doubt about that.


Tell me what you think!
I don't care if you disagree, hate me or love me! Just comment!