DKC>"ARE, not "were"."
XS>Great catch on the verse.
Not exactly. From Paul's perspective "are" would be correct since the temple was still standing and the temporal/temporary Levitical priesthood was still ministering according to the bloody requirements of the old covenant, the covenant that was decaying and passing away. AD70 was the fulfillment of the "days of vengeance" meted out against unrepentant Israel.
From our perspective, 2000 years since the temple was destroyed and the keys of the Kingdom were transferred from national Israel to spiritual Israel, the Church, the phrase I used was quite correct.
11 posted on 09/10/2007 5:02:44 PM MDT by topcat54
was correct for forty years, but is incorrect today because it conflicts with your eisgesis. How does this square with your belief that all scripture was fulfilled in 70 AD.If I understand you correctly Elohim's Holy Word i.e. Yah'shua HaMashiach
shalom b'shem Yah'shua
Not incorrect, rather fulfilled.
"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. " (Luke 21:20-22)
The temple was destroyed, just as Jesus prophesied. The new covenant was established and sacrifices and priesthood were ended within the “seventy weeks”, just as Daniel predicted (Dan. 9:26,27).
How does this square with your belief that all scripture was fulfilled in 70 AD.
Not “all Scripture”, just those pertaining to the destruction of the temple and the end of the old covenant system, and the handing of the “keys of the kingdom” over to the new covenant leadership.
"Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. " (Matt. 21:43)
“Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.” (Matt. 23:36)
Frankly, I’m not the one with the fancy eisegesis. Nor do I need to buck most of the New Testament as well as the teaching of the Church for 2000 years.
Obviously if you have temporal language, at some point, an event which a text foretells in the future is in the present, and at a point after that, it's in the past. That doesn't mean that the scripture is "incorrect," it means that it was written at a particular point in time which has passed.
Deuteronomy 18:15 says that God "will raise up" -- future tense -- for Israel a prophet like unto Moses. Is that event still in the future, or was it realized in time when Christ came, and therefore now in our past? And if God has now sent the prophet like unto Moses, does that mean that the Scripture was correct, and now is not?
Of course not.