Posted on 06/18/2010 9:45:21 AM PDT by Ken4TA
I'm sure you can. Bottom line is its tragic and I think a testimony to spiritual immaturity when divisions and splits come of interpreting future events. The cross of Christ and salvation only by Him through grace are our dispositive doctrines.
Because of this some people and churches avoid the subject altogether. I think that also is a mistake. We need to grow in grace and the knowledge of the Lord so we can learn together in the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Jim 0216, I wasn't the one who split the Church up saying that the Jews are handled differently by God than this re-definition of "the Church". It is the Darby crowd that rejects millennia of orthodoxy and declares by fiat that "the church" doesn't have as its members Seth, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and Sarah and the pre-Pentacost saints of God.
The body of Christ has been chugging along just fine having our long-time academic contests over the sacraments, soteriology, church government, ecclesiology, and numbers of angels dancing in confined spaces.
What is downright embarassing is having the Evangelicals looking at every earthquake, troop movement and political leader whose name can be creatively enumerated into 666 going on-line and claiming that this regurgitated pagan rite of beseeching the Oracle is somehow Christian, and is absolutely "prophesized in Scripture". So a generation ago, Gog was the Soviet Union, recently it is Iran, once it was considered the UK, now it is alternatively Turkey or Russia, depends on which Oracle you consult.
I truly appreciate and respect Star Traveler identifying this brand of teaching as within the domain of Evangelicalism. As long as Evangelicals recognize and admit that their teaching is way off the ranch in terms of millennia of orthodoxy, then y'all can do what you want.
I was sanctified out of Dispensationalism; the LORD, as promised to His Elect will surely do the same for others within His flock.
THX THX.
While I haven't the time right now to read 2 Kings, it is Jesus who is reigning right now. He is whom I'm talking about. When Jesus pours out his wrath that will be the end of this world. I shudder thinking of all the unsaved that will come under the wrath to be poured out. Peter's description of what is going to happen is too drastic for most people to believe, but it's going to happen anyhow. See the third chapter of second Peter.
Hmmm...maybe, maybe not. Jesus told John that what is prophecied in the book was to happen shortly, however, our vision of time certainly isn't God time sense. Thousands of years is as a day, and a day is as thousands of years to God. A question: where in the book would each 3 1/2 years be separated?
then count forward from the "command to restore Jerusalem unto Messiah the prince" (when Jesus first came as Savoir) (Dan 9:25).
Hmmm....where is Messiah called the "prince"? I read it that the after Messiah is "cut off", i.e., crucified, not for himself, but for those whose sins are to be forgiven is one thing; but it is "the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary...". That prince is not Jesus, for he was already "cut of" in the first half of the week. The prince came 40 years later to destroy Jerusalem and the temple.
What about the seventieth week? Dan 9:27 reveals this last week and the broken covenant and abomination of the world ruler in the midst (halfway through) of the "week" (3 1/2 years). This maps exactly to 2 Thess 2:4 and more precisely to the events after Rev 11: 14 and in Matt 24:15-31 (the second 3 1/2 years - what Jesus called "the end").
Sorry, everything points to Jesus being "cut off" in the middle of the 70th week. Jesus confirmed the covenant for the full 70th week. 3 1/2 years during which he had his ministry, and 3 1/2 years under the ministry of the apostles to the Jews alone. Then Cornelius was converted and the New Covenant was fully in place - ALL who believed and obeyed the Gospel were added to the Kingdom proclaimed in the Gospel. That Kingdom is today being added to as people are converted to Christ from all the nations of the world.
What you say about Dan. 9:27 is chock full of esegesis, not exegesis. It's reading many things into it that are not said nor indicated. That's my take on what you said; sorry about that. Maybe you could expound on that paragraph to make it clearer?
Please expound on the above and make it more explanitory. That would be a great help to many people IMHO.
Well God bless you on your journey with Him.
What about the seventieth week (the last seven years)?
Start with the last part of Dan9:26(b), and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. As you point out this prince is not Jesus but the one who creates “desolations”, as Jesus referred to in Matt 24:15 (the “abomination of desolation”).
Now it starts to get precise: And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: Dan 9:27a. I believe (and other scripture points to this) that this “prince” will make a “covenant” (non-aggression treaty) with Israel not unlike what Hitler did with England and Russia while he amassed the power he needed to eventually double cross and attack them.
Now the 3 ½ year split: and in the midst of the week (3 ½ years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Dan 9:27b. This “prince” (the same world ruler as that in Daniel 11:21-45) will after 3 ½ years set up “the abomination of desolation” (Matt 24:15 & Dan 11:31). Also referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:4: Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. This is “the beast” in Revelation.
Now I’ll ask you to do something:
1st 3 ½ years: read and see if you can’t map Matt 24:4-14 with Rev 6:1-14:16. Both begin with man’s deception (Jesus’ warning in Matt. and the false Messiah on the white horse in Rev. (interestingly many think this is Jesus but Jesus carries a sword not a bow)) and end with the gospel preached to all nations (Rev 14:6).
2nd 3 ½ years: read and see if you can’t map Matt 24:15-31 with Rev 11:14-19:21. Both begin with the world ruler tearing off his mask revealing himself to be the abomination of desolation in Matt. and Satan’s “beast” in Revelation (third woe and seventh trump) and end with the Son of Man coming in the clouds with power and great glory in Matt. and the heavens opening and the appearing of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 19:11-21).
There is overlap in the verses referenced in Revelation because the masterpiece of the tapestry the Holy Spirit paints here contains parenthetical imagery to give a perspective and background to what’s going on. May the Lord give us understanding to the Word He wrote.
God Bless.
Sorry, but right off that start you are mimicking the dispensational teachings of the Scofield Study Bible and the writings of all the "saints" of the dispensational viewpoint. Jesus is crucified in the midst of the week: that week is the 70th week of the prophecy. There is no "gap" between the 69th and 70th week, regardless of how many and who says so. Their exegesis is terrible, to say the least. BTW, I never said that Jesus was crucified at the end of the 69th week.
What about the seventieth week (the last seven years)? Start with the last part of Dan9:26(b), and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. As you point out this prince is not Jesus but the one who creates “desolations”, as Jesus referred to in Matt 24:15 (the “abomination of desolation”).
Absolutely. Messiah is not the Prince, and besides, if that was so, it would be the "people of the Prince" who would be the destroyers of Jerusalem and the temple; and that would be 40 years after the 70th week! The "abomination of desolation" is Jerusalem surrounded by the armies of Rome under Titus. See Luke 21:20-24, which is Luke's recording of Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 24:15-25.
Now it starts to get precise: And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: Dan 9:27a. I believe (and other scripture points to this) that this “prince” will make a “covenant” (non-aggression treaty) with Israel not unlike what Hitler did with England and Russia while he amassed the power he needed to eventually double cross and attack them.
Now the 3 ½ year split: and in the midst of the week (3 ½ years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Dan 9:27b. This “prince” (the same world ruler as that in Daniel 11:21-45) will after 3 ½ years set up “the abomination of desolation” (Matt 24:15 & Dan 11:31). Also referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:4: Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. This is “the beast” in Revelation.
Interesting, but IMHO, completely wrong. You are taking what the Messiah accomplished and crediting it to the Prince's people that would come. I will write another post to you with a much better explanation and exegesis of Daniel's 70th week. Give me until tomorrow to do so.
Now I’ll ask you to do something:
1st 3 ½ years: read and see if you can’t map Matt 24:4-14 with Rev 6:1-14:16. Both begin with man’s deception (Jesus’ warning in Matt. and the false Messiah on the white horse in Rev. (interestingly many think this is Jesus but Jesus carries a sword not a bow)) and end with the gospel preached to all nations (Rev 14:6).
2nd 3 ½ years: read and see if you can’t map Matt 24:15-31 with Rev 11:14-19:21. Both begin with the world ruler tearing off his mask revealing himself to be the abomination of desolation in Matt. and Satan’s “beast” in Revelation (third woe and seventh trump) and end with the Son of Man coming in the clouds with power and great glory in Matt. and the heavens opening and the appearing of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 19:11-21).
Sorry, I'll not be able to do what you ask, for it is impossible to do. Look for my post to you tomorrow.
There is overlap in the verses referenced in Revelation because the masterpiece of the tapestry the Holy Spirit paints here contains parenthetical imagery to give a perspective and background to what’s going on. May the Lord give us understanding to the Word He wrote.
Yes, there sure is overlap in all of the book of Revelation. And yes, "May the Lord give us understanding to the words He gave to John to write!" May the spirit of truth prevail for both of us. I really enjoyed your explanation, for it gave me a good insight into your thoughts on this issue. Watch for my post to you tomorrow, sometime during the day. It will take a little bit of time to write it, and I hope you will at the minimum consider what I'm going to say. God bless you in your study of His word in the Scriptures.
The first article (The Promise to Abraham) is the perfect illustration of reading the NT back into the Old. Curtis cant go 1 paragraph without bringing some NT thought into a very straightforward promise to Abraham.
Lets explore the first few sentences from that article ...
God made a promise to Abraham: “In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed” (Gen.12:3). Later he repeated the promise, “because you have obeyed my voice” (Gen. 22:18). What of this promise? Was it fulfilled? Or is it yet to be realized in some material sense? Gross confusion prevails. The tragic result is that Christians look for a fulfillment which will not come, because they look for the wrong kind of promise. People keep getting this original promise to Abraham mixed up with the Law given to Moses and with the land of Canaan in which the Israelites established a nation.
The covenant to Abraham is separate from the Mosaic covenant, no one is getting the two mixed up, except perhaps Curtis.
But the promise to Abraham had nothing to do with the law nor with national Israel. Paul explained, “For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of Faith” (Rom. 4:13). Three things are revealed here: 1) That the promise has nothing to do with the law, 2) That it does have to do with inheriting the world, and not a mere fraction of it, and 3) The it is through faith, and not through racial descent. Jesus said that Abraham “rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56, cf. 8:44). Obviously Abraham understood that the promise that he was to be the father of many nations and that all families should be blessed through him was a promise concerning Christ and the salvation he would purchase for believers.
Again, notice how to the non-dispensationist, the interpretation of the OT text must be injected with the New Testament understanding of that text. Not only that, but Curtis has also missed the entire point of what Paul was saying in Romans, i.e., justification by faith alone. He just keys on the word "law," finds a NT passage that contains the word "law," and tries to harmonize the two passages.
The second highlighted section of Curtis' argument highlights what happens when you read the NT back into the Old ... you begin to insert ideas that are foreign to the text. There is nothing in the text of Genesis 12 or 17 that suggests that Abraham understood the covenant that God made with him as anything but a promise that he would be the father of a great nation and that nation would possess certain boundaries. Where in the text of Genesis 12 or 17 does it even remotely suggest that Abraham forsaw and understood that the covenant he made with God was really the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31?
My patience has run out reading this stuff. Perhaps we should just rejoice that our names are written in heaven.
I'm amazed that you put forth like you understand the Gospels and the rest of the writings of the NT. You are far from understanding the OT and the NT's explanation of the prophecies of the OT.
You are saying that Jesus and the writers of the NT were building strawman arguments by referencing the OT and applying it to what they said! Amazing, that's all I can say. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for saying that our analysis is vapid at best and dishonest at the worst!
The covenant to Abraham is separate from the Mosaic covenant, no one is getting the two mixed up, except perhaps Curtis.
More strawman argument from you. How do you face yourself in the morning? Curtis (which I agree with here) is not mixed up at all - it is you that is saying he is even though his words are plain enough in showing that he does not mix up the two promises as you say he does! Ridiculous! Don't you understand what you read, or are you just itching for an argument?
Curtis says: But the promise to Abraham had nothing to do with the law nor with national Israel. Paul explained, “For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of Faith” (Rom. 4:13). Three things are revealed here: 1) That the promise has nothing to do with the law, 2) That it does have to do with inheriting the world, and not a mere fraction of it, and 3) The it is through faith, and not through racial descent. Jesus said that Abraham “rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56, cf. 8:44). Obviously Abraham understood that the promise that he was to be the father of many nations and that all families should be blessed through him was a promise concerning Christ and the salvation he would purchase for believers.
Again, notice how to the non-dispensationist, the interpretation of the OT text must be injected with the New Testament understanding of that text.
You in effect are calling Jesus Himself a non-dispensationalist, which I agree with. After all, it was Jesus Himself that brought up Abraham, saying that "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. (John 8:56, and also read verses 57-58!). Apparently you don't believe Jesus Himself! He injected His take on Abraham - so, he is a strawman builder? Ridiculous!
Not only that, but Curtis has also missed the entire point of what Paul was saying in Romans, i.e., justification by faith alone. He just keys on the word "law," finds a NT passage that contains the word "law," and tries to harmonize the two passages.
FYI, Paul does not say by "faith alone". Read Rom. 4:9-5:1 and weep. Curtis is exactly right in what he said in that article! It's just like saying that belief requires obedience to the Gospel - a fact that was first espoused by Jesus Himself in the Gospel: "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him" (John 14:21). Keeping Christ's commandments is obedience, and if you believe in Him you love Him and the Father.
The second highlighted section of Curtis' argument highlights what happens when you read the NT back into the Old ... you begin to insert ideas that are foreign to the text.
Curtis' statement is right on. It's exactly what Paul was trying to get across to his readers - which you apparently aren't. Curtis is actually putting in different words what the Apostel Paul was saying about Abraham Where in the text of Genesis 12 or 17 does it even remotely suggest that Abraham forsaw and understood that the covenant he made with God was really the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31?
I doubt that Abraham saw and/or understood that Jeremiah was going to write about a New Covenant. Jesus said that Abraham “rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56, cf. 8:44). Is that too hard to understand? Is what Paul said also to hard for you to understand? If not, then Curtis is right and you seem to be looking for an argument based upon a speculative theology of dispensationalism.
My patience has run out reading this stuff. Perhaps we should just rejoice that our names are written in heaven.
My thoughts exactly on what you wrote :-)
“LIKE A THIEF. Several passages of Scripture mention Christ coming “as a thief in the night”
It’s important to emphasise that as Christians we are warned to be ready whenever He comes - we don’t have to watch out for signs & wonders, in fact Jesus Christ Himself was rather scathing about those who were looking for such. That state of readiness is the nature of the Christian life. His coming “as a thief” is for those who are not ready, ie those who don’t believe.
There is no 2-stage coming, merely 2 types of people. Those who are ready.......and those who are not.
“Unlike Noah and Lot, we won’t be kept from the wrath and judgment of God upon the whole world. Curious because Jesus said that’s exactly what is going to happen. Luke 17:26-29; Rev 3:10. “
Luke 17 - the point there is that salvation and destruction there are simultaneous - as it will be at the end. He comes as a thief for those who don’t believe, those who are His are ready.
Rev 3 - This was written to an actual church extant at the time of writing. It is not a promise to all who believe. In fact John tells us in his Gospel that in this world we will have trials. The general idea conveyed throught the Bible is that God preserves His people THROUGH tribulation, not FROM it.
“Well, start with And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: Daniel 9:26a. As you said, this is Jesus crucified that comes at the end of sixty-nine weeks. Up to this point, only sixty-nine weeks are accounted for and the commensurate 493 years is historically accurate. (Again, this is how we know Daniel’s prophetic time: one week prophetic time equals seven actual years.)”
No, it doesn’t say that Jesus is crucified at the end of 69 weeks, it says AFTER 69 weeks, ie during the 70th week - specifically half-way during that week.
“Replacement theologians call it the “secret rapture” (none of us pre-trib rapturists call it that) and then use scripture to show there is nothing secret about it ... “
Maybe you don’t call it a “secret rapture” but many Pre-trib rapturists DO call it that. I was brought up with the Plymouth Brethren so it’s something I am all too familiar with. I had major difficulty trying to convince my late Dad that the Bible never mentions a SECRET rapture - the Brethren had never even considered the possibilty. And the use of the word ‘replacement” is dishonest. The church is made up of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. No-one is being replaced. We are dealing with completion, not replacement.
And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. Mark 8:31 Looks like Jesus rose "after" three days ON the third day.
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: Daniel 9:26a. "After" 69 weeks ON the 69th week.
Jesus is crucified ie during the 70th week - specifically half-way during that week.
Another assertion with no backup or evidence.
I wouldn't know, I've never studied any of that stuff and frankly couldn't care less what any of them say or don't say.
Jesus is crucified in the midst of the week: that week is the 70th week of the prophecy.
Come on Ken - an assertion without scriptural evidence and consistency is not really a valid argument.
If you understand the tribulation to come, pretty much everyone in the world will be killed and except for a remnant of Israel, no one is going to make it through alive.
Right! As Jesus said, He would come as a thief comes to break into a house; one wouldn't know at what time that thief would come, so the owner of the house should be ready at all times. The return of Christ will be like a thief in the sense that we don't know when he will strike. We must watch at all times. But there is nothing in any of the thief passages to indicate that the event will be secret. See Mt. 24:43, 44; Luke 12:39, 40).
Instead of teching that Christ would return in a secret coming in the dead of the night, Jesus actually warned against this concept: See Mt. 24:23, 26, 27). In Mt. 24 Jesus stressed that men will not know the day or hour of his coming (v. 36). It will be like the days of Noah when people were eating, drinking and getting married, not expecting destruction to fall. They "knew not UNTIL the flood came and took tham all away, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (v. 36). The wicked didn't know util the flood came - but, it is very obvious that when it came they knew it! It was no secret event; it was observed by believeres and unbelievers (although it was only Noah's family that were the believers!).
There is no 2-stage coming, merely 2 types of people. Those who are ready.......and those who are not.
Exactly!
Amazing! You never studied the dispensationalist theory, yet mimick what they teach? Get real, what you said goes right along with what they say.
I said: "Jesus is crucified in the midst of the week: that week is the 70th week of the prophecy."
Come on Ken - an assertion without scriptural evidence and consistency is not really a valid argument.
"And AFTER threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be CUT OFF, but not for himself (FOR US!);" Dan. 9:26a
While Christians generally agree in the belief that the "seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks", that is, 69 weeks (483 years) MEASURED to the time of Christ, they don't all agree concerning the final week of the prophecy - the 70th week!
Dispensationalist insert a huge GAP of time (2000+ years) between the 69th and 70th week. We who believe that the whole 70 weeks are fulfilled also believe that 70 follows 69 in logical sequence.
Dispensationalists, and other futurist groups for the most part, say that the 70th week refers to the ANTICHRIST who will MAKE a covenant with the Jews, and after 3 1/2 years will BREAK that covenant. The fulfilled 70th week is just the opposite: the Messiah CONFIRMS the covenant that the Jews were under for the full 70th week. In the "midst of the (70th) week Messaih will be "cut off" - a word that means to be murdered or killed. Jeus confirmed the covenant during his ministry of 3 1/2 years, and the apostles continued to confirm it for another 3 1/2 years - only to the Jews, for Christ came to save the lost sheep of Israel. Then Cornelius was converted and the Gospel was extended to ALL men.
Enough! I'm going to write a real clear exegesis on Daniel's 70 week later today. I'll ping you to it when I post it. Look for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.