Why do Many Christians Ignore YHWH's Moedim?

visionary · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
Yes, and when God says Jesus will rule a thousand years, I also understand what that means, especially when those three words occur surrounded by a plethora of figurative language. The bears aren't actual bears, the dragon isn't literal and neither is the one thousand years. Jesus rules for all time and there has never been a time when the logos of God who is God hasn't ruled. Thanks for making my point with me. Appreciated.

Figure of speech doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just like a football team is called by some animal etc.etc.. name doesn't mean it isn't literal.

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

visionary said:
Figure of speech doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just like a football team is called by some animal etc.etc.. name doesn't mean it isn't literal.

Nice red herring. No one here has said "it doesn't exist." I have, on the contrary, stated the exact opposite.

The facts in evidence are as I have stated. Your own analogy was figurative!

The only place a thousand year reign is mentioned is Revelation 20. That is a fact.
Everything surrounding the mentions of a thousand year reign in Rev. 20 is figurative. That is a fact.
Elsewhere when the Bible speaks of a "thousand" it is figurative. That is a fact.

Those are not matters up for debate and those who dissent aren't facing the facts.

Some in Christendom do in fact (pun intended) ignore the facts and act as if those three words are the only words in the entire passage that can and should be treated literally. That is a fact. When those people who do that deny they are doing that then that is not only obvious and evident to all observing, it then becomes evidence of a lack of knowledge and understanding of their won practice, That is a fact.

It is a fact the book of Revelation begins and ends with the pronouncement the events described in the vision would be happening quickly because the time is near. This is found plainly stated in Revelation 1:1-3 and Revelation 22:7-10. Anyone with access to a Bible can at any time look that up and verify that..... fact.

And as you have so astutely pointed out: when I read the word "near" I know what that means. But some people don't read "near" to mean near; they read "near" to mean "more than 2000 years from now." So they read "near" figuratively but "a thousand years" literally and when they do so a gross inconsistency is demonstrated. The fact is the scriptures always use the word "near" to mean near. That is a fact.

So, yes, when I read mention of "a thousand years" in the midst of symbol after symbol after symbol after symbol then I understand the "thousand years" is figurative and when I examine scripture to verify that usage elsewhere I have uniform confirmation. That is a fact.

Lots of people disagree, but they do so in neglect of the above-stated facts.

Deade · Apr 7, 2020

visionary said:
Figure of speech doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just like a football team is called by some animal etc.etc.. name doesn't mean it isn't literal.

josheb appears to be amillennial and probably a preterite. You can't reason with them. They think Christ is already ruling and Satan already bound. Never mind all scriptures defining the utopia we will experience during that time.

HatGuy · Apr 7, 2020

HARK! said:
Many believe this way. I used to; but that is because many translations render this verse in the past tense. Let's look at the source of this belief from a literal translation:

I don't quite see how this really changes much - for the law now to become something it would imply it was something else before that. Now it becomes our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ. This still matches quite well with the Protestant Law / Gospel dialectic.

HARK! said:
I'm not sure that we do. In what sense?

We seem to have a different understanding of how Jesus fulfilled things eschatologically (and probably what the new heavens and earth look like)

HARK! said:
I believe that when we are born anew; we are the new creation in Yahshua.

Sure, I'm sure you do, but I see "new creation" excluding written Torah, with all its rules, regulations etc. (Hence, we see eschatology differently.)

HARK! said:
Torah is simply the Hebrew word for law. The law expresses the nature of our father. I believe that in the Ruach Ha'Kodesh indwells us (to a lesser degree), as it does in Yahshua; (Yahshua's is without measure) that we take on the nature of our father.

I believe the Law does not fully express the nature of the Father, but Jesus proclaimed in the gospel does.

visionary · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
Nice red herring. No one here has said "it doesn't exist." I have, on the contrary, stated the exact opposite.

The facts in evidence are as I have stated. Your own analogy was figurative!

The only place a thousand year reign is mentioned is Revelation 20. That is a fact.

Everything surrounding the mentions of a thousand year reign in Rev. 20 is figurative. That is a fact.

Elsewhere when the Bible speaks of a "thousand" it is figurative. That is a fact.

Those are not matters up for debate and those who dissent aren't facing the facts.

Some in Christendom do in fact (pun intended) ignore the facts and act as if those three words are the only words in the entire passage that can and should be treated literally. That is a fact. When those people who do that deny they are doing that then that is not only obvious and evident to all observing, it then becomes evidence of a lack of knowledge and understanding of their won practice, That is a fact.

It is a fact the book of Revelation begins and ends with the pronouncement the events described in the vision would be happening quickly because the time is near. This is found plainly stated in Revelation 1:1-3 and Revelation 22:7-10. Anyone with access to a Bible can at any time look that up and verify that..... fact.

And as you have so astutely pointed out: when I read the word "near" I know what that means. But some people don't read "near" to mean near; they read "near" to mean "more than 2000 years from now." So they read "near" figuratively but "a thousand years" literally and when they do so a gross inconsistency is demonstrated. The fact is the scriptures always use the word "near" to mean near. That is a fact.

So, yes, when I read mention of "a thousand years" in the midst of symbol after symbol after symbol after symbol then I understand the "thousand years" is figurative and when I examine scripture to verify that usage elsewhere I have uniform confirmation. That is a fact.

Lots of people disagree, but they do so in neglect of the above-stated facts.

In God's world, a thousand years is a day in His court, and yes, He can say it is short. 2 thousand years after being on earth in the flesh, time is running out. We have had 2 thousand years before the Kingdom was announced from Mount Sinai, then 2 thousand years later, give or take a few years, He comes in the flesh, and now 2 thousand years later, we can start preparing for the 1 thousand year rest, the 7th thousand Sabbath.

Yeshua HaDerekh · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
Even if I were to accept the premise Matthew was not a prophet that does not change the fact that a New Testament source is used to interpret the Old Testament prophets. It does not change the fact that Matthew is recording Jesus, a New Testament prophet, interpreting the Old. Who was and wasn't defined as an OT prophet has been defined by an NT text. It has been defined by an NT prophet recorded by an NT writer. Furthermore, if Matthew is not a prophet then who was an was not a prophet has been defined by someone who, according to you, was not a prophet. I other words, a non-prophet has defined who qualifies as a prophet.

This does not avoid the fact Jesus, Peter, James, and Paul also made prophetic statements and rendered the OT prophets. Even if I accept the premise the OT prophets stopped with the NT John the baptizer that doesn't change the fact NT prophets did render OT prophets. Or is it being denied Jesus, Peter, James, and Paul were prophets?

Remember: the original question was, "When the NT prophets and writers render the OT prophets do you take that as a measure of prophecy?"

Proof-texting is never valid and it doesn't change the fact OT prophets have been rendered by an NT writer.

...in the New Testament!

When the NT prophets and writers render the OT prophets do you take that as a measure of prophecy?

Mostly what you wrote are semantics and you know it. Your 1st paragraph is silly to put it bluntly. You act like there is a full break between the "OT" and the "NT". There isn't. Of course NT writers use the OT to prove their points and for apologetics. I never said otherwise. What prophecy did Peter, James and Paul utter? Prophecy is for the future. The OT prophets uttered prophecy that was fulfilled later. It was not prophecy to know OT scripture and interpret it because of current events. That does not make you a prophet. John was an OT prophet and Yeshua said he was the last. Sorry...

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

Deade said:
josheb appears to be amillennial and probably a preterite. You can't reason with them.

That is ad hominem: No need to listen to posters if they are preterists. Preterists are X so don't listen to them. It is that kind of reasoning that can't be reasoned with.

The fact is I have backed up everything I have posted with scripture, and I have done so with scripture rendering scripture. I have not appealed to anything extra-biblical so if the best argument you can muster is "Don't listen to Josh because he's an X," then I'm happy to let you have that nonsense.

Deade said:
They think Christ is already ruling and Satan already bound. Never mind all scriptures defining the utopia we will experience during that time.

As I have already shown, it isn't I who says that but God's word that says so. You're not arguing against me when disputing the truth; it is God's word being disputed.

Colossians 3:1
"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God."

Hebrews 8:1-2
"Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man."

Jesus is currently enthroned at God's right hand. I take God's word as written and I do not add nor subtract anything from it when it states Jesus is enthroned as God's right hand I accept that as written. Jesus is enthroned.

Acts 2:22-36 KJV
"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

Jesus will remain seated there until his enemies are made a footstool. That's what the text states. That is what I believe. It is that statement into which I place my faith. David's throne was the resurrection. That is what the text states, so that is what I believe.

Preterism can be attacked aplenty but that attack doesn't change the facts of scripture plainly written, plainly read. The onus is on those who don't read scripture as written, rendered by scripture itself.

This op argues the Old Testament moedim have yet to be fulfilled and I am not alone in dissenting from that claim. No one need be an eivl preterist to understand the festivals are foreshadowings of Christ crucified and resurrected and if those who adhere to the idea of unfulfilled moedim aren't interested in learning how moedim have in fact been fulfilled that's okay with me. Sad and unnecessary, but certain within their liberty to do so.

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

visionary said:
In God's world, a thousand years is a day in His court, and yes, He can say it is short. 2 thousand years after being on earth in the flesh, time is running out. We have had 2 thousand years before the Kingdom was announced from Mount Sinai, then 2 thousand years later, give or take a few years, He comes in the flesh, and now 2 thousand years later, we can start preparing for the 1 thousand year rest, the 7th thousand Sabbath.

Abuse of scripture and an avoidance of the point made.

Peter is stating his first century readers should not think God has tarried because a day is like a thousand years to God and God is bringing to fruition His promises in those last days. The irony here is that once again, a figurative use of "thousand" has been used to argue for a literal reading of "thousand" elsewhere. Logic tells us if God uses the word figuratively in the first example and then later uses the same word figuratively in the second example then He probably intends the reader to understand the third use of the word is also figurative, especially when everything surrounding the third usage is entirely figurative!

So, once again, I thank you for making the point with me.

One of the most important principles of sound exegesis is to first understand what the NT writer and his NT audience would have understood the text to be saying in the NT era! God did not intend the first century reader to understand the 21st century. This ought to be automatically understood by everyone, regardless of their eschatology. When the first century reader read the first century writings the understood what was being said.

To say otherwise means the scriptures were meaningless to all those Christians, and scripture is never meaningless.

Yeshua HaDerekh · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
That is ad hominem: No need to listen to posters if they are preterists. Preterists are X so don't listen to them. It is that kind of reasoning that can't be reasoned with.

The fact is I have backed up everything I have posted with scripture, and I have done so with scripture rendering scripture. I have not appealed to anything extra-biblical so if the best argument you can muster is "Don't listen to Josh because he's an X," then I'm happy to let you have that nonsense.

As I have already shown, it isn't I who says that but God's word that says so. You're not arguing against me when disputing the truth; it is God's word being disputed.

This op argues the Old Testament moedim have yet to be fulfilled and I am not alone in dissenting from that claim. No one need be an eivl preterist to understand the festivals are foreshadowings of Christ crucified and resurrected and if those who adhere to the idea of unfulfilled moedim aren't interested in learning how moedim have in fact been fulfilled that's okay with me. Sad and unnecessary, but certain within their liberty to do so.

Ooooh, I think he hit a nerve! So it is not YOU but God's word? Well it is YOUR incorrect interpretation of it that is in question by all of us...

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

Yeshua HaDerekh said:
Mostly what you wrote are semantics and you know it. Your 1st paragraph is silly to put it bluntly. You act like there is a full break between the "OT" and the "NT". There isn't. Of course NT writers use the OT to prove their points and for apologetics. I never said otherwise. What prophecy did Peter, James and Paul utter? Prophecy is for the future. The OT prophets uttered prophecy that was fulfilled later. It was not prophecy to know OT scripture and interpret it because of current events. That does not make you a prophet. John was an OT prophet and Yeshua said he was the last. Sorry...

You're being dismissive.

And no, I do not believe there is a "full break" between Old and New. That perception is entirely false and another example of you putting dross into my posts I never said and do not believe. It's easy to dismiss what someone post if you think negatively of them. Despite the false accusations I believe the Bible speaks cohesively and progressively with one single voice about God's uniform purpose for creation and those created in His image.

I wonder if you level such accusations against Premillennial Dispensationalists because they unabashedly assert and hold to full breaks not just between Old and New but between the various dispensations. They are the ones cutting up the Bible into distinct "full breaks."

The fact of the gospels is that nearly everything Jesus taught can be found in the Old Testament. It is wrong of you to falesly imagine I think there is a full break between the OT and the NT. Everything built upon that error is also erroneous.

And so the errors in the responses I have received begin to mount and what I have posted is not being discussed; it is being avoided in favor of ad hominem. With each new post this becomes increasing about practice, not just content. For all the good your eschatology may have done you it has not made you a better poster. I believe you can discuss these things but I do not know whether you will discuss these concerns..... and the evidence of these posts increasingly testifies to the negative.

Ephesians 4:29-32
"Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you."

Philippians 2:1-5
"Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus..."

Even were I considered and outsider scripture is clear how that should be handled.

Colossians 4:5-6
"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person."

So you go right ahead and attack the person but do so understanding it has no adverse effect on the veracity of the posts' content, nor on me. I know Whose I am. I hope for better from you because the same Spirit at work in me is at work in you.

Galatians 5:19-21
"Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ...enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions ...and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God."

I read that scripture the same way I read Acts 2, Revelation 20, and all the other passages I have cited: as written, plainly read, scripture rendered first by scripture itself. I do the same with the following:

Galatians 5:22-26
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another."

So post all the ad hominem you like. I'll be available for scripturally-obedient conversation when you're ready to discuss what's been posted relevant to the op. Just let me know.

Yeshua HaDerekh · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
You're being dismissive.

And no, I do not believe there is a "full break" between Old and New. That perception is entirely false and another example of you putting dross into my posts I never said and do not believe. It's easy to dismiss what someone post if you think negatively of them. Despite the false accusations I believe the Bible speaks cohesively and progressively with one single voice about God's uniform purpose for creation and those created in His image.

I wonder if you level such accusations against Premillennial Dispensationalists because they unabashedly assert and hold to full breaks not just between Old and New but between the various dispensations. They are the ones cutting up the Bible into distinct "full breaks."

The fact of the gospels is that nearly everything Jesus taught can be found in the Old Testament. It is wrong of you to falesly imagine I think there is a full break between the OT and the NT. Everything built upon that error is also erroneous.

And so the errors in the responses I have received begin to mount and what I have posted is not being discussed; it is being avoided in favor of ad hominem. With each new post this becomes increasing about practice, not just content. For all the good your eschatology may have done you it has not made you a better poster. I believe you can discuss these things but I do not know whether you will discuss these concerns..... and the evidence of these posts increasingly testifies to the negative.

Even were I considered and outsider scripture is clear how that should be handled.
So you go right ahead and attack the person but do so understanding it has no adverse effect on the veracity of the posts' content, nor on me. I know Whose I am. I hope for better from you because the same Spirit at work in me is at work in you.

So post all the ad hominem you like. I'll be available for scripturally-obedient conversation when you're ready to discuss what's been posted relevant to the op. Just let me know.

Not at all. I don't know you or what you believe other than what you write in your posts and that is what I comment on. BTW, I agree with "the fact of the gospels is that nearly everything Jesus taught can be found in the Old Testament"...yes it is called Torah, the prophets and the writings. I am not sure what a "Premillennial Dispensationalist" is...

visionary · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
Abuse of scripture and an avoidance of the point made.

Peter is stating his first century readers should not think God has tarried because a day is like a thousand years to God and God is bringing to fruition His promises in those last days. The irony here is that once again, a figurative use of "thousand" has been used to argue for a literal reading of "thousand" elsewhere. Logic tells us if God uses the word figuratively in the first example and then later uses the same word figuratively in the second example then He probably intends the reader to understand the third use of the word is also figurative, especially when everything surrounding the third usage is entirely figurative!

So, once again, I thank you for making the point with me.

One of the most important principles of sound exegesis is to first understand what the NT writer and his NT audience would have understood the text to be saying in the NT era! God did not intend the first century reader to understand the 21st century. This ought to be automatically understood by everyone, regardless of their eschatology. When the first century reader read the first century writings the understood what was being said.

To say otherwise means the scriptures were meaningless to all those Christians, and scripture is never meaningless.

Every figuratively has a reality.or it serves no purpose.

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

Yeshua HaDerekh said:
Not at all. I don't know you or what you believe other than what you write in your posts and that is what I comment on. BTW, I agree with "the fact of the gospels is that nearly everything Jesus taught can be found in the Old Testament"...yes it is called Torah, the prophets and the writings. I am not sure what a "Premillennial Dispensationalist" is...

Then you have no business posting, "Mostly what you wrote are semantics and you know it... Your 1st paragraph is silly to put it bluntly. You act like there is a full break between the 'OT' and the 'NT'," or "Ooooh, I think he hit a nerve! So it is not YOU but God's word? Well it is YOUR incorrect interpretation..."

What you've now revealed is the reality we have a shared view of scripture but you chose to ignore the possibility in deference to ad hominem.

Yeshua HaDerekh: I am not the topic of this discussion. ALL those comments about me ontradict the claim, "...what you write is your posts..." is what you comment on. I didn't write about me in any of the posts.

So now I have evidence of a poster contradicting his/her own content, evidence of a poster misrepresenting his own content. I now have evidence showing I cannot rely on what the posters posts because I might later read a contradiction of it.

This is what invariably happens whenever any poster breaks the rule" "Posts, not posters." You've take yourself out of the conversation that was being had. This OP is about the premise Christians ignore moedim and my response is that we do not ignore it; we walk in the moedim every single day because they have in fact been fulfilled in Christ. We don't honor one day above another unless we choose to do so and those who do so are not to judge those who don't and those who don't are not to judge those who do. I've repeatedly offered to explain my position but not a single respondent has asked and some have evidenced a complete lack of knowledge and understanding how my op-reply could even possibly be the case. It is not enough for you to level an accusation of bad interpretation (especially since I did not "interpret" anything); you have to provide evidence of an accurate alternative. Otherwise it is just a baseless accusation. And no such evidence has been provided.

I meant what I said:

You let me know when you're ready to discuss what I posted op-relevantly.

Josheb · Apr 7, 2020

visionary said:
Every figuratively has a reality.or it serves no purpose.

Yep. I STATED THAT QUITE PLAINLY SEVERAL POSTS AGO!!!

You are not adding anything to the conversation. It's increasingly clear you haven't read my posts.

Everyone believes the prophesies will be fulfilled. They will actually be fulfilled. They will "literally" be fulfilled, but that us of the term "literally," is much different than saying the prophesies will be fulfilled literally.

The prophesies will literally be fulfilled.
The prophesies will be fulfilled literally.

Two completely different statements.

The Chicago football players are not literally bears. satan is not literally a dragon. The thousand year reign is not a literal thousand years but it is an actual occurrence.

The moedim have been fulfilled. They are fulfilled in Christ. You want to discuss that then I'm all eyes and fingertips. Otherwise, no worries; you believe what you want no matter what else may be brought to bear on that view and I'll move on.

Deade · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
You're being dismissive.

And no, I do not believe there is a "full break" between Old and New. That perception is entirely false and another example of you putting dross into my posts I never said and do not believe. It's easy to dismiss what someone post if you think negatively of them. Despite the false accusations I believe the Bible speaks cohesively and progressively with one single voice about God's uniform purpose for creation and those created in His image.

I wonder if you level such accusations against Premillennial Dispensationalists because they unabashedly assert and hold to full breaks not just between Old and New but between the various dispensations. They are the ones cutting up the Bible into distinct "full breaks."

The fact of the gospels is that nearly everything Jesus taught can be found in the Old Testament. It is wrong of you to falesly imagine I think there is a full break between the OT and the NT. Everything built upon that error is also erroneous.

And so the errors in the responses I have received begin to mount and what I have posted is not being discussed; it is being avoided in favor of ad hominem. With each new post this becomes increasing about practice, not just content. For all the good your eschatology may have done you it has not made you a better poster. I believe you can discuss these things but I do not know whether you will discuss these concerns..... and the evidence of these posts increasingly testifies to the negative.

Ephesians 4:29-32
"Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you."

Philippians 2:1-5
"Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus..."

Even were I considered and outsider scripture is clear how that should be handled.

Colossians 4:5-6
"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person."

So you go right ahead and attack the person but do so understanding it has no adverse effect on the veracity of the posts' content, nor on me. I know Whose I am. I hope for better from you because the same Spirit at work in me is at work in you.

Galatians 5:19-21
"Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ...enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions ...and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God."

I read that scripture the same way I read Acts 2, Revelation 20, and all the other passages I have cited: as written, plainly read, scripture rendered first by scripture itself. I do the same with the following:

Galatians 5:22-26
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another."

So post all the ad hominem you like. I'll be available for scripturally-obedient conversation when you're ready to discuss what's been posted relevant to the op. Just let me know.

See how you give walls of scripture completely unrelated to the discussion of Christ's now or future reign? You are giving walls of texts telling us how righteous you are in your conduct, and showing fruits of the spirit. Nothing really related to the question at hand.

Tell me, how do you relate to the prophecy in Rev. 11:15 "And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever." Is that yet future or has it already happened?

Yeshua HaDerekh · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
Then you have no business posting, "Mostly what you wrote are semantics and you know it... Your 1st paragraph is silly to put it bluntly. You act like there is a full break between the 'OT' and the 'NT'," or "Ooooh, I think he hit a nerve! So it is not YOU but God's word? Well it is YOUR incorrect interpretation..."

What you've now revealed is the reality we have a shared view of scripture but you chose to ignore the possibility in deference to ad hominem.

Yeshua HaDerekh: I am not the topic of this discussion. ALL those comments about me ontradict the claim, "...what you write is your posts..." is what you comment on. I didn't write about me in any of the posts.

So now I have evidence of a poster contradicting his/her own content, evidence of a poster misrepresenting his own content. I now have evidence showing I cannot rely on what the posters posts because I might later read a contradiction of it.

I meant what I said:

You let me know when you're ready to discuss what I posted op-relevantly.

You have attacked others yet you can't take any comments against you. Yeah we ALL can see that you can give it out but can't take it. And yes I HAVE commented on what you write. I don't think we share the same views on all scripture, I think we agree on that one thing that I posted. I don't think you want to discuss anything, I think you just want to be right and argue...

HARK! · Apr 7, 2020

Josheb said:
As I have already shown, it isn't I who says that but God's word that says so. You're not arguing against me when disputing the truth; it is God's word being disputed.

I haven't spent very much time studying prophesy; so my bias is minimal; and this question is sincere in that I don't believe I am studied enough to change your mind..

How do you reconcile this:

(CLV) Ho 3:4
For many days shall the sons of Israel dwell without king and without chief official, And without sacrifice and without altar, And without ephod or Urim and Thummim.

(I view this as current.)

With this:

(CLV) Zch 14:16
And it will come to be that everyone left of all the nations coming against Jerusalem, they will also go up, as often as year by year, to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to celebrate the festival of booths.

( I view this as future)

Yeshua HaDerekh · Apr 7, 2020

HARK! said:
I haven't spent very much time studying prophesy; so my bias is minimal; and this question is sincere in that I don't believe I am studied enough to change your mind..

How do you reconcile this:

(CLV) Ho 3:4
For many days shall the sons of Israel dwell without king and without chief official, And without sacrifice and without altar, And without ephod or Urim and Thummim.

(I view this as current.)

With this:

(CLV) Zch 14:16
And it will come to be that everyone left of all the nations coming against Jerusalem, they will also go up, as often as year by year, to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to celebrate the festival of booths.

( I view this as future)

Zch 14:16 definitely is in the future, that has never happened yet...although many from the Nations are doing that now...

expos4ever · Apr 7, 2020

It is, of course, true that Jesus speaks of how the Law of Moses will last until "heaven and earth pass away". This seems to contradict the many times Paul clearly declares that the time of the Law of Moses has come to an end.

Well, there is a way to achieve consistence without committing any exegetical crimes.

There is a long Old Testament tradition of using images of cosmological collapse as a metaphor for socio-political upheavals in the here and now. Here is but one example.

From Jeremiah 4:

I looked on the earth, and behold, it was formless and void;
And to the heavens, and they had no light.
I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking,
And all the hills moved to and fro.
I looked, and behold, there was no man,
And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were pulled down
Before the Lord, before His fierce anger.
For thus says the Lord,
“The whole land shall be a desolation,
Yet I will not execute a complete destruction.
“For this the earth shall mourn
And the heavens above be dark,
Because I have spoken, I have purposed,
And I will not change My mind, nor will I turn from it.”

Note that images of cosmological-scale destruction are all over the place in this passage. Does Jeremiah want to be understood literally? No, he does not. Read the material in Jeremiah 4 leading up to this passage - it is all about God's coming judgment on Israel (and not about the end of the world).

And if you know your history, Jeremiah wrote around 600 BC. What happened starting in about 598 BC?

In 589 BC, Nebuchadnezzar II laid siege to Jerusalem, culminating in the destruction of the city and its temple in the summer of 587 or 586 BC

Jesus lived in a culture where "end of the world" language was not to be taken literally.

So when Jesus says the Law will not pass away until heaven and earth pass, we cannot simply assume that since we are obviously still here, that the Law is still in force.

HARK! · Apr 7, 2020

expos4ever said:
So when Jesus says the Law will not pass away until heaven and earth pass, we cannot simply assume that since we are obviously still here, that the Law is still in force.

We can't simply assume that Yahshua made such an extreme, long term, statement; then within a year or two that it came to pass.

Why do Many Christians Ignore YHWH's Moedim?

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Christian

Called of God

Some guy in a hat

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

Christian

Christian

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

Christian

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Christian

Christian

Called of God

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

שמע

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

Well-Known Member

שמע

Similar threads