Mat 24:22 "Unless those days had been cut short

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Hi Zeke, that was for Carmella P's questions.

I don't think I could answer your request because millenial is necessarily a restoration of the land and worship system of Judaism, isn't it? I couldn't change the observation that the global, universal changes at the 2nd coming need no Judaic details to happen--are not dependent on them happening. Since the 'vineyard was given to those who will produce its fruit' in Mt 21's parable, I know of no reason why we are dependent on anything happening in modern Israel, any restored Judaism. Of course, it would be fantastic if there were an outpouring of the Spirit to preach the Gospel to all nations--a positive replication of the early chapters of Acts, wouldn't it?

I did forget to mention one thing in #3 about 2 Th 2. That was not to say it is about the distant future. It was to show that it was about the 7th decade. It has the same expectations of a total divine end of all evil as does Mt 24 & //s. When I said this man of sin proclaims himself as God, "Dougg" here at CF said 'then it can't be a figure active in Judaism because Judaism does not think Messiah to be divine.' We have debated that and I think he has quit that view.

In an odd way, it highlights the dilemma of Christ: he was Messiah and claimed to be divine with many demonstrations, but the claim offended Judaism. AC or the man of sin claimed to be god, without proof (although that was expected) and got away with the claim because the population was so deluded into thinking a messiah would help overthrow Rome. The sad thing is much of the following of Judaism in the 7th decade were both delusional and terrorist. Think of something like the Taliban and Jim Jones 'Peoples Church' at the same time. Paul couldn't have written of the problem of 'claiming to be god' unless it was prohibited to claim such and should have been seen as abhorrent to those in Judaism--unless you actually were (Christ).

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
It was hidden in the prophets all the time but they and Judaism thought it meant all these Gentiles had to learn Levitical regulations, dietary code, circumsiion, sabbath laws etc.
--Inter

Judaism didn't think that. Judaism did not think that Jesus was the messiah.

It was Jews who had become Christians who thought the gentile Christians should have to adopt the Jewish observances.

Judaism back then, as today, is opposed to Christianity. Judaism's answer for the gentiles is Noahidism, which is a sort of a form of Judaism lite.

Doug
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
When I said this man of sin proclaims himself as God, "Dougg" here at CF said 'then it can't be a figure active in Judaism because Judaism does not think Messiah to be divine.' We have debated that and I think he has quit that view.

:D:D:D:D:D, oh brother. I gave you links. And posted an excerpt for you from Judaism101.com. I haven't said anything more because I thought you got the message. Apparently not.

Again, Judaism does NOT think that the Messiah is God or divine.

Ask any Jewish rabbi. Go to any Judaism site. btw, your quote of me is a paraphrase, but it's okay.

Doug
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
re declarations about OT by Christ
Doug, I think the dimension you are missing is that Christ had authority (through God's) to declare the meaning of the OT ("the prophets" in this discussion). You're right that Judaism would have said one thing, but are we to set much more upon that fact than it is an artefact of history for just some of Israel? I doubt very much Isaiah would have been clouded about all this with the virgin's son whose name would be called Emmanuel, the Mighty God, etc., all this apparently before ch 53 comes along (not to mention all the other curious prophecies in Isaiah.) Jeremiah would have known something very peculiar was coming with the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Daniel, with Messiah cut off but not for himself. Etc.

The question you have to check into is what happens in the process of denial and spiritual resistance. For ex., I get no sense at all that Ezra or Nehemiah end with a very Christian direction in their spiritual 'renewal.' The dismissal of all foreign wives! Yet that sets precedent for the next centuries. You need to define what the veil is in 2 Cor 3-4. Who had it? why? What would allow a person to see through it?

If there is no hope for people seeing through the veil in some limited ways before Christ comes, then there can be no Heb 11 "hall of faith." It is nonsense. And Peter is nonsense in Acts 3's declarations, by your standards.

--Inter

Well, it's important to know what Judaism thinks because it has not changed that much since the first century when the disciples were looking for the messiah.

Just like we can look at the Amish of today and see what life would have been like in their community back before the time of electricity.

It is not that Judaism back then or now was right about Jesus or the correct understanding of the scriptures that told about Jesus, but it is revealing about the nature of the soon to arrive Antichrist (false messiah), how the Jews will errantly believe that he is their messiah.

There were many false christs who came after Jesus in the first century, true enough. But they were not false christ's by claiming to be God, or being a savior from sins. Guy's like Simon Bar Kochba, who rabbi Akiva (master Kabbalist), thought Bar Kochba was the messiah based in part of some trance Akiva went into, was their hope to free the Jews from Roman Occupation - i.e. restore Israel to an independent nation and bring in the redemption. It ended up getting Akiva, and 500,000 Jews killed in the Bar Kochba revolt.


Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
777
✟97,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Originally Posted by Douggg
If one was living back in the day of the disciples they would have been taught what their religious leaders taught them.

Doug

That is not true. It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. There has always been God's reserved remnant, who follow and obey Him, no matter their level of understanding of all His Plan, and in spite of the politics of religious leaders, so called; for then, as now, we know in part and see in part, and there have always been those who seek to understand, and find, and know that to have a personal relationship with the LORD trumps knowledge of men. The entire period of the prophets refutes what you said.

The Essenes withdrew at the time of the partial return from the dispersion because the priesthood was polluted, politicized, sold for money. We have their "Bible" in the Qumran caves -the Dead Sea Scrolls.

From the time of the [partial] return from the dispersion, there was no agreement and there was strife and political struggles for religious power over the people.

You need to seek understanding of not only the Word of God and the Doctrine/Message of Christ from the beginning, but you need really to study history, for yourself.
Missed that one, apparently.
 
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
re Jewish Christians who imposed law
your line from 3 posts above:
Judaism didn't think that. Judaism did not think that Jesus was the messiah.

It was Jews who had become Christians who thought the gentile Christians should have to adopt the Jewish observances.


In that case Paul's opposition would have come from Christians, but many were Judaizers, like he was. (There was some opposition from what he called Christians--Phil, Gal.). But there is opposition from those in Judaism who remained outside all through Acts. The original opposition is from outside, for that matter! What you are saying is Acts is historically false. And the Gospels.

I've lost the significance of Judaism saying Messiah was not divine. It totally missed the controversy of the accusations of Jesus. Or declares the Gospel records false. As for the bogus messiahs of the 1st century, what is a delusion if not to proclaim yourself as God. They killed the standing high priest. The really arrogant thing would be to proclaim yourself a man-god combination that would win the war, which was apparently the attempt in the revolt, and fomented by the Dead Sea scriptures that were popping up.

re: your account of Judaism, there are probably Judaism's that don't accept Ps 2, 110, etc. if it means that 2nd person is one with God. Which would miss the standing or falling article of the apostles (Jesus is the Christ).

How about this: instead of repeating what you think Judaism says, just tell me what "Jesus is the Christ" proclaims? Acts 2:36, 18:5, 28. The opposition, remember, is not Jewish Christians.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Barraco

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2004
1,619
56
41
Minot, ND
Visit site
✟24,057.00
Faith
Christian
Partaker of Christ said:
Mat 24:21 "For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will. Mat 24:22 "Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
Mat 24:23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ,' or 'There He is,' do not believe him.
Mat 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Jesus said that there would be great tribulation, and that those days would be cut short for the sake of the elect.
He then goes on to say "THEN"...."Then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ', or 'There He is,' do not believe him."

If Christ had already come before the great tribulation (per trib), then why would He warn about false Christ's appearing after the great tribulation?

I know I'm late on this and it may have already been covered.

The tribulation Jesus described was about the generation of Jews and their immediate children. After Judea went to war with Rome, it became very unbeneficial to boast of circumcision. The Jews that followed Jesus (the elect; John 17:6; Ephesians 1:12,) did not flaunt of any Judaism, distinguishing between them and their Jewish counterparts.

Had not the war against the Jews been cut short and the Jews scattered, aggressions would have likely made it to the elect, much like a Jew hunt. Many Jews appealed to the elect during the war to join the Jewish cause, but they would not revert to Judaism.

Josephus even mentioned false prophets going about telling the Jews that they would be delivered in Jerusalem or on the temple; mainly a lie invented by John if Gischala to keep the Jews from fleeing the city. Jesus warned the disciples not to be deceived by anyone, for the temple was destined to be destroyed (meaning the Jews would lose the war.)

Anything in the Gospel according to Matthew will point to Jesus being the Messiah and Him giving the kingdom if God to His elect and the Gentiles. Matthew, in several parables and even plainly, showed Jesus saying that Jerusalem would be destroyed.

Like Lot had fled Sodom, the elect fled Jerusalem. Jesus was telling them not to get caught back up in Judaism and return to Jerusalem because of false messiahs and false prophets; because Jerusalem was going to be destroyed. He told them not to turn back like Lot's wife did. He was telling then so they would be preserved from the destruction the Jewish Nation would face.

Please read what Luke's Gospel said about this:

"And he said to the disciples, "The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, "Look, there!" or "Look, here!" Do not go out or follow them. For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot--they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all-- so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. Remember Lot's wife. Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it." (Luke 17:22-33 ESV)
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Originally Posted by Douggg
If one was living back in the day of the disciples they would have been taught what their religious leaders taught them.

Doug
Missed that one, apparently.

Are you talking about me?

I was talking about what the disciples thought concerning the messiah prior to the resurrection. As far as a remnant that follows God (that yeshuahsavedme had written in his post), a person can go to any Jewish (Judaism) site and find that they believe the same thing, and it is them (in their view). Which wasn't the case anyway of why the Jews, the disciples before the resurrection, did not consider the messiah as someone who would die for their sins. They were taught, and it was not incorrect, that the messiah would be a descendant of king David who would restore Israel as an independent nation and usher in the messianic age of peace and universal knowledge of God. What the disicples and the Jews didn't understand prior to the resurrection was the gospel of Christ and him crucified.

Doug
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
How about this: instead of repeating what you think Judaism says, just tell me what "Jesus is the Christ" proclaims? Acts 2:36, 18:5, 28. The opposition, remember, is not Jewish Christians.
--Inter

Acts 2:
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Christ in the above verse -it means that God had made Jesus the Savior from our sins. The term "Christ" because with the advent of Christianity, the term gained an extended meaning to also mean Savior from our Sins.

Prior to the resurrection, a person a Jew living in the land of Israel, who spoke only greek, the term Christ, christos, would have meant messiah in the Judaism concept of the messiah - the special anointed king of Israel that God promised to them. The term "Christ" at that time had no implied meaning as Savior from our Sins.

Judaism of today does not refer to their anticipated messiah as "Christ", because "Christ" carries with it the Christian connotation of Savior from our Sins.


Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
re pre Christian Judaism
I think Doug that what you are trying to say between the lines is that the Christian meaning goes sideways from Judaism and does not take over from it as the expected messianic kingdom and new era coming with Messiah. D'ism, Judaism, and futurism all subscribe to that, all have that in common.

this makes the arrival of Christ and the Christian message a non-issue. There would have been no conflict, if not disinterest. You have hollowed out the drama of the NT, and I suppose that is why you won't answer the questions truly. To go back the furthest,
the injury to the heal of the Seed is a phrase meant to convey mortally wounding a victim because a fatal wounding is not possible. The suffering of the Seed was known since the black day in the garden. Then there's the issue of the timeframe. Dan 9's Anointed One accomplishes the list of seven and is cut off but not for himself in the time period.

I don't mean to sound like I'm ignoring your site. I have hours of discussions with messianic Jews. I have an MCS in research in NT backgrounds. That study was under Dr Nolland, one of the editors of the Th. Dict. of the NT. 5 years of koine. I have read most of Sandmel, Grant, Cassuto, Cornfeld, Edersheim, Keller on Judaica. And as you know there is a famous quote of Abraham Lincoln about the internet that we should believe everything on the internet.

Do you think it is possible that the veil means that Judaism does not see itself clearly?

--Inter
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
re pre Christian Judaism
I think Doug that what you are trying to say between the lines is that the Christian meaning goes sideways from Judaism and does not take over from it as the expected messianic kingdom and new era coming with Messiah. D'ism, Judaism, and futurism all subscribe to that, all have that in common.

That the messiah would be the Savior of mankind from the power of sin is something that was not part of the Jewish concept of messiah. That Jesus is the Savior from our sins, does not negate the promise of God regarding that the messiah would be a great King of Israel that would usher in the messianic age of peace and universal knowledge of the One True God throughout the earth.

Judaism doesn't share in the idea that the messiah will be the Savior from out sins.

However, I do agree that Dispensationism, Judaism, futurism all subscribe to the concept of a great King of Israel to usher in the messanic age. In Judaism, of course, they will accept "another" who God did not send them to be their messiah King of Israel - who that another will be the Antichrist. Eventually, after nominally 2 years, 3 months of the false messiah, they will realize their mistake and will embrace Jesus as their King of Israel, and will see him again, which btw is why Jesus only appeared to his followers after the resurrection because they did say blessed he who comes in the name of the Lord.



this makes the arrival of Christ and the Christian message a non-issue.
That of course is incorrect. In Judaism only, they consider Christian belief as "irrelavent".


There would have been no conflict, if not disinterest. You have hollowed out the drama of the NT, and I suppose that is why you won't answer the questions truly.
I don't know what you are talking about. You asked me what is meant by "Christ" in Acts 2:36 and I responded giving a clear explanation.

To go back the furthest,
the injury to the heal of the Seed is a phrase meant to convey mortally wounding a victim because a fatal wounding is not possible. The suffering of the Seed was known since the black day in the garden. Then there's the issue of the timeframe. Dan 9's Anointed One accomplishes the list of seven and is cut off but not for himself in the time period.
If you are making the Christian argument, that is fine, but it was not what the disciples understood back before the resurrection. Their understanding of what Jesus said to the disciples about himself of his death
ahead of his crucifixion - was not understood by them until after the resurrection.

Here are the same verses, again for the umpteenth time, after the resurrection as Jesus was speaking to them.....

Luke 24:
44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.


I don't mean to sound like I'm ignoring your site. I have hours of discussions with messianic Jews. I have an MCS in research in NT backgrounds. That study was under Dr Nolland, one of the editors of the Th. Dict. of the NT. 5 years of koine. I have read most of Sandmel, Grant, Cassuto, Cornfeld, Edersheim, Keller on Judaica. And as you know there is a famous quote of Abraham Lincoln about the internet that we should believe everything on the internet.
Messianic Jews don't represent Judaism. Messianic Jews believe in the gospel. Jews (Judaism) do not. You have to go to a Judaism site, like Jews for Judaism, or MessiahTruth, which are dedicated to counter
Christianity and thus have a honed edge in their own religion of Judaism.

Do you think it is possible that the veil means that Judaism does not see itself clearly? --Inter
No. I think it is that they (Judaism) have conditioned themselves over generations to a point where it is difficult for them to consider Christianity and to seek answers as to such obstacles for them, for example, how Jesus could have been (be) God. They also have some misunderstandings about Satan.

Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
re the veil and the "conditioning"
sorry not to be clear, Doug, but that is the very thing I'm addressing. So your answer would be "No, they can't see it." which is why I would spend a minimum of time at a site about Judaism by Judaism's followers in light of the NT and its declarations.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
re the non-issue
so would you mind saying what the issue with Judaism is in the setting of Jesus and the apostles? It's not that Judaism didn't believe it. It is that they were opposed. why? Because of the belief that the Seed was 'many people' rather than 'one person' (Gal 3). therefore Isaiah 53 could not have been about an individual, and certainly not God, although both were true the whole time.

Are you telling me what Judaism believed in agreement with them, or in disagreement? Here is why I ask. Occasionally at this site, I read people who state a sequential description of Israel getting decieved and destroyed (future they think), but their emotions are displaced. They are really excited that this is going to happen. Very rarely do I find someone saying this who realizes this is really horrible; that denial and disbelief and loss of life is really awful. they seem more excited about Israel being destroyed this way than they are about it believing, and they are "supporters of Israel." With support like that, who needs enemies?

re irrelevant
No, people who find something irrelevant walk away and go back to selling olive oil as they were. Not so any time the claims of Christianity before the resurrection came up. It is not clear to say the disciples didn't think this before the resurrection. To be in denial is not the same as to think differently. Zechariah in Luke 1 expressed that all this was for the forgiveness of sins that far back. So its not the resurrection. Its any time the Spirit of God moves, because, as I said before about Isaiah, he beheld the child born of the young woman who "the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." It is there in their hymnbook, Dougg, but they were in denial when the 490 years were ending.

That is what makes the bypassing of NT historical events puzzling to abide here. The kind of deception, the destructive leadership, it's all there in the events of the 7th decade. Slightly out of focus, a bit different from literalism, but it is there. You and others often write out your speculations on some future events and never look at what happened "in that generation" that was condemned in Mt 23. Extremely puzzling, and very poor homework.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
re the non-issue
so would you mind saying what the issue with Judaism is in the setting of Jesus and the apostles? It's not that Judaism didn't believe it. It is that they were opposed. why? Because of the belief that the Seed was 'many people' rather than 'one person' (Gal 3). therefore Isaiah 53 could not have been about an individual, and certainly not God, although both were true the whole time.

The argument you would get from Judaism is that they believe the suffering servant in Isaiah 53 is "righteous" Israel, which they believe is that God always has a remnant of Israel that stays loyal to God, which they call righteous Israel.

Whether that was the common understanding back in the day of the disciples, I cannot say for certain. It is the argument that Judaism uses today however to counter Christianity's position that the suffering servant is Jesus.

However, that the Jews of the disicples time considered the messiah to be the promised great King of Israel that God would send them is for certain, and verified in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Are you telling me what Judaism believed in agreement with them, or in disagreement? Here is why I ask. Occasionally at this site, I read people who state a sequential description of Israel getting decieved and destroyed (future they think), but their emotions are displaced. They are really excited that this is going to happen. Very rarely do I find someone saying this who realizes this is really horrible; that denial and disbelief and loss of life is really awful. they seem more excited about Israel being destroyed this way than they are about it believing, and they are "supporters of Israel." With support like that, who needs enemies?

I am not sure of what you are getting at, but Judaism of today as far as their view of the messiah is identical to what the disciples view of the messiah was - prior to the resurrection.

re irrelevant
No, people who find something irrelevant walk away and go back to selling olive oil as they were. Not so any time the claims of Christianity before the resurrection came up. It is not clear to say the disciples didn't think this before the resurrection. To be in denial is not the same as to think differently. Zechariah in Luke 1 expressed that all this was for the forgiveness of sins that far back. So its not the resurrection. Its any time the Spirit of God moves, because, as I said before about Isaiah, he beheld the child born of the young woman who "the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." It is there in their hymnbook, Dougg, but they were in denial when the 490 years were ending.

Forgiveness of sins is something that the Jews (Judaism) believe in. Before the crucifixion and resurrection, Jesus forgave many of their sins, saying your sins have been forgiven. But he did not say your sins have been atoned for, to them. Jesus's death on the cross was more than forgiveness of sins, it was also for atonement of sins, and for propitiation of sins - that is, washing them away as though they never happended.


That is what makes the bypassing of NT historical events puzzling to abide here. The kind of deception, the destructive leadership, it's all there in the events of the 7th decade. Slightly out of focus, a bit different from literalism, but it is there. You and others often write out your speculations on some future events and never look at what happened "in that generation" that was condemned in Mt 23. Extremely puzzling, and very poor homework. --Inter

What didn't happen to that generation of 70 AD was Jesus's return. The Mt of Olives is still intact.

Doug
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
OK, so you agree that Judaism had the great kingdom of David belief at that time. The friction with the Christian message was that this was countered by the kingdom that was now here. There was friction before the resurrection--over authority to forgive, over the sabbath, over eschatology, because they knew what he was saying and knew it was in their Scriptures--"which testify of me."

You're splitting hairs about atonement v. forgiveness. Christ's authority was about both. Obviously the merit lies in the work on the cross but that can be accessed ahead of time, which maybe is the point of this rabbit trail. It was prefigured and the Spirit helped people see it ahead of time.

I feel like you have gone 360 and are now saying nothing. The Christian message was not new, it was retroactive--saying that its message was back there all along. Do we share that?

The remarks about the misplaced emotions of the "future" view of Israel are plain enough: excitement about all the wrong things--even if they do happen that way.

Yes, the 2nd coming has not happened--I've tried to say that each time about Mt 24:29. Mt of Olives? that has nothing to do with the 2nd coming. There are no Judaic details that need to happen for the end of this world to happen. The messianic kingdom is now and limps along at times. No ordinary language passage about the 2nd coming has any Judaic details; I would not build a case on a totally symbolic apocalytic document, not when the 1st debate is how much of it had to do with the 7th decade, which I see as substantial.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
OK, so you agree that Judaism had the great kingdom of David belief at that time. The friction with the Christian message was that this was countered by the kingdom that was now here. There was friction before the resurrection--over authority to forgive, over the sabbath, over eschatology, because they knew what he was saying and knew it was in their Scriptures--"which testify of me."

The friction before the resurrection by the Jewish leadership was that Jesus when he said your sins are forgiven, it was that he was equaling himself with God. But no, it was not that they understood or believed that their scriptures testified of him.

Judaism even to this day does not believe that Jesus came back from the grave. Which as I pointed out in my previous post, Jesus did not appear to those who did not welcome him as he entered Jerusalem - saying blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord. He only appeared to those who had thought he was the promised great King of Israel.
You're splitting hairs about atonement v. forgiveness. Christ's authority was about both. Obviously the merit lies in the work on the cross but that can be accessed ahead of time, which maybe is the point of this rabbit trail. It was prefigured and the Spirit helped people see it ahead of time.
It is not splitting hairs; it is an essential part of Christian doctrine. You are wrong that the Holy Spirit helped people see it ahead of time, because it was not until after the resurrection, that Jesus in John 20:22 breathed on the disciples and said receive ye thee the Holy Spirit.

John 20:
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

I feel like you have gone 360 and are now saying nothing. The Christian message was not new, it was retroactive--saying that its message was back there all along. Do we share that?
I think it is more of a case that you are hearing nothing.

You simply have not acknowledged Luke 24:44-47 as proof that the disciples did not understand the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and him crucified, ahead of the resurrection. And that the Jews thought before the resurrection that the role of the messiah was to be the great King of Israel who would restore the kingdom as independent nation. Here is one more verse to prove that point...

The disciples speaking...
Luke 24

21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

The remarks about the misplaced emotions of the "future" view of Israel are plain enough: excitement about all the wrong things--even if they do happen that way.

Yes, the 2nd coming has not happened--I've tried to say that each time about Mt 24:29. Mt of Olives? that has nothing to do with the 2nd coming. There are no Judaic details that need to happen for the end of this world to happen. The messianic kingdom is now and limps along at times. No ordinary language passage about the 2nd coming has any Judaic details; I would not build a case on a totally symbolic apocalytic document, not when the 1st debate is how much of it had to do with the 7th decade, which I see as substantial.
--Inter
The Mt of Olives has everything to do with Jesus's second coming because the Mt. of Olives is where Jesus departed from in Acts 1 and the two angels said he would be returning in like manner.

Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
re atonement and righteousness:
I do not think for a minute that people reading about atonement for sins in Is 53, about the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS in Jer 23-33, about Abraham's faith counting as righteousness, about the Melchizedek the King who was righteousnes and a priest, about the Anointed one atoning for iniquity, would have any doubt that Abraham believed the exact thing Paul taught!

They knew all these concepts, but to be in denial that Jesus was fulfilling them was the problem to be overcome, the veil. That's why i asked you to define the veil, and why I asked you whether Judaism might not be able to see its own veil!

As soon as John said behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (in the same sense as Dan 9 and Is 49--Rom 11), someone there would have known at least something had broken in. And we are not saved by knowledge, which will be imperfect, but by faith and it will be 'in our unbelief.' (Faith will not be perfect, but the object will) That perfect object is what John proclaimed, and no one in Judaism could have mistaken the boldness of "the Lamb of God". This was not a Dali moment; John did not speak something irrational into a vacuum and have a bunch of followers mindlessly agree, yeah, cool, brother. (Dali paints all his C'ian scenes as though they never happened in real space/time/history; they are always 'phantom', see-through, contentless).

The salvation that was coming was not a detour or a side story or surprise to what was supposed to come to Israel. It was the fulfillment. This is why the resurrection of Christ is "the fulfillment of everything promised to the fathers" in Acts 13's sermon. That's because it is proof that we are justified from our sins; it could not have happened without the Father's approval of the accomplishment of Christ. It, not a restored kingdom of David, was where Judaism was headed.

When I debate this with BW he breaks into 'that's about salvation' or 'that's a salvation verse.' Meaning: it has nothing to do with Israel's "real" promises. Or the "real" meaning of Rom 11 is about the restored Davidic kingdom. That has always been the imagined detour of the "church" that does not think the whole business was headed toward and designed for and shaped for the mission work to the nations (Acts 13's quote of Is 49).

NOte that in Acts 13's sermon, David fell asleep and "had served God's purposes in his generation". We therefore have a case that those purposes were over with, since they are not mentioned again. What is mentioned is that Israel had a mission to the world.

I would think we could agree to that. The burning in the apostles hearts on the Emmaus road may well refer to realizing that Judaism should have known all along, that it is not aware of its veil.

As for the Mt Olives thing. He'll return in that manner, obvious, and in time and space. I don't know what the Mt Olives has to do with anything.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
re atonement and righteousness:
I do not think for a minute that people reading about atonement for sins in Is 53, about the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS in Jer 23-33, about Abraham's faith counting as righteousness, about the Melchizedek the King who was righteousnes and a priest, about the Anointed one atoning for iniquity, would have any doubt that Abraham believed the exact thing Paul taught!

They knew all these concepts, but to be in denial that Jesus was fulfilling them was the problem to be overcome, the veil.

Not before the resurrection, they didn't. And neither would you have declared any of the above back then, before the resurrection, as to predicting the gospel of Christ and hims crucified. Why? Because, as a saved person, you have what they didn't have back then, that is, indwelt by the Holy Spirit who leads into all truth and testifies of Jesus.

So now you are acknowledging that Christ and him crucified was kept a secret from the beginning of time? Until it was unveiled after the resurrection?
That's why i asked you to define the veil, and why I asked you whether Judaism might not be able to see its own veil!
First of all, as many persons have told you here, your writing and posting style is confusing and hard to follow. You don't quote the other person, when you respond, like all of the other posters here. And you don't copy and paste the bible passages that you internally are thinking about - expecting us to read your mind. So we are left to guess as to what you are writing. Anyway....

Om Romans 11:25...
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

As soon as John said behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (in the same sense as Dan 9 and Is 49--Rom 11), someone there would have known at least something had broken in
.

The above statement is what I am talking about regarding your poor communication skills. "something had 'broken in' "........ we are left to guess what you mean by "broken in".

And we are not saved by knowledge, which will be imperfect, but by faith and it will be 'in our unbelief.' (Faith will not be perfect, but the object will) That perfect object is what John proclaimed, and no one in Judaism could have mistaken the boldness of "the Lamb of God".
More bad communications. "That perfect object".... what does "object" mean? And what does "boldness" of the "Lamb of God", what's that supposed to mean? Flowery language - a good argument does not make.

You have the intelligence and ability to communicate in excellent fashion, but you are not applying yourself.

John was the mouthpiece for the Holy Spirit. No-one at the time would have understood that meant the Lord Jesus Christ and him crucified. None of the disciples, no one, prior to the resurrection, went around preaching the gospel of Lord Jesus Christ and him crucified, as a result of hearing John the Baptist .

This was not a Dali moment; John did not speak something irrational into a vacuum and have a bunch of followers mindlessly agree, yeah, cool, brother. (Dali paints all his C'ian scenes as though they never happened in real space/time/history; they are always 'phantom', see-through, contentless).
:D:D:D... oh brother, you have already admitted that the gospel was veiled to Judaism. And what religion do you think the disciples were?

What does Dali moment have to do - with the Holy Spirit speaking through John, in similitude as Peter made the declaration that Jesus is ....

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.


Then not much later, Peter denied him three times at the crucifixion - instead of preaching to them who accused him of being one of Jesus's followers that the crucifixion was all foretold in scriptures.... (because Peter at that time did not understand the gospel, which later after the resurrection and having received the Holy Spirit would die for).


John the Baptist, likewise, questioned as to Jesus was the one, the messiah, to restore Israel to its greatness as an independent kingdom.



The salvation that was coming was not a detour or a side story or surprise to what was supposed to come to Israel. It was the fulfillment. This is why the resurrection of Christ is "the fulfillment of everything promised to the fathers" in Acts 13's sermon. That's because it is proof that we are justified from our sins; it could not have happened without the Father's approval of the accomplishment of Christ. It, not a restored kingdom of David, was where Judaism was headed.
The gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and him crucified was kept a secret since the beginning of the world. You need to deal with that.

The sermon(s) in Acts are all in retrospect. That is, they are after the resurrection and Jesus had opened the understanding of the TANACH to the disciples, after which they became known as the apostles. And Paul was taught directly as a result of the road to Damascus encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ... who up to then had persecuted the followers of Jesus in spite of Saul of Tarsus being an expert in the very scriptures that you claim would have made it obvious that Jesus was the fulfillment of.

What your arguments fail to take into account is that it was after the resurrection that the Holy Spirit was given to indwell Christians. And to them who were (are) not yet Christians, it is the Holy Spirit who draws men to the risen Christ, the Savior from our sins.


Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I could answer all the several points but I have to ask: are you thinking you can exempt Israel from what it should have done because of what you think is its future? That seems to be what binds all your points together. If so, that is the main reason I am not a "theologian." I am a historian, consulting with rabbis, linguists, archeologists, historians. Not people trying to figure out the future, because they have missed so much and come across as toying with history.

(The thing it should have done here is not to have prevented the crucifixion, but rather, phase 2: they should have become its most ardent missionaries. that's what the messianic kingdom is all about, why it reads so universal and worldwide, and has no concern about a restored Davidic kingdom except to apply that to the mission as in "David's fallen tent" in Amos 9 in Acts 15. I always follow the NT template for using the OT.

--Inter
 
Upvote 0