Questions about Luke 16:16

[Acts29]

Do you believe that you yourself... is the John that is to come?....The Final act being Chap 29.?

Fix your eyes on Jesus and he will explain to you that John ( Elijah ) has already come.

Ha Ha

 

[Acts29]

It's a real good and legitimate question. My own thought is that all of the OT prophets and leaders were subservient to Christ's 1st Coming and death on the cross. None of them could bring Eternal Life to Israel, even though they were kept in covenant relationship with God. So everything the Law and the Prophets were designed to do was complete Israel's covenant with God by ushering in the means of Eternal Life.

First, thank you for taking the time and effort to reply point by point.
Do you believe God's covenant with Israel remains to this day? I understand the new covenant, the just shall live by faith, etc. God making a new, and better imo, covenant does not delete His prior covenant with Israel, as I see it. (Not trying to suggest you think it does.) If God's covenant with Israel remains, that would pretty much mean the law and prophets still have a role to play for Israel.

It's a little confusing, but here's my take on it. The Law and the Prophets presented a covenant relationship between God and Israel based on the Law. But it would not result in Eternal Life until the Messianic Kingdom comes.

This anticipation of the Messiah continued up until John, the messenger of Messiah. After John the Baptism the Gospel of the Messianic Kingdom began to be preached by Jesus and by his Apostles.

And this Kingdom was preached even before the cross to the Jews, who proceeded to try to enter the Kingdom by their own independent efforts, apart from dependence on God. They were promoting self-autonomy in the name of trust in God.

Fair enough.

It is not "revival" Jesus spoke of, but rather, of the Pharisees who thought they could "earn" their way into Heaven through good works. They did good deeds while retaining a relationship apart from God.

Their relationship with God was pretend and fake. They tried "forcing* their way into God's Kingdom, by taking down Christ, who represented the opposite way of achieving this. By default they hoped to retain their position in Israel, representing God's Kingdom on earth.

Yes, the Jews who rejected Jesus were forcing their way into retaining Israel's place, even though God had rejected them as hypocrites. Instead of repenting they wanted to take away Christ, the messenger of God's rebuke.

I have never considered that angle, that the Pharisees were the ones trying to force their way into the kingdom. It seems Jesus indicates people actually pressing into the kingdom, as in, they would be successful at doing so. But, your views are noted.

Nominal, pretend Christians today also try to "force" their way into God's Kingdom, by retaining their place in the traditional churches. They wish to remove those who maintain a true message of faith and dependence upon God.

They don't really believe in a spiritual relationship with God, but wish to emulate their idea of what a "good Christian life" is. This is just a form of modern idolatry, where they can fashion their own idea of "Christianity," and put their own words into it.

Wow. That is pretty fiery. I can't say I disagree.

This comes to mind. Jesus said in that day there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Think about the teeth gnashers for a moment. Would atheists and unbelievers gnash their teeth at Jesus whom they do not know or even believe in? I don't think so. Revelation 6 mentions the wicked asking rocks to fall on them to hide from the wrath of the Lamb. The AC will be destroyed at the brightness of His coming, etc. That seems to suggest the outright wicked will be in great fear that day, not gnashing their teeth. That really only leaves one group, the religious who thought they were righteous, but were actually lawless. The Pharisees have new names today, but they still exist. They likewise will gnash their teeth at Jesus, once they realize they are cast into outer darkness.

No, but I do believe that history repeats itself. Just as Israel became a temporal representation of God's Kingdom on earth for awhile, and then apostacized, so also European Civilization and beyond have entered also into this temporal representation of God's Kingdom, through the international Church.

And we also will see an apostasy in European Civilization, and across the world, I believe. This will mean a day of reckoning for the whole world, just as it meant a day of reckoning for Israel when they backslid and rejected Jesus. Yes, the present day apostasy of the Church means "the end is near!"

Europe is in a dire condition for sure, as is much of the west. I think the enemy thinks he will reach the tipping point soon and much pressure/persecution will be attempted. Likely within a year, imo. The people's willingness to kneel at the altar of government during the Covid crisis has emboldened the enemy. I think many of the wicked were surprised how fast the people caved in and has taken full advantage to press even harder. The censorship by the tech companies against their own customers makes no logical sense. When logic goes out the window it is a good sign it is a spiritual matter. A boiling point is near, as is the end.

 

[ralliann]

First, thank you for taking the time and effort to reply point by point.
Do you believe God's covenant with Israel remains to this day?

The covenant made with Israel is Sinai. The Sinai covenant was not made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, nor the twelve patrarchs.
De 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

I understand the new covenant, the just shall live by faith, etc. God making a new, and better imo, covenant does not delete His prior covenant with Israel, as I see it.

The covenants made with Abraham, are not deleted by the Sinai covenant. Which covenants are law. Since these covenants are law As Paul says, then every jot and title of it will be done. What law?
Ro 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. which law established and we fulfill in Christ.
Hear the law... (the law of faith)
Gal 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

(Not trying to suggest you think it does.) If God's covenant with Israel remains, that would pretty much mean the law and prophets still have a role to play for Israel.

The law and the prophets speak concerning several covenants made with individuals. Mainly Genesis 17 concerning kings, (kingdom).
The royal seed.......
Ge 17:6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
Ge 17:16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her. {she … : Heb. she shall become nations }

The covenant made with Israel at Sinai did not disannul the covenant made with their fathers. Which as shown before,,,, the Sinai covenant was not made with their fathers.
Gentiles and Jews that accept Christ are indeed establishing the law (the things of the kings) promised Abraham
Ac 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
1Co 4:8 Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.

 

[RandyPNW]

First, thank you for taking the time and effort to reply point by point.
Do you believe God's covenant with Israel remains to this day? I understand the new covenant, the just shall live by faith, etc. God making a new, and better imo, covenant does not delete His prior covenant with Israel, as I see it. (Not trying to suggest you think it does.) If God's covenant with Israel remains, that would pretty much mean the law and prophets still have a role to play for Israel.

Absolutely I believe God's covenant promise remains with Israel--only now through the New Covenant. The Old Covenant of Mosaic Law expired, and God had fully anticipated it would expire, just as the Law was utterly unable, at its core, of ushering in Eternal Life on its own. Remember that only a single broken law could expel Adam and Eve from Eternal Life. The Law of Moses simply reinforced that fact. Only Christ would provide Eternal Life where the Law failed. So yes, God had every intention of maintaining His relationship with the nation Israel. But it had to come through Christ, and not through the Covenant of Law.

I have never considered that angle, that the Pharisees were the ones trying to force their way into the kingdom. It seems Jesus indicates people actually pressing into the kingdom, as in, they would be successful at doing so. But, your views are noted.

Yes, I went through these questions way back in the mid-70s, when the New International Version, the NT exclusively, first appeared where I was. I had been reading George Eldon Ladd, a NT theologian and specialist in biblical eschatology.

I noted where he began to introduce to me a foreign view of the passage, "the Kingdom comes by force," and then saw the same language in the NIV NT Bible. I searched to see if Ladd had contributed to this reading, and I believe back then his name was listed among the credits. I haven't seen it since then.

The older reading of the text, prior to the NIV, seemed to suggest that wicked Jewish leaders were trying to force their way into controlling the temporal kingdom of God on earth, which is Israel. And this seemed much more natural to me.

Unfortunately for my pov, people have picked up on Ladd's view and on this new language in the NIV, and has become very popular with Christians who adopt a "Faith" attitude. They claim they can do this or that, and so bring in the Kingdom by force.

That seems very unnatural to me, and in fact, unspiritual. How can we "force" God's Kingdom to come? But I don't make divisions with Christians who want to believe this. We all need to be convicted by our own guidance from God.

Wow. That is pretty fiery. I can't say I disagree.

If you think about it, most all of Europe has at one time or another claimed to be Christian. So when that society changes and goes back to pagan living, it in a sense brings back "7 demons with it." It is a replay of what happened to Israel when they backslid, in the days just before the Babylonian Captivity. Religious people, when they turn away from God and back to their old ways, become awful people!

Europe is in a dire condition for sure, as is much of the west. I think the enemy thinks he will reach the tipping point soon and much pressure/persecution will be attempted. Likely within a year, imo. The people's willingness to kneel at the altar of government during the Covid crisis has emboldened the enemy. I think many of the wicked were surprised how fast the people caved in and has taken full advantage to press even harder. The censorship by the tech companies against their own customers makes no logical sense. When logic goes out the window it is a good sign it is a spiritual matter. A boiling point is near, as is the end.

I don't make dates, but I agree with your assessment of the dire condition of the West today, particularly with COVID. Progressives have become almost militant and dedicated to a one-party system. And its object appears to be to shut down Christian culture as a threat to their "freedoms." Thanks for sharing!

 

[pescador]

Absolutely I believe God's covenant promise remains with Israel--only now through the New Covenant. The Old Covenant of Mosaic Law expired, and God had fully anticipated it would expire, just as the Law was utterly unable, at its core, of ushering in Eternal Life on its own. Remember that only a single broken law could expel Adam and Eve from Eternal Life. The Law of Moses simply reinforced that fact. Only Christ would provide Eternal Life where the Law failed. So yes, God had every intention of maintaining His relationship with the nation Israel. But it had to come through Christ, and not through the Covenant of Law.



Yes, I went through these questions way back in the mid-70s, when the New International Version, the NT exclusively, first appeared where I was. I had been reading George Eldon Ladd, a NT theologian and specialist in biblical eschatology.

I noted where he began to introduce to me a foreign view of the passage, "the Kingdom comes by force," and then saw the same language in the NIV NT Bible. I searched to see if Ladd had contributed to this reading, and I believe back then his name was listed among the credits. I haven't seen it since then.

The older reading of the text, prior to the NIV, seemed to suggest that wicked Jewish leaders were trying to force their way into controlling the temporal kingdom of God on earth, which is Israel. And this seemed much more natural to me.

Unfortunately for my pov, people have picked up on Ladd's view and on this new language in the NIV, and has become very popular with Christians who adopt a "Faith" attitude. They claim they can do this or that, and so bring in the Kingdom by force.

That seems very unnatural to me, and in fact, unspiritual. How can we "force" God's Kingdom to come? But I don't make divisions with Christians who want to believe this. We all need to be convicted by our own guidance from God.



If you think about it, most all of Europe has at one time or another claimed to be Christian. So when that society changes and goes back to pagan living, it in a sense brings back "7 demons with it." It is a replay of what happened to Israel when they backslid, in the days just before the Babylonian Captivity. Religious people, when they turn away from God and back to their old ways, become awful people!



I don't make dates, but I agree with your assessment of the dire condition of the West today, particularly with COVID. Progressives have become almost militant and dedicated to a one-party system. And its object appears to be to shut down Christian culture as a threat to their "freedoms." Thanks for sharing!

I am a progressive and a devoted, believing Christian. I am not dedicated to a one-party system, nor do I have the slightest desire to shut down Christian culture as a threat to my "freedoms."

There you have the facts from a true progressive, not from some rumor mill.

 

[Acts29]

Absolutely I believe God's covenant promise remains with Israel--only now through the New Covenant. The Old Covenant of Mosaic Law expired, and God had fully anticipated it would expire, just as the Law was utterly unable, at its core, of ushering in Eternal Life on its own. Remember that only a single broken law could expel Adam and Eve from Eternal Life. The Law of Moses simply reinforced that fact. Only Christ would provide Eternal Life where the Law failed. So yes, God had every intention of maintaining His relationship with the nation Israel. But it had to come through Christ, and not through the Covenant of Law.

That is replacement theology, in which I do not agree. The covenant with Israel has not expired and many scriptures attest to that. I don't understand why Christians cannot see that God has both covenants working for a reason. The new is better in every way, for sure. As Paul wrote, Abraham had two sons, one free and one in bondage. That is still two sons, not one. The covenant of bondage, God's remedial program for Israel, has a purpose in the kingdom.

Leviticus 18:5 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the Lord.

Habakkuk 2:4 ... the just shall live by his faith.

Both ways lead to life. Remember, the OT system is a type/shadow of things to come. The Levites were given NO land inheritance within Israel, because God Himself IS their inheritance. The Levites are the symbol of the believing church.

Revelation 1:6 and has made us a kingdom of priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
Revelation 7:14 ... “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple. And He who sits on the throne will dwell among them.
1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people

The church was never given any land inheritance promise just like the Levites. As priests, God IS our inheritance. In the OT only the priests could come into the inner Temple. To me, the purpose and destiny of the church is quite plain. Also in the OT, there was a place for non-priests to live and worship from a distance. The final state of the kingdom has both priests and nations. Simply being a Christian does not negate the rest of the kingdom. Don't you think God knew in advance that 98% of Israel would not believe in Christ? Of course, He did. Why do think He chose them?

 

[RandyPNW]

That is replacement theology, in which I do not agree. The covenant with Israel has not expired and many scriptures attest to that. I don't understand why Christians cannot see that God has both covenants working for a reason. The new is better in every way, for sure. As Paul wrote, Abraham had two sons, one free and one in bondage. That is still two sons, not one. The covenant of bondage, God's remedial program for Israel, has a purpose in the kingdom.

You're wrong. Traditional Christianity does *not* believe that *both* covenants, OT and NT, remain in effect. Classic Pauline Theology teaches that the Law ran its course when Christ appeared and fulfilled what it had intended to do.

It had not intended to last forever, even though it was intended to be continuous, ie lasting from generation to generation until it had run its course. When Christ came, he brought about the offering that the Law's offerings had only symbolized and foreshadowed. To continue to offer animal sacrifices under the Law is *not* taught in Scriptures. And this is *not* Replacement Theology--not in the least.

Replacement Theology rejects Israel has a covenant people of God. I don't reject Israel as a covenant people of God. They will be restored as a nation of God under the New Covenant when the nation converts to Christ at his coming. This restoration, therefore, will be a NT restoration, and not a reinstitution of the Old Covenant.

Leviticus 18:5 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the Lord.

Habakkuk 2:4 ... the just shall live by his faith.

Both ways lead to life. Remember, the OT system is a type/shadow of things to come. The Levites were given NO land inheritance within Israel, because God Himself IS their inheritance. The Levites are the symbol of the believing church.

Being symbols of something does not mean the OT shadows were intended to remain once the fulfillment of those shadows had come! The "life" that Israel obtained by keeping the Law was a temporal existence on earth, extended by keeping faith with God through the Law. But this was not Eternal Life. Only Christ could pay the price for that.

Revelation 1:6 and has made us a kingdom of priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
Revelation 7:14 ... “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple. And He who sits on the throne will dwell among them.
1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people

Yes, this is a NT priesthood, and not the Aaronic and Levitical priesthood. It was Christ's NT priesthood, which has been extended to us. We do not earn our own Salvation, but we serve God as His priests through the covering that Christ has extended to us by his own work of redemption.

The church was never given any land inheritance promise just like the Levites. As priests, God IS our inheritance. In the OT only the priests could come into the inner Temple. To me, the purpose and destiny of the church is quite plain. Also in the OT, there was a place for non-priests to live and worship from a distance. The final state of the kingdom has both priests and nations. Simply being a Christian does not negate the rest of the kingdom. Don't you think God knew in advance that 98% of Israel would not believe in Christ? Of course, He did. Why do think He chose them?

I can't make any sense of this. God chose the entire nation of Israel to convert to Christianity. He did not fulfill the OT Law by saving .02 percent of Israel!

All Christians have God as their portion, through the sacrifice of Christ. He is our heir, and nothing of this world. Yes, God converts nations. That doesn't mean everybody in a nation will be saved--only that God's promises are fulfilled to the nations when they convert to Christianity. This encourages salvation among many, as well as protect the interests of social justice in a society.

 

[RandyPNW]

I am a progressive and a devoted, believing Christian. I am not dedicated to a one-party system, nor do I have the slightest desire to shut down Christian culture as a threat to my "freedoms."

There you have the facts from a true progressive, not from some rumor mill.

Here we have a single claim without verification, saying, "Trust me. It's true." I've been watching the news for decades. And what I've seen over the last several years is progressives turning callous and threatening, loud and screechy, railing against Christian values without directly describing it as such.

If you are different, then you are the exception, and not the rule. Or you're just taking sides and not actively part of the tidal wave I refer to as Progressivism. I'm sure there are tons of so-called "progressives" who either don't know what they're doing, spiritually, or who simply follow it as some kind of popular wave.

If one follows Enlightenment Philosophy through to Social Liberalism and Progressivism, you'll recognize that at its core it's opposed to conservative Christian values. It values a plurality of beliefs, and anything but a Christian ideology. Even Islam, with its violent rhetoric, is preferable to Christianity, which is viewed as backward, corrupt, and the cause of all wars.

Progressivism in practice acts as if sin is not real, and that what is really needed is disregard for religious differences, depending on social programs run by government. Any sense of a society deferring to a moral compact with God was denied or ignored. It was deemed irrelevant in light of a greater interest shown towards equality of religious and moral views.