yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
No. No interpretation by man is permitted. What God Means, God Breathed / Inspired Himself, and never permits private interpretation. It is written. It is so.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No. No interpretation by man is permitted. What God Means, God Breathed / Inspired Himself, and never permits private interpretation. It is written. It is so.Naturally, you would think your interpretation is the correct one.
Not those who obey the Father. He says Scripture is NOT OPEN to private interpretation, ever.
He never preached about an earthly kingdom. He uses the terms, "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" exclusively, indicating that the realm of the kingdom was NEVER intended to be earthly. And then there is of course the matter of him explicitly saying that it was not of this earth. There is no evidence that he made any change at all in his teaching on this. In fact, after he was raised from the dead, he mocked two of his disciples for thinking that there was ever any doubt as to what was to take place.
Luke 24:25,26
Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
This is a stretching of the text to attempt meeting a pre-conceived narrative.
The problem with interpreting Acts 3:17-20 as being some sort of attempt to extend an olive branch and establish an earthly kingdom is that there was never any mention or promise of an earthly kingdom by Jesus or the prophecies. Also, you have the problem of the the sermon on the Day of Pentecost where Peter explains that it was foretold that Jesus would sit on the throne, not on earth but in heaven. He's preaching to Jews, the same Jews who crucified Christ and he doesn't offer them membership in an earthly kingdom but a heavenly one. He's explaining why it is they were wrong in their own interpretation of the scriptures and this explanation causes thousands to repent, obey and become Christians.
Jesus pointed out that scripture was not speaking of earthly things before he was crucified. As he points out at the end of Luke's gospel, it was always known that many Jews would reject his kingdom. Not a surprise, not unplanned for. They were given 33 years to submit and then God destroyed their earthly kingdom. Modern Israel is not any sort of re-establishment of God's people. That cow left the barn.
It was never going to be a physical kingdom and it never will be.
No. No interpretation by man is permitted. What God Means, God Breathed / Inspired Himself, and never permits private interpretation. It is written. It is so.
Most criticism of Dispensationalism has centered on the Rapture, the most well known belief of Dispensationalists. Much criticism has been focused on their treatment of Jews and Israel, which sometimes sets up a two-tiered scheme of salvation. A lot of criticism has been focused on Dispensationalism as a surprisingly recent belief system. Dispensationalists are extreme literalists but this doesn't mean that they agree with other literalists.
As we shall see, the Dispensationalists say that the crucifixion of Christ and the entire church age that followed, is only a "parenthesis" in God's plan. God's original plan is on hold. Most Christians find this rather jarring, considering the emphasis that Paul put on "Christ crucified." A critic would say that the whole notion of a parenthesis is only needed to make their end-of-the-world calculations come out right.
This thread focuses on the most basic idea of Dispensationalism, besides dispensations. Dispensationalism claims that God offered the Jews a chance to make Jesus their earthly King. Jesus would then have overthrown the Romans and established Israel as a theocratic Kingdom, eventually covering the world. Since this was God's original plan, Christianity came about when the Jews rejected the Kingship of Jesus. God went to Plan B, which included the (crucifixion), the (resurrection), the (ascension), (Pentecost), and the (church age).
"This offer of the kingdom which was extended through Christ, John, and the disciples to the nation [Israel] was rejected by that nation, notwithstanding the fact that it was in complete fulfillment of every divinely given prediction. It was a bona fide offer and, had they received Him as their King, the nation's hope would have been realized."
Chafer, Lewis Sperry. The Collected Works of Lewis Sperry Chafer - Seven books in one. Jawbone Digital. Kindle Edition. The Kingdom in History and Prophecy, Chapter V: The Kingdom Rejected and Postponed, Kindle location 3470-3473.
Chafer (1871-1952) founded the Dallas Theological Seminary. He is one of the most frequently quoted Dispensationalists. According to Chafer, there are seven Dispensations in the Bible. Other interpreters have added or subtracted from this. More conventional theologians say there are only two, the Old Testament and the New Testament.
The claim of a Kingdom offer made by Chafer and other Dispensationalists is flatly contrary to the Bible. It also leaves Christian theology in chaos.
"14 After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself."
John 6: 14-15 NIV
According to John, it was not the Jews who rejected the offer of a Kingdom, but Jesus who fled from those who wanted to make Him a King. Jesus did not intend to lead a revolt against Rome and local monarchs like Herod.
There are other Gospel verses that contradict Chafer's notion of Jesus setting up a theocratic Jewish kingdom.
20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”[c]
Luke 17:20-21 NIV
c:Luke 17:21 Or is within you
20 Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; 21 nor will they say, ‘Lo, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”[c]
Luke 17: 20-21 RSV
c: Luke 17:21 Or within you
When the Pharisees ask when is the Kingdom coming, Jesus doesn't say that the Jews have to accept a theocratic kingdom for it to happen. Instead He says that the Kingdom of Heaven is more subtle than the one they are expecting.
Rev. Chafer's notion that the crucifixion wasn't planed from the beginning is apparently contradicted by this verse.
70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him.
John 6:70-71 RSV
It looks like Judas was chosen as an Apostle precisely because the crucifixion was the plan from the beginning.
You are not a Jew so you are not familiar with the prophetic promises in the OT.
If you are convinced there will never be a physical kingdom, you will naturally interpret those promises differently. That is fine.
I'm convinced because the author of those prophecies came and told us what they meant and told us that the kingdom was not of this earth. And he "opened the hearts" of the apostles to the meaning of those prophecies. Then they preached a spiritual kingdom and wrote the meaning of those prophecies in books.
But I *am* a Jew, having been born into that spiritual kingdom of Israel and circumcised with the circumcision not made with hands. "Thus all Israel will be saved." I have been grafted into the spiritual kingdom of Israel along with the remnant who accepted the Messiah's teachings.
I do also believe that the New Covenant officially begins with Jesus Christ's death, as well. Jesus celebrated the Lord's supper and said the cup of the fruit of the vine represents His shed blood of the New Testament (i.e. New Covenant) (Luke 22:20). Also, the temple veil was torn from top to bottom (Matthew 27:51); This lets us know that the laws on the priesthood and the animal sacrifices had ended. Meaning: The Old Law is no more
Clearly the the 69th week has already transpired, and the 70th week has not happened yet.
If you reject dispensationalism and instead embrace replacement theology, it is understandable why you would come to those beliefs.
Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all.
This is a very popular view but unfortunately not born by Scripture. Animal sacrifices continued on even throughout the book of Acts.
The resurrected Christ, in the most popular version of the Great Commission, told the 12 to preach to others that "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". (Matthew 28:20)
Even as late as Acts 21, those who believe were all zealous for the Law. (v20)
Someone forgot to tell them?
Heb 10:11
And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
It's obvious too from the council in Jerusalem that they were not teaching Gentiles to take on the Mosaic law. Christians were not taking animals to the temple as sin offerings. We don't see Peter or John or Paul teaching Christians that they must adhere to the Mosaic law. The opposite is true. They taught that the old law was dead and that Christians were to follow the law of Christ.
Thanks captain Obvious but I don't really care what it is called. I don't believe a doctrine because of its label but because it was taught by Jesus and his apostles.
The reason I believe what I do, is because I read the scriptures and accept them as the truth. Jesus, a Jew, taught that his kingdom was not earthly. Paul taught that the real Jews were those who accepted and believed Jesus and lived by this faith. That makes me and the rest of Jesus' disciples, spiritual Jews according to the scriptures.
Well, I am not a hardcore Dispensationalist whereby I believe every little thing they say. I do not believe all Dispensationalists believe the same thing, either.
This is a very popular view but unfortunately not born by Scripture. Animal sacrifices continued on even throughout the book of Acts.
The resurrected Christ, in the most popular version of the Great Commission, told the 12 to preach to others that "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". (Matthew 28:20)
Even as late as Acts 21, those who believe were all zealous for the Law. (v20)
Someone forgot to tell them?
Given that God through the angel Gabriel said that the time of the prophecy would be 70 weeks rather than 69, and the Messiah came in the period prophesied, in the 70th week, the only way one can say we're in the 70th week now (or maybe some later time) is to say that the Messiah hasn't actually yet come, that Gabriel was mistaken. The covenant was to be made in the 70th week. Every other week in the prophecy happened in regular measure (7 years per week) but the last week, rather than being 7 years long has stretched out past 2000 years.
"and he will confirm a covenant with many for one week," - adding up the weeks that have elapsed in the prophecy, the time of the covenant's confirmation is the 70th week.
Did Jesus not really come and confirm his covenant? Do you see how absurd this doctrine is to those of us who accept that Jesus came and made a covenant and sealed it with his crucifixion and resurrection? We are asked to believe that prophecy was not actually fulfilled in the time allotted for its completion by God, his angel and his prophet.
Where's the gap mentioned in scripture?
My Commentary to Daniel 9:24-27:
24 "Seventy weeks [70 weeks] are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks [7 weeks], and threescore and two weeks [62 weeks]: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks [62 weeks] shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself [The Messiah is Jesus who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the entire world]: and the people of the prince [the people of the prince of the power of the air, i.e. the devil - see: Ephesians 2:2] that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [i.e. the Romans destroyed the Jewish temple in 70AD]; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he [The "he" is the "prince" of the people mentioned in verse 26] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [make a treaty with the Jews and others in the final 7 years]: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [this prince will stop the Jewish sacrifices in the temple], and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."
(Daniel 9:24-27).
After 7 weeks (49 days /49 years) = Temple Rebuilt (verse 25).This passage sets the backdrop or framework for Daniels 70 Week Prophecy (verse 24).
+ (Plus)
After 62 weeks = (a) Christ dying for our sins (b) 70AD Temple destruction.
(Verse 26).
(Gap of time or Age of Grace: The War (verse 26), or Spiritual Time of Battle for the Cause of Christ in Spreading the Gospel)
+ (Plus)
The last 1 week (7 days/7 years) = Tribulation period (verse 27).
7 + 62 + 1 = 70 Weeks.
Side Note 1:
If you were to carefully look at the text, it states that there are things that happen in the gap like a.... "war" until the end. Also, Christ dies, and the temple is destroyed also within the gap of time that is not accounted for within the 70 weeks, as well. The text is actually saying that things are happening within the gap of the 69th week, and the 70th week.
Side Note 2:
The texts in brackets in blue and red in the Daniel 9 passage is my personal commentary on the text.
No - simply a statement of my opinion.I don't get this. Is it a double reverse negative?
So ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?