Featured Seventy Weeks Prophecy, no Gap, but a Solid Promise

Just comparing scripture with scripture and using your very own rule of interpretation.

The Church has been attacked and persecuted many times throughout history. She has also experienced seasons of refreshing and periods of revival down through the ages.

No, it the same Jerusalem as is here, the Church, the Israel of God:

22 but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels,
23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better than that of Abel. Heb 12

I don't know what people would do around here without you tirelessly telling them what their problem is.

????

32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those that escape, as Jehovah hath said, and among the remnant those whom Jehovah doth call. Joel 2

Those believing at Pentecost were 'saving themselves from that crooked generation' and escaping the wrath that was soon to come upon it.

Well, 'you guys' certainly have restored 'the gap', haven't you?

And I suppose we fellas need fellas like you to explain all these 'multiple applications' to us, right?

 

No, you are not applying that principle of interpretation. You are demanding the spiritualization of such texts.

Zechariah does not say "church" nor does it speak of Jerusalem in heaven as Galatians 4:24 explicitly states "IS ABOVE" but explicitly states the Jerusalem in Zecharian is ON EARTH and the object of attack by armies ON EARTH.

What part of "WHICH IS ABOVE" in Galatians 4:24 do you not understand. Hebrews 12:22 says "HEAVENLY" Jerusalem not EARTHLY Jerusalem whereas, Zechariah clearly describes an EARTHLY Jerusalem.

The saints are only "enrolled" in heaven they are not IN heaven!

22 but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels,
23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better than that of Abel. Heb 12

Your "problem" is so obvious to any Bible student who is objective in their approach to scripture and who follows common sense rules of interpetation. You don't compare scripture to scripture you go in with a wrecking ball and completely destroy scripture, ignore obvious contextual distinctions. But how else could you defend your theory???

JOel 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

The underlined portion in Joel 2:32 is not quoted by Peter but Peter stops in the middle of the verse BECAUSE anyone that continues to read Joel (remember there were no chapter and verse divisions in the original) can easily see there is a final application of this text at the end of the world, as the same celestial and earthly signs are repeated shortly afterwards concerning a BATTLE and DESTRUCTION:

Joel 3:1 ¶ For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land........14 Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.
15 The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.
16 The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.

Notice this occurs AFTER A.D. 70 as they have already been "scattered among the nations." Hence, verse 15 cannot refer to A.D. 70.

Don't have to "restore" what is already there. Just have to point it out to those who want to ignore what is there.

Explain it we do, but opening blind eyes to recognize and see it is above my pay grade.

 

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning UNLESS the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise."

Did you not notice how I framed my question with 'in light of'?

The new is in the old concealed, the old is in the new revealed.

So you take everything in Zech 12 as literal? Literal house of David and their wives, literal house of Nathan and their wives, literal house of Levi and wives, literal Shimeites , etc.,etc.?

So is it heretical for me if I don't take this to literally mean present modern day earthly Jerusalem?

Which part of "ye are come unto" do you not understand?

There you go again running that nasty little mouth.

I almost feel sorry for you with your bondage to the letter. What a dead, dry, barren, parched place that must be. Who is this that the prophet Isaiah is referring to here? (hint, check out Gal 4:24-28):

1 Sing, O barren, she hath not borne! Break forth with singing, and cry aloud, She hath not brought forth! For more are the sons of the desolate, Than the sons of the married one, said Jehovah.
2 Enlarge the place of thy tent, And the curtains of thy tabernacles they stretch out, Restrain not -- lengthen thy cords, And thy pins make strong.
3 For right and left thou breakest forth, And thy seed doth nations possess,
4 And desolate cities they cause to be inhabited. Fear not, for thou art not ashamed, Nor blush, for thou art not confounded, For the shame of thy youth thou forgettest, And the reproach of thy widowhood Thou dost not remember any more.
5 For thy Maker is thy husband, Jehovah of Hosts is His name, And thy Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, `God of all the earth,` He is called.
6 For, as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, Called thee hath Jehovah, Even a youthful wife when she is refused, said thy God.
7 In a small moment I have forsaken thee, And in great mercies I do gather thee,
8 In overflowing wrath I hid my face for a moment from thee, And in kindness age-during I have loved thee, Said thy Redeemer -- Jehovah!
9 For, the waters of Noah is this to Me, In that I have sworn -- the waters of Noah Do not pass again over the earth -- So I have sworn, Wrath is not upon thee, Nor rebuke against thee.
10 For the mountains depart, and the hills remove, And My kindness from thee departeth not, And the covenant of My peace removeth not, Said hath thy loving one -- Jehovah.
11 O afflicted, storm-tossed, not comforted, Lo, I am laying with cement thy stones, And have founded thee with sapphires,
12 And have made of agate thy pinnacles, And thy gates of carbuncle stones, And all thy border of stones of delight,
13 And all thy sons are taught of Jehovah, And abundant is the peace of thy sons.
14 In righteousness thou establishest thyself, Be far from oppression, for thou fearest not, And from ruin, for it cometh not near unto thee.
15 Lo, he doth diligently assemble without My desire, Who hath assembled near thee? By thee he falleth!
16 Lo, I -- I have prepared an artizan, Blowing on a fire of coals, And bringing out an instrument for his work, And I have prepared a destroyer to destroy.
17 No weapon formed against thee prospereth, And every tongue rising against thee, In judgment thou condemnest. This is the inheritance of the servants of Jehovah, And their righteousness from me, an affirmation of Jehovah! Isa 54

 

Again, your related passages have significant differences which you merely ignore.

Do you take everything in Genesis 1 as literal or do you spiritualize that away simply because 2 Cor. 4:6 applies Genesis 1:3 to salvation???? This is the kind of rationalization and application you follow which would demand the complete spiritualization of Genesis 1 simply due to "an" application in another text, which you would then classify as a "related passage."

It is an interpretational error for certain.

Again, notice your misapplication of contextual facts. It is in comparison to Israel coming before God, heaven and angels at Mount Sinai. Does that mean they were even with God or in heaven? No! We come before God, heaven and angels when we assemble in the congregation as angels and God are present (1 Cor. 11:10). Does that men we are IN heaven? No! Does it mean that our congregation is IN heaven? No! Jerusalem in in heaven in Hebrews 12:22-23 not on earth as is the "SPIRITS OF JUST MEN MADE PERFECT."

Truth hurts doesn't it?

You simply don't get it! A mere application does not mean fulfillment! Remember, Genesis 1:3 is applied to salvation in 2 Cor. 4:6. According to your rationale and principle of intepretation we should not literalize Genesis 1;3 but spiritualize it as really meaning salvation since it is evidently applied to salvation in 2 Cor. 4:6. THIS KIND OF INTERPRETATION CHARACTERIZES your false theory.

 

Isin't that what pre-trib-dispensationalists do to Daniel 9: 26, 27; John 5:28, 29 and others too numerous to mention; all because of Irving and Darby!

 

You obviously do not understand this text as you are jerking it out of context and applying to something that has absolutely no relationship to the text. Paul is not speaking about hermeneutics but about the internal nature of the New Covenant versus the Jewish application of the Old Covenant which is purely external in nature.

And how do you understand and interpret these words? "spiritually"? If spiritually than perhaps "allegorically" means "literal" or etc.? You are demonstrating the absolute nonsense of your approach to scripture! You demand this statement must be taken literal in order to defend your NON-LITERAL hermeneutic - oxymornonic!

 

Our sufficiency is from God. Who here is going to argue with that?
--"Not of the letter but of the Spirit"
What is the context? Why do you pull a verse out of context?
Paul is addressing the Corinthians who have been attacked by false teachers, teachers that have been preaching a false gospel (no doubt the same Judaizers that have been confronted elsewhere), and that Paul is defending himself at the beginning of this same chapter.

With the gospel is great clarity and plainness of speech. It gives life.

[FONT=&quot]2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
[/FONT]
--Not so with the message of the false teachers:
[FONT=&quot]2 Corinthians 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
--There is one gospel, a gospel of the Holy Spirit, a gospel that gives life.
So why the unwarranted comparison??
[/FONT]

Another reference (note specific reference not given), jerked out of context as if to support supposed position.

To plead ignorance to the recognition of a metaphor or a simile is to plead ignorance to literature and simple literary devices. Most people (except the RCC) knows what a metaphor is. When Jesus said "take this and eat, it is my flesh" the RCC will not recognize it as a metaphor. Most others will. Just as Jesus said: I am the door, I am the vine, you are the branches, etc. (Do you look like a branch?) That is the nature of a metaphor, and they are not hard to recognize.

When the disciples didn't understand Jesus they went back to him and asked him: "What do you mean..."
Secondly, after the ascension, "The Holy Spirit brought back to remembrance all things whatsoever I have taught you," so that they could right them down for us in Scripture.
Third, again after the resurrection, many of the things that he said were made clear to them. For example:
[FONT=&quot]John 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.[/FONT]
Fourth, it seemed as it they were slow learners at times (not quick like you)

[FONT=&quot]Luke 24:13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.[/FONT]
--60 furlongs = 7 1/2 miles.

[FONT=&quot]Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.[/FONT]
--There were no metaphors here. It was plain talk. He went through all the Scriptures expounding each one to them during that long walk. Still they did not recognize him.
They were slow learners.
Hindsight is better than foresight. You might be a bit harsh on the disciples.

 

It is interesting that you responded to the one verse I chose not to expound on because I didn't have the time.
You are not the only one that teaches. My classes are just starting.
This will be my last post for a while.

 

Classes were great! I have some time to look up Gal.4:24 and respond to it.

[FONT=&quot]Galatians 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.[/FONT]

First, it is the only time the word "allegory" is used in the NT.
And second, it is not to be used as an excuse or reason for a different method of interpretation. I believe that A.T. Robertson has some good advice on this word and topic.

Please note from the above quote:
Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching.
--This is not an excuse for an allegorical style of preaching.

So, where sound sense makes good sense...
The literal method of interpretation is demanded by scripture unless otherwise indicated.
We recognize literary devices such as metaphors and similes.
We also recognize anthropomorphisms such as "The Lord will hide you under his wings," when we know that God is spirit, and a "Spirit" has no wings.
The Bible uses many literary devices. As a general rule it does not use allegory, or intend for the reader to allegorize the Word.