Plain Sense Syllogisms from Acts 2

I cannot judge when they all actually believed. Thomas doubted, and Peter denied the Lord three times, all before Acts 2. Of course Jesus did breathe on them and said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" in John 20:22. And Peter did give a profession of faith in Mt. 16:16.

 

Grasshopper.
Where did I ever say that Israel replaces the Church?

And if you are implying that Mt. 21:43 refers to Israel as a whole, then you do believe in Replacement Theology.

And you seem to be having problems with the term "revealed". I don't want to hear various opinions of past Christians who all disagree. But rather what should be a general consensus exactly who he was.

For example, 20 years ago people might speculate on who would be the president of the United States in 2,005. Even 6 years ago you could find various opinions. But in a hundred years from now there will not be various opinions on who he was. That is the problem with you answer on the Anti-Christ. Since he was to be revealed before the great and terrible day of the Lord, we should all know his name from historians and early Christian writers.

And I don't answer all your questions because you ask strawman questions like this one:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nor did you answer why the Jews that didn't die in the raid on Jerusalem in 70AD that you said all literally saw Him, were not saved.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What scripture are you referring to that says those who survive the siege by the Romans would be saved?

I never said that there was such a referrence. It's a ridiculous question to boot. I was implying that since you believe that Jesus' visable return was in 70AD, and that Israel will be saved when they see Him, that Jews that survived Titus' invasion should have been saved and testified about Jesus as Lord after 70AD. Which none did.

 

Still think Is. 13 is future? Can you at least answer that one?

 

Well, doesn't verse 19 say that God will destroy the sinners out of it? Are there sinners in Iraq today?

Doesn't verse 11 say that God will punish the world and not just Babylon, and also to cause the pride to cease?

And how about verse 20 where God says that it will never be inhabited again from generation to generation? Is there not people in present day Iraq? (A great nuclear war could do the trick though to fulfill this prophesy where none can live there).

Besides, that prophesy could be fully about the Medo-Persians in Daniels time and still these prophesies would stand:

"Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and
I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely:
And they shall be my people, and I will be their God:
And I will give them one heart, and one way, (John 14:6) that they may fear me
for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them:
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in
their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.
Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul.
For thus saith the LORD; Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have
promised them." Jer. 32:37-42

"In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:
That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.
And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.
And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the
LORD thy God." Amos 9:11-15

 

So Is. 13:10 has been fulfilled?

 

So Is. 13:10 has been fulfilled? </font>[/QUOTE]You'll have to ask an astronomer that question. I don't know if it was done before by the Lord. But I do know that He will perform it in the future. (Mt. 24:29-30; which for even the preterist is after Daniel BTW)

I am wondering if you think that Isa. 13:20 has been fulfilled yet?

 

Before we carry this on any further, why don't you figure out what you believe then we can carry on this debate. First you say no Is 13 is not fulfilled then yes but will be fulfilled again, now back to no/not sure.

What does Is 13 have to do with Daniel coming before Matthew?

Yes for the umpteenth time, Is 13 is fulfilled including verse 20. And I quoted perhaps the greatest Baptist theologian ever who says the same thing. I wonder if LE would allow John Gill to post here?

 

Grasshopper wrote:

As I posted on the heresy page, not all Preterists take reality literally.

Newsflash Grasshopper...there are people living in Iraq today. (Sigh)

 

still can't answer the question can you?

 

Do you mean like you not naming the Anti-Christ?

 

Hey, GH, don't drag me into your web.

 

I answered it twice.
Still looking for "anti-christ" in Thessolonians. You must have the LaHaye Bible.

Since you have now become a fan of Albert Barnes,

Isa 13:20 -
It shall never be inhabited - This has been completely fulfilled. It is now, and has been for centuries, a scene of wide desolation, and is a heap of ruins, and there is every indication that it will continue so to be.

Who are the Medes? Does Jack or Roxella have an opinion on this? Since you believe this obviously doesn’t mean the Medes of 2500 years ago just wondering who these Medes are:

Isa 13:17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.

Are you looking forward to this world war fought with bows and swords? You're still a literalist aren't you?

Talk about denying reality.

 

(My answers in bold.)

I answered it twice.
Still looking for "anti-christ" in Thessolonians. You must have the LaHaye Bible.

Since you have now become a fan of Albert Barnes,

Isa 13:20 -
It shall never be inhabited - This has been completely fulfilled. It is now, and has been for centuries, a scene of wide desolation, and is a heap of ruins, and there is every indication that it will continue so to be.

If Albert said that then his "every indication" has been proven to be wrong. Modern day Iraq before the US invasion was a modern thriving country with quite a few inhabitants. So you are both obviously wrong.

Who are the Medes? Does Jack or Roxella have an opinion on this? Since you believe this obviously doesn’t mean the Medes of 2500 years ago just wondering who these Medes are:

Isa 13:17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.

Are you looking forward to this world war fought with bows and swords? You're still a literalist aren't you?

Talk about denying reality. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Who then are Gog and Magog from Ez. 38? And how come we have these ancient people mentioned in Rev. 20:8 as a still future prophesy from the time of John's writing? Please regale us with a history lesson on who these people are and when that invasion happened before or around 70AD! And do you really expect God to mention the modern names of the countries in His prophesies? It's no wonder you can't understand escatology.

The Medes are modern day Iran who just happen to be developing nuclear weapons as we post. You might recall that they had quite a war going on not too long ago, and this Iran generation still has animosity towards them. Muslims don't forgive or forget. And they will have even more reason now that they have a new radical muslin leader who is fueling the insurgency in Iraq. He also will not like a democratic former Muslim country right next door. Besides, God's Word says that God will stir up their heart to do this. It will not take much coaxing of His part either BTW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medes

And the use of weapons in Scripture could be figurative without compromising the text. In Isa. 15:18 (and verse 12) it says that the Medes will destroy all or almost all the men, women and children. But did that really happen when Cyrus invaded Babylon as you suppose? No!

"Finally in 539 BC, Cyrus marched triumphantly into the ancient city of Babylon. After this victory, he set the standard of the benevolent conqueror by issuing the Cyrus Cylinder. In this declaration, the king promised not to terrorize Babylon nor destroy its institutions and culture.

The Cyrus Cylinder is an artifact of the Persian Empire, consisting of a declaration inscribed on a clay barrel. Upon his taking of Babylon, Cyrus the Great issued the declaration, containing an account of his victories and merciful acts, as well as a documentation of his royal lineage. It was discovered in 1879 in Babylon, and today is kept in the British Museum.

The royal history given on the cylinder is as follows: The founder of the dynasty was King Achaemenes (ca. 700 BC) who was succeeded by his son Teispes of Anshan. Inscriptions indicate that when the latter died, two of his sons shared the throne as Cyrus I of Anshan and Ariaramnes of Persia. They were succeeded by their respective sons Cambyses I of Anshan and Arsames of Persia. Cambyses is considered by Herodotus and Ctesias to be of humble origin. But they also consider him as being married to Princess Mandane of Media, a daughter of Astyages, King of the Medes and Princess Aryenis of Lydia. Cyrus II was the result of this union.
Cyrus was killed during a battle against the Massagetae or Sakas."

"After the death of Belshazzar, Darius entered the city of Babylon on October 12, 539 B.C. not with a roar but a whimper as will be seen. He was soon to be followed by his commander Cyrus. Cyrus the Great, a humane and wise administrator, captured Babylon on Oct. 29, 539 B.C., and his empire would last approximately 200 years until the rise of Alexander the Great around 331 B.C. This military man captured the Medes in the 550's B.C. and overran Lydia in 546 B.C., but what he may be best remembered for is his kindness to the exiles in Babylon. The Cyrus Cylinder, found by Hormuzd Rassam in the nineteenth century, records this generosity in allowing the exiles to return home, including the Jews to Palestine. The Cylinder states, "I also gathered all of their inhabitants and returned to them their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk….all the gods…in their former chapels." Another notable record asks the gods of the people "exiled" to acknowledge his good deed and perhaps the people will refrain from future ill will: "May all the gods of whom I have resettled in their sacred cities ask daily Bel and Nebo for a long life for me and may they recommend me to Marduk" (Free 1992, 203-204)."

http://adcommunications.org/Neo-Babylon,Daniel1024.htm

So no, Isa. 15 was not a prophesy concerning the Medes in 539 BC as you assume, as verses 11 and 20 attest.

And your constant references to the Van Impes is quite childish. I also could say that you get your theology from the Vatican since your escatology matches theirs to a T, but I'm an adult.

And the term Anti-Christ is just a modern title for the man of sin mentioned in Thessalonians we all know, and you cannot name. You merely gave various opinions of who he might have been. That's like me asking you who was the first president of the US, and you give ten different answers while quoting ten different hair-brained so-called historians.

 

Well, now that I'm here, PREACH IT, JackRUS!

 

Well, why don't we hear from some futurist commentators on this shall we? After all, I'm sure they will agree with you. They are certainly not heretics.

J Vernon Magee

Babylon is the subject of the first burden. It is suggestive of many things to the reverent student of Scripture. First of all, the literal city of Babylon is the primary consideration . This is indeed remarkable, as Babylon in Isaiah’s day was an insignificant place. It was not until a century later that Babylon became a world power. God pronounced judgment upon Babylon before it became a nation!

PUNISHMENT OF BABYLON IN THE DAY OF THE LORD

The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see [ Isa. 13:1 ].

The literal city of Babylon in history is in view in this chapter and also in chapter 14 . It became one of the great cities of the ancient world. In fact, it became the first great world power and is so recognized in Daniel’s prophecy. Nebuchadnezzar was the “head of gold” of Babylon. He was the king of the first great world power.

Wow, I didn't know J Vernon Magee was a preterist. Did you?

Let me try again:

John Wesley

God's armies , ver. 1-5. The destruction of Babylon by the Persians and Medes , their great distress, anguish, and utter desolation , ver. 6-22.


V. 1. The burden -This title is commonly given to sad prophecies, which indeed are grievous burdens to them on whom they are laid. Babylon -Of the city and empire of Babylon by Cyrus .

V. 3. Sanctified ones - The Medes and Persians , so called, because they were set apart by God, for this holy work of executing his just vengeance. Mighty ones -Those whom I have made mighty for this work. Highness -Or, as others render it, in my glory , in the doing of that work which tends to the advancement of my glory. Tho' the Medes had no regard to God, but only to their own ends.


V. 11. The world -The Babylonish empire , which is called the world , as the Roman empire afterwards was, because it was extended to a great part of the world.


V. 13. Therefore -A poetical and prophetical description of great horrors and confusions, as if heaven and earth were about to meet together.

One would have thought John Wesley knew that world meant "entire globe". Guess not. Let me try one more, surley a modern day futurist will get it right:

Warren Wiersbe

In chapters 13–23 , Isaiah announces God’s judgment on ten gentile peoples as well as on His own people in Judah and Israel. He begins with Babylon, which would one day swallow up the Assyrians, take Judah captive and then itself be defeated by the Medes and Persians (vv. 17–22 ).

Isaiah’s message against Babylon was fulfilled, and the city and empire are no more .

I apologize for these heretical statements made by these hair-brained "scholars". I thought they were futurists.

 

Because John wrote Revelation in the mid 60’s.

Start another thread on this and maybe I’ll decide to answer.

What? God uses symbolism? I thought you and LE took prophecy literally. Guess not.

So the fact that the Medes conquered Babylon is just as mere coincidence and has nothing to do with Isaiah 13? Incredible.

So the Medes will destroy the world?

There you go again with your hypocrisy. Chastising preterist for the allowance of figurative language in prophecy and now all the sudden you do a 180.

So it will happen in the future correct? Iran will wipe out almost the entire world, is this what you are saying?
Of course there is the “context” of who we are speaking of found in verse 19:

Isa 13:19 And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.

But I guess its just symbolism right?

Yea, you just run around calling everyone heretics. Secondly my eschatology is nothing like the Vaticans. But you can go ahead and say it, won't be the first time you've been wrong.

No, “anti-Christ” is a biblical term that modernists have made into something it is not.

So now if one disagrees with you he is no longer just a heretic but also hair-brained. Any other names you wish to throw out? Might as well get them all out now.

 

Now lets wrap this up shall we?

Here are some of your statements regarding Is 13:

I am wondering why then God says in the next verse that He will punish the world if it was only Babylon?

Doesn't verse 11 say that God will punish the world and not just Babylon, and also to cause the pride to cease?

So this is a prophecy concerning the destruction of the whole world?

You might also explain why God says in verse 20 that it will never be inhabited again after this judgement? Care to turn on the news and see if anyone is living in Iraq today?

And how about verse 20 where God says that it will never be inhabited again from generation to generation? Is there not people in present day Iraq? (A great nuclear war could do the trick though to fulfill this prophesy where none can live there).

Yes, nuclear war would do that, and if it is a world-wide war as you say then the entire world will be uninhabitable.

Are you starting to see your problem yet? How about you LE? Let us continue on....

Well, doesn't verse 19 say that God will destroy the sinners out of it? Are there sinners in Iraq today?


So all sinners will be destroyed leaving just the non-sinners to live……where? The whole world is no uninhabitable, remember?


Besides, that prophesy could be fully about the Medo-Persians in Daniels time and still these prophesies would stand:

Well at one point you were almost convinced Is 13 was fulfilled. But you must have gone to a dispie site for some research and quickly realized your error. Then it became apparent that if Is. 13 was fulfilled that would also included verse 10 and that little fact caused your entire system to begin to collapse so you immediately returned to the bosom of dispieville. (Notice I didn’t say Jack VanImpe)

So to return this to the original intent of the thread, When Joel uses this figurative language that Peter repeats in Acts, you must determine if the language was meant to be figurative in nature. By simply going to other Prophets who used similar language throughout the OT it can be easily established that this is figurative language. At least to those with an open mind, heart, and open Bible of course.

So let the readers of this thread determine for themselves if the language found In Joel and Isaiah is figurative or literal.

 

Joel 2 is literal, partially fulfilled awaiting completion in accord with Jesus prophetic statement "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".

HankD

 

Uh-huh, don't go there please. Let me give you the rules I and others follow for interpreting Bible prophecy. Ready?

The words of Bible prophecy are taken in their plain, literal sense unless the text or context gives compelling evidence that the language is figurative.

Also, figurative language is used in prophecy to teach literal truth.

Dr. Bob has a great saying about literal vs. figurative interpretation. Something about using common sense and any other sense is nonsense - but, I hope he'll weigh in and post it once again, cause I can't remember it.

 

Joel 2 is literal, partially fulfilled awaiting completion in accord with Jesus prophetic statement "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]Right on, HankD!