Isaiah 66 and Acts

[asterisktom]

I'm a sinner saved by grace for faith Jesus work on the cross, not because of anything I can do, would like to do or have done or due to my fantastic luck living in the time after the cross.

I'm not the one that thinks that we are in the kingdom promised in the law and prophets and I'm not the one that thinks that all or even most prophecy is fulfilled. By faith I expect that Jehovah will keep his promises to the absolute letter made to the son's of Abraham/Isaac/Jacob.

My Bible teaches that when Jesus returns it will be quite an event on the scope of the flood of Noah, not something that is missed by those who are actively looking for His return centuries later. If I were to think that Jehovah changed His mind about promises made to the Jews then based on what behavioral traits of the 21st century church do I think he will keep his promises to me?

You are deflecting. You are the one that brought up the passage. And now you ignore what the passage teaches.

Forget it.

 

[asterisktom]

My Bible teaches that ...

And don't tell me "My Bible teaches..." when you ignore the truth about the passage that you yourself brought up.

 

[thomas15]

And don't tell me "My Bible teaches..." when you ignore the truth about the passage that you yourself brought up.

Oh ok. But it clearly states in the Bible that when Jesus returns he will bring with him an army from heaven dressed in white and riding white horses. Then he will rule with an iron rod. And this will all be proceeded by judgments that will resemble those in Egypt at the Exodus except it will involve the whole world.

I get it Tom, you are fully committed to your doctrine and don't want the embarrassment of having to admit error because the simpletons of the faith are expecting Jehovah to do exactly what he said he would.

 

[asterisktom]

Oh ok. But it clearly states in the Bible that when Jesus returns he will bring with him an army from heaven dressed in white and riding white horses. Then he will rule with an iron rod. And this will all be proceeded by judgments that will resemble those in Egypt at the Exodus except it will involve the whole world.

I get it Tom, you are fully committed to your doctrine and don't want the embarrassment of having to admit error because the simpletons of the faith are expecting Jehovah to do exactly what he said he would.

Oh please. Deal with your verse that you brought up and then we can go on to your doctrine that you are committed to. Even though it is derailing this thread I really want to know how you think it is possible that only part of the Law and the Prophets (can be fulfilled) and not all of it.

 

[rlvaughn]

As far as the places are concerned, yes. I think it was Matthew Poole's commentary where I first read this. The more I studied out the context of the chapter, and extending many chapters before, the more the pieces seemed to fit.

I found this in Matthew Poole's commentary on verse 19:

It is on all hands agreed that this verse is a prophecy of the conversion of the Gentiles...And they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles; and they shall every where preach the gospel, and set up my gospel ordinances and institutions. This was eminently made good upon the apostles leaving the Jews, and turning to the Gentiles, Acts 13:46, and more fully after the destruction of Jerusalem, when the believers among the Jews, as well as the apostles, went about publishing the gospel to all people, which was the declaring of the Lord’s glory.

 

[asterisktom]

I found this in Matthew Poole's commentary on verse 19:

Yes, that is the section in Poole that I was referring to. Of course he would not agree with the OP on the connections I made concerning Jerusalem. If I remember correctly he pretty much followed the Reformed line of seeing Rome as Babylon, and consequently downplaying the eschatological importance of Jerusalem.

This 66th chapter of Isaiah makes so much more sense, however, when you see it as having special reference to the crooked terminal Jewish generation of the first century. Stephen, before he was stoned by those Jews, quoted verse one of this chapter. He clearly had them in mind. Read also the following verses about sacrifices, once legitimate, now become abhorrent in the sight of God. This all clearly fits in with that last generation.

More later.

 

[George Antonios]

Did you ever notice that the places mentioned in Isaiah 66, where the Kingdom of Zion first reaches toward, are the same areas that are first visited by the missionary efforts in the Acts of the Apostles? Very instructive.

Make no mistake on this point. Physically, there is no longer a Zion for them to come to. In AD 70 the Jewel and Crown of earthly Zionism is laid in the dust by the Roman Empire. And within 70 years years the next - and last - Jewish revolt, that of Bar Kochba - is decisively and inexorably put down, the glory of city of Jerusalem demolished. Earthly Jerusalem is finished, having become the long-ago destroyed Babylon of Revelation.

But the Jerusalem from above, "the mother of us all", Gal. 4:26 - the one Isaiah and Revelation - assures us of, is not finished. It just keeps growing. In fact, of this "kingdom there shall be no end." Luke 1:33.

And yet here you are 2,000 years later still trying to bury earthly Zion...

 

[asterisktom]

And yet here you are 2,000 years later still trying to bury earthly Zion...

There is nothing here to respond to. But maybe you just wanted to vent.

 

[thomas15]

Oh please. Deal with your verse that you brought up and then we can go on to your doctrine that you are committed to. Even though it is derailing this thread I really want to know how you think it is possible that only part of the Law and the Prophets (can be fulfilled) and not all of it.

If if if. If by Law you or anyone else thinks keeping OT dietary laws and the rituals and sacrifice and feasts and ceremonies and if you think that by keeping all that, one is saved then you are teaching two ways of salvation. But the Bible teaches only one way and that is by grace through faith. From righteous Able to Zachariah all who are saved are saved by grace not by works and not by works of the law. When you read the words of Jesus saying the law and the prophets are fulfilled that has to do with the predictions made centuries earlier about the Savior not the temple ritual. I think you know this you just refuse to accept it.

Jesus said if you don't believe Moses you will not believe Me because he (Moses) wrote of me. Psalm 1 speaks of delighting in the law. I know an conservative Jewish man who has most of the OT memorized. He can run rings around me when it comes to reciting Bible verses. The difference between him and me is I believe it and he doesn't. Your preterism is looking for a way to avoid believing that Jehovah's message prior to the first century is the same as after the first century.

Because we are saved by grace through faith in the risen Christ we do not need the OT rituals to point us in the right direction. Keep in mind that the Jews in the first century knew their Bible verses as well as we do if not better but since most of them didn't believe the actual words they rejected Christ. It is as simple as that.

 

[asterisktom]

If if if. If by Law you or anyone else thinks keeping OT dietary laws and the rituals and sacrifice and feasts and ceremonies and if you think that by keeping all that, one is saved then you are teaching two ways of salvation. But the Bible teaches only one way and that is by grace through faith.

Incredible. You miss my point entirely. No, we are not saved by doing the Law. We are saved by grace through faith. That is not the point.

Forget it. I am tired of trying to get you to think about your passage.

 

[asterisktom]

Are you referring particularly to verse 19?

Like I wrote earlier, there are more connections between this chapter and the first century than just this verse. Here are a few others that I think are worthy of notice:

1, ¶ Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?

As I wrote earlier, Stephen quoted this passage in Acts 7,

2, For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.
3, He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb,1 as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth2 incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.
4, I also will choose their delusions,3 and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.

What God considers abhorrent here are these acts of sacrifice. The acts themselves. Nowhere does God say the judgment is on the sacrificers because of hypocrisy or any other sin. The point is that these acts - at this time - are now considered abominable. When did this happen? Certainly when Christ had already been sacrificed as the only acceptable sin-offering. So, going back to these previous acts of devotion are abominable. They would be accounting the sacrifice of Christ an unclean thing.

5, ¶ Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.

As Christ warned His disciples there would come a time when those persecuting them, putting them to death, would think they are doing God service. The "appearing" here is the Parousia c. AD 70, bringing joy to believers and shame to the enemies of Christ.

6, A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies.
7, Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.
8, Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

The "nation born at a once" was the holy nation and royal priesthood that Peter wrote of. And Christ forewarned the Pharisees of this very thing in Matt. 21:43:

"Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."