What Time Is It?

[Stephen Green]

I look forward to answering your questions but first I have one for you. Do you accept the very plain and unambiguous statements of Jesus Christ concerning himself when he came into the world the first time? Here are two.

1)
Mt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

2)
Mt 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Yes

 

[Stephen Green]

My father whom I lost to cancer 5 years ago is not in Hades like Daniel WAS. I've read here by someone suggesting the captives were set free during Jesus' 40 days He was resurrected, but not yet ascended.

My understanding is that all were set free from Hades between the point He died and the point He was resurrected ... the New Covenant established at His baptism meant no more Hades additions. absent from the body & present with the Lord ... to be resurrected at the rapture with an incorruptible body ... but not in Hades.

I'm not sure how there's no more unfulfilled prophesy. Daniel 9:25 is a clear illustration of The Day of The Lord ... aka Second Coming ... Jesus' Return. That includes the prophesy sealed-up .... which means until that day, there is prophesy revealed/fulfilled.

I'm not fully versed on this further discussion you offer regarding the resurrection and unfulfilled prophesy. I can agree that the resurrection doesn't happen until the prophesy is sealed (on The Day of The Lord) ...but that hasn't happened yet; there is unfulfilled prophesy. The Bridegroom has yet to Return for His Bride, but will, as prophesied.

I think you have have a GREAT handle on this, but I'm just not where you are on this point about the current condition of all prophesy being fulfilled.

Thanks!

Thanks for clarifying, Two Wings! So am I rightly understanding that it is your position that all (as in, all people destined for heaven both past, present and future) were rescued from Hades between the Cross and Easter Sunday — what church tradition calls the “Harrowing of Hell”?

You might find it compelling or at least curious that even as late as the Middle Ages, the “Gospel of Nicodemus” (not really a gospel) presents the “Harrowing of Hell” resurrections (Mt. 27:52) as exclusively OT saints, and characterizes this as the first resurrection (Rev. 20:6).

I am certainly not asserting that “Nicodemus” is canonical, but that it shows how long this tradition survived in the church (since it was written in the Middle Ages). It also has some interesting details such as identifying the two witnesses (Rev. 11:3) as Elijah and Enoch; and “Nicodemus” records these two as preparing to
descend to earth for this end times ministry within the generation (as in, the Apostles’ days).

Thusly, church tradition also places what we call the “general resurrection” (that concept did not exist nominally in the early church, however) immediately following those events. And though not all church fathers agree, many of the earliest asserted that the resurrection to eternal life promised by Christ was delivered when the promised signs of Daniel (the destruction of the city and temple) were seen on earth.

Happy to get more into scripture but again, a lot of my basic eschatological points are in my big 2-parter! At any rate, it’s bed time! God bless.

 

[Two Wings]

So am I rightly understanding that it is your position that all (as in, all people destined for heaven both past, present and future) were rescued from Hades between the Cross and Easter Sunday — what church tradition calls the “Harrowing of Hell”?

no sir.

I could be wrong, and would need clear scriptural refutation, but under the Law, those who feared God went to the holding pen when their bodies expired; Abraham, Isaac, Jacob ... prophets Samuel, Isaiah, Ezekiel .... It was a LOT of 'em. I have the picture of Rambo releasing the POWs, but they number FAR more than the dozen/so Rambo liberated and He did it in less than 3 days!

But when Jesus was baptized He brought the New Covenant and those who feared God (generally) ... but specifically repented of their sin (vice killing a critter) and believed in Jesus Christ ... became "born again" from their dead spirit ... there was no such effect before Jesus' baptism. When the body of a born again believer expires, he enters into the presence of The Lord.

IDK how this will be manifest, but on The Day of The Lord (future, hasn't happened yet, prophesy yet fulfilled) both of these deceased groups; God fearing/Law abiding more or less dead before Christ's baptism ... and the born again who died after Christ's baptism ... get incorruptible/glorified bodies just prior to the living born again Believers.

“Gospel of Nicodemus”

never heard of it. I can imagine the rest of Nicodemus' days, post convo with The Master or specifically after the morning Jesus and His disciples departed, were a roller coaster.

 

[Stephen Green]

Perhaps a better way to explain the major difference between the baptism, the cross, and the Parousia (the destruction of temple & city in fulfillment of Daniel 9) is this:

1) After Jesus’ baptism, he preached only to Jews, who would be saved by repentance and obedience to Law.

2) After the cross, the Gentiles were called. The Gentiles were subject to less rigorous standards for salvation than Jews (Acts 15) — the Jewish Christians were still required to keep the entire Law, and this is why they awaited the hour of Judgment.

3) Once the Temple fell, the Levitical priesthood fell with it, and the Law was no longer in effect (Hebrews). Hence the entire nation of Israel, which was dead in sin (power of sin is the law), rose again in grace. Rev 7 says a remnant of 144,000 from every tribe was saved in Israel, and many more Gentiles grafted in. This fulfills all prophecy.

no sir.

I could be wrong, and would need clear scriptural refutation, but under the Law, those who feared God went to the holding pen when their bodies expired; Abraham, Isaac, Jacob ... prophets Samuel, Isaiah, Ezekiel .... It was a LOT of 'em. I have the picture of Rambo releasing the POWs, but they number FAR more than the dozen/so Rambo liberated and He did it in less than 3 days!

But when Jesus was baptized He brought the New Covenant and those who feared God (generally) ... but specifically repented of their sin (vice killing a critter) and believed in Jesus Christ ... became "born again" from their dead spirit ... there was no such effect before Jesus' baptism. When the body of a born again believer expires, he enters into the presence of The Lord.

IDK how this will be manifest, but on The Day of The Lord (future, hasn't happened yet, prophesy yet fulfilled) both of these deceased groups; God fearing/Law abiding more or less dead before Christ's baptism ... and the born again who died after Christ's baptism ... get incorruptible/glorified bodies just prior to the living born again Believers.



never heard of it. I can imagine the rest of Nicodemus' days, post convo with The Master or specifically after the morning Jesus and His disciples departed, were a roller coaster.

 

[37818]

1) After Jesus’ baptism, he preached only to Jews, who would be saved by repentance and obedience to Law.

I do not think that interpertation is true.
Because:
Romans 3:19, ". . . Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. . . ."
And.
Galatians 2:21, ". . . I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. . . ."

 

[Two Wings]

This fulfills all prophecy.

except for the Day of the Lord.

The wheat and the tares.

The sign of the Son of Man ... sun darkened ... from the 4 corners the saints gathered. sky rolled up like a scroll.

revelation of the lawless one ... who is from the people who crucified Jesus and is taller than his associates (Daniel) ... Zech ... worthless shepherd with a bum arm and blind right eye.

haven't seen/read/heard about that dude.

wedding feast of the Lamb? bema seat? 1 Cor 15

7 year clean-up of Israel? Ez 42

So ... I appreciate the expounding upon the period of Jesus' walking the earth between the start of His ministry and the end of it ... or the handing-off of it .. .and I have a better understanding of the progression of The Gospel.

But I still don't see the basis for declaring all prophesy fulfilled when we're still here getting sick, dying, striving, cursing, "malacing," judging in unrighteousness, immoralitying, drunkennessing, carousing ... All the things of the fallen world, some directly because of what we've done, said or thought, others by those who came before us ...

 

[John of Japan]

Part 2.

Two Wings: "But if all these time periods of Daniel have already passed ... where are we today? Where have we been the last 2000 years? Certainly not the millennium reign with Christ. If this is that ... we've been fooled big time about this entire theology/doctrine/existence."

Millennialism or chiliasm was condemned as an ascriptural heresy by the Second Ecumenical Council of 381.

This is a myth. Since it is a myth, it is impossible to prove. "According to historical theologian, Jaroslav Pelikan, chiliast beliefs escaped official anathema by all of the early councils because they did not deny the creed.52 My investigation of the canons of the early councils similarly has uncovered no condemnation of chiliasm by them." (https://francisgumerlock.com/wp-con... and the Early Church Councils. Gumerlock.pdf)

The heresy was originally very rare and had no advocates in the first generations of the church except for a few, in whom the particular error of chiliasm was condemned while the rest of their teachings were accepted (such as Justin Martyr).

Rare? Again, unprovable. Chiliasm is based on a literal interpretation of Scripture, and allegorical interpretation was extremely rare until Origen discovered Philo. And where do you get that Justin's chiliasm was condemned? By whom? Please source that. It's a new one to me.

Chiliasts before Origen besides Justin Martyr include almost everybody writing then: Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Pothinus, Melito, Hegisippus, Tatian, Irenaeus, churches in Vienne and Lyons, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Commodian, Nepos, Coracion, Victorinus, Methodius, Lactantius, and others (Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 374-375).

As to the rest of your post, I'll leave that to others.

 

[Two Wings]

This is a myth. Since it is a myth, it is impossible to prove. "According to historical theologian, Jaroslav Pelikan, chiliast beliefs escaped official anathema by all of the early councils because they did not deny the creed.52 My investigation of the canons of the early councils similarly has uncovered no condemnation of chiliasm by them." (https://francisgumerlock.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/Millennialism and the Early Church Councils. Gumerlock.pdf)

Rare? Again, unprovable. Chiliasm is based on a literal interpretation of Scripture, and allegorical interpretation was extremely rare until Origen discovered Philo. And where do you get that Justin's chiliasm was condemned? By whom? Please source that. It's a new one to me.

Chiliasts before Origen besides Justin Martyr include almost everybody writing then: Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Pothinus, Melito, Hegisippus, Tatian, Irenaeus, churches in Vienne and Lyons, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Commodian, Nepos, Coracion, Victorinus, Methodius, Lactantius, and others (Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 374-375).

As to the rest of your post, I'll leave that to others.

wooosh! over my noggin. and my noggin is pretty high!

Thanks JoJ. I am not qualified to discuss this part of it. I simply take what I read in the Word of God and try to listen to The Still Small Voice. I trust in HIM, His unchanging character, to align/correct regardless of a Chilean or whatever.

 

[John of Japan]

Perhaps a better way to explain the major difference between the baptism, the cross, and the Parousia (the destruction of temple & city in fulfillment of Daniel 9) is this:

1) After Jesus’ baptism, he preached only to Jews, who would be saved by repentance and obedience to Law.

2) After the cross, the Gentiles were called. The Gentiles were subject to less rigorous standards for salvation than Jews (Acts 15) — the Jewish Christians were still required to keep the entire Law, and this is why they awaited the hour of Judgment.

3) Once the Temple fell, the Levitical priesthood fell with it, and the Law was no longer in effect (Hebrews). Hence the entire nation of Israel, which was dead in sin (power of sin is the law), rose again in grace. Rev 7 says a remnant of 144,000 from every tribe was saved in Israel, and many more Gentiles grafted in. This fulfills all prophecy.

This misinterpretation of the Greek word parousia (παρουσία) is common among preterists. The word never, ever refers to anything but a physical coming or presence, never a "spiritual" one (whatever that means to a preterist). Christ did not physically appear at the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Nor did He appear spiritually, because the word parousia does not allow for that. And anyway, for Christ to have appeared "spiritually," His dead body would have to be up there in Heaven still, since "the body without the spirit is dead."

It occurs 17 times in the NT in reference to Christ's second coming. Other than that, it occurs in Paul's epistles in reference to the physical coming of his friends four times:

1Co 16:17 I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied.

2Co 7:6 Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;

2Co 7:7 And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.

Php 1:26 That your rejoicing may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming to you again.

It occurs twice as physical presence:

2Co 10:10 For [his] letters, say they, [are] weighty and powerful; but [his] bodily presence [is] weak, and [his] speech contemptible.

Php 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Again, it never, ever refers to anything other than a physical coming or presence. I could go on and quote from the Septuagint (LXX) if anyone thinks I have not proven my point sufficiently.

In fact, it came to mean the physical coming of a king. The BAGD lexicon (most authoritative) says that parousia "became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp. of kings and emperors visiting a province" (p. 630). That would, of course, be a physical visit, and strengthens the interpretation of Christ the King coming to earth on an official, physical visit.

 

[Stephen Green]

Hi John, I read the article you shared with interest. However, it greatly twists the primary sources from the Council of Constantinople. It is not appropriate, either, to make such a straw man out of the Apollonian heresy -- as if that being a focus of the Council somehow means chiliasm wasn't? Similarly, the author's attempt (and that of his contemporary sources) to make Marcellus a red herring for the chiliast conspiracy (shall we say) is weak, and he even concedes that Cyril may not be referring to Marcellus. Even if he was, Cyril's description of the heresy is precisely chiliasm -- so even allowing for a "mythbusted" Council of Constantinople (which that article failed to do), you still have Cyril condemning the school of thought.

Your list of chiliasts doesn't prove chiliasm. I could give you a list of Arians and Nestorians. I could give you a list of Gnostics. That doesn't make them orthodox. Sheer numbers prove nothing. Cyprian, Cyril, Augustine, Aquinas, I could go on, all had correctives for the chiliast fathers. Calvin did as well, if the opinion of reformers matters to you.

God bless

This is a myth. Since it is a myth, it is impossible to prove. "According to historical theologian, Jaroslav Pelikan, chiliast beliefs escaped official anathema by all of the early councils because they did not deny the creed.52 My investigation of the canons of the early councils similarly has uncovered no condemnation of chiliasm by them." (https://francisgumerlock.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/Millennialism and the Early Church Councils. Gumerlock.pdf)

Rare? Again, unprovable. Chiliasm is based on a literal interpretation of Scripture, and allegorical interpretation was extremely rare until Origen discovered Philo. And where do you get that Justin's chiliasm was condemned? By whom? Please source that. It's a new one to me.

Chiliasts before Origen besides Justin Martyr include almost everybody writing then: Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Pothinus, Melito, Hegisippus, Tatian, Irenaeus, churches in Vienne and Lyons, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Commodian, Nepos, Coracion, Victorinus, Methodius, Lactantius, and others (Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 374-375).

As to the rest of your post, I'll leave that to others.

 

[Stephen Green]

The tares would be burnt up. There was a very conspicuous conflagration not just in Jerusalem but throughout the territories in AD 70. The historian Josephus records that the Christians in Jerusalem, having received an oracle, escaped before it happened. They listened to Jesus: "When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, know its desolation is near."

Whether you consider this prophecy fulfilled or not all comes down to whether you take Jesus' word at face value when he says, multiple times, that a) this is to fulfill prophecy and b) the prophecies would be fulfilled in his own generation.

The sign of the Son of Man of course happened. Read the prophecy again in Daniel 7:13. It is describing the heavenly moment that fulfills 1 Cor. 15:25-27. The last enemy to be destroyed is death; the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. Therefore the sign of the Son of Man being enthroned in heaven, after conquering that last enemy, is the destruction of the Temple and the Levitical priesthood -- the power of the law destroyed.

And I must also point out that Daniel 7:13 absolutely is a scene set in heaven, not earth; which is why Jesus speaks of the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.

This moment of the end of the Law, also, is the Wedding Feast, when the new heavens (with the Resurrected Son of Man enthroned) comes to earth (that is, the relationship between heaven and earth is no longer mediated by the law, but Christ rules directly over the earth from heaven, dwelling in the hearts of believers as per the promise of John 15).

As for sickness and death and mourning etc, please please re-read Rev. 22. There are nations without the city; there are sinners without; there are leaves within to heal, therefore sickness without; there is the water of life for all who thirst, therefore there is thirst without. And this is open to everybody who desires to come. Where is your faith? Jesus promises eternal life for all who believe; he promises healing for those who pray; etc, etc. This is why we leave the world and come to the Church, to receive these blessings. When a Christian dies, he doesn't truly die; though his body dies, he continues living his eternal life in Christ in heaven.

I hope you find all of this thought-provoking and edifying to your faith. We live in a glorious creation and Christ rules in our midst. Amen!

except for the Day of the Lord.

The wheat and the tares.

The sign of the Son of Man ... sun darkened ... from the 4 corners the saints gathered. sky rolled up like a scroll.

revelation of the lawless one ... who is from the people who crucified Jesus and is taller than his associates (Daniel) ... Zech ... worthless shepherd with a bum arm and blind right eye.

haven't seen/read/heard about that dude.

wedding feast of the Lamb? bema seat? 1 Cor 15

7 year clean-up of Israel? Ez 42

So ... I appreciate the expounding upon the period of Jesus' walking the earth between the start of His ministry and the end of it ... or the handing-off of it .. .and I have a better understanding of the progression of The Gospel.

But I still don't see the basis for declaring all prophesy fulfilled when we're still here getting sick, dying, striving, cursing, "malacing," judging in unrighteousness, immoralitying, drunkennessing, carousing ... All the things of the fallen world, some directly because of what we've done, said or thought, others by those who came before us ...

 

[Stephen Green]

I appreciate your lengthy response, but I also know full well the plain meaning of the Greek word parousia. Nonetheless, the coming of Christ must be defined by scripture, not by secular etymology and semantics. As I've said elsewhere, the sign of the coming of the son of man in heaven is a reference to Daniel 7:13-14 -- the moment Christ is enthroned after fulfilling 1 Cor. 15:25-27. The last enemy is death; the sting of death is sin; the power of sin is the Law. Therefore the scriptural interpretation of the sign of the fulfilment of Dan. 7:13-14 is the conquering of the power of the Law, when the Temple and the Levitical priesthood were destroyed.

God bless

This misinterpretation of the Greek word parousia (παρουσία) is common among preterists. The word never, ever refers to anything but a physical coming or presence, never a "spiritual" one (whatever that means to a preterist). Christ did not physically appear at the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Nor did He appear spiritually, because the word parousia does not allow for that. And anyway, for Christ to have appeared "spiritually," His dead body would have to be up there in Heaven still, since "the body without the spirit is dead."

It occurs 17 times in the NT in reference to Christ's second coming. Other than that, it occurs in Paul's epistles in reference to the physical coming of his friends four times:

1Co 16:17 I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied.

2Co 7:6 Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;

2Co 7:7 And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.

Php 1:26 That your rejoicing may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming to you again.

It occurs twice as physical presence:

2Co 10:10 For [his] letters, say they, [are] weighty and powerful; but [his] bodily presence [is] weak, and [his] speech contemptible.

Php 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Again, it never, ever refers to anything other than a physical coming or presence. I could go on and quote from the Septuagint (LXX) if anyone thinks I have not proven my point sufficiently.

In fact, it came to mean the physical coming of a king. The BAGD lexicon (most authoritative) says that parousia "became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp. of kings and emperors visiting a province" (p. 630). That would, of course, be a physical visit, and strengthens the interpretation of Christ the King coming to earth on an official, physical visit.

 

[Stephen Green]

When Jesus was approached by a Canaanite woman, he said: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Mt. 15:24). He healed her, but did not preach to her.

He charged his disciples not to preach to anyone but Jews: "These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go onto the road of the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." Mt. 10:5-6

There was no mission to the Gentiles until the Holy Spirit commissioned St. Paul and St. Peter to lead it in the book of Acts. This did not happen until after the cross. The next step, the Parousia, could not happen til the "fullness of the Gentiles" had been brought in, after which all Israel would be saved. All Israel was saved when the Levitical administration of the Law, which condemned Israel, was destroyed along with the Temple in AD 70. This is all covered extensively in Hebrews. Re-read it if you have to.

God bless!

I do not think that interpertation is true.
Because:
Romans 3:19, ". . . Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. . . ."
And.
Galatians 2:21, ". . . I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. . . ."

 

[JD731]

JD, thanks for your lengthy and thoughtful sharing. A few questions.

You say that "The kingdom of heaven is at hand was his message until Matthew 12 and after the showdown with the Jewish rulers when it became obvious that the harvest of that age was ripe but there were no laborers to reap it, the message was the 'mysteries of the kingdom.' It was a mystery because there was not a single mention of this age by the OT prophets."

First, the Lord didn't say that there were "no" laborers, but that there were "few". But he resolves this himself by sending the twelve; and Luke also records that he sent out the seventy-two. Luke's account makes this problem-solution sequence even more clear. Not only this, but he sends out these messengers with the same message as his own from the beginning ("The Kingdom of God/heaven is at hand" Mt. 10:7, Lk. 10:11) -- there is no pivot to another message, as you have claimed. What do you say to this?

I will answer the questions in this manner.
The earthly ministry of Jesus was coming to an end in Matt 12. The time of his ministry was 42 months, or 3 1/2 years. It, the gospel, was to Israel only in the initial application The gospel that he preached was "the kingdom of heaven is at hand." This gospel was understood by all Jews and sons of Israel because it is through these people that God has written his bible and preserved it to the world and it is through them that he will work out his purposes in redemption of the whole world. In it were special and specific promises that were to this people group alone. He had made an unconditional promise that this people, beginning in Abraham, would grow into a mighty people and become the head nation of the world and that God himself would rule over them as King, as well as being King of all other nations at the same time. He laid out the boundaries of the land mass that the whole family would occupy and when this nation finally occupied their territory that had been given them, Jehovah God established himself as King of Israel and for the first 400 years governed this nation through 12 judges whom he chose. A picture for us, if you will, of the millennial reign of Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, King over Israel after this model, and by extension, over the whole earth.

Mt 19:27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye (apostles) which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Lu 22:30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Stop and think. This is a promise coming out of the mouth of God. You will need to accept it as literal truth or as some kind of non nonsensical type that means something other than what is stated. If you accept it literally then you will know that sometimes in the future there will be a new birth of the divine order after which Jesus Christ will really sit on the throne of his glory, and these apostles, who in this same context is said to get eternal life for their faith, will sit on thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. If this has not happened yet, then it is not true or it is yet in the future. What good are thrones if there is not a kingdom?

 

[JD731]

God and his ways can be rejected and that is what is happening in Matt 1 - 12 by the Jewish rulers of Jesus days, and we have an OT type to teach us this truth. The same result took place in the OT as it did in Matt 12 and 13. God found a way to pivot and still accomplish his will, however at a cost.

1 Sam 8:4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
9 Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

Saul was the result, a picture and type of the antichrist that is predicted for the final showdown between God and Satan. This reminds me of what Jesus said to Israel in his days.

Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Mr 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and [of] the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

During all these years, from Abraham to Jesus, God taught Israel about himself through the tabernacle worship service that he established and the offices of the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods. In these were the types established, that is, God gave physical representations of spiritual truths for their learning about him and his nature and his ways. Later, he gives the Davidic covenant under which Jesus will eventually reign as King over Israel and the world. As Christians today, our study of them serves the same purpose and without them we cannot know the mind of God and his deep things. The word for word scriptures are that important.

So yes, there is a pivot point at Matt 13 that is not a matter of prophecy in the OT. The fields are white unto harvest in chapter 12 but the harvest is not reaped except for a remnant, but he did not come to save a remnant only. Jesus Christ had dealt with the devils, exercising dominion over them for 3 years by casting them out of the house of Israel and preparing the house for the coming Spirit to indwell them and regenerate them by his presence in them, only to have the house be repopulated by more and worse devils than before and this generation to be accursed and unpardonable for their actions against him. When Jesus said he left the house in Matt 12 it meant more than him leaving the house, he departed from his purpose of redeeming the nation at that time. How can one establish his kingdom over a people whose rulers did this;
(take some time to word search "generation" in the gospel accounts and see what he says to THIS generation, which is the generation of Jesus Christ, 70 years long = Psa 90:10)

Mt 12:14 Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.[/QUOTE]

I said in the beginning of my posts that God reveals himself in circles and there is nothing new under the sun, he says. This 3 1/2 years, or 42 months of the ministry of Jesus Christ would have fulfilled the first half of Daniel's prophesied seventieth week had Israel received him as Messiah and believed he is the son of God. History would have been written differently from Matt 12 and all the prophesies of the day of the LORD judgements, that take place in the 42 months of the second half of that week of years would be accomplished through the Roman nation or some other ten nation confederation that rose up quickly. All was in place in those days for the prophesy to be fulfilled. The Jews occupied Jerusalem and their land. There was a temple and temple worship. Rome was the 4th world kingdom since the beginning of the "times of the gentiles and the 4th kingdom is described only as being diverse from the former 3 kingdoms." The enemies of Israel were the same then as they are today. The second half of that week would find the Day of the LORD's judgements being fulfilled, the nation born again of the Spirit, and sinners destroyed from the earth. All the things written after Matt 12 that pertains to this age are "mysteries." What does that mean? It means they were not prophesied in the former ages but were hidden in the mind of God. They would not have ever occurred if Israel would have repented and no one would have known the difference.

From the first word of chapter 13, Jesus is speaking metaphorically.

Mt 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

Remember, this is new to them. It is the end of his ministry, which logic will tell us from their question that he had not been speaking in parables before.

His answer:

11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

So, the parables were truth couched in types that must be revealed to the hearer by God, the indwelling Spirit, and was his way of keeping a generation who had the responsibility of receiving him but would not from understanding and getting saved. He said he would not save them.

Mt 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

 

[JD731]

The multitudes are not the Jewish rulers and the appeal now is not national but individual. This new world is not set up immediately but occupies the time from the resurrection of Jesus Christ until the day of the LORD judgements, that have been delayed because of Israel's unbelief and because of the remnant of believers in Israel.

Isa 5:1 Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill:
2 And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. (harvest time)
3 And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.
4 What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?
5 And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; [and] break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down:
6 And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.
7 For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts [is] the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry.

Probation

Lu 13:6 He spake also this parable; A certain [man] had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung [it]:
9 And if it bear fruit, [well]: and if not, [then] after that thou shalt cut it down.

It was cut down and removed in AD 70.

1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us (the apostles and prophets) , as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.
3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
4 For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.
6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and [to] Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think [of men] above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

1Co 13:2 And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries,

Eph 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now (in this age) revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

Ga 1:4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, (aion = age) according to the will of God and our Father:

Dispensation time divisions and purposes is not a fanciful teaching, it is the truth but sound bites will not prove it. There must be some meat. I have given some things that should be convincing, but I have just raked over the surface in so short of a post. What you should understand is that a showdown between God and the Devil concerning the earth is at hand

 

[Stephen Green]

JD, after reading through your responses I think I understand your position a bit better. I will briefly respond now and I'm happy to expand later when I have more time.

It seems to me that your primary error is that you are under the impression that the promise of the Kingdom was conditional on the obedience of the people. It was not. It was an unconditional, irrevocable promise (Rom. 11:29; Ps. 89:28-35, etc). In fact, the fullness of its coming required the rejection of Christ (Is. 53 etc) and therefore his crucifixion, his resurrection, his ascension; the preaching to the Gentiles (Is. 60:3 etc), the coming of the Jewish War (Dn. 9:26, Rev, 13:5-7), and the destruction of Jerusalem, its priesthood and its Temple (Daniel 9, etc).

I appreciate all of the nuances you are trying to point out in the progress of Christ's ministry, but your false premise leads to false distinctions. The mysteries of the Kingdom are very clearly summarized by St. Paul in Ephesians 3.

As far as the apostles sitting on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel; I can get deeper into this when there's time, but they did judge on earth, in preaching and shepherding (gathering the elect from the four winds); as well as in heaven. The first sign of this was in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70; but the saints continue to reign with Christ through the Church in heaven and on the earth, and will forever.

 

[John of Japan]

Hi John, I read the article you shared with interest. However, it greatly twists the primary sources from the Council of Constantinople. It is not appropriate, either, to make such a straw man out of the Apollonian heresy -- as if that being a focus of the Council somehow means chiliasm wasn't? Similarly, the author's attempt (and that of his contemporary sources) to make Marcellus a red herring for the chiliast conspiracy (shall we say) is weak, and he even concedes that Cyril may not be referring to Marcellus. Even if he was, Cyril's description of the heresy is precisely chiliasm -- so even allowing for a "mythbusted" Council of Constantinople (which that article failed to do), you still have Cyril condemning the school of thought.

Your list of chiliasts doesn't prove chiliasm. I could give you a list of Arians and Nestorians. I could give you a list of Gnostics. That doesn't make them orthodox. Sheer numbers prove nothing. Cyprian, Cyril, Augustine, Aquinas, I could go on, all had correctives for the chiliast fathers. Calvin did as well, if the opinion of reformers matters to you.

God bless

My list was not intended to prove chiliasm, but to show that the poster was wrong in saying that very few in the early centuries were chiliasts. However, the truth is that it was the eschatological standard for the first 300 years (when those names were taken from).

Why was it the standard? Because a literal interpretation always, always produces chiliasm. And as I pointed out, allegorical interpretation did not enter Christianity until Origen (c. 185-c. 254) who followed the Jewish interpreter Philo. This is basic in the history of hermeneutics. So, the churches almost all were chiliasts until the third century, and even then it took quite a bit of time for Philo's allegorical interpretation to catch on. (One author I read said it was Augustine, 354-430, who popularized it.)

I hope you had a wonderful Thanksgiving.

 

[John of Japan]

I appreciate your lengthy response, but I also know full well the plain meaning of the Greek word parousia. Nonetheless, the coming of Christ must be defined by scripture, not by secular etymology and semantics.

If you are replying to me, it would be helpful if you said so.

First of all, of course the coming of Christ must be measured by Scripture. However, Scripture must be interpreted by the meaning of the individual words. I recommend for you the excellent book on this by Moises Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning.

It is an hermeneutical crime to simply attach your own meaning to words willy nilly. This is actually an existential practice, right out of neo-orthodoxy (the theology based on existentialism), though you may not have meant that. This practice is used by Eugene Nida, the inventor of dynamic equivalence translation, who actually uses the term "semantic relativity."

So again, the Greek word parousia always means a physical presence or appearance, never a spiritual one (though I believe there is one metaphorical usage in the NT).

Secondly, in order to refute what I said about parousia, you must find a case where the word does not mean a literal, personal coming or presence. That's how hermeneutics works.

Thirdly, I did not reference etymology (historical linguistics), nor will I in this case. Linguists do not use etymology to determine contemporary meaning, which refers to the meaning of a word at the time it is used in a document.

 

[JD731]

JD, after reading through your responses I think I understand your position a bit better. I will briefly respond now and I'm happy to expand later when I have more time.

It seems to me that your primary error is that you are under the impression that the promise of the Kingdom was conditional on the obedience of the people. It was not. It was an unconditional, irrevocable promise (Rom. 11:29; Ps. 89:28-35, etc). In fact, the fullness of its coming required the rejection of Christ (Is. 53 etc) and therefore his crucifixion, his resurrection, his ascension; the preaching to the Gentiles (Is. 60:3 etc), the coming of the Jewish War (Dn. 9:26, Rev, 13:5-7), and the destruction of Jerusalem, its priesthood and its Temple (Daniel 9, etc).

I appreciate all of the nuances you are trying to point out in the progress of Christ's ministry, but your false premise leads to false distinctions. The mysteries of the Kingdom are very clearly summarized by St. Paul in Ephesians 3.

As far as the apostles sitting on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel; I can get deeper into this when there's time, but they did judge on earth, in preaching and shepherding (gathering the elect from the four winds); as well as in heaven. The first sign of this was in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70; but the saints continue to reign with Christ through the Church in heaven and on the earth, and will forever.

Thank you Stephen for your response and I apologize for long and wordy posts, but my points are based on a literal and a contextual understanding of words and therefore I must produce the words to make my points. I need to show you my logic.

I asked you at the first if you believed that Jesus came not but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel at his first coming and you said you do believe that.Yet, I am reading your post and it does not seem to me that you are believing the words are literal. For instance you said this;

As far as the apostles sitting on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel; I can get deeper into this when there's time, but they did judge on earth, in preaching and shepherding (gathering the elect from the four winds); as well as in heaven.The first sign of this was in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70; but the saints continue to reign with Christ through the Church in heaven and on the earth, and will forever.

Now you have thrown out an interpretation to me that has nothing to do with thrones or a King. These 12 apostles have never to this point in human history sat of thrones. Therefore I conclude you do not believe thrones in the promise are literal thrones. There were 12 apostles to Israel and there are 12 tribes in Israel and Jesus said they would judge the 12 tribes of Israel. Furthermore, Jesus Christ has not assumed his office as an earthly King. He at this very moment is sitting on his Father's throne in heaven prosecuting his office as intercessor and High Priest.

Lu 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. (stewardship)
14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this [man] to reign over us.
15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.
20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, [here is] thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:
21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.
22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, [thou] wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:
23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give [it] to him that hath ten pounds.
25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds)
26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me.

Remember you said Jesus was ministering to Israel only at his first coming. This is a kingdom parable and it is not in heaven although it is from heaven. It is on earth when HE RETURNS.

If he has not returned then this has either not happened yet or it is not true. If you do not believe the words you will believe a fanciful interpretation.