User Tag List

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 67

Thread: Actual, Mid-Acts, Bible Study

  1. #16
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,848
    Thanks
    133,794
    Thanked 39,603 Times in 24,602 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148087
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    Inquiring minds would like to see authoritative and reliable MAD teaching somewhere and somehow, because right now it seems more like a nihilism; it's not this, it's not that, etc., etc. Of course that's a tall order, because no Christian position has such a thing, save for Catholics, arguably the Orthodox (and I argue not), and Calvinism's Westminster standards. I suppose there could be others, but those are the big ones.
    I think that is because MAD is not a denomination, etc., with creeds and traditions and such.
    It's just a term used to separate those that believe a particular point from those that do not believe that particular point.
    The particular point being that the BOC is not Israel, but a completely different entity from Israel.

    I mean, there is no MADism vs. Calvinism, because even among Calvinists you will find some that believe Israel will be restored on earth and some that don't.

    It's kinda like the term 'pre-trib'.
    It's not a denomination, but just a term we throw out there to separate those that think the rapture happens before the tribulation, as opposed to those that don't.


    In other words, folks can believe what MAD does and still be a member of most any denomination.

    God Bless America

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Tambora For Your Post:

    Right Divider (October 25th, 2017)

  3. #17
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,848
    Thanks
    133,794
    Thanked 39,603 Times in 24,602 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148087
    Quote Originally Posted by intojoy View Post
    Revelation 20:4-6: And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as worshipped not the beast, neither his image, and received not the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they lived, and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead lived not until the thousand years should be finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that has part in the first resurrection: over these the second death has no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

    Here are some that co reign with Messiah in the kingdom. We will be included with them.


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL
    Maybe you could detail your reasoning a bit more, cause I'm not seeing anything in the above that DEMANDS that it can only be about the BOC.

    God Bless America

  4. #18
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,848
    Thanks
    133,794
    Thanked 39,603 Times in 24,602 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148087
    Quote Originally Posted by intojoy View Post
    Well, I believe in a literal thousand year kingdom when Israel is saved and Messiah reigns from Jerusalem. During that time the church saints "we" will be reigning with the Tribulation saints. I figured it out that Jerry thinks he will be watching soap operas all day up in heaven during this time.


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL
    Do you hold the view of pre-trib rapture?

    God Bless America

  5. #19
    Over 5000 post club Nihilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The North & the West
    Posts
    5,121
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 982 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    263126
    Quote Originally Posted by intojoy View Post
    Well, I believe in a literal thousand year kingdom when Israel is saved and Messiah reigns from Jerusalem. During that time the church saints "we" will be reigning with the Tribulation saints. I figured it out that Jerry thinks he will be watching soap operas all day up in heaven during this time.
    I audibly cracked up.

    What if the first resurrection is just baptism---when first we believed---and the real mystery is what 1000 years means, especially in light of the other famous 1000 year passages, but also, perhaps, maybe, , in light of how long the One Church was also one organization, on the earth, from about AD 30 to AD 1054? It's not exact, no. Not as exact as the Lord's prediction of how long it would be, before Rome wrecked the temple, that was 40 years straight-up-and-down. But the duration from AD 30 to 1054 is within what a statistician would call "3% accuracy," which is . . . not great, honestly. But 1054 - 30 = 1024, which is exactly, FWIW, 2^10, which is kind of like the "binary thousand," and why the megabyte and kilobyte and gigabyte and terabyte aren't actually 1000 bytes, but are 1,024 bytes. So in "the Greek," are we talking about a "kiloyear," or is it 1000 years?

    2nd Peter 3:8 (KJV) Psalm 90:4 (KJV)
    THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

    Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

    Trevor: "I know how to drive, man."
    Ricky: "You also know how to be stupid."

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Nihilo For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  7. #20
    Over 5000 post club Nihilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The North & the West
    Posts
    5,121
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 982 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    263126
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    I think that is because MAD is not a denomination, etc., with creeds and traditions and such.
    It's just a term used to separate those that believe a particular point from those that do not believe that particular point.
    The particular point being that the BOC is not Israel, but a completely different entity from Israel.

    I mean, there is no MADism vs. Calvinism, because even among Calvinists you will find some that believe Israel will be restored on earth and some that don't.

    It's kinda like the term 'pre-trib'.
    It's not a denomination, but just a term we throw out there to separate those that think the rapture happens before the tribulation, as opposed to those that don't.


    In other words, folks can believe what MAD does and still be a member of most any denomination.
    Well, you tricked me. I, after years of trying, didn't "figger out" that MADism was primarily an eschatological distinction in Christian theology. Very interesting Tambora, thank you.
    THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

    Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

    Trevor: "I know how to drive, man."
    Ricky: "You also know how to be stupid."

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Nihilo For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  9. #21
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,848
    Thanks
    133,794
    Thanked 39,603 Times in 24,602 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148087
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    Well, you tricked me.
    I weren't tryin to.


    I, after years of trying, didn't "figger out" that MADism was primarily an eschatological distinction in Christian theology. Very interesting Tambora, thank you.
    Once in a blue moon I do something right. (Which is also a good song!)

    God Bless America

  10. #22
    Over 5000 post club Nihilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The North & the West
    Posts
    5,121
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 982 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    263126
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    I weren't tryin to.


    Once in a blue moon I do something right. (Which is also a good song!)
    I prefer the version on the movie Babe, sung by mice.
    THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

    Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

    Trevor: "I know how to drive, man."
    Ricky: "You also know how to be stupid."

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Nihilo For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  12. #23
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,848
    Thanks
    133,794
    Thanked 39,603 Times in 24,602 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148087
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    I prefer the version on the movie Babe, sung by mice.
    I was thinking of this one. Different song all together.


    God Bless America

  13. #24
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    6,529
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 710 Times in 606 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    Do you hold the view of pre-trib rapture?
    Yes


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to intojoy For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  15. #25
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    6,529
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 710 Times in 606 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    I audibly cracked up.

    What if the first resurrection is just baptism---when first we believed---and the real mystery is what 1000 years means, especially in light of the other famous 1000 year passages, but also, perhaps, maybe, , in light of how long the One Church was also one organization, on the earth, from about AD 30 to AD 1054? It's not exact, no. Not as exact as the Lord's prediction of how long it would be, before Rome wrecked the temple, that was 40 years straight-up-and-down. But the duration from AD 30 to 1054 is within what a statistician would call "3% accuracy," which is . . . not great, honestly. But 1054 - 30 = 1024, which is exactly, FWIW, 2^10, which is kind of like the "binary thousand," and why the megabyte and kilobyte and gigabyte and terabyte aren't actually 1000 bytes, but are 1,024 bytes. So in "the Greek," are we talking about a "kiloyear," or is it 1000 years?

    2nd Peter 3:8 (KJV) Psalm 90:4 (KJV)
    Then we would be allegorical hermeneutists


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to intojoy For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  17. #26
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    6,529
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 710 Times in 606 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    Maybe you could detail your reasoning a bit more, cause I'm not seeing anything in the above that DEMANDS that it can only be about the BOC.
    In verse 4, John describes three groups of saints who are to co-reign with the Messiah.

    First, in verse 4a, there are those to whom judgment was given.

    This would be a reference to the Church saints who were raptured at some time preceding the Great Tribulation. The judgment spoken of is that of the Judgment Seat of the Messiah, the judgment of the believer's works. In fact, it is the outcome of this judgment that will determine the position of each Church saint in the Kingdom.

    Secondly, in verse 4b there are those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus.

    These saints are the believers who will be martyred during the first half of the Great Tribulation and were mentioned under the fifth seal (Rev. 6:9-11).

    Thirdly, in verse 4c there are those who did not worship the Antichrist or his image, nor receive the mark of 666 on their forehead or right hand. Since these things were initiated only at the middle of the Tribulation, this third group of saints will be those of the second half of the Great Tribulation.

    Both Church and Tribulation saints, then, will co reign with the King for one thousand years. The Old Testament saints will have a different destiny.




    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to intojoy For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  19. #27
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,690
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,307 Times in 2,478 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1119335
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    Inquiring minds would like to see authoritative and reliable MAD teaching somewhere and somehow, because right now it seems more like a nihilism; it's not this, it's not that, etc., etc. Of course that's a tall order, because no Christian position has such a thing, save for Catholics, arguably the Orthodox (and I argue not), and Calvinism's Westminster standards. I suppose there could be others, but those are the big ones.
    One does not build an entire University based on the Mid-Acts Perspective of Dispensationalism on the little you have concluded it does or does not hold to.

    And an entire University is what the late Charles Baker helped found.

    Google the words "pdf A Dispensational Theology Charles F. Baker" and a copy of one of said University's required readings will come up.

    It alone is some 600 pages plus.

    You'll find the Mid-Acts Perspective of Dispensationalism is more than an Eschatology.

    Another, shorter work of his can be found via googling the words "pdf Dispensational Relationships Charles F. Baker."

    Thing is, people either tend to not bother looking into the history of a thing, or do so not really well equipped to look at a thing objectively.

    Case in point - one of John Nelson Darby's earliest distinctions was not the distinction that Dispensationalism in General is now known for - the distinction between the Nation ISRAEL and The Body of Christ.

    Rather, he arrived at that as the result of a prior distinction - his understanding of the Believer's Complete Identity in Christ.

    Which is an understanding that goes beyond Eschatological distinctions.

    And even that understanding had only been a continuance of what had already been in motion for him as a point of departure from the Reformed tradition he had been a part of.

    Thing is, on the one hand, such things are never as black and white as most appear to need to make them.

    On the other, that alone does not mean there isn't a black that is, and can be distinguished from a white.

    You might notice this fact from all that Baker's book "A Dispensational Theology" often only touches the surface of.

    Because each aspect of the whole that is Mid-Acts Dispensationalism (Soteriology; Bibliology; Angelology; etc.) is a never ending, ever fascinating study in it's own right.

    Case in point - a later, much more refined understanding holds to far less Dispensations or Economies than Baker had held to in his day.

    The determining factor being, not departure from the basic Acts 9 study approach, rather; further refinements in the basic study approach.

    Further refinements which result only from continually returning to the Scripture to there attempt to better understand the text absent of the Mid-Acts Perspective going in, as a means of keeping the Scripture separate from the Perspective: actually hearing the text out, and given all that then entails paying close attention to.

    Case in point - my comment to the poster quoted in the OP.

    His assertion is erroneous in that the Lord saved the Apostle Paul, after God had already concluded both Unbelieving ISRAEL and the Gentiles "under sin."

    Both were now concluded "heathen" "pagan" or given over to "idolatry."

    But that poster's point of departure is the error that is the fusion or hybrid of how Acts 9 Dispensationalism studies a thing out with how Acts 28 Dispensationalism studies them out.

    The result being that various of his/their positions end up neither actually Acts 9, nor Acts 28 based.

    Rather, such have ended up at a hybrid of both approaches and their differrent conclusions that results in views held by neither.

    Their marriage of points of departure held by both the Acts 9 and the Acts 28 is obvious to anyone familiar with the history of both the Acts 9 and the Acts 28 Perspectives within Dispensationalism in general.

    As someone once astutely noted "within any belief lies the history of it's origin."

    The result being that tracing a conclusion and or it's resulting assertion back to it's origin (beliefs, approach, etc.) ends up not that tough a thing to trace back.

    Problem is, such easily take offense to having this pointed out to them.

    Bad enough such continually prove I'll-equipped to see the obvious.

  20. #28
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,690
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,307 Times in 2,478 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1119335
    A Mid-Acts Study Principle ever worth keeping in mind.

    We read the following concerning the Apostle Paul prior to, and just after his encounter with, and salvation by, the Lord...

    Acts 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

    9:8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

    9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

    9:20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

    As is, that all appears to assert that the Apostle Paul continued his trip to Damascus after he encountered the Lord, and shortly thereafter, he began to preach that He is the Son of God.

    By itself; it leads to that error, but also, to the error concerning what is implied by Luke's assertion there that Paul preached that Christ is the Son of God.

    In fact, there is a gap in time in between the following two sentences, the awareness of which impacts one's conclusions.

    Acts 9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

    We read the following concerning all that in...

    Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

    Meaning that the UNDERSTANDING of this...

    Acts 9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

    ...is actually this...

    Acts 9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. (...went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.) Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

    Acts 9:20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

    I'll return to add more to this...

    But one point is that one ought to often carefully consider that Gaps In Time between a word, a phrase, and or passages, might sometimes be the case, and need to be considered as A Study Principle because the awareness and or unawareness of such Gaps in Time can greatly impact one's resulting conclusions.

  21. #29
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    10,672
    Thanks
    7,457
    Thanked 12,948 Times in 7,419 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147641

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Danoh View Post
    Respond how ignorantly and intolerantly some of you will - nevertheless; the fusion of the Acts 9 approach with that of the Acts 28 into some sort of a means of solving for seeming holes in Acts 9 that you and some others on here have bought into is an error...
    Thanks Mr. Tolerance.
    turbosixx says "Yep. Pentecost was the first time men heard the gospel."
    When corrected, turbsixx says "diversion tactic"
    turbosixx is dishonest.


    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

    Eph 2:8-9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:8) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: (2:9) Not of works, lest any man should boast.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

  23. #30
    Silver Member SaulToPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    18,463
    Thanks
    3,099
    Thanked 19,614 Times in 11,395 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147799
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    They can't compete with a real writer and grammar scholar
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    You're too literal to get it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    The New Covenant preceded the Old Covenant.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SaulToPaul For Your Post:

    heir (September 18th, 2017),Tambora (June 1st, 2017)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us