User Tag List

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45

Thread: Are We Now In the Time of the prophecy of Luke 17: 26-29?

  1. #1
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788

    Are We Now In the Time of the prophecy of Luke 17: 26-29?

    Are We Now In the Time of the Prophecy of Luke 17: 26-29?

    Luke 17: 26-29 says "And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.28. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 29.But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all."

    Luke 17: 26-29 says that people at this point in time will be like those in the time of Noah, they will not know what is going on and what is ahead. We are in a time in which people are divided one against another by their opposing ideology. Many who do not know what Marxism is are promoting forms of Marxism.

    Fascism, like Marxism, moves toward the creation of a totalitarian world government with a collectivist culture and society. But Marxism begins from the dialectic.

    "In the eyes of the dialectical philosophy, nothing is established for
    all time, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx)

    Marx as a young radical intellectual followed a Leftist Hegelian movement in Berlin, based upon Hegel's bringing the Greek philosophy of the διαλεκτική, or dialectic, into modern philosophy. In the dialectic the first position, called the thesis, is argued against by an opposite position, called the anti-thesis. Though not understood by many, this paradigm has somehow come to be used in a great deal of discourse now in all the institutions of society.

    The dialectic in Greek philosophy before the time of Christ was a procedure for making arguments and counter arguments by use of a thesis and its opposition or anti-thesis. The dialectic is in appearance a formal way of making arguments. But Paul says in I Timothy 6: 20-21 that the anti-thesis in the dialectic process produces "falsely called knowledge."

    αντιθεσεις. anti-thesis, is translated as oppositions in I Timothy 6: 20 in the King James Version.. But there are other Greek words used in the New Testament which mean opposition, such as anthistémi, antidiatithémi, antipolítef̱si̱, or enantío̱si̱. Antithesis is a specific word used in Greek philosophy in relation to the dialectic.

    The tactics of argument do not necessarily, in the dialectic, deal with what is true, but often what appears to be an argument or a tactic of discrediting the opponent.

    Dean Gotcher says: "God cannot speak into the pre-flood, Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah, dialectic mind, even though it might quote scripture." From: https://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brai...ic-gotcher.htm

    "The dialectic is man thinking through his feelings. This is the reason God flooded the world and will judge the world again. "And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man." (Luke 17:26) " So says Gotcher.

    Then he says "The dialectic paradigm rejects the word of God as the final authority.........You do not dialogue truth, you teach truth, you dialogue compromise. From: https://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brai...ic-gotcher.htm.".......The prophecy of Luke 17: 26. Gotcher is saying, can be seen to began to be fulfilled now because of the widespread use of the dialectic.

    Gotcher is saying that the mindset behind the use of the dialectic is somehow like that of the mindset of pre-Flood times, as well as the mindset of people at the times of the Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah events.

    Various forms of the dialectic are in use now in the media, in education, in government in the corporations and in the churches. We not only live in an age of deception, and in a time when common morality is declining, but we also live in the era of the dialectic, both as a way of making arguments and also as a way of thinking.

    The Tower of Babel Event is in Genesis 11: 1, 4-9. "And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.............And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. 6. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. 8. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth."

    Genesis 11: 1, 4-9 has to be interpreted by other scriptures, and the interpretation of the Flood event in Genesis 6 to 7 is part of the understanding of Genesis 11: 1, 4-9.

    Those descendants of Noah, his sons and their wives after the Flood who are the subject of Genesis 11: 1,4-9, apparently not only speak the same language, but they also have the same religion, follow the same doctrines of what can be called an early form of the Babylonian religion. In a sense the descendants of Ham in the Tower of Babel Event had returned to the mindset - the dark and flawed mindset of those right before the Flood. In other words, the descendants of Ham in the Tower of Babel Event had reverted back, to some extent, to the mental and spiritual condition of the descendants of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Men of Genesis 6, an inter-breeding which brought on the judgment of God as the Flood of Noah/. Genesis 6: 9 says "These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."

    Generations is from: Strong's Hebrew number 8435, to-led-aw': or toldah {to-led-aw'}; from 03205; (plural only) descent, i.e. family; (figuratively) history:--birth, generations." This sounds like it could be talking about Noah's genetics. But whether the Sons of God in Genesis 6 were fallen angels who bred with human women to produce a race of hybrids, or a people faithful to God had bred with a people not faithful to God, to produce offspring who God rejected, the Tower of Babel Event marked some kind of return to the mindset, morally and psychology, of the pre-Flood times.

  2. #2
    Silver Member SaulToPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    18,343
    Thanks
    3,060
    Thanked 19,381 Times in 11,268 Posts

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


    Rep Power
    2147797
    huh?
    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.

  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SaulToPaul For Your Post:

    glorydaz (September 5th, 2017),Right Divider (September 7th, 2017),steko (September 6th, 2017)

  4. #3
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,455
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 666 Times in 586 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    There are many good thoughts here North, but attaching it to something outside that generation is not sound, because of the other locations where it is. There is no coincidence that Daniel also said the end of the city and worship system would be like a flood...or perhaps the evil of that generation of zealots would be like that. Words kind of escaped Josephus trying to describe them. And yes they do have a way of harkening back to the problem of the nephilim.

    He meant his generation, although there are examples to all others. There may even have been some 'marxism' at work in the antimessianic movement.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  5. #4
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788
    Luke 17: 26-29 is a prophecy for the future, at some time, from the point of view of the First Century, How the mentality of people at the time the prophecy is to be fulfilled is like the mentality of people at the time of Noah is probably hard enough to grasp by those on TOL who are more focused on issues like what is Israel.

    I don't know if dispensationalism has a position on Luke 17: 26-29. Nor have I ever come across any specific preterist or historicist view on Luke 17: 26-29.

    I probably should have left out the mention of the Tower of Babel event because the connection between Marxism, the bringing of the dialectic in Greek philosophy into modern philosophy by Hegel, the Marxist version of the dialectic, its widespread use now and the mentality of people at the time of the Flood of Noah is so foreign to those on TOL.

    If you do not know what the dialectic is as used by many now, you probably also do not know that it is being used widely now. The idea is not necessarily that the mentality at the time of Noah's Flood was Marxist, but that in our time Marxism contributed to the widespread use of the Marxist form of the dialectic.

    And the idea of Gotcher that God does not speak into the dialectic mind of the pre-flood, Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah people at that time, just as he does not speak into the dialectic mind of people in 2017 is an abstract idea. It is beyond the literal attitude. There is something more abstract going on to make the dialectic mind as seen by Gotcher at the time of the Flood of Noah and before like the dialectic mind of 2017.

    Gotcher says "The dialectic is man thinking through his feelings. This is the reason God flooded the world and will judge the world again."

    He says "The dialectic paradigm rejects the word of God as the final authority.........You do not dialogue truth, you teach truth, you dialogue compromise." From: https://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brai...ic-gotcher.htm.

    That you do not dialogue Truth in the dialectic is one reason why Paul in I Timothy 6:20-21 says to avoid the false or pseudo knowledge of the αντιθεσεις. anti-thesis. The anti-thesis within the dialectic, opposes the thesis, which for the Word of God is Truth. Dialogue is necessary for the dialectic to work and to oppose Truth.

    At a more abstract level we can see that the dialectic mind of people right before the Flood of Noah rejected Objective Truth, and they rejected the idea that there can be Objective Truth from God. "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11.And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12.That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

    It is interesting that this statement on love of the truth as a condition of salvation is placed right near Paul's statement that there is to come an apostasy as the man of sin, the son of perdition, is to sit in the temple of God. And for the dispensationalists that must be a literal temple of God and the man of sin must be one individual. II Thessalonians 2: 3-12
    Last edited by northwye; September 6th, 2017 at 07:46 AM.

  6. #5
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,455
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 666 Times in 586 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    Quote Originally Posted by northwye View Post
    Luke 17: 26-29 is a prophecy for the future, at some time, from the point of view of the First Century, How the mentality of people at the time the prophecy is to be fulfilled is like the mentality of people at the time of Noah is probably hard enough to grasp by those on TOL who are more focused on issues like what is Israel.

    I don't know if dispensationalism has a position on Luke 17: 26-29. Nor have I ever come across any specific preterist or historicist view on Luke 17: 26-29.

    I probably should have left out the mention of the Tower of Babel event because the connection between Marxism, the bringing of the dialectic in Greek philosophy into modern philosophy by Hegel, the Marxist version of the dialectic, its widespread use now and the mentality of people at the time of the Flood of Noah is so foreign to those on TOL.

    If you do not know what the dialectic is as used by many now, you probably also do not know that it is being used widely now. The idea is not necessarily that the mentality at the time of Noah's Flood was Marxist, but that in our time Marxism contributed to the widespread use of the Marxist form of the dialectic.

    And the idea of Gotcher that God does not speak into the dialectic mind of the pre-flood, Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah people at that time, just as he does not speak into the dialectic mind of people in 2017 is an abstract idea. It is beyond the literal attitude. There is something more abstract going on to make the dialectic mind as seen by Gotcher at the time of the Flood of Noah and before like the dialectic mind of 2017.

    Gotcher says "The dialectic is man thinking through his feelings. This is the reason God flooded the world and will judge the world again."

    He says "The dialectic paradigm rejects the word of God as the final authority.........You do not dialogue truth, you teach truth, you dialogue compromise." From: https://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brai...ic-gotcher.htm.

    At a more abstract level we can see that the dialectic mind of people right before the Flood of Noah rejected Objective Truth, and they rejected the idea that there can be Objective Truth from God. "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11.And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12.That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

    It is interesting that this statement on love of the truth as a condition of salvation is placed right near Paul's statement that there is to come an apostasy as the man of sin, the son of perdition, is to sit in the temple of God.




    Sorry but I've concluded that Jesus is might 'tighter' in his references. He said the same things in Mt24A and Mk13A so I think he's sharpening warnings about that generation. He used the flood analogy thanks to Daniel 9.

    Luke is crammed with references to things or images of the zealot revolt: terrorists, bad military decisions, Pilate's killing of rebel Galileans while sacrificing, the 'terms of peace,' (twice) the "vultures," the obvious lines of ch 19 and 21, the timestamped warning of ch 23 about the babes as adults. The redemption of Israel is intentionally there in the nativity so that in the overall presentation about Jesus and Paul, any Roman administrator can see it is not inflammatory, and mentioned again at 24:21, again showing Jesus was not a Galilean rebel. the question of 22:52 re rebellion.

    The question "what will men do?" (23:31) asks how awful would they get in the revolt. They were. Like I said, Josephus runs out of words, but it was extremely evil, and the upper classes who were baited into thinking they would have 'peace and safety' (I Th 5:3) became disgusting too, in relation to what high ethical standards they had.

    Everything Paul says (Luke-Acts is mostly transcribing and protecting Paul, Lk 1, Acts 1, 16:10 being where Luke joins the team) points to an understanding that the end of the world was to be right after this revolt failed and Israel demolished, esp in Thess. The Son would be revealed. That word choice is the obvious first reason to connect the Rev to the destruction of the country.

    The longing to see a day of the Son of Man referred back to happier times during the ministry which would be increasingly distant as the days turned awful in the general revolt. The wrath of the Son of Man would quick and be after the evil like Noah and S&G.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  7. #6
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,229 Times in 2,418 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1100283
    Quote Originally Posted by northwye View Post
    ...I don't know if dispensationalism has a position on Luke 17: 26-29. Nor have I ever come across any specific preterist or historicist view on Luke 17: 26-29...
    As in every other area of inquiry and or reflection on in life, it is ever the case that when one approaches attempting to sort out a thing through operative principles or general rules of thumb, rather than through specific content, one finds one is easily able to figure out whatever content has been left out and or never touched on.

    Or..."give a man a fish" (content), feed him for a day (tomorrow he will need more outside help; he will need additional content once more).

    "Teach him how to fish" (guiding principles any content is basically the result of) and "you feed him for a lifetime" (he is now able to figure out what's what, what goes where, etc., on his own).

    In this, it is obvious once more, that your approach has resulted in your being so used to needing to be spoonfed where Dispys supposedly stand on one position or another, northwye, that unless you are spoonfed it - via one more book "about" or another - you are unable to "know if dispensationalism has a position on..." it.

    In this, northwye, you have ended yourself up no better off in your "study" approach than others on here I have tried pointing out this very principle to, only to find the same obvious ignorance at work in them that you just now exhibited once more, is exactly the case with you.

    If your approach does not allow you to sort out where a different perspective sees things from without your having to ask, then your approach has a gaping hole in it.

    Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8

  8. #7
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788
    "At a more abstract level we can see that the dialectic mind of people right before the Flood of Noah rejected Objective Truth, and they rejected the idea that there can be Objective Truth from God." Otherwise, they would not have all perished in the flood except Noah and his family.

    What does the Jewish revolt in the First Century have to do with the dialectic of Satan and the mindset of people right before the Flood of Noah?

    Behind the dialectic interpretation of Luke 17: 26-29 is the understanding that there are examples of the use of the dialectic in scripture and that the implication from Genesis 3: 1-6 and John 8: 31-44 is that Satan is the author of the dialectic.

    In Genesis 3: 1-6 the serpent deceived Eve into getting into a dialogue with him and in that dialogue the Serpent used the dialectic to "fix" Eve's faith in God and obedience in him.

    In John 8: 32 Jesus told the people standing before him, including the Pharisees, that "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

    The Pharisees replied to Christ, "We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?" John 8: 33

    Again in John 8: 39 the Pharisees argued with Christ saying to him "Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham."

    Then in John 8: 44 Christ said to the Pharisees, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

    Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father the devil. Jesus had come to create the New Covenant, and in the dialectic the thesis, or Truth, was now Jesus Christ, who was standing before them. The doctrine of the Pharisees from the Old Covenant that they were the chosen people by their flesh was no longer the Truth. but the Pharisees were using this doctrine in John 8:39 and 8: 41 to make a dialectic argument opposing that of Christ. The Pharisees were of their father the devil who was a murderer and a liar, and the implication is that they were also of the devil in making an argument against the Truth of Christ, the Mediator of the Everlasting New Covenant (Hebrews 8: 6, Hebrews 9: 15 and Hebrews 12: 24). They were doing the dialectic against Jesus.

  9. #8
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,229 Times in 2,418 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1100283
    lol

    northwye, were you an old school Pentecostal in a former life - I mean...your hoighty toighty, and demon behind every bush, really does take the cake...and then some...



    Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Danoh For Your Post:

    steko (September 8th, 2017)

  11. #9
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788
    This Looks Like One Dispensationalist View of Luke 17: 20-37

    https://gracethrufaith.com/end-times...imes-prophecy/

    "Luke 17, The Lord’s Other End Times Prophecy - A Bible Study by Jack Kelley"

    "After being rejected and executed by the leaders of His generation, the Lord would go away, and only the invisible phase of the Kingdom would remain. It’s called the Church"

    "This is a clue as to why the Church and Israel are mutually exclusive in the world. The Kingdom of God began with Israel. He had Moses tell them so. “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Exodus 19:5-6)"

    "But then because of their disobedience it was taken away from Israel and given to the Church. In Matt. 21:43 Jesus said. “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.”

    "But this wasn’t to be permanent. After the Church disappears, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. The early Church understood this, as evidenced by James’ prophecy in Acts 15:13-18 where he said that the Lord would first take from among the Gentiles a people for Himself, and after that would return to rebuild David’s fallen tabernacle. Later Paul confirmed this, saying that Israel had been hardened in part until the full number of Gentiles come in, and after that Israel would be saved. (Romans 11:25-27)"

    "The Days Of Noah"

    “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.” (Luke 17:26-27)

    Like it was in Noah’s time most people on Earth at the End of the Age will be unaware that life as they know it is about to end, not because they haven’t been warned but because they haven’t believed the warning. Noah is used as a model of the believing remnant of Israel at the end of the age, preserved through the judgment while the world is destroyed. Noah and his family remained in the general location of the judgment while the unbelievers were swept away in the flood.

    At the End of the Age Israel’s believing remnant will remain in the general location of the judgment but will be preserved while the Lord completely destroys the nations around them. Speaking of the time of Jacob’s Trouble (the Great Tribulation) in Jere. 30:11 the Lord said,

    I am with you and will save you,’ declares the LORD. ‘Though I completely destroy all the nations among which I scatter you, I will not completely destroy you.”

    In the symbolic language of Revelation the Jewish remnant is represented by a woman, while Satan is called the serpent.

    The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach. (Rev. 12:14)"

    There is a lot of dispensationalist theology cited here, and very little on how the time of fulfillment of Luke 17: 26-29 will be like that of the historical time right before Noah's Flood, or how the mentality of the people at the time of the fulfillment of the Luke 17 prophecy would be similar to that before the Flood,in which God judged the entire generation.

    There is an interesting interpretation of Acts 15: 13-18 above: "But this wasn’t to be permanent. After the Church disappears, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. The early Church understood this, as evidenced by James’ prophecy in Acts 15:13-18 where he said that the Lord would first take from among the Gentiles a people for Himself, and after that would return to rebuild David’s fallen tabernacle." The text says "And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
    14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
    15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
    16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
    17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
    18. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."

    The interpretation that James gives of Amos 9: 11-12 is in Acts 15: 13-14, " And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
    14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
    15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
    16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
    17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things."

    James interpreted Amos 9: 11-12 and similar Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel as agreeing with Peter's saying that God had called a people out of the Gentiles for himself. The restoration of Amos 9: 11-12 is seen in the New Testament to be the New Covenant though some dispensationalists try to take advantage of the very brief and cryptic statements in Acts 15 and deny this is the case.
    Last edited by northwye; September 6th, 2017 at 11:53 AM.

  12. #10
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,229 Times in 2,418 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1100283
    Your post immediately above mine here, northwye, is sourced from Acts 2 Dispensationalism, not Acts 9.

    Acts 2 Dispensationalism is similar in erroneous approach to that of the hybrid of Acts 9 and Acts Dispensationalism being purported by most on here as THEIR "MAD."

    Acts 2 Dispensationalism itself is a hybrid of Reformed Theology with how Acts 2 Dispensationalism attempts to sort things out.

    But it never really broke free of it's purported freedom from the Reformed.

    Thus, it's continued obvious mix of the two.

    The other extreme being the mix of Acts 9 and Acts 28 Dispensationalism as a hybrid, being touted on here by most as "MAD."

    The same error in principle is obvious.

    Good luck sorting it out.

    They themselves remain blind to being able to do so.

    Taking offense this is even pointed out to them.

    Just as you do.

    Birds of a feather each trying to pass off their version of the bottom of their bird cage, as a solution.

    Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8

  13. #11
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,455
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 666 Times in 586 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    North,
    maybe slow down so this is a conversation.

    You asked:
    What does the Jewish revolt in the First Century have to do with the dialectic of Satan and the mindset of people right before the Flood of Noah?

    Were we talking about the dialectic of Satan? The question was 'are we now in the time of Lk 17's prophecy?' It's about that generation, and the dialectic of Satan was probably used by the zealots. The flood analogy was used by Daniel about the same event of the 1st century. The picture painted by Christ about people right before the destruction of Israel has both:

    the agitators who wanted the fight with Rome and the upper classes were in their way, and

    the upper classes who wanted 'peace and safety' and no conflict with either zealots or Rome, yet ended up doing truly horrible things in the end.

    I was saying that the ugly head of Noachian types showed itself in that generation, but more sophisticated and pseudo-messianic.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  14. #12
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,455
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 666 Times in 586 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    Quote Originally Posted by northwye View Post
    This Looks Like One Dispensationalist View of Luke 17: 20-37

    https://gracethrufaith.com/end-times...imes-prophecy/

    "Luke 17, The Lord’s Other End Times Prophecy - A Bible Study by Jack Kelley"

    "After being rejected and executed by the leaders of His generation, the Lord would go away, and only the invisible phase of the Kingdom would remain. It’s called the Church"

    "This is a clue as to why the Church and Israel are mutually exclusive in the world. The Kingdom of God began with Israel. He had Moses tell them so. “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Exodus 19:5-6)"

    "But then because of their disobedience it was taken away from Israel and given to the Church. In Matt. 21:43 Jesus said. “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.”

    "But this wasn’t to be permanent. After the Church disappears, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. The early Church understood this, as evidenced by James’ prophecy in Acts 15:13-18 where he said that the Lord would first take from among the Gentiles a people for Himself, and after that would return to rebuild David’s fallen tabernacle. Later Paul confirmed this, saying that Israel had been hardened in part until the full number of Gentiles come in, and after that Israel would be saved. (Romans 11:25-27)"

    "The Days Of Noah"

    “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.” (Luke 17:26-27)

    Like it was in Noah’s time most people on Earth at the End of the Age will be unaware that life as they know it is about to end, not because they haven’t been warned but because they haven’t believed the warning. Noah is used as a model of the believing remnant of Israel at the end of the age, preserved through the judgment while the world is destroyed. Noah and his family remained in the general location of the judgment while the unbelievers were swept away in the flood.

    At the End of the Age Israel’s believing remnant will remain in the general location of the judgment but will be preserved while the Lord completely destroys the nations around them. Speaking of the time of Jacob’s Trouble (the Great Tribulation) in Jere. 30:11 the Lord said,

    I am with you and will save you,’ declares the LORD. ‘Though I completely destroy all the nations among which I scatter you, I will not completely destroy you.”

    In the symbolic language of Revelation the Jewish remnant is represented by a woman, while Satan is called the serpent.

    The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach. (Rev. 12:14)"

    There is a lot of dispensationalist theology cited here, and very little on how the time of fulfillment of Luke 17: 26-29 will be like that of the historical time right before Noah's Flood, or how the mentality of the people at the time of the fulfillment of the Luke 17 prophecy would be similar to that before the Flood,in which God judged the entire generation.

    There is an interesting interpretation of Acts 15: 13-18 above: "But this wasn’t to be permanent. After the Church disappears, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. The early Church understood this, as evidenced by James’ prophecy in Acts 15:13-18 where he said that the Lord would first take from among the Gentiles a people for Himself, and after that would return to rebuild David’s fallen tabernacle." The text says "And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
    14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
    15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
    16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
    17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
    18. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."

    The interpretation that James gives of Amos 9: 11-12 is in Acts 15: 13-14, " And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
    14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
    15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
    16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
    17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things."

    James interpreted Amos 9: 11-12 and similar Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel as agreeing with Peter's saying that God had called a people out of the Gentiles for himself. The restoration of Amos 9: 11-12 is seen in the New Testament to be the New Covenant though some dispensationalists try to take advantage of the very brief and cryptic statements in Acts 15 and deny this is the case.



    re your last line. Right: all they are doing is protecting Chafer's repair of the broken Bible as he found it before he came.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  15. #13
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788
    OK You agree that the form of the dialectic used widely now as Dean Gotcher understands it is of Satan. The dialectic could be a formal academic debate where there is considerable agreement on both sides as to what a fact is and mostly attacks on the opponent to discredit him do not occur. But this formal kind of dialectic is not what Gotcher is talking about. Gotcher is also saying that as a result of this widespread form of the dialectic that many people now think in a dialectic way, so that there is what he calls the dialectic mind. The dialectic mind can be seen as leading not only to loss of faith, but to serious divisions in society and culture which can lead to widespread violence.

    It would probably take a few years to turn our whole educational system around and began to teach didactically again. But to began that turn around, there has to be an understanding of what the form of the dialectic now in popular use is all about. It may be that a few of those of the Baby Boomer Generation who are now in their sixties and early seventies have some slight memory of what a didactic educational system is. And "Uncle" Carl Rogers of Squaw Bay in Madison, Wisconsin should be understood as having been one of the Social Engineers who brought us this form of the dialectic. William Coulson, a clinical psychologist, was one of the encounter group facilitators under Rogers in southern California after Rogers left the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Coulson became what was called "The Repentant Psychologist." https://www.ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/LATINM.TXT

    Coulson repented of having worked with Rogers to "destroy" the Immaculate Heart nuns of Los Angeles, California in the mid sixties. He became critical of Carl Rogers and the Encounter Group movement partly under Rogers at that time.

    http://www.culturewars.com/CultureWars/1999/rogers.html

    The Encounter Group facilitators were mostly psychologists who made use of some of the then recent findings of experimental social psychologists of the Group Dynamics movement, which studied group behavior and ways to create a cohesive small group as a collective. In other words, both the Group Dynamics and Encounter Group movements were moving toward a collectivist culture and society. Something like the dialectic was used by the Facilitators in the Encounter Group movement. Dean Gotcher has studied both movements and had a series of talks he made on Carl Rogers and Gotcher in other talks and essays looks at the Group Dynamics movement. Carl Rogers was one of my professors at Wisconsin.
    Last edited by northwye; September 7th, 2017 at 07:58 AM.

  16. #14
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,455
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 666 Times in 586 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    North,
    to help you get closer to clarity: describe the Seahawks Michael Bennett situation, but without using the word dialectic.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  17. #15
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ol Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    870
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 213 Times in 172 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    24788
    I talked to William Coulson on the phone once and exchanged E Mail messages with him maybe four years ago. I don't think I mentioned Dean Gotcher to him, though it was Gotcher who first told me about Coulson. I did talk to Coulson about the Frankfurt School of Transformational Marxism. He is aware of their important role in the changes going on since about 1950. He said that A.H, Maslow hung out with the Frankfurters, meaning that when both Maslow and Herbert Marcuse were professors at Brandeis they were friends. Along with Theodore W. Adorno, Marcuse was an original Frankfurter Marxist who became influential professors in the U.S.

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