ECT A Preterist Time Chart

Interplanner

Well-known member
So you reject the entirety of Romans 11?

Spoiler
I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying,“L ord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life” ?But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.Just as it is written: “God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that they should not see And ears that they should not hear, To this very day.”And David says: “Let their table become a snare and a trap, A stumbling block and a recompense to them.Let their eyes be darkened, so that they do not see, And bow down their back always.”I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches.And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree,do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.”Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience,even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy.For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!“For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has become His counselor?”“Or who has first given to Him And it shall be repaid to him?”For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen. - Romans 11:1-36 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans11:1-36&version=NKJV




You have no idea what it is saying. Why do you ask this question instead of about a detail when I have posted on it for 2 years? We are way past assuming you know anything because your comments have been fraught with misunderstanding and damages to the text.

The person you need to demonstrate proof to is myself, not yourself. So far you can't see that.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
You have no idea what it is saying.

Diversion. Answer the question.

Why do you ask this question instead of about a detail when I have posted on it for 2 years?

Because my question is fundamental in nature, and doesn't dive straight into the details.

Answer the question.

We are way past assuming you know anything because your comments have been fraught with misunderstanding and damages to the text.

Insulting me is called an ad hominem attack, and doesn't answer my question.

Answer my question.

The person you need to demonstrate proof to is myself, not yourself. So far you can't see that.

More diversion away from yourself.

Answer the question:

Do you, IP, reject Romans 11?
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Did you read it? Your response makes it seem like you didn't.

It was not a Biblical book I linked, so if you're going "from memory," that probably didn't work.





There we have it again, folks. When the going gets rough for D'ists, they get out books and then slam you for your commentaries.

D'ism and its futurism was developed by a guy who thought the Bible didn't make sense until he came along, after 200 years of teaching by Reformation theologians.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
I disagree. Those that understood prophecy knew that Jerusalem was to be destroyed, Israel scattered, and then regathered for the final week.






So is that why Daniel was disturbed to hear the vision? Is there some reason why the title of the vision isn't the 500 weeks?

The final week is the destruction of the country. this is once again the elephant of D'ism--that when the ordinary meaning of the text is seen, they haul out their system's explanation, and suddenly everything is ping-pong ding-dong in the text.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Back to another real 'time' issue:

Mt 24A is about 1st century Judea up to v29. After that the passage is about the world-wide judgement, and that has been delayed, as is allowed by 'only the Father knows.' (Christ had already said when the 1st material was to happen and locked it in with 'the babes nursing today will see these things' as adults, in Lk 23.) Paul spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem in the 5th decade as already fact.
 

Danoh

New member
So what? They are partially hardened because he explained that he hardens people all through time. They will be that way to the end, when all those who are believers who are Gentiles will have come in. It does not 'go back' to Israel at the point. That is the end. The next thing is the swift destruction of this world and evil, and then the NHNE. No Judaic details whatsoever.

The core problem in your every post is that you assert a thing is so as if one is just supposed to buy into your assertion because you asserted it.

For you NEVER EVER lay out the passages you base ANY of your assertions on.

I know your approach well - it is the approach of the books based "Bible expert."

I've run across it many a time.

Your kind conclude you know the Scripture because you have read endless books "about" it.

Sorry, but I simply do not respect that approach; you are wasting your time on here.

One would think that from all your time on here, you would have gotten a clue by now that your approach (which works very well between books based "Bible experts") is not cutting it on here.

Obviously you have read ABOUT Isaiah.

Not really read him.

For he wrote of your exact kind on this sort of thing...

Isaiah 8:19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Either get with the program on TOL - T-H-E - S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E or find yourself some books based pals.

For until you do get with the program on TOL, there is no Acts 17:11 with you. And certainly no Acts 17: 12.

Rom. 5: 6-8.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
So is that why Daniel was disturbed to hear the vision? Is there some reason why the title of the vision isn't the 500 weeks?

The final week is the destruction of the country. this is once again the elephant of D'ism--that when the ordinary meaning of the text is seen, they haul out their system's explanation, and suddenly everything is ping-pong ding-dong in the text.

:chuckle:

The destruction of the city and sanctuary is BEFORE the 70th week begins.
Plain as day. Reread Daniel 9 1000x.
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
The core problem in your every post is that you assert a thing is so as if one is just supposed to buy into your assertion because you asserted it.

For you NEVER EVER lay out the passages you base ANY of your assertions on.

I know your approach well - it is the approach of the books based "Bible expert."

I've run across it many a time.

Your kind conclude you know the Scripture because you have read endless books "about" it.

Sorry, but I simply do not respect that approach; you are wasting your time on here.

One would think that from all your time on here, you would have gotten a clue by now that your approach (which works very well between books based "Bible experts") is not cutting it on here.

Obviously you have read ABOUT Isaiah.

Not really read him.

For he wrote of your exact kind on this sort of thing...

Isaiah 8:19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Either get with the program on TOL - T-H-E - S-C-R-I-P-T-U-R-E or find yourself some books based pals.

For until you do get with the program on TOL, there is no Acts 17:11 with you. And certainly no Acts 17: 12.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

Pot calling the kettle black.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Can you be more specific?

:wave2:

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Just reading this in a straightforward manner, we see that the one week is after the destruction of the city and sanctuary.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
:wave2:

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Just reading this in a straightforward manner, we see that the one week is after the destruction of the city and sanctuary.





Nope in the middle of it. I can't understand where this is coming from STP. EVERY normal expression in the Bible is stood on its head, butt side out, after you read it. Rom 11, Acts 13, Acts 2, Acts 26.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
STP might have a case about Dan 9 if he would quote a Hebrew commentator on it, but I don't think he ever has. Leaving us to the 'plain as day' of most translations; that the events took place 490 years in the future; that the final week is momentuous, not only because of what Christ accomplishes but because of what the figure Dan 8:13--the leader of the 'rebellion than desolates'--accomplishes as well. And also because it seems to stretch out further than a week--to the end.

I do not know of a Hebrew commentary in which the 'he' of v27 is a departure from the main track of the paragraph--The Christ. Then the final line--the one who causes desolation--is considered a shift in POV or subject.

There are some commentators who say the two figures mirror each other, making an anti-type or counter-Christ out of the last.
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
:wave2:

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Just reading this in a straightforward manner, we see that the one week is after the destruction of the city and sanctuary.

Well, before I asked the question about being more specific I read that portion of Daniel over a few times to see if I could understand your meaning. So the repetition of scripture here is fine, but does not explain your interpretation specifically.

Ancient Hebrew writers did not organize their thoughts and words in a chronological fashion the way we do. By default their logic organized what they wrote in subject blocks and not according to our Greco-Roman step philosophy. So I wonder if the "straightforward manner" you are talking about takes that into consideration and what specifically about the text leads you to suspect that a chronological interpretation is warranted.

In addition, it is generally accepted that the prophets glimpsed mountain ranges of future historical events but, because of their distant perspective, the specific order of the peaks was not necessarily distinguishable to them. Only the unfolding of God's redemptive plan would reveal these finer details.

The other thing I find missing in Daniel 9, if a chronological perspective is adopted (and I am not saying it should be), is any hint that what was being prophesied was to have any kind of interruption in history.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Well, before I asked the question about being more specific I read that portion of Daniel over a few times to see if I could understand your meaning. So the repetition of scripture here is fine, but does not explain your interpretation specifically.

Ancient Hebrew writers did not organize their thoughts and words in a chronological fashion the way we do. By default their logic organized what they wrote in subject blocks and not according to our Greco-Roman step philosophy. So I wonder if the "straightforward manner" you are talking about takes that into consideration and what specifically about the text leads you to suspect that a chronological interpretation is warranted.

In addition, it is generally accepted that the prophets glimpsed mountain ranges of future historical events but, because of their distant perspective, the specific order of the peaks was not necessarily distinguishable to them. Only the unfolding of God's redemptive plan would reveal these finer details.

The other thing I find missing in Daniel 9, if a chronological perspective is adopted (and I am not saying it should be), is any hint that what was being prophesied was to have any kind of interruption in history.






Indeed.
 

Danoh

New member
Well, before I asked the question about being more specific I read that portion of Daniel over a few times to see if I could understand your meaning. So the repetition of scripture here is fine, but does not explain your interpretation specifically.

Ancient Hebrew writers did not organize their thoughts and words in a chronological fashion the way we do. By default their logic organized what they wrote in subject blocks and not according to our Greco-Roman step philosophy. So I wonder if the "straightforward manner" you are talking about takes that into consideration and what specifically about the text leads you to suspect that a chronological interpretation is warranted.

In addition, it is generally accepted that the prophets glimpsed mountain ranges of future historical events but, because of their distant perspective, the specific order of the peaks was not necessarily distinguishable to them. Only the unfolding of God's redemptive plan would reveal these finer details.

The other thing I find missing in Daniel 9, if a chronological perspective is adopted (and I am not saying it should be), is any hint that what was being prophesied was to have any kind of interruption in history.

True on most of that.

Likewise in the NT often as well: descriptions do not always follow a linear order.

As for your last point, the division actually begins after the phrase "but not for himself" in verse 26, and continues on to the end of the chapter, leaving verse 24 in limbo.

And Daniel is told more than once in Daniel, that he is not to know the exact times or seasons for all that.

Case in point, how the book ends...

Daniel 12:8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12:12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. 12:13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

But he is not to know when that would be.

No surprise there...

The Lord's Own Words about His cutting off, but not for Himself...

Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Followed by an obvious gap in time, in between that, and this...

26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

And He constantly does that - alludes to a time sometime yet future divided by a gap in time between His 1st and His 2nd Advent...

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye 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. 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. 19:30 But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.

Luke 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

Thus, His assertion in the following...

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Leaving Daniel 9: 24 in limbo.

Til Paul.

He was given a bit more detail about this delay...which is what this is addressing...

Romans 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

In other words, Paul is rhetorically addressing the Jew's "what's the hold up now?"

To which Paul responds by remind the Jew of other times in Israel's past wherein God Prophesied events that played out within His Own timeframe, given His Sovereignty to do so...

9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

That reminder out of the way, he then goes into one more delay...

9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Afterwhich, Paul then relates other times from Israel's past in which God had delayed things, the result being that it had only looked as though God had been through with Daniel's people and Holy City, etc.

Romans 9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. 9:26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God. 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. 9:29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

Daniel's exact concern about the future of his people and their Holy City, in his prayer to the Lord, at the beginning of Daniel 9.

Acts 17:11, 12
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
True on most of that.

Likewise in the NT often as well: descriptions do not always follow a linear order.

As for your last point, the division actually begins after the phrase "but not for himself" in verse 26, and continues on to the end of the chapter, leaving verse 24 in limbo.

And Daniel is told more than once in Daniel, that he is not to know the exact times or seasons for all that.

.............

Pardon me for saying so, but there is so much here that I disagree with and I just don't have the time to address it all.
Besides which, these were questions to StP specifically.

But I will just say one thing about your comment on this;

26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.


And He constantly does that - alludes to a time sometime yet future divided by a gap in time between His 1st and His 2nd Advent...

Your system which requires a gap, is creating, in your mind, artificial and unscriptural reasons why this gap must exist.
Jesus simply told his disciples that He would not drink wine until after His resurrection; that is, after He had conquered Satan and death itself. His death and resurrection inaugurated the Kingdom of God and it is here now.

He drank wine and ate with selected witnesses after His death fulfilling this promise.
Acts 10:40-41KJV
 
Top