Theology Club: Actual, Mid-Acts, Bible Study

[intojoy]

But, do you not see that if there is a group responsible for judging everyone in the whole world (in your view would be the BOC), then what is the point to have another group of a few that only judges a small portion of the world?
Or are you saying that the 12 judge Israel and the BOC judges the rest of the world (ie. all outside of Israel)?

The twelve apostles will judge one tribe each in Israel.

Jewish believers will live and co reign in Israel.

Gentile believers will live outside of Israel and have different degrees of authority judging the gentile nations.

During the kingdom a person will have to their 100th birthday to accept Christ, death will be present and sin present among those under the age of a hundred. It will be those that we will be judging during that time.

This is what I believe scripture teaches.

Why would you think that Messiah would give us His Bride a thousand year separation? What kind of husband would do that?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

It's odd that you will not just come out and SAY what the error is. Are you ashamed of your position?

Indeed, pagan Gentiles were only promised a curse from God, yet we see many many being blessed.
How does Danoh explain this? "Heirs according to the promise"

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

It's not complicated.

There were some Gentiles that Paul could take through the prophets and show them that they were in line for a blessing.

There were other Gentiles that he could not do that with. Their blessing was hid in God.

 

[Danoh]

It's odd that you will not just come out and SAY what the error is. Are you ashamed of your position?

Try that legalistic nonsense on some newbie.

Fact is, the two men on those two links I posted turn out to have arrived at basically the same conclusions against your Hybrid that I myself long arrived at and posted against early on, on TOL.

Both links of which you have each skirted.

No sense in redoing what another has so aptly laid out.

You, know, RD - the same reason you and yours will at times point others to one link or another for.

But as I have already noted, yours and yours' is a double-standard.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Try that legalistic nonsense on some newbie.

Fact is, the two men on those two links I posted turn out to have arrived at basically the same conclusions against your Hybrid that I myself long arrived at and posted against early on, on TOL.

Both links of which you have each skirted.

No sense in redoing what another has so aptly laid out.

You, know, RD - the same reason you and yours will at times point others to one link or another for.

But as I have already noted, yours and yours' is a double-standard.

Did Gentiles in the synagogue and pagan Gentiles take the same path into the Body?

 

[Nihilo]

Then we would be allegorical hermeneutists

Isn't Revelation allegorical? Plainly?

 

[Tambora]

The twelve apostles will judge one tribe each in Israel.

Jewish believers will live and co reign in Israel.

Gentile believers will live outside of Israel and have different degrees of authority judging the gentile nations.

During the kingdom a person will have to their 100th birthday to accept Christ, death will be present and sin present among those under the age of a hundred. It will be those that we will be judging during that time.

This is what I believe scripture teaches.

So that's your reason to insert the BOC in Rev 20:4, because you think the BOC needs something to do?

I won't say that is an impossible interpretation, but I feel (ie. just my observation) that the BOC does not go through the wrath of the tribulation.
The BOC never has to choose to take the mark of the beast or not, as we have already been raptured into incorruptible bodies.
So, to me, the BOC cannot be the ones of Rev 20.
I see no reason why Rev 20 cannot be speaking of the 12 thrones promised (judging the 12 tribes of Israel), and the trib saints that reign with Christ 1000 years (judging the whole world).

Why would you think that Messiah would give us His Bride a thousand year separation? What kind of husband would do that?

This will create another impase between us at this time because I don't think the BOC is the bride.
I believe the bride is Israel, and will be fulfilled as Hosea tells us. That His bride (Israel) was unfaithful and became a harlot, and then He redeems/purchases His bride back to Himself.

And I'm not sure we can take the message that we will forever be with Christ as meaning that we will be riding His coattail or hovering around Him everywhere He goes, anymore than we have to be in His immediate presence right now as we live on earth and yet He is still with us at all times.

And we must remember that there is still a spirit realm in which angels exist, and it is said of the BOC that we will be judging angels.
And I feel rather confidant that since the angels have access to both the spirit realm and earth, that the BOC will too.
So I'm certainly not saying that the BOC cannot have access to earth, but just that I don't see the BOC as having any specific role in the restored kingdom of Israel.


Anyway, it nice to see others views and how they put it together.
So I do appreciate you taking the time to do so whether we arrive at the same conclusion or not.
And as usual, I leave my options open for further study.


The one study that I have always wanted to do with others is to study the millennium and gather and/or separate the scriptures that apply to it.
Mainly because I think some confuse what happens in the mil with what happens in the eternal state when the wicked are totally gone from the righteous.
But for some odd reason, it's hard to get a group to do a study on that topic.
For some odd reason most don't want to bother with it.
I don't recall ever seeing one here at TOL.

 

[heir]

Yours is error.

Show us how.

 

[heir]

No: it is worse; it is the surgical hack of the Acts 28er as he approaches the Scripture, imposed on the highly refined skill of the Acts 9.

It is very simple: the Hybrid of both into an Acts 9/Acts 28 view is no different from how some end up leaving Dispensationalism in general.

Such leave Dispensationalism for some other school of thought; when their not yet developed skill at properly studying a thing out on their own, meets with one seeming perplexity or another not seemingly solved for by the Dispensational approach.

Off they go to writers and teachers "without the camp."

The Hybrid is the result of something similar. Only, such within Mid-Acts, turned to Welch and Bullinger in search of possible solutions.

In contrast; the 're-emergence of Mid-Acts itself arose out of the labor of those few within Dispensationalism in general, who simply stuck out the seeming perplexities, knowing they just needed more time in Scripture: further refining through the Scripture: both their greater knowledge of the whole of Scripture, together with a greater understanding of the Dispensational principle that Scripture itself teaches.

This path is very evident throughout the likes of Anderson's; Stam's; O'Hair's; and Baker's both sound assertions, and mis-fires.

Especially in O'Hair's, as he often writes of his previous mis-fires and how he had only much later been able to solve for them.

We can each relate to all that; to some extent.

One of the latter of men such as they once noted it had taken him 7 years in Scripture before he allowed himself to conclude he had finally understood the intended sense of one passage in Galatians he had long been perplexed by.

A great exercise is to take a paragraph, say, from Romans 9, or even from Pastor Joel Finck's great little book "The Power of God unto Salvation" and attempt to work a thing out backwards from either's assertions.

From their assertion; to where they are looking at things from, as implied by their assertions.

This, towards attempting to identify what principles behind how a thing works, and or what principles of study, they appear to be relying on that result in their assertions.

This, in turn, towards making conscious one's own use and application of how one thing or another, is properly studied out.

In a sense, then, RD is actually off-base.

Beyond the basics; the sound study of Scripture in more and more depth is very much like a "rocket science."

Where's you scripture?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Where's you scripture?

He was just explaining the Danohianic Principle that we're missing from our studies.

 

[Right Divider]

So that's your reason to insert the BOC in Rev 20:4, because you think the BOC needs something to do?

I won't say that is an impossible interpretation, but I feel (ie. just my observation) that the BOC does not go through the wrath of the tribulation.
The BOC never has to choose to take the mark of the beast or not, as we have already been raptured into incorruptible bodies.
So, to me, the BOC cannot be the ones of Rev 20.
I see no reason why Rev 20 cannot be speaking of the 12 thrones promised (judging the 12 tribes of Israel), and the trib saints that reign with Christ 1000 years (judging the whole world).

This will create another impase between us at this time because I don't think the BOC is the bride.
I believe the bride is Israel, and will be fulfilled as Hosea tells us. That His bride (Israel) was unfaithful and became a harlot, and then He redeems/purchases His bride back to Himself.

And I'm not sure we can take the message that we will forever be with Christ as meaning that we will be riding His coattail or hovering around Him everywhere He goes, anymore than we have to be in His immediate presence right now as we live on earth and yet He is still with us at all times.

And we must remember that there is still a spirit realm in which angels exist, and it is said of the BOC that we will be judging angels.
And I feel rather confidant that since the angels have access to both the spirit realm and earth, that the BOC will too.
So I'm certainly not saying that the BOC cannot have access to earth, but just that I don't see the BOC as having any specific role in the restored kingdom of Israel.

Anyway, it nice to see others views and how they put it together.
So I do appreciate you taking the time to do so whether we arrive at the same conclusion or not.
And as usual, I leave my options open for further study.

The one study that I have always wanted to do with others is to study the millennium and gather and/or separate the scriptures that apply to it.
Mainly because I think some confuse what happens in the mil with what happens in the eternal state when the wicked are totally gone from the righteous.
But for some odd reason, it's hard to get a group to do a study on that topic.
For some odd reason most don't want to bother with it.
I don't recall ever seeing one here at TOL.

:thumb: Great post Tam... this scripture also comes to mind in this context:

Col 3:1-2 (KJV)​

(3:1) If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. (3:2) Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.

​

 

[Danoh]

Show us how.

I already have - those two men on those two links hold the same view on these issues that I hold.

But you are too incompetent to see your obvious errors.

And quit following me around posting negative remarks to me in the thank you option :chuckle:

 

[Danoh]

Did Gentiles in the synagogue and pagan Gentiles take the same path into the Body?

Depends on when the wall fell.

But you hold the 28er view on that.

 

[intojoy]

Isn't Revelation allegorical? Plainly?

Of course not. Everything in the first 19 chapters of Revelation is a repeat of what the Hebrew prophets already said in the OT.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[intojoy]

So that's your reason to insert the BOC in Rev 20:4, because you think the BOC needs something to do?

I won't say that is an impossible interpretation, but I feel (ie. just my observation) that the BOC does not go through the wrath of the tribulation.
The BOC never has to choose to take the mark of the beast or not, as we have already been raptured into incorruptible bodies.
So, to me, the BOC cannot be the ones of Rev 20.
I see no reason why Rev 20 cannot be speaking of the 12 thrones promised (judging the 12 tribes of Israel), and the trib saints that reign with Christ 1000 years (judging the whole world).


This will create another impase between us at this time because I don't think the BOC is the bride.
I believe the bride is Israel, and will be fulfilled as Hosea tells us. That His bride (Israel) was unfaithful and became a harlot, and then He redeems/purchases His bride back to Himself.

And I'm not sure we can take the message that we will forever be with Christ as meaning that we will be riding His coattail or hovering around Him everywhere He goes, anymore than we have to be in His immediate presence right now as we live on earth and yet He is still with us at all times.

And we must remember that there is still a spirit realm in which angels exist, and it is said of the BOC that we will be judging angels.
And I feel rather confidant that since the angels have access to both the spirit realm and earth, that the BOC will too.
So I'm certainly not saying that the BOC cannot have access to earth, but just that I don't see the BOC as having any specific role in the restored kingdom of Israel.


Anyway, it nice to see others views and how they put it together.
So I do appreciate you taking the time to do so whether we arrive at the same conclusion or not.
And as usual, I leave my options open for further study.


The one study that I have always wanted to do with others is to study the millennium and gather and/or separate the scriptures that apply to it.
Mainly because I think some confuse what happens in the mil with what happens in the eternal state when the wicked are totally gone from the righteous.
But for some odd reason, it's hard to get a group to do a study on that topic.
For some odd reason most don't want to bother with it.
I don't recall ever seeing one here at TOL.

I never said that we go thru the Tribulation. The rapture is one of the mysteries of the NT and failure to see a pre trib rapture denotes spiritual immaturity.

Christ comes for us, bema's us, weds us and returns to set up the kingdom with us His bride.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Tambora]

I never said that we go thru the Tribulation. The rapture is one of the mysteries of the NT and failure to see a pre trib rapture denotes spiritual immaturity.

Christ comes for us, bema's us, weds us and returns to set up the kingdom with us His bride.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

I know you don't.
Which is why I found it puzzling that you include the BOC with ruling with those that go through the trib.
But thanks for your view anyway.

 

[intojoy]

I know you don't.
Which is why I found it puzzling that you include the BOC with ruling with those that go through the trib.
But thanks for your view anyway.

They rule those that survive the trib after the trib during the thousand year kingdom. Not through the trib - through the kingdom.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Danoh]

I know you don't.
Which is why I found it puzzling that you include the BOC with ruling with those that go through the trib.
But thanks for your view anyway.

That's because he views Romans thru Philemon as "New Testament," not as uniquely Pauline Mystery.

Just one of those principles of seeing things through principles of a thing, to begin with.

In contrast, whenever one ends up off on one thing or another, it is because they are focused, not on the principles of a thing, but on said principle's resulting content.

And those two things differ from one another.

Sort of like attempting to illustrate a principle to someone by way of an example, only to find they have concluded the example itself was what one was talking about.

As with anyone who fuses OT and NT and Mystery into one and the same thing.

Such have failed (for what ever reason) to distinguish between a principle a thing is based on, and the thing itself.

That right there is the very heart of most every error.

As a result, no matter how sincere such might be, such will remain unable to see the obvious no matter how much it is pointed out to them, nor by what questions and or examples.

Nobody home...no one's BEEN home for some time.

This is also the very difference between where Acts 9 approaches its study of one thing or another from, and where Acts 28 does, and why fusing both approaches in to one (whether intentionally or not) only results in one being unable to see the obvious.

Of course, any attempt to point this out only proves that such is exactly the case.

I titled this thread the way I did in light of this very issue.

An issue that a chip on the shoulder of such, can only result in more of the same old road to nowhere.

And this is nothing new within Mid-Acts.

It is the same old chip on one shoulder or another that eventually resulted in various camps within Mid-Acts decades ago - camps that actually hold the exact same views.

 

[intojoy]

I know you don't.
Which is why I found it puzzling that you include the BOC with ruling with those that go through the trib.
But thanks for your view anyway.

Keep in mind that those saved during the trib are those that once rejected Christ. Why would they be in positions to rule? The survivors of the trib do not reign with Christ. Those that survive the trib enter the kingdom with their sin nature still intact while we will not have a sin nature.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Tambora]

I see.
Then I'm outta of this thread.
You can complain how others study to yourself.