PDA

View Full Version : Did Elijah come, is he coming, or both?



Pages : [1] 2

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 07:16 AM
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."

Naphal
Jan 5th 2007, 09:24 AM
Some will say John was the fulfillment of this, some will say no. I say no. Elijah is Elijah and John was John. John said he wasn't Elijah and being that John was a very knowledgeable man and would have known if he was Elijah or not. John was merely a type of Elijah. Elijah will literally return "before" the "great and dreadful" day of the Lord, which is the second advent not the first.

ShirleyFord
Jan 5th 2007, 11:42 AM
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."


The angel Gabriel told Zacharias that his son, John the Baptist, would come in the spirit and power of Elijah:

Luke 1:17 And he (John the Baptist) shall go before him (Jesus) in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

Jesus said that the coming of John the Baptist fullfilled Malachi's prophecy of the coming of Elijah:


Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

Matthew 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

The Pharisees taught, as do the rabbis of Judaism teach today, that Elijah himself must physically come before Israel's Messiah can come, according to Malachi's prophecy concerning the coming of Elijah. The disciples ask Jesus about the Pharisees' teaching and He declares the truth to them:

Matthew 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?

Matthew 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

Matthew 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

Matthew 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.



Mark 9:12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought.

Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.


Jesus said that the coming of John the Baptist in the power and spirit of Elijah fulfilled the coming of Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. I believe Him.

Shirley

Naphal
Jan 5th 2007, 12:04 PM
So why did John himself say he was not Elijah? John knew he didn't fulfill the prophecy about Elijah returning. John was the fulfillment of a different prophecy!


Matthew 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.


The other prophecy is concerning the return of Elijah the prophet, not just the spirit of Elijah in someone.

ShirleyFord
Jan 5th 2007, 12:19 PM
So why did John himself say he was not Elijah? John knew he didn't fulfill the prophecy about Elijah returning. John was the fulfillment of a different prophecy!


Matthew 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.


The other prophecy is concerning the return of Elijah the prophet, not just the spirit of Elijah in someone.

John the Baptist was not the physical person of Elijah.

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Notice that John the Baptist nor Jesus said that Elijah had to return physically in order to fulfill Malachi's prophecy. Neither does Malachi say how Elijah would come.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

And Jesus declared that Elijah had already come in the coming of John the Baptist.

Shirley

Naphal
Jan 5th 2007, 12:31 PM
John the Baptist was not the physical person of Elijah.

This is true and the prophecy about the return of Elijah is the person and prophet Elijah returning. No one but Elijah can fulfill that prophecy.


John 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Notice that John the Baptist nor Jesus said that Elijah had to return physically in order to fulfill Malachi's prophecy.


They didn't need to say this because the prophecy is clear enough on its own.





Neither does Malachi say how Elijah would come.

It is clear enough in that it says Elijah the prophet will be sent. That means him.



Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

And Jesus declared that Elijah had already come in the coming of John the Baptist.

Jesus was only confirming that John was in the spirit of Elijah, not that he fulfilled the return of Elijah the prophet. John wasn't even a prophet so he doesn't qualify on many levels to fulfill the prophecy.

ShirleyFord
Jan 5th 2007, 01:34 PM
Jesus was only confirming that John was in the spirit of Elijah, not that he fulfilled the return of Elijah the prophet. John wasn't even a prophet so he doesn't qualify on many levels to fulfill the prophecy.



Evidently, Jesus would disagree with you. John the Baptist was certainly a prophet if we are to believe the words of Christ:

Matthew 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?

Matthew 11:8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.

Matthew 11:9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.
Matthew 11:10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.


Shirley

Benaiah
Jan 5th 2007, 03:14 PM
Jesus Said that John was the fulfillment of the prophecy of malachi.

Mat 11:13 "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Mat 11:14 "And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come.
Mat 11:15 "He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Mat 17:12 "But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands."

jesuslover1968
Jan 5th 2007, 06:22 PM
Jesus Said that John was the fulfillment of the prophecy of malachi.

Mat 11:13 "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Mat 11:14 "And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come.
Mat 11:15 "He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Mat 17:12 "But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands."


I have to say....look at the EXACT wording of Mt.11:14...it says..."And IF you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come"
Not only does it say IF, it also says is to come...John the Baptist was not accepted, he was martyred. Therefore, the prophecy was NOT fulfilled as the end of the sentence says' is to come,' not already came. I think that leaves us with the knowledge that Elijah will come again before the great and dreadful day of the Lord. In person, not Spirit.
On a sort of unrelated note, notice what else these verses say to us...Mt. 11:13 tells us that The prophets and the law prophecied UNTIL John...therefore it would lead us to believe that there are no more prophets of God at this time. As Jesus fulfilled the law, then, knowing that there will be two prophets in the endtime, or the tribulation period, what does one think must happen BEFORE this can take place? If the church age needs no prophets, ( as we have the Holy Spirit as an indwelling Spirit ) then what would happen that would cause the need of prophets again? I believe this is another reference to the absence of the Church during the tribulation. God Bless.

matthew94
Jan 5th 2007, 06:31 PM
I have to say....look at the EXACT wording of Mt.11:14...it says..."And IF you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come"
Not only does it say IF, it also says is to come...John the Baptist was not accepted, he was martyred. Therefore, the prophecy was NOT fulfilled as the end of the sentence says' is to come,' not already came. I think that leaves us with the knowledge that Elijah will come again before the great and dreadful day of the Lord. In person, not Spirit.

That seems a very strange interpretation. Jesus was simply saying that they had a free will choice whether to recognize or not that John was indeed the fulfillment of the prophecy. "IF" they trusted Jesus, they'd see it as fulfilled.

The "is to come" doesn't refer to something yet future! Jesus is directly saying John IS that Elijah! To paraphrase, Jesus was saying "you know how scripture tells us that Elijah IS TO COME, well, John is that Elijah"

The UNTIL you mention next is simply referring to all the prophets that prophesied about the coming of the Messiah. Why would prophets prophecy about his coming once he had already come? Your arguments sound, to me, like someone who decides they're doctrine and then tries to make the verses fit them.

jesuslover1968
Jan 5th 2007, 06:42 PM
That seems a very strange interpretation. Jesus was simply saying that they had a free will choice whether to recognize or not that John was indeed the fulfillment of the prophecy. "IF" they trusted Jesus, they'd see it as fulfilled.

The "is to come" doesn't refer to something yet future! Jesus is directly saying John IS that Elijah! To paraphrase, Jesus was saying "you know how scripture tells us that Elijah IS TO COME, well, John is that Elijah"

The UNTIL you mention next is simply referring to all the prophets that prophesied about the coming of the Messiah. Why would prophets prophecy about his coming once he had already come? Your arguments sound, to me, like someone who decides they're doctrine and then tries to make the verses fit them.


I am sorry, that is what I would have to say about those who think it says the prophecy was fulfilled.
If I say to you something like, " there is a storm to come," would you assume it already came? How is interpreting that passage exactly as it is written trying to fit a square in a round hole, so to speak? Because Israel did not receive and accept John the Baptist, who came in the spirit of Elijah, the prophecy could not be fulfilled. The word if is what denotes that. IF is a word that is dependent upon something taking place, or something being done. It was not, so therefore could not be fulfilled. :)
I could say something to someone like, " IF you do this, I will do something for you. " If the person I am speaking to doesn't do it, then I can't fulfill what I said I would do because it would be going back on my word. God Bless.

Mograce2U
Jan 5th 2007, 07:24 PM
There is something interesting to see in Malachi 3:

16 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.

17 And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.

18 Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.

Notice who the Lord considers to be His jewels: those who fear the Lord. These are the ones who will be spared in the coming judgment of Ch 4. But notice in v18 what the result of their being spared will be: they will gain discernment between those who served God and those who did not. It would seem that life continues at this time.

This is directly in answer to 3:15 about those who deny it is profitable to serve the Lord and who call the proud happy:

15 And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.

This turning of things upside is about to be fixed when this judgment arrives. Now they lack this discernment because they are not serving God and Malachi admonishes them to continue in obedience - in particular he mentions their tithing.

The coming of a prophet like Elijah was to mark when this day had arrived. He would call them to repentance before judgment is sent - to turn their hearts. Why else did John the Baptist get such a turn out in response to his call? Because the people were anticipating this call to repentance as the thing that would tell them Messiah was about to arrive. After 400 years of silence, John was the man! He even dressed like Elijah and the Pharisees had no trouble seeing him in that role either. And why did they flock to John? Because he warned them of a judgment that was coming. Not 2000 years into the future, but in their day.

That day would leave the unrepentant neither ROOT NOR BRANCH. But for the repentant the Sun of righteousness would bring healing.

Jesus clearly says that John fulfilled this role in which Malachi only sees one who is like Elijah, not knowing his name.

(Mat 17:12-13 KJV) But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. {13} Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

In Mat 11:15, Jesus calls to those who have ears to hear to grasp what he is saying; and in 17:12, it seems clear the disciples had received their ears and were able to understand what Malachi had only received in type.

Notice when they received this understanding? It was after ch 14 when John was put to death. Once they have grasped who John is then Jesus uses this event of his death to predict His own death in ch 17.

Saved7
Jan 5th 2007, 07:45 PM
Jesus said he has come and he WILL come. All in the same conversation if I am not mistaken. I know I have seen it somewhere. Check out all of the verses that refer to Elijah and John the Baptist, when Jesus is speaking. That should help.

matthew94
Jan 5th 2007, 08:56 PM
I am sorry, that is what I would have to say about those who think it says the prophecy was fulfilled.
If I say to you something like, " there is a storm to come," would you assume it already came? How is interpreting that passage exactly as it is written trying to fit a square in a round hole, so to speak? Because Israel did not receive and accept John the Baptist, who came in the spirit of Elijah, the prophecy could not be fulfilled. The word if is what denotes that. IF is a word that is dependent upon something taking place, or something being done. It was not, so therefore could not be fulfilled. :)
I could say something to someone like, " IF you do this, I will do something for you. " If the person I am speaking to doesn't do it, then I can't fulfill what I said I would do because it would be going back on my word. God Bless.

For starters....

Where are you even getting the 'is to come'

KJV, NIV & NASB all say 'was' in Matthew 11:14

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 09:00 PM
Was John the Baptist a 'tishbite'?
I ask this because the Septuagint says 'Elias, the Tishbite'.

matthew94
Jan 5th 2007, 09:04 PM
Was John the Baptist a 'tishbite'?
I ask this because the Septuagint says 'Elijah, the Tishbite'.

I don't think it matters

Just like John wasn't LITERALLY Elijah
He doesn't need to LITERALLY be a Tishbite
Jesus said John WAS Elijah
So obviously Jesus viewed it as a spiritual fulfillment

DiscoJack
Jan 5th 2007, 09:19 PM
Jesus said:
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come. 15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

What does it mean, "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John." except that John was the last of the prophets (who all pointed to Christ, I might add) and they did likewise.

John was the last of the old covenant prophets. Malachi, the last prophet to write in the Old Testament says in his last 2 sentences of the last chapter of his book saying:
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
6 And he will turn
The hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”

And remember that Jesus said that all the prophets and the law prophesied about him up to and including John. Therefore even Malachi himself must be included in on this and he said God was sending Elijah the prophet. John being the last prophet of the Old Covenant must therefore be the Elijah God foretold of through Malachi and just to put sugar on it Jesus said John was the Elijah they have been anticipating. Who is to come means nothing more here than the one they anticipated.

Some of you want to reject what Jesus said as substantiating that John the Baptist was the Elijah but you must deal with the fact that no other prophet is to come after John the Baptist. He was the last of the prophets to declare the Christ.

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 09:24 PM
So far in searching Early Church History, I have found three who taught that Elijah will come before the Day of the Lord. They are:

Victorinus(1), John Chrysostem(1), and Augustine(2).

Mograce2U
Jan 5th 2007, 09:30 PM
John the Baptist was not the physical person of Elijah.

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Notice that John the Baptist nor Jesus said that Elijah had to return physically in order to fulfill Malachi's prophecy. Neither does Malachi say how Elijah would come.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

And Jesus declared that Elijah had already come in the coming of John the Baptist. Shirley,
It is interesting that the questions put to John are from the priests and Levites and his answer to them is the record he made that concerns his witness of Jesus as the only begotten Son of God.

The questions they are asking concern Elijah from Mal 4 and "that Prophet" from Deut 18:15 and of course his denial that he was the Christ. John explains himself as being the one prophesied about from Isa 40:3. What is the voice instructed to cry? (40:6) "Behold your God!" (Isa 40:9)

So why is John denying that he is Elijah when Jesus confirms that he is? It is because of who is questioning him and why. John is clearly pointing out that he is not "that Prophet" that Moses spoke of - which is WHO they also thought that Elijah would be. This is why he points them to the correct understanding of Malachi's prophecy found in Isaiah - Elijah was the one who would cry in the wilderness - not the Prophet Moses spoke of - who was Messiah.

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 10:00 PM
I don't think it matters

Just like John wasn't LITERALLY Elijah
He doesn't need to LITERALLY be a Tishbite
Jesus said John WAS Elijah
So obviously Jesus viewed it as a spiritual fulfillment

I see what your saying Matt.
But Jesus also said that Elijah shall come and restore all things.
What is obvious is that He could not have been talking about John even if He hadn't used future tense.
John preceded Christ as a messenger to prepare the way. Every mountain was to be brought low and every valley raised as a preparation for restoration. But John restored nothing.
John called men to a life of self-denial and repentance from the dead works of the law laying the ax to the root in preparation for the message of the cross. This same work continues to this day. Only when pride and self-confidence is dead can the good news of the cross be realized. But he restored nothing.


"And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them."

Notice that the disciples only understood the Scripture as explained to them by the scribes. Did the scribes know of two advents of Christ? What advent were they looking for and subsequently taught about?
They had no clue of the two advents of Christ, let alone His death. So there may be a principle at work here that we are not aware of.

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 10:25 PM
Justin Martyr(1), Victorinus(1), John Chrysostem(1), and Augustine(2)

Lou M.
Jan 5th 2007, 11:04 PM
Justin Martyr(1), Victorinus(1), John Chrysostem(1), Origen(1) and Augustine(2)

ShirleyFord
Jan 6th 2007, 01:29 AM
Shirley,
It is interesting that the questions put to John are from the priests and Levites and his answer to them is the record he made that concerns his witness of Jesus as the only begotten Son of God.

The questions they are asking concern Elijah from Mal 4 and "that Prophet" from Deut 18:15 and of course his denial that he was the Christ. John explains himself as being the one prophesied about from Isa 40:3. What is the voice instructed to cry? (40:6) "Behold your God!" (Isa 40:9)

So why is John denying that he is Elijah when Jesus confirms that he is? It is because of who is questioning him and why. John is clearly pointing out that he is not "that Prophet" that Moses spoke of - which is WHO they also thought that Elijah would be. This is why he points them to the correct understanding of Malachi's prophecy found in Isaiah - Elijah was the one who would cry in the wilderness - not the Prophet Moses spoke of - who was Messiah.

Amen, Robin. John the Baptist knew his mission in life. He knew His calling.

He prepared Israel to meet their Messiah before Jesus came on the scene.

Matthew 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,

Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Matthew 3:4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.

Matthew 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,

Matthew 3:6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Matthew 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

Matthew 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Matthew 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Matthew 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.



Then when Jesus came on the scene after His baptism, John the Baptist introduced Israel to their promised Messiah!

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

John 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

John 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

John 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

John 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

John 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

John 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;

John 1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!

John 1:37 And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus.

Shirley

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 02:49 AM
This is true and the prophecy about the return of Elijah is the person and prophet Elijah returning. No one but Elijah can fulfill that prophecy.

Jesus Himself said that John the Baptist was the fulfillment of the prophecy concerning Elijah. Isn't that good enough? Shouldn't we accept that? Why disagree with Jesus and insist that Elijah himself has to come when Jesus made it very clear that John the Baptist was the one of whom the prophecy was speaking? John the Baptist went out with the spirit of Elijah. This means he was just like Elijah. He was bold and passionate like Elijah. It doesn't mean he was Elijah or even had Elijah's spirit in him. We should accept Jesus's explanation of the fulfillment of the prophecy and not contradict his explanation by insisting on a literal return of Elijah. When it comes to the real fulfillment of the Malachi 4 prophecy, it seems that you are not willing to "receive it".

13For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
14And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. - Matthew 11:13-14

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 03:07 AM
I am sorry, that is what I would have to say about those who think it says the prophecy was fulfilled.
If I say to you something like, " there is a storm to come," would you assume it already came? How is interpreting that passage exactly as it is written trying to fit a square in a round hole, so to speak? Because Israel did not receive and accept John the Baptist, who came in the spirit of Elijah, the prophecy could not be fulfilled. The word if is what denotes that. IF is a word that is dependent upon something taking place, or something being done. It was not, so therefore could not be fulfilled. :)
I could say something to someone like, " IF you do this, I will do something for you. " If the person I am speaking to doesn't do it, then I can't fulfill what I said I would do because it would be going back on my word. God Bless.

When Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist and said "This is Elijah"(Matt 11:14), was He just joking? When Jesus said that Elijah had come already(Matt 17:12), was He just making that up? When the disciples understood that by saying that Elijah had come already, Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist(Matt 17:13), were they mistaken?

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 03:08 AM
Malachi must be a two part prophecy
He came in the spirit to turn the hearts of ALL (those who would recieve)
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
He will return in the flesh to turn the hearts of Israel(and others who did not recieve)
Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 03:45 AM
Malachi must be a two part prophecy
He came in the spirit to turn the hearts of ALL (those who would recieve)
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
He will return in the flesh to turn the hearts of Israel(and others who did not recieve)
Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.


Nowhere does it say that Elijah himself must return in the flesh. The two witnesses are described as two candlesticks and two olive trees. Can you explain how Elijah (along with another individual witness) fits that description?

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 04:26 AM
Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

two literal people, in the flesh

"before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD"

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 04:31 AM
John the Baptist went out with the spirit of Elijah. This means he was just like Elijah.


When Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist and said "This is Elijah"(Matt 11:14), was He just joking? When Jesus said that Elijah had come already(Matt 17:12), was He just making that up? When the disciples understood that by saying that Elijah had come already, Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist(Matt 17:13), were they mistaken?

I don't understand how it can be so difficult to conclude that John came in the spirit and power of Elijah, to prepare the way of the Lord before His first coming.
However, just as there was preparation before the first coming, why not before the second? A restoration of all things that the Lord prepare for Himself a complete and spotless bride.

Augustine even went as far to conclude that the sign from God of the restoration of Moses' hand from leprosy (Exodus 4:6-7) was a prefigurement of the restoration of Israel after her rejection of Christ.

ScottJohnson
Jan 6th 2007, 04:33 AM
Nowhere does it say that Elijah himself must return in the flesh. The two witnesses are described as two candlesticks and two olive trees. Can you explain how Elijah (along with another individual witness) fits that description?

I'm with you Eric. Matthew makes it as clear and understandable as it could ever possibly be, yet for the sake of a doctrine......

And it's said that ammillers spiritualize the Bible away. :rolleyes:

Mat 11:12-15
(12) But from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent seize it.
(13) For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
(14) And if you are willing to receive, he is Elijah, the one going to come.
(15) The one having ears to hear, let him hear.

Mat 17:10-13
(10) And His disciples asked Him, saying, Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?
(11) And answering, Jesus said to them, Elijah indeed comes first and shall restore all things.
(12) But I say to you, Elijah already came, and they did not know him, but did to him whatever they desired. So also the Son of Man is about to suffer by them.
(13) Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them about John the Baptist.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 04:58 AM
John the Baptist was certainly a prophet if we are to believe the words of Christ:

Matthew 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?

Matthew 11:8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.

Matthew 11:9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.
Matthew 11:10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

I don't see John being called a prophet. He is said to be more than a prophet and so he was but he wasn't "Elijah the prophet" who is to come.

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 05:06 AM
I don't see John being called a prophet. He is said to be more than a prophet and so he was but he wasn't "Elijah the prophet" who is to come.

Can you explain how you can say that in light of Jesus' own Words?

matthew94
Jan 6th 2007, 05:07 AM
he wasn't "Elijah the prophet" who is to come.


And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.

Are you willing to accept it? :)

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 05:15 AM
Are you willing to accept it? :)Yes(amen).
For those who are'nt (including Israel), is God finished?:pp

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 05:16 AM
I don't understand how it can be so difficult to conclude that John came in the spirit and power of Elijah, to prepare the way of the Lord before His first coming.
However, just as there was preparation before the first coming, why not before the second? A restoration of all things that the Lord prepare for Himself a complete and spotless bride.

Are you saying that you believe that Elijah's spirit was inside of John the Baptist or no? As far as "why not before the second"...simply because the prophecy is already fulfilled. Jesus said it was. Jesus said that Elijah had already come, so why should we do anything but accept what Jesus said?



Augustine even went as far to conclude that the sign from God of the restoration of Moses' hand from leprosy (Exodus 4:6-7) was a prefigurement of the restoration of Israel after her rejection of Christ.

I don't base my beliefs on Augustine. I notice you have been quoting him often, but that doesn't really mean anything to me.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 05:18 AM
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

If no other prophecy had a two fold fullment (literal/spiritual), I would not look for any two fold fullment of any other prophecys. A two fold fulfillment here cannot be excluded; it is possible.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 05:20 AM
he wasn't "Elijah the prophet" who is to come.




And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.


Are you willing to accept it? :)

I am certainly willing to accept it. Especially since Jesus Himself is now posting here! :lol:

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 05:24 AM
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

He said "if ye will receive it" because He knew they were hard of spiritual hearing. That's why in the next verse He said, "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.". He wasn't saying "if ye will receive it, this is Elias, otherwise it's not. So, whether this is Elias or not is all up to you.".

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 05:31 AM
He could have just as easily (easier said) said "Yes, this is him"

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 05:53 AM
He could have just as easily (easier said) said "Yes, this is him"

He could have, but He didn't. So be it. Nonetheless, I believe the way He said it was still quite clear. Jesus said of John the Baptist: "if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come" and "I say unto you, That Elias is come already". That's easy enough to understand, isn't it? If He didn't have Malachi 4:5-6 in mind when He said those things, then what was He talking about?

Here's something that I want you to notice. If you don't mind, let's look at Malachi 4:5-6 and then look closely at Luke 1:76-80.

5Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: 6And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. - Malachi 4:5-6

This is Zechariah speaking about his son, John the Baptist:

76And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
78Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
79To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. 80And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel. - Luke 1:76-80

Compare Malachi 4:6 with Luke 1:79. I believe Luke 1:79 is speaking of the fulfillment of Malachi 4:6. John the Baptist helped "give light to them that sit in darkness" and "the way of peace" by turning "the heart of the fathers to the children and the heart of the children to their fathers" by sharing the "knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins".

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 06:01 AM
Are you saying that you believe that Elijah's spirit was inside of John the Baptist or no?

No, but I believe that John operated under the same annointing from the Holy Spirit as did Elijah.

I'm not to sure that I can say that Elijah's spirit entered John, i.e., that John was Elijah incarnate.
That would be getting a little to close to what the eastern religions teach; to me anyway.


I don't base my beliefs on Augustine. I notice you have been quoting him often, but that doesn't really mean anything to me.

Well, what it does show is that the teaching that Elijah will come before the second coming is not a new teaching, or some strange and alien doctrine in the Church.
Now as I have shown, this doctrine can (so far) be traced all the way back to Justin Martyr (100-165 AD).

But as to your consern so you understand why I'm doing that.

Irenaeus (120-202 AD) wrote:
"Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?" (Against Heresies- Chapter IV.-The Truth is to Be Found Nowhere Else But in the Catholic Church, the Sole Depository of Apostolical Doctrine. Heresies are of Recent Formation, and Cannot Trace Their Origin Up to the Apostles. (http://www.bible.ca/history/fathers/ANF-01/anf01-60.htm#P7328_1952979))

"The antiquity of a view ways in its favor, especially when that antiquity reaches back to the apostolic age. For those who received their doctrine first hand from the apostles and from those who heard them stood in a better position to judge what was apostolic doctrine than we who are many centuries removed." (Robert Gundry)


So there are two possibilities:

1) Their scholarship was inferior to ours in knowledge and they didn't have any oral traditon handed down to them from the Apostles as they claimed.

2) Our modern scholarship has simply come to the point when [I]'they (we) will not endure sound doctrine;..."

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 06:36 AM
I am certainly willing to accept it. Especially since Jesus Himself is now posting here! :lol:
(Mat 18:20 KJV) For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

(Mal 3:16 KJV) Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.

It seems to me if we stick to scripture then Jesus is present!

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 06:37 AM
John146:


Yes, and if we leave it at that, that is fine for all of us. It is significant that the OT ends with the prophecy of Elias (John the baptist), and the NT picks up with John (Elias).
It may also be significant that God included at this important place "before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:"

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 06:39 AM
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

If no other prophecy had a two fold fullment (literal/spiritual), I would not look for any two fold fullment of any other prophecys. A two fold fulfillment here cannot be excluded; it is possible.
All things are possible, but is it probable? What would be the point?

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 06:43 AM
John146:


Yes, and if we leave it at that, that is fine for all of us. It is significant that the OT ends with the prophecy of Elias (John the baptist), and the NT picks up with John (Elias).
It may also be significant that God included at this important place "before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:" You are assuming this is the 2nd advent when the first is clearly in view. There was also a great and dreadful day of the Lord in the first advent.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 06:46 AM
There was also a great and dreadful day of the Lord in the first advent.

Nope. That is specific to the second advent only. Plus it cannot be just any day in the advent as implied but the one day of the advent, the day of the return.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 06:47 AM
You are assuming this is the 2nd advent when the first is clearly in view. There was also a great and dreadful day of the Lord in the first advent.Yes. Could you explain more, I'm just a student.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 06:55 AM
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

It is simple enough to figure out if this day is of the first or second advent:


Isaiah 2:12 For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:
Isaiah 2:13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan,
Isaiah 2:14 And upon all the high mountains, and upon all the hills that are lifted up,
Isaiah 2:15 And upon every high tower, and upon every fenced wall,
Isaiah 2:16 And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
Isaiah 2:17 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day.
Isaiah 2:18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
Isaiah 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.

Recognize this? You should.


Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?



Isaiah 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Recognize this? Its from second advent events as well. This is what the day of the Lord is.



Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.



Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Joel 2:1 Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand;
Joel 2:2 A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations.


Joel 2:11 And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it?

This is also found here:


Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
Revelation 6:14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


There are so many more scriptures but this makes the point. The prophecy is about Elijah returning before the second advent not the first.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 07:00 AM
Yes, thank you. We're on the same page.

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 07:00 AM
Yes. Could you explain more, I'm just a student.The prophecy in question begins in Malachi. It is the last prophetic word given in the OT after which is silence for 400 years. The next prophet to appear is John the Baptist who calls the nation to repentance in preparation for receiving their Messiah. There is some confusion about who he is in that the scribes question him as to whether he is Elijah as Malachi prophesied or "the Prophet" that Moses spoke of in Deut 18:15. Their confusion lies in thinking that there is only one prophet to come whom they consider must also be Messiah. John corrects their misunderstanding by pointing them to Isaiah 40:3. He is not denying what Jesus confirms - that he is the one Malachi prophecied of - only that he is not the one Moses spoke about. John clearly denies that he is the Christ. This is where the confusion comes in (IMO), about John apparently denying he is Elijah while Jesus claims he is. Does this help?

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 07:07 AM
No, but I believe that John operated under the same annointing from the Holy Spirit as did Elijah.

I'm not to sure that I can say that Elijah's spirit entered John, i.e., that John was Elijah incarnate.
That would be getting a little to close to what the eastern religions teach; to me anyway.

Okay, thanks. Just wanted to get clarification.


I don't base my beliefs on Augustine. I notice you have been quoting him often, but that doesn't really mean anything to me.


Well, what it does show is that the teaching that Elijah will come before the second coming is not a new teaching, or some strange and alien doctrine in the Church.
Now as I have shown, this doctrine can (so far) be traced all the way back to Justin Martyr (100-165 AD).

I never said it was a new teaching. My view is not a new teaching, either. So, I guess we have to decide which early church fathers were right about this topic and which were wrong.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 07:12 AM
All things are possible, but is it probable? What would be the point?We agree all things are possible.
Is it probable? Yes.
Point? That God can and will keep all His promises to Israel.

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 07:14 AM
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

It is simple enough to figure out if this day is of the first or second advent:


Isaiah 2:12 For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:
Isaiah 2:13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan,
Isaiah 2:14 And upon all the high mountains, and upon all the hills that are lifted up,
Isaiah 2:15 And upon every high tower, and upon every fenced wall,
Isaiah 2:16 And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
Isaiah 2:17 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day.
Isaiah 2:18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
Isaiah 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.

Recognize this? You should.

Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Isaiah 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Recognize this? Its from second advent events as well. This is what the day of the Lord is.

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Joel 2:1 Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand;

Joel 2:2 A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations.

Joel 2:11 And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it?

This is also found here:

Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
Revelation 6:14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

There are so many more scriptures but this makes the point. The prophecy is about Elijah returning before the second advent not the first.You have a nice mix of scripture but fail to consider context. The cross is the central focus of all prophecy. You cannot skip past it when going from the OT to the NT. There was a judgment that occurred in 70 AD which must be considered before you run ahead to the end of the world. And that judgment concerned Israel. When you have accounted for it then you can determine what yet remains to be fulfilled. Your mix does not do that. Malachi did not have John's name in his sight when he prophesied of Elijah (he wasn't born yet) - no Jesus fills that in for us and ties is to the first advent. First consider where prophecy is stated as fulfilled, then lacking that, you can move ahead to what is not.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 07:16 AM
[quote=Mograce2U;1105485]The prophecy in question begins in Malachi. It is the last prophetic word given in the OT after which is silence for 400 years. The next prophet to appear is John the Baptist who calls the nation to repentance in preparation for receiving their Messiah. There is some confusion about who he is in that the scribes question him as to whether he is Elijah as Malachi prophesied or "the Prophet" that Moses spoke of in Deut 18:15. Their confusion lies in thinking that there is only one prophet to come whom they consider must also be Messiah. John corrects their misunderstanding by pointing them to Isaiah 40:3. He is not denying what Jesus confirms - that he is the one Malachi prophecied of - only that he is not the one Moses spoke about. John clearly denies that he is the Christ. This is where the confusion comes in (IMO), about John apparently denying he is Elijah while Jesus claims he is. Does this help?Yes, thank you, we're on the same page (I had two of you guys confused with each other) Appears we're all talking about the same thing.:)

Mograce2U
Jan 6th 2007, 07:20 AM
We agree all things are possible.
Is it probable? Yes.
Point? That God can and will keep all His promises to Israel.But God did keep His promises to Israel in sending Jesus - all they need do is believe it. "It is finished" was declared at the Cross.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 07:20 AM
There was a judgment that occurred in 70 AD which must be considered before you run ahead to the end of the world.



This isn't related to the first advent. Christ was already ascended by this year. When scripture speaks of "the day of the Lord" it is the second advent and a day of wrath, ie dreadful as written.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 07:22 AM
You have a nice mix of scripture but fail to consider context. The cross is the central focus of all prophecy. You cannot skip past it when going from the OT to the NT. There was a judgment that occurred in 70 AD which must be considered before you run ahead to the end of the world. And that judgment concerned Israel. When you have accounted for it then you can determine what yet remains to be fulfilled. Your mix does not do that. Malachi did not have John's name in his sight when he prophesied of Elijah (he wasn't born yet) - no Jesus fills that in for us and ties is to the first advent. First consider where prophecy is stated as fulfilled, then lacking that, you can move ahead to what is not.so "
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: "

was the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A>D>?

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 07:28 AM
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

It is simple enough to figure out if this day is of the first or second advent:


Isaiah 2:12 For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:
Isaiah 2:13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan,
Isaiah 2:14 And upon all the high mountains, and upon all the hills that are lifted up,
Isaiah 2:15 And upon every high tower, and upon every fenced wall,
Isaiah 2:16 And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
Isaiah 2:17 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day.
Isaiah 2:18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
Isaiah 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.

Recognize this? You should.


Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?



Isaiah 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Recognize this? Its from second advent events as well. This is what the day of the Lord is.



Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.



Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Joel 2:1 Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand;
Joel 2:2 A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations.


Joel 2:11 And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it?

This is also found here:


Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
Revelation 6:14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


There are so many more scriptures but this makes the point. The prophecy is about Elijah returning before the second advent not the first.

You quoted Malachi 4:5, but what about Malachi 4:6?

5Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. - Malachi 4:5-6

Compare that passage with the following passage, which is speaking of John the Baptist:

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:17

Luke 1:17 quotes Malachi 4:5-6 and indicates that it is John the Baptist who would "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children". That is an exact quote from Malachi 4:6. The rest of the verse is very similar to the rest of Malachi 4:5-6. It is not hard to see the connection. So how can you think that John the Baptist did not fulfill Malachi 4:5-6?

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 07:34 AM
You quoted Malachi 4:5, but what about Malachi 4:6?

5Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. - Malachi 4:5-6

Compare that passage with the following passage, which is speaking of John the Baptist:

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:17

Luke 1:17 quotes Malachi 4:5-6 and indicates that it is John the Baptist who would "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children". That is an exact quote from Malachi 4:6. The rest of the verse is very similar to the rest of Malachi 4:5-6. It is not hard to see the connection. So how can you think that John the Baptist did not fulfill Malachi 4:5-6?



Ever hear of a type? He was very similar but not the ultimate fulfillment. John was not Elijah. Elijah is still alive in heaven and is waiting to return as prophesied just before the second advent, the day of the Lord. John lived long too early to fulfill the prophecy.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 07:40 AM
Nope. That is specific to the second advent only. Plus it cannot be just any day in the advent as implied but the one day of the advent, the day of the return.

The day of the Lord was used in Joel 2:28-32 to refer to the time of the first coming of Christ and the day of Pentecost. It is quoted as being fulfilled in Acts 2:16-21. So the phrase "day of the Lord" does not always refer to the second coming, especially when used in the Old Testament. For example, Zephaniah 1:7 says "...for the day of the Lord is at hand". Well, that book was written a long time ago. The second coming certainly wasn't "at hand" at that time. The fact is, there isn't just one "day of the Lord" in Scripture. But there is a future day of the Lord and it is described in passages like 1 Thess 5:1-10 and 2 Peter 3:10-13. Unfortunately, many people have wrongly interpreted passages such as Joel 2:28-32 and Malachi 4:5-6 to be speaking of that day of the Lord, but that requires one to disregard or blatantly misinterpret the New Testament passages that speak of the fulfillment of those prophecies.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 07:41 AM
Ever hear of a type? He was very similar but not the ultimate fulfillment. John was not Elijah. Elijah is still alive in heaven and is waiting to return as prophesied just before the second advent, the day of the Lord. John lived long too early to fulfill the prophecy.

Jesus said that John the Baptist was the fulfillment. Why don't you believe Him?

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 07:45 AM
but what about Malachi 4:6?

5Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. - Malachi 4:5-6

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:17

So how can you think that John the Baptist did not fulfill Malachi 4:5-6?Was it (completely) fulfilled with John?

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
John fulfilled it if Jesus is (only) talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 07:46 AM
The day of the Lord was used in Joel 2:28-32 to refer to the time of the first coming of Christ and the day of Pentecost.

Incorrect. The use of "the day of the Lord" in verse 31 is strictly the second coming not the first.


For example, Zephaniah 1:7 says "...for the day of the Lord is at hand". Well, that book was written a long time ago. The second coming certainly wasn't "at hand" at that time.

Its still at hand. Time is different for God than us.




The fact is, there isn't just one "day of the Lord" in Scripture. But there is a future day of the Lord and it is described in passages like 1 Thess 5:1-10 and 2 Peter 3:10-13.


Those are both the second advent.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 07:48 AM
Jesus said that John the Baptist was the fulfillment. Why don't you believe Him?

He wasnt saying what you interpret him to be saying. Scripture doesn't contradict itself. We know John knew he wasn't Elijah, and yet you want to contradict this by thinking Christ disagreed with John. The fact is John was a type, he was similar but not the complete fulfillment. It wasn't even the correct advent for the prophecy to be fulfilled.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 07:54 AM
Was it (completely) fulfilled with John?

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
John fulfilled it if Jesus is (only) talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

Yes, it was completely fulfilled with John the Baptist. Jesus said so. He said John the Baptist was the Elijah to come, and there is nothing that says there would be more than one Elijah to come. As far as 70 AD, I'm not sure what you're getting at, unless you are saying that is the "great and dreadful day of the Lord". Either way, it is completely fulfilled and has no future fulfillment.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:01 AM
He wasnt saying what you interpret him to be saying. Scripture doesn't contradict itself. We know John knew he wasn't Elijah, and yet you want to contradict this by thinking Christ disagreed with John. The fact is John was a type, he was similar but not the complete fulfillment. It wasn't even the correct advent for the prophecy to be fulfilled.

John wasn't Elijah. That is true. He was John. Elijah's spirit wasn't in him or anything like that. He came in the spirit of Elijah, meaning he was much like Elijah, and thanks to Jesus we can know that is what the prophecy means: that someone much like Elijah was to come. And that was John the Baptist.

One thing we should realize here is that Malachi 4 is a continuation of Malachi 3. Most of us here wouldn't have any trouble seeing that Malachi 3 is speaking of the first coming of Christ. Malachi 4:5-6 is describing the same messenger as Malachi 3:1 only in further detail. I don't think anyone here would try to say that Malachi 3:1 is speaking of anyone but John the Baptist.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:05 AM
John wasn't Elijah. That is true. He was John. Elijah's spirit wasn't in him or anything like that. He came in the spirit of Elijah, meaning he was much like Elijah,


Great but the prophecy is not "someone like Elijah" will come but names the person to come as being Elijah the prophet. That is the one we all know of that was taken to heaven. Its simple, he will return. Just like John being there before Christ began his ministry, Elijah will return before Christ makes his final advent.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 08:06 AM
[quote=Naphal;1105519]disagreed with John. The fact is John was a type, he was similar but not the complete fulfilled.

Another type (forshadow):

Psa 89:20 I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him:
Psa 89:21 With whom my hand shall be established: mine arm also shall strengthen him.
Psa 89:22 The enemy shall not exact upon him; nor the son of wickedness afflict him.
Psa 89:23 And I will beat down his foes before his face, and plague them that hate him.
Psa 89:24 But my faithfulness and my mercy shall be with him: and in my name shall his horn be exalted.
Psa 89:25 I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right hand in the rivers.
Psa 89:26 He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:08 AM
Incorrect. The use of "the day of the Lord" in verse 31 (of Joel 2) is strictly the second coming not the first.

Why did Peter quote it within Acts 2:16-21 as though it related directly to what was happening at Pentecost then?



Those are both the second advent.

Correct. That's why I said they were referring to the future day of the Lord.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:11 AM
Great but the prophecy is not "someone like Elijah" will come but names the person to come as being Elijah the prophet.

Okay, that's fine. And Jesus said if you can accept it, the prophecy was speaking of John the Baptist. So, we should accept it and not read any more into it. Your insistence on reading Malachi 4:5-6 completely literally (i.e. thinking that it must be Elijah himself that comes) is keeping you from accepting the explanation of the fulfillment of the prophecy given by Jesus Himself.



That is the one we all know of that was taken to heaven. Its simple, he will return. Just like John being there before Christ began his ministry, Elijah will return before Christ makes his final advent.

Sorry, but it only indicates one coming of Elijah, not two. And according to Jesus, he already came.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 08:12 AM
Yes, it was completely fulfilled with John the Baptist. Jesus said so. He said John the Baptist was the Elijah to come, and there is nothing that says there would be more than one Elijah to come. As far as 70 AD, I'm not sure what you're getting at, unless you are saying that is the "great and dreadful day of the Lord". Either way, it is completely fulfilled and has no future fulfillment.Then we should'nt be expecting a coming great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:22 AM
Then we should'nt be expecting a coming great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.


We should be expecting the day of the Lord spoken about in 1 Thessalonians 5 and 2 Peter 3. The "great and dreadful day of the Lord" mentioned in Malachi 4:4-6 had to do with Jesus coming and saving mankind from our sins (great) by being rejected and crucified(dreadful) and shedding His blood as an atonement for our sins(great).

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:22 AM
Why did Peter quote it within Acts 2:16-21 as though it related directly to what was happening at Pentecost then?

He is being thorough but what you seem not to know is that what happened on Pentecost as not the fulfillment of what Joel wrote but Peter was showing that the tongues were the same. What Joel described will happen prior to the second advent. This is why Pentecost day did not contain the rest of the prophecy about the sun being dark and the moon to blood.


Matthew 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Matthew 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.


Mark 13:11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.


Mark 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
Mark 13:25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.


The above is the same events in Joel.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:27 AM
We should be expecting the day of the Lord spoken about in 1 Thessalonians 5 and 2 Peter 3. The "great and dreadful day of the Lord" mentioned in Malachi 4:4-6 had to do with Jesus coming and saving mankind from our sins (great) by being rejected and crucified(dreadful) and shedding His blood as an atonement for our sins(great).

The great and dreadful day of the Lord is not great and dreadful to the Lord but to his enemies. This is the vengeful day of wrath of the second coming. Scripture is consistent about this concept. The first advent simply does not fit into being "the great and dreadful day of the Lord".

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 08:31 AM
Sorry, but it only indicates one coming of Elijah, not two. And according to Jesus, he already came.
Elias has come and won't come again?

Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

It appears Jesus is saying Elias will come and has already come.

Note that He says these things after Elias appeared with Moses.


Only one comming of Elias?

and went up into a mountain to pray.
Luk 9:29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.
Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:
Luk 9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:34 AM
Joel 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.


We all know this is speaking of the second coming. The word TERRIBLE here is the same Hebrew word as DREADFUL.


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

This is simply also the second coming and the same terrible/dreadful day of the Lord.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:48 AM
Elias has come and won't come again?

Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

It appears Jesus is saying Elias will come and has already come.

On the surface that doesn't make much sense, does it. Certainly He wouldn't contradict Himself. But I believe the context of what He was saying was something like this: "Yes, it's true that it says in the prophecy that Elijah would first come and restore all things. But, I'm telling you that you don't have to wait for this to happen because he already came and they did not recognize him and did whatever they wanted to him."



Only one comming of Elias?

and went up into a mountain to pray.
Luk 9:29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.
Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:
Luk 9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.

I would hardly say that would qualify as a coming of Elijah as far as it relates to the prophecy.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 08:50 AM
Joel 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.


We all know this is speaking of the second coming. The word TERRIBLE here is the same Hebrew word as DREADFUL.


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

This is simply also the second coming and the same terrible/dreadful day of the Lord.

And yet you are ignoring the fact that the fufillment of Malachi 4:6 can clearly be seen in Luke 1:17, which had to do with the first coming:

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:17

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:51 AM
A coming is an appearance and Elijah did appear with Moses. He appeared literally there, symbolically/spiritually through John and will come again in a literal sense before the one true "great and dreadful day of the Lord"

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:56 AM
And yet you are ignoring the fact that the fufillment of Malachi 4:6 can clearly be seen in Luke 1:17, which had to do with the first coming:

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:17


Did John succeed in this? Did the disobedient turn to the wisdom of the just? Were "a people" prepared for the Lord or was Jesus rejected of his generation?

I think John began a good work but was cut short and beheaded. Elijah will succeed where John did not.



Luke 17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 09:12 AM
But I believe the context of what He was saying was something like this: "Yes, it's true that it says in the prophecy that Elijah would first come and restore all things. But, I'm telling you that you don't have to wait for this to happen because he already came and they did not recognize him and did whatever they wanted to him."





Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.



Disagree. Nevertheless the point Jesus is making after the But I say unto you is His suffering, not that John is Elias.

I believe it is significant the Jesus gave a future tense to the coming of Elias, though He does'nt focus on it.


But I do agree that Jesus is saying Elias has come already.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 04:59 PM
A coming is an appearance and Elijah did appear with Moses. He appeared literally there, symbolically/spiritually through John and will come again in a literal sense before the one true "great and dreadful day of the Lord"
Neither elijah or moses were "literallly" on the mount of transfiguration. what the disciples saw was a vision, NOT a literal event.

Mat 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead."


Did John succeed in this? Did the disobedient turn to the wisdom of the just? Were "a people" prepared for the Lord or was Jesus rejected of his generation?
Yes John suceeded, there were multitudes who turned to Christ. it is plain from the scriptures thart the religious leaders would have killed Jesus much sooner had it not been thier fear of the people that prevented them from taking action against him sooner. the people they feared were the same ones who had heard john's message and had been baptised by him.


I think John began a good work but was cut short and beheaded. Elijah will succeed where John did not.
The God of dispensationalism seems to be rather incompetent. He cant seem to get it right the first time and has to keep trying until he suceeds. in dispensational eschatology John failed, Jesus failed, and God has to try again at some future date.

Just to show you how aburd dispensational reasoning is. Dipsies claim JOhn the baptist does not fulfill the prophecy of malachi so Elijah must literally return to do te job. but what does the malachi say?

Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Mal 4:6 And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse."

And when does the "real" elijah of dispensationalisim come? oh yeah, He comes during the great tribulation as God is striking the earth with curses. Apparently the "'real" elijah is going to be as big a failure as John was.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 07:11 PM
Quote:
A coming is an appearance and Elijah did appear with Moses. He appeared literally there, symbolically/spiritually through John and will come again in a literal sense before the one true "great and dreadful day of the Lord"

Neither elijah or moses were "literallly" on the mount of transfiguration. what the disciples saw was a vision, NOT a literal event.

Mat 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead."

A vision is something that is SEEN and it was fully real and literal.





Quote:
Did John succeed in this? Did the disobedient turn to the wisdom of the just? Were "a people" prepared for the Lord or was Jesus rejected of his generation?

Yes John suceeded, there were multitudes who turned to Christ. it is plain from the scriptures thart the religious leaders would have killed Jesus much sooner had it not been thier fear of the people that prevented them from taking action against him sooner. the people they feared were the same ones who had heard john's message and had been baptised by him.

So you dispute the scripture that says Jesus was rejected by his generation? That doesn't exactly sound like "all things" being restored to me.






Quote:
I think John began a good work but was cut short and beheaded. Elijah will succeed where John did not.

The God of dispensationalism seems to be rather incompetent. He cant seem to get it right the first time and has to keep trying until he suceeds. in dispensational eschatology John failed, Jesus failed, and God has to try again at some future date.

Typically immature. You ignore the facts for your own crafted version of history and events.




Just to show you how aburd dispensational reasoning is. Dipsies claim JOhn the baptist does not fulfill the prophecy of malachi so Elijah must literally return to do te job. but what does the malachi say?

Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Mal 4:6 And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse."

And when does the "real" elijah of dispensationalisim come? oh yeah, He comes during the great tribulation as God is striking the earth with curses. Apparently the "'real" elijah is going to be as big a failure as John was.

You misunderstand that as badly as you do the rest.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 07:30 PM
A vision is something that is SEEN and it was fully real and literal.

So as long as something is "seen" then it is literal? then I gues all the events of revelation which were "seen" by john were literal and have allready happend. after all they were visions that he saw.


So you dispute the scripture that says Jesus was rejected by his generation? That doesn't exactly sound like "all things" being restored to me.

But the events of revelation and men not repenting DOES sound like the restoration of "all things" apparently. The Truth of the matter is that not all of that genration rejected him. Their were myraids of jews who followed Christ and these were the remnant that God had promised to save throughout the OT. The generation that rejected him were the evil ones, the unbelievers. and that generation persihed in their unbelief just as the generation ( except 2) that came out of egypt perished because of their unbelief.


Typically immature. You ignore the facts for your own crafted version of history and events.

if rejecting your view that God fails in what He sets out to do is immatrue then I will happily remain a child. and come to think of it that is who Jesus said would enter in to the kingdom isnt it?

so, if john "failed" what was the curse that struck the earth after that failure as per malachi?

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 08:42 PM
if rejecting your view that God fails in what He sets out to do is immatrue then I will happily remain a child.

God never fails. You fail to understand the difference between a type and a fulfillment. John was never meant to fulfill the prophecy but to be similar.


and come to think of it that is who Jesus said would enter in to the kingdom isnt it?

Children, yes. Immature adults, no.



so, if john "failed" what was the curse that struck the earth after that failure as per malachi?

That prophecy is about Elijah not John.

John146
Jan 6th 2007, 09:00 PM
That prophecy is about Elijah not John.

So, when Jesus said that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come, was He mistaken? Shouldn't we take Him at His word even if we don't fully understand it? No wonder Jesus said, "And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.". He knew it would be difficult to understand how John the Baptist could be the Elijah to come as prophesied in Malachi 4:4-6, so that's why He worded His statements the way He did. Apparently, for some reason, it's still difficult for people to receive or accept that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come despite the indisputable fact that Jesus said he was.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 09:13 PM
So, when Jesus said that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come, was He mistaken?

No. We are mistaken to assume he meant that literally rather than in spirit as a type. Christ was not always easy to understand so I understand any difficulty people have distinguishing between something literal and something being a type. What Christ appears to say isn't always what he is literally saying and he does this a lot.

Had John actually been Elijah fulfilling the prophecy then there would have been no choice in the matter; "if you receive this". When Elijah returns, there will be no deciding/receiving whether it is him or not. Christ was mocking the Multitudes. Its more like "Well if you think John is Elijah then he is Elijah to you" and then Christ proceeds to describe just how dumb the generation was.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 09:20 PM
God never fails. You fail to understand the difference between a type and a fulfillment. John was never meant to fulfill the prophecy but to be similar.


Where does Jesus say that John was a "type" of elijah? in Matt 17:12 Jesus plainly states that "Elijah has come allready" and He was speaking of John. But you deny Jesus own interpretation of Malachi in favor of your own.


Children, yes. Immature adults, no.

When Jesus said that unless we became as a child we would not enter the kingdom he was talking about believing God. He was pointing to the passage in deuteronomy about the genreration that did not believe and instead fell in the wilderness.

Deu 1:39 'Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.

out of that generation only TWO believed God that the Land was theirs for the taking. the rest denied that this could possibly be the fulfillment of God's promise. and so they were forced to remain in the wilderness until the unbelievers died.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 09:28 PM
Where does Jesus say that John was a "type" of elijah?


For those with eyes to see and ears to hear he doesn't have to say it outright. Christ was always clever in what he said and said things that intentionally confused people. Often Christ did not mean things on the surface level as you are reading. Be that as it may. For you Elijah came and no future prophecy is left. For me, I know Elijah is to come before the second advent and I await and look forward to that day.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 09:29 PM
Had John actually been Elijah fulfilling the prophecy then there would have been no choice in the matter; "if you receive this". When Elijah returns, there will be no deciding/receiving whether it is him or not. Christ was mocking the Multitudes. Its more like "Well if you think John is Elijah then he is Elijah to you" and then Christ proceeds to describe just how dumb the generation was.

That has got to be the most absurd interpretation I have ever seen.

Mat 17:12 "But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands."

WHere in this passage do you get the idea that Jesus was making john and "optional" elijah? his words are perfectly clear, "elijah has come allready".

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 09:33 PM
For those with eyes to see and ears to hear he doesn't have to say it outright. Christ was always clever in what he said and said things that intentionally confused people. Often Christ did not mean things on the surface level as you are reading. Be that as it may. For you Elijah came and no future prophecy is left. For me, I know Elijah is to come before the second advent and I await and look forward to that day.
In other words you feel free to interpret scripture however you like according to your own rules. Feel free to await, and look for the coming of Elijah, I will await and look forward to the coming of Christ, my redeemer.

Maybe you would care to share with us the pertinant scriptures were Jesus or any of the apostles instruct us to await for, and look forward to, the coming of elijah.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 09:38 PM
WHere in this passage do you get the idea that Jesus was making john and "optional" elijah? his words are perfectly clear, "elijah has come allready".

If you haven't understood that Christ was talking metaphorically by now then you aren't going to get it. The multitudes didn't get it either but then again they were blind and deaf spiritually speaking. John was Elijah to you and that's fine for you.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 09:45 PM
If you haven't understood that Christ was talking metaphorically by now then you aren't going to get it. The multitudes didn't get it either but then again they were blind and deaf spiritually speaking. John was Elijah to you and that's fine for you.

well here is another small problem with your view. Jesus wasnt speaking to the multitudes. He was speaking to his disciples in private when He told them that Elijah had allready come.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 09:52 PM
well here is another small problem with your view. Jesus wasnt speaking to the multitudes. He was speaking to his disciples in private when He told them that Elijah had allready come.

Its always better to actually read something before stating one's opinion as if it is fact.



Matthew 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?
Matthew 11:8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.
Matthew 11:9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.
Matthew 11:10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matthew 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

You are one of the multitudes :) I am not.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 10:07 PM
Its always better to actually read something before stating one's opinion as if it is fact.

it's even better when you read and respnd to what someone actually posted.


He was speaking to his disciples in private when He told them that Elijah had allready come.

Mat 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead."
Mat 17:10 And His disciples asked Him, saying, "Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"
Mat 17:11 Jesus answered and said to them, "Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things.
Mat 17:12 "But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands."

As I stated Jesus was speaking ot His disciples privately when He told them that elijah had allready come.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 10:17 PM
He was saying the same thing to the multitudes.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 10:35 PM
He was saying the same thing to the multitudes.

Only He didnt give His disciples the "option" of receving it did he? and what did Jesus say about his private discussions with the disciples about his public statements?

Mat 13:10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?"
Mat 13:11 He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.

Jesus private instructions ot the disciples were not "optional". and in private He told them plainly that Elijah had allready come and He didnt qualify it as being metaphorical in nature.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 10:53 PM
Nice try but Christ doesn't qualify either as metaphorical. This must be discerned. It isn't important that Christ said "if ye receive it" to the multitudes but not the other time privately and this was only for three of them because thewy ere with Christ on the Mt when Elijah appeared with Moses. Not all the disciples were present so this waasn't special thing only for the disciples. Christ had already publicly said "if ye receive" to all including the disciples.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 10:57 PM
So as long as something is "seen" then it is literal? then I gues all the events of revelation which were "seen" by john were literal and have allready happend. after all they were visions that he saw.vision in revelation;
G3706
ὅρασις
horasis
hor'-as-is
From G3708; the act of gazing, that is, (external) an aspect or (internal) an inspired appearance: - sight, vision.

vision in matthew
G3705
ὅραμα
horama
hor'-am-ah
From G3708; something gazed at, that is, a spectacle (especially supernatural): - sight, vision.


Rev 9:17 - Thus (οὕτως)
After this manner.
In the vision (ἐν τῇ ὁπάσει)
Or "in my vision." See on Act_2:17. The reference to sight may be inserted because of I heard in Rev_9:16.


Mat 17:9 -
Vision (ὅραμα).
The spectacle.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 11:02 PM
Nice try but Christ doesn't qualify either as metaphorical. This must be discerned. It isn't important that Christ said "if ye receive it" to the multitudes but not the other time privately and this was only for three of them because thewy ere with Christ on the Mt when Elijah appeared with Moses. Not all the disciples were present so this waasn't special thing only for the disciples. Christ had already publicly said "if ye receive" to all including the disciples.

That entirely misses the point of what Jesus told his disciples that His private instructions to them were the plain truth of his words. Jesus words to the multitudes of "if you can receive it" refer to them receiving the truth of his words not a statement that truth is optional. or truth is relative to ones own views.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 11:06 PM
Christ gave no different or special private explanation of this to the disciples. "if ye shall receive it" applies to all.

calidog
Jan 6th 2007, 11:11 PM
Neither elijah or moses were "literallly" on the mount of transfiguration. what the disciples saw was a vision, NOT a literal event.

Mat 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead."


Yes John suceeded, there were multitudes who turned to Christ. it is plain from the scriptures thart the religious leaders would have killed Jesus much sooner had it not been thier fear of the people that prevented them from taking action against him sooner. the people they feared were the same ones who had heard john's message and had been baptised by him.

The God of dispensationalism seems to be rather incompetent. He cant seem to get it right the first time and has to keep trying until he suceeds. in dispensational eschatology John failed, Jesus failed, and God has to try again at some future date.

Just to show you how aburd dispensational reasoning is. Dipsies claim JOhn the baptist does not fulfill the prophecy of malachi so Elijah must literally return to do te job. but what does the malachi say?

Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Mal 4:6 And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse."

And when does the "real" elijah of dispensationalisim come? oh yeah, He comes during the great tribulation as God is striking the earth with curses. Apparently the "'real" elijah is going to be as big a failure as John was.
Marks take:
Mar 9:2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Mar 9:3 And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them.
Mar 9:4 And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.
Mar 9:5 And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
Mar 9:6 For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid.
Mar 9:7 And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.
Mar 9:8 And suddenly, when they had looked round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves.
Mar 9:9 And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead.
Mar 9:10 And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.
Mar 9:11 And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mar 9:12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh fimarst, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought.
Mar 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.




"And when does the "real" elijah of dispensationalisim come? oh yeah, He comes during the great tribulation as God is striking the earth with curses. Apparently the "'real" elijah is going to be as big a failure as John was."
Or mankind is as stubborn as he has always been.

The God of dispensationalism seems to be rather incompetent. He cant seem to get it right the first time and has to keep trying until he suceeds. in dispensational eschatology John failed, Jesus failed, and God has to try again at some future date.

Again mankind is stubborn, God is longsuffering.
Your statement is equivalent to saying ""it took 4000 years for God to convince SOME of us that we need a Savior"" is God's fault or failure.

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 11:33 PM
Christ gave no different or special private explanation of this to the disciples. "if ye shall receive it" applies to all.

As I already pointed out Jesus words. "if you can receive it does not make it optional or subject to ones views. Jesus words of "if you can receive it" are better explained in the context of scripture. And scripture tells us how people receive the things of God.

Joh 3:27 John answered and said, "A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven.

And Jesus himself continually pointed out that not all could or would receive His words. Only those that were his received his words.

Naphal
Jan 6th 2007, 11:36 PM
Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.


Christ is actually referring to Elijah written in the OT rather than John because nothing had been written about John yet. At the time Christ spoke these words John hadn't even been dead very long.

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 11:42 PM
Just to show you how aburd dispensational reasoning is. Dipsies claim JOhn the baptist does not fulfill the prophecy of malachi so Elijah must literally return to do te job. but what does the malachi say?

Dispensationalism was not around in the post-apostolic Church.
How is it that you attempt to tie this 1900 year old doctrine as a product of dispensationalism?

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 11:49 PM
Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.


Christ is actually referring to Elijah written in the OT rather than John because nothing had been written about John yet. At the time Christ spoke these words John hadn't even been dead very long.

Are yu actually unable to see that you just argued against your own view?

Benaiah
Jan 6th 2007, 11:51 PM
Dispensationalism was not around in the post-apostolic Church.
How is it that you attempt to tie this 1900 year old doctrine as a product of dispensationalism?

Dispensationalis, has picked up alot of bad interpretations and doctrines. I never said they all originated with dispensationalism itself.

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 11:51 PM
Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Christ is actually referring to Elijah written in the OT rather than John because nothing had been written about John yet. At the time Christ spoke these words John hadn't even been dead very long.

Most likely, Mark is referring to what the other gospel accounts had written about John.

Lou M.
Jan 6th 2007, 11:56 PM
Dispensationalis, has picked up alot of bad interpretations and doctrines. I never said they all originated with dispensationalism itself.

And it is just as equally safe to conclude that 'other' classes of eschatological belief systems 'have picked up alot of bad interpretations and doctrines' as well.

Naphal
Jan 7th 2007, 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napal
Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Christ is actually referring to Elijah written in the OT rather than John because nothing had been written about John yet. At the time Christ spoke these words John hadn't even been dead very long.


Most likely, Mark is referring to what the other gospel accounts had written about John.


Except this isn't Mark's words but words coming directly from Christ's mouth. Christ was referring to the old testament.

Lou M.
Jan 7th 2007, 12:03 AM
Except this isn't Mark's words but words coming directly from Christ's mouth. Christ was referring to the old testament.

:hmm: :hmm: :hmm: :hmm: Ah yes. Point made!
Disreguard my last statement.

Naphal
Jan 7th 2007, 12:05 AM
Ah yes. Point made!
Disreguard my last statement.

:) .

Benaiah
Jan 7th 2007, 12:10 AM
And it is just as equally safe to conclude that 'other' classes of eschatological belief systems 'have picked up alot of bad interpretations and doctrines' as well.

Now on that we can certainly agree.

calidog
Jan 7th 2007, 12:57 AM
Most likely, Mark is referring to what the other gospel accounts had written about John.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napal
Mark 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Christ is actually referring to Elijah written in the OT rather than John because nothing had been written about John yet. At the time Christ spoke these words John hadn't even been dead very long.


Mark may have gotten his information from the other gospel(s)?

Lou M.
Jan 7th 2007, 06:34 AM
Mark may have gotten his information from the other gospel(s)?

No! As Naphal had pointed out, those were the words of Jesus, not Mark.
I was at fault for not going back to the Bible and checking before I said what I did about Mark referring to what was written of John in one of the other Gospels.

I am to blame, no one else.

Lou M.
Jan 7th 2007, 07:01 AM
So that this issue remains open in all our minds, I will suggest the following:


I) If I believed that the prophecy was fulfilled only in the past through John the Baptist, I certainly would not limit God to that and would see at least the possibility of God's fulfilling it again for two reasons:
a) What is apparent is that for 1900 years the teaching has existed in the Church.



b) God has used Prophetical Scripture to teach of a near and far fulfillment.
II.) If I believed in God fulfilling the prophecy in the future, I would not close my eyes to that which occured in the past fulfillment, for what comes in the future will follow the pattern of the past.

:2cents:

Mograce2U
Jan 7th 2007, 04:41 PM
I) If I believed that the prophecy was fulfilled only in the past through John the Baptist, I certainly would not limit God to that and would see at least the possibility of God's fulfilling it again for two reasons:

a) What is apparent is that for 1900 years the teaching has existed in the Church.
b) God has used Prophetical Scripture to teach of a near and far fulfillment.II.) If I believed in God fulfilling the prophecy in the future, I would not close my eyes to that which occured in the past fulfillment, for what comes in the future will follow the pattern of the past.Lou,
Not only the pattern must be followed but also the purpose.

If we trace the prophecy back to its first occurence then we can see why the prophecy was given in the first place. If we can see the original intent then we are in a better position to see whether it has been fulfilled or not. We have 2 prophecies of a prophet that is coming, one of whom is Jesus in Deut 18:15-22 and the other who is John in Malachi 3:1, 4:5. In the gospels it is clear that there was some confusion over this in that the people were only expecting one prophet to arrive because they thought Malachi was speaking of the same Prophet that Moses was.

(Deu 18:15-22 KJV) The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; {16} According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. {17} And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. {18} I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. {19} And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. {20} But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. {21} And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? {22} When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

When Malachi speaks of Elijah coming, this passage from Deut is who the people thought Malachi was speaking about. When John the Baptist comes upon the scene you can see the people's confusion when they ask him who he is. The scribes ask him if he is Christ, that Prophet or the resurrected Elijah, because they are confused in their understanding of the prophecies. When John denies he is any of them, he does so because of their misunderstanding and points them instead to Isaiah 40:3.

Moses' prophecy was not linked by them to Messiah, instead they linked it to Malachi's Elijah whom they expected to be resurrected. When Jesus cries out from the cross, the people who heard Him thought He was calling for Elijah to come and save Him. (Mark 15:35) This can only be because they knew of His raising of Lazarus already and still expected Elijah to appear. The people only had a literal understanding of prophecy and failed to see what fulfilled it.

Jesus is the one who points us to John as being Elijah and Peter shows us who is the Prophet Moses was speaking about:

(Acts 3:18-26 KJV) But those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. {19} Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; {20} And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: {21} Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. {22} For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. {23} And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. {24} Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. {25} Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. {26} Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

The purpose in sending John first was given to Zecharias, his father, by the angel Gabriel:

(Luke 1:16-17 KJV) And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. {17} And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

He fulfilled his course by calling the people to repentance and announcing the arrival of the Lamb of God:

(John 1:29-34 KJV) The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. {30} This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. {31} And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. {32} And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. {33} And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. {34} And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

The prophecies foretold of the cross and the atonement for sin. What dual fulfillment can there be since this has occurred? The thing has come to pass and so we know the word the prophets spoke was true. That word still goes forth today to turn the hearts of the people - why should we look for another to deliver this message to us?

Jesus is not coming to the cross again, no He is bringing salvation for His followers and judgment for the world - both of which have already been announced. When He returns it will be upon an unsuspecting world who has heard the gospel for 2 millenium already and is without excuse. Who is going to announce the arrival of a Thief?

ShirleyFord
Jan 7th 2007, 07:13 PM
Lou,
Not only the pattern must be followed but also the purpose.

If we trace the prophecy back to its first occurence then we can see why the prophecy was given in the first place. If we can see the original intent then we are in a better position to see whether it has been fulfilled or not. We have 2 prophecies of a prophet that is coming, one of whom is Jesus in Deut 18:15-22 and the other who is John in Malachi 3:1, 4:5. In the gospels it is clear that there was some confusion over this in that the people were only expecting one prophet to arrive because they thought Malachi was speaking of the same Prophet that Moses was.

(Deu 18:15-22 KJV) The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; {16} According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. {17} And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. {18} I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. {19} And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. {20} But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. {21} And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? {22} When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

When Malachi speaks of Elijah coming, this passage from Deut is who the people thought Malachi was speaking about. When John the Baptist comes upon the scene you can see the people's confusion when they ask him who he is. The scribes ask him if he is Christ, that Prophet or the resurrected Elijah, because they are confused in their understanding of the prophecies. When John denies he is any of them, he does so because of their misunderstanding and points them instead to Isaiah 40:3.

Moses' prophecy was not linked by them to Messiah, instead they linked it to Malachi's Elijah whom they expected to be resurrected. When Jesus cries out from the cross, the people who heard Him thought He was calling for Elijah to come and save Him. (Mark 15:35) This can only be because they knew of His raising of Lazarus already and still expected Elijah to appear. The people only had a literal understanding of prophecy and failed to see what fulfilled it.

Jesus is the one who points us to John as being Elijah and Peter shows us who is the Prophet Moses was speaking about:

(Acts 3:18-26 KJV) But those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. {19} Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; {20} And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: {21} Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. {22} For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. {23} And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. {24} Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. {25} Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. {26} Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

The purpose in sending John first was given to Zecharias, his father, by the angel Gabriel:

(Luke 1:16-17 KJV) And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. {17} And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

He fulfilled his course by calling the people to repentance and announcing the arrival of the Lamb of God:

(John 1:29-34 KJV) The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. {30} This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. {31} And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. {32} And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. {33} And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. {34} And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

The prophecies foretold of the cross and the atonement for sin. What dual fulfillment can there be since this has occurred? The thing has come to pass and so we know the word the prophets spoke was true. That word still goes forth today to turn the hearts of the people - why should we look for another to deliver this message to us?

Jesus is not coming to the cross again, no He is bringing salvation for His followers and judgment for the world - both of which have already been announced. When He returns it will be upon an unsuspecting world who has heard the gospel for 2 millenium already and is without excuse. Who is going to announce the arrival of a Thief?

Exactly. A great gospel message of absolute Scriptural truth! Thanks!

Amazingly, the one passage in Malachi 4 is the only Scripture in the OT mentioning a future coming of Elijah. Yet many Christians today accept Christ-rejecting rabbis' interpretation of Malachi 4 - who bypass the NT and the words of Christ along with His First Coming as their Messiah, and forward the prophecy to just before their human messiah comes - and reconcile the rabbis' interpretation then by forwarding Malachi 4 to Rev. 11, with Elijah as one of the two witnesses.

This was such a puzzel and mystery to me as a dispensationalist. I couldn't understand how my teachers were able to know to forward Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 to one of the two witnesses of Rev. 11:3-12.

I was just as confused years later when some of my teachers began to teach that John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah but not physically as Elijah himself. Then they began teaching that according to Malachi and Jesus that there would be a dual fulfillment of the future coming of Elijah: (1) spiritually, through John the Baptist (2) physically, a Elijah himself.

These are a few of the questions I had:

1. Where in Malachi's prophecy does he say that Elijah would be one of the two witnesses to usher in the Second Coming of Christ?

2. Where in Revelation 11:3-12 does John identify one of the two witnesses as Elijah?

3. Where in Malachi's prophecy does he say that Elijah must return physically before Christ can return?

4. Where does the angel Gabriel, Zacharias, John the Baptist, Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke or John say that Elijah must have a dual fulfilling of his prophecy in order for Malachi 4:5-6 to be completely fulfilled?

Shirley

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 12:33 AM
4. Where does the angel Gabriel, Zacharias, John the Baptist, Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke or John say that Elijah must have a dual fulfilling of his prophecy in order for Malachi 4:5-6 to be completely fulfilled?

In light of this very same 'application' of reasoning, one may wonder how in the world Matthew equated Jesus' coming out of Egypt after the death of Herod (Matthew 2:14-15) to Hosea 11:1.

Mograce2U
Jan 8th 2007, 01:53 AM
In light of this very same 'application' of reasoning, one may wonder how in the world Matthew equated Jesus' coming out of Egypt after the death of Herod (Matthew 2:14-15) to Hosea 11:1.Well, I suppose it is the difference between prophecy and type/ antitype. Hosea 11:1 concerns the latter, Malachi the former. Israel is the type and shadow of the antitype who is Jesus, the Seed to come from Abraham then David. Jesus is Israel in that sense. Much like the Levites were said to have tithed to Melchiseldek while still in the loins of Abraham.

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 02:16 AM
Well, I suppose it is the difference between prophecy and type/ antitype. Hosea 11:1 concerns the latter, Malachi the former. Israel is the type and shadow of the antitype who is Jesus, the Seed to come from Abraham then David. Jesus is Israel in that sense. Much like the Levites were said to have tithed to Melchiseldek while still in the loins of Abraham.

And of Deut. 18?
We know that the immediate fulfillment was in Joshua, with the ultimate fulfillment in Jesus (Greek for the Hebrew name, Joshua).

In like manner, how is it that we assume to "know" that God will not accomplish the same type of work with the prophecy of the coming of Elijah. Though some act and speak as if the know it, they know nothing.

Also of Matthew attributing the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15) to what Herod did with the firstborn male children. But in the context of Jeremiah 31 we know that this was God's promise to Israel that after the Babylonian captivity their children would again inhabit the land of Cannan (vs. 16-17).

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 02:19 AM
Or is it in these very things that we a found to exalt our so called knowledge against the true knowledge of God?

Benaiah
Jan 8th 2007, 02:27 AM
In light of this very same 'application' of reasoning, one may wonder how in the world Matthew equated Jesus' coming out of Egypt after the death of Herod (Matthew 2:14-15) to Hosea 11:1.

They got it from Jesus himself. who said. "I am the true vine."(John 15:1) the disciples understood that in the OT Israel was referred to as the vine of the Lord.

ShirleyFord
Jan 8th 2007, 02:29 AM
In light of this very same 'application' of reasoning, one may wonder how in the world Matthew equated Jesus' coming out of Egypt after the death of Herod (Matthew 2:14-15) to Hosea 11:1.

Matthew 2:14-15 says that Jesus fulfilled Hosea 11:1. Why? Do you believe that Jesus has got to come out of Egypt again to completely fulfill Hosea:11:1?

Jesus already fulfilled it just like John the Baptist already fulfilled Malachi 4:5-6.

Shirley

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 02:52 AM
Matthew 2:14-15 says that Jesus fulfilled Hosea 11:1. Why? Do you believe that Jesus has got to come out of Egypt again to completely fulfill Hosea:11:1?

Did Joshua fulfill Hosea 11:1? We know that Jesus did because the Bible says so. But didn't Joshua fulfill it also?

The same word was fulfilled once by Joshua and once by Christ. Two fulfillments, not just one.

Malachi was fulfilled once by John the Baptist. It is an assumption that God will not fulfill it again as 1900 years of Church history believed!

Benaiah
Jan 8th 2007, 03:16 AM
Did Joshua fulfill Hosea 11:1? We know that Jesus did because the Bible says so. But didn't Joshua fulfill it also?

The same word was fulfilled once by Joshua and once by Christ. Two fulfillments, not just one.

Ok I guess I am pretty dense here...how are you considering a prophecy written over a thousand years AFTER joshua to be a prophecy conerning him?Matthews point is that Hosea was a prophecy concerning Christ. maybe yuo have a different definition of prophecy but I always thought that prophecies were made BEFORE the person or events occured.

Mograce2U
Jan 8th 2007, 03:19 AM
And of Deut. 18?
We know that the immediate fulfillment was in Joshua, with the ultimate fulfillment in Jesus (Greek for the Hebrew name, Joshua).

In like manner, how is it that we assume to "know" that God will not accomplish the same type of work with the prophecy of the coming of Elijah. Though some act and speak as if the know it, they know nothing.

Also of Matthew attributing the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15) to what Herod did with the firstborn male children. But in the context of Jeremiah 31 we know that this was God's promise to Israel that after the Babylonian captivity their children would again inhabit the land of Cannan (vs. 16-17).I did try to explain that for a dual prophecy to be valid both the pattern and the purpose of the original prophecy ought to remain intact. The coming of Elijah was to announce and prepare the people for Messiah. John did this. When Jesus returns, it is as a thief. What announcement is needed for that?

Naphal
Jan 8th 2007, 05:06 AM
Well, I suppose it is the difference between prophecy and type/ antitype.


Same here. John the Baptist was only a type of Elijah. Elijah is the anti-type of "Elijah the Prophet to come".

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 08:51 AM
Ok I guess I am pretty dense here...how are you considering a prophecy written over a thousand years AFTER joshua to be a prophecy conerning him?

My bad.
I was thinking of the prophecy conserning Joshua in Deut. 18 that was also fulfilled with Christ. And the prophecy of Hosea 11:1, in the context of Hosea 11:1 speaking of something already accomplished by Israel and looking forward to Christ.

Lou M.
Jan 8th 2007, 08:52 AM
Same here. John the Baptist was only a type of Elijah. Elijah is the anti-type of "Elijah the Prophet to come".

Exactly!.........

calidog
Jan 8th 2007, 01:14 PM
I did try to explain that for a dual prophecy to be valid both the pattern and the purpose of the original prophecy ought to remain intact. The coming of Elijah was to announce and prepare the people for Messiah. John did this. When Jesus returns, it is as a thief. What announcement is needed for that?
Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

wpm
Jan 8th 2007, 01:41 PM
Same here. John the Baptist was only a type of Elijah. Elijah is the anti-type of "Elijah the Prophet to come".

I prefer Christ's word. Matthew 17:10-13 records, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

Paul

Mograce2U
Jan 8th 2007, 03:41 PM
Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. If you back up a bit to 10:8 you will see that an angel is speaking to John; ch 11 to v14 is not another vision but a message he receives that pertains to the 2nd woe and 6th trumpet. John has already been given and eaten the little book and it is from this that he will prophesy again before many nations. It makes his belly bitter because it concerns judgment.

Both Moses and Malachi predicted a prophet to come. These 2 prophets are who Israel was anticipating. In Duet 18:15 the Prophet Moses predicts is Jesus and in Malachi 3:1 it is Elijah - who Jesus tells us John the Baptist fulfilled. The ministries of Moses and Elijah are typified for us in 11:6. Elijah had the power to stop/ start rain and Moses the power of plagues. It was the prophetic testimony of these two prophets that pointed to Jesus and substantiated who He was to Israel during His 3 1/2 year earthly ministry. These prophecies predicted His first advent was to suffer and atone for sins.

Jerusalem is identified as the city where the Lord was crucified which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt. This association points to the judgments that came upon those peoples and ties it to the judgment coming upon Jerusalem.

The people of the beast who crucified the Lord did so to stop His testimony. They rejoiced for 3 1/2 days while His body lay in the tomb because they thought they had killed these 2 witnesses against them. Upon the resurrection of Jesus, His testimony also revived and His witness is ascended to heaven and alive with Him there. It still goes forth today for any who search the scriptures to find that they spoke of Him.

"In the same hour" is referring to the judgment that came upon those men who crucified the Lord in 70 AD. Notice that the prelude to this message was for John to measure the temple and the altar and count the worshippers who were still there. The trampling of the city for 42 months coincides with the Roman armies that came against Jerusalem.

Rev 19:10 "the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy". On the road to Emmaus, Jesus spoke to the 2 disciples of all the prophecies that related to Him. What we have here is an encapsulated rendition of where those prophecies can be found and what they were about.

calidog
Jan 8th 2007, 06:17 PM
I prefer Christ's word. Matthew 17:10-13 records, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

Paul
prefer Christ's word. Matthew 17:10-13 records, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”


he SHALL first come and restore ALL things;

he CAME already and they knew him not.

calidog
Jan 8th 2007, 06:27 PM
If you back up a bit to 10:8 you will see that an angel is speaking to John; ch 11 to v14 is not another vision but a message he receives that pertains to the 2nd woe and 6th trumpet. John has already been given and eaten the little book and it is from this that he will prophesy again before many nations. It makes his belly bitter because it concerns judgment.

Both Moses and Malachi predicted a prophet to come. These 2 prophets are who Israel was anticipating. In Duet 18:15 the Prophet Moses predicts is Jesus and in Malachi 3:1 it is Elijah - who Jesus tells us John the Baptist fulfilled. The ministries of Moses and Elijah are typified for us in 11:6. Elijah had the power to stop/ start rain and Moses the power of plagues. It was the prophetic testimony of these two prophets that pointed to Jesus and substantiated who He was to Israel during His 3 1/2 year earthly ministry. These prophecies predicted His first advent was to suffer and atone for sins.

Jerusalem is identified as the city where the Lord was crucified which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt. This association points to the judgments that came upon those peoples and ties it to the judgment coming upon Jerusalem.

The people of the beast who crucified the Lord did so to stop His testimony. They rejoiced for 3 1/2 days while His body lay in the tomb because they thought they had killed these 2 witnesses against them. Upon the resurrection of Jesus, His testimony also revived and His witness is ascended to heaven and alive with Him there. It still goes forth today for any who search the scriptures to find that they spoke of Him.

"In the same hour" is referring to the judgment that came upon those men who crucified the Lord in 70 AD. Notice that the prelude to this message was for John to measure the temple and the altar and count the worshippers who were still there. The trampling of the city for 42 months coincides with the Roman armies that came against Jerusalem.

Rev 19:10 "the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy". On the road to Emmaus, Jesus spoke to the 2 disciples of all the prophecies that related to Him. What we have here is an encapsulated rendition of where those prophecies can be found and what they were about.


I guess so ,maybe??, if revelation is not prophetic but rather historical,

Mograce2U
Jan 8th 2007, 08:20 PM
I guess so ,maybe??, if revelation is not prophetic but rather historical,It is both prophetic and historical.

calidog
Jan 8th 2007, 11:42 PM
It is both prophetic and historical.
Rev 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.


Agreed. But your earlier comment caused me think your interpretation was historical beyond Rev 4:1.

For the following reasons I think it may be pointless to go on. (in addition to us getting off the subject) :

""The problem for anyone trying to interpret the book is that on reading the text one can find support for all (four) views which is why there is such a wide variety of interpretations and indeed disagreements. In a sense they are all correct, the futurist sees the beast as the future antichrist, the historicist sees the beast of history, the preterist sees the beast in Roman times and the idealist sees a succession of beasts leading up to the antichrist. The futurist writes from the point of view of a church not undergoing persecution now but expects it in the future particularly from the antichrist. The historicist writes from the point of view of current persecution or recent persecution as historical events and finds these in Revelation. The idealist looks to past periods of persecution and sees general principles within Revelation that can explain these. The preterist writes about how Revelation explains the persecution under the Roman empire. They are all correct, but they all see truth from a different perspective.""
from; apocalipsis.org/rev-int.htm#schools (http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-int.htm#schools)

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naphal http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1107457#post1107457)
Same here. John the Baptist was only a type of Elijah. Elijah is the anti-type of "Elijah the Prophet to come".


I prefer Christ's word. Matthew 17:10-13 records, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”


Wouldn't be the first time they were mistaken.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 12:46 AM
Wouldn't be the first time they were mistaken.

If they were mistaken then who was Jesus talking about if not John the Baptist?

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 12:51 AM
If they were mistaken then who was Jesus talking about if not John the Baptist?

Elijah.




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

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 01:04 AM
Elijah.


So when was it exactly that Elijah had allready come?

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 01:07 AM
Wouldn't be the first time they were mistaken.

Why not just accept what Scripture says? :pp

Paul

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 01:11 AM
Wouldn't be the first time they were mistaken.

Matthew 17:10-13 says, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

The same people that killed John, would also kill Christ.

Paul

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 01:19 AM
The same people that killed John, would also kill Christ.


Technically yes but the ones that wanted each dead were different. Herod's daughter wanted John dead so he had it done. The religious community wanted Christ dead and got the Roman's to do it. Tho

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 01:21 AM
So when was it exactly that Elijah had allready come?

FYI I normally ignore simplistic questions like this. But I'll make an exception for you lol

Read the Old testament where it speaks of a man, oddly enough, named Elijah.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 01:23 AM
Why not just accept what Scripture says?


See the post above...but, why not try to understand what scripture means rather than just accept what it says? When a parable is told, do we only accept what is written or try to understand what it means?

Mograce2U
Jan 9th 2007, 01:50 AM
Technically yes but the ones that wanted each dead were different. Herod's daughter wanted John dead so he had it done. The religious community wanted Christ dead and got the Roman's to do it. Tho
Fulfilling this prophecy:
(Psalms 2:2-3) The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, {3} Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 02:07 AM
FYI I normally ignore simplistic questions like this. But I'll make an exception for you lol

Read the Old testament where it speaks of a man, oddly enough, named Elijah.

Lets see, the disciples asked why the scribes said that Elijah must come before the messiah.( an obvious reference to Malachi 4:5) Jesus confirms this as true, then he adds that Elijah has allready come. and you claim that Jesus is referring to elijah in the OT? so in your view malachi 4:5 is not a prophey since it was written long after the time of elijah. is this a new eschatology based on the theory of relativity?

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 02:10 AM
The prophecy is about the second coming of Elijah as opposed to his first. John could only "fulfill" it as a type which means it is not the complete fulfillment. Not to mention the prophecy is concerning the second coming of both Elijah and Christ, not their first's.

Mograce2U
Jan 9th 2007, 02:12 AM
Rev 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

Agreed. But your earlier comment caused me think your interpretation was historical beyond Rev 4:1.

For the following reasons I think it may be pointless to go on. (in addition to us getting off the subject) :

""The problem for anyone trying to interpret the book is that on reading the text one can find support for all (four) views which is why there is such a wide variety of interpretations and indeed disagreements. In a sense they are all correct, the futurist sees the beast as the future antichrist, the historicist sees the beast of history, the preterist sees the beast in Roman times and the idealist sees a succession of beasts leading up to the antichrist. The futurist writes from the point of view of a church not undergoing persecution now but expects it in the future particularly from the antichrist. The historicist writes from the point of view of current persecution or recent persecution as historical events and finds these in Revelation. The idealist looks to past periods of persecution and sees general principles within Revelation that can explain these. The preterist writes about how Revelation explains the persecution under the Roman empire. They are all correct, but they all see truth from a different perspective.""
from; apocalipsis.org/rev-int.htm#schools (http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-int.htm#schools)Obviously, they are not "all correct", which is why we discuss these things!

One point about "hereafter" is that is means afterwards; you have to take a leap to make that 2000 years past the point John received it.

The main reason I prefer the partial preterist view of Revelation is because of Jesus repeatedly saying that His return will be as a thief upon an unsuspecting world as it was in the days of Noah and Lot. The things the dispensationalist would have us anticipating contradict that possibility. A pretrib rapture in particular would put the world into extreme chaos - which would hardly be the time they are saying "peace & safety" to themselves.

I do think the saints will experience an increase in persecutions near the end - which is already happening now. The ecumenical movement afoot today is creating a giant split from those who do not share in their agenda. The beast of Revelation need not be a particular man to accomplish the dragon's agenda. The false unity is progressing nonetheless without a particular leader. The sellers of oil are working hard for the "beast" and worship the dragon as Mammon, without much provocation other than their own greed. Are they deceived in thinking their success is equal to godliness? You bet.

What more could an Antichrist figure accomplish that is not already happening? The world already worships the false god Mammon...

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 02:49 AM
The prophecy is about the second coming of Elijah as opposed to his first. John could only "fulfill" it as a type which means it is not the complete fulfillment. Not to mention the prophecy is concerning the second coming of both Elijah and Christ, not their first's.

Scripture says NOTHING whatsoever about a "second coming" of elijah. that is simply the interpretation that the scribes had placed on the passage in malachi. Jesus gives the proper interpretation of it in matt. 17.( that John was elijah who is to come) The "messenger of Malachi 3:1 is the same as the person spoken of in Malachi 4:5 and that is John the baptist.

Mal 3:1 "Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple, Even the Messenger of the covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming," Says the LORD of hosts.

Luk 1:17 "He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."

Luk 7:27 "This is he of whom it is written: 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, Who will prepare Your way before You.'

Where in all the passages concerning the second coming of Christ, or the end times does Jesus or any of the apostles tell us to look for another coming of elijah?

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 05:08 AM
Scripture says NOTHING whatsoever about a "second coming" of elijah.


Scripture speaks of his first coming and then that he was taken away and then we have scripture saying that he will return. That's two comings. Being that his coming will precede "the great and dreadful day of the Lord" we know that his second coming is close to Christ's second coming and this is no surprise that he is leading the way for Christ just as John did as a type of Elijah.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 06:04 AM
Scripture speaks of his first coming and then that he was taken away and then we have scripture saying that he will return. That's two comings. Being that his coming will precede "the great and dreadful day of the Lord" we know that his second coming is close to Christ's second coming and this is no surprise that he is leading the way for Christ just as John did as a type of Elijah.

No, What we have is a passage in malachi that states, "I will send elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord." and then we have an angel in luke 1:17 clearly saying that John would fulfill this role. then we have Jesus himself confirming that john was the elijah the prohecy spoke of. neither Jesus nor the apostles ever spoke of another coming of elijah in any of their statements concerning the end times or Jesus return.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 06:11 AM
then we have Jesus himself confirming that john was the elijah the prohecy spoke of.


There is no such thing as "the Elijah" as if Elijah is an object or title. Elijah is a person, a prophet that lived long ago and was taken to heaven. Prophecy states he will return before the day of the Lord and that's what will happen.

Mograce2U
Jan 9th 2007, 06:15 AM
There is no such thing as "the Elijah" as if Elijah is an object or title. Elijah is a person, a prophet that lived long ago and was taken to heaven. Prophecy states he will return before the day of the Lord and that's what will happen.And what will be the point of his coming (again) before Jesus returns? To announce the Thief coming upon the world?

Lou M.
Jan 9th 2007, 06:19 AM
Why not just accept what Scripture says?

Why?
Well, most likely for the same reason that some do not accept what Zechariah 14 has to say will occur before the Day of the Lord.

Lou M.
Jan 9th 2007, 06:26 AM
And what will be the point of his coming (again) before Jesus returns? To announce the Thief coming upon the world?

There is nowhere in Scriptures that state that the Lord will come as a thief in the night accept to the wicked, unbelieving, unrepentant world who is in darkness.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 06:45 AM
There is no such thing as "the Elijah" as if Elijah is an object or title. Elijah is a person, a prophet that lived long ago and was taken to heaven. Prophecy states he will return before the day of the Lord and that's what will happen.

Elijah was NOT taken to heaven. Scripturee is clear That Christ alone has ascended to heaven.

Joh 3:13 "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 07:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naphal http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1108723#post1108723)
There is no such thing as "the Elijah" as if Elijah is an object or title. Elijah is a person, a prophet that lived long ago and was taken to heaven. Prophecy states he will return before the day of the Lord and that's what will happen.

And what will be the point of his coming (again) before Jesus returns? To announce the Thief coming upon the world?


The point is to accomplish what the prophecy says he will.


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Also called "restoring all things" in NT verses.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 07:37 AM
Elijah was NOT taken to heaven. Scripturee is clear That Christ alone has ascended to heaven.

Joh 3:13 "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

I didn't say Elijah "ascended" to heaven. Do you even know what "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven" means?

The parable of the rich man makes clear that people, good and bad, go up to heaven after they die. Elijah simply did not have to die to get there.



Elijah was NOT taken to heaven.

2 Kings 2:1 And it came to pass, when the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal.


2 Kings 2:11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

Scripture says you are wrong.

Benaiah says "Elijah was NOT taken to heaven."
Scripture says "the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven"
and "Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven"

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 01:23 PM
why not try to understand what scripture means rather than just accept what it says?

I think we need to accept what it says because it is God's Word. God said in His Word they "understood," you say they didn't. I go with Scripture. Just because it doesn't fit with your belief doesn't mean we need to import another meaning into it. Lets accept Scripture for what it is.



When a parable is told, do we only accept what is written or try to understand what it means?


I agree. However, this isn't a parable.

Paul

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 01:27 PM
There is no such thing as "the Elijah" as if Elijah is an object or title. Elijah is a person, a prophet that lived long ago and was taken to heaven. Prophecy states he will return before the day of the Lord and that's what will happen.

Luke 1:13-17 records the angel speaking to Zacharias about the birth of ohn the Baptist, saying, “Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Paul

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 01:55 PM
There is nowhere in Scriptures that state that the Lord will come as a thief in the night accept to the wicked, unbelieving, unrepentant world who is in darkness.1Th 5:4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
1Th 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 02:18 PM
Where in all the passages concerning the second coming of Christ, or the end times does Jesus or any of the apostles tell us to look for another coming of elijah?

Jesus tells US to look-up (for Him).

Does scripture teach He's given up on unbelieveing Israel?

Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 02:28 PM
Scripture says NOTHING whatsoever about a "second coming" of elijah. that is simply the interpretation that the scribes had placed on the passage in malachi. Jesus gives the proper interpretation of it in matt. 17.( that John was elijah who is to come) The "messenger of Malachi 3:1 is the same as the person spoken of in Malachi 4:5 and that is John the baptist.

Mal 3:1 "Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple, Even the Messenger of the covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming," Says the LORD of hosts.

Luk 1:17 "He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."

Luk 7:27 "This is he of whom it is written: 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, Who will prepare Your way before You.' ?


''So that this issue remains open in all our minds, I will suggest the following:






I) If I believed that the prophecy was fulfilled only in the past through John the Baptist, I certainly would not limit God to that and would see at least the possibility of God's fulfilling it again for two reasons:
a) What is apparent is that for 1900 years the teaching has existed in the Church.
b) God has used Prophetical Scripture to teach of a near and far fulfillment.II.) If I believed in God fulfilling the prophecy in the future, I would not close my eyes to that which occured in the past fulfillment, for what comes in the future will follow the pattern of the past." Quote Lou M.

:2cents:

Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Joh 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 02:35 PM
The same people that killed John, would also kill Christ.

Pauland, the same people who kill Elijah will also "try" to kill Christ.

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 03:31 PM
Jesus tells US to look-up (for Him).

Does scripture teach He's given up on unbelieveing Israel?

Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:


Did John the Baptist come before or after "the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD"?

Paul

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 04:22 PM
Did John the Baptist come before or after "the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD"?

Paul
before.


If prophecy is literally fulfilled (I believe it is),
then
Elijah will too.

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 04:53 PM
before.


If prophecy is literally fulfilled (I believe it is),
then
Elijah will too.

I have showed that John fulfilled that prophecy - but you won't accept it.

Jesus said, in Matthew 11:12-14, “from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.”

Paul

jesuslover1968
Jan 9th 2007, 05:46 PM
Jesus said, in Matthew 11:12-14, “from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.”


As I said in an earlier post, what is being missed is the word IF. They did not accept it, therefore that was not the fulfillment. Jesus said IF, meaning it was do this and this will happen, they did not do their part so it didn't happen. John the Baptist came preaching in the spirit of Elijah, but he was not Elijah.

John 1:21-23
21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? 23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.
God Bless.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 06:01 PM
The parable of the rich man makes clear that people, good and bad, go up to heaven after they die. Elijah simply did not have to die to get there.


The word translated "ascended" means a Literal, physical, bodily movement. it is the same word transalted as UP elsewhere. Jesus is the ONLY one who has physically and bodily ascended into heaven.

Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Joh 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John was not physically Elijah, so He answered truthfully, But an angel declared he would fulfill the prophecy concerning Elijah and Jesus himself declared he was the fulfillment of the prophecy. but some people choose thier own interpretations rather than that of Jesus himself.

jesuslover1968
Jan 9th 2007, 06:11 PM
The word translated "ascended" means a Literal, physical, bodily movement. it is the same word transalted as UP elsewhere. Jesus is the ONLY one who has physically and bodily ascended into heaven.

Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Joh 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John was not physically Elijah, so He answered truthfully, But an angel declared he would fulfill the prophecy concerning Elijah and Jesus himself declared he was the fulfillment of the prophecy. but some people choose thier own interpretations rather than that of Jesus himself.


Jesus did not say that He WAS the fulfillment, He said IF they would receive it, which they didn't. When, in your estimation, has Elijah come and restored all things? God Bless.

Mograce2U
Jan 9th 2007, 06:56 PM
Jesus did not say that He WAS the fulfillment, He said IF they would receive it, which they didn't. When, in your estimation, has Elijah come and restored all things? God Bless.Here is what Malachi said:

(Mal 3:1) Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

(Mal 4:5-6) Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: {6} And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

This messenger of the covenant would turn the hearts of the people to prepare them for receiving the Lord.

The disciples, influenced by the Pharisees of their day, thought the kingdom was coming in its earthly glory - this was the restoration they had been taught to expect when Messiah arrived. If you look at all the passages that mention Elijah in the NT you will see how they were being corrected in their expectations. Before the cross and Pentecost, the disciples understood none of these things.

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 06:59 PM
As I said in an earlier post, what is being missed is the word IF. They did not accept it, therefore that was not the fulfillment. Jesus said IF, meaning it was do this and this will happen, they did not do their part so it didn't happen. John the Baptist came preaching in the spirit of Elijah, but he was not Elijah.

John 1:21-23
21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? 23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.
God Bless.

He was simply explaining he was not actual Elijah, but he was the Elijah that was to come spiritually in the power of the Spirit. Matthew 17:10-13 says, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

Paul

wpm
Jan 9th 2007, 07:01 PM
Jesus did not say that He WAS the fulfillment, He said IF they would receive it, which they didn't. When, in your estimation, has Elijah come and restored all things? God Bless.

True Israel excepted Him, the rest were of their father the devil.

Can I remind you, Israel's Redeemer has already come.

Paul

Mograce2U
Jan 9th 2007, 07:04 PM
He was simply explaining he was not actual Elijah, but he was the Elijah that was to come spiritually in the power of the Spirit. Matthew 17:10-13 says, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”It is also interesting to note that the disciples did not gain this understanding until after John was martyred. Jesus then uses his death to point to His own.

Benaiah
Jan 9th 2007, 07:22 PM
Originally Posted by Benaiah http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1108588#post1108588)
The same people that killed John, would also kill Christ.

Paul
and, the same people who kill Elijah will also "try" to kill Christ.
That is not my quote, but I do agree with Paul on it. and NO they didnt "try" to kill Jesus they did it.

Herod was the one that put John to death. and Herod was involved in the death of Christ as well.

Act 4:27 "For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together

jesuslover1968
Jan 9th 2007, 11:02 PM
Here is what Malachi said:

(Mal 3:1) Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

(Mal 4:5-6) Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: {6} And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

This messenger of the covenant would turn the hearts of the people to prepare them for receiving the Lord.

The disciples, influenced by the Pharisees of their day, thought the kingdom was coming in its earthly glory - this was the restoration they had been taught to expect when Messiah arrived. If you look at all the passages that mention Elijah in the NT you will see how they were being corrected in their expectations. Before the cross and Pentecost, the disciples understood none of these things.


Luke 12:51-53


51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.



Apparently, Jesus did not have His first coming in mind as to when Elijah's ministry would take place. What do you think the point would be for Elijah to turn the hearts to each other if Jesus' intention was to turn them away from each other? God Bless.

Mark 3:23-26



23And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
24And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

Luke 11:15-18



15But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
16And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven.
17But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth. 18If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub.

I don't think Jesus would make any mistakes, and surely not one He made it plain would cause the fall of His Kingdom, which can't happen anyway because He is God.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 11:06 PM
I think we need to accept what it says because it is God's Word. God said in His Word they "understood," you say they didn't.

God didn't say they understood correctly. It merely says they understood he was talking about Elijah. They could be wrong because they are the ones making the decision that they have understood.



I agree. However, this isn't a parable.

Doesn't need to be.

jesuslover1968
Jan 9th 2007, 11:07 PM
True Israel excepted Him, the rest were of their father the devil.

Can I remind you, Israel's Redeemer has already come.

Paul


What has that got to do with the spirit of Elijah?
I don't need to be reminded that our redeemer has come. Elijah's ministry was one of prophecying wrath if Israel did not repent, as it will be in the endtimes. It amazes me that you take every opportunity to point out who is the children of the devil and do not see that we once were as well. While the Church still has breath, there is still time to witness to them. We are no more deserving of our salvation than they are, but He saved us, as He said He would. He said all Israel would be saved, and it will. It should be quite obvious that He knows that all who will come have not yet, and He is waiting and has not written them off, so why should we? :) God Bless.

Naphal
Jan 9th 2007, 11:22 PM
The word translated "ascended" means a Literal, physical, bodily movement. it is the same word transalted as UP elsewhere. Jesus is the ONLY one who has physically and bodily ascended into heaven.

I'm afraid this is a perfect example of understanding the meaning of the words in English and how they are arranged but failing to grasp that the saying has a meaning that is not apparent in a cursory reading.

Acts 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
It is believed by some that these verses support "soul sleep" that no one, not even David has ever ascended into heaven, therefore, they must be still in the grave literally. It is also believed that these verses say that no one has ever "ascended" to the "third heaven" except Christ. However, is that really what is being addressed?
Many of us understand that all who die, wicked and good, ascend up to heaven to either side of that gulf. It is written that when that silver cord is parted that the spirit returns to God. Even Elijah ascended up into heaven via that "whirlwind" and he didn't even die so these verses have to have a deeper meaning.
I believe God has shown me the true meaning of this:

Romans 10:6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above : )
Romans 10:7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead)
I think this may be the key to understanding what the other verses mean. Paul has just explained what it means to "ascend into heaven". It's a figure of speech! It doesn't mean what the literal, plain reading of the words suggest.

Acts 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens [that is, to bring Christ down from above] : but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, [that is, to bring Christ down from above], but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man.

Its not about anyone being unable to ascend into heaven. Its about bringing Christ down and no one, not even David could do this; only Christ could.

calidog
Jan 9th 2007, 11:31 PM
Rev 11:10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.
---------------------------------------------
Mat 14:5 And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet.
Mat 14:6 But when Herod's birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod.

wpm
Jan 10th 2007, 12:33 AM
What has that got to do with the spirit of Elijah?
I don't need to be reminded that our redeemer has come. Elijah's ministry was one of prophecying wrath if Israel did not repent, as it will be in the endtimes. It amazes me that you take every opportunity to point out who is the children of the devil and do not see that we once were as well. While the Church still has breath, there is still time to witness to them. We are no more deserving of our salvation than they are, but He saved us, as He said He would. He said all Israel would be saved, and it will. It should be quite obvious that He knows that all who will come have not yet, and He is waiting and has not written them off, so why should we? :) God Bless.

Scripture no where teaches corporate salvation. It is an individual thing. All Israel that accepts Christ will be saved. Romans 11:26 declares, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.” This reference is significantly based upon, and taken from, Isaiah 59:20 which specifically qualifies the saying, stating, “And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.” Paul wasn’t saying that every Israelis would be saved. Paul in essence is teaching, “And so houto (Strong’s 3779) (or) in this manner (or) on this fashion all Israel (all those that bow the knee to Christ in repentance) will be saved.”

Romans 11:27 continues, identifying Israel’s only hope of salvation, “For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.” Firstly, the Deliverer/Redeemer here is Christ. Secondly, the covenant that would “take away their sins” was the new covenant. There was/is no other covenant that could meet the demand to “take away their sins.”

Paul

Benaiah
Jan 10th 2007, 12:41 AM
ohn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
It is believed by some that these verses support "soul sleep" that no one, not even David has ever ascended into heaven, therefore, they must be still in the grave literally.

This isnt about soul sleep.Their bodies are still in the grave literally.


It is also believed that these verses say that no one has ever "ascended" to the "third heaven" except Christ. However, is that really what is being addressed?

Yes that is precisely what it means, no one has physically and bodily ascended into heaven EXCEPT Christ.


Many of us understand that all who die, wicked and good, ascend up to heaven to either side of that gulf. It is written that when that silver cord is parted that the spirit returns to God. Even Elijah ascended up into heaven via that "whirlwind" and he didn't even die so these verses have to have a deeper meaning.
I believe God has shown me the true meaning of this:

an that si a good example of what happens when you think that the scriptures are subject to your private interpretations.

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 02:21 AM
I'm afraid this is a perfect example of understanding the meaning of the words in English and how they are arranged but failing to grasp that the saying has a meaning that is not apparent in a cursory reading.

Acts 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
It is believed by some that these verses support "soul sleep" that no one, not even David has ever ascended into heaven, therefore, they must be still in the grave literally. It is also believed that these verses say that no one has ever "ascended" to the "third heaven" except Christ. However, is that really what is being addressed?
Many of us understand that all who die, wicked and good, ascend up to heaven to either side of that gulf. It is written that when that silver cord is parted that the spirit returns to God. Even Elijah ascended up into heaven via that "whirlwind" and he didn't even die so these verses have to have a deeper meaning.
I believe God has shown me the true meaning of this:

Romans 10:6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above : )
Romans 10:7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead)
I think this may be the key to understanding what the other verses mean. Paul has just explained what it means to "ascend into heaven". It's a figure of speech! It doesn't mean what the literal, plain reading of the words suggest.

Acts 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens [that is, to bring Christ down from above] : but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, [that is, to bring Christ down from above], but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man.

Its not about anyone being unable to ascend into heaven. Its about bringing Christ down and no one, not even David could do this; only Christ could.Paul is paraphrasing a quote from Moses in Deut 30:11-14. Moses commanded the people to keep the law which had been revealed to them. What they needed to do to please God was not kept hidden from them so that they needed to search heaven and earth to find out what God desired. Blessings and curses attached to the law would help them to remember and obey it. In Rom 10 Paul compares what Moses said concerning the righteousness of law and applies it to Christ and faith. Christ does not need to die and resurrect again for this blessedness to come to us. No the same word that God sent to instruct the people thru Moses has also been sent now in the gospel Paul preached and was received by faith.

In Acts 2 Peter quotes Ps 110. It helps to go back and look at why these passages were cited and how they were applied by the apostles.

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 02:30 AM
Luke 12:51-53

51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Apparently, Jesus did not have His first coming in mind as to when Elijah's ministry would take place. What do you think the point would be for Elijah to turn the hearts to each other if Jesus' intention was to turn them away from each other? God Bless.A gathering and turning implies that one must be brought back to a prior condition from what it was that turned them away. The remnant was turned which also divided them from those who were not.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 05:08 AM
I prefer Christ's word. Matthew 17:10-13 records, “his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

Paul

Good post, Paul. What is so hard about this? The part that you bolded and underlined could not be more clear. Jesus said that Elijah had come already. That is not debatable. Then it says the disciples understood that when Jesus said Elijah already came, He was speaking of John the Baptist. Again, it couldn't be more clear and it is not debatable. Here are the indisputable facts according to Jesus Himself: 1)Elijah already came and 2) the Elijah that came was John the Baptist. Malachi prophesies of ONE Elijah to come. Jesus said it was John the Baptist. There is nothing whatsoever in Malachi 4 that suggests that Elijah would come back twice.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 05:38 AM
The point is to accomplish what the prophecy says he will.


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Also called "restoring all things" in NT verses.

John the Baptist fulfilled that prophecy, as we can see clearly in the following passage:

16And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
17And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. - Luke 1:16-17

Notice the direct quote of Malachi 4:6 in Luke 1:17. This passage is saying that John the Baptist would go before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah and would "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children", just as it was prophesied in Malachi 4:6. And John the Baptist did just that:

1In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
3For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. - Matthew 3:1-6

John the Baptist's father Zechariah knew that is what John came to do:


76And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
78Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
79To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. 80And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel. - Luke 1:76-80

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 06:07 AM
Jesus did not say that He WAS the fulfillment, He said IF they would receive it, which they didn't. When, in your estimation, has Elijah come and restored all things? God Bless.

Since when is the fulfillment of prophecy determined by whether or not people accept it? Many people don't accept the prophecy of the first coming of Christ as having been fulfilled. Does that mean it's not fulfilled? Of course not. No, the reason for Jesus using that word "if" in that situation is that He knew that it would be difficult for these hard of spiritual hearing people to accept what He was about to tell them. So, He was saying in effect, "If you can unplug your spiritual ears for a minute so that you can understand what I'm saying, then you will accept the fact of what I'm telling you now, which is that John the Baptist fulfills the prophecy from Malachi 4:5-6 concerning the Elijah to come". Jesus did not need anyone's approval in order to declare a prophecy as being fulfilled. When He said, "Elijah has already come" in Matthew 17:12, He did not add, "that is, only if you accept it.". He just said Elijah had already come. Therefore, the prophecy was fulfilled. It did not require acceptance on the part of anyone in order to be fulfilled. If Jesus says it's fulfilled and says that Elijah already came then we should believe it.

This is how John the Baptist restored all things:

76And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
78Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
79To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. 80And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel. - Luke 1:76-80

1In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
3For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. - Matthew 3:1-6

The phrase "restore all things" is up for interpretation. I'm sure you would agree. But I believe He restored all things by preparing the way for the Lord Jesus. He led many to repent of their sins and to confess their sins and to be baptized in preparation for the arrival of Jesus Himself.

Naphal
Jan 10th 2007, 06:53 AM
"he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias"

This also proves John was not Elijah but was only a type to come in the spirit and power of Elijah. That's similar but not what the prophecy about Elijah is about. Elijah will be sent, not only someone like Elijah.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 07:02 AM
"he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias"

This also proves John was not Elijah but was only a type to come in the spirit and power of Elijah. That's similar but not what the prophecy about Elijah is about. Elijah will be sent, not only someone like Elijah.

If we accept Jesus's explanation of the fulfillment of the prophecy then we know that the prophecy had to do with one coming in the spirit and power of Elijah and not Elijah himself. Jesus said that Elijah had already come. If it wasn't John the Baptist (as the disciples understood him to be) then who was it?

Also, what do you think of Luke 1:17, which is speaking of John the Baptist and actually quotes Malachi 4:6? You think Elijah is coming in the future to "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children", but Luke 1:17 says John the Baptist already did that.

Naphal
Jan 10th 2007, 07:22 AM
If we accept Jesus's explanation of the fulfillment of the prophecy then we know that the prophecy had to do with one coming in the spirit and power of Elijah and not Elijah himself.

Or if we understand Jesus' words concerning John and Elijah we would understand that he never said John fully fulfilled it and that Elijah the prophet would not be sent like the prophecy clearly says.

I know it looks like Jesus was saying what you think he was saying but there are others of us that realize that he isn't saying what you think he is. The only way we'll know for sure is if Elijah returns or not.




You think Elijah is coming in the future to "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children", but Luke 1:17 says John the Baptist already did that.


It doesn't say John finished or was successful in this. He accomplished a little of this on a small scale and then was beheaded. I expect Elijah to accomplish this fully and on a grander scale.

Naphal
Jan 10th 2007, 07:27 AM
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.


Luke 1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.
Luke 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
Luke 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.


Take note that Elijah will not only turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, but even turn the hearts of the children to their fathers. John is only said to be sent to accomplish half of that. It is easier to turn the heart of a father to his children than it is to turn the heart of a children to its father. There is a clear division between fathers and children and only Elijah will accomplish a restoration between both.

What's said about Elijah and what he will be sent for is similar but not exactly the same as what John was sent for. John was sent in the spirit and power of Elijah and that's a mighty thing but the prophecy about Elijah is that Elijah will be sent himself. It doesnt say, "Behold, I will send you someone in the spirit and power of Elijah the prophet before the first coming of the LORD"

It says Elijah the prophet will be sent and that he will come before (which means at or very near to) the great and dreadful day of the Lord which can only be interpreted properly as the second coming.

Naphal
Jan 10th 2007, 07:43 AM
JFB commentary:

Mal 4:5 - I send you Elijah--as a means towards your "remembering the law" (Mal_4:4).
the prophet--emphatical; not "the Tishbite"; for it is in his official, not his personal capacity, that his coming is here predicted. In this sense, John the Baptist was an Elijah in spirit (Luk_1:16-17), but not the literal Elijah; whence when asked, "Art thou Elias?" (Joh_1:21), He answered, "I am not." "Art thou that prophet?" "No." This implies that John, though knowing from the angel's announcement to his father that he was referred to by Mal_4:5 (Luk_1:17), whence he wore the costume of Elijah, yet knew by inspiration that he did not exhaustively fulfil all that is included in this prophecy: that there is a further fulfilment


and:


The words "before the . . . dreadful day of the Lord," show that John cannot be exclusively meant; for he came before the day of Christ's coming in grace, not before His coming in terror, of which last the destruction of Jerusalem was the earnest (Mal_4:1; Joe_2:31).



Barnes commentary:


When He says Mat_17:11, “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things,” He implies a coming of Elijah, other than that of John the Immerser, since he was already martyred, and all things were not yet restored. This must also be the fullest fulfillment. “For the great and terrible Day of the Lord” is the Day of Judgment, of which all earthly judgments, however desolating, (as the destruction of Jerusalem) are but shadows and earnests. Before our Lord’s coming all things looked on to His first coming, and, since that coming, all looks on to the second, which is the completion of the first and of all things in time.
Our Lord’s words, “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things,” seem to me to leave no question, that, as John the Immerser came, in the spirit and power of Elias, before His first coming, so, before the second coming, Elijah should come in person, as Jews and Christians have alike expected. This has been the Christian expectation from the first. Justin Martyr asked his opponent “Shall we not conceive that the Word of God has proclaimed Elias to be the forerunner of the great and terrible day of His second Coming?” “Certainly,” was Trypho’s reply. Justin continues, “Our Lord Himself taught us in His own teaching that this very thing shall be, when the said that ‘Elias also shall come;’ and we know that this shall be fulfilled, when He is about to come from heaven in glory.”

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 03:35 PM
JFB commentary:

Mal 4:5 - I send you Elijah--as a means towards your "remembering the law" (Mal_4:4).
the prophet--emphatical; not "the Tishbite"; for it is in his official, not his personal capacity, that his coming is here predicted. In this sense, John the Baptist was an Elijah in spirit (Luk_1:16-17), but not the literal Elijah; whence when asked, "Art thou Elias?" (Joh_1:21), He answered, "I am not." "Art thou that prophet?" "No." This implies that John, though knowing from the angel's announcement to his father that he was referred to by Mal_4:5 (Luk_1:17), whence he wore the costume of Elijah, yet knew by inspiration that he did not exhaustively fulfil all that is included in this prophecy: that there is a further fulfilment

and:

The words "before the . . . dreadful day of the Lord," show that John cannot be exclusively meant; for he came before the day of Christ's coming in grace, not before His coming in terror, of which last the destruction of Jerusalem was the earnest (Mal_4:1; Joe_2:31).

Barnes commentary:

When He says Mat_17:11, “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things,” He implies a coming of Elijah, other than that of John the Immerser, since he was already martyred, and all things were not yet restored. This must also be the fullest fulfillment. “For the great and terrible Day of the Lord” is the Day of Judgment, of which all earthly judgments, however desolating, (as the destruction of Jerusalem) are but shadows and earnests. Before our Lord’s coming all things looked on to His first coming, and, since that coming, all looks on to the second, which is the completion of the first and of all things in time.
Our Lord’s words, “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things,” seem to me to leave no question, that, as John the Immerser came, in the spirit and power of Elias, before His first coming, so, before the second coming, Elijah should come in person, as Jews and Christians have alike expected. This has been the Christian expectation from the first. Justin Martyr asked his opponent “Shall we not conceive that the Word of God has proclaimed Elias to be the forerunner of the great and terrible day of His second Coming?” “Certainly,” was Trypho’s reply. Justin continues, “Our Lord Himself taught us in His own teaching that this very thing shall be, when the said that ‘Elias also shall come;’ and we know that this shall be fulfilled, when He is about to come from heaven in glory.”Naphal,
I can certainly see why you are convinced in your view because you have lots of support for it: JFB, Barnes, Trypho and Martyr. The problem is that none of these men were willing to receive what the Lord said about John fulfilling the prophecy. Therefore I cannot receive this view. Saying that Jesus did not mean what He said in the way that He said it would seem to go against the literal view of interpretation. We already have a good example from scripture for how this is done in Mat 4:1-11. You might want to notice too that in this chapter, after John is imprisoned that Jesus picks up his ministry and continues calling the people to repentance. Do you think Jesus failed in this too? He even quotes this verse pointing us to its fulfillment:

(Isa 9:2 KJV) The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

(Mat 4:17 KJV) From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:06 PM
Scripture no where teaches corporate salvation. It is an individual thing. All Israel that accepts Christ will be saved. Romans 11:26 declares, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.” This reference is significantly based upon, and taken from, Isaiah 59:20 which specifically qualifies the saying, stating, “And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.” Paul wasn’t saying that every Israelis would be saved. Paul in essence is teaching, “And so houto (Strong’s 3779) (or) in this manner (or) on this fashion all Israel (all those that bow the knee to Christ in repentance) will be saved.”

Romans 11:27 continues, identifying Israel’s only hope of salvation, “For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.” Firstly, the Deliverer/Redeemer here is Christ. Secondly, the covenant that would “take away their sins” was the new covenant. There was/is no other covenant that could meet the demand to “take away their sins.”

Paul


you are beating a dead horse. I have told you repeatedly that I don't disagree with this. It is just your interpretation of what I believe that is faulty. The only difference is that I say that Christ died for our sins, yes. But if that gift is not accepted, then it is of no effect. God said that He always has a remnant,( which I believe to be the all Israel spoken of) And I believe in the rapture of the Church prior to the tribulation, and I believe that that is when all Israel will be saved. Not because Christ's gift was not for them at the time of His death, but because they did not accept it. I believe their belief will bring Jesus back to save them from their enemies who will have them surrounded. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:08 PM
A gathering and turning implies that one must be brought back to a prior condition from what it was that turned them away. The remnant was turned which also divided them from those who were not.

that doesn't answer the question I asked at all. It is a question that can not be answered by the view you hold because it would make your view faulty. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:11 PM
Good post, Paul. What is so hard about this? The part that you bolded and underlined could not be more clear. Jesus said that Elijah had come already. That is not debatable. Then it says the disciples understood that when Jesus said Elijah already came, He was speaking of John the Baptist. Again, it couldn't be more clear and it is not debatable. Here are the indisputable facts according to Jesus Himself: 1)Elijah already came and 2) the Elijah that came was John the Baptist. Malachi prophesies of ONE Elijah to come. Jesus said it was John the Baptist. There is nothing whatsoever in Malachi 4 that suggests that Elijah would come back twice.


what is hard to understand is how people read into those verses what is not there. What is so hard about taking it for what it says and not pretending it is saying something else? Jesus did not say that John the Baptist was Elijah. Please look at exactly what that verse says. Try taking it for what it says and not what you need it to say in order for your view to stand. :hug: God Bless.

Romulus
Jan 10th 2007, 05:26 PM
what is hard to understand is how people read into those verses what is not there. What is so hard about taking it for what it says and not pretending it is saying something else? Jesus did not say that John the Baptist was Elijah. Please look at exactly what that verse says. Try taking it for what it says and not what you need it to say in order for your view to stand. :hug: God Bless.

I seems clear cut for me that Elijah had come and they missed him, even the disciples until Jesus told them it was him. I don't know how you can take anything else from this scripture. What do you believe it says.

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 05:26 PM
that doesn't answer the question I asked at all. It is a question that can not be answered by the view you hold because it would make your view faulty. God Bless.Sure it does.

(Luke 1:17 KJV) And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

The people needed to be prepared to meet their Lord. That this would cause division in families is to be expected - as it does now. There is no universal salvation offered today or in the future - for anybody. Now that would be a faulty view IMO.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 05:27 PM
what is hard to understand is how people read into those verses what is not there. What is so hard about taking it for what it says and not pretending it is saying something else? Jesus did not say that John the Baptist was Elijah. Please look at exactly what that verse says. Try taking it for what it says and not what you need it to say in order for your view to stand. :hug: God Bless.

By taking it for what it says we should see that Jesus said Elijah had already come and then it says that the disciples understood that He was speaking of John the Baptist. That is what it says. Are YOU willing to take it for what it says instead of reading things into it?

Toolapc
Jan 10th 2007, 05:29 PM
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."


Elijah during our time is one of the two witnesses or the last prophet from God.

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 05:42 PM
what is hard to understand is how people read into those verses what is not there. What is so hard about taking it for what it says and not pretending it is saying something else? Jesus did not say that John the Baptist was Elijah. Please look at exactly what that verse says. Try taking it for what it says and not what you need it to say in order for your view to stand. :hug: God Bless.Notice that "if you will receive it" equates to "if you will accept it". Apparently you will not accept the plain words spoken by our Lord. Nothing is being added to come to this understanding. Rather you must focus upon the word "if" to make it some sort of conditional statement that renders Jesus' words about this prophecy unfulfilled.

Here is the Greek transliteration from the CLV:
(Mat 11:14) And if * ye are willing * to receive * he is Elias * the one being about * to be coming.

15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

This is often said concerning a prophetic revelation that requires understanding, and so the call to pay close attention to what is being said and not reject it.

Edit: The "if" here clearly applies to whether or not those hearing Hiim will accept what He is saying, it is not to Elijah that the if is applied, rather it is the one who hears Jesus' words.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:44 PM
Since when is the fulfillment of prophecy determined by whether or not people accept it? Many people don't accept the prophecy of the first coming of Christ as having been fulfilled. Does that mean it's not fulfilled? Of course not. No, the reason for Jesus using that word "if" in that situation is that He knew that it would be difficult for these hard of spiritual hearing people to accept what He was about to tell them. So, He was saying in effect, "If you can unplug your spiritual ears for a minute so that you can understand what I'm saying, then you will accept the fact of what I'm telling you now, which is that John the Baptist fulfills the prophecy from Malachi 4:5-6 concerning the Elijah to come". Jesus did not need anyone's approval in order to declare a prophecy as being fulfilled. When He said, "Elijah has already come" in Matthew 17:12, He did not add, "that is, only if you accept it.". He just said Elijah had already come. Therefore, the prophecy was fulfilled. It did not require acceptance on the part of anyone in order to be fulfilled. If Jesus says it's fulfilled and says that Elijah already came then we should believe it.

This is how John the Baptist restored all things:

76And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
78Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
79To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. 80And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel. - Luke 1:76-80

1In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
3For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. - Matthew 3:1-6

The phrase "restore all things" is up for interpretation. I'm sure you would agree. But I believe He restored all things by preparing the way for the Lord Jesus. He led many to repent of their sins and to confess their sins and to be baptized in preparation for the arrival of Jesus Himself.

Jesus already knew they wouldn't accept it. Where else in scripture is there an "if" attached to a prophecy? Of those verses that have that if, what happened when the if wasn't fulfilled?
It amazes me how people can actually pretend they know what Jesus is thinking. The statements you made above are pure conjecture. I do not believe that the prophecy was fulfilled with John the Baptist. John the Baptist came in the SPIRIT of Elijah, he was NOT Elijah. Jesus said if and I prefer His word over what some would say they know he was thinking or saying. He wasn't speaking in riddles or parables when He said if. He was basically giving an ultimatum to something which He already knew the outcome of. Jesus does not say it is fulfilled. Only humans can make that distinction. I did not see it written that Jesus said, " today this prophecy is fulfilled in John the Baptist. " No, He said if.
I am sorry I do not agree with your verses of how John the Baptist restored things. Things are not restored. They will be restored in the future when people are not all against each other. When fathers don't beat mothers and children, and when mothers don't beat fathers and children. When children don't hate each other and fight with each other and go against each other. When there is no more murder, rape, pornography, sodomizing of our children, incest and molestation, etc...God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:46 PM
Notice that "if you will receive it" equates to "if you will accept it". Apparently you will not accept the plain words spoken by our Lord. Nothing is being added to come to this understanding. Rather you must focus upon the word "if" to make it some sort of conditional statement that renders Jesus' words about this prophecy unfulfilled.

Here is the Greek transliteration from the CLV:
(Mat 11:14) And if * ye are willing * to receive * he is Elias * the one being about * to be coming.

15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

This is often said concerning a prophetic revelation that requires understanding, and so the call to pay close attention to what is being said and not reject it.

I didn't add the word if, Jesus did. It is not fulfilled and your greek transliteration just proved it. :) God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 05:46 PM
By taking it for what it says we should see that Jesus said Elijah had already come and then it says that the disciples understood that He was speaking of John the Baptist. That is what it says. Are YOU willing to take it for what it says instead of reading things into it?


I always do. :) God Bless.

Benaiah
Jan 10th 2007, 05:53 PM
It doesn't say John finished or was successful in this. He accomplished a little of this on a small scale and then was beheaded. I expect Elijah to accomplish this fully and on a grander scale.

There is nothing in scripture that indicates that John was a failure. We have Jesus onw testimony that of men born of women there has not risen one greater than john the baptist.( this would INCLUDE elijah.) it is estimated that during his brief ministry that john baptised up to a million jews. it was certainly enough that even the pharisees and sadducees traveled out intot he desert to have a look at him. of course THEY rejected John as being the one who prepared the way before the Lord, just as some do today. John's message was received and believed by enough people that the religious leaders who rejected his message were nevertheless fearfu of saying they didnt believe him ecause of the people. When they challanged Jesus to answer thier question Jesus agreed to answer if they answered his first. Jesus asked them if JOhn's message was of God or man. the leaders were fearful of expressing their rejection of John because of the people so they said "we dont know".

Any claim that john was a failure or accomplished only "part" of his mission has no biblical support whatsoever. and any claim that "elijah" will come and do a greater work than john is contradicting Jesus own words concerning John.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 05:56 PM
I didn't add the word if, Jesus did. It is not fulfilled and your greek transliteration just proved it. :) God Bless.

Jesus said that Elijah already came. What do you think that means? And where do you see anywhere that it says Elijah would come twice? We know he already came once because Jesus said so.

John146
Jan 10th 2007, 06:02 PM
I always do. :) God Bless.

In that case, do you agree with the disciples understanding that Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist when He said that Elijah had already come?

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 06:03 PM
I seems clear cut for me that Elijah had come and they missed him, even the disciples until Jesus told them it was him. I don't know how you can take anything else from this scripture. What do you believe it says.


I believe it says exactly what it says. Jesus said it was Elijah IF they would accept it. They did not. John the Baptist said he wasn't Elijah. Is he a liar? Of course not. When they asked him who he was, he said, ..." the voice of one crying in the wilderness..." ( John 1:23 ) God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 06:05 PM
In that case, do you agree with the disciples understanding that Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist when He said that Elijah had already come?


of course. I just take it for ALL it says and don't ignore the part that says that they did not accept it. They knew who Jesus was speaking of, they were aware of the prophecy. They were also aware of the fact that he was rejected. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 06:08 PM
Jesus said that Elijah already came. What do you think that means? And where do you see anywhere that it says Elijah would come twice? We know he already came once because Jesus said so.


lol, this is a dead argument. John the baptist came in the spirit of Elijah. Even he said that he wasn't Elijah. Elijah will come physically, not just spiritually. God Bless.

wpm
Jan 10th 2007, 06:17 PM
you are beating a dead horse. I have told you repeatedly that I don't disagree with this. It is just your interpretation of what I believe that is faulty. The only difference is that I say that Christ died for our sins, yes. But if that gift is not accepted, then it is of no effect. God said that He always has a remnant,( which I believe to be the all Israel spoken of) And I believe in the rapture of the Church prior to the tribulation, and I believe that that is when all Israel will be saved. Not because Christ's gift was not for them at the time of His death, but because they did not accept it. I believe their belief will bring Jesus back to save them from their enemies who will have them surrounded. God Bless.

I refer you back to my last post which rebuts your theory.

Paul

Benaiah
Jan 10th 2007, 06:22 PM
The whole "If you can receive it" being interpreted as meaning that john would only be the fulfillment of the prophecy IF they believed Jesus words is mind boggling. but not suprising, I generally find that dispensationalist\futurist place greater emphasis on the sovereignty of man than they do the sovereignty of God. The idea that the plans or actions of God are dependant upon, or subject to the will of man is simply unscriptural.

Jesus words of "if you can receive it" are in the same context of people receiving the TRUTH, the same as whether or not they receive the truth of the gospel. Jesus is the messiah, that truth does not change dependant on whether or not people receive it. likewise john was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Malachi according ot both the angel who announced his birth and Jesus himself.

Romulus
Jan 10th 2007, 06:56 PM
The whole "If you can receive it" being interpreted as meaning that john would only be the fulfillment of the prophecy IF they believed Jesus words is mind boggling. but not suprising, I generally find that dispensationalist\futurist place greater emphasis on the sovereignty of man than they do the sovereignty of God. The idea that the plans or actions of God are dependant upon, or subject to the will of man is simply unscriptural.

Jesus words of "if you can receive it" are in the same context of people receiving the TRUTH, the same as whether or not they receive the truth of the gospel. Jesus is the messiah, that truth does not change dependant on whether or not people receive it. likewise john was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Malachi according ot both the angel who announced his birth and Jesus himself.

Amen brother. I doubt that God when He made this plan that He was a wondering if man would accept it, and then and only then would it be true. I don't think so, God's Will, will be done whether or not we accept it. His truth is the truth. Otherwise the Gospel could not have come if it was dependent on man's acceptance. Jesus was also rejected, did that stop salvation from coming? Of course not, God's plan is never postponed. It comes as God says it will come.

calidog
Jan 10th 2007, 07:49 PM
Amen brother. I doubt that God when He made this plan that He was a wondering if man would accept it, and then and only then would it be true. I don't think so, God's Will, will be done whether or not we accept it. His truth is the truth. Otherwise the Gospel could not have come if it was dependent on man's acceptance. Jesus was also rejected, did that stop salvation from coming? Of course not, God's plan is never postponed. It comes as God says it will come.


The whole "If you can receive it" being interpreted as meaning that john would only be the fulfillment of the prophecy IF they believed Jesus words is mind boggling. but not suprising, I generally find that dispensationalist\futurist place greater emphasis on the sovereignty of man than they do the sovereignty of God. The idea that the plans or actions of God are dependant upon, or subject to the will of man is simply unscriptural.



Jesus words of "if you can receive it" are in the same context of people receiving the TRUTH, the same as whether or not they receive the truth of the gospel. Jesus is the messiah, that truth does not change dependant on whether or not people receive it. likewise john was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Malachi according ot both the angel who announced his birth and Jesus himself.Sounds like Gods' not going to give up on those who did'nt "recieve".
Rom 11:21 For, if God did not have mercy on the natural branches, he will not have mercy on you.
Rom 11:22 See then that God is good but his rules are fixed: to those who were put away he was hard, but to you he has been good, on the condition that you keep in his mercy; if not, you will be cut off as they were.
Rom 11:23 And they, if they do not go on without faith, will be united to the tree again, because God is able to put them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if you were cut out of a field olive-tree, and against the natural use were united to a good olive-tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be united again with the olive-tree which was theirs?
Rom 11:25 For it is my desire, brothers, that this secret may be clear to you, so that you may not have pride in your knowledge, that Israel has been made hard in part, till all the Gentiles have come in;


maybe He'll send Elijah before that great and terrible day of the Lord to prophecy to His people and prepare their hearts for the Lord.

those who "recieved" Elijah

Mar 11:9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:
Mat 21:9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.

those who will "recieve" Elijah

Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Luk 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
Luk 13:35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Benaiah
Jan 10th 2007, 08:13 PM
So what your proposing is that the ones that ddint receive elijah will therefore be given another witness? I see no warrant in scripture to support this. what they will have to receive is the Gospel that has allready been given.

I cant help but notice the strong similarity in what you are proposing and what the rich man in hell thought. He begged abraham to send lazarus to his brothers saying that if one would come to them from the dead they would believe. what was abraham's response? Abraham said " 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" yet you propse that those who rejected the witness of John,(whom Jesus said WAS elijah) Jesus himself, and the apostles will accept the witness of "elijah".

Mograce2U
Jan 10th 2007, 08:44 PM
calidog, #216 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1110450&postcount=216)
Jesus is referring to Psalm 69:25
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,

then here He refers to Psalm 118:26
Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Take a look at both of these Psalms and the prior verses in Mat 23 and then see who Jesus is addressing when He says these things as He declares to them that the day of salvation has come. He has just pronounced 7 woes upon these men who were plotting to kill Him. He is not giving them a far future promise of salvation when He comes again, rather He is pronouncing their damnation that is coming in the near future from 2 very commonly known Messianic psalms. His point is to turn them to repentance.

Romulus
Jan 10th 2007, 08:52 PM
[But Dan, apparently you do not understand the gospel! It is because Jesus did not save "all Israel" in His first coming (only those who believed), that He must come to Israel again and accomplish what the cross could not.

What the Cross could not? The cross was redemption par excellence. The truest and best. The accomplished. In essence are you saying Christ's atonement for redemption was a failure? This is the foundation of the Good News, the culimination of all of history. I mean history is His(Christ) Story.


Don't you see that the bible is about Israel?

I agree but who is Israel. Israel is the redeemed of each generation since the beginnning of the New Covenant. It was never limited to the last generation of ethnic Israel. How could it, was it God's plan to redeem a final few at the end of the world while 2000+ years of Israel have been lost not knowing Him? There is no Jew or Gentile, all are one in Christ. Either you are in Christ or not. If you are in Christ there is no disctinction. We are all Children of God who have accepted Jesus Christ as Lord. This is the Good News.


Their redemption, of which the rest of the world is only incidental, is the supreme thing.

Is it an accident that we are saved because Israel as a whole rejected the Messiah? I don't think so. The redeemed of each generation always included Jews and Gentiles. We the Church are not an accident, God always meant for us to be His children, since before the foundation of the World. Children of promise, Children of Faith, not based on ethnicity but on faith in His Son, Jesus.



If you could just grasp that then there would be no disagreements! Why do you insist upon taking Jesus' words literally when it is plain that whatever He said must be about Israel's salvation whether they want it or not?


If you are not in Christ, you are not Israel


Just because God originally promised Adam way back at the beginning that He would send a Redeemer to save all mankind from their sin and then confirmed that promise to Abraham; is no reason to think that Israel was not His goal from jump.

All mankind, not just ethnic Israel. They were to be the foundation through who all mankind would be saved. The faithful remnant did acccept the Gospel(Peter, John, Thomas etc. all Jews) and then the Gospel was given to the gentiles through Paul therefore encompassing all who call on the name of the Lord.....Faith NOT enthnicity.


Afterall, Jesus was a Jew. Without Israel we would have no salvation, even though God could raise up worshippers from the stones of the earth if He needed to.

He did.......the faithful Jews and gentiles of all time, not at the end of the world but through every generation in history, people who call on the name of the Lord by faith.


God committed Himself to Israel therefore He must do what He said - whether they want it or not.

He did, and we are here now, an Israel based on faith in Him. All peoples!



In fact He will make them want it even if He must blind them and then punish them for 2 millenia in order to turn their hearts of unbelief. So even though millions would die in their sins as a result, God will save a small remnant just before He returns to give them their promised kingdom so they can rule the world.


That is a poor plan I must say. If the Israel of God is only a final generation then millions of Israel have been lost since the beginning of time.




Don't you know that the cross was merely the way that Jesus would bring salvation to Gentiles? It was not enough for Israel however - the ones to whom He gave the word of God and all the promises and blessings; yet who would not embrace their Redeemer when He came the first time. The Jews require a sign you know. But since some of them rejected the sign of Jonah that was given them, they will need a greater sign than to see their Messiah rise from the dead and ascend into heaven. Yeah, when He comes in the clouds in blazing glory - they will believe that! THEN all Israel will be saved (except for the millions who were not in the meantime). After they have been through even greater suffering than the Holocaust, inflicted on them by God for crucifying Christ.


I won't even begin to say how awful this is. The cross was for ALL PEOPLE not just Gentiles. All who call on the name of the Lord.



You must be anti-semetic if you do not believe this is the God of the bible and the gospel Jesus would have us preach - to Israel


This is uncalled for. Please refrain from this form of accusing. As Christians we are not anti anyone. We are all brothers and Sisters in Christ.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 11:00 PM
The whole "If you can receive it" being interpreted as meaning that john would only be the fulfillment of the prophecy IF they believed Jesus words is mind boggling. but not suprising, I generally find that dispensationalist\futurist place greater emphasis on the sovereignty of man than they do the sovereignty of God. The idea that the plans or actions of God are dependant upon, or subject to the will of man is simply unscriptural.

Jesus words of "if you can receive it" are in the same context of people receiving the TRUTH, the same as whether or not they receive the truth of the gospel. Jesus is the messiah, that truth does not change dependant on whether or not people receive it. likewise john was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Malachi according ot both the angel who announced his birth and Jesus himself.

hahaha. That is a typical amill answer, thanx for the laugh...:)
I might also add that the prophecies of John in Malachi were stated as fulfilled. As for your last statement, I believe that is a false statement and needs to be retracted as 1) you do not know all dispensational/futurists
2) lumping a bunch of people into the same mold as believing everything you say they do is mere conjecture and must be rejected...( I thought it befitting to use a statement Paul likes to make when he believes people step over the line. :) )
I also don't believe I ever said if you can receive it. I think I said that is what Jesus said by saying if. ;) God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 10th 2007, 11:03 PM
Amen brother. I doubt that God when He made this plan that He was a wondering if man would accept it, and then and only then would it be true. I don't think so, God's Will, will be done whether or not we accept it. His truth is the truth. Otherwise the Gospel could not have come if it was dependent on man's acceptance. Jesus was also rejected, did that stop salvation from coming? Of course not, God's plan is never postponed. It comes as God says it will come.


I don't believe I ever said any such thing, so you must have been mistaken. :) I don't think Jesus wondered anything. I believe I stated that He knew they would reject John, yes? I agree with your last statement. Much better to take the Bible for what it says and not what humans try to make it say. :hug: God Bless.

calidog
Jan 10th 2007, 11:41 PM
So what your proposing is that the ones that ddint receive elijah will therefore be given another witness? I see no warrant in scripture to support this. what they will have to receive is the Gospel that has allready been given.

I cant help but notice the strong similarity in what you are proposing and what the rich man in hell thought. He begged abraham to send lazarus to his brothers saying that if one would come to them from the dead they would believe. what was abraham's response? Abraham said " 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" yet you propse that those who rejected the witness of John,(whom Jesus said WAS elijah) Jesus himself, and the apostles will accept the witness of "elijah".one third will.

calidog
Jan 10th 2007, 11:43 PM
calidog, #216 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1110450&postcount=216)
Jesus is referring to Psalm 69:25
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,

then here He refers to Psalm 118:26
Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Take a look at both of these Psalms and the prior verses in Mat 23 and then see who Jesus is addressing when He says these things as He declares to them that the day of salvation has come. He has just pronounced 7 woes upon these men who were plotting to kill Him. He is not giving them a far future promise of salvation when He comes again, rather He is pronouncing their damnation that is coming in the near future from 2 very commonly known Messianic psalms. His point is to turn them to repentance.
and prior to that:

Mat 21:9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.
Mat 21:10 And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this?

Benaiah
Jan 11th 2007, 12:12 AM
JesusLover1968 Post 205


Jesus already knew they wouldn't accept it. Where else in scripture is there an "if" attached to a prophecy? Of those verses that have that if, what happened when the if wasn't fulfilled?

There is no IF attached tot he prophecy being spoken of, the "if" is in relation to people beliving Jesus words or not. You try to make it out that the "if" instead determines whether A prophecy is fulfilled our not.


Things are not restored. They will be restored in the future when people are not all against each other. When fathers don't beat mothers and children, and when mothers don't beat fathers and children. When children don't hate each other and fight with each other and go against each other. When there is no more murder, rape, pornography, sodomizing of our children, incest and molestation, etc...God Bless.

When will that be? let me see you believe that elijah himself is going to return and do this work BEFORE Christ returns right? and the scenario you believe in which all the nations of the world will surround jeruslaem to destroy God's people doesnt qualify as "Being againt each other" apparently. and I guess those nations which surround jerusalem none of their citizens will be doing any of the things you listed since elijah will have restored all things. they will be their to destroy God's people not out of any animosity or ill will, they just didnt have anythign more entertaining to do that day.

The way you present it makes me have to wonder if God didnt really drop the ball when he made Jesus the messiah instead of elijah.

jesuslover1968
Jan 11th 2007, 01:16 AM
JesusLover1968 Post 205



There is no IF attached tot he prophecy being spoken of, the "if" is in relation to people beliving Jesus words or not. You try to make it out that the "if" instead determines whether A prophecy is fulfilled our not.



When will that be? let me see you believe that elijah himself is going to return and do this work BEFORE Christ returns right? and the scenario you believe in which all the nations of the world will surround jeruslaem to destroy God's people doesnt qualify as "Being againt each other" apparently. and I guess those nations which surround jerusalem none of their citizens will be doing any of the things you listed since elijah will have restored all things. they will be their to destroy God's people not out of any animosity or ill will, they just didnt have anythign more entertaining to do that day.

The way you present it makes me have to wonder if God didnt really drop the ball when he made Jesus the messiah instead of elijah.


Quite interesting thought, as I was beginning to think the same thing about your idea of what will take place. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross gives us salvation, IF we choose it. That cannot be argued. If it wasn't this way, even those who don't believe or choose to accept Christ would be saved. We know that isn't true. So, IF we believe in Jesus Christ and accept Him as our Lord and Savior, we will be saved.
In answer to your next question, I believe that Elijah will come back as one of the two witnesses, which I believe to be two literal people, not symbolic of something else. With the witness of these two supernaturally protected men, Israel will begin to get the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior. The Israelites did not listen to Elijah the first time he was here. They did not listen to John the Baptist when he came in the spirit of Elijah, but during the tribulation, Elijah will come again. Then Israel, who I believe is being spoken of in the passages concerning the hearts being turned, Will finally listen and turn to the Lord. Then this prophecy will be fulfilled. Jesus will come back and save Israel who will be encompassed by the armies of the anti-Christ. :) God Bless.

John146
Jan 11th 2007, 01:51 AM
Quite interesting thought, as I was beginning to think the same thing about your idea of what will take place. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross gives us salvation, IF we choose it. That cannot be argued. If it wasn't this way, even those who don't believe or choose to accept Christ would be saved. We know that isn't true. So, IF we believe in Jesus Christ and accept Him as our Lord and Savior, we will be saved.
In answer to your next question, I believe that Elijah will come back as one of the two witnesses, which I believe to be two literal people, not symbolic of something else. With the witness of these two supernaturally protected men, Israel will begin to get the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior. The Israelites did not listen to Elijah the first time he was here. They did not listen to John the Baptist when he came in the spirit of Elijah, but during the tribulation, Elijah will come again. Then Israel, who I believe is being spoken of in the passages concerning the hearts being turned, Will finally listen and turn to the Lord. Then this prophecy will be fulfilled. Jesus will come back and save Israel who will be encompassed by the armies of the anti-Christ. :) God Bless.

Can you point me to the prophecy that says Elijah would come and then come back again later? Because he did come. Jesus said so. Can you agree with Jesus and acknowledge that Elijah did already come? The disciples did. If not, then you are just ignoring what He said. So, since it's a fact, according to Jesus, that Elijah already had come, where does it say he will come yet again in the future? Malachi 4:5 only speaks of him coming once. And Jesus said he already came. Even if you don't think John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecy, you can't argue with the fact that Jesus said Elijah already came. So, where can you find this other coming of Elijah prophesied in Scripture? Because it's not found in Malachi 4. Unless you don't think Jesus was speaking of the prophecy in Malachi 4 when He said Elijah had already come. If so, then what was He talking about?

Benaiah
Jan 11th 2007, 02:47 AM
Jesus' sacrifice on the cross gives us salvation, IF we choose it. That cannot be argued. If it wasn't this way, even those who don't believe or choose to accept Christ would be saved. We know that isn't true. So, IF we believe in Jesus Christ and accept Him as our Lord and Savior, we will be saved.

if one does not believe in Jesus that does not make him NOT the messiah. No matter how many reject Him HE will still be the messiah and the fulfillment of prophecy.


With the witness of these two supernaturally protected men, Israel will begin to get the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior.

Begin? what a minute you claimed elijah would restore all things. I guess it does present a problem for you that your elijah gets killed midway thru your 7 years tribulation and Jesus doesnt return for another 3 1\2 years and "save" all israel. who then believe when they see him return. so how is that Elijah restores all things but they still dont believe for another 3 1\2 years?


Then Israel, who I believe is being spoken of in the passages concerning the hearts being turned, Will finally listen and turn to the Lord. Then this prophecy will be fulfilled.

You mean the 1\3 of Israel that is left alive dont you? How is it that the multitudes that were baptised by john and who followed Christ dont fulfill the prophecy?

Mograce2U
Jan 11th 2007, 04:53 AM
Does anyone remember the story of the rich man and Lazarus?

(Luke 16:27-31 KJV) Then he (the rich man in hell) said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: {28} For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

{29} Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

{30} And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

{31} And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

It would seem keeping an empty seat for Elijah is a futile endeavor since Christ did rise from the dead and Moses said all would be required to hear Him (Deut 18:15). If men will not hear Moses nor Jesus, what makes anyone think God is planning to send Elijah as a back up plan? Why pray tell, should we think any would listen to him??? Elijah WAS one of the prophets that they didn't listen to!

Naphal
Jan 11th 2007, 07:31 AM
There is nothing in scripture that indicates that John was a failure.

It doesn't help your cause to exaggerate what others say. I never said John was a failure. I said he simply didn't succeed in the prophecy about Elijah which means he wasn't supposed to. He wasn't Elijah and was never meant to fulfill fully what Elijah is prophesied to complete.




We have Jesus onw testimony that of men born of women there has not risen one greater than john the baptist.( this would INCLUDE elijah.)

I guess you believe Christ said John was even greater than Jesus Christ huh? No, Christ didn't mean that literal. He was making a point, lost on some people.



it is estimated that during his brief ministry that john baptised up to a million jews.


lol, there is no possible way to estimate such a thing.




Any claim that john was a failure or accomplished only "part" of his mission has no biblical support whatsoever.

It is a fact that John did not turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children AND the hearts of the children to their fathers. The angel only said John would do part of that. It's a fact John did not "restore all things".





and any claim that "elijah" will come and do a greater work than john is contradicting Jesus own words concerning John.

And any claim that Elijah is not retuning is contradicting the prophecy of God.

And, Christ did a greater work than John! Christ lived sinless. Christ died for mankind's sins. Christ raised from the dead. Christ ascended into heaven to the right side of the Father. Did John do these things?

Naphal
Jan 11th 2007, 07:40 AM
{31} And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

It would seem keeping an empty seat for Elijah is a futile endeavor since Christ did rise from the dead and Moses said all would be required to hear Him (Deut 18:15). If men will not hear Moses nor Jesus, what makes anyone think God is planning to send Elijah as a back up plan? Why pray tell, should we think any would listen to him??? Elijah WAS one of the prophets that they didn't listen to!


Abraham isn't talking about Jesus raising from the dead here. He is talking about if Lazarus raised back to the dead to warn the rich man's family. The rich man asked for Lazarus to go back.

Elijah, not someone like him, will be sent before the Lord's second coming as is written.

ShirleyFord
Jan 11th 2007, 11:22 AM
In answer to your next question, I believe that Elijah will come back as one of the two witnesses, which I believe to be two literal people, not symbolic of something else. With the witness of these two supernaturally protected men, Israel will begin to get the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior. The Israelites did not listen to Elijah the first time he was here. They did not listen to John the Baptist when he came in the spirit of Elijah, but during the tribulation, Elijah will come again. Then Israel, who I believe is being spoken of in the passages concerning the hearts being turned, Will finally listen and turn to the Lord. Then this prophecy will be fulfilled. Jesus will come back and save Israel who will be encompassed by the armies of the anti-Christ. :) God Bless.

Misty, this is the Scripture concerning the two witness:

Revelations 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Revelations 11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Revelations 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

Revelations 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.

Revelations 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

Revelations 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Revelations 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

Revelations 11:10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

Revelations 11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

Revelations 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

Revelations 11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

1. In which of these verses do you find "Israelites?

2. In which of these verses do you find the Israelites "getting the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior"?

3. In which of these verses do you find the heart of the fathers turning to the children, and the heart of the children turning to their fathers.

4. In which of these verses do you find Elijah mentioned and that he is one of the two witnesses?

5. Where does Malachi prophecy that Elijah will be one of the two witnesses?


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.


Thanks. :)

Shirley

Mograce2U
Jan 11th 2007, 01:36 PM
Abraham isn't talking about Jesus raising from the dead here. He is talking about if Lazarus raised back to the dead to warn the rich man's family. The rich man asked for Lazarus to go back.

Elijah, not someone like him, will be sent before the Lord's second coming as is written.Naphal,
Jesus is the one telling this story. The players in the story are not incidental - Lazarus WAS raised from the dead and the same men who crucified the Lord plotted to kill him as well. Do you think Jesus gave the beggar this name for no reason?

Luke did not relate the episode of the raising of Lazarus in his gospel account, yet only Luke relates this story told by Jesus. It seems likely that Luke expected his readers to be able to correlate them.

It is only after Abraham tells the rich man that his brothers have all they need to hear from Moses that the rich man asks that this great sign be given them as though that would convince them. Jesus (thru Abraham) assures him that they would not hear him either.

(Mat 12:39-41 KJV) But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: {40} For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. {41} The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

You seem to be stuck on hearing the rich man and not what Jesus said to him. Who do you think the rich man's 5 brothers represent if not Jews still living? The sign of Jonah is still witnessing to them today. Or do you think that Jonah himself must appear to make that witness effective?

The gospel we preach is accompanied by the power of the Holy Spirit to convict the hearts of men who will look to Christ crucified and risen and be saved. Just like the brass serpent that Moses lifted up - only those who looked to it were healed. (Num 21:9; John 3:14-15)
***
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

(Rom 1:3-4 KJV) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; {4} And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

(1 Cor 1:23-25 KJV) But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; {24} But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.{25} Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

(1 Cor 2:5 KJV) That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

(Eph 1:17-20 KJV) That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: {18} The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, {19} And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, {20} Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

Romulus
Jan 11th 2007, 02:58 PM
I don't believe I ever said any such thing, so you must have been mistaken. :) I don't think Jesus wondered anything. I believe I stated that He knew they would reject John, yes? I agree with your last statement. Much better to take the Bible for what it says and not what humans try to make it say. :hug: God Bless.

The example I used if God's will is accomplished based on it being accepted was Christ wondering if Israel would receive Him. My argument was Christ accomplished the Fathers Will even though Israel as a whole rejected Him. I did not mean to make it sound that you said my example

jesuslover1968
Jan 11th 2007, 04:46 PM
Misty, this is the Scripture concerning the two witness:

Revelations 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Revelations 11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Revelations 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

Revelations 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.

Revelations 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

Revelations 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Revelations 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

Revelations 11:10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

Revelations 11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

Revelations 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

Revelations 11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

1. In which of these verses do you find "Israelites?

2. In which of these verses do you find the Israelites "getting the message that Jesus Christ is the Savior"?

3. In which of these verses do you find the heart of the fathers turning to the children, and the heart of the children turning to their fathers.

4. In which of these verses do you find Elijah mentioned and that he is one of the two witnesses?

5. Where does Malachi prophecy that Elijah will be one of the two witnesses?


Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

Malachi 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.


Thanks. :)

Shirley


Thanx Shirley. I believe those are all in my Bible too. :lol: Answer...all of them....:) God Bless.

Benaiah
Jan 11th 2007, 04:58 PM
It doesn't help your cause to exaggerate what others say. I never said John was a failure. I said he simply didn't succeed in the prophecy about Elijah which means he wasn't supposed to. He wasn't Elijah and was never meant to fulfill fully what Elijah is prophesied to complete.

If you say someone did not suceed then you are most certainly saying they failed.

I will repost what you said in post 192

John146 said:
You think Elijah is coming in the future to "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children", but Luke 1:17 says John the Baptist already did that.

Naphal replied:
It doesn't say John finished or was successful in this. He accomplished a little of this on a small scale and then was beheaded. I expect Elijah to accomplish this fully and on a grander scale.


No, Christ didn't mean that literal. He was making a point.
Actually I am old enough to understand HOW men are born of women, women do not give birth without the assistence of a male, in this there is but one exception, Jesus himself. Mary gave birth to Jesus without the involvemnt of a man in the process.


It is a fact that John did not turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children AND the hearts of the children to their fathers. The angel only said John would do part of that. It's a fact John did not "restore all things".
it's a fact that john baptised multitudes for the remission of sins and that multitudes followed Christ and believed in Him and THIS is what elijah was to accomplish. These were the remnant that throuhout the OT God promised to save.


And any claim that Elijah is not retuning is contradicting the prophecy of God.
No it is only contradicting your flawed interpretations of that prophecy. an interpretation that Contradicts Jesus himself.


And, Christ did a greater work than John! Christ lived sinless. Christ died for mankind's sins. Christ raised from the dead. Christ ascended into heaven to the right side of the Father. Did John do these things?
And Christ was not born of a woman in the same manner of all other men either. Christ was born of a virgin was john? Christ was God, was John?

Faithwalker
Jan 11th 2007, 05:20 PM
Mat 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.
Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

It seems clear to me here that Jesus knew, as well as the disciples of Jesus that John was indeed Elijah who was foretold to come, and they had done (meaning PAST tense) to him whatsoever they wished. In this case, John got his head cutt off.

So, if John says hes not Elijah. And John's earthly father says this:

Luk 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

("Elias" being the aramaic for Elijah(hebrew))


Then the only conclusion I can come to is that John the baptist was indeed Elijah but NOT physically. He had the "spirit" of Elijah. Jesus knew this, but John somehow didn't realize it. That may explain why Jesus said:

Mat 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive [it], this is Elias, which was for to come.

The greek origin for "receive" in this passage denotes an ACCEPTANCE. IN other words:

IF you can accept it, John is Elijah reincarnate. Not physically, but spiritually.

Thats my two cents.

John146
Jan 11th 2007, 05:49 PM
Mat 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.
Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

It seems clear to me here that Jesus knew, as well as the disciples of Jesus that John was indeed Elijah who was foretold to come, and they had done (meaning PAST tense) to him whatsoever they wished. In this case, John got his head cutt off.

So, if John says hes not Elijah. And John's earthly father says this:

Luk 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

("Elias" being the aramaic for Elijah(hebrew))


Then the only conclusion I can come to is that John the baptist was indeed Elijah but NOT physically. He had the "spirit" of Elijah. Jesus knew this, but John somehow didn't realize it. That may explain why Jesus said:

Mat 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive [it], this is Elias, which was for to come.

The greek origin for "receive" in this passage denotes an ACCEPTANCE. IN other words:

IF you can accept it, John is Elijah reincarnate. Not physically, but spiritually.

Thats my two cents.


No, John was not Elijah reincarnate. You are suggesting that Elijah possessed someone else's body. Ridiculous! There is no such thing as reincarnation. I don't think you realize what you are saying. John was like Elijah, but he was John. John and Elijah are two separate people. John himself said that he was not Elijah. The fact that you think Elijah's spirit was in a different body is unbelievable to me. :o When John was asked if he was Elijah and said "No", why didn't he say "No, but his spirit is in me"? Because that isn't what "And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias" means. It means that he would go in like manner as Elijah. John's spirit and power were like Elijah's.

The reason that Jesus said "if you accept it" is that He knew they were expecting the literal Elijah. But He knew the fulfillment of the prophecy did not come with the literal Elijah or with Elijah's spirit, but one who was just like Elijah and his name was John the Baptist.

Romulus
Jan 11th 2007, 08:17 PM
No, John was not Elijah reincarnate. You are suggesting that Elijah The reason that Jesus said "if you accept it" is that He knew they were expecting the literal Elijah. But He knew the fulfillment of the prophecy did not come with the literal Elijah or with Elijah's spirit, but one who was just like Elijah and his name was John the Baptist


In harmony with scripture and the what anyone who heard Jesus speak would have understood.

Faithwalker
Jan 11th 2007, 11:19 PM
To say that John knew more about his own spirit than Jesus would know is RIDICULOUS.. if you wanna talk "ridiculous"...

You refuted my last two passages, yet not the first... in which case JESUS says:

Mat 17:9 On their way down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, "Don't tell anyone about this vision until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead."
Mat 17:10 So the disciples asked him, "Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"
Mat 17:11 He answered them, "Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things.
Mat 17:12But I tell you that Elijah has already come, yet people did not recognize him and treated him just as they pleased. In the same way, the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands."
Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he had been speaking to them about John the Baptist. :)


So by taking your stand on two passages yet neglecting this one you seem to think that John the baptist knew more than Jesus did. I dont think thats good theology, do you?

Thanks for listening.

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 01:20 AM
Jesus is the one telling this story. The players in the story are not incidental - Lazarus WAS raised from the dead and the same men who crucified the Lord plotted to kill him as well. Do you think Jesus gave the beggar this name for no reason?

This is a different Lazarus that was not raised from the dead. This man died a beggar, the other was not.


It is only after Abraham tells the rich man that his brothers have all they need to hear from Moses that the rich man asks that this great sign be given them as though that would convince them. Jesus (thru Abraham) assures him that they would not hear him either.

Again, the rich man asks Abraham for Lazarus to raise back to life and warn his family members but Abraham says no, that Lazarus would not be sent back because those family members wouldn't listen to the prophets so they wouldn't listen to Lazarus even if he would raise from the dead. This certainly is similar to Christ raising and some still not believing but in this case it is not Christ that is being addressed. Only proper study and rightly dividing reveals this.

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 01:26 AM
If you say someone did not suceed then you are most certainly saying they failed.

Not when they weren't supposed to completely fulfill it. You left that part out. John wasn't supposed to fulfill the prophecy about Elijah. John did as much as he was supposed to do which was short of what Elijah is prophesied to accomplish.


Actually I am old enough to understand HOW men are born of women, women do not give birth without the assistence of a male, in this there is but one exception, Jesus himself. Mary gave birth to Jesus without the involvemnt of a man in the process.

No, no, this is all wrong. Women can give birth without any men assisting. They cannot CONCEIVE without male sperm however.




it's a fact that john baptised multitudes for the remission of sins and that multitudes followed Christ and believed in Him and THIS is what elijah was to accomplish.

And it is also a fact that Christ's generation as a whole rejected Him. John neither restored all things nor did he solve the division between Father and children.

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 01:28 AM
In harmony with scripture and the what anyone who heard Jesus speak would have understood.


lol. Very few actually ever understood Jesus when he spoke and that includes the disciples.

Benaiah
Jan 12th 2007, 01:54 AM
Not when they weren't supposed to completely fulfill it. You left that part out. John wasn't supposed to fulfill the prophecy about Elijah. John did as much as he was supposed to do which was short of what Elijah is prophesied to accomplish.

No I didnt leave it out. you didnt say that to begin with. that was your fall back when you were called on claiming that john was not sucessful.


No, no, this is all wrong. Women can give birth without any men assisting. They cannot CONCEIVE without male sperm however.

I see and a male donating his sperm does not qualify as assistence in your book.


And it is also a fact that Christ's generation as a whole rejected Him. John neither restored all things nor did he solve the division between Father and children.

John did just what Elijah was prophesied to do. you seem to keep forgetting that it was the remnant that would be prepared and saved.

Joe 2:32 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls.

notice that the above passage is quoted by peter on the day of pentecost He claimed it had come to pass.

Mograce2U
Jan 12th 2007, 02:21 AM
lol. Very few actually ever understood Jesus when he spoke and that includes the disciples.That may be true before Pentecost; what do you suppose the problem is since then?

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 02:50 AM
No I didnt leave it out. you didnt say that to begin with. that was your fall back when you were called on claiming that john was not sucessful.

I said it here:


Take note that Elijah will not only turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, but even turn the hearts of the children to their fathers. John is only said to be sent to accomplish half of that. It is easier to turn the heart of a father to his children than it is to turn the heart of a children to its father. There is a clear division between fathers and children and only Elijah will accomplish a restoration between both.

And I touched upon this same thing in less detail in other posts. John was never supposed to fully fulfill the prophecy about Elijah. The very fact that he did not accomplish all the prophecy claims Elijah would do proves John wasn't the one the prophecy said would do those things. John was only a type.I have been consistent on this from day one, and for years.



John did just what Elijah was prophesied to do. you seem to keep forgetting that it was the remnant that would be prepared and saved.

That's not what the prophecy of Elijah's return talks about.

Benaiah
Jan 12th 2007, 05:19 AM
That's not what the prophecy of Elijah's return talks about.

The propphecy concerning God sending Elijah is not seperate and unrelated to
the rest of the OT prophecies concerning who will be saved. and over and over again in the OT God speaks of the remnant. The prophecy in joel that peter quotes on the day of pentecost speakks of the calling of the remant as well.

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 05:21 AM
The propphecy concerning God sending Elijah is not seperate and unrelated to
the rest of the OT prophecies concerning who will be saved.


Its bad scholarship to blend prophecies together. No wonder there is so much confusion on this issue.

Benaiah
Jan 12th 2007, 05:27 AM
Its bad scholarship to blend prophecies together. No wonder there is so much confusion on this issue.

Just so I am not misunderstanding you. Your saying that prophecies concerning the events of the coming of the messiah and God's salvation are all unrelated to one another?

Naphal
Jan 12th 2007, 05:31 AM
I'll say it a second time. Its bad scholarship to blend prophecies together. You cannot take a specific prophecy about Elijah and what he is to accomplish and take another prophecy that does not speak about him and make it part of his prophecy.

Benaiah
Jan 12th 2007, 05:36 AM
I'll say it a second time. Its bad scholarship to blend prophecies together. You cannot take a specific prophecy about Elijah and what he is to accomplish and take another prophecy that does not speak about him and make it part of his prophecy.

That doesnt answer my question. But let me say this. it is bad scholarship and even worse theology to claim that prophecy is unrelated. the prophecy of malachi does not stand alone, seperate from other prophecies that speak of the purposes of God in His plan of salvation.