Page 26 of 33 FirstFirst ... 15161718192021222324252627282930313233 LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 483

Thread: holy ground in the NT?

  1. #376
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    2 points I wish to reiterate here.
    1) There is no proof that repeated reference to the 2nd Coming diminishes the fact that the 70 AD desolation of the temple is the Main Subject of the Olivet Discourse. There are reasons that the 2nd Coming is mentioned in connection to the destruction of the temple in Jesus' generation.

    a. Jesus was asked about the 2nd Coming in connection with his prophecy of the desolation of the temple.
    b. the desolation of the temple ended the Jewish Hope in the view of the disciples, making them wonder when the Jewish Hope would be restored.
    c. the desolation of the temple in Israel set a precedent for world judgment at the 2nd Coming.

    2) There is no proof that when Jesus mentioned the Gospel being preached until "the end" that "the end" refers to "the endtimes," when the Gospel would stop being preached, and an AoD arises. On the contrary, Jesus seemed to refer to the actual close of the age, when there would be no more "abominations."

    On the contrary, the AoD was a judgment in Israel, revealed in the 66-70 AD war, when the Jewish People were ultimately judged and cast out of Israel in the NT Diaspora. The "end" is a reference to the end of Jewish disasters, and hope in a new age of Jewish restoration.

  2. #377
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post

    I'd be careful about suggesting idiocy or obstinacy of views that clearly do rely on context here, views that have been corroborated by the Church Fathers, and views that have been legitimized by historical interpreters. To assume that your small group of friends have the "obvious truth," and that it is "beyond dispute," are playground antics, in my view. Why not dignify historic views with the respect they deserve, wrong or right?
    I try not to be disrespectful of others views, and apologize for giving that impression. You don't seem to be showing much respect though.

    The Church Father's didn't have the tools we have at our disposal , so I wouldn't give them too much precedence. Not that I disrespect their views, they just didn't have the accumulated research we have at our fingertips via the Internet.

    Regarding idiocy and obstinacy, I didn't say those things, rather speak to those who did.

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    2 points I wish to reiterate here.
    1) There is no proof that repeated reference to the 2nd Coming diminishes the fact that the 70 AD desolation of the temple is the Main Subject of the Olivet Discourse. There are reasons that the 2nd Coming is mentioned in connection to the destruction of the temple in Jesus' generation.
    It only gets 8 verses, the second coming gets a lot more focus than just 8 verses. A lot more. The OD goes into other subjects as well, like standing before kings, and persecutions, and signs in the sky preceding the second coming. These are the facts if anyone reads the OD.

  4. #379
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    "

    On the contrary, the AoD was a judgment in Israel, revealed in the 66-70 AD war, when the Jewish People were ultimately judged and cast out of Israel in the NT Diaspora. The "end" is a reference to the end of Jewish disasters, and hope in a new age of Jewish restoration.
    The text actually associates the "end" with the gospel preached to all nations, not the 70AD event. Even those that use the less common view of "all nations" can acknowledge that the gospel spread faster throughout the Roman World AFTER the 70AD event, not before. 70 AD was a partial catalyst for the spread of the gospel.

    14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.


    That end occurred after the 70 AD event, not at the 70 AD event.

  5. #380
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    I try not to be disrespectful of others views, and apologize for giving that impression. You don't seem to be showing much respect though.
    True, I'm just defending myself against a "gang mentality." We're all agreed on what's "obviously true," and you're just a bit "slow." That kind of thing.

    But I have a ton of respect for you otherwise, as well as for Trivalee and for ForHisglory. There's a time to have respect, and a time for no respect, a time to kill, and a time to heal.

    You're not being diminished, in my book, simply because you're a bit "over zealous" in your self-confidence. We all have fits, etc. We're all human.

    I just wish to get past that now. I can laugh at myself. But let's get past that now, and seriously consider the arguments being made. You feel that this has been too repetitious, and has gone on too long. I feel like I've been marginalized and ignored for too long.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    The Church Father's didn't have the tools we have at our disposal , so I wouldn't give them too much precedence. Not that I disrespect their views, they just didn't have the accumulated research we have at our fingertips via the Internet.
    That's true and significant in many ways. However, in terms of this subject I don't think that's relevant at all. They were closer to the actual people who heard Jesus' Discourse. They would know better the environment, the culture of that time, and how it would've been perceived--not us so much.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    Regarding idiocy and obstinacy, I didn't say those things, rather speak to those who did.
    You didn't use the word "idiot" there, nor am I saying you actually used that word. However, the inference was there, that only an idiot would perpetuate an argument for a lengthy period of time with a block of Swiss cheese!

    Hey, if I would think you're "idiotic" too if you held up a block of Swiss cheese and claimed there were no holes in it over a period of several years!

  6. #381
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    True, I'm just defending myself against a "gang mentality." We're all agreed on what's "obviously true," and you're just a bit "slow." That kind of thing.

    But I have a ton of respect for you otherwise, as well as for Trivalee and for ForHisglory. There's a time to have respect, and a time for no respect, a time to kill, and a time to heal.

    You're not being diminished, in my book, simply because you're a bit "over zealous" in your self-confidence. We all have fits, etc. We're all human.

    I just wish to get past that now. I can laugh at myself. But let's get past that now, and seriously consider the arguments being made. You feel that this has been too repetitious, and has gone on too long. I feel like I've been marginalized and ignored for too long.



    That's true and significant in many ways. However, in terms of this subject I don't think that's relevant at all. They were closer to the actual people who heard Jesus' Discourse. They would know better the environment, the culture of that time, and how it would've been perceived--not us so much.



    You didn't use the word "idiot" there, nor am I saying you actually used that word. However, the inference was there, that only an idiot would perpetuate an argument for a lengthy period of time with a block of Swiss cheese!

    Hey, if I would think you're "idiotic" too if you held up a block of Swiss cheese and claimed there were no holes in it over a period of several years!
    I understand why you think it's gang mentality. It could be possible that we were the last 3 with the obstinacy to keep on at a subject being over discussed. Your allies dropped off, next thing there's only four left in an endlessly frustrating debate, 3 against one. Nothing was deliberate , just the debate became endless. I would say the hotheadedness comes from everyone hanging in there instead of dropping a subject and agreeing to disagree.

    And if my Swiss cheese has no holes, then its time to eat quality cheese

  7. #382
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    It only gets 8 verses, the second coming gets a lot more focus than just 8 verses. A lot more. The OD goes into other subjects as well, like standing before kings, and persecutions, and signs in the sky preceding the second coming. These are the facts if anyone reads the OD.
    I don't care how many times the 2nd Coming is mentioned! As I said, that does not address what the Main Topic is, in this Address! The Main Topic is the desolation of the temple. A question about the 2nd Coming is asked, *after the fact.*

    I gave you several reasons why a question was asked about the 2nd Coming in light of the Main Topic--the desolation of the temple. The question about the 2nd Coming came in response to the Desolation of the Temple. The Disciples did *not* ask about the Desolation of the Temple in response to Jesus' statement about the 2nd Coming!

    These are facts, as well, brother. You make no point whatsoever, except to count up *what you think* has to do with the 2nd Coming. In reality, the entire Discourse is primarily about the Desolation of the Temple. I will outline in green what has to do with the Desolation of the Temple and what has to do with the 2nd Coming in red. In reality, if both events are being compared they are *both* involved in the entire Discourse!

    But I will have demur on one thing here. When we read of "the end," I think this may have been speaking not of the end of the age, as I have said. Rather, this was more likely speaking of the end of Jerusalem, ie its desolation.

    Matt 24.1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
    3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen
    , and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?
    4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.
    9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
    15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.
    22 “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.
    26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.
    27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28 Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.
    29 “Immediately after the distress of those days
    “‘the sun will be darkened,
    and the moon will not give its light;
    the stars will fall from the sky,
    and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’
    30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
    32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[e] is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
    The Day and Hour Unknown
    36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[f] but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.
    42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.
    45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

  8. #383
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    I understand why you think it's gang mentality. It could be possible that we were the last 3 with the obstinacy to keep on at a subject being over discussed. Your allies dropped off, next thing there's only four left in an endlessly frustrating debate, 3 against one. Nothing was deliberate , just the debate became endless. I would say the hotheadedness comes from everyone hanging in there instead of dropping a subject and agreeing to disagree.

    And if my Swiss cheese has no holes, then its time to eat quality cheese
    The problem is, I don't lose patience over a period of years on a single subject. I do agree, however, that when things become too heated, to "personal," it's time to change subjects.

    You certainly could've moved on, but you don't speak for everyone. This is what I mean by a "gang mentality." You think one in a gang represents the whole gang.

    On a forum, there are more than "gangs." There are visitors, or guests, who may be interested in seeing this thing drag out longer. I certainly do!

    Until I'm taken seriously, or none of "your gang" has any more interest, I will continue to defend the argument. It has nothing to do with the people involved. It has to do with defending the position for others, since I believe my position is closer to the biblical position, and can help others as it has me.

    If it isn't for you, by all means drop out! I will not be offended.

  9. #384
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The problem is, I don't lose patience over a period of years on a single subject. I do agree, however, that when things become too heated, to "personal," it's time to change subjects.

    You certainly could've moved on, but you don't speak for everyone. This is what I mean by a "gang mentality." You think one in a gang represents the whole gang.

    On a forum, there are more than "gangs." There are visitors, or guests, who may be interested in seeing this thing drag out longer. I certainly do!

    Until I'm taken seriously, or none of "your gang" has any more interest, I will continue to defend the argument. It has nothing to do with the people involved. It has to do with defending the position for others, since I believe my position is closer to the biblical position, and can help others as it has me.

    If it isn't for you, by all means drop out! I will not be offended.
    I'm not a member of a gang . I was just explaining what probably made it look that way, everyone else dropped out and you had 3 people left who believe in a future abomination, and then the chat carried on and on. I may drop off, not sure yet.

  10. #385
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    The text actually associates the "end" with the gospel preached to all nations, not the 70AD event. Even those that use the less common view of "all nations" can acknowledge that the gospel spread faster throughout the Roman World AFTER the 70AD event, not before. 70 AD was a partial catalyst for the spread of the gospel.

    14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.


    That end occurred after the 70 AD event, not at the 70 AD event.
    Okay, I'm going to change my position on this. I will see "the end" as the end of Jerusalem's temple. The abomination of desolation referred to the desolation, or "end," of the temple in Jerusalem. It began with an army surrounding Jerusalem--the Roman Army. And then 3 years later the Army returned to carry out the actual event--the "end."

    I had thought this has to do with the end of the age, because I've been told for decades that "the gospel will be preached throughout the earth until when this mission is done the end of the age will take place, and Christ will return." I think I've been duped! I now believe that Jesus was simply proclaiming that the Gospel would go from an Israel-centric message to a world-centric message. The gospel would no longer be nationalistic, involving only Israel. It would become a universal message of salvation for the whole world.

    That happened in Jesus' day. The universality of the Gospel took place after Jesus told his Apostles to preach the gospel to *all nations.* The universal nature of the Gospel became apparent to Peter and to the inner circle of Jesus' Disciples when Peter received his vision of the unclean foods. And it became apparent that the Gospel had gone world-wide, to all nations, with the call to Paul to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.

    All this happened in Jesus' generation, ie in the generation of those who lived during the time Jesus died. And the thing that would follow this initial proclamation of the Gospel was the end of the old worship, the worship under the Law and the temple law. Jerusalem would be attacked, and an "end" would be made to the temple.

    Thus, the gospel will be preached to all nations, and then the end [to the temple] will take place. When Jesus said, "these are the beginning of birth pains--the end is still to come," he was speaking of the end of the temple worship, and the end of the Jewish nation in Israel. The initial birth pains were signs all of which took place just before 70 AD--false Christs, false prophets, persecution of the Jewish Church, earthquakes, famines, and a universal proclamation (and warning) of the Gospel. There would be a false Jewish anticipation of the coming of the Messianic Kingdom, before Israel would collapse. This was a stunning deception in the face of imminent judgment!

    This is a significant change I'm making here with respect to "the end" and how to define it in this context. It renders the Discourse even more about 66-70 AD than about the 2nd Coming. But I appreciate the extension of this discussion because as you can see I'm still trying to make modifications. This late in life it does take awhile, apparently?

  11. #386
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    But I will have demur on one thing here. When we read of "the end," I think this may have been speaking not of the end of the age, as I have said. Rather, this was more likely speaking of the end of Jerusalem, ie its desolation.
    Persecutions and preaching before 70AD are not events of 70 AD. Jesus was preparing the church for many things and didn't just focus on the two questions put to him.

    70 AD assisted the spread of the gospel, because the Christians escaped and spread out just before 70AD, and the gospel to all nations then gathered momentum. This verse is therefore fulfilled after 70AD placing the abomination after 70AD:
    14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
    15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

  12. #387
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I had thought this has to do with the end of the age, because I've been told for decades that "the gospel will be preached throughout the earth until when this mission is done the end of the age will take place, and Christ will return." I think I've been duped! I now believe that Jesus was simply proclaiming that the Gospel would go from an Israel-centric message to a world-centric message. The gospel would no longer be nationalistic, involving only Israel. It would become a universal message of salvation for the whole world.

    That happened in Jesus' day. The universality of the Gospel took place after Jesus told his Apostles to preach the gospel to *all nations.* The universal nature of the Gospel became apparent to Peter and to the inner circle of Jesus' Disciples when Peter received his vision of the unclean foods. And it became apparent that the Gospel had gone world-wide, to all nations, with the call to Paul to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.

    All this happened in Jesus' generation, ie in the generation of those who lived during the time Jesus died. And the thing that would follow this initial proclamation of the Gospel was the end of the old worship, the worship under the Law and the temple law. Jerusalem would be attacked, and an "end" would be made to the temple.

    Thus, the gospel will be preached to all nations, and then the end [to the temple] will take place. When Jesus said, "these are the beginning of birth pains--the end is still to come," he was speaking of the end of the temple worship, and the end of the Jewish nation in Israel. The initial birth pains were signs all of which took place just before 70 AD--false Christs, false prophets, persecution of the Jewish Church, earthquakes, famines, and a universal proclamation (and warning) of the Gospel. There would be a false Jewish anticipation of the coming of the Messianic Kingdom, before Israel would collapse. This was a stunning deception in the face of imminent judgment!

    This is a significant change I'm making here with respect to "the end" and how to define it in this context. It renders the Discourse even more about 66-70 AD than about the 2nd Coming. But I appreciate the extension of this discussion because as you can see I'm still trying to make modifications. This late in life it does take awhile, apparently?
    Nations is an ambiguous term , I believe most countries , but not every tribe has been preached to yet.
    Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.

    I understand your view of the term "all nations" but I prefer the more common biblical use of phrase, I believe we are on safer ground there. Usages like this:
    Acts 17:26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth
    Galatians 3:8 Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
    Revelation 12:5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”
    Revelation 15:4 Who will not fear you, Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed.”

  13. #388
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    Persecutions and preaching before 70AD are not events of 70 AD. Jesus was preparing the church for many things and didn't just focus on the two questions put to him.
    Talking about the signs that *precede* the fall of the temple is indeed talking about the fall of the temple indirectly. It is far more about the fall of the temple than it is about the 2nd Coming!

    If I talk about birth pains, I'm talking about the birth of the child, and not about some future time on some future world! The "birth pains" were signs of the destruction of the temple, and not about the 2nd Coming. There are also "birth pains" that herald the 2nd Coming, but this is not where this is being discussed.

    The reason this is talking about "birth pains" at all is due to the expectation of the coming of the Messianic Kingdom. But Jesus said that the fig tree would not produce fruit, and the Kingdom of Israel would be aborted. The child would come to birth, but would fail to be born. The Jews expected the Messianic Kingdom, but instead would suffer great national judgment.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    70 AD assisted the spread of the gospel, because the Christians escaped and spread out just before 70AD, and the gospel to all nations then gathered momentum. This verse is therefore fulfilled after 70AD placing the abomination after 70AD:
    14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.


    Nobody is disputing that the gospel mission has continued long after the fall of the temple in 70 AD. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the point being made.

    Rather, what is being said, in my view, is that the universal gospel message would be initiated prior to the fall of the temple. The gospel mission would, of course, continue long after Jewish worship had been destroyed under the old covenant system.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

  14. #389
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,618

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    Nations is an ambiguous term , I believe most countries , but not every tribe has been preached to yet.
    Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.
    There are several ways to approach this, from my pov.
    1) Just the *universality* of the Gospel had to be initiated. This means that the intent of the outreach had to be there before the end of the temple, rather than the completion of the mission.
    2) The Gospel was preached by the universal word of God, by angels, and by men. The full propagation of the Gospel mission involves many things. But just these elements were involved from the very beginning, *before* the end of the temple.

    Your point is, therefore, moot, from my perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    I understand your view of the term "all nations" but I prefer the more common biblical use of phrase, I believe we are on safer ground there. Usages like this:
    Acts 17:26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth
    Galatians 3:8 Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
    Revelation 12:5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”
    Revelation 15:4 Who will not fear you, Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed.”
    I'm not sure what you think my use of the term "nations" is? But I do understand that you think this sentence means the *completion* of the Gospel mission is involved.

    I don't think that's possible, since there is nothing to clearly define what that would look like? Does that, for example, mean that every nation has been thoroughly evangelized? Or does that mean that planes have dropped leaflets in the jungles and plains everywhere, on island civilizations, in mountains, etc.?

    No, we're just talking about the launch of a *universal* Gospel, as opposed to a strictly nationalistic Gospel to Israel. That happened before the fall of the temple in 70 AD.

  15. #390
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    7,766
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: holy ground in the NT?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I should hope you have complete liberty to state and hold to your opinion. Completely fine by me. You could even be right. My only concern here is that I be given the same dignity, to argue and hold to my position, until it actually becomes indefensible. Not only have I failed to see the "Swiss chees," but I have failed to see a single hole in my position at all! Please give me just one?

    But I have no problem with you disagreeing and holding to another position. On this forum, however, you should be able to defend it against any and all challenges. And I haven't seen you do that. I just see you insult my position, or try to marginalize it as "not part of the group think."

    The AoD only has a number of possible views. As I've said repeatedly, it is completely reasonable to assume that the AoD in Matthew and Mark is the "encirclement of Jerusalem by Roman troops" in Luke. This is the "bologna in between the slices of bread" in *all 3 versions!* You don't have to agree, but to call this "Swiss cheese" is a poor characterization indeed, particularly when the Church Fathers largely agreed that the AoD took place in the 66-70 AD time period, generally.
    Are you having a laugh? No one can take your dignity from you; any damage done is all down to you. You can't play the victim card by pleading to be allowed to "hold your own position" since it's everybody's right to take a stand and defend it. Something you've done pretty well over the years. For one who has notched over 10,000 posts, you're not a newbie around here, so stop playing the victim. To see the 'holes' in your position, you need to first, acknowledge them. But as long as you continue to propagate the views that the majority has outed as incorrect, how can you ever see them?

    Asking me to show you "just one hole" in your extensive exegesis is more or less a rhetoric query that requires no response. Your question is further dumbfounding considering that I numerically highlighted your position on the OD back in post #325 and showed my disagreement against each of them. Fortunately, acknowledged that I articulated your position correctly in post #334. Perhaps you understand why it will be superfluous for me to point out the holes per your request?

    Don't you think it's unbecoming of you to claim to be 'insulted' by anyone who disagrees with your views? I just have to flick back a few pages and show the number of people you've claimed to either insult you or your position. I have no reason to insult your person - I just disagree with your position. Given the years we've been breaking bread here (word of God) you should know that I'm not one to concur to what I know in my heart to be wrong so as not to hurt your ego?

    Prophecy is not philosophy where the most entertaining or skillfully expressed theory carries the day! It is exact in its entirety! So forgive me for not being swayed by your "reasonable assumptions" as acceptable "alternatives" to understanding the discourse. The place for reasonable assumptions is in a court of law as you know. Again, I don't mean any disrespect - just responding the only way I know how.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Holy, Holy, Holy! Lord God Almighty
    By doug3 in forum Praise
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Apr 24th 2011, 03:41 PM
  2. My first ground up build...
    By Firefighter in forum Solomon's Porch
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Mar 10th 2011, 01:39 PM
  3. Holy Ground
    By LLarios in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Sep 8th 2009, 06:19 AM
  4. Replies: 128
    Last Post: Jul 18th 2009, 11:28 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •