Consistency in Interpreting Prophecy

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by ktn4eg, Jul 18, 2010.

  1. ktn4eg

    ktn4eg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    1
    In another thread about Isaiah 9, my good friend Dr. Bob (who I'm sure could run circles around my knowledge of interpreting scriptures) cited Luke 4:17-20 as proof that Isaiah 9's prophecy about the kingdom not being completely fufilled while Christ was physically here on earth. (Which, I too agree & do not consider the present Body of Christ as fulfilling the promise of Isaiah 9.)

    OTOH, Peter in Acts 2:14-21 in explaining the events of the day of Pentecost cites the complete prophecy found in Joel 2:28-30 as being this prophecy's fulfillment. If what happened on the day Pentecost was the complete fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, shouldn't they have experienced the things mentioned in Acts 2:19-20 as well?

    Was Peter "completely correct" in his assertion that the events that took place on the day of Pentecost was the complete fulfillment of Joel's prophecy?

    IOW, should the principle derived from Jesus's statements in Luke 4 in explaining Isaiah 9 be the universal standard of reference of determing where part of a prophecy is being fulfilled and another part still waits to be fulfilled?
     
  2. RAdam

    RAdam
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,100
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think Luke 4 proves Isaiah 9 hasn't been fulfilled. I think Luke 4 proves Isaiah 61 hasn't all been fulfilled.

    The government there spoken of is the government of His kingdom. He now rules His kingdom. He is King now. Of the increase of His government there shall be no end. It has been ever expanding since He ascended on high with the clouds of heaven, came to the Ancient of Days, and received glory, dominion, and a kingdom.
     

Share This Page

Loading...