The Jewish calender is based on the creation of Adam. My understanding of it is that they passed things down with the scepter like the sheperds staff with the information for each family. Moses writting the book of Genesis would have utilized this in His writing. Moses also created the years of the Jewish cevial and religious year based on what God gave Him in when the feast would be followed. So their calender while it is off too and based on a lunar year is fairly close to accurate. I do believe it is off several years. We can't say the exact year the Lord will return because calenders are off, no longer based on God's timetable. That doesn't affect how the dispensations work. Nor God's ultimate timetable.Don't mind me while I roll my eyes. Jewish Calendar?
Done now. What Jew in what year made the first so called Jewish calendar? How did falliable man keep track of time passing before that first calendar was written down with rules to divide the days, months and seasons and the length of each?
I'm going to tell you: by the count of generations and reverse mathematics. The problem is, men didn't always count each and every generation. It's like poor Prince Charles over there in England who may never see the throne because his mother has lived so long. If he dies before she, his generation won't count! People will count the reign from his mother to his son and leave him out entirely.
This sort of count is not reliable. You can't tied God to man's timetable. That is what the verse you quoted says in context! It's not meant to be a mathmatical formula for figuring up how old the earth is (and we are warned against worrying about genealogies in 1 Tim 4:1).
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
...and your house...
- Thread starter menageriekeeper
- Start date
- Status
menageriekeeper
Active Member
Good, now that we agree you can tell me why Dispensationalism is a better system than Covenant Theology.
To me dispensations work hand in hand with covenants. The covenants were given in the different dispensations as God's way of dealing with mankind. Salvation by Grace through faith has remained the constant, the way man is represented to God has vhanged through the dispensations and the covenants.Good, now that we agree you can tell me why Dispensationalism is a better system than Covenant Theology.
Allan,
We see this in the gospels
This whole idea of replacement theology is incorrect....the Nt church is grafted into the Covenant...so in reality it is more properly called expansion theology Isa54.....lengthen the cord and strengthen the stakes
We see this in the gospels
Here is an example of the Holy Spirit bringing things to their remebrance;
This whole idea of replacement theology is incorrect....the Nt church is grafted into the Covenant...so in reality it is more properly called expansion theology Isa54.....lengthen the cord and strengthen the stakes
Last edited by a moderator:
revmac
true to your view, you post this;
Well....many believers believe that it has begun.....it is in effect.
for this reason,among others;
Jesus is ruling now in the midst of His enemies;
rev mac His rule is from the throne in Heaven, The heavenly Zion.
He rules in the midst of His enemies,now as the kingdom of God goes to the nations.
At this point you might want to say that the church is a mystery form of the kingdom,and a parenthesis in God's plan for Israel....but I think we will see this is not so...a couple of more verses to consider:
So the Apostles see this as now....
sounds like it is happening now.....
true to your view, you post this;
Well....many believers believe that it has begun.....it is in effect.
for this reason,among others;
Jesus is ruling now in the midst of His enemies;
rev mac His rule is from the throne in Heaven, The heavenly Zion.
He rules in the midst of His enemies,now as the kingdom of God goes to the nations.
At this point you might want to say that the church is a mystery form of the kingdom,and a parenthesis in God's plan for Israel....but I think we will see this is not so...a couple of more verses to consider:
So the Apostles see this as now....
sounds like it is happening now.....
allan,
I think we do...see my last post to revmac, also:
Here we have such a promise,
And we see this in Hebrews12;
In Christ we have come to ...the heavenly Jerusalem, PHIL 3:20 tells us
20For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
21Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
I think we do...see my last post to revmac, also:
Here we have such a promise,
And we see this in Hebrews12;
In Christ we have come to ...the heavenly Jerusalem, PHIL 3:20 tells us
20For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
21Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
Revelation 20:4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
This Kingdom is yet to come one in which Christ reigns on Davids throne as the heir of the kingdom for 1000 years. This is the millinial kingdom and this is the fufillment of David's Kingdom.
5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
This Kingdom is yet to come one in which Christ reigns on Davids throne as the heir of the kingdom for 1000 years. This is the millinial kingdom and this is the fufillment of David's Kingdom.
Respectfully no, you didn't. Quoting passages of scripture does not validate why it was not a view taught by the apostles to their disciples, and those disciples to their (the next generation of) disciples, for nearly 4 to 5 generations. We have in the early church writings no such concepts till the 3rd century, again, church historians agree, the premil position was main orthodox position of the church - and for the 1st and 2nd century there was 'no' other views in/of the Church. That included Christ personally and physically reigning in Israel from Jerusalem for a literal 1000 years. That there will be a literal personal anti-christ, ect..
In the 3rd century we find the first person of only 4 recorded (Origen to basic founder of the growing view) who sought to spiritualize scripture but his main reasoning was due to his belief that nothing physical can be holy and good - stemming from his Aristotelian studies. He even denied (if I remember correctly) the physical bodily resurrection of Jesus because of this. Thus he denied any literal Godly Kingdom.
Thus my question historically, regarding the teachings of the apostles.
It can not be proven to any extent that the apostles taught there will be no literal kingdom, not literal personal anti-christ, no Kingdom restored again to Israel. We 'know' this because the early church, and more specifically those of John (the writer of Revelation) own disciple and the disciple of that disciple NEVER
taught such a doctrine. That is also why Premil and not Amil (postmil or preterism) was ever considered the orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church for nearly 400 years after Christ ascended.
We see the context and operation of these passages differently.
Sorry for the quick drive by postings.. it is all I can afford at present and don't wish to be disrespectful to you by not answering.. however I'm afraid I might only get one or two more quick ones in before I have to go away for a bit altogether due to my schedule.
Thanks for the interactions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Allan,
What i like about the message boards is,that the posts stay here...get to them when and if you can..I understand completely...with my job sometimes i do not get online for several days. No apology necessary I am sure others will jump in to fill in the gaps.
Origen from what i have read did spiritualize things,and also might have gone into heretical ideas....but i do not get any of my teaching from Him.
I also have heard it preached that the early church after the apostles did have the idea that The 1000yrs would literally be fulfilled...by around 1033ad, but abandoned that idea after the literal thousand years past,lol
I think nero was "the anti-christ" spoken of by Paul because in part of this verse;
you notice in vs 5+6 paul tells them ....in the first century.....to remember what he taught them,and now they know......it would seem to indicate he was speaking to them of something that was going to happen in their lifetime.
Allan, that is not a hill I would choose to die on, but at this point it makes more sense to me than the wild speculations of potential anti christs in our day, rebuilt temples, and animal sacrifice going on again.....The glorified Christ on a literal throne, with the world still producing unsaved persons to rebel against the Glorified Christ.
The 1000yrs......literal or figurative is a big topic,probably its own thread
Allan...if the 1000yrs is symbolic for the whole gospel period , which other system would you see as most consistent...post mill or amill?
You know, if you had to pick one! Be safe and take care of your responsiblities first and get back to me later..:wavey:
ps...
It can not be proven to any extent that the apostles taught there will be no literal kingdom...
Allan, keep in mind that rev 20 was not written till later on.....as foundational teaching it seems as if the apostles were used to establish the basis of the kingdom, giving us a completed canon of scripture....for the long haul...What if we are still the early church?
What i like about the message boards is,that the posts stay here...get to them when and if you can..I understand completely...with my job sometimes i do not get online for several days. No apology necessary I am sure others will jump in to fill in the gaps.
Origen from what i have read did spiritualize things,and also might have gone into heretical ideas....but i do not get any of my teaching from Him.
I also have heard it preached that the early church after the apostles did have the idea that The 1000yrs would literally be fulfilled...by around 1033ad, but abandoned that idea after the literal thousand years past,lol
I think nero was "the anti-christ" spoken of by Paul because in part of this verse;
you notice in vs 5+6 paul tells them ....in the first century.....to remember what he taught them,and now they know......it would seem to indicate he was speaking to them of something that was going to happen in their lifetime.
Allan, that is not a hill I would choose to die on, but at this point it makes more sense to me than the wild speculations of potential anti christs in our day, rebuilt temples, and animal sacrifice going on again.....The glorified Christ on a literal throne, with the world still producing unsaved persons to rebel against the Glorified Christ.
The 1000yrs......literal or figurative is a big topic,probably its own thread
Allan...if the 1000yrs is symbolic for the whole gospel period , which other system would you see as most consistent...post mill or amill?
You know, if you had to pick one! Be safe and take care of your responsiblities first and get back to me later..:wavey:
ps...
It can not be proven to any extent that the apostles taught there will be no literal kingdom...
Allan, keep in mind that rev 20 was not written till later on.....as foundational teaching it seems as if the apostles were used to establish the basis of the kingdom, giving us a completed canon of scripture....for the long haul...What if we are still the early church?
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello revmac,
Yes you are giving the pre-mill position,,but the post and amill view also believe the rev20 passage .
Revmac- have you been exposed to these positions? I am not asking if you believe them, I am asking how familiar you are with the content of the teaching.
Does this look like what you believe?
Mk,
I am pathetic,last night I thought I posted but it did not come out again,lol
In Gen 4 after the fall ....Cain kills abel.......Eve gets pregnant and what does she say:
God hath appointed me another seed......she was looking for the Covenant promise,Gen3:15.......God highlights this for us.
Rather than seven dispensations being how God deals with man, He deals In Covenant terms.
Scripture records how God preserves the Godly line {seed of the woman}
seperating ,and protecting them from the seed of the serpent..{ungodly line}
When Israel is being judged by God, what does He tell them...
In protecting the Godly line, God gave laws that regulated their religious and civil life. yet as covenant breakers they failed to seperate from the unclean nations. Mixed marraige was not to take place, because it would pollute the Godly line leading to idolatry ,rather than holiness.
The whole Ot can be understood properly being view peoples relationship to the Covenant,and Covenant keeping God, so much so , that most all of the judgements were used by God to protect or preserve the godly seed.
I am pathetic,last night I thought I posted but it did not come out again,lol
In Gen 4 after the fall ....Cain kills abel.......Eve gets pregnant and what does she say:
God hath appointed me another seed......she was looking for the Covenant promise,Gen3:15.......God highlights this for us.
Rather than seven dispensations being how God deals with man, He deals In Covenant terms.
Scripture records how God preserves the Godly line {seed of the woman}
seperating ,and protecting them from the seed of the serpent..{ungodly line}
When Israel is being judged by God, what does He tell them...
In protecting the Godly line, God gave laws that regulated their religious and civil life. yet as covenant breakers they failed to seperate from the unclean nations. Mixed marraige was not to take place, because it would pollute the Godly line leading to idolatry ,rather than holiness.
The whole Ot can be understood properly being view peoples relationship to the Covenant,and Covenant keeping God, so much so , that most all of the judgements were used by God to protect or preserve the godly seed.
Yes, but for me it is more about me remembering to come back after a being away for a while :laugh:
Oh no.. I think you misunderstood me.. I wasn't say that is where you got it from. I was stating the first record of spirituallizing prophesies for a non-premil view was Origen and that was in the 3rd century.
not true though. The church changed it's position on orthodoxy during Augustine's time.. more specifically when Constantine united the Church and State, which was nearly 450+ years after Pentecost.And if it were true.. what would be the 'wild speculations' be?
IF.. I would think post-mil
Revelation was written by John. Johns disciple, Polycarp taught a literal physical kingdom of Israel, Jesus reigning from it for 1000 years, a literal anti-Christ -to come-, ect.. Polycarp's disciple, Irenaeus also taught this same stuff. Now since John wrote the book, he would know if certain parts meant Nero and other such aspects.. and told his followers. But no such statements were recorded. What we have historically recorded was that John taught a literal view. We also must note that since it was the unquestioning view for first 200 years since Pentecost that the other apostles taught the same thing.. as did their disciples to new believers.
Mk,
After the flood what does God say to Noah;
in this promise to not destroy the earth by flood anymore....God says it is His covenant that he will establish with man.
man made covenants are mutually agreed upon, God establishes His covenant on His own terms.
After the flood what does God say to Noah;
in this promise to not destroy the earth by flood anymore....God says it is His covenant that he will establish with man.
man made covenants are mutually agreed upon, God establishes His covenant on His own terms.
menageriekeeper
Active Member
What strikes me most about the first two covenants is that they were to mankind as a whole and not specific to the nation of Israel. (or Abraham as the next Covenant is)
Why the change, do you suppose?
Why the change, do you suppose?
God is setting the stage so to speak to progressively bring about a true and saving knowledge of His covenant purpose. The history of redemption is being revealed to Moses......remember.......Moses was not there for these events
He learns of them by direct revelation from God.
The creation,the fall,and first gospel promise are explained.
So as God moves forward, he next picks out one nation from all the others,and makes promise to Abram, in Gen 12 15 17.
Notice in 15...abram is put to sleep,and only God confirms the Covenant passing through the divided animal.
So now instead of dealing with all mankind, as the promise of the seed is traced, God narrows the focus, from the world ,to a chosen nation, to only a remnant in that nation.
I think we can also see in Romans 1....Men everywhere at one time had a knowledge of the true God ,but turned from it,I believe before the tower of babel,when God divided the people....God gave them up to a reprobate mind...they are without excuse
Last edited by a moderator:
mk
the changing of Abrams name to Abraham, is because God has already covenanted to save people from all nations;
the changing of Abrams name to Abraham, is because God has already covenanted to save people from all nations;
I was thinking about this some more...God had not yet passed His covenant on to Abraham.....when the tower of Babel happens the languages confused and the nations scattered.....God was allowing those scattered nations to go and fight among themselves, and turn to idolatry and condemnation,which as sinners they desired to do.
God singles out Israel to be His servant, His firstborn son....special from all nations . He gives them His law and promises.
This is part of His eternal plan being unfolded in time.The nations were for a lengthy period of time placed outside the realm of the salvation in and among the Kingdom of God.
menageriekeeper
Active Member
I don't disagree, though even then, it was possible for other nations to follow God. Remember, for a time, Babylon worshipped the God of Israel at the behest of Nebuchadnezzar because of the witness of Daniel and others. Later on in scriptures though Babylon isn't spoken of very well.
But they weren't they all knew God's promise of a saviour. They all knew to be looking for Him, God used Abraham as the Nation called out to bring forth that Saviour. The problem was that the gospel failed to get propagated to many of those nations. But some were following them even up to Abram's being called out. The story of Job proves that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast
The nations were for a lengthy period of time placed outside the realm of the salvation in and among the Kingdom of God.
But they weren't they all knew God's promise of a saviour. They all knew to be looking for Him, God used Abraham as the Nation called out to bring forth that Saviour. The problem was that the gospel failed to get propagated to many of those nations. But some were following them even up to Abram's being called out. The story of Job proves that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by revmwc; Today at 08:31 AM.
No......God gave them over......in judgement as follows;
When the Abrahamic covenant was made......no one in south america, or china heard about it....they were idolators, under the judgement of God....there were no missionaries, translating hebrew to them.
The nations were for a lengthy period of time placed outside the realm of the salvation in and among the Kingdom of God.
But they weren't they all knew God's promise of a saviour. They all knew to be looking for Him, God used Abraham as the Nation called out to bring forth that Saviour. The problem was that the gospel failed to get propagated to many of those nations. But some were following them even up to Abram's being called out. The story of Job proves that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by revmwc; Today at 08:31 AM.
No......God gave them over......in judgement as follows;
When the Abrahamic covenant was made......no one in south america, or china heard about it....they were idolators, under the judgement of God....there were no missionaries, translating hebrew to them.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status