Question About Open Theism

Right Divider

Body part
Hebrews tells us Christ has fulfilled Yom Kippur.
Another unsupported claim...

The Day of Atonement comes AFTER the trumpets.

The first four are SPRING feasts and the last three are FALL feasts.

If the first four feasts were executed IN ORDER, why does your theory have the last three OUT of order?

Your theory is way out of wack.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Another unsupported claim...

The Day of Atonement comes AFTER the trumpets.

The first four are SPRING feasts and the last three are FALL feasts.

If the first four feasts were executed IN ORDER, why does your theory have the last three OUT of order?

idk. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe Hebrews was written after all seven of them were already fulfilled, and they did go in order. All I've been saying is that, since Hebrews claims Yom Kippur is fulfilled, then maybe Trumpets and Booths are too.

Your theory is way out of wack.

Possibly. That's what we're all here to find out, no? How good our theories are? How well we're thinking about things? Whether we're on to the truth, or nah? That's why I'm here anyway.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Hebrews confirms Yom Kippur is fulfilled. If that were not the case I wouldn't be floating the idea that perhaps all seven Leviticus 23 feasts, festivals, holidays, etc., have already been fulfilled. I guess it all depends on Hebrews saying or claiming that Yom Kippur is fulfilled. One thing's for sure, it's the right book of the Bible to answer the question, because it was literally written to them.

Chapter verse, please.

You have a very dogmatic view of Revelation. When I've set out the case that Mr. 666 is Nero I didn't get your response to that. We literally have the coins with his name and image on them, made of gold, all of those are mentioned in Revelation, about Mr. 666.



Except unless Nero is Mr. 666. I basically agree with you, unless Nero is Mr. 666. And I find the argument that it's Nero persuasive. It even explains why some copies of Revelation manuscripts have the Number of the Beast as 616 instead of 666, because Nero's name in Greek as opposed to Hebrew, numerologically sums to 616, while in the Hebrew, Caesar Nero or Kaesar Neron in the Greek I think, sums to 666. It explains the exception and the rule, so that's a very persuasive argument to me.

Nero COULD HAVE BEEN the Antichrist, had circumstances not changed.

You can't just ignore the change in circumstances in order to save your belief.

Israel rejected her Messiah, and was cut off, and God turned to working with the Gentiles directly. This is what Scripture teaches, and what Paul explicitly states.

The fact that there's almost no chance that Revelation was written before AD 90, and the fact that Paul was sent to the Gentiles, and the fact that the feasts were to be performed in order, as well as the fact that Christ has not come to reign for 1000 years, blows your theory out of the water completely.

Or what, you think Nero is the only person who will ever live whose name can't be added up to 666 or 616?
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Chapter verse, please.



Nero COULD HAVE BEEN the Antichrist, had circumstances not changed.

You can't just ignore the change in circumstances in order to save your belief.

Israel rejected her Messiah, and was cut off, and God turned to working with the Gentiles directly. This is what Scripture teaches, and what Paul explicitly states.

The fact that there's almost no chance that Revelation was written before AD 90, and the fact that Paul was sent to the Gentiles, and the fact that the feasts were to be performed in order, as well as the fact that Christ has not come to reign for 1000 years, blows your theory out of the water completely.

Or what, you think Nero is the only person who will ever live whose name can't be added up to 666 or 616?

My only point is that it could be Nero. ofc it could not be Nero, that's not in dispute. And if it is Nero, then that's good evidence Revelation was written before AD 70. And again that's my point. It could not be Nero, but it also could be Nero, and I find the argument that it is Nero persuasive, because it explains both the rule (666) and the exception (616) equally. I haven't heard any other theory that explains them both equally; that's why I find the argument it's Nero persuasive.
 

Right Divider

Body part
idk. Maybe it doesn't.
Please be more CLEAR about what you're talking about.
Maybe Hebrews was written after all seven of them were already fulfilled, and they did go in order.
The seven feasts are extremely important to God's dealings with His people... and yet you think that a couple of the fulfillment's of these extremely important feasts were just left out of the scripture. That's a pretty ridiculous idea. Although, this does fit with the RCC lack of respect for scripture.
All I've been saying is that, since Hebrews claims Yom Kippur is fulfilled, then maybe Trumpets and Booths are too.
Again, a CLAIM without any SUPPORT.

QUOTE IT!
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Please be more CLEAR about what you're talking about.

OK I'll TRY to be more CLEAR for you RD.

The seven feasts are extremely important to God's dealings with His people... and yet you think that a couple of the fulfillment's of these extremely important feasts were just left out of the scripture.

Because they happened after the Scripture, or, for whatever reason. Again the whole point here is that this is in the context of Sola Scriptura, and if it's NOT in Scripture, then the prima facie presupposition is that it did NOT happen. So that's WHY I've mentioned this NOTION.

That's a pretty ridiculous idea. Although, this does fit with the RCC lack of respect for scripture.

As a Catholic the Scripture and logical propositions are both 100% solid truth. I'm pretty sure we're the same on that mark.

Again, a CLAIM without any SUPPORT.

QUOTE IT!

This isn't how civil discussions go RD. lol.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Because they happened after the Scripture, or, for whatever reason.
That is a very lame "reason".
Again the whole point here is that this is in the context of Sola Scriptura, and if it's NOT in Scripture, then the prima facie presupposition is that it did NOT happen.
o_O
Wow.
As a Catholic the Scripture and logical propositions are both 100% solid truth.
That is hilarious.
This isn't how civil discussions go RD. lol.
You continue to make an unsupported claim. That is NOT how any "discussion" goes.

If you are going to make a claim about what is in scripture... SHOW IT!
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
That is a very lame "reason".

o_O
Wow.

That is hilarious.

You continue to make an unsupported claim. That is NOT how any "discussion" goes.

If you are going to make a claim about what is in scripture... SHOW IT!

Show that Hebrews confirms Yom Kippur is fulfilled in Christ? OK.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
My only point is that it could be Nero. ofc it could not be Nero, that's not in dispute. And if it is Nero, then that's good evidence Revelation was written before AD 70. And again that's my point. It could not be Nero, but it also could be Nero, and I find the argument that it is Nero persuasive, because it explains both the rule (666) and the exception (616) equally. I haven't heard any other theory that explains them both equally; that's why I find the argument it's Nero persuasive.

You've made two three posts now without answering this:

Hebrews confirms Yom Kippur is fulfilled. If that were not the case I wouldn't be floating the idea that perhaps all seven Leviticus 23 feasts, festivals, holidays, etc., have already been fulfilled. I guess it all depends on Hebrews saying or claiming that Yom Kippur is fulfilled. One thing's for sure, it's the right book of the Bible to answer the question, because it was literally written to them.

Chapter verse, please.

Please post the chapter and verse(s) in Hebrews which says that the Day of Atonement has been fulfilled.

Nero was antichrist.

He could have been the Antichrist, except circumstances changed that precluded the end times from occurring, which precludes ANYONE from being the Antichrist.

Now, please post chapter and verse from Hebrews that supports your claim that the Day of Atonement has been fulfilled.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You've made two three posts now without answering this:



Please post the chapter and verse(s) in Hebrews which says that the Day of Atonement has been fulfilled.

I'm working on it.

Nero was antichrist.

He could have been the Antichrist, except circumstances changed that precluded the end times from occurring, which precludes ANYONE from being the Antichrist.

That is based on your own view of Revelation being the truth, which is presupposition. Could be, that another view is right.

Now, please post chapter and verse from Hebrews that supports your claim that the Day of Atonement has been fulfilled.

I'm working on it.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I'm working on it.

So you made a claim without being ready to back up said claim?

That's real smart... /s

That is based on your own view of Revelation being the truth, which is presupposition. Could be, that another view is right.

I'm literally just paraphrasing scripture, Idolater.

Of course it's true.

Therefore your position is false, because it goes against what scripture says.

I'm working on it.

Should have had it ready when you made the claim. Now you just look like you're floundering.

Post the chapter and verse that says that the Day of Atonement has already been fulfilled, or shut up until you can.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
So you made a claim without being ready to back up said claim?

That's real smart... /s



I'm literally just paraphrasing scripture, Idolater.

That's literally what everybody says they do too. It's extremely dogmatic. You could be wrong.

Of course it's true.

Therefore your position is false, because it goes against what scripture says.

Again, reasonable people disagree with you, this is bluster and dogmatic, and is definitely not how civil discourse occurs.

Should have had it ready when you made the claim. Now you just look like you're floundering.

Could be.

Post the chapter and verse that says that the Day of Atonement has already been fulfilled, or shut up until you can.

I'm working on it.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
That's literally what everybody says they do too. It's extremely dogmatic. You could be wrong.



Again, reasonable people disagree with you, this is bluster and dogmatic, and is definitely not how civil discourse occurs.

The difference is that I, like a few other on this forum, can back up what I say when challenged, with the context of scripture that we are referencing.

So far, you cannot. Have not.

Could be.

Are. No question.

I'm working on it.

Your next post should include it then. Don't post another thing until you have your evidence in-hand.

Or, admit you cannot.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
I believe in math and I believe in engineering. Engineers tell me I can trust the calculator to do math for me. To then now believe in the calculator like I believe in math and engineering is a bit tenuous, I get that. But the calculator is never going to be the standard if there's a conflict between the math or engineering textbook and the calculator, we're not going to correct the texts because the calculator said so. That's something the JWs do, and the Lutherans, who just deleted seven books from the texts, because the calculator said to. Or at least, it said it was OK to delete them. I mean something like that.

So any calculator that's going to have you redacting texts is definitely bonkers. You should either replace it or at least try to fix it until it tells you accurately what the texts say.
All of that is MY argument, not yours!

It is because prophesy has to do with Israel and not the Body of Christ that we know that preterism is false. We KNOW it is false. It isn't a theory, it isn't a hypothesis, it isn't an opinion. If preterism is true then Paul is a false apostle and practically every doctrine that is uniquely Christian is falsified!

WHY?

That's the question you should have asked! But you're either too proud or too stupid to understand the need to ask such a simple question!

The reason why, or at least a chief reason, is the fact that Paul AND ONLY PAUL, explicitly teaches that Israel (i.e. as a nation - not individual believing Jews) has been cut off! There's no way he wrote that BEFORE the destruction of Israel in 70 AD! And how are there going to be any prophecies fulfilled that concern Israel if Israel's prophesied program has been stopped (i.e. put on hold - temporarily)? There can't be! And so either Paul is telling the truth or preterism might be true. It cannot be both!
 

Nick M

Reconciled by the Cross
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Peter at Pentecost referred to the day of atonement. Repent and stop sinning, and be baptized (with water) and receive the Holy Spirit for the temporary putting away of sin (remission) to survive Jacob's trouble (great tribulation), so the times of refreshing can come. That is when Israel completes Daniel 9, and atonement is made for the sin of the nation. The author of Hebrews may have been at Pentecost and the council in Acts 15. He was still looking forward. In fact, Peter is looking forward to salvation in Acts 15, while stating Paul and the gentiles already have it.
 

Nick M

Reconciled by the Cross
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
According to Luke in Acts 2
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.”

19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.


And Acts 3

17 “Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

And Acts 15, still speaking of the future, well after the conversion of Paul. The times of refreshing is the restoration of Israel and the rebuilding of Jerusalem. And driving out the Romans while we are at. There is a catch in John 3, for later.

8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”

Peter is looking forward to grace. As the covenant of circumcision is very hard burden to carry. And read the words of James very carefully. He speaks of the literal restoration and earthly kingdom of Israel. Peter and James belong to this church. They will sit in judgement over the tribes of Israel.

13 And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: 14 Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written:

16 ‘After this I will return
And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;
I will rebuild its ruins,
And I will set it up;


17 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
Says the Lord who does all these things.’


It isn't just the gentiles, he will rebuild the tabernacle of David. As Daniel first told. As soon as you accept you are not part of Peter's church, the sooner you will understand. There are 2 New Testament churches. We have the same foundation, and nobody says otherwise. But we are appointed to heavenly places. The Jews are not. But, don't feel bad. They get a kingdom on the new earth. And it isn't like this hasn't been posted many times, but for the lurkers that only read, here it is again. From the prophet Daniel.

24 “Seventy weeks are determined
For your people and for your holy city,
To finish the transgression,To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,

To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

25 “Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem


The feasts have not been finished.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
The difference is that I, like a few other on this forum, can back up what I say when challenged, with the context of scripture that we are referencing.

So far, you cannot. Have not.



Are. No question.



Your next post should include it then. Don't post another thing until you have your evidence in-hand.

Or, admit you cannot.

I was compelled to come back before I'm done. So I'll just show you what I have.

I just have a hard time with Hebrews obv invoking the festival or feast or holy day or holiday of Yom Kippur, and Yom Kippur not being fulfilled. This is because Passover and First Fruits were so obv shown to be prophetic shadows of Christ Himself and of His First Coming, that He fulfilled.

Passover and First Fruits are two of Leviticus 23's seven feast, festival, or holy days, or holidays. And one of them is Yom Kippur. And the writer of Hebrews invokes clearly this holiday when he speaks about the Holy of Holies, because the Holy of Holies was only gone into one time per year. So there's no other Earthly reason anyway to be in there, except for on one day.

So Christ entered Heaven's Holy of Holies, or Heaven is the true Holy of Holies, or something like that.

I find that surprising, if He did NOT fulfill Yom Kippur, as He DID clearly fulfill Passover and First Fruits.

So all I've got is a branch of a decision tree with a low probability, but it's not definitely zero, which is what you all are trying to tell me, but I'm not buying it. There's definitely not ZERO chance that the holy day of Atonement was fulfilled in Christ, like how Passover and First Fruits were. That's definitely not ZERO chance. That's your all's position, but it's not, to my mind, invulnerable. I'd put it at a 14-16% chance of being true or false, not 50-50, I feel like it's closer to 5-to-1 or 6-to-1 kind of odds, which isn't so small that you can just ignore it.

So I evaluated the decision branch, where Christ fulfills or has fulfilled Atonement. That's three out of seven, and it's arguable that somehow Pentecost was fulfilled. If that's so, that leaves just Unleavened Bread or Matzos, Trumpets, and Booths or Tents.

For whatever else you think about Christ's discourse on the Bread of Life, and the Eucharist, you probably agree He somehow fulfilled Unleavened Bread or Matzos. By hook or by crook, without needing to believe Communion is ontologically His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, I'm sure you accept that He fulfilled Unleavened Bread or Matzos.

So now that's five of the seven feast, festival, holy days, or holidays, of Leviticus 23.

So all I'm thinking, is maybe Trumpets was somehow fulfilled too. idk how Booths or Tents could be fulfilled—I haven't got there yet in my analysis, I'm just contemplating Trumpets and Yom Kippur rn.

That's all I've got. Poke holes in it, because I know they're there.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
All of that is MY argument, not yours!

It's also MINE. So let's reason together rather than just shout at each other, Clete. I didn't lie, I wrote you the truth to the best of my ability. That's how I see Apostolicity. It's like the mathematician and the engineer making a calculator and both of them telling me I can trust the calculator to do math. If the calculator ever goes haywire, we will know it because we've got some standards to compare it to. The Scripture's one, and what the whole Church, everywhere, and always has always believed and taught, is the other (Vincent of Lerins first explained this succinctly). They are both Apostolic, because the Apostles gave us the Scripture, and their oral teaching, both of those branches are Apostolic and infallible, because the Apostles were given Jesus Christ's own teaching authority, which means infallibility.

Even Peter, whose choices conflicted with his teaching, which is why Paul called him out and dressed him down—it was not because Peter taught wrong, but because he acted wrong, he was a hypocrite, not a false teacher. Even Peter was infallible.

They gave us the Scripture and the Apostolic oral or Sacred Tradition—Tradition in this context is always a teaching, not a practice. The tradition for example, of the priest holding up the consecrated host in Communion and showing us, is not the same as the Apostolic Tradition of the Trinity or Hypostatic Union or that abortion is murder. Teachings versu practices.

It is because prophesy has to do with Israel and not the Body of Christ that we know that preterism is false.

That's only true if Acts 9erism is true, so this is transparent begging the question.

We KNOW it is false. It isn't a theory, it isn't a hypothesis, it isn't an opinion. If preterism is true then Paul is a false apostle and practically every doctrine that is uniquely Christian is falsified!

So you equate the fulfillment of Trumpets with preterism, I'm gathering. I'm not sure what the right term is yet, I do believe that some things that some Christians take to be future prophecies, have already been fulfilled, such as Jesus prophesying the temple would disappear. It did disappear, so that was definitely already fulfilled. That makes me a partial preterist. I just am unclear on the entier terminology of this theological space.

WHY?

That's the question you should have asked! But you're either too proud or too stupid to understand the need to ask such a simple question!

If you want to shout let's go do it over at nee_Twitter because TOL is a family site.

The reason why, or at least a chief reason, is the fact that Paul AND ONLY PAUL, explicitly teaches that Israel (i.e. as a nation - not individual believing Jews) has been cut off! There's no way he wrote that BEFORE the destruction of Israel in 70 AD!

? Do you mean 'after'? He died in like AD 65, Clete.

And how are there going to be any prophecies fulfilled that concern Israel if Israel's prophesied program has been stopped (i.e. put on hold - temporarily)? There can't be! And so either Paul is telling the truth or preterism might be true. It cannot be both!

That bit about their "program" (btw not a Biblical term) being "stopped" is you begging the question again that Acts 9erism is already true. That's ONLY true if Acts 9erism is true, that's why it's begging the question. You're presuming you're right, and then proceeding to tell me, "Therefore ..."

Yeah ofc. IFF you're right. That's a big IFF.
 
Top