Is Prophecy Being Fulfilled in the Dispensation of Grace?

[JudgeRightly]

Does anyone care to get back on topic?

Is God fulfilling (per scripture) any prophecy related to the nation of Israel?

There are a couple of subjective and unsubstantiated claims. .... Anyone care to make any actual confirmations?

There will be no more prophecy fulfilled until the fullness of the gentiles has come in.

This is because Israel is currently cut off in unbelief, and the New Covenant put on hold.

 

[Idolater]

Does anyone care to get back on topic?

Is God fulfilling (per scripture) any prophecy related to the nation of Israel?

There are a couple of subjective and unsubstantiated claims. .... Anyone care to make any actual confirmations?

Jeremiah 33
In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.

16 In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness.

17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;

Yay or nay, is this prophecy being fulfilled in the dispensation of grace? The keys to the kingdom of Heaven, Jesus, Who had them, gave them, to Peter. This is a transliteration of the deep structure of the Greek in the New Testament. Now you already said that those keys had to do with David's throne. That's the throne in Jeremiah 33.

 

[Idolater]

I imagine it’s in heaven at the moment, and the earth is His footstool….the Lord is on the throne.

Matthew 22:44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?​

​

Acts 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;​

So you think Christ, seated at the right hand of the Father in Heaven rn, is there sitting on David's throne? You're saying David's ontological, literal throne rn is at the right hand of the Father, and Jesus is CURRENTLY sitting on David's throne?

Because that's one of the main reasons Mid Acts argues is a point for them, is that Jesus is currently NOT sitting on David's throne. Was this the reason Mid Acts stopped making sense for you personally?

Sir, he most certainly was not the worst sinner as you claim.

He was the worst sinner YET, to make it plainer. No murderer had been made a new man like that, going from murderer to good Christian boy. And going from murderer to Apostle? None of the other Apostles were murderers, not like Judas. ... Well OK Judas was a murderer of sorts, like how Paul was a murderer of sorts as well. Paul was like ... the new Judas.

Not in fact, and not by a long shot. He kept the law perfectly, and that included punishing those who were infidels. He did stand and watch Steven, but he believed he was doing the right thing

That has nothing to do with this and is a terrifying image. Hitler believed he was doing the right thing. But if Hitler was born again a new creation, then he would say he was the chief of sinners. And he would be totally right. And only Hitler apologists, no offense, would say that, yeah but, Hitler believed he was going the right thing.

So what?

, and he may have felt like the worst sinner after he got saved, but I think it was because he was a pattern

​

1Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.​

Right, pattern being, you can even be a murderer—and still "come to Jesus". None of the other Apostles had this in their past. So Paul is saying you can have some pretty terrible things left in your past, and one of the main reasons again Mid Acts is that it believes and teaches that Paul doesn't want us trying to not sin, which to them sounds like being under law or something like that. Paul doesn't want the stuff like murder coming back, you're a new creation, and you're dead to sin, that means, you don't sin.

I am confident God knows ….no DNA lab work will be required.


Read it somewhere. Maybe you could look that up and let us know.

Are you thinking of the seat of Moses? That is also a throne. A throne, a seat, a chair, "cathedra" in Latin. It's all the same word, it means "an important seat or chair", it's not like you call the folding chair a cathedra, that's the official chair that the officer in that office is seated in. His or her cathedra really just means, his office. Whether there's a literal chair or not (there usually is, usually the officer gets the nice chair, because his office is so important, and the officer himself or herself gets to sit in that actual chair, but the chair itself, could be disposed of and replaced, since it's not really about the literal ontological chair, it's the office that's ontologically important, not the seat the officer sits on).

So maybe seat of Moses? Rather than throne of David?

The Holy Spirit dwells in us, but that’s an in body thing.
Won’t be others coming to worship like at other temples.

Could be. Depends on whether the seat of Moses is operable today.

 

[Right Divider]

Jeremiah 33
In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.

16 In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness.

17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;

Yay or nay, is this prophecy being fulfilled in the dispensation of grace?

No. If it was, someone would demonstrate that it is.

The keys to the kingdom of Heaven, Jesus, Who had them, gave them, to Peter.

Completely pointless... that has nothing to do with the present day and the CURRENT dispensation of the grace of God.

This is a transliteration of the deep structure of the Greek in the New Testament.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are 99% old covenant.

Heb 9:16-17 (AKJV/PCE)​

(9:16) For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. (9:17) For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.​

Now you already said that those keys had to do with David's throne. That's the throne in Jeremiah 33.

Yes, and Jeremiah 33 is future prophecy.

You are deaf, dumb, and blind.

 

[Right Divider]

Jer 33:15-18 (AKJV/PCE)​

(33:15) ¶ In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. (33:16) In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this [is the name] wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. (33:17) ¶ For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; (33:18) Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.​

​

Clearly future when "Jerusalem shall dwell safely" (in THOSE days and at THAT time).

 

[glorydaz]

So you think Christ, seated at the right hand of the Father in Heaven rn, is there sitting on David's throne? You're saying David's ontological, literal throne rn is at the right hand of the Father, and Jesus is CURRENTLY sitting on David's throne?

Because that's one of the main reasons Mid Acts argues is a point for them, is that Jesus is currently NOT sitting on David's throne. Was this the reason Mid Acts stopped making sense for you personally?

I don’t know their position on this, and to be honest, I haven’t given it that much thought.
One of those things just “out there”, so to speak.

He was the worst sinner YET, to make it plainer. No murderer had been made a new man like that, going from murderer to good Christian boy. And going from murderer to Apostle? None of the other Apostles were murderers, not like Judas. ... Well OK Judas was a murderer of sorts, like how Paul was a murderer of sorts as well. Paul was like ... the new Judas.

That has nothing to do with this and is a terrifying image. Hitler believed he was doing the right thing. But if Hitler was born again a new creation, then he would say he was the chief of sinners. And he would be totally right. And only Hitler apologists, no offense, would say that, yeah but, Hitler believed he was going the right thing.

So what?

Anyway, you keep calling him a murderer when he was not considered a murderer under the law. He was an officer of the law. A cop, if you will.

Right, pattern being, you can even be a murderer—and still "come to Jesus". None of the other Apostles had this in their past. So Paul is saying you can have some pretty terrible things left in your past, and one of the main reasons again Mid Acts is that it believes and teaches that Paul doesn't want us trying to not sin, which to them sounds like being under law or something like that. Paul doesn't want the stuff like murder coming back, you're a new creation, and you're dead to sin, that means, you don't sin.

I believe you’re mistaken in your summation of what they believe on this, but that aside, perhaps Paul was the first of something. A pattern of someone saved totally by grace through faith?

Are you thinking of the seat of Moses? That is also a throne. A throne, a seat, a chair, "cathedra" in Latin. It's all the same word, it means "an important seat or chair", it's not like you call the folding chair a cathedra, that's the official chair that the officer in that office is seated in. His or her cathedra really just means, his office. Whether there's a literal chair or not (there usually is, usually the officer gets the nice chair, because his office is so important, and the officer himself or herself gets to sit in that actual chair, but the chair itself, could be disposed of and replaced, since it's not really about the literal ontological chair, it's the office that's ontologically important, not the seat the officer sits on).

So maybe seat of Moses? Rather than throne of David?



Could be. Depends on whether the seat of Moses is operable today.

I don’t have a clue, but I enjoyed your thinking process.

 

[glorydaz]

Does anyone care to get back on topic?

Is God fulfilling (per scripture) any prophecy related to the nation of Israel?

There are a couple of subjective and unsubstantiated claims. .... Anyone care to make any actual confirmations?

Ah, I like how you said, “fulfilling”. As in the process of being fulfilled?

There is always a process you know?

By that are you opening the door to the scene setting?
When you see these things beginning to take place….you know, those types of things?

 

[Clete]

I have been stewing over this part all morning, because I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what you see here, and what it is that you think It proves. Frankly, there isn’t enough information given. Had all her husbands died, and she just hadn’t gotten married to this one?

Well, this is the problem you run into when you are in the habit of not taking the text for what it seems to be saying. Go and find a young kid, something like 10 or 12 years old and read him the passage in John 4 and see what he thinks is going on. He doesn't have the life experience needed to try to parse the words like lawyer and it won't ever occur to him that "there isn't enough information given" and he will instantly and intuitively understand what is being talked about because it's plainly obvious to anyone who doesn't have a doctrinal reason to think something else is happening.

If she's been widowed five times, she's almost certainly a murderer, but, what has happened to her FIVE other husbands is irrelevant. The point is that "the [man] whom you now have is not your husband".

I will have quote you on this one. “You need to slow down and be clear about what it is you’re responding to before writing this sort of thing.”

Truths from the Bible are revealed to me all the time as I read.
I eat the Word daily, and carefully chew and ponder, and I read even more from the Bread of life, and BINGO I marvel at what I see.

If this were true, you and I would agree here and there'd be no need or motive for you to read your doctrine into the text.

No, not the opposite, just the understanding of what is being revealed through the Word.

It is the opposite! It says the God gave Israel a certificate of divorce and you are saying that it means He DIDN'T give Israel one!

That sounds like the opposite to me!

Ah, a minor detail. See how minor details grow into mountains?

You are the one who referred to it as minor in a previous post. I was merely bouncing of your own characterization.

You may call them conditional, and they may sound conditional when you list all the IF’s, BUT it was not conditional to God, or God would have dumped them in the wilderness before they ever got sent into exile the first time.

Okay, now this was a simple lie. You KNEW that this was false when you wrote it.

I don't debate with liars. Such people are will to go to ANY lengths whatsoever to preserve their doctrine and will not all ANYTHING, including God's own verbatim statements to move them at all.

We're done until such time as you can at least be honest. I didn't read the rest of your post and won't do so. You've wasted the last of my time. Believe whatever the Hell it is you want to believe. What the crap you're bothering with the bible for, I don't know but I no longer care either.

 

[Clete]

Your disagreement is with God Himself, not @Clete.

The Lord said also to me in the days of Josiah the king: “Have you seen what backsliding Israel has done? She has gone up on every high mountain and under every green tree, and there played the harlot. And I said, after she had done all these things, ‘Return to Me.’ But she did not return. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it. Then I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away and given her a certificate of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear, but went and played the harlot also. So it came to pass, through her casual harlotry, that she defiled the land and committed adultery with stones and trees. And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah has not turned to Me with her whole heart, but in pretense,” says the Lord.

Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 3:6, Jeremiah 3:7, Jeremiah 3:8, Jeremiah 3:9, Jeremiah 3:10 - New King James Version

A Call to Repentance - The Lord said also to me in the days of Josiah the king: “Have you seen what backsliding Israel has done? She has gone up on every high mountain and under every green tree, and there played the harlot.

www.biblegateway.com

She doesn't care what God said. She only cares about the emotion that the subject of divorce wells up inside her. It is a barrier that cannot be overcome by any amount of reason. God HIMSELF could not persuade her, as the passage you quote it proof of. She's entrenched and has chosen this hill to die on.

 

[Right Divider]

She doesn't care what God said. She only cares about the emotion that the subject of divorce wells up inside her.

This reminds me a lot of the time that I was discussing incest with anna.

 

[glorydaz]

She doesn't care what God said.

Liar.

See I’ve learned something from you, Clete.

She only cares about the emotion that the subject of divorce wells up inside her. It is a barrier that cannot be overcome by any amount of reason. God HIMSELF could not persuade her, as the passage you quote it proof of. She's entrenched and has chosen this hill to die on.

Actually, I care about men slandering God because they are unable to see or understand the Truth. Wise in their own conceits as the Apostle Paul tells us, and “Hath God cast away His people? God forbid.“

I’m sure I won’t die on this hill.
Unless, of course, you’re speaking rhetorically, and you fellas are about to kick me off this forum again.

That’s always a possibility.

I do find it extremely odd that you seem to understand how Jesus calls Himself a shepherd to help us understand the idea of the care He gives us, but you can’t seem to comprehend God comparing Himself to a husband to His covenant people in order for them/us to understand His displeasure with their actions. It’s so simple. How can you miss it?

Be that as it may, you have claimed divorcing can be a good and necessary thing, but this is what the Bible tells us. It was only FOR THE HARDNESS OF YOUR HEART.

God’s heart is not hard, oh silly man.

Mark 10​

4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.​

5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.​

6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.​

​

God does not have a hard heart, as you insist. He sent His people into exile, and you want to believe He cast them aside, like a weak human male would do. One that promised to love and cherish until death us do part. (And, no, I am not speaking as a cast off wife - before you start slandering me in your little guy group.)

But, God proved over and over again that He had not and would never forsake them. The scripture is full of the promises. Must I write them all out?

Drink His blood - eat His body - take that literally and you’ll be a Catholic. 🫢

​

​