Question About Open Theism

[Idolater]

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.

The way I read Hebrews, he said Christ already entered into the Heavenly Holy of Holies, not that He was going to in the future. You read it differently?

Also how do you interpret Daniel saying the daily sacrifice would stop and the abomination of desolation? Isn't that obv when the temple disappeared? What's 'desolation'? It means there's nothing. It's desolate.

 

[Idolater]

This is what I hear from teenagers regarding their bedrooms.

That's what you'd hear from fresh recruits too if there weren't drill sergeants.

 

[Idolater]

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.

Acts 15 was when the temple still stood in Jerusalem, so that's not rebuilding the tabernacle of David. The Gentiles were called, and they came, so whatever David's tabernacle is supposed to mean, it was already rebuilt in Act 15, because “ Gentiles who are called by My name ” already “ seek the Lord ”. That was already happening, it was why the Act 15 convention or conference or council was even convening in the first place—what are we supposed to do about all these Gentiles? was the meeting agenda.

 

[Nick M]

Acts 15 was when the temple still stood in Jerusalem, so that's not rebuilding the tabernacle of David.

Israel lost her way. Did you not read the scriptures or what the Lord Jesus Christ said to them?

That was already happening, it was why the Act 15 convention or conference or council was even convening in the first place

No, the conference is because Paul was preaching to gentiles and told them to not keep the law of Moses.

1And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.

5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.”

 

[Right Divider]

@Idolater The spring feasts were all fulfilled IN ORDER.

Why would the fall feasts be fulfilled OUT OF ORDER?

I believe that this alone shows that the Day of Atonement is yet future. It will be fulfilled AFTER Trumpets.

 

[Clete]

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.

You're so blind it's absolutely incredible. Your appeal to tradition just means that you can pick and choose to believe whatever you decide to call tradition. It's fundamentally impossible to debate because there is no foundation to it whatsoever.

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

That's stupidity.

You show up with this post by first claiming not to be a liar and wanting to reason together and then the first thing you say undermined anyone's ability to reason at all and then you say something so patently idiotic as this!

Paul himself explicitly states that the body of Christ is a "mystery hidden in God" (Ephesians 3:9), "not made known to the sons of men" in past ages (Ephesians 3:5), and therefore cannot be found in the Old Testament, and even if that weren't the case, there is not even one Old Testament prophesy that you can point to at all that has anything to do with anyone other than Israel. The only exception being Abraham being promised to be the father of many nations and even that is not a predictive prophecy of the Body of Christ by YOUR OWN DOCTRINAL POSITION!!!

In other words the lack of prophecy about the Body of Christ is a PREMISE of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism, not a conclusion of it. It is a biblical fact that stands as observable truth whether a single other syllable of my doctrine is true or not.

So you equate the fulfillment of Trumpets with preterism, I'm gathering.

I'm equating the idea that the events of A.D. 70 are a fulfillment of prophecy with Preterism. It is the only group of any significance that believes it.

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.

If one syllable of prophecy concerning Israel was fulfilled after Acts 9 (See Romans 9-11), it falsifies Paul's entire ministry. Israel's prophesy can't come true when they're cut off from the source of the prophecy.

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

Like I said, too proud or too stupid.

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

Like I said, too proud or TOO STUPID!!!

Can you seriously not detect it when you make arguments that make my point for me?!

Last time I check A.D. 65 was before A.D. 70!!

That bit about their "program" (btw not a Biblical term) being "stopped" is you begging the question again that Acts 9erism is already true.

It just happens to be the whole subject matter of Romans 11 (and the previous two chapters as well).

Romans 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you ALSO will be cut off.​

The problem here is that you simply do not know the scriptures.

That's ONLY true if Acts 9erism is true, that's why it's begging the question.

I swear to God that if you ever say anything like this slobber mouthed stupidity to me ever again, I will put you on ignore and you can waste someone else's time.

Don't say things about stuff you know nothing about! You didn't even know Romans 9-11 were in your bible until I just told you!

You're presuming you're right, and then proceeding to tell me, "Therefore ..."

I know what question begging is, Idolater!

I am presuming nothing! The cutting off of Israel is NOT a conclusion of Mid_Acts Dispensationalism, it is a biblical fact that anyone who can read can see and understand. The fact of Israel's being cut off is a necessary condition for Mid-Acts Dispensationalism, not a conclusion of it!

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

It is impossible for me to express how infuriating it is to try to have productive discussions about rather important and complex issues with people who flat out do not know what they're talking about but have the temerity to talk down to me like I'm the ignoramus! It is a level of hypocrisy that I just cannot take!

I'm not kidding Idolater. You are not to ever say anything to me ever again about "begging the question". You barely have enough grasp of the English language to even know how to use that phrase properly and you sure as Hell don't understand my doctrine well enough to ever begin to formulate such an argument against it of this nature. If you want to end any further discussion on the topic with me, just test me on this. I will not have my time wasted by condescending ignoramuses around here any longer.

 

[Nick M]

Your appeal to tradition just means that you can pick and choose to believe whatever you decide to call tradition.

This point is something The Chosen gets wrong. I think it is deliberate. They often quote scripture correctly, other times no. But when it is no they show him disregarding scripture when we know he did not. He wrote it after all. The RCC is just like the unbelieving Jews.

2 “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” 3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?

And Trad, he continues with his rebuke of them for rejecting the scripture for their tradition. This means scripture is the authority. It doesn't mean you can't have tradition, it means tradition is secondary to the words of God.

4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.

 

[Ps82]

Do you know the parts that are wrong?

And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver-of-Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. And [we believe] in one, holy, catholic (universal) and Apostolic Church. We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, [and] we look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen

Jumping in here ... and if you think I am impolite to sort of add to the topic then just ignore my post. BUT, have you thought about this concept?
While studying I asked this question of God once, "What is the difference between God the invisible Spirit and the gift Christ brought of the Holy Ghost in us?"

I believe God showed me a nuance of difference by showing me these truths:
1. There is ONE God one Spirit.
2. Nothing is ever lost or gained of his wholeness. Creation is in him and He is within creation. Even when he manifests things he is still all and in all and of him all things exist and consist.
3. Yet, the ONE Spiritual God is able to allocate things of himself unto created things while nothing will be equal to him.
4. The only things which equaled the Spiritual God was The Father LORD God and the Son Lord God the Savior, who God manifested as persons visible to men and angels within creation. The inner spirit of the Father and the Son was God and yet they were with God identified as individuals unto men and angels.

Now where did I find the information that this relationship between The Father and the Son are equal to The Spirit of God?
A few answers:
John 1:1-18 These verses state all the ways that The WORD/Christ/Lord Jesus was God come in Flesh and that John [the Baptist] came to reveal him unto men.]
John 3:34,35 makes this very clear: [paraphrased] God did not give out things of the Spirit unto Jesus by measure, but gave ALL things into his hand! This means that God has measured out things to created beings and such but Jesus had access to all things of God.

Notice I've used two concepts: allocates and access to all things.

Allocates means that God can share measures of himself unto created things which will not be equal to Him: Some examples are - things of energy, power, knowledge, wisdom, creativity, foreknowledge of his Word, and love. He can even impart measures of life in this fashion - long term on-going sustainability versus mortal or immortality.

He allocates by giving access as he wills.

All access was given to the Christ without measure but the human condition of the Christ meant that God gave him access as occasions arose. This is why Jesus said: I only do and say what the Father tells me. IOW, as Jesus heard God's will from the Father he knew and did those things.

The miracle The Spirit performed which added to the Equality of the Father and the Son was this:
The invisible Spirit created one image to represent himself within creation. The first time he used HIS IMAGE was to appear as The One ultimately known as the Father. This was an image which was dangerous to mortal mankind, but IT could be manipulated in intensity according to God's purposes.

Well, Jesus told us clearly that his bodily appearance was like the Father's [When you have SEEN ME, you have SEEN THE FATHER ... and John the Baptist explained that Jesus's body had a lesser glory due to mortal flesh. Jesus was THAT LIGHT [the glory of the Father's presence] which came into the world but people did not recognize the Son as being God's presence due to flesh.

I interpret Isaiah 43:11 like this: I [God the Spirit], even I, AM the LORD [Super-natural presence of the Father]; beside ME [as The Spirit and the Presence] there is no Savior.

Lastly John 1:18 [After diagramming this verse I now take the liberty to move words around a bit within this verse to put modifiers with the words they rename and describe and also identity the antecedents of the pronouns] - WATCH:

No man at any time hath seen God, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he [John the Baptist] hath declared him [God the Son].

IOW, people had seen God as the Father ... but it was the first time to ever see God as the Son.

"What is the difference between God the invisible Spirit and the gift Christ brought of the Holy Ghost in us?"
My answer: The Holy Spirit has been allocated to us and we have access to HIM but this happens only by an additional measure of the Spirit which Christ has ben given the authority to give us. We are not equal to God and never will be.

Jesus said to the Woman at the Well: If you only knew the Water I have to give ... from which you would never thirst again. He was talking about the additional measure of life from the Spirit of God which he had the authority to give.

Jesus was different from even what we will be someday in our future ... He had ALL access to God the Spirit ... but the mortality of his physical condition and his mission meant access came at God's timing - like a child growing up in the knowledge of Godly things ... or ... having knowledge of future events which God was not ready to share with humanity...

Sorry - just a few thoughts which has something to the concept of the trinity.

 

[Nick M]

Sorry - just a few thoughts which has something to the concept of the trinity.

More people need to think. Nothing to be sorry for...He is the image of the invisible God. According to Paul.