ECT When DID Amos 9:15 happen?

[Interplanner]

Here's an item recently found in research on Thomas Paine. In London in 1793, David Levi, who was an Anglo-Jewish scholar was alarmed at things Paine wrote in AGE OF REASON because of the following beliefs: that the American and French Revolutions were divine acts of God, and that he (Levi) believed that Jews would return to their land and a triumphant Messiah would appear.

There is no information in the one-line reference to this as to whether there was a connection to Darby. Levi was concerned at the wholesale incrimination of the OT. But it does illustrate something to me: that even outside the modern period Jews have treated the OT as literally as today and think that it's direction is toward a return to their land and a triumphant Messiah (presumed against enemy nations).

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Ahhh, "cogent" means "agrees with you" I see. I'll edit my dictionary.

Astute.

The fact of new belief by the non-Jews in the Christian church there in that chapter IS the raised fallen tent.

Purdy much.

So there is a 'new' Israel that Amos 9 has in mind and it is planted in the missionary work of the church. Consequently they get an unshakeable kingdom because all created things will be shaken and destroyed, Heb 12.

Yes, and it can be tasted here and now.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

double post.

 

[Interplanner]

Astute.




Purdy much.




Yes, and it can be tasted here and now.

That's a fascinating word there: tasted. But not consumed! That's later. Very precise for the concept he was trying to communicate.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

That's a fascinating word there: tasted. But not consumed! That's later. Very precise for the concept he was trying to communicate.

 

[TweetyBird]

If all was fulfilled in 70 AD...Amos 9:15?

Allegorical?

Figure of speech?

Hyperbole?

Hebraic poeticicism?

Spurchally fulfilled in the heavenlies?

Just not true?

Hat tip to Right Divider's sig for the excellent question.

Amos prophesied around 800BC. Nehemiah and Ezra [500ish BC] brought together the remnant from the northern tribes and were joined with Judah, Benjamin and Levi. After that point, no division of kingdoms remained. The land was given once again to all of Israel. One king ruled over Israel until Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. It is recorded in Neh, that all the promises of God concerning the land and Israel were fulfilled.

Neh 9:8 And Thou didst find Abraham's heart faithful before Thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give him the land of the Canaanite, of the Hittite and the Amorite, of the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite-- to give it to his descendants. And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous.

 

[Interplanner]

Amos prophesied around 800BC. Nehemiah and Ezra [500ish BC] brought together the remnant from the northern tribes and were joined with Judah, Benjamin and Levi. After that point, no division of kingdoms remained. The land was given once again to all of Israel. One king ruled over Israel until Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. It is recorded in Neh, that all the promises of God concerning the land and Israel were fulfilled.

Neh 9:8 And Thou didst find Abraham's heart faithful before Thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give him the land of the Canaanite, of the Hittite and the Amorite, of the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite-- to give it to his descendants. And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous.

Good work, TB; it is rarely quoted.

 

[musterion]

Amos prophesied around 800BC. Nehemiah and Ezra [500ish BC] brought together the remnant from the northern tribes and were joined with Judah, Benjamin and Levi. After that point, no division of kingdoms remained. The land was given once again to all of Israel. One king ruled over Israel until Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. It is recorded in Neh, that all the promises of God concerning the land and Israel were fulfilled.

Neh 9:8 And Thou didst find Abraham's heart faithful before Thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give him the land of the Canaanite, of the Hittite and the Amorite, of the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite-- to give it to his descendants. And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous.

What part of "no longer shall be pulled up from the land I have given them" do you not understand.

This is why I rarely respond to you anymore.

 

[Danoh]

HINT:

The tabernacle of David stood for 40 years, while the tabernacle of Moses stood at the same time.

The priests performed all their priestly duties at Moses' tabernacle, but God dwelled at David's tabernacle via the Ark of the Covenant.

Both stood at the same time for 40 years. When the 40 years ended, the son sat down on God's throne in the new temple.

To-tel-a-lie ever remains consistent in his goal in his incompetence.

Fact of the matter?

The OT clearly shows David's Tabernacle came to represent something physical of another kind.

But, just as he has gone on for years asserting no one taught Dispensational distinctions before Darby even though even many a Preterist has shown otherwise, I think I'll let him search this Tabernacle issue out on his own...for years...to no avail...given his unbelief...given his...great incompetence.

When it is finally shown by his own...he will once more be proven...a fraud.

What...a...clown...To-tel-a-lie continues to prove...he is.

 

[Interplanner]

Danoh wrote:
The OT clearly shows David's Tabernacle came to represent something physical of another kind.

...which is why there is no 2P2P in the NT. The old covenant is...old, over with.

 

[Danoh]

Danoh wrote:
The OT clearly shows David's Tabernacle came to represent something physical of another kind.

...which is why there is no 2P2P in the NT. The old covenant is...old, over with.

Nope.

Put your OVER RELIED ON books based reasoning away for a time.

Study this Tabernacle issue out in Scripture devoid of ANY P.

Can you do that?

No?

I thought so :chuckle:

 

[TweetyBird]

What part of "no longer shall be pulled up from the land I have given them" do you not understand.

This is why I rarely respond to you anymore.

What part about "And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous." do you not understand?

What part of "you must be obedient to My Covenant Law or it will be taken from you" do you not understand?

 

[tetelestai]

The OT clearly shows David's Tabernacle came to represent something physical of another kind.

Wrong again Danoh.

David's tabernacle was a typology of what took place between 30AD - 70AD.

Which is why Amos was quoted by the Apostles 30AD - 70AD.

But, just as he has gone on for years asserting no one taught Dispensational distinctions before Darby even though even many a Preterist has shown otherwise,

Wrong again Danoh.

No one, not even IP, has shown Dispensationalism being taught before Darby. No matter how much you want it to be, it's not there.

Also, you need to make up your mind. On one hand your claiming Dispensationalism existed before Darby, then on the other hand you're quoting verses from Acts about "new doctrine" in order to defend your NEW Dispensationalism.

Make up your mind, James warned us about people like you:

(James 1:8) Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do.

I think I'll let him search this Tabernacle issue out on his own

You're the one that needs to do the research.

Ask yourself how David, from the tribe of Judah, (NOT a priest from the tribe of Levi) was allowed to offer burnt sacrifices and peace offerings at his tabernacle. Something that was clearly against the Law of Moses.

(2 Sam 6:17) They brought the ark of the LORD and set it in its place inside the tent that David had pitched for it, and David sacrificed burnt offerings and fellowship offerings before the LORD.

 

[Interplanner]

Wrong again Danoh.

David's tabernacle was a typology of what took place between 30AD - 70AD.

Which is why Amos was quoted by the Apostles 30AD - 70AD.



Wrong again Danoh.

No one, not even IP, has shown Dispensationalism being taught before Darby. No matter how much you want it to be, it's not there.

Also, you need to make up your mind. On one hand your claiming Dispensationalism existed before Darby, then on the other hand you're quoting verses from Acts about "new doctrine" in order to defend your NEW Dispensationalism.

Make up your mind, James warned us about people like you:

(James 1:8) Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do.



You're the one that needs to do the research.

Ask yourself how David, from the tribe of Judah, (NOT a priest from the tribe of Levi) was allowed to offer burnt sacrifices and peace offerings at his tabernacle. Something that was clearly against the Law of Moses.

(2 Sam 6:17) They brought the ark of the LORD and set it in its place inside the tent that David had pitched for it, and David sacrificed burnt offerings and fellowship offerings before the LORD.

Interesting points, Tet, thanks. Some questions:
1st group: so your understanding about Amos 9 in Acts 15 is that is it specifically there because of the 40 year span?
Is it the only verse that could do that?
Why doesn't this show in Hebrews where 40 years is mentioned aplenty?
What happens to the coronation of Acts 2 based on Ps 2, which has the built-in realization by David that His Lord was the one God would set in place?

2nd group:
re prior D'ist thought.
1, Ribera did have a futurist scheme. He may not have known it but it couldn't have made sense without the kind of D'ism we have today supporting it. That's the Counter-Reformation.
2, I found an "Anglo-Jewish" scholar David Levi in the 1790s in London who was already teaching that there would be a return to the land, and a Messiah triumphant on earth, and that both the American and French revolutions were acts of God. That 2nd rev assertion throws me, but there it is. This is some 30 years before Darby would have been of age to teach such a thing. Levi was responding to the deist ways of thinking in Thomas Paine and the complete wiping of all Judaic particulars from decent religion.
3, One of the Crusades was concerned about what would happen in the year 1000 and wanted to participate in helping a theocracy exist again in Judea.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

The land of the OT refers to the Kingdom of the NT which will in the future fill the whole earth.

LA

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Astute.




Purdy much.




Yes, and it can be tasted here and now.

Fess up, you don't understand a word that IP posts either!

 

[Danoh]

Fess up, you don't understand a word that IP posts either!

I don't either :chuckle:

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I don't either :chuckle:

You've caught on to his Holfordian patterns, or so I thought.

 

[Danoh]

You've caught on to his Holfordian patterns, or so I thought.

How...Holfordian of you :chuckle:

 

[Interplanner]

The land of the OT refers to the Kingdom of the NT which will in the future fill the whole earth.

LA

You mean it was meant as a picture. I heard a pastor the other day say that under Solomon only 10% of the 'promise' was fulfilled, or 30,000 SM. So at some point it has to be 300K SM to be "true" (to literalists). At that point you might be close to what Luke meant in Acts 2 when he said the whole earth...as far as ancient-speak goes.

Back to the 'picture.' That's fin but it must give way to the reality, which is Christ's current kingdom over the earth. And that is not a 'state' as we know it.