Posted on 08/03/2007 4:32:13 PM PDT by topcat54
And I should be concerned about that why? The day truth is decided by Freeper polls is the day we all should pack it in.
"28 And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions. 29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days."
Peter tells us in Acts 2 that this prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost.
"14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. 19 I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord. 21 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the Lord Shall be saved.'"
Peter understood the prophecy as symbolically referring to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the new covenant people of God. The prophet was announcing the "day of the Lord", that is, the end of the old covenant and the beginning of the new. God's people were receiving the blessing of the Holy Spirit, while the Jews who were obstinate and did not follow Messiah would soon be cut off, the "last days" of old Israel.
But I'm sure you'll find plenty out there who'd like to debate it with you.
But this part that you cited was not fulfilled back in those days:
19 I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord. 21"
Not according to Peter. I think the problem is that you are not approaching the prophecies in the same way that Peter and the other apostles did. If Peter did not believe that that those verses were being fulfilled in that day, the he might have stopped quoted from Joel at a more appropriate point. He did not. He was clearly not a "literalist" when it came to interpreting the OT prophecies. He saw them all as primarily being fulfilled in Christ's appearance and work back in those days.
It hard to get around the true meaning of Peter’s works unless you are willing to resort to a brute force disregard for what he was intending to say.
Then why did you bother bringing it up? Just so you could pick a might between me and someone else?
Yes according to Peter. He is only telling them that the outpouring of the spirit part is being fulfilled on that day---- not all the rest. Note the words "And" and "before" especially. Those words indicate sequential not simultaneous fulfillment.
He was clearly not a "literalist" when it came to interpreting the OT prophecies.
Right ---- and the signs in the heavens were not occurring on that day ---- only the outpouring of the Spirit --- and he was not looking up in the heavens above waiting for them to occur either.
Peter is merely citing Joel in full in order to provide the context for the outpouring of the spirit in light of a sequence of events that would precede the "Day of the Lord". Those other events were and are yet future.
He saw them all as primarily being fulfilled in Christ's appearance and work back in those days.
Not according to Scripture --- especially the Scripture that he wrote.
Insisting does not good exegesis make.
And I do not recall in recent memory seeing you post on any subject other than pro-preterism and/or anti-dispensationalism.
And your point would be? Dispensationalism is a popular topic and fraught with error. It is a natural subject for discussion in this type of forum. E.g., it was John MacArthur who made the highly questionable claim that all Calvinists ought to be dispensational premil like him. Perhaps we need a poll among the Calvinists here on FR to see it that it true.
Good Advice ---- Take it!!
I'm not the one denying the apostle's plain teaching on the meaning of the Joel prophecy. Your presuppositions about eschatology are the only thing that requires you to give such a response.
There are enough other examples in the NT of very selective quotes from the OT to lead us to believe that Peter fully intended to include the entire thought from Joel as being entirely fulfilled in that generation and among those people. Peter explains what the term “last days” was intended to mean, not some far future time, but the transition from the old covenant to the new. The apostle John confirms this view when he wrote:
“18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.” (1 John 2)
We also have the testimony of Hebrews, were we are told of Jesus’ coming into the world:
“26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” (Heb. 9)
Men today choose to ignore the biblical meaning of these phrases, believing instead that “last days” and “end of the age” applies to modern times in order to prop up their questionable eschatology.
Around here, if a person sees a handle and already knows what the poster is going to say - he is likely to save time and just ignore it unless of course, he has time on his hands and enjoys replaying the same theological ball game.
Any hoot, that's my two cents...
LoL.....
Men today choose to ignore the biblical meaning of these phrases, believing instead that “last days” and “end of the age” applies to modern times in order to prop up their questionable eschatology.
Maybe those men just choose to read the whole bible and all of Hebrews 9:
"27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment. 28So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."
the first time in v26 ---- the second time in v28
No one is denying a second coming, but it is verse 26 (not 28) that refers to "the end of the ages" and plainly places it in the context of His first coming (“He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself”).
You need to evaluate how these phrases are used in context, not according to some pre-defined schema.
Not so. Are you trying to say that the "ages" ended there in the 1st century??? I don't think so. Verse 26 should probably read: "the end of the age" not "ages", since there were ages to come.[Eph 2:7, Mt12:32]
The greek is sunteleia twn aiwnwn , end of the aeons (ages, plural).
As I said before, insisting does not good exegesis make. And there's one about "denial".
You didn’t answer the question: Did the ages end in the first century? Yes or No -——
According to the testimony of Scripture (some of which I quoted to you), the answer is "Yes, the ages in view did end at the coming of Jesus Christ into the world to redeem His people from their sin."
Here’s another verse for your consideration:
"Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. " (1 Cor. 10:11)
"11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool." (Heb. 10)
When Christ sat down on His throne it marked then end of the old system (what the Jews referred to as "this age") and ushered in "the age to come" (marked by eternal life, Mark 10:30).
Now to my question, without twisting the plain meaning, does Heb. 9:26 testify that Christ appeared at the end of the ages to put away sin?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.