The Point Of Stephen's Speech?

[Dave L]

So back to quoting you're so called ancient experts.

Just stick with the bible. Every use talks about a defilement of the holy of holies and temple.

You are redefining the meaning.

You drop your hypothetical gap and all the false prophecy based on it, and then you can pull the splinter out of my eye.

 

[CoreIssue]

You drop your hypothetical gap and all the false prophecy based on it, and then you can pull the splinter out of my eye.

The usage of AOD in the bible is literally what I said.

 

[Dave L]

The usage of AOD in the bible is literally what I said.

How can it be literal when it happened in 167 BC?

 

[CoreIssue]

How can it be literal when it happened in 167 BC?

Antiochus Epiphanies sacrificed a pig on the altar. The pig was an AOD. Not because it was an animal, but because it was a pig and he was not a priest of the temple.

And Jesus did not abolish animal sacrifices, he fulfilled them.

Israel will return. The temple will return. The priesthood will return. Law will return.

But the church will be rapture first.

 

[Dave L]

Antiochus Epiphanies sacrificed a pig on the altar. The pig was an AOD. Not because it was an animal, but because it was a pig and he was not a priest of the temple.

And Jesus did not abolish animal sacrifices, he fulfilled them.

Israel will return. The temple will return. The priesthood will return. Law will return.

But the church will be rapture first.

No scripture = false prophecy.

 

[Hidden In Him]

@CoreIssue , @Enoch111 , @Episkopos , @Frank Lee , @tigger 2 , @brakelite , @Dave L, @quietthinker.

Alright, gentlemen. Thank you very much to everyone who posted, and I will try to engage as many of you on your responses as I can. I'm certain it will still be up for debate, but let me post what I believe were the driving points and purposes behind what Stephen was saying:

Stephen gave this speech because he was dragged before the Sanhedrin to give a defense for why he was supposedly speaking evil of the Jewish temple, and saying Jesus of Nazareth was going to come and supernaturally destroy it:

Then they produced men, saying, "We have heard him speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God." And they stirred up the people, and the elders and the scribes, and having come upon him they seized him and brought hm to the Sanhedrin. And they set up false witnesses, saying, "This man does not cease to speaking words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard him saying that this Jesus the Nazarene will destroy this place, and change the customs which Moses delivered unto us." And having looked intently upon him, those sitting in the Sanhedrin saw his face as the face of an angel. And the high priest said, "Are these things so?" And he said, "Men, brothers and fathers, listen..." (Acts 6:11-7:2)

These were false accusations and exaggerations of what Stephen likely taught. What the New Testament believers were now teaching was that the Jewish temple would be destroyed by the Romans (Matthew 24:1-2), and that the church had now become the true temple of God on earth (1 Corinthians 3:16, Ephesians 2:13-22). But because Stephen was preaching Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah whom they had crucified, they were now bearing false witness against him to vilify him by suggesting he was somehow in favor of the Jewish temple being destroyed.

To counter these accusations, Stephen began by tracing through the history of Abraham and his descendants to show how God had specifically chosen the land of Israel to be where His people would serve and worship Him (v.7). The tabernacle was the first makeshift temple built in the wilderness (v.44), but eventually King Solomon built a true temple for the Lord in Jerusalem (v.47). But Stephen then quoted Isaiah 66:1-2 to prove from the word of God that the Lord ultimately never desired to dwell in temples made by human hands but in the hearts of men, a teaching the Jewish leadership were still unwilling to hear. Stephen gives the driving point in v.48:

But the Most High does not dwell in temples made by hand. As the prophet says, "Heaven is a throne for Me, and the earth is a footstool for My feet. What house will you build me?" says the Lord, "or what place for My rest? Has not My hand made all these things?" Oh stiff-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears, you always contradict the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you as well. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who proclaimed in advance the coming of the Righteous One, whom you became the betrayers and murderers of, who received the law by the ordinations of angels yet did not keep it. (Acts 7:48-53)

By calling them "stiff-necked and uncircumcised of hearts and ears," Stephen was telling the Jewish leadership they were still carnally-minded, and thus resisting what the Holy Spirit was now teaching through the church. And because they also had not received the baptism in the Holy Spirit, they were unable to keep the law just like their forefathers had not been able to.

Does this ring true with anyone? Yes or no?

 

[CoreIssue]

No scripture = false prophecy.

Mark 8:18 New International Version (NIV)
18 Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember?

You need to start hearing and seeing

 

[Dave L]

Mark 8:18 New International Version (NIV)
18 Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember?

You need to start hearing and seeing

This really supports your claims...........

 

[CoreIssue]

@CoreIssue , @Enoch111 , @Episkopos , @Frank Lee , @tigger 2 , @brakelite , @Dave L, @quietthinker.

Alright, gentlemen. Thank you very much to everyone who posted, and I will try to engage as many of you on your responses as I can. I'm certain it will still be up for debate, but let me post what I believe were the driving points and purposes behind what Stephen was saying:

Stephen gave this speech because he was dragged before the Sanhedrin to give a defense for why he was supposedly speaking evil of the Jewish temple, and saying Jesus of Nazareth was going to come and supernaturally destroy it:

Then they produced men, saying, "We have heard him speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God." And they stirred up the people, and the elders and the scribes, and having come upon him they seized him and brought hm to the Sanhedrin. And they set up false witnesses, saying, "This man does not cease to speaking words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard him saying that this Jesus the Nazarene will destroy this place, and change the customs which Moses delivered unto us." And having looked intently upon him, those sitting in the Sanhedrin saw his face as the face of an angel. And the high priest said, "Are these things so?" And he said, "Men, brothers and fathers, listen..." (Acts 6:11-7:2)

These were false accusations and exaggerations of what Stephen likely taught. What the New Testament believers were now teaching was that the Jewish temple would be destroyed by the Romans (Matthew 24:1-2), and that the church had now become the true temple of God on earth (1 Corinthians 3:16, Ephesians 2:13-22). But because Stephen was preaching Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah whom they had crucified, they were now bearing false witness against him to vilify him by suggesting he was somehow in favor of the Jewish temple being destroyed.

To counter these accusations, Stephen began by tracing through the history of Abraham and his descendants to show how God had specifically chosen the land of Israel to be where His people would serve and worship Him (v.7). The tabernacle was the first makeshift temple built in the wilderness (v.44), but eventually King Solomon built a true temple for the Lord in Jerusalem (v.47). But Stephen then quoted Isaiah 66:1-2 to prove from the word of God that the Lord ultimately never desired to dwell in temples made by human hands but in the hearts of men, a teaching the Jewish leadership were still unwilling to hear. Stephen gives the driving point in v.48:

But the Most High does not dwell in temples made by hand. As the prophet says, "Heaven is a throne for Me, and the earth is a footstool for My feet. What house will you build me?" says the Lord, "or what place for My rest? Has not My hand made all these things?" Oh stiff-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears, you always contradict the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you as well. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who proclaimed in advance the coming of the Righteous One, whom you became the betrayers and murderers of, who received the law by the ordinations of angels yet did not keep it. (Acts 7:48-53)

By calling them "stiff-necked and uncircumcised of hearts and ears," Stephen was telling the Jewish leadership they were still carnally-minded, and thus resisting what the Holy Spirit was now teaching through the church. And because they also had not received the baptism in the Holy Spirit, they were unable to keep the law just like their forefathers had not been able to.

Does this ring true with anyone? Yes or no?

And what is the church supposed to teach? God's word through the bible.

If one cannot open a bible and offer proof, they need to be quiet and listen instead of telling others what truth is.

 

[CoreIssue]

This really supports your claims...........

No, it was advice to you.

 

[Frank Lee]

@CoreIssue , @Enoch111 , @Episkopos , @Frank Lee , @tigger 2 , @brakelite , @Dave L, @quietthinker.

Alright, gentlemen. Thank you very much to everyone who posted, and I will try to engage as many of you on your responses as I can. I'm certain it will still be up for debate, but let me post what I believe were the driving points and purposes behind what Stephen was saying:

Stephen gave this speech because he was dragged before the Sanhedrin to give a defense for why he was supposedly speaking evil of the Jewish temple, and saying Jesus of Nazareth was going to come and supernaturally destroy it:

Then they produced men, saying, "We have heard him speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God." And they stirred up the people, and the elders and the scribes, and having come upon him they seized him and brought hm to the Sanhedrin. And they set up false witnesses, saying, "This man does not cease to speaking words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard him saying that this Jesus the Nazarene will destroy this place, and change the customs which Moses delivered unto us." And having looked intently upon him, those sitting in the Sanhedrin saw his face as the face of an angel. And the high priest said, "Are these things so?" And he said, "Men, brothers and fathers, listen..." (Acts 6:11-7:2)

These were false accusations and exaggerations of what Stephen likely taught. What the New Testament believers were now teaching was that the Jewish temple would be destroyed by the Romans (Matthew 24:1-2), and that the church had now become the true temple of God on earth (1 Corinthians 3:16, Ephesians 2:13-22). But because Stephen was preaching Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah whom they had crucified, they were now bearing false witness against him to vilify him by suggesting he was somehow in favor of the Jewish temple being destroyed.

To counter these accusations, Stephen began by tracing through the history of Abraham and his descendants to show how God had specifically chosen the land of Israel to be where His people would serve and worship Him (v.7). The tabernacle was the first makeshift temple built in the wilderness (v.44), but eventually King Solomon built a true temple for the Lord in Jerusalem (v.47). But Stephen then quoted Isaiah 66:1-2 to prove from the word of God that the Lord ultimately never desired to dwell in temples made by human hands but in the hearts of men, a teaching the Jewish leadership were still unwilling to hear. Stephen gives the driving point in v.48:

But the Most High does not dwell in temples made by hand. As the prophet says, "Heaven is a throne for Me, and the earth is a footstool for My feet. What house will you build me?" says the Lord, "or what place for My rest? Has not My hand made all these things?" Oh stiff-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears, you always contradict the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you as well. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who proclaimed in advance the coming of the Righteous One, whom you became the betrayers and murderers of, who received the law by the ordinations of angels yet did not keep it. (Acts 7:48-53)

By calling them "stiff-necked and uncircumcised of hearts and ears," Stephen was telling the Jewish leadership they were still carnally-minded, and thus resisting what the Holy Spirit was now teaching through the church. And because they also had not received the baptism in the Holy Spirit, they were unable to keep the law just like their forefathers had not been able to.

Does this ring true to you? Yes or no?

You must recognize that it is the Holy Spirit speaking through Stephen... Not Stephen. Stephen only lent his voice to God. If we do not comprehend the division of flesh from spirit we have erred.

Have you never spoken under the anointing, knowing that the words and wisdom were not yours? As Holy Spirit baptized followers of Jesus Christ it is a basic Tennant of our walk with the creator. Stephen would be the first to affirm these things.

If I have to speak based on my own wisdom, strength, knowledge and power then woe unto me. But I don't and neither did Stephen. Yes it's as simple as that. If we see Stephen as being the producer of this speech we have failed in comprehending and accepting the elementary elements of our faith.

 

[CoreIssue]

You must recognize that it is the Holy Spirit speaking through Stephen... Not Stephen. Stephen only lent his voice to God. If we do not comprehend the division of flesh from spirit we have erred.

Have you never spoken under the anointing, knowing that the words and wisdom were not yours? As Holy Spirit baptized followers of Jesus Christ it is a basic Tennant of our walk with the creator. Stephen would be the first to affirm these things.

If I have to speak based on my own wisdom, strength, knowledge and power the woe unto me. But I don't and neither did Stephen.

I always seek God's guidance.

But some think every word they speak is from God, which is false.

We're to always ensure everything, including what we say, alligns with the bible.

 

[Frank Lee]

I always seek God's guidance.

But some think every word they speak is from God, which is false.

We're to always ensure everything, including what we say, alligns with the bible.

If you speak as the very oracles of God, and we are told to do this, then the burden is on God if our heart be right.

Even though the listeners proposed to be followers of God they refused the words because their hearts were not right. The words they rejected were not Stephen's but God's.

 

[Enoch111]

Hi Brother Enoch, by your response I’m supposing you to be saying Everlasting Righteousness will not be established until there is no sin, and to me that would put the 70th week of Daniel at the end of the 1000 year reign of Christ.

No larry2, here is what I am saying:

SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
1. The Rapture
2. Daniel's 70th week (7 years)
3. The Second Coming of Christ
4. The Millennium
5. The cleansing of the earth by fire
6. The New Heavens and the New Earth
7. Everlasting righteousness on earth

Therefore for anyone to claim that Daniel's 70th week was accomplished in the first century is TOTALLY ABSURD.

 

[Dave L]

No, it was advice to you.

It's judgmental.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Even though the listeners proposed to be followers of God they refused the words because their hearts were not right. The words they rejected were not Stephen's but God's.

If you'll look closely Frank, that's what I was saying:

By calling them "stiff-necked and uncircumcised of hearts and ears," Stephen was telling the Jewish leadership they were still carnally-minded, and thus resisting what the Holy Spirit was now teaching through the church.

 

[quietthinker]

It does not say the time of israel was over. Not even hinted at.

and the curtain torn from top to bottom?

 

[CoreIssue]

If you speak as the very oracles of God, and we are told to do this, then the burden is on God if our heart be right.

Even though the listeners proposed to be followers of God they refused the words because their hearts were not right. The words they rejected were not Stephen's but God's.

Who says you're speaking as an oracle of God? You, a demon or the holy spirit? How do you know which?

 

[CoreIssue]

The

It's judgmental.

So? Since when is judging something evil? The bible tells us to do so as long as we do it justly.

 

[CoreIssue]

and the curtain torn from top to bottom?

When Christ died the mosaic covenant was annulled and Israel was suspended as being covenant nation and wife of God.

With Christ being the sacrificial lamb God was now available to all, so no more need for the curtain.

Many believe the church began at pentecost. I believe it began at the death of Christ.

Now before anybody goes hyper, I remind all Israel grew and developed over time old as the covenant nation. Coming out of Egypt, the choosing of Moses, the giving of the 10 commandments, the giving of the law, the giving of the land, the building of the temple and more.

I see the same process having happened in the Church.

I see nothing to argue about over date setting the beginning of Israel or the church.