The Point Of Stephen's Speech?

[brakelite]

What is your response to Daniel 9:26-27, Brakelite? I'm curious to know myself.

Can I start at verse 25, as it sets the scene for the rest of the prophecy...
Dan 9:25

(A) "Know therefore and understand, that"

(B) "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem"

- There were actually four commands issued that can be located in scripture and must be considered:

(1) Ezra 1:1-14, 1st year of Cyrus, dated to 537 B.C.
(2) Ezra 6:1-12, 2nd year of Darius dated to 520 B.C.
(3) Ezra 7:1-27, 7th year of Artaxerxes dated to 457 B.C.
(4) Neh 2:1-8, 20th year of Artaxerxes dated to 444 B.C.

Given the generally accepted age of 30 for Jesus (Luke 3:23) at His baptism in the 15th year of Tiberius (Luke 3:1) which can be independantly and firmly established as 27 A.D., only one of the decrees fits, that being the 3rd decree given in Ezra 7 in the fall of 457 B.C. The others are either too early or too late to be the command referred to. The decree in Ezra 7 (vs. 23-26), permits civil and religious autonomy to be restored in Jerusalem in compliance with God's law, fulfilling Daniel's prophecy. So starting in the fall of 457 B.C. places the end of the 70 weeks, or 490 years, in the fall of 34 A.D., placing the year of the crucifixion, (which happened in the middle of the 70th week of Daniel), at the Spring of 31 A.D..
(C) "unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks:"

- After 69 weeks the Messiah will be anointed by God as such. This happened at the Baptism of Jesus by John when the Holy Spirit descended as a dove and God the father announced Jesus as his Son (Acts 10:37-38). The end of the 69 weeks is mentioned by Jesus in Mark 1:15 when He says "The time is fulfilled". Counting down 69 weeks of years (483) from the fall of 457 B.C. you arrive at the fall of 27 A.D. for the baptism of Jesus. Futurists generally try to tie this event to the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Yet Jesus entry into Jerusalem was NOT when He was first recognized as the Messiah, except perhaps by the people of Jerusalem. God the Father and the Holy Spirit anointed him as the Messiah at his Baptism - the entry into Jerusalem pales in comparison to this holy event.

(D) "the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times."

- The rebuilding of Jerusalem would be rebuilt despite opposition. (Ezra 4:4,5 and Neh 4 + 6)

Dan 9:26

(A) "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:"

- Following the 62 weeks, the Messiah would be crucified for our sins. The 62 weeks, as we saw in verse 25 above, ended in His baptism. The exact time of the crucifixion is not specified here, but it is in verse 27. In effect, this is saying that the crucifixion will follow the anointing.

(B) "and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;"

- Jesus is the prince that shall come. The unbelieving Jews through their rebellion against God and Roman rule, brought about the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by the Roman general Titus, crushing the Jewish rebellion, fulfilling this prophecy. The unbelieving Jews had rejected the ultimatum contained in the 70 week prophecy, and their destruction and scattering in 70 A.D. was the result.

- Some think the prince that shall come may apply to Titus, who tried to protect the Temple, but his soldiers destroyed it anyway against his explicit orders. Titus did not confirm any covenant, however, Jesus did (see below) .

(C) "and the end thereof shall be with a flood,"

- According to contemporary historians, the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was swift like a flood.

(D) "and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

- One interpretation continues to apply this to the war with Rome and the destruction of 70 A.D.

- It may also mean that until the end of the war with Satan and sin, Jerusalem and the Temple will be desolate (lack the presence of God), their house being desolate - Mat 23:38 and Luke 13:35. To date this appears to be the case. See also verse 27(C).

 

[brakelite]

Dan 9:27


(A) "And he [Jesus] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:"


- Some would claim that the "he" could not refer to Jesus since his ministry on earth was only 3 1/2 years in length. They try to apply this to the antichrist (the prince who shall come in verse 26) and a 7 year peace treaty (covenant) with the Jews. Note the following, verses in red were spoken by Jesus-


Rom 15:8 (KJV) Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:


Psalms 105:8-11 (KJV)

8 He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word ​

which​

he commanded to a thousand generations. ​

9 Which ​

covenant​

he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; ​

10 And ​

confirmed​

the same unto Jacob for a law, ​

and​

to Israel ​

for​

an everlasting covenant: ​

11 Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance:

Matt 10:5-6 (KJV)


5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Matt 15:21-24 (KJV)


21 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


(NIV) Mat 26:28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.


(KJV) Mark 10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.


(NIV) Mark 14:24 "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them.


- During this 70th week, the Gospel was preached only to the Jews.


​

 

[brakelite]

continued from above.....

- The event that ends the 70 weeks is the stoning of Stephen as found in Acts 7:59. At that point the Gospel was no longer preached exclusively to the Jews, Peter and Paul having been shown by vision to begin preaching to Gentiles (Acts 10 & 22:17-21). (See also Acts 11:18, 13:46, 14:27, 15:9, 18:6). The Jews are no longer the exclusively chosen people of God (Gal 3:28). See also the parable of Mark 12:1 and Luke 20:9. The original husbandmen (the Jews) of the vineyard are rejected, and replaced, never to tend the vineyard again. This does not mean they have been rejected as individuals. They can still be saved by faith in Jesus like anyone else. Promises made to the Jewish nation have been rejected by the Jews due to their unbelief, so the fulfillment of those promises will be made to those of faith, regardless of national origin (Gal 3:29).


- So the final week of the 70 week period left to the Jews continues unbroken from the baptism of Jesus in 27 A.D. thru to 34 A.D., to confirm and fulfill (seal up) the prophecy of Daniel.


(B) "and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,"


- In the middle of the week, in 31 A.D., Jesus is crucified, bringing an end to the symbolic temple sacrifices, which were a type (shadow) of his sacrifice at the cross. This is confirmed by the tearing of the veil in the Temple at the instant of his death, exposing the most holy place (Mat 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45) signaling the end of the typical earthly sacrificial priesthood and the beginning of the priestly ministry of Jesus. The fact that Temple ceremonies continued until 70 A.D. is irrelevant.


(C) "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation,"


- The temple in Jerusalem will remain desolate, lacking the presence of God, until the end of time. (Mat 23:38-39, Luke 13:35)


- Whether the Jews rebuilt the temple or not is irrelevant. It will remain in desolation. In fact, rebuilding the Temple and a resumption of Temple sacrifices would be the ultimate manifestation of unbelief and a complete rejection of Jesus Christ, the Messiah. It would be an abomination.


(D) "and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."


- This has an initial application with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. The Roman armies first surrounded Jerusalem in 66 A.D. and then withdrew for some unexplained reason. The believing Jews understood Mat 24:15 to apply to them and they fled the city at this opportunity. The Roman armies soon returned and laid siege to Jerusalem, resulting in it's fall in 70 A.D. At that time thousands of Jews were slaughtered, not one of them was Christian. So this part of verse 27 finds fulfillment in 70 A.D. It may also be interpreted that Jerusalem and the temple will remain desolate of God until the execution of Judgment on the wicked, beginning with the last 7 plagues. That is to say Jesus will not dwell with His people until He does so after the second coming when the righteous dead are raised and the living are transformed, and they all join Him in the clouds (Rev 21:22).​

 

[Hidden In Him]

(B) "and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;"

- Jesus is the prince that shall come. The unbelieving Jews through their rebellion against God and Roman rule, brought about the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by the Roman general Titus, crushing the Jewish rebellion, fulfilling this prophecy. The unbelieving Jews had rejected the ultimatum contained in the 70 week prophecy, and their destruction and scattering in 70 A.D. was the result.

(B) "and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,"

- In the middle of the week, in 31 A.D., Jesus is crucified, bringing an end to the symbolic temple sacrifices.

(C) "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation,"

The temple in Jerusalem will remain desolate, lacking the presence of God, until the end of time. (Mat 23:38-39, Luke 13:35)

Thanks for taking the time to put together a lengthy response.

About your argument, here is my problem: The way these statements are phrased, they all have the subject ("the prince") acting directly upon the city and sanctuary (and destroying them); acting directly upon the sacrifices and oblations (and causing them to cease); acting directly upon Jerusalem (and making it desolate). You depict these events as taking place as indirect consequences of His appearing, which seems to be a rephrasing of the language, and cheats the natural reading somewhat. This is why the futurist position of the Antichrist acting directly to make these things happen himself seems to be the stronger position to me.

 

[brakelite]

Thanks for taking the time to put together a lengthy response.

About your argument, here is my problem: The way these statements are phrased, they all have the subject ("the prince") acting directly upon the city and sanctuary (and destroying them); acting directly upon the sacrifices and oblations (and causing them to cease); acting directly upon Jerusalem (and making it desolate). You depict these events as taking place as indirect consequences of His appearing, which seems to be a rephrasing of the language, and cheats the natural reading somewhat. This is why the futurist position of the Antichrist acting directly to make these things happen himself seems to be the stronger position to me.

Except for the dates. And the fact that Antichrist appeared in the 6th century. And that Israel's resistances against God throughout their existence spelled their demise. As Stephens speech, and Jesus's parables accurately depicted.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Except for the dates. And the fact that Antichrist appeared in the 6th century. And that Israel's resistances against God throughout their existence spelled their demise. As Stephens speech, and Jesus's parables accurately depicted.

I'm just saying that whenever I've found I had to force a text into an unnatural interpretation, it was usually a sign that some of the other things I assumed to be true actually weren't.

Tell me about these parables you referenced. I'm a big fan of the parables. If you want to simply provide a link I can read, that's fine too.

 

[brakelite]

Mark 12:1-12
Luke 20:1-19 There is a direct correlation between this parable and Matt 21:19.

Then note the first cleansing of the temple, John 2:13-25 how Jesus, when challenged regarding His authority to act as He did, called the temple "My Father's house". Then for a second time, which is in the context of the fig tree I mentioned above, again, Jesus authority is challenged by the priests. This time, Jesus called the temple "My house". Later, again His authority is challenged and Jesus responds Matt.23:29-38 with a scathing indictment similar to what Stephen said to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. At the end of His rebuke, Jesus says, your house is left unto you desolate. By this time, Jesus knew His time had come, and that the rulers of the nation had carried the nation so far into rebellion there was no future hope of gathering fruit from it. They would kill Him...the King would then bring upon the nation His judgement in the form of the abomination of desolation...the idolatrous standards of Rome would be raised in the holy place (which extended in this context beyond the walls of the city)and the temple, the city, and all the people destroyed or taken captive...except for those Christians who escaped.

The whole context of Stephen's address is the finish of the probation period of 70 weeks allotted to Israel, and Israel's abject failure to fulfil the purpose for which they were raised and established. The parables confirm that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to others who would bring forth the fruit expected. The fig tree was cursed to never again be fruitful.

What is being forced into the whole scenario is the expectation of a future temple period over which God Himself presides offering sacrifice for no purpose, during a period of time when the earth itself lays empty and desolate. What is being forced is the expectation of the coming of an Antichrist figure which enters that temple prior to Jesus coming and which somehow deceives the world into worshiping him, enforcing the world into receiving a convenient means of tracking spending, which brings down upon the world the unmixed wrath of God. How does any of that make any sense, particularly when one considers the historic reality and testimony of scripture which unerringly identifies the antichrist as having already arrived 1500 years ago, whose lifespan met perfectly the Biblical timespan allotted him as the 1260 years until he received his mortal head wound in 1798. That wound is now healed. The deception is almost complete. The Antichrist will soon be welcomed back into the Christian fold, where he once before pronounced HIs deity, and will do so again, and all the world, including many futurist Christians who are looking for him in the wrong direction, will wonder after the beast and surrender to him, receiving his mark of authority as opposed to the authority of Christ.
Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless. Individuals, both Jews and Greeks, must now be attached to the Vine, Messiah, to have any chance of bearing fruit and entering into the kingdom. There are not two different ways of entering glory. The prerogatives once belonging to Israel now belong to the church. The church is now the temple of God. Beware lest that house is declared desolate.

 

[bbyrd009]

I see the major point being given in Acts 7:55, 56.

could you expand a little there maybe, give us a tie-in? ty

 

[bbyrd009]

Previously in John 1:51 And He (Jesus) saith unto him (Nathanael), Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.

Act 7:56 And (Stephen) said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God

nice catch
such a strange passage, really,
46“Can anything goodcy come out of Nazareth? ” Nathanael asked him.

“Come and see,” Philip answered.

47Then Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him and said about him, “Here is a true Israelite;cz no deceit isin him.”

48“How do you know me? ” Nathanael asked.

“Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you,” Jesus answered.

 

[bbyrd009]

A marked difference between Stephen and other prophets was that Stephen offered no room nor opportunity for repentance.

really? hmm, gotta check that out, interesting.

as i see you got some resistance there you might clarify that a bit, ty

 

[Hidden In Him]

Mark 12:1-12
Luke 20:1-19 There is a direct correlation between this parable and Matt 21:19.

Then note the first cleansing of the temple, John 2:13-25 how Jesus, when challenged regarding His authority to act as He did, called the temple "My Father's house". Then for a second time, which is in the context of the fig tree I mentioned above, again, Jesus authority is challenged by the priests. This time, Jesus called the temple "My house". Later, again His authority is challenged and Jesus responds Matt.23:29-38 with a scathing indictment similar to what Stephen said to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. At the end of His rebuke, Jesus says, your house is left unto you desolate. By this time, Jesus knew His time had come, and that the rulers of the nation had carried the nation so far into rebellion there was no future hope of gathering fruit from it. They would kill Him...the King would then bring upon the nation His judgement in the form of the abomination of desolation...the idolatrous standards of Rome would be raised in the holy place (which extended in this context beyond the walls of the city)and the temple, the city, and all the people destroyed or taken captive...except for those Christians who escaped.

The whole context of Stephen's address is the finish of the probation period of 70 weeks allotted to Israel, and Israel's abject failure to fulfil the purpose for which they were raised and established. The parables confirm that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to others who would bring forth the fruit expected. The fig tree was cursed to never again be fruitful.

What is being forced into the whole scenario is the expectation of a future temple period over which God Himself presides offering sacrifice for no purpose, during a period of time when the earth itself lays empty and desolate. What is being forced is the expectation of the coming of an Antichrist figure which enters that temple prior to Jesus coming and which somehow deceives the world into worshiping him, enforcing the world into receiving a convenient means of tracking spending, which brings down upon the world the unmixed wrath of God. How does any of that make any sense, particularly when one considers the historic reality and testimony of scripture which unerringly identifies the antichrist as having already arrived 1500 years ago, whose lifespan met perfectly the Biblical timespan allotted him as the 1260 years until he received his mortal head wound in 1798. That wound is now healed. The deception is almost complete. The Antichrist will soon be welcomed back into the Christian fold, where he once before pronounced HIs deity, and will do so again, and all the world, including many futurist Christians who are looking for him in the wrong direction, will wonder after the beast and surrender to him, receiving his mark of authority as opposed to the authority of Christ.
Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless. Individuals, both Jews and Greeks, must now be attached to the Vine, Messiah, to have any chance of bearing fruit and entering into the kingdom. There are not two different ways of entering glory. The prerogatives once belonging to Israel now belong to the church. The church is now the temple of God. Beware lest that house is declared desolate.

Ok Brakelite, let's break this parable down then. I'll post it and then ask a few questions:

9 And he began to speak unto the people this parable: A man planted a vineyard, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into another country for a long time.
10 And at the season he sent unto the husbandmen a servant, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11 And he sent yet another servant: and him also they beat, and handled him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12 And he sent yet a third: and him also they wounded, and cast him forth.
13 And the lord of the vineyard said, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; it may be they will reverence him.
14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned one with another, saying, This is the heir; let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
15 And they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16 He will come and destroy these husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
17 But he looked upon them, and said, What then is this that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, The same was made the head of the corner?
18 Every one that falleth on that stone shall be broken to pieces; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.

Alright, you are saying that the vineyard is Israel in verse 9, yes? He goes into a "far country" afterward, and I'm assuming you agree this is a reference to Him returning to Heaven after His descent on Mt. Sinai and traveling with the Jews in the cloud and in the pillar of smoke until they finally entered the promised land. The vineyard is the land of Israel, yes? And the husbandmen are the Jewish leadership, and the servants He sent are the prophets, correct?

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Acts 7: 43 points to the Satanic star that most Christians nowadays refuse to believe is a fact, Stephen points this out, it's the truth !

That star is 666 it came from Egypt and is a work of man, not God at all.

Then read Acts 7: 39- 42 then the Satanist made the stupid Golden Calf idol, then he points out in 44 to 53 and this points out who they are of, there god Satan.

Then we see Saul a devout Jew got the message that he had been led astray by religious works and became Paul.

 

[Jay Ross]

Mark 12:1-12
Luke 20:1-19 There is a direct correlation between this parable and Matt 21:19.

Then note the first cleansing of the temple, John 2:13-25 how Jesus, when challenged regarding His authority to act as He did, called the temple "My Father's house". Then for a second time, which is in the context of the fig tree I mentioned above, again, Jesus authority is challenged by the priests. This time, Jesus called the temple "My house". Later, again His authority is challenged and Jesus responds Matt.23:29-38 with a scathing indictment similar to what Stephen said to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. At the end of His rebuke, Jesus says, your house is left unto you desolate. By this time, Jesus knew His time had come, and that the rulers of the nation had carried the nation so far into rebellion there was no future hope of gathering fruit from it. They would kill Him...the King would then bring upon the nation His judgement in the form of the abomination of desolation...the idolatrous standards of Rome would be raised in the holy place (which extended in this context beyond the walls of the city)and the temple, the city, and all the people destroyed or taken captive...except for those Christians who escaped.

The whole context of Stephen's address is the finish of the probation period of 70 weeks allotted to Israel, and Israel's abject failure to fulfil the purpose for which they were raised and established. The parables confirm that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to others who would bring forth the fruit expected. The fig tree was cursed to never again be fruitful.

What is being forced into the whole scenario is the expectation of a future temple period over which God Himself presides offering sacrifice for no purpose, during a period of time when the earth itself lays empty and desolate. What is being forced is the expectation of the coming of an Antichrist figure which enters that temple prior to Jesus coming and which somehow deceives the world into worshiping him, enforcing the world into receiving a convenient means of tracking spending, which brings down upon the world the unmixed wrath of God. How does any of that make any sense, particularly when one considers the historic reality and testimony of scripture which unerringly identifies the antichrist as having already arrived 1500 years ago, whose lifespan met perfectly the Biblical timespan allotted him as the 1260 years until he received his mortal head wound in 1798. That wound is now healed. The deception is almost complete. The Antichrist will soon be welcomed back into the Christian fold, where he once before pronounced HIs deity, and will do so again, and all the world, including many futurist Christians who are looking for him in the wrong direction, will wonder after the beast and surrender to him, receiving his mark of authority as opposed to the authority of Christ.
Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless. Individuals, both Jews and Greeks, must now be attached to the Vine, Messiah, to have any chance of bearing fruit and entering into the kingdom. There are not two different ways of entering glory. The prerogatives once belonging to Israel now belong to the church. The church is now the temple of God. Beware lest that house is declared desolate.

Let me only at this stage address your understanding of Matthew 21:19: - "19 And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, "Let no fruit grow on you ever again." Immediately the fig tree withered away.", by addressing the English translation of "ever again" of the Greek text.

The Greek text is "εἰς (to a particular point in time) τὸν (the) αἰῶνα (age)" and tells us for how long the fig tree will not bear any fruit, i.e. the will be no fruit on the fig tree until the time of the "age".

What "Age" that Jesus was referring to is the Age when at the very start, Israel will be redeemed. Paul tells us in Romans 11 that all of Israel will be saved/redeemed after the completion of the time of the gentiles and their 2,300 year period of the trampling of the sanctuary of God. How will we know when the end of the gentiles trampling will occur? Usually, God when the Gentiles have served His purposes against Israel, He then JUDGES the Gentile nations who have been exercising His purposes, usually by going to war against the nations concerned. In Luke 14: 31 - 32 does not Jesus tell a parable of a "King" who is waring against the nations in view of Jerusalem, and that Israel will, at that point in time, seek this kings terms of peace? When will this happen? Well Revelation 16:12-16 gives us a clue as to when God will assemble all of the heathen nations together at one place for a great day of the Lord battle of judgement. We are now seventeen years further on from the time of the three foul spirits which went abroad to begin drawing the nations of the earth to assemble at Armageddon, and the urgency of gathering the nations at Armageddon is being ramped up further as this battle draws near.

It is around the time of the nations of the fifth segment of the Daniel 2 prophecy of the statue entering Babylon, sadly only to heal the Babylonian nation that God will establish His everlasting Kingdom based on the foundational stone that will come down out of heaven at that time which will grind into dust/chaff the nations which will then be blown away by the wind of the spirit coming out of heaven.

This rock that comes down out of heaven is the foundation stone that Jesus refers to in Mark 12: -

Mark 12:9-11: - 9 "Therefore what will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the vinedressers, and give the vineyard to others. 10 Have you not even read this Scripture:

'The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
11 This was the Lord's doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes'?"
​

Who are the winedressers that God will destroy? The priests and the teachers who had leadership over Israel during the time of Christ. Who are the others whom God gives the vineyard to tend? Initially, they are the gentile disciples, but after Israel repents of their iniquities, and is redeemed by God, all of the nation of Israel will also be given the authority of to be a holy nation of priests and added to God's royal Priesthood to minister to the people during the time of the Great Harvest during the next age to come.

We must be mindful that not everybody that claims to be a priest of God's Royal Priesthood is actually a Priest of God's anointed Priesthood. There are wolves among them to lead many astray.

Shalom.

 

[quietthinker]

Mark 12:1-12
Luke 20:1-19 There is a direct correlation between this parable and Matt 21:19.

Then note the first cleansing of the temple, John 2:13-25 how Jesus, when challenged regarding His authority to act as He did, called the temple "My Father's house". Then for a second time, which is in the context of the fig tree I mentioned above, again, Jesus authority is challenged by the priests. This time, Jesus called the temple "My house". Later, again His authority is challenged and Jesus responds Matt.23:29-38 with a scathing indictment similar to what Stephen said to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. At the end of His rebuke, Jesus says, your house is left unto you desolate. By this time, Jesus knew His time had come, and that the rulers of the nation had carried the nation so far into rebellion there was no future hope of gathering fruit from it. They would kill Him...the King would then bring upon the nation His judgement in the form of the abomination of desolation...the idolatrous standards of Rome would be raised in the holy place (which extended in this context beyond the walls of the city)and the temple, the city, and all the people destroyed or taken captive...except for those Christians who escaped.

The whole context of Stephen's address is the finish of the probation period of 70 weeks allotted to Israel, and Israel's abject failure to fulfil the purpose for which they were raised and established. The parables confirm that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to others who would bring forth the fruit expected. The fig tree was cursed to never again be fruitful.

What is being forced into the whole scenario is the expectation of a future temple period over which God Himself presides offering sacrifice for no purpose, during a period of time when the earth itself lays empty and desolate. What is being forced is the expectation of the coming of an Antichrist figure which enters that temple prior to Jesus coming and which somehow deceives the world into worshiping him, enforcing the world into receiving a convenient means of tracking spending, which brings down upon the world the unmixed wrath of God. How does any of that make any sense, particularly when one considers the historic reality and testimony of scripture which unerringly identifies the antichrist as having already arrived 1500 years ago, whose lifespan met perfectly the Biblical timespan allotted him as the 1260 years until he received his mortal head wound in 1798. That wound is now healed. The deception is almost complete. The Antichrist will soon be welcomed back into the Christian fold, where he once before pronounced HIs deity, and will do so again, and all the world, including many futurist Christians who are looking for him in the wrong direction, will wonder after the beast and surrender to him, receiving his mark of authority as opposed to the authority of Christ.
Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless. Individuals, both Jews and Greeks, must now be attached to the Vine, Messiah, to have any chance of bearing fruit and entering into the kingdom. There are not two different ways of entering glory. The prerogatives once belonging to Israel now belong to the church. The church is now the temple of God. Beware lest that house is declared desolate.

yeah... this is how I see it as well.

 

[Jay Ross]

yeah... this is how I see it as well.

I have no issue with you agreeing that the SDA understanding of the prophetic is the correct way to view Bible history and to interpret the Holy scriptures. However, I disagree with a blanket statement being given without any other evidence to support your claim.

My research into the End Time timeline is very different to the one that @brakelite presented in his post above. Since the SDA timeline was established, there have been a number of additional events, even within the last 20 years, that suggest and confirm that the timeline of the events is very much different to the one that brakelite espoused above.

Shalom

 

[brakelite]

I have not issue with you agreeing that the SDA understanding of the prophetic is the correct way to view Bible history and to interpret the Holy scriptures. However, I disagree with a blanket statement being given without any other evidence to support your claim.

My research into the End Time timeline is very different to the one that @brakelite presented in his post above. Since the SDA timeline was established, there have been a number of additional events, even within the last 20 years, that suggest and confirm that the timeline of the events is very much different to the one that brakelite espoused above.

Shalom

I think Jay that the only thing that has changed is the increased fervour with which dispensationalism is propagated. Since Adventists settled on their historicists eschatology 150 years ago, nothing has happened since then, not even 1948, that throws a spanner in that hermeneutic. If anything, quite the opposite. The massive change in American politics and religion in the last 50 years had done more to confirm our eschatology, particularly in the last 5 years.
The truly of that is that for those who cling to historicism as the reformers did before them, we are willing to approach prophecy with more confidence than ever

 

[Hidden In Him]

@brakelite : Just created a thread on the wicked husbandmen parable, since I figured it deserved its own thread:
Parable Of The Wicked Husbandmen

 

[Jay Ross]

What is being forced into the whole scenario is the expectation of a future temple period over which God Himself presides offering sacrifice for no purpose, during a period of time when the earth itself lays empty and desolate. What is being forced is the expectation of the coming of an Antichrist figure which enters that temple prior to Jesus coming and which somehow deceives the world into worshiping him, enforcing the world into receiving a convenient means of tracking spending, which brings down upon the world the unmixed wrath of God. How does any of that make any sense, particularly when one considers the historic reality and testimony of scripture which unerringly identifies the antichrist as having already arrived 1500 years ago, whose lifespan met perfectly the Biblical timespan allotted him as the 1260 years until he received his mortal head wound in 1798. That wound is now healed. The deception is almost complete. The Antichrist will soon be welcomed back into the Christian fold, where he once before pronounced HIs deity, and will do so again, and all the world, including many futurist Christians who are looking for him in the wrong direction, will wonder after the beast and surrender to him, receiving his mark of authority as opposed to the authority of Christ.

If what you are claiming is true according to the SDA understanding of scripture, then from my understanding, which is dependent only on what is recorded is the scriptures, then there is an error of around 250 years between when the fourth beast receives it head wound, and when, IMHO the five mentioned beasts/wicked heavenly hosts, of Daniel 7, are judged as recorded in Daniel 7. There are other errors in the SDA understanding that have resulted from poor choices of interpretation and understanding.

Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless. Individuals, both Jews and Greeks, must now be attached to the Vine, Messiah, to have any chance of bearing fruit and entering into the kingdom. There are not two different ways of entering glory. The prerogatives once belonging to Israel now belong to the church. The church is now the temple of God. Beware lest that house is declared desolate.

After having looked at the covenant and prophecies concerning Israel, and the misunderstanding that are the traditions of the overall "Church", I cannot make the above bolded claim as you have done that "Israel as a nation chosen of God is dead. Fruitless." I accept what Paul wrote in Romans 11:25-26 that all of Israel will be saved after the fullness in time of the heathen gentiles trampling the sanctuary of God is completed. This event will occur in around 20-30 years time into our future. This is in line with the parable Christ told of the man who had planted a fig tree and came looking at the tree expecting it to be producing fruit and when after three seasons, he looked and asked the gardener to destroy the tree, but the Gardener, i.e. Christ, interceded on behalf of the fig tree and pleaded for another season before that decision to destroy the fig tree is implemented and then only if the fig tree did not produce any early fruit. We know that the stump of the fig tree in 1948 once again began to sprout and bud new leaves, and that the fig tree will shortly produce fruit after a period of some 91 days, depending on when the climate dictates when the spring season begins.

I think Jay that the only thing that has changed is the increased fervour with which dispensationalism is propagated. Since Adventists settled on their historicists eschatology 150 years ago, nothing has happened since then, not even 1948, that throws a spanner in that hermeneutic. If anything, quite the opposite. The massive change in American politics and religion in the last 50 years had done more to confirm our eschatology, particularly in the last 5 years.

As I live on a flat land continent, I am not interested in only what happens in America, but I am also interested in what is happening else where in the world as well. What we can be confident of is that there will be a minimum of at least another three "kings of the north" before the end of this present age.​

The truly of that is that for those who cling to historicism as the reformers did before them, we are willing to approach prophecy with more confidence than ever

Confidence built upon the foundations of flawed and misunderstanding of biblical prophecy is sure to crumble when put to the test.

I on the other hand accept that what I perceive will happen, as God allows His prophecies to unfold before me, may not occur in the order that I am foreseeing that they will happen in. I am also not looking for the manifestations of the beast(s) and the antichrist as many are doing on the mistaken belief that the beast(s) and the antichrist will be of human form. I hold to the understanding that the beast(s) and the antichrist are wicked fallen heavenly hosts that will hold sway over many people living at the time of their ability to influence the peoples of the earth as they exercise their respective characteristic dominions.

In recent months I have come to understand that prophetic events recorded in the Book of Revelations have already begun and that probably one of the prophesied events has already been fulfilled. Then again I do not tend to rely on the traditions of past understandings, as even the SDA also do, i.e. that the fourth segment of the Daniel 2 statue prophecy is the Roman empire, simply because they had dominion over the land of Canaan and it was an opportunity to demonise the Roman Catholic Church during the reformation period.

Be that as it may be, many of the End Time prophecies recorded in scripture are still sealed up because of our reliance on our traditions of understanding and as such we delude ourselves and go rogue with the word of God.

Shalom

 

[quietthinker]

I accept what Paul wrote in Romans 11:25-26 that all of Israel will be saved after the fullness in time of the heathen gentiles trampling the sanctuary of God is completed

All Israel will be saved, this is true Jay.....but, hear the language.....Israel does not consist of a people identifying themselves as Israel. This point is made again and again throughout the scriptures. Israel are God's chosen. Unless this is understood there is only confusion.

 

[Jay Ross]

All Israel will be saved, this is true Jay.....but, hear the language.....Israel does not consist of a people identifying themselves as Israel. This point is made again and again throughout the scriptures. Israel are God's chosen. Unless this is understood there is only confusion.

You may well be right, but it does come down to our understanding of what is meant by "Israel are God's chosen"?

Like David, I am happy being the lowly servant of God with no desire for grandeur or position within His court.

Shalom