Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 203 of 327 (507851)
05-08-2009 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by purpledawn
05-08-2009 12:21 PM


Re: Righteous Servant
To the more likely scenario of the Suffering Servants physical death Purpledawn writes:
Could be, but then that casts out the offspring verse. As I said before, if we go with the idea that he physically died and came back from the dead; then the point of the song is that he lived physically on Earth and had children and enjoyed the spoils of victory. The ascension doesn't go with the song.
I don't think that this offspring matter is a serious obstacle to the prophecy meaning Christ.
The next chapter 54 has some striking words about the barren woman having children and the married one not.
"Give a ringing shout, O barren one, you who have not borne; Break forth into a joyful shouting and cry out, you who have not been in labor.
For more numerous are the children of the desolate one than the children of the married woman, says Jehovah. ... For your Maker is your Husband." (See Isaiah 54:1,5)
There is the implication here that God as the Creator, the Maker, is not limited to the natural process of birth. There is at least a divine hint that His desire to produce children for His people is not limited by typical nature.
So the seed of the previous chapter's Suffering Servant of Israel should not be under such a natural limitation either.
Now I need to refer to the New Testament because the revelation of the Bible is progressive. Jesus told the Jews that God was able to raise up stones to be Abraham's descendents, so they should not place too much confidence simply on that natural relationship.
Since the revelation of God's economy is progressive, unfolding gradually and successively, here a little, and there a little, there may have been no other way for God to convey this thought.
The New Testament is a matter of God conveying His Spirit and His life into man making a kin relationship of sons to a divine Father. Jesus hinted at this when they asked Him to leave the crowd to see His mother and family. He stretched out His hands on the crowd and said that the ones who do the will of His Father were His mother, and sister, and brothers.
So the offspring matter of the Suffering Servant, I do not think, is made impossible by Jesus not being married or father children in the natural sense.
NET Bible
53:12 So I will assign him a portion with the multitudes, he will divide the spoils of victory with the powerful, because he willingly submitted to death and was numbered with the rebels, when he lifted up the sin of many and intervened on behalf of the rebels.
All the parts have to come together.
If the righteous servant is removed from the land of Israel and then returned in victory, the servant is able to have children and enjoy the spoils of the victory.
As stated, in the next chapter 54 you have a hint that God the Maker of Israel, the Creator Who is her Husband, will not be limited in the childbearing matter by typical natural limitations.
So the "barren" woman is to rejoice. At least you have a divine "heads up" that the Maker is able to obtain offspring for His inheritance by virtue of His divine transcendents.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 12:21 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 3:56 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 204 of 327 (507854)
05-08-2009 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by purpledawn
05-08-2009 12:01 PM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Righteous Servant
You're adding to the text. Jesus was baptized by John, who preached repentance and baptism. If there was no sin, then there was no need to be baptized. The fallen nature idea is a later teaching, not what Jesus preached.
Please quote the additions to clarify what you mean.
Where did I add to a text? I interpreted a text. Is that your idea of adding to a text?
Then you also have been adding to the text by interpreting in your way Isaiah 53??
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 12:01 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 4:03 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 205 of 327 (507856)
05-08-2009 1:57 PM


You're adding to the text. Jesus was baptized by John, who preached repentance and baptism. If there was no sin, then there was no need to be baptized. The fallen nature idea is a later teaching, not what Jesus preached.
This matter of denying the self was certainly NOT a latter post Jesus concept.
How many times did He say it? If you would follow Him you had to deny yourself, take up your cross and follow Him.
These are the words of Jesus. You see baptism, burial and so forth are closely related to the cross. Both are a dying. You bury what has died. Am I right?
Now, it is true that John the Baptist was relunctant to "bury" Jesus in the symbolic baptism. He didn't think he was worthy to do so. Jesus insisted upon it.
It could not be because He was sinful. He taught that He had no sin. Satan had nothing in Him. "Which of you convicts Me of sin?" He stated. So He did not see Himself as sinful and in need of baptism for that reason.
And I believe Him.
Now, why then be baptized? What needed to be buried ? If not the sinful man which needed burial in this case, then what ?
All men must deny themselves to follow Christ. You cannot follow Christ if you can only follow yourself. This can be your good self too.
I am trying to help you. But my experience is limited. I do know that you have to say "No" often to your SELF, even your "good" self in order to follow Jesus Christ.
Jesus took the lead to deny Himself and follow the Father. We follow by denying ourselves to follow Jesus. It is not only a matter of sins. It is a matter of living without God, independently, that has to be denied, buried.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 4:14 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 206 of 327 (507858)
05-08-2009 2:20 PM


You guys should stop trying to splice and dice the Bible apart.
You want to splice away the Old Testament from the New Testament. You want to divide the quotations of Jesus from the epistles of the Apostles.
You want to chop the living revelation up so as to kill it. You chop here and there to separate the pieces. You want to kill the beast by chopping up the plenary revelation of the Bible.
This is a "Divide and Conquer" stradegy. If you can chisle away Isaiah from the Gospels, you can kill the revelation of Jesus Christ, so you think.
"Jesus has nothing to do with Isaiah's Book." Yes He does. He is the center of the whole divine revelation of the 66 books.
"For whatever promises of God there are, in Him is the Yes, and through Him the Amen ..."
So after His resurrection Jesus opened the minds of the disciples to see that the Scriptures were speaking about Him in so many places:
"And He said to them, O foolish and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!
Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and enter into His glory?
And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, He explained to them clearly in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." (Luke 24:25-27)
Slow of heart. Some of you are slow of heart. Some of your hearts are not only slow or standing still. You are struggling to go in the wrong direction.
Now I'm preaching, now I'm preaching. I know.
Listen. When Jesus opened up the Scriptures to them I bet He also went over a lot of things in the book of Isaiah. That is probably why Philip knew that that passage in chapter 53 pertained to Jesus, as he told the Ethiopian servant.
Now instead of a hymn or passing the plate around, we'll have a few retorts from the Internet audience.

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 207 of 327 (507863)
05-08-2009 2:35 PM


You made a claim that the the lord is rich to all who call upon him. I suggested that it was not the case, which demonstrates that it is not universal. This shows that this prophecy is not fulfilled, or cannot be verified as being fulfilled. Do you agree?
No, I do not agree that the prophecy is not fulfilled because you claimed that calling did nothing for you.
That is not a good enough reason for me to deny it.
The prophet Joel prophesied that the Spirit of God would be poured out on all flesh and the sons and daughters of the Israelites would prophecy, the old men would dream dreams.
The book of Acts records the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on the early church. Some people were standing by scoffing and geering as you do.
It is not up to them to pronounce that Joel's prophecy was not fulfilled because of thier scoffing and geering.
Besides, you do not know that you will not in some future time experience this richness of the Lord upon calling.
I only say that Romans 10:12 is not the only verse in the Bible. And we should learn not simply what the Bible says, but what it also says.
It speaks of calling from a pure heart. It speaks of calling with a pure lip. It speaks of calling in truth. These aspects should be considered also. He is still rich to all who call upon Him, yet in a way which does not violate other important aspects of drawing near in faith to God.

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by Perdition, posted 05-08-2009 2:42 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 215 by Modulous, posted 05-08-2009 8:56 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 209 of 327 (507871)
05-08-2009 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Peepul
05-08-2009 11:45 AM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
This is unjustified - the prophecy is objectively not fulfilled!
Lets take one that is rather more objective then.
What would you accept as evidence of a prophecy being fulfilled? Let's take Jesus prophesying about the weather being really a problem in the days just before His second coming:
"And there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth anguish of nations in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the billows, Mens hearts fainting from fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken." (Luke 21:25,26)
Are you expecting that fulfillment of this prophecy means that there is no possibility left to doubt that the words of Jesus have come true?
If that is what you mean, I don't think even such an objective prediction as this necessarily means fulfillment cannot still be doubted.
Fulfillment of prophecy does not have to mean that there is universal agreement that prophecy has been fulfilled, even if the matters are entirely objective.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Peepul, posted 05-08-2009 11:45 AM Peepul has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by bluescat48, posted 05-08-2009 4:31 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 216 of 327 (507956)
05-09-2009 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by purpledawn
05-08-2009 4:03 PM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Righteous Servant
Me:
The baptism of Jesus does not signify that He sinned and needed His sins washed away. It does signify that in His incarnation He came in the form of the fallen Adamic nature which needed to be denied, terminated, and buried because it is self bound and so independent.
Purple:
None of this is in the text of Mark 1 concerning the baptism of Jesus. Your explanation is not an interpretation of the text.
The fallen Adamic nature is gleaned from Paul's letters, not what was written in the Gospels.
You're giving an explanation of the plain text based on later doctrine and tradition inspired by Paul's ministry.
This does not constitute adding to the TEXT. No words were ADDED to any passage in Mark 1:4-13. Not one word was added by me. At best you could say that the interpretation I give of why Jesus desired to be baptized was wrong.
Now I used the parallel discription in Matthew 3:13-17 perhaps without a clear enough indication that I was doing so.
Your resistence to me interpreting what happened at Jesus' baptism with the help of other Scriptures is just your familiar tactic of "Divide and Conquer" - trying to isolate Scriptures from one another to kill the plenary revelation of the Bible as a whole.
The problem at hand is whether or not Jesus being baptized meant that He was a sinner. No it does not.
" ... Jesus came ... and was baptized in the Jordon by John. And immediately, coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens being parted and the Spirit as a dive descending upon Him. And a voice came out of the heavens:
You are My Son, the Beloved; in You I have found My delight." (Mark 1:9-11)
In case you didn't notice, the Son of the Father was the delight of the Father. The Father had previously found His delight in Him. And I submit that the Father did so because among all human beings on the earth He lived a life of thirty years to this point SINLESS. That is the basic teaching of the Four Gospels.
So we really do not have to consult with Pauline epistles to learn this much.
In the very next section of Mark 1 we see Jesus put to the test. He undergoes extreme temptation from Satan and He passes with flying colors. He indeed demonstrates that He is the Beloved Son in whom the Father has found His perfect delight. No other human living before, during, or after was the cause of such a direct utterance from heaven as Mark 1:11.
You should have gotten a hint of Jesus' perfection from Mark 1:7.
"And he [John the Baptist] preached, saying, He who is stronger than I comes after Me, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. ... but He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit" (v.7,8)
You should know then that Jesus is far far above John the Baptist in righteousness. Otherwise John would not have so highly recommended Him.
So even restricting my comments to the Gospel of Mark you are proved wrong on this matter of Jesus having sinned.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by purpledawn, posted 05-08-2009 4:03 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 8:13 AM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 217 of 327 (507957)
05-09-2009 8:04 AM


Purpledawn:
The fallen Adamic nature is gleaned from Paul's letters, not what was written in the Gospels.
You vastly underestimate how Paul derived his teaching from the SCriptures of the Old Testament themselves. He did not invent such an idea. He saw it in the Old Testament and ulluminated more light upon it.
The Old Testament writers spoke of man's dammaged nature quite long before Paul wrote His epistles. For example:
" See, this alone have I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes." (Ecc. 7:29)
Though God made man upright somehow man has gone off and sought out many devices and schemes which are not upright.
"Behold I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." (Psalm 51:5)
As a typical man David expresses his frustration that his nature from birth was defective before God.
"And do not enter into judgement with Your servant, For no one alive is righteous in Your sight." (Psalm 143:2)
These passages and others from the Old Testament testify that the man created "very good" (Gen. 1:34) has become damaged and fallen.
Paul shed more light on it in the New Testament. He did not invent the teaching.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 219 of 327 (507959)
05-09-2009 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by Modulous
05-08-2009 8:56 PM


Re: The confidence trick continues
You only answered half the question. You said that the prophecy is that Yahweh's name is rich to all those that call. I called, and I experienced no richness. There are two possibilities.
Thankyou for this clarification. You did not call on the name of Jesus then? If you mentioned it before I didn't see it.
This is what happens when you use inflamatory language. There is the danger that your readers will afterwards only skim over your posts quickly to avoid further insults. It is really counter productive.
The Romans passage which I said was a prophecy concerned the name of Jesus.
Maybe that was the problem then. Either you were not recognizing the Yahweh's name today is Jesus for Jesus is God incarnate.
Or perhaps you sought to approach God without recognizition that your sins needed to be first forgiven, via Jesus.
There is a distinction in the Bible between faith and presumption. Perhaps you PRESUMED something rather wrong and mistook that for faith.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Modulous, posted 05-08-2009 8:56 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Modulous, posted 05-09-2009 11:26 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 223 of 327 (507974)
05-09-2009 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by purpledawn
05-09-2009 8:13 AM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Righteous Servant
The need for Jesus to be perfect or sinless is a later development. Jesus didn't present himself as having never sinned or perfection. He did present himself as an example that people could follow. He lead by example. Perfection is improbable since there is no consistent criteria in Christianity.
At the baptism a voice came from heaven - "You are My Son, the Beloved; in You I have found My delight." (Mark 1:11)
This persuades me that the uniqueness of the Son was that He was free from having transgressed God ever.
In the same Gospel, same chapter Jesus pronounces forgiveness on a sinner and is criticized for it. They thought that ONLY a perfect God has the right to forgive sins. See Mark 1.
"But some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, Why is this man speaking this way? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins except One, God? (Mark 1:6,7)
Jesus responds:
"But that you mau know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth - He said to the paralytic -To you I say Rise, take up your mat and go to your house."
Only the sinless God has authority to forgive sins. Jesus responded by demonstrating His authority to heal as well as to forgive sins. The impact of the situation is that He is indeed the Son of God - the Son of Man, the delight of the Father and without sin - who has authority to forgive it.
You are desperate in your revisionism.
He repented,
WHERE ? OF WHAT ? Quote Mark.
was baptized, and then was tested. He didn't give into temptation once he had repented.
I'm adding to the text? Why don't you count this as adding to the text then?
Please point out in the text where Jesus repented.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 8:13 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 11:49 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 228 by Bailey, posted 05-09-2009 4:23 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 224 of 327 (507976)
05-09-2009 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by purpledawn
05-09-2009 8:13 AM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Righteous Servant
The suffering servant is not described as perfect or having never sinned. So perfection is not a requirement to fulfill the prophecy.
Why then was the Suffering Servant called "the righteous One"? (Isa. 53:11)
Why does it say "Nor was there any deceit in His mouth" (v.9)
It further says that "He was crushed because of our iniquities" (v.5)
Where's the hint in Isaiah 53 that He was crushed because of His OWN iniquities?
You're twisting the Bible.
Furthermore Isaiah says that He made Himself an offering for sin. The sin offering had to be without blemish. The spiritual meaning should be clear that the sin offering was itself to be without sin.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 8:13 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 12:26 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 229 by Bailey, posted 05-09-2009 5:17 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 235 of 327 (508057)
05-10-2009 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by purpledawn
05-09-2009 12:26 PM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Righteous Servant
In Isaiah 53:11, the usage of righteous may be used more as a legal reference. From the NET Bible notes:
tn Heb he will acquit, a righteous one, my servant, many. (tsadiq) may refer to the servant, but more likely it is dittographic (note the preceding verb , yatsdiq). The precise meaning of the verb (the Hiphil of , tsadaq) is debated. Elsewhere the Hiphil is used at least six times in the sense of make righteous in a legal sense, i.e., pronounce innocent, acquit (see Exod 23:7; Deut 25:1; 1 Kgs 8:32 = 2 Chr 6:23; Prov 17:15; Isa 5:23). It can also mean render justice (as a royal function, see 2 Sam 15:4; Ps 82:3), concede (Job 27:5), vindicate (Isa 50:8), and lead to righteousness (by teaching and example, Dan 12:3). The preceding context and the next line suggest a legal sense here. Because of his willingness to carry the people’s sins, the servant is able to acquit them.
Though technical, this is not very convincing to me given the tenor of the whole chapter. I don't see readily how much difference would be made with English expressions like "vindicate," or "lead to righteousness," or "render justice," etc.
Nothing in Isa. 53 remotely suggests that one sinner is himself a sin or trespass offering for others. The whole concept of the chapter is that a righteous and innocent Servant made Himself a sin offering for others not righteous. He took on not what He deserved but what they deserved. And doing so justified them as the sin or trespass offering was designed to do.
Recovery Version - "By the knowledge of Him, the righteous One, My Servant, will make the many righteous." (v.11)
1901 American Standard Bible - "thou shalt make his soul and offering for sin ... by the knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many and he shall bear their iniqities."
The AV footnote on "justify" says "make many rightoues".
J.N. Darby New Translation - "by his knowledge shall my righteous servant instruct many in righteousness; and he shall bear their iniquities."
Darby's note on "many" - "Lit. 'the many,' i.e. those that are in relationship with him"
Me:
Why does it say "Nor was there any deceit in His mouth"
Purpledawn:
Deceit is not the only sin out there. It just implies he didn't lie. I'm sure of your point.
Lying is not the only sin. True. But the accumulative effect of the discriptions of the Suffering Servant is His purity.
Your hunting for indications to the contrary is like looking for hen's teeth. The accumulative effect is to His righteousness. You're going against the tone of the passages in an attempt to twist them.
Me:
Where's the hint in Isaiah 53 that He was crushed because of His OWN iniquities?
PD:
I didn't say that he was.
Then where is the hint of His own iniquities period ?
Me:
Furthermore Isaiah says that He made Himself an offering for sin. The sin offering had to be without blemish. The spiritual meaning should be clear that the sin offering was itself to be without sin.
PD:
Well the suffering servant and Jesus wouldn't qualify either. Blemish free deals with physical appearance and health, not actions.
Wrong. It is ridiculous to assume that the sin offering was to justify people as to their physical perfection before the priests. It was to their moral corrections the offerings were instituted.
Actions needed to be atoned for, for the most part, and not physical imperfections.
There is some mention of people not being allowed to enter the temple because of physical defects. But the far greater purpose of the Levititcal offerings concerned sinul ACTIONS in need of atonement. In interpreting as you are you are practically destroying ancient Judaism, not to speak of your unwarranted attack on the Christian faith.
It means no cuts, bruises, disfigurement, etc. Plus humans weren't accepted as a sin offering. Literally they don't qualify, figuratively they wouldn't need to die.
Humans were not accepted until the Suffering Servant (Who was sinless) came to offer Himself once for all for the sins of the people. No one before Him was qualified.
This offering of the Human offering for sin was done:
1.) By Jehovah - (v.6) "And Jehovah has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him."
2.) And by the Servant Himself - (v.10) " ... He makes Himself an offering for sin."
His making Himself an offering for sin is pleasing to Jehovah and not displeasing - "But Jehovah was PLEASED to crush Him, to afflict Him with grief. When He makes Himself an offering for sin ..."
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by purpledawn, posted 05-09-2009 12:26 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by purpledawn, posted 05-10-2009 10:51 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 236 of 327 (508062)
05-10-2009 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Modulous
05-09-2009 11:26 PM


Re: The confidence trick continues
Will you accept, that a prophecy that could be seen as a fulfilled prophecy no matter what happens in the future, is a useless prophecy for the purposes of this thread? If nobody felt the richness upon calling on Yahweh, it would be just as much of a success as if nobody felt the richness and it would just as much of a success if there was a mixture of people's feelings. We could explain that those that don't experience richness don't meet some criteria (not trying hard enough, aren't attempting it in the right temporal context, aren't sincere, are too sceptical, they secretly want it to fail, you don't know what feeling rich means - maybe you feel it but don't realize it etc etc), and those that do feel it: success!
I believe that Christians should be decerning and not wreckless when it comes to intepreting prophesies. I don't think we should easily jump to the conclusion that this or that event is the fulfillment of a prophecy.
So you insist to me "But I DID call on Jesus and nothing has happened."
Okay, maybe that problem of yours is too hard for me to solve. However, I don' think I will play into you hands and say because of your problem therefore prophecies in the Bible are unreliable in general.
I'm sorry that you experience nothing of the richness of what and Who Jesus Christ is (for whatever reason that may be).
But I know 100 times more people personally who daily call on the the Lord Jesus in all kinds of situations. And His attributes are rich and richly experienced by them.
PS
Some readers of this post may be interested in this website on calling on the name of the Lord:
Calling on the Lord
Some readers may be interested in these topics covered in the above website:
CALLING ON THE NAME OF JEHOVAHTHE I AM
The Definition of Calling On the Lord
The History of Calling On the Lord
The Purpose of Calling On the Lord
To Be Saved
To Be Rescued from Distress, Trouble, Sorrow, and Pain
To Participate in the Lord’s Mercy
To Partake of the Lord’s Salvation
To Receive the Spirit
To Drink the Spiritual Water and to Eat the Spiritual Food for Satisfaction
To Enjoy the Riches of the Lord
To Stir Up Ourselves
How to Call On the Lord
CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD
Calling on the Name of the Lord in the Old Testament
Practiced by the New Testament Believers
The Purpose of Calling
The Way to Call
The Need of Practice
CALLING ON THE LORD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
Seth and EnoshCalling upon the Name of the Lord
AbrahamLiving in the appearing of God and calling upon the Name of the Lord.
IsaacLiving in the appearing of God and calling upon the Name of the Lord
JacobLiving in the appearing of God and calling upon the Name of the Lord
SamuelPraying and calling upon the Name of the Lord
USING OUR MOUTH TO CALL UPON THE LORD
Calling on the Lord to enjoy His Riches
Calling on the Lord to draw Water out of the wells of Salvation
CALLING TO RECEIVE THE SPIRIT
RECEIVING THE DISPENSING BY CALLING
ENJOYING THE CIRCULATING SPIRIT BY CALLING
CALLING ON THE LORD IN WEAKNESSENOSH
CALLING ON THE LORD TO ENJOY CHRIST
DRINKING AND EATING BY CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD
The Need for Proper Spiritual Digestion
BEING ANOINTED WITH THE COMPOUND SPIRIT BY CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD
THE NEED FOR A GENUINE REVIVAL AND A CORPORATE MODEL
INSPIRED BY CALLING
Receiving the Spirit by Calling on the Name of Jesus
THE SPRINGS OF SALVATION
Breathing and Drinking by Calling on the Name of the Lord
EXPRESSING GOD AND CONQUERING HIS ENEMY IN OUR DAILY LIFE
How Christ gets into us
Enjoying the outpoured Spirit by calling on the Name of the Lord
Drinking the Spirit by calling on the Name of the Lord
The Calling People
Contacting the Word by calling on the Name of the Lord
The Lord being rich to all who call upon Him
Called by God to call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus
THE PRACTICAL WAY TO WALK IN THE SPIRIT
CALLING ON THE NAME OF JEHOVAH, THE ETERNAL MIGHTY ONE
A FRESH SENSE OF GOD
EXPERIENCING CHRIST MOMENT BY MOMENT
LIVING CHRIST BY FAITH
CHRIST BELIEVED IN AND CALLED UPON
THE RECOVERY OF CALLING ON THE LORD’S NAME
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Modulous, posted 05-09-2009 11:26 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 10:35 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 248 by Modulous, posted 05-10-2009 11:37 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 238 of 327 (508066)
05-10-2009 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by bluescat48
05-10-2009 9:26 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
My point is there is no corroborating evidence. The only evidence is Biblical writing.
You should know that there is extra-biblical testimonial to the fact that Jesus lived and died.
Now I am not sure if you understand that there might be a vested interest in DENYING at all costs certain aspects of His existence.
When you ask, for example, for extra-biblical testimony that Jesus rose from the dead, I think there would be the problem of the vested interest of unbelievers in Christ's Lordship to deny it.
Sometimes I get the impression that what some skeptics want is a record of some atheist saying "Yep, Jesus was raised from the dead by God."
But that would make them Christian believers, wouldn't it? Then they would be discarded by skeptics as not reliable or objective.
I don't mind looking into your request of extra-biblical confirmation of Bible prophecy having come to pass. However, I am not sure how to solve the problem of the vested interest in unbelievers as "outsiders" to the faith, wanting to naturally deny the truth of the Bible.
Are you saying "Give us the confirmation of unbelievers in the Bible to the truth of the Bible"?
Look at all the resistence that has been raised on trying to get some of you to see that Isaiah 53 most impressively points to Jesus.
I have also see quite a bit of resistence to extra-biblical testimonial that Jesus was extraordinary and lived. Popular is the excuse that such historical testimonial was forged by Christians.
What do you do?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by bluescat48, posted 05-10-2009 9:26 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 10:52 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 251 by bluescat48, posted 05-10-2009 1:04 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 239 of 327 (508068)
05-10-2009 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 10:35 AM


Re: The confidence trick continues
Again, I need to ask. Can you quite your preaching and try to defend your previous assertions.
I am not sure what you mean by preaching. But you have your style of writing and I have mine.
You don't have to sit passively in a pew and make no remark by "Amen" to my "preaching".
Your fundie website had no business being posted on the forum. It does nothing to bolster your argument. It does show that your true interest in coming here is to preach
Please point out the rule where that is not allowed.
If it is a waste of your time to talk with me, then go find someone else to talk to.
I'm here. And until I'm banned I post what I post the way I post it.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 10:35 AM Theodoric has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024