A few months ago I was having a conversation with a pastor of an Acts 2 dispensationalist church. Dispensationalists who are “Acts 2” are those that believe that the “salvation by faith alone” gospel started immediately following Christ’s death. Talking to Acts 2 dispensationalists sometimes gets a little humorous, especially when it is pointed out that immediately after Jesus’ resurrection that Jesus spends 40 days preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom:
Act 1:3 to whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.
After Christ rose from the dead, he spent 40 days with his disciples. The text explicitly tells the reader what the 40 days was spent doing: “speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God”. When talking to the Acts 2 pastor, with a straight face he declared “Jesus was just describing what the kingdom of God would be like”. I asked: “You mean the physical features.” To which he said: “yes”.
In the world of Acts 2 dispensationalists Jesus decides to spend his last 40 days on Earth, not explaining to the apostles how to preach the gospel or the meaning of His death and resurrection (Acts 2 dispensationalists claim the apostles were confused about these things later in Acts). No, instead of clearing up the massive amount of strife and confusion about Jews and Gentiles and faith and works, Jesus instead taught about what the Kingdom of God would look like. Add to this that every apostle to whom Jesus was describing the Kingdom would be dead before they saw the Kingdom. Why on earth would Jesus focus his last 40 days on that topic? Did the apostles then decide not to share with the rest of humanity what Jesus’ most important 40 days were spent teaching?
In reality, Jesus was still promoting an imminent, physical Kingdom of God which would soon return to Earth and establish Israel has his priest nation. This was the focus of his entire ministry, and this is what the apostles were told to preach:
Luk 24:46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,
Luk 24:47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Mar 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”…
So Jesus tells his apostles, according to Mathew, Mark and Luke to preach Jesus’ commandments, to preach the gospel, and to preach repentance and remission of sins. Jesus did not ever teach “salvation by faith alone”, and each of these verses are spoken after Jesus has resurrected. Jesus explicitly tells the apostles to continue the gospel that he started; the gospel that states an imminent kingdom of God is soon to appear and some of the apostles will be alive to see it. In fact the disciples answer him in Acts stating:
Act 1:6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Act 1:7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.
Act 1:8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”
The first thing the apostles ask is when God would “restore the kingdom to Israel”. I guess this might make sense in a world in which Jesus spent 40 days describing the physical features of the Kingdom of God. The apostles might be thinking: “This sounds all pretty and nice, but can we talk about something that affects us in a new environment in which our leader has just be crucified and we are to take over the spread of a foundling church while navigating the politics of a Roman occupation of our land”. So the Acts 2 dispensationalists have me there.
It is clear that Jesus spent his last 40 days on earth (days after he rose from the dead), preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom and telling his followers to do the same. It was only later, after the Jews rejected this plan that God turned to the gentiles with “salvation by faith alone” (Rom 9).
reality is not optional 
Jesus also appeared to 500 people during this time. Imagine that! Imagine the shock and awe of it all! This fact and the 40 days post-resurrection period of ministry are almost ‘hidden’ (in plain sight!) in the narrative that most people are completely unaware of these things. The disciples’ paradigm must’ve been well and truly shifted during those 40 days. From a pre-crucifixion paradigm to a pre-ascension paradigm. Preparation, preparation, preparation. Finally, they understood who Jesus was (and is). Now, they understood who they were – Jesus showed them who they really were and were to become. And, like them, “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for”.
Pingback: Acts 2 Dispensationalists? Phooey! « RightNerve – Hitting All the Right Nerves!
I would draw your attention to what Jesus was teaching during the 40 days between His resurrection and ascension concerning the “Kingdom of God”. Interestingly you excluded these vitally important scriptures that give vivid details on the subject what Jesus taught . Instead you have taken ONE SCRIPTURE (your usual method of “segmented” half-truth Bible interpretation) and put your works-faith kingdom spin in it’s place. Here are some solid scriptures on what Jesus taught during the “40 days”. Luke 24:25-49 (Remember the disciples had the O.T. prophets and scriptures, the words of John the Baptist, and what Jesus taught them to draw from for doctrine.) Jesus quotes from these sources continually.
*One important reason Jesus stayed for 40 days was to prove to His followers HE WAS REALLY PHYSICALLY ALIVE AS HE HAD PROMISED–His BODILY resurrection.
(Luke 24:38-43) He spoke to the disciples, showed them His hands and feet, scarred from the crucifixion, and said “..it is I MYSELF (the same Jesus that was nailed to the cross) and NOT a “spirit” which has neither flesh and bones as He had. He invited them to “handle me and see”. Then He called for something to eat and was given a “piece of broiled fish and an honeycomb” and “did eat before them.”
*Another reason for Jesus 40 day ministry was to expound on what He told them before what was to be fulfilled “In the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning ME. It was all about JESUS fulfilling the O.T. Scriptures. Basically, how HE (Jesus) fulfilled ALL the prophesies concerning THE GOSPEL of HIS DEATH, BURIAL, RESURRECTION! He then went through them all and “opened their understanding, that they MIGHT UNDERSTAND THE SCRIPTURES. (Luke 24:44-45)
*Jesus next told them *WHAT* would be PREACHED, *WHERE* it was to be preached, and BY WHOM it would be preached and HOW it will be preached.
WHAT WAS TO BE PREACHED: (Luke 24:46-49) “It behoved Christ TO SUFFER, and to RISE FROM THE DEAD THE THIRD DAY: AND REPENTANCE AND REMMISSION OF SINS should be preached *IN HIS NAME*”. Simply the GOSPEL of the Jesus Christ ;DEATH, BURIAL, and RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD; to “REPENT” (change the mind, and believe; not stop sinning) “FORGIVENESS OF SINS” (SALVATION OF THE SOUL) ie “eternal life”.
WHERE IT WAS TO BE PREACHED: (Luke 24:47) “AMONG *A L L* NATIONSsssss, BEGINNING AT JERUSALEM.” (This is clearly MUCH MORE than a “so-called gospel” preached only to Israel within the boundaries of the ONE NATION!) lol.
WHO WILL PREACH IT: “(Luke 24: 48) “YE (the apostles and disciples present) are witnesses of THESE THINGS”.
HOW IT WOULD BE PREACH: (Luke 24:49) “And, behold, I send THE PROMISE of my Father upon you: But tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be endued with POWER from on high.”
This is clearly speaking of the Holy Spirit and HOW they would be empowered to PREACH IT.
Excuse me Fisher, “YE DO ERR NOT KNOWING THE SCRIPTURES” This is the same GOSPEL message Paul preached to the Gentiles and Peter preached in Jerusalem and to Cornelius (a Gentile) and would be the SAME GOSPEL preached TO ALL NATIONS!
Act 1:3 to whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.
A couple questions:
1. What does Acts 1:3 say that Jesus did during his 40 days?
2. What is the Kingdom of God?
3. Is the Kingdom of God referenced anywhere else in the Bible?
4. What did Jesus preach about the Kingdom of God? What was it? When was it coming? What would happen when it came?
5. Was the teaching the “Kingdom of God” the equivalent of Jesus’ gospel?
6. Was this the same Gospel described by Paul in 1 Cor 15?
7. If so, please show your work.
8. Was that the same Gospel preached to Abraham in Gal 3:8?
9. If so, please show your work.
10. Was this the same Gospel mentioned in the Septuagint?
11. If so, please show your work.
12. What do the apostles think about the Kingdom of Heaven, as evident in their question to Jesus (Act 1:6)?
13. Did the apostles (especially Peter and James) understand the gospel preached during Jesus’ 40 days?
14. What does Peter’s reaction to Cornelius tell us about Jewish attitudes towards Gentiles well after Christ had ascended? In other words, did Peter think that Jesus taught full inclusion of the Gentiles?
Already answered #1. Luke 24:25-49 This is what Jesus taught during 40 days before He went to Heaven.
#2. Kingdom of God definition is (βασιλεία) Kingdom –“realm and rule” of “God” θεός.
It is only mentioned 4 times in Matthew, “Kingdom of God”, yet it is called the “Kingdom of Heaven” about 30 times. If one reads in the Bible about the “Kingdom of God” and the “Kingdom of Heaven”, these are SYNONOMOUS. Matthew was writing primarily to Jews and he wrote of the Kingdom of Heaven because the Jews were careful about using the divine name.
Jesus clearly taught that the K O God was already present in His ministry: “nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.” (Luke 17:21). Answering #4.
THe Gospel means “good message”. All has to do with Jesus Christ and the realm and rule He will possess.
The Good message to Abraham was about Isaac, the son of promise; through whom ALL NATIONS would be blessed; the linage leading to Jesus Christ. Issac pictured Jesus Christ as the sacrificial Lamb on Mount Moriah. This is direct prophecy to the Gentile NATIONS being saved through the “good message” of Christ 1Cor 15:1-4. CHRIST IS CENTERAL FIGURE IN ALL REFERENCES TO THE GOSPEL.
I will start out with the questions you missed and then talk about “the Kingdom of God”:
4. What did Jesus preach about the Kingdom of God? What was it? When was it coming? What would happen when it came?
5. Was the teaching the “Kingdom of God” the equivalent of Jesus’ gospel?
6. Was this the same Gospel described by Paul in 1 Cor 15?
7. If so, please show your work.
8. Was that the same Gospel preached to Abraham in Gal 3:8?
9. If so, please show your work.
10. Was this the same Gospel mentioned in the Septuagint?
11. If so, please show your work.
12. What do the apostles think about the Kingdom of Heaven, as evident in their question to Jesus (Act 1:6)?
13. Did the apostles (especially Peter and James) understand the gospel preached during Jesus’ 40 days?
14. What does Peter’s reaction to Cornelius tell us about Jewish attitudes towards Gentiles well after Christ had ascended? In other words, did Peter think that Jesus taught full inclusion of the Gentiles?
In Acts 1:6, the apostles do not have the same understanding of the Kingdom that you profess. You try to make it metaphorical, but they ask “when will you restore the Kingdom to Israel?” This was not: “when will you restore the Kingdom to Israel and the Gentiles who are Christians?” This was not: “when will you increase your manifestation of the Kingdom?” They were expecting, based on Jesus’ teaching (consistent with Jesus’ entire message) that the Kingdom was coming soon and involved the nation of Israel. Jesus is clear to point out he didn’t come except unto the lost sheep of Israel.
A better understanding of the metaphorical Luke uses is that Luke is describing current manifestations, but a more full manifestation would soon arrive (look to the parable of the mustard seed). In this Kingdom of God, people gather, sit and eat, they travel to, the look for signs that it is coming, that they wait for.
Luk 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.
Luk 13:29 And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
Luk 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
Luk 23:51 (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.
This is all Luke. In Mark if people pluck out one eye they will enter the Kingdom of God with one eye:
Mar 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
In Matthew, Peter is given the “keys to Kingdom heaven”. Getting authority to decide terms for entering the Kingdom (we see him exercising that authority in Acts 15):
Mat 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
And how do people enter the Kingdom? By doing the will of God and being righteous. Not everyone who believes in God will enter the Kingdom!
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
And if they falter, they lose the Kingdom:
Mat_21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Mat 13:20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
Mat 13:21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
I will build a more thorough post. But while there were slight present manifestations (small as a mustard seed), the Kingdom of God would come in its glory, supplant the current rule of the world, kill the wicked, and house the righteous. The Kingdom of God is not equivalent to what Christian’s understand as “heaven”. It was a physical place ruled by God. That is what Jesus and the 12 preached, that is the object of people’s “saving faith” (they were saved from literal death), and that is how people understood them.
Matt 28:19-20 Clearly shows THIS GOSPEL was to be preached to *ALL* NATIONSss. There is only ONE GOSPEL and would be sent TO ALL PEOPLE!! Denial will not suffice.
OK. You are delusional. Nations can be translated: 1. Countries. Remember the Jews were scattered throughout the land. 2. People of Israel. 3. The gentiles (preaching that they need to repent of their sins to be saved from the coming wrath). Here is how to stop being a delusional prick.
If you think you have a good point about something, ask a question if you don’t know how the other person deals with it. Or state your point plainly. Saying ” nationssssss” shows you are a stupid prick.
Here is the thing. Your entire theology is based on a made up definitions of words and incorrect use of proper nouns. You ignore Jesus’ own preaching. Jesus’ entire ministry was “to repent of your sins because the end was near”. God would return with his angels, and kill the wicked. The jews would act as a priest nation to the gentiles. This is what people needed to be saved from. This is what people had to have faith in. Jesus raising from the dead showed he was the real Messiah to affect this. When he pointed to his resurrection, he used it to point too the truth of his gospel. This was the gospel of the kingdom. And nothing you have quoted indicates otherwise.
edit:
I realize that I called you delusional, but readers might not understand my entire body of evidence for this claim. When I use the word, it is not figurative. You are literally living in our own special frame of mind that bears little semblance to reality. Observe:
1. You read blog posts about a specific topic, a blog post that gives evidence and examines the text. You comment, posting a long rant that INGORES the body of evidence in the blog post.
2. In your long rants you use terms and assume you understand what they mean. Assumptions not shared by me (the person on whose blog you are posting), language scholars, or laymen.
3. You define these terms, not based on the context in which the term is made, but by an extremely arbitrary method of your own invention.
4. On top of this, you just claim (without evidence and apparently based on your own special authority) that I am wrong in how I understand the terms.
5. You then claim you have special revelation of the exact meaning on the Greek terms, against everything human beings know about how language works. In fact, if we gathered together all experts and ask them who they more agree with (me or you), I have no doubt that when you find yourself alone you will claim “they are ALL biased”. If we did the same with laymen, I don’t think the results would differ much.
6. Speaking of which, you rant against BOTH experts and laymen! You are living in your own special world!
7. When using the Greek, you are wildly inconsistent in how you define words. (e.g. “False Brethren in Greek means ‘false brethren’, which means unreal Christians, not the more natural understanding of the term brother as ‘close acquaintance’ or the literal understanding as ‘blood relative’.” AND e.g. “Nevermind the root meaning of aionios does not mean ‘eternal’ it means ‘eternal’ because I say it does.” )
8. Even the English words you use are wildly inconsistent. Gospel means very nuanced things until you want it to mean “the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus”, then you proclaim “there is one gospel”. Really, and what was Abraham’s gospel? What was the object of his “faith”? But, you don’t like questions. Speaking of which:
9. When I ask you basic questions about the text, you downright ignore the questions. These questions are not leading (e.g. What did James and Peter think about the people they were debating in Acts 15? What did they think about the people from Judea?). These are basic reading comprehension questions. The only reason you claim they are “leading” is because you want to ignore simple questions that undermine your own private and unsupported theology that NO ONE believes. Here is a hint why no one believes it: because basic questions show that it is a really stupid understanding of events and your beliefs are absurd on face value.
10. When you do try to look at text, the misapplication is appalling. (e.g. “Because the end of Luke describes a couple of instances in which Jesus proved to people he rose, that is what he meant by Gospel and that is what he was preaching for 40 days after he rose about ‘the kingdom’ ”).
11. And on top of all of this, you have ZERO humility. You just assume you are right. You don’t ask questions for clarification. You don’t even care if I could answer immediately your most basic points. You just assume you are right. And you have the unsourced rants to prove it.
12. You are militantly arrogant in your wrongness. You will say “nationssssss” as if it invalidates anything I have written or counters any of my points. You will capitalize random words as if they somehow contradict me. I am waiting for an explanation of how your points counter me, but none is proffered.
13. When for sake of argument and to not let you sidetrack conversations I say we will assume your premise is true, you freak out. Mostly because if I assume your rants are true, they still don’t answer the basic questions and you are left stumped. There is nothing left but to lash out mindlessly.
For these reasons, I think you are delusional.
Here are your 17 unpublished spam comments spouting your insanity.
Here is a good idea. Write a paragraph describing what Jesus’ gospel was. What did he mean by faith? What did he mean by saved? Then we will look at what Jesus taught, and we will be able to see if you are letting Jesus deterime your theology or forcing your theology on Jesus.
Mr. Fisher, I am surprised you did not comment on the answers I gave to some of your questions from Luke 24:25-49 detailing Acts 1:3. I did “show my work“ (God‘s Word). Remember, your original question was what did Jesus teach DURING THE 40 DAYS, between His resurrection and ascension. I noticed you have now extended that time frame to include passages that span over the entire 3 1/2 years BEFORE His resurrection, and have for the most part, seemingly few of those AFTER the resurrection during those during the 40 DAYS.
Question #4? You have actually asked five (5) questions under #4. First, I personally do not believe you can dogmatically say the KOG is limited to ONE geographic region and one group of people as you are contending. The Greek definition of the KOG is the “realm and rule of God”. As you read the Bible you cannot escape the fact that the terms “Kingdom of God”, “Kingdom of Heaven” are used interchangeably, and are synonymous. In Matthew’s ‘gospel’. Only 4 can be attributed to “KOG” and the rest are stated as the “Kingdom of Heaven.” I believe historically, as I stated before, that the Jews were careful about using God’s name when writing or copying scriptures.
However, there are other titles used elsewhere in scripture for the “realm and rule” of God.
(Eph. 5:5) Paul calls it “the Kingdom of Christ and of God.”
(Acts 8:12) Philip was preaching “the things CONCERNING the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ.”
(Acts 2:31) Paul was “Preaching the Kingdom of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ.”
In particular though, look what “Peter” says:
(2 Peter 1:11) “For an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”
This is a profound scripture; The word “everlasting” is αἰώνιος, meaning “perpetual” used of both past and future eternity! In other words it means “never having a beginning or ending“. So the Kingdom Peter himself will enter with those he is writing to in his epistle is called the “everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”
I also believe this perpetual kingdom of Jesus Christ is GROWING. At the present it exists in the “third heaven” and will extend eventually to include all the earth (and space and atmosphere in between) after the millennium when the Lord God remakes a New Heaven and Earth “wherein dwells righteousness”
I believe this answers #4 “what it was (is)” “when it will come” and some of what would happen when it came (I have shown (my) His work here.)
1. A side point about languages: I think you are off in your Greek about the word “eternal”. See this link. This man uses very Greek word usage arguments to show that “eternal” did not mean in Greek what we think of today: http://www.mercifultruth.com/eternity.html
In your mindset, you cannot argue with him. By your own static understanding of language, how can you tell him he is wrong about the Greek language saying that there is no eternal damnation?
I can critique him. I can point out that Jesus was preaching a Jewish concept in Aramaic which was translated to Greek. The Greek words may be imprecise because they are translations, coupled with how language normally works (words changing meaning to fit contexts). This is just a side point, but you need to admit that the Greek “eternal” means something different than “everlasting”.
2. About what Jesus preached after being raised: if Jesus preaches the Kingdom of God before his death, and afterwards he preaches it after he rises, shouldn’t we understand that was teaching the same thing before and after? How is his previous description now irrelevant? Do his disciples expect (after 3 years and an extra 40 days of Jesus’ preaching) that this kingdom is going to be real and given to Israel? Do they preach an imminent return of Christ or a prolonged one?
Furthermore, were they preaching what Paul preached later? Did they accept Gentiles (after 3 years and an extra 40 days of Jesus’ preaching)? How do they treat Gentiles in Acts 9? What does this tell us about what Jesus preached? What did Jesus preach about Gentiles? What did he mean when he said he was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel?
3. I have written in the past that the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are one and the same. I guess I don’t understand why you think that I think Kingdom of Heaven and Kingdom of God are different things.
Every time the Bible uses Kingdom of God (or Kingdom or Kingdom of Heaven), the reader needs to look at the text and decide if the term means “spiritual manifestation” or “coming physical Kingdom on Earth”. Jesus used the term differently in different contexts, as described before. Sometimes the Kingdom was a place where the wicked were excluded, the righteous admitted, and people would come and eat things. Sometimes Jesus was cryptic about what it meant, spiritualizing it. We need to make the most sense out of what is being said, and the best way, I believe, is to understand that there were present manifestations, but like a mustard seed, it would bloom into a full scale rule of God.
The direct disciples of Jesus preached a coming apocalypse, in which God would institute his Kingdom on earth. They were preparing for the end times, and all Jesus’ preaching and their own echo a soon return of the “Son of Man” with the angels of God to kill the wicked. So when Phillip is preaching the term, I think he is talking about a coming physical Kingdom (he is preaching the apocalypse).
“Jesus was preaching a Jewish concept in Aramaic which was translated to Greek. The Greek words may be imprecise because they are translations, coupled with how language normally works (words changing meaning to fit contexts). This is just a side point, but you need to admit that the Greek “eternal” means something different than “everlasting”.” (a total fabrication!)
I never like to call people liars–usually they are just repeating something somebody else said who may be lying or they absolutely don’t know what they are talking about and just say “whatever might sound intelligent” to get themselves out of a jam when pinned the corner by the truth. It is the ignorant man’s way of escape. Basically, what you said above is completely FALSE., and you didn’t “show your work”. You are saying “I MUST admit” the Greek “eternal” means something different than “everlasting”? What I must admit is you FAIL! Greek and Aramaic and Hebrew were THE languages Jesus spoke fluently and He being The Word of God incarnate, He was perfect at it. (Jesus did NOT change the meaning of words to fit the context of His teachings)lol!
First of all the “coine Greek” language is one of the most precise, and descriptive languages on planet earth contrary to what you said. “imprecise” It was developed by military generals and linguist under Alexander the Great at his personal command and was spread to dominate the entire Byzantine Empire. It was THE language of the theologians, philosophers, intellectuals, scientists and mathematicians through out most of the Mediterranean in the days of New Testament writing. That is what “Greeks” are know for. They seek after “wisdom” 1Cor 1:22. The Jews seek “signs”. I personally took 2 full courses in Greek in college and from personal experience, to read the New Testament in Greek is to realize how perfect that language is for the theological writings of apostles like Paul and John.
Greek has more “parts of speech” than English and incorporates special endings on words for precise rendering for parsing of a sentence. The Greek “verb” is at the heart of the language. Present active indicative verbs are most interesting, coupled with the Greek prepositional system that show the dynamics of the linear action. (you know very little about the Greek language or you would not have made such ridiculous statements.) The Greek was the “actual words the apostles spoke” and it unified the church, especially in missionary work where Greek was a universal throughout the region!
The Greek New Testament was recorded in a language that was truly universal and I believe God choose it because of what I said above.
I’m telling you a aionos does not mean eternal in Greek! Read the link. It means pertaining to the age.
According to scripture, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. He “is eternal life”. 1 John 5:20 ,past present and future SAME GREEK WORD. αἰώνιος. His Kingdom is also eternal as He is the King eternal. The context is about the “eternal King”, Jesus Christ. If he has no KINGDOM, He is not the “Eternal King”. If Kingdom means “realm and rule of God” “domain” the Kingdom must also be “eternal” past, present and future because He is there. Your argument of your friend does not hold true in the context–If King Jesus is from “everlasting to everlasting” Psalm 90:2 so is His Kingdom. Dan 4:3 “‛âlam” a “remote” Kingdom whether future or past indefinitely.
“How is his previous description now irrelevant?” Those are your words and not mine; I never said that “they were irrelevant”. (I will deal with those next) However, that is where you went to and did not address Jesus’ words AFTER the resurrection for 40 days– deal with THAT; Luke 24:25-49; that is exactly what Jesus taught then.
Aionos means age, so the adjective version means:
1. Pertaining to the Age
2. Eternity
You are out of your mind nuts.
Refer to my list of reasons why you are delusional. Also refer to my statement that in no case will I let my comments section be overran with a bunch of crazy rants.
Pingback: the apostles taught the law | reality is not optional
Pingback: Machetes, “Enough” and a Free Gospel | Lamb's Harbinger
I’m certainly not an Acts 9 dispensationalist. But this article does deal with certain views among the Acts 2 dispensationalists. I’m very weary of a lot of strong dispensationalism, as I feel like it cuts the Bible too much in pieces and is hermeneutically dishonest. To me, it sounds like it emerged from modern easy-believist baptist teaching, NOT first century Judeo-Christian teaching.