Search results

The point is that Trumpets may have been fulfilled in AD 70. Both Peter and Paul, both who died around AD 65 or 66, importantly, before AD 70's destruction of Jerusalem and particularly the temple there, anxiously awaited the fulfillment of Trumpets, which had not yet occurred in any of the...

It can't be just one time in all history that 14 Nisan fell on a Friday, 15 Nisan on a Saturday, and so 16 Nisan on Sunday. And anytime this is what the calendar called for, then that would mean First Fruits is on 16 Nisan because it always follows the first Sabbath after Passover, which is 15...

That's true, Passover 14 Nisan wasn't a day of rest but a day of work, like First Fruits also wasn't a day of rest but of work. Unleavened Bread and the Sabbath were days of rest, not days of work.

If Friday begins at night time, then it would be Friday night, even though with either midnight to midnight, or morning to morning, it would be Thursday night.

The one in the Bible, evening to evening, not morning to morning, not midnight to midnight.

It's not as interesting as the three denial prophecy. It's more interesting just because it indicates John wrote his Gospel AFTER Peter's death, which puts it after c. AD 66—maybe the last book written in the Bible for all we know.

Since when do we believe sources outside of the Bible Clete? And if we do permit them, then why only people like Josephus who did NOT believe in Christ? If we allow extra-Biblical primary sources in, then why aren't we also receiving Clement and the Didache and Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp...

That's what I said. I'm glad you're not headed for Hell—ofc. Why was there a possessed serpent in the Garden with them? It wasn't like that was against God's will, that the Ancient Serpent Deceiver was there. That was God's will. He could have arranged to stop the Devil from entering into...

There are no advantages to this view over my position that 15 Nisan was a Saturday, and so counted as both Unleavened Bread and the standard weekly Sabbath in one day. As you say, there's no limit to what day 14 Nisan could be, so there's no limit to when 15 Nisan could be as well. So nothing...

Agreed.

The 70th week is interesting, if you associate a week with a year. It was literally AD 70 when the temple was laid waste and it's been ground to powder ever since, never heard from, never seen again.

God's control of the future causes His foreknowledge, so it's really a distraction to ask the question whether his foreknowledge settles the future. The future is settled because He settled it, His foreknowledge is the rather trivial coincidence that He also happens to KNOW what the future is...

You're just focusing in on one lapsarian position. The one that states that God decreed the fall before He created. That's not standard or canonical Clavinism—that's just one party among Clavinists. Others believe He decreed the Fall only after He created, and not before. So He creates, then...

15 Nisan begins what we call Friday at sundown. So that night, is both the first day (because the day begins at night) of Unleavened Bread, plus the Sabbath, meaning 16 Nisan is First Fruits, which begins Saturday night. So with those two holidays happening at the same time, overlapping...

I wonder what it was like, coming to after that.

Mere faith? or faithfulness (or 'allegiance' maybe)?

So are we talking about faithfulness then, or mere faith? If all we're meaning by faith as a fruit is mere faith, then we are all the same, because we all acknowledge and believe what I think we all believe to be mere Christianity, meaning basically the Trinity and Christ's Resurrection, right...

I believe all of the bold above, and I am not Open. This is why I mentioned Sozo because he also recognized that the provocative movie The Game with Michael Douglas explores this issue, he would always say the movie demonstrated love, I saw instead sovereignty and divine foreknowledge...

It's similar to Trinitarians trying to dunk by quoting the disciple Thomas saying, "My Lord and my God." Why are they assigning /assuming infallibility here, when it seems prima facie to be extemporaneous? It's weak.

It's stronger than @Lon 's argument for why He said He didn't know, which was an argument from silence.