ArchivedThe Latter Rain of the Last Days: Now or Future? :: Re: AineoRe: Aineo
Aineo wrote:Joel has nothing to do with the 1st or 2nd advent of Jesus.
No, with all due respect, you are the one being obtuse. I have already demonstrated that Joel 2 refers to end of the Tribulation and the Second Coming of Christ.
LuckyStrike wrote:No, look at the entire chapter of Joel 2.
Verses 1-9 speak of armed forces invading Israel (ref. Zechariah 14:2-5), while verse 10 has signs of the Tribulation occurring in the background (ref. Matthew 24:29). Then verse 11 shows the coming of the Lord taking place (ref. Revelation 19:11-21).
In verses 12 through 17, the Lord calls for Israel's repentance and renewal of heart. Notice that in verse 16, the Lord urges Israel to gather its people together, with the bridegroom and bride leaving their chamber or room. This refers to the end of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:6-9), involving Christ and the Church (ref. Ephesians 5:25-33, John 3:29), where Christ and the Church are revealed for the Second Coming (ref. Revelation 19:11-21, Matthew 24:29-31).
After this call, verses 18 through 27 state how the Lord will have pity on Israel (verse 18). He will drive away the Northern Army (ref. Revelation 16:12) (verse 20), repay Israel for the army of locusts that he sent (ref. Revelation 9:1-12) (verse 25), and provide abundance for Israel (verses 19 and 22-23). He ends by promising that Israel will never be shamed again (verses 26-27).
Then, in verses 28 through 32, the Lord promises to pour out his Spirit on Israel (ref. Ezekiel 39:25-29) (verses 28 and 29), while showing signs of the Tribulation (ref. Matthew 24:29, Revelation 6:12) (verses 30 and 31). After this, the Lord promises that everyone who calls upon him will be saved, with salvation coming to the remnant of Israel (ref. Romans 9:27) (verse 32).
Thus, the context of Joel 2 is about Israel going through the Tribulation, not the Church Age.
Now instead of simply declaring that I am wrong, prove that this interpretation of Joel 2 is wrong.
Aineo wrote:Acts 2 records the giving of the Holy Spirit to the body of Christ, not just to the 12 apostles, which is your contention; a contention you have already acknowledged is false since 120 people were present in the upper room and all 120 were filled with the Holy Spirit. Scripture does not verify or deny the other 380 believers Jesus appeared to received the gift of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost or as some later date.
You are still equivocating the Baptism of the Spirit with specific manifestations of the Spirit.
Let me ask you this: If Acts 2 simply refers to the giving of the Spirit, then should not all people speak in tongues when they are saved? After this, should not all saved people see visions, dreams, and/or prophesy during their lifetime?
Aineo wrote:which is your contention[...]
My position is that the "pouring out" of Acts 2 was done for the sake of the Apostles and the testimony they would give to Israel.
Arguing over the difference between (a) the Spirit being "poured out" on the Apostles alone as opposed to (b) the Spirit being "poured out" on the entire house the Apostles were in is irrelevant, especially since you cannot prove the same thing happened to all other believers living at the time (ref. 1 Corinthians 15:6).
Aineo wrote:Peter understood Joel's prophecy as being fulfilled in Acts 2, which is why he quoted it.
And Peter also understood that Joel 2:28-32 refers to the national salvation of Israel at the end of the Tribulation, which means that he saw the events of Acts 2:1-13 as a partial fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32.
Aineo wrote:So if anyone is ignoring what the Bible teaches it is you.
Aineo wrote:Where does common sense and taking what is recorded at face value enter your theology? You are contradicting yourself on different threads based on your desire to argue over your personal theology.
With all due respect, you have it backwards. You are the one who is simply making declarations, not debating, as if that simply voids out what other people say. And on top of this, you engage in ad hominem ranting against the opposing viewpoint.
Yes, I made an error in interpreting Acts 2 and admitted it. I hope that when you make an error in interpreting Acts 2, you will do the same.
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |