Posted by Ray Kidder on 9/18/2009, 10:14 pm, in reply to "Psalm 2:7-12"
98.204.216.96
Searcher,
In my previous post, I wrote:
"There is another thing about your assertion that Acts 28:25-27 tells of a second rejection by the Jews that Jesus is their messiah, causing some kind of great postponement of the Kingdom of God on Earth, and the development of a new form of Christianity that is not based on the great commission found at the end of Matthew. One of my Bibles dates Acts 28 at 63 AD. It also dates 2 Peter at 66 AD, and Jesus implied that his second coming would occur after St. Peter was crucified. In addition the destruction of the temple occurred in 70 AD, as this fulfilled a prophecy of Jesus in Luke 19:44 & Matthew 24:2. Why would God expect an acceptance of Jesus by the Jews during Acts 28 if some of the prophecies of Jesus had not yet occurred? If the Jewish religious establishment had accepted Jesus during Acts 28, would the temple have been destroyed, and St. Peter been crucified? If these two events had not occurred, then wouldn't Jesus have been a false prophet?"
I was under the impression that you believe St. Paul's failed attempt to convert some Jews to Christianity in Acts 28 implied a postponement of the second coming of Jesus. It is as though you believe the second coming of Jesus was supposed to occur within the lifetime of most of the apostles, when the conversion of the Jewish religious establishment to Jesus as their messiah would take place. Do you believe the second coming of Jesus was to occur (circa) 50 to 70 AD, and that that Jesus was to team up with the 1st century Jews to commence a rule over the gentile world through the Kingdom of God on earth at this time?
Ray Kidder
Message Thread:
« Back to thread