"Jerusalem a cup of trembling" future or past?

[gilgal]

It seems to me that many prophecy teachers, authors and tele-evangelists are looking to make a fast buck claiming things that will never come true.

When you buy their books but then decide to read the bible yourself you'll feel you've been deceived and brainwashed.

Take a look at Zechariah 12. Unless someone has something to share proving this to be futuristic that I haven't noticed, I'm persuaded to think that this prophecy has been fulfilled already.

Zechariah 12
1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

When Nehemiah returned to rebuild the walls he met a strong resistance from the surrounding nations that they complained to the king and made him stop the work for a certain period. But the king was persuaded that the Jews had no evil intentions and allowed them to resume the work. The prophets Zechariah and Haggai were encouraging the work. So by reading Zechariah 12 it seems to me that he was anticipating what occurred in Nehemiah.

[gilgal]

Further as you read you'll notice the rebuilding of the walls and temple led to the appearing of the Messiah the Prince.

Zechariah 12
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

If my interpretation above is correct, then verse 10 will turn out to be referring to Acts 2 since the house of David is Jerusalem. Jesus told his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for power from on high.

When the people heard the disciples, mostly unlearned fishermen (and other low professions) speak their language they were attentive. And hearing the crucifixion of their Messiah made them feel sorrowful and unsure what to do.

[gilgal]

The prophet Daniel like Nehemiah (Daniel 9 and Nehemiah 9) confessed the national sins before God and got an answer:

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The word for week in Hebrew is actually 7 years. So 70 weeks is 70x7 = 490 years. So we continue...

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

So adding 7x7 and 62x7 we get 483 years from the time Darius gave Nehemiah the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem. As I'm saying this off the top of my head, 450 years later Jesus Christ was born. Adding 33 years and the crucifixion will be 483 years.

The only place where a specific number of days is given to the coming of the Messiah is this. As we continue reading ... the crucifixion:

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

"The people of the prince that shall come" are the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD.

So if you still doubt that Jesus is the Messiah...come on could anyone else have appeared within 483 years from the rebuilding? and fulfilled prophecy to the letter that he ought to be "cut off" meaning die "but not for himself" ...for us!

[joel]

So if you still doubt that Jesus is the Messiah...come on could anyone else have appeared within 483 years from the rebuilding? and fulfilled prophecy to the letter that he ought to be "cut off" meaning die "but not for himself" ...for us!


The coming of Jesus as Messiah is not in question here as I understand the spirit of most posts.......He came as the suffering servant portion of the prophetic scriptures and conquered sin and death through His own death.

What is strongly asserted on this forum is that the judgment upon Jerusalem in 70A.D. was the fulfillment of the majority if not all remaining prophecies concerning Israel and laid them in a permanent grave.

His Kingdom has come, and is being expanded in the spiritual realm which has occurred for 2,000 years. We do not have dissent on this issue as far as I can tell.

But, where we continue to be at odds is the significance placed upon the destruction of Israel; those who see as a finality with Israel, and, those who see it as a temporary.

No manner of discourse seems to make any difference between them.

Paul said divisions were inevitable.

Joel

[gilgal]

No manner of discourse seems to make any difference between them.
Joel

What do you mean by this statement?

[joel]

Quote:
Originally Posted by joel
No manner of discourse seems to make any difference between them.
Joel

What do you mean by this statement?

Those who post on the forum who profess preterism remain unpersuaded by those who hold such views. It seems obvious to me.

Joel

[gilgal]

Quote:
Originally Posted by joel
No manner of discourse seems to make any difference between them.
Joel

What do you mean by this statement?

Those who post on the forum who profess preterism remain unpersuaded by those who hold such views. It seems obvious to me.

Joel
In general I'm a futurist because I can't view Revelation as a mere symbolical thing. I find Revelation symbolical. But Zechariah 12 seems to be for that period.

You can't compare modern covetous Zionist Israel with Israel in Ezra's and Nehemiah's time who rebuilt the walls and temple by the king's permission. Nowadays it's by rebellion. Besides. What use is it when Messiah's already revealed himself?

[joel]

In general I'm a futurist because I can't view Revelation as a mere symbolical thing. I find Revelation symbolical. But Zechariah 12 seems to be for that period.

You can't compare modern covetous Zionist Israel with Israel in Ezra's and Nehemiah's time who rebuilt the walls and temple by the king's permission. Nowadays it's by rebellion. Besides. What use is it when Messiah's already revealed himself?

You are right about the comparison with that which already occurred.

But what about Hosea 3:4,5?

When they seek the Lord their God, and David their King....and fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days........surely this is yet to transpire.

Joel

[gilgal]

You are right about the comparison with that which already occurred.

But what about Hosea 3:4,5?

When they seek the Lord their God, and David their King....and fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days........surely this is yet to transpire.

Joel

I'm not sure. My tip is to look at when the prophecy was written and read that section in the books of Kings and Chronicles.

[gregoryfl]

I believe it happened in the first century, just like other prophecies concerning Israel.

Here is one that Jews today still look forward to in the future:

Amo 9:11 In that day I will raise up the tent of David who is fallen, and close up its breaches, and I will raise up its ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old;
Amo 9:12 that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all the nations who are called by my name,” says Yahweh who does this.

Ever since the dwelling place of David was destroyed, Jews have been waiting for it to be rebuilt. To this day it has not, that is, not if you are looking for a physical, literal fulfillment.

The early Christians applied the rebuilding of the tent of David to their day which they applied to the church, with the gentiles being a part.

Now, it did have a literal fulfillment, but not in the expected way of one reading the text and looking for the literal physical ruins to be rebuilt.

Not sure, why it is so hard to believe that the natural is only the shadow, but that the spiritual is the fulfillment. Not part of a fulfillment, but the final fulfillment of things. Never is a natural spoken of as a fulfillment. That goes against the very nature of God's purpose.

Ron

[gilgal]

I believe it happened in the first century, just like other prophecies concerning Israel.

Here is one that Jews today still look forward to in the future:

Amo 9:11 In that day I will raise up the tent of David who is fallen, and close up its breaches, and I will raise up its ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old;
Amo 9:12 that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all the nations who are called by my name,' says Yahweh who does this.

Ever since the dwelling place of David was destroyed, Jews have been waiting for it to be rebuilt. To this day it has not, that is, not if you are looking for a physical, literal fulfillment.

The early Christians applied the rebuilding of the tent of David to their day which they applied to the church, with the gentiles being a part.

Now, it did have a literal fulfillment, but not in the expected way of one reading the text and looking for the literal physical ruins to be rebuilt.

Not sure, why it is so hard to believe that the natural is only the shadow, but that the spiritual is the fulfillment. Not part of a fulfillment, but the final fulfillment of things. Never is a natural spoken of as a fulfillment. That goes against the very nature of God's purpose.

Ron

I think it was Amos which was cited in Acts 15.I believe that's futuristic. But looking at the encouragement of rebuilding the city and Temple seems to me as a thing in the past because of the needlessness after Christ was crucified.

Psalm 40 mentioned in Hebrews 10 mentions that sacrifices and wine offering were not needed anymore.

[Rose]

I think it was Amos which was cited in Acts 15.I believe that's futuristic. But looking at the encouragement of rebuilding the city and Temple seems to me as a thing in the past because of the needlessness after Christ was crucified.

Psalm 40 mentioned in Hebrews 10 mentions that sacrifices and wine offering were not needed anymore.

You are absolutely right Gilgal, Christ came as the ultimate sacrifice....to build a Temple again would be an abomination to God.

Heb. 10:9-12 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

God Bless

Rose

[gilgal]

You are absolutely right Gilgal, Christ came as the ultimate sacrifice....to build a Temple again would be an abomination to God.

Heb. 10:9-12 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

God Bless

Rose

Check this out:

Revelation 21
22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
Both God and the Lamb are the temple (singular).

[gregoryfl]

I think it was Amos which was cited in Acts 15.I believe that's futuristic. But looking at the encouragement of rebuilding the city and Temple seems to me as a thing in the past because of the needlessness after Christ was crucified.

Psalm 40 mentioned in Hebrews 10 mentions that sacrifices and wine offering were not needed anymore.

Gilgal,

Can you clarify something, just to make sure I understand you correctly. Are you saying that Amos 9:11,12 is yet future, that it was not fulfilled in the first century?

Ron

[gilgal]

Gilgal,

Can you clarify something, just to make sure I understand you correctly. Are you saying that Amos 9:11,12 is yet future, that it was not fulfilled in the first century?

Ron

Acts 15
14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
It seems to me that it's something that was fulfilled in the 1st century. But I don't understand what "the tabernacle of David means". The kingdom?

[gregoryfl]

It seems to me that it's something that was fulfilled in the 1st century. But I don't understand what "the tabernacle of David means". The kingdom?

gilgal,

Thanks for clarifying. The tabernacle of David was the tent David set up on Mount Zion in Jerusalem as a dwelling place for the ark of the covenant. The mood of this tent was different than the tabernacle that God had Moses set up. The sacrifices that took place at the tabernacle of David were not animal ones, but praise, thanksgiving, and worship.

I believe that James rightly spoke of the tabernacle of David being raised up again, because it was in the church, both Jew and Gentile, that God permanently would dwell, and it is also there that those same sacrifices of praise, thanksgiving, and worship would continue.

That physical tabernacle was within the kingdom of Israel, and now, the fulfillment of it is within the kingdom of God within us. Therefore it does have a connection with the kingdom, as Isaiah 16:5 says:

Isa 16:5 A throne will be established in loving kindness. One will sit on it in truth, in the tent of David, judging, seeking justice, and swift to do righteousness.


Ron

[gilgal]

gilgal,

Thanks for clarifying. The tabernacle of David was the tent David set up on Mount Zion in Jerusalem as a dwelling place for the ark of the covenant. The mood of this tent was different than the tabernacle that God had Moses set up. The sacrifices that took place at the tabernacle of David were not animal ones, but praise, thanksgiving, and worship.

I believe that James rightly spoke of the tabernacle of David being raised up again, because it was in the church, both Jew and Gentile, that God permanently would dwell, and it is also there that those same sacrifices of praise, thanksgiving, and worship would continue.

That physical tabernacle was within the kingdom of Israel, and now, the fulfillment of it is within the kingdom of God within us. Therefore it does have a connection with the kingdom, as Isaiah 16:5 says:

Isa 16:5 A throne will be established in loving kindness. One will sit on it in truth, in the tent of David, judging, seeking justice, and swift to do righteousness.


Ron

This is the first time I hear this. Can you give me the passages? When was it first set up. How was it used...

[gregoryfl]

This is the first time I hear this. Can you give me the passages? When was it first set up. How was it used...

Sure thing,

When the ark got captured by the Philistines, it was retaken but then left at the home of Abinidab.

When David became king, he brought the ark to Jerusalem. This is recorded in 2Sa 6. He took it here instead of Gibeon where the Tabernacle was. On mount Zion he set up a tent and put the ark in there.

2Sa 6:17 They brought in the ark of Yahweh, and set it in its place, in the midst of the tent that David had pitched for it; and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before Yahweh.

After this, David set up worship to take place there, according to history, for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This setting up of music is recorded in the book of Chronicles:

1Ch 6:31 These are they whom David set over the service of song in the house of Yahweh, after that the ark had rest.
1Ch 6:32 They ministered with song before the tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting, until Solomon had built the house of Yahweh in Jerusalem: and they waited on their office according to their order.

The worship that was set up in this tent was direct access to God, as there was no curtain separating the ark from the people. When the temple was built by Solomon, the ark was moved to it and the musicians went there to continue their service. Now the ark was hidden behind the curtain, but for the time of David, the presence of God represented by the ark was accessible for all. Most of the Psalms were composed during this time as well, as people would go into the tent to worship the Lord, where the musicians were.

Ron

[gilgal]

Sure thing,

When the ark got captured by the Philistines, it was retaken but then left at the home of Abinidab.

When David became king, he brought the ark to Jerusalem. This is recorded in 2Sa 6. He took it here instead of Gibeon where the Tabernacle was. On mount Zion he set up a tent and put the ark in there.

2Sa 6:17 They brought in the ark of Yahweh, and set it in its place, in the midst of the tent that David had pitched for it; and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before Yahweh.

After this, David set up worship to take place there, according to history, for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This setting up of music is recorded in the book of Chronicles:

1Ch 6:31 These are they whom David set over the service of song in the house of Yahweh, after that the ark had rest.
1Ch 6:32 They ministered with song before the tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting, until Solomon had built the house of Yahweh in Jerusalem: and they waited on their office according to their order.

The worship that was set up in this tent was direct access to God, as there was no curtain separating the ark from the people. When the temple was built by Solomon, the ark was moved to it and the musicians went there to continue their service. Now the ark was hidden behind the curtain, but for the time of David, the presence of God represented by the ark was accessible for all. Most of the Psalms were composed during this time as well, as people would go into the tent to worship the Lord, where the musicians were.

Ron

This deserves a study. Wow. It's kind of strange having the ark unveiled.

[joel]

If you look at what James says in Acts 15, He says;
1.) "after this"
2.) I will return, and,
3.) build again
the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and,
4.) set up
the ruins thereof
5.) that the residue of men might seek the Lord, and,
6.) all the Gentiles upon My name is called.
Sayeth the Lord, Who doeth all these things.

Did this occur in the time of Acts?.....or,.......in 70 A.D.?
I see that this is yet to occur. What say ye?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

If you look at what James says in Acts 15, He says;
1.) "after this"
2.) I will return, and,
3.) build again
the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and,
4.) set up
the ruins thereof
5.) that the residue of men might seek the Lord, and,
6.) all the Gentiles upon My name is called.
Sayeth the Lord, Who doeth all these things.

Did this occur in the time of Acts?.....or,.......in 70 A.D.?
I see that this is yet to occur. What say ye?

Joel
Hey there my friend! :yo: It's been a long time since we chatted. I trust all is well.

I think the answer is that is all happened before 70 AD, when the church (the NT Temple of God) was established in fullness at Pentecost and the subsequent entrance of the gentiles into the New Covenant that God made with the Jews.

Many blessings my friend,

Richard

[gilgal]

If you look at what James says in Acts 15, He says;
1.) "after this"
2.) I will return, and,
3.) build again
the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and,
4.) set up
the ruins thereof
5.) that the residue of men might seek the Lord, and,
6.) all the Gentiles upon My name is called.
Sayeth the Lord, Who doeth all these things.

Did this occur in the time of Acts?.....or,.......in 70 A.D.?
I see that this is yet to occur. What say ye?

Joel

To give an answer I need to fully understand what this Tabernacle of David is. It's probably something that's still occurring. Looking at the context it seems to be something that either started or fulfilled in Peter's time as James mentions.

Acts 15
13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

It makes me wonder what I will return means. This makes one turn to read Amos 9 completely. But even after reading it's hard to tell what that meant.

I still don't understand the prophecies where "David" is mentioned instead of a title like "Son of David" if you look at Ezekiel 37 and other places:

Ezekiel 37
25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

[joel]

Hey there my friend! It's been a long time since we chatted. I trust all is well.

I think the answer is that is all happened before 70 AD, when the church (the NT Temple of God) was established in fullness at Pentecost and the subsequent entrance of the gentiles into the New Covenant that God made with the Jews.

Many blessings my friend,

Richard

Good to hear from you again, The Great Karmack, Administrator Extraordinaire.
Blessings to you "two".

Joel

[gregoryfl]

If it were yet future, then there would be no point for James to use it to try and show how the tent of David being rebuilt would be used for the Gentiles to come, and then say that applied to what they were seeing happen in their day.

One thing to keep in mind is that something being fulfilled does not always mean it ends, as though after 70 AD the Bible no longer has relevance. The fulfillment can take place forever, and there are several scriptures that fit that description.

For example, I believe that Revelation 22 has been fulfilled to the letter, yet today, and forever into the future that fulfillment will continue forever, without end.

Ron

[gilgal]

If it were yet future, then there would be no point for James to use it to try and show how the tent of David being rebuilt would be used for the Gentiles to come, and then say that applied to what they were seeing happen in their day.

One thing to keep in mind is that something being fulfilled does not always mean it ends, as though after 70 AD the Bible no longer has relevance. The fulfillment can take place forever, and there are several scriptures that fit that description.

For example, I believe that Revelation 22 has been fulfilled to the letter, yet today, and forever into the future that fulfillment will continue forever, without end.

Ron


2 Samuel 6:17
And they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it: and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD.
Isaiah 16:5
And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.
Amos 9:11
In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:
Acts 15:16
After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:

Still, to me this tabernacle is still a mystery. Does the breaches refer to Uzzah's breach in 2 Samuel 6? The breach was over the ark of the covenant. The tabernacle was used for sacrifices in that chapter.

Off topic, there was a temple before Solomon's:

1 Samuel 1
9 So Hannah rose up after they had eaten in Shiloh, and after they had drunk. Now Eli the priest sat upon a seat by a post of the temple of the LORD.

[gregoryfl]

Hey Gilgal,

Yes, as I mentioned in my other post, David took the ark to the tent he had made instead of the tabernacle in Gibeon, which was according to Moses. The priests still offered their normal sacrifices and services there, but without the ark in it. The only animal sacrifices that took place in the tent of David were the ones that you read about in 2Samuel 6, as you noted, which served to inaugurate the putting of the ark in it. From then on it served as the place of continual worship in song and dance, for 33 years, until Solomon built another temple and the ark and the singers were moved there.

Ron

[Richard Amiel McGough]

If you look at what James says in Acts 15, He says;
1.) "after this"
2.) I will return, and,
3.) build again
the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and,
4.) set up
the ruins thereof
5.) that the residue of men might seek the Lord, and,
6.) all the Gentiles upon My name is called.
Sayeth the Lord, Who doeth all these things.

Did this occur in the time of Acts?.....or,.......in 70 A.D.?
I see that this is yet to occur. What say ye?

Joel
I think Scripture gives a very clear answer to these questions. We simply need to read the context:

Acts 15:7-11 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them [the first century Gentiles] the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them [the first century Gentiles] , purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they [the first century Gentiles] .
James then explicitly stated that the prophecy from Amos 9 was speaking of the first century Gentiles that received the Gospel:

Acts 15:14-17 Simeon [Peter] hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Is there any question here? Is not the meaning as plain as 1 + 1 = 2? The rebuilding of the "tabernacle" is a symbol of the New Covenant Church in which God created "one new man" from Jews and Gentiles. There is now no difference. It seems to me to be absolutely and perfectly coherent with the entire teaching of the entire New Testament.

Many blessings to all.

Richard

[gregoryfl]

Still, to me this tabernacle is still a mystery. Does the breaches refer to Uzzah's breach in 2 Samuel 6? The breach was over the ark of the covenant.

The breaches, (notice it is in the plural) speaks of the divided house of Israel and also the division of Jew and Gentile, being healed, repaired. This would be for the nations to then seek the Lord, as was started in the first century and continues even to this day.

Ron

[gilgal]

I think Scripture gives a very clear answer to these questions. We simply need to read the context:

Acts 15:7-11 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them [the first century Gentiles] the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them [the first century Gentiles] , purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they [the first century Gentiles] .
James then explicitly stated that the prophecy from Amos 9 was speaking of the first century Gentiles that received the Gospel:

Acts 15:14-17 Simeon [Peter] hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Is there any question here? Is not the meaning as plain as 1 + 1 = 2? The rebuilding of the "tabernacle" is a symbol of the New Covenant Church in which God created "one new man" from Jews and Gentiles. There is now no difference. It seems to me to be absolutely and perfectly coherent with the entire teaching of the entire New Testament.

Many blessings to all.

Richard

I see differences of the quotation in Acts by James and the actual prophecy:


Amos 9
11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:
12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.


Acts 15
15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

Could this be a putting together of several prophecies? And how should I will return be interpreted? Spiritual? Physical?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I see differences of the quotation in Acts by James and the actual prophecy:

Could this be a putting together of several prophecies? And how should I will return be interpreted? Spiritual? Physical?

Hi Gilgal,

I have wondered about the slight change of language too. I don't think anyone knows the answer for sure, but here is what the New American Commentary has to say on this point:

James now showed how the coming of the Gentiles into the people of God was grounded in the Old Testament prophets. Basically he quoted from the Septuagint text of Amos 9:11–12, with possible allusions from Jer 12:15 and Isa 45:21. In the Hebrew text of Amos 9:11–12, the prophet spoke of the coming restoration of Israel, which God would bring about. The house of David would be rebuilt and the kingdom restored to its former glory. Edom and all the nations over which David ruled would once again be gathered into Israel. The Greek text differs significantly and speaks of the remnant of humankind and all the nations seeking the Lord.93 In both traditions there is the concept of “the nations which are called by my name,” which links directly with “a people for his name” (“for himself,” NIV) in v. 14. This is the main concept James wished to develop. In the Gentiles, God was choosing a people for himself, a new restored people of God, Jew and Gentile in Christ, the true Israel. In the total message of Acts it is clear that the rebuilt house of David occurred in the Messiah. Christ was the scion of David who fulfilled the covenant of David and established a kingdom that would last forever (2 Sam 7:12f.; cf. Acts 13:32–34). From the beginning the Jewish Christians had realized that the promises to David were fulfilled in Christ. What they were now beginning to see, and what James saw foretold in Amos, was that these promises included the Gentiles.
In any case, the slight variation of language seems like a secondary issue relative to the primary message of Acts 15, which is that the birth of the Church and the inclusion of the Gentiles with the Jews as a new restored "people of God." I see nothing in Acts 15 that would suggest any future fulfillment.

Richard

[gregoryfl]

James felt free, because he was speaking of the event as taking place after the tent was in ruins, to speak of it as "after this." As to the return of the Lord to do this, it is not the usual term for the coming again of Christ which happened in 70 AD. It appears to be referring to Jesus coming as he did, as the son of David, and as rightful heir to the throne, restoring what was lost of the Davidic dynasty and glory. This I believe he did upon his ascension.

Ron

[gilgal]

Hi Gilgal,

I have wondered about the slight change of language too. I don't think anyone knows the answer for sure, but here is what the New American Commentary has to say on this point:

James now showed how the coming of the Gentiles into the people of God was grounded in the Old Testament prophets. Basically he quoted from the Septuagint text of Amos 9:11–12, with possible allusions from Jer 12:15 and Isa 45:21. In the Hebrew text of Amos 9:11–12, the prophet spoke of the coming restoration of Israel, which God would bring about. The house of David would be rebuilt and the kingdom restored to its former glory. Edom and all the nations over which David ruled would once again be gathered into Israel. The Greek text differs significantly and speaks of the remnant of humankind and all the nations seeking the Lord.93 In both traditions there is the concept of 'the nations which are called by my name,' which links directly with 'a people for his name' ('for himself,' NIV) in v. 14. This is the main concept James wished to develop. In the Gentiles, God was choosing a people for himself, a new restored people of God, Jew and Gentile in Christ, the true Israel. In the total message of Acts it is clear that the rebuilt house of David occurred in the Messiah. Christ was the scion of David who fulfilled the covenant of David and established a kingdom that would last forever (2 Sam 7:12f.; cf. Acts 13:32–34). From the beginning the Jewish Christians had realized that the promises to David were fulfilled in Christ. What they were now beginning to see, and what James saw foretold in Amos, was that these promises included the Gentiles.
In any case, the slight variation of language seems like a secondary issue relative to the primary message of Acts 15, which is that the birth of the Church and the inclusion of the Gentiles with the Jews as a new restored "people of God." I see nothing in Acts 15 that would suggest any future fulfillment.

Richard

The prophets mentioned in the New Testament often refers to the 12 minor prophets namely:

Hosea;
Joel;
Amos;
Obadiah;
Jonah;
Micah;
Nahum;
Habakkuk;
Zephaniah;
Haggai;
Zechariah;
Malachi

So there are 3 possibilities that I know what James meant when he said written in the prophets:

It's written in one of the books of the 12 minor prophets;
It's written in the prophets in general;
or it's written in several prophets but putting it in all together



Jeremiah 12:15
And it shall come to pass, after that I have plucked them out I will return, and have compassion on them, and will bring them again, every man to his heritage, and every man to his land.
This is what happened in Ezra's time.

[gilgal]

I want to move this discussion in a new thread because I believe this is very important:
http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?p=12044#post12044