Pray For The Peace Of Jerusalem

[Asyncritus]

I do not know what I will conclude re Rev 11. But if that text "proves" that Jesus is not presently King, my faith in the inerrancy of Scripture will be shaken,

That seems to be a very strong conclusion to draw - and I humbly suggest, a completely wrong one.

Your faith in the certainty of your opinions is what should be shaken, not the inerrancy of scripture. I am confident - well, hopeful, anyway - that you would be the first to agree that you have not yet attained to a state of all knowledge!

since then we would have a number of texts, including Matthew 28 and Acts 2 (you have yet to respond to that argument) placing Jesus in the role of presently seated king of the earth, and Revelation 11 suggesting otherwise.

I don't know why you are referring to Acts 2. Nothing there remotely indicates that Jesus is as yet king over all the earth, or even Israel. Remember, He was born TO BE the King of the Jews, and He will be.

By the way, I never said that God was presently king, I said that Jesus was presently king. 1 Corinthians 15 has Jesus "handing over" the kingdom to God at some point in the future.

In that, you commit a seriously unscriptural blunder. I really didn't think this was a point to even begin to dispute. However:

Ps 29:10 The LORD sitteth upon the flood; yea, the LORD sitteth King for ever.

Ps 47:8 God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness.

Ps 59:13 Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be: and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. Selah.


Ps 99:1 The LORD reigneth; let the people tremble: he sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved.

Re 5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

Note, the Lamb is in second place, just as we would expect.

Da 4:17 This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.

So in sum:

God is the King over the planet.

Jesus is at His right hand, and WILL BE the king over the Jews first, and then the Gentiles. He will not be so UNTIL the proper time, (so designated by God in Ps 110.1) which will be at His return.

 

[Asyncritus]

Hebrews 2.8 may be a useful verse:

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing [that is] not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. [/FONT][/FONT]

A very useful quote, Farouk. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[Drew]

On earth:

Lu 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

This clearly means he received the right to kingship over the earth, but it has certainly not happened yet, since He hasn't returned.

Ah, but He has returned.

Please consider the following argument, which you have already seen from our previous battles over Jesus as God:

Much of the gospel of Luke is the story of Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. Towards the end of that journey, Jesus tells the parable of the returning king – the story of a king who goes away and then returns to call his servants to account. This parable is found in Luke 19:11 and following.

This parable has almost universally been understood to constitute a statement by Jesus that He will go away, though crucifixion, resurrection, and then ascension, only to return in the future (i.e. in the 2nd coming). On such a reading, Jesus sets Himself, as He tells the parable, in the role of the king who is about to leave.

I suggest this is not the correct reading. Instead, we should understand that in telling the parable, Jesus is setting Himself in the role of the returning king, not the departing one. On such a reading, the departing king represents YHWH leaving his people by abandoning the temple and sending the Jews into exile, something that lies in the past of Jesus’ audience. If this interpretation is correct, Jesus can logically fill only one role in the parable: YHWH returning to Zion as promised. And this means, of course, that Jesus is the embodiment of Israel’s God.

Why should we read the parable this way? Well, for starters, the parable does not really work on its traditional reading. Note what happens to the third servant – all that he has is taken from him. This really cannot be reconciled with the notion that the returning King is Jesus at his 2nd coming, calling his people to account. Nowhere in the New Testament is there even the slightest suggestion that any of Jesus’ followers will be cast out and lose all at Jesus’ 2nd coming as the parable would seem to suggest on the traditional reading. It is clear from the scriptures that that believers who “build with hay and stubble†will still be saved. So it is very hard to make the parable work with Jesus as the King about to go away and return at a 2nd coming.

Besides, consideration of what happens next makes it clear that Jesus is setting himself in the role of the returning king. Note what happens after parable is told – Jesus rides on to Jerusalem and, upon seeing it, says the following:

"If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes. 43"For the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side, 44and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation."

Clearly, Jesus sees Himself as the King returning in visitation, returning to judge Jerusalem who is set in the role of the unfaithful 3rd servant. If, as many believe, the returning King in the parable is Jesus at His second coming, then it would be deeply misleading for Jesus to give the parable then immediately ride into Jerusalem as He does, to palm branches waving no less, with all the imagery of a returning King that this action clearly evokes. No. Jesus clearly intends his listeners to understand that He is the returning King, not the departing one. In giving this parable and then riding into the royal city as a king, Jesus is clearly telling us that He, through this teaching and these actions, is embodying the fulfillment of the hoped for return of YHWH to his people. And what does Jesus do next?:

Then he entered the temple area and began driving out those who were selling. 46"It is written," he said to them, " 'My house will be a house of prayer'; but you have made it 'a den of robbers.'

Note how this maps perfectly to this prophecy about the return of YHWH to his people:

Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts. 2"But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap.

The overall picture is clear. We have the strong Biblical tradition of the promised return of YHWH to Zion (and his temple) after the time of the exile. Now here, in Luke, we have the journey of a young Jew named Jesus to Jerusalem. As He is about to enter, He tells a parable of a king who goes away and then returns. Next, He laments over Jerusalem and declares that she is not recognizing His mission as a “visitationâ€. In the context of Jews who saw themselves still in exile, and still awaiting the return of YHWH, Jesus’ intended meaning is clear. In saying that Jerusalem has not recognized her visitation, He is saying that she has failed to recognize that, in His very actions, the promised return of YHWH to Zion is being fulfilled. And then Jesus enters the temple and overturns the tables in judgement, fulfilling the Malach 3 promise that YHWH will come suddenly to the temple in judgement. The coherence of this picture is compelling. Jesus is embodying the return of YHWH to Zion. And that, of course, makes Him the embodiment of Israel’s God.

 

[farouk]

A very useful quote, Farouk. Thanks for the reminder.

A: YW

 

[Drew]

Hebrews 2.8 may be a useful verse:

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing [that is] not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. [/FONT][/FONT]

Of course, and this support the idea, also expressed in 1 Corinthians 15 that Jesus can be reigning (read "be king", of course) even though some enemies remain to be defeated.

There is this commonly held notion that Jesus cannot be King right now since there is still evil and death in the world. Both Paul and the writer of Hebrews know otherwise - Jesus is Lord right now even though not all enemises are yet defeated.

 

[Drew]

That seems to be a very strong conclusion to draw - and I humbly suggest, a completely wrong one.

The point was that if Rev 11 denies that Jesus is presently King over the world, then there is a conflict with Matthew 28, which clearly states that He is:

If Jesus has already been given all authority on earth, - and He clearly has - this, by definition, places Him in the "King" role.

Can you explain how someone who has "all authority on earth" would not be understood to be "King" of earth?

Who is King, if it is someone other than the person with all authority? Whoever, that person is, he must have zero authority since Jesus clearly has it all.

How can a person (or being) with zero authority on earth be "King" of earth?

Why is no one answering this question? I think I know why.

 

[Drew]

I want to clarify something. Even though I believe Jesus is presently a King over the entire earth, this does not mean that I believe that His Kingdom is fully "complete" or consummated. That only happens in the future. But the Scriptures are clear - He is already King over the world.

 

[reba]

Rom 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.



Luk 11:20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.



Luk 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
Luk 22:16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
Luk 22:17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
Luk 22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.



Luk 24:30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
Luk 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

 

[Drew]

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

I would like to say something about this text.

Some assert that a brief of teaching in Luke 17, particularly verse 21, locate the kingdom of God as “inside†the believer, with the implication that the broader world does not fall under its jurisdiction. Here are several translations of verse 21:

NET: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is in your midst.â€

NIV: nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you."

NASB: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

NLT: You won’t be able to say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘It’s over there!’ For the Kingdom of God is among you."

MSG:Nor when someone says, 'Look here!' or, 'There it is!' And why? Because God's kingdom is already among you."

BBE: And men will not say, See, it is here! or, There! for the kingdom of God is among you.

NRSV: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For, in fact, the kingdom of God is among you."

NKJV: "nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you."

Note how only 2 of these 8 translations render the last bit as “within youâ€. All the other translations have Jesus telling the listeners that the Kingdom is “in your midst†or “among you†– suggesting, of course, that the kingdom is “present right nowâ€.

And the fatal blow to the “within you†interpretation arises from who Jesus is speaking to:

Now at one point the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God was coming, so he answered, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed

If Jesus is saying that the “location†of the kingdom is specifically “within the human personâ€, Jesus is telling the Pharisees that the kingdom of God is within them, the Pharisees, in this sense.

Not likely, of course – the Pharisees were precisely the ones in whom the kingdom was not present.

 

[reba]

If we are full of righteous peace and joy. It will over flow and be in the midst. So often we only see the negative in our world.



I may not say it the same way Drew but i do agree with you.

Would Jesus say the Kingdom, this and that, when there was/is no kingdom? Is there a kingdom with out a King?

 

[Vic C.]

Back to the OP, please!

 

[Asyncritus]

Ah, but He has returned.

???????2:o:shocked!2

This parable is found in Luke 19:11 and following.

On such a reading, Jesus sets Himself, as He tells the parable, in the role of the king who is about to leave.

That is correct.

I suggest this is not the correct reading...Jesus is setting Himself in the role of the returning king, not the departing one....

Now you begin to defy my comprehension.

...Nowhere in the New Testament is there even the slightest suggestion that any of Jesus’ followers will be cast out and lose all at Jesus’ 2nd coming as the parable would seem to suggest on the traditional reading.

You've gotta be kidding me, haven't you?

So it is very hard to make the parable work with Jesus as the King about to go away and return at a 2nd coming.

I'm sorry, but it isn't hard at all. The difficulty arises from your preconception.

...the returning king. Note what happens after parable is told – Jesus rides on to Jerusalem and, upon seeing it, says the following:

"...and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation."

Clearly, Jesus sees Himself as the King returning in visitation...

You are mistaken. The prophecy being fulfilled says:

Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

The fulfilment is equally clear on the point.

Mt 21:5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

Joh 12:15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt.

There is not the slightest suggestion of 'returneth unto thee'. If you can see such a suggestion, please point it out to me,because I've missed it completely, along with thousands of other people.

The visitation being referred to is His first coming. They failed to recognise Him, and in consequence were severely punished, exactly as He says, and you quote:

because you did not recognize the time of your visitation."

Consequence:

...they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another,

the word 'because' connects their rejection of Him, to the destruction of the city and the nation. There is no difficulty whatsoever in comprehending the point.

...it would be deeply misleading for Jesus to give the parable then immediately ride into Jerusalem as He does, to palm branches waving no less, with all the imagery of a returning King that this action clearly evokes.

As I've pointed out, He is COMING to Jerusalem as their (to be rejected) King.

No. Jesus clearly intends his listeners to understand that He is the returning King, not the departing one....

I don't think you could possibly be more mistaken here.

And what does Jesus do next?:

Then he entered the temple area and began driving out those who were selling. 46"It is written," he said to them, " 'My house will be a house of prayer'; but you have made it 'a den of robbers.'

Note how this maps perfectly to this prophecy about the return of YHWH to his people:

You may not have noticed, but they were making HIS FATHER's HOUSE a den of thieves. Not Jesus' own.

Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; ...

I've put up various translations of this verse which make it clear that the Lord whom ye seek is not YHWH. The word is 'adon' meaning:

1 ¶ Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, (Heb. adon) whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. AV

1 ¶ "Look! I’m sending my messenger on ahead to clear the way for me. Suddenly, out of the blue, the Leader you’ve been looking for will enter his Temple—yes, the Messenger of the Covenant, the one you’ve been waiting for. Look! He’s on his way!" A Message from the mouth of GOD-of-the-Angel-Armies.

Message Bible gets the idea perfectly here.

He did come to the temple; He did purge it - but the prophecy remains unfulfilled in completeness:

2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap:

3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.

This never happened at His first coming. The sons of Levi did not offer in righteousness after He cleansed it - in fact the temple was destroyed, obliterated completely.

4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.

This is certainly completely in contrast to what Jesus actually prophesied, and what did happen in AD70.

... As He is about to enter, He tells a parable of a king who goes away and then returns. Next, He laments over Jerusalem and declares that she is not recognizing His mission as a “visitationâ€.

So far, so good.

In the context of Jews who saw themselves still in exile,

This is totally incorrect. You may recall the priests saying:

Jn 11. 48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

They certainly did not WANT to go into exile - therefore they did not think of themselves as BEING in exile.

In saying that Jerusalem has not recognized her visitation, He is saying that she has failed to recognize that, in His very actions, the promised return of YHWH to Zion is being fulfilled.

If this is really the case, then it is utterly remarkable that He does not say so very plainly. He doesn't, and that casts the gravest doubt on this construction you are putting up.

... And that, of course, makes Him the embodiment of Israel’s God.

I think you've said this the wrong way round.

Your preconception that Jesus is the embodiment of Israel's God is driving the production of this tortuous, and I'm afraid, mistaken interpretation of one of the major doctrines of the New Testament, and the Old, come to that.

I don't know if you know it, but if Jesus HAS returned, then it is invisibly, and you're right in the arms of the Jehovah's Witnesses and their astonishing group of errors.

You are also going to struggle with passages such as:

Rev 1.7 Behold, he comes with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Matt. 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

2 Thess.1.7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:[didn't you say something about the lack of punishment?]
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

They HAVE to see Him in order to admire Him.

As far as I can tell, none of this has happened yet.

 

[tim-from-pa]

reba you misunderstand that. when we pray for peace in jerusalem were a saying this O LORD COME. that is the only way peace shall come to jerusalem.

where does christ physically return? the mount of olives and that is where? right outside of jerusalem.

I'm with you 110%. That's what I told people. There can be no peace in Jerusalem until the Lord comes, so when one prays for Jerusalem they are effectively praying for the Lord to return whether they realize it or not.

 

[jasoncran]

I'm with you 110%. That's what I told people. There can be no peace in Jerusalem until the Lord comes, so when one prays for Jerusalem they are effectively praying for the Lord to return whether they realize it or not.

and jews think we are blessing them. lol we are praying that they come to the lord and become fully jewish as the lord wanted them to be.

man i cant tell them that one buts there.jesus told the pharisee that God is able of these rocks to raise children of abraham.

 

[tim-from-pa]

So why should anyone need to be praying for the peace of the Jerusalem which is above.. is there not peace there..?

No answer for this..?

I had to chuckle with you on this. I agree with you. Why would we be praying for the heavenly Jerusalem? Jesus is already exulted and God has control over that Jerusalem no problem. King David wrote about the earthly Jerusalem at the time, and that's what we should be praying for and for Christ to return and take the throne there.

 

[jasoncran]

the prayer for the peace of jerusalem in the tanakh days was for the first comming of the lord. the reason some do it now is for the messiah to actually do what king david wanted.

 

[Eventide]

I had to chuckle with you on this. I agree with you. Why would we be praying for the heavenly Jerusalem? Jesus is already exulted and God has control over that Jerusalem no problem. King David wrote about the earthly Jerusalem at the time, and that's what we should be praying for and for Christ to return and take the throne there.

And why is it such a problem for so many in Christendom.. that God is going to save and restore Israel..?

 

[Asyncritus]

The actual truth is quite startling. Here's Peter:

Acts 3.19 ESV: Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out,
20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus,
21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.

The force of that is: unless they repent, God will not send Him. When they do repent, He will.

So the whole future of the world depends on the Jews repenting and accepting Jesus as their Messiah. Jesus Himself says so too:

Lu 13:35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

So we ought to be praying seriously and frequently for the peace of Jerusalem - ie that God may send the Christ back to the earth to establish the Kingdom of God.

 

[tim-from-pa]

And why is it such a problem for so many in Christendom.. that God is going to save and restore Israel..?

Well, I'm going to adamantly state that Jesus, which is taken up into heaven, shall come in like manner as he was seen going into heaven. I guess some non-futurists have problems with that thought.

 

[Drew]

???????2:o:shocked!2

My assertion was clear and understandable and the rest of my argument supported it. I see no reason for your "surprise".

You've gotta be kidding me, haven't you?

Not constructrive. And, of course, you are ignoring the argument. If Jesus is setting Himself in the position of the King who is about to leave and who will return in the future, then we have a problem precisely because this returning King "casts out" some of his own:

He said to him, 'By your own words I will judge you, you worthless slave. Did you know that I am an exacting man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow? 23'Then why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, I would have collected it with interest?' 24"Then he said to the bystanders, 'Take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.'

We need to honour the details. On the conventional reading of this parable, the "King" (Jesus) is about to go away and return at the "2nd coming" - which we all agree lies in the future. And he tells the "slaves" (who clearly stand for "us the church on the traditional reading) to be responsible stewards of that which He has entrusted to them. But if that is so, when Jesus returns, He will, according to the parable, cast out some of his own subjects for failing in their commission.

But that means that some who are real members of the church will be lost. However, this is something we never get a hint of anywhere else in the Scriptures (or so I would suggest). In fact, we are told that God will most assuredly "complete that which He has begun in us.

In any event, the force of the argument does not really rest on this bit - it rests on Jesus following this statement up by riding into Jerusalem announcing that He is not "visiting". This is, of course, the promised return of YHWH to Zion, something you deny (in the threads on Jesus' divinity).

The parable is not about the second coming, it is about the "first" coming and a judgement against Israel. The king (God) has commissioned Israel to be a light to the world, and has promised to return and judge. Well, Jesus fits perfectly in the role of the returning King (YHWH) who judges those members of Israel who have failed in their commission.

This interpretation coheres very well both with many other judgements that Jesus makes against Israel of His day. Why, shortly after He gives us this parable, He weeps over Jerusalem and then enters the very symbol of Israel - the temple - and performs a symbolic act of judgement against Israel.

To those who see the flow of the narrative, it should be clear - Jesus is the returning King, not the departing King. And the ones He is judging are Jews who have not fulfilled their covenant obligations. This is not a teaching about the second coming.

I will address the rest of your post later.