When James cited Amos 9:11-12 in defense of his decision, he deliberately changed the words “In that day I will raise up” to “After this I will return”. Is James rendering of “After this I will return” in reference to the Second Coming and subsequent 1000 year reign (thus establishing fallen tent of David)? Dispensationalist author John Walvoord wrote:
He states, in effect, that it was God’s purpose to bless the Gentiles as well as Israel, but in their order. God was to visit the Gentiles first, “to take out of them a people for his name.” James goes on to say that this is entirely in keeping with the prophets, for they had stated that the period of Jewish blessing and triumph should be after the Gentile period: “After these things I will return, And I will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen.” Instead of identifying the period of Gentile conversion with the rebuilding of the tabernacle of David, it is carefully distinguished by the first (Gentile blessing), and after this, referring to Israel’s coming glory. The passage instead of identifying God’s purpose for the church and for the nation, Israel, established a specific time order. Israel’s blessing will not come until “I return,” … That it could not refer either to the Incarnation or to the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost is evident in that neither are “return’s.” The passage under consideration constitutes, then, an important guide in determining the purpose of God. God will first conclude His work for the Gentiles in the period of Israel’s dispersion; then He will return to bring in the promised blessings for Israel. It is needless to say that this confirms the interpretation that Christ is not now on the throne of David bringing blessing to Israel as the prophets predicted, but He is rather on His Father’s throne waiting for the coming earthly kingdom and interceding for His own who form the church.
https://bible.org/seriespage/7-fulfillment-davidic-covenant
John Foster
Let me see the experiment where evolution occurred between a single cell and its constituent ingredients. Or how about where a simple cell developed its Golgi bodies.
John Foster
You made 3 statements. I responded to the second one where you said science was repeatable. Science has its problems even proving its existence without an outside source providing the background for it to exist. Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created… and science was part of what was created!
Paul Gray
There are statements about the world we live in , in scripture that I consider scientific. If it contradicted known facts I wouldn’t trust it to be inspired. Scripture says that the earth hangs upon nothing, that the stars are as the sands of the sea, that the earth is circular, that the light , water , plants , sea creatures, land and flying creatures were all created before man and in this logical sequence that science bears out. It says that all creatures or trees produce fruit after their own kind, without mans intervention observational science proves this to be true. It even talks about the rivers flowing into the ocean but then they return back to where they came . It describes pathways in the sea that have recently been discovered. This may not have been on topic but I spent all this time typing it so here you go.
Harold Goldman
First verse of the bible is the theroy of relativity