Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why 70 A.D. and why predictions | Matt 16:28 | Tomret | 183851 | ||
Hi Brian, Sorry, I misunderstood the focus of your question to be, why is the study of Jesus predictions and 70 AD of importance? Was John the only one left? Not long ago I searched for info on disciples' deaths and found a virtual void. What is your source for this? Of possible interest to you might be http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1878_russell_parousia/russell_parousia_03d.html : Opening of the Seventh Seal, continues Russell's commentary, Rev. 8 through 11. The last trumpet sounds, the Judgement is come. He says the two witnesses were Jesus brother James and Peter. He rejects as a fable the claim that Peter was crucified upside down - at his request so as not to die in the same manner as Jesus - in Rome by order of Nero. Cited as proof of Peter's crucifixion is Jesus' prediction of Peter's martydom at John 21:18, but the language does not indicate crucifixion as the means. And I think it highly unlikely that the evil despot Nero would find mercy to grant Peter's request. Now, this is not proof of course but the conclusions of the commentator, and to me a plausible scenario that would match the Truth spoken by Jesus. I beleive the disciples hearing Jesus say to them, "34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." could have had no other understanding than that their generation - them and others living at that time - were the ones meant, and that after all signs detailed from verse 4-33 were fulfilled, then would be His Coming. I agree He couldn't reveal more than the Father would allow and to do so would be to sin. Moreover, to say He didn't know if He did know would also be a sin. During His transformation to human form, He had to have had many of man's limitations. He truly didn't know the day and hour. And He was tempted, experienced the emotions of a man, and felt pain, oh what pain! No the Mt. of Olive has not split, nor has the sun went dark, etc. But if it were ever to happen, it would be the end of life on earth then eventually our solar system at the least. Wouldn't that mean that God has broken the promise made in Gen. 8:21,22? Since I don't see that as possible I have to conclude this type language is figurative or symbolic. 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." appear - phaino: can mean to be seen but also to appear to the mind, seem to one's judgment or opinion. tribe - phule: a tribe, in the NT all the persons descending from one of the twelve sons of the patriarch Jacob, a nation, people. earth - ge: can mean earth as a whole but also a country, land enclosed within fixed boundaries, a tract of land, territory, region. As far as I know no one has ever suggested OT descriptions of God coming in the clouds was a literal visible event. I beleive Jesus return in judgement happened in 70AD, but I agree it is still imperative we be ready to meet our Maker for we know not when that might be. Two days for us or for God? Tom |
||||||
2 | 70A.D. or not? | Matt 16:28 | Brian#9 | 183889 | ||
Hello Tom, How important is it that Jesus came back in 70A.D. or not? Anything my Lord and Savior dose is important to me. And if He did not why are they teaching it? Quote " I believe the disciples hearing Jesus say to them,"34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." could have no other understanding than that their generation - them and others living at that time - were the ones meant, and that after all signs detailed from verse 4-33 were fulfilled, then would be His Coming." Tom do you believe Jesus came back in 70A.D.yes or no? "I agree He couldn't reveal more than the Father would allow and to do so would be a sin.Moreover, to say He didn't know if He did know would also be a sin." We are in total agreement hear. Do you believe that Matt. 24:34 is part of the proof that Jesus came back in 70A.D.? Still looking for Truth, Brian P.S. God's days ,He is the only one that counts. |
||||||
3 | 70A.D. or not? | Matt 16:28 | Tomret | 183896 | ||
Hi Brian, good to hear from you again. If Jesus came in final judgement in 70AD - and yes, I beleive He did - It confirms His prophesies of that event throughout the Gospels, and it removes the argument of atheists, Jews, Muslims, and others that He was NOT the Messiah because the things He predicted didn't come to pass in the time frame indicated. You ask why are they teaching it? By "they" I assume you mean Preterists. Why does any denomination, creed, or faith teach their interpretation over another? Because they beleive it to be the Truth. I beleive Matt. 24:34 was a prophesy to the disciples that the generation living at the time He spoke would not pass until the things He had just described came to pass. And I beleive these things did come to pass culminating in His judgement in 70AD, confirming His prophesy. Let me ask you to mentally travel back in time and be one of those disciples. Leave your beleifs here because they didn't yet have a beleif system, they were learning one. Jesus had been describing the signs that would precede His coming and the end of the age. Then He said, "Verily (Listen up! What I'm about to say is important!) I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." Would you have honestly thought He was talking about a people living thousands of years later? OK, I know you would like to stay there, but come on back to the present. If one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day, then two of His days could be two thousand of our years, right? Amazing how the math works out. Now, allow me to digress a bit to give you some idea where I'm coming from. Although I became a Christian in my younger days I never became a serious student of the Bible. I read it from time to time but didn't get much out of it. Most of the OT may as well have been in Hebrew. The NT was easier to understand, but Jesus seemed to be telling the disciples and others that some of them would live to see His coming. That wasn't what I'd been taught. I couldn't tolerate the doubt this caused me so I had to conclude I was just too dumb to understand it. Keep in mind this was before I had heard of Preterism. After I retired 3 1/2 years ago I decided to make another attempt. I would sit and read and before long find myself nodding off. And I got about as much out of it while nodded off as when awake! I would hear something on a religious documentary and not knowing where to go in the Bible to see if it were true, I turned to the internet. Before long I stumbled upon a Preterist site. The more I read the more sense it made. Suddenly the NT came alive, and so did I. I've been studying intently - sometimes obsessivly - ever since. Now I'm by no means an expert - if what I know would fill a kitchen cupboard then what I don't know would fill a warehouse, but I hope this is helpful to you. Researching to try to answer your questions has been helpful to me. Tom |
||||||
4 | 70A.D. or not? | Matt 16:28 | jonp | 183906 | ||
Hi, While I can fully agree that Jesus came in judgement on Jerusalem in 70 AD just as He came in power at Pentecost and in what followed I note that no one has mentioned what Luke says. There the position is expressed with total clarity. First the destruction of Jerusalem (Luke 21.21-24. Then the scattering of the Jews as they are led captive among all nations (Luke 21.24). Then the treading down of Jerusalem during the times of the Gentiles (Luke 21.24). Then the cosmic effects and men fainting for fear at what is to come (Luke 21.25-26). And then the Son of Man will come in power and great glory (Luke 21.27). I fail to see in this how His coming in glory can indicate the destruction of Jerusalem as important events are to take place between them. The 'these things' (which are to happen in that generation) are the indicators of the coming time of redemption, not the time of redemption itself (Luke 21.28), which Jesus did not know (Mark 13.32). They are the leaves that indicate that the Kingly Rule of God is near (Luke 21.29), not the actual coming of the Kingly Rule of God in His coming. There is no question therefore of unfulfilled prophecy. I do not wish to prolong this subject which has been well aired. But it important that we take all Scriptures into account. Perhaps you could be kind enough to explain what you think Luke meant, if he did not mean what he said. All best wishes jonp |
||||||
5 | 70A.D. or not? | Matt 16:28 | Coper44 | 183925 | ||
jonp, Can you provide Scripture that describes the Day of Pentecost as the coming of the Lord? I've always thought it was the coming of the Holy Spirit. The same Comforter that Jesus said He would send. I don't see this as a coming of Christ. In fact I haven't found Scriptural support for more than two "comings". Heb. 9:28 Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. It's interesting that you appeal to Luke 21 to support two separate "comings" of Christ. One in judgement on Jerusalem and one in power and great glory to further fulfill prophecy. Luke 21:22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Since we are to take "all Scriptures into account" what do you think the phrase "all that is written" is refering to? Scripture leads us to the conclusion that the coming of the Lord in judgement was also the second coming to which the NT refers. Coper |
||||||
6 | 70A.D. or not? | Matt 16:28 | jonp | 183935 | ||
Hi Coper. Yes there are Scriptures which refer to Jesus returning in different ways. For example. 'I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you,' (John 14.18). Does this not refer to Pentecost? Again in Matthew 28.20 Jesus says, 'And lo I am with you always'. Does this not have Pentecost in mind?. Again Jesus says, 'If a man loves Me he will keep My word, and My Father will love Him, and we will come to Him and make our home with Him.' Here we have Jesus continually coming a million times over. Again in Matthew 18.20 we read, 'where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.' He could not be in the midst of them without coming! Hebrews 9.28 refers to a physical coming. I did not suggest that Jesus came physically at Pentecost or in the destruction of Jerusalem. My point in using Luke 21 was in order to demonstrate that Jesus made absolutely clear that there was a period of time between what happened to Jerusalem, and His glorious appearing. He demonstrated that there was a fairly large gap between them. Now please do not go off at a tangent. I am waiting to be convinced (I am not a pre-tribulational rapturist). If you can go through Luke 21.20-26 and show me what it means step by step then I will consider that you have an argument. If you cannot then my case is proved. Best wishes jonp |
||||||