|
Post by BlueSky on May 22, 2019 16:47:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gal328 on May 23, 2019 4:39:07 GMT
Excellent points. Very convincing! Hard to believe that some view the events of 70 AD as just a blip on the historical/Biblical radar screen! I once heard Jerry Fallwell say that the only reason 70 AD happened is because the Romans were "anti-Semitic!"
|
|
|
Post by foxjj on Jun 18, 2019 2:34:14 GMT
This article is well worth reading, presenting thought provoking arguments for the truth regarding the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 15, 2019 15:38:45 GMT
There is some agreement and some disagreement on my part. I agree with the importance of 70 AD as the end of God's OT covenant with the Jews, with respect to the Law of Moses. That system was designed to be continuous, but only in terms of its fulfillment in the New Covenant of Christ. To continue under the Law when it so obviously demonstrated the national failure of Israel is the height of folly. However, I don't believe that the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD in any way relates to the sign of Jesus' Coming from heaven. I believe that the prophecy of the Coming of the Son of Man *with the clouds* in Dan 7 has to do with Jesus' 2nd Coming at the end of the age. The fact that Jesus relates the two events does not mean they happen simultaneously, but only that the two events were somewhat related in the minds of Jesus' disciples, who wanted to know how they related. Jesus' point, I believe, is that the 2nd Coming would not be immediate, but that the fall of Jerusalem would indeed be relatively immediate--it took place approx. 40 years after Jesus predicted it. That event showed the importance of the new spiritual reality, which has now encompassed the whole world, and not just Israel. It is a guarantee of the life to come, and not a mere legal routine that applied indiscriminately to all Israel. Eternal Salvation is based on individual faith, and not on national identity. But I do believe there is hope still for nations.
|
|
|
Post by BlueSky on Oct 18, 2019 2:07:23 GMT
There is some agreement and some disagreement on my part. I agree with the importance of 70 AD as the end of God's OT covenant with the Jews, with respect to the Law of Moses. That system was designed to be continuous, but only in terms of its fulfillment in the New Covenant of Christ. To continue under the Law when it so obviously demonstrated the national failure of Israel is the height of folly. However, I don't believe that the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD in any way relates to the sign of Jesus' Coming from heaven. I believe that the prophecy of the Coming of the Son of Man *with the clouds* in Dan 7 has to do with Jesus' 2nd Coming at the end of the age. The fact that Jesus relates the two events does not mean they happen simultaneously, but only that the two events were someone related in the minds of Jesus' disciples, who wanted to know how they related. Jesus' point, I believe, is that the 2nd Coming would not be immediate, but that the fall of Jerusalem would indeed be relatively immediate--it took place approx. 40 years after Jesus predicted it. That event showed the importance of the new spiritual reality, which has now encompassed the whole world, and not just Israel. It is a guarantee of the life to come, and not a mere legal routine that applied indiscriminately to all Israel. Eternal Salvation is based on individual faith, and not on national identity. But I do believe there is hope still for nations. We are very close Randy, thanks for the reply.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Oct 18, 2019 14:14:53 GMT
You have a nice Forum here, Blue Sky. I'm praying that God will open it up for more input. I'm acutely aware that Christian ministries require God's help to move forward. We (my wife and I) have a church situation like that right now. I've seen God move, and I've seen Him stifle moves. Your group is good, and has a good spirit. I'm praying that God opens the doors for you. We'll all benefit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2020 17:45:00 GMT
There is some agreement and some disagreement on my part. I agree with the importance of 70 AD as the end of God's OT covenant with the Jews, with respect to the Law of Moses. That system was designed to be continuous, but only in terms of its fulfillment in the New Covenant of Christ. To continue under the Law when it so obviously demonstrated the national failure of Israel is the height of folly. However, I don't believe that the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD in any way relates to the sign of Jesus' Coming from heaven. I believe that the prophecy of the Coming of the Son of Man *with the clouds* in Dan 7 has to do with Jesus' 2nd Coming at the end of the age. The fact that Jesus relates the two events does not mean they happen simultaneously, but only that the two events were someone related in the minds of Jesus' disciples, who wanted to know how they related. Jesus' point, I believe, is that the 2nd Coming would not be immediate, but that the fall of Jerusalem would indeed be relatively immediate--it took place approx. 40 years after Jesus predicted it. That event showed the importance of the new spiritual reality, which has now encompassed the whole world, and not just Israel. It is a guarantee of the life to come, and not a mere legal routine that applied indiscriminately to all Israel. Eternal Salvation is based on individual faith, and not on national identity. But I do believe there is hope still for nations. We are very close Randy, thanks for the reply. I agree with Randy. There is a distinction to be noticed between the words of the OT (Isa. 19:1) and the words of Christ regarding the coming of the Son of man. Isaiah says, ". Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt". Isaiah does not say He will be seen in the clouds. But Christ tells us "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven". When we search through the New Testament Scripture, we find 'shall appear' as that which is seen, or understood in a physical sense. The Greek word (phaínō) is defined - to lighten (shine), i.e. show (transitive or intransitive, literal or figurative):—appear, seem, be seen, shine, × think. IMO this strengthens the case for a literal physical appearance at the end of the age, because this affirms what is spoken of His return in the book of Acts. This tells me that Christ was not using metaphoric language to prove Christ came spiritually in 70 AD.
Ac 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
Ac 1:10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Ac 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
|
|
|
Post by Joe swift on Apr 6, 2021 1:28:50 GMT
I came to faith within the context of a dispensational gospel presentation. I never really knew anything different. I must confess I spent many years bouncing around ( or rather away from ) crazy dispensational views. So many weird interpretations and so many people making bizarre timelines. I pretty much just stopped studying eschatology. It was too confusing , even painful.
I focused on Christology for a long time instead and then Church History.
Finally When I studied the Historicity of the life and times of Christ I came face to face with the events of ad. 70. Something that made everything else around it and Christ settle into place. (Or rather settle me into place) That was the beginning of the end of my dispensationalism .
I now see in the Olivet discourse a continuous unified prophecy which Jesus gave to His disciples in answer to their question about the destruction of the temple and His “ Parousia”.
The OT references and prophetic language shedding light on the language that Jesus used and especially the statements “Some of those standing here shall not taste death till all of these things take place” and “ This generation shall not pass away until these events be fulfilled “.
I have much more to work through but ad 70 is an absolutely critical event to understand everything else.
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 6, 2021 2:13:41 GMT
I came to faith within the context of a dispensational gospel presentation. I never really knew anything different. I must confess I spent many years bouncing around ( or rather away from ) crazy dispensational views. So many weird interpretations and so many people making bizarre timelines. I pretty much just stopped studying eschatology. It was too confusing , even painful. I focused on Christology for a long time instead and then Church History. Finally When I studied the Historicity of the life and times of Christ I came face to face with the events of ad. 70. Something that made everything else around it and Christ settle into place. (Or rather settle me into place) That was the beginning of the end of my dispensationalism . I now see in the Olivet discourse a continuous unified prophecy which Jesus gave to His disciples in answer to their question about the destruction of the temple and His “ Parousia”. The OT references and prophetic language shedding light on the language that Jesus used and especially the statements “Some of those standing here shall not taste death till all of these things take place” and “ This generation shall not pass away until these events be fulfilled “. I have much more to work through but ad 70 is an absolutely critical event to understand everything else. Check out this link areopagus.proboards.com/thread/59/matthew-chapter-24-fufilled-70ad
|
|
|
Post by foxjj on Apr 6, 2021 7:40:14 GMT
I came to faith within the context of a dispensational gospel presentation. I never really knew anything different. I must confess I spent many years bouncing around ( or rather away from ) crazy dispensational views. So many weird interpretations and so many people making bizarre timelines. I pretty much just stopped studying eschatology. It was too confusing , even painful. I focused on Christology for a long time instead and then Church History. Finally When I studied the Historicity of the life and times of Christ I came face to face with the events of ad. 70. Something that made everything else around it and Christ settle into place. (Or rather settle me into place) That was the beginning of the end of my dispensationalism . I now see in the Olivet discourse a continuous unified prophecy which Jesus gave to His disciples in answer to their question about the destruction of the temple and His “ Parousia”. The OT references and prophetic language shedding light on the language that Jesus used and especially the statements “Some of those standing here shall not taste death till all of these things take place” and “ This generation shall not pass away until these events be fulfilled “. I have much more to work through but ad 70 is an absolutely critical event to understand everything else. Welcome Joe, I also came to faith at a time when dispensational theology was popular. Like you I found that Christology was more spiritually rewarding. Again as you state, 70 AD is critical to our understanding, and it opened my eyes to the wonders of Bible prophecy.
|
|
|
Post by Joe swift on Apr 7, 2021 21:26:18 GMT
I came to faith within the context of a dispensational gospel presentation. I never really knew anything different. I must confess I spent many years bouncing around ( or rather away from ) crazy dispensational views. So many weird interpretations and so many people making bizarre timelines. I pretty much just stopped studying eschatology. It was too confusing , even painful. I focused on Christology for a long time instead and then Church History. Finally When I studied the Historicity of the life and times of Christ I came face to face with the events of ad. 70. Something that made everything else around it and Christ settle into place. (Or rather settle me into place) That was the beginning of the end of my dispensationalism . I now see in the Olivet discourse a continuous unified prophecy which Jesus gave to His disciples in answer to their question about the destruction of the temple and His “ Parousia”. The OT references and prophetic language shedding light on the language that Jesus used and especially the statements “Some of those standing here shall not taste death till all of these things take place” and “ This generation shall not pass away until these events be fulfilled “. I have much more to work through but ad 70 is an absolutely critical event to understand everything else. Welcome Joe, I also came to faith at a time when dispensational theology was popular. Like you I found that Christology was more spiritually rewarding. Again as you state, 70 AD is critical to our understanding, and it opened my eyes to the wonders of Bible prophecy.
|
|
|
Post by Joe swift on Apr 7, 2021 21:51:18 GMT
I read the article that you posted under my comment John, yes , I am actually currently ready Hanks book and about 2/3 through it. It’s been coming together quite a bit. I have gone through quite a bit of recalibration in my thinking through my studies as mentioned earlier.
I certainly follow what you posted.
Once I realized the likelihood of early dating (Pre-AD 70) on Revelation and other various scriptures it made much more sense .
The absence of any mention of the Temple destruction and fall of Jerusalem just made no sense if they were written post AD AD 70 .
Holding to a late date coupled with a too literal sense of Jesus prophetic statements and the way our English bibles render (aeon or age) lead me to try to put things into a futurist perspective.
Things just make so much more sense and seeing that Jesus is not speaking in cryptic riddles is cause to rejoice in His faithfulness.
But again , I’m still working through a lot of details.
I enjoyed the article greatly! It just confirms that I’m seeing what I’m seeing.
Thank you
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 8, 2021 2:06:44 GMT
I read the article that you posted under my comment John, yes , I am actually currently ready Hanks book and about 2/3 through it. It’s been coming together quite a bit. I have gone through quite a bit of recalibration in my thinking through my studies as mentioned earlier. I certainly follow what you posted. Once I realized the likelihood of early dating (Pre-AD 70) on Revelation and other various scriptures it made much more sense . The absence of any mention of the Temple destruction and fall of Jerusalem just made no sense if they were written post AD AD 70 . Holding to a late date coupled with a too literal sense of Jesus prophetic statements and the way our English bibles render (aeon or age) lead me to try to put things into a futurist perspective. Things just make so much more sense and seeing that Jesus is not speaking in cryptic riddles is cause to rejoice in His faithfulness. But again , I’m still working through a lot of details. I enjoyed the article greatly! It just confirms that I’m seeing what I’m seeing. Thank you I think that it may of been me that posted the article to you Joe if you have time check out some of the other articles in this section of the site Thanks
|
|
|
Post by randy on Apr 8, 2021 2:43:41 GMT
I read the article that you posted under my comment John, yes , I am actually currently ready Hanks book and about 2/3 through it. It’s been coming together quite a bit. I have gone through quite a bit of recalibration in my thinking through my studies as mentioned earlier. I certainly follow what you posted. Once I realized the likelihood of early dating (Pre-AD 70) on Revelation and other various scriptures it made much more sense . The absence of any mention of the Temple destruction and fall of Jerusalem just made no sense if they were written post AD AD 70 . Holding to a late date coupled with a too literal sense of Jesus prophetic statements and the way our English bibles render (aeon or age) lead me to try to put things into a futurist perspective. Things just make so much more sense and seeing that Jesus is not speaking in cryptic riddles is cause to rejoice in His faithfulness. But again , I’m still working through a lot of details. I enjoyed the article greatly! It just confirms that I’m seeing what I’m seeing. Thank you Hi Joe: I don't hold to a Preterist view, but I hold to commonalities with it, including the centrality of the 70 AD event in the Olivet Discourse. I believe Jesus was asked about his Coming, because the Jewish People held to the "Jewish Hope," in which Messiah would come and make everything better for the Jewish People. Jesus' prophecy that Israel would basically be destroyed seemed to call into question this "Jewish Hope," and so the Disciples asked Jesus about it.
Jesus wouldn't countenance trying to live the Christian life anticipating the times and seasons. So he did not predict exactly when he would come to restore Israel. But he did say when Jerusalem would fall, in "this generation," ie in the generation of the apostles.
So the central feature of the Olivet Discourse is the Fall of Jerusalem in the Jewish War 66-70 AD. I don't think there can be any question at all about that, notwithstanding the incredible popularity of Dispensationalism. But I am a futurist, and believe a literal Antichrist is Coming. It's just that I interpret the "Great Tribulation" differently than do Dispensationalists. They see it as the future Reign of Antichrist. I see it as the Jewish Punishment, or Jewish Diaspora, of the entire NT age.
We can discuss these things. But they can seem difficult in the current Dispensationalist environment. And I do agree with the folks here who are *not* Dispensationalist. The only place where I would agree with Dispensationalism is with the idea that God will restore the nations called by God. And that would include Israel along with the many nations that have converted to Christ in history. I believe that all of these nations will be judged and restored to Christ at his Coming.
Note: This last point is determined by whether your eschatology is Premillennial or Amillennial. Although I'm quite willing to argue this in favor of Premillennialism, I'm hardly hostile towards Amillennialists. Most of Church History was characterized by Amillennial thought. If God tolerated a belief in the Church for that long, there must've been a lot of truth in it, regardless of whether it was entirely accurate or not. Speculative, future matters are, nonetheless, less important in relation to things we need to do *now,* right?
|
|
|
Post by Joe on Apr 13, 2021 14:33:08 GMT
Greetings Randy, yes on a personal note about eschatological views I do not put any fences of separation with regard to friendship / fellowship. We are all learning and seeking truth and the implications of Truth. When I began in the faith with a dispensational predisposition I had almost no knowledge or value of the events shortly leading up to and including AD 70 destruction of the Temple. It was my search in Christology that first showed me that God used types and shadows to point to Christ as complete the complete fulfillment of God salvation plan promised in Genesis 3:15. Jesus Christ was the antitype of all the types.
So from a Christological perspective I could see that there is no need for a return to the types and shadows of Temple worship sacrifice and Aaronic priesthood. Having Christ makes all of these things a return to types and shadows . This for me, began a journey from the ground up starting in the past through the prophets and Temple Sacrifices to Christ. There is much more behind us that is obsolete because the fullness is in Christ.
Now I am in the process of working out what will be yet to come but much, (very much ) makes sense that was all mixed up for me before.
The views that I share here are not the usual topic of my Christian conversation and fellowship but I am grateful for the clarity of the scriptures and the progressive nature of God plan in Christ
|
|
|
Post by randy on Apr 14, 2021 2:42:32 GMT
Greetings Randy, yes on a personal note about eschatological views I do not put any fences of separation with regard to friendship / fellowship. We are all learning and seeking truth and the implications of Truth. When I began in the faith with a dispensational predisposition I had almost no knowledge or value of the events shortly leading up to and including AD 70 destruction of the Temple. It was my search in Christology that first showed me that God used types and shadows to point to Christ as complete the complete fulfillment of God salvation plan promised in Genesis 3:15. Jesus Christ was the antitype of all the types. So from a Christological perspective I could see that there is no need for a return to the types and shadows of Temple worship sacrifice and Aaronic priesthood. Having Christ makes all of these things a return to types and shadows . This for me, began a journey from the ground up starting in the past through the prophets and Temple Sacrifices to Christ. There is much more behind us that is obsolete because the fullness is in Christ. Now I am in the process of working out what will be yet to come but much, (very much ) makes sense that was all mixed up for me before. The views that I share here are not the usual topic of my Christian conversation and fellowship but I am grateful for the clarity of the scriptures and the progressive nature of God plan in Christ You sound pretty balanced in your attitude. That can take you quite a ways, when you ask God for help understanding things. It's taken me a lot of years to get where I am, and yes, I've had to rearrange my own Dispensationalist perspective. Thanks for weighing in, though. It's always helpful to have more Christian input. There are many gifts in the Body of Christ. I want to be exposed to all input, if it is of value to anybody.
|
|
|
Post by Joe on Apr 25, 2021 16:51:39 GMT
Yes, there s so much to learn in both head and heart. Lately I’ve wondered why Christians have not used the historical happenings of ad.70 as an infallible and major proof in establishing Jesus Christ as Lord.
For example: Does not this historic reality clearly prophesied by Christ to the leaders and the people vindicate Him in everything He said?
Not everyone has seen the crucifixion/ burial/ post resurrection appearances and ascension of Christ , but every one can look back to see that “ Not one stone was left upon another”.
That the daughters of Jerusalem needed to weep for themselves because of those things which took place.
It has caused me to see that maybe this event in our seen world ( ad.70) , is a major and inescapable reality that tells us that This Christ is both Lord and King. He is everything that He has declared.
We did not see the miracles because we weren’t there but we can all look back and see this event. I think this truth of Ad. 70 is a sign to all men. Jesus is the Christ .
|
|
|
Post by foxjj on Apr 25, 2021 18:23:56 GMT
Amen to that Joe.
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 25, 2021 18:44:16 GMT
Yes, there s so much to learn in both head and heart. Lately I’ve wondered why Christians have not used the historical happenings of ad.70 as an infallible and major proof in establishing Jesus Christ as Lord. For example: Does not this historic reality clearly prophesied by Christ to the leaders and the people vindicate Him in everything He said? Not everyone has seen the crucifixion/ burial/ post resurrection appearances and ascension of Christ , but every one can look back to see that “ Not one stone was left upon another”. That the daughters of Jerusalem needed to weep for themselves because of those things which took place. It has caused me to see that maybe this event in our seen world ( ad.70) , is a major and inescapable reality that tells us that This Christ is both Lord and King. He is everything that He has declared. We did not see the miracles because we weren’t there but we can all look back and see this event. I think this truth of Ad. 70 is a sign to all men. Jesus is the Christ . Yes this event was a prophecy with a date added to it and when it happened it proved without a doubt that Jesus is both the messiah and God
|
|
|
Post by randy on May 12, 2021 0:06:28 GMT
Yes, there s so much to learn in both head and heart. Lately I’ve wondered why Christians have not used the historical happenings of ad.70 as an infallible and major proof in establishing Jesus Christ as Lord. For example: Does not this historic reality clearly prophesied by Christ to the leaders and the people vindicate Him in everything He said? Not everyone has seen the crucifixion/ burial/ post resurrection appearances and ascension of Christ , but every one can look back to see that “ Not one stone was left upon another”. That the daughters of Jerusalem needed to weep for themselves because of those things which took place. It has caused me to see that maybe this event in our seen world ( ad.70) , is a major and inescapable reality that tells us that This Christ is both Lord and King. He is everything that He has declared. We did not see the miracles because we weren’t there but we can all look back and see this event. I think this truth of Ad. 70 is a sign to all men. Jesus is the Christ . If only rational proofs, or reason, was the only need for people to come to Christ! But alas, nobody comes to Christ unless he or she is ready to lay down his or her own will, and humbly submit to the Creator. We are presented with the presence and Spirit of God, and so, we choose. If we are drawn to the love of God, we also accept the cross that goes with it, the rejection by the world, and the sufferings in this world. We want to remain with Him to the end. But yes, of the many, many proofs of Jesus' prophetic authority this is one of the greatest proofs. The statement that Israel would lose its religion for all time was unprecedented. Israel had been going since about 1500 BC, and even when the Babylonian Captivity brought about the destruction of the temple, it was rebuilt again 70 years later. So when Jesus said the temple would be destroyed again, and that the Jewish People would be rejected not for 70 years but for the entire span of the present age, it was a huge prophecy! Even so, all of the prophecies in the world coming to pass will not convince a man to go against his flesh, if he is committed to it.
|
|