WHY IS DANIEL 9:24-27 ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT PASSAGES IN SCRIPTURE ?

[Davy]

....
Jesus did not say those things would stop at the end, only that they (the disciples) would see things leading up to the end

You were referencing what I spoke about the wars and rumors of war Matt.24 passage. You have misrepresented what Jesus said there. And you failed to even quote the gist of what I had covered with that. Why would you do that? you totally omitted the point that I made with this passage, because I did cover it?

Matt 24:6
6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
KJV

Can you know what something is by knowing what it is not? Yes, scientists use that method a lot to arrive at a truth. Likewise with this verse Jesus gave, that last phrase about the 'end is not yet' is about a time opposite of those wars and rumors of wars. The idea is as long as you keep seeing wars and rumors of war, which is a CONDITION. But a condition for what? It is a condition for knowing the 'end' has not come yet. What end? The events leading up to Christ's future return, or course.

What is the 'end'? And why did the disciples associate the destruction of the temple with the 'end'?

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen (temple destruction), and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

That won't work. His disciples asked Him about the time of His future 2nd coming. And that little diddy-bop change you-all try to do with that Greek word 'aion' doesn't change that time of His coming which they asked Him about. The KJV translators translated aion to "world", as it is in many other KJV Scriptures. And the reason is because it's easy to know Christ's disciples asked Jesus about His SECOND COMING, which is still future to us even!

Because of Daniel:

Daniel 9:26 people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed

So the 'end' doesn't have to do with the end of the 'kosmos' (greek for world), but the end of 'aionos' (age). Which has to do with the destruction of the Jerusalem and it's temple, which is the whole context of the matthew discourse:

Matthew 24:2 Do YE not see all these (temple buildings right in front of them)? verily I say to YOU, There may not be left here a stone upon a stone, that shall not be thrown down.’

Dan.9:27 is about the Dan.11:31 events by the "vile person", which is a pointer to the future Antichrist who will come to Jerusalem and play God in a newly built temple by the Jews, which is what Apostle Paul taught in 2 Thessalonians 2, even showing that must happen prior to Christ's second coming and gathering of His Church. None of what you say there agrees with these Scriptures in God's Word. Instead they agree with men's doctrines of Preterism, which believes wrongly that these things are past history.

The Jews were living in relative safety before the Jewish Roman War. They continued with eating, drinking, festivals, and giving in marriage before they were destroyed in the war. Christians, on the other hand were not as easily living in safety due to Jewish persecution. And Jesus never promised his followers earthly peace and safety.

Matthew 24:36-38
And concerning that day and the hour no one hath known — not even the messengers of the heavens — except my Father only; and as the days of Noah — so shall be also the presence of the Son of Man; for as they were, in the days before the flood, eating, and drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage, till the day Noah entered into the ark

The time of "Peace and safety" that Apostle Paul gave as a marker for the end of this world has nothing... to do with past history like you're trying to insert. Sorry, but I have to even laugh at your response to that, it's so ludicrous.

The event of "Peace and safety" in 1 Thess.5 that Paul was speaking of involves the events of the very end of this world when the deceived will be saying that, and then... the "sudden destruction" will come upon them, like he also said:

1 Thess 5:2-3
2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
3 For when they shall say, "Peace and safety"; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
KJV

Paul was pulling from the OT prophets with that idea. They too prophesied of events for the very end of this world. That is where Paul got that "day of the Lord" concept and the deceived proclaiming world peace and safety finally has arrived! but it will be a false peace and safety, for God's judgment upon this present world will come very quickly after they proclaim that. In 2 Peter 3:10, Peter taught that "day of the Lord" event will burn the elements off this earth.

It's really useless conversing with you because of the doctrines of men you have instead accepted vs. staying with God's Word as written. What you believe makes me wonder if you're not also on the plan for a one-world government system of controls over the whole earth, which will be the coming Antichrist's system at the END of this world. You may not be very aware of that plan, and just are deceived by their doctrines. But your doctrine is what they like, because they are going to setup an imposter in Jerusalem that the orthodox Jews will worship, thinking he will be Messiah. And the deceived in all the rest of the world will follow suit.

That is the reason why the originators of the Preterist doctrines want us to think all these Bible prophecies for the very end of this world, including Christ's 2nd coming, was all history. The ones they support have the plan to establish their own saving system for all... nations today on earth, and setup 'their' "king of the world" (their claim, not mine). Biblical ideas of Christ's future return to this earth simply gets in their way of deceiving the nations.

 

[BABerean2]

Dan.9:27 is about the Dan.11:31 events by the "vile person", which is a pointer to the future Antichrist who will come to Jerusalem and play God in a newly built temple by the Jews, which is what Apostle Paul taught in 2 Thessalonians 2, even showing that must happen prior to Christ's second coming and gathering of His Church.

Do you think the angel Gabriel came to reveal the timeline of the New Covenant Messiah and then he forgot to even mention the New Covenant?

The scriptural reference beside of Daniel 9:27 in my NKJV Bible is Matthew 26:28.

.

 

[claninja]

You were referencing what I spoke about the wars and rumors of war Matt.24 passage. You have misrepresented what Jesus said there. And you failed to even quote the gist of what I had covered with that. Why would you do that? you totally omitted the point that I made with this passage, because I did cover it?

Matt 24:6
6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
KJV

I understand your point. Your argument is that the 'end', is the 'end of the literal world'. So there will be wars and rumors of wars occurring UNTIL the 'end of the literal world'. Then after the 'end of the literal world', there will be no more wars, famines, false prophets, etc....

To prove your point, you will have to prove that the end of the 'age' means something other than age. If your going to the change the meaning of age to literal world, then the burden of proof lies on you.

In the mean time, I'll provide evidence for why the meaning of age should not be changed to literal world.

The language used in Matthew 13 shows that there is a difference between age and world. If the harvest was going to occur at the end of the world, well, shouldn't end/consummation of the kosmos been used?

Matthew 13:36-40 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.The field is the world (kosmos), and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one,and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age (aionos), and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age (aionos).


But as it is the field is not destroyed at the end of the age, in fact, the 'end of the age' was occurring during the disciples life time:

Acts 2:15-17
For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day.b 16But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,

1 Corinthians 10:11
Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.

Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

Hebrews 9:26
But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

1 John 2:18
Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

Can you know what something is by knowing what it is not? Yes, scientists use that method a lot to arrive at a truth.

This type of argument is known as an argument from ignorance. It's a type of logical fallacy.
Scientists don't use this arrive at truth. They use it to rule out possibilities, but it is never used to prove a truth.

His disciples asked Him about the time of His future 2nd coming.

I agree that they were asking about his coming, which would be future to them and would be associated with the temple destruction. The following questions all mean the same thing:

Matthew 24:3
the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Mark 13:4
“Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?

Luke 21:7
And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?”

The 'when will these things be = temple destruction/not one stone on top another, and the 'signs of your coming/end of the age = signs these things (temple destruction), are about to take place.

So Jesus' coming, at the end of the age, would be associated with the temple destruction, which I believe you would agree, the exception is that you make it about a 3rd future temple and not about the temple that Jesus is pointing to right in front of the disciples.

And that little diddy-bop change you-all try to do with that Greek word 'aion' doesn't change that time of His coming which they asked Him about.

I don't actually have to change the meaning of Aion for my interpretation. But you do have to change it to mean literal world to fit your belief. So if anyone is changing anything, it is you. As pointed out above, there is clearly a difference in 'kosmos' and 'aion'. The KJV may not recognized that, but most translations do.

Dan.9:27 is about the Dan.11:31 events by the "vile person", which is a pointer to the future Antichrist who will come to Jerusalem and play God in a newly built temple by the Jews, which is what Apostle Paul taught in 2 Thessalonians 2, even showing that must happen prior to Christ's second coming and gathering of His Church. None of what you say there agrees with these Scriptures in God's Word. Instead they agree with men's doctrines of Preterism, which believes wrongly that these things are past history.

If you believe that Daniel 9:26 is about 70 ad and Daniel 9:27 is about a 3rd future temple, maybe I could see your point. But if you believe they are about the same thing, which is what I believe, then we have a problem. There is only 1 prediction of temple destruction, not 2.

The time of "Peace and safety" that Apostle Paul gave as a marker for the end of this world has nothing... to do with past history like you're trying to insert. Sorry, but I have to even laugh at your response to that, it's so ludicrous.

It's true that Jerusalem was in relative peace and safety before the Jewish-Roman war. IF you want to ignore history, that's up to you.

In 2 Peter 3:10, Peter taught that "day of the Lord" event will burn the elements off this earth.

I suggest looking up what 'elements' mean and all the contexts in which 'element' is used in the NT.

It's really useless conversing with you because of the doctrines of men you have instead accepted vs. staying with God's Word as written. What you believe makes me wonder if you're not also on the plan for a one-world government system of controls over the whole earth, which will be the coming Antichrist's system at the END of this world. You may not be very aware of that plan, and just are deceived by their doctrines. But your doctrine is what they like, because they are going to setup an imposter in Jerusalem that the orthodox Jews will worship, thinking he will be Messiah. And the deceived in all the rest of the world will follow suit.

alrighty then.....

hat is the reason why the originators of the Preterist doctrines want us to think all these Bible prophecies for the very end of this world, including Christ's 2nd coming, was all history. The ones they support have the plan to establish their own saving system for all... nations today on earth, and setup 'their' "king of the world" (their claim, not mine). Biblical ideas of Christ's future return to this earth simply gets in their way of deceiving the nations.

There is 1 king, and he is the Christ, who is currently reigning over the heavens and the earth at the right hand of the Father.

 

[David Kent]

The OP has got it all wrong. The basis of all prophecy is Daniel 2 and Daniel 7. If your pophecy does not fit in with them, and no futurist prophecies do, it is false.

 

[Davy]

I understand your point. Your argument is that the 'end', is the 'end of the literal world'. So there will be wars and rumors of wars occurring UNTIL the 'end of the literal world'. Then after the 'end of the literal world', there will be no more wars, famines, false prophets, etc....

You need to shorten your posts.

Not the "end of the literal world", but for a time just prior... to the literal end of this world. There is a difference, because Rev.11 & 13 gave us the period of 42 months that the dragon will reign, and the time before the final 3rd Woe - 7th Trumpet.

To prove your point, you will have to prove that the end of the 'age' means something other than age. If your going to the change the meaning of age to literal world, then the burden of proof lies on you.

No, I DON'T have to prove that the question Jesus' disciples asked Him upon the Mount of Olives involves some Preterist "age" idea like you're trying to push. They asked Him about the signs of His SECOND COMING AND THAT EVENT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET TODAY! So for you to be able to prove that they were asking Him about signs to happen in THEIR day, you would have to PROVE Jesus' 2nd coming happened back then! That you CANNOT DO! And if you say Jesus' 2nd coming is past already, then you are a liar.
So the rest of your post is worthless!

 

[BABerean2]

And if you say Jesus' 2nd coming is past already, then you are a liar.

Amen.

One of the greatest errors of Full-Preterism is the claim that the Sinai Covenant remained in effect until 70 AD.
They must ignore Hebrews 7:12, and Hebrews 10:16-18, to make the idea work.


.

 

[David Kent]

No, I DON'T have to prove that the question Jesus' disciples asked Him upon the Mount of Olives involves some Preterist "age" idea like you're trying to push. They asked Him about the signs of His SECOND COMING AND THAT EVENT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET TODAY! So for you to be able to prove that they were asking Him about signs to happen in THEIR day, you would have to PROVE Jesus' 2nd coming happened back then!

Yes and Jesus said there would be no sign for that day. The signs were for the destruction of the temple,which has already happened.

 

[claninja]

You need to shorten your posts.

Thank you, I'll take that into consideration

Not the "end of the literal world", but for a time just prior... to the literal end of this world. There is a difference, because Rev.11 & 13 gave us the period of 42 months that the dragon will reign, and the time before the final 3rd Woe - 7th Trumpet.

Exactly, there would be wars and rumors of wars, but the end is not yet.

No, I DON'T have to prove that the question Jesus' disciples asked Him upon the Mount of Olives involves some Preterist "age" idea like you're trying to push.

Then why are you on here debating? Debates typically involve both parties providing evidence for their belief. I provided evidence, with the parable of the weeds, that aion and kosmos are 2 different words. And that upon the end of the aion (age) the harvest occurs, but the kosmos (world) does not end. This provides evidence, that age means age and not world. But you want to make age mean world, so now the burden of proof lies on you. If you don't want to provide evidence for your argument, then i'm not really sure why you are on here debating.

They asked Him about the signs of His SECOND COMING

They asked him when the temple would be destroyed and what would be the signs that it was about to occur. They understood that the coming of Christ at the end of the age had to do with the temple destruction.

It appears we agree that the temple destruction would occur future to the disciples at Christ's coming at the end of the age. The only difference is that you believe it is about a future 3rd temple and end of the world, but I believe it is about the temple Jesus pointed to right in front of the disciples at the end of the age.

ND THAT EVENT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET TODAY!

Christ did come in Judgement on Israel in 70ad whether you believe it or not:

Matthew 21:40-41, 45
When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?” 41They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.” When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them

Luke 19:14, 27
But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’”

So for you to be able to prove that they were asking Him about signs to happen in THEIR day, you would have to PROVE Jesus' 2nd coming happened back then! That you CANNOT DO!

We agree that they were asking about the destruction of the temple at Christ's coming at the end of the age. Where we disagree is on the timing. You believe it still future, on a 3rd temple that is yet to be built, while I believe it was about the temple right in front of the disciples.

All I have to do is show that the text talks about the temple right in front of the disciples, which it clearly does:

Matthew 24:1-2
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

However, you have to provide scripture where Jesus says a 3rd temple will be built and destroyed after the 2nd temple to prove your point. Other wise, you are clearly changing scripture to fit your belief.

And if you say Jesus' 2nd coming is past already, then you are a liar. So the rest of your post is worthless!

Was Christ a liar too?

Matthew 10:23
When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

Matthew 16:27-28
For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 24:34
Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Matthew 26:64
Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

 

[claninja]

Amen.

One of the greatest errors of Full-Preterism is the claim that the Sinai Covenant remained in effect until 70 AD.
They must ignore Hebrews 7:12, and Hebrews 10:16-18, to make the idea work.


.

Babarean, thanks for the video, I did enjoy it. I agree with most of what he said.

He does make the claim that Jesus came in 70ad for judgment, which I agree with.

One of the greatest errors of Full-Preterism is the claim that the Sinai Covenant remained in effect until 70 AD.

All eschatological beliefs make errors to make their beliefs work because were all looking through a dimly lit mirror. Dispensationalists, full preterists, partial preterists, partial futurists .....on this side of heaven no one knows all the answers, and all make errors, especially in eschatology.

So maybe you could help me with this then. Why must the curses of the old covenant (days of vengeance luke 21:22) take place after the cross, if the old covenant officially ended?

If the old covenant was gone, how were Jews still being held captive by it. Jews who believed were dying to the law and being raised spiritually in Christ, But Jews who did not believe in Christ were still a slave to it.

Roman 7:4-6
Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.c

In galatians 4, we can see 2 covenants, the old covenant (hagar) corresponded to the PRESENT Jerusalem according to Paul:

Galatians 4:22-26
Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.

And those under the old covenant were persecuting those of the new covenant:

Galatians 4:29
But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now.

hey must ignore Hebrews 7:12, and Hebrews 10:16-18, to make the idea work.

I don't ignore those verses, I agree with them, just as the author also states the old covenant was obselete, but it still existed and was ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 8:13
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

 

[Davy]

Yes and Jesus said there would be no sign for that day. The signs were for the destruction of the temple,which has already happened.

So now you're contradicting Jesus!

It was the unbelieving Pharisees who asked Him for a sign where He replied to 'them'... that only the sign of Jonas would be given them. That didn't apply to His disciples whom He showed all things.

 

[Davy]

Exactly, there would be wars and rumors of wars, but the end is not yet.

No, not exactly what you said earlier. You didn't leave any space for the 42 months of Rev.11 & 13 for the very end of this world just prior to Christ's 2nd coming. In other words, you didn't leave room for the Dan.12 "time of trouble" ("great tribulation") prophesied to occur in the final generation.

Then why are you on here debating? Debates typically involve both parties providing evidence for their belief. I provided evidence, with the parable of the weeds, that aion and kosmos are 2 different words. And that upon the end of the aion (age) the harvest occurs, but the kosmos (world) does not end. This provides evidence, that age means age and not world. But you want to make age mean world, so now the burden of proof lies on you. If you don't want to provide evidence for your argument, then i'm not really sure why you are on here debating.

The only evidence you have provided is in your own mind. What you're trying to show with applying men's doctrine to interpreting the single word aion is NOT Biblical proof of your theory. And because you won't listen to reason, but instead act like a broken record, into some child-like 'yes it is, no it isn't', 'yes it is, no it isn't' game, I simply don't care to play that with you. Go bug a child somewhere. I don't have time for your silliness of inserting men's doctrines into The Word of God.

 

[claninja]

No, not exactly what you said earlier. You didn't leave any space for the 42 months of Rev.11 & 13 for the very end of this world just prior to Christ's 2nd coming. In other words, you didn't leave room for the Dan.12 "time of trouble" ("great tribulation") prophesied to occur in the final generation.

Sorry, I’m not following you. I didn’t leave any space for the time of tribulation? I agree the tribulation takes place before the temple destruction, so I’m not sure what you mean.

The only evidence you have provided is in your own mind

The parable of the weeds is in my mind? I’m pretty sure it’s in the Bible, where you will find the Greek word aion with regards to the harvest at the end of the age and the Greek word kosmos for world, which does not end or become destroyed in the parable.

And because you won't listen to reason

What reason am I suppose to listen to, you have provided no evidence that end of the aion means end of the literal world, You have provided no evidence that Jesus says a 3rd earthly temple will be rebuilt and destroyed, you use arguments from ignorance to “prove truth” and you deny historical facts. Instead of providing evidence using scripture and history, you just repeat “doctrines of men” over and over again, call me a liar, tell me to go bug children, and accuse me of being a part of some bizarro one world order antichrist conspiracy.

I don’t understand why you keep responding with accusations , instead of providing evidence for you arguments, if you don’t have time for this ‘silliness’.

Are you here to debate or just sling mud?

 

[BABerean2]

So maybe you could help me with this then. Why must the curses of the old covenant (days of vengeance luke 21:22) take place after the cross, if the old covenant officially ended?

The first question we must ask is, what does the New Testament say about the end of the Old Covenant?

Do we have any scripture which we must ignore to claim that the Old Covenant did not end until 70 AD?


Mat 26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (NKJV) (When was this Blood Covenant fulfilled? When did the "testator" die?)


Mar 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
Mar 15:38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.
(What happened on this day, and why did God rip the veil in half? See Hebrews 10:19)


Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.
(What was the purpose of the Law of Moses, and why is the word "till" used in this verse?)

Read Galatians 4:24-31. Did Paul tell the Galatians that they could gain salvation under either covenant?

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (On what day was the priesthood changed, in the eyes of God? )


Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
(Is this verse written in the present tense, before 70 AD ?)


Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; (Quoted from Jeremiah 31:31-34)
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
(Is this verse written in the present tense, before 70 AD? What does this verse mean about animal sacrifices still being made at this time?)


Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
(Is this passage written in the present tense before 70 AD?)

Based on the text above, no unbiased reader could say that both covenants were in effect until 70 AD.

......................................................
Now let us deal with the days of "vengeance".

Remember that God also had allowed the Babylonians to destroyed the city and the sanctuary.
One of the reasons was because the Israelites had refused to give the land its Sabbath Rest, every 7th year.
Therefore, God enforced His decree for 70 years, while the remnant was in captivity in Babylon.

What did Jesus say about the city and the sanctuary being destroyed again?



Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
(The reasons for God's vengeance is found above.)


Luk 19:41 And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
Luk 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
Luk 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

The city and the sanctuary were destroyed in 70 AD because God took vengeance on those who rejected His Son, and the prophets, and His Word.

This time He used the Romans to do what the Babylonians had done before.

.

 

[David Kent]

So now you're contradicting Jesus!

It was the unbelieving Pharisees who asked Him for a sign where He replied to 'them'... that only the sign of Jonas would be given them. That didn't apply to His disciples whom He showed all things.

It is Not me, that is contradicting Jesus, I wouldn't dare

• 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Jesus begins to answer Matthew's supplementary question. Up to that point the answers had been in answer to the disciples comments on Matthew 23, particulaly

• 35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
• 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
• 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
• 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

The righteous blood of all the prophets killed by their fathers would come upon them because they crucified their Messiah.

• 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
• 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
• 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Again we see that no warning will be given.

• 42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

 

[Davy]

It is Not me, that is contradicting Jesus, I wouldn't dare

Well, when you apply what our Lord said to the Pharisees about seeking a sign to the signs of the end He revealed to His disciples upon the Mount of Olives, you are contradicting Jesus. You should well realize that with our Lord Jesus there is no... contradictions, but you created one with your pointing to the sign of Jonas only would be given vs. His Olivet Discourse signs He gave His Church (which are actually the Seals of Revelation 6).

• 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Jesus begins to answer Matthew's supplementary question. Up to that point the answers had been in answer to the disciples comments on Matthew 23, particulaly

WRONG!

At the beginning of Matthew 24, Jesus leaves the temple and goes out to the Mount of Olives with His disciples.

Matt 24:1-3
24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
KJV

The rebuke of Matt.23 Jesus gave was in the temple, and to the blind Pharisees. Matthew 24 begins a new subject from a different location, i.e., the location where He ascended to Heaven from, and also where He will return to this earth (Acts 1; Zech.14).

The righteous blood of all the prophets killed by their fathers would come upon them because they crucified their Messiah.

• 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
• 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
• 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Again we see that no warning will be given.

• 42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

An error you should never make is the posting of verses without their Book and Chapter label. Those verses there are from Matthew 24, but they are not about the destruction of 70 A.D. Jerusalem. When Apostle John was given Christ's Revelation on the Isle of Patmos, it was years after the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Yet John was shown the events of destruction to occur upon Jerusalem again for the very end, and the signs there in Matthew 24 which are the Seals of Rev.6.

So if you want to live in the past with the theories of men called Preterism, but that's what you're basically doing, living in the past and not watching like our Lord Jesus commanded us.

 

[claninja]

The first question we must ask is, what does the New Testament say about the end of the Old Covenant?

That it was obsolete but had not yet vanished:

Hebrews 8:13 In speaking of a new, He has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear (present verb tense)

2 Corinthians 3:11 for if that which is being made useless through glory (present tense), much more that which is remaining in glory.



The Jews (not gentiles) were held captive to the law, as long as they were not born again:
Romans 7:1
Or do you not know, brothersa—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives?

The Jews that died through the body of Christ and were raised (born again) were then able to belong to another, otherwise it would be adultery, serving both the old and new
Romans 7:3-4
Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.

The Jews, under the old covenant, were held captive to the law. But through Christ, Jews born again, died to this old covenant (a useless covenant as Christ had come) and were free to be a part of the new covenant.
Roman 7:6
But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.c

The Jews who were never born again, remained captive to the law and never reached righteousness
Romans 9:31
but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousnessd did not succeed in reaching that law

And the Israel who remained captive to the useless old covenant, rejecting Christ, would be cast out and made as Sodom and Gomorrah
Romans 9:27-28
And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israelc be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.”

Galatians 4:25,30
Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.”

Do we have any scripture which we must ignore to claim that the Old Covenant did not end until 70 AD?

How do you explain Hebrews 8:13 and 2 Corinthians 3:11? We both agree, the law was obsolete at the Cross. But the law still had it's Jewish captives, of which, the elect were being born again and freed from the law to be with Christ.

Mat 26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (NKJV) (When was this Blood Covenant fulfilled? When did the "testator" die?)

Definitely at the Cross, I absolutely agree.

Mar 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
Mar 15:38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.
(What happened on this day, and why did God rip the veil in half? See Hebrews 10:19)

The old covenant and temple worship became obsolete, as the new covenant was instituted.

John 4:24
But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him.

Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.
(What was the purpose of the Law of Moses, and why is the word "till" used in this verse?)

I agree, the law was a guardian until Christ.

Galatians 3:23-24
Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the Law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the Law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (On what day was the priesthood changed, in the eyes of God? )

Definitely at the death, resurrection, and the ascension of Christ.

Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
(Is this verse written in the present tense, before 70 AD ?)

Absolutely agree, the new covenant was instituted at the Cross through Christ's blood and body.

Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; (Quoted from Jeremiah 31:31-34)
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
(Is this verse written in the present tense, before 70 AD? What does this verse mean about animal sacrifices still being made at this time?)

I agree, I would go even further to say that animal sacrifices never actually took away sins. The old covenant only being a shadow of Christ. The old covenant was never for salvation, it was only a guardian until Christ.

Hebrews 10:3-4
Instead, those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins.

Read Galatians 4:24-31. Did Paul tell the Galatians that they could gain salvation under either covenant?

I agree, the old covenant never brought salvation. Only Christ through the new covenant could do that.

Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
(Is this passage written in the present tense before 70 AD?)

Yes it is in present tense. And I agree, the new covenant was initiated at the Cross.

Now let us deal with the days of "vengeance".

Remember that God also had allowed the Babylonians to destroyed the city and the sanctuary.
One of the reasons was because the Israelites had refused to give the land its Sabbath Rest, every 7th year.
Therefore, God enforced His decree for 70 years, while the remnant was in captivity in Babylon.

What did Jesus say about the city and the sanctuary being destroyed again?



Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
(The reasons for God's vengeance is found above.)


Luk 19:41 And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
Luk 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
Luk 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

The city and the sanctuary were destroyed in 70 AD because God took vengeance on those who rejected His Son, and the prophets, and His Word.

I absolutely agree. Vengeance was placed on the Israel that rejected Christ, who were under the old covenant. This was predicted in law and prophets (old covenant).

Luke 23:29-31
For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

The kingdom would be taken from unfaithful old covenant Israel and given to a new nation (the body of Christ, Jew and gentile) upon old covenant Israel's destruction at the vineyard owners coming

Matthew 21:40-41, 43-44
When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?” They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.”
Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.”

 

[David Kent]

Well, when you apply what our Lord said to the Pharisees about seeking a sign to the signs of the end He revealed to His disciples upon the Mount of Olives, you are contradicting Jesus. You should well realize that with our Lord Jesus there is no... contradictions, but you created one with your pointing to the sign of Jonas only would be given vs. His Olivet Discourse signs He gave His Church (which are actually the Seals of Revelation 6).



WRONG!

At the beginning of Matthew 24, Jesus leaves the temple and goes out to the Mount of Olives with His disciples.

Matt 24:1-3
24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
KJV

The rebuke of Matt.23 Jesus gave was in the temple, and to the blind Pharisees. Matthew 24 begins a new subject from a different location, i.e., the location where He ascended to Heaven from, and also where He will return to this earth (Acts 1; Zech.14).




An error you should never make is the posting of verses without their Book and Chapter label. Those verses there are from Matthew 24, but they are not about the destruction of 70 A.D. Jerusalem. When Apostle John was given Christ's Revelation on the Isle of Patmos, it was years after the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Yet John was shown the events of destruction to occur upon Jerusalem again for the very end, and the signs there in Matthew 24 which are the Seals of Rev.6.

So if you want to live in the past with the theories of men called Preterism, but that's what you're basically doing, living in the past and not watching like our Lord Jesus commanded us.

Yes sorry about posting the verses without chapter. My mistake, The Olivet was a result of the woes declared in the temple and not unconnected. Jesus said their house was left unto them desolate and all those woes would come upon that generation, which of course the generation that crucified the Messiah. The disciples were astounded by that comment and when they arrived at Olivet they drew the attention of Jesus to the size of the stones. Jesus told them that not one stone would be left upon another. They asked him Matthew 24:3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? Jesus told them that it would be when they saw the Abomination of Desolation standing where it should not, and Luke tells us it was when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies. Jesus also said it would be a time where there would be wars and rumors of wars, earthquakes, false prophets and false Christs. All this happened in that period.

Matthew asked a supplementary question "and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" Which of course was nothing to do with the previous discussion.

 

[David Kent]

I seem to have lost the last part of that when I posted it,
Answer to that latter question.
Matt 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

 

[BABerean2]

How do you explain Hebrews 8:13 and 2 Corinthians 3:11? We both agree, the law was obsolete at the Cross. But the law still had it's Jewish captives, of which, the elect were being born again and freed from the law to be with Christ.

Based on your logic above, modern Orthodox Jews are still in captivity to the law and therefore the Old Covenant system is still in effect.

I could go buy a sheep and erect a stone altar to make an animal sacrifice for my sin.
As a matter of fact a local man who claims to be a rabbi has done that very thing.
Would the sacrifice of that sheep in any way bring back the Old Covenant system?
No. Because that system of sacrifices ended at Calvary, instead of during 70 AD.

You are ignoring the world "till" below in Galatians chapter 3.

Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Both the Book of Galatians and the Book of Hebrews were written to correct the idea that you are promoting.
We can very often latch onto a few verses that might be used to defend our doctrine. You have done this with Hebrews 8:13. The verse says the New Covenant had already made the Old Covenant "obsolete" and that the Old Covenant was about to pass away.
Did that statement mean that the animal sacrifices being done during the temple at that time were accepted by God for the sins of the people?

If viewed as a whole, what do we find in the rest of the Book of Hebrews?
Hebrews 7:12 is just one example.

You seem to be promoting a dual-covenant time period between Calvary and 70 AD, in order to make your version of Preterism work.

.

 

[parousia70]

If viewed as a whole, what do we find in the rest of the Book of Hebrews?
Hebrews 7:12 is just one example.

You seem to be promoting a dual-covenant time period between Calvary and 70 AD, in order to make your version of Preterism work.

.

You know I respect your views on a myriad of topics B.. But I have to ask:

Which "First Covenant" do you believe was " becoming obsolete, growing old, and ready to vanish" decades after Calvary, yet prior to AD70?

Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.