Is the 6th seal about the destruction of Jerusalem?

[seventysevens]

But more importantly Revelation is about Revealing Jesus return to earth as King on earth and that Kingdom will Never end

 

[keras]

ANY theological position that Rests its hat on the notion that the Divinely inspired Apostles were not only IN error but TAUGHT THEIR ERROR to their flocks, ought be automatically rejected.

This sort of reply shows the extreme bias against those who try to warn and prepare others about the forthcoming last days of this age events.

The Apostles did think that Jesus could Return at any time. That was what God wanted, so as His people would be constantly in anticipation of Jesus' Return. Exactly how it has been thru the age.
Only now, with the benefit of hindsight, we can see from the world situation; that the Return is very close. But there is much prophesied to happen before that glorious Day and most Christians are unaware and unprepared for it all.
Preterists, rapture to heaven and prosperity teachers and all who ignore the prophesies are actually working against God in this life or death matter.

People can believe whatever they like, but teaching and promoting those false beliefs, is very serious and will incur Judgement. ​

 

[parousia70]

This sort of reply shows the extreme bias against those who try to warn and prepare others about the forthcoming last days of this age events.

Yes. I have a bias toward apostolic inerrancy. I freely admit such.

The Apostles did think that Jesus could Return at any time.

None of them taught He could return "at any time in the next 2000 years." Not even one. Rather, they ALL taught their contemporaries to prepare for His Coming in THEIR DAY.

That was what God wanted, so as His people would be constantly in anticipation of Jesus' Return. Exactly how it has been thru the age.

So God wanted His people to believe a falsehood? Why?

God purposely led generations of Christians into believing a lie?
That's your position?

How is the Christain from the 1400's who believed Jesus could have returned in his generation better off today than the Christian from the 1400's who believed no such thing?

Only now, with the benefit of hindsight, we can see from the world situation; that the Return is very close.

So, armchair internet Hindsight now supersedes Divinely Inspired Apostolic Writ?

People can believe whatever they like, but teaching and promoting those false beliefs, is very serious and will incur Judgement.

​

Like teaching and promoting that the apostles believed and taught ERROR?

I agree.

 

[claninja]

My reference was in regard to the results shown in that thread - and that thread was created based on what is in this thread , the temple destruction in 70 AD supposedly being referenced in Revelation
So now you want to keep the results out of this thread ....

What?...... I started a new thread so as to not derail this thread. Which is about the 6th seal. Which is in regards to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Keep the results out? You mean the only result that anyone is providing for post 70 ad evidence: an irenaeus quote?

 

[parousia70]

For the record, I don't disagree with the way some of you are interpreting passages such as that in the OT.

Glad to hear it.

But to apply that the same way to any comings on clouds, concerning Christ, that's what I disagree with.

There is no biblical instruction to apply a polar opposite meaning to Christ's Cloud coming that I am aware of. The Apostles did not use the same words as the prophets that preceded them in polar opposite fashion to those very prophets. Suggesting such is just absurd.

Anything involving clouds and Christ involve a literal physical coming. Daniel 7:13-14, for one, proves it.

How does Daniel 7:13-14 prove that?

 

[seventysevens]

What?...... I started a new thread so as to not derail this thread. Which is about the 6th seal. Which is in regards to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Exactly You state that the Book of Revelation supports your view in regards to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD . As such it is relevant to show that it does not support that view , you want to use it to support your view but at the same time you don't want anyone to use it to show that it does not support the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem.

 

[parousia70]

Exactly You state that the Book of Revelation supports your view in regards to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD . As such it is relevant to show that it does not support that view , you want to use it to support your view but at the same time you don't want anyone to use it to show that it does not support the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem.

Wel, my guess is, if you had any proof that Rev was penned after 70AD you'd have presented it by now....

 

[seventysevens]

Wel, my guess is,

As stated ..
But more importantly Revelation is about Revealing Jesus return to earth as King on earth and that Kingdom will Never end
That has not happened

 

[DavidPT]

How does Daniel 7:13-14 prove that?

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


Obviously this involved a literal physical coming, keeping in mind, the text indicates---one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.

After that it says----and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

All of that obviously involves a physical appearence and physical presence of the one seen who came with the clouds of heaven. If that coming with the clouds of heaven, and if meaning Christ, involved a literal physical coming, as in He was initially somewhere else, then arrived at the above location, why would any other passages involving Christ, having to do with clouds of heaven, not also involve a literal physical coming, where He is also initially somewhere else, and then arrives at a new location? As to the latter, why not this? He was initially in heaven, meaning where He is now, post His death and resurrection, and when He is seen coming in the clouds of heaven, the destination is now the earth, as in coming there literally and physically---Matthew 24:30, as an example.

Acts 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.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
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.

This is when Jesus initially was on His way back to heaven. Notice that it involves a cloud. A literal cloud though? Maybe, maybe not, more than likely not. Could be meaning angels, as in accompanying Him back to heaven, when in Daniel 7 He is seen coming with the clouds of heaven, maybe meaning with angels.

Matthew 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.

Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:


Both speaking of a coming. One indicates----coming in the clouds of heaven. While the other one indicates----and all the holy angels with him.

It is therefore not unreasonable to maybe conclude the clouds of heaven are meaning all the holy angels with him.

Maybe it means that, maybe it doesn't, yet, like I pointed out, it is not unreasonable to conclude that maybe it does.

 

[parousia70]

Obviously this involved a literal physical coming, keeping in mind, the text indicates---one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.

Please dumb this down for me... How is this "Obvious" to you?

After that it says----and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

All of that obviously involves a physical appearence and physical presence of the one seen who came with the clouds of heaven.

So the Ancient of Days has a Physical Appearance? has flesh and bone?
Or is it Just one like a Son of Man that does?

Or are you suggesting Christ was Physically "appearing near before" a non Physical Entity?

If that coming with the clouds of heaven, and if meaning Christ, involved a literal physical coming, as in He was initially somewhere else, then arrived at the above location, why would any other passages involving Christ, having to do with clouds of heaven, not also involve a literal physical coming, where He is also initially somewhere else, and then arrives at a new location?

Wait... when God came on a Cloud to Egypt, wasn't He somewhere else before, then arrived at Egypt?

if so, I don't get how that proves or even implies physicality?

I guess we need to determine the Nature of Christ's Body at the point of His appearing before God.

Do you believe Christ is in a flesh and Bone Body today?
Or, do you, like me, believe At the ascension, the Moment the Cloud Received Him out of their sight, He was at that monent "Glorified" and returned to the Glory He had before the Incarnation, per Jesus' petition to the Father in John 17:5?

As to the latter, why not this? He was initially in heaven, meaning where He is now, post His death and resurrection, and when He is seen coming in the clouds of heaven, the destination is now the earth, as in coming there literally and physically---Matthew 24:30, as an example.

Again, Because The cloud-coming of Revelation 1:7 that "every eye would see" is shown in Revelation 14:14-20 to be an event that occurs in the heavenly realms. As the passage reveals, Christ's actions and commands in the heavenlies result in various tribulation-period disasters that transpire on earth. Simply put, Revelation 14:14-20 is the cloud-coming that "every eye would see." This is significant, for St. John is not describing the coming of Christ as some visual spectacular with cumulus clouds in the skies overhead, but as the coming of Yahweh himself, making Christ equal with the Father. Jesus promised his apostles that he would return in their lifetimes "in the glory of the Father" (Matt 16:27-28; Lk. 9:26; Matt 24:33-34). Christ's return at AD 67-70 was precisely in the manner and tradition of Yahweh's Old-Testament-era comings.

The parallels are simply too strong, repeated and many for me to ignore or disregard.

 

[parousia70]

As stated ..
But more importantly Revelation is about Revealing Jesus return to earth as King on earth and that Kingdom will Never end
That has not happened

Jesus is King on Earth Today.

There is no name on earth today with Power and Dominion above His.

We do agree it is without end, We just disagree on when it began

 

[seventysevens]

Jesus is King on Earth Today.

There is no name on earth today with Power and Dominion above His.

We do agree it is without end, We just disagree on when it began

Boy you sure are in for a big surprise when he really returns literally , If it had begun the world would be a whole lot different

 

[DavidPT]

So the Ancient of Days has a Physical Appearance? has flesh and bone?
Or is it Just one like a Son of Man that does?

Or are you suggesting Christ was Physically "appearing near before" a non Physical Entity?

I'll try and address the rest of your post maybe later. For the time being I will try and address this.

The setting for the passage below appears to be in heaven where the Father dwells, the same place Jesus left when He was initially born, the same place He returned to after His death and resurrection, the same place He will be leaving when He again returns to this earth, the 2nd coming.

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

In this passage there are two distinct entities. 1----one like the Son of man. 2----the Ancient of days

If the former is meaning Christ, that obviously makes the latter meaning the Father then. Thus----Christ came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Father, and they brought Christ near before the Father. And there was given Christ dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve Christ: Christ's dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and Christ's kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


Based on that, I'm failing to understand why you are asking some of the things that you are? If Christ didn't receive dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, once He initially returned to heaven, when will He be given these things then if the above is not referring to any of that when He initially returned to heaven?

 

[DavidPT]

Jesus is King on Earth Today.

There is no name on earth today with Power and Dominion above His.

We do agree it is without end, We just disagree on when it began

The fact this is your view of things, it perplexes me as to why we are not on the same page in regards to Daniel 7:13-14 then?

 

[shilohsfoal]

Agreed



Yet, In EVERY OT instance of Yahweh being SEEN "coming" down to earth riding clouds, wielding His sword and killing people with his Brightness, The prophets used that explicit VISUAL language to describe God in Heaven using Human armies as His instruments of Judgement on earth.

Every one.

Where is your scriptural instruction to apply a POLAR OPPOSITE interpretation to Christ's Coming on the Clouds described in the NT?



Where is the Historical Documentation of this GLOBALLY VISIBLE EVENT?:
The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; (Is 52:10)

Where is the documentation of God's Physical Arm being seen by every eye of everyone in every nation as the Prophet said?



Again, According to the prophets, The stars fell from heaven when the Medes Sacked Babylon (Isaiah 13)

According to the prophets, the Heavens receeded like a scroll at the fall of Edom (Isaiah 34)

According to the prophets, the World's mountains quaked and melted at the fall of Nineveh (Nahum 1)

So I ask again, Since Scripture interprets scripture, Where is your scriptural instruction to Interpret language like Stars falling, sun darkening, heaven rolling up like a scroll, mountains melting, Locally and Figuratively when it is used to describe already fulfilled National Judgments in the OT, but suddenly apply a polar opposite "literal, universal" interpretation to the exact same language when it is found in the NT?

The prophet prophecied the .heavens would be darkened when the Medes sacked Babylon but there is no written record of it ever happening because it hasn't happened yet.
You are claiming something happened that hasn't happened yet.

Unfulfilled prophecy

Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the Day of the LORD is coming--cruel, with fury and burning anger--to make the earth a desolation and to destroy the sinners within it.


Nothing was made desolate when the Medes sacked Babylon.And the sinners remained in it.
My bet is you dont know who Babylon is.

 

[DavidPT]

The prophet prophecied the stars would fall when the Medes sacked Babylon but there is no written record of it ever happening because it hasn't happened yet.
You are claiming something happened that hasn't happened yet.

Good point. Clearly some of those things brought up in those passages are yet to be fulfilled, just like you indicated. But of course though, when one is debating a Preterist, via their perspective, expect pretty much everything to have already been historically fulfilled. Clearly some of it would be, but all of it though?

 

[shilohsfoal]

Good point. Clearly some of those things brought up in those passages are yet to be fulfilled, just like you indicated. But of course though, when one is debating a Preterist, via their perspective, expect pretty much everything to have already been historically fulfilled. Clearly some of it would be, but all of it though?

Isaiah was not prophesying against ancient Babylon.He was prophesying against the same city of Babylon in revelation.
These two prophecies speak of the exact same events.

Isaiah 13:16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes, their houses will be looted, and their wives will be ravished.

Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all the nations for battle against Jerusalem, and the city will be captured, the houses looted, and the women ravished. Half of the city will go into captivity, but the rest of the people will not be removed from the city.

Comparing scripture we learn that the city of Babylon in isaiah 13 and revelation is actually Jerusalem.

The ruler of the Medes (Iran)has every intention to destroy the occupants of babylon(Jerusalem)and openly tells the world.But the world is drunk and has no clue these prophecies will come to pass within the next 7 years.
Preterists have no chance of understand what will happen because they convince themselves it already has.

 

[keras]

None of them taught He could return "at any time in the next 2000 years." Not even one. Rather, they ALL taught their contemporaries to prepare for His Coming in THEIR DAY.

One of the best scriptures that refers to the Return of Jesus, is 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17.
Paul plainly tells the Thess. Christians to not be alarmed by false prophets who say Jesus is coming or is already here. He reiterates Jesus Words: do not be deceived, for that Day cannot come before the final rebellion against God, when the Adversary will declare himself to be god in the Temple.
Jesus told us this must happen first. Matthew 24:13

So you have made a bad error in your wrong assertion about what the Apostles believed and taught.
Obviously, from your determination to bin all prophecy into history, the idea of dramatic events in our time on earth, terrifies you.
Sad really, for you because you compound your error by promoting it. And by doing it in a way that denigrates and belittles anyone who opposes you.

 

[keras]

I have requested, multiple times, a similar list from anyone claiming "most scholars" prefer the late (90'sAD) date.

John the Revelator was exiled to Patmos by the Emperor Domitian. 81-96 AD
This is stated by the ECF's and proved by Roman records held in the Vatican, but kept secret.

There is nothing in the Book of Revelation about the Roman conquest of the Jews and the Temples destruction, because Revelation is all about the time of the fulfilment of the Church era.
Note that the Seven Church's are established and flourishing when John wrote, that would not have been the case before 70 AD. The Church in Jerusalem isn't mentioned, as they relocated to Pella, circa 69 AD.

 

[Douggg]

If Christ didn't receive dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, once He initially returned to heaven, when will He be given these things then if the above is not referring to any of that when He initially returned to heaven?

In heaven, the kingdom Jesus was given is the Kingdom of Heaven, a kingdom not of this world.

When Jesus returns, he brings the dominion of the Kingdom of Heaven to this earth as the Kingdom of God, to have dominion over all earthly kingdoms.

Currently, Satan's kingdom, referred to as Babylon the great, has dominion over all earthly kingdoms - which, when the 7th trumpet sounds, the dismantling of that kingdom begins, so that the kingdoms of the world become the kingdoms of God and His Christ. Completed when Jesuss descends down to earth and Satan is bound in chains and cast into the bottomless pit.

There is not going to be anymore Babylon the great ruling over the earth any more, after that, ever.