A basic flaw in Partial Preterist interpretation

[DavidPT]

I just wrote in message #73 that Zech 12 is future. Call me an atypical Amil if you like. But other Amils have a similar understanding (post #76). Looks like you misunderstood.

No way whatsoever did I misunderstood any Amils in the past regarding these particular Scriptures in Zech 12. They clearly applied them to the first century around the time of Christ's death. I'm not claiming all Amils do, but these certainly did.

The same way there are different versions of Premil, there are also different versions of Amil. One Premil might believe there is going to be a temple where animal sacrifices continue, post the 2nd coming. Another Premil might not believe such a thing. In the same way, one Amil might believe nothing in Zech 12 is future, while another Amil might. This causes a problem with the texts if anything in Zech 12 is meaning anything in Matthew 24:30, and that the interpreter has the former as already past and fulfilled, while at the same time, has the latter future still. That is a contradiction.

And BTW, these Amils in the past I discussed things with, they concluded Matthew 24:30 is future still. Thus a contradiction if anything in Zechariah 12 is meaning anything in Matthew 24:30.

 

[DavidPT]

Zechariah 12:10 does have fulfillment in the 1st century, specifically with the death of Christ

zechariah 12:10 And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a --firstborn.

John 19:34-37 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe. For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken.” And again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they have pierced.”




I guess, how is it not supported? The original context of the prophecy is in regards to the nation of Israel and their tribal clans mourning because they pierced God. Zechariah 12:12 is not about the all people or the whole world in general, its specifically about Israel.

Zechariah 12:12-13 The land shall mourn, each tribe by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself, and their wives by themselves; and all the families that are left, each by itself, and their wives by themselves.

Jesus quotes from zechariah 12:12 as occuring shortly after the destruction of 1st century jerusalem.

Matthwe 24:29-30 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.


Jerusalem is destroyed because they did not recognize the time of Jesus' coming......
Luke 19:43-44 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

.......Which correlates with the Vineyard owner "COMING" to destroy the wicked tenants for killing his son.
Matthew 21:40-45 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.” Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: “‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone;d
this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? 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.”e When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them.

Thus, I'm not sure on what grounds we can separate the coming of the vineyard owner to destroy the wicked tenants in association with kill His son and their mourning because of this?

Your arguments fall flat, the fact the coming in Matthew 24:30 is meaning the coming in the end of this age. Let's look at it from the perspective of Luke 21.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

The coming in Matthew 24:30 is after all of the above events have been fulfilled. And this includes...and shall be led away captive into all nations. Obviously, that has to end at some point, and it couldn't have ended in 70 AD, if in 70 AD that is when it initially began. Therefore the coming is after the captivity into all nations has ended, or that the coming puts an end to the captivity, whichever of these two might be correct.

Why would anyone apply verses 25-26, something else that needs to be fulfilled before the coming in Matthew 24:30 can take place, to that of any events in the first century around 70 AD? Verses 25-26 are describing events so profound, that there is no way any of this is connected with events in the first century. If one applies these events to the first century, and the fact this same one takes the events connected with 70 AD literally, which they indeed were, that same one, in order to remain consistent, would have to take the events in verse 25 and 26 literally as well. So, when during the first century was there literally upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring?

 

[Christian Gedge]

So, when during the first century was there literally upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring?

It's hard to find mention of 'roaring waves' or unusual tidal activity between AD 67-70 by historians. Ive heard figurative interpretations from ADseventyists of 'falling stars', but 'roaring waves' is a difficult one for them.

My thought on this (I'm Amil BTW) is that the earth will take a hammering from falling objects from the sky. One asteroid would have the Pacific ocean bouncing. Not a good day to go fishing.

 

[claninja]

Your arguments fall flat,

It would be helpful for me if you addressed which part of my arguments fall flay and why.

the fact the coming in Matthew 24:30 is meaning the coming in the end of this age.

Right, and Paul declares the end of the ages had come upon them the 1st century generation, so I seen no issue.

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.

Let's look at it from the perspective of Luke 21.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

All of this happened in 66-70ad, and it attested by history. Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and destroyed, Christians fleed Jerusalem, women ate their own children, there was war all in the land of Israel, and the Jews were lead captive among the nations after the destruction.

24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

I typically view this of the signs in the heavens and earth language as allegorical for judgment. This could also be fulfilled literally, just by clouds covering the sky. Notice this same language is used in OT judgments:

God's judgment on Eygpt
Ezekiel 32:1,7-8 In the twelfth year, on the first day of the twelfth month, the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Son of man, take up a lament for Pharaoh king of Egypt and say to him:
When I extinguish you, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars. I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light. All the shining lights in the heavens I will darken over you,
and I will bring darkness upon your land,’

God's judgment on Babylon
Isaiah 13:1, 10 This is the burden against Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz received:
For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light.
The rising sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light.


As far as the earth and heavens shaking, I view this in agreement with the Benson Commentary:

Hebrews 12:26-27 At that time His voice shook the earth, but now He has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth, but heaven as well.”h The words, “Once more,” signify the removal of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that the unshakable may remain.


"Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven — Meaning, probably, the abolition of the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Matthew 24:29; John 4:21; John 4:23; and even the overthrow of the heathen idolatry" (benson commentary).

The coming in Matthew 24:30 is after all of the above events have been fulfilled. And this includes...and shall be led away captive into all nations. Obviously, that has to end at some point, and it couldn't have ended in 70 AD, if in 70 AD that is when it initially began

I argue it would have began in 66ad, When Cestius seiged Jerusalem, but pulled back suddenly, which allowed for Christians to flee. By the time Titus arrived in 70ad, there would have been no chance for anyone to flee the city.

The coming in Matthew 24:30 is after all of the above events have been fulfilled. And this includes...and shall be led away captive into all nations. Obviously, that has to end at some point, and it couldn't have ended in 70 AD, if in 70 AD that is when it initially began. Therefore the coming is after the captivity into all nations has ended, or that the coming puts an end to the captivity, whichever of these two might be correct.

I interpret Luke's timing in light of other scripture:

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken

Luke 21:24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

revelation 11:2 do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.

So the Jews (tribes of the land of Israel) did not wail and mourn because of their destruction and being lead into captivity?

Why would anyone apply verses 25-26, something else that needs to be fulfilled before the coming in Matthew 24:30 can take place, to that of any events in the first century around 70 AD?

2 reasons:

1.) that type of language was used by the OT prophets to signify judgment on places like Babylon and Egypt

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

So, when during the first century was there literally upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring?

I mean, many from the last 2,000 years have used tsunamis, earthquakes, "blood moons", falling stars, eclipses as signs to try to predict the coming of Christ.

I remember an old guest pastor I once had stated that hurricaine Katrina back in 2005 was signs of coming judgment in the next year in agreement with "waves roaring". 2nd coming still did not happen the next year

So I try not to personally interpret the signs, but apply them as other scripture has applied them.

 

[Andrewn]

Zechariah 12:10 does have fulfillment in the 1st century, specifically with the death of Christ

True, but I think it's an ongoing rather than a one time fulfillment.

I guess, how is it not supported? The original context of the prophecy is in regards to the nation of Israel and their tribal clans mourning because they pierced God.

I didn't think I would have to paste the verses. The following clearly didn't take place in 70 AD:

3 On that day I will make Jerusalem into a heavy stone for all the peoples.
All who carry it will hurt themselves;
nevertheless, the nations of the earth will conspire against it.
4 On that day, says the Lord, I will strike every horse with confusion
and its rider with madness.
I will keep my eyes open for the house of Judah;
I will strike blind every horse of the peoples.
5 The chieftains of Judah will say to themselves, We are strong;
the inhabitants of Jerusalem will say,
The Lordtheir God of heavenly forces is strong.
6 On that day I will place the chieftains of Judah like a pot on a wood fire and like a burning torch among the bundles of grain.
They will devour all the surrounding nations to the right and the left.
Jerusalem will dwell again in its place, in Jerusalem.
7 The Lord will first deliver the tents of Judah so that the splendor of David’s house
and the splendor of Jerusalem’s inhabitants won’t overshadow Judah.
8 On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
Anyone among them who stumbles on that day will become like David,
and David’s house will become like God,
like the Lord’s messenger in front of them.
9 On that day I intend to destroy all the nations who come against Jerusalem,

Jesus quotes from zechariah 12:12 as occuring shortly after the destruction of 1st century jerusalem.

You quoted Matthwe 24:29-30 as proof. But I already said that the 2nd part of verse 30 is future.

Jerusalem is destroyed because they did not recognize the time of Jesus' coming. . . . Which correlates with the Vineyard owner "COMING" to destroy the wicked tenants for killing his son. . . . Thus, I'm not sure on what grounds we can separate the coming of the vineyard owner to destroy the wicked tenants in association with kill His son and their mourning because of this?

I'm not separating them. I admit that the fulfillment of Zech 12:10 started at the crucifixion.

I would argue Matthew 26:64 is pointing to Daniel 7:13-14, in which the son of man comes on the clouds TO the Father. This would correlate nicely with the son of man sitting at the right hand.

I didn't say they were different.

Thus, just as Jesus "from now on" IS sitting at the right hand, He IS coming on the clouds. . . . This language also points to how God came in judgment upon His enemies. He came down from heaven to judge David's enemies. . . . He came down from heaven to judge Egypt. . . . He came down from heaven to judge samaria

All these prove my point that Mt 26:64 is speaking figuratively.

What is consistent is that Christ came in judgment upon Israel in 70ad, which is specific to that 1st century generation, and Christ will come to judge the living and the dead as the Nicene creed states, which can be applied to all generations, past to and FUTURE to us.

Yes, we agree.

 

[jgr]

However in regards to the Heruli, I thought they were conquered by the Lombards? I could be wrong though, as I am not too familiar with all the different tribes and kingdoms that came from the roman empire. Only have done a little "google" research .

Theodoric was leader of the Ostrogoths, Odoacer was leader of the Heruli.

"Theodoric invaded Italy in 489 and by August 490 had captured almost the entire peninsula, forcing Odoacer to take refuge in Ravenna. The city surrendered on 5 March 493; Theodoric invited Odoacer to a banquet of reconciliation and instead of forging an alliance, killed the unsuspecting king."

Theodoric was allied with papal Rome.

"Theodoric is also known for his attainment of support from the Catholic Church and on one occasion, he even helped resolve a disputed papal election.[27] During his reign, Theodoric, who was an Arian, allowed freedom of religion, which had not been done before. However, he did try to appease the Pope and tried to keep his alliance with the church strong. He saw the Pope as an authority not only in the church but also over Rome itself. His ability to work well with Italy's nobles, members of the Roman Senate, and the Catholic Church all helped facilitate his acceptance as the ruler of Italy.[28]

 

[sovereigngrace]

It would be helpful for me if you addressed which part of my arguments fall flay and why.



Right, and Paul declares the end of the ages had come upon them the 1st century generation, so I seen no issue.

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.



All of this happened in 66-70ad, and it attested by history. Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and destroyed, Christians fleed Jerusalem, women ate their own children, there was war all in the land of Israel, and the Jews were lead captive among the nations after the destruction.



I typically view this of the signs in the heavens and earth language as allegorical for judgment. This could also be fulfilled literally, just by clouds covering the sky. Notice this same language is used in OT judgments:

God's judgment on Eygpt
Ezekiel 32:1,7-8 In the twelfth year, on the first day of the twelfth month, the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Son of man, take up a lament for Pharaoh king of Egypt and say to him:
When I extinguish you, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars. I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light. All the shining lights in the heavens I will darken over you,
and I will bring darkness upon your land,’

God's judgment on Babylon
Isaiah 13:1, 10 This is the burden against Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz received:
For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light.
The rising sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light.


As far as the earth and heavens shaking, I view this in agreement with the Benson Commentary:

Hebrews 12:26-27 At that time His voice shook the earth, but now He has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth, but heaven as well.”h The words, “Once more,” signify the removal of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that the unshakable may remain.


"Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven — Meaning, probably, the abolition of the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Matthew 24:29; John 4:21; John 4:23; and even the overthrow of the heathen idolatry" (benson commentary).



I argue it would have began in 66ad, When Cestius seiged Jerusalem, but pulled back suddenly, which allowed for Christians to flee. By the time Titus arrived in 70ad, there would have been no chance for anyone to flee the city.



I interpret Luke's timing in light of other scripture:

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken

Luke 21:24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

revelation 11:2 do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.

So the Jews (tribes of the land of Israel) did not wail and mourn because of their destruction and being lead into captivity?



2 reasons:

1.) that type of language was used by the OT prophets to signify judgment on places like Babylon and Egypt

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




I mean, many from the last 2,000 years have used tsunamis, earthquakes, "blood moons", falling stars, eclipses as signs to try to predict the coming of Christ.

I remember an old guest pastor I once had stated that hurricaine Katrina back in 2005 was signs of coming judgment in the next year in agreement with "waves roaring". 2nd coming still did not happen the next year

So I try not to personally interpret the signs, but apply them as other scripture has applied them.

When you compare the vivid and repeated biblical detail pertaining to “this age” and “the age to come” you can see the contrast between the temporal and the eternal, not the old covenant and the new covenant. That is a Preterist invention! This age is depicted as evil, carnal, corrupt and temporal, whereas, the age to come is depicted as perfect, renewed, glorified and eternal. This age involves mortal believers and unbelievers. The age to come belongs exclusively to the glorified elect. One must be worthy to inherit it (namely being redeemed). One must be fittingly prepared to enter it (namely through glorification). Sin, sinners, death and decay, rebellion and war, attend the whole duration of “this age,” whereas, the age to come is described as a perfected unending arrangement where perfected believers possess a perfected earth. All the ugly result of the fall is finally removed. Satan has been stripped of his power and banished to the lake of fire. Sin and sickness, corruption and the curse are now destroyed, never to race anymore.

 

[claninja]

I didn't think I would have to paste the verses. The following clearly didn't take place in 70 AD:

3 On that day I will make Jerusalem into a heavy stone for all the peoples.
All who carry it will hurt themselves;
nevertheless, the nations of the earth will conspire against it.
4 On that day, says the Lord, I will strike every horse with confusion
and its rider with madness.
I will keep my eyes open for the house of Judah;
I will strike blind every horse of the peoples.
5 The chieftains of Judah will say to themselves, We are strong;
the inhabitants of Jerusalem will say,
The Lord their God of heavenly forces is strong.
6 On that day I will place the chieftains of Judah like a pot on a wood fire and like a burning torch among the bundles of grain.
They will devour all the surrounding nations to the right and the left.
Jerusalem will dwell again in its place, in Jerusalem.
7 The Lord will first deliver the tents of Judah so that the splendor of David’s house
and the splendor of Jerusalem’s inhabitants won’t overshadow Judah.
8 On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
Anyone among them who stumbles on that day will become like David,
and David’s house will become like God,
like the Lord’s messenger in front of them.
9 On that day I intend to destroy all the nations who come against Jerusalem,

Ah, this my be why there is a little confusion in our conversation.

I wasn't attempting to show the fulfillment verses 3-9. Only that Christ quotes from zechariah 12:12 in the olivet discourse.

Zechariah 12:12-14 The land will mourn, each clan on its own: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, and all the remaining clans and their wives.”

Matthew 24:30 At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven,c and all the tribes of the land will mourn.

Thus, zechariah 12:12 found its fulfillment in coming of the vineyard owner to destroy the wicked tenants due to their killing of His son (Christ pierced by a spear Zechariah 12:10, results in the tribes of the land of Israel wailing at their destruction Zechariah 12:12-14).

Matthew 21:40-41 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.”

You quoted Matthwe 24:29-30 as proof. But I already said that the 2nd part of verse 30 is future.

So then per your assessment:

1.) Occurred in 70ad at the coming judgment of Christ upon Israel.
Matthew 24:30a Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn,

2.) Occurs future to us at the resurrection and judgment of living and deat
Matthew 24:30b and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory

I think that is a fair assessment and probably the best amil explanation I have read so far. Thanks Andrewn

I only slightly disagree as for part b being future to us because:
matthew 24:34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Unless we want to get into the whole, God is outside of time to us, thus even if the final judgment began outside of earthly time around 70ad, its still future to us, as we are in time.....which is how I typically view it....but that's just a personal idea and not developed in scripture.

I'm not separating them. I admit that the fulfillment of Zech 12:10 started at the crucifixion.

So you would agree then that zechariah 12:12 finds its fulfillment in the coming judgment of Christ upon Israel if you are not separating it?

I didn't say they were different.

I didn't say you did, I was just trying to show what I believe.

All these prove my point that Mt 26:64 is speaking figuratively.

Which means we are in agreement

Yes, we agree.

I'm glad we can find some common ground

 

[claninja]

When you compare the vivid and repeated biblical detail pertaining to “this age” and “the age to come” you can see the contrast between the temporal and the eternal, not the old covenant and the new covenant. That is a Preterist invention! This age is depicted as evil, carnal, corrupt and temporal, whereas, the age to come is depicted as perfect, renewed, glorified and eternal. This age involves mortal believers and unbelievers. The age to come belongs exclusively to the glorified elect. One must be worthy to inherit it (namely being redeemed). One must be fittingly prepared to enter it (namely through glorification). Sin, sinners, death and decay, rebellion and war, attend the whole duration of “this age,” whereas, the age to come is described as a perfected unending arrangement where perfected believers possess a perfected earth. All the ugly result of the fall is finally removed. Satan has been stripped of his power and banished to the lake of fire. Sin and sickness, corruption and the curse are now destroyed, never to race anymore.

What does this have to do with anything in post #84?

 

[claninja]

Theodoric was leader of the Ostrogoths, Odoacer was leader of the Heruli.

"Theodoric invaded Italy in 489 and by August 490 had captured almost the entire peninsula, forcing Odoacer to take refuge in Ravenna. The city surrendered on 5 March 493; Theodoric invited Odoacer to a banquet of reconciliation and instead of forging an alliance, killed the unsuspecting king."

Theodoric was allied with papal Rome.

"Theodoric is also known for his attainment of support from the Catholic Church and on one occasion, he even helped resolve a disputed papal election.[27] During his reign, Theodoric, who was an Arian, allowed freedom of religion, which had not been done before. However, he did try to appease the Pope and tried to keep his alliance with the church strong. He saw the Pope as an authority not only in the church but also over Rome itself. His ability to work well with Italy's nobles, members of the Roman Senate, and the Catholic Church all helped facilitate his acceptance as the ruler of Italy.[28]

This is very interesting. Thanks for bringing this up JGR.

However, Still a little confused though about Heruli being one of the 3 uprooted kingdoms.

I see that Theodoric was the 3rd king in the Amal dynasty of the ostrogoths.
(Ostrogoths - Wikipedia)

And I see that Odoacer was killed in 493AD
(Ostrogoths - Wikipedia)

But it states the Heruli kingdom was destroyed by the Lombards in the 6th century
"Their independent kingdom was however destroyed by the Lombards in the early 6th century AD"
Heruli - Wikipedia

I may be missing something though.....

 

[jgr]

This is very interesting. Thanks for bringing this up JGR.

However, Still a little confused though about Heruli being one of the 3 uprooted kingdoms.

I see that Theodoric was the 3rd king in the Amal dynasty of the ostrogoths.
(Ostrogoths - Wikipedia)

And I see that Odoacer was killed in 493AD
(Ostrogoths - Wikipedia)

But it states the Heruli kingdom was destroyed by the Lombards in the 6th century
"Their independent kingdom was however destroyed by the Lombards in the early 6th century AD"
Heruli - Wikipedia

I may be missing something though.....

Yeah Claninja, there seem to be some inexplicabilities between the accounts e.g. my links say very little about the Lombards, and the Heruli link says nothing about the death of Odoacer, the leader.

Daniel 7:24 says:

And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The assassination of Odoacer at the hands of the papist Theodoric satisfies me that the latter subdued the former, as described by Scripture.

 

[keras]

Yeah Claninja, there seem to be some inexplicabilities between the accounts e.g. my links say very little about the Lombards, and the Heruli link says nothing about the death of Odoacer, the leader.

Daniel 7:24 says:

And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The assassination of Odoacer at the hands of the papist Theodoric satisfies me that the latter subdued the former, as described by Scripture.

Inexplicabilities ? I'll say so! [A good word, jgr. I'll keep it for use against the 'rapture' theory]

It is sheer confusion and misunderstanding of the Prophetic Word, to make out the fall of the Roman Empire to be the fulfilment of the prophesies that tell about a future One World Government, that will be initially ruled by ten Presidents.
Putting those prophesies into the past simply doesn't work, as the conquerors of the Romans were never a coherent group of ten peoples at one time.

 

[Andrewn]

Thus, zechariah 12:12 found its fulfillment in coming of the vineyard owner to destroy the wicked tenants due to their killing of His son (Christ pierced by a spear Zechariah 12:10, results in the tribes of the land of Israel wailing at their destruction Zechariah 12:12-14).

Even if I agree about this, what would you do w/ Zech 12:3-9? But I will agree only to the extent that fulfillment of these prophecies has started at Christ's crucifixion and continues in the present. Christians mourn for the Lord as they contemplate his cross. Jewish clans will mourn for him at his second coming.

I only slightly disagree as for part b being future to us because: matthew 24:34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

I've read different interpretations for this, some in this thread. But the way I look at this verse is different. To me it's like after the Lord had made a long speech covering to the end of times, he came back a full circle to directly address his hearers.

So you would agree then that zechariah 12:12 finds its fulfillment in the coming judgment of Christ upon Israel if you are not separating it?

You convinced me that it's not completely future. It looks like what I initially said about Zec 12:10 applies to the whole passage Zec 12:10-14. Continuous fulfillment started in 30 AD and will culminate in the 2nd coming.

Which means we are in agreement

We have more in common than with Dispensationalists who seem to be ignorant of history and of God's plan of salvation.

 

[jgr]

Inexplicabilities ? I'll say so! [A good word, jgr. I'll keep it for use against the 'rapture' theory]

It is sheer confusion and misunderstanding of the Prophetic Word, to make out the fall of the Roman Empire to be the fulfilment of the prophesies that tell about a future One World Government, that will be initially ruled by ten Presidents.
Putting those prophesies into the past simply doesn't work, as the conquerors of the Romans were never a coherent group of ten peoples at one time.

I'll take the Reformers' discernment over your delusion, any time and every time, keras.

 

[sovereigngrace]

What does this have to do with anything in post #84?

 

[DavidPT]

It would be helpful for me if you addressed which part of my arguments fall flay and why.

My point was, something has to trump here. And if the coming meant in Matthew 24:30 is meaning in the end of this age like I and others believe, you can make arguments against that until the cows come home and none of those arguments are ever going to trump an interpretation that is agreeing with the text when yours isn't. I then went on, though somewhat briefly at the time, to show why a coming in the end of the age is the only conclusion one should be coming to regarding Matthew 24:30.

All of this happened in 66-70ad, and it attested by history. Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and destroyed, Christians fleed Jerusalem, women ate their own children, there was war all in the land of Israel, and the Jews were lead captive among the nations after the destruction.

I'm not disputing that, but let me add the following which I neglected to add at the time, in order to clarify one of the points I was attempting to make.

Luke 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.


Verse 32 says----This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

All, obviously has to mean everything Jesus has brought up in the Discourse, and that would include this---and shall be led away captive into all nations. And since this captivity can't last forever, all can not be fulfilled before this captivity into all nations ends at some point. And we already know from the text when it likely ends---- and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Preterists typically conclude that Jerusalem was trodden down of the Gentiles between 66 and 70 AD, as you have shown above, therefore the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled by 70 AD according to Preterists. But even you admit that the Jews were lead captive among the nations after the destruction. That would mean after the times of the Gentiles have been fulfilled according to this interpretation. Yet the text indicates that this captivity apparently ends when the times of the Gentiles have been fulfilled.

Your interpretation suggests, that in Luke 21:24, Jerusalem is meaning the literal city in the Middle East in the first century, yet---and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled--is obviously referring to the following in Revelation 11:2-----But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

If a literal city in the first century is meant by Jerusalem in Revelation 11:2, to remain consistent, then so must the 2 witnesses be meaning two literal people in the first century, with literal fire proceeding out of their mouths, etc. Even if one didn't take those things in the literal sense, yet takes Jerusalem in verse 2 in the literal sense, still there is nothing remotely in Rev 11 that fits with anything that literally happened to Jerusalem in 70AD. It certainly didn't involve, in any sense, two witnesses breathing fire like fire breathing dragons, thus devouring anyone that might try to harm them. And there certainly wasn't anyone in any sense, that had power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will---between 66 AD and 70 AD.

To use an argument, that because Revelation 11:2 sounds like it is meaning in the literal sense, therefore it is meaning what happened to Jerusalem in 66-70, is a weak argument if one can't also get the rest of the text in that same chapter to agree with what one is concluding about verse 2 in that same chapter.


All of this tells us, though Luke 21:20 involved Jerusalem in the first century, this is not meaning the same thing as---and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled--verse 24. That proven by the captivity into all nations, that if it has a starting point, it also has to have an ending point, otherwise one has to conclude this captivity into all nations continues forever without end. So how can, when the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, not be when this captivity ends? How can the end of this captivity not be included within all things that shall be fulfilled before this generation can pass? Plus the fact, only verse 2 in Revelation 11 looks like it might support what happened in 66-70 AD, but when adding the remaining verses in that chapter, it's obvious to most of us that 66-70 AD isn't meant in verse 2 after all.

 

[keras]

I'll take the Reformers' discernment over your delusion, any time and every time, keras.

The Reformers and the Early Church Fathers word is not scripture.
They were subject to error, as is every learned and wise person. Matthew 11:25

I repeat: it is nonsense to make out the fall of the Roman empire fit prophesies like Daniel 7:23-27 and Revelation 17:12-14, +

 

[jgr]

The Reformers and the Early Church Fathers word is not scripture.
They were subject to error, as is every learned and wise person. Matthew 11:25

I repeat: it is nonsense to make out the fall of the Roman empire fit prophesies like Daniel 7:23-27 and Revelation 17:12-14, +

Keras' word is not Scripture.
He claims to be a babe (Matthew 11:25).
Scripture describes babes as carnal and unskillful (1 Corinthians 3:1; Hebrews 5:13).

I repeat, I'll take the Reformers' wise discernment over carnal unskillful babes, any time and every time.

 

[keras]

Keras' word is not Scripture.
He claims to be a babe (Matthew 11:25).
Scripture describes babes as carnal and unskillful (1 Corinthians 3:1; Hebrews 5:13).

I repeat, I'll take the Reformers' wise discernment over carnal unskillful babes, any time and every time.

When did I ask you to take my word?
What I do expect you to believe is the scriptures I present. Ones that prove you wrong about the yet to happen 10 region; One World Government.

I have read the Reformers and the ECF's. They more often than not disagreed with one another. They are no better than todays fallible expositors. Believing all they say, is foolishness.

 

[DavidPT]

It would be helpful for me if you addressed which part of my arguments fall flay and why.

In the event you were planning on addressing post #96 at some point, please don't bother. I have been under a lot of stress lately, personal issues at home, therefore I wasn't thinking clearly at the time per some of that post. When I used Revelation 11:2 as an argument, I should have been arguing that verse from Revelation 13, not from Revelation 11. So today I have a better idea. I don't even need to use the book of Revelation to demonstrate that a portion of your interpretation of the Discourse couldn't possibly be correct. I can do that from a verse or two in the Discourse alone, in order to easily demonstrate that a portion of your interpretation of the Discourse couldn't possibly be correct. I don't know why I didn't think of this sooner? But it's better late than never, as they say.


Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Your interpretation of this verse says this----and shall be led away captive into all nations--after the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Yet that is not what that verse says. That verse does not say---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword--after the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. Nor does it say---and shall be led away captive into all nations--after the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

That verse says---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword--until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. That verse says---and shall be led away captive into all nations--until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.


As far as I can tell, you don't argue---until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled---that this is not included among all the things that must be fulfilled before this generation can pass. You argue that it is included. Therefore, according to the text, your argument has to be this---and shall be led away captive into all nations--until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled---being what has to be fulfilled before this generation can pass.

Your argument cannot instead be this---and shall be led away captive into all nations--that the end of this captivity is not even included among the things that must be fulfilled before this generation can pass. That argument is illogical. Of course that has to be included among the things that must be fulfilled before this generation can pass. There is no way when one is correctly arguing from the text in Luke 21:24, to then arrive at 70 AD at the end of that verse. To argue in an incorrect manner instead would be to argue---and shall be led away captive into all nations--began and ended by 70 AD. Yet we all know, including you, the captivity into all nations began after the destruction of Jerusalem.

Your interpretation of this portion of the Discourse has been debunked. The question is, are you able to accept it, thus admit it? Probably not would be my guess. But if I have to be wrong about something, I'd rather it be that I'm wrong about this, that you instead are able to accept it, are able to admit it.