LUKE CHAPTERS 19, 21, 23 AND REVELATION "DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 70AD"

ToServe · Oct 21, 2018

parousia70 said:
So Paul and James were wrong in your view to be zealous for the Law after the cross?

They lived, learned and adjusted their mission statement throughout their fact finding commission. All truth was being revealed as a work in progress.

The Apostles realised that their attachment to the Law was a passing fad and it was through their fact finding commission that they realised that there must be two willing parties to a contractual agreement. After the sign of Jonah was given the Jewish nation, their time was up and they really needed to come to the Lord by being subjects of the Cross and to say "Blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord".

A 40 year probationary period before 70AD final judgment was given to the desolate house, desolate priesthood, desolate temple, in order for them to come to the Cross.

The God party had parted ways from them at the Cross and there was really no access to God through an authorised Old Covenant Holy Temple for there to be a continued agreement (covenant) in the first place. The sign of Jonah was therefore the annulment of the Old Covenant agreement.

The entire book of Hebrews tries to appeal to the Judaizers in a way so that it would not detract them from what the Apostles were trying to inform them and that was that the Law was done away with at the Cross and since there was a change in priesthood (Melchizedek = Grace & Truth) then there necessitated the Old being immediately replaced with the New.

Read Hebrews and with reference to all my posts and you will not find any inconsistencies in what I have been trying to communicate to you and other Preterists in that the Old Covenant ended at the Cross.

Acts 7:51 is alerting the establishment that their hearts and ears are still not circumcised which alludes to the efforts of Peter to inform them that the Law was done away with and could not give them the circumcision required for them to be saved and in relationship with God. This means that there can't be an Old Covenant agreement if Peter is explicitly saying there is no relationship between them and God as they are accused of resisting the Holy Spirit.

Galatians 4
Paul makes a comparison between Hagar and Sarah and asks the question "Tell me, you Judaizers who want to be under the Law, are you not aware of what the law says? He makes a contrasting point between Hagar's son and Sarah's son in an effort to highlight to them that God never had an agreement with Hagar in the first place and when Sarah's son of promise came along he had to send away Hagar's son because there is only one agreement and it is with Christ's Grace and Truth and not the Law.

God wasn't holding for 40 years in one hand a contractual agreement for Hagar's son which is the Law of bondage and in the other a contractual agreement for Sarah's son which is the Grace and Truth of the Freedom in Christ Jesus.

When has God ever held two diametrically opposite agreements in his hands at the same time?

The 70AD Preterist covenantal narrative has to be rejected and to clearly point to the many unresolvable contradictions and explicit teachings of Hebrews that debunk this narrative as ill conceived at best.

Hebrews 4-10 chapters explicitly inform the Judaizers that since the priesthood changed at Christ's ascension, then the contractual convenantal agreement needed to change also in order to be in harmony with the Kingly High Priest Melchizedek.

Old Testament prophecy even explicitly states that the transition between the Old and the New happens when the Old priesthood is sacked and replaced by a new priest who has the keys of David and can open doors that no man can shut and shut doors that no man can open. Eliakim a symbol of Christ means "God will raise up" (sign of Jonah). Hilkiah a symbol of God the Father means my portion of Yahweh. So this Father and Son relationship of the Trinity is plainly revealed in the name meanings.

Read Isaiah 22:19-25 and discern that this played out and was fully ratified at Christ's ascension.

parousia70 said:
Unfaithful servants BOUND by the curse of the Covenant.
If as you say the covenant was no longer extant, then those unfaithful servants were not bound to it's curses.

They were the only party in that agreement left who testified to their own destruction and so they ultimately cursed themselves for 40 years just as their forefathers cursed themselves in the desert.

parousia70 said:
Surely, when Jesus said it is finished then he who is the Messiah whom the Old Testament prophets said would come and be as the firgure of Moses called The Servant in Deuteronomy 18:15-19 ended the OC agreement right there and then.
What was that agreement? "Do X or else..."
If they did not do X, then the OR else still applies... you would have it that the "or else" no longer applied.

Once the Most High was anointed (Crowned Monarch) then their refusal meant that they were no longer in agreement and God treated them as Gentiles who trampled his Church. That is right, once they were members of the commonwealth, then they lost their citizenship and were exiled from any benefits of the one Kingdom of God established according to Daniel 2:44.

parousia70 said:
absolutely. He continued with the "or else" clause of the agreement.

The Old Covenant contractual agreement had a clause to say you must kiss the Son, the Seed of Promise when he comes. Jesus said no other sign will be given the Old Covenant generation except the sign of Jonah. This is God's exit clause for those who did not abide by it and so the or else continuing in an agreement would not be an option in the first place as this would be an insult to Christ and the Spririt of Grace. God the Father would immediately sever his other party from continuing in agreement with him because they failed to comply with the original agreement in the first place and they became cast out as Gentiles.

parousia70 said:
We seem to agree.

On spiritual matters yes, but on covenantal contractual matters no.

parousia70 said:
You have moved your goalposts from Extinguished at the cross to "will eventually dissipate after the cross".

You will find that when I stated God is no longer a party to any contractual agreement with them then we see them being slowly as a cause extinguished into the Gentile crowd and then dispersed into their nations as outcasts. They could have come to God through the Son as Gentiles, but what they could not do is to come to God as those still in an annulled agreement.

parousia70 said:
we are making progress!

Sure, but do you see why 70AD is not as important as Christ's ascension and him being the Kingly High Priest covenantal cutoff marker?

Once the Most High is anointed there is only one covenant and if you read Hebrews 4-10 you will get a clear picture.

parousia70 said:
Again, you seem to agree here that the 70Ad judgment was a judgment determined and poured out per the OC contract. again we agree.

Not on the OC contract, but on those who once had an OC contract before the Sign of Jonah, but now were no more or less than other Gentiles who had the same opportunity to come to God through the Son's blood contractual agreement.

parousia70 · Oct 22, 2018

ToServe said:
A 40 year probationary period before 70AD final judgment was given to the desolate house, desolate priesthood, desolate temple, in order for them to come to the Cross.

I have no disagreement with this statement.

God wasn't holding for 40 years in one hand a contractual agreement for Hagar's son which is the Law of bondage and in the other a contractual agreement for Sarah's son which is the Grace and Truth of the Freedom in Christ Jesus.

The Old Covenant Laws ALL had to be obeyed note for note by God's people. The curses and blessings of the Law are entirely dependent on the obedience of its subjects to the code. The judgments of the Law are what happened to Israel when the Babylonians destroyed them (read Lamentations). The judgments of the Law are what happened when the Romans destroyed them. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are the judgments of the Law.

Moses promised the following when Israel was in disobedience to the law:

Deuteronomy 28:15, 20-23, 25
"But it shall come about, if you do not obey the LORD your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes with which I charge you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you: The LORD will send upon you curses, confusion, and rebuke, in all you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and until you perish quickly, on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken Me. The LORD will make the pestilence cling to you until He has consumed you FROM THE LAND...The LORD will smite you with consumption and with fever and with inflammation AND WITH FIERY HEAT and with the sword and with blight and with mildew, and they will pursue you until you perish. THE HEAVEN WHICH IS OVER YOUR HEAD SHALL BE BRONZE AND THE EARTH WHICH IS UNDER YOU, IRON. The LORD shall cause you to be defeated before your enemies; you will go out one way against them, but you will flee seven ways before them, and you will be an example of terror to all the kingdoms of the earth.

Those who were STILL UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES included a great many in the early churches who, like those in Galatians 4:1-5:5 and Romans 8:14-25, were not making an effective conversion out of keeping the Law for righteousness and were entangled in Law bondage and corruption (including mandatory circumcision for righteousness). Such men were becoming debtors again to do the whole Law and were falling from grace at the time the Church was waiting for the hope of righteousness by faith (Gal 5:1-5; Gal 4:9-11; Romans 8:23-25). Those stumbling Christ-rejectors of the early Church met their full doom at AD 70 when they fell underneath the curses of the Law defined in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. The true Christians, however, escaped the wrath miraculously and received the adoption and eternal inheritance of Christ and Abraham and were manifested at AD 70 as the true sons and daughters of God as they were hoping. This was yet a hope at the time Paul wrote Romans 8:23-25, but was realized when the Law curses came down upon Israel and the the Law of Moses was forever removed from planet earth.

They were the only party in that agreement left who testified to their own destruction and so they ultimately cursed themselves for 40 years just as their forefathers cursed themselves in the desert.

Agreed... and what specific event was foretold would end that 40 year probation?

"The coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy those wicked men" (Matt 21:33)

Do you agree with Jesus that AD 70 was "the coming of the lord of the vineyard to destroy those wicked men"?

Not on the OC contract, but on those who once had an OC contract before the Sign of Jonah, but now were no more or less than other Gentiles who had the same opportunity to come to God through the Son's blood contractual agreement.

The Gentiles were never bound by the curses of the LAW, nor did they suffer the curses of the Law.. the Jews, on the other hand were bound by and did suffer those curses.

If you claim that post cross, the Unrepentant Jews and pagan gentiles were no different in God's eyes, Why would you say God singled the Jews out over the gentiles for such judgment of their temple, priesthood and sacrificial system, if not because of their specific disobedience to the contract?
Was AD 70 not a direct result of their specific position as party to the covenant contract?

Paul ties the victory over death to the end of the LAW AGE, when the early followers of Jesus would cease to observe the Law of Moses (which they did observe up to AD 70). It was when the Mosaic System was destroyed that the victory would happen: Paul writes:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW

See that? See what was preventing the final victory from occuring at AD 30 at the Cross? It was the fact that the Law of Moses continued right on past the crucifixion until AD 70. THE STING OF DEATH IS SIN AND THE STRENGTH OF SIN IS THE LAW OF MOSES. Paul's famous and triumphant summary of his teaching here is indeed tied to the end of the LAW AGE. Paul showed that the sting and victory of death (which futurists teach have not yet been eradicated) existed due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF MOSES! (1 Cor 15:56). The Law Covenant was ABOUT to vanish away at the time Hebrews 8:13 was written (AD 60s) -- the Law Covenant did indeed vanish away at AD 70 when Christ's prophecies about the Temple were fulfilled.

The legal constitution instituted at Sinai with Moses was made obsolete by the legal constitution instituted by The Christ. The Mosaic Legal Covenant then went fully extinct at AD 70, and only the Christic Legal Covenant remained in real history, Nailed to the Cross at AD 30 and brought to total extinction by the days of God's vengeance at AD 70 (Lk 21:20-22), when the Temple and Levitical priesthood vanished in their entirety.

That "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, when "the Lord of the Vineyard came and destroyed them, and was the stone that ground them to powder".

parousia70 · Oct 22, 2018

ToServe said:
How could God offer freedom through his Son whilst still legally honouring the covenant of death embraced by the sons who wanted to stay in bondage?

Tell me how two legal documents can be legally valid if one contradicts the other?

Whenever a legal document is drafted the previous is nullified as a legally standing documented.

To think that God had two open contracts from Christ's Cross to 70AD is belony and it begs belief.

How could Paul have been so wrong then, when he said:

1 Cor 9:20
and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law;

Paul is very clear that there are those who were indeed "under the Law" at that time.

To believe the opposite, You would have to interpret this plain language as saying something it does not.

Who then, do you say these People are, who Pauls says were currently "under the law" at that time?

Do you know something Paul didn't?

Galatians 4:1-10; 5:1-5
Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ ... But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days and months and times and years. I am afraid of you , lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain... Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

This parallels The "adoption, the redemption of OUR BODY (singluar)" in Romans 8:14-25 which is that redemption out of the bondage of the Law as righteousness with God and is precisely parallel to Galatians 4:1-10/5:1-5. Paul's churches were struggling to break free from the bondage and corruption to the Law and many were not making it out of that bondage. They were fighting the corruption as they constantly were getting entangled back into the "yoke of bondage." As Paul asked them, "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days and months and times and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain"

At the time Paul wrote this, they were NOT adopted yet. They were NOT delivered out from the bondage of corruption to the glorious liberty of the children of God yet. They were NOT saved yet. Instead, they were all struggling with leaving Moses behind as a system of Righteousness with God and entering Christ as a system of Righteousness with God. Paul longed for the day when the Mosaic Economy and Temple would be destroyed and ALL of them would be free.

The position of the Church today is different than it was during the last days of the Old Testament era when they had not yet made the switch out of keeping the Law for righteousness. The earliest followers of Jesus were abiding in the Mosaic system as was Jesus. It wasn't until years later (after the cross) that Paul got his revelation and worked with James and Peter to dismiss gentile conversion into the Mosaic Law system. Paul shows us that his earliest converts were going back UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES (Gal 4:1-5:5) at the time the firstfruits generation was groaning to get out from under the curse and bondage of the Law which existed over all who were abiding by the Laws of Moses for righteousness -- until AD 70. The Law of Moses system for righteousness was REMOVED from the planet at AD 70 just like it was given to the planet at approximately 1500 B.C.

ToServe · Oct 22, 2018

parousia70 said:
The judgments of the Law are what happened when the Romans destroyed them.

The question that begs is whose Law?

The Mosaic Law or Christ's Law.

Scripture explicitly states they fell under Christ's Law, the stone which points to the tablets of inscribed Law that ended up condemning them by reason of unbelief.

Their Old Covenant promises were conditionally based on accepting their Messiah and once they had failed to do so after being given the sign of Jonah accompanied by a 40 year probationary period, they were pulverised by the Tabet Law Stone of Christ under the New Agreement they were given time to accept at the Cross or else the pulverisation judgment of 70AD.

They were being judged by the Stone, the Law Tabet of Christ under the Church (Woman) of 1st Century mentioned in Revelation 12.

There was only one agreement and they were given 40 years to embrace the Law of Christ under the New Agreement/Covenant or else to face annihilation. Their Ancesstors were given the same deal that is 40 years to accept the Law of Moses or to face death in the desert. The sign of Jonah was given them to believe in their Messiah and to say blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord or else to face the consequences dispensed under the Stone that the builders rejected.

parousia70 said:
Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are the judgments of the Law.

Whose Law were they being judged by, after the Messiah fulfilled the Law and the Prophets at the Cross, when he said it is finished?

The Law of Moses or the Law of Christ.

John 14:15
If you love me, you will keep My Commandments.

John 14:21
Whoever has. my Commandments and keeps them.....

parousia70 said:
But it shall come about, if you do not obey the LORD your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes with which I charge

Do you not get it yet!

There cannot be two subsets of Laws and Agreements. One must be in place and the other phased out. Just as there can't be Moses and Jesus at the same time according to Deuteronomy 18:15-18 who are representing God. One was a shadow of the permanent figure.

At the Mount of Transfiguration Moses (Law) and Elijah (Prophets) was shown before a glorified Messiah and this represents Christ fulfilling both, then later commissioning his Ekklessia.

parousia70 said:
BRONZE AND THE EARTH WHICH IS UNDER YOU, IRON. The LORD shall cause you to be defeated before your enemies; you will go out one way against them, but you will flee seven ways before them, and you will be

You have the earthly kingdoms contrasted by the seven candlestick menorah of God under the Commission of Ekklessia. Fleeing before the feet of Ekklessia is to his Church, whilst the one way against their enemies would be in vain because they will not retain the power of a nation.

parousia70 said:
Those who were STILL UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES included a great many in the early churches who, like those in Galatians 4:1-5:5 and Romans 8:14-25, were not making an effective conversion out of keeping the Law for righteousness and were entangled in Law bondage and corruption (including mandatory circumcision for righteousness). Such men were becoming debtors again to do the whole Law and were falling from grace at the time the Church was waiting for the hope of righteousness by faith (Gal 5:1-5; Gal 4:9-11; Romans 8:23-25). Those stumbling Christ-rejectors of the early Church met their full doom at AD 70 when they fell underneath the curses of the Law defined in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. The true Christians, however, escaped the wrath miraculously and received the adoption and eternal inheritance of Christ and Abraham and were manifested at AD 70 as the true sons and daughters of God as they were hoping. This was yet a hope at the time Paul wrote Romans 8:23-25, but was realized when the Law curses came down upon Israel and the the Law of Moses was forever removed from planet earth.

Where is the evidence to your inferences?

I will quote you again -

"THOSE WHO WERE STILL UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES included a great many in the early churches, who were not making an affective conversion out of keeping the law for righteousness and were entangled in law bondage and corruption."

Firstly, if they accepted Christ and were part of a congregation within the Church, then they have entered a New Agreement and regardless of them practising the law, they are judged under the commission of the Church. Apostle John designates them as Antichrists of the synagogue of Satan, yet their temple is not even the temple in Jerusalem, for their temple is a spiritual temple that the many sons of perdition sit in, in claiming to be of God's Holy Spirit Temple and as a result are treading under foot the Son of God and insulting the Spirit of Grace.

Jesus in Revelation says that they claim to be Jews and they are not, though they follow Jewish customs, yet they have become the synagogue of Satan. Since Jesus says some will come before the Head Ekklessia figure in Asia Minor to repent, then they have no relationship in context to the temple in Jerusalem or to unbelieving Jews who have not even accepted the Messiah. Christ's words of being many false Christ's and false prophets/preachers is alluding to members of the Church claiming to be in agreement with Christ yet they are not. This has nothing to do with the old covenant age of law.

parousia70 said:
Agreed... and what specific event was foretold would end that 40 year probation?

The old mosaic law is never in question here, for it is the Stone, the Tablet of God's Law through his Messiah and later dispensed by his Commissioned Ekklessia. The unbelieving Jews are given 40 years to accept the New Agreement enforced by the preaching of his Ekklessia. God is not giving them 40 years to get out of their other agreement with death that God is not a party to, making it no agreement at all, since an agreement can only be valid if there are a minimum of two parties. The Israelites after Moses rescued them from Pharoah never had a continued agreement with Pharoah for 40 years. God did not allow them 40 years to get over their bondage for Pharoah for this was never the point of the 40 years exodus. The 40 years exodus was a probationary period given them to accept God's covenantal agreement or else face death in the desert. The bondage of Pharoah was abolished when they marched with Moses the Law giver. In this respect the Law giver after the sign of Jonah is Christ Jesus. The Old Covenant law is Pharoah and 40 years cooling off period was not given to Pharoah.

What sort of a twisted covenantal eschatological doctrine would give merit to Pharoah for 40 years after Moses marched them out of bondage. The mosaic law (Pharoah) doesn't even come into question during the probationary period.

parousia70 said:
"The coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy those wicked men" (Matt 21:33)

Those wicked men who chased the woman of Revelation 12 and her seed who had the testimony of Jesus from city to city were symbolic of Pharoah and his armies (flood of people) who tried to chase them down. They are wicked men and not servants, since a servant is one who can be said to be in contractual agreement with God. Pharoah had no agreement with God and so those wicked who symbolised Pharoah and his armies tried to chase down the woman and to shut up the preaching of the Gospel (child) before it was born (spread). They were confronted by God when he burnt their city, which is not the City of God Jerusalem mentioned in Zechariah 14:1-4 which is his Church establishment Jerusalem, the one with many women (denominations).

parousia70 said:
Do you agree with Jesus that AD 70 was "the coming of the lord

Jesus did not say he came on 70AD. You and your Preterists friends are saying it.

parousia70 said:
If you claim that post cross, the Unrepentant Jews and pagan gentiles were no different in God's eyes, Why would you say God singled the Jews out over the gentiles for such judgment of their temple, priesthood and sacrificial system, if not because of their specific disobedience to the contract?
Was AD 70 not a direct result of their specific position as party to the covenant contract?

They were put under judgement by Christ's Commissioned Ekklessia where those wicked who rejected them and their preaching of the Gospel and trampled upon the Holy City Jerusalem (city of Peace) were to face judgement under the new Moses Jesus Christ and his Law, the Stone of Tablet Law that breaks and pulverises the enemies of his Church.

Jesus said what you tie on earth will be tied in Heaven and what you loosen on earth will be loosened in Heaven and he said how he will deal with those who reject his commissioned Ekklessia -

Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gommorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
(Matthew 10:15)

Read how the Church preaching the Gospel whilst being persecuted by the Red Dragon and the flood of wicked people he sends after the woman of Revelation 12 and her seed places them and their wicked city under condemnatin leading to the final judgement of their city in 70AD.

Their city was the wicked city and their temple a desolate house and it is obedience to his Church Ekklessia or the lack there of that decided their fate and not the mosaic law.

ToServe · Oct 22, 2018

parousia70 said:
Paul ties the victory over death to the end of the LAW AGE, when the early followers of Jesus would cease to observe the Law of Moses (which they did observe up to AD 70). It was when the Mosaic System was destroyed that the victory would happen: Paul write

Corinthians 15:54-56
and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW

The context that you are applying does not seem to gel with the overall scope of the text in its entirety and the implications there off if you push a 70AD narrative. I have covered this previously with you in highlighting that 70AD is not the context of the Lord's coming of 1 Corinthians 15.

The letter is written to the congregation of Corinth that are not only Jewish, but are mostly Gentiles and what Paul is trying to convey is that post Cross of Christ when Christ started to reign, the Power of Sin is the Law meaning that Gentles and Jews would be judged under the Law of Christ if they continued sinning. The Law of Mosss has no power to judge, rather it would be the Law of Christ, his commandments that he dispensed through his Ekklessia when he said what you tie in earth will be tied in Heaven and what you loosen on earth shall be loosened in Heaven.

So what were the sins Paul was talking about?
To which audience that formed the majority of the congregation in Corinth was he addressing?

1 Corinthians 12:2
You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols.

1 Corinthians 14:24
But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgement by all. Underline unbeliever which includes Jew and Gentile.

So this would apply to both unbelieving Jews and Gentiles who have yet to embrace Christ whilst Ekklessia is ministering the Gospel.

The stone that was bringing all unbelieving Jews into judgement was not whether they continued in the Law but whereby they were convicted to accept the Son and this is why they were given a 40 year probationary period in the valley of decision (Joel 3:14) to avert judgement from themselves, just like the men of Nineveh believed in Jonah and averted judgement. The sign of Jonah was Christ's Cross and ascension Day and in this respect the Men of Nineveh condemning this generation points to them being under God's wrath during the 40 year probationary period just as their Ancesstors were under the 40 years exodus curse before they even were given the Law.

So it remained that the Law they had yet to receive through their anointed Moses who was a symbol of Christ would be in context to Daniel's 70 week prophesy of the coming of Messiah, after the Cross, the Law of Christ through the kin of Moses, the Prophet in Deuteronomy 18:15-18, who was giving them his Law. Therefore they were under the curse of Christ's Law that was the stone of judgement/wrath beng dispensed upon the unbelievers heads as they had no sanctuary and no agreement with God, but only the dispensation of the Law of Christ that annulled their sacrifices at the Cross as far as them being atonement sacrifices before God, instead they became abominations and their temple as unholy synagogue of Satan (Daniel 9:27).

The sin of 1 Corinthians 15 is being addressed to the predominately Gentile Church in Corinth. Paul is not talking about the sin of observing the Law of Moses, but is explicitly warning against those who taught that there is no bodily resuscitation (resurrection). Paul says why should I risk my life daily if this temporal life is all there is and tomorrow when I die I am no more afterwards. So in this respect if we do not rise after we biologically die, then let us live it up by eating and drinking and being merry for tomorrow we are not going to be around to enjoy anything.

Paul places the Resurrection of the Dead when Christ hands over the Kingdom of Daniel 2:44 to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For now, he must continue to reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The at enemy to be destroyed is death. Then he becomes subject to the Father after he accomplishes this and his reign concluded.

Implications of a 70AD narrative are far too many to just shrug off, especially when I have shown you that the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead prematurely ends Christ's reign and then he becomes subject to the Father as God would be all in all the Gentiles who have now been fully accounted for in the Book of Life, when the books are opened and death spiritual/biological is no more, the the singing of Paul comes into play as follows -

Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?

Paul is not applying this teaching in the Church at Corinth to the unbelieving Jews who have not embraced Christ within the New Covenant agreement. Paul is applying it to the predominate Gentile Church who have been deceived into believing that there is no resurrection of the dead.

In this respect an Old Covenant Law Age being the victory over death on 70AD is a fabricated narrative that prematurely ends Christ's reign and claims that the power of the Cross and of the Spirit of Grace is no longer in play as the new heaven and new earth millennium has already commenced and that death spiritual/biological no longer applies.

Preterists say that Christ was instructing only the Jews, yet if it is the Church in Corinth that the letter was written to, then death ending could not be applied to the Mosaic Law in question as this would imply that Christ's reign ended in 70AD, when the Old Law Age ended and this is pure fabrication at best.

If Preterists claim that we are enjoying the benefits of the resurrection, where death spiritual was no more only post 70AD, then they unwittingly denying the power of the Cross that gave life to those from the Cross to 70AD as this was only a transitional period and death spiritual had not yet been defeated by Christ on the Cross at Calvary.

Huge implications and resulting consequences of a Preterist covenantal eschatology gone awry.

parousia70 said:
See that? See what was preventing the final victory from occuring at AD 30 at the Cross? It was the fact that the Law of Moses continued right on past the crucifixion until AD 70. THE STING OF DEATH IS SIN AND THE STRENGTH OF SIN IS THE LAW OF MOSES. Paul's famous and triumphant summary of his teaching here is indeed tied to the end of the LAW AGE. Paul showed that the sting and victory of death (which futurists teach have not yet been eradicated) existed due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF MOSES! (1 Cor 15:56). The Law Covenant was ABOUT to vanish away at the time Hebrews 8:13 was written (AD 60s) -- the Law Covenant did indeed vanish away at AD 70 when Christ's prophecies about the Temple were fulfilled.

So the sting of victory of death owing to the bondage to Pharoah existed due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF PHAROAH for 40 years until God finally got around to completely disassociating Pharoah from his Agreement that he gave on Mount Sinai?

Come on! Really!
Sin had no power after the Cross owing to the works of Chirst on the Cross, availed to all of humanity. God defeated Pharoah (Mosaic Law) on the Cross and the 40 years was a probationary period given to unbelievers in general who are then classified as the unmeasured Gentle court without the Temple who trample the Church. The Gentiles include the unbelieving Jews. The fire coming out from the mouth of those witnesses who preach the Gospel and to disclose God's terms through his Christ are immediately placing under condemnation those who are rejecting them and their message.

parousia70 said:
The legal constitution instituted at Sinai with Moses was made obsolete by the legal constitution instituted by The Christ. The Mosaic Legal Covenant then went fully extinct at AD 70, and only the Christic Legal Covenant remained in real history, Nailed to the Cross at AD 30 and brought to total extinction by the days of God's vengeance at AD 70 (Lk 21:20-22), when the Temple and Levitical priesthood vanished in their entirety.

The Mosaic Law was not what was judging the unbelieving Jews who are then classed as Gentiles and as outcasts to the commonwealth of Israel. They could not be under old covenant law judgement if they are no longer part of the commonwealth of Israel, where now they are considered as gentile unbelievers who have the same obligation to either accept or reject God's new terms through his Messiah.

parousia70 said:
That "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, when "the Lord of the Vineyard came and destroyed them, and was the stone that ground them to powder".

That temple in Jerusalem was not The Temple and that city was not The Jerusalem. Do you get it friend. You have the wrong temple and the wrong city post Cross of Christ. The city is classified as the wicked city and the desolate house/temple.

You can't have a desolate temple dispensing judgement, just as Pharoah (Mosaic Law) was not the one dispensing judgement on the Israelites in their 40 year exodus but it was God dispensing judgement according to the dictates of the tablet stone that condemned those who continued to reject God's terms by wanting to go back to Pharoah.
In the respect it was the Stone the Tablet stone of Christ's Law through his commissioned Ekklessia that condemned them.

ToServe · Oct 23, 2018

parousia70 said:
How could Paul have been so wrong then, when he said:

1 Cor 9:20
and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law;

Paul is saying they were wrong to culturally still be prostituting themselves with the law.

parousia70 said:
Paul is very clear that there are those who were indeed "under the Law" at that time.

Paul is clear that those who prostitute themselves to the law are betraying Christ.

parousia70 said:
To believe the opposite, You would have to interpret this plain language as saying something it

What is plain to me seems a complete opposite to you.

parousia70 said:
Who then, do you say these People are, who Pauls says were currently "unde

Those servants who had enteted in agreement with the blood covenant of the Son, who then continued to prostitute themselves to the law were by no means accredited at the same time for being in agreement with God through the Mosaic law, but rather were wilfully treading under foot the Son of God and insulting the Spirt of Grace. (Hebrews 10:29)

Read the entire context of Hebrews 10

But my righteous one will live by faith. And I take no pleasure in the one who shrinks back.”

But we do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved.

Paul is addressimg those who have entered in agreement with Christ but then shrink back in prostituting themselves to the law.

parousia70 said:
time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons

Now you throw a doozy to try and confuse the reader by surplus incoherent play so to push an emotion button of appeal.

This does not work on me friend.

Adoption was not ratified in 70AD.
Adoption was not ratified when those once servants, who were forced by war to stop prostituting themselves to the law by fleshly circumstances.
Adoption has nothing to do with the cultural mindset of objectors but was fully ratified on the Cross and by the Spirit of Grace.

parousia70 said:
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Exactly, why are they perishing in the present tense of shrinking back to the law? Gentile believers were doing this also, so where is 70AD narrative in this mix?

parousia70 said:
of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith

Servants as fallen , but the wicked who were not in agreement with Christ in the first place were never the context of all the letters and so why draw a narrative of an unholy city of the wicked being destroyed as a demarcation line separating the new from the old?

parousia70 said:
redemption of OUR BODY (singluar)" in Romans 8:14-25 which is that redemption out of the bondage of the Law as righteousness with God and is precisely parallel to Galatians 4:1-10/5:1

Redemption of the body is in context to after it biologically dies. It does not speak of spiritual dying as this was done when they were baptised in Christ and in dwelled by the Hoy Spirit, otherwise one would have to deny the power of the Cross and of the Spirit of Grace from 33AD to 70AD.

parousia70 said:
At the time Paul wrote this, they were NOT adopted yet. They were NOT delivered out from the bondage of corruption to the glorious liberty of the children of God yet. They were NOT saved yet. Instead, they were all struggling with leaving Moses behind as a system of Righteousness with God and entering Christ as a system of Righteousness with God. Paul longed for the day when the Mosaic Economy and Temple would be destroyed and ALL of them would be free.

So they were not completely regenerated into the new creation until the cultural world view prevailed owing to the circumstances of war from 68-75AD, right?

Why 70AD, when the war and terror lasted 7 years?

The taxonomy of God does not declare he wicked and their unholy city as the Mosaic Economy and Temple. Where does it explicitly mention this?

parousia70 said:
The position of the Church today is different than it was during the last days of the Old Testament era when they had not yet made the switch out of keeping the Law for righteousness.

So the switch from the old to the new was inspired by the culture at the time and not by God on the Cross. Is this what you are suggesting?

How is this religious narrative not dictated by a mind governed by the flesh (Romans 8) ?

Where does 70AD even come into it is a mystery in itself.

parousia70 said:
as was Jesus. It wasn't until years later (after the cross) that Paul got his revelation and worked with James and Peter to dismiss gentile conversion into the Mosaic Law system

Christianity is not a wing it yourself salvation message. The Apostles can make mistakes along the way for they were only human.

This is where Paul blasts Peter for his hypocrisy and at the same time justifies his disguise to pretend to be under the law so to win souls to Christ.

Was Paul's heart in the law when he pretended to be under the law?

No.

parousia70 said:
bondage of the Law which existed over all who were abiding by the Laws of Moses for righteousness -- until AD 70

Where does it explicitly say the Law of Moses existed after the Cross and was only done away with by God in 70AD.

Does people's attitude reflect what God does?

parousia70 said:
The law of Moses system for righteousness was REMOVED from the planet at AD 70 just like it was given to the planet at approximately 1500

Removed by whom?
The people's attitude?

You have presented a case of appeal from one side by which converts still embraced the Mosaic law until they for obvious reasons could not by their own free will continue in it, as it was forced upon them by the terror of war.

You are alleging that this is how God presented his case by dealing with them by physical means that has nothing to do with free agency owing to a mind that is governed by the Spirit.

Your narrative of God destroying the members of his Son's own Body as opposed to the wicked and their unholy city who opposed the members of his Sons's Body who preached the Gospel is really at odds with one another.

Which one is it?

Did God destroy the wicked and their unholy city or did he single out and destroy those within his Son's Body who practised the Old System under the mosaic law.

Why does 70AD have any bearing on the line of demarcation separating the old from the new?

claninja · Oct 25, 2018

ToServe said:
Do you not get it yet!

There cannot be two subsets of Laws and Agreements. One must be in place and the other phased out. Just as there can't be Moses and Jesus at the same time according to Deuteronomy 18:15-18 who are representing God. One was a shadow of the permanent figure.

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

The greek word for "he makes the first one obsolete" is perfect indicative active. That means the action is completed and the effects of the completed action are continuous. So, Christ by his death and resurrection, made the old covenant obsolete: completed action that is already done. The effects of this already completed work are continuous for all who believe.

The greek words for "growing old" and "aging" are present participle active. This means that the "growing old" and "aging" are a present tense verbs, which represent a present ongoing action, used to describe the old covenant. So even though the old covenant had been made obsolete, by the death and resurrection of Christ, it was still present, albeit growing old and ready to vanish.

2 Corinthians 3:7-11 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which is being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if that which is being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

The greek word for "is being brought to an end" is a present participle. This the means the "is being brought to an end" is a present tense verb, which represents an ongoing action, used to describe the ministry of death. Christ made the ministry of death obsolete at the cross, BUT it was still being brought to an end when Paul wrote Corinthians.

Hebrews 9:8-9 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle is having a standing. This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of those worshiping.

"is having" is a present participle and "had not yet been disclosed" is a perfect infinitive. Remember the perfect tense means completed. Thus, while the first tabernacle (sanctuary according to the law) was presently standing, the way to the Most Holy was not yet revealed (it was not yet completed). The tenses of "being offered" and "worshiping" are present tense, thus it has to do with worshiping according to the law during the time Hebrews was written. In other words, while the temple still stood and worshipers were still worshiping according to that old obsolete law, the way into heaven (resurrection) was not yet revealed.

However, when the old obsolete law would finally vanish (destruction of temple and those who worship according to the obsolete law) then sin would no longer have its power:
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law

and the resurrection would come to pass
1 Corinthians 15:54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” h

This coincides perfectly with the destruction of the temple followed by coming of Christ and gathering of elect as stated in the Olivet discourse.

ToServe · Oct 25, 2018

I will address point by point your seemingly good line of reasoning to your claims and in support of the Preterist 70AD narrative. What I want to suggest to you and other Preterists is to directly address the many contradictions and consequences arising from the 70AD narrative that I have presented in previous postings throughout this thread. I do not want to believe that my efforts were in vain, but plead with you and others to aleast address the issues, contentions and facts by being faithful to what the text explicitly teaches without trying to ignore it, because it does not gel with the 70AD narrative.

Here we go.

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

Who makes the first obsolete, in perfect indicative active when the words on the Cross at Calvary spoken were, "It is Finished"?

What is growing old and aging and ready to vanish away, in a present participle active?

Think of subjects and their corresponding actions in conjunction to both the perfect indicative active and the present participle active, that are attributed to the actions of parties involved within the scheme of things and within the dynamic historical play.

Perfect indicative active is the actions of God through his Messiah in declaring "It is Finished".

Present participle active is the actions of a desolate priestly house within an unholy temple and in the absence of the Ark of the Covenant who in vain cling to their death bed.

In God's eyes and from God's perspective as the perfect indicative active party, who considered at the Cross of his only begotten Son the old priesthood was already dead, consisting of "dead men's bones". Where did we hear this label? Matthew 23:27, coincidently immediately following his departure from the temple, leading into the Olivetti Discourse of Matthew 24. The disciples asking him about what will happen to the establishment and their temple signifies a turning point in the minds of the disciples who started questioning the ordained Church Establishment under the Aeronic Priesthood.

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jesus is the God of the Living.

The present particle active actions of the desolate priesthood was indeed fading away, notwithstanding the explicitly declared perfect indicative active of the Godhead.

God the Jesus Christ, throughout Matthew 22 & 23 as a lead in to the Olivetti Discourse, lombasted the Church establishment within the temple by laying the ground works as the symbol of Eliakim (God will raise up - sign of Jonah) mentioned in Isaiah 22:19-25 for the sacking of the old priestly administration at the Cross of Calvary.

claninja said:
The greek words for "growing old" and "aging" are present participle active. This means that the "growing old" and "aging" are a present tense verbs, which represent a present ongoing action, used to describe the old covenant. So even though the old covenant had been made obsolete, by the death and resurrection of Christ, it was still present, albeit growing old and ready to vanish.

From God's perfect indicative active point of view, the Aeronic priesthood tied to the 1st Temple model was dismembered from his will and barred from any contractual agreement after the giving of the sign of Jonah at Christ's resurrection and ascension Day. The condition of the 1st Temple Agreement (Solomon's Temple) to that Old Covenant generation was the sign of Jonah, that conditionally obligated them to say blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord.

God gave them one Agreement and allowed them as a nation 40 years probationary, just like the exodus narrative, to come through his Melchizedek Kingly High Priest, the Crowned Monarch Jesus Christ. Their old agreement could not continue from ascension Day since God has put them on probation, whilst offering them as outcasts to His Commonwealth of Israel and his Holy City New Jerusalem a New Agreement through his Melchizedek Kingly Priesthood.

claninja said:
2 Corinthians 3:7-11 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which is being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if that which is being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

You are reading the text from the perspective of a party that is stated as once having glory within the context of the Old Contractual Agreement, but now has come to have no glory, because of the Glory under the New Agreement that trumps it. Therefore, from the perfect indicative active party who is God, since his Glory is not present with the present participle active party, then there is no contractual agreement that is standing as to give the notion that it is waxing waning from the perspective of the vain efforts of the enemy combatant party.

What the 70AD narrative of the Old Agreement waxing and waning implies, is that God had an Agreement with Moses, whilst also having an "Cooling off" agreement with Pharaoh, who is the symbol of bondage, when the Israelites were on probationary for 40 years in the desert.

This is not how God introduces the New Agreement, while still latching onto the Old as in allowing a "Cooling off Period", rather God completely severed the ties with Pharoah (symbol of Bondage), by immediately freeing the Israelites from the yoke of Pharaoh (symbol of law/bondage) and then introducing the escape plan through his Christ like Moses figure who showed them the way to the Promised Land under the New Agreement. Sure, from a present participle active enemy combatant pint of view, they were still clinging onto Pharoah (bondage/law) and wishing they were under his yoke.

That is why it is written in Isaiah 63:10, "Yet they continued to rebel and to grieve his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them as they perished during the 40 ears probationary period."

Please think on a deeper level of discernment, how could God have a 40 year "Cooling off period" for an enemy combatant that stands diametrically opposed to his Son's Church, opposed to his Melchizedek priesthood and opposed to his New Contractual Blood Covenant?

It would be unthinkable would it not?

Acts 7:51
"You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your Ancesstors. You always resist the Holy Spirit!"

claninja said:
The greek word for "is being brought to an end" is a present participle. This the means the "is being brought to an end" is a present tense verb, which represents an ongoing action, used to describe the ministry of death. Christ made the ministry of death obsolete at the cross, BUT it was still being brought to an end when Paul wrote Corinthians.

Ill contrived.

claninja said:
Hebrews 9:8-9 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle is having a standing. This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of those worshiping.

Read Hebrews in its entirety without blending in new meanings the text. The text explicitly states that the New Melchizedek Kingly Priesthood of the Kingdom of Danial 2:44 was already established at ascension day when the Son approached the Ancient of Days (The Father) and was given Authority, Gory and a Kingdom that will last forever.

Now, please go back to Hebrews 9:8-9 and read it correctly. What was the Holy Spirit showing within the 1st Temple Construct (Solomon's Temple), where the Ark of the Covenant was present?

Showing the way into the Most Holy as a foreshadowing, that is a role play of what had not yet been disclosed within that ancient 1st Temple Construct.

The Hebrews writer then reveals that that was only an illustration for the present time, which is when he spoke those words.

Why?

Because Christ our Anointed Most High was anointed at his ascension and was given a dominion and an everlasting Kingdom as the High Priest who entered the Most Holy Place with his own blood. Hebrews informs us, in the present tense usage of verbs well before 70AD, that Jesus then started to minister and to intercede before the Father for the sins of the people under his Blood Contractual Agreement.

Therefore, the foreshadowing illustration of the 1st temple cannot still be foreshadowing the genuine article for 40 years, after the genuine article of the Most Holy Place was already established under the New Kingy High Priesthood of Melchizedek on Ascension Day.

Hebrews in ts entirety is explicitly explaining this away as to communicate across the absence of any Old Covenant Agreement under the 1st Temple Construct.

claninja said:
"is having" is a present participle and "had not yet been disclosed" is a perfect infinitive. Remember the perfect tense means completed. Thus, while the first tabernacle (sanctuary according to the law) was presently standing, the way to the Most Holy was not yet revealed (it was not yet completed). The tenses of "being offered" and "worshiping" are present tense, thus it has to do with worshiping according to the law during the time Hebrews was written. In other words, while the temple still stood and worshipers were still worshiping according to that old obsolete law, the way into heaven (resurrection) was not yet revealed.

The implications of this line of reasoning denies that Christ Jesus was ministering in the Holy of Holies from his ascension to 70AD and as a consequence this open declaration is treading under the foot the Son of God and also offending the Spirit of Grace.

The consequences and unresolvable contradiction of the Preterist 70AD narrative is that the most Holy place (Holy of Holies) was not yet revealed and therefore was unoccupied by the Kingly High Priest, thereby unwittingly as a consequence denying that Christ had entered it with his own blood, because of the allegations that the salvation plan through the New Agreement had not been completely ratified until 70.

So here comes the unresolvable contradiction -

Christ returns in 70AD judgement appearing to completely ratify the New Covenant (bring it into fullness) and to initiate the resurrection of the dead and to reign in the new heaven and the new earth, whilst never entering the Holy Place, rendering his crucifixion and ascension irrelevant to the issues at heart to the advocates of the 70AD resurrection and coming narrative within the new heaven and the new earth.

Did Christ enter the Holy Place at his ascension? Yes/No

If you say Yes, then the Holy Place has been completely revealed as the authors of Hebrews explicitly say it was in their present time and before the 70AD fictitious narrative.

If you say No, then Christ could not save people until 70AD, which then unwittingly denies the power of the Cross and offends the Spirit of Grace.

So which one is it friend.

claninja said:
However, when the old obsolete law would finally vanish (destruction of temple and those who worship according to the obsolete law) then sin would no longer have its power:
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law

If power of sin under the law existed from Christ's ascension until 70AD coming and resurrection narrative then the power of Christ's Cross is denied as implying sin under the law could still be used by God the Father to make judgement.

The 70AD narrative is therefore an anti-thesis eschatological doctrine.

claninja said:
and the resurrection would come to pass
1 Corinthians 15:54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” h

This implies that there was still death under the Mosaic law judgments, notwithstanding the blood of Christ. To say that God still judged those under the mosaic law as under the law for 40 years, after his Son's precious blood was shed is denying the salvation plan of God and treading under foot the Son of God and offending the Spirit of Grace.

claninja · Oct 26, 2018

ToServe said:
Who makes the first obsolete, in perfect indicative active when the words on the Cross at Calvary spoken were, "It is Finished"?

Christ did. Christ made the old covenant obsolete. This is a completed work, with the results ongoing to this day.

ToServe said:
What is growing old and aging and ready to vanish away, in a present participle active?

a participle is a verbial adjective. It is describing the noun: "that the first". It is the first covenant that was growing old and ready to vanish when Hebrews was written.

It was "ready to vanish away" when Hebrews was written. When do you believe it vanished?

I believe it vanished away in 70 AD. Since then, it as been impossible to worship according the law of Moses and is regulations for the last almost 2000 years.

ToServe said:
The present particle active actions of the desolate priesthood was indeed fading away, notwithstanding the explicitly declared perfect indicative active of the Godhead.

I agree 100%. God's completed action through the cross made the old covenant obsolete. That old obsolete covenant was still being practiced in an already desolate house by a desolate priesthood, but was soon about to be destroyed. And we know the priesthood had already changed, because Christ became our high priest, not from the line of aaron, when he entered heaven.

Hebrews 7:12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well

ToServe said:
From God's perfect indicative active point of view, the Aeronic priesthood tied to the 1st Temple model was dismembered from his will and barred from any contractual agreement after the giving of the sign of Jonah at Christ's resurrection and ascension Day. The condition of the 1st Temple Agreement (Solomon's Temple) to that Old Covenant generation was the sign of Jonah, that conditionally obligated them to say blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord.

And yet, Jews were still worshiping according to the Law even after Christ's death. Did this save them, worshipping according to an old obsolete law? No, in fact it cursed them, for it is impossible for man to follow the Law 100%

Galatians 3:10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them
Romans 8:8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

ToServe said:
God gave them one Agreement and allowed them as a nation 40 years probationary, just like the exodus narrative, to come through his Melchizedek Kingly High Priest, the Crowned Monarch Jesus Christ.

I can agree, the 40 years in the wilderness for the Israelites being the type, while the 40 years from Christ's death (30 Ad) until 70 Ad destruction being the anti type.
Deuteronomy 8:2 Remember how the Lord your God led you all the way in the wilderness these forty years, to humble and test you in order to know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands.

By the time the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness came to an end, the wicked generation was dead. This is the type. The destruction of the wicked generation 40 years after Jesus' day, being the anti type.
Numbers 14:34 For forty years—one year for each of the forty days you explored the land—you will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you.’ I, the Lord, have spoken, and I will surely do these things to this whole wicked community, which has banded together against me. They will meet their end in this wilderness; here they will die.”
Matthew 23:35-36 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation.

The Jews entering the promiseland (God's rest) after 40 years being the type. Believers entering the true promise land (heaven; God's rest; resurrection) after 40 years, the anti type
Hebrews 4:8-11 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, e just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience.

And since the coming of Christ occurs with the destruction of the temple, in the Olivet discourse (40 years after his death), the resurrection fits well with around 70 AD (believers entering the true promiseland)

ToServe said:
You are reading the text from the perspective of a party that is stated as once having glory within the context of the Old Contractual Agreement, but now has come to have no glory, because of the Glory under the New Agreement that trumps it. Therefore, from the perfect indicative active party who is God, since his Glory is not present with the present participle active party, then there is no contractual agreement that is standing as to give the notion that it is waxing waning from the perspective of the vain efforts of the enemy combatant party.

The Law is holy, righteous, and good. But it is impossible to earn salvation by relying on the works of the Law
Romans 7:12 then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good.

So what is even more glorious than that? Christ fulfilling the law, that man couldn't, so that it would be fulfilled in those who walk according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:4 so that the righteous standard of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Christ's 1st coming did not abolish the law, it fulfilled the law
Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.

Christ 2nd coming removed the old obsolete law ushering in the new heavens and earth, where man was on longer separated from God upon physical death.

ToServe said:
What the 70AD narrative of the Old Agreement waxing and waning implies, is that God had an Agreement with Moses, whilst also having an "Cooling off" agreement with Pharaoh, who is the symbol of bondage, when the Israelites were on probationary for 40 years in the desert.

The 70 AD "narrative" simply states that the old covenant became obsolete at Christ's death. The obsolete covenant then vanished away when the temple was destroyed. Jesus sums this up perfectly in John:

John 4:23 Yet a time is coming AND has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks

ToServe said:
This is not how God introduces the New Agreement, while still latching onto the Old as in allowing a "Cooling off Period", rather God completely severed the ties with Pharoah (symbol of Bondage), by immediately freeing the Israelites from the yoke of Pharaoh (symbol of law/bondage) and then introducing the escape plan through his Christ like Moses figure who showed them the way to the Promised Land under the New Agreement. Sure, from a present participle active enemy combatant pint of view, they were still clinging onto Pharoah (bondage/law) and wishing they were under his yoke.

Were all of Jews who rejected Christ instantly freed from the law? Or did they have to be born again (die with Christ and be raised up).

Romans 7:6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Notice Paul preached to those UNDER THE LAW.
1 Corinthians 9:20 To those under the Law I became like one under the Law (though I myself am not under the Law), to win those under the Law

But a time was coming, when it would be impossible to be UNDER THE LAW: temple destruction.

ToServe said:
Ill contrived.

Poor argument. you disagree with what scripture explicitly states, then just say "ill contrived". Instead, how about explaining why scripture doesn't actually mean what paul explicitly stated.

ToServe said:
The text explicitly states that the New Melchizedek Kingly Priesthood of the Kingdom of Danial 2:44 was already established at ascension day when the Son approached the Ancient of Days (The Father) and was given Authority, Gory and a Kingdom that will last forever.

You are responding to the Hebrews 9 quote. So I disagree that this text "explicitly states" Melchizedek. Melchizedek is not mentioned in Hebrews 9. However, I do agree with you premise here that the kingdom was established at Christ's ascension.

ToServe said:
Because Christ our Anointed Most High was anointed at his ascension and was given a dominion and an everlasting Kingdom as the High Priest who entered the Most Holy Place with his own blood. Hebrews informs us, in the present tense usage of verbs well before 70AD, that Jesus then started to minister and to intercede before the Father for the sins of the people under his Blood Contractual Agreement.

I agree

ToServe said:
The implications of this line of reasoning denies that Christ Jesus was ministering in the Holy of Holies from his ascension to 70AD and as a consequence this open declaration is treading under the foot the Son of God and also offending the Spirit of Grace.

Incorrect, your strawman argument is based on a false assumption. I agree that Christ was ministering in the Most holy when he ascended.

ToServe said:
The consequences and unresolvable contradiction of the Preterist 70AD narrative is that the most Holy place (Holy of Holies) was not yet revealed and therefore was unoccupied by the Kingly High Priest, thereby unwittingly as a consequence denying that Christ had entered it with his own blood, because of the allegations that the salvation plan through the New Agreement had not been completely ratified until 70.

I would agree with you, if Christ had never been to heaven before.
John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.

However, Christ already knew the way to heaven because that is where he came from.

ToServe said:
Did Christ enter the Holy Place at his ascension? Yes/No

Yes

ToServe said:
If you say Yes, then the Holy Place has been completely revealed as the authors of Hebrews explicitly say it was in their present time and before the 70AD fictitious narrative.

The way, Jesus himself, was revealed in flesh at the 1st coming. However, the resurrection, the way into heaven (the most holy place) for man would not occur until his 2nd coming. And according to the olivet discourse this would occur when the temple was destroyed.

John 13:33 Little children, I am with you only a little while longer. You will look for Me, and as I said to the Jews, so now I say to you: ‘Where I am going, you cannot come.’

John 13:36 Jesus answered, “Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but you will follow later.”

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

ToServe said:
If power of sin under the law existed from Christ's ascension until 70AD coming and resurrection narrative then the power of Christ's Cross is denied as implying sin under the law could still be used by God the Father to make judgement.

The power of sin is the law. The law was ready to vanish and so was sin's power, thus death would be swallowed up, which was the last enemy for Christ defeat while he was reigning from heaven.

ToServe said:
To say that God still judged those under the mosaic law as under the law for 40 years, after his Son's precious blood was shed is denying the salvation plan of God and treading under foot the Son of God and offending the Spirit of Grace.

Another strawman argument ToServe. Do you believe those that reject Christ receive salvation or forgiveness of sins?

ToServe · Oct 26, 2018

claninja said:
The power of sin is the law. The law was ready to vanish and so was sin's power, thus death would be swallowed up, which was the last enemy for Christ defeat while he was reigning from heaven.

The implications of this line of reasoning is quite disconcerting to say the least, in claiming that “the power of sin is the law” that was waxing and waning over the body of Christ (His Church), whilst in addition claiming that the Most Holy Place was only to be revealed in 70AD, with the ushering in of the new heaven and the new earth.

This means that from Christ’s Cross and ascension Day the power of sin owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ and Christ had not totally defeated the Mosaic Law on the Cross and therefore was not yet anointed as the most High Crowned Monarch and High Priest Melchizedek until the events of the fleshly wars of 68-75 AD, specifically 70AD.

As a consequence to the 70AD narrative, most of the disciples and followers of Christ who perished before 70AD were not born again as a new creation, because they biologically died before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD, that was solely owing to the most Holy Place being revealed with Christ’s coming in judgement through fleshly wars and by the spiritual new heavens and new earth that emerged. Hence the founding Church did not take part in the resurrection and were not completely living in a completed regenerative spiritual state of being born again and were still under the yoke of bondage which was the Mosaic law.

The 70AD anti-thesis eschatological view denies the power of the Cross and denies the power of Christ and denies the Spirit of Grace, because of the claim that the power owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ and that God the Father was still judging those who belong to his Son and his precious blood as still being under the Mosaic Law.

What I have said thus far is a summary of the Preterist 70AD narrative.

So Preterist associate the last enemy that Christ defeated in 70AD, as the sin’s power, owing to death under the curses of the Mosaic Law. According to how Preterist interpret Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:26 is to insinuate that Christ continued to reign in Heaven for 40 years until he finally defeated the sin’s power, owing to death under the curses of the Mosaic Law. This view denies that Christ defeated it on the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished, by advocating that he continued to reign by contending with the curses of the Mosaic Law until he was able to finally defeat it in 70AD.

Do you see why and how this 70AD Preterist view denies the Power of the Cross and denies the precious blood of Jesus and denies the Spirit of Grace.

Let me also explain how Preterist think. They take fleshly wars and worldly events and ungodly temples that are not God’s temple post Pentecost and to associate the phrase “the hour is already here” as Christ spoke as being some 40 years pointing in the future (futurists) to fleshly war judgements. The Preterist view is incoherent to the hour is already here that Jesus spoke of, that hour being at the foot of the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished.

Jesus also said no other sign will be given this Old Covenant generation, except the sign of Jonah. Preterist say the 70AD was that sign that was the line of demarcation between the Old Law under Moses and the New Law under Christ. So that Jesus was not reigning on the seat of David until 70AD, because Moses and Jesus were both in contention with each other until it was decided Jesus would finally defeat the Mosaic Law by fleshly worldly judgements of unbelievers, of unholy cities and of ungodly temples that were not related to the true form of worship in the spirit of that hour actually being Pentecost and onwards. From the point of reference of the founding disciples the Preterists are futurists.

It seems according to the Preterist eschatological 70AD view that the Power from on high was powerless to overcome and to guarantee the resurrection to believers, because most disciples and followers of Jesus biologically died on his watch before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD. This is a Preterist insult to the Spirit of Grace.

How much more can one appeal to the human rationale thought process and in explaining how damnable this 70AD eschatological view is owing to its rejection of the Cross and the rejection of the Spirit of Grace.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:24:28 according to the Preterists is comforting a congregation with the hope of an alleged 70AD resurrection, when most will never see it. Yet Paul is explicitly comforting them that they will all take part in it. In this case Paul says if we biologically die tomorrow, the Preterist says before 70AD, then let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die anyhow and will never enjoy what is to come in the Preterist 70AD resurrection.

Also care to note, according to the Preterist view that Christ is reigning until he destroys the final enemy, where they say the final enemy is the sin’s curses under the Mosaic Law. Then according to the Preterist, Christ’s reign through his Cross did not finish at the Cross and had continued for 40 years. What then afterwards?

Christ allegedly according to Preterists hands over the Kingdom to the Father in 70AD as it is mission accomplished where God is all in all, which implies that all who are needing to be saved through the Cross are saved and now Christ retires his Cross and becomes subject to the Father.

According to the Preterist, the consequences result in Christ’s reign through his Cross ending in 70AD when the Books are opened at his coming and allegedly God was all in all, thereby accounting for all who were to be saved across the entire harvest of God. The Spirit of Grace also completed his commission by guaranteeing what was to come in 70AD and so from 70AD, according to the Preterist 70AD narrative Christ is no longer reigning through his Cross and the Spirit of Grace is no longer operating in the world anymore after the new heaven and new earth were revealed in 70AD, thereby rendering the end of the mission of the Cross and of the Holy Spirit.

How much more do people need to scrutinise the 70AD narrative to see the implications, consequences and contradictions that expose it as an anti-thesis gospel to that of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I said in the previous post -

To say that God still judged those under the mosaic law as under the law for 40 years, after his Son's precious blood was shed is denying the salvation plan of God and treading under foot the Son of God and offending the Spirit of Grace.

You replied -

Another strawman argument ToServe. Do you believe those that reject Christ receive salvation or forgiveness of sins?

They neither receive salvation and neither receive forgiveness of sins, for the faith in Christ is to be brought into restoration by being at the foot of the Cross of Christ. Power of Christ Jesus is through his Precious Blood.

Apparently, the Preterist 70AD alleged view is that post 70AD, the new heaven and the new earth came into play when the books were opened. After 70AD, allegedly both the Cross and the Spirit of Grace were to no avail because God was all in all after 70AD and Christ no longer reigns because his mission was solely to defeat the curses of the Mosaic Law and then to retire his Cross in 70AD, when he became subject to the Father as mission accomplished after handing back the Kingdom.

God willing, I will respond to every one of your other replies in your previous post, but I must ask you to be patient as I can discern that some replies would be short and others lengthy. Yet I jumped to this one because I wanted to lay the ground work for future replies.

One Son · Oct 27, 2018

ToServe said:
The implications of this line of reasoning is quite disconcerting to say the least, in claiming that “the power of sin is the law” that was waxing and waning over the body of Christ (His Church), whilst in addition claiming that the Most Holy Place was only to be revealed in 70AD, with the ushering in of the new heaven and the new earth.

This means that from Christ’s Cross and ascension Day the power of sin owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ and Christ had not totally defeated the Mosaic Law on the Cross and therefore was not yet anointed as the most High Crowned Monarch and High Priest Melchizedek until the events of the fleshly wars of 68-75 AD, specifically 70AD.

As a consequence to the 70AD narrative, most of the disciples and followers of Christ who perished before 70AD were not born again as a new creation, because they biologically died before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD, that was solely owing to the most Holy Place being revealed with Christ’s coming in judgement through fleshly wars and by the spiritual new heavens and new earth that emerged. Hence the founding Church did not take part in the resurrection and were not completely living in a completed regenerative spiritual state of being born again and were still under the yoke of bondage which was the Mosaic law.

The 70AD anti-thesis eschatological view denies the power of the Cross and denies the power of Christ and denies the Spirit of Grace, because of the claim that the power owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ and that God the Father was still judging those who belong to his Son and his precious blood as still being under the Mosaic Law.

What I have said thus far is a summary of the Preterist 70AD narrative.

So Preterist associate the last enemy that Christ defeated in 70AD, as the sin’s power, owing to death under the curses of the Mosaic Law. According to how Preterist interpret Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:26 is to insinuate that Christ continued to reign in Heaven for 40 years until he finally defeated the sin’s power, owing to death under the curses of the Mosaic Law. This view denies that Christ defeated it on the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished, by advocating that he continued to reign by contending with the curses of the Mosaic Law until he was able to finally defeat it in 70AD.

Do you see why and how this 70AD Preterist view denies the Power of the Cross and denies the precious blood of Jesus and denies the Spirit of Grace.

Let me also explain how Preterist think. They take fleshly wars and worldly events and ungodly temples that are not God’s temple post Pentecost and to associate the phrase “the hour is already here” as Christ spoke as being some 40 years pointing in the future (futurists) to fleshly war judgements. The Preterist view is incoherent to the hour is already here that Jesus spoke of, that hour being at the foot of the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished.

Jesus also said no other sign will be given this Old Covenant generation, except the sign of Jonah. Preterist say the 70AD was that sign that was the line of demarcation between the Old Law under Moses and the New Law under Christ. So that Jesus was not reigning on the seat of David until 70AD, because Moses and Jesus were both in contention with each other until it was decided Jesus would finally defeat the Mosaic Law by fleshly worldly judgements of unbelievers, of unholy cities and of ungodly temples that were not related to the true form of worship in the spirit of that hour actually being Pentecost and onwards. From the point of reference of the founding disciples the Preterists are futurists.

It seems according to the Preterist eschatological 70AD view that the Power from on high was powerless to overcome and to guarantee the resurrection to believers, because most disciples and followers of Jesus biologically died on his watch before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD. This is a Preterist insult to the Spirit of Grace.

How much more can one appeal to the human rationale thought process and in explaining how damnable this 70AD eschatological view is owing to its rejection of the Cross and the rejection of the Spirit of Grace.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:24:28 according to the Preterists is comforting a congregation with the hope of an alleged 70AD resurrection, when most will never see it. Yet Paul is explicitly comforting them that they will all take part in it. In this case Paul says if we biologically die tomorrow, the Preterist says before 70AD, then let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die anyhow and will never enjoy what is to come in the Preterist 70AD resurrection.

Also care to note, according to the Preterist view that Christ is reigning until he destroys the final enemy, where they say the final enemy is the sin’s curses under the Mosaic Law. Then according to the Preterist, Christ’s reign through his Cross did not finish at the Cross and had continued for 40 years. What then afterwards?

Christ allegedly according to Preterists hands over the Kingdom to the Father in 70AD as it is mission accomplished where God is all in all, which implies that all who are needing to be saved through the Cross are saved and now Christ retires his Cross and becomes subject to the Father.

According to the Preterist, the consequences result in Christ’s reign through his Cross ending in 70AD when the Books are opened at his coming and allegedly God was all in all, thereby accounting for all who were to be saved across the entire harvest of God. The Spirit of Grace also completed his commission by guaranteeing what was to come in 70AD and so from 70AD, according to the Preterist 70AD narrative Christ is no longer reigning through his Cross and the Spirit of Grace is no longer operating in the world anymore after the new heaven and new earth were revealed in 70AD, thereby rendering the end of the mission of the Cross and of the Holy Spirit.

How much more do people need to scrutinise the 70AD narrative to see the implications, consequences and contradictions that expose it as an anti-thesis gospel to that of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I said in the previous post -

To say that God still judged those under the mosaic law as under the law for 40 years, after his Son's precious blood was shed is denying the salvation plan of God and treading under foot the Son of God and offending the Spirit of Grace.

You replied -

They neither receive salvation and neither receive forgiveness of sins, for the faith in Christ is to be brought into restoration by being at the foot of the Cross of Christ. Power of Christ Jesus is through his Precious Blood.

Apparently, the Preterist 70AD alleged view is that post 70AD, the new heaven and the new earth came into play when the books were opened. After 70AD, allegedly both the Cross and the Spirit of Grace were to no avail because God was all in all after 70AD and Christ no longer reigns because his mission was solely to defeat the curses of the Mosaic Law and then to retire his Cross in 70AD, when he became subject to the Father as mission accomplished after handing back the Kingdom.

God willing, I will respond to every one of your other replies in your previous post, but I must ask you to be patient as I can discern that some replies would be short and others lengthy. Yet I jumped to this one because I wanted to lay the ground work for future replies.

Good Post,

Acts1:6(ASV) They therefore, when they were come together, asked him, saying, Lord, dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? 7And he said unto them, It is not for you to know times or seasons, which the Father hath set within His own authority. 8But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.9 And when he had said these things, as they were looking, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they were looking stedfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven.

The Stoning of Stephen (AD36?)

Acts7:54 Now when they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. 55 But he,(Stephen) being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on * the right hand of God, 56 and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on* the right hand of God.

*1537. ek or ex ►
Strong's Concordance
ek or ex: from, from out of
Original Word: ἐκ, ἐξ
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: ek or ex
Phonetic Spelling: (ek)
Definition: from, from out of
Usage: from out, out from among, from, suggesting from the interior outwards.

Heb.9:27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; 28so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.(2Cor.5:17).

ToServe · Oct 27, 2018

One Son said:
Good Post,

Acts1:6(ASV) They therefore, when they were come together, asked him, saying, Lord, dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? 7And he said unto them, It is not for you to know times or seasons, which the Father hath set within His own authority. 8But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.9 And when he had said these things, as they were looking, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they were looking stedfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven.

The Stoning of Stephen (AD36?)

Acts7:54 Now when they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. 55 But he,(Stephen) being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on * the right hand of God, 56 and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on* the right hand of God.

*1537. ek or ex ►
Strong's Concordance
ek or ex: from, from out of
Original Word: ἐκ, ἐξ
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: ek or ex
Phonetic Spelling: (ek)
Definition: from, from out of
Usage: from out, out from among, from, suggesting from the interior outwards.

Heb.9:27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; 28so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.(2Cor.5:17).

When we biologically die we know that we have a home with the Lord within His Father's house.

The judgement comes after biological death when Christ will judge the dead and then finally the living at the final Trumpet when he declares time no longer for the harvest.

The faithful await the blessed day, each in turn when they depart to behold the Lord's Appearing as Saint Stephan beheld it when Jesus the faithful King of kings and Lord of lords came to take him as his prized possession.

claninja · Oct 27, 2018

You didn't answer my question, at least i didn't see an answer. When did the old covenant vanish away?

ToServe said:
The implications of this line of reasoning is quite disconcerting to say the least, in claiming that “the power of sin is the law” that was waxing and waning over the body of Christ (His Church), whilst in addition claiming that the Most Holy Place was only to be revealed in 70AD, with the ushering in of the new heaven and the new earth.

Scripture literally states "the power of sin is the law". This was written long after the Cross.
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law

Scripture literally states the obsolete first covenant was "growing old", "aging", "fading away", and "ready to vanish". This was written long after the Cross. The verbs being present tense.
2 corinthians 3:11 For if what is fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which endures!
Hebrews 8:13 By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete; and what is growing old and aging will soon vanish away.

"is still standing" is present tense. This was written long after the Cross.
Hebrews 9:8-9 By this arrangement the Holy Spirit was showing that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle is still standing. It is an illustration for the present time

ToServe said:
his means that from Christ’s Cross and ascension Day the power of sin owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ and Christ had not totally defeated the Mosaic Law on the Cross

Jesus did not come of abolish or defeat the Law, but fulfill it. The Law, according to Jesus, would not pass away UNTIL heaven and earth passed away:

Matthew 5:17-18 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

ToServe said:
and therefore was not yet anointed as the most High Crowned Monarch and High Priest Melchizedek until the events of the fleshly wars of 68-75 AD, specifically 70AD.

Incorrect, I know of no preterist that believes this, just another strawman argument. These Strawman arguments show that you actually do not understand the preterist perspective.

Christ was anointed at his baptism:
Acts 10:38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him

Christ sat on the throne of David upon his resurrection and ascension to heaven, where he received a kingdom. It is from heaven where Christ reigns:
Acts 2:30-31 Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ,

Luke 19:12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return

1 corinthians 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet

claninja · Oct 27, 2018

ToServe said:
As a consequence to the 70AD narrative, most of the disciples and followers of Christ who perished before 70AD were not born again as a new creation, because they biologically died before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD, that was solely owing to the most Holy Place being revealed with Christ’s coming in judgement through fleshly wars and by the spiritual new heavens and new earth that emerged. Hence the founding Church did not take part in the resurrection and were not completely living in a completed regenerative spiritual state of being born again and were still under the yoke of bondage which was the Mosaic law.

Incorrect. Everyone who believes Jesus is the messiah has been born again and is a new creation. This clearly includes the followers of Jesus in the 1st century, PRIOR to 70 ad
1 Peter 1:23 For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.
1 John 5:1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the Father also loves the one born of Him

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.a The old has passed away. Behold, the new has come!

Even though Paul had been born again and was a new creation, he was still waiting for the resurrection that was "about to be"

Acts 24:15 and I have the same hope in God that they themselves cherish, that there is about to be resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Believers had died prior to 70 AD, and yet Paul does not say they went to heaven, instead he states they had "fallen asleep"
1 corinthians 15:6 After that, He appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.

ToServe said:
The 70AD anti-thesis eschatological view denies the power of the Cross and denies the power of Christ and denies the Spirit of Grace, because of the claim that the power owing to the Mosaic Law was still overshadowing the body of Christ

Incorrect. The Mosaic Law was not overshadowing the body of Christ. But sin, using the Law, was warring with those free from the Law, with those of the Body of Christ. The children of the slave woman (old covenant) were persecuting those of the free woman (new covenant).
Galatians 4:28-29 Now you,c brothers, like Isaac, are children of the promise. At that time, however, the son born by the flesh persecuted the son born by the Spirit. It is the same now.

Judiazers (false brothers) were very present in the church, using the Law, to war against those free in Christ.
Galatians 2:4 This issue arose because some false brothers were brought in under false pretenses to spy on our freedom in Christ Jesus, in order to enslave us.

Galatians 5:11-12 Now, brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those who are agitating you, I wish they would proceed to emasculate themselves!

The unbelieving Jews often persecuted the Church. This persecution did cause many Jews to fall away from the faith, back to the bondage of the Law.

ToServe said:
and that God the Father was still judging those who belong to his Son and his precious blood as still being under the Mosaic Law.

Incorrect, God does not judge those who belong Christ as being under the Mosaic Law. Why? because the righteous requirements of the Law are fulfilled in believers, through Christ.
Romans 8:3 By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin,c he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

ToServe said:
What I have said thus far is a summary of the Preterist 70AD narrative.

Incorrect, what you have said is your uninformed opinion of the the preterist 70 ad narrative. You appear to not actually know what the preterist believes, and thus have stringed together a series of strawman arguments that do not actually reflect the preterist belief. Once more, you don't even provide scriptural support for your claims.

ToServe said:
This view denies that Christ defeated it on the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished, by advocating that he continued to reign by contending with the curses of the Mosaic Law until he was able to finally defeat it in 70AD.

Incorrect. The preterist acknowledges that Christ abolished death at his resurrection around 30ad.

2 Timothy 1:10 And which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

And by Christ abolishing death, believers were raised with Christ.

Romans 8:10-11 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet the Spirit gives you life because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the deadc will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit, who dwells in you.

Christ is the first fruits from the dead

1 corinthians 15:20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

Believers would be resurrected at his coming

1 corinthians 15:23 But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him.

It is at Christ's coming that death, the last enemy, would be defeated.
1 corinthians 1525-26 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death
Revelation 20:14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

ToServe said:
Do you see why and how this 70AD Preterist view denies the Power of the Cross and denies the precious blood of Jesus and denies the Spirit of Grace.

This isn't the preterist view. This is your own made up version of the preterist view. A strawman argument.

claninja · Oct 27, 2018

ToServe said:
Let me also explain how Preterist think.

it appears you don't actually know what preterist believe based on your strawman arguments.

ToServe said:
They take fleshly wars and worldly events and ungodly temples that are not God’s temple post Pentecost and to associate the phrase “the hour is already here” as Christ spoke as being some 40 years pointing in the future (futurists) to fleshly war judgements. The Preterist view is incoherent to the hour is already here that Jesus spoke of, that hour being at the foot of the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished.

Incorrect, the preterists takes the words of Jesus at face value.

Physical destruction of Jerusalem, which did occur in 70 ad

Luke 19:41-44 And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 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.”

Physical destruction of Jerusalem = Days of vengeance to fulfill ALL THAT IS WRITTEN
Luke 21:20-22 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near.Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, 22for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

Immediately after tribulation (physial destruction of Jerusalem and temple) the son of man comes and the angels gather the elect
Matthew 24:29-31 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. 30Then 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. 31And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Jesus clearly states "this generation" will not pass away UNTIL ALL these things take place. Thus the 2nd coming and resurrection are associated with the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem

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

ToServe said:
So that Jesus was not reigning on the seat of David until 70AD, because Moses and Jesus were both in contention with each other until it was decided Jesus would finally defeat the Mosaic Law by fleshly worldly judgements of unbelievers, of unholy cities and of ungodly temples that were not related to the true form of worship in the spirit of that hour actually being Pentecost and onwards.

This logic makes no sense. Jesus ascended to the throne around 30 ad. From heaven is where Jesus reigns while his enemies were made a footstool. Jesus did not "defeat" the mosaic Law. He fulfilled it, for the Law is a shadow of Christ. One does not "defeat" their own shadow.

ToServe said:
It seems according to the Preterist eschatological 70AD view that the Power from on high was powerless to overcome and to guarantee the resurrection to believers, because most disciples and followers of Jesus biologically died on his watch before they could enjoy the alleged resurrection of 70AD. This is a Preterist insult to the Spirit of Grace.

Again, another strawman argument, that doesn't make sense. God did give a guarantee, his spirit.
2 corinthians 1:22 And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.d
2 corinthians 5:5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.

Many believers did biologically die prior to 70 ad

1 corinthians 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.

But these that were dead in Christ would be resurrected at Christ's coming

1 thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

ToServe said:
Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:24:28 according to the Preterists is comforting a congregation with the hope of an alleged 70AD resurrection, when most will never see it. Yet Paul is explicitly comforting them that they will all take part in it. In this case Paul says if we biologically die tomorrow, the Preterist says before 70AD, then let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die anyhow and will never enjoy what is to come in the Preterist 70AD resurrection.

This is absolutely incorrect. Another strong man argument. The resurrection was the hope. If there was no resurrection, then death would be end for Paul.
1 corinthians 15:32 IF the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”

There are 2 different beliefs among preterists in regards to the resurrection. Prior to 70 ad, no one (except Christ) went to heaven.

However, Now after 70ad:
1.) when a believer biologically dies, they go to heaven. This is the resurrection

or

2.) The resurrection was only for those who died and went to sheol prior to 70 ad. Thus the hope of the resurrection was for those prior to 70ad. After 70 ad, believers no longer went to sheol to wait for the resurrection. Believers, now, never go sheol. They have eternal life and thus upon biological death go directly to heaven.

ToServe said:
Also care to note, according to the Preterist view that Christ is reigning until he destroys the final enemy, where they say the final enemy is the sin’s curses under the Mosaic Law. Then according to the Preterist, Christ’s reign through his Cross did not finish at the Cross and had continued for 40 years. What then afterwards?

Christ allegedly according to Preterists hands over the Kingdom to the Father in 70AD as it is mission accomplished where God is all in all, which implies that all who are needing to be saved through the Cross are saved and now Christ retires his Cross and becomes subject to the Father.

According to the Preterist, the consequences result in Christ’s reign through his Cross ending in 70AD when the Books are opened at his coming and allegedly God was all in all, thereby accounting for all who were to be saved across the entire harvest of God. The Spirit of Grace also completed his commission by guaranteeing what was to come in 70AD and so from 70AD, according to the Preterist 70AD narrative Christ is no longer reigning through his Cross and the Spirit of Grace is no longer operating in the world anymore after the new heaven and new earth were revealed in 70AD, thereby rendering the end of the mission of the Cross and of the Holy Spirit.

How much more do people need to scrutinise the 70AD narrative to see the implications, consequences and contradictions that expose it as an anti-thesis gospel to that of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Just more strawman arguments. I could make up straw agruments about what you believe and then discredit them, seemingly, on the surface "defeating" your belief.

ToServe said:
I said in the previous post -

To say that God still judged those under the mosaic law as under the law for 40 years, after his Son's precious blood was shed is denying the salvation plan of God and treading under foot the Son of God and offending the Spirit of Grace.

Which is a strawman argument. Preterists do not believe those in Christ are judged according to the mosaic law.

ToServe said:
God willing, I will respond to every one of your other replies in your previous post, but I must ask you to be patient as I can discern that some replies would be short and others lengthy. Yet I jumped to this one because I wanted to lay the ground work for future replies.

If you are going to respond in the future. please refrain from strawman arguments. Maybe brush up on what preterists actually believe first? just a suggestion.

ToServe · Oct 28, 2018

claninja said:
Christ did. Christ made the old covenant obsolete. This is a completed work

If you say that Jesus made the Old Covenant Mosaic Law obsolete through his completed work, then God's measuring plumline from the Cross (sign of Jonah) and onwards is no longer the Mosaic Law.

Zechariah's prophesy said: do not despair over the small beginnings; God will see to it that the temple is completed, and God the Holy Spirit will oversee the project to its completion for his hands shall finish it. “Whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plumb line in the hand of God” (Zechariah 4:10).

The term plumb line is used in Scripture in several contexts. The Lord pictures Himself as a builder in Isaiah 28: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation” (Isaiah 28:16). This is a promise of an unshakeable kingdom, with the Messiah in charge. Jesus Christ is the “precious cornerstone” (see Mark 12:10; Acts 4:11; Romans 9:33; 1 Peter 2:6). As the Lord builds His kingdom, He will ensure it is perfect in every way: “I will make justice the measuring line and righteousness the plumb line” (Isaiah 28:17). There will be no crookedness/sin in the kingdom of Christ.

So if Christ is the justice measuring line and his righteousness the plumb line for God to dispense His judgement, then the mosaic law irrespective of the desolate house continuing in it is never the measuring plumb line that God uses in dispensing judgement.

claninja said:
It was "ready to vanish away" when Hebrews was written. When do you believe it vanished?

The mosaic law vanished at the Cross, because it ceased to being the measuring benchmark/plumbline by which God dispenses judgement.

claninja said:
I believe it vanished away in 70 AD

You would be mistaken, because it would imply that God still used it as his justice measuring line and its righteousness the plumb line in dispensing judgement.

claninja said:
I agree 100%. God's completed action through the cross made the old covenant obsolete. That old obsolete covenant was still being practiced in an already desolate house by a desolate priesthood, but was soon about to be destroyed. And we know the priesthood had already changed, because Christ became our high priest, not from the line of aaron, when he entered heaven.

Hebrews 7:12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well

So it is clear, cut and dry that when the priesthood was changed according to Hebrews, then the mosaic law no longer became a measuring plumb line for God. Since God changed the mosaic law to Christ's Law, then the Cross (sign of Jonah) is when the Old Covenant ceased to be God's benchmark for dispensing His judgement.

claninja said:
And yet, Jews were still worshiping according to the Law even after Christ's death. Did this save them, worshipping according to an old obsolete law? No, in fact it cursed them, for it is impossible for man to follow the Law 100%

Galatians 3:10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them
Romans 8:8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Regardless of the Jews continuing to observe the law, the act would be seen by God as defiance and an abomination. The mere thought of circumventing the one and only covenant that existed through the precious blood of Jesus is an open declaration of war with God and his Christ. To even suggest that two agreements existed in God's hands for 40 years is to denigrate the Cross and the Father's character.

God had discarded the Old Covenant agreement at the Cross and though the rebellious Jews continued in it, God eventually condemned them by the measure of his Son's plumb line.

ToServe · Oct 28, 2018

claninja said:
I can agree, the 40 years in the wilderness for the Israelites being the type, while the 40 years from Christ's death (30 Ad) until 70 Ad destruction being the anti type.

As Aaron and Jesus were type and anti-type of High Priest position, then we must further correlate the Old as a type of the bondage under Pharoah in contrast to the New as an anti-type of the bondage under the Mosaic Law. The Old order of things being the type and the New order of things being the anti-type.

Mosses was a type to Jesus as the anti-type.

Pharoah as the type was destroyed by God at the beginning of the 40 year exodus by water.

The Mosaic law was an anti-type that was destroyed by God on the Cross at the beginning of the 40 year probationary exodus by water (John 3:5) note - The water that ran out of the side of Christ as being the water that destroyed the Law as the anti-type.

The Law giver inscribed by fire the Mosaic law on stone tablets as the type.

The Law giver inscribed by fire of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of stone as the anti-type.

John 3:5
Verily, verily, I say unto you, except a man be born of water (freed from the mosaic law) and the Spirit (purgation fire of the heart of stone).

claninja said:
By the time the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness came to an end, the wicked generation was dead. This is the type. The destruction of the wicked generation 40 years after Jesus' day, being the anti type.

Underline wicked, for in both cases the wicked were shown to cling onto bondage and refused the Law that God dispensed within his approved contractual agreement.

In the type, the wicked clung on Pharoah and refused the Mosaic Law.
In the anti-type, the wicked clung onto the Mosaic Law and refused the Law of Christ (his commandments under the new contractual agreement).

In either case we ought not think that the type who is Pharoah and the anti-type which is the Mosaic Law were waxing and waning for 40 years, because both had ended at the beginning of the 40 years by water.

The bondage under Pharoah was ended at the beginning of the 40 years by water.
The bondage under the Mosaic Law was ended at the beginning of the 40 years by water out of Christ's side on the Cross.

Both Pharoah type and Mosaic Law anti-type were ended at the very beginning of the 40 years.

claninja said:
The Jews entering the promiseland (God's rest) after 40 years being the type. Believers entering the true promise land (heaven; God's rest; resurrection) after 40 years, the anti type

The Old type faithful Jews had entered God's rest within the 40 years, for they were freed by water and protected by fire.

The New type faithful believers had entered God's within the 40 years, for they were freed by water and protected by fire.

So what was 40 years all about and what is the promised land of milk and honey?

40 years was a probation that would at the end yield the abundance of God's blessings through his Church and had nothing to do with the judgement of the wicked, for the wicked were already being judged within the 40 years probationary as they were dying without Christ and perishing to eternal damnation.

Historic evidence indicates that Christianity flourished decades after the 40 years probationary and it exponentially grew to fulfill the prophesy of Abraham's seed being so numerous as the sand of the seashore.

The type for the promised land was a place to eat food that sustains the body.
The anti-type for the promised land is a pace to eat spiritual food/manna that sustains the soul.

In order for God to restore what the canker worm had eaten as Joel puts it, God starts to build up his Son's Church in ways that are humanity improbable and in this regard 70AD narrative has no meaning to how the type correlates to the anti-type in the way Preterists paint it.

claninja said:
And since the coming of Christ occurs with the destruction of the temple, in the Olivet discourse (40 years after his death), the resurrection fits well with around 70 AD (believers entering the true promiseland)

Christ does not explicitly nor implicitly state that he comes in 70AD as symbol of judgement upon the wicked. Jesus could not care less for an unholy city, an unholy temple which is run by the wicked who have refused the water and fire of John 3:5.

The coming of Christ as reported in Acts 1:11 and many other places in scripture (2 Timothy 4:6-8, 1 Corinthians 15:23) is for his faithful who are in covenant with him and who are born again (John 3:5)

The focal points of Christ's return for Preterists is a 70AD coming in judgement for the wicked and this is completely at odds with every single verse that one can find in scripture.

ToServe · Oct 28, 2018

claninja said:
So what is even more glorious than that? Christ fulfilling the law, that man couldn't, so that it would be fulfilled in those who walk according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:4 so that the righteous standard of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Christ's 1st coming did not abolish the law, it fulfilled the law
Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.

You are playing with words.
The type was the heart of stone.
The anti-type is the heart of flesh.
Living according to the Spirit is according to John 3:5 being born again.
The law that is being fulfilled is not the letter of the law, but is the law of Christ that brings us into harmony through a mind that is being governed by the Spirit of God.
In this case the law owing to Moses is abolished and has been reconstituted into the heart of flesh within the New Covenant Temple Construct that is governed by the mind of Christ. Therefore, born again believers become the walking and breathing law of Christ and this is how all the Law and the Prophets are being fulfilled, for the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of prophesy.

The law of Christ is being fulfilled within the born again believers and this has absolutely nothing to do with the Mosaic law under the old covenant temple construct. As far as God is concerned after the Cross of his Son, the letter of the Mosaic law was dead and destroyed by water (John 3:5).

claninja said:
The 70 AD "narrative" simply states that the old covenant became obsolete at Christ's death. The obsolete covenant then vanished away when the temple was destroyed. Jesus sums this up perfectly in John:

The hour is already here according to Jesus as he explicitly states has nothing to do with the temple in Jerusalem or the mountain where Moses received the Ten Commandments.

The hour is here within the context of true worship is applicable through the New Covenant Temple Construct. The destruction of a temple not asscoiated with true post Pentecost form of worship in the Spirit is not a temple where the Law of God and his Christ is being dispensed and it would be contradictory to the explicit details Jesus gave of where the Law of God resides.

On Pentecost and onwards, the Law of God resides in the New Covenant Temple owing to the true form of worship. Where the Law of God is, there also is the Covenant and in this respect since the law became letterless and became migrated into the heart of flesh, then any temple absent of the Law of God is no temple at all and does not in any way have any association with God what so ever.

So when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed, to God it would be a "So what!, that is not my Temple".

claninja said:
hn 4:23 Yet a time is coming AND has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks

You have a clear explicit instruction from Jesus that from Pentecost onwards, which is owing to the phrase "the hour is coming and has now come", that the temple in Jerusalem has absolutely nothing to do with the true form of worship. According to Jesus' explicit teaching the temple in Jerusalem is not the true form of worship and nether is it the Temple of God, therefore you need to obey Jesus and to drop the 70AD Preterist narrative right here and now.

ToServe · Oct 28, 2018

claninja said:
Were all of Jews who rejected Christ instantly freed from the law? Or did they have to be born again (die with Christ and be raised up).

Were the Israelites who came with Moses instantly freed from Pharoah?

The same freedom God was giving the Israelites he was giving the Jews who still were clinging onto the Mosaic law. The outcome for the type was those who clung onto Pharoah died within the 40 years valley of decision as objectors to God's offer. The outcome for the anti-type was those who clung onto the Mosaic Law died within the 40 years valley of decision as objectors to God's offer.

They were freed by their Messiah as prophesied by Daniel when the type symbol of the anti-type Christ who is Michael made a stand for Daniel's people on the Cross at Calvary.

They were freed, but as the saying goes, you can take a horse to water but you can't make it to drink. The same applied to the Jews and Christ's appeal to them highly suggests this was being brought to their attention.

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing."

"Yet you refuse to come to me to have life."

They were freed, but in order for them to have life and to be saved they needed to be born again (John 3:5). They needed the water and the Spirit and yet the same attitude that brought about the Israelites demise for that generation in the desert within those 40 years, played out within 40 years for that generation that perished because they did not embrace the sign of Jonah.

claninja said:
Romans 7:6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Notice Paul preached to those UNDER THE LAW.
1 Corinthians 9:20 To those under the Law I became like one under the Law (though I myself am not under the Law), to win those under the Law

But a time was coming, when it would be impossible to be UNDER THE LAW: temple destruction

"But now, dying to what once bound us"

To die is an appeal to embrace the sign of Jonah and to be born again and to disassociate one's self from what once bound us, which suggests it no longer is bounding us, therefore why not embrace it by dying to the Mosaic Law. So why not die to the written code (Mosaic Law) if we have now in the present tense of the usage of the verb, been fully freed from it.

Has nothing to do with a temple destruction that has no power in it what so ever, as the Spirit of God does not reside in it and so the old way of the written code is no longer applicable post Pentecost, because we have been freed by our Messiah.

Paul is just saying he became a covert operative in order to sway them to Christ.

claninja said:
Poor argument. you disagree with what scripture explicitly states, then just say "ill contrived". Instead, how about explaining why scripture doesn't actually mean what paul explicitly st

Pause and to rethink what was said. Your attempt at responding was not addressing the point in particular. If you want to further elaborate on your previous point then I will respond in depth of the matter.

claninja said:
You are responding to the Hebrews 9 quote. So I disagree that this text "explicitly states" Melchizedek. Melchizedek is not mentioned in Hebrews 9. However, I do agree with you premise here that the kingdom was established at Christ's ascension.

It is a given that when Hebrews speaks of a Kingly High Priest who has a permanent and non-transferable priesthood, then it is talking about the High Priest Melchizedek. Hebrews central theme is how the High Priest brought about the change from the Old to the New and since the time Christ entered the Holy of Holies with his win blood as the High Priest, the Most Holy Place was revealed on ascension day when he was made available as our intercessor within the Most Holy Place. That is why Jesus says knock and ask me for anything.

Therefore the Most Holy Place was availed to the born again believer from the very moment our Kingly High Priest started making intercessions to the Father and on our behalves.

claninja said:
I would agree with you, if Christ had never been to heaven before.
John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.

However, Christ already knew the way to heaven because that is where he came from.

Christ went into Heaven within the context of our Kingly High Priest and this is only one time event, irrespective of him residing in Heaven before his ascension.

claninja said:
The way, Jesus himself, was revealed in flesh at the 1st coming. However, the resurrection, the way into heaven (the most holy place) for man would not occur until his 2nd coming. And according to the olivet discourse this would occur when the temple was destroyed.

The born again believers were given access to the Most Holy Place through their High Priest well before 70AD and irrespective of a godless and lawless temple in Jerusalem being destroyed. Jesus said what you tie on earth shall be tied n heaven and what you loosen on earth shall be loosened in Heaven. Born again believers were given access through their High Priest to the Most Holy Place, for nothing was being held back for them owing to the wicked and their unholy and ungodly temple.

claninja said:
John 13:36 Jesus answered, “Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but you will follow later.”

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

Jesus was informing his disciples that where he is going on the Cross they can't follow him for he is doing it by himself. As the prophesy states he was taken and his sheep scattered in every direction.

claninja said:
Little children, I am with you only a little while longer. You will look for Me, and as I said to the Jews, so now I say to you: ‘Where I am going, you cannot come.’

Calvary is where he was going.

ToServe · Oct 28, 2018

claninja said:
You didn't answer my question, at least i didn't see an answer. When did the old covenant vanish away?

It disappeared when the sign of Jonah was given that Jewish nation and Jesus became the plumb line of God in dispensing his justice and righteousness.

The Jews who rebelled against their own Messiah would come under condemnation due to their unbelief. Jesus compared this present day condemnation of the Jewish nation as an anti-type to the type of condemnation that was dispensed upon the Men of Nineveh if they did not believe and to repent after the sign of Jonah. Yet we are told the Men of Nineveh averted condemnation.

claninja said:
Scripture literally states "the power of sin is the law". This was written long after the Cross.
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law

sin,
ἁμαρτία (hamartia)
Noun - Nominative Feminine Singular
Strong's Greek 266: From hamartano; a sin.

A sin presented to a predominantly Gentile Church in Corinth is not speaking of the Old Covenant Mosaic Law. Paul is address the day to day sins. Paul is alluding that due to human weakness and fickleness, it is not possible to live perfectly without offending God. Paul says, in other words, hey that's ok, Christ did it in the present tense for us and we have the victory through Christ.

Death spoken about here is related to Adamic Fall.

claninja said:
Scripture literally states the obsolete first covenant was "growing old", "aging", "fading away", and "ready to vanish". This was written long after the Cross. The verbs being present tense.
2 corinthians 3:11 For if what is fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which endures!
Hebrews 8:13 By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete; and what is growing old and aging will soon vanish away.

Paul states the Old has no Glory and hence it has no presence of God. No Glory, hence no Power and so after the Cross the Mosaic Law had no Glory or Power and though many zealots continued in it, according to Paul was a futile act that would eventually fade away as it was absent of God's presence and blessings.

Paul when saying the Mosaic Law has no glory is explicitly saying that it is not sanctioned by God.

claninja said:
is still standing" is present tense. This was written long after the Cross.
Hebrews 9:8-9 By this arrangement the Holy Spirit was showing that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle is still standing. It is an illustration for the present tim

The illustration was the type pointing to Solomon's Temple where the Ark of the Covenant was present under the Aaronic High Priesthod. The anti-type present in their day is where the Temple and High Priest is Jesus and the Most Holy Place is now revealed to us. The contrasting effect is for the purpose of saying the historic type served as an illustration only and was no longer present and the anti-type is now present through our High Priest.

Contrasting effect of the 1st being absent and the 2nd through Christ Jesus beng present.

claninja said:
Jesus did not come of abolish or defeat the Law, but fulfill it. The Law, according to Jesus, would not pass away UNTIL heaven and earth passed away:

Matthew 5:17-18 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

It speaks of Christ's Law under his covenantal agreement. The Mosaic law was married to Moses and so Christ's law is married to Christ the High priest. Moses and Jesus did not contend with one another, no more than the illustration contended with the anti-type genuine article.

claninja said:
Christ was anointed at his baptism:
Acts 10:38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him

Anointing of the Most High places Christ as the High Priest above Aaron and Moses to fulfill Deuteronomy prophesy.

claninja said:
Christ sat on the throne of David upon his resurrection and ascension to heaven, where he received a kingdom. It is from heaven where Christ reigns:
Acts 2:30-31 Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ,

Then it is a done deal, where Moses and the Mosiac Law can't continue after the priesthood was changed.

claninja said:
Luke 19:12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return

The far country was earth, as compared to his original Heavenly estate. Abraham sojourned to find the dwelling place of God as a type, whereby Jesus as the anti-type came down from Heaven to go to a far country to be Emmanuel.

claninja said:
1 corinthians 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet

His reign to make disciples of all the world had not ended in 70AD, because the books were not yet opened and we today are testimont to this fact.

LUKE CHAPTERS 19, 21, 23 AND REVELATION "DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 70AD"

Luke chapters 19, 20 and 23 showing in Revelation?

Yes, it appears they are

No they are not

I don't know

Other [please explain]

Active Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads