The Olivet Discourse

mkgal1 said:

You seem to misunderstand the nuance of what was going on there. Yes.....I agree.....the Temple sanctuary was no longer holy.....that's true (and I NEVER implied that wasn't true).....however, the Temple stood (and God made it impossible for the High priest to ever enter the Holy of Holies again after the Cross by ripping the veil)....the priests were still observing what was written in the Torah.....and the disciples of Christ were still subjected to the authority of the religious leaders. But....that all came to an end in 70 AD. The power was stripped from the religious leaders......just as Jesus had told them it would.

So.....who was right in that power struggle between Jesus and the religious leaders? Who had the "last word" so to speak? God did.....confirming that Jesus was/is God and that Paul/Peter/James/Mary and all of Jesus' followers and prophets were "right". This was their vindication (the destruction of the Temple).

Click to expand...

You have a habit of ignoring Scripture that forbids your theology. Text after text goes unaddressed, argument after argument is ignored. This does not advance your argument but rather exposes it as unbiblical. You have clearly zero rebuttal to my several detailed responses. All i am reading is private interpretation to reinforce your fixation with the coming of Titus in AD70. Obviously, that is all you think about. How sad!

It is a waste of time engaging with you.

sovereigngrace said:

Your Preterism is forcing you to argue something that is blatantly unbiblical. The old covenant died when Jesus died.

Click to expand...

Paul seems to disagree with you (using this metaphor.....I hope you don't consider someone dead when they are "growing old and aging". It's a process.....transitions take time):

sovereigngrace said:

You have a habit of ignoring Scripture that forbids your theology. Text after text goes unaddressed, argument after argument is ignored. This does not advance your argument but rather exposes it as unbiblical. You have clearly zero rebuttal to my several detailed responses. All i am reading is private interpretation to reinforce your fixation with the coming of Titus in AD70. Obviously, that is all you think about. How sad!

It is a waste of time engaging with you.

Click to expand...

No......that one event is not ALL I think about. In fact......pages ago I had brought up an excellent post of Parousia70's that listed many "comings" of God throughout recorded history....but you never responded to that. Post #94 ---->The Olivet Discourse

I could launch that accusation back at you, however......because you don't seem to recognize the long history of God reconciling His people - going all the way back to Genesis 3.....and, instead, seem to focus narrowly on His future return.

I prefer to focus on what He has done (the whole story....not just one event)...........and what He is doing....and the faith and trust that comes from that. Remember the Joshua stones? I see much of the Bible in that way.....reminders of His goodness....His sovereignty.......His omnipotence...and His glory.

But I won't be hurt if you'd rather not discuss things with me any longer.

mkgal1 said:

No......that one event is not ALL I think about. In fact......pages ago I had brought up an excellent post of Parousia70's that listed many "comings" of God throughout recorded history....but you never responded to that. Post #94 ---->The Olivet Discourse

I could launch that accusation back at you, however......because you don't seem to recognize the long history of God reconciling His people - going all the way back to Genesis 3.....and, instead, seem to focus narrowly on His future return. I prefer to focus on what He has done.......and what He is doing....and the faith and trust that comes from that. Remember the Joshua stones? I see much of the Bible in that way.....reminders of His goodness....His sovereignty.......His omnipotence...and His glory.

Click to expand...

Full Preterists will talk in detail and repeatedly about any coming as long as it is not the glorious literal physical visible future second coming of Jesus.

mkgal1 said:

Paul seems to disagree with you:

Hebrews 8:13 ~ In saying, "new," He has made obsolete the first; and that which is growing old and aging is near vanishing. (written just prior to 70 AD - long after 30 AD)​

Click to expand...

I already addressed this, and you already ignored it, as is your custom.

The Jewish temple in Jerusalem, after Christ’s death and the ripping of the curtain in two, was rendered wholly redundant. Please read this slowly and carefully. Please address the Scriptures and the arguments for a change.

Its usefulness was over. It was obsolete. It remaining standing up until AD70 did not mean it had any further earthly purpose, or that the old covenant remained in effect. It was just like a human corpse awaiting burial. It had no vitality, no relevance and no purpose. Once Christ died, the old covenant died. Degeneration immediately set in, just like the decay that kicks in when a human gives up the ghost.

2 Corinthians 3:11: “For if that which is done away (katargeo or rendered entirely idle, useless) was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.”

Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth (palaioo or is worn out, or declared obsolete) and waxeth old (gerasko) is ready to vanish away.”

Even though a corpse may look asleep it is gradually decaying, and will ultimately vanish away. But that entity has no further earthly use. Its time is up.

There cannot be 2 covenants ongoing at the one time. That is absurd! One superseded the other. There cannot be 2 competing priesthoods. One replaced the other.

sovereigngrace said:

It was just like a human corpse awaiting burial.

Click to expand...

Your metaphor is in disagreement with Paul's. I edited my post to make that more clear. "Growing old and aging" does not equate to dead.

sovereigngrace said:

Its usefulness was over. It was obsolete. It remaining standing up until AD70 did not mean it had any further earthly purpose, or that the old covenant remained in effect. It was just like a human corpse awaiting burial. It had no vitality, no relevance and no purpose. Once Christ died, the old covenant died. Degeneration immediately set in, just like the decay that kicks in when a human gives up the ghost.

Click to expand...

And you have yet to address my posts about the fact that the Temple WAS still standing.....the priests were still maintaining their duties (with the exception of the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies each year - God put an end to that in 30 AD, for sure).....and the religious leaders temporarily still had earthly political power over the disciples. That all ended (as Jesus said it would in His parables) when the Landowner came and took the Kingdom of God away from them (for good!). Physically.....in a tangible way the world saw God's glory.....recorded by unbiased historians. Matthew 21:33-46

mkgal1 said:

Your metaphor is in disagreement with Paul's. I edited my post to make that more clear. "Growing old and aging" does not equate to dead.

Click to expand...

It means decaying! Those who espouse error jump from Bible version to Bible version in order to get one to support their false teaching. They manipulate Scripture for their own gain.

mkgal1 said:

And you have yet to address my posts about the fact that the Temple WAS still standing.....the priests were still maintaining their duties (with the exception of the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies each year - God put an end to that in 30 AD, for sure).....and the religious leaders temporarily still had earthly political power over the disciples. That all ended (as Jesus said it would in His parables) when the Landowner came and took the Kingdom of God away from them (for good!). Physically.....in a tangible way the world saw God's glory.....recorded by unbiased historians. Matthew 21:33-46

Click to expand...

I have addressed this in detail and you have carefully sidestepped it. You must do this in order to support your fixation with the coming of Titus in AD70.

These religious apostates had no spiritual power in God's economy after the cross.
Hebrews 10:1 confirms: the old covenant “can never with those sacrifices … make the comers thereunto perfect.” The fact is, “the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did” (Hebrews 7:19).

That “better hope” was Christ and the transaction He paid for sin at the cross. It was that final sacrifice for sin that perfects the redeemed. Why? Christ has satisfied every righteous demand of a holy God. He took upon Himself our sin and in turn took the penalty that was due to us. There is therefore no condemnation for them that are in Christ. Heb 10:14 of this narrative confirms: “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

The cross of Christ is continually presented in the New Testament as the pivotal point in history for redemption, the introduction of the new covenant, the abolition of the old covenant, not the coming of Titus in AD70 as you and other Preterists imagine.

sovereigngrace said:

It had no vitality, no relevance and no purpose.

Click to expand...

Romans 5:20 ~ The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more.

The whole purpose the Law was given to the Israelites was to prove that ALL are sinners.....and that God is gracious. The first century Jews had a lot of transitioning to do (as I pointed out, Peter was still observing dietary laws.....and considered even Gentiles unclean long after the Cross). This is what they read faithfully about King David's view of the Law (the Torah....the first 5 books of our Old Testament):



The Law (the Torah....the first 5 books of our Old Testament) pointed to Christ.....and the revelation that Jesus was/is God....the Son of Man - spoken of by the prophet Daniel). That takes a few years for the ancient Jews (including Peter) to wrap their minds around (and God was gracious and merciful with them to give them that time).

sovereigngrace said:

It means decaying! Those who espouse error jump from Bible version to Bible version in order to get one to support their false teaching. They manipulate Scripture for their own gain.

Click to expand...

.....an opinion of yours.

sovereigngrace said:

These religious apostates had no spiritual power in God's economy after the cross.

Click to expand...

The authority given to the Levitical priests was temporary.....but even though it had become corrupt, I believe there was still a purpose. So.....I agree that they had no spiritual power or authority.

But in the physical world of ancient Israel.....they did still have political authority (from 30 AD to 70 AD), and had earlier been given the priesthood in order to represent God to others (so it could give the outward appearance that they had spiritual authority).

However.....as Jesus said in Matthew 21:33-46 - that was coming to an end (but it hadn't physically come to an end in 30 AD - except for the Holy of Holies.....the High priest could never again enter into the presence of God in the sanctuary because of the literal ripped curtain). The full end came in 70 AD. There was no confusion then over who the Kingdom of God belonged to.


Matthew 21:42-44
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone the builders rejected

has become the cornerstone.

This is from the Lord,

and it is marvelous in our eyes’k ?43Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. 44He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.l ”

mkgal1 said:

.....an opinion of yours.

Click to expand...

No, it is the Word of God speaking:

Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth (palaioo or is worn out, or declared obsolete) and waxeth old (gerasko) is ready to vanish away.”

The old covenant lay rotting like a decaying corpse. Fit and able for nothing.

sovereigngrace said:

is ready to vanish away.”

Click to expand...

"is ready to vanish away" does not equate to "is gone".

By 70 AD that could be said - "it was gone". Remarkably so, considering so many things.

sovereigngrace said:

That “better hope” was Christ and the transaction He paid for sin at the cross. It was that final sacrifice for sin that perfects the redeemed.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly not arguing against this. That has nothing to do with what we're discussing. I tend to ignore some of the points you make that are superfluous to what we're discussing because it almost seems like an intentional way to distract and confound. Just know that's typically one of the reasons I'm ignoring some of your points - I'm trying to stay on topic and to one point at a time.

mkgal1 said:

The authority given to the Levitical priests was temporary.....but even though it had become corrupt, I believe there was still a purpose. So.....I agree that they had no spiritual power or authority.

But in the physical world of ancient Israel.....they did still have political authority (from 30 AD to 70 AD), and had earlier been given the priesthood in order to represent God to others (so it could give the appearance that they had spiritual authority).

However.....as Jesus said in Matthew 21:33-46 - that was coming to an end (but it hadn't physically come to an end in 30 AD - except for the Holy of Holies.....the High priest could never again enter into the presence of God in the sanctuary because of the literal ripped curtain). The full end came in 70 AD. There was no confusion then over who the Kingdom of God belonged to.


Matthew 21:42-44
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone the builders rejected

has become the cornerstone.

This is from the Lord,

and it is marvelous in our eyes’k ?43Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. 44He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.l ”

Click to expand...

Galatians 3:13-14, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Calvary is here advanced as the defining moment for the Gentiles (repeatedly referred to in Scripture as the nations). It was the turning point in God’s plan of salvation for “the nations.” No longer would they suffer in complete darkness. All that are found in Christ (the ultimate son of Abraham) are considered the seed of Abraham. Saving faith is the spiritual quality that identifies the true children of Abraham irrespective of race or birthday. Those who would argue otherwise argue with Scripture and present a false theory.

Calvary was the central transaction that caused the Gentiles to receive the glorious Gospel of Christ. That cruel event graciously precipitated the liberation of “the (once wholly blinded) nations” causing notable hurt (as predicted in Genesis 3:15) to the plans of the devil and his once overwhelming hold upon the heathen. The purpose and effect of Christ’s dying unquestionably enabled the Gospel to spread to “the Gentiles” and allowed “the blessings of Abraham” and “the promise of the Spirit” to become a real possession of “the nations.”

Calvary is plainly advanced here as the crucial turning point in relation to God’s sovereign dealings with the Gentiles – “the nations.” It was undoubtedly the decision hour in God’s plan of salvation for mankind, in that it widened out that glorious redemptive provision to the hopelessly deluded nations. Undoubtedly, it is the Cross and not the second coming that is advanced as the crucial event that spiritually damaged the enormous sphere of the devil’s influence and caused God’s favour to directed towards “the nations.”

Ephesians 2:11-13 confirms this, saying, “ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were (1) without Christ, (2) being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and (3) strangers from the covenants of promise, (4) having no hope, and (5) without God in the world: but now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.”

When you recognize that “the blood of Christ” is the remedy for the “afar off” condition and that the “far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ” we can confidently assume that we are looking at pre and post conversion conditions. The phrase to be “made nigh by the blood of Christ” describes the wonderful change in status that occurs when a Gentile moves from being a child of the devil to a child of God.

The blood of Christ doesn’t merely draw believers near (or close) to “Christ” in an external or detached sense, but brings them nigh into Christ in an intimate spiritual union upon salvation. They become one with Christ upon conversion in a mystical union. Paul reinforces this fact by showing that drawing nigh results in us becoming members of the body of Christ and components of the temple of God. To be nigh to God clearly denotes salvation here. This is seen throughout Scripture.

Those who were hitherto aliens and strangers to Almighty God, being outside of His intimate plan and purpose, were now graciously “made nigh by the blood of Christ.” Through Calvary, the Gentile has been given real access to God and fully entered into:

· Christ
· The commonwealth of Israel
· The covenants of promise
· Spiritual hope
· Union with God in this present world

mkgal1 said:

"is ready to vanish away" does not equate to "is gone".

By 70 AD that could be said - "it was gone". Remarkably so, considering so many things.

Click to expand...

A corpse can still be visible but it is lifeless and has no ability to function. That is what happened to the old covenant between AD30-70.

sovereigngrace said:

Galatians 3:13-14, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Click to expand...

This doesn't stand in opposition to my point. Of course this is Scripture.....and of course this is true.....but it took the Ancient Jews some time to absorb this New Covenant way.....this shift. Just think of theological shifts you may have personally made.....didn't they take some time? As I mentioned before.....look at the life of Peter (and he was with Jesus daily for 3 1/2 years.....listening to His teaching).....it took Peter awhile to feel comfortable stepping into a Gentile's home, because he still viewed them as unclean.

sovereigngrace said:

A corpse can still be visible but it is lifeless and has no ability to function. That is what happened to the old covenant between AD30-70.

Click to expand...

Okay.....use the metaphor of corpse, if you like......but just don't say it wasn't useful or without purpose (or that it had vanished). That is a contradiction to Scripture. If nothing else......we could say the purpose was God's grace and mercy....but there was a purpose and God did use it for His good/His glory. We....thousands of years later....still use the Old Testament (and some *misuse* it and try to mix the instruction with the New Covenant even today). Just think how much more difficult it would have been for first century Jews that literally formed their lives around the Temple and ordinances and words written in the Torah (our Old Testament).

Forty years (or days) is used a few times, Biblically, to represent a transition period between two distinct epochs.

Quote from Wiki ~ In the Hebrew Bible, forty is often used for time periods, forty days or forty years, which separate "two distinct epochs". Rain fell for "forty days and forty nights" during the Flood (Genesis 7:4). ... Examples include Eli (1 Samuel 4:18), Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Samuel 5:4), and Solomon (1 Kings 11:42).

sovereigngrace said:

The support you submit to support your position is (ironically) the false charge of the apostate Jews against Paul in Acts 21:28: “Men of Israel, help us! This is the man who teaches everywhere against our people and against our law and against this place. Furthermore, he has brought Greeks into the temple and defiled this holy place.”

Click to expand...

And what did Paul do about these false accusations (was my point)? Did Paul inform them that the Old Testament (the Law and the Prophets) "no longer functioned".....and that the priests were all out of jobs and served a different god (because that is so - they made the Temple a high place by claiming they had no god but Caesar).

What actually happened? I read that Paul showed them that their accusations were false.....and that Paul DID observe the Law (the instruction in the Old Testament):


17When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers welcomed us joyfully. 18The next day Paul went in with us to see James, and all the elders were present. 19Paul greeted them and recounted one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.20When they heard this, they glorified God. Then they said to Paul, “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. 21But they are under the impression that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or observe our customs. 22What then should we do? They will certainly hear that you have come.23Therefore do what we advise you. There are four men with us who have taken a vow. 24Take these men, purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is no truth to these rumors about you, but that you also live in obedience to the law.25As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they must abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals, and from sexual immorality.”26So the next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he entered the temple to give notice of the date when their purification would be complete and the offering would be made for each of them.

And in Acts 22......we see that there are still many Jews that were strictly observant of the Law (and I believe it was still a "schoolmaster" and served some purpose - even if it were only to show a contrast between "those living in the flesh" and those "living in the Spirit" in order to bring Jews to faith in Christ and giving Paul credibility and the ability to be listened to by those that were still zealous for God and His Law). Paul said:


The judaizers also accused Paul of being a people pleaser.....but I don't believe that is true either. Paul responded to those accusations here: