I disagree with your interpretation. I fully agree with every single word that the author of Hebrews wrote.
So then you agree that while the first section stands, the way into the most holy place is not yet manifest, correct?
That isn't the context in which Jesus was speaking. He was speaking of the time when the future bodily resurrection of the dead occurs. Your denial of a future event of a mass bodily resurrection of all the dead (
John 5:28-29,
Daniel 12:2, Acts 24:15) is your downfall. At that time there will literally be no more death and no more marriage.
1.) I don't deny a future bodily resurrection, so please refrain from strawman arguments. I believe in a future resurrection. I know I am not in my future resurrected body as I type this, and I assume you are not in your resurrected body either....
2.) Doesn't change the fact, that you still believe that when the believer's soul rises to heaven, they will never die again nor partake in earthly marriage.
It will be the ultimate consummation of the new covenant at which point the eternal new heavens and new earth will be ushered in where we will dwell with God forever (Rev 21:1-4).
This is where I am confused about your belief. You state the new covenant was "fully realized" at the cross or around the time of the spirit, but then say it will be "consummated" in the future.....doesn't make sense. IF you stated "inaugurated" at the cross and then consummated at the 2nd coming, then I your position would make sense.
No. That is a different context. Were people not saved by Christ's shed blood of the new covenant before 70 AD? Of course they were. The new covenant was fully in effect upon the death and resurrection of Christ. For anyone to say otherwise is ridiculous.
1.) Yes, people were saved by the blood of Christ prior to 70ad, and after 30-33ad. The new covenant being inaugurated in Christ's blood. Were people resurrected into their new bodies and living in the new heavens and earth as part of the new covenant in 30-33 ad?
2.) You just stated the consummation, which means completion/fulfillment, is future. So I'm not following your reasoning that it is "fully in effect" now and yet needs to be consummated in the future?
Why are you quoting a historicist premil to back up your preterist amil doctrine? I'm surprised you would trust what a premil says about anything. I disagree with him and I disagree with you. How do you interpret
1 Thessalonians 4:13-17?
You mean bengel? I see nothing wrong with using "historicist premil" resources on understanding expressions not related to eschatology, especially when they agree with amil sources.
the expression "from the uttermost parts of heaven" refers to the whole world and not the literal abode of God. Can you provide evidence to the contrary of this instead of deflecting with "well that's a premil source"? Premils also believe Jesus is the son of God who died for our sins, should I reject that because they also believe it?
Right. If you read
Luke 21 you should see that "the tribulation of those days" is not referring to what happened in 70 AD but rather is referring to the end of the "times of the Gentiles" which we are still in now.
The destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70, fulfilled the days of vengeance in regards to all that was written. It is during this time that Jerusalem would be trampled by the nations, until the times of the gentiles is fulfilled.
Luke 21:20-24 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,
for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people.
They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
The trampling is of Jerusalem by gentiles is 42 months. Thus consistent with Mark and Matthew, that the son of man would come the clouds and send his angels to gather the elect "immediately/in the days" after the tribulation of Jerusalem.
revelation 11:1-2 Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out,
for it is given over to the Gentiles, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.
You know that I don't believe that, so why would you ask it? Believers don't yet have their immortal bodies and people are still dying. So, it can't yet be said that death is swallowed up in victory. Do you know that 1 Cor 15:54 is referencing
Isaiah 25:8, as does
Revelation 21:4? What is your interpretation of
Revelation 21:1-4?
So you don't believe that death and hades have victory any more? So then you believe the mortal already puts on immortality? Because the saying "death is swallowed up in victory...." comes to pass when the perishable puts on the imperishable. Do you believe this passage in regards to Christ resurrection or in regards to our future resurrection? I believe it is a reference to revelation 20:14, in which death and hades are thrown into the lake of fire.
1 corinthians 15:54-55 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: “
Death is swallowed up in victory.” “O death, where is your victory? O hades, where is your sting?”
1 corinthians 15:24-26 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
Revelation 21:1-4 = new covenant language. I agree with Eusebius' stance:
EUSEBIUS Bishop of Caesarea (c. 265 - 340) Extract from the 'Theophania' "All authorities concur in the declaration that "when all these things should have been done" "The End" should come : that "the mystery of God should be finished as he had declared to His servants the prophets" : it should be completed : time should now be no more : the End of all things (so foretold) should be at hand, and be fully brought to pass : in these days should be fulfilled all that had been spoken of Christ (and of His church) by the prophets : or, in other words, when the gospel should have been preached in all the world for a testimony to all nations, and the power of the Holy People be scattered (abroad), then should the End come, then should all these things be finished.
I need now only say, all these things have been done : the old and elementary system passed away with a great noise; all these predicted empires have actually fallen, and the new kingdom, the new heaven and earth, the new Jerusalem--all of which were to descend from God, to be formed by His power, have been realized on earth; all these things have been done in the sight of all the nations ; God's holy arm has been made bare in their sight: His judgments have prevailed, and they remain for an everlasting testimony to the whole world. His kingdom has come, as it was foretold it should, and His will has, so far, been done; His purposes have been finished; and, from that day to the extreme end of time, it will be the duty, as indeed it will be the great privilege of the Church, to gather into its bosom the Jew, the Greek, the Scythian, the Barbarian, bond and free; and to do this as the Apostles did in their days--in obedience, faith and hope.'
Why would that have started happening at that time? And, if what you are saying was true then why did Paul write this:
Because Jesus stated it would occur IMMEDIATELY after the tribulation of Jerusalem.
Matthew 24:29-31
Immediately after the tribulation of those days: ‘The sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
b’
30At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven,
c and all the tribes of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.
d 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 the heavens to the other.
Here, Paul gives the order of bodily resurrections unto bodily immortality. He indicated that Christ was the first and then next in order is "those who belong to Him" which will be "when He comes". Your doctrine does not agree with this. Your order of resurrections unto bodily immortality would be Christ's first, as Paul said, but instead of the next in order being those who belong to Christ when He comes, you have some being resurrected in 70 AD and then more each day from that point on. That is not at all what Paul taught. Instead, he taught that all who belong to Christ will be resurrected on the same day, which will be the day Christ returns which will be "at the last trumpet" (1 Cor 15:50-54).
Where did I say resurrection in 70ad?
What you believed happened at the cross onward: souls of dead believers rising to heaven to never die nor partake in the earthly form of marriage, I instead believe occurred from 70ad and onward.