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

[ToServe]

Yes they were freed in 1 day as they were led by moses and passed through the water.

Was Egypt completely destroyed that it was impossible for Israel to go back?

Egypt after the seven plagues and waking up to find their first borns dead is a verifiable indication that they were a nation in a Pitt of despair, mourning their destruction.

The impossibility and improbability of Israel going back is the sign of the bloody Cross on their doors which pardoned them from destruction also by saving their first borns.

This "type" turning moment was the done deal that there was no turning back and the "anti-type" Cross as far as God is concerned was a point of no return. Hypothetical was no longer a practical choice, though many wanted to go back, history recounts otherwise, as they died in the desert (valley of decision).

Before 70 AD was it possible for Jews to go back to worshiping at the temple according to the Law?

No. As Moses had parted the sea in the middle and the Israelites crossed it, then it was no turning back. When the outer temple vail was parted in the middle, then this as the anti-type to the type of Moses parting the sea would signal the point of no return to the Holy of Holies. The temple became a memory just like the Israelites who wanted to go back to Pharoah was only a memory.

God no longer saw and defined that temple as his Temple and this spiritually meant that they were separated from accessing their old ways in their dealings with God and in this regard they would continue abominations until it was eventually poured upon their heads in the form of death without Christ irrespective of 70AD. Just like they were falling like flies in the desert within the 40 years exodus, so too were the Jews without a legitimate temple falling like flies without Christ within the 40 years probationary period.

As the Israelites coud not access Pharoah in making a deal (agreement) with him, so too were the Jews unable to access God in making a deal (agreement) with him through their priesthood who sanctioned the Letter of the Law.

The vail symbolised a path that they could no longer access in their dealings with God so to continue in their crafted covenant with death.

God basically blocked their access and it was no longer availed to them, though they continued in their imagination just like the Israelites imagined if they could only strike up a deal with Pharoah to take them back. Pharoah did not take them back, neither did God take them back after the blood was served on their door posts pointing to Christ's Cross.

After 70AD was it possible for Jews to back to worshiping at the temple according the Law?

Not an applicable question, considering they had no dealings with God when their access to the Holy of Holies was revoked after the temple vail was torn down the middle.

I agree, the Law of Moses was OBSOLETE for those in Christ from the Cross onward.

The destruction of the temple has made it impossible for anyone to worship according the Law of moses for the last 2000 years.

The worship after the parting of the temple vail when Christ was crucified was a point of no return, for their access to God was revoked and so who exactly were they worshiping? It wasn't God.

I agree. But the way to heaven was not a mystery to Christ, nor was he separate from the Father. In fact, he and the Father were one. and the fullness of God dwelled within Christ.

His ascension into heaven according to Daniel's prophesy was to be anointed as the Most High Kingly High Priest and given the keys of David in fulfilment to the prophesy of Isaiah 22-19-25. It was the fulfilment of Daniel 2:44 when the Son of Man approached the Ancient of Days and was given authority, glory and dominion (Kingdom).

So this uniquely points to one event at Christ's ascension, though he originally came from Heaven.

Because of Christ we now have direct access to the Father while in our earthly tents. But if Christ has not yet come, we do not yet have access to heaven to be with the Father. For the resurrection occurs at Christ's coming.

Christ's coming is when the books are opened and the Cross would have run its course in making disciples of all Gentiles. who are to be accounted for in the Book of Life. Then Christ's reign through his Cross ends after he accomplishes his mission, then the end of the harvest. Obviously, the end of the harvest didn't come in 70AD, as the books are still recording names.

Also the falling away from the faith positions Christ coming to separate the Tares from amongst the wheat within his own Church and this is accompanied by Jesus saying will the Son of Man find faith in the world when he returns? The notion of a judgment of the Church and a time in history that indicates the lowest point of faith of no possibility of return to faith once given to the saints is not evident in 70AD premise presented, as Christianity flourished and has been flourishing for almost 2000 years. This alone debunks a 70AD return. Unless you can prove that post 70AD Christianity is not the faith in Christ and that the increase of members is owing to another religion calling itself Christian. We are told that when Christ returns many false Christs (leaders) and prophets (ministers) will emerge to create another religion. Either way you look at it, it would prove that 70AD was not his return. Consider history and I ask you don't you feel it deep down that 70AD was not Christ's return owing to a fallen state of the Church, instead Christianity flourished after the Beast and the false prophet were removed in 70AD and so too did the harvest and workme increase.

Possible interpretation, but I disagree, considering the very following chapter:

Jesus said I am going somewhere and that place you cannot come and then in the following chapter 14 he says I will not leave you as orphans for I will come back to you.

Where was Jesus going to prepare a place? When Jesus would come again, where would he take them?

Read chapter 14 and discern that it is centrally focussed on Pentecost when the Spirit of Truth comes and that Jesus is making his home with the born again believers through the sanctioned Temple of God. In another place he states that he will reveal himself to them. This isn't some 40 years in the future, for it was from Pentecost onwards.
So Jesus is alluding to the disciples that them being taken to be with Jesus in his Father's house is the way Jesus took when he was crucified and this points to faith onto biological death. Yet Jesus says for I will not leave you without hope for on that day pointing to Pentecost you will know the truth and be provided the means to die whilst keeping the faith and in this regard I will come for you when you have found the way. Saint Stephen found the way in Acts of the Apostles and Christ came for him on the day of redeeming his soul. 70AD has no grounds for the resurrection because it becomes implausible in many many circumstances that haven't even been covered to the depths of scrutiny within this thread.

 

[claninja]

The way the Old Covenant priesthood applied the Law of God was totally at odds with how God intended them to apply it. If we only look at how Jesus dressed down the Pharisees in how erroneously they applied the law.

Right, no one's arguing that people erroneously apply the law. Jesus makes that very clear multiple times and Paul makes that clear multiple times. However, The Law is good, and sin used what is good to bring about death. It is not Law that does this, it is sin.

Romans 7:13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

BUT that is not what you stated earlier, you stated "there is NO VERSE THAT EVEN MILDLY HINTS that the mosaic Law was GOOD" This is a false statement.

There is no verse that even mildly hints that the Mosaic Law was good.

Because the Law is, in Fact good. It is sin that uses what is good to bring about death.

Romans 7:12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

 

[claninja]

Egypt after the seven plagues and waking up to find their first borns dead is a verifiable indication that they were a nation in a Pitt of despair, mourning their destruction.

The impossibility and improbability of Israel going back is the sign of the bloody Cross on their doors which pardoned them from destruction also by saving their first borns.

This "type" turning moment was the done deal that there was no turning back and the "anti-type" Cross as far as God is concerned was a point of no return. Hypothetical was no longer a practical choice, though many wanted to go back, history recounts otherwise, as they died in the desert (valley of decision).

This doesn't answer my question. Was Egypt completely destroyed?

God no longer saw and defined that temple as his Temple and this spiritually meant that they were separated from accessing their old ways in their dealings with God and in this regard they would continue abominations until it was eventually poured upon their heads in the form of death without Christ irrespective of 70AD. Just like they were falling like flies in the desert within the 40 years exodus, so too were the Jews without a legitimate temple falling like flies without Christ within the 40 years probationary period.

I agree. But a major event happened in 70AD, the destruction of that old obsolete temple. It happened Just as Christ prophesied it would.

matthew 24:1-2 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

God basically blocked their access and it was no longer availed to them, though they continued in their imagination just like the Israelites imagined if they could only strike up a deal with Pharoah to take them back.

They sacrificed imaginary animals in an imaginary temple between 30ad and 70ad? Because it was just in their imaginations? I completely disagree

The Israelites continued in the physical practice of the obsolete old covenant. It wasn't just there imagination, as you are supposing. Cleansing rituals, feasts, sacrifices all still occurred from 30AD to 70AD albeit of no significance to God after the cross.

Pharoah did not take them back, neither did God take them back after the blood was served on their door posts pointing to Christ's Cross.

Interestingly enough, they were taken back to Egypt AFTER the cross during the Jewish Roman war, fulfilling another part of the Law's curse:

Deuteronomy 28:68 And the Lord will bring you back in ships to Egypt, a journey that I promised that you should never make again; and there you shall offer yourselves for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves, but there will be no buyer.”

According to Josephus, during the Jewish Roman war, Jews were sent to Egypt as slaves and the buyers were few. Here are 2 quotes from Josephus:

"And as for the rest of the multitude that were above seventeen years old, he put them into bonds, and sent them to the Egyptian mines.”

"For they left only the populace, and sold the rest of the multitude, with their wives and children, and every one of them at a very low price, and that because such as were sold were very many, and the buyers were few"

Not an applicable question, considering they had no dealings with God when their access to the Holy of Holies was revoked after the temple vail was torn down the middle.

It absolutely is applicable. And it's a simple answer. NO. After 70 ad, Jews could no longer worship in accord with that old obsolete covenant, because the temple was gone.

The worship after the parting of the temple vail when Christ was crucified was a point of no return, for their access to God was revoked and so who exactly were they worshiping? It wasn't God.

I agree, that after the cross, the temple and old covenant were obsolete. BUT, Jews were still worshipping, in an obsolete fashion, in the temple from 30 ad to 70 ad. After 70 ad, it was impossible to worship according to the old obsolete covenant.

His ascension into heaven according to Daniel's prophesy was to be anointed as the Most High Kingly High Priest and given the keys of David in fulfilment to the prophesy of Isaiah 22-19-25. It was the fulfilment of Daniel 2:44 when the Son of Man approached the Ancient of Days and was given authority, glory and dominion (Kingdom).

So this uniquely points to one event at Christ's ascension, though he originally came from Heaven.

Not sure what this has to do with Christ already knowing the way to the most holy place prior to his ascension.

Christ's coming is when the books are opened and the Cross would have run its course in making disciples of all Gentiles. who are to be accounted for in the Book of Life. Then Christ's reign through his Cross ends after he accomplishes his mission, then the end of the harvest. Obviously, the end of the harvest didn't come in 70AD, as the books are still recording names.

Those whose names are in the book of life have been there since the foundation of the world.
Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

**Are there any scriptures that state names are ADDED to the book of life?

Also the falling away from the faith positions Christ coming to separate the Tares from amongst the wheat within his own Church and this is accompanied by Jesus saying will the Son of Man find faith in the world when he returns? The notion of a judgment of the Church and a time in history that indicates the lowest point of faith of no possibility of return to faith once given to the saints is not evident in 70AD premise presented, as Christianity flourished and has been flourishing for almost 2000 years. This alone debunks a 70AD return

Christianity flourishing for 2000 years debunks 70 ad return? I would disagree.
Notice the new Jerusalem, which occurs AFTER the dead are judged, provides healing to the nations
Revelation 22:2And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations

Outside of the New Jerusalem are sinners:
revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

How can there be nations needing healing, and sinners outside of the New Jerusalem AFTER the judgment of the dead?

Also the falling away from the faith positions Christ coming to separate the Tares from amongst the wheat within his own Church and this is accompanied by Jesus saying will the Son of Man find faith in the world when he returns?

I'm not understanding this statement. Can you rephrase? What is the actual question here?

The notion of a judgment of the Church and a time in history that indicates the lowest point of faith of no possibility of return to faith once given to the saints is not evident in 70AD premise presented, as Christianity flourished and has been flourishing for almost 2000 years

Christianity flourishing for 2000 years debunks 70 ad return? I would disagree.
Notice the new Jerusalem, which occurs AFTER the dead are judged, provides healing to the nations
Revelation 22:2And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations

Outside of the New Jerusalem are sinners:
revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

How can there be nations needing healing, and sinners outside of the New Jerusalem AFTER the judgment of the dead?

Unless you can prove that post 70AD Christianity is not the faith in Christ and that the increase of members is owing to another religion calling itself Christian.

Unless I can prove post 70ad Christianity is not Christian? this statement makes no logical sense.

We are told that when Christ returns many false Christs (leaders) and prophets (ministers) will emerge to create another religion.

Before or after Christ returns?

Either way you look at it, it would prove that 70AD was not his return.

Actually no, it doesn't at all. What modern Christianity does is takes Jesus words "this generation will not pass away" and manipulate them saying "that's not really what Jesus meant". Even though all other uses of "this generation" in the gospels point to the 1st century audience.

Consider history and I ask you don't you feel it deep down that 70AD was not Christ's return owing to a fallen state of the Church,

Who said Christ's return is owing to the fallen state of the church? That doesn't make any sense.

Christianity flourished after the Beast and the false prophet were removed in 70AD.

I agree

Jesus said I am going somewhere and that place you cannot come and then in the following chapter 14 he says I will not leave you as orphans for I will come back to you.

Read chapter 14 and discern that it is centrally focussed on Pentecost when the Spirit of Truth comes and that Jesus is making his home with the born again believers through the sanctioned Temple of God. In another place he states that he will reveal himself to them. This isn't some 40 years in the future, for it was from Pentecost onwards.
So Jesus is alluding to the disciples that them being taken to be with Jesus in his Father's house is the way Jesus took when he was crucified and this points to faith onto biological death. Yet Jesus says for I will not leave you without hope for on that day pointing to Pentecost you will know the truth and be provided the means to die whilst keeping the faith and in this regard I will come for you when you have found the way.

we will have to agree to disagree, as you have posted no supporting scripture for your opinions.

Saint Stephen found the way in Acts of the Apostles and Christ came for him on the day of redeeming his soul.

When Jesus died, he gave up spirit to the Father
Luke 23:46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” e When he had said this, he breathed his last.

But that does not mean Jesus went to heaven, to the Father
John 20:17 17Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father

If Jesus ascended AFTER the resurrection, why would Stephen ascend BEFORE the resurrection?
Acts 7:59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit

70AD has no grounds for the resurrection because it becomes implausible in many many circumstances that haven't even been covered to the depths of scrutiny within this thread.

Paul believed the resurrection was "about to be".
Acts 25:15 and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there is about to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked

When it comes to who to believe, you, who states the resurrection is 2000+ years later, or the apostle Paul who states the resurrection was "about to be", I'll stick with Paul.

 

[ToServe]

This is incorrect according to scripture.

1. Christ came to fulfill the law, not abolish it (Matthew 5:17)
2. It obsolete and ready to vanish away when Hebrews was written (Hebrews 8:13)

The Law of God will never vanish away for Jesus said heaven and earth will pass but the Law will remain. The passing fad of the Jewish practises did pass away, but the Law was strengthened by Christ by applying it and instructing how it ought to have been applied in the first place.

According to Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, where does sin get its power?

Sin got its power and entered the world according to the context of 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 by one man Adam in the fall and then it was removed by the last Adam who is Christ Jesus.

Hebrews 9:8-9 By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age).

The 1st sanctuary as where the ark of the covenant was under the Aaronic priesthood. The contrast is that now present to the Hebrews writer that 1st sanctuary was only an illustration to the anti-type sanctuary under the permanent royal priesthood of Melchizedek as the Temple himself. The 1st was not the one in Jerusalem at that time, for the author is making a contrasting comparison of the type which is Solomon’s Temple to the anti-type which is Christ the Temple.

I agree, but this doesn't address Matthew 5:17-18

Jesus is saying he came to properly establish the Laws through their proper application. Heaven and earth passing is a hyperbole to imply that even if the earth was gone the Laws would still be around. So to say that heaven and earth past away in 70AD metaphorically speaking, with the passing of the Law of God makes no sense since it is not implying that the Law of God will at any point in humanities entire existence cease to exist.

It did though. This is a historical fact. The old obsolete covenant continued to be performed in an old desolate temple, until it was taken away in 70 AD.

Regardless of it being performed, the emphasis here is that it was nullified at the Cross for Christ freed them from the Old Covenant priesthood that made a covenant of death by virtue of their misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the Laws of God.

Leviticus 8 was fulfilled when Christ was baptized. Christ is the temple that was anointed.

Christ is the Temple and he was anointed the Most High Priest when he entered the Holy of Holies with his own blood and ascended up to be given power, glory and an everlasting Kingdom.

Incorrect. The Far country Is heaven. Jesus would receive his kingdom when he would go to the Father.
Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven
there came one like a son of man, and he CAME TO the Ancient of Days
and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,

From the point of reference of the Living Word of God the Son, he came from above as Royalty and emptied himself by becoming like his servants. The far country is the earth that the Son came to claim his pearl of great price from. The harvest is plenty, but the workmen are few.

 

[ToServe]

"That day" is the appearing of the Lord. When jesus would come, paul would receive his reward.
2 Timothy 4:6-8 Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

Jesus punishes and rewards at his coming.
Revelation 22:12 “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.

Can we at least quote the verse in proper.

"Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness"

Present tense "now there is" for the subject Paul "for me"

"which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day"

The verb "award" to the subject in question is Paul, that is "to me" and on "that day"

"that day" noun (event) of the verb "award" to the subjective noun in question "me", who is Paul

That leaves us the subject specific event "that day" to be connected to the antecedent verse

"the time for my departure is near."

"the time" noun (event) associated with "my" noun (person) is connected to the verb in the present tense that expresses an action in the present tense which is "that day" to Paul the subject after he is put to death.

Offcourse, this didn't happen in 70AD, rather it happened immediate to Paul's departure.

Is there a turn criteria that is implicitly mentioned?

the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.

Now we need a second witness in the Acts of the Apostles.

Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55-56)

While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7:59-60)

After the tombs of the Old Covenant Daniel's people were opened in Matthew 27:51-53 after Christ's resurrection as foretold in Revelation 14, the first fruits were the first to be redeemed from the earth's harvest. Then after these 144,000 were reaped from the harvest as first fruits, then Stephan was the first to be redeemed as the New Covenant witness full of the Holy Spirit. That subject specific day came for Saint Stephan first then it came for Paul as a thief in the night.

Revelation 14 has the first fruits being reaped before the Gospel goes out to the Gentile nations abroad and this explicitly reveals two groups of people being raised. Daniel's people who were waiting in their lots were mass resurrected as prophesied in Daniel 12:1-5. Christ's people are being raised individually on the day of their departure from the body, that is to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Offcourse there is also a mass translation at the end of the new covenant age just before the books are opened, portraying those who are blessed who remain onto 1335 symbolic days as the last good tasting wine of the wedding supper of the Lamb of God.

We need a third witness to present the to death do us apart turn criteria, as in all men are destined to die once then judgement.

But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

The antecedent being the congregation that is being preached to as being the recipients of the message and subjects to the turn criteria after Christ's resurrection. It would not make sense if Paul says each in turn when the other party is Christ, since each implies of those subjects being spoken to.

The verse you posted, 2 Timothy 4:6-8, does not say that.

Think deep and you will get it.

Incorrect, another strawman argument. I should really be keeping a tally of these, as I have lost count.

Preterists believe Paul died before Christ returned, and was raised from the grave to heaven to receive his eternal inheritance at Jesus' coming around 70AD

Preterists overwhelming say that the Bible is silent on the afterlife and it was a spiritual resurrection and not a bodily resuscitation.

Preterists believe from that point on (70AD) any believer who dies goes straight to heaven
Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven telling me to write, “Blessed are the dead—those who die in the Lord from this moment on.”

I beg to differ on what you have been told. Could you please provide links of Preterists who explicitly state that they believe in a bodily resuscitation.

 

[claninja]

Can we least quote the verse in proper.

I copied and pasted from the ESV translation. So not sure what you mean by proper.

Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness"

Present tense "now there is" for the subject Paul "for me"

2 Timothy 4:8 Now there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness

1.)"from now on"= greek adjective
2.)"is laid up"= preset tense middle/passive verb
3.) it is NOT Paul that "is laid up", it is the crown of righteousness. The crown of righteousness is the subject. Paul is NOT the subject.

So presently, before Paul had even died/departed there was a crown presently laid up for Paul. This is consistent with paul's other teachings of already having the blessings of heaven.

Ephesians 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed (past tense) us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ

Ephesians 2:6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated (past tense) us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus

which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day"

The verb "award" to the subject in question is Paul, that is "to me" and on "that day"

"that day" noun (event) of the verb "award" to the subjective noun in question "me", who is Paul

Paul is not the subject, Paul is the object of the action of the Lord. It is the Lord who will award paul.

2 Timothy 4:8 which the Lord (subject), the righteous judge, will award (future tense verb) to me (object) on that day, not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

There was presently a reward laid up for Paul. On "that day", The Lord would award Paul the crown of righteousness that "is laid up".

Now we must determine what is "that day". Is it Pauls' departure or the Lord's appearing?

Paul would receive his award from the Lord on "that day", but not only Paul, but also ALL those that Loved the Lord's appearing. Did ALL those that loved the Lord's appearing receive their reward when paul died?

That leaves us the subject specific event "that day" to be connected to the antecedent verse

Subject specific event? This is not a rule in grammar, so I don't know what your talking about.

"the time for my departure is near."

"the time" noun (event) associated with "my" noun (person) is connected to the verb in the present tense that expresses an action in the present tense which is "that day" to Paul the subject after he is put to death.

If the red highlighted below was not part of the sentence, I would say you have a point. HOWEVER, Paul specifically states on "that day" not only is he getting his reward, but ALL those who have loved his appearing. So if "that day" = Paul's departure then ALL who loved his appearing also receive their reward on they day Paul died.

2 timothy 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

So I disagree with your interpretation. "that day" = the coming of the Lord, otherwise believers were awarded by God at Paul's death. This would not be consistent with scripture, as Christ rewards at his coming.

Revelation 12:12 “Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done.

Offcourse, the didn't happen in 70AD, rather it happened immediate to Paul's departure.

If it didn't happen in 70AD then someone was wrong, as the coming of the son of man and the angels gathering the elect would occur immediately after the temple destruction/tribulation.

Matthew 24:29-21 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And 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.

The temple was destroyed in around 70AD, this is a fact.

Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55-56)

I agree that AFTER Jesus resurrected, he ascended to the Father's right hand.

While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7:59-60)

This doesn't say Stephen went to heaven. In fact, Jesus also gave up his spirit to the Father when he died:
Luke 23:46 Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last.

Even though Jesus gave up his spirit to the Father, we know Jesus did not go heaven upon death. Jesus went to heaven AFTER the resurrection.
John 20:17 17Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’

After the tombs of the Old Covenant Daniel's people were opened in Matthew 27:51-53 after Christ's resurrection

This verse does not say that those that came out of the tomb went to heaven. In fact, this story is mentioned no where else in the Bible. All this tells us is that something like Lazarus happened, after Jesus was raised.

John 11:43-44 When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth.

Notice that believers AFTER the cross had fallen asleep, just as the saints had fallen asleep before they were raised, not to heaven, but to walk around.
Matthew 27:52 And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.
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

Revelation 14, the first fruits were the first to be redeemed from the earth's harvest. Then after these 144,000 were reaped from the harvest as first fruits, then Stephan was the first to be redeemed as the New Covenant witness full of the Holy Spirit. That subject specific day came for Saint Stephan first then it came for Paul as a thief in the night.

Revelation 14 isn't about the 144,000 going to heaven. The body of Christ had those things prior to going to heaven.

1 Corinthians 6:20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
James 1:18 He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

Revelation 14:3,4 except the 144,000 who had been bought from the earth They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

Christ's people are being raised individually on the day of their departure from the body, that is to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Jesus stated this followers would be repaid AT THE RESURRECTION OF THE JUST
Luke 14:14 But when you host a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind, and you will be blessed. Since they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”

Paul, MANY YEARS AFTER THE CROSS, was still waiting for the resurrection of the Just to receive his reward. But he knew it would be in his lifetime, hence he states "about to be"
Acts 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there is about to be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust

The context of 2 Corinthians 5 is resurrection. The spirit was the guarantee of the resurrection.
2 Corinthians 5:5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.

Offcourse there is also a mass translation at the end of the new covenant age just before the books are opened, portraying those who are blessed who remain onto 1335 symbolic days as the last good tasting wine of the wedding supper of the Lamb of God.

The wedding supper occured AFTER Jerusalem was destroyed:
Matthew 22:7-10 The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.’ And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests.

Revelation 19:2, 7 for his judgments are true and just; for he has judged the great prostitute who corrupted the earth with her immorality, and has avenged on her the blood of his servants.” 7Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come,

But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

The antecedent being the congregation that is being preached to as being the recipients of the message and subjects to the turn criteria after Christ's resurrection. It would not make sense if Paul says each in turn when the other party is Christ, since each implies that subjects being spoken to.

The sentence simply states: Each however in the own order, the first fruit Christ, then those the Christ at the coming of him. It makes perfect logical sense. "Each" applies to 2 subjects: Christ and those of Christ. Christ was the first to raise to eternal life, then when Jesus comes on the last day, he will raise up those who belong to him.

John 6:40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

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

Acts 24:15 and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there is about to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked

Preterists overwhelming say that the Bible is silent on the afterlife and it was a spiritual resurrection and not a bodily resuscitation.

The preterist believes in a bodily resurrection, albeit that body is spiritual.

1 Corinthians 15:52-44 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

I beg to differ on what you have been told. Could you please provide links of Preterists who explicitly state that hey believe in a bodily resuscitation.

Here are 3 links

David Curtis (preterist)
https://www.preteristarchive.com/Hyper/1999_curtis_resurrection.html

Kenneth Gentry (partial preterist)
https://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2003_gentry_christs-resurrection.html

Ed Stevens (Preterist)
http://lastdayspast.com/wp-content/...013.07.28-Refuting_Resur_Error-Ed-Stevens.pdf

 

[ToServe]

The Author of Hebrews moves your supposed "unmovable goal post".
Hebrews 6:4-6
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age— and then have fallen away, to be restored

Quote the entire paragraph in question -

To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.

Many parables that Jesus taught about the faithful and unfaithful servants and virgins who kept or failed to keep the faith at the midnight hour calling. The parable of the Tares being separated from the Wheat is speaking of the members within the body of Christ, the believers.

Jesus said to keep the faith onto death and I will give you a crown of Life, lest you go off naked and in the outer darkness to be lumped with the unbelievers.

So you believe that no one who has become a Christian has fallen away from Christianity?

Was the body of Christ (those born of the free woman) persecuted by Jews (old covenant born of the slave woman)? YES

Did any of those who once tasted the holy spirit, return to the Law for righteousness? YES

And no I do not place more emphasis on the law as you are falsely accusing. You are either misunderstanding the preterist position or creating a strawman argument.

They have fallen away, but the main emphasis is, have they died in a fallen state or not and this is the midnight hour's calling, that is, 'that day' for the servant, whether they are categorised by Christ as either faithful or wicked and if wicked, then their portions will be appointed with the unbelievers. Jesus is saying a servant who does not finish their race of faith onto biological death will be treated as an unbeliever who has forfeited their salvation by treading under foot the Son of God and by insulting the Spirit of Grace.

The sons born of the slave woman always persecuted the sons born of the free woman. Many of those of the free woman returned to the law and their actions were judged as treading under foot the Son of God and by insulting the Spirit of Grace. They fell under the curse that is sanctioned under the New Covenant, because once they entered an agreement, then their judgement was based on that newly ratified contract on the precious Blood of Jesus.

If you are saying that because once believers who turned and done a complete 180 to revert back to the Mosaic were judged under the curses of the Old Covenant, then how is that not placing more emphasis on the law. Was there an exit clause in the New Covenant agreement they entered that said that if they revert back to the Mosaic Law that they will be judged by its curses?

Absolutely not!

If you say yes, then you make the New Covenant Agreement they entered as a none ratified agreement and doing so implicates that you are placing more emphasis on the Law of Moses than the Law of Christ.

You don't have to believe me. But I ask that you believe scripture

But do you not believe Paul that those of the 1st covenant were persecuting those of the 2nd covenant? Do you believe that Hagar was dead when Sara was alive? or Do you believe that they lived at the same time? Did Ishmael die before persecuting Jacob or did they live at the same time?

Galatians 4:24-26,28-29 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. IT IS THE SAME NOW

Both Hagar's son and Sara's son were alive at the same time and Ishmael persecuted Jacob, yet as it stood, God only had a contractual agreement with one son, the son of the free woman when they both existed. There is a big difference when you try and eronously lump the once believers who entered an Agreement with God owing to the free woman (New Covenant) with the unbelieving Jews who were always of the slave woman who had no contractual agreement with God and therefore no ties. Sure, the unbelievers who were always of the slave woman were condemned already, but scripture is focused on the believers who backslide to the Mosaic Law and thereby are judged under Christ's Law because there is no exit clause once one enters the New Covenant with God as is highlighted in Hebrews 6:4-8.

You don't have to believe me. But I ask that you believe scripture.

Romans 8:3-4 And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

It is speaking of the Law of Christ, his commandments as the New Moses, who is the Prophet to Come in Deuteronomy to replace Moses and to pave the way for the application of the Law of God through the new form of worship in the Spirit, within the temple of the body. You are not suggesting that the Temple of the Holy Spirit was fully meeting the righteousness requirement of the Mosaic Law?

That implication borders on an emphasis being placed on the Mosaic Law. We today are also fully meeting the righteousness requirements of the Law, through the application of Christ's commandments and instructions. Read John 14 and discern this is speaking of the Law of Christ within the New Covenant Temple construct and has nothing to do with the Mosaic Law.

This is absolutely false, using 1 Corinthians 15:23 we can see that Christ is the first fruit.

1.) this is not a semitic language, its greek.
2.) the greek word for "first fruit" in 1 Corinthians 15:23 is SINGULAR
3.) The greek literally reads "in the own order first fruit Christ THEN those the Christ at the coming of him"

Christ Jesus who is God in flesh is the Lord of the Harvest and he is the one sending first John the Baptist and then his disciples to work on his harvest, for he said the harvest is plentiful but the workmen are few. The Lord of the Harvest cannot be the fruit of the harvest, for it is not him who is being redeemed from the earth, for this is what a fruit is, an offering to the Lord of the Harvest. Jesus cannot be an offering to himself, can he?

This is absolutely incorrect, again using 1 Corinthians 15:23, we can see that Christ is the firstfruit. The SINGULAR noun First fruit comes before Christ in the sentence structure. These 2 nouns are followed by THEN.

ἕκαστος (each) δὲ (however) ἐν (in) τῷ (the) ἰδίῳ (own) τάγματι (order) ἀπαρχὴ (firstfruit) Χριστός (Christ) ἔπειτα (THEN) οἱ (those) τοῦ (of/the) Χριστοῦ (Christ) ἐν(in) τῇ (the) παρουσίᾳ (coming) αὐτοῦ (of him)·

Christ is the forerunner to the resurrection as the Lord of the Harvest, for he is the King of kings. The firstfruits is what is offered to him as those Old Covenant Saints of Daniel 12:1-4, who are raised as the many stars (Angels) of Heaven who accompany him as the White Cloud.

The sacrifice is not the fruit, the resurrection is, of whom Christ was the first to rise, then at his coming those who belong to him.

Christ is the Temple as described in Revelation and the Temple cannot be the fruit offering from the harvest. The fruit offering of the harvest is what are Living Stones, who are the created beings. Jesus is not a created being as to identify him as a fruit offering within the Temple of God.

Revelation 21:22
I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its Temple.

Jesus said destroy this Temple and I will raise it up in three days. Jesus is the Temple owing to the Temple of the Holy Spirit who paved the way to the new form of worship in the Spirit that brings his creation in the Temple, meaning to him as Living Stones and those Living Stones are the Daily Sacrifice that is being offered within the New Testament Temple construct as a fruit of the harvest.

Romans 12:1
Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship.

By now I'm wondering how many more strawman arguments are going to produce?


spring/summer feasts

Passover (14th day of Nissan): Christ crucified

first fruits (Day after the Sabbath of Passover;3rd day after passover): Christ rose on the day of first fruits

feast of weeks (50 days post first fruits): Christ sent the spirit on the feast of weeks.

No straws just hard facts that underpin the fallacy of the 70AD resurrection as something invented to keep alive two Covenants, which would place Hagar's sons and Sara's sons being in contractual agreement with God at the same time, whilst the other is persecuting the sons of the free woman. What we know is that God sent away the son of the slave woman and made it clear when the sons of the free woman arrived on the scene that the sons of the slave woman was not welcomed and had no dealings with God or his promises.

Christ reign never ends.

When he returns he would deliver the Kingdom to God the Father as in mission accomplished. Paul states that he will continue to reign until he achieves this. So if Jesus returned in 70AD, this implies that his reign ended and the books were opened. We know that this claim to be utterly false, notwithstanding that Preterist deny that Christ's reign ends, but their eschatological implications make it this way whether they like it or not.

I believe my name was recorded in the book of life before the foundation of the world:
Ephesians 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love

A person must be born and to biologically die whilst keeping the faith. Revelation 6:9 instructs those departed under the Altar that they must also wait for their brothers to die like manner, why?

The free will agency is what is being played out and you cannot say, God, banks everyone he wants without letting it play out. Hence the books do not get opened until everyone who is to be written in the book of Life is born and is raised on the last day.

The books have not been opened and therefore Jesus did not return in 70AD.

Prior to 70AD no one went to heaven. All went to sheol. When Christ came in 70AD he raised the dead to judgment. Now, AFTER 70 ad, when man dies he does not go to sheol, instead he appears before God and is judged (believers to life, unbelievers to annihilation).

Hebrews 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” “Blessed indeed,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow them!”

This happens before 70AD after the Old Covenant firstfruits were sealed/raised in Matthew 27:51-53.

No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth.4These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

Notice they are the firstfruits offering to God and Jesus Christ, hence Jesus cannot be the firstfruits.

Also the Revelation 14:13 applies when?

Then I saw another angel flying in midair, and he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth—to every nation, tribe, language and people.

So before the Gospel goes out to the Gentile nations, the 144,000 OC firstfruits are raised as an offering to God and Jesus Christ and therefore making the rendering of 1 Corinthians 15:23 confirm that the firstfruits are those OC Daniel's people who were waiting in their lot for Messiah to come, to be the first to be redeemed from the earth.

Jesus is not being offered as a firstfruits, for the offering of the firstfruits is for him and he is the Temple to whom they are being offered.

So Revelation 14:13 only applies before the Gospel goes out to the Gentile nations and not after or some future time in 70AD.

Scripture, please, that states when the books are opened the harvest ends?

Do you believe Christians go to heaven when they die? if so you believe the resurrection is past and Christ has come. If you don't believe Christians go to heaven upon death, then you are still waiting for Christ to come and the resurrection to occur. The latter would be more consistent with your belief.

Why would Christians ascend to heaven BEFORE the resurrection if Christ ascended to heaven AFTER the resurrection?

Faithful Christians do go to heaven. Christ comes at the end of the harvest when the wine is depleting and what remains is the good tasting wine at the wedding supper of the lamb at the gleaning. Christ said will the Son of Man find faith on earth when he returns which points to the falling away from the faith after the Living Stones as the Daily Sacrifice are removed and replaced by the Abomination of Desolation by the many sons of perdition who overrun his Church and rape the denominations (women) (Zechariah 14:1-4).

 

[ToServe]

I disagree with your interpretation of Zechariah 14:1-4 as being about the "end times" Church. There are 2 Jerusalem's mentioned in the Bible:

Yes, there are two Jerusalems, but we need to identify which Jerusalem is Zechariah informing us about. The Jerusalem that is portrayed in Zechariah is the spiritual Jerusalem that is built upon the Cornerstone and this is how we know.

We know this is the spiritual Jerusalem because God goes out to fight against those nations as he fights on a Day of Great Battle of God Almighty. For the earthly Jerusalem 'type', the Lord is sending the nations to completely destroy and to annihilate it, whereas in the 'anti-type' the Lord is pictured coming to the defence and rescue of Jerusalem and this is how we know that it is the 'anti-type' that is being spoken off, because the Lord's peace comes and rests with those who had not been exiled from the City.

The Earthly Jerusalem
Luke 21:20 When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near

This is the 'type' being spoken off because all inhabitants were cut-off from the city and there was left none that were not taken from the city, unlike the 'anti-type' who had people that were not taken from the City (Zechariah 14:2).

Galatians 4:25,30 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”

As soon as the child of Promise Jesus Christ came into the world, God immediately sanctioned the getting rid of the slave women and her children. Jesus said,

John 5:40,43-47
yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?
“But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?”

Jesus right there and then is reprimanding the Jews who abide in the someone who is Moses who came in his own name, whilst seeking Moses' glory, yet rejecting the glory that comes from the only God Jesus Christ.

Jesus was setting the line of demarcation right there and then, by instructing the Jews to separate their hopes from Moses who had come in his own name and to immediately come to him (Jesus) to have life. This is proof that God was not in the business of waiting around for 40 years when the Seed of Promise was on the scene to still hold onto the children of the slave women, rather he would immediately get rid of them along with their agreement/covenant and to place them on probationary. When an employer places a full-time worker on probationary, then the intent is to get rid of them after the period of 40 years grace and at the same time have nothing to do with them and their hopes in an another who is Moses.

Zechariah 14:1-2 A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls. I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city

But the rest of the people will not be taken from the City. Why?
Because the Lord comes to defend and to rescue them in a Day of Great Battle of God Almighty.
The Jerusalem spoken off is the 'anti-thesis' Jerusalem that comprises of many women (denominations) and many houses (Temples/Church congregations).

The Lord sends the spiritual army of the enemy to infiltrate the City within its very walls in th form of those who received the knowledge of the truth but yet had pleasure in unrighteousness and served a lie. These Man/peoples of Sin are the many sons of perdition, like the Judas Iscariots of the world who are let loose in his own Church Jerusalem to rat out the Tares from amongst the Wheat in the climax finale towards the end of the harvest, where Jesus says will he find faith in the world when he returns.

Luke 18:6-8
And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

The coming of Christ is on a Day of Great Battle to weed out the goats from the sheep within his own Jerusalem City so that he dispenses judgement upon the many sons of perditon by the breath of his mouth and the splender of his coming.

God uses a smite then to heal approach upon his Church Jerusalem and the entire chapter of Zechariah reveals that after God removes the many sons of perdition from within his Church City Jerusalem, then his presence remains amongst those faithful that have not been removed from His City, as his presence shall reach onto AZAL (in Persian it means eternity).

The Heavenly Jerusalem
Galatians 4:26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem
Zechariah 14:11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

The presence of the Lord did not rest upon the Jerusalem 'type' that was destroyed in 70AD, for it was thrown into the lake of fire with the 1st Beast (kingdom under Herodian Dynasty) and the false prophet (Pharisaical religious System). The 'anti-type' which is the Jerusalem of God was blessed by the presence of God after the purging was complete on a Day of Great Battle.

Scripture does not say "Will not leave a living stone upon another in you". You are adding this to scripture by your own personal interpretation.

Go back to your original post and look what you quoted. I am only responding to your quote and it is a word for word from your original post.

The type is the earthly temple, which was destroyed in 70AD, the anti-type is the spiritual temple built by Christ which will never be destroyed, nor can anything evil enter it, nor can it be trampled. Just as Jerusalem was destroyed in Zechariah 14:1-4, so was the earthly Jerusalem destroyed in 70AD. Just as the Jerusalem in Zechariah 14:11 will never be destroyed, so to will the heavenly Jerusalem never be destroyed.

That is correct the anti-type is the spiritual temple built by Christ which will never be destroyed and Zechariah 14 explicitly informs us that the City in question will continue even after the Day of Great Battle (purging) where the faithful will not be removed from the City and the Lord's presence will come and rest with them and be with them forever, for his presence shall reach onto AZAL (eternity).

The heavenly Jerusalem cannot be shaken nor destroyed, unlike the earthly Jerusalem.
Hebrews 12:28-29 Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our “God is a consuming fire.” f

Though the City of Zechariah 14 was purged, yet it was not destroyed as there were people still in residence within its very walls that were not removed from it.

It is the unbelieving Jews who persecuted the church in the Thessalonica and the surrounding areas (Berea). This is the context of 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

You cannot have it both ways. First you say that those letters address the members of those congregations to whom the letters were for, who had reverted back to the Mosaic Law influences and then you bring in another party, the sons of the slave women who are not even a consideration to the letters as those letters concern the Church and its members within the Church who started to be swayed by those within the Church to revert back to practising Jewish customs with the Judaisers.

That is why Paul addresses them as follows -

Galatians 3:1-3
You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh?

The Church in Thessalonica contended with Judaisers amongst their own membership. The effective way to introduce Judaic practices within the Chruch is not by unbelievers who are the sons of the slave woman but by the sons of the free woman who had access to congregational members and who wielded their power of influence to sway member opinion. An outside attack or influence would be like a Muslim trying to sway the opinion within a Church congregation and we know that this is not going to happen.

Acts 17:1, 5, 13 When Paul and his companions had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. But other Jews were jealous; so they rounded up some bad characters from the marketplace, formed a mob and started a riot in the city. They rushed to Jason’s house in search of Paul and Silas in order to bring them out to the crowd. But when the Jews in Thessalonica learned that Paul was preaching the word of God at Berea, some of them went there too, agitating the crowds and stirring them

This is a completely different context that you are cutting and pasting. Jealous Jews are those of the slave woman who wanted to hinder the Gospel and yet how could this external enemy force influence the members within the Church, requiring Paul and the Apostles to reprimand their own members by being swept up in this rigmarole.

1 thessalonians 2:14-15 For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone

Now, this is a completely different context again and these are not the unbelieving Jews but are believing Jews who are not jealous of the Gospel being preached, as they are said to be imitators of God's Churches in Judae, which are in Christ Jesus.

This context fits Galatians 4:24-29. This is where Paul describes those under the old covenant of slavery (earthly Jerusalem) were persecuting those who are free under the new covenant (Jerusalem above).

Yes and so?

This is the true form of worship under the new covenant (anti-type), of which the old covenant was only a picture (type). I'm sure we agree on this aspect.

The Old Covenant pointing to the place where the Ark of the Covenant lay. The 1st Temple is the comparison and for the purpose of illustration of what was already present, that is the anti-type Temple. Jesus is that Temple and the faithful in Christ are also of the Temple of God and so the type cannot exist when the anti-type was established by God, no more can Moses exist whilst Christ is present and neither can Moses be a path to hope whilst Christ's Hope was established from that moment onward, neither can the sons of the slave women be allowed in God's presence whilst the Son of Promise was present.

Many aspects of the 70AD narrative are really just failed eschatological theories that do not have any grounds scholastically, in order to be taken seriously and when scrutinised to the depths of exegetical studies, they are more akin to out of context assertions and uncorroborated claims that are disharmonious to the many implicit Apostolic teachings, in addition, compounded by the many consequences resulting from those fallacious claims.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes, there are two Jerusalems, but we need to identify which Jerusalem is Zechariah informing us about. The Jerusalem that is portrayed in Zechariah is the spiritual Jerusalem that is built upon the Cornerstone and this is how we know.

We know this is the spiritual Jerusalem because God goes out to fight against those nations as he fights on a Day of Great Battle of God Almighty. For the earthly Jerusalem 'type', the Lord is sending the nations to completely destroy and to annihilate it, whereas in the 'anti-type' the Lord is pictured coming to the defence and rescue of Jerusalem and this is how we know that it is the 'anti-type' that is being spoken off, because the Lord's peace comes and rests with those who had not been exiled from the City..

Were you and/or others aware there are 2 different Greek words for Jerusalem in the NT?


Is the GREAT CITY in Revelation symbolizing the LAKE OF FIRE?
Why 2 different greek words for Jerusalem in NT?

2414. Hierosoluma
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierosolyma (i.e. Jerushalaim},
the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2419.
G2414 matches the Greek (Hierosolyma), which occurs 59 times in 59 verses

2419. Hierousalem
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierusalem (i.e. Jerushalem), the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2414.
G2419 matches the Greek (Ierousalēm), which occurs 83 times in 80 verses

And also in the OT:

3389 Yruwshalaim yer-oo-shaw-lah'-im rarely Yruwshalayim {yer-oo- shaw-lah'-yim};
a dual (in allusion to its two main hills (the true pointing, at least of the former reading, seems to be that of 3390));
3390 Yruwshalem yer-oo-shaw-lame' (Chald)
Jerusalem = "teaching of peace" the chief city of Palestine and capital of the united kingdom and the nation of Judah after the split

Were you and/or others aware that there appears to be 2 different greek words for "Jerusalem" in the NT?

G2419 (KJV)

2419. Hierousalem
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierusalem (i.e. Jerushalem), the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2414.
G2419 matches the Greek (Ierousalēm), which occurs 83 times in 80 verses

TR — 83x in 3 unique form(s)
Ἰερουσαλὴμ — 40x
Ἰερουσαλήμ — 41x
Ἱερουσάλημ — 2x

This one is really interesting.

It is used just 1 each in Matthew and Mark, [none in John]
the rest in Luke, Acts, Epistles and Revelation

Matthew 23:37
O Jerusalem, G2419 Jerusalem, G2419 thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mark 11:1
And when they came nigh to Jerusalem, G2419 unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth forth two of his disciples,

Luke 13:34
O Jerusalem, G2419 Jerusalem, G2419 which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
Luke 21:20
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem G2419 compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem G2419 shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Luke 23:28
But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, G2419 weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.

It is mentioned 3 times in Revelation

Revelation 3:12
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, G2419 which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Revelation 21:2
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, G2419 coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Revelation 21:10
And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, G2419 descending out of heaven from God,

This other word for "Jerusalem"

G2414 (KJV)

2414. Hierosoluma
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierosolyma (i.e. Jerushalaim}, the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2419.
G2414 matches the Greek (Hierosolyma), which occurs 59 times in 59 verses

TR — 59x in 4 unique form(s)
Ἰεροσόλυμα — 2x

Ἱεροσόλυμα — 32x

Ἱεροσολύμοις — 14x

Ἱεροσολύμων — 11x

1st time used:

Matthew 2:1
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, G2414

Last time used in Gospels

John 12:12
On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, G2414

Last times used in NT. It is used in only 3 verses outside of the Gospels and Book of Acts, all in Galatians:

Galatians 1:17
17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem G2414 to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem G2414 to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
Galatians 2:1
Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem G2414 with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also..

 

[ToServe]

Were you and/or others aware there are 2 different Greek words for Jerusalem in the NT?

No, not in particular to exegetical studies.

2414. Hierosoluma
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierosolyma (i.e. Jerushalaim},
the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2419.
G2414 matches the Greek (Hierosolyma), which occurs 59 times in 59 verses

2419. Hierousalem
of Hebrew origin (3389); Hierusalem (i.e. Jerushalem), the capitol of Palestine:--Jerusalem. Compare 2414.
G2419 matches the Greek (Ierousalēm), which occurs 83 times in 80 verses

After you bring up this point of two distinct words in the Greek, I immediately focussed on the culture of the day and how they addressed people.

Jesus was a Galilean of Galilee. There would be two words in Greek that would delineate the subject who is the Galilean from the object that is Galilee.

As for the two distinct words for Jerusalem, we can draw from their cultural point of view that when a person or people were being addressed, they would be addressed from the town they originated from, as in Nazarene of Nazareth. The quoted verse below suggests this type of language discourse being used within that culture -

O Jerusalem, G2419 Jerusalem, G2419 thou that killest the prophets,

This is appealing to the subjects of Jerusalem the city (object), as in "oh you Jerusalemites of Jerusalem."

 

[ToServe]

The type (old covenant worship through the temple) was destroyed/cast out in 70AD. The anti-type (new covenant; worship through the spirit; spiritual temple of Christ) can never be destroyed, it is eternal. Nothing evil can enter the spiritual Jerusalem as you are claiming. That is a false statement. Only those who are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world can enter the true Jerusalem, of which the earthly Jerusalem was only a picture.

Revelation 21:27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

The Church Jerusalem of Zechariah was purged and not destroyed and there the Lord is said to reside amongst those who had not been cut-off from the City. The entire context of Zechariah 14 reveals that the Lord' presence is in that City and this cannot be the 70AD city of the unbelieving sons of Hagar.

A generation is about 40-70 years, not 2000. The greek word for generation in the olivet discourse is singular, not plural. It is the 1st century generation that would experience all the things of the olivet discourse. It is the generation (singular 40-70 years) that would see these things, not generations (plural over 2000 years).

The word generation is generic for peoples of a certain age during when Christ was present and from that moment onwards. This alludes to the New Testament generation as compared to the generation before Christ that was under the Mosaic Law.

Please provide scripture that states the Law is the shadow of Moses. Scripture clearly states that the Laws from the Law of Moses are a shadow of Christ:
Colossians 2:17 Therefore let no one judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a festival, a New Moon, or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the body that casts it belongs to Christ.

Moses passed and with his passing the New Moses was the Lord to come in the name of God the Father.

As a preterist I would disagree with you. Can you provide support for your claim on this "majority". As a preterist, I do associate the resurrection of 70AD with the raising of the biologically dead to spiritual bodies, So your blanket, generic statement is false.

Go and listen to Don Preston and his circle of friends amongst other leading preterists who come to their gatherings and you will get the other leading names and their view of the resurrection.

 

[ToServe]

I agree. and what is the judgment for not following the law? They would be destroyed.

Deuteronomy 28:45 All these curses will come on you. They will pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you did not obey the Lord your God and observe the commands and decrees he gave you.

Whose Law?

The judgement was for not fulfilling the Law in them within the context of the Holy Spirit Temple, through the anointed Most High Priest of the New Covenant Jesus Christ.

They did not obey the Lord your Jesus Christ and for that matter the Stone the builders rejected became their wrecking Stone.

They failed to observe the demands and decrees Jesus Christ gave them and they were -

You will not see me until you say blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
No other sign will be given this generation (before the Cross) except the Sign of Jonah.

The Old nation under the Old Aaronic priesthood was ended at the Cross as far as God was concerned. After the Cross he gave them a probationary grace period as the many Gentiles who trample his two witnesses (Church) within the generation after the Cross.

Israel was not destroyed instantly for disobeying the Law. God allowed the northern 10 tribes to disobey the law for 390 years before being destroyed by Assyria and the 2 southern tribes (Jerusalem) 40 years before being destroyed by Babylon.
Ezekiel 4:5 I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the people of Israel.

You will bear the sin of the people of Israel through captivity.

Jesus beared the sin of Daniel's people on the Cross, pointing to the sign of Jonah.

So the context is to bear the sin.

Ezekiel 4:6-8 After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the people of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year. 7Turn your face toward the siege of Jerusalem and with bared arm prophesy against her. 8I will tie you up with ropes so that you cannot turn from one side to the other until you have finished the days of your siege.

To bear the sin.
Were the unbelieving Jews bearing their sins for 40 years?

Absolutely not!

Jesus bore their sins on the Cross in one day as was prophesied in Old Testament scriptures.

Zechariah 3:9
For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall beseven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day.

So to, God did not destroy Jerusalem Instantly for disobeying Jesus, but allowed 40 years for Jerusalem (from 30AD to 70AD) for rejecting Christ (disobeying Deuteronomy 18). At the end of the 40 years, the destruction according the Law came upon Jerusalem for disobeying Christ according to Deuteronomy 18.

Destruction came by the Stone and not by the Mosaic Law.

This does not answer why either Corinthians or Hebrews states IN THE PRESENT TENSE that the old covenant was "fading away", "growing old", or "aging"

Their old covenant ways were fading, but to God they ended in that single day on the Cross.

 

[ToServe]

Right, no one's arguing that people erroneously apply the law. Jesus makes that very clear multiple times and Paul makes that clear multiple times. However, The Law is good, and sin used what is good to bring about death. It is not Law that does this, it is sin.

The Law was used to expose sin in order to condemn its workings to death. Sin used the subjects of the Law so that on the surface it appeared to be in obedience to the Law, yet under the surface sin flourished and used the Law in a way to justify its existence by the pithy form of sacrifices in an external temple whilst condemning the inner Temple of the heart which brings the greater condemnation before God in the first place.

So the method by which the Law was applied under the Mosaic Law priesthood became a curse because sin which was the subjects, found a way to circumvent the Law of God by a religious system of worship that was fleshly, owing to a heart of stone.

Romans 7:13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful

Sin was able to defeat Paul as a Pharisee of Pharisees because it took the commandments which were Holy and deceived the subject in believing they were saved in their spiritually uncircumcised state. So sin through the Old Covenant Mosaic application of worship worked death in the subjects by which was good that is the Law.

Old Covenant Law is tied to a fleshly form of worship, whereas the Law according to Paul is spiritual and requires spiritual application in order to route out sin (Romans 7:14).

BUT that is not what you stated earlier, you stated "there is NO VERSE THAT EVEN MILDLY HINTS that the mosaic Law was GOOD" This is a false statement.

Mosaic Law is not the Law of God which is spiritual. The Mosaic Law in its application was not good at all. Jesus corrected the priesthood, who were the subjects of sin who applied it to their own destructiom.

An eye for an eye amongst many unsavory applications that God had not intended his Law to be. When the Aaronic priesthood was let loose they started to make a covenant with death by way of their application of the Law and this had nothing to do with God.

Because the Law is, in Fact good. It is sin that uses what is good to bring about death.

Romans 7:12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

The sin that uses the Law are the subjects of the priesthood within the Mosaic Covenant that apply the Law not as intended by which it brings death. They make a Mosaic Covenant with death and not God, for God is the God of the living and not the God of the dead.

 

[ToServe]

This doesn't answer my question. Was Egypt completely destroyed?

Egypt was a wreck after the seven plagues and the citizens were utterly demoralized. How would you define destroyed?

Destroyed is not annihilated.

I agree. But a major event happened in 70AD, the destruction of that old obsolete temple. It happened Just as Christ prophesied it would.

matthew 24:1-2 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

Sure, the destruction of the 'type' temple was destroyed in 70 AD as prophesied, but the coming of Christ is after the attack on his 'anti-type' Temple by the many gentile nations that come to full and who infiltrate it within its very walls. Christ's coming is when the man (sons) of sin (perdition) sit in the 'anti-type' temple of God and claim to be of God within the context of the many false Christ's (religious heads) and the many false prophets (religious ministers) who replace the Living Stones Daily Sacrifice to the Abomination of Desolation (what ever that is). Christ comes to avenge his Church City Jerusalem (anti-type) on a Day of Great Battle within the context of the Falling Away from the faith to remove the many sons of perdition (TARES) by the breath of his mouth and the splendor of his coming. (2 Thessalonians 2:8)

The coming of Christ is for the remnant of his Church. that is what is left of it after the statement of "will the Son of Man find faith on earth when he returns" comes to be at the closing of the harvest when the Gentiles come to full.

They sacrificed imaginary animals in an imaginary temple between 30ad and 70ad? Because it was just in their imaginations? I completely disagree

They sacrificed animals but those sacrifices were counted as abominations within the 'type' temple that was a desolate house, so regardless of their practices the sons of the slave woman were exiled and had no dealings with God and neither did their Mosaic application of the Law of God was considered valid by God.

What about Jews who continued to practice sacrifices after 70 AD?

What is that to God or what is the 'type' temple to God.

Absolutely nothing!

The Israelites continued in the physical practice of the obsolete old covenant. It wasn't just there imagination, as you are supposing. Cleansing rituals, feasts, sacrifices all still occurred from 30AD to 70AD albeit of no significance to God after the cross.

All Abominations. That is why the Stone the builders rejected became the Stone that condemned them to utter destruction. Their Mosaic Law application of the Law of God was a futile final acts of disobedience that further would pour upon the desolate the greater condemnation of God.

How could their condemned Mosaic Law Application be used to condemn them in the first place, rather those very practices infuriated God over 40 years which condemned them by the very Stone he laid as a sure foundation of His House.

The Mosaic Law Application was not used as a plumb line to condemn them, Christ the Stone was the plumb line that condemned them.

Interestingly enough, they were taken back to Egypt AFTER the cross during the Jewish Roman war, fulfilling another part of the Law's curse:

Deuteronomy 28:68 And the Lord will bring you back in ships to Egypt, a journey that I promised that you should never make again; and there you shall offer yourselves for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves, but there will be no buyer.”

According to Josephus, during the Jewish Roman war, Jews were sent to Egypt as slaves and the buyers were few. Here are 2 quotes from Josephus:

"And as for the rest of the multitude that were above seventeen years old, he put them into bonds, and sent them to the Egyptian mines.”

"For they left only the populace, and sold the rest of the multitude, with their wives and children, and every one of them at a very low price, and that because such as were sold were very many, and the buyers were few"

No, they were punished by the Law's curses because the law was given through Moses and applied incorrectly; yet grace and truth in applying the Law correctly came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17). They were condemned by the Law of Christ and not by the faulty application of the Law that is the Mosaic law.

You are using the wrong plumb line in how God dispensed judgment upon them.

It absolutely is applicable. And it's a simple answer. NO. After 70 ad, Jews could no longer worship in accord with that old obsolete covenant, because the temple was gone.

The 'type' was desolated after the Cross, regardless whether bricks and mortar were still standing. The 'anti-type' replaced the 'type'. You cannot have a 'type' existing alongside an 'anti-type' for God is not the God of confusion.

I agree, that after the cross, the temple and old covenant were obsolete. BUT, Jews were still worshipping, in an obsolete fashion, in the temple from 30 ad to 70 ad. After 70 ad, it was impossible to worship according to the old obsolete covenant.

You keep on saying obsolete but do not apply the true meaning of what obsolete means. It means that the 'type' is no longer applicable and is replaced by the 'anti-type'.

Not sure what this has to do with Christ already knowing the way to the most holy place prior to his ascension.

The ascension was the prophetic event of Christ receiving the title Kingly High Priest whereby the Most Holy Place was revealed to the Church, where they can tie on earth what will be tied in heaven and loosen on earth what will be loosened in Heaven. The Most Holy Place was accessible because it was granted to the Church through the anointing of the Most High Priest at his ascension where Jesus approached the Ancient of Days (The Father) and received power, glory and a Kingdom of Daniel 2:44.

Those whose names are in the book of life have been there since the foundation of the world.
Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

**Are there any scriptures that state names are ADDED to the book of life?

Revelation 6:9 states that many are to be beheaded as they were and so those departed under the altar of God who were sealed and given white robes were told to wait until the full compliment of numbers would come to be accounted for.

The Gentiles come to full also implies that there is a need to allow time times and half a time for the numbers who are to be accounted for in the book of life to be born and then to biologically die as Testators before they too can receive their eternal inheritance (Hebrews 9:15-16).

“I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche, to agree in the Lord. Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life” (Phil. 4:2-3).

So one needs to be born and die as a testator in order to account for that name. The registry needs to be applied after the testator's life plays out otherwise life has not yet been justified by blood within the Blood Covenant, in order to be ratified into the book of life. The Cross must be making subjects onto death otherwise the book cannot be opened until the unveiling of the book that finally proves that Christ has reigned and has delivered the Kingdom to God the Father as in mission accomplished through his Cross.

Christianity flourishing for 2000 years debunks 70 ad return? I would disagree.
Notice the new Jerusalem, which occurs AFTER the dead are judged, provides healing to the nations
Revelation 22:2And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations

Outside of the New Jerusalem are sinners:
revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

How can there be nations needing healing, and sinners outside of the New Jerusalem AFTER the judgment of the dead?

Because after the first-fruits 144,000 were raised the reign of Christ began at his ascension and so the future judgment of the dead unveils the book of life as in mission accomplished. A foregone conclusion, that Christ has delivered the Kingdom to God and made all the subjects of the Cross that need to be made to fill his quota and then it is declared God is all in all.

 

[ToServe]

I'm not understanding this statement. Can you rephrase? What is the actual question here?

I am saying that Jesus returns at the midnight hour meaning time is up to reward a servant whether he is a good servant or a wicked complacent one. So the phrase "I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”"

He is speaking of faith within his own Church after the context of the falling away from the faith. So Jesus comes when faith amongst his servants is at an all time low to do battle with the many sons of perdition within his Holy City Jerusalem.

Christianity flourishing for 2000 years debunks 70 ad return? I would disagree.
Notice the new Jerusalem, which occurs AFTER the dead are judged, provides healing to the nations
Revelation 22:2And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations

Outside of the New Jerusalem are sinners:
revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

How can there be nations needing healing, and sinners outside of the New Jerusalem AFTER the judgment of the dead?

Yet when Christ returns the healing of nations is no longer in play because the sea and every person that ever lived gives up its dead and are judged according to their works in the earthly body. Obviously, 70AD did not give up all the dead in order for them to be judged, since they had not been born as testators to biologically die so to be judged (Hebrews 9:27)

Revelation 20:13
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.

How can there be nations needing healing, and sinners outside of the New Jerusalem AFTER the judgment of the dead?

Christ comes to judge the living and the dead and so after he comes the judgement of the dead occurs according to the judgement of all of the works past tense to those who lived and biologically died in order to be judged. The foregone conclusion means there is no further judgement after he comes and since there is no more judgement then there is no need for something to be healed when it is the end. The judgement of the dead has not happened and therefore Christ has not returned.

Unless I can prove post 70ad Christianity is not Christian? this statement makes no logical sense.

Because post 70AD means that judgement of those who are written in the book of life when it is unveiled has no more disciples to be made at the white throne judgement and as a consequence post 70AD would imply that no more disciples are made through the Cross because Satan, Hell and death itself would have been destroyed in the lake of fire.

Before or after Christ returns?

Before Christ returns there will be many false Christ's and false prophets.

Actually no, it doesn't at all. What modern Christianity does is takes Jesus words "this generation will not pass away" and manipulate them saying "that's not really what Jesus meant". Even though all other uses of "this generation" in the gospels point to the 1st century audience.

Pre and post Cross generation that is all it is implying.

Who said Christ's return is owing to the fallen state of the church? That doesn't make any sense.

Zechariah 14, Peter, Paul, John and Daniel.

Paul and Zechariah depict a war raging within the Church by the many sons of perdition who remove the daily sacrifice owing to the anti-type Temple of God and these are destroyed by the breath of Christ's mouth and by his brilliant coming on a day of great battle against the wicked servants, the Tares.

Revelation 20:9 marries up with Zechariah 14 where the anti-type Jerusalem is infiltrated within its very walls.

9They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. 10And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.

This event is not about the type temple but about the anti-type because at this point Satan is destroyed never to rise again. Also note that the past tense language of when Satan is destroyed is future to the where the beast and the false prophet of 70AD had been thrown.

The type is when the beast and the false prophet of the type temple are destroyed in 70AD and the nations are preserved for a time times and half a time for the healing of those nations (Revelation 22:2).

The anti-type is when the gentiles comes to full within Christ's discipleship numbers and Satan is destroyed with the many sons of perdition of decieved nations within the anti-type temple who replace the daily sacrifice with the abomination of desolation. Paul says they recieved the knowledge of the truth just like Judas Iscariot but then by serving a lie within the context of the falling away from the faith they loved not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thessalonians 2:10).

Satan was not destroyed in the lake of fire in 70AD, where the beast and the false prophet are as the types. Satan as the anti-type is destroyed within the anti-type destruction of the many Judas Iscariot like sons of perdition

When Jesus died, he gave up spirit to the Father
Luke 23:46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” e When he had said this, he breathed his last.

But that does not mean Jesus went to heaven, to the Father
John 20:17 17Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father

If Jesus ascended AFTER the resurrection, why would Stephen ascend BEFORE the resurrection?
Acts 7:59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit

Jesus ascended after his resurrection day which is not 70AD. Saint Stephan saw Jesus come for him and saint Stephan was expecting to be recieved by Jesus and this coming for Saint Stephan is before 70AD and after Christ's resurrection/ascension to sit on the right hand of Power.

Paul believed the resurrection was "about to be".
Acts 25:15 and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there is about to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked

When it comes to who to believe, you, who states the resurrection is 2000+ years later, or the apostle Paul who states the resurrection was "about to be", I'll stick with Paul.

Paul'a statement is merely saying that he believes in a future resurrection of the dead, that the unbelieving accusers also believe in. You cannot draw a line to 70AD. In fact Paul believed it to be present in that moment as attested to his many other letters.