Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[robycop3]

Josephus wrote that the Romans sacrificed to idols in the temple complex in “wars of the Jews 6.6.1”.

But if you don’t accept Josephus as evidence, What proof do you have they were looking for Gold?

Josephus embellished many of his stories to keep Vespasian, then Titus, entertained.

those scriptures don’t mention anything of an AOD, nor sacrifices given to an idol in the temple complex…..so….no idea what your talking about…..

Please read Rev. 13 closely. Sacrifices will be made to the statue of the beast.

 

[robycop3]

Can't be, that would ruin your made-up doctrine.

Nah, I'll just claim that none of that counted and your doctrine will still be rubbish. <Laugh>

So, the AOD, etc. have already occurred? Then, WHERE'S JESUS???????????????? He said He'd return immediately after the trib.

 

[robycop3]

I'm sure I'd be impressed. I knew some old boys a few years ago who derclared themselves to be the legal government of the Repubic of Texas. Spoiler Alert: They weren't. Are there some Jews (or more likely "Messianic Jews" who are about as Jewish as I am) who want a "temple" rebuilt? No doubt. They're right up there with the folks who are waiting for the Planet Nibiru to show up.

Nero

Dunno, don't read Latin anyway.

Don't know. Don't care. I don't insist that all prophecies ever made havwe been fulfilled. That's as ludicrous as claiming, as you lot do, that any ptophecy that has been fulfilled "didn't count". I try to avoid that kind of goofiness.

I don't think there'll be one. Here's where I use y'all's favorite closing "You'll see soon enough!" <Laugh>

There ya go with that "Nero was the beast" garbage.
Nero was never in Jerusalem, so he couldn'ta committed the AOD.
He had no false prophet as a sidekick.
He didn't claimtabee God, nor recognized any god but himself; he worshipped the Roman pantheon.
he didn't overthrow 3 other rulers to become Caesar; he wasn't interested in becoming Caesar. He was appointed by his uncle Claudius & confirmed by the Roman Senate.
And he died; he had his secretary Epaphroditus stab him with a sword. His death was witnessed by several of Galba's men who'd come to arrest him.

Remember, ALL prophecies MUST be fulfilled EXACTLY, TO THE LETTER. And Nero failed to fulfill many of them about the beast. The resta your stuff aint worth answering.

 

[Timtofly]

I guess I’m confused by this. It seems like the only difference between Antiochus’ AOD and the Roman armies AOD is location. Antiochus put an idol on the alter and made a sacrifice there. The Roman armies places their standards (which were idols) and sacrificed near the eastern gate of the temple. However, both occurred in the temple complex.

can it only occur on the alter to be considered an AOD?

Luke 21 was about 66AD, not any AoD in the first century. It talked about armies surrounding Jerusalem showing that soon Jerusalem would be desolate.

 

[parousia70]

Luke 21 was about 66AD, not any AoD in the first century. It talked about armies surrounding Jerusalem showing that soon Jerusalem would be desolate.

Parallel passages can not be interpreted to have polar opposite meanings.

When we compare the parallel accounts in Matthew and Luke, we see they are speaking of the exact same event:

-COMPARE THIS-

Matthew 24:15-21
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

-TO THIS-

Luke 21:20-23
20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

Both above passages speak of the same "When" the same "Desolation" the same "time to flee", the same "those days of woe to the pregnant and nursing" and the same "Great Tribulation/Distress.

These two, separate-but-parallel, synoptic accounts are of the exact same discourse Given by Jesus, to the exact same apostles, at the exact same moment, covering the exact same subject.

Again, Parallel passages CANNOT be interpreted in a way thet renders their individual meanings be anything BUT entirely PARALLEL to one another.

 

[Timtofly]

Parallel passages can not be interpreted to have polar opposite meanings.

When we compare the parallel accounts in Matthew and Luke, we see they are speaking of the exact same event:

-COMPARE THIS-

Matthew 24:15-21
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

-TO THIS-

Luke 21:20-23
20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

Both above passages speak of the same "When" the same "Desolation" the same "time to flee", the same "those days of woe to the pregnant and nursing" and the same "Great Tribulation/Distress.

These two, separate-but-parallel, synoptic accounts are of the exact same discourse Given by Jesus, to the exact same apostles, at the exact same moment, covering the exact same subject.

Again, Parallel passages CANNOT be interpreted in a way thet renders their individual meanings be anything BUT entirely PARALLEL to one another.

That is not polar opposite meanings.

If I told you to flee a camp site if you saw a bear.

Then I said flee a camp site if you saw fire.

Then you complain a bear mauled your body, because you did not flee, because you saw no fire.

In 66AD they fled and never came back because of seeing armies. There was no AoD to flee from in the first century.

 

[claninja]

Why aren't you using the same argument in Luke 21?

because Robycop3 said:

"I'm not saying it-SCRIPTURE is"

That chapter says zero about an AOD as well, yet you insist it involves an AOD, regardless.

I've never claimed Luke 21 specifically says "AOD". I "interpret" it that way based on Luke 21 being parallel to Matthew 24 and Mark 13, but I've never said "i'm not saying it - scipture is". If I said "i'm not saying Luke 21 is about the AOD, scripture is", wouldn't you ask me where does Luke mention the AOD?

 

[parousia70]

That is not polar opposite meanings.

If I told you to flee a camp site if you saw a bear.

Then I said flee a camp site if you saw fire.

Then you complain a bear mauled your body, because you did not flee, because you saw no fire.

In 66AD they fled and never came back because of seeing armies. There was no AoD to flee from in the first century.

That still doesn’t square with the fact that Luke 21 and Matthew 24 are parallel.

Parallel passages cannot be interpreted to have different meanings, (polar opposite or just slightly different doesn’t matter).

Parallel passages cannot be interpreted to have different meanings from one another.
That’s the hurdle you have to overcome, but There is no honest hermeneutic that allows for such gymnastics.

 

[DavidPT]

That still doesn’t square with the fact that Luke 21 and Matthew 24 are parallel.

Yet, they are not parallel unless they are involving the same period of time and the same events. In Luke 21 where is there even a hint in the text that it is involving any of the following during when Luke 21:20 is meaning? Or how about this instead, since history recorded what happened in 70 AD and leading up to 70 AD, meaning the following below, how is any of that applicable to 70 AD and or leading up to it?


When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15)

if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not(Matthew 24:23-26).

Seriously, what does any of that have to do with what happened to the unbelieving Jews at the hands of the Romans in 70 AD, and or leading up to 70 AD? According to Matthew 24, verses 23-26 are apparently meaning during great tribulation(verse 21). Do some of you think unbelieving Jews in the first century were concerned with false Christs, the fact they didn't even believe the real Christ was the real Christ? So, they instead starting seeking false Christs, thus believing them instead?

 

[robycop3]

Parallel passages can not be interpreted to have polar opposite meanings.

When we compare the parallel accounts in Matthew and Luke, we see they are speaking of the exact same event:

-COMPARE THIS-

Matthew 24:15-21
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

-TO THIS-

Luke 21:20-23
20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

Both above passages speak of the same "When" the same "Desolation" the same "time to flee", the same "those days of woe to the pregnant and nursing" and the same "Great Tribulation/Distress.

These two, separate-but-parallel, synoptic accounts are of the exact same discourse Given by Jesus, to the exact same apostles, at the exact same moment, covering the exact same subject.

Again, Parallel passages CANNOT be interpreted in a way thet renders their individual meanings be anything BUT entirely PARALLEL to one another.

They're not parallel. When Vespasian first besieged Jerusalem, he got news of Nero's death & Galba's assuming the Caesarship. Vespasian's army urged him to lead them back to Rome to overthrow Galba & become Caesar himself. So, he headed back to Rome with the army, thus lifting the siege. Some 8 months later, when the dust had settled, Titus came back with an army to besiege J again. Thus, there was plenty of time for people to flee J.

 

[parousia70]

They're not parallel. When Vespasian first besieged Jerusalem, he got news of Nero's death & Galba's assuming the Caesarship. Vespasian's army urged him to lead them back to Rome to overthrow Galba & become Caesar himself. So, he headed back to Rome with the army, thus lifting the siege. Some 8 months later, when the dust had settled, Titus came back with an army to besiege J again. Thus, there was plenty of time for people to flee J.

And this proves they're not parallel...how?

 

[robycop3]

And this proves they're not parallel...how?

Jesus said in Matt. 24, flee IMMEDIATELY when the army surrounded J, but He didn't say that in Luke. So, the Matthew account refers to a future event.

 

[DavidPT]

Jesus said in Matt. 24, flee IMMEDIATELY when the army surrounded J, but He didn't say that in Luke. So, the Matthew account refers to a future event.

I realize it mentions an army surrounding J in Luke 21, but where does it ever mention an army surrounding J in Matthew 24? Especially when you are arguing they are not parallel. Sounds like they can be parallel to me if you are seeing an army surrounding J in Matthew 24, something the text doesn't even mention. Which then makes me think you are getting this army surrounding J idea from that of Luke 21. Except you are arguing that these accounts aren't parallel. While I do agree they are not parallel, that still doesn't explain how you are seeing armies surrounding J in Matthew 24 when Matthew 24 mentions no such thing as far as I can tell, unless I overlooked something.

 

[claninja]

Josephus embellished many of his stories to keep Vespasian, then Titus, entertained.

so your counter argument is that jospehus made up the story of the Romans sacrificing to idols in Jewish temple (wars of the Jews 6.6.1)?

out of all the things that jospehus could or would embellish , why would he make up a story about a practice that Romans were known for doing?

 

[claninja]

Jesus said in Matt. 24, flee IMMEDIATELY when the army surrounded J, but He didn't say that in Luke. So, the Matthew account refers to a future event.

Jesus said to flee in both accounts:

Matthew 24:15-16 15So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’adescribed by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand), 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.


Luke 21:20-21 20But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, you will know that her desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains

 

[DavidPT]

Jesus said to flee in both accounts:

Matthew 24:15-16 15So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’adescribed by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand), 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.


Luke 21:20-21 20But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, you will know that her desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains

If these are involving the same events, how would one know when to flee? In one account He says to flee when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation. In the other account He says to flee when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

 

[parousia70]

if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not(Matthew 24:23-26).

Seriously, what does any of that have to do with what happened to the unbelieving Jews at the hands of the Romans in 70 AD, and or leading up to 70 AD?
Do some of you think unbelieving Jews in the first century were concerned with false Christs, the fact they didn't even believe the real Christ was the real Christ? So, they instead starting seeking false Christs, thus believing them instead?

Yes. 100%.
History records that is EXACTLY what happened:

Matt 24:4-5, 23-26 -- Christ predicts the intensification of false messianic movements within Israel and around the empire.

First-century examples:

Dositheus the Samaritan (Origen: Contra Celsum, VI, ii; Hom. xxv in Lucam; Contra Celsum, I, lvii), Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24) who was deified in Rome, Theudas (Acts 5:36-37), Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37), Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:20-23), Menahem (Josephus: War of the Jews; 2.433-450). Under the government of Felix, deceivers rose up daily in Judea and persuaded the people to follow them into the wilderness, assuring them that they should behold conspicuous signs and wonders performed by the Almighty. (Felix, from time to time, apprehended many and put them to death.) During this period (52-58 AD) arose a celebrated Egyptian deceiver (Acts 21:38), who collected thirty-thousand followers and persuaded them to accompany him to the Mount of Olives, telling them that from there they would see the walls of Jerusalem fall down at his command as a prelude to the capture of the Roman garrison and their obtaining the sovereignty of the city (Josephus: War of the Jews, 2.259-263; Antiquities of the Jews 20.169-171). Such messiahs and magicians were often as powerful in the display of miracles as were the apostles (see: Simon of Samaria in Acts 8:9-11; Apollonius of Tyana). Partial list of first-century false messiahs: Judas, son of Hezekiah (4 BC); Simon of Peraea (4 BC); Athronges, the shepherd (4 BC); Judas, the Galilean (6 AD); the Samaritan prophet (36 AD); King Herod Agrippa (44 AD); Theudas (? AD); the Egyptian prophet (52-58 AD); anonymous prophet (59 AD); Menahem, the son of Judas the Galilean (66 AD); John of Gischala (67-70 AD); Vespasian (67 AD); Simon bar Giora (69-70 AD).

Do some of you think none of this actually happened?

 

[claninja]

If these are involving the same events, how would one know when to flee? In one account He says to flee when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation. In the other account He says to flee when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

looks like you just answered your own question:

“If these are involving the same events, how would one know when to flee? In one account He says to flee when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation. In the other account He says to flee when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies.”

 

[parousia70]

Jesus said in Matt. 24, flee IMMEDIATELY when the army surrounded J

What verse in Matthew 24 can we find Jesus saying this?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I realize it mentions an army surrounding J in Luke 21, but where does it ever mention an army surrounding J in Matthew 24?

Do you understand that Matthew and Luke were writing to different audiences? Matthew was writing to Jews and Luke was writing to Gentiles. That is what accounts for the differences in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20. Matthew's audience was familiar with the prophecies in Daniel which is why it says "let the reader understand". Luke's audience of Gentiles would have known nothing about Daniel's prophecies, so it would make no sense for Luke to tell them to consider the prophecy in Daniel about the abomination of desolation and then to say "let the reader understand".

If you insist on continuing to claim that Matthew 24:15-22 and Luke 21:20-24a are not parallel accounts, then you need to show exactly when you think Jesus said what He did in Matthew 24:15-22 in relation to when He said what He did in Luke 21:20-24. Can you please do that? Please combine Matthew 24 and Luke 21 together to show your understanding of when He said what. At least as it relates to those two passages.

So, if you think He said what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24 after what He said in Matthew 24:15-22, then please show when you think He said what up to that point. Or if you think He said what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-22 after what He said in Luke 21:20-24a then show it up to that point. This is the only way that I can take you seriously is if you can give some kind of evidence that makes some kind of sense as to how those two passages could possibly not be parallel.