Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Then explain this: Matthew 5:17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

You do not seem to differentiate between the moral law and the ceremonial law. This is a mistake. Christ fulfilled everything that the prophets and the ceremonial law demanded. Through His redemptive work on the cross everything is now finalized.

When Christ comes and regenerates the old physical corrupted arrangement, the moral law will no longer be need because sin and sinners will be finally and eternally banished.
 
Upvote 0

Ed Parenteau

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2017
458
128
75
San Bernardino, CA
✟441,934.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You're right, I don't differentiate as scripture never makes that case. The differentiation that scripture makes is between the law and the gospel found in:
Luke 16:16The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for a single stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
The law of Moses required a theocracy in order to carry it out. Does your church stone women to death for adultery? It all ended with the destruction of the temple in 70ad.
As Paul said 1 Corinthians 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), to win those under the law.
There is no theocracy left and no one is under the law today, therefore the church is the New Jerusalem which had already come down from heaven and was being approached here and shows the difference between the Law(physical kingdom) and the gospel (spiritual kingdom)
Hebrews 12:
18For you have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom, and storm; 19to a trumpet blast or to a voice that made its hearers beg that no further word be spoken. 20For they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 21The sight was so terrifying that even Moses said, “I am trembling with fear.”i

22Instead, you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to myriads of angels 23in joyful assembly, to the congregation of the firstborn, enrolled in heaven. You have come to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

They were in the present tense "receiving" that kingdom. Hebrews 12:28 Therefore, since we are receiving an unshakable kingdom, let us be filled with gratitude, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You're right, I don't differentiate as scripture never makes that case. The differentiation that scripture makes is between the law and the gospel found in:
Luke 16:16The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for a single stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
The law of Moses required a theocracy in order to carry it out. Does your church stone women to death for adultery? It all ended with the destruction of the temple in 70ad.
As Paul said 1 Corinthians 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), to win those under the law.
There is no theocracy left and no one is under the law today, therefore the church is the New Jerusalem which had already come down from heaven and was being approached here and shows the difference between the Law(physical kingdom) and the gospel (spiritual kingdom)
Hebrews 12:
18For you have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom, and storm; 19to a trumpet blast or to a voice that made its hearers beg that no further word be spoken. 20For they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 21The sight was so terrifying that even Moses said, “I am trembling with fear.”i

22Instead, you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to myriads of angels 23in joyful assembly, to the congregation of the firstborn, enrolled in heaven. You have come to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

They were in the present tense "receiving" that kingdom. Hebrews 12:28 Therefore, since we are receiving an unshakable kingdom, let us be filled with gratitude, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe.

It doesn't matter what the Jews did after the cross, or does it matter what they are doing today. The old covenant is dead. It is gone. AD70 was not the end of the old covenant. That occurred 40 years earlier. When Christ said "it is finished" on the cross that was the end of the old covenant arrangement. From a heavenly perspective the renting of the veil finished the temple sacrifices forever. Whilst Matthew doesn’t identify what Christ said before He gave up the ghost John does in 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

The continued practice of the Jewish sacrifice system and the strict religious laws that the apostate Jewish religious leaders enforced after Christ's death did not in any way negate the abolition of the old covenant at the cross. To say otherwise is to fight with multiple NT Scripture.

The book of Hebrews shows the removal of the old covenant arrangement and its replacement by the new superior covenant. Hebrews 8:6 declares (before AD70): “now hath he (Christ) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.”

Hebrews 8:7-8 explains (before AD70), “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”

The old covenant was faulty or defective. It had many limitations. It had to be replaced. Those who suggest it was still active and useful between Calvary and AD70 undermine the cross and fight with clear and repeated Scripture.

Albert Barnes contends: “it did not contain the ample provision for the pardon of sin and the salvation of the soul which was desirable. It was merely ‘preparatory’ to the Gospel.”

The Preachers Homiletical states: “Not merely ‘free from defect’, but ‘incomplete’, unable fully to meet man’s case. The old system was complete enough for its limited sphere and purpose: fault was found with its limitations.”

John Wesley explained: “For if the first had been faultless - If that dispensation had answered all God's designs and man's wants, if it had not been weak and unprofitable unable to make anything perfect, no place would have been for a second.”

Scripture (before AD70) describes the old covenant sacrificial system as that which is done away (2 Corinthians 3:11) and that which is abolished (2 Corinthians 3:13). It makes clear: the old testament … vail is done away in Christ" (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms: He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”

The sad thing is: many Christians today speak on this subject as if the cross never happened. They talk as if the old covenant still exists and is still relevant today or in the future. They fail to see that it has been eternally removed and the new covenant has replaced it. This is why they get messed up when they get to this subject. They want to go back to the old imperfect arrangement or they want Israel to go back to the old imperfect arrangement. They yearn for an old-covenant-type physical kingdom that is focused on the natural, temporal and earthly.

Equally, they want to elevate Israel to a place that they no longer own in the New Testament. Many want to render circumcision (the sign of the old covenant) meritorious or advantageous when the New Testament says it avails nothing.

The fact is, on the authority of God’s Word, we are never going back to the shadow, the type and the abolished. The reason being: God was, and is, fully and eternally satisfied with the new covenant. It doesn’t need modified, added to or replaced. The cross did it all!

The old covenant was only a signpost to the new covenant – the substance, fulfilment and the reality. It simply pointed to the new covenant arrangement that was focused on the real Jerusalem (the heavenly), not Christ-rejecting carnal Jerusalem. The old has been eternally abolished.

Hebrews 10:1 (before AD70) makes it perfectly clear, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things."

The old Jewish temple in Jerusalem, which is now destroyed, served as an impressive physical, yet, imperfect temporal type of the living temple of God – the Lord Jesus Christ and His mystical body. It was the focal-point for the whole Judaic sacrificial system for many centuries.

Paul the Apostle addresses this in Galatians 4:9-10 (before AD70), asking, “now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.”

The New Testament writer is referring here to the old covenant ceremonial calendar. His contention is simple: why would a liberated Christian want to go back to the old elaborate abolished Jewish arrangement? This phrase “days, and months, and times, and years” refer to the many holy days, feasts and festivals that Israel had to carefully maintain until Jesus died on the cross. All of these were a heavy bondage to them. Paul despaired because some believers were looking back to the bondage of the old that was gone. This is so opposed to the freedom that comes in Christ.

The phrase “Ye observe” is one Greek word paratēreō meaning you ‘assiduously observe’ or you ‘painstakingly observe’. The word translated “weak” here (asthenes) means strengthless or impotent. The word interpreted “beggarly” in this passage (ptochos) relates to the condition of a pauper. It is derived from the original word ptoeo meaning fallen or flown away. The word “bondage,” which relates to the old Judaic system, is the word douleuo, meaning to be a slave.

As we piece these original Greek words together, we start to get a real sense of how the New Testament viewed the whole Old Testament ceremonial law. The old covenant ritualistic system has been abolished because it is expressly impotent, impoverished and slavish’. The old covenant could not remove sin. It could never eradicate a guilty conscious. It was destitute. It has fallen and flown away. It has been rendered redundant. It is obsolete!

It has no ongoing purpose in the plan of God because of its weakness. It could never secure eternal salvation because it was not an eternal covenant. It had an expiration date. The coming in of the new perfect covenant removed the old imperfect system. When Christ came, He introduced “the everlasting covenant,” thus making the old temporal system useless. The shadow simply pointed to the substance.

Why would God ever want to bring back an insolvent and ineffective religious system that has been replaced by a perfect arrangement?

Colossians 2:14 (before AD70) plainly declares, speaking of these Old Testament ordinances and what happened at Calvary: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

The Greek word for “blotting out” here is exaleiphō meaning: ‘to wipe off, wipe away, to obliterate, erase, wipe out, blot out’

Q. When did/will the "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" occur?
A. Christ "took it out of the way" by "nailing it to his cross.”

These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial and ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross. When Christ made that final sacrifice for sin He satisfied all God’s holy demands for sin and uncleanness and thus Christ became the final propitiation and substitution for the sinner.

Colossians 2:16-17 (before AD70) continues, keeping on the same theme: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”

The Greek word translated “holyday” here is heorte meaning a festival or feast. The normally precise KJV should probably have used feast or festival here rather than holyday because out of 27 mentions of this word in the New Testament it is interpreted “feast” in all of them apart from here.

New American Standard puts it like this: “Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day -- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.”

The Living Bible says, “So don't let anyone criticize you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. For these were only temporary rules that ended when Christ came. They were only shadows of the real thing-of Christ himself.”

Paul is saying here that the old covenant feasts and festivals simply served as types and shadows of things that were to come. They looked forward to the new covenant arrangement and the reality and substance in Christ. The Jews of Ezekiel’s day and Zechariah’s day would never have understood this.

Colossians 2:20-22 (before AD70) adds, summing up the new covenant freedom: “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, whyare ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men?”

The phrase “are ye subject to ordinances” is interpreted from the lone Greek word dogmatizo, which literally means to submit to ceremonially rule. Christianity took us completely away from the bondage of the old Mosaic ceremonial law. These festivals were filled with numerous ordinances and blood sacrifices that had to be stringently observed.

Speaking of these impotent religious ordinances, Scriptures counsels: “Touch not; taste not; handle not.” This couldn’t be clearer!

Matthew Henry adds: “Christians are freed by Christ from the ritual observances of Moses's law, and delivered from that yoke of bondage which God himself had laid upon them. Subjection to ordinances, or human appointments in the worship of God, is highly blamable, and contrary to the freedom and liberty of the Gospel.”

Adam Clarke explains: “all the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion now perish, having accomplished the end of their institution; namely, to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

Romans 15:6-7 (before AD70) tells us: One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.”

The strict religious insistence on observing precise sacred days and the keeping of the old arrangement is exposed here as erroneous. Under the new covenant we are at liberty to worship God anywhere at any time, and it is totally acceptable unto God.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
It doesn't matter what the Jews did after the cross, or does it matter what they are doing today. The old covenant is dead. It is gone. AD70 was not the end of the old covenant. That occurred 40 years earlier. When Christ said "it is finished" on the cross that was the end of the old covenant arrangement. From a heavenly perspective the renting of the veil finished the temple sacrifices forever. Whilst Matthew doesn’t identify what Christ said before He gave up the ghost John does in 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

The continued practice of the Jewish sacrifice system and the strict religious laws that the apostate Jewish religious leaders enforced after Christ's death did not in any way negate the abolition of the old covenant at the cross. To say otherwise is to fight with multiple NT Scripture.

The book of Hebrews shows the removal of the old covenant arrangement and its replacement by the new superior covenant. Hebrews 8:6 declares (before AD70): “now hath he (Christ) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.”

Hebrews 8:7-8 explains (before AD70), “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”

The old covenant was faulty or defective. It had many limitations. It had to be replaced. Those who suggest it was still active and useful between Calvary and AD70 undermine the cross and fight with clear and repeated Scripture.

Albert Barnes contends: “it did not contain the ample provision for the pardon of sin and the salvation of the soul which was desirable. It was merely ‘preparatory’ to the Gospel.”

The Preachers Homiletical states: “Not merely ‘free from defect’, but ‘incomplete’, unable fully to meet man’s case. The old system was complete enough for its limited sphere and purpose: fault was found with its limitations.”

John Wesley explained: “For if the first had been faultless - If that dispensation had answered all God's designs and man's wants, if it had not been weak and unprofitable unable to make anything perfect, no place would have been for a second.”

Scripture (before AD70) describes the old covenant sacrificial system as that which is done away (2 Corinthians 3:11) and that which is abolished (2 Corinthians 3:13). It makes clear: the old testament … vail is done away in Christ" (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms: He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”

The sad thing is: many Christians today speak on this subject as if the cross never happened. They talk as if the old covenant still exists and is still relevant today or in the future. They fail to see that it has been eternally removed and the new covenant has replaced it. This is why they get messed up when they get to this subject. They want to go back to the old imperfect arrangement or they want Israel to go back to the old imperfect arrangement. They yearn for an old-covenant-type physical kingdom that is focused on the natural, temporal and earthly.

Equally, they want to elevate Israel to a place that they no longer own in the New Testament. Many want to render circumcision (the sign of the old covenant) meritorious or advantageous when the New Testament says it avails nothing.

The fact is, on the authority of God’s Word, we are never going back to the shadow, the type and the abolished. The reason being: God was, and is, fully and eternally satisfied with the new covenant. It doesn’t need modified, added to or replaced. The cross did it all!

The old covenant was only a signpost to the new covenant – the substance, fulfilment and the reality. It simply pointed to the new covenant arrangement that was focused on the real Jerusalem (the heavenly), not Christ-rejecting carnal Jerusalem. The old has been eternally abolished.

Hebrews 10:1 (before AD70) makes it perfectly clear, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things."

The old Jewish temple in Jerusalem, which is now destroyed, served as an impressive physical, yet, imperfect temporal type of the living temple of God – the Lord Jesus Christ and His mystical body. It was the focal-point for the whole Judaic sacrificial system for many centuries.

Paul the Apostle addresses this in Galatians 4:9-10 (before AD70), asking, “now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.”

The New Testament writer is referring here to the old covenant ceremonial calendar. His contention is simple: why would a liberated Christian want to go back to the old elaborate abolished Jewish arrangement? This phrase “days, and months, and times, and years” refer to the many holy days, feasts and festivals that Israel had to carefully maintain until Jesus died on the cross. All of these were a heavy bondage to them. Paul despaired because some believers were looking back to the bondage of the old that was gone. This is so opposed to the freedom that comes in Christ.

The phrase “Ye observe” is one Greek word paratēreō meaning you ‘assiduously observe’ or you ‘painstakingly observe’. The word translated “weak” here (asthenes) means strengthless or impotent. The word interpreted “beggarly” in this passage (ptochos) relates to the condition of a pauper. It is derived from the original word ptoeo meaning fallen or flown away. The word “bondage,” which relates to the old Judaic system, is the word douleuo, meaning to be a slave.

As we piece these original Greek words together, we start to get a real sense of how the New Testament viewed the whole Old Testament ceremonial law. The old covenant ritualistic system has been abolished because it is expressly impotent, impoverished and slavish’. The old covenant could not remove sin. It could never eradicate a guilty conscious. It was destitute. It has fallen and flown away. It has been rendered redundant. It is obsolete!

It has no ongoing purpose in the plan of God because of its weakness. It could never secure eternal salvation because it was not an eternal covenant. It had an expiration date. The coming in of the new perfect covenant removed the old imperfect system. When Christ came, He introduced “the everlasting covenant,” thus making the old temporal system useless. The shadow simply pointed to the substance.

Why would God ever want to bring back an insolvent and ineffective religious system that has been replaced by a perfect arrangement?

Colossians 2:14 (before AD70) plainly declares, speaking of these Old Testament ordinances and what happened at Calvary: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

The Greek word for “blotting out” here is exaleiphō meaning: ‘to wipe off, wipe away, to obliterate, erase, wipe out, blot out’

Q. When did/will the "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" occur?
A. Christ "took it out of the way" by "nailing it to his cross.”

These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial and ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross. When Christ made that final sacrifice for sin He satisfied all God’s holy demands for sin and uncleanness and thus Christ became the final propitiation and substitution for the sinner.

Colossians 2:16-17 (before AD70) continues, keeping on the same theme: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”

The Greek word translated “holyday” here is heorte meaning a festival or feast. The normally precise KJV should probably have used feast or festival here rather than holyday because out of 27 mentions of this word in the New Testament it is interpreted “feast” in all of them apart from here.

New American Standard puts it like this: “Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day -- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.”

The Living Bible says, “So don't let anyone criticize you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. For these were only temporary rules that ended when Christ came. They were only shadows of the real thing-of Christ himself.”

Paul is saying here that the old covenant feasts and festivals simply served as types and shadows of things that were to come. They looked forward to the new covenant arrangement and the reality and substance in Christ. The Jews of Ezekiel’s day and Zechariah’s day would never have understood this.

Colossians 2:20-22 (before AD70) adds, summing up the new covenant freedom: “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, whyare ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men?”

The phrase “are ye subject to ordinances” is interpreted from the lone Greek word dogmatizo, which literally means to submit to ceremonially rule. Christianity took us completely away from the bondage of the old Mosaic ceremonial law. These festivals were filled with numerous ordinances and blood sacrifices that had to be stringently observed.

Speaking of these impotent religious ordinances, Scriptures counsels: “Touch not; taste not; handle not.” This couldn’t be clearer!

Matthew Henry adds: “Christians are freed by Christ from the ritual observances of Moses's law, and delivered from that yoke of bondage which God himself had laid upon them. Subjection to ordinances, or human appointments in the worship of God, is highly blamable, and contrary to the freedom and liberty of the Gospel.”

Adam Clarke explains: “all the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion now perish, having accomplished the end of their institution; namely, to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

Romans 15:6-7 (before AD70) tells us: One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.”

The strict religious insistence on observing precise sacred days and the keeping of the old arrangement is exposed here as erroneous. Under the new covenant we are at liberty to worship God anywhere at any time, and it is totally acceptable unto God.
To all God’s people saying AMEN!
 
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟115,462.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Would you call anyone who does not believe the rapture is found in Rev. 4:1 a preterist or partial preterist? Yes.

Would you call anyone who believes we are NOW at the 5th seal waiting for the final church age martyr to be killed a preterist or partial preterist? Yes. The seals, trumpets, & vials will all be fulfilled simultaneously as part of the great trib,
 
Upvote 0

Ed Parenteau

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2017
458
128
75
San Bernardino, CA
✟441,934.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It doesn't matter what the Jews did after the cross, or does it matter what they are doing today. The old covenant is dead. It is gone. AD70 was not the end of the old covenant. That occurred 40 years earlier. When Christ said "it is finished" on the cross that was the end of the old covenant arrangement. From a heavenly perspective the renting of the veil finished the temple sacrifices forever. Whilst Matthew doesn’t identify what Christ said before He gave up the ghost John does in 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

The continued practice of the Jewish sacrifice system and the strict religious laws that the apostate Jewish religious leaders enforced after Christ's death did not in any way negate the abolition of the old covenant at the cross. To say otherwise is to fight with multiple NT Scripture.

The book of Hebrews shows the removal of the old covenant arrangement and its replacement by the new superior covenant. Hebrews 8:6 declares (before AD70): “now hath he (Christ) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.”

Again, Jesus clearly said not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away until heaven and earth passed away. I guess you're arguing that "heaven and earth passed away at the cross, unless you're taking it upon yourself to rewrite what Christ said or forgot to say. And it wasn't just the ceremonial laws that was nailed to the cross, it was whole written code.

Romans 7:4Therefore, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. 5For when we lived according to the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, bearing fruit for death. 6But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
7What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed, I would not have been mindful of sin if not for the law. For I would not have been aware of coveting if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” 8But sin, seizing its opportunity through the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from the law, sin is dead.

Ephesians 2:14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace 16and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.

Romans 8:1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For in Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set you free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful man, as an offering for sin. He thus condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the righteous standard of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Hebrews 10:11For the law is only a shadow of the good things to come, .... It doesn't say the law was, it says the law is. It seems that no futurist actually believes the grammar nor the time statements nor the direct promises that were made to those living in the generation that Christ called "this generation"

Same with this: Colossians 2:17These are a shadow of the things to come, but the body that casts it belongs to Christ. It doesn't say were a shadow, it says are a shadow.
And the obvious proof is Christ's fulfilling the first four feasts of the exodus. He died at the same time the high priest was sacrificing the passover lamb in the temple. 2 days later fulfilling the feast of firstfruits by being raised from the dead as the firstfruits. Then 50 days later the feast of weeks(Pentecost) was fulfilled and they became the firstfruits of the grain harvest.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, Jesus clearly said not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away until heaven and earth passed away. I guess you're arguing that "heaven and earth passed away at the cross, unless you're taking it upon yourself to rewrite what Christ said or forgot to say. And it wasn't just the ceremonial laws that was nailed to the cross, it was whole written code.

Romans 7:4Therefore, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. 5For when we lived according to the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, bearing fruit for death. 6But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
7What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed, I would not have been mindful of sin if not for the law. For I would not have been aware of coveting if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” 8But sin, seizing its opportunity through the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from the law, sin is dead.

Ephesians 2:14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace 16and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.

Romans 8:1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For in Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set you free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful man, as an offering for sin. He thus condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the righteous standard of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Hebrews 10:11For the law is only a shadow of the good things to come, .... It doesn't say the law was, it says the law is. It seems that no futurist actually believes the grammar nor the time statements nor the direct promises that were made to those living in the generation that Christ called "this generation"

Same with this: Colossians 2:17These are a shadow of the things to come, but the body that casts it belongs to Christ. It doesn't say were a shadow, it says are a shadow.
And the obvious proof is Christ's fulfilling the first four feasts of the exodus. He died at the same time the high priest was sacrificing the passover lamb in the temple. 2 days later fulfilling the feast of firstfruits by being raised from the dead as the firstfruits. Then 50 days later the feast of weeks(Pentecost) was fulfilled and they became the firstfruits of the grain harvest.

Until you understand the difference between the ceremonial law and the moral law you will never understand this. This is a very basic Christian doctrine. Whatever way we look at it: the Book forbids Preterism. It must be imposed upon the sacred text. That is why Bible students should reject it.
 
Upvote 0

Ed Parenteau

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2017
458
128
75
San Bernardino, CA
✟441,934.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Until you understand the difference between the ceremonial law and the moral law you will never understand this. This is a very basic Christian doctrine. Whatever way we look at it: the Book forbids Preterism. It must be imposed upon the sacred text. That is why Bible students should reject it.
Yeah right, Christ died to save us from Jewish festivals, and if one doesn't believe that, then Preterism is false.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hebrews 10:11For the law is only a shadow of the good things to come, .... It doesn't say the law was, it says the law is. It seems that no futurist actually believes the grammar nor the time statements nor the direct promises that were made to those living in the generation that Christ called "this generation"

Bingo. Exactly. Have a cigar. Take the rest of the day off.

Futurism requires that eschatological scriptures were specifically given to be utterly useless and of no prophetic or theological value to - or worse yet, deliberately mislead - the original receivers, to whom the letters were DIRECTLY addressed and delivered to.

This alone, renders the view untenable.

Again, brilliant post.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Context! You're missing it. The context of a temple in Matthew 24 is in relation to the physical temple standing at that time. This is undeniable. The disciples told Jesus to look at the temple buildings while they were marveling at them and then Jesus told them they would be destroyed. Then the disciples asked Him when that would happen. Your interpretation of Matthew 24 doesn't take that into account at all. You act as if that question wasn't even answered anywhere in Matthew 24.

Hi Spiritual Jew,

Your comment caught my attention. Are you saying that you believe the first two verses of Matthew 24 are about the physical temple and stones that were literally falling? Can I explain something about it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ed Parenteau

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2017
458
128
75
San Bernardino, CA
✟441,934.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Bingo. Exactly. Have a cigar. Take the rest of the day off.

Futurism requires that eschatological scriptures were specifically given to be utterly useless and of no prophetic or theological value to - or worse yet, deliberately mislead - the original receivers, to whom the letters were DIRECTLY addressed and delivered to.

This alone, renders the view untenable.

Again, brilliant post.
Thanks parousia70. They all like the phrase "His coming is near", but just when they say it, not when He said it.
 
Upvote 0

Ed Parenteau

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2017
458
128
75
San Bernardino, CA
✟441,934.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
All the arguments are trumped by the FACT that THE ESCHATOLOGICAL EVENTS HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED. Can't get around it.
Of course they have, just like Jesus and the apostles and prophets said they would. It's not my fault you don't believe them. The fact that the temple was made so desolate a pagan temple has been standing in it's place for the last 1300 years ought to be a hint that it was made desolate, just like Jesus and the apostles said.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
All the arguments are trumped by the FACT that THE ESCHATOLOGICAL EVENTS HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED. Can't get around it.
Thanks for proving my point :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
The difference is that Christ says not one stone would be left standing in the city of Jerusalem, and I bear witness to His very factual Word. While some people here say Josephus said that there was not one literal stone left standing and that is proof that Christ's words were fulfilled when every rational and logically thinking person can see that there were, and will be stones left standing in Jerusalem. Even as there are to this very day.

It's not about "who thinks," it's about who is presenting "scripture that actually says" what they "claim" it does, and who is not presenting scripture saying what they claim. Who is playing the martyr, and who is actually addressing the Biblical questions of Christ's Martyrdom? It's not really about diverse interpretations, it's really all about sound exegesis, methodology, comparison, and hermeneutics. Because if our assumptions are wrong, then our conclusions will be wrong. It's important to understand that our personal conclusions do not equate to biblical theology "unless" it is soundly grounded in the Bible. Conclusions concerning AD 70 are based upon historical secular evidence and man's personal interpretation, rather than upon scripture. The whole idea of a prophecy of God's Holy Temple in AD 70 having an abomination stand in it and falling (and this be the Jewish Temple) is altogether foreign to the bible. As I've demonstrated time and again with scripture, the Jewish Holy Temple fell at the cross in God's eyes. Some people here even reluctantly confessed as much. But he has added another falling in AD 70 for good measure that is never prophesied in scripture, and that conflicts with what is prophesied in scripture. It is not "stubborn" to declare that many stones were left standing one upon another in AD 70, when the prophecy in scripture calls for not one to be left standing one upon another, it's FAITHFULNESS. What is stubborn is to attempt to force those explicit scriptures to be some sort of self-serving hyperbole, while at the same time insisting that it be taken very literally when referring to a physical Temple in AD 70. Inconsistency is the hallmark of error.

Mark 14:56-59

  • "For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.
  • And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
  • We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
  • But neither so did their witness agree together."
Consistency means the witness has to agree with the Biblical facts. And inconsistency is the hallmark of error. In a superficial reading of this, one might think that they were accurately witnessing to the prophesy of Christ, but faithfulness requires us to see that though it might sound or "seem" somewhat right, it is in actuality false and inconsistent with what Christ actually said. Likewise, the belief that Christ's very specific prophesy that "not one stone" would be left standing one upon another (in the Temple and city) refers to AD 70, is found wanting. It sounds good when we read scripture superficially or when we listen to Josephus, but careful consideration of it (in the light of the Bible) finds the interpretation false and inconsistent with both scripture "and" the facts of history.

Therefore any doctrine of Preterism is false.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
One may ask, "What is the difference between what you believe about 70AD, and what he believes?

The difference is that he says things that cannot be Biblically validated and pass them off as the actual Word of God. Allow me to demonstrate the difference.

For example, if I were to say that I think many Jewish revolutionaries were held up in the hills in AD 70, and someone else says they think that only a few revolutionary Jews went up into the hills, then we have a legitimate difference of opinion. Either of us could be right or wrong in our opinion, we can't really know for sure. But this has nothing to do with understanding the Bible or Prophesy. On the other hand, if I were to say that the Bible teaches that in the New Testament dispensation that started at the cross, the Holy Temple of God is the Church and no longer the Jewish Temple, and you were to deny that in some way, this is NOT a simple matter of legitimate difference of opinion, this is a denial of the Word of God. There is a difference! When you do everything you can to avoid receiving the truth of scripture, it's not opinion, it's denial and what God calls rebellion. It's about keeping the word of God faithfully, rather than trampling it under foot, ignoring it, or finding some "irrational" way to get around it. You simply cannot look at Lamentations chapter four of the gold becoming dim and changed, and "read into" this scripture that it is referring to the Elect. That is just the "abominable handling" of the scriptures.

Psalms 119:4-7
  • "Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently.
  • O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes!
  • Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.
  • I will praise thee with uprightness of heart, when I shall have learned thy righteous judgments."
Likewise, we cannot postulate that God Himself is making a prophecy of an Old Testament Temple, years after Calvary with the Temple's veil torn down, and still calling it the Holy Temple that is becoming abominable, and that believers must then flee from when they see this action take place. That's ludicrous! The Old Testament system of ceremonial worship in the "holy place" in the Holy Temple of Israel came to an end at the cross when Christ tore the veil, not AD 70. God is not saying the abomination will start in AD 70 and that is when the Apostles should look for it and flee. That makes absolutely no biblical sense. AD 70 wasn't the beginning of a new era, the death and resurrection of Christ were. The fact is, their house was abominable then, and it's desolation ushered in the New Testament Church dispensation. So the "difference" in our approach to prophesy is that one (the AD 70 interpretation) is extra-Biblical historical speculation, and the other (that Israel fell at the cross) is the "witness of the word."

When Christ said true Christians "hear His words" He is not just whistling Dixie. It is a divine characteristic of true Christianity to receive God's word, and a characteristic of the unfaithful to do everything in their power to get around it, or to not receive it. Because true Christians have the Spirit of God within them, who is not offended by His own Truth. Thus, by the Spiritual, we receive the Spiritual word.

Matthew 11:14-15
  • "And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
  • He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
Christ says "IF" you will receive it, because He knows full well that the Scribes, Pharisees, Judaizers and other sundry religionists will not receive it. They cannot receive it. For this same reason, some Premillennialists are still looking for literal Elijah to come back today to fulfill that prophecy. Like those enamored with Josephus, they are so constrained by the historical or physical, that they cannot even comprehend that this scripture was fulfilled already some other way. Likewise with the destruction of Israel. What many fail to understand was that Israel was prophesied to fall spiritually by the hand of God, not Physically by the hand of Roman soldiers. But because their eyes are on the temporal, carnal, worldly, the physical rather than the spiritual, the physical is all that they only seem to be able to see. They don't recognize the Prophet Elijah came before Christ, or that the Temple was destroyed long before AD 70. As Christ said, "If" you will receive it, he who hath an ear, let him hear. The Truth is, stones fell, highways were straightened, ears were made deaf, valleys made low, eyes blinded, cities wasted, fig trees cursed that they never bear fruit again, etc., and it had NOTHING to do with the physical. People "recognize" that in the mind of God, the temple fell with the tearing of the veil in the Temple at Christ's death, but they then "irrationally" refuse to RECEIVE the truth that this (according to the mind of God, which they recognize) was the fulfillment of the fall of the Temple. It is "foolishness" to some people that we would declare such a thing unless a physical temple falls. ..But not so!

1st Corinthians 2:14-16
  • "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
  • But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
  • For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."
You see knowing the mind of Christ involves "following The word of God" ONLY! Because that is the revealed mind of Christ that instructs us. Not Josephus nor his merry band of Historicists. Selah!

The problem is, every gospel that is not the true gospel, does this dance called the "half-step." They refuse to receive "some particular truths of scripture," and others want to simply chalk our difference in methodology to a difference of opinion when it's not really that simple. Whether Free Willism, Premillennialism, Roman Catholicism, Dispensationalism, Mormonism, Preterism, Ecumenism, Liberalism, whatever! They all come to their conclusions based upon the flawed premise that they can interpret the scriptures when only God can interpret scripture. Not Josephus, Not John Darby, not the Pope, not Joe Smith, not John Calvin, not any man. Interpretations belong to God. Thus the fall of the Temple is defined by the mind of Christ, not by the vain imaginations of man looking at history or world news.

What is the difference you ask? The difference is that "GOD SAID" that He destroyed Israel, took the Kingdom from her, and gave it to another nation that would bring forth the fruits. By everyone's account, this spoke of the Church! This New Testament Church of the kingdom of God started at Pentecost, not AD 70! Selah! What further witness do we need than that of the Bible? Josephus? Other Jewish historians? Traditions? No, it's just common sense that we simply "RECEIVE" if we have ears to hear. But I think that it was Francois Voltaire who said, "common sense is just not that common!" Oh how right he was. What he (and most of the rest of mankind) didn't understand is the reason for this. It's because man is a sinful creature, desperately wicked, and he wants "his will" to be done rather than God's. Another way to describe irrational behavior is sin.

Therefore all doctrines of Preterism are false.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,620.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
What is the difference you ask? The difference is that "GOD SAID" that He destroyed Israel, took the Kingdom from her, and gave it to another nation that would bring forth the fruits. By everyone's account, this spoke of the Church! This New Testament Church of the kingdom of God started at Pentecost, not AD 70!
Well, that New Testament Church was actually started with the change in the priesthood when Christ ascended on His resurrection day and was anointed by God to serve in that role of our "Great High Priest". Pentecost 50 days later only gave overwhelming evidence that this New Testament Church had already been established under the New Covenant. I think you also included some comments above that agree with this. But you are right that the New Testament Church did not begin in AD 70. The events of AD 70 were merely God "taking out the trash" by physically destroying and burning up those elements that had already died back in AD 33 (i.e., the physical temple, the Levitical priesthood, and the tribal genealogies).

You are getting a little bit hung up on the current city of Jerusalem today having buildings made of stones standing within it. These were rebuilt later on in generations following the total destruction of Jerusalem, using some of the reclaimed materials lying around. Whether you choose to believe his eye-witness or not, Josephus writes that after the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, a traveler standing at the site would have to ask directions for where he was, because there was nothing there that could make him believe he was standing in front of what used to be the city of Jerusalem. Josephus' eye-witness testimony only agrees with that of Jesus when He prophesied that all the temple and the city's buildings within it would be "laid level with the ground". This was certainly fulfilled. The "Wailing Wall" is no exception to this either, since it is merely the below-ground foundation stones that were holding up the Fortress of Antonia above where the Roman soldiers were garrisoned.

Likewise, we cannot postulate that God Himself is making a prophecy of an Old Testament Temple, years after Calvary with the Temple's veil torn down, and still calling it the Holy Temple that is becoming abominable, and that believers must then flee from when they see this action take place. That's ludicrous!
You are missing the literary use of an "anachronism" in scripture. The second temple and the city of Jerusalem was only called "holy" AFTER Christ's resurrection (such as in Matthew 27:53) because that is the title it USED TO GO BY and was the term which the Jews associated with it. That is not a contradiction to the fact that Jerusalem's physical temple system was defunct and obsolete the moment Christ established the New Covenant in His blood at His resurrection-day ascension.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Well, that New Testament Church was actually started with the change in the priesthood when Christ ascended on His resurrection day and was anointed by God to serve in that role of our "Great High Priest". Pentecost 50 days later only gave overwhelming evidence that this New Testament Church had already been established under the New Covenant. I think you also included some comments above that agree with this. But you are right that the New Testament Church did not begin in AD 70.

Good.

The events of AD 70 were merely God "taking out the trash" by physically destroying and burning up those elements that had already died back in AD 33 (i.e., the physical temple, the Levitical priesthood, and the tribal genealogies).

This is not how Bible confirmed this.

You are getting a little bit hung up on the current city of Jerusalem today having buildings made of stones standing within it. These were rebuilt later on in generations following the total destruction of Jerusalem, using some of the reclaimed materials lying around. Whether you choose to believe his eye-witness or not, Josephus writes that after the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, a traveler standing at the site would have to ask directions for where he was, because there was nothing there that could make him believe he was standing in front of what used to be the city of Jerusalem. Josephus' eye-witness testimony only agrees with that of Jesus when He prophesied that all the temple and the city's buildings within it would be "laid level with the ground". This was certainly fulfilled. The "Wailing Wall" is no exception to this either, since it is merely the below-ground foundation stones that were holding up the Fortress of Antonia above where the Roman soldiers were garrisoned.

Disagreed.

First of all 70 A.D. doesn't qualify as an abomination that made anything desolate, much less the Holy Temple of God--which "that" Temple in Jerusalem at the time was not! That Temple Christ spoke of was left desolate in 33 A.D., along with the Holy City of Jerusalem. It was left desolate by the abominations that, to this day, its people still don't recognize. Not abominations as Josephus, assorted Premils, and Preterists think they might refer to, but as defined and spoken of throughout God's word. The abominations of "His People."

Ezekiel 43:7-8
  • "And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
  • In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger."
Flavius Josephus doesn't know anymore about "this" abomination that makes Desolate prophesy against the people of Israel, as the majority of the people of Israel themselves did. Nor do many professing Christians today understand the "real" abominations that they themselves have wrought that will make their house desolate as well. They all are all too busy looking at the temporal things like physical armies, cities, materials of buildings, literal stones and mountains, geopolitical wars, golden thrones, and the power of the rulers of this world. In doing so, like Israel before them they completely miss the point, just as you do! The Biblical fact is, the Romans didn't make the Temple Desolate by any act they did in it, it was the people of Israel by the acts they did in it. Contrary to Josephus, the abominations were not by the Romans, but by the Israelites themselves, and the desolations were not of the physical city having all its stones falling or being thrown down (Lu 19:41-4), but of a spiritual fall of a city, a spiritual kingdom removed, and a spiritual Holy Temple whose stones were all thrown down. Jesus was talking about the fall of the old testament covenant and in three days, he rebuilt it this time with the New Testament covenant the very covenant that he has confirmed in Daniel 9:24. Believe it or not, as we see there is not really much difference between the eschatology of Flavius Josephus, the Premillennialists and the Preterists. They all have their collective heads stuck in earthly Jerusalem seeking physical fulfillment there, rather than an archetypal Jerusalem that represents the city from above.

Selah!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟415,058.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
According to Josephus a lot of things are and were, that aren't and weren't. Preterists' words (contradictorily) say much. Contradiction does not make for a sound, systemartic, analytical, Biblical, Sola-Scriptura interpretation of God's word, by God's word. Interpretation by the words of unbeliever Josephus God would never advise. It's a known "fact" that many of Josephu's writings are biased and some just plain not true. Which says it all as far as using him as an authority on Hebrew (God-authored) prophecy fulfilled and Christian doctrine or understanding. Wisdom manifests itself in accepting the Bible alone as the authoritative revelator of prophecy. Not the "well respected" writings of the unbelievers who write their views of history.

Proverbs 1:5-8
  • "A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
  • To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.
  • The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
  • My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:"

God says a man of understanding will attain unto wise counsels to understand a proverb and the interpretation. ...that would NOT be Josephus nor ALL those who depend upon his writings for validation, but the inerrant authoritative word of God. When God tells you what abominations are in His Holy Temple, it's inerrant so we should listen. When God defines desolation there because of abominations, it's inerrant, so we should listen and compare. So while according to Josephus, the fundamental cause of the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple was God through the abominations of Romans acting out in it and tearing it down, God says it is "His OWN People" who practiced the abominations in His house, and it is "His People" that will fall down TYPE as with not one left as a stone in that building. It is Christ HIMSELF who is the New building, the cornerstone of their Temple that was rejected and has become head of the corner anyway, and the restoration of stones from every nation. STONES = PEOPLE. Not physical stones. Get it? The Holy Temple is re-established in the nations, as the judgment of His people is that the Kingdom has been taken from them and given to another. God's words, not mine. Not the words of Josephus, Calvin or John Walvoord, but God's inerrant word of truth and interpretation.

As righteous Joseph said, "Do not interpretations belong to God?" Indeed they do. Flavius Josephus notwithstanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DavidPT
Upvote 0