This generation

[Hammster]

Still utterly disappointing if "no place was found for them" just means "well Christianity will just be the most popular religion, but God gave up on this world and we all just go to a spiritual floaty cloudy place and be disembodied floaty spirity things when we die"
Because it means God said to Satan "here, you can keep this world, I'm just taking people to floaty cloudy place forever and abandoning my creation, forget what I said about restoring all things, you won this time"

I’m not sure what post you are responding to. It certainly wasn’t mine. Any chance you’ll respond to that one? Here’s the questions again.

Was Isaiah wrong when he said that His government would increase? Was Daniel wrong when he said that the stone cut without hands would grow into a mountain and fill the earth? Was Jesus wrong when He said that His kingdom would start tiny and grow until it was huge?

 

[Hammster]

This all happened 40 years before your "end date". This was all finished and completed in 30AD. Not a single verse in this quote points to 70AD. The Word of God on the Cross is, "IT IS FINISHED".

It was finished, but something still had to happen, correct?

 

[Jamdoc]

You apparently believe that the Judean Christians were wrong to heed Jesus' warning and flee.

They should have stayed put and been slaughtered.

No, I'm not saying that, they probably anticipated Jesus to return then.
But it didn't happen, meaning that either God exaggerated so badly that it might as well have been a lie, Jesus outright lied, which doesn't appear to be the case because SOMETHING happened. Just not exactly what Jesus had said....
or, there is a more exact fufillment that we still need to be watching for.

Here's the thing, were they right to watch for the warnings? Yes
But because Jesus did not return at that time, it is ALSO right for EVERY generation to continue to watch, because an ultimate fulfillment that does involve a Great Tribulation, and culminates in the return of Jesus Christ WILL happen. To see 70AD as the ultimate fulfillment requires massive stretches to accommodate it.

It requires 1 of 2 things:
1. Inserting a disconnect between the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming (Partial Preterism) which Jesus not only didn't teach, but directly taught against.
or
2. Deluding yourself into believing Jesus DID return (Full Preterism), and claiming that this cursed, degenerate, sin glorifying sodomite exalting drug addicted depraved wicked violent pornographic child murdering Christ denying self worshiping war ridden world.... is the New Heavens and New Earth promised where RIGHTEOUSNESS dwells. Such a level of delusion either involves residing in an echo chamber or a cave to not bear witness to the wickedness that God will punish this Earth for, or allegorizing and internalizing everything so heavily that it no longer has any real meaning. You might as well spout new age mantras about peace and joy coming from within or whatever they say.

Believing in Preterism means you see no point in watching, because either it already happened (full preterism) and now you're just waiting to die because there's no hope left except dying to be with the Lord, or there's no point in watching because the signs have all happened, and now the only thing left is a sudden instant nuke of the world when Jesus returns (partial preterism), which, you can't even watch for anyway since no signs precede it or those that did happened so long ago they're not useful for marking when it could happen.
But we were given the signs so that we would not completely be in the dark, we'd be able to anticipate it and hope for it, to watch for it and pray for it.

 

[Hammster]

It is the generation that sees the fig tree blooming. So if you do not see the fig tree as Israel, that would be every single year for the last 1992 years.


"Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

This generation is the one signified by the parable of the fig tree blooming. Jesus did say it to them, with the criteria specified of the parable. The parable is part of these things. Jesus did not say, "your generation that sees these things". Jesus said, "this generation that sees these things".

I posted this before. Maybe you missed it.

From verse one to verse 34 there are 14 uses of “you” as a second person plural, meaning “y’all who I’m talking to”.

Here’s the parable you are referring to.


“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.
— Matthew 24:32-33

Based on this, who is it that needs to look for signs? His immediate audience.

Then He says this


Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:34

Again, He’s talking to His immediate audience. And when He said this generation, it’s the generation He just told to look for signs.

So grammatically, it has to be that generation to whom He was speaking to.

 

[Jamdoc]

Those signs, however, were about the judgement coming upon Jerusalem. Hence “this generation”. Again, you have assumed your conclusion.

If you think Matthew 24 was not about His second coming
then Revelation isn't either.
That's the logical leap you're taking with this assertion.
Because the darkening of the sun and moon is a sign indicating the day of the Lord, and it is used over and over in Old Testament scripture. Now, at the crucifixion itself these signs did play out to an extent, there was darkness over the land for 3 hours, and an earthquake just before Jesus died.
I'd almost have gone with that as the fulfillment of the old testament prophecies and been left scratching my head about all the things connected with those prophecies that DID NOT happen....
except John wrote about it in Revelation as something still future when it was written, which the majority of scholars put after 70AD, only a few people trying to make preterism claims date it prior.

But it is the same sign given, and it's just before the day of the Lord, before the trumpets and vials.

So you either need to assert that Revelation was fulfilled, making you a full preterist, or assert that Revelation isn't about the second coming.
Because to claim that the Olivet Discourse isn't about the second coming, but Revelation is, is inconsistent.

 

[Hammster]

Because the darkening of the sun and moon is a sign indicating the day of the Lord, and it is used over and over in Old Testament scripture.

Let’s focus on this. What was the language used to convey?

 

[Jamdoc]

Let’s focus on this. What was the language used to convey?

destruction, followed by restoration.
you can claim that AD70 had the destruction aspect.
But there was no restoration.

and that is the key thing to hope for, the restoration after. Of course nobody really looks forward to the destruction aspects, the wrath of God will be a terrible thing, but, we still look forward to the Return of Jesus, because it will bring the restoration of the Earth.

 

[Hammster]

destruction, followed by restoration.
you can claim that AD70 had the destruction aspect.
But there was no restoration.

and that is the key thing to hope for, the restoration after. Of course nobody really looks forward to the destruction aspects, the wrath of God will be a terrible thing, but, we still look forward to the Return of Jesus, because it will bring the restoration of the Earth.

Right. It was decreation language. And then rebuilding. Sun/moon/stars always represented leaders. So we have the old Jerusalem destroyed, and then the new Jerusalem. Hence “this generation”.

 

[Zao is life]

I’m not clear on your point.

Makes no difference to whether or not we can legitimately assume that the great tribulation that the elect would go through (which is what Jesus was talking about when He used the words "this generation" - Matthew 24:9 through 34) means the time in history and time of tribulation of those who believe in Jesus generation we want to place it in.

I know. I had a disconnect to this server while I was trying to edit my poor grammar. But now I have to find the your post I was replying to so I know what I was talking about. Otherwise you won't know either.

 

[Zao is life]

I never argued for the return of Christ in 70 AD. So I don’t know why you’d bring it up. Hopefully it’s not an attempt to distract.

Makes no difference as to whether or not we can legitimately assume that the great tribulation which the passage is referring to (Matthew 24:34, Matthew 24:29-31, Matthew 24:21-22 and Matthew 24:9-14, which is what the passage says the elect would go through) is referring to a time in history we choose to place "this generation" (Matthew 24:34) in - whether in the 1st century or at any other time, or in the future.

The time of the great tribulation that "this generation" of Christians (Matthew 24:34, 29-31, 21-22, 9-14) would face does not necessarily have to mean the time that the temple was destroyed.

Jesus begins to tell of the tribulation of Christians in Matthew 24:9, and if anyone denies that from that verse onward, the whole passage is joined together by the words "and", "therefore", "but", "for" and "because", linking the tribulation of verses 29-31 and 21-22 to the tribulation of verse 9, then the person doing so is only showing the whole world how intellectually dishonest he is capable of being with himself in order to hang onto a belief that "this generation" mentioned in verse 34 is "not" speaking about "this generation" of Christians that will face this time of great tribulation -

"this generation" in Matthew 24:34 is not referring at all to the Jews of Jerusalem whom Luke says in Luke 21:20-24 would experience great distress because the wrath of God will come upon the city when it's surrounded by armies.

Therefore "this generation" in Matthew 24:34 can be referring to any generation of Christians.

 

[Zao is life]

Irrelevant.
You'r task is to demonstrate where the Bible instructs you to interpret 2 Samuel 22 Figuratively, but Interpret Peter Literally.
The reason you can't, is because it doesn't.



I am appealing DIRECTLY to what Peter said.
He uses (as all the apostles and Jesus also use) the langage and imagry of universal cataclysm, God being SEEN riding a cloud to earth, personaly fighing His enemies on the battlefield, figuratively to describe a local judgment upon a nation EXACTLY the same way the OT prophets before them used it.

The fact remains, There is no scripture instucting you to interpret Jesus' and the apostles' use of this same language in a Polar Opposite way from How you interpret the OT prophets' use of it.

Which is why, it seems, you are taking the greatest pains to avoid honestly answering the question.



The ECFs after AD 70 were not inspired in their writings as were the apostles. We must prefer the apostolic teaching over later inventions where they are shown to be in contradiction.

We must recognize that they were not inspired nor reliable from any consensus standpoint.

If you want the truth, you must trust the ECFs of AD 30-70 that wrote the New Testament letters.


Fine, Since you asked so nicely...

From The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom
(A.D.347-407)
Archbishop of Constantinople:

[1] "O God of spirits and of all flesh, who hast trampled down death and overthrown the devil, and given life to thy world, do thou, the same Lord, give rest to the souls of thy servants, names, who have fallen asleep, in a place of light, in a place of verdure, in a place of repose, whence all sickness, sorrow and sighing are fled away. Pardon every sin committed by them in word or deed or thought, for thou art a good God and Lover of man, for there is no man that liveth and sinneth not, for thou only art without sin and thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy word is truth."

[2] "Remembering this saving commandment and all those things which have come to pass for us: the cross, the grave, the resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven, the sitting down at the right hand, and the second and glorious coming"

[3] "Attend, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, from thy holy dwelling place and from the glorious throne of thy kingdom, and come to sanctify us, O thou that sittest with the Father above, and that are invisibly present here with us. And vouchsafe, by thy strong right hand to impart to us thine immaculate body and thy precious blood, and through us, to all thy people."

(On The Fulfillment of Prophecy)
"It is proper and just to sing hymns to You, to bless You, to praise You, to thank You, to worship You in every place of Your kingdom; for You are God ineffable, inconceivable, invisible, incomprehensible, ever existing, yet ever the same. You, and your only Son and Your Holy Spirit; You brought us forth from non-existence into being, and raised us up again when we had fallen, and left nothing undone until you had brought us to heaven and bestowed upon us your future kingdom." (Prayer of the Anaphora - Eucharistic Prayer)

For certain, the greatest number of the earliest Christians believed that a number of, if not all, prophecies of the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in the first century destruction of Jerusalem. The challenge, in fact, is to find even one early Christian that didn't teach the Preterist interpretation of Matthew 24. The earliest and most significant writers were in unanimous agreement, proclaiming the fulfillment of these prophecies in the time of the AD70 destruction of the Jewish city, temple and nation.

Here's a couple more snippets:

Origen - Against Celsus | John | Matthew "I challenge anyone to prove my statement untrue if I say that the entire Jewish nation was destroyed less than one whole generation later on account of these sufferings which they inflicted on Jesus. For it was, I believe, forty-two years from the time when they crucified Jesus to the destruction of Jerusalem."

Chrysostom - Homilies on Matthew 24 "Was their house left desolate? Did all the vengeance come upon that generation? It is quite plain that it was so, and no man gainsays it."

The ECFs recognized:

(1) that the great tribulation is past, transpiring at AD 66-70
(2) that AD 70 involved a coming of Jesus Christ in judgment

So, while they did not establish a biblically consistent preterism, they were far more preteristic in their understanding of eschatology than most modern futurists. The fact is that the ECFs had their hands full with formulating a consistent Christology, and didn't spend as much time formulating an orthodox, systematic eschatology. We know that the ECFs had mostly assigned Matthew 24 to the past, and the Protestant Reformers had a majority view that all Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the first century.

Classical preterism (i.e. The Catholic Preterism of the likes of James Aiken, Scott Hahn, St Cryssostom, St Thomas Aquinas, Eusebius, etc...) sees AD 70 as a temporal judgment coming of God/Christ.

St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Eusebius all understood this basic principle of bible eschatology, and we really ought to take their words to heart.

As St. Thomas Aquinas taught:
The signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to Hesychius about the end of the world, refer not only to Christ's [future] coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find that none of them refers to the coming advent, as he remarks: because these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race (Thomas Aquinas; Summa Theologica, Supplement Question 73, Article 1)

And even St. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa (AD 336-395) - My signature line:
"Do we romance about three Resurrections? Do we promise the gluttony of the Millennium? Do we declare that the Jewish animal-sacrifices shall be restored? Do we lower men's hopes again to the Jerusalem below, imagining its rebuilding with stones of a more brilliant material? What charge like these can be brought against us, that our company should be reckoned a thing to be avoided?"

Regardless, again, it's the views of the ECF from AD30-70 who's views we ought to prefer when they are shown to contradict the views of the Later ECF.

Peter talks about the elements melting with fervent heat. Peter's description of the return of Christ hardly fits the language of prophets when they have spoken about the heavens being shaken, stars falling, sun and the moon being darkened. Those metaphors all have specific metaphoric meanings (unlike Peter's words).

It takes a great sense of illegitimate liberty to apply a meaning to Peter's words that fits the same metaphoric language seen in 2 Samuel 22.

Your task is to demonstrate where the Bible says that we must assume (like you do) that Peter's words fits the same metaphoric meaning, but you fail to even try because you know you cannot.

 

[3 Resurrections]

and this cursed, sin glorifying, homosexuality exalting, lawless, depraved, degenerate, reprobate world is your idea of the fulfillment of the New Heavens and New Earth at the end of Revelation?

If I at all thought you might be right.. I'd be so disappointed I'd be considering suicide.
I don't, because I think you're flat out wrong.
But that's the fruit of preterist teaching to me.

If I compared this to the way people cook, I would say you are thinking in terms of a microwave process. Punch a few buttons, and presto...instant meal, over and done. Of course, we would all like to see humanity immediately cease its endless examples of abominable activity.

But God thinks more in terms of a crock pot cooking method. A slow, simmering, overnight process. God is called "long-suffering" for a reason. He has more patience than we do by a long shot.

The NHNE was never intended to illustrate the final judgment and the totally-purified conditions on this earth. It is only within the New Jerusalem city itself that everything is presented as flawless. That is due to Christ's imputed perfection that covers anyone who has entered its gates called "Salvation" (back in Isaiah 60:18). But outside those open gates wickedness is still being practiced, as in Revelation 22:15.

God uses the tree of life inside the New Jerusalem to "heal the nations" of that wickedness; one individual person at a time (Revelation 22:2). If you don't like the slow pace of that healing process, you'll have to take that up with God who devised this means of growing His kingdom up until the final judgment.

 

[Zao is life]

If I compared this to the way people cook, I would say you are thinking in terms of a microwave process. Punch a few buttons, and presto...instant meal, over and done. Of course, we would all like to see humanity immediately cease its endless examples of abominable activity.

But God thinks more in terms of a crock pot cooking method. A slow, simmering, overnight process. God is called "long-suffering" for a reason. He has more patience than we do by a long shot.

The NHNE was never intended to illustrate the final judgment and the totally-purified conditions on this earth. It is only within the New Jerusalem city itself that everything is presented as flawless. That is due to Christ's imputed perfection that covers anyone who has entered its gates called "Salvation" (back in Isaiah 60:18). But outside those open gates wickedness is still being practiced, as in Revelation 22:15.

God uses the tree of life inside the New Jerusalem to "heal the nations" of that wickedness; one individual person at a time (Revelation 22:2). If you don't like the slow pace of that healing process, you'll have to take that up with God who devised this means of growing His kingdom up until the final judgment.

Copy @Jamdoc
Nice theory but you have to ignore the fact that in the last 2,000 years of the slow cooking you are talking about, the meat is still raw and the stench thereof is as great as ever. This process is not going to go on slow-cooking for eternity, and nothing gets better just because until the day that God destroys "Jericho", His arm of mercy and long-suffering will be stretched out still.

It does not mean that "when the wickedness of the inhabitants of the land of Canaan has reached its fullness", total destruction is not going to come upon the wicked at the hand of God, so that He can establish His (Christ's) Kingdom, in which only righteousness dwells.

Your slow cooking is gonna have all your wedding guests left long ago, because they know at this rate your theory is never gonna get cooked properly.

 

[Hammster]

Makes no difference as to whether or not we can legitimately assume that the great tribulation which the passage is referring to (Matthew 24:34, Matthew 24:29-31, Matthew 24:21-22 and Matthew 24:9-14, which is what the passage says the elect would go through) is referring to a time in history we choose to place "this generation" (Matthew 24:34) in - whether in the 1st century or at any other time, or in the future.

The time of the great tribulation that "this generation" of Christians (Matthew 24:34, 29-31, 21-22, 9-14) would face does not necessarily have to mean the time that the temple was destroyed.

Jesus begins to tell of the tribulation of Christians in Matthew 24:9, and if anyone denies that from that verse onward, the whole passage is joined together by the words "and", "therefore", "but", "for" and "because", linking the tribulation of verses 29-31 and 21-22 to the tribulation of verse 9, then the person doing so is only showing the whole world how intellectually dishonest he is capable of being with himself in order to hang onto a belief that "this generation" mentioned in verse 34 is "not" speaking about "this generation" of Christians that will face this time of great tribulation -

"this generation" in Matthew 24:34 is not referring at all to the Jews of Jerusalem whom Luke says in Luke 21:20-24 would experience great distress because the wrath of God will come upon the city when it's surrounded by armies.

Therefore "this generation" in Matthew 24:34 can be referring to any generation of Christians.

The problem with your argument is one I’ve pointed out at least a half dozen times in this thread. The “you” statements are second person plural. They are directed to the immediate audience.


“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:32-34

These are all the people hearing Him. So this statement is directed to them. If it was to be a future generation, He could have said “that generation”.

 

[Zao is life]

The problem with your argument is one I’ve pointed out at least a half dozen times in this thread. The “you” statements are second person plural. They are directed to the immediate audience.

“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:32-34

These are all the people hearing Him. So this statement is directed to them. If it was to be a future generation, He could have said “that generation”.

If what you say about the "you" in the verse is true, then the "you" is limited to the very limited audience that Jesus had gathered around Him on that day on the Mount of Olives. But of course, what you say carries zero truth, as do most Preterist arguments (according to my own human intellect or IMO):

Revelation 18:20
20 Rejoice over her, Heaven, and the holy apostles, and the prophets, since God judged your [ὑμῶν hymōn] judgment on her.

05216
ὑμῶν hymōn, hoo-mone'
genitive case of 5210;
of (from or concerning) you:--ye, you, your (own, -selves).

Then they will deliver you [ὑμᾶς hymâs] up to be afflicted and will kill you. And you will be hated of all nations for My name's sake.

ὑμᾶς hymâs, hoo-mas'
accusative case of 5210;
you (as the objective of a verb or preposition):--ye, you (+ -ward), your (+ own).

The verbs are deliver and kill. The objective is their (the disciples') tribulation.

And then many will be offended, and will betray one another, and will hate one another.

.. and of course there is an abundance of history about Christians betraying one another in the 1st century.

Oh, but of course there isn't.

It's referring to the disciples who would go through great tribulation and be gathered by Christ's angels (Matthew 24:29-31). That's clear.

Matthew 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you [ὑμᾶς hymâs], do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you,, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you

So now Jesus is referring only to the same generation of believers He was talking to in the Olivet Discourse? According to your argument He is only referring to that generation.

Still no proof from you that it's referring to the generation that was alive in 30 A.D whom Jesus was giving the message to.

.. and the "you" would not have been referring to the generation alive in 70 A.D if what you say about the meaning of the word "you" were true.

 

[Hammster]

If what you say about the "you" in the verse is true, then the "you" is limited to the very limited audience that Jesus had gathered around Him on that day on the Mount of Olives. But of course, what you say carries zero truth, as do most Preterist arguments (according to my own human intellect or IMO):

Revelation 18:20
20 Rejoice over her, Heaven, and the holy apostles, and the prophets, since God judged your [ὑμῶν hymōn] judgment on her.

05216
ὑμῶν hymōn, hoo-mone'
genitive case of 5210;
of (from or concerning) you:--ye, you, your (own, -selves).

Then they will deliver you [ὑμᾶς hymâs] up to be afflicted and will kill you. And you will be hated of all nations for My name's sake.

ὑμᾶς hymâs, hoo-mas'
accusative case of 5210;
you (as the objective of a verb or preposition):--ye, you (+ -ward), your (+ own).

The verbs are deliver and kill. The objective is their (the disciples') tribulation.

And then many will be offended, and will betray one another, and will hate one another.

.. and of course there is an abundance of history about Christians betraying one another in the 1st century.

Oh, but of course there isn't.

It's referring to the disciples who would go through great tribulation and be gathered by Christ's angels (Matthew 24:29-31). That's clear.

Still no proof from you that it's referring to the generation that was alive in 30 A.D whom Jesus was giving the message to.

.. and the "you" would not have been referring to the generation alive in 70 A.D if what you say about the meaning of the word "you" were true.

I just gave you the proof. The “you” statements were directed to His audience. Because of that “this generation” is also directed to them. In the same manner “this generation” was directed to the Pharisees in Matt 23.


Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
— Matthew 23:36


If you want to redefine “you” that on you.

 

[Zao is life]

I just gave you the proof. The “you” statements were directed to His audience. Because of that “this generation” is also directed to them. In the same manner “this generation” was directed to the Pharisees in Matt 23.


Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
— Matthew 23:36


If you want to redefine “you” that on you.

Matthew 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you [ὑμᾶς hymâs], do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you.

So now Jesus is referring only to the same generation of believers He was talking to in the Olivet Discourse? According to your argument He is only referring to that generation. Same word used.

 

[Hammster]

Matthew 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you [ὑμᾶς hymâs], do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you.

So now Jesus is referring only to the same generation of believers He was talking to in the Olivet Discourse? According to your argument He is only referring to that generation. Same word used.

Does He mention “this generation” in that text? If not, your argument isn’t relative. He does mention “this generation” in other places (see the OP). In those cases, it was always to the generation whom He was speaking to. The “you” statements in Matthew 24 just go to support that it was them who would see the signs.

 

[JulieB67]

Lucifer is not Satan. Lucifer is called "the man that made the earth to tremble..." in Isaiah 14:16.

Lucifer is definitely Satan. Lucifer in the Hebrew is heylel (in the sense of brightness), the morning star.

Angels are often called men in the Bible. They look just like us. Satan is no different other than God made him the full pattern, he's beautiful. And as Paul states, that's why we need to full amour on- to fight the wiles of the devil -Satan. He will be disguised as an angel of light so he can play savior. And he succeeds in getting most of the world to worship him. Paul says people will be thinking peace and safety and then bam, destruction, the true Christ returns. People will be wanting to hide at that point in their shame. And the verses in Isaiah refer to that time in the future when he and his will deceive most of the world.

He will be the Babylon King for the end times. The Assyrian and King of Tyrus also have double meanings and point to Satan. We know this because of the Garden of Eden references among others.

Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Sa'-tan, which deceived the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."

The following verse is the gospel that Christ talks about that must be published before the end comes. In Luke Christ says people must not premeditate because it will the the Holy Spirit that will speak through them and of course Paul includes the Word of God as part of the amour that one will need at that time.

Revelation 12:11 "And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.


Revelation 2:10 "Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.."

Back to Isaiah,

Isaiah 14:13 "For thou hast said in thine heart, `I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:"

Notice the words "also will sit". He will sit on the temple in Jerusalem proclaiming to be God.

Isaiah 14:14 "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the MOST HIGH."

Paul's teachings mirror this.

II Thessalonians 2:4 "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."

No babylon king ever sat on the the throne in Jerusalem claiming to be God. They had their own thrones and their own Gods.

Isaiah 14:15 "Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

John is a second witness because that's how perfect our Father is,

Revelation 20:1 "And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

"Revelation 20:2 "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.

Isaiah 14:16 "They that see thee shall shall narrowly look upon the, and consider thee, saying. "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

He deceived most of the world. Afterwards they'll look at him like he's nothing compared to our Lord.



The bible has to be taken as a whole so many of these truths can open up.

Many Christians don't give Satan the importance they should when it comes to the Word of God. They think he's some pesky little spirit but he will be here sometime in the future and people need to prepare for that. Christ says beware as well as Paul. We have been warned and told to watch. It will come upon one generation.

 

[Timtofly]

The ECFs recognized:

(1) that the great tribulation is past, transpiring at AD 66-70
(2) that AD 70 involved a coming of Jesus Christ in judgment

So, while they did not establish a biblically consistent preterism, they were far more preteristic in their understanding of eschatology than most modern futurists. The fact is that the ECFs had their hands full with formulating a consistent Christology, and didn't spend as much time formulating an orthodox, systematic eschatology. We know that the ECFs had mostly assigned Matthew 24 to the past, and the Protestant Reformers had a majority view that all Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the first century.

The only thing pointed out in their quotes was that Jerusalem was destroyed and left desolate. That is not even a point in the OD. That was a declaration Jesus made at the temple. History outside of God's Word declared Jerusalem was leveled. That is putting Josephus ahead of Jesus when it comes to the Gospel. Jesus did not mention in the OD, what Josephus actually wrote about 70AD. Except for an event 3 years prior, when they saw the armies, they fled. That is the only confirmation that even Josephus gave, who actually was there before the ECF who came later. The ECF, did know the historical record that Jerusalem was sacked. They associated that with the fact the Jews claimed vengeance themselves if Jesus was actually innocent. Matthew 27:24-26

"When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified."

This is the point of those 2 quotes, not the OD.

No one claimed Matthew 24 was fulfilled until a Catholic Jesuit made stuff up during the Reformation. Millions have accepted Islam. That does not make it the truth. If all of Christianity accepts Preterism, that still would not make it true.

If the church had issues even accepting who Christ was, how would they know how many times Christ actually ministered in a physical capacity on earth? The fact is two generations, and even a third generation were all dead or enslaved 40 years later after the Cross. 40 years was plenty of time to kill off 2 generations in the first century, let alone one. Look how many generations of even emperors changed hands in the first century.

Tribulation, persecution, and death did not stop in 70AD. It was still going strong during the Reformation. It is still going strong today. The end has not been declared. Matthew 24:12-14.

"And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

Jesus did not say "you" as in "that generation" had to endure until the final "end of all things". The point is not giving up, even at the point of death. Being saved is not physical, but one's spiritual condition. On the other side of physical death is a totally different physical body. No one is saving this flesh, but gaining a permanent incorruptible physical body. That did not apply to just one generation. That has applied to every generation since the Cross. It still applies today. If the OD was finalized in 70AD, no preterist after 70AD could claim that point for themselves. No one could endure until the end. There would be nothing but carnal pleasure to endure for, and no more salvation nor resurrection after 70AD. Preterism is not even about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. That is just history. Preterism is about the total end of persecution and the spread of the Gospel itself. After 70AD, no one would have to endure at all, because 70AD was the end for Preterist. It was for that one generation, and once completed, that was the end.

In the OD, Jesus was not teaching the end of the Law. Jesus was teaching the end of the Gospel of the Cross.