Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

[eternally-gratefull]

Exactly, dispensationalist teachers have always down played the significance but the historical record is clear, but few go the extra mile and actually read primary sources.

Actually,

Amiilenials are downplaying what the bible says.

The bible says how things will be, And if the historical record shows otherwise, We must take the bib le first.

1. AD70 was a walk in the park compaired to many of the wars of the last century
2. Jesus did not return at the end of that war to put and end to it so all life would not die
3. Nothing that was said to happen AFTER these events have occured.

I suggest we look to scripture and stop interpreting it to fit our belief system. But take it at its word.

 

[UnderGrace]

Actually,

Amiilenials are downplaying what the bible says.

The bible says how things will be, And if the historical record shows otherwise, We must take the bib le first.

1. AD70 was a walk in the park compaired to many of the wars of the last century
2. Jesus did not return at the end of that war to put and end to it so all life would not die
3. Nothing that was said to happen AFTER these events have occured.

I suggest we look to scripture and stop interpreting it to fit our belief system. But take it at its word.

Absolutely and completely wrong....that you could even use the words "walk in the park" demonstrates your lack of historical knowledge

How shall we make the comparison, body count, level of horror, the evil perpetuated by the Roman soldiers, the level of suffering of the Jews.....what is your criteria?

 

[crossnote]

You are splitting hair here. Do you believe that, in the age to come, it is still possible for an unbeliever to be saved?

If I am an unbelieving Gentile or Jew during the Tribulation, how do I count myself as a saint when Jesus finally make his 2nd return to Earth?

By believing the Gospel preached...

Revelation 14:6-7 NKJV
[6] Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth-to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people- [7] saying with a loud voice, "Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water."

Revelation 11:3 NKJV
[3] And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."

Revelation 7:13-14 NKJV
[13] Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?" [14] And I said to him, "Sir, you know." So he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

 

[crossnote]

So if I choose to take the mark of the beast after I believe in Jesus, will Jesus consider me as saved at the end of Tribulation, if you read Rev 14:11-12 together?

If you choose to take the Mark, then it's curtains. There will be those who refuse though and be martyred.

Revelation 20:4 NKJV
[4] And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Absolutely and completely wrong....that you could even use the words "walk in the park" demonstrates your lack of historical knowledge

How shall we make the comparison, body count, level of horror, the evil perpetuated by the Roman soldiers, the level of suffering of the Jews.....what is your criteria?

Really?

How you can look at ww1 and ww2 and think what happened in AD actually compairs is absolutely and completely utterly unfathomable.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Absolutely and completely wrong....that you could even use the words "walk in the park" demonstrates your lack of historical knowledge

How shall we make the comparison, body count, level of horror, the evil perpetuated by the Roman soldiers, the level of suffering of the Jews.....what is your criteria?

You ever been gassed, and suffered a horrific and slow death, that may have taken years.

You ever been put into an oven, where slowly your body burns, until a point you die

You ever been in a point where you are so hungry and so malnurished you do nto even look like a human anymore?

You ever suffere nightly air raid bombings, and watch your friends and neighbors and family members being blown to bits. Or hope they were. Because they lost limbs and everything else?

The things which occured in 70 ad were horrific. No one is denying this, but to compair that with events which happened in the early and mid 19th century, and even what is happening today. You just can’t

 

[azamzimtoti]

What happened in those years was like a picnic compaired to WW1 and WW2
Jesus and the prophet Jeremiah, said these days (great tribulation/time of Jacob’s trouble) would be so severe there would be nothing like it, up till that time, or after it.
Since things have occured after ad 70 period which were gravely and far superior in terms of tribulation and suffering on the earth, It can not be interpreted to be AD 70

It's the dispensational view that distorts the scripture, however we understand the great tribulation the attempt to claim there has been greater suffering since 70 AD is irrelevant given the fact that Jesus stated these things would occur in His generation:

(Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be suffering unlike anything that has happened from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, or ever will happen. )

(Mark 13:20 And if the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would be saved. But because of the elect, whom he chose, he has cut them short. )

(Mark 13:30 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

Dispensationalism can't handle the "this generation" statements because it defeats their attempt at shuffling off into the future some part of Matt 24 and Mark.

(Luke 23:28 But Jesus turned to them and said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. )

(Luke 23:29 For this is certain: The days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore children, and the breasts that never nursed!' )

Jesus is speaking directly to the woman of HIS generation that would experience the great tribulation.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It's the dispensational view that distorts the scripture, however we understand the great tribulation the attempt to claim there has been greater suffering since 70 AD is irrelevant given the fact that Jesus stated these things would occur in His generation:

(Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be suffering unlike anything that has happened from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, or ever will happen. )

(Mark 13:20 And if the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would be saved. But because of the elect, whom he chose, he has cut them short. )

(Mark 13:30 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

Dispensationalism can't handle the "this generation" statements because it defeats their attempt at shuffling off into the future some part of Matt 24 and Mark.

(Luke 23:28 But Jesus turned to them and said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. )

(Luke 23:29 For this is certain: The days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore children, and the breasts that never nursed!' )

Jesus is speaking directly to the woman of HIS generation that would experience the great tribulation.

Yes we can handle this generation. We interpret it correctly. It does NOT always mean the people living, that day. It could be translated people who live during a particular time, The time Jesus spoke of would end in the last days with his return.

Its funny how you demand we must interpret this generation. But you reject the same passage says all live could possibly die (how was that going to happen in 70 AD) and to prevent this from happening, Christ himself would have to return?

You can not have it both ways..

You claim generation is our failure, when it is not

Yet deny the ability of all flesh being being killed (all flesh means all living creatures) and Jesus returning to put an end to it. (Your own failure) and it was also called the last days (BEFORE his return ) which again, has not occured yet.

You have way more issues than we do my friend.

Our issue can easily be resolved. Your can not.

 

[azamzimtoti]

Yes we can handle this generation. We interpret it correctly. It does NOT always mean the people living, that day. It could be translated people who live during a particular time, The time Jesus spoke of would end in the last days with his return.

Wrong.

Its funny how you demand we must interpret this generation. But you reject the same passage says all live could possibly die (how was that going to happen in 70 AD) and to prevent this from happening, Christ himself would have to return?

.

I haven't rejected anything, Jesus is speaking locally (the land occupied by the Roman Empire and specifically the land of Israel) not globally as everyone on the planet.

We know the days were "shortened" because the elect came through the great tribulation, if the war of 66-70 AD had not been cut short then even the elect would not have escaped the tumult/war.

(Mat 24:21 For then there will be great suffering unlike anything that has happened from the beginning of the world until now, or ever will happen. )

(Mat24:22 And if those days had not been cut short, no one would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. )

(Mat 24:34 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

Luke says the same thing about "this generation":

(Luke 21:20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. )

(Luke 21:22 because these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. )

(Luke 21:32 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Wrong.

Well this surely set me straight

Thats the problem with people and this convesation, they are so head stuck that they are right, they can not even argue their point.

I haven't rejected anything, Jesus is speaking locally (the land occupied by the Roman Empire and specifically the land of Israel) not globally as everyone on the planet.

We know the days were "shortened" because the elect came through the great tribulation, if the war of 66-70 AD had not been cut short then even the elect would not have escaped the tumult/war.

(Mat 24:21 For then there will be great suffering unlike anything that has happened from the beginning of the world until now, or ever will happen. )

(Mat24:22 And if those days had not been cut short, no one would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. )

(Mat 24:34 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

Luke says the same thing about "this generation":

(Luke 21:20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. )

(Luke 21:22 because these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. )

(Luke 21:32 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

It does not say Jesus is speaking locally. Your adding to the word.

And by the way, Look at your own proof text.

It says when you see jerusalem SURROUNDED BY ARMIES. (This was prophesied in the OT, where their woudl be many armies of different nations all surrounding jerusalem. So the people Jesus spoke to would have understood what he meant. And remember, JERUSALEM IN 70 AD WAS A SLAVE NATIOn and the CITY WAS A SLAVE CITY.

In 70 ad. Jerusalem was surrounded by ONE ARMY!

Your own proof texts destroy your argument.

 

[azamzimtoti]

It says when you see jerusalem SURROUNDED BY ARMIES. (This was prophesied in the OT, where their woudl be many armies of different nations all surrounding jerusalem. So the people Jesus spoke to would have understood what he meant. And remember, JERUSALEM IN 70 AD WAS A SLAVE NATIOn and the CITY WAS A SLAVE CITY.

In 70 ad. Jerusalem was surrounded by ONE ARMY! Your own proof texts destroy your argument.

No they don't:

Strongs

G4760 stratopedon strat-op'-ed-on

from the base of G4756 and the same as G3977;

a camping-ground, i.e. (by implication) a body of troops.

KJV: army.
-------------------

So when Jesus stated that when Jerusalem would be surrounded by troops then it's destruction was nigh.

Young's Literal:

(Luke 21:20 And when ye may see Jerusalem surrounded by encampments, then know that come nigh did her desolation)

(Luke 21:32 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

 

[azamzimtoti]

Well this surely set me straight

Well let me set you straight now then.

(Mat 23:35 “that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar .)

(Mat 23:36 “Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.)

So, according to your scheme a yet to come generation will have fall upon them "the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar".

Yeah, that makes sense.

 

[iamsoandso]

Exactly, dispensationalist teachers have always down played the significance but the historical record is clear, but few go the extra mile and actually read primary sources.

No offense but you've herd a bunch of people quote from Josephus but never actually double checked by reading it for yourself correct?

 

[UnderGrace]

No offense but you've herd a bunch of people quote from Josephus but never actually double checked by reading it for yourself correct?

What are you trying to state??

 

[iamsoandso]

What are you trying to state??

lol, it's not possible if you read the writings of Josephus, that you would see everything fulfilled by ad70. Josephus destroys preterism it does not uphold it. Most of what you are being told by them are select portions that seem to support preterism as long as you don't read the entire book/books ect.

 

[UnderGrace]

lol, it's not possible if you read the writings of Josephus, that you would see everything fulfilled by ad70. Josephus destroys preterism it does not uphold it. Most of what you are being told by them are select portions that seem to support preterism as long as you don't read the entire book/books ect.

Mr. SoandSo....Josephus documented what he witnessed....his writings are not to be viewed to support or counter a certain eschatological view but rather what actually happened in 70 AD and his writings certainly refute it was a "walk in the park"

I do not need to be told anything by anybody who promotes any eschatology, I have access to many first hand primary sources and the writings of later historians who have analyzed the writings of ancient historians

The scripture supports orthodox preterism....Jesus states clearly in the Olivet Discourse......"no stone shall be left here upon another" "this generation shall not pass"

Revelations...."shortly" "soon" "time is at hand"

And if the destruction of Jerusalem had already happened when John was writing the book of Revelations .....why was he silent on such a momentous historical event.

Tell me how does one measure a temple that is destroyed?

 

[iamsoandso]

Mr. SoandSo....Josephus documented what he witnessed....his writings are not to be viewed to support or counter a certain eschatological view but rather what actually happened in 70 AD and his writings certainly refute it was a "walk in the park"

I do not need to be told anything by anybody who promotes any eschatology, I have access to many first hand primary sources and the writings of later historians who have analyzed the writings of ancient historians

The scripture supports orthodox preterism....Jesus states clearly in the Olivet Discourse......"no stone shall be left here upon another" "this generation shall not pass"

Revelations...."shortly" "soon" "time is at hand"

And if the destruction of Jerusalem had already happened when John was writing the book of Revelations .....why was he silent on such a momentous historical event.

Tell me how does one measure a temple that is destroyed?

lol, You seem as if you think you need to argue the point of Jerusalem being destroyed in ad70 with me. You should notice if you have not ever that I have never stated that the Romans did not besiege and destroy Jerusalem and by the end of the third revolt scatter the Jews involved into the earth.

What I did say was that in the writings of Josephus other things he wrote fully proves that not everything was fulfilled at that time. If you compare his writings with Scripture you will see that they(the Jews involved in the revolt) were doing the direct opposite of what Revelation states of those who received the mark and worship the image do.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

No they don't:

Strongs

G4760 stratopedon strat-op'-ed-on

from the base of G4756 and the same as G3977;

a camping-ground, i.e. (by implication) a body of troops.

KJV: army.
-------------------

So when Jesus stated that when Jerusalem would be surrounded by troops then it's destruction was nigh.

Young's Literal:

(Luke 21:20 And when ye may see Jerusalem surrounded by encampments, then know that come nigh did her desolation)

(Luke 21:32 I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. )

You need to read the whole passage man

The disciples asked

1. When will these things (the destruction of the temple) take place.
2. What will be the sign of your comming and
3. The end of the age.

Jesus answered all those question. THE ONLY answers jesus gave concerning AD 70 was the answer concerning “WHEN” not one stone will be left standing.

The rest (the birth pangs, the wars and rumers of wars. The great tribulation, the abomination of desolation. The fact that tribulation will be so great all flesh will die if Christ does not return.

These answer the last two questions. And have YET to be fulfilled!

Part of that is the last war. Where jerusalem will be surrounded by armies and Jesus will destgroy them upon his return.

This is not the same as what happened in 70 AD

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Well let me set you straight now then.

(Mat 23:35 “that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar .)

(Mat 23:36 “Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.)

So, according to your scheme a yet to come generation will have fall upon them "the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar".

Yeah, that makes sense.

No more sense than saying in 70 ad all flesh even in jerusalem was threatened with extinction causing christ to return and land on the mount of olives, spliting the mount into 2 places

So once again, trying to set me straight, you failed.

 

[Guojing]

If you choose to take the Mark, then it's curtains. There will be those who refuse though and be martyred.

Revelation 20:4 NKJV
[4] And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

If you don't regard that as faith + works for salvation, then okay, its a matter of semantics.