Are you preterist or merely 'modified post-trib'?

[abcdef]

"How long has Rome Ruled over Israel?"

I think you are forgetting the Muslims held it far longer than Rome ever did.

There goes that "Rome" theory...

But, let's not let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

Israelites are the children of Jacob, the people.

It's the natural branches that Rome rules over, not the land.

 

[Locutus]

The physical nation of Israel is no longer a favored nation, it lost that status in the 1st century.

The nation of Israel are the followers of Jesus:

(1 Pet 2:9 KJV) But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Peter has taken the status from old covenant "Israel" and applied it to Christ's people consisting of believers from all nations:

(Deu 14:2 KJV) For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

Only the Seventh Day disAdvantaged cling to the outdated historicist view.

 

[abcdef]

The physical nation of Israel is no longer a favored nation, it lost that status in the 1st century.

The nation of Israel are the followers of Jesus:

(1 Pet 2:9 KJV) But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Peter has taken the status from old covenant "Israel" and applied it to Christ's people consisting of believers from all nations:

(Deu 14:2 KJV) For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

Only the Seventh Day disAdvantaged cling to the outdated historicist view.

The nation of Israel, which is the Pentecost Kingdom (church), both the wild and Natural branches, is still favored by God.

Are there any Christians living in the Land of Israel and Jerusalem at this present time who a part of the natural branches?

If there are then that would qualify as part of the restoration.

 

[Locutus]

Doesn't matter where Christians live, the kingdom is not land centric - the land of Israel is just as any other nations land.

 

[iamsoandso]

Yer gotta remember the dispensational friends of Zion want the Jews back in the land so 2/3 of them can die in the great tribulation.

For them Armageddon is good news.

With friends like that who needs enemas?

hmm,"them",that's always the same mistake.

 

[Locutus]

hmm,"them",that's always the same mistake.

I'm gonna rename you iamsocryptic.

 

[abcdef]

Doesn't matter where Christians live, the kingdom is not land centric - the land of Israel is just as any other nations land.

Everything that has a beginning, has an end, Neo (The Matrix 3, ha ha).

--

The idea of the 7 times, and the 3 1/2ts, etc., is that they are a period of time with a beginning and an end.
--
The times of the gentiles is a time with a beginning and an end Lk 21:20-24,

It ends when Israel is restored to control of Jerusalem.
--
The woman in the wilderness for the 3 1/2 times in Rev 12, is a time period with a beginning and an end,

Israel is in the wilderness of the gentiles, outside of Jerusalem, until the 3 1/2 times are finished,
--
The 2 witnesses are outside of Jerusalem for 3 1/2 times, then they witness in Jerusalem again.
--

The restoration of Jerusalem to Israel, the natural branches, is prophecy fulfilled.

 

[Locutus]

I think pushing the "metaphor" of the "natural branches" past it's use by date is fruitless.

In regards to Paul in the letter to the Romans there are some pointers that need to be acknowledged:

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.


Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:


Rom 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

We have the remnant of Israel in the 12 tribes being restored according to James:

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

All the remnant of the 12 tribes were saved in the 1st century.

Rom 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

Rom 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

The lord will make a "short work", "salvation nearer" and the "day is at hand" all point to the salvation of all Israel in the 1st century not long after Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans.

Unless one can prove another salvation centuries on from when Paul wrote we have to conclude that that "day at hand" is long gone.

 

[iamsoandso]

I'm gonna rename you iamsocryptic.

lol, I bet it does sound cryptic to you. let me ask you in Matthew 24:22 the "elect" does he shorten the days so that some of the Jews(them) can be saved or are the elect the Christians?

It's something that I mentioned about "if you own something it looks different". As I said as far as I have been told I am of Jewish genealogy and so as you can imagine in my family and among our friends this subject often comes up. For the most part I myself am looked at of the oddball sort and why is because most of them follow the Jewish faith but I do not I am Christian by faith. You could imagine the way the holidays go around our family get together times one thinks we should gather on this day while others think another.

Anyway for the most part if I bring up any of the books from Matthew to Revelation then I would be quickly told by them that those are Christian books and not Jewish books and so they don’t regard anything they say. Now they are not ignorant of what they say they just do not regard them as if they are valid. So if you(me) try to explain things like "mark of the beast" I would be told that that book according to itself is addressed to the seven Churches in Asia not to them,(them meaning Jews). Then they point out that if they(them) were to have needed to be warned about any "mark" then they(them) would have been warned far in advance of ad70 of it and not after those Churches were established by the apostles.

Now so I notice something among those who are not of the Jewish bloodline whether they are preterit or D'ist in that they(both) transfer the scripture Matthew 24:22 to the Jews. This is odd because if the "elect" are the Jews then it is saying that the days would be shortened for their sake as if he was saving some of this ethnic group(Jews) for something in the future(so it becomes anti-preterit). On the other hand if the "elect" are the Christians and the days are shortened that some of the flesh of them were saved then they face the tribulation and the days are shortened so some of them are spared which means they were not raptured beforehand(so it becomes anti-D'isp.)


So both transfer this to the Jews at this point because they both see it as not belonging to themselves. That's the easy way to look at it I suppose to either transfer it to mean someone in the past or transfer it to someone in the future. One thing I do notice though is that it is always "transferred" by either of the two.

It's a blast to sit around after we eat and discuss this in my little group I point out all the usual scriptures about there being no Jew nor gentile ect. and as fast as I say it one of the Jewish faith tells me fast that absolutely none of the Jews who died in ad70 died for "Jesus names sake" because they did not believe in him,and they quote Matthew 24:9 to me. If I try to use Matthew 24;21 on them they remind me that a million one hundred thousand non Christians died in ad70 at Jerusalem but 6-9 million non-Christians(Jews) died in the Holocaust(notice my age,I was born in the midst). As you can see those conversations could turn quickly wroth if the term "elect" is transferred in my little group,lol.

So I suppose it would seem cryptic to you that I noticed you also transferred the elect to the Jews and away from the Christians in the case of Matthew 24 who would want to "own it"? Now though in other scriptures will everyone who transfers the ownership maintain it throughout their theology or will they then transfer ownership of the blessings only? My suggestion is that instead of seeing it as cryptic one would look real close at who the days are shortened for and why. It's an ownership thing you see Adar is shortened if the grain would be overripe or none would know the visitation.

 

[Locutus]

lol, I bet it does sound cryptic to you. let me ask you in Matthew 24:22 the "elect" does he shorten the days so that some of the Jews(them) can be saved or are the elect the Christians?

Now so I notice something among those who are not of the Jewish bloodline whether they are preterit or D'ist in that they(both) transfer the scripture Matthew 24:22 to the Jews. This is odd because if the "elect" are the Jews then it is saying that the days would be shortened for their sake as if he was saving some of this ethnic group(Jews) for something in the future(so it becomes anti-preterit). On the other hand if the "elect" are the Christians and the days are shortened that some of the flesh of them were saved then they face the tribulation and the days are shortened so some of them are spared which means they were not raptured beforehand(so it becomes anti-D'isp.)

Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

He's addressing this to those that heard him speak this:

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

Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:


There may have been some Gentile Christians at the time of the "abomination of desolation" - but Christ is addressing the "Jews".

And we are told when that would happen:

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

"This is odd because if the "elect" are the Jews then it is saying that the days would be shortened for their sake as if he was saving some of this ethnic group(Jews) for something in the future(so it becomes anti-preterit)."

I don't see anything odd about it - he was saving them, but not for "something in the future" as in some yet to be prophetic "event"

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that ALL things which are written may be fulfilled.

You can speculate all you want - but Christ plainly said ALL things written would be fulfilled - so what is left in prophecy "for something in the future"?

Nothing.

You either accept what Jesus said in Luke 21:22 or you can twiddle around dreaming up end time scenarios till you end up in the grave as worm food just as confused as you started out.

 

[iamsoandso]

Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

He's addressing this to those that heard him speak this:

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

Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:


There may have been some Gentile Christians at the time of the "abomination of desolation" - but Christ is addressing the "Jews".

And we are told when that would happen:

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

"This is odd because if the "elect" are the Jews then it is saying that the days would be shortened for their sake as if he was saving some of this ethnic group(Jews) for something in the future(so it becomes anti-preterit)."

I don't see anything odd about it - he was saving them, but not for "something in the future" as in some yet to be prophetic "event"

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that ALL things which are written may be fulfilled.

You can speculate all you want - but Christ plainly said ALL things written would be fulfilled - so what is left in prophecy "for something in the future"?

Nothing.

You either accept what Jesus said in Luke 21:22 or you can twiddle around dreaming up end time scenarios till you end up in the grave as worm food just as confused as you started out.

hmm. it is a juggling act to transfer it isn't it and why is because who he was addressing was not non-Christian Jews but rather his own disciples Matthew 24:3 who were believing Jewish Christians.

 

[GaryA]

Where we are now on the [ smaller ] 'Chronological Order' chart / table - below the [ larger ] main chart / table - on my Olivet Discourse page - is 5.

The 5 I stated in the quote above is referring to Chronological Order chart / table row 5.

It is after Chronological Order chart / table row 4 ---- in which row 17 of the main chart / table is listed.

Therefore, I have [ effectively ] stated that [ the initial start of events in ] row 17 of the main chart / table is past.

Where we are now on the Chronological Order chart / table ---- is row 5 ---- in which rows 5 and 6 of the main chart / table are listed.

.
.
.


Is this making sense yet?

 

[GaryA]

You do realize that the Olivet Discourse [ verses ] are not in "straight-through chronological order", don't you?

That is what the [ smaller ] chart / table - below the [ larger ] main chart / table - is for ---- to show ( in a summary form ) the chronological order of the events that are indicated in the Olivet Discourse.

 

[GaryA]

As an example - based on my statement in post #442 - rows 5 and 6 in the main chart / table occur after rows 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, and 17.

 

[GaryA]

So, I put the break after verse 26. So, I am 1 million percent positive that verse 26 and backwards are all in the past.

This is a good time to point out to everyone again that the Great Tribulation is over.

But ---- what do you then do with verse 29 and "Immediately after the tribulation of those days..." ?

 

[Ahwatukee]

You do realize that the Olivet Discourse [ verses ] are not in "straight-through chronological order", don't you?

That is what the [ smaller ] chart / table - below the [ larger ] main chart / table - is for ---- to show ( in a summary form ) the chronological order of the events that are indicated in the Olivet Discourse.

Hello GaryA,

I don't know why you would say that. The events listed are definitely in order as Christ presented them. In fact, the Lord mentions some of the seals:

2nd Seal:
Matt.24:7 = Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
Rev.6:2 = The rider is given power to take peace from the earth and to make men kill each other

3rd Seal:
Matt.24:7 = There will be famines and earthquakes in various places
Rev.6:5 = The rider on the black horse represents famine

The Lord's mention of the abomination being set up in Matt.24:15, marks the middle of Daniel's seven years, which means from Matt.24:15 to Matt.24:31 represents that last 3 1/2 years with Christ returning to the earth to end the age at the end of that 3 1/2 years.

 

[GaryA]

Hello GaryA,

I don't know why you would say that. The events listed are definitely in order as Christ presented them.

So ----- what do you do with phrases like "But before all these,..." in Luke 21:12 ???

( just ignore them, perhaps? )

 

[Ahwatukee]

So ----- what do you do with phrases like "But before all these,..." in Luke 21:12 ???

( just ignore them, perhaps? )

"But before all this, they will seize you and persecute you. They will hand you over to synagogues and put you in prison, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name.And so you will bear testimony to me. "

Prior to the scripture above, Jesus says to watch out for false Messiah's and false prophets, that nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, then he simply inserts "but before those things happen, this is going to happen, ." He's just inserting something that he hadn't mention prior to those other events. It doesn't mean that the events are not in chronological order. All you have to do is put the events of Luke 21:12 as taking place prior to verses 8 thru 10.

It doesn't mean that none of the other events are not in chronological order. It's kind of like saying "oh by the way, before those things I already mentioned take place, this is going to happen first." That's all it is. Everything else is in order.

 

[PlainWord]

Yes - but I'm reading it differently PL:

Gal 4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born [b[after the flesh persecuted[/b] him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

Paul is using Agar and her children symbolically in the midrash, what he's saying is the non-believing persecuting Jews were far more numerous than the persecuted believers and that's why he says - even so it is now..

There were no Muslim around to be persecuting when Paul wrote - and this ties in with the "remnant" only being saved:

Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

The casting out is what Jesus said would happen in relation to the kingdom:

Luke 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

"thrust and cast" are the same Greek word.

Yes, we are reading Gal 4 differently. It's all about the covenant, who got it, who didn't. Ask any Muslim and they will tell you that the covenant belonged to the oldest son of Abraham, that being Ishmael. They believe that their faith is the correct faith, not Judaism and not Christianity. I know Islam did not start until the 7th century (hence it was a mystery to John) but the descendants of Ishmael (who Muhammad claimed to be) are the same peoples and have persecuted the sons of Jacob ever since.

Keep in mind what God said about Esau. He hated him because he sold his birthright for a bowl of stew. As first born, Esau should have been Israel instead of Isaac. This is why Abraham wouldn't bless him. Then what does Esau do? He marries the daughter of Ishmael thus marrying into the lineage of the forefathers of Islam.

Islam is by far the biggest false religion on earth today making up 1/4 of the world's population. Do not discount their role in future events.

 

[PlainWord]

But ---- what do you then do with verse 29 and "Immediately after the tribulation of those days..." ?

I explained this before but perhaps you didn't see it. IMO, the "tribulation of those days" does not refer back to the "great tribulation" of verse 21 but rather it refers back just one verse to verse 28. If I am correct, the break comes between verse 26 and 27. In verse 26 Jesus gives His last warning about the false Christs then in verse 27 He basically says, "If anybody walks up to you claiming to be me, don't believe them because when I come, it will be as fast as lightening and this is how you will know when it's really me." From this moment on, Jesus begins talking about His Second Coming and has finished the 70 AD discussion (verse 34 aside).

So, the "tribulation of those days" again refers back to verse 28:

[SUP]28 [/SUP]For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.

Compare with Luke 17:20-37 where Jesus is discussing the kingdom to come and His return. Read this section carefully and you will not see any of the signs given leading up to the Great Tribulation of Israel in Mat 24:1-26. In Luke 17:26-29 Jesus describes the conditions on earth just prior to His return - Like the Days of Noah - sin, life is normal, nothing obvious is going on to warn those of Christ's pending return. This could not be said of the conditions in 66-70 AD which was the worst tribulation any nation ever experienced or will experience ever again.

[SUP]30 [/SUP]Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

Then we have the famous "taken and left behind" passage. The pre-tribber thinks the saved are taken, but Christ makes clear it is the wicked being taken. Then Jesus is asked, "Taken where?"

So He said to them, “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”

The wicked are taken to the body where the eagles are gathered just as in Mat 24:28. Now, this is critically important. Christ is revealed first, then they are taken, then He returns AFTER their tribulation. This is the order given in Luke 17 and it agrees with the order given in Mat 24 and Mat 13 but it happens in rapid succession.

1. CHRIST REVEALED
2. WICKED TAKEN (for tribulation/death)
3. CHRIST RETURNS
4. RIGHTEOUS GATHERED

Compare to 2 Thes 1 as you have all the same elements.

[SUP]6 [/SUP]since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, [SUP]7 [/SUP]and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, [SUP]8 [/SUP]in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. [SUP]9 [/SUP]These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, [SUP]10 [/SUP]when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe...