Christs parousia was active in a number of notable places throughout the Bible. He was with Joshua at Jericho and brought the Babylonians down on Judah to cite just a couple of incidents. Paul says that we are waiting for the blessed hope, which most of the church has believed to be Christs second coming since his day. AD70 was hardly a blessed hope at least it wasn't for the estimated 1.5 million Jews who experienced it. Also whatever position you take on the rapture according to Paul there is going to be one which doesn't square with the idea that everything happened during the Jewish War
The Rapture
- Thread starter 2nicee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Matt 19:28, "And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
When does this event happen?
When is the throne of His glory?
Will we see His face?
Will the world see His face?
What happens after this?
Where is this event shown in Revelation?
Before the resur/rapt or after? During the mill?
No one can see His face and live, Ex 33:20.
When does this event happen?
When is the throne of His glory?
Will we see His face?
Will the world see His face?
What happens after this?
Where is this event shown in Revelation?
Before the resur/rapt or after? During the mill?
No one can see His face and live, Ex 33:20.
Paul gave Titus the "blessed hope" he didn't give it to us. What hope would there be for Titus if Christ didn't return for 2,000+ more years? In 1 Thes 5 Paul tells them to "watch and be sober." Watch for something 2,000 + years away? Let's say something really big is going to happen in the year 4018 and I know about it. Would I be running around all crazy telling everyone to watch for it? Everyone would tell me to "shut up" and "who cares?"
In Mat 24, they start out talking about 70 AD events, right? Where does anyone say, "but a long time will past before the rest of this happens?" There is no gap of any sort found in Mat 24.
You mention other appearances of Christ and you are correct. We also find the presence of God coming close to man repeatedly in the OT. When his people were being good, He was present blessing them. When they were really bad, He turned His face away from them. When they were really bad, His presence would come and He'd kick their butt. This was the point I was trying to make to End. A monumental event like the destruction of God's people and temple we should expect God to be involved in that in a very personal and up-close way.
In Mat 24:29, the sun and moon darken and stars fall from the sky, right? These astral omens are very similar to the heavenly signs said to accompany the fall of Judah (Jer 4:23-26), the fall of Egypt (Ezek 32:7-9), the fall of Babylon (Isa 13:9-13), and the fall of Edom (Isa 34:4-5) all of which happened in the 6th century BC. Thus the 6th century BC was a century of divine intervention, if you will. Just as various heavenly omens marked a great slaughter, at the fall of these once great nations, the same thing is foretold and should be expected at the fall of Israel in 70 AD. If you read Josephus, they certainly knew they were being punished. This punishment was predicted and foretold by nearly every OT prophet, including NT prophets like John the Baptist, Jesus Himself, Paul, Peter and lastly John.
The fall of Jerusalem and Israel at the end of the age was such a monumental event, wouldn't you expect it to receive more than a footnote? After the first 6 chapters in Genesis, the Bible chronicles the history of the Jewish people and it ends with the end of that nation.
The 1.1 million estimated Jews that perished in the war were wicked. They were the "perverse and faithless generation" that Jesus loathed. According to Titus, they were the most wicked people he had ever encountered, this from a Roman?? Titus felt he was doing God's work in destroying them - he was right!! Anyway, Christ return served two purposes, punish and destroy the wicked, reward the righteous. Both happened. The wicked were "swept away" like the flood while the righteous were "gathered into His barn." The barn is the Kingdom of God.
The Kingdom of God comes without observation, (Lk 17:20) right? So why are people expecting to see the Kingdom come? Is the Kingdom Coming a future event or has it happened? I'm saying it happened in 70 AD. All believers were gathered to Christ in the spirit and we are still "with" Him today. The Jewish War and destruction of the Temple was a sign to the world that a new way of salvation had come and was available to all who believed. This is when Christianity spread like wildfire throughout the known earth.
[SUP]20 [/SUP]Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation;
[SUP]21 [/SUP]nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”
Last edited:
Thanks dear brother. Isaiah was the man!! I believe Isaiah was also on Jesus' mind in Mt 23 when He accused the religious leaders of His day for the death of the prophets and told them what was soon to happen to them.
[SUP]31 [/SUP]“Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. [SUP]32 [/SUP]Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt.
[SUP]33 [/SUP]Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? [SUP]34 [/SUP]Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city,
[SUP]35 [/SUP]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. [SUP]36 [/SUP]Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
He left their house desolate in 70 AD. Every last priest was killed. It amazes me how any one can read the above passage and think Christ was speaking to a generation in our future 2,000 years later. We read at the end of Rev 18 that judgment came to those who killed the prophets. How anyone can conclude that the below was not the fulfillment of the above is beyond me. The power of preconceived notions and biases always trump the truth in people's minds.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]
And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints, and of all who were slain on the earth.”
I think God was done sending prophets after this. The time for education was over as it was time for judgment.
Brother Endoscopy,
So, you cannot answer the questions, too bad.
Jesus sits on the eternal throne of David now. He rules the kingdom on planet earth now.
If the throne was on planet earth, everyone would be dead, because no one can see His face in His glory and live.
The idea that He will rule from the earthly Jerusalem is false.
After Jesus comes for the kingdom at the resur/rapt, this planet ends in fire.
Then the judgment happens.
The planet earth flies away from the throne, because it is not perfect and is in a state of decay. Rev 20.
There are some who still look for an earthly kingdom, instead of a spiritual kingdom.
So, you cannot answer the questions, too bad.
Jesus sits on the eternal throne of David now. He rules the kingdom on planet earth now.
If the throne was on planet earth, everyone would be dead, because no one can see His face in His glory and live.
The idea that He will rule from the earthly Jerusalem is false.
After Jesus comes for the kingdom at the resur/rapt, this planet ends in fire.
Then the judgment happens.
The planet earth flies away from the throne, because it is not perfect and is in a state of decay. Rev 20.
There are some who still look for an earthly kingdom, instead of a spiritual kingdom.
No they didn't!! They foretold the end of Israel, see Deu 28. But first, look at the YLT:
[SUP]10 [/SUP]
I can see why you would think this but Peter was not discussing the end of the planet, just the end of Israel. Yours is a poor translation but its really more of the way they talked and the figurative language they use that's the main problem. We read literature that is 2,000 years old, written with their lexicons but instead of understanding it as they intended, we understand it the way we would intend it had we written those words today. This mistake has caused so much confusion.
Let's say the US, the UK, Australia, Switzerland, any country, was going to end in less than 20 years. 93% of the population was to be killed and the remaining 7% hauled off into slavery with virtually nobody from the country remaining. It would be the end of our world, wouldn't it? But the planet goes on.
The world "earth" can also be translated "land." The "land" in the Bible is almost always the particular country that is being discussed - in this case Israel. Thus Peter is writing about the end of Israel, a topic of great importance and interest to him as it would be to us if our country was about to be destroyed.
"Works" can be deeds but back then it could also mean "something built with hands" like the temple and great buildings. If I were living in 69 AD and pointed out the temple and surrounding buildings to you I might say, "Look at these great works, the most impressive works in the world." This is exactly the way Josephus referred to them also, see:
So, here are 5 examples of Josephus, a contemporary to Peter, using "works" to describe various structures, especially the temple. Was the temple burned down with all of its element by fire? The Jews themselves in that day knew that God was going to destroy their temple by fire. It was foretold to them in their sacred writings which I will show you in a minute. But first, another term we frequently get wrong is "end of the age." Too often the "end of the age" is translated the "end of the world." Let me show you 4 translations of the same passage, KJV, NKJV, NIV and YLT.
Notice Young's uses "presence" instead of "coming?" Interesting, isn't it? I love the KJV but in this example, it gives a completely different message than the other 3 translations. It was an "age" coming to an end, not the world. Would you agree? So what is an age? Here's the first definition give by Dictionary.com:
Wow, a fellow Jew, just a few years younger than the disciples uses the term "age" to define the end of Israel as the complete "revolution of ages." The second temple was destroyed on the exact same day as the first temple. They had come full circle. If this doesn't help you, I give up.
[SUP]10 [/SUP]
and it will come -- the day of the Lord -- as a thief in the night, in which the heavens with a rushing noise will pass away, and the elements with burning heat be dissolved, and earth and the works in it shall be burnt up.
I can see why you would think this but Peter was not discussing the end of the planet, just the end of Israel. Yours is a poor translation but its really more of the way they talked and the figurative language they use that's the main problem. We read literature that is 2,000 years old, written with their lexicons but instead of understanding it as they intended, we understand it the way we would intend it had we written those words today. This mistake has caused so much confusion.
Let's say the US, the UK, Australia, Switzerland, any country, was going to end in less than 20 years. 93% of the population was to be killed and the remaining 7% hauled off into slavery with virtually nobody from the country remaining. It would be the end of our world, wouldn't it? But the planet goes on.
The world "earth" can also be translated "land." The "land" in the Bible is almost always the particular country that is being discussed - in this case Israel. Thus Peter is writing about the end of Israel, a topic of great importance and interest to him as it would be to us if our country was about to be destroyed.
"Works" can be deeds but back then it could also mean "something built with hands" like the temple and great buildings. If I were living in 69 AD and pointed out the temple and surrounding buildings to you I might say, "Look at these great works, the most impressive works in the world." This is exactly the way Josephus referred to them also, see:
Now although any one would justly lament the destruction of such a work as this was, since it was the most admirable of all the works that we have seen or heard of, both for its curious structure and its magnitude, and also for the vast wealth bestowed upon it, as well as for the glorious reputation it had for its holiness; yet might such a one comfort himself with this thought, that it was fate that decreed it so to be, which is inevitable, both as to living creatures, and as to works and places also.
for besides their notion that all their hopes were cut off, in case these their works were once burnt, the soldiers were greatly ashamed
for besides their notion that all their hopes were cut off, in case these their works were once burnt, the soldiers were greatly ashamed
The works that belonged to the four legions were erected on the west side of the city.
So, here are 5 examples of Josephus, a contemporary to Peter, using "works" to describe various structures, especially the temple. Was the temple burned down with all of its element by fire? The Jews themselves in that day knew that God was going to destroy their temple by fire. It was foretold to them in their sacred writings which I will show you in a minute. But first, another term we frequently get wrong is "end of the age." Too often the "end of the age" is translated the "end of the world." Let me show you 4 translations of the same passage, KJV, NKJV, NIV and YLT.
Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
“Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?
“Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?
“Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
`Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?'
`Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?'
Notice Young's uses "presence" instead of "coming?" Interesting, isn't it? I love the KJV but in this example, it gives a completely different message than the other 3 translations. It was an "age" coming to an end, not the world. Would you agree? So what is an age? Here's the first definition give by Dictionary.com:
AGE: the length of time during which a being or thing has existed;length of life or existence to the time spoken of or referred to:
What were they discussing the end of in Mat 24:1-2? What time frame was in view? Can we agree that the disciples associated the return of Christ with the end of an age? Would the end of Israel be considered an "end of their age?" Again, how did they talk back then. Again let's look at Josephus:
So Titus retired into the tower of Antonia, and resolved to storm the temple the next day, early in the morning, with his whole army, and to encamp round about the holy house. But as for that house, God had, for certain, long ago doomed it to the fire; and now that fatal day was come, according to the revolution of ages; it was the tenth day of the month Lous, [Ab,] upon which it was formerly burnt by the king of Babylon.
Last edited:
Brother PW,
Yes, you are right, except that 70 ad was not the end of Israel.
All these things that you are repeating were acceptable until Israel was restored to Jerusalem. That changed the interpretation of the time line because the thought was that Israel would never be restored.
The viewpoint that you are taking is RCC teaching. The teaching says that the RCC is now Israel, basically.
There are issues that are still not resolved using this viewpoint. Although most things seem to have an answer, the theory does have it's problems. You and I have exchanged ideas on some issues.
------
The interpretation of the statue in Daniel 2 is one place.
The stone striking cannot be the establishment/beginning of the kingdom. That happens just after the iron begins.
The clay cannot be Israel, unless you can support it with scripture.
When the stone strikes, the statue of the nations is destroyed. Since the nations still exist, the stone has not struck yet.
----
I have been down this road before. The theory will not fit into the overall time line and still has too many problems.
Yes, you are right, except that 70 ad was not the end of Israel.
All these things that you are repeating were acceptable until Israel was restored to Jerusalem. That changed the interpretation of the time line because the thought was that Israel would never be restored.
The viewpoint that you are taking is RCC teaching. The teaching says that the RCC is now Israel, basically.
There are issues that are still not resolved using this viewpoint. Although most things seem to have an answer, the theory does have it's problems. You and I have exchanged ideas on some issues.
------
The interpretation of the statue in Daniel 2 is one place.
The stone striking cannot be the establishment/beginning of the kingdom. That happens just after the iron begins.
The clay cannot be Israel, unless you can support it with scripture.
When the stone strikes, the statue of the nations is destroyed. Since the nations still exist, the stone has not struck yet.
----
I have been down this road before. The theory will not fit into the overall time line and still has too many problems.
Your post started out with such promised. I almost "liked" it but then you ended bad, LOL. Please read my last post - every word - I beg you.
But to your first point, you are correct. I was re-reading Polycarp, the oldest church writer after the disciples and a disciple himself of the Apostle John. Look what he has to say about Christ's reign.
that ye have believed on Him that raised our Lord Jesus Christ from
the dead and gave unto him glory
But to your first point, you are correct. I was re-reading Polycarp, the oldest church writer after the disciples and a disciple himself of the Apostle John. Look what he has to say about Christ's reign.
Polycarp 2:1
Wherefore gird up your loins and serve God in fear
and truth,
forsaking the vain and empty talking and the error of the many,
forforsaking the vain and empty talking and the error of the many,
that ye have believed on Him that raised our Lord Jesus Christ from
the dead and gave unto him glory
and a throne on His right hand;
unto whom all things were made subject that are in heaven and that
are on the earth; to whom every creature that hath breath doeth
service; who cometh as
judge of quick and deadunto whom all things were made subject that are in heaven and that
are on the earth; to whom every creature that hath breath doeth
service; who cometh as
; whose blood God
will require of them that are disobedient unto Him.
will require of them that are disobedient unto Him.
Here we see Christ is already reigning over the Earth. He doesn't need to come here to do it. As you said, we would all be dead if He did. Too bad about the "earth" being destroyed. Guess He won't have it as His footstool anymore and we don't get to reign there. Sad
.
.
Ecc 1:4
One generation passes away, and another generation comes; But the earth abides forever.
Last edited:
My "theory" is the best of any out there with the least amount of problems. Let's go over where we differ one-by-one. There's hope for you and Tanakh to join LOC and me. You just need a little more nudging/educating. Ask and you shall receive, LOL.
Isaiah 64:8
But now, O Lord, You are our Father; We are the clay, and You our potter; And all we are the work of Your hand.
Jeremiah 18:6
“O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel!
But now, O Lord, You are our Father; We are the clay, and You our potter; And all we are the work of Your hand.
Jeremiah 18:6
“O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel!
Lamentations 4:2
The precious sons of Zion, Valuable as fine gold, How they are regarded as clay pots, The work of the hands of the potter!
The precious sons of Zion, Valuable as fine gold, How they are regarded as clay pots, The work of the hands of the potter!
^ "The end of Israel"? I think not. There will always be a remnant. Perhaps you haven't noticed the dozens of prophecies fulfilled in THIS generation?
Good try at dismissing scripture but I don't buy this convoluted and long-winded denial. The heavens and the elements will melt, not the earth only. When did that happen? The works of Josephus and other historians are sometimes a good study aid but they are NOT scripture.
Greek
3:10 Ἥξει δὲ ᾗ ἡμέρα κυρίου ὡς κλέπτης ἐν νυκτὶ ἐν ἡ οἱ οὐρανοὶ ῥοιζηδὸν παρελεύσονται στοιχεῖα δὲ καυσούμενα λυθήσονται καὶ γῆ καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ ἔργα κατακαήσεται
Good try at dismissing scripture but I don't buy this convoluted and long-winded denial. The heavens and the elements will melt, not the earth only. When did that happen? The works of Josephus and other historians are sometimes a good study aid but they are NOT scripture.
Greek
3:10 Ἥξει δὲ ᾗ ἡμέρα κυρίου ὡς κλέπτης ἐν νυκτὶ ἐν ἡ οἱ οὐρανοὶ ῥοιζηδὸν παρελεύσονται στοιχεῖα δὲ καυσούμενα λυθήσονται καὶ γῆ καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ ἔργα κατακαήσεται
Brother PW,
In the context of this issue 2 Pet 3:1-13, Peter is describing the flood that destroyed the planet of all human souls except for 8 persons.
The flood was a world wide event, not restricted to one city or area.
The fire described also melts the elements. This statement comparing the flood waters and the fire are showing the difference between the 2 events.
The waters are an element, along with earth, air, and fire.
But the fire destroys the other elements, melting/consuming them.
The comparison to the flood shows the extent of the fire, planet wide. Not just Israel/Jerusalem.
When Peter says that the elements melt, this is showing a much greater destruction than just a local event.
In the context of this issue 2 Pet 3:1-13, Peter is describing the flood that destroyed the planet of all human souls except for 8 persons.
The flood was a world wide event, not restricted to one city or area.
The fire described also melts the elements. This statement comparing the flood waters and the fire are showing the difference between the 2 events.
The waters are an element, along with earth, air, and fire.
But the fire destroys the other elements, melting/consuming them.
The comparison to the flood shows the extent of the fire, planet wide. Not just Israel/Jerusalem.
When Peter says that the elements melt, this is showing a much greater destruction than just a local event.