Jesus is not coming back. He already did in 70 A.D.

Matt 16: 27-28, "For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.28 Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

I know that the Mount of Transfiguration is the next verse after these and begins in Matt 17: 1. The problem with your interpretation is that Jesus did not reward every man according to his works at the Mount of Transfiguration. Nor at Pentecost or any other time except 70 A.D.

Some people will remain obsessed with 70 AD no matter whether it is true or false. This phenomenon belongs in Ripley's Believe It or Not!

Your ideas are similar to this report:

WEIRD NEWS
THIS THREE-CONTINENT ANT MEGA-COLONY WILL CONQUER EARTH SOON
RIPLEY'S BELIEVE IT OR NOT!, FEBRUARY 4, 2019

Either Jesus was telling the truth or He was a false prophet in Matthew 16. I believe Jesus was telling the truth.

I see the problem.
Jesus is slightly problematic.
He sometimes speaks one sentence in one context and then another in a different context.

So He states John the baptist is Elijah, if you want to believe it.

So He talks about His return to earth at the end at the time of final judgement.
He then mentions that the coming of the Kingdom will start within the lifetime of the disciples.

And theologically there is a dispensational shift.
Jesus preached the Kingdom of God is near. Then the Kingdom of God is coming.

He then introduces the indwelling Holy Spirit as the teacher of spiritual truth for the believer.
Until this time, faith was a ceremonial experience, without spiritual gifting and communion.
Paul extends this to us being the Holy Temple of God.

The falling of the Holy Spirit on His people, Jews and gentiles alike again changed everything.
We then get ministries of apostles, prophets, teachers etc.

So I would conclude the Kingdom started at pentecost. A new dispensation of communion with mankind,
openned with the gift of tongues.

I do not like this view, but it fits with how it is written and what is written about the reality of the
spiritual life in the believer. The age of the church is so different to the age of Israel and the temple,
it is hard to resolve. AD70, the age of the temple stopped, dead.

This is as far as I have gone, but it is a depth I am happy with. Need I know more?
For me it is learning to walk like Jesus, a real question. Aim at perfection? Again do I like
this idea or approach? No. But God does. And I must carry my cross.

That's no even the issue. The issue is whether you are willing to abandon your delusions.

The glory of God does not come by observation. It will be the light of the new creation. The temporal Sun and moon will no longer be needed to count days or times. There will be no darkness or night..

Mount of Transfiguration is not when the reward came as a representative glory (graves opened) That was when Christ said it is finished .The promised time of reformation has come .The veil was rent signaling the last days or last time and not in 70 AD .

Irenaeus writes that John received his vision from God "almost in our own day, during the end of the reign of Domitian." Domitian reigned between 81-96 AD.

Irenaeus born around 125, As a young man in Smyrna (near Ephesus, in what is now western Turkey), he heard the preaching of Polycarp, who as a young man had heard the preaching of the [[((Apostle John))]].

Roman Archives have when Domitian ruled.

These timelines prove it was almost 25 years after 70 A.D. that Domitian both ruled and put John into Patmos.


Dates from Roman Archives, Historians of our faith, and facts prove that John was in Patmos during Domitian's reign. And Domitian did not begin reigning until 12 years AFTER 70 A.D. (81/82 A.D.). The time Domitian reigned alone destroys this 70 A.D. myth.

Eusebius in his Church History (CH) provides the first reference to Domitian persecuting the church. Writing over three centuries later in the early fourth century C.E., this ancient Christian historian first quotes Melito of Sardis, who mentioned that Domitian brought slanderous accusations against Christians (CH 4.26.9). He also cites Tertullian, who claimed that Domitian was cruel like the emperor Nero (r. 54–68 C.E.), but that Domitian was more intelligent, so he ceased his cruelty and recalled the Christians he had exiled (CH 3.20.9). Eusebius also quotes Irenaeus, who claimed Domitian’s persecution consisted only of John’s banishment to Patmos and the exile of other Christians to the island of Pontia (CH 3.18.1, 5).

I am aware of this quote from Irenaeus and have been for a long time. This is the same Irenaeus who thought Jesus was 50 years old when he was crucified. His record as an accurate historian is very spotty.

The quote you are referring to about "almost in our own day, during the end of the reign of Domitian" is ambiguous. If you read the whole quote in Greek it is unclear whether he is referring to John himself that was seen or the apocalypse. Even if he was referring to the apocalypse he has proven himself to be wrong on several things he recorded and is not reliable.

If you google this phrase, "Kenneth Gentry Before Jerusalem Fell pdf" you will find a free book you can start reading immediately. It presents a strong case for why Revelation was written before 70 A.D. The simple fact is people have been arguing over its date for 2,000 years. If you understand what the book is actually about (the fall of Jerusalem) then it becomes clear it was written before 70 A.D.

You still didn't answer my question about Matt 16: 27-28. Do you think Jesus was telling the truth when He made that statement?

You have presented evidence, not proof.

Every man was not rewarded according to His works during Christ's resurrection. Christ said He would do this during His second coming and that He would do it before some of them standing there died (Matt 16: 27-28).

The only possible time for this is 70 A.D. This was the resurrection and judgment. Dan 9 is the 70 weeks prophecy which Gabriel tells Daniel is all the time that is left for his people, the Jews.

Dan 10,11 & 12 give some details about that 70 weeks. Daniel 12 is the end of the 70 weeks period during the first century. Dan 12: 2 tells us that "multitudes who sleep in the dust will awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt".

Jesus says the same thing in Matt 25: 31-46 with the sheep and goats judgment. He says in Matt 24: 34 that all those things in Matt 24 & 25 would come upon His generation.

That is 2 different passages (and there is more) all pointing to resurrection and judgment in 70 A.D. That was when the Great White Throne judgment happened and the new heavens and earth began.

If Revelation's is about 70 A.D., why is there still death, evil, the grave, the Adversary, Fallen angels (Demons), this current Earth and space all still here?

No Armageddon?

No Tribulation?

After Yeshua returns in Revelation's, Armageddon happens, this current Earth disappears and a New Earth takes its place, New Jerusalem, God will be accessible to everyone, there will be Judgement, and then everyone will live for eternity.

NONE OF THIS HAS HAPPENED YET, and that was 1900+ years ago.

This 70 A.D. idea is a trick from Satan!!


And to answer your question, Yeshua was there speaking. He would definitely be there for the Second Coming to be a witness.

Roku 23, i understand perfectly your school of thoughts and the verses that have persuaded you to believe what you believe, but why 70 AD and not 71AD or 69AD? 75AD is perfectly within Jesus' contemporaries and even 90AD.

Where does the bible ever say 70AD or what scriptural timelines end up in 70AD?

If you have to use historians words (and not the scriptures) about the 70AD events, you also have to use the same historians words about some gospels and the book of Revelation being written well after 70AD, you are not at liberty to choose the parts that suit your doctrine and discard other parts.

No discussing is not useful.
If he had come in 70 ad, then he must came without that somebody notice it.

You will be surprised when he comes!

Revelation 2-12
Revelation 22-18,19
If you must invalidly insist on the technicallities of stating the obviously known word of God which demands the fear and reverence you seek to invalidate.....
Technicalities about listing every commonly known scriptural detail from the most published book of all time.....
Either one is familiar and acknowledges or they seek to allow unclean spirits to estrange themself from it.
Either way it is of none effect upon the word which is easily recognizable to the familiar.😀
Frivilous arg's for citations of that which is commanded SHOUTED unto the world really......? Feel free to worship at the temple of your internet LAWS.....threats to ignore also of none real effect if you consider upon the technicality of the word in its expansionary properties.
There exists no malice of intent on my part to inflict damage optically or audibly in any imagined equivalence.
Or even to psychologically traumatize as appears apparent. I do not possess such a spirit or am I so likewise suffer from such sensitivities.....
May your trauma and suffering at my abusiveness be healed swiftly.😀

unfortunately for you, He was not telling YOUR truth

metaphorically speaking of course

Uh huh. If you're content with using fallacious arguments to defend your position, so be it. Be assured that they have no merit for convincing me of anything.

oh yeah

we are all definitely living in the kingdom now

just wish someone would tell Africa, Palestine, Mexico, Venezuela and all the other hellish places so they could calm the hey down and enjoy life for a change

this Preterist interpretation of scripture is KOO KOO and you can quote me

do you think Jesus will say 'surprise!' to these dudes or will He be questioning them why they got so wrong

Well, I cant understand that People come to this view. : Jesus came back 70 ad.
1. John is written far after 70 ad. And John wrote in 1. John, 2,28 : And now,little children,abide in him, so that, when he appears we may have confidece and not shrink from him in shame at his coming.
John would not wrote f.e. this, if this would happend.
This teaching is simply false and destructive.

hahahaha what a joke

The OP idea (Preterism) does not jive with the following, which Scripture itself reveals (I posted this pack in November, I think, so my apologies for the repeat ):

[quoting that post (mine)]

The "SEE" then "FLEE" is indeed following the "beginning of birth pangs [plural]" in Matthew 24.

But in Luke 21, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

--"the beginning of birth pangs" = Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5-8 / and DESCRIBED in Lk21:8-11... [but then verse 12 says, "BUT BEFORE ALL THESE" (and then [vv.12-24a] describes the 70ad events which must come BEFORE the "beginning of birth PANGS [PLURAL]/and 1Th5:2-3 is the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]")]

so...

in Luke 21 the order/SEQUENCE is not "birth pangs" THEN "SEE" THEN "FLEE," but instead is "SEE [Jeru compassed with armies]" THEN "FLEE" [BEFORE ALL OF THESE--->] "beginning of birth pangs" [which is Matt24:4-8/Mt13:5-8/Lk21:8-11 and then followed by much more...].

Completely distinct and wholly different SEQUENCE (not to mention the specific thing they were/are to "SEE" in each)

[end of that quote]

Studying out the SEQUENCE issues (revealed within His Olivet Discourse) shows us the two distinct time frames and what events bracket them (i.e. what they each involve, and what precedes and follows).

Since Matt24:4-8 / Mark 13:5-8 EQUAL that which is being DESCRIBED in Luke 21:8-11, then we can see very clearly (due to verse 12's "BUT BEFORE ALL THESE [that is, BEFORE these just-described-beginning-of-BP]") something else must take place and unfold first (i.e. the 70ad events), then afterward [meaning, at some point after that (not immediately, if you study this out)] the beginning of birth pangs proceed to commence, then we can see that much more FOLLOWS "the beginning of birth pangS [PLURAL]" (and its INITIAL "birth pang [SINGULAR]" is referred to in 1Th5:2-3 regarding the START of a very specific time period which will also involved "the man of sin IN HIS TIME" and all he will DO over the course of the 7-yrs... [2Th2 tells of events both immediately preceding AND thru those yrs (BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END)])