Romans 16:20 is a Strong Proof of Christ's 70 AD Return

[Grasshopper]

So, when was the "abomination of desolation" spoken of by Daniel the Prophet?

Are you saying that "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be".
has already occurred?

Charles Spurgeon

15-18. When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolution, spoken, of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains: let him which is on the housetop not come down to take anything out of his house neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

This portion of our Savior's words appears to relate solely to the destruction of Jerusalem. As soon as Christ's disciples saw "the abomination of desolution", that is, the Roman ensigns, with their idolatrous emblems, "stand in the holy place", they knew that the time for them to escape had arrived, and they did "flee to the mountains."

The Christians in Jerusalem and the surrounding towns and villages, "in Judea", availed themselves of the first opportunity for eluding the Roman armies, and fled to the mountain city of Pella, in Perea, where they were preserved from the general destruction which overthrew the Jews.

There was no time to spare before the final investment of the guilty city, the man "on the house-top" could "not come down to take anything out of his house", and the man "in the field" could not "return back, to take his clothes." They must flee to the mountains in the greatest haste the moment that they saw "Jerusalem compassed with armies ".(#Lu 21:20)


32-33. 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. Heaven and earth shall pass away but my words shall not pass away.

Our Lord here evidently returns to often made use of it's illuminated the subject of the destruction of Jerusalem, and in these words gives his apostles warning concerning the signs of the times. He had recently used the barren fig tree as an object-lesson, he now bids his disciples "learn a parable of the fig tree" and all the trees. (#Lu 21:31) God's great book of nature is full of illustrations for those who have eyes to perceive them, and the Lord Jesus, the great Creator, often made use of it's illuminated pages in conveying instruction to the minds of his hearers. On this occasion, he used a simple simile from the parable of the fig-tree: "When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh." They could not mistake so plain a token of the near return of summer, and Jesus would have them read quite as quickly the signs that were to herald the coming judgment on Jerusalem: "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors." The Revised Version has the words, "Know ye that he is nigh," the Son of man, the King. His own nation rejected him when he came in mercy, so his next coming would be a time of terrible judgment and retribution to his guilty capital. Oh, that Jews and Gentiles today were wise enough to learn the lesson of that fiery trial, and to seek his face, those wrath they cannot bear!

The King left his followers in no doubt as to when these things should happen: "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." It was just about the ordinary limit of a generation when the Roman armies compassed Jerusalem, whose measure of iniquity was then full, and overflowed in misery, agony, distress, and bloodshed such as the world never saw before or since. Jesus was a true Prophet, everything that he foretold was literally fulfilled. He confirmed what he had already said, and what he was about to say, by a solemn affirmation: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." "The Word of the Lord endureth for ever," and though that Lord appeared in fashion as a man, and was shortly to be crucified as a malefactor, his words would endure when heaven and earth would have fulfilled the purpose for which he had created them, and passed away. Christ's promises of pardon are as sure of fulfilment as his prophecies of punishment, no word of his shall ever "pass away."

http://www.historicism.com/sites/matt24/spurgeon.htm

The fulfillment of many of these prophecies is not just an interpretation held by wild-eyed full-preterist, in fact they seem to be the traditional view held pre-Darby.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The original Abomination of Desolation was when Antiochus Epiphanes took possession of Jerusalem and defiled the Temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar. This is the occasion indicated by Daniel 11.

It is also clear that the Lord Jesus was speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matt 24:15, but that does not mean at all that He was also speaking of the Coming of Christ, any more than Christ came at the time of Antiochus. The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 is the vengeance of the landowner (Matt 21:41), not the end of the world.

Steve

 

[beameup]

Charles Spurgeon

I am not familiar with "Charles Spurgeon",
however the Apostle Paul says:
and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
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. 2 Thess 2:3b-4

Are you asserting that Titus Vespasian was "the man of sin" who
"sat in the temple of God" and demanded worship "as God"?

THE Apostle Paul continues:
And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth,
and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan
with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish;
because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2 Thess 2:8-11

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Who is Paul referring to in this verse?
...and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
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. - 2 Thes 2:3b-4

I think that I had asked you when the things of Matt 24 occurred (fully, not "partially"
as in a "preview" like for example Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 63BC).

Scripture is not clear on the identity of this person or personage. The identity would not change the clear grammatical context of Scripture. Also, I couldn't help but notice that you totally avoided the fact that EVERY reference by Christ to the coming judgement is clear as to the apostles being witnesses to these events. Christ made this point very clear. I'll believe Christ's own words over twisted dispy doctrine. Typical dispy tactic; when you can't stand against the weight of Scripture, argue a point that does not change the actual teachings of Christ.

 

[Grasshopper]

It is also clear that the Lord Jesus was speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matt 24:15, but that does not mean at all that He was also speaking of the Coming of Christ, any more than Christ came at the time of Antiochus. The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 is the vengeance of the landowner (Matt 21:41), not the end of the world.

Steve

Neither is Mattew 24 speaking of the end of the word, but the end of the age. If this portion of the passage is not speaking of a coming of Christ, then when does Jesus change from speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem to the coming of the son of man in verse 30?

 

[beameup]

Typical dispy tactic; when you can't stand against the weight of Scripture, argue a point that does not change the actual teachings of Christ.

If I read these words penned by the Holy Spirit through Paul,
I'd definitely be "paying attention"...

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the
Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth,
and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

If I read these words penned by the Holy Spirit through Paul,
I'd definitely be "paying attention"...

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the
Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth,
and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

Were you trying to make another point, or just continuing to avoid my original claim that Christ said what He meant & meant what He said when He claimed that the apostles would witness the abomination that causes desolation. Try reading through the gospels with the grammatical context kept intact. It will be quite the eye opener.

 

[beameup]

Were you trying to make another point, or just continuing to avoid my original claim that Christ said what He meant & meant what He said when He claimed that the apostles would witness the abomination that causes desolation. Try reading through the gospels with the grammatical context kept intact. It will be quite the eye opener.

Actually, Jesus was speaking to His DISCIPLES.
He had DISCIPLES then, and he will again have
(genetic) Israelite DISCIPLES during the Tribulation.
And yes, they will READ the N.T. Gospels.

It is not a difficult thing for God to "hit the pause button"
around 70AD and then at some future point hit the "play button"
... in the fullness of time.

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not:
I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus:
worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. Rev 19:10

 

[OldRegular]

In Matthew 24 the disciples ask two questions:

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus Christ answered both of them.

 

[Grasshopper]

In Matthew 24 the disciples ask two questions:

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus Christ answered both of them.

Mark helps out here:

13:3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?”

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Actually, Jesus was speaking to His DISCIPLES.
He had DISCIPLES then, and he will again have
(genetic) Israelite DISCIPLES during the Tribulation.
And yes, they will READ the N.T. Gospels.

It is not a difficult thing for God to "hit the pause button"
around 70AD and then at some future point hit the "play button"
... in the fullness of time.

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not:
I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus:
worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. Rev 19:10

Nor is it a difficult thing for you to add "pauses" to God's Word which Christ did not speak of, or to make Him out to be a liar. He was speaking directly to the apostles, not to some mythical future disciples. If your best rebuttal is that Christ could have possibly been speaking of some other group of disciples instead of the group to whom He was actually speaking, then your doctrine is resting on a thin foundation of assumption & personal presupposition.
All of those "pauses" & massive spaces of time which must be added to God's Word for dispensationalism to be correct are all eisegetical. It sounds just like the excuses humanistic evolutionists give for their baseless theories. They also assume great expanses of time against the witness of Scripture & true science. Ask yourself if your theology would hold up without all of the presuppositions of breaks in time & faulty grammar on Christ's part. My view is based on the actual words of Christ within the grammatical & chronological context of the text.

 

[beameup]

2 Thess 2:1-12 excerpts
Subject: The Gathering of the Bride of Christ (NT Church) unto Christ.
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
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.

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. [ref. Romans 11:25]

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
___________________________

I know it must be difficult to rationalize or just ignore this passage since it is "merely" from the Apostle Paul rather than part of the "red letter" Gospels.
I would like to hear how all of this occurred prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. :wavey:

 

[Logos1]

Such an arrogant statement to make: "We know Christ returned in 70 A.D."
But you don't know. And that in itself is the spirit of antichrist according to 1John. Why boast of things you do not know?

And yet you blithely go on thinking that you KNOW that 70 A.D. Christ returned without a shred of evidence that he did.

A belated Merry Christmas to you dhk--hope you had a jolly good one.

LOL, well dhk is it arrogance when it proves to be true. Besides I don’t think you can get into my brain and decide what I know—looks like I did know what I was talking about—Christ didn’t come back—which does more to validate my point on 70 AD than it does to support the 2,000 year record of failure of futurism doesn’t it. If you would actually read the bible straight up as opposed to wasting your time numbering post about this and that you would know that the 12 Apostles understood Christ’s teaching to them of a first century return and even though he didn’t date it for them it did in fact prove to be 70 AD.

The Apostles question of Matthew 24:3 certainly tells us when the temple would be destroyed is when the end of the age would be and that is when he would come back—and that just happen to be 70 AD. So therefore I have 12, count’em twelve, a whole dozen witnesses to the Preterist view point.

I don’t see any Apostles (or Christ’s answer) supporting your view point dhk. Just saying.


I will leave that to the superb eisegesis of Logo...Oldregular

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

The “falling away” and “the coming of the man of sin” were first century events. They occurred in connection with the persecution of the church just before the Jewish revolt in A.D. 66. The destruction and defilement of the temple at Jerusalem is explained in great detail by Josephus. While 2 Thess. 2:1-4 is usually associated with “THE” Antichrist, we need to remember that the anti-Christian spirit was already at work in the first century.
Regardless of this, it is foolishness to force clearly written passages to fit your own ideology via presuppositions of gaps in time.

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. (2 Thess. 2:7)

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
(1Jn 4:3)

 

[preachinjesus]

Logos1, I'd apply all of my questions which asterisktom ran away from to you as well.

Perhaps the most significant is, if Jesus did return in AD 70, why does no one record His second coming when there are many records of His first coming? Why wouldn't Jesus appear to His living apostles in His AD 70 return?

 

[beameup]

He was speaking directly to the apostles, not to some mythical future disciples. If your best rebuttal is that Christ could have possibly been speaking of some other group of disciples instead of the group to whom He was actually speaking, then your doctrine is resting on a thin foundation of assumption & personal presupposition.

I believe that Mark 13:32 sheds a little light on this. [re: Mk 13 & Mt 24]
But of that day and [that] hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father [ONLY].

The Son did not even know when he would return;
he was speaking to his DISCIPLES in response to their questions.
In this case he was prophesying concerning his return.

Of course, your assumption seems to be that (genetic) Israel is "forever cut-off", and so even any "hint"
of the possibility of future (genetic) Israelite disciples must be rejected out-of-hand.

Rather than focusing on those cryptic passages and parables and different "audiences" presented in the Gospels,
may I recommend the clear-concise language of Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, to bring clarity and understanding.

I believe that Romans 11 will bring real "clarity and understanding" on this issue:
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graft them in again. - vs. 23
You see, nothing is impossible with God.

Paul goes on:
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits;
that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Jesus will sit on David's Throne.

 

[OldRegular]

Logos1, I'd apply all of my questions which asterisktom ran away from to you as well.

Perhaps the most significant is, if Jesus did return in AD 70, why does no one record His second coming when there are many records of His first coming? Why wouldn't Jesus appear to His living apostles in His AD 70 return?

Don't hold your breath waiting for a legitimate answer, you will only pass out!

 

[Grasshopper]

Logos1, I'd apply all of my questions which asterisktom ran away from to you as well.

Perhaps the most significant is, if Jesus did return in AD 70, why does no one record His second coming when there are many records of His first coming? Why wouldn't Jesus appear to His living apostles in His AD 70 return?

Neither full of partial preterism teaches a literal,physical coming. I thought everyone understood that but apparently not.

John Gill:

and coming in, the clouds of heaven.
So Christ's coming to take vengeance on the Jewish nation, as it is often called the coming of the son of man, is described in this manner, (Matthew 24:27,30) .

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Neither full of partial preterism teaches a literal,physical coming. I thought everyone understood that but apparently not.

John Gill:

and coming in, the clouds of heaven.
So Christ's coming to take vengeance on the Jewish nation, as it is often called the coming of the son of man, is described in this manner, (Matthew 24:27,30) .

Rather than pull a quote of Gill out of context, here is Article Ten of the Goat yard Delaration of Faith which was written personally by Gill for his church at Horse Lie Down, London:-

X. We believe that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust; and that Christ will come a second time to judge both quick and dead, when he will take vengeance on the wicked, and introduce his own people into his kingdom and glory, where they shall be for ever with him.

Note that this coming of Christ was still future in 1729 when Gill wrote about it. Note also that it is Christ's Second Coming, not His Third.

Steve

 

[JesusFan]

Rather than pull a quote of Gill out of context, here is Article Ten of the Goat yard Delaration of Faith which was written personally by Gill for his church at Horse Lie Down, London:-


Note that this coming of Christ was still future in 1729 when Gill wrote about it. Note also that it is Christ's Second Coming, not His Third.

Steve

was he then one who taught iA-Mil for the second coming?

Church has historically held that A-Mil/pre/Post/Historical mil were ALL OK to hold...

Has it EVER held to full pretierism as being a valid way to view end times?