Larry H

Greetings for those who want to know the preterist view of Revelation by Ken Gentry

Greeting Don Preston's Position.....He does not believe in a literal first century Rapture of the saints taken off the earth, and Ed Stevens disagree. Taken from Don Preston's Affirmative 1. So, my position is that at the coming of the Lord in AD 70 the fellowship that was forfeited (lost) through the sin and the death of Adam (and Eve) was restored. Heaven and earth were reunited in fellowship. It is my contention that since it was fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven that was lost, that there was no need whatsoever for any of the saints (living in AD 70 or at any other time) to be “raptured” removed from the earth. All that was needed, all that was foretold, was that the fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven would be restored. This goes to the very definition of “parousia” the presence of Christ. 2. What this debate is NOT about. It is NOT about the nature of the resurrected body of Christ. It is NOT even about the nature of our body in heaven. It is about whether the saints, alive in AD 70, were removed from the earth. I came across this verse, and I am not sure how a Rapture tribulationist would deals with it. John 17:15 I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one.

Greetings I believe some details should be added prior to the first century rapture debate between two scholarly full preterist authors. To understand the CBV, Don Preston and IBV Ed Stevens view on the topic. "Don labors to point out that our eschatology (last things) cannot stand unless it is built on a solid biblical protology (first things). He goes further to assert that if our first things (our views on the Death of Adam) are “wrong,” then our last things (our eschatological views) will be “misguided.” Thus, we have to prove our protology first, before constructing our eschatology. First things first!" Ed Stevens Refreshing on a Spiritual resurrection. "Spiritual resurrection is the process of regeneration when people believe. This is different IN NATURE from bodily resurrection. Passages that discuss spiritual resurrection include: Luke 15:32; John 5:24-25; 11:25; Romans 6:1-14, 23; 8:11; Ephesians 2:1-7; 5:13; Colossians 2:12-14; 3:1-4; 1 John 3:14. Look these passages up and you will see that people are “dead” in their sins but “made alive” by belief in Christ." Meeks "Of course Don Preston has an “exclusive spiritual death ONLY” that has absolutely NO NEED for a physical body. This is a foundational doctrine for Don Preston in what he teaches. Don says that Adam died this exclusive spiritual death ONLY” when Adam stepped out of the garden that was in Eden (spiritual separation death at that moment.)"

Greetings The eschatology of the bible is what was lost in the Garden was restored in the closing stages of salvation. Whether it be restoration of all things, or just fellowship with God. Genesis 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." "But Jesus said to him, "Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead" "The two major views on resurrection within the Preterist movement (CBV versus IBV) part ways at the very beginning of the Bible in regard to how we each define the “death” that God threatened and carried out against Adam “on the very day” he sinned. The CBV defines it as a spiritual-only death, while the IBV sees it as a comprehensive death, including physical, spiritual, and eternal death." Ed Stevens

This is a continuation from previous posts in this thread. The battle rages on between two well known Full Preterist, this is the first Negative in response to Don Preston's opening affirmative. The question in view is..... was the Rapture a literal taking up from the earth as the tribulationist believe, however taking place in the first century. Or does it mean as Don Preston posted .... "So, my position is that at the coming of the Lord in AD 70 the fellowship that was forfeited (lost) through the sin and the death of Adam (and Eve) was restored. Heaven and earth were reunited in fellowship. It is my contention that since it was fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven that was lost, that there was no need whatsoever for any of the saints (living in AD Preston-Stevens Rapture Debate Stevens First Negative - March 6, 2019 MY PRAYER: Blessing and Honor, Glory and Praise be unto You, Oh Lord Most High! We exalt your Holy Name. We pray that this debate will bring glory and honor to You, and exalt your Truth above all of our feeble opinions. Please help us to express our differing views in such a way that Your Truth becomes clearly manifested to every truth-seeker who reads it. We pray this in the Name of Your Glorious Son, our God-Man in heaven, whose physical death on the Cross was our substitute sacrifice. May His Holy Name be blessed forever. Amen. Abbreviations: CBV = Collective (Corporate) Body View (Max King’s resurrection view) IBV = Individual Body View (preterist resurrection view) DoA = Death of Adam WSMHA = We Shall Meet Him in the Air, by Don K. Preston OPENING STATEMEnTS: I consider it a privilege and an honor to participate in this formal written debate with Don K. Preston. His reputation as a highly-skilled debater is well-known and well-deserved. And I greatly appreciate Don’s affirmation that he and I “are both full preterists,” especially since some of his CBV associates have called me a partial preterist. Don is right about that! When Don and I collaborated to debate two Amillennialists in New York City (April 6, 2002), it was fascinating to watch as Don overwhelmed our opponents with negative arguments. Even when Don was allegedly on the affirmative, he was still dumping boatloads of negatives on those guys. I almost felt sorry for them. His strategy then, as it is here also, is to put his opponent on the defensive as quickly as possible, and then keep him there for the duration of the debate. Don does not like to be on the defensive, and neither do I. Skilled debaters minimize the exposure of their view so that their opponents cannot easily see it, analyze it, and challenge it. That may be why Don’s proposition statement seems so generic and bland. He alludes to the resurrection/rapture event in such nebulous terms (“restoration of fellowship”) that even a futurist could agree with it, except for its AD 70 timing. Thus, his proposition does not give me very much to negate. However, Don is supposed to be on the affirmative, laying out his position clearly and comprehensively, and then defending it. Instead, the details and implications of his view remain mostly unstated and unclear, with much of his time spent trying to negate my view before I have even affirmed it. But I have no obligation to deal with his negative material until it is my turn to be in the affirmative. And since Don did not give us very much information about his “collective body” view of the resurrection, bodily change, and rapture, it means that I will need to explain some of that here before attempting to negate it. So, let us begin To be continued

Greeting Thought I would take a break from the debate, and add this for now in its place. Will pick up on it in the next post. Thanks Charles Meek Skeptic Bertrand Russell made an accusation similar to the one by C.S. Lewis in the attached visual. Russell was one of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century and the Nobel Prize winner for literature in 1950. He published a pamphlet entitled “Why I Am Not a Christian.” In the pamphlet he explained that one of the reasons he rejected Christianity was that Jesus failed to return as He promised. Russell wrote: "The Nobel Prize in Literature 1950 was awarded to Earl (Bertrand Arthur William) Russell "in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought." "Jesus certainly thought that His second coming would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who were living at that time. There are a great many texts that prove that. . . and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that His second coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living [examples: Mt. 10:23; 16:27-28; 24:34; 26:64]." Consider this attack by the group Jews for Judaism: "No amount of Christian theological acrobatics will ever solve the problems engendered by the historical reality that a promised imminent fulfillment made two thousand years ago did not occur as expected by the New Testament. Simply stated, Jesus is never coming back, not then, not now, not ever." Was Jesus a false prophet? If so, Jesus was not divine and Christianity collapses. Christians have been weak to answer these charges. But there are answers. The preterist view of eschatology successfully answers these charges, showing that JESUS WAS RIGHT—AND THE SKEPTICS ARE WRONG. Capitalization Mine

This is Part 4 off previous postings in a debate between two full preterist concerning the Rapture. If parts 1-3 were not read, I recommend reading them before evaluating this one. Both parties in the debate do not expect a future Rapture or return of Christ, since they believe it is history. Part 4 14-B. If heaven is the ultimate home of the saints then an on-going rapture of believers and thus, recipients of the promise of never dying, would be necessary to take them to their ultimate home in heaven. In other words, the rapture would not be, as Ed posits, a one time, for all time event. It would be an on-going, unending reality, since Ed does not believe in an end of time. That is patently not a reality. 14-C. If the death of Christ was substitutionary - as Ed believes - then no saint since the first century should have died physically- “If a man keep my saying, he shall never die.” We should have 2000 year old saints among us. If not, why not? Incredibly, Ed makes Jesus’ promise of “never dying” applicable exclusively to that first century generation of believers - not to us today! That essentially means that the Gospel of John - at the least - with all of the promises of eternal life, not dying, etc., has no application to us today! To sustain his position, Ed must prove definitively that Jesus’ promise: “Those who believe in me shall never die” - applied exclusively to the first century saints who were ruptured and has no application to us today. Ed’s claim that Jesus’ promise applied exclusively to the first century generation is a frightening prospect! 15. I agree that the death of Christ was substitutionary, but, it was not his physical death that served as the substitute. Jesus was alienated from the Father spiritually as he hung on the Cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” His (necessary) physical death, shedding his blood for forgiveness, was the visible proof of the greater spiritual realities taking place. But, his physical death was not the substitutionary death or else the difficulties delineated here present themselves. 16. Ed realizes there is a conundrum in the substitutionary death of Christ. So, he offered this: “You are probably wondering: “So why do we still die physically if Jesus died physically in ourplace on the Cross?”.... “We are supposed to die “on the very same day we sin,” just like Adam. But Adam did not die physically “on that very day” simply because the lamb died physically in his place. And we do not die physically “on the very day we sin” simply because Jesus died physically in our place. So physical death (“on the day we sin”) is still a part of the consequences (wages) of sin, along with spiritual condemnation and eternal separation. And the only reason we are not struck dead “on the very day we sin” (just like Adam would have been if the lamb had not died in his place) is because Jesus died physically in our place “once for all” (1Pet 3:18; Gal 3:13; Eph 2:16-18; Col 1:21-22).” 17. So, Ed says that the reason Adam did not die the very day he sinned (as he was supposed to) was due to the substitutionary death of the animals. The animal sacrifice delayed that death for 900 years. Ed says that we do not die the very day that we sin because of Christ’s substitutionary death. Yet, he knows that we will all die physically. This raises several questions. 17-A. Why doesn’t the death of Christ delay our physical death at least as long as the animal sacrifice delayed Adam’s physical death? Why doesn’t the death of Christ delay our physical death for even one single day? Christians die at every stage of our lives - just like non-Christians. Why doesn’t the substitutionary death of Christ at least delay our physical death longer than the death of the reprobate sinners? The truth is that it should totally prevent it! 17-B. If the substitutionary death of the animals forestalled the physical death of Adam for 900 years, why did it not delay his spiritual alienation (death) from God on the very day he sinned? If the animal sacrifice could prevent him from dying physically for 900 years, why didn’t it postpone his expulsion from the Garden for even one day? In similar fashion, man is alienated from God (he dies spiritually) the day he sins (Cf. Colossians 1:20f / 2:12-13). Yet, in Ed’s paradigm, the death of Christ does not extend our physical life by even one day. It is undeniable that the substitutionary death of Christ does not delay our death for even a fraction of how long the animal sacrifice delayed the death of Adam. Why? And, Christians do not live any longer - at all - than the most reprobate of sinners. Once again, the physical death of Christians is not forestalled by even one moment longer than the death of sinners. 17-C. Why doesn’t the substitutionary death of Christ totally prevent our physical death - “If a man keep my saying, he shall never die”? For Ed to say that we do not die immediately because of the substitutionary death of Christ is patently false. The question is: why do we die at all? Which raises another related question. 18. Since Christians do not die immediately when they sin, as a result of the substitutionary death of Christ, why is it that non-Christians, who hate Christ, do not die the very day that they sin the first time? They are not under the power of the blood of Christ, are they? So, what is keeping them from dying immediately upon sinning? Is the blood of Jesus being applied to the unbeliever in the same manner as it is to the Christian? This is hugely problematic for Ed’s view. 19. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). The “law of sin and death” says that, “You sin, you die.” This was the law of the Garden. Adam sinned, he died spiritually the day he sinned. Ed says he should have died physically that day, but, God provided a substitutionary sacrifice that postponed his physical death. 20. Paul says that the Christian is no longer subject to the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-2). Living in Christ, where his Atoning blood continually washes us (1 John 1:7) means that we have eternal life (1 John 5:11-13). It means that we shall never die. Amazingly, Ed says Christians are not subject to the law of sin and death. This is patently false if the law of sin and death meant, “If you sin, you die physically.” This is logically irrefutable. Feel Free to Respond

Part 3 picked up from Previous Post, soon the negative from Ed Steven who will challenge this view. Both parties don't believe in a restoration of the animal kingdom. The word all in verses indicating such have their limitation. As many other verses in the bible using the same wording. Acts 3:21 compare Matthew 21:26 But if we say, 'From men,' we fear the multitude, for all count John as a prophet." 7. Let me say again: since Biblical eschatology was focused on the restoration of what was lost in Adam, and the reality that what was lost in Adam was the fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven, I suggest that there was no need for the removal of man from earth for that fellowship to be restored. After all, if fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven was the goal of Biblical eschatology, then why would God have to remove man from earth - even one generation of men - to restore that fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven?8. Paul affirmed that the eternal purpose of God was the reconciliation of heaven and earth: “Having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth—in Him. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will.” (Ephesians 1:9-11). 9. Thus, for Paul, the re-unification of heaven and earth, in Christ, was God’s eternal purpose. The physical removal of that first generation of believers from the earth would run counter to that goal of eschatology. How would the removal of the first generation of the reconciled, signal the accomplishment of God’s purpose of reuniting heaven and earth? Their removal would not indicate that restoration at all. 10. I ask Ed to explain for us, carefully and exegetically, what was the need for God to remove that one single generation of believers, in order to restore what was lost in Adam - i.e. fellowship between heaven and earth? 11. Ed says that part of the Adamic Curse was physical death. He admits that Adam died “spiritually” - by being separated from God - the very twenty four hour day that he sinned. However, he did not die physically that day because God killed the animals as a substitutionary sacrifice. The animal sacrifice forestalled Adam’s physical death for 900 years. 11-b - This issue has a direct bearing on the resurrection and the rapture. (When I say things like, “Ed believes...” I am referencing his answers to a series of written questions that I submitted to him in preparation for this debate). 12. Ed believes that due to the substitutionary animal sacrifice, Adam’s physical death was delayed for 900 years. He says that because of the substitutionary death of Christ, we do not die the day we sin- but we do die later. This raises severe problems. 13. What does “substitutionary” mean? It means “in the place of, instead of.” When the Passover lamb was slain, it died “in the place of, instead of” the firstborn in the houses where the blood was applied. The firstborn did not die due to the substitutionary Passover sacrifice. 14. If Jesus’ physical death was substitutionary, - and it was - then those in the power of that death should never die physically - period. If only the first generation of saints were the object of Jesus’ promise to never die, as Ed suggests, (Response to my question #22) then, that demands that only the first generation of saints were recipients of Jesus’ promise to never die. Yet, Ed says that Christ’s substitutionary death does apply to us today, even though we will die for our own sins. If those in Christ do not die physically, then certain things would be necessary, if the ultimate goal / home of the saints is heaven (which Ed believes): 14-A. If Christ’s physical death was substitutionary, and those in him never die, then those in him already possess the gift of eternal life, incorruptibility, and do not have to die physically to inherit eternal life. Feel Free to respond

For those who want to take a break from their a comfort zone in systematic theology. Feel Free "scriptural speaking" to show evidence this dogma is erroneous. It will be hard to get a grip on this "Part 2" without considering part 1 in in the mean time. This is part 2 Of Don Preston's affirmative 1. So, my position is that at the coming of the Lord in AD 70 the fellowship that was forfeited (lost) through the sin and the death of Adam (and Eve) was restored. Heaven and earth were reunited in fellowship. It is my contention that since it was fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven that was lost, that there was no need whatsoever for any of the saints (living in AD 70 or at any other time) to be “raptured” removed from the earth. All that was needed, all that was foretold, was that the fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven would be restored. This goes to the very definition of “parousia” the presence of Christ. 2. What this debate is NOT about. It is NOT about the nature of the resurrected body of Christ. It is NOT even about the nature of our body in heaven. It is about whether the saints, alive in AD 70, were removed from the earth. 3. Let me state my affirmative in the following manner: If the goal of Biblical eschatology was the restoration of what was lost through sin and the death of Adam And, If fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven is what was lost through sin and the death of Adam, Then, it must be true that the goal of Biblical eschatology was the restoration of the fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven. That argument leads to this: It is true that the goal of Biblical eschatology was the restoration of what was lost through sin and the death of Adam. It is true that fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven is what was lost through sin and the death of Adam, Therefore, it must be true that the goal of Biblical eschatology was the restoration of the fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven. 4. Now, there is virtually no debate as to whether the goal of Biblical eschatology is the restoration of what was lost through sin and the death of Adam- (Romans 5 / 1 Corinthians 15:22). If Ed wishes to deny that this is true, he can make his argument. 5. There is likewise virtually no debate as to whether fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven was lost through sin and the death of Adam. If Ed wishes to differ with this and challenge it, he can present his arguments. 6. Ed believes that what was lost through Adam’s sin and death was more than fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven. I asked him about the death that God threatened Adam with for sinning. I asked him if that death included physical death; he said it did. This logically demands that the threat of death included two deaths: (Ed says it was actually three). ☛ Spiritual death, i.e. alienation and separation from God. ☛ Physical death.

Greetings There is a battle going on .... on the internet by two esteemed authors of Full Preterism. But not appreciated by Partial Preterist or the Christian community. They are called Heretics.....meaning they differs in opinion from established religious dogma. The subject matter is ...... Rapture or no Rapture Don Preston ......No Rapture Ed Stevens ........A literal first century Rapture, taken off the planet to meet the Lord in the air. Many Preterist have already taken side, forming groups, and are allowed comments negative or positive. Depending on who's side one takes. Or the dogma against preterism when all's said and done. Here are the first few chapters by Don Preston. Feel free to respond. AD 70: Rapture or No Rapture Here is Part of Don K. Preston’s First Affirmative My proposition: “The Bible teaches that 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, i.e. the coming of Christ at His parousia in A.D. 70, was the return of God to man, to dwell forever, reuniting heaven and earth in spiritual fellowship and life, versus a departure or removal of the then living saints from the earth.” I am affirming a bit of a negative, but, Ed and I have agreed that this is acceptable for this discussion. I am honored to participate in this discussion and know that it will be a cordial exchange of ideas. Let me define my terms: By “The Bible” I mean the 66 books of the Bible, both Old Covenant and New. By Teaches: I mean imparts understanding and the reality of truths. By 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18- I believe this is self-explanatory. By “the coming of Christ at His parousia in A.D. 70” - I mean what is commonly referred to as Christ’s “second appearing” which was “for salvation” (Hebrews 9:28). Ed and I are both full preterists, believing that Christ’s end of the age coming and the resurrection occurred in AD 70. By “reuniting heaven and earth in spiritual fellowship and life” - By this I mean that as a result of the Adamic Curse of the Death of Genesis 2:15-17, heaven and earth were divided, separated from one another due to that sin and death. Fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven was broken and forfeited. It was thus God’s eternal plan and purpose that fellowship between man on earth and God in heaven would be restored by Christ and in Christ (Ephesians 1:9f). By, “versus a departure or removal of the then living saints from the earth” - I mean that there was not a physical removal of the then living saints (living in AD 70) from the earth.

Greeting If anyone is interested, and uneducated in Preterism, this advocate, Gary DeMar, gives his understanding on Zechariah 14. Feel free to challenge this view taking the opportunity to do so. So it can be compared with other theologies, post tribulationist and the like, who oppose this growing dogma concerning preterism. There are notes taken from different resource at the end this authors article. I believe he does a good job in answering question usually used to debunk the preterist concepts. Enjoy Zechariah 14 and the Coming of Christ By Gary DeMar 2001 Zechariah 14 and the Coming of Christ By Gary DeMar 2001 In the premillennial view of Bible prophecy, the events depicted in Zechariah 14 are most often interpreted as depicting the second coming of Christ when Jesus will descend from heaven and stand on the Mount of Olives and from there set up His millennial kingdom. The chronology outlined in Zechariah, however, does not fit this scenario. Events actually begin in chapter thirteen where it is prophesied that the Shepherd, Jesus, will be struck and the sheep will be scattered (Zech. 13:7). This was fulfilled when Jesus says, “‘You will all fall away, because it is written, “I WILL STRIKE DOWN THE SHEPHERD, AND THE SHEEP SHALL BE SCATTERED”‘” (Mark 14:27). What follows describes events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. God will act as Judge of Jerusalem and its inhabitants. As the king, He will send “his armies” and destroy “those murderers, and set their city on fire” (Matt. 22:7). For I will gather all the nations [the Roman armies] against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, the houses plundered [Matt. 24:17], the women ravished [Luke 17:35], and half the city exiled [Matt. 24:16], but the rest of the people will not be cut off from the city” (Zech. 14:2). This happened when the Roman armies, made up of soldiers from the nations it conquered, went to war against Jerusalem. Rome was an empire consisting of all the known nations of the world (see Luke 2:1). The Roman Empire “extended roughly two thousand miles from Scotland south to the headwaters of the Nile and about three thousand miles from the Pillars of Hercules eastward to the sands of Persia. Its citizens and subject peoples numbered perhaps eighty million.”1 Rome was raised up, like Assyria, to be the “rod of [His] anger” (Isa. 10:5). “So completely shall the city be taken that the enemy shall sit down in the midst of her to divide the spoil. All nations (2), generally speaking were represented in the invading army, for Rome was the mistress of many lands.”2 Thomas Scott, using supporting references from older commentators and cross references to other biblical books, writes that Zechariah is describing the events surrounding Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70. The time when the Romans marched their armies, composed of many nations, to besiege Jerusalem, was “the day of the Lord” Jesus, on which he came to “destroy those that would not that he should reign over them” [Matt. 22:­10; 24:3, 23­-35; Luke 19:11 ­27, 41-­44]. When the Romans had taken the city, all the outrages were committed, and the miseries endured, which are here predicted [Luke 21:20-­24]. A very large proportion of the inhabitants were destroyed, or taken captives, and sold for slaves; and multitudes were driven away to be pursued by various perils and miseries: numbers also, having been converted to Christianity, became citizens of “the heavenly Jerusalem” and thus were “not cut off from the city” of God [Gal. 4:21­-31; Heb. 12:22-­25].3 Forcing these series of descriptive judgment to leap over the historical realities of Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70 so as to fit a future judgment scenario is contrived and unnecessary. Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle (14:3). After using Rome as His rod to smite Jerusalem, God turns on Rome in judgment. Once again, Assyria is the model: “I send it against a godless nation and commission it against the people of My fury to capture booty and to seize plunder, and to trample them down like mud in the streets . . . . So it will be that when the Lord has completed all His work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, He will say, ‘I will punish the fruit of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the pomp of his haughtiness'” (Isa. 10:5­6, 12-­13). “It is significant that the decline of the Roman Empire dates from the fall of Jerusalem.”4 Thomas Scott concurs: “It is also observable, that the Romans after having been thus made the executioners of divine vengeance on the Jewish nation, never prospered as they had done before; but the Lord evidently fought against them, and all the nations which composed their overgrown empire; till at last it was subverted, and their fairest cities and provinces were ravaged by barbarous invaders.”5 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south (Zech. 14:4). It is this passage that dispensationalists use to support their view that Jesus will touch down on planet earth and set up His millennial kingdom. Numerous times in the Bible we read of Jehovah “coming down” to meet with His people. In most instances His coming is one of judgment; in no case was He physically present. Notice how many times God’s coming is associated with mountains. “And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. . . . Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech” (Gen. 11:5, 7). “So I have come down to deliver them from the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey. . . (Ex. 3:8). “Then Thou didst come down on Mount Sinai, and didst speak with them from heaven. . . (Neh. 9:13 a). “Bow Thy heavens, O LORD, and come down; touch the mountains, that they may smoke” (Psalm 144:5). “For thus says the LORD to me, ‘As the lion or the young lion growls over his prey, against which a band of shepherds is called out, will not be terrified at their voice, nor disturbed at their noise, so will the LORD of hosts come down to wage war on Mount Zion and on its hill'” (Isa. 31:4). “Oh, that Thou wouldst rend the heavens and come down, that the mountains might quake at Thy presence” (Isa. 64:1). “When Thou didst awesome things which we did not expect, Thou didst come down, the mountains quaked at Thy presence” (Isa. 64:3). In Micah 1:3 we are told that God “is coming forth from His place” to “come down and tread on the high places of the earth.” How is this descriptive language different from the Lord standing on the Mount of Olives with the result that it will split? Micah says “the mountains will melt under Him, and the valleys will be split, like wax before the fire, like water poured down a steep place” (1:4). “It was not uncommon for prophets to use figurative expressions about the Lord ‘coming’ down, mountains trembling, being scattered, and hills bowing (Hab. 3:6, 10) mountains flowing down at his presence (Isaiah 64:1, 3); or mountains and hills singing and the trees clapping their hands (Isaiah 55:12).”6 What is the Bible trying to teach us with this descriptive language of the Mount of Olives “split in its middle”? The earliest Christian writers applied Zechariah 14:4 to the work of Christ in His day. Tertullian wrote: “‘But at night He went out to the Mount of Olives.’ For thus had Zechariah pointed out: ‘And His feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives’ [Zech. xiv. 4].”7 Tertullian was alluding to the fact that the Olivet prophecy set the stage for the judgment-coming of Christ that would once for all break down the Jewish/Gentile division. Matthew Henry explains the theology behind the prophecy: You will notice that there is no mention of a thousand year reign. Yet, we are told that “the LORD will be king over all the earth” (14:9). So what is new about this language? “For the LORD Most High is to be feared, a great King over all the earth. He subdues peoples under us, and nations under our feet” (Psalm 47:2, 3). This is exactly what happened with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Paul told the Roman Christians that “the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom. 16:20). The church’s adversary (Satan) were those Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah and persecuted His Bride, the church (see John 16:2). Jesus calls them a “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 3:9). Thanks for reading NOTES 1. Otto Friedrich, The End of the World: A History (New York: Coward, McCann and Geoghegan, 1982), 28. 2. G. N. M. Collins, “Zechariah,” The New Bible Commentary, F. Davidson, ed., 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1954), 761. 3. Thomas Scott, The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments, According to the Authorised Version; with Explanatory notes, Practical Observations, and Copious Marginal References, 3 vols. (New York: Collins and Hannay, 1832), 2:955 4. Collins, “Zechariah,” 761. 5. Scott, The Holy Bible, etc., 956. 6. Ralph Woodrow, His Truth is Marching On: Advanced Studies on Prophecy in the Light of History (Riverside, CA: Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, 1977), 110. 7. “Tertullian Against Marcion,” Book 4, chapter XL, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 3:417. 8. Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, 6 vols. (New York: Fleming H. Revell, n.d.), 4:1468.

Uriah I'll give you the last word, thanks for your time. I Peter 3:15 Kind Regards Larry

Hi again Uriah Please try to take your time and read it all. Did God take vengeance on the Nations who sacked Jerusalem after using the Roman armies to accomplish His Divine purpose of the destruction of Jerusalem. Will get to that. Did the Apostles Know the Post Trib end times theology in the order it is presented today, or was it revealed at a latter date. How can I go further if you have not at yet responded to my last post. The only response I got was CHERRY PICKING, OR SLEIGHT OF HAND. Walking through the cataloger etc stuff of that kind. Did you figure the statements out by yourself, or heard it from someone else. ☺️ So here goes again You don't have to see it to believe it, a good encyclopedia will tell you all about it. Allies of Rome Zechariah 14:2 For I WILL GATHER ALL THE NATIONS to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, THE HOUSES RIFLED, And the WOMEN RAVISHED. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 1 "In fact, JOSEPHUS RECORDS THAT TITUS HAD TEN COHORTS OF AUXILIARY TROOPS FROM KINGS OF DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, SUCH AS ARABIA, SYRIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES (Wars, Bk. 4, chapter 4, Whiston, p. 642). In other words, it was the KINGS OF THE EARTH THAT GATHERED AGAINST LITERAL JERUSALEM!" 2 For I will gather all the nations.....Roman Allies. Usually, defeated peoples became "allies" of the Romans with loyalties strengthened by Roman. 3 "the houses plundered" Matthew 24:17 4 "the women ravished" Luke 17:35 5 Luke 23:28 Jesus turned and said to them, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; WEEP FOR YOURSELVES AND FOR YOUR CHILDREN. Zechariah 14:2 [I will gather all nations] The Romans, whose armies were composed of all the nations of the world. In this verse there is a pitiful account given of the horrible outrages which should be committed during the siege of Jerusalem, and at its capture. [The residue of the people shall not be cut off] Many were preserved for slaves, and for exhibition in the provincial theatres. Adam Clarke's Commentary What scripture, and who predicted this stuff about the UN. It is important to note that there is nothing we can do to speed up, move in time, God’s prophetic timetable. God alone is in control of the timetable, and it is perfectly designed—not one moment too soon, and not one moment too late.". Matthew 24:Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" In context with the chapter, of the day or hour no one knew about, Christ coming in Judgement of an apostate Nation finalized, the end of the Mosaic Economy, by the destruction of the temple AD 70. Matthew 24:3 when will these things be? what things Matthew 24:3 the end of the age Daniel 12 7:"when the power of the holy people [ the chosen nation ...Jewish] has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished ........"Not one stone upon another" Daniel 12:11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away. Stay with me I'll get to those other verses you referenced in due time. Your Up

Hi Uriah Allies of Rome Zechariah 14:2 For I WILL GATHER ALL THE NATIONS to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, THE HOUSES RIFLED, And the WOMEN RAVISHED. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city. NKJV 1 "In fact, JOSEPHUS RECORDS THAT TITUS HAD TEN COHORTS OF AUXILIARY TROOPS FROM KINGS OF DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, SUCH AS ARABIA, SYRIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES (Wars, Bk. 4, chapter 4, Whiston, p. 642). In other words, it was the KINGS OF THE EARTH THAT GATHERED AGAINST LITERAL JERUSALEM!" 2 For I will gather all the nations.....Roman Allies. Usually, defeated peoples became "allies" of the Romans with loyalties strengthened by Roman. 3 "the houses plundered" Matthew 24:17 4 "the women ravished" Luke 17:35 5 Luke 23:28 Jesus turned and said to them, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; WEEP FOR YOURSELVES AND FOR YOUR CHILDREN. Zechariah 14:2 [I will gather all nations] The Romans, whose armies were composed of all the nations of the world. In this verse there is a pitiful account given of the horrible outrages which should be committed during the siege of Jerusalem, and at its capture. [The residue of the people shall not be cut off] Many were preserved for slaves, and for exhibition in the provincial theatres. Adam Clarke's Commentary It is important to note that there is nothing we can do to speed up, move in time, God’s prophetic timetable. God alone is in control of the timetable, and it is perfectly designed—not one moment too soon, and not one moment too late.". Matthew 24:Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" Matthew 24:36 No One Knows the Day or Hour (Mark 13:32-37; Luke 17:26,27,34,35; 21:34-36) "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. In context of the verses, of the day or hour no one knew about, Christ coming in Judgement of an apostate Nation finalized, the end of the Mosaic Economy, by the destruction of the temple AD 70 Daniel 12 7:"when the power of the holy people [ the chosen nation ...Jewish] has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished ........"Not one stone upon another" Daniel 12:11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away. Thoughts

Hi Uriah Zechariah 12:3 And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it. NKJV "Does it mean that America will fight against Jerusalem? If not, why not? Or mean that the 17 smallest countries in the world, most of which have no armies, will join the battle? If, after all, one is going to insist that “all the nations” means literally, every nation on earth, then to be consistent, one must argue that every South American country, the USA and every other country on the globe will join in" You see Uriah Rome was not alone "In fact, Josephus records that Titus had ten cohorts of auxiliary troops from kings of different countries, such as Arabia, Syria and other countries (Wars, Bk. 4, chapter 4, Whiston, p. 642). In other words, it was the kings of the earth that gathered against literal Jerusalem!" You're up

Hi Uriah Sorry for the wait. Excellent question, there are a couple of deviation between the two verses. The word coming/parousia differs in the Greek Strong's, and in like manner Young's Literal Translation in Matthew 24:30 uses earth instead of land that is used in Rev. 1:7. And accordingly, unless there is more and I am sure there will be with anticipation, there seems to be two comings of Christ. One in the first century by Divine intervention on a apostate Nation, the other in our future i.e. A Partial Preterist view....Post Trib theology Have you considered Zec. 12:10 You're up, if you're up to it. ?

Hi Uriah good to hear from you again, Thought you jumped ship when I referenced Matthew 26:64 with no response. Just kidding it was likely missed. All capitulations are mine. So here it is again. Matthew 26:64 "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." How far into the future will, or did, the High Priest Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin witness it. Got some more homework Uriah for you to do Matthew 24:29-30 Considering those verses some people have to see it to believe it as a replacement for just taking Jesus at His word. Note what He said just four verses down. I TELL YOU THE TRUTH, THIS GENERATION will certainly not pass away UNTIL ALL THESE THINGS HAVE HAPPENED. So apparently those phenomenon's in Matthew 24: 29,30 should not be taken literally but as representations taken from Old Testament Jesus took advantage of to show the outcome of the destruction of Jerusalem and it temple. EXAMPLE Ezekiel 32:7,8 I believe "relating to the fall of Pharaoh"" When I snuff you out, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light. All the shining lights in the heavens I will darken over you; I will bring darkness over your land, declares the Sovereign LORD. Ezekiel 32:7 [I will cover the heaven] Destroy the empire. [I will cover the heaven] Destroy the empire. [Make the stars thereof dark] Overwhelm all the dependent states. [I will cover the sun] The king himself. [And the moon shall not give her light.] The queen may be meant, or some state less than the kingdom. Adam Clarke's You up

Questions, Questions, Questions Not sure of what point of time is meant at His coming concerning the resurrection . Do they take place at the same time, if not what happens first, the resurrection of the dead, or the second coming in our future. Are we in the last days before the "end of time Will there still be forgiveness of sin after the second coming

Hi Uriah A follow up from my previous post with evidence of a first century appearing in a cloud. The cloud representing God's wrath on a nation in the Old Testament. Isa. 19:1 Here is the Preterist, be it Partial or Full understanding of the Rev.1:7 According to Young's Literal Translation the Tribes of the Land. I.e. the 12 tribes of Israel were responsible for His piercing. Causing a weeping by the Apostate Nation therein by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. Matthew 24:1-34 Revelation 1:7 "Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen!" Young's Literal Translation YLT Zechariah 12:10 Mourning for the Pierced One "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. NKJV And Jesus on His way to be crucified said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children". Luke 23:28 Revelation 1:7 [Behold, he cometh with clouds] This relates to his coming to execute judgment on the enemies of his religion;perhaps to his coming to destroy Jerusalem, as he was to be particularly manifested to them that pierced him, which must mean the incredulous and rebellious Jews. [And all kindreds of the earth] Pasai hai phulai tees gees. All the tribes of the land. By this the Jewish people are most evidently intended, and therefore the whole verse may be understood as predicting the destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive proof that the Apocalypse was written before the final overthrow of the Jewish state. Adam Clark Your up thought

Hello again Uriah "YES, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." Matthew 26:64 Your thoughts

Hi Retrobyter Sorry about that Ret SPIRITUALLY spir'-it-u-al-i (pneumatikos): As in 1 Corinthians 2:14, "spiritually judged," i.e. by means of the spirit renewed and enlightened by the spirit of God; having the mind of the Spirit is to be spiritually-minded (compare the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) Romans 8:6). Allegorically used also (Revelation 11:8) to characterize, in a bad sense, the qualities of the spiritual (i.e. the spirit's) life: "which spiritually is called Sodom." The word in Christian circle can take on different perspectives. How I view the word spiritually should be in context with the verse and surrounding text. For example if one is spiritually dead, it suggest separation from God which Jesus repaired. Isa. 59:2 Rom. 5:1 In purpose within the things of God. "Spiritually discerned" Also morally or other wise.

Hi Uriah Nero cannot be the anti-Christ, because there were many anti-Christ, and the Anti-Christ idiom is not mentioned in the book of Revelation. I personally don't believe everything said in the articles presented,. but Nero is the best choice for the beast of Revelation in my estimation. Where was it said that it was Nero was thrown in the lake of fire, perhaps it can by cut and paste from a previous post. Revelation. Here are some consideration according to the preterist view. The book was specially written to the Seven churches in first century Asia, not to the universal church we see today. Rev. 1:4,11. It was penned to their state of affairs, not ours, if not how could they be blessed by the words therein. Rev.1:3 The time indicators are literally imminent occurrences in the first century. Rev. 1:1,3. The first century Christian reading the time indicators as day was a day not thousands of years later. A thousand years may be in God's but not to those he wrote. It would be irrelevant to them to read a letter that was really meant to a people thousands of years later. The theme of the book is Revelation 1:7 "Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen!" Young's Literal Translation Your thoughts

Hi Uriah Is Flavius Josephus a first century Historian a reliable Author? Or Shimon Gibson in our day. Mark 12:13-17 The Beast of Revelation As they say seeing is believing. The link at the end of this post. Archaeologists from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte are reporting that they’ve found a gold coin bearing the image of the mid-first century Roman emperor Nero, uncovered during excavations in the Western Hill of Jerusalem (more commonly referred to as Mount Zion). This type of coin is in fact well-attested in the archaeological record. However, one of the lead professors associated with this find, Shimon Gibson, is quoted in the press release as saying “The coin is exceptional,” said Gibson, “because this is the first time that a coin of this kind has turned up in Jerusalem in a scientific dig. Coins of this type are usually only found in private collections, where we don’t have clear evidence as to place of origin.” Although the book of Revelation was, of course, written in Greek, scholars have recognized that a Greek form of Nero’s name, Νέρων Καῖσαρ (Neron Caesar), when rendered into Hebrew/Aramaic¹ as נרון קסר, gives us a combined value of 666: 50 + 200 + 6 + 50 + 100 + 60 + 200.² Read More https://www.patheos.com/blogs/atheology/2016/09/first-century-coin-of-nero-found-in-jerusalem-the-mark-of-the-beast/ Your thoughts

Hi Uriah Thanks for the response and the time spent to do so. I have some more homework for you to do about the Mark of the beast . Dr Jonathan Welton, Thd "Regarding the “mark of the beast,” it is important to note that in the ancient cultures of Rome, the public market was the main source of trade and retail. For people to enter the public market, they had to pass through the main gate. It was required of all who entered the main gate to pay homage to the idol of the Emperor. Once homage was paid, ashes were placed on the hand or on the forehead of the individual, and then they were allowed to pass through the gates and buy and sell merchandise. This was taking the mark. The parallels between this and the “mark of the beast” are stunning, and they further confirm the reality that the beast was Nero and the Roman Empire." Consider IMHO from the verse in Revelation posted, that the full preterist differ in interpretation timing and certain events of the book. The question should be how did those in the Seven Churches Rev. 1:4,11 in first century Asia understand it. If they did not how would they be blessed by hearing the words therein. Rev. 1:3 And the book would be irrelevant to those suffering brothers. By the way the book was specifically written to their happening, not universal Christianity. Example To the angel of the church in Sardis write: To the angel of the church in Ephesus write, "To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: OK Your up Regards Larry

Hi again Uriah Yes, Nero committee suicide around the date you mentioned. Revelation 13:18 This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666. Check the internet what that number 666 added up to, a man's number Here is the Historical evidence you asked for, it seems to me to make sense. Nero so affected the imagination that the pagan writer Apollinius of Tyana, a contemporary of Nero, specifically mentions that Nero was called a "beast": "In my travels, which have been wider than ever man yet accomplished, I have seen many, many wild beasts of Arabia and India; but this beast, that is commonly called a Tyrant, I know not how many heads it has, nor if it be crooked of claw, and armed with horrible fangs. . . . And of wild beasts you cannot say that they were ever known to eat their own mother, but nero has gorged himself on this diet." The Christians of the first century were under the military authority of Rome, a nation which openly proclaimed its rulers, the Caesars, to be divine. All those under the jurisdiction of Rome were required by law to publicly proclaim their allegiance to Caesar by burning a pinch of incense and declaring, "Caesar is Lord". Upon compliance with this law, the people were given a papyrus document called a "libellus", which they were required to present when either stopped by the Roman police or attempting to engage in commerce in the Roman marketplace, increasing the difficulty of "buying or selling" without this mark. This is the essence of Scripture’s warnings to the early Christians against taking upon themselves the "mark of the beast". There is also the historical evidence that Nero placed his statue at various agoras (market places) throughout his Roman empire. In order for one to enter, to buy or sell in the agora, one had to stop and pay homage to Nero, by burning incense to his statue. It was an act of Emperor worship (Emperor Cult Worship of the Roman Empire). After one burned the incense, it was required of them to smear the ash from the incense on the forehead or right hand to prove right to enter the agora. To take this mark was called “taking the mark of Nero” or “taking the mark of the beast”.