Was AD 70 the Parousia?

[gdemoss]

Danielzk, Gary, this last link is especially for you. Please reference the Scriptural passages.

http://www.eschatolo...-sorrow-no-pain

Peter

Thank you Peter, but I am not here to chase links and read articles about what others say. I come here and wanted to have a discussion with you about certain verses that you might personally address through the wisdom given you by God.

Gary

Hi Gary,

I had a hunch that you had not read the links I had presented in the passed. These links just save me a lot of work and time. I work 12 hour shifts so spare time is a precious commodity. I don't have time to go down every rabbit hole every day. How about answering some of the questions I ask you then from now on if you want me to invest the time with you. Are you in agreement friend?

Peter

I was unaware that I had side stepped questions you have asked. I would wonder why I did not answer something you asked. I understand that you might not have time to address a question posed unto you and that is perfectly legitimate but how long does it take to address a verse or two from your own knowledge bank? Something as simple as when did the following happen?

Isaiah 11

8 6 The wolf will live with the lamb,

the leopard will lie down with the goat,

the calf and the lion and the yearling together;

and a little child will lead them.

I fully expect this to be literally fulfilled one day as I understand the reason that this doesn't happen now is because of the constant judgments taking place due to sin running rampant in our world and that will not be the case when Jesus rules and reigns with a rod of iron for a thousand years. Examples like Ananias and Saphira will be present and those who even think to do evil will bring thoughts of them to mind and decide against the evil they would do. The land and all of its inhabitants will finally have rest. This has never happened to my knowledge.

Gary

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Peter.

Shalom Roy, (Gary, Danielzk, Montana, you are included in this post),

...

You are still missing the point, regardless of whether the verse teaches God is our source of strength, IMO. Is God using a figure of speech when He uses a thousand in the verse, or is it a literal 1,000?

No, I'm not "missing the point." Yes, it is a LITERAL 1,000 people! Without "alef" meaning "1,000" in these verses, how are these people to remain confident in the face of danger? It's not enough to say that God would be their source of strength in the face of "a very large number" of enemy soldiers! That's too arbitrary and nebulous! It's subjective because one person's idea of a "very large number" could be different than another person's idea of "a very large number." The number in one person's head might be too small for them to have much confidence in God! They were given a CONCRETE, SPECIFIC number on purpose - an OBJECTIVE, ABSOLUTE number to which all of them could relate - so they could feel confident in both the ability of God to "handle" their enemies and in the love of God to do so for them! ANYONE who could count could calculate how big "1,000" is! Thus, they were all on the same page!

...

Again, the point is to show that you can't take everything as literal when the number 1,000 is used in Scripture, and as you say, Solomon was talking of the pointlessness of living, outside of God. Granted that God's thoughts are above and beyond us, but God uses man's language in order to reason and communicate with man, otherwise we would have no understanding of God. The point is that a thousand does not necessarily mean exactly one thousand.

And, again, if it doesn't mean a literal "thousand years," then where is the communication?! It would be lost in the nebulous and arbitrary picture you're trying to paint! They may not experientially know what a "thousand years" is, but they would know from the book of B'resheet (Genesis) that it was longer than Adam or Metushelach (Methusaleh) lived and longer than their lifetimes added together! This gives some concrete, absolute, literal meaning to what Shlomo was trying to say. Even if the PHRASE is used figuratively, if the words within the phrase aren't given their literal meaning, what basis does one have for communicating that phrase?

It is a direct quote from Psalm 90, even though it is connected to many other passages.

Psalm 90:4 only contributes to CONFIRM a literal 1,000 years for what would be the sense in comparing it with a single day (or any other measurement of time) if one didn't know how long a "thousand years" was? Again, even if the phrase or the sentence is being used in a figurative way, the NUMBERS aren't! They must be given their literal sense within the phrase, or the comparison makes no sense.

I believe the Lord gives us a clear understanding of what He means by a generation in Hebrews:

Hebrews 3:7-4:11

New International Version (NIV)

Warning Against Unbelief

⁷ So, as the Holy Spirit says:

“Today, if you hear his voice,

⁸ do not harden your hearts

as you did in the rebellion,

during the time of testing in the wilderness,

⁹ where your ancestors tested and tried me,

though for forty years they saw what I did.

¹⁰ That is why I was angry with that generation;

I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray,

and they have not known my ways.’

¹¹ So I declared on oath in my anger,

‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ”^[a]

¹² See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. ¹³ But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. ¹⁴ We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end. ¹⁵ As has just been said:

“Today, if you hear his voice,

do not harden your hearts

as you did in the rebellion.”^[b]

¹⁶ Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? ¹⁷ And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? ¹⁸ And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? ¹⁹ So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God

4 Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. ² For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed.^[c]3 Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,

“So I declared on oath in my anger,

‘They shall never enter my rest.’”^[d]

And yet his works have been finished since the creation of the world. ⁴ For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.”^[e]5 And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.”

⁶ Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, ⁷ God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:

“Today, if you hear his voice,

do not harden your hearts.”^[f]

⁸ For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. ⁹ There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; ¹⁰ for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works,^[g] just as God did from his. ¹¹ Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience.

Footnotes:

1. Hebrews 3:11 Psalm 95:7-11
   
2. Hebrews 3:15 Psalm 95:7,8
   
3. Hebrews 4:2 Some manuscripts because those who heard did not combine it with faith
   
4. Hebrews 4:3 Psalm 95:11; also in verse 5
   
5. Hebrews 4:4 Gen. 2:2
   
6. Hebrews 4:7 Psalm 95:7,8
   
7. Hebrews 4:10 Or labor
   

Since Jesus died in A.D. 30-33 the time line fits well to coincide with the destruction of the city and temple and with the author's admonition to enter that rest while it is still today. God was angry with that generation that perished in the desert, just like He is angry with this generation for rejecting His beloved Son. There is a contrast between the old and the new throughout the book. The author is reminding this people who lived in the 1st century of what happened to that other generation, since I think it can be deduced that these 1st century people being addressed had made a profession of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah. Remember that the book starts by stating that:

Hebrews 1:1-2

New International Version (NIV)

God’s Final Word: His Son

1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ² but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

You can't keep ignoring the time passages or who is being primarily addressed as they relate to the context of the Scriptures without mangling His word. Here is the author, addressing Hebraic Christians concerning the last days and a better covenant that the one that still existed until A.D. 70. The author wants to make sure that they do not rely on their own works but on those of Christ. Moses, the Levitical priesthood, their offerings and sacrifices, Mount Sinai and the Old Covenant is being compared to Jesus and the new better covenant. Just as those failed to enter the Promised Land and rest from their labors, so these were in danger of doing so too.

Actually, I believe in an early birth of Yeshua` because Herod died in 4 B.C. and the Magi visited Miryam, Yosef, and Yeshua` when He was a "paidion," a Greek word that means a "toddler," as one that a parent would first be willing to "swat" or "spank with a single, light stroke," coming from the root verb "paioo," meaning "I strike; I sting." Strong's even goes so far as to say that, by extension, the word means "a half-grown boy or girl." This would put Yeshua`s birth in 6 or 5 B.C. Furthermore, it can be proved that Yeshua`s birth was in the early fall on or soon after Ro'sh haShannah, the Jewish New Year. Also, when one considers that Jewish children are considered 1 year old at birth, that means that Yeshua` was 30 in 24 A.D. Four Passovers later, would put His death in 28 A.D. at the latest. Therefore, 40 years from His death would put it in 68 A.D. which is when I believe that the prophecy of the Olivet Discourse began to be fulfilled, not just in 70 A.D.

Regardless, 40 years is NOT a hard and fast rule for how long a generation is. It just was THAT generation's length of time. Frankly, it was a 40-year time of testing and trials. Numbers 1:46 said that there were 603,550 men of fighting age within Isra'el's ranks. THESE men were supposed to proceed into the Promised Land and allow God to work through them to conquer the Land. Instead, they balked from fear, and God said they would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation was all DEAD (except for 2)! That means that they were dying at 15,089/year on average! That's 42 a day on average, and that's not counting the Levites or the men who were older than fighting age or any of the women who died during the time! They were spending all their time mourning and burying their dead!

You will not find anywhere in Scripture where it says "a man lived 40 years and gave birth to a son who lived 40 years and gave birth to a son who lived 40 years and...." Furthermore, compare Matthew's account of Yeshua`s lineage (I believe, through Yosef) against the actual list of kings of Y'hudah (Judah) in either 1 and 2 Kings or 1 and 2 Chronicles. You will find that they DO NOT MATCH! There are "generations" that are SKIPPED! Did Matittyahu (Matthew) make a mistake? Was he fibbing? Was he juggling the numbers to make them fit? I don't believe any of that is true. I believe that we simply don't have the right definition of what a "generation" is.

If you will check the lists carefully, you will find that a generation is a time period that only changed when God's assessment of the individuals who reigned changed. In other words, if a person was said to do "what was right in God's eyes," when the last person was said to do "what was evil in God's eyes," then the "generation" changed, and the opposite is also true. If a person was said to do "what was evil in God's eyes," when the last person was said to do "what was right in God's eyes," then the "generation" changed. I believe this explains why some people were skipped. They were still in that "generation" because both their predecessor and their successor had the same assessment.

...

I think you miss the boat on this one Roy. How can we be subjects of a kingdom that does not exist and a Christ who does not reign? Does Christ reign in your heart, your life? If He does not then how can He be Lord?

http://www.eschatolo...eternal-kingdom

Don't get all "super-spiritual" on me. I don't respond well to someone who has the gall to question my relationship with YHWH and His Son, Yeshua`. Yeshua` does NOT truly reign in my "heart" (the "core" of my thinking) because, first, He is never said to reign there, and second, He is not physically here to reign. HOWEVER, I am still His SLAVE (Greek: doulos) and since "Lord" means "Master," then He can EASILY still be my Master, despite His absence. And, as I said, I can CONSIDER myself His subject prematurely, again despite His absence, and I will respond to Him and His wishes as a subject! I am just 100% convinced that He will REIGN INDEED, LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, ABSOLUTELY from His father David's throne in Isra'el, just as He was foretold to do!

...

I don't see this futurist view in the writings of the apostles although I know it was present with some of the early church fathers, but what do the Scriptures say. Regarding Darby and Scofield, I believe that they were the ones who made the view popular and that by taking Daniel 9:24-27 out of context along with many other Scriptures.

Actually, Darby and Scofield perpetuated the pretribulational rapturist's point of view and that often includes a dispensational point of view, as well, but that is NOT when futurism or premillennialism began. The apostles EXPECTED HIM TO RETURN LITERALLY AND PHYSICALLY! That is seen in the Scriptures over and over again!

...

What promises has God not kept from Israel? The fulfillment of the land has happened. New Israel reigns with God, both Jew and Gentile, the faithful remnant of OT plus the faithful believers in the NT. (Gary, Danielzk, this is for you too):

http://www.eschatolo...ction-of-beauty

http://www.eschatolo...illed-or-future

Danielzk, Gary, this last link is especially for you. Please reference the Scriptural passages.

http://www.eschatolo...-sorrow-no-pain

Peter

Sorry, Peter, but this is all "spiritualized" away and no amount of claiming that there is a "New Israel" will cut it when it comes to a literal fulfillment of the prophecies in the Tanakh! These prophecies MUST be literally fulfilled just as the 400 prophecies about Yeshua`s first coming were literally fulfilled during His first advent. We have NOT replaced "Old Isra'el," neither has God forgotten His people - the actual children (grandchildren, great grandchildren, etc.) of ISRA'EL the man - past, present, or future! One has no validation (or excuse) for lumping them into the "church," or replacing them by the "church!" It doesn't wash! READ THE TANAKH (preferably, in Hebrew, if you can)! One has no justification for reading the "church" into any of the texts of the Tanakh (except, perhaps, some of the prophecies, and seldomly then)!

[PGA]

Hi Gary,

Sorry to be so long in replying to your last post. I took a break for a number of reasons.

I was unaware that I had side stepped questions you have asked. I would wonder why I did not answer something you asked. I understand that you might not have time to address a question posed unto you and that is perfectly legitimate but how long does it take to address a verse or two from your own knowledge bank? Something as simple as when did the following happen? –Gary

I was getting you mixed up with others, to which I apologize, although there was one particular instance/issue on the 1 Thessalonians 4 forum that I feel you side-stepped.

The question is does Scripture support the interpretation? Let God be God and every man a liar. Can you justify your position from Scripture? That is the test. Prove all things. Language does have specific meaning or God is unable to communicate with us, or we with each other. –Me

All you gave me was opinion – no Scripture to back up your claims, just personal experience.

For instance:

Peter, thank you very much for sharing that link. You have no idea how God uses you. The video did not bring me to believe the preterist view with any convincing arguments but solidified my futurist, as it is called, view of the second coming and the end of the church age. Oh but what a can of worms is opened in it!

The man in the video asked a few tough questions that must have answers such as how can both the first and second covenants be in full effect simultaneously as not one jot or tittle of the law will fail until all has been fulfilled but we see that not all has been fulfilled to its utmost fulfillment. The man asked great questions that I needed to hear and take to our Father for answers.

I am now convinced more than ever that the premil posttrib point of view is the one true view. Thank you for taking time to post. I'm dismayed that you cannot see and understand. I pray that God will do for you what he has done for me in revealing these difficult truths unto you. I'm so glad he has abased me and stopped me from the worship of my own understanding so that I might rely upon the leading of his Holy Spirit to discern truth. –Gary

Not one Scripture quoted to support your position of premil posttrib.

Peter, when the Lord provides time, I will put some thoughts together for you with scriptures in a PM. I am sure you didn't want to know what method God used to answer me but the answers themselves. The method was speaking scriptures to my heart that revealed the truth about how everything applies and to whom each thing applies and why. He does this while I listen to sermons and such the like. It was scary when it began because I was sitting in a pew and the Holy Spirit exposed the pastor as a false teacher and the congregation as those who had selected a teacher having itching ears. He explained that the man was deceived and going about deceiving others. I'll get back to you as soon as the Lord permits...tomorrow is Wednesday which is super busy so maybe something by Thursday. –Gary

Thank you Gary!

PS. There is no surer word than God's word itself. There have been many people who have claimed to be led of God who have contradicted what the Scriptures actually teach. If I am wrong then it is important to me that you show me through His word, not through your feelings on what He has conveyed to you brother. Lots of people who claim to be Spirit led make statements that God spoke to them that contradict Scripture itself. –Me

That post of yours above was the last I heard from you on that forum and still no Scripture. IMO, anyone can claim a religious experience based on feelings. The question is how your position relates to God’s word. Personal experience is not something I can verify except by checking on how it related to God’s word. The key is to provide Scripture on your premil posttrib view that confirms what is said as true to God’s word.

Isaiah 11

8 6 The wolf will live with the lamb,

the leopard will lie down with the goat,

the calf and the lion and the yearling together;

and a little child will lead them.

I fully expect this to be literally fulfilled one day as I understand the reason that this doesn't happen now is because of the constant judgments taking place due to sin running rampant in our world and that will not be the case when Jesus rules and reigns with a rod of iron for a thousand years. Examples like Ananias and Saphira will be present and those who even think to do evil will bring thoughts of them to mind and decide against the evil they would do. The land and all of its inhabitants will finally have rest. This has never happened to my knowledge. –Gary

Yes, I understand you are looking for a literal interpretation. Again you are trying to relate something that I believe is figurative language to a literal fulfillment.

Has Jesus made peace between you and God? If so then the spiritual reality is that the wolf and the lamb exist in peace. The wolf, as well as the leopard, has changed their spot so to speak. The gospel of grace has changed them. I would suggest that you read some of these commentaries so that you may glean what other scholars of the past have said concerning this passage.

http://new.studylight.org/com/cal/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=1-16

http://new.studylight.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=6-9

http://new.studylight.org/com/jfb/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=6-6

http://new.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=6-6

http://new.studylight.org/com/bnb/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=6&search=isaiah%2011#isaiah%2011

http://new.studylight.org/com/kdo/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=6-9

http://new.studylight.org/com/mhm/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=11&vs=1-9

So if you want to take it literally, I think you go against a vast wealth of knowledge in men of God who see it other than literal. But the point is for the Preterist, it is fulfilled in Christ already.

Peter

[PGA]

Hi again Gary,

Concerning Zechariah 14, if you follow the context you will find it changes from an address to the people of that time frame in history to a people of another day - that day - a day in which we can identify as when Jesus came to earth. It concerns the generation in which Jesus actually lived on earth with His people.

Gary Demar raises some interesting points in the following link that I'm judging from previous experience when I provide a link you might have possibly ignored, so I'm providing the full quotation here along with the link to follow. I feel this demonstrates how figurative language is used in the OT to describe the coming of the LORD and that this passage also contains figurative language in it concerning the coming of the Messiah, but ignores, for the dispensationalist, the time frame - that day and when it refers to - to which I will also provide a quote from another link to explain the logic behind the view taken by Preterists concerning 'that day', along with also adding my comments:

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. 22:1­10; 24:3, 23­35; Luke 19:11­27, 41­44]. When the Romans had taken the city, all the outrages were committed, and the miseries endured, which are here predicted [Luke 21:20­24]. 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 4:21­31; Heb. 12:22­25].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, 12­13). "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. 9:13a).

"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 (A.D. 145­220) 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:

The partition-wall between Jew and Gentiles shall be taken away. The

mountains about Jerusalem

, and particularly this, signified it to be an enclosure, and that it stood in the way of those who would approach to it. Between the Gentiles and Jerusalem this

mountain of Bether

, of

division

, stood, Cant. ii. 17. But by the destruction of Jerusalem this mountain shall be made to

cleave in the midst

, and so the Jewish pale shall be taken down, and the church laid in common with the Gentiles, who were made one with the Jews by the breaking down of this

middle wall of partition

, Eph. ii. 14.

8

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).

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2001_demar_zechariah-14.html

Now to show you that 'that day' corresponds to the first century here are quotations from the other link with my comments added, then the link itself. I also underlined parts of the commentary:

"THE DAY OF THE LORD"

[NOTE THE KEY PHRASE:- "IN THAT DAY"]

WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN

"IN THAT DAY"?

The covenant God had made with the Hebrew nation was everlasting in essence but they had violated the terms of the covenant.

11:10-11 So God was going to break His covenant with them "in that day". Note this was to be the end of the covenant with the Jewish nation. It was never to be reinstated!

This is linked directly with the Messiah's passion.

From here on all the predictions are Messianic:-

11:12-13 God is going to break the covenant with the Hebrew nation, the same"day" as when the Messiah, in whom dwelt bodily all the fulness of YHWH (Col.2:9), is valued by the religious elite, to be worth merely the cost of a slave, THIRTY PIECES OF SILVER, which in their considered opinion was a reasonable sum.

"I even told them, Pay what in your eyes is my best value, otherwise keep it. So they payed my value, thirty pieces of silver. And the LORD said unto me, Cast it to the potter, the handsomeness of the value, my value that they arrived at. So I took the took the thirty pieces of silver, and I cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD."

In these chapters, all passages falsely relegated to a yet future carnal, supposedly Armageddon type warfare, are stated to be occurring "IN THAT DAY" the day of the passion of our Lord.

12:3 "IN THAT DAY" 12:4 "IN THAT DAY" 12:6 "IN THAT DAY" 12:8 "IN THAT DAY" 12:9 "IN THAT DAY"

12:10 The same "day" as when many are smitten with affliction of the heart through looking on Him whom they had pierced.

"And I will pour on the house of David, and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and supplications: and they shall look on ME whom they pierced, and they shall mourn for HIM, as mourning for an only child, grieving bitterly for him as one grieves bitterly for the firstborn son."

The "ME" is YHWH, the "HIM" is the Messiah. YHWH Himself is in the Messiah reconciling humanity to Himself. 2.Corinthians 5:19

12:11 The mourning would be as intense as when Josiah, the last king to follow the LORD with all his heart, was slain in the valley of Megiddo. This occurred three years previous to the Judean captivity. That is twenty-one years before the devastation of Jerusalem and the Temple.

"In that day shall there be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadad Rimon in the plain of Megiddo"

This is "the day" of the battle of the plain of Megiddo, the battle of Armageddon

12:12-14 The grief over the Lord being pierced was not collective grief as a nation or as families but individual grief. This is evident from the use of the word "apart/by itself".

13:1 IN THAT DAY a fountain is opened that, as the hymn writer puts it, "those plunged beneath its flood loose all their guilty stains"

"IN THAT DAY a fountain shall be opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for impurity."

13:4-7. "In that day":- he receives wounds in his hands, in house of his friends [beloved companions]. The shepherd is smitten and the sheep are scattered.

Matt.26:31 "Then Jesus says to them, This night all of you shall be repulsed by me: for it is written, I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered."

FORETOLD 500 YEARS BEFORE IT OCCURRED.

[This document is represented in the Dead Sea Scrolls}

13:8-9 In this warfare the lost exceed the rescued and the refiner's fire refines the rescued.

"THE DAY OF THE LORD"

THE SPLITTING OF OLIVET

Zechariah 14:1. "See! THE DAY OF THE LORD comes, when your plunder shall be shared out in your presence."

One marvels at how the Jewish hierarchy inadvertently brought about the fulfilment of these prophecies, but those who implicitly trusted the LORD, understood.

[Ch.11,v.11 "And it (the covenant) was revoked IN THAT DAY: SO THE AFFLICTED OF THE FLOCK, THOSE WATCHING ME, KNEW that it was the word of the LORD."]

14:2-3 This is the decisive battle of all time, more critical and more crucial than any other conflict from the creation to the consummation of the world. It is Satan's climatic confrontation with the LORD:-

[Ge. 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall crush your head, and you shall strike his heel.]

14:4-5 "IN THAT DAY", on Olivet, in Gethsemane the tension reached and passed the crisis point, forging a decisive rift, a haven to which one can flee, available to all mankind.. [Luke 22:42-44]

"HE SHED NO TEARS FOR HIS OWN GRIEFS BUT SWEAT DROPS OF BLOOD FOR MINE".

The beauty and wonder of this most traumatic of events smites one to the heart with overpowering awe. How puerile by comparison is the doctrine that the prophesy refers to God needing to vindicate Himself in a yet future worldwide physical war. Our God is vindicated at Calvary ("glorified" John 12:27-28,31-32,13:31-32,17:1

BY MY SPIRIT

"Not by might nor by power but by my Spirit saith the LORD"

In that day; the covenant with the Jews was irrevocably broken, and a fountain was opened for sinners.

14:6-7: All happening "in that day", a "day" of satanic obscurity in the minds of the religious leaders, where there should have been light. Yet out of that darkest hour of despair, from that ghastly gibbet on Cavalry shines superlative clarity pervading down the centuries.

"ONE DAY", perpetual in its influence, all pervading down to the end of time.

14:8 "In that day" living waters sprang continuously in every direction from Jerusalem.

14:9 "In that day" YHVH became ruler over all the earth.

14:16-21 The annual observance of the feast of the tabernacles is figuratively fulfilled in spiritual Israel, v.20 "in that day" v.21 "in that day".

This is a perpetual feast of thanksgiving for spiritual harvest from out of all nations. For whom every aspect of their existence is "holiness to the LORD".

Sadly Jews are confused by prophesies such as these and will be until individually they see the Lord Jesus in the prophesies.

The Old Testament makes sense, only when seen fulfilled in the lowly Messiah, from the prediction in Genesis 3:15 "I will put enmity between .... your seed and her seed; He shall crush your head, and you shall strike his heel."to the prediction in Malachi 4:5 "See! I will send Elijah the prophet to you before the great and dreadful day of the LORD comes".

This latter was going to be God's final act of tolerance, v.6 ".... or I will come and smite the land with a curse."

"Not by might nor by power but by my Spirit saith the LORD"

BY WHAT SPIRIT IS THE CONFLICT WON ?

THE SPIRIT OF EXTREME HUMILITY OF ONE WHO WAS VALUED TO BE WORTH ONLY THE PRICE OF A SLAVE.

THE SPIRIT OF THE ONE WHO "SHED NO TEARS FOR HIS OWN GRIEFS BUT SWEAT DROPS OF BLOOD FOR MINE".

JESUS' WORK WAS NOT A PARTIAL FAILURE

IT WAS A TOTAL SUCCESS !

With a loud voice he made his triumphant cry :-

"IT IS FINISHED/ACCOMPLISHED !"

"THIS DAY" IS THE "DAY" OF THE PASSION

"You are become my salvation.

The builders, they rejected the stone.

It is become the main capstone.

The LORD caused this to happen.

Our eyes marvel at it."

"THE LORD HAS MADE THIS DAY;

Let us rejoice and let us be glad in it !"

"Blest be He who comes in the name of the LORD"

Psalm 118:21b-24 & 26a

http://www.preteristarchive.com/BibleStudies/Bible_OT/Zechariah/articles/1996_miller_olivet-split.html

Again, you would do well to read the full article Gary.

So, what I want you to notice throughout Zechariah is the reference to 'that day' and the context in each case in which it is used, such as in regards to the time in which Jesus came bodily to this earth and then again in the time in which He sets foot on the Mount of Olives. You see, the time reference is Zechariah 10,11, 12 of 'that day' is used in relation to the time of Jesus' coming to this earth. The question to you is, Are there references in relation to 'that day' two different days or only one? If you contend two, then the onus of proof is on you to explain/provide how 'that day' (the day of God's judgment in which the OT is ended) does not mean 'that day', but another day in Zechariah 14, separated from Zechariah 10,11, 12. You see, as a Preterist/partial Preterist I see this time reference 'that day' as a time reference to the judgment that took place to first century Israel, the same OT Israel that God made a covenant with and they did not keep, the same OT Israel that pierced Him, the same OT Israel in which Jesus refered to as a scattering of the sheep, within the span of that generation that Jesus lived in, not some modern Israel who do not have a covenant because they are mostly atheists and unbelieving of the God of heaven and are removed by 2,000 years. My position can explain this and so much more. You need to show how this Zechariah 14 or Matthew 5:17-18 has not yet been fulfilled by Jesus, how He did not complete what He came to do, how that fountain of living water is not flowing to the nations yet. Can you do that convincingly from the text of the Bible?

Notice the two staffs, one called Favor and the other Union (Zech. 11:7). Notice how God grew tired of the disobedient flock and says that He will no longer be their shephard (vs 11:8-9). Notice how He broke the staff He called Favor, revoking the covenant on 'THAT DAY' with the afflicted of the flock (vs 11). Notice it was in the same day that they paid Him His pay, 30 pieces of silver, and notice that it was thrown to the Potter (vs 13). Notice that Judah as well as Jerusalem is going to be besieged (Zech. 12:3), when all the nations of the earth gather against her. I believe that is during the fourth kingdom when the Roman Empire, of whom all the nations of the earth were represented, surrounded Jerusalem and conquered her, just as spoken of in Luke 21, as a time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written against 'this people' who are felled by the sword - the sword - not some modern weapon. I also believe that the Jerusalem spoken of in Zechariah 12:3 is the New Jerusalem, the heavenly Jerusalem - a rock for all nations, the same rock that the builders rejected, that Israel of old rejected. Notice in verse 4 that 'that day' is again referred to. The Lord is a shield on that day to all who are truly His own. In 'that day' God pours out on the house of David and the inhabitance of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication, that they will look on the One they have pieced. Who pieced the Lord? Notice that they will mourne for Him, just as Jesus had told THAT GENERATION they would do. Notice that their weeping will be great (vs 11). Notice that each clan of the tribes of Israel mourn so the mourning is from Israel. Notice on 'that day' a fountain is opened to cleanse them from their sins (13:1; 14:8). Did Jesus provide the cleansing Gary, or is this something again you believe will happen in the future; that His death did not accomplish this task? Please provide Scriptural proof if you think the latter. If this all applies to the first century then what makes you think that chapter 14, verse 4 or 9 does not?

Peter

[gdemoss]

Peter, if your calling my not providing you with the scripture you ask for side stepping, then by all means, that is what I have done. One of the reasons I like the book of James is for his use of OT scripture without the burden of word for word quotes of the text. He simply had ate the word, digested it and if flowed from him in his speech. He exhibited an understanding of the text as scene in his beautifully flowing piece to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.

You and I already had this discussion. Talking to you about it is pointless because you do not accept a duality to the fulfillment of prophecy so as soon as you see a fulfillment of a text then you automatically put a cap on it as 'finished work'. The bible has way more depth to it than that. Your demands for scripture this and scripture that are worthless to me because giving you scripture will only stir up in your mind some solidified position that you have that 'explains' it has already happened and is case closed. While I appreciate your attempts to set me straight in all this as you have obviously put a lot of effort into it, you cannot convince me contrary to the conviction I now hold. Only time will be able to do that because if I am wrong it is because I am following the doctrine of devils and not revelation from the Spirit of God.

My hope is that you will finally understand this and move on from thinking you must come and set the record straight while demanding that people open the bible and point to scriptures that you simply believe say something else. Your admission to the necessity to call certain texts figurative to make them work with your position shows the error of your thoughts but you won't be happy until you can get every nook and cranny in place even if it must be called figurative.

May God bless you openly in all your studies as you work to obey his word,

Gary

[PGA]

Hi Gary,

Since dialog is no longer possible, if I read you correctly, best wishes and blessings in Christ Jesus!

Peter

[gdemoss]

Hi Gary,

Since dialog is no longer possible, if I read you correctly, best wishes and blessings in Christ Jesus!

Peter

We could talk till we are blue in the face but our methods of interpretation and understanding will never lead to a unified understanding of the texts in question. So yes, we part ways on the topic and each wish the other blessings in Christ

Gary

[Guest]

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

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

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.

And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;

The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;

All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart. Zechariah 12:7-14

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. Zechariah 12:1-3

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the LORD. Jeremiah 31:20

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Psalms 2:1-7

God Makes His Declaration

And Man Says The Jew You Say

I Just Won't Have It No No I Will Not Believe

For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up. And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart. Jeremiah 24:6-7

Tossing Out Two Thirds Of The Holy Bible For Ones Philosophy

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Colossians 2:8

Is Unwise I Think

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. Psalms 119:11

[PGA]

Hi Fresno Joe,

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

The Israel of God is saved in the Lord Jesus Christ. I see a distinction between the spiritual Israel and the physical Israel. The one could never keep His decrees, the other has kept them and will keep them in Christ Jesus!

The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.

And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;

The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;

All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart. Zechariah 12:7-14

'In that day' is a term that you should follow through Zechariah from the time it is first used and determine from the passages just when it refers to. In what day was Jesus pierced and in what day did Jerusalem mourn? In what day did God open the fountain of living water for the nations to drink from? Are we talking of one "In that day" or two distinct 'In those days?' Obviously Scripture uses the singular 'In that day' so why are you trying to separate Old Covenant Israel in that day with an Israel that is mostly atheistic and agnostic and cannot follow the Law of Moses because it was obliterated in A.D. 70? The Law, what we refer to as the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, the Torah, the laws given to Moses can no longer be fulfilled in full measure with the disappearance of the temple, the priesthood, the sacrifices, the feast days so the words of Jesus must have been fulfilled:

Matthew 5:17-18

New International Version (NIV)

The Fulfillment of the Law

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

What did Jesus say? He said He did not come to abolish the LAW or the Prophets but to fulfill them. He said that not one letter would disappear until all is accomplished. How do you explain this discrepancy? Obviously some letters of the law have been abolished because they can no longer be met.

As Christians we no longer need the law of God engraved in stone for it is written on our hearts in loving God and loving our neighbor. IMO, the contrast between the old and new is too long to expand on fully.

What did Jesus come to do? You look for a natural fulfillment yet to be accomplished instead of one already done and in doing so that is what you see? Where did Paul say that his citizenship was? Remember that there is both an old Jerusalem and a new Jerusalem that Scripture speaks extensively on, the earthly and the heavenly; just like there are two countries, two women, two covenants, two peoples, two ways of meeting God's righteous requirements - by fulfilling every letter of the Law in our own merit which is a daunting/impossible task, or in Jesus who HAS done it. It is complete. It is finished! The way is open, reconciliation has been accomplished, the water of life has been given and whoever thirsts may drink!

PS. Roy, I'm almost ready for a reply to your last post, in part anyway.

Peter

[PGA]

Hi Roy,

Again, the point is to show that you can't take everything as literal when the number 1,000 is used in Scripture, and as you say, Solomon was talking of the pointlessness of living, outside of God. Granted that God's thoughts are above and beyond us, but God uses man's language in order to reason and communicate with man, otherwise we would have no understanding of God. The point is that a thousand does not necessarily mean exactly one thousand. –Me

And, again, if it doesn't mean a literal "thousand years," then where is the communication?! It would be lost in the nebulous and arbitrary picture you're trying to paint! They may not experientially know what a "thousand years" is, but they would know from the book of B'resheet (Genesis) that it was longer than Adam or Metushelach (Methusaleh) lived and longer than their lifetimes added together! This gives some concrete, absolute, literal meaning to what Shlomo was trying to say. Even if the PHRASE is used figuratively, if the words within the phrase aren't given their literal meaning, what basis does one have for communicating that phrase? –Roy

The communication in a passage like 2 Peter 3:8 is sometimes in the concept conveyed such as like time is insignificant to an eternal being, that what seems long to man is insignificant to God. The point I think Peter is conveying is that God is faithful and keeps His promises. If Psalm 90 is a prayer of Moses then the time span is greater than a thousand years between when it was written to the time that Peter is writing. Peter is reminding these old covenant people that just like God kept His promises back then to Moses He is about to keep them to this generation.

In other passages whether it is a thousand or ten thousand, no matter how many, He is able to give the victory, and has in Christ Jesus. What do we have to fear if we place our trust in Christ?

You can’t take everything as literal in Scripture without getting into immense difficulty. You have to understand how the language is used to correctly understand the communication involved, the idea(s) conveyed, and you have to understand whether it is being used literally.

If I was to communicate to you that I am green with envy you would not take my comments as literal without good reason, such as that I was actually colored green, would you? It is a figure of speech that communicated an idea. Do you believe that every number used in Scripture is literal, nothing rounded off?

Many times the word ALL is used in Scripture. Does that mean every single person without distinction, or does it sometimes mean every kind of person – rich, poor, male, female, Jew, Gentile, from every nation, etc., etc. Obviously if not everyone is saved then it means the latter.

It is a direct quote from Psalm 90, even though it is connected to many other passages. –Me

Psalm 90:4 only contributes to CONFIRM a literal 1,000 years for what would be the sense in comparing it with a single day (or any other measurement of time) if one didn't know how long a "thousand years" was? Again, even if the phrase or the sentence is being used in a figurative way, the NUMBERS aren't! They must be given their literal sense within the phrase, or the comparison makes no sense. –Roy

In Psalm 90 just as in 2 Peter 3 the term LIKE is used to denote a comparison of two periods of time, not a literal period of time actually passing.The term ‘one thousand years’ is used, IMO, to express not only the insignificance of time with God, but also to remind Israel and the scoffers that Peter is addressing of God’s faithfulness. Time is for the purpose of man, not God, yes, but every time the word one thousand is used does not necessarily mean the period is exactly one thousand years. Whether it is an exact one thousand years or ten million years it is insignificant to an eternal Being, and it is like comparing a thousand years to a day for us. It is used to convey the CONCEPT that a long period of time for us is but nothing to God and Peter is reminding these scoffers that this day, the last day, will come upon them like a thief in the night in fulfillment of all that has been written to covenant Israel. So Peter is bringing to mind Psalm 90 to remind the scoffers of God’s faithfulness to Israel and a warning to them. He has not forgotten them. The promises concerning salvation of Israel were not near for the old covenant saints, but near for them now.

1 Peter 1:10-12

New International Version (NIV)

¹⁰ Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, ¹¹ trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. ¹² It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

Remember, this salvation was to be revealed in the last time.

1 Peter 1:5-6

New International Version (NIV)

⁵ who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. ⁶ In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials.

The NT reveals just such suffering for these NT saints, so that the promises of God would be fulfilled in their lifetime. These scoffers, OT Israel to a large extent rejected the Rock that made them stumble (1 Peter 2:6-8). Here is Peter warning them that the end of all things (concerning the Olds Covenant) is near.

1 Peter 4:7

New International Version (NIV)

⁷ The end of all things is near. Therefore be alert and of sober mind so that you may pray.

Peter conveys to them that it is time for judgment to begin.

1 Peter 4:17

New International Version (NIV)

¹⁷ For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?

Peter could have used many other words to convey judgment thousands of years in the future if that is what he meant to convey. He said ‘it IS time. The context is addressing first century believers and scoffers. In 2 Peter 3, Peter reminds them that this is now his second letter to them to remind them and to recall the words spoken in the past by the prophets concerning this time and His soon to be coming.

2 Peter 3:1-4

New International Version (NIV)

The Day of the Lord

3 Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. ² I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.

³ Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. ⁴ They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”

Here we see these scoffers in Israel’s last days.

In 1 John we see the time line even closer to the coming judgment. Instead of the term last days John is now conveying the idea of urgency – the last hour.

1 John 2:18-19

New International Version (NIV)

Warnings Against Denying the Son

¹⁸ Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. ¹⁹ They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Again we see the nature of not only the antichrists but also the scoffers.

We see both the warning of this coming wrath and the wrath starting to manifest itself.

1 Thessalonians 2:16

New International Version (NIV)

¹⁶ in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.

The first century believers were in a transition period between covenants. The old had to be completely removed before the new took full effect.

There is a transition that is going to take place in THEIR day, not ours, between the old covenant and the new.

Hebrews 1:1-2

New International Version (NIV)

God’s Final Word: His Son

1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ² but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

Hebrews 7:11-12

New International Version (NIV)

Jesus Like Melchizedek

¹¹ If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? ¹² For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.

When did the priesthood change? Most definitely it changed when there was no more Levitiacal priesthood, and it was in transition after Jesus' death.

Hebrews 7:18

New International Version (NIV)

¹⁸ The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless

Hebrews 8:7

New International Version (NIV)

⁷ For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.

Hebrews 8:13

New International Version (NIV)

¹³ By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

Hebrews 9:15

New International Version (NIV)

¹⁵ For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

Here was old covenant Israel waiting for the salvation promised and they failed for the most part to receive Christ that would free them from the penalty of the law. Jesus set aside the first to establish the greater and better covenant. That is why the temple, priesthood, feast days, sacrifices and offerings were obliterated in A.D. 70 in order for this to come about.

Hebrews 10:1-4

New International Version (NIV)

Christ’s Sacrifice Once for All

10 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. ² Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. ³ But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. ⁴ It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God stopped them from being offered in A.D. 70, which was long enough for that generation to repent and follow Jesus. Instead, most of them wept and wailed with the destruction of the city and temple because judgment had come upon them and now a more perfect city and temple were replacing the old, as mentioned in Hebrews 12 in which they were not part of in their rejection of Jesus and hardning of heart.

Hebrews 12:22-29

New International Version (NIV)

²² But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, ²³ to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, ²⁴ to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

²⁵ See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? ²⁶ At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.”^[a]27 The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain.

²⁸ Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, ²⁹ for our “God is a consuming fire.”

When the author says ‘we are’ he is talking of the present generation at the time of writing as well as us today indirectly, for by God’s grace and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ the reality is met.

Jesus said to His disciples that He was going to prepare a place for them and that He would return and bring them to that place, the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city, the holy mountain. He said that some standing there would not taste death before they saw Him coming in His kingdom and with great power. Why is it that we want to make these words say other than they do and yet take a concept like ‘a thousand years is LIKE a day’ and turn it into a literal one thousand years when the verse is speaking figuratively – LIKE. A comparison is being made between one thousand years and one day to show that God is faithful and has not forgotten OT Israel and He is displaying His faithfulness and judgment to them in that generation.

I’m out of time.

Peter