Did Jesus return around 70 AD?

[Truth7t7]

The "HE" who confirms the covenant with many in Daniel 9:27 is JESUS CHRIST!

Your Claim Above Is "False" Jesus Doesn't Cause Abomination As Seen In Daniel 9:27

"Daniel's AOD Is Future" and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" The Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

Matthew 24:15KJV
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

This "Future" evil figure (The Beast) will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future" (The End)

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[ewq1938]

Between 30 and 70 AD the Christians were severely persecuted.

Christians were more persecuted later, and 70AD was about a Jewish rebellion not Christian related.

 

[ewq1938]

Matthew 24:21 was fulfilled between 66 and 70 AD.

No, it wasn't. All of the OD has yet to happen and Christ said one generation would see all the events includoing the Coming and rapture not some of them.

 

[ewq1938]

What if Jesus returned around 70 AD, took all his followers, and brought them to a better world?

Such an event didn't happen.

 

[sondring7]

Matthew 24:21 was fulfilled between 66 and 70 AD. Read verse 16. More than obvious. And also read the the first 3 verses of that chapter.

Maybe my question was hard to understand.
Try this :)
Was 66-70 AD the GREATEST tribulation there ever was and will ever be ?

 

[grafted branch]

Where does Scripture teach your rule that Scripture interprets Scripture for doctrine but not for prophetic fulfillment after the canon was completed?

Here’s a simple test.
If you can tell me the exact day and time the church goes apostate using only the scripture with no extra Biblical evidence, then you have used scripture to interpret scripture for a prophetic fulfillment. Post that date and how you arrived at it so we can all learn.
If you have to use any extra Biblical information whatsoever to know when the church goes apostate then you have your answer to the question above. In this case it’s you that needs to learn.

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Here’s a simple test.

Simple test? No you simple do not know what you are talking about.

If you can tell me the exact day and time the church goes apostate using only the scripture with no extra Biblical evidence, then you have used scripture to interpret scripture for a prophetic fulfillment.

Exact day and time?! What an absurd argument!

Where does Scripture teach that we must identify the "exact day and hour of a prophetic event" before we can understand its fulfillment? You have invented another rule that Scripture itself never establishes!

You are completely misunderstanding the nature of the Great Apostasy and the prophetic sequence revealed in Scripture.

First, NO MAN KNOWS when the last of God's elect will be sealed (Revelation 7:1–4). Nor does Scripture reveal the exact day or hour when Satan will be released from the bottomless pit to deceive the nations again (Revelation 20:3, 7–8).

NO MAN!

Do you seriously imagine that the entire professing church throughout the world will suddenly become apostate at precisely 12:00 midnight on some particular date? LOL! That is not what Scripture teaches!

The great falling away is a process of spiritual deception, not some worldwide announcement that every church has officially become apostate overnight!

When Satan is released for his little season, he goes forth to deceive the nations again (Revelation 20:7–8). This deception spreads through false prophets, false christs, and corrupt teachings, just as Christ warned in Matthew 24:11, 24. And it takes time for them to spread into all congregations!

Over time, those who have spiritual discernment will begin recognizing the evidence of apostasy within the professing congregations. This is why Christ repeatedly warned His people to WATCH!

Now consider something important:

Revelation 12:1 describes a woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet, and a crown of twelve stars. In this prophetic interpretation, the woman represents the covenant congregation of God's people.

Therefore, the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars in Matthew 24:29 must be examined in light of this symbolic language, rather than automatically assuming Christ is describing literal astronomical disasters.

The darkening signifies spiritual judgment and the loss of spiritual light within the professing congregation.

Notice carefully the prophetic sequence:

Matthew 24:29 — "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven..."

Matthew 24:30 — "AND THEN shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven..."

Did you catch those two words?

"AND THEN!"

Christ establishes an order: the tribulation (falling away), the darkening of the heavenly lights (judgment of the unfaithful church), AND THEN the appearance of the sign of the Son of Man.

Within this spiritual understanding, the heavenly signs reveal God's judgment upon the apostate congregation before the final manifestation of Christ's coming in glory.

We are not given an exact calendar date for the beginning of worldwide apostasy. Rather, we are instructed to recognize its spiritual characteristics through the Word of God.

Consider Matthew 24:32–33, where Christ uses the fig tree to teach His disciples to recognize when events are drawing near. The lesson is about discerning the season from the signs, not calculating an "exact day and hour."

And Matthew 24:36 explicitly warns that no man knows the day and hour of Christ's coming, right? Huh? Huh?

So here is the fundamental problem with your challenge:

You are demanding an exact date that Scripture never promises to reveal, then pretending that the inability to provide that date somehow disproves spiritual discernment of prophecy!

That is a completely false standard.

Scripture tells us WHAT the great falling away is, WHY deception occurs, and HOW God's people must remain watchful. It does not provide a timestamp for the precise moment the last elect is sealed, Satan is released, the great falling away, or the judgment of the whore.

We discern the fulfillment of prophecy by understanding Scripture first, not by inventing dates or forcing historical observations into our preconceived interpretations.

And one final question:

If you insist that an exact date is necessary to establish prophetic fulfillment, then show me the Scripture that establishes YOUR rule!

Until then, your demand for an exact day and hour is nothing more than another human assumption.

Selah!

 

[grafted branch]

Within this spiritual understanding, the heavenly signs reveal God's judgment upon the apostate congregation before the final manifestation of Christ's coming in glory.

We are not given an exact calendar date for the beginning of worldwide apostasy. Rather, we are instructed to recognize its spiritual characteristics through the Word of God.

So are you now admitting we need to look at something outside the Canon to know when a prophecy inside the Canon is fulfilled?

By the way you failed the test.

 

[TribulationSigns]

So are you now admitting we need to look at something outside the Canon to know when a prophecy inside the Canon is fulfilled?

By the way you failed the test.

LOL!

Failed WHAT test? Your own man-made test based on a rule you cannot even establish from Scripture? Clearly you did not read my post carefully or listen to it. Typical!

You are still confusing two entirely different things: interpreting prophecy and observing events that may correspond to its fulfillment.

The Canon of Scripture is the authority by which we understand WHAT prophecy means! Observing events outside the Canon does not give those events authority to determine what Scripture means! Duh!

Do you understand the difference?

For example, Christ warned that false christs and false prophets would arise and deceive many (Matthew 24:11, 24). We can observe false teachings spreading throughout the professing churches, but how do we determine whether those teachings are false? BY SCRIPTURE! Not by human observation, historical speculation, or so-called "common sense."

1 John 4:1 commands us to "try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."

How can we test those spirits without comparing their teachings against the Word of God?

Acts 17:11 commends the Bereans for searching the Scriptures daily to determine whether what they heard was true.

Now, concerning your obsession with the Canon: Where does Scripture teach that the completion of the biblical Canon changed the principles of interpreting prophetic fulfillment? You keep repeating that claim without producing a single verse to support it! You have failed!

I have NEVER argued that Christians cannot observe historical events. I am saying that historical observation does not have authority to DEFINE the meaning of biblical prophecy.

That is the distinction you repeatedly fail to grasp!

You want to begin with history and make Scripture conform to your interpretation of events. I insist that we begin with Scripture and examine events according to what God has revealed.

Scripture is the standard. History is not the interpreter. Selah!

So before congratulating yourself for supposedly catching me in a contradiction, perhaps you should first understand the difference between biblical interpretation and historical observation.

You haven't exposed a contradiction in my argument. You've merely demonstrated that you still don't understand what you are blabbing about!

Selah!

 

[claninja]

LOL. Oh boy, here we go.

Lol, you are the one who always first responds to me, just saying…….

Hello? Why would Paul say "those of us who have fallen asleep" when he wasn't dead? But, he was not saying he knew for sure that he would be alive when Jesus came. That's ridiculous. He was simply saying that those who have fallen asleep (are physically dead) will be gathered with those who are still alive when Jesus comes from heaven to meet Him in the air. He was not implying one way or another whether he would be alive or dead at that point.

Let’s get it straight. He did not say “those who are alive and remain”.

Grammatically, he said “WE who are alive and remain.

Grammatically, the first person construct “we” defaults to include Paul himself living AND remaining, UNLESS there is internal contextual evidence, within 1 Thessalonians 4, to support he is talking corporately in a more generic sense.

So what internal textual evidence would you like to provide that Paul is actually talking corporately in a general sense?

Hello? That's because he was alive at the time. Imagine him including himself among the dead while he was alive! Come on.

correct, he was living. Was he remaining?

The Greek construct is BOTH living AND remaining. He included himself among the living and remaining as opposed to those who had died.

The argument is that he was alive and remaining as opposed to those who had died. Since he does not argue a corporate nor general sense for the dead (ie those of us who have died) then he’s likely not contrasting that to a corporate or general sense for the living and remaining.

Anyways, even preterists don’t believe Paul lived and remained until 70ad, but they recognized he believed he would.

Nothing in the passage signals otherwise. He spoke of a future event without giving any indication of when that event would occur and whether he would be dead or alive when it occurs. That's something that preterists like yourself read into the passage because of extreme doctrinal bias.

I never said Paul explained “when” it would happen.

My argument is simply from a grammatical standpoint point Paul included himself in those who would be alive AND remaining.

He said “WE who are alive and remain”. From a grammatical standpoint point that defaults to include Paul unless there is surrounding the contextual evidence to support its “we” in a corporate or general sense.

He did not say “those who are alive and remain” nor did he say “those of us who have died”

LOL. Why do you always need everything spelled out to you in order to understand what it's saying? It's unbelievable. He had no need to just spell everything out like that.

Because that’s how grammar and context work. The first person construct (we) defaults to Paul including himself in the group who would be alive and remaining until the coming. There needs to be other internal surrounding context to determine if Paul was actually speaking in a corporate or general sense. So YES, you do need the text to tell spell it out for you.

LOL. This just gets funnier and funnier. You are making baseless claims here. Paul did not indicate one way or another if he thought it would happen in his lifetime. He probably believed it could happen in his lifetime since no one knew when it would happen, but he gave no indication one way or another in that passage of whether he thought it would happen in his lifetime or not.

He said “WE” who are alive and remain. The first person construct grammatically indicates Paul included himself in the group that would be living AND remaining until the coming, UNLESS there is an internal textual context that makes it clear Paul was speaking in a general and corporate sense.

You have provided zero internal context to support paul was writing corporately or generically.

Of course you would. But, I don't buy that argument at all. It's not a coincidence that some standing there did indeed get a foretaste of His coming in glory and it's not a coincidence that was described immediately after verse 28.

Matthew is very consistent at telling his readers when something is fulfilled. Where does Matthew explain that the transfiguration fulfills Matthew 16:28?

What He was saying did relate to His future coming, but what you don't understand is that He was saying He was going to give some standing there a glimpse or foretaste of that. He surely has not yet come in glory with His angels, so to try to relate that to what happened in 70 AD is just plain ludicrous.

Matthew never explains that the transfiguration was a glimpse/foretaste, thus fulfilling Matthew 26:28, so I don’t know where you are getting this from?

Again, you expect the scripture to just spell things out to you instead of having to ever discern what scripture is talking about. It's unbelievable.

Ok

 

[grafted branch]

I asked you a straightforward question: Where does Scripture teach that Scripture interprets Scripture for doctrine but NOT for prophetic fulfillment? Instead of providing biblical evidence, you appeal to your own reasoning and call it "common sense." LOL! aThat is not biblical exegesis. That is human assumption masquerading as biblical authority.

Above is what you said previously

The Canon of Scripture is the authority by which we understand WHAT prophecy means! Observing events outside the Canon does not give those events authority to determine what Scripture means! Duh!

Above is what you’re saying now


The definition of Doctrine A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.

It appears as if you’re now trying to agree that we compare scripture with scripture for doctrine and we compare scripture with outside events for fulfillment. Is that right or are you still insisting it’s scripture with scripture only?

 

[SeekTruth]

Maybe my question was hard to understand.
Try this :)
Was 66-70 AD the GREATEST tribulation there ever was and will ever be ?

Flavius Josephus about 66-70 AD:

"Whereas the war which the Jews made with the Romans, hath been the greatest of all those, not only that have been in our times, but, in a manner, of those that ever were heard of; both of those wherein cities have fought against cities, or nations against nations." Josephus: Of the War, Preface

Flavius Josephus states that 1.1 million people perished during the siege in 70 AD, primarily through starvation, disease, internal factional warfare, and slaughter by Roman soldiers. He explains that most were Jews who had travelled to Jerusalem for Passover and became trapped inside the city.

 

[SeekTruth]

No, it wasn't. All of the OD has yet to happen and Christ said one generation would see all the events includoing the Coming and rapture not some of them.

Do you believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD to avenge the blood of Jesus, the blood of the prophets, the blood of the Church? For indeed, Jerusalem killed all. Jesus himself said: "So that all blood that was shed on earth comes upon Jerusalem." Do you believe God sent the Romans to punish Jerusalem for her sins? Scripture says: "Her sins are piled up to heaven." Flavius Josephus states so many people were killed that Jerusalem was covered by blood. Do you believe when Jerusalem was covered by blood, that the angels in heaven said: “Hallelujah! Her smoke rises up forever and ever.”

 

[SeekTruth]

A key to understand that Jesus returned around 70 AD is to understand that Jerusalem was Babylon. And I am convinced that Jerusalem was Babylon. And if you understand who Babylon was, then you will come to conclusions. Conclusions you may not like.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Above is what you said previously

Above is what you’re saying now


The definition of Doctrine A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.

It appears as if you’re now trying to agree that we compare scripture with scripture for doctrine and we compare scripture with outside events for fulfillment. Is that right or are you still insisting it’s scripture with scripture only?

No. I acknowledge that fulfillment occurs in actual events. I do not agree that those events become the authority for interpreting prophecy. Those are two different claims.

Scripture establishes what a prophecy means and what qualifies as its fulfillment. We then evaluate what we observe according to that biblical standard. Events do not interpret themselves, and a supposed resemblance does not prove fulfillment.

Your appeal to Matthew 11:3–5 illustrates this very point. Jesus identified works that corresponded to the prophetic descriptions in Isaiah 35:5–6 and 61:1. What the disciples saw mattered because of what Scripture had already revealed.

Quoting a dictionary definition of “doctrine” does not establish a separate rule for interpreting prophecy. Prophecy itself teaches truths we are called to believe.

So my position remains consistent: Scripture governs both our understanding of prophecy and our judgment about its fulfillment. Observing events does not authorize us to redefine the prophecy to fit them.

Now answer the original question that you seem to avoid: Where does Scripture teach that comparing Scripture with Scripture applies to doctrine but excludes prophetic fulfillment? Or will you end up like Sel@h who ran away crying playing a victim card when she can't answer my questions?

 

[TribulationSigns]

Flavius Josephus about 66-70 AD:

"Whereas the war which the Jews made with the Romans, hath been the greatest of all those, not only that have been in our times, but, in a manner, of those that ever were heard of; both of those wherein cities have fought against cities, or nations against nations." Josephus: Of the War, Preface

Flavius Josephus states that 1.1 million people perished during the siege in 70 AD, primarily through starvation, disease, internal factional warfare, and slaughter by Roman soldiers. He explains that most were Jews who had travelled to Jerusalem for Passover and became trapped inside the city.

Is the even surrounding 70AD the worst ever witnessed on Earth anytime in history? Really?

 

[TribulationSigns]

A key to understand that Jesus returned around 70 AD is to understand that Jerusalem was Babylon.

No, physical city Jerusalem was never Babylon.

And I am convinced that Jerusalem was Babylon.

Show us chapter and verse to prove this.

And if you understand who Babylon was, then you will come to conclusions. Conclusions you may not like.

The conclusions I am seeing everywhere coming out of your mouth is that you are wrong with your assumption. You have not yet offer a single verse to support your claim.

 

[ewq1938]

Do you believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD to avenge the blood of Jesus, the blood of the prophets, the blood of the Church?

Almost 40 years later? No. Some Jews rejected Roman rule and rebelled and Rome got revenge for that. It happened at least one more time.

For indeed, Jerusalem killed all. Jesus himself said: "So that all blood that was shed on earth comes upon Jerusalem." Do you believe God sent the Romans to punish Jerusalem for her sins?

Not in 70AD. Of course Rome had been there a long time before that and maybe Rome ruled the area due to some sins of the people. Being ruled over and even kept as slaves was something that happened to Israel many times.

Scripture says: "Her sins are piled up to heaven." Flavius Josephus states so many people were killed that Jerusalem was covered by blood. Do you believe when Jerusalem was covered by blood, that the angels in heaven said: “Hallelujah! Her smoke rises up forever and ever.”

Sounds like you are referring to Babylon, not Jerusalem. End times Babylon is a symbolic city and woman which are those who worship the false god in the trib. It's essentially the counterfeit of the bride of Christ.

 

[ewq1938]

A key to understand that Jesus returned around 70 AD

Why didn't Jesus rapture and change into immortal the saints like John? John died over 20 years later. If there was no rapture, and no resurrection of the saved dead then Jesus did not return in the past.

The second coming changes everything in this world so it's obvious he did not come yet. It's no different than someone saying we live on the new Earth found in Rev 21-22 and that we are immortals etc.

 

[grafted branch]

Now answer the original question that you seem to avoid: Where does Scripture teach that comparing Scripture with Scripture applies to doctrine but excludes prophetic fulfillment?

I already did, it’s common sense. God is not the author of confusion.

The Bible doesn’t specifically say to use common sense, that verse isn’t in the Bible. Are you now going to argue that we shouldn’t use common sense because it isn’t Biblical and no interpretation needs to make sense?