Did Jesus return around 70 AD?

[Spiritual Israelite]

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

Tell me, if Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem as YOU claim, then WHY does this verse say that Jesus was crucified IN THE STREET OF THE GREAT CITY?

It's symbolic text. Do you take all of Revelation literally? Do you think Babylon is a literal woman who literally sits on a literal seven headed, ten horned beast and on literal waters?

Are you just too afraid to address the fact that John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that John the Baptist was considered a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) and died outside of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that Jesus was referring to the people of Jerusalem in Luke 13:33-34 and not the physical city of Jerusalem?

 

[SeekTruth]

It's symbolic text. Do you take all of Revelation literally? Do you think Babylon is a literal woman who literally sits on a literal seven headed, ten horned beast and on literal waters?

Are you just too afraid to address the fact that John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that John the Baptist was considered a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) and died outside of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that Jesus was referring to the people of Jerusalem in Luke 13:33-34 and not the physical city of Jerusalem?

First you said Jesus didnt really mean that. Now you say it is symbolic. Whatever i bring you invent an excuse. Why not just accepting what the Bible says? If the Bible says A is A, why do you try to make A to a B? The Bible says Jesus was crucified IN Jerusalem. Take it how it is.

 

[Marty fox]

Then why did God let all houses in Jerusalem to be destroyed in 70 AD? Why did he let destroy the temple? Why did he let burn the streets? Why did God's wrath fall upon physical Jerusalem? Never before had a city been so wiped out as Jerusalem in 70 AD. According to Josephus, the destruction was eerie and terrible.

You can't be serious here can you?

You think that Jesus was talking about literal building?

God destroyed the literal city because it was the Jews city. Do you not realize that 1.1 million Jews perished and only 97,000 were taken as slaves?

Matthew 23
37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’[c]”

If the verses about do you really think that literal buildings killed the prophets and not the Jews?

Jerusalem in the first century was the apostate Jews.

 

[TribulationSigns]

yes, i believe it.

Matthew 23:34-37
On account of this, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will flog in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!

Sigh, you don't "understand" what the Lord talks about. You do not even know what generation the Lord talked about. Clearly! Here is a biblical lesson for anyone with ear to hear on who is actual responsible for the blood of ALL Saints, including the heathens:

Revelation 17:5

• "And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."

God calls her that "great city", not that great earth or world. Here in this verse God calls her the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, "not" the earth itself. That great city and a Harlot is the exact same words God called "His congregation" Israel because of their spiritual unfaithfulness. Again, Scripture interprets Scripture.

As for Cain being the one who slew Abel,

Genesis 4:9-11

• "And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
• And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
• And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;"

The message is not that Cain would can drink blood literally, or that the world is responsible for Abel's blood, but that "Cain" is. Listen, the blood Cain spilled on the ground in symbolism is a witness against him. God saying the earth is drinking it is a metaphor, not a declaration that the world is responsible.

When God says "now you are cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand." He is simply saying that because you spilled blood on the earth, the earth will not yield to him its increase as before. It is as a "testimony" to his sin, not that the earth is responsible for Abel's murder. This also confirmed in the very next verse, 12.

The portrait painted here is that Cain is the first unbeliever of God's people, the first "brother" to rise up in the family against the Lord's chosen and slay him. God is talking about professed believers just like professed Christians today. Cain is the first of the generation (or family) of evil, the first of the line of those who hate and are offended by the Lord's servants. There would be many more after him. This is also illustrated in Israel when Christ called those of His people a family of evil. If we consider the mystery wisely, Christ tells us who Babylon really is and why all the blood from Abel to his time is required of her.

Matthew 23:31-35

• "Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
• Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
• Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
• Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
• That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
• Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation."

Christ didn't claim that all the blood from Abel to Zechariah would be upon the whole world! Christ didn't say that the world were the seed, the family, the generation of them that killed the prophets. Christ didn't say the world was responsible for killing, persecuting, crucifying and scourging the prophets in their synagogues, Christ said perfectly clearly that it was these people, yes "His people," who were responsible for this, and who did all these things, and who the blood of Abel was upon. Not the world, them--the unfaithful of His own very congregation. The children of those who slew the prophets. Yes, THAT generation or family of evil! They are "spiritually" Babylon. The professed believers! Hello!

Now, how were "they" responsible for the blood of Abel? Just as Christ explained, they were the children (family) of those who killed the prophets. Even though they may protested that they would never do such a thing, Christ knew they had the exact same murderous, wicked heart of their father the devil. And that congregation is measured the same as their fathers, and would become a cage of devils. This was all proven of course as they ended up having Christ crucified, fulfilling Christ's Words. They were of that "same" evil generation or family that Cain was of. The whole unfaithful family of Gods congregation (not the world) were the ones killing God's prophets. Read Bible history, it's all right there illustrating that the major antagonists of God's servants were God's own people. The rebellion was brother against brother, Israel against Israel, Kingdom against kingdom, nation against nation, the Jews against their God. These verses 34 and 35 could have been taken right out of the text of God concerning Babylon, because they are nearly identical. Get this, Babylon is the unfaithful congregation, the harlot, "the great whore" which God called Israel again and again. Scripture interprets Scripture. Babylon is a contradiction if it represents the world, certain city, or empire.

Luke 11:47-51

• "Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
• Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
• Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:
• That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
• From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."

So the Jews living in the first century were personally responsible for all the blood shed since the foundation of the world? Of course not! My point is that “this generation” identifies a spiritual lineage: the generation of vipers, the evil and adulterous generation. “Adulterous” points to covenant unfaithfulness—people who profess allegiance to God while betraying Him.

These are children of the devil dwelling among the Lord’s servants within the congregation and persecuting them. The warning concerns enemies within the professing congregation.

That is why the church must examine what is happening within its own walls. Pointing at Russia, Rome, or some worldly government will not expose false prophets standing in the pulpit. In this interpretation, the faithful witnesses are silenced by the very religious community that claims to speak for God. That unfaithful congregation is spiritual Babylon.

And why does her identity remain a “mystery” to so many Christians? Because they keep looking everywhere else! Jerusalem, America, Iraq, Rome, the world system, Mecca, even the Royal Bank of Scotland—the list keeps growing. Meanwhile, the possibility of an unfaithful church escapes their scrutiny!!

Calling a place “Babylon” does not establish its identity from Scripture. My argument rests on the biblical picture of spiritual adultery: a covenant people becoming unfaithful to the God they profess to serve.

Consider the pattern. Among the Old Testament congregation, corrupt religious leaders and their followers persecuted the prophets and delivered Christ to be crucified. Likewise, false prophets and false christs arise among professing believers, deceiving people and opposing the faithful. This is how they will kill the two witnesses as the silencing of the faithful elect’s testimony.

Different centuries, but the same spiritual family: professing allegiance to God while opposing His truth and persecuting His servants. That is the continuity has been running since CAIN! It did not begun and end in Jerusalem in the first century!

Before pointing to another city or nation, consider whether the warning reaches the congregation claiming to represent God—including your own.

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Selah!

 

[TribulationSigns]

First you said Jesus didnt really mean that. Now you say it is symbolic. Whatever i bring you invent an excuse. Why not just accepting what the Bible says? If the Bible says A is A, why do you try to make A to a B? The Bible says Jesus was crucified IN Jerusalem. Take it how it is.

Within the God's congregation, there are two groups: the elect and those whose Christianity is merely a profession. The former discern spiritual truth and bear faithful witness; the latter approach spiritual things with a carnal understanding.

Your insistence on a strictly geographical interpretation reflects the latter approach. Yes, Christ was physically crucified outside Jerusalem’s gates. The question you have yet to address is how that fact relates to the spiritual identity of the city “where also our Lord was crucified” in Revelation 11:8. Simply pointing to a location does not explain the passage.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I believe Babylon the great to also be Jerusalem in the first century, but Jerusalem isn't a literal city its Apostate Isreal

Incorrect. Read here.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

First you said Jesus didnt really mean that.

No, I did not. Stop lying. He meant what He said. You just don't understand what He meant. Tell me, did the physical city of Jerusalem kill the prophets or did the people of Jerusalem kill the prophets? Do you agree with Jesus that John the Baptist was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11)? If so, do you understand that John the Baptist was killed outside of Jerusalem? If so, how does that line up with your understanding of Luke 13:33-34?

Now you say it is symbolic. Whatever i bring you invent an excuse. Why not just accepting what the Bible says? If the Bible says A is A, why do you try to make A to a B? The Bible says Jesus was crucified IN Jerusalem. Take it how it is.

Why are you so evasive? Are you just too afraid to address the fact that John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that John the Baptist was considered a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) and died outside of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that Jesus was referring to the people of Jerusalem in Luke 13:33-34 and not the physical city of Jerusalem? You are the one not accepting what the Bible says. Why are you comfortable with cherry picking scripture the way you do? Why do you disregard verses like John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12?

 

[SeekTruth]

No, I did not. Stop lying. He meant what He said. You just don't understand what He meant. Tell me, did the physical city of Jerusalem kill the prophets or did the people of Jerusalem kill the prophets? Do you agree with Jesus that John the Baptist was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11)? If so, do you understand that John the Baptist was killed outside of Jerusalem? If so, how does that line up with your understanding of Luke 13:33-34?

Why are you so evasive? Are you just too afraid to address the fact that John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that John the Baptist was considered a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) and died outside of Jerusalem? Are you too afraid to address the fact that Jesus was referring to the people of Jerusalem in Luke 13:33-34 and not the physical city of Jerusalem? You are the one not accepting what the Bible says. Why are you comfortable with cherry picking scripture the way you do? Why do you disregard verses like John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12?

Jesus himself said in Luke 13:33: "It is NOT possible that a prophet would perish OUTSIDE of Jerusalem."

 

[Davidpt]

Are you too afraid to address the fact that Jesus was referring to the people of Jerusalem in Luke 13:33-34 and not the physical city of Jerusalem?

I too do not agree that Babylon is meaning Jerusalem in the first century. Regardless whether you think he is correct or not is irrelevant. Why would you think that he or anyone would think a physical city can kill someone rather than it's people?

Regardless whether he is right or wrong about mystery Babylon is meaning Jerusalem in the first century, surely he hasn't lost all touch with reality where he thinks the city itself is the one killing someone.

Consider the following scenarios. Prophets are sent to a city and are stoned there. Vs prophets are sent to a city that is now a ghost town, not a single person lives there, and they are stoned there. No one would think the latter is logical, that a city with no people can stone anyone.

The point is you complain about others supposedly misrepresenting Amil, me being who you usually accuse of doing that, but what you are doing here is not misrepresenting someone's view whatsoever?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus himself said in Luke 13:33: "It is NOT possible that a prophet would perish OUTSIDE of Jerusalem."

Yes, He did. But, when He continued referring to Jerusalem in Luke 13:34 was He talking about the physical city of Jerusalem or the people of Jerusalem? Obviously, the latter, because it's not the physical city that killed the prophets. So, what Jesus was saying is that it wasn't possible for a prophet to not perish apart from the Jews killing him or having him killed.

John the Baptist was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11). He was killed outside of the physical city of Jerusalem. How do you reconcile that with your belief?

Why do you ignore what John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate, which is that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem?

 

[SeekTruth]

Yes, He did. But, when He continued referring to Jerusalem in Luke 13:34 was He talking about the physical city of Jerusalem or the people of Jerusalem? Obviously, the latter, because it's not the physical city that killed the prophets. So, what Jesus was saying is that it wasn't possible for a prophet to not perish apart from the Jews killing him or having him killed.

John the Baptist was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11). He was killed outside of the physical city of Jerusalem. How do you reconcile that with your belief?

Why do you ignore what John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 indicate, which is that Jesus was crucified outside of the city of Jerusalem?

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I too do not agree that Babylon is meaning Jerusalem in the first century. Regardless whether you think he is correct or not is irrelevant. Why would you think that he or anyone would think a physical city can kill someone rather than it's people?

I didn't claim that he thinks that. Read what I say more carefully. I said what I did because he is interpreting Luke 13:33-34 as if Jesus said a prophet can't die outside of the physical city of Jerusalem. He is insisting that Jesus was saying that no prophet can die outside of the physical city of Jerusalem, but when Jesus refers to Jerusalem in that passage, He's not talking about the physical city, but rather the people of Jerusalem. That' what I'm trying to get him to understand.

Regardless whether he is right or wrong about mystery Babylon is meaning Jerusalem in the first century, surely he hasn't lost all touch with reality where he thinks the city itself is the one killing someone.

I'm not saying he thinks that. I'm showing him the context of the passage. I'm trying to get him to actually think about what Jesus was saying there.

Consider the following scenarios. Prophets are sent to a city and are stoned there. Vs prophets are sent to a city that is now a ghost town, not a single person lives there, and they are stoned there. No one would think the latter is logical, that a city with no people can stone anyone.

The point is you complain about others supposedly misrepresenting Amil, me being who you usually accuse of doing that, but what you are doing here is not misreprenting someone's view whatsoever?

LOL. Show me where I accused him of believing that the physical city killed the prophets? I didn't. I was simply showing that Jesus couldn't have been talking about the physical city since it wasn't the physical city that killed the prophets. Yet, he interprets Luke 13:33 as if Jesus said a prophet can't be killed outside of the physical city of Jerusalem. I'm simply trying to get him to see the context of what Jesus was saying.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

Are you incapable of addressing my points? Why do you not accept what is indicated in the following verses...

John 19:20 Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.

Hebrews 13:12 Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

Do you understand that there is a lot of symbolism in the book of Revelation? You assume that Babylon is a literal, earthly city. Why don't you also believe that Babylon is a literal woman (harlot) since it is described that way, as well? Babylon has a scope much larger than just Jerusalem. It reigns over the kings of the earth. It is the hold of EVERY foul spirit. It is the spiritual opposite of the new, heavenly Jerusalem that we (the church) are part of (Galatians 4:26, Hebrews 12:22). It is a global, worldly entity representing everything that opposes God. Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem within this evil world that opposes God. We (believers) are in the world, but not of the world. We follow Christ, not the world. Those who are spiritual citizens of Babylon are of the world.

 

[SeekTruth]

Are you incapable of addressing my points? Why do you not accept what is indicated in the following verses...

John 19:20 Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.

Hebrews 13:12 Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

Luke 13:33: "It is NOT possible that a prophet would perish OUTSIDE of Jerusalem."

 

[Marty fox]

Luke 13:33: "It is NOT possible that a prophet would perish OUTSIDE of Jerusalem."

You guys keep going back and forth getting nowhere because you don't understand exactly what Jerusalem is?

Is Jerusalem a literal city or a type of people?

Jerusalem can be a literal city

Jerusalem can be people like in Matthew chapter 23

Jerusalem is also the church the New Jerusalem

 

[SeekTruth]

You can't be serious here can you?

You think that Jesus was talking about literal building?

God destroyed the literal city because it was the Jews city. Do you not realize that 1.1 million Jews perished and only 97,000 were taken as slaves?

Matthew 23
37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’[c]”

If the verses about do you really think that literal buildings killed the prophets and not the Jews?

Jerusalem in the first century was the apostate Jews.

If it was only about the Jewish people, why did the wrath of God even come upon God's own temple? Why did God destroy his own temple? God was mad even at the physical. Couldnt he just punish the Jews? Why punish the temple?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Luke 13:33: "It is NOT possible that a prophet would perish OUTSIDE of Jerusalem."

LOL. So, can you confirm that you do not believe what is indicated in John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 then? Tell me how John the Baptist, who was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) perished outside of the physical city of Jerusalem.

 

[SeekTruth]

LOL. So, can you confirm that you do not believe what is indicated in John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 then? Tell me how John the Baptist, who was a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) perished outside of the physical city of Jerusalem.

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city (Jerusalem) which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If it was only about the Jewish people, why did the wrath of God even come upon God's own temple?

LOL. What are you saying, that you think God was angry at a physical temple? LOL. He obviously destroyed it as part of the punishment against the rebellious Jewish people. They were not using the temple in the way God intended, so He took it away from them. Also, His plan was for His people to be the temple of God and to dwell in them, so no physical temple would be required any longer.

Why did God destroy his own temple? God was mad even at the physical.

You can't be serious here. He was not made a physical temple. Goodness gracious.

Couldnt he just punish the Jews? Why punish the temple?

LOL! Please ask God for wisdom, so that you can understand why He did what He did (James 1:5-7). It certainly wasn't because He was angry with a physical building. LOL!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city (Jerusalem) which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

I see that you are a child who is not able to answer questions and address any points that others make. I'm not wasting any more time on you. Please seek the truth for real so that your username will actually make sense.