Search results

He misunderstood what generation the Lord talked about. Typical Premillennialists and Preterists mistake.

Now, third, after the city was destroyed, then God sent out His servants to secure wedding guests, right? Are we to then suppose that the church waited over 30 years until 70 A.D. when a "physical destruction of Jerusalem" took place before God (this King) sent His servants out to find guests...

Moreover, as I said before, if the destruction was of a physical city, then obviously, rationally and logically the rebuilding would have to be of that same alleged physical city. It didn't! Clearly the parable illustrates the rebuilding is the New Testament congregation. Why? Because the...

Yep, you shall see. :-) Why not? Jealous for some attention? Why should I? I can do whatever I want with my post. I decided to use it as a response to RWB to correct your interpretation. Got your attention? Looks like it worked. Because it is. I can clearly see that Marty and your...

It’s not really “that easy,” though. Saying people simply “can’t grasp it” assumes the interpretation is already settled and self-evident, when in reality that’s exactly what’s being debated. The issue isn’t comprehension—it’s whether your conclusion actually follows from the text. I understand...

I see, but I am sorry, the physical destruction for Jerusalem/temple in 70 was NOT what Christ talked about. Allow me to explain again what Zechariah 14 was talking about. Please read entire chapter then read my message below: Christ did come to earth literally and He did plant His feet very...

I disagree. The Jews were indeed the living stones of the tabernacle/temples of Old Testament. For example, when God commanded the tabernacle, His ultimate purpose was not merely a building: "And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them." (Exodus 25:8) Notice that God says...

To argue that a group of Jews in first-century Judea somehow suffered two separate Great Tribulations simultaneously requires a level of interpretive gymnastics that the text simply does not support. That's not exegesis; that's wishful thinking.

Time out. You are assuming that every reference to Jerusalem, the temple, and stones must be interpreted literally, even though the New Testament repeatedly redefines these things spiritually in Christ. For example, in Matthew 23:37-39, Christ is not merely lamenting a geographical city. He...

You keep repeating that Jerusalem was destroyed when Jesus said it would be, but that assumes the very thing I'm disputing—that Jesus was talking about physical Jerusalem and the physical temple. I don't believe Jesus was. Throughout the New Testament, Christ shifts the focus away from...

So your argument is basically: Jerusalem was destroyed, therefore Jesus must have been referring to that specific event in the exact way you interpret it—and that settles it for you? Ahem…that’s not really “proof,” it’s just reading your conclusion back into the text and calling it...

Yes, I read your whole post, including your additional arguments beyond casualty counts and Josephus. But even taking those broader factors into account, your conclusion still does not hold up. Nothing you presented demonstrates that the events in first-century Judea constitute the worst time...

Big mistake. I do NOT think Josephus can carry the weight that your interpretation places upon him. @rwb's question was not whether the destruction of Jerusalem was terrible. It certainly was. My question was how 70 AD fulfills Christ's words that it would be a tribulation "such as was not...

RWB, I will response to Spiritual Israelite ridiculous post here. What SI is trying to do is to creates two different "great tribulations" where Scripture only speaks of one. He is distinguishing between a great tribulation that believers endure and another great tribulation that is supposedly...

Correct! I believe we are in agreement on this point. The Great Tribulation of Revelation 7 encompasses the entire history of God's faithful people, from Abel and the prophets of the Old Testament to the saints of the New Testament, continuing until the Second Coming of Christ. That is why the...

Hi @rwb. How are you doing so far. I thought I would explain my position on Revelation 7:13-15 now that you brought it up. Revelation 7:13-15 "And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? And I said unto him, Sir...

More speculation and false interpretation. I recently post a length response. Read it.

I don’t think you’re understanding what the “daily sacrifice” and the “abomination of desolation” refer to. This isn’t about Jewish sacrifices—whether in the first century (as Preterists argue) or a future third temple (as Premillennialists believe). The “daily sacrifice” points to the...

Wrongo! The third temple is not "critical for eschatology"; it is critical for your flawed dispensational/premillennialism. There is a difference! The problem is that Scripture never plainly teaches the rebuilding of a third temple as an end-times necessity. The doctrine is treated as a...

Excuses, excuses. It does exists. You are spiritually deaf with Dispensational Israel (or National/Ethnic Israel) doctrine for so long that you really have not heard of covenant Israel theology often.