Archaeological proof of Christ's AD 70 bodily return

[David in NJ]

And now, a word from the sponsor of this thread:

View attachment 67370

This Post was presented to our 12 Member Panel of Judges and I am excited to announce:

Lady's and Gentlemen we have our contest WINNER

 

[quietthinker]

Archaeological proof of Christ's AD 70 bodily return​

Making claims like this is clearly either indicative of scriptural illiteracy or deliberately disseminating misinformation or both.

 

[3 Resurrections]

"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Mat. 16:27-28)

For Jesus to be "coming in His kingdom" included His coming with the glory of His Father with the angels, to give rewards o every man according to his works. That is Great White Throne judgment language that accompanies a bodily resurrection. And some of those standing in front of Christ at that moment would still be alive to see that day come when Christ would bodily return. It would be on that day when Christ would perform all those activities.

This is not an isolated verse dealing with an AD 70 bodily return for Christ. It's only one of the many.

Your problem is that you don't understand what the Bible means when it talks about "tasting death."

Christ was said to "taste death for every man" (Heb. 2:9). That was a literal, physical death process which Christ passed through. There were some standing in front of Christ in Matt. 16:27-28 that would not "taste death" by this literal, physical death process before they saw Him returning with the angels, etc., etc.

Are you suggesting that Lazarus never died again?

I'm not suggesting. Scripture tells us it is impossible for a resurrected person to die twice. Heb. 9:27 says that "It is appointed unto men ONCE to die..." - not twice. Christ told us that in the resurrection process, the "children of the resurrection" are made like unto the angels in heaven, which are deathless. "Neither CAN they die anymore" states it to be impossible for Lazarus to die twice. NOBODY who was bodily resurrected in Scripture ever died twice. It's an impossibility.

The chief priests wanted to kill him, and you have him at the crucifixion site in your fantasy.

Who cares what the chief priests wanted to do? Their evil desire to see Lazarus die again does not mean that it was a possibility. The disciple whom Jesus loved was "known to the high priest". He was even allowed to enter the palace of the high priest, when a fisherman from Galilee such as the son of Zebedee would not have been allowed entrance (John 18:15). And he even knew the name of Malchus the servant of the high priest, which shows his familiarity with the members of the priesthood - not something that the fisherman son of Zebedee would have known.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The debate is over...unless somebody can prove, from scripture, that anybody other than Jesus and the twelve apostles were present at the Last Supper.

"Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved." (John 13:23)

Any takers?

Please notice from what you quoted above: the twelve APOSTLES were at the last supper, but it was one of His DISCIPLES, whom he loved, that was leaning on Jesus’s breast at that Last Supper. Lazarus was known far and wide as “He whom thou lovest”. It was Lazarus the disciple, not John the Apostle leaning on Christ at that moment.

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

NOBODY who was bodily resurrected in Scripture ever died twice.

KNOCK! KNOCK!

Who is it?

It's the son of the widow in Zarephath who was raised from the dead by Elijah. Come on out. I want to show you something...

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

Please notice from what you quoted above: the twelve APOSTLES were at the last supper, but it was one of His DISCIPLES, whom he loved, that was leaning on Jesus’s breast at that Last Supper. Lazarus was known far and wide as “He whom thou lovest”. It was Lazarus the disciple, not John the Apostle leaning on Christ at that moment.

Nope.

The twelve apostles were also called disciples.

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover? And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him. And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?" (Mark 14:12-14)

Those "two disciples" were the apostle Peter and the apostle John.

"Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat. And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in." (Luke 22:7-10)

Care to try again?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Apparently you are willing to ignore the “ONCE TO DIE” appointed limitation for mankind found in Hebrews 9:27. That applies to the few OT individuals we have also, including the example you gave above.

And you also have nothing to say about Christ telling us that for those who go through the resurrection process, “Neither CAN they die anymore, for they are equal unto the angels…” (Luke 20:36).

The Scriptures do not contradict each other. Nobody who is bodily resurrected dies twice. It’s a Bible rule. No “double jeopardy”. Not Lazarus, not Dorcas, the widow’s son, not the ones Elisha and Elijah raised from the dead, not the many Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints, or anyone else Christ and the twelve apostles raised from the dead either during His earthly ministry.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The disciple that Jesus loved is listed separately from the two sons of Zebedee in the fishing expedition found in John 21.

Also, when the resurrected Jesus showed Himself to the eleven apostles (minus Judas), He rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart because they had not believed the report of the women that he was now alive again (Mark 16:14).

Yet Scripture states quite plainly that the disciple whom Jesus loved DID BELIEVE when he visited the empty sepulcher (John 20:8 - “…and he saw and believed…”. That tells us that the believing, beloved disciple was NOT one of the unbelieving 11 disciples (minus Judas, who was dead by then.)

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

The disciple that Jesus loved is listed separately from the two sons of Zebedee in the fishing expedition found in John 21.

No, he isn't, so stop lying.

John chapter 21

[1] After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed he himself.
[2] There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples.
[3] Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately; and that night they caught nothing.
[4] But when the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore: but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus.
[5] Then Jesus saith unto them, Children, have ye any meat? They answered him, No.
[6] And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes.
[7] Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.

There is NOTHING in what we just read that precludes John, one of "the sons of Zebedee," from being "that disciple whom Jesus loved." In fact, we know that John was a fisherman, but we know no such thing about Lazarus, yet you desperately seek to place him on this fishing trip. As usual, you are grasping at straws.

Also, when the resurrected Jesus showed Himself to the eleven apostles (minus Judas), He rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart because they had not believed the report of the women that he was now alive again (Mark 16:14).

Yet Scripture states quite plainly that the disciple whom Jesus loved DID BELIEVE when he visited the empty sepulcher (John 20:8 - “…and he saw and believed…”. That tells us that the believing, beloved disciple was NOT one of the unbelieving 11 disciples (minus Judas, who was dead by then.)

Are you a butcher by profession? I ask because you regularly butcher the scriptures. Here is what the verse actually says IN CONTEXT:

John chapter 20

[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
[2] Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
[3] Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
[4] So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.
[5] And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
[6] Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
[7] And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
[8] Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.
[9] For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
[10] Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

Mary Magdalene told Peter and that other disciple, whom Jesus loved, "They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him." When they got to the sepulchre, "that other disciple" believed. Believed what? Mary Magdalene's report that they had taken away Jesus' body. He didn't believe that Jesus had risen from the dead because the very next verse tells us, "FOR AS YET THEY KNEW NOT THE SCRIPTURE, THAT HE MUST RISE AGAIN FROM THE DEAD."

So, are you ready yet to prove that Lazarus was at the Last Supper?

You will NEVER be able to do so.

Do you know why?

I do.

HE WAS NOT THERE!

Deal with that reality, and teach no more heresy.

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

Apparently you are willing to ignore the “ONCE TO DIE” appointed limitation for mankind found in Hebrews 9:27. That applies to the few OT individuals we have also, including the example you gave above.

And you also have nothing to say about Christ telling us that for those who go through the resurrection process, “Neither CAN they die anymore, for they are equal unto the angels…” (Luke 20:36).

The Scriptures do not contradict each other. Nobody who is bodily resurrected dies twice. It’s a Bible rule. No “double jeopardy”. Not Lazarus, not Dorcas, the widow’s son, not the ones Elisha and Elijah raised from the dead, not the many Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints, or anyone else Christ and the twelve apostles raised from the dead either during His earthly ministry.

I am not willing to ignore anything. That is your specialty. Instead, your posts are filled with so much heresy that I would have to devote much of my time to deal with it all, and you are simply not worth the effort because of your continued stubborn refusal to admit and repent of your errors.

Jesus was speaking of the resurrection in which saints will receive glorified bodies, and nobody has attained to that resurrection yet. You would know this is you had at least half of a clue, but, sadly, you don't.

 

[3 Resurrections]

[2] There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples.

Take special note of the mention of "two other of his disciples". One of these unnamed "other disciples" was "the disciple whom Jesus loved", mentioned later on in this context. The unnamed "other disciple" is separate from the named two sons of Zebedee.

we know that John was a fisherman, but we know no such thing about Lazarus, yet you desperately seek to place him on this fishing trip.

Are you implying that a glorified, resurrected individual cannot possibly go fishing, or know anything about such an activity? The glorified Christ already had fish waiting on the coals at the shore for all these men to eat on this occasioni, and during His lifetime on earth, His trade was not fishing.

Mary Magdalene told Peter and that other disciple, whom Jesus loved, "They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him." When they got to the sepulchre, "that other disciple" believed. Believed what? Mary Magdalene's report that they had taken away Jesus' body. He didn't believe that Jesus had risen from the dead because the very next verse tells us, "FOR AS YET THEY KNEW NOT THE SCRIPTURE, THAT HE MUST RISE AGAIN FROM THE DEAD."

You need to compare the various gospel accounts of this same incident. Look at Luke 24. The women at the empty tomb were told, "He is not here, but is risen! Remember how He spoke to you when He was still in Galilee, saying, 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. And they remembered His words. Then they returned from the tomb and told all these things to THE ELEVEN, AND TO ALL THE REST." (which means more than just the eleven apostles heard the message about Christ's rising the third day). The women "told these things to THE APOSTLES. And their words seemed to them" (unto the ELEVEN APOSTLES) "like idle tales, and THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THEM." (THE ELEVEN APOSTLES were not believing that Christ had risen).

Then we have Peter and the disciple that Jesus loved running to the tomb, where we are told that this unnamed disciple whom Jesus loved "SAW AND BELIEVED". It was up until that point ("as of yet") they did not know the meaning of Christ's prediction that He would rise from the dead. But once this single disciple that Jesus loved saw the empty tomb, he DID BELIEVE the women's account that Christ had risen from the dead that third day. Peter didn't believe, because Christ reproved the eleven for "their UNBELIEF AND HARDNESS OF HEART" (Mark 16:14) because NONE OF THE ELEVEN APOSTLES (minus the dead Judas) believed the women's report of the angel saying that Christ was risen on that third day.

Even with Christ standing in front of them in His glorified resurrected state showing His hands and his feet to the eleven apostles, "And while THEY BELIEVED NOT for joy, and wondered..." (Luke 24:41).

By combining these accounts of that day's events, we can understand that:
The eleven disciples that evening with Christ were STILL NOT BELIEVING the evidence and the women's report from the angel that Christ had risen that third day.
The disciples that Jesus loved "SAW AND BELIEVED" the women's report at the moment he saw the empty tomb early that morning.

Conclusion: The BELIEVING "disciple whom Jesus loved" was NOT one of the UNBELIEVING ELEVEN APOSTLES that Christ was reproving for their UNBELIEF AND HARDNESS OF HEART. John the son of Zebedee (one of THE ELEVEN APOSTLES) was NOT "the disciple whom Jesus loved".

Jesus was speaking of the resurrection in which saints will receive glorified bodies, and nobody has attained to that resurrection yet.

Yes, they did. Anybody in Scripture who was raised from the dead went through that resurrection process into a glorified changed body form, a process which can never be undone. This is a mirror of the certainty of our spiritual resurrection process, which can never be undone either.

The rule in Hebrews 9:27-28 is that mankind only dies ONCE physically. This truth is directly compared to Christ who was offered only the ONE TIME as our sacrifice, and "dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over Him". (Romans 6:9)

If you think that a bodily resurrection can be undone by the person dying again, then you have essentially given tacit approval to the idea that mankind's spiritual resurrection can be undone also, because one reality is a mirror of the other. Perhaps you do believe this, as many do. But there are absolutely no grounds for that belief in Scripture. Quite the contrary.

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

Anybody in Scripture who was raised from the dead went through that resurrection process into a glorified changed body form, a process which can never be undone.

You are so far gone that I doubt there is any hope for you. Your wife is right. You are a heretic. Welcome to "ignore."

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

 

[3 Resurrections]

You are so far gone that I doubt there is any hope for you. Your wife is right. You are a heretic. Welcome to "ignore."

I didn't type the above to convince you yourself necessarily, but for the many others who are watching and reading from the sidelines, either now or in the future, who just might give some further thought to the subject. We are all writing for the "gallery", so to speak. It is a very common tactic to simply label someone a "heretic" without addressing the pertinent Scriptures that they are using. It does not help your case.

 

[PinSeeker]

The Rev. 20 millennium is a hotly debated subject, for certain.

Sure. And that's unfortunate for several reasons.

But Scripture gives us the literal "expiration" date for this particular millennium.

Sure it does; the bringing of God's Israel to completion and Jesus's subsequent return. Not a specific (or even implied) date, but a time of completion, for sure. As Jesus said, "concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

It ended with the "First resurrection",

The first resurrection is actually still going on, through the course of God's millennium. The first resurrection is what Paul talks about in Ephesians 2:4-10, the resurrection of the dead in sin to life in Jesus. This is how we ~ all of God's Israel ~ are "made alive together with Christ and raised us up with Him and seated with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:5-6) and thus come to "share in Christ's resurrection," and "over us the second death has no power," and we are "priests of God and of Christ," and we "reign with Him ~ even now ~ for this thousand years," which is what John says in Revelation 20:6.

when a "remnant of the dead" came to life again.

Well... right... but see above.

Satan was cast out of heaven down to earth on Christ's resurrection day...

Ah, now, we're not far from agreeing on this; I say it was when Christ was born to Mary. I say that what we read in Revelation 20:1-3, the "angel coming down from heaven, holding in His hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain... He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended," is a vision, a symbolic description of what happened on that first Christmas morning 2000-plus years ago. And from what Jesus says in Matthew 12:28-29, namely, "if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you... how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house," we can easily see that this binding is a past event, even in Jesus's day. And we can also see that this time is still present, as Jesus is, even now, still plundering Satan's "goods" ~ more and more people are being born again and raised/resurrected in Christ and thus coming to share in His resurrection every day.

, and John 12:12 gave the believers a warning that the Devil had already come down unto them in great wrath, knowing he had but a "short time".

Ah, Revelation 12:12, right? I mean, yes, I agree, but again, see above reference to Matthew 12... Sata

That "short time" of Satan's release was the same as the "little season" when Satan was released at the end of the Rev. 20 millennium.

Disagree. <smile> Satan knows his time is short, because he knows that ~ John says in Revelation 12, "Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come." Right now, Satan "accuses (us) day and night before our God," but we who are born again of the Spirit "have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of (our) testimony." Remember what Paul says in Romans 8, that "we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us..." (Romans 8:37). So, yes, "the devil has come down to (us) in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short"...

But regarding Satan's releasing at the end of the Revelation 20 millennium, that time is still to come, as we are in the millennium at present. Again, John is "seeing" in these visions all of the millennium from beginning to end as if it is already past, which, much of it, maybe most of it, is, but there is at this point still a remaining portion of it to come... we have not yet reached the end of it.

In other words, the literal thousand year millennium of Rev. 20 had already "expired" and was "finished" even before John put pen to parchment in AD 59 / 60.

Strongly disagree. See above.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Making claims like this is clearly either indicative of scriptural illiteracy or deliberately disseminating misinformation or both.

It's neither, I think. 3R is just fully bought in to an errant understanding of these Scriptures we're talking about. He obviously knows Scripture at least fairly well, and he's not "deliberately disseminating misinformation," which would be lying. He's just mistaken. I don't mean to soft-pedal anything, but it is what it is. Who are any of us to pronounce condemnation on him or anyone else?

Grace and peace to you, QT.

 

[PinSeeker]

The "disciple whom Jesus loved" was Lazarus.

No, John calls himself "the disciple whom Jesus loved." John is speaking of himself in John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, and 21:20.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Sure it does; the bringing of God's Israel to completion and Jesus's subsequent return.

Sorry, but that is not how Revelation 20:5 describes this ending of the millennium. The millennium comes to an end simultaneously with the time when the "First resurrection" takes place - an event when the "remnant of the dead" comes to life again, which John labels as being "the First resurrection". This "remnant" (loipoi) of the dead coming to life again was the many (but not all of the OT dead) Matthew 27:52-53 saints coming to life again that same day as "Christ the FIRST-fruits" arose. He is called the "FIRST-born", and the "FIRST-begotten", as well as the "FIRST-fruits". Plenty of "FIRSTS" so that we do not mistake what John meant by the "FIRST resurrection" event on the calendar in AD 33.

The first resurrection is actually still going on, through the course of God's millennium

I agree that we believers are all the beneficiaries of the blessings Christ wrought for us in the "First resurrection", but we are NOT all the specific number of participants who took part in that single event on the timeline. John used terms such as "expired", "finished" and "fulfilled" to describe the particular ending point of the Rev. 20 millennium on the calendar. If this was merely discussing the spiritual resurrection aspect of the believers coming to life in Christ, then we would have a millennium coming to an ending point every time someone became a believer in Christ. Not a plausible interpretation, especially when this "remnant" coming to life again uses the terms that Scripture always employs for the dead "standing again" after bodily rising out of a grave in a bodily resurrection process.

And from what Jesus says in Matthew 12:28-29, namely, "if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you... how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house," we can easily see that this binding is a past event, even in Jesus's day.

Yep, I agree with you that this is proof of a past event for Satan's binding (of the Rev. 20 millennium) which had already taken place before Christ was "plundering his goods" by casting out devils during His earthly ministry.

Ah, now, we're not far from agreeing on this; I say it was when Christ was born to Mary.

If we read the context of the war in heaven, and when Satan was cast out of heaven, it declares that the victory overcoming Satan as the "accuser of the brethren" was accomplished by "the blood of the Lamb". This means that we are looking at a victory achieved by the blood of the Lamb being accepted by God in heaven that resurrection day, when God consecrated Christ as our Great High Priest. Satan didn't have a legal leg to stand on from that point forward, so he and his devils lost the war and were cast out of heaven down to earth for that "short time" and "little season" when the millennium had just ended.

The millennium ended when Christ first ascended to heaven and the devil descended to earth on that "First resurrection" day.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Ah, Revelation 12:12, right? I mean, yes, I agree, but again, see above reference to Matthew 12.

LOL, Yep, sorry, I'm typing too fast. It was Revelation 12:12 (not John 12:12) when John was giving a warning to his own readers that Satan had already come down to them in great wrath for that "short time" / aka the "little season" when he was released from his millennial chain so that he could once more deceive the nations. A "little season" when compared to the "long season" of 40 years of wilderness wanderings for the Israelites (Joshua 24:7) means that Satan's "little season" beginning in AD 33 couldn't possibly last longer than a "long season" of 40 years. And it didn't. Satan and all his unclean spirits and demonic hosts were imprisoned within Jerusalem in AD 66 to plague that "wicked generation" of Israelites in their "last state". God slew them all in that location by the close of AD 70, as predicted in Scripture.

 

[Muna]

No, John calls himself "the disciple whom Jesus loved." John is speaking of himself in John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, and 21:20.

Grace and peace to you.

Agreed, John 21:20 will takes us to John 21:24 which reads

John 21:24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.