Archaeological proof of Christ's AD 70 bodily return

[IndianaRob]

Stephen's spirit didn't leave his body before his body died. It does not say that and that makes no sense whatsoever. A person's soul and spirit leave their body after their body dies first. You should not make things up like this just because of how you interpret other scriptures.

Jesus said he who believes in Him will never see death but you’re telling me that Stephen saw death. Who would you go with if you were me?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus said he who believes in Him will never see death but you’re telling me that Stephen saw death. Who would you go with if you were me?

I would go with you asking God for wisdom (James 1:5-7) so that you can understand what Jesus taught. I explained to you before what Jesus meant by looking at John 11:25-26, but you twisted the text to fit your view. The context of what Jesus was saying was in relation to the bodily resurrection of the dead.

John 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

First, Martha showed that she believed what Jesus had previously taught about those who believe in Him being resurrected at the last day (John 6:40), which refers to the bodily resurrection of the dead on the last day. Then He indicated that even if someone dies "yet shall he live". In context, Jesus was saying even if someone physically dies, that's not the end for that person because they will be bodily resurrected and live bodily again forever. Then He pointed out that those who live spiritually in Him and believe in Him will never die, which, in context, means they will live bodily for eternity after being bodily resurrected rather than experiencing the second death, which is eternal and is only something that those whose names are not written in the book of life will experience (Rev 20:14-15).

 

[IndianaRob]

I would go with you asking God for wisdom (James 1:5-7) so that you can understand what Jesus taught. I explained to you before what Jesus meant by looking at John 11:25-26, but you twisted the text to fit your view. The context of what Jesus was saying was in relation to the bodily resurrection of the dead.

John 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

First, Martha showed that she believed what Jesus had previously taught about those who believe in Him being resurrected at the last day (John 6:40), which refers to the bodily resurrection of the dead on the last day. Then He indicated that even if someone dies "yet shall he live". In context, Jesus was saying even if someone physically dies, that's not the end for that person because they will be bodily resurrected and live bodily again forever. Then He pointed out that those who live spiritually in Him and believe in Him will never die, which, in context, means they will live bodily for eternity after being bodily resurrected rather than experiencing the second death, which is eternal and is only something that those whose names are not written in the book of life will experience (Rev 20:14-15).

Jesus meant exactly what He said in John 11:26. Jesus was conveying a direct promise, yet you’re adding “second death” into His words to make them fit your idea of what you think He meant, but that’s not in the text. When you do that, you completely destroy the message Jesus was giving, making it impossible for you to receive it.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus meant exactly what He said in John 11:26.

Yes, He did, but it's too bad that you don't know what He said because you don't allow the previous verses to show you the context of that verse.

Jesus was conveying a direct promise, yet you’re adding “second death” into His words to make them fit your idea of what you think He meant, but that’s not in the text.

You are interpreting John 11:26 in isolation from the previous verses. That's not how to interpret scripture. You need to learn to interpret scripture in context instead of cherry picking verses out of context.

 

[IndianaRob]

Yes, He did, but it's too bad that you don't know what He said because you don't allow the previous verses to show you the context of that verse.


You are interpreting John 11:26 in isolation from the previous verses. That's not how to interpret scripture. You need to learn to interpret scripture in context instead of cherry picking verses out of context.

I’m not talking about the verse before because that verse deals with people who died believing in Christ before the cross. They are the Old Testament saints who were raised with Christ to the same eternal life we have.

The next verse deals with believers who are alive.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I’m not talking about the verse before because that verse deals with people who died believing in Christ before the cross. They are the Old Testament saints who were raised with Christ to the same eternal life we have.

The next verse deals with believers who are alive.

So, you choose to ignore the context of what Jesus was saying, which was in relation to the bodily resurrection of the dead. Bad choice.

 

[IndianaRob]

So, you choose to ignore the context of what Jesus was saying, which was in relation to the bodily resurrection of the dead. Bad choice.

I’m not ignoring it, the two aren’t related.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I’m not ignoring it, the two aren’t related.

So, you think He just suddenly changed the topic for no apparent reason. I see.

 

[Earburner]

Here you go...

As for your discussion with the other person concerning the James ossuary that somehow they thought proved James wasn't bodily resurrected - that ossuary is empty. Many, but not all of the ossuaries retrieved for study are found empty. Part of the reason for that could very well be that those ossuaries were confiscated by thieves for sale on the black market, who inadvertently dumped the contents as being considered unimportant before those ossuaries eventually passed into official hands. But that isn't the only reason why many are found empty.

Take for example the Caiaphas family tomb, first discovered intact in the Peace Forest section of Jerusalem. There were 12 ossuaries inside. Six of these ossuaries, (including the Caiaphas ossuary), had bones within, but not the others. Blame was placed on "grave-robbers" for the ossuaries which were opened and empty. But this does not make sense - especially for an intact family tomb. Why would the most ornate of the 12 ossuaries (the one with Caiaphas' name on it) be one that the supposed "grave-robbers" paid no attention to? Wouldn't those supposed "grave-robbers" have opened ALL of the ossuaries in their hunt for relics? Why leave the elaborately-carved Caiaphas ossuary alone? I maintain that, even among the Caiaphas family which was opposed to Christ, there had been individual members who had been true children of God during their lifetime - and whose mortal remains were bodily resurrected at Christ's AD 70 return. Six empty ossuaries in this intact Caiaphas tomb speak volumes.

Let's also consider the famous Hebron "cave of Machpelah", in which Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah were all buried. These were all children of faith. There is the traditional site today which is called the "cave of Machpelah" in Hebron, but the site doesn't match at all with the location we have described in Scripture for this cave. I believe the true location was discovered by Wyatt's team. This "cave of Machpelah" was entered and examined, and no bones whatever were found within this cave - only a large flat single bowl which more than likely was used for the preparation of spices to anoint the dead. One would think that at the very least Jacob's mummified body would still have some vestiges remaining for examination. But no. The burial cave with its three double niches for three pairs of bodies is completely empty. Again, I maintain that the six righteous occupants of this burial cave were bodily-resurrected in AD 70 and taken to heaven with the bodily-returning Christ.

As proof that Christ bodily returned to the Mount of Olives in AD 70, we can examine the description of this predicted return in Zechariah 14:4-5 IN THE LXX - not in the other translations which err in translating some of the language. This text does NOT teach that people would "flee" through a valley created by the Lord standing on the Mount of Olives. Wrong translation.

The better LXX translation reads as follows for Zech. 14:4-5: "And his feet shall stand in that day on the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave asunder, half of it toward the east and the west, a very great division; and half the mountain shall lean to the north, and half of it to the south. And the valley of my mountains shall be CLOSED UP, and the valley of the mountains shall be joined on to Jasod, and shall be BLOCKED UP as it was blocked up in the days of the earthquake, in the days of Ozias king of Juda; and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with him."

This is describing an earthquake at the Mount of Olives location when Christ returns, with the crest of the Mount of Olives breaking apart and "leaning" or falling downhill in all directions - north, south, east, and west. This resulting landslide rubble falling downhill would "CLOSE UP" or "BLOCK UP" the Kidron Valley as far as the "Jasod" location. This is the "Azal" location which the KJV writes about, which actually shows up on today's maps as the "Wadi Yasul", just off the far southeastern corner of Jerusalem's walls. Nobody was going to "flee" through this valley at Christ's bodily return, because it was going to be "blocked up" or "closed up" when Christ set foot on the Mount of Olives at that second coming return.

Archaeologists have examined the top layers which currently fill the bed of the Kidron Valley, and have discovered that there is a 40' layer which has been deposited there around the AD 70 time frame, and with yet another layer below that one (deposited in King Uzziah's days during that earthquake). This topmost 40' layer has moved the deepest part of the bed of the Kidron Valley about 70' further away from the walls of Jerusalem than it was in Christ's days. In other words, the current-day Mount of Olives isn't nearly as steep as it used to be in Christ's days, because the top of the Mount of Olives broke apart at Christ's bodily return in AD 70, with all that landslide rubble falling downhill to "close up" the Kidron Valley and "block it up" as far as the Azal location.

And since we know that this earthquake at Christ's bodily return to the Mount of Olives was to be accompanied by a resurrection, and those resurrected ones being caught up together with Him to meet the Lord in the air to return to heaven with Him, this dates Christ's return to the date of that topmost earthquake rubble layer. He left His "calling card" of landslide rubble lying in the Kidron Valley back then as proof that He came exactly where and when He was predicted to bodily return.

Daniel 12:11-13 had predicted this resurrection, and he dated it to arrive 1,335 days after those two predicted events would take place during the same season of time. Those two events in Daniel 12:11 occurred in AD 66, with the end of the 1,335th day countdown falling on AD 70's Pentecost day in Jerusalem - the date of Christ's second coming return.

We should also realize the significance of the eastern gate of the temple which Ezekiel 46 described. For that rebuilt temple constructed at Zerubbabel's directions, the people of Israel in the post-exilic return were to worship as they stood facing that eastern gate in the Sabbaths and the new moons (Ez. 46:1-3). This gate was only for the "prince" of the people to enter AND LEAVE by that gate (Ez. 46:8). The significance of the people of Israel worshipping at that particular location and at those particular times was to symbolize both the location and time for where and when "Messiah the Prince" would both enter AND LEAVE this world to return to heaven along with the bodily-resurrected saints.

NOTE: Once that Jerusalem temple was torn down in September of AD 70, that eastern gate of the temple was also torn down - because by then, the significance of that eastern gate's existence would have been fulfilled by Christ having bodily returned to the Mount of Olives location AND LEFT from that eastern side of Jerusalem's walls. There would be no more reason for that temple and its eastern gate to exist, once it had fulfilled its intended purpose.

1. I strongly disagree with your timing of 70 AD. being the time of the resurrection of many of the saints.
2. I also disagree with your understanding of the event of Jesus standing on the Mt of Olives, supposedly also taking place in 70 AD.

All of the above took place within the period of the first 3.5 years of the 7.0 years within the 70th week of the "70 weeks prophecy", before and upon His crucifixion.
Mat. 27:45-54.

 

[Earburner]

You need a course on hereneutics and Exegesis.

Daniel 9, Matthew 24 and Thesselonians defines WHO the AOD is:

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.

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:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Notice the abomination stands in the HOLY PLACE- this is vastly different from Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

2 Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Why do so many christians become grammatically illiterate to defend their allegorical reinterpretations? This is speaking of 2 people groups.

7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

1. Every eye will see HIm.

2 ALSO denotes another group. And many that ordered jesus death among the Jews were dead by 70AD so that cannot be about them who conspired to kill Jesus. sorry but this fails exegetically, hereneutically and grammatically.

Don't know where you get you rhistory but that is whacked! According to Eddersheim and Fruchtenbaum, two born again Jewish and Rabbinic Scholars, the secret or inner chambers were rooms used for travelling prophets to lodge. in light of the warning, it is true compared to your secret cash room which has mention in any knowledgeable history.

YOur preterism and allegorical rewrite of Scripture is shameful. You ahve to be Gods editor because He wrote in secret code which only the "enlightened" could figure out! Let me see who else have pulled that line over the centuries?

Kabbalists
Christian mystics
Romanism
Father Divinje
Mary Baker Eddy
Father divine
Mormons
Watchtower
David Koresh
Jim Jones to name but a few.

You are in infamous company.

Then you don't understand Isa. 55:8-9 and all of 1 Cor. ch. 2

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Then you don't understand Isa. 55:8-9 and all of 1 Cor. ch. 2

Says you! but I have not read you are the ultimate authority for Bible understanding!

And I understand them both far better than you know.

they are not some code for you to seek hidden knowledge like the mystics do.

And I hate to disappoint you but I am not a natural man. I have been born again, baptized by the spirit, washed in the blood, perfected forever and am being sanctified.

Maybe before you go hunting for all this supposed hidden wisdom you should realize Paul was speaking of his words and not some read between the lines to find hidden meanings. That is the high mark of a cult leader wannabe.

 

[covenantee]

Then you don't understand Isa. 55:8-9 and all of 1 Cor. ch. 2

You're talking to someone whose "hereneutics" declare Messiah the Prince to be the abomination of desolation.

Add to that his abomination of desecration that denies the complete fulfillment of the New Covenant in and by Christ and His Blood.

Claims to be "washed in the blood", but denies the Blood by his denial of the New Covenant, because the Blood is the Blood of the New Covenant. Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 11:25

Throw in the racism and blasphemies of "Christian" zionism.

Quite the package.

 

[Prycejosh1987]

Isnt the eastern gate still in Israel. It is covered shut. Apparently some sources say Jesus is still going to through them. When He returns. I believe it is true, the eastern gate will be connected to the 3rd temple as it was connected to the 2nd temple.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Isnt the eastern gate still in Israel. It is covered shut. Apparently some sources say Jesus is still going to through them. When He returns. I believe it is true, the eastern gate will be connected to the 3rd temple as it was connected to the 2nd temple.

The current so-called "Golden Gate" that is presently blocked up is NOT the same as the eastern gate of Christ's days, which was torn down to the last stone in AD 70, once it had fulfilled its purpose for Christ's second coming return to that location. Today's current "Golden Gate" is the work of reconstruction since that time, and is most probably dated to the time of Constantine, and which was later walled up by the Moslems during the crusades era.

I recommend reading the article by J. L. Leeper from 1903 titled, "Remains of the Temple at Jerusalem" from "The Biblical World" vol. 22, pp 329-341 at www.jstor.org.

 

[3 Resurrections]

1. I strongly disagree with your timing of 70 AD. being the time of the resurrection of many of the saints.

Then you disagree with both Christ and Daniel, who predicted the exact countdown to the resurrection which happened to fall on AD 70's Pentecost day. Christ told His first-century audience in Matt. 24:15 that if they read their Daniel Scriptures, that they would understand the timing of the events leading up to His second coming return. Daniel 12:11-13 listed two specific events taking place during the same season which would jumpstart a 1,335-day countdown to a resurrection. These two events occurred in the summer of AD 66, with a 1,335-day countdown to the resurrection in which Daniel was also to participate on that last 1,335th day in AD 70.

2. I also disagree with your understanding of the event of Jesus standing on the Mt of Olives, supposedly also taking place in 70 AD.

Then you disagree with the prophet Zechariah who gave a detailed description in chapters 12-14 of the AD 66-70 siege in Jerusalem, with the tribes of Israel mourning as they saw that return of Christ to the Mount of Olives location.

Hint: we don't have any of the "house of Judah" or the "house of David" or the "house of Nathan", or the "house of Levi", or "the family of Shimei" in existence anymore. God planned for the archived tribal genealogies to be burned up during that AD 66-70 period. You should remember the ancient prophecy of Jacob, who told his 12 sons what would befall each of them in "the last days". For Judah, the Genesis 49:10 prophecy was that "the sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, UNTIL Shiloh come, and unto him shall the gathering of the people be".

"Shiloh" is almost universally recognized as being Christ Jesus, the "Prince of Peace". Judah as the lawgiver and a ruling tribe would be reserved for that dominant role among the other tribes UNTIL Shiloh came, and had gathered the people together (in a bodily resurrection event). Zechariah 12 makes a very pointed reference to God using the "governors of Judah" for His own purposes in bringing down the city of Jerusalem. Judah would also fight against Jerusalem during that siege period of internecine strife within the city, right up to the point when the Romans came for the second time just after Passover started in AD 70 and surrounded the city for the final period of the siege. Forty-five days later, Christ Jesus returned to the Mount of Olives, just as Zechariah 14:4-5 and Daniel 12:11-13 had predicted.

The tribal genealogies disappeared during that turbulent period, and have not been restored - just as God intended. So, since there is no longer any "house of Judah" since the AD 70 period, then according to Jacob's prophecy in Genesis 49:10, we can know that "Shiloh" already came and gathered the people together at His return back then.

All of the above took place within the period of the first 3.5 years of the 7.0 years within the 70th week of the "70 weeks prophecy", before and upon His crucifixion.
Mat. 27:45-54.

At least it appears that you and I agree about the timing of the 70th week of Daniel's 70-week prophecy. Even though I see Scripture describing the raising of the Matthew 27:52-53 saints as being "the FIRST resurrection" in Rev. 20:5 - not Christ's second coming.

 

[Earburner]

You're talking to someone whose "hereneutics" declare Messiah the Prince to be the abomination of desolation.

If one thinks more spiritually, they will clearly understand that the act of shedding innocent blood was indeed an abomination against God, and not against the temple or the Jews.
Proverbs 6
[16] These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
[17] A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[18] An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Add to that his abomination of desecration that denies the complete fulfillment of the New Covenant in and by Christ and His Blood.

I don't think he denies the complete fulfillment of the NC in and by Christ and His Blood, it's more like he misunderstands the application.

Claims to be "washed in the blood", but denies the Blood by his denial of the New Covenant, because the Blood is the Blood of the New Covenant. Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 11:25

I can't be the judge of that, except to say it's being misapplied.

Throw in the racism and blasphemies of "Christian" zionism.

Quite the package.

I agree! Born again Christians should have nothing to do with the present nation state of Israel attempting to fulfill OC prophetic scripture. All those promises to them became null and void when their hands shed the innocent blood of their Savior.

 Edit:

Netanyahu Says He’s “Very” Invested in Idea of “Greater Israel” to Conquer Large Swaths of Middle East

“Greater Israel” is an extremist ideology for Israel to conquer Palestine as well as parts of numerous other countries.

truthout.org

If this Zionism continues with Israel, and it's own vain glory of attempting to enlarge its borders by violent conquest and genocide, I have no problem understanding how Rev. 9:13-21 will be fulfilled.

 

[covenantee]

I don't think he denies the complete fulfillment of the NC in and by Christ and His Blood, it's more like he misunderstands the application.

He does deny it. This is his response to Matthew 26:28.

So show when these declared provisions of the covenant were completed and fulfilled.

 

[Earburner]

In reply to post #257:

I agree!!
Any professing Christian who denies the truth of Mat. 26:28 is nothing but a "Religionist", revealing that they only have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof.... 2 Tim. 3:5

Mat. 26
[27] And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.