Preterism's Claim Of 70AD Fulfillment Is Silenced In One Verse, Luke 21:35

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,854
3,275
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I didn’t call you a troll I actually said that Im not saying that you are one I said that you sound like one because there’s no logic to your answers and these people do come onto sites like this. I also did edit it and apologize if I offended you but you just really confuse me and it’s all that I can think as there’s no logic to some of your post
Marty there is no logic in any person that would deny, that the "Literal" second coming of Jesus Christ is seen below, that's my "Opinion"

To think Preterism teaches that the literal second coming of Jesus Christ isnt seen below in Matthew 24:30, but that it represents a symbolic Judgement upon Jerusalem, Real Big Smiles!

Pinocchio's nose grows real long when that claims made!

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 
Last edited:

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm fully aware of your Preterist claims, the events seen below are "Future" and haven't been fulfilled

(Future Events)
Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
Matthew 24:30 The Secon Coming


To think Preterism teaches that the literal second coming of Jesus Christ isnt seen below in Matthew 24:30, but that it represents a symbolic Judgement upon Jerusalem, Real Big Smiles!

Pinocchio's nose grows real long when that claims made!

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Brother, the only Pinocchio nose belongs to you, because I'm not a Preterist. I believe some prophecies were fulfilled in history. Or, are you a Preterist because you believe that the prophecy that Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem was fulfilled in the past?

Believing that some prophecies, such as the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, was fulfilled in the past is not Preterism. What makes Preterism is the belief that nearly all future prophecies were fulfilled in the past, in the early centuries of the Church.

I don't believe that. I believe the fall of Jerusalem was indeed fulfilled in the past, as many commentators do. But I still believe that many future prophecies have yet to be fulfilled, including the continuing great tribulation of the Jewish People, ie the Jewish Diaspora, and the 3.5 year Reign of Antichrist, as well as the 2nd Coming of Christ. I'm also a Premillennialist.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,854
3,275
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Brother, the only Pinocchio nose belongs to you, because I'm not a Preterist. I believe some prophecies were fulfilled in history. Or, are you a Preterist because you believe that the prophecy that Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem is still future? ;)
Do you believe all of the events below are future, if not which have been fulfilled, how and when?

(Future Events)
Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Do you believe all of the events below are future, if not which have been fulfilled, how and when?

(Future Events)
Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

The AoD was the Roman Army surrounding Jerusalem, as Jesus indicated in Luke 21.
The Great Tribulation was the Jewish Punishment, by exile, in the current NT age--also indicated in Luke 21.
The 2nd Coming will end the age--I'm a Postribulationist, as indicated by Paul in 2 Thes 2.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,854
3,275
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The AoD was the Roman Army surrounding Jerusalem, as Jesus indicated in Luke 21.
The Great Tribulation was the Jewish Punishment, by exile, in the current NT age--also indicated in Luke 21.
The 2nd Coming will end the age--I'm a Postribulationist, as indicated by Paul in 2 Thes 2.
As I stated your a (Partial Preterist) in your eschatology, you believe Items 1 & 2 below have been fulfilled

How do you account for the literal second coming of Jesus Christ in Matthew 24:29-30 below, this didn't take place anytime in history, as it states "Immediately After The Tribulation"?

You believe in a 70AD Great Tribulation, with immediately after meaning 2,000 years and waiting for the literal second coming seen

1+1 = 2,000?

Matthew 24:30KJV
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, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.


(Future Events)
1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming
 
Last edited:

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As I stated your a (Partial Preterist) in your eschatology, you believe Items 1 & 2 below have been fulfilled

How do you account for the literal second coming of Jesus Christ in Matthew 24:29-30 below, this didn't take place anytime in history, as it states "Immediately After The Tribulation"?

You believe in a 70AD Great Tribulation, with immediately after meaning 2,000 years and waiting for the literal second coming seen

1+1 = 2,000?

Matthew 24:30KJV
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, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.


(Future Events)
1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

No, I'm not a Partial Preterist. I explained it to you. If you need, I'll explain it to you again later. Or, you can reread what I said.

Preterism was born many centuries after the view that I hold to. It is *not* Preterism, though Preterists have a similar view.

You need to understand the difference. Historical fulfillments of prophecy are not Preterism. Belief that historically-fulfilled prophecies all took place in the early centuries of the Church is. I don't hold to that position.
 
Last edited:

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,854
3,275
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, I'm not a Partial Preterist. I explained it to you. If you need, I'll explain it to you again later. Or, you can reread what I said.

Preterism was born many centuries after the view that I hold to. It is *not* Preterism, though Preterists have a similar view.

You need to understand the difference. Historical fulfillments of prophecy are not Preterism. Belief that historically-fulfilled prophecies all took place in the early centuries of the Church is. I don't hold to that position.
Yes You Are (Partial Preterist) In Your Eschatology

The Olivet Discourse and the three items mentioned below are the test, you can deny your a (Partial Preterist) but that's what you are

In the one fact seen below, you believe Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD was fulfilled in 70AD, when Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, (Partial Preterism) A (Fact)

(Quote Randy Kluth Post #324 Below)
"The AoD was the Roman Army surrounding Jerusalem, as Jesus indicated in Luke 21."


Yes (Historicism) taught in the reformed churches is also (Partial Preterism)

(Future Events)
1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

(Full Preterism) believes all three items are fulfilled

(Partial Preterist) Believe 1 or 2 of the three items are fulfilled

(Futurist) believe all three items are unfulfilled

Wikipedia: Preterism
The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is a prefix denoting that something is "past" or "beyond".[1] Adherents of preterism are known as preterists. Preterism teaches that either all (full preterism) or a majority (partial preterism) of the Olivet discourse had come to pass by AD 70.
 
Last edited:

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes You Are (Partial Preterist) In Your Eschatology

The Olivet Discourse and the three items mentioned below are the test, you can deny your a (Partial Preterist) but that's what you are

In the one fact seen below, you believe Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD was fulfilled in 70AD, when Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, (Partial Preterism) A (Fact)

(Quote Randy Kluth Post #324 Below)
"The AoD was the Roman Army surrounding Jerusalem, as Jesus indicated in Luke 21."


Yes (Historicism) taught in the reformed churches is also (Partial Preterism)

(Future Events)
1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

(Full Preterism) believes all three items are fulfilled

(Partial Preterist) Believe 1 or 2 of the three items are fulfilled

(Futurist) believe all three items are unfulfilled

Wikipedia: Preterism
The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is a prefix denoting that something is "past" or "beyond".[1] Adherents of preterism are known as preterists. Preterism teaches that either all (full preterism) or a majority (partial preterism) of the Olivet discourse had come to pass by AD 70.

I'm not going to belabor this for you. No, I'm not a Partial Preterist. You obviously think that believing the AoD was the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem is what defines a Preterist. It doesn't. Your bad. A lot of people think this. Their bad.

Most of the Church Fathers saw the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy of the imminent destruction of Jerusalem. That's precisely what Jesus said. If you don't want to believe that, and call all those who believe that "Preterists," that's your choice. But it isn't true.

As I said, Preterism didn't even exist when the Church Fathers shared their opinions. Believing what Jesus said is not Preterism.

Jesus said the temple would come down "stone by stone" in *his generation.* I believe this, but this doesn't make me a member of a party that came into existence many centuries later.

You're wrong. But I can see that you stubbornly like to cling to name-calling, instead of debating the point. So I won't waste any more time with you unless you care to be reasonable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,854
3,275
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm not going to belabor this for you. No, I'm not a Partial Preterist. You obviously think that believing the AoD was the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem is what defines a Preterist. It doesn't. Your bad. A lot of people think this. Their bad.

Most of the Church Fathers saw the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy of the imminent destruction of Jerusalem. That's precisely what Jesus said. If you don't want to believe that, and call all those who believe that "Preterists," that's your choice. But it isn't true.

As I said, Preterism didn't even exist when the Church Fathers shared their opinions. Believing what Jesus said is not Preterism.

Jesus said the temple would come down "stone by stone" in *his generation.* I believe this, but this doesn't make me a member of a party that came into existence many centuries later.

You're wrong. But I can see that you stubbornly like to cling to name-calling, instead of debating the point. So I won't waste any more time with you unless you care to be reasonable.
No Name Calling, I'm Futurist In My Eschatology, Your Partial Preterist, Its That Simple

The Olivet Discourse and the three items mentioned below are the test, you can deny your a (Partial Preterist) but that's what you are

In the one fact seen below, you believe Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD was fulfilled in 70AD, when Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, (Partial Preterism) A (Fact)

(Quote Randy Kluth Post #324 Below)
"The AoD was the Roman Army surrounding Jerusalem, as Jesus indicated in Luke 21."


Yes (Historicism) taught in the reformed churches is also (Partial Preterism)

(Future Events)
1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

(Full Preterism) believes all three items are fulfilled

(Partial Preterist) Believe 1 or 2 of the three items are fulfilled

(Futurist) believe all three items are unfulfilled

Wikipedia: Preterism
The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is a prefix denoting that something is "past" or "beyond".[1] Adherents of preterism are known as preterists. Preterism teaches that either all (full preterism) or a majority (partial preterism) of the Olivet discourse had come to pass by AD 70.
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I disagree, Jesus Christ taught the 10 commandments and enforced them

Will you be great or least in the Kingdom?

Matthew 19:17-19KJV
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.



Matthew 5:19KJV
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
You are correct. Jesus taught the 10 commandments.... To sinners that were not born again.

Not to NT saints.

You are missing my point.(Not to saints).

The abolishment of the 10 commandments is exclusive to the saints.
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, the Law ended at the cross, where the covenant between God and Israel was violated by Israel. It was not just a little transgression--it was the crucifixion of the Son of God, their Messiah!

The Law, as a covenant, was completely terminated. And this was represented by the tearing of the veil of the temple, indicating that the condemnation of the Law can no longer prevent the saints from obtaining eternal life from God.



The Law of Moses was only for Israel, and not for any other nation of the world. Since the Law of Moses has now been abrogated even for Israel, no nation on earth is under the Law.

The testimony of the Law is distinct from the covenant of the Law. Even though the covenant of Law is now gone, the testimony of the Law to God's character and to His holiness remains.

All men, saints and sinners, have an obligation to obey God's word, having been made in God's image, after His likeness. Our conscience is designed to hear the truth, even though our rebelliousness and sin nature obscures that truth. God's Law is in our soul, and all men are therefore accountable to God's word.

The covenant of Law simply bore witness to this Law of God within all men, though it applied only to Israel. But the testimony of God's word and the history of Israel has been made available to the world as a testimony so that all can understand God's progressive plan more clearly.

He began with Israel to prepare for final atonement in Christ. And then this gospel would be preached to the world--not the Law of Moses but the eternal Law of God impressed upon the human conscience. By knowing God's word within we know how we should live. And hearing the gospel of Christ we know that we must fully accept him to be saved.



Biden claims to be a Christian through Catholicism. But he conveniently believes his political office allows him to accommodate all opinions even if his private opinion is different as a Christian. For example, he knows Catholics oppose abortion. But as President he feels free to pursue abortion on demand on behalf of all Americans, who feel differently than Catholics do.

Biden should be under grace. But I don't feel he truly lives it. He embraces parts of the "love" of the Gospel, but then lives an unsanctified life with pagan friends. And it shows in his political philosophy, which completely compromises Christian truth. It seems he even persecutes Evangelicals.



All men are subject to God's Law from the beginning, which requires us to live as people created in the likeness of God. This is *not* the Law of Moses, which provided, temporarily, an atonement that was less than adequate for obtaining eternal life.

To obtain eternal life, men need to hear the gospel of Christ, so that they can give up their own ways fully for the word of God. Only Christ was able to prepare us for that and obtain acceptance by God through him.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;


This is only for Jews?

Gentiles are not included as these sinners?

This was already done away as written?
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.


This is only speaking of Jews?
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
1 Cor 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.


Is this Law for Jewish women only?
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Eph 6 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

2 Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise;

3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.


Is this Jews kids only?
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,300
1,480
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Can't a saint sin, Truther? Yes, they can. What is sin? It is Lawlessness, the breaking of the Law of God; the breaking of the Commandments of God - the 10 Commandments.
1 John 3:4
The 10 Commandments will never be done away. God, in the OT AND in the NT, couldn't have been more clear on that. And all of the Apostles understood it and taught it.
Sinning prevents anybody from salvation. Period.

The breaking of the Commandments is the definition of sin.

If you are referring to the 600+ Mosaic Jewish laws, you are correct. None of those laws were ever written in stone and they were all nailed to the cross because they were ceremonial laws that died with Christ's sacrifice. Under the Law, Over the Law, by the Law, through the Law, ..... Every man on earth is expected by God to obey His 10 Commandments that He so dramatically wrote, with His own finger, in Stone ... TWICE. He presented them ... to the world ... as His Eternal Way. There is no getting around it. If you live any other 'Way' ... you are living in sin and separated from God.
Agreed.
And accept His very specific 10 Commandments as His Way.

Jesus is The Way, and The Truth and The Life. God's Stone Commandments are The Way we are to live; it is exactly how Jesus lived and how all are expected to live who will be called brothers and sisters of Christ.
Agreed.
The sinning saint puts himself back under the Law to be judged by it.

The only way to live free from the law and it's judgmental consequences is to walk in the Spirit.

Then, and only then, are the saints free from the Law.

If we are not walking in the Spirit, we are walking in the flesh to be governed by the law.

Gal 5 covers what I am saying.
 

GEN2REV

Well-Known Member
May 12, 2021
3,850
1,436
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But your odd notion that the Olivet Discourse had only to do with the 2nd Coming, and nothing to do with the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem in 70 AD is purely ignorant. Many scholars in history fully recognize that when Jesus said, "Not one stone will remain on another," he was predicting the fall of the temple in 70 AD, in "this generation."
The "this generation" meat of your case is referring to the generation that sees the signs of the end times coming about. That generation will be around to see the end of all things.

The reference to stones is in correlation with Peter's reference to believers being precious stones to God and the fact that they will be separated from one another in the end time; scattered ... throughout the world. And that they will all be thrown down; as were all the Apostles, present with Jesus at that time, thrown down at the end of their lives.

1 Peter 2:4-5
Zechariah 13:7; Matthew 26:31
Matthew 24:2

Jesus often spoke with dual meanings. This event was no exception.

When He spoke of His body, His Temple, being destroyed and raised again in 3 days, many took Him to be speaking of THE Temple which was later destroyed. Clearly, He was referring to His body and the resurrection.

Matthew 27:63; Mark 14:58; Luke 24:46; John 2:19

(As a side note: it is interesting to see here that He claimed that HE would rebuild it - not the Father. Jesus IS the Father and HE, Himself, raised Himself. -Take it or leave it.)
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,690
7,948
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, I'm not a Partial Preterist. You obviously think that believing the AoD was the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem is what defines a Preterist. It doesn't. Your bad. A lot of people think this. Their bad.

Most of the Church Fathers saw the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy of the imminent destruction of Jerusalem. That's precisely what Jesus said. If you don't want to believe that, and call all those who believe that "Preterists," that's your choice. But it isn't true.

As I said, Preterism didn't even exist when the Church Fathers shared their opinions. Believing what Jesus said is not Preterism.

Jesus said the temple would come down "stone by stone" in *his generation.* I believe this, but this doesn't make me a member of a party that came into existence many centuries later.

I get what is said about the temple being destroyed in 70 AD. My question is …was that stone building the focus of Christ or…was it the poor widow that was the focus of Christ? He told them over and over as said the Prophets also that God does not dwell in temples made with hands, so what is the temple of God where is His focus as the Habituation build up for God to dwell there in? His words were a warning that they devour widows houses. Yes the works of their hands He followed up with those works of “temples made with hands” not a stone will be left upon another. But still, what was the true temple they were destroying made without hands if not devouring poor widows houses…shutting up their bowels of compassion where if any shuts up his bowels of compassion then how does the love of God dwell in him?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I get what is said about the temple being destroyed in 70 AD. My question is …was that stone building the focus of Christ or…was it the poor widow that was the focus of Christ? He told them over and over as said the Prophets also that God does not dwell in temples made with hands, so what is the temple of God where is His focus as the Habituation build up for God to dwell there in? His words were a warning that they devour widows houses. Yes the works of their hands He followed up with those works of “temples made with hands” not a stone will be left upon another. But still, what was the true temple they were destroying made without hands if not devouring poor widows houses…shutting up their bowels of compassion where if any shuts up his bowels of compassion then how does the love of God dwell in him?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

You're right to bring the poor widow in to bring understanding to the passage, but I don't see Jesus' depreciation of the temple as an actual *invalidation* of the temple worship. After all, God established the temple worship, and it would be inconsistent for him to depreciate something he had already set up and valued. So what did he mean?

Jesus was saying that if temple worship isn't done properly, such as in showing respect for sincere giving, then the temple worship is nothing more than a façade. It is just a stone building with no heart, and not like the widow had when she gave even a little bit.

There is no question that God doesn't fit within a temple, and make His existence with Israel contingent upon Him remaining in a temple. He's not going anywhere--not even if the covenant is broken, and the temple destroyed. God is everywhere, and His grace remains in effect even without the covenant of Law, and even without the temple building.

So Jesus is himself God's true temple from heaven, and he came down to outlast the temple worship, to bring about a worship that lasts forever. The temple worship was only there temporarily until he could come and provide better sacrifices that atone for man's sins forever.

The temple sacrifices could not accomplish that, but could only "hold the fort" temporarily. Once Israel failed under the Law, a new system was required that would save only those who truly wished to take worship seriously. And Israel would be rebuilt only on true worshipers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,690
7,948
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I get what is said about the temple being destroyed in 70 AD. My question is …was that stone building the focus of Christ or…was it the poor widow that was the focus of Christ? He told them over and over as said the Prophets also that God does not dwell in temples made with hands, so what is the temple of God where is His focus as the Habituation build up for God to dwell there in? His words were a warning that they devour widows houses. Yes the works of their hands He followed up with those works of “temples made with hands” not a stone will be left upon another. But still, what was the true temple they were destroying made without hands if not devouring poor widows houses…shutting up their bowels of compassion where if any shuts up his bowels of compassion then how does the love of God dwell in him?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

“But he spoke of the temple of his body” for Acts 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

so again I am questioning what was the temple of God being turned into merchandise, what temple become a den of thieves? Mark 11:15-21 And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; [16] And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple. [17] And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves. [18] And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine. [19] And when even was come, he went out of the city. [20] And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. [21] And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.

what does the parade show withers? Is it buildings or His body? And why do we get pumped when Jesus Christ performs the miracle of restoring the withered hand …in “stretch forth thy hand” and that which was withered was restored whole again…but we are not so pumped when in the parable that which is withered up can also be made whole again by the Power of God?

John 2:15-17 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; [16] And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise. [17] And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.
Again what is being “eaten up”? What is the topic of shall “they with feigned words make merchandise of you,His body…which unless I’ve misunderstood is the temple of God.
2 Peter 2:1-3 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. (Destruction upon an building?) [2] And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. [3] And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

to make “merchandise of you” is that the same as making merchandise of The temple of God, 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? [17] If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

Making it a den of thieves and not the House of prayer? For “they have eaten me up” …careful for they devour poor widows houses.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,792
2,443
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I've had the problem of being called a Preterist in more than one discussion forum. And it's because with the prevalence of Futurism in Christian Eschatology, some of the older views have been lost and are now being confused with Preterism.

Preterism refers to interpreting prophecy in the past. But not all prophecy, interpreted as past, is Preterism. Many make this error today. Particularly, when someone interprets the Olivet Discourse as applicable to Jesus' generation, they are thought to be Preterists. But this is not necessarily true. Preterists hold to this position, but so do Historicist interpreters.

I am a Historicist interpreter with respect to this aspect of the Olivet Discourse, that the Abomination of Desolation was the Roman Army come to destroy Jerusalem and the temple. My believing this does *not* make me a Preterist, no matter how many times someone says this or claims this. If I believe that the Olivet Discourse also includes future prophecy, then I'm *not* a Preterist.

Holding to the historical fulfillment of the AoD in 70 AD is not Preterism, unless one is actually a Preterist. And I'm *not* a Preterist. I only agree with them on that one point. I believe the Great Tribulation is not just the 70 AD destruction of the temple, but also the continuing tribulation of the Jewish People down through the ages. It is the NT Jewish Diaspora, which Jesus said would last until he comes again.

These facts make me *not* a Preterist, no matter how many times one wishes to call me that. They wish to avoid, apparently, the idea that one can interpret the AoD as past, as fulfilled in 70 AD, and just rely on name-calling to dismiss this historically-validated position.

Many scholars in history, and most of the Church Fathers, held to this position. They may have had some disagreement about what precisely the AoD was, but they all interpreted this as fulfilled in and around 70 AD. It is *not* Preterism, and continuing to call me that is purely an escape from the real issues.

Jesus was plainly focused, in his Olivet Discourse, upon the fall of the temple, and only mentioned his 2nd Coming as a backdrop to the concern of the failure of the Covenant of Law. He plainly said every stone will be brought down, completely destroying the temple forever. He said he would come back only after a long period in which Israel would be without their covenant with God. They would, however, still have their eternal hope with God, their eternal promises given them by God.

Many think the "great" tribulation is called "great" because it is the worst war in history, or the worst generation. In fact, it is called the "worst" in history because it lasts many, many generations--longer than any previous period of judgment in Israel's history. It will seem to end Israel's hope of salvation entirely, although Christ will come back to save the nation.

The AoD has no reference to Antichrist whatsoever, and is fulfilled in Jesus' own generation, as he said. The Antichrist isn't even mentioned there. The AoD refers back to Dan 9, where Daniel speaks of the fall of both Jerusalem and the temple by the "people of the ruler to come," ie the Roman Army.

This is highly significant in Jesus' ministry, because it is here that he declares the end of Israel's exclusivity in the world, and the end of their exclusive form of worship under the Law. It spells the complete end of their temporary temple system, which had been perennially conditioned on Israel's faithfulness as a people. But Moses knew that in the end Israel would fail. You can read that back in the closing chapters of Deuteronomy.