the great Jewish "distress"

[Truth7t7]

I don't think you know what you're talking about. I was referring to Historical Interpretation, which recognizes prophecies that have already been fulfilled. This I'm distinguishing from "Historicism" as a system of interpretation, which can be confused with how some Christians in history have interpreted the Antichrist, for example, as the RCC.

I interpret the Abomination of Desolation as the Roman Army, which destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. I don't know of any Christian scholars who would deny this, just as they would not deny that Jesus already came and fulfilled prophecy by dying on the cross.

However, I view myself as a Futurist, because I believe the book of Revelation largely refers to a future, as yet unknown Antichrist, who will preside over 10 nations which have emerged out of the former Roman Empire.



That may be true, but it fails to distinguish between Preterism, of any kind, and Historical Interpretations of Prophecy that are not Preterism of any kind. I already explained this to you. Preterists interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. Partial Preterists accept that a few things are still future, in particular Christ's 2nd Coming.

I do not interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. I interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in a future Antichrist. I explained that to you. If you have trouble understanding that, then you don't really understand the peculiarities of these schools of interpretation.

Don't try to fit me into a particular school unless you know how they differ from one another. The respectful way is to learn first, and then proclaim something--not the reverse order.

Teaching that the AOD in Matthew 24:15 took place in the 66-70AD destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman Armies gains the tag of Preterism, because the AOD is a "Future" event unfulfilled

Matthee 24:15KJV
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

You state you believe "Most" of the book of Revelation is future, what parts have been fulfilled?

Daniel 9:24-27 represents a "Future" human man, that will cause "Abomination & Desolation" up to the very end "Consummation"

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummatingthe consummation of a contract by mutual signaturespecifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end : FINISH

Daniel 9:27KJV
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.

 

[Truth7t7]

I don't think you know what you're talking about. I was referring to Historical Interpretation, which recognizes prophecies that have already been fulfilled. This I'm distinguishing from "Historicism" as a system of interpretation, which can be confused with how some Christians in history have interpreted the Antichrist, for example, as the RCC.

I interpret the Abomination of Desolation as the Roman Army, which destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. I don't know of any Christian scholars who would deny this, just as they would not deny that Jesus already came and fulfilled prophecy by dying on the cross.

However, I view myself as a Futurist, because I believe the book of Revelation largely refers to a future, as yet unknown Antichrist, who will preside over 10 nations which have emerged out of the former Roman Empire.



That may be true, but it fails to distinguish between Preterism, of any kind, and Historical Interpretations of Prophecy that are not Preterism of any kind. I already explained this to you. Preterists interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. Partial Preterists accept that a few things are still future, in particular Christ's 2nd Coming.

I do not interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. I interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in a future Antichrist. I explained that to you. If you have trouble understanding that, then you don't really understand the peculiarities of these schools of interpretation.

Don't try to fit me into a particular school unless you know how they differ from one another. The respectful way is to learn first, and then proclaim something--not the reverse order.

You state you believe "Most" of the book of Revelation is future, what parts have been fulfilled?

 

[Truth7t7]

The Church Fathers, as I understand them, believed that the AoD took place in the 66-70 AD destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman Armies, and were *not* Preterists! This is historical interpretation, and many non-Preterist Christian scholars have believed this. If you just want to call me a Preterist you won't get away with it with me.

By all means, please give citation of these early church fathers, that you claim believed Matthew 24:15, and Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled in the 66-70AD Jerusalem Destruction By Roman Armies, "Waiting"?

 

[Randy Kluth]

By all means, please give citation of these early church fathers, that you claim believed Matthew 24:15, and Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled in the 66-70AD Jerusalem Destruction By Roman Armies, "Waiting"?

This tells me you know nothing and want me to do all your work for you. Go ahead and spout false things. It's plain to me you don't know the difference between Preterism and Historical Interpretation.

Here's a sample:

Here Tertullian is explaining his belief from Dan 9, the "70th Week" prophecy. And he interprets it together with the Olivet Discourse in the sense that the Jews are being punished in 70 AD due to their rejection of Christ. This is a common theme among the Church Fathers.

Tertullian (c. 160-225) An Answer to the Jews: Chap. XIII.--Argument from the Destruction of Jerusalem and Desolation of Judea.
For, after His advent, we read, according to Daniel, that the city itself had to be exterminated; and we recognize that so it has befallen. For the Scripture says thus, that “the city and the holy place are simultaneously exterminated together with the leader,” —undoubtedly (that Leader) who was to proceed “from Bethlehem,” and from the tribe of “Judah.” Whence, again, it is manifest that “the city must simultaneously be exterminated” at the time when its “Leader” had to suffer in it, (as foretold) through the Scriptures of the prophets... Since, therefore, the Jews were predicted as destined to suffer these calamities on Christ’s account, and we find that they have suffered them, and see them sent into dispersion and abiding in it, manifest it is that it is on Christ’s account that these things have befallen the Jews, the sense of the Scriptures harmonizing with the issue of events and of the order of the times.

Clement also viewed the prophecy of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse as one, seeing in them the earthly ministry of Jesus, followed by the destruction of Jerusalem. Clement had some particularities about his interpretation, which I would disagree with, but the point is, the Church Fathers generally held to this historical fulfillment of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse in the earthly ministry of Jesus, followed by the fall of Jerusalem. It was an historical interpretation, making the "abomination of desolation" connected to the fall of Jerusalem, and not to the Antichrist.

Clement of Alexandria The Stromata, Book 1, Chap. XXI (c. A.D. 190)
From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel the prophet as follows: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people.. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week the sacrifice and oblation shall be taken away; and in the holy place shall be the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time shall the consummation be assigned for desolation. And in the midst of the week shall he make the incense of sacrifice cease, and of the wing of destruction, even till the consummation, like the destruction of the oblation." That the temple accordingly was built in seven weeks, is evident; for it is written in Esdras. And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, "the Holy of Holies," having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father.
In those "sixty and two weeks," as the prophet said, and "in the one week," was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.

Origen also viewed an historical fulfillment of Daniel's 70 Weeks prophecy.

Origen, De Principiis, Book IV: Chap. 1, Sec. 5 (c. A.D. 225)
The weeks of years, also, which the prophet Daniel had predicted, extending to the leadership of Christ, have been fulfilled.

Athanasius likewise combined Dan 9 and the destruction of Jerusalem to Jesus' proclamation of the destruction of Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse. And like all of the other Church Fathers, the point made was that the Jews should've recognized their Messiah, since Jerusalem was destroyed right after Christ was crucified.

Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) On the Incarnation of the Word, Sec. 39. XXXIX.
Do you look for another ? But Daniel foretells the exact time....
" Seventy 1 weeks are cut short upon thy people, and
" upon the holy city...
Where not only is the Christ referred to, but he that is...

...to be anointed is declared to be not man simply, but the
Holy of Holies; and Jerusalem is to stand till his
coming, and thenceforth, prophets and vision cease in
Israel.
XL.
Argument (1) from the withdrawal of prophecy and destruction
of Jerusalem, (2) from the conversion of the Gentiles, and
that to the God of Moses. What more remains for the
Messiah to do, that Christ had not done ?

So the Jews are trifling, and the time in question,
which they refer to the future, is actually come. For
when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, save when
Christ came, the Holy of Holies ? For it is a sign, and
an important proof, of the coming of the Word of God,
that Jerusalem no longer stands, nor is any prophet
raised up nor vision revealed to them and that very
naturally.

John Chrysostom (c. 347-407) Homilies on Matthew Homily XLIII
Because what things befell them in the time of Vespasian and Titus, were very far more grievous than those. Wherefore also He said, "There shall be great tribulation, such as never was, neither shall be."
What then did He after these things? Since they were not willing to come, yea and also slew those that came unto them; He burns up their cities, and sent His armies and slew them.
LXIX
And these things He saith, declaring beforehand the things that took place under Vespasian and Titus, and that they provoked the father also, by not believing in Him; it is the father at any rate who was avenging.
And for this reason let me add, not straightway after Christ was slain did the capture take place, but after forty years, that He might show His long suffering, when they had slain Stephen, when they had put James to death, when they had spitefully entreated the apostles.

Augustine of Hippo, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, Book XII:44 (c. A.D. 390)
44. The same Saviour is spoken of in Daniel, where the Son of man appears before the Ancient of days, and receives a kingdom without end, that all nations may serve Him. Daniel 7:13-14 In the passage quoted from Daniel by the Lord Himself, "When you shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, let him that reads understand," Matthew 24:15 the number of weeks points not only to Christ, but to the very time of His advent. With the Jews, who look to Christ for salvation as we do, but deny that He has come and suffered, we can argue from actual events. Besides the conversion of the heathen, now so universal, as prophesied of Christ in their own Scriptures, there are the events in the history of the Jews themselves. Their holy place is thrown down, the sacrifice has ceased, and the priest, and the ancient anointing; which was all clearly foretold by Daniel when he prophesied of the anointing of the Most Holy.

There are others. I would add that Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and perhaps a few others, held to the idea that the AoD would be the future Antichrist. But generally, all the Church Fathers saw the importance of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse in showing the superiority of Christianity over fallen Judaism, indicated by the fall of Jerusalem and by the destruction of the temple. This was an historical fulfillment, notwithstanding some elements of futurist interpretation.

 

[Truth7t7]

This tells me you know nothing and want me to do all your work for you. Go ahead and spout false things. It's plain to me you don't know the difference between Preterism and Historical Interpretation.

Here's a sample:

Here Tertullian is explaining his belief from Dan 9, the "70th Week" prophecy. And he interprets it together with the Olivet Discourse in the sense that the Jews are being punished in 70 AD due to their rejection of Christ. This is a common theme among the Church Fathers.

Tertullian (c. 160-225) An Answer to the Jews: Chap. XIII.--Argument from the Destruction of Jerusalem and Desolation of Judea.
For, after His advent, we read, according to Daniel, that the city itself had to be exterminated; and we recognize that so it has befallen. For the Scripture says thus, that “the city and the holy place are simultaneously exterminated together with the leader,” —undoubtedly (that Leader) who was to proceed “from Bethlehem,” and from the tribe of “Judah.” Whence, again, it is manifest that “the city must simultaneously be exterminated” at the time when its “Leader” had to suffer in it, (as foretold) through the Scriptures of the prophets... Since, therefore, the Jews were predicted as destined to suffer these calamities on Christ’s account, and we find that they have suffered them, and see them sent into dispersion and abiding in it, manifest it is that it is on Christ’s account that these things have befallen the Jews, the sense of the Scriptures harmonizing with the issue of events and of the order of the times.

Clement also viewed the prophecy of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse as one, seeing in them the earthly ministry of Jesus, followed by the destruction of Jerusalem. Clement had some particularities about his interpretation, which I would disagree with, but the point is, the Church Fathers generally held to this historical fulfillment of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse in the earthly ministry of Jesus, followed by the fall of Jerusalem. It was an historical interpretation, making the "abomination of desolation" connected to the fall of Jerusalem, and not to the Antichrist.

Clement of Alexandria The Stromata, Book 1, Chap. XXI (c. A.D. 190)
From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel the prophet as follows: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people.. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week the sacrifice and oblation shall be taken away; and in the holy place shall be the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time shall the consummation be assigned for desolation. And in the midst of the week shall he make the incense of sacrifice cease, and of the wing of destruction, even till the consummation, like the destruction of the oblation." That the temple accordingly was built in seven weeks, is evident; for it is written in Esdras. And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, "the Holy of Holies," having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father.
In those "sixty and two weeks," as the prophet said, and "in the one week," was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.

Origen also viewed an historical fulfillment of Daniel's 70 Weeks prophecy.

Origen, De Principiis, Book IV: Chap. 1, Sec. 5 (c. A.D. 225)
The weeks of years, also, which the prophet Daniel had predicted, extending to the leadership of Christ, have been fulfilled.

Athanasius likewise combined Dan 9 and the destruction of Jerusalem to Jesus' proclamation of the destruction of Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse. And like all of the other Church Fathers, the point made was that the Jews should've recognized their Messiah, since Jerusalem was destroyed right after Christ was crucified.

Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) On the Incarnation of the Word, Sec. 39. XXXIX.
Do you look for another ? But Daniel foretells the exact time....
" Seventy 1 weeks are cut short upon thy people, and
" upon the holy city...
Where not only is the Christ referred to, but he that is...

...to be anointed is declared to be not man simply, but the
Holy of Holies; and Jerusalem is to stand till his
coming, and thenceforth, prophets and vision cease in
Israel.
XL.
Argument (1) from the withdrawal of prophecy and destruction
of Jerusalem, (2) from the conversion of the Gentiles, and
that to the God of Moses. What more remains for the
Messiah to do, that Christ had not done ?

So the Jews are trifling, and the time in question,
which they refer to the future, is actually come. For
when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, save when
Christ came, the Holy of Holies ? For it is a sign, and
an important proof, of the coming of the Word of God,
that Jerusalem no longer stands, nor is any prophet
raised up nor vision revealed to them and that very
naturally.

John Chrysostom (c. 347-407) Homilies on Matthew Homily XLIII
Because what things befell them in the time of Vespasian and Titus, were very far more grievous than those. Wherefore also He said, "There shall be great tribulation, such as never was, neither shall be."
What then did He after these things? Since they were not willing to come, yea and also slew those that came unto them; He burns up their cities, and sent His armies and slew them.
LXIX
And these things He saith, declaring beforehand the things that took place under Vespasian and Titus, and that they provoked the father also, by not believing in Him; it is the father at any rate who was avenging.
And for this reason let me add, not straightway after Christ was slain did the capture take place, but after forty years, that He might show His long suffering, when they had slain Stephen, when they had put James to death, when they had spitefully entreated the apostles.

Augustine of Hippo, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, Book XII:44 (c. A.D. 390)
44. The same Saviour is spoken of in Daniel, where the Son of man appears before the Ancient of days, and receives a kingdom without end, that all nations may serve Him. Daniel 7:13-14 In the passage quoted from Daniel by the Lord Himself, "When you shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, let him that reads understand," Matthew 24:15 the number of weeks points not only to Christ, but to the very time of His advent. With the Jews, who look to Christ for salvation as we do, but deny that He has come and suffered, we can argue from actual events. Besides the conversion of the heathen, now so universal, as prophesied of Christ in their own Scriptures, there are the events in the history of the Jews themselves. Their holy place is thrown down, the sacrifice has ceased, and the priest, and the ancient anointing; which was all clearly foretold by Daniel when he prophesied of the anointing of the Most Holy.

There are others. I would add that Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and perhaps a few others, held to the idea that the AoD would be the future Antichrist. But generally, all the Church Fathers saw the importance of Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse in showing the superiority of Christianity over fallen Judaism, indicated by the fall of Jerusalem and by the destruction of the temple. This was an historical fulfillment, notwithstanding some elements of futurist interpretation.

Thanks for the response!

Once Again, To Believe Matthew 24:15 In The AOD Being Fulfilled Is In The (Partial Preterist Camp) Your Unaware Of Its Definition

Clement and Origen were heretics, and maintained false doctrines later known as Arianism to mention one

Your quote of Athanasius dosent hint at a correlation to Daniel

Your quotes of John Chrysostom, and Augistine of Hippo do teach a direct association

Justin Martyr, Iranaeus and Hippolytus taught the revealing of the Antichrist and Daniels Abomination was future from their 2nd, and 3rd century lives, showing 66-70AD fulfillment false

Once again, thanks for the response

 

[Truth7t7]

This tells me you know nothing and want me to do all your work for you. Go ahead and spout false things. It's plain to me you don't know the difference between Preterism and Historical Interpretation.

Randy Jerusalem Being Surrounded By Armies And Tread Underfoot By The Gentiles Is A Future Event, That Preceeds The Future AOD

Revelation 11:1-2 Of John Below Was Written In 95AD, 25 Years "After" The Claims Of 70AD Fulfillment, Luke 21:24 Shows This To Be The Same Event, And Also Seen In The Olivet Discourse, As They Are All "Parallel" Teachings Of The Exact Same "Future" Event

(Luke) 21:24KJV
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

(Revelation) 11:1-2KJV
1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

The Testimony Of The Early Church Fathers Below, Would Show Emperor Domitian's Reign 81-96AD That Puts Preterism's 66-70AD Fulfillment In "The Waste Basket"

Wikipedia: Domitian (/dəˈmɪʃən, -iən/; Latin: Domitianus; 24 October 51 – 18 September 96) was Roman emperor from 81 to 96. He was the son of Vespasian and the younger brother of Titus

THE ARGUMENTS FOR AN A.D. 95 AUTHORSHIP

The evidence for the Book of Revelation being written in A.D. 95 includes-

Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30).

The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42)

Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

 

[Oseas]

This tells me you know nothing and want me to do all your work for you. Go ahead and spout false things. It's plain to me you don't know the difference between Preterism and Historical Interpretation.

Here's a sample:
Here Tertullian is explaining his belief from Dan 9, the "70th Week" prophecy. And he interprets it together with the Olivet Discourse in the sense that the Jews are being punished in 70 AD due to their rejection of Christ. This is a common theme among the Church Fathers.

Why are you accusing others of writting false interpretation of Scriptures. You should look for you yourself, your above post is full of false interpretations not from you, in fact you are spreading historical false interpretations because you believe in lies, it because you received the spirit of ancient men liars and you preach their tares here or elsewhere, by their liar spirit.

- Around two thousand years ago - See the birthplace of Antichrist
1 John 2:v.19
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Very interesting this revelation of the Apostle John of the primitive Church. Who is the Apostle John talking about or to whom is he referring in the verse above? Do you know?

See, we know that the book of Revelation was showed to John around year 95 AD, i.e. 65 years after the ascension of JESUS to the third heaven. And we know also that there are two distinct Beasts described in Revelation 13:v. 1 to 18. Today, after about 2,000 years, we can and should discern both Beasts will lead two distinct satanic religious systems in near future, but one, the FIRST Man Beast, he already exists, the another has not come yet, but he will manifest in near future.

In fact one already exists since ancient time, it has existed for about two thousand years, that is, the Beast of sea, a satanic religious system developed by Satan within the Roman Empire, after he had corrupted the church of Rome that was established by the Apostles Peter and Paul, both were killed by persecution, and thus was developed satanic Antichrist's movements through the corrupt church of Rome, the Catholic Church. Notice that Revelation describes 7 churches, and the church of Rome would be the eighth, but it was left out because the church of Rome was already completely disapproved by JESUS. When Jesus sent his angel to John on the island of Patmos around 65 years after his ascension, in fact an archangel, at that time the church of Rome had completely apostatized, it was no longer part of the body of Christ, which is why JESUS directed messages only to seven churches in Asia, the church of Rome would have been the eighth if it had not apostatized.

In fact, the church or Rome developed a systematic opposition against to the Churches of the Lord that preached the Gospel of God's Kingdom, preached firstly by the Lord JESUS Christ, and continued by the Apostles and disciples of the Lord, by the way, it is preached yet until today.
The satanic religious structures and organizations of the Roman Catholic Church within the Roman Empire, which rides upon the Beast of sea, the Pope, since the confuse election of the first Pope in the first century after Christ, who can be Linus or ClEMENT, and for to increase the confuse election of whom really is the first Pope, the own Satan, the main leader of the blasphemer movement of Antichrist of the Roman Catholic Church, he himself, time after, from the late 2nd or early 3rd century the convention began of regarding Peter as the first pope. Its more a satanic blasphemy.

Again: About the events above described, and the corruption of the Church of Rome, the Word of GOD reveals by the VISUAL testimony of Apostle John: 1 John 2:v.18-21
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
19 They (the Church of Rome) went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.
21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

What we can say is that the woman, that is the Babylonian Roman Catholic Church, married to 266 Popes, currently Francis I is the Pope, she sits upon the scarlet colored Man Beast of sea, the Pope, the Papacy - from the Latin expression Pater Patrum - , full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns, reason by which the RCC is called Babylon The Great, The Mother Of Harlots And Abominations Of The Earth, which is drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.


THE PUNISHMENT OF THE ANCIENT AND CORRUPT CHURCH OF ROME FROM NOW ON - THE WORD IS GOD
Revelation 18:v. 1 to 5
1 And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.

The Word is God

 

[Randy Kluth]

Thanks for the response!
Once Again, To Believe Matthew 24:15 In The AOD Being Fulfilled Is In The (Partial Preterist Camp) Your Unaware Of Its Definition

I've explained this to you, indicating I have a good awareness of the definition of PP. I have good friends in the PP camp., and they know I'm *not* PP! Brother, it is *you* who don't understand PP, in its differentiation from my position. I hold to a future Antichrist, and PP most often does not (there are rare exceptions).

Clement and Origen were heretics, and maintained false doctrines later known as Arianism to mention one

I'm aware that a good number of Christians assign the label "heretic" to Origen and others. However, they are Church Fathers. Origen was one of the most dedicated and most prolific Christian authors in history. He obviously would hit some areas that are questionable, and difficult, and would misrepresent the orthodox Christian position of today. I think most of us have made mistakes. Hindsight is 20 20 right?

Your quote of Athanasius dosent hint at a correlation to Daniel

I saved space by not quoting the whole thing. You do the work, brother, instead of putting it all on me! I gave you the reference. Here's a fuller quote:

Athenasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) On the Incarnation of the Word, Sec. 39. XXXIX.

Do you look for another ? But Daniel foretells the exact time.
Objections to this removed.

But perhaps, being unable, even they, to fight con-
tinually against plain facts, they will, without denying
what is written, maintain that they are looking for these
things, and that the Word of God is not yet come.
For this it is on which they are for ever harping, not
blushing to brazen it out in the face of plain facts.
2. But on this one point, above all, they shall be all
the more refuted, not at our hands, but at those of
the most wise Daniel, who marks both the actual
date, and the divine sojourn of the Saviour, saying :
" Seventy 1 weeks are cut short upon thy people, and
" upon the holy city, for a full end to be made of sin,
" and for sins to be sealed up, and to blot out iniquities,
" and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring
" everlasting righteousness, and to seal vision and pro-
" phet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies ; and thou shalt
" know and understand from the going forth of the
" word to restore 2 and to build Jerusalem unto Christ
"the Prince." 3. Perhaps with regard to the other
(prophecies) they may be able even to find excuses
and to put off what is written to a future time. But
what can they say to this, or can they face it at all ?
Where not only is the Christ referred to, but he that is...

...to be anointed is declared to be not man simply, but the
Holy of Holies; and Jerusalem is to stand till his
coming, and thenceforth, prophets and vision cease in
Israel. 4. David was anointed of old, and Solomon and
Ezechias ; but then, nevertheless, Jerusalem and the
place stood, and prophets were prophesying, Gad and
Asaph and Nathan, and, later, Esaias and Osee and
Amos and others. And again, the actual men that were
anointed were called holy, and not Holy of Holies. But
if they shield themselves with the captivity, and say that
because of it Jerusalem was not, what can they say about
the prophets too ? For in fact when first the people went
down to Babylon, Daniel and Jeremy were thei-e, and
Ezechiel and Aggams and Zachary were prophesying.

XL.
Argument (1) from the withdrawal of prophecy and destruction
of Jerusalem, (2) from the conversion of the Gentiles, and
that to the God of Moses. What more remains for the
Messiah to do, that Christ had not done ?

So the Jews are trifling, and the time in question,
which they refer to the future, is actually come. For
when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, save when
Christ came, the Holy of Holies ? For it is a sign, and
an important proof, of the coming of the Word of God,
that Jerusalem no longer stands, nor is any prophet
raised up nor vision revealed to them and that very
naturally. 2. For when he that signified was come,
what need was there any longer of any to signify him ?
When the truth was there, what need any more of the
shadow ? For this was the reason of their prophesying

68 Refutation of the Jews.

at all namely, till the true Righteousness should come,
and he that was to ransom the sins of all. And this
was why Jerusalem stood till then namely, that there
they might be exercised in the types as a preparation for
the reality. 3. So when the Holy of Holies was come,
naturally vision and prophecy were sealed and the king
dom of Jerusalem ceased. For kings were to be anointed
among them only until the Holy of Holies should have
been anointed ; and Jacob prophesies that the king
dom of the Jews should be established until him, as
follows : " The ruler 1 shall not fail from Juda, nor the
"Prince from his loins, until that which is laid up for
; him shall come ; and he is the expectation of the
" nations." 4. Whence the Saviour also himself cried
aloud and said : " The 2 law and the prophets prophesied
until John."

But what I had quoted did indeed connect to Dan 9! I don't know how you missed it? The destruction of Jerusalem is stated clearly in Luke 21, and certainly was in Athanasius' mind and thinking, though it doesn't appear to be directly referenced. Instead Dan 9 is connected to the general *time* of Christ's 1st Coming.

Your quotes of John Chrysostom, and Augistine of Hippo do teach a direct association

Justin Martyr, Iranaeus and Hippolytus taught the revealing of the Antichrist and Daniels Abomination was future from their 2nd, and 3rd century lives, showing 66-70AD fulfillment false

Once again, thanks for the response

I didn't know about Justin Martyr's reference--can you give me the quotation or the source? My feeling is that 2 or 3 Church Fathers held a *minority opinion* and cannot prove that the Church Fathers, overall, did not see the AoD as the fall of Jerusalem in 70 or thereabouts.

You're welcome on my providing my proof texts, but I didn't want to. Sometimes others argue without doing the work themselves, expecting me to prove what I believe but proving nothing themselves. That's not proper, as I see it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Why are you accusing others of writting false interpretation of Scriptures. You should look for you yourself, your above post is full of false interpretations not from you, in fact you are spreading historical false interpretations because you believe in lies, it because you received the spirit of ancient men liars and you preach their tares here or elsewhere, by their liar spirit.

That was not my accusation. The brother was not properly representing my system of prophetic interpretation. He is confused about the difference between Partial Preterism and my position. PP interprets the book of Revelation, except for the 2nd Coming, as something that was fulfilled in the Early Church. I do not hold to that position. I believe the book of Revelation is largely about the endtime reign of Antichrist.

- Around two thousand years ago - See the birthplace of Antichrist
1 John 2:v.19
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Very interesting this revelation of the Apostle John of the primitive Church. Who is the Apostle John talking about or to whom is he referring in the verse above? Do you know?

See, we know that the book of Revelation was showed to John around year 95 AD, i.e. 65 years after the ascension of JESUS to the third heaven. And we know also that there are two distinct Beasts described in Revelation 13:v. 1 to 18. Today, after about 2,000 years, we can and should discern both Beasts will lead two distinct satanic religious systems in near future, but one, the FIRST Man Beast, he already exists, the another has not come yet, but he will manifest in near future.

In fact one already exists since ancient time, it has existed for about two thousand years, that is, the Beast of sea, a satanic religious system developed by Satan within the Roman Empire, after he had corrupted the church of Rome that was established by the Apostles Peter and Paul, both were killed by persecution, and thus was developed satanic Antichrist's movements through the corrupt church of Rome, the Catholic Church. Notice that Revelation describes 7 churches, and the church of Rome would be the eighth, but it was left out because the church of Rome was already completely disapproved by JESUS. When Jesus sent his angel to John on the island of Patmos around 65 years after his ascension, in fact an archangel, at that time the church of Rome had completely apostatized, it was no longer part of the body of Christ, which is why JESUS directed messages only to seven churches in Asia, the church of Rome would have been the eighth if it had not apostatized.

I don't see that. 7 churches were addressed, and the RCC had not even come into existence yet.

In fact, the church or Rome developed a systematic opposition against to the Churches of the Lord that preached the Gospel of God's Kingdom, preached firstly by the Lord JESUS Christ, and continued by the Apostles and disciples of the Lord, by the way, it is preached yet until today.
The satanic religious structures and organizations of the Roman Catholic Church within the Roman Empire, which rides upon the Beast of sea, the Pope, since the confuse election of the first Pope in the first century after Christ, who can be Linus or ClEMENT, and for to increase the confuse election of whom really is the first Pope, the own Satan, the main leader of the blasphemer movement of Antichrist of the Roman Catholic Church, he himself, time after, from the late 2nd or early 3rd century the convention began of regarding Peter as the first pope. Its more a satanic blasphemy.

I believe the Catholic Church was a major Christian witness in times before the Reformation. Even when there were bad popes, there were good Christians within that communion. I do believe that the 2nd Beast could be a false pope in the endtimes, trying to lead the RCC into the worship of Antichrist--I just don't know. To date, there are still good Christians within the RCC, even though I find some serious problems with Catholic doctrine.

You're not going to win any Catholics over by bashing them. And it won't even be telling the truth about them. It would be a slanderous accusation. To date, many true Christians are within the Catholic communion. I do agree there are serious damning issues within the Catholic faith. But there exists enough laxity that genuine Christians continue to worship there.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Randy Jerusalem Being Surrounded By Armies And Tread Underfoot By The Gentiles Is A Future Event, That Preceeds The Future AOD

I think most Bible scholars would disagree with you. Consult the commentators.

Revelation 11:1-2 Of John Below Was Written In 95AD, 25 Years "After" The Claims Of 70AD Fulfillment, Luke 21:24 Shows This To Be The Same Event, And Also Seen In The Olivet Discourse, As They Are All "Parallel" Teachings Of The Exact Same "Future" Event

Rev 11 does not contradict Luke 21.24. It is a vision, which is a style of prophecy that can either look forwards or backwards in time.

(Luke) 21:24KJV
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

(Revelation) 11:1-2KJV
1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Both passages show Jerusalem trampled. Rev 11 is looking particularly at the endtimes situation, in which Antichrist rules, without contest, for 3.5 years. Rev 11 is symbolic, since a temple is being measured, and there was, apparently, no more temple in John's time. He knew Jesus said the temple would be destroyed by the Romans, and that apparently had already happened.

The Testimony Of The Early Church Fathers Below, Would Show Emperor Domitian's Reign 81-96AD That Puts Preterism's 66-70AD Fulfillment In "The Waste Basket"

I'm not defending Preterism!

THE ARGUMENTS FOR AN A.D. 95 AUTHORSHIP

I'm not arguing against a 95 AD authorship for Revelation!

 

[Truth7t7]

0p

Rev 11 does not contradict Luke 21.24. It is a vision, which is a style of prophecy that can either look forwards or backwards in time.

Both passages show Jerusalem trampled. Rev 11 is looking particularly at the endtimes situation, in which Antichrist rules, without contest, for 3.5 years. Rev 11 is symbolic, since a temple is being measured, and there was, apparently, no more temple in John's time. He knew Jesus said the temple would be destroyed by the Romans, and that apparently had already happened.



I'm not defending Preterism!



I'm not arguing against a 95 AD authorship for Revelation!

We Will Strongly Disagree, Horse Is Dead

Randy your claim (Revelation) 11:2 is a kind of prophecy looking backwards is "False", as you desperately attempt to keep 70AD fulfillment alive in error

The things which are, equals conditions at the writing of the Revelation, that will shortly come to pass "Future" prophetic

The things which shall be hereafter, equals "Future" events unfulfilled "Prophetic"

(Revelation) 1:1 & 19KJV
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Randy your in "Denial" of the clear fact that Jerusalem being trampled under foot of the gentiles is exactly the same "Future" event as seen in (Luke) 21:24 & (Revelation) 11:2

Randy Jerusalem Being Surrounded By Armies And Tread Underfoot By The Gentiles Is A Future Event, That Preceeds The Future AOD

Revelation 11:1-2 Of John Below Was Written In 95AD, 25 Years "After" The Claims Of 70AD Fulfillment, Luke 21:24 Shows This To Be The Same Event, And Also Seen In The Olivet Discourse, As They Are All "Parallel" Teachings Of The Exact Same "Future" Event

(Luke) 21:24KJV
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

(Revelation) 11:1-2KJV
1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

The Testimony Of The Early Church Fathers Below, Would Show Emperor Domitian's Reign 81-96AD That Puts Preterism's 66-70AD Fulfillment In "The Waste Basket"

Wikipedia: Domitian (/dəˈmɪʃən, -iən/; Latin: Domitianus; 24 October 51 – 18 September 96) was Roman emperor from 81 to 96. He was the son of Vespasian and the younger brother of Titus

THE ARGUMENTS FOR AN A.D. 95 AUTHORSHIP

The evidence for the Book of Revelation being written in A.D. 95 includes-

Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30).

The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42)

Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

 

[Randy Kluth]

0p
We Will Strongly Disagree, Horse Is Dead

Randy your claim (Revelation) 11:2 is a kind of prophecy looking backwards is "False", as you desperately attempt to keep 70AD fulfillment alive in error

If you think I'm "desperate," you're fooling yourself! I'm quite serious about this, and you fail to acknowledge it, to your discredit. Visions, particularly in the apocalyptic genre, are often symbolic and difficult to pin down to literal realities. In the same way, parables Jesus told were difficult to translate into literal realities, and he did this intentionally.

There are terms for this vacancy of time-literalness, such as prolepsis or flashback. If you can't acknowledge that, you won't get my point. Insulting me as "desperate" just clouds the issue. Reverting to "visions" to prove doctrine is often a ruse, covering up what is more plainly spoken as doctrine in the Bible.

Randy Jerusalem Being Surrounded By Armies And Tread Underfoot By The Gentiles Is A Future Event, That Preceeds The Future AOD

You're asserting what you wish to prove. Being incapable of proof without resorting to symbolic visions indicates you have no biblical doctrine to prove your case.

I won't respond to your bizarre insistence on arguing against Preterism or on John's vision dated in the 90s, after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. I've already said I'm not arguing for Preterism, since I'm not either a Preterism or even a Partial Preterist. And I accept the late date for the book of Revelation.

So your insistence on arguing these things is bewildering. In fact you haven't yet acknowledged that I'm not a Preterist, being that I believe the book of Revelation is fulfilled at the end of the age, during the reign of Antichrist. Preterists don't believe that, and yet you insist on inferring that I'm a Preterist.

So brother, unless you want me to call you a "trouble-maker," you should recognize this, and respond to it. Otherwise, that'll be exactly what you are--a trouble-maker. I've given you some very clear answers on your claim that I'm a Preterist and defending the Preterist position. You say a lot of things, but nothing in response to this. So what are you--trouble-maker or good Christian?

 

[Timtofly]

I continue to have a huge problem getting Christians to acknowledge the obvious, that in the Olivet Discourse Jesus focused not on the 2nd Coming as much as on the judgment to come against Israel in his own generation, and that Israel would go through a period of "great tribulation" from 70 AD, when the temple would be destroyed, to the end of the age. We call this the "Jewish Diaspora." Very few seem to be willing to acknowledge this, for the simple reason that modern prophetic circles do not favor that interpretation.

Just to answer your questions--not to settle the matters--I suggest my reasoning follows a general sense from Scriptures that we are not to prognosticate too much about the future, particularly when that may be obscuring what God is telling us to do now.

Deut 18. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.

Acts 1. 7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority."

There is a tendency, sometimes, for people to want prophecy to be all about distant future events, so as to ignore what God is saying today.

Eze 12. 21 The word of the Lord came to me: 22 “Son of man, what is this proverb you have in the land of Israel: ‘The days go by and every vision comes to nothing’? 23 Say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am going to put an end to this proverb, and they will no longer quote it in Israel.’ Say to them, ‘The days are near when every vision will be fulfilled. 24 For there will be no more false visions or flattering divinations among the people of Israel. 25 But I the Lord will speak what I will, and it shall be fulfilled without delay. For in your days, you rebellious people, I will fulfill whatever I say, declares the Sovereign Lord .’ ”

And I think this fits well in the context of Jesus' Olivet Discourse in which some may have relegated his warning about the fall of Jerusalem to some distant, future generation, rather than something of immediate consequence, requiring immediate preparation. Jesus' Disciples were looking more to the Messianic coming at the end of the age than to the intervening judgment coming against Jerusalem and Jewish religion. They were looking for Israel's salvation even though Israel was presently ripe for judgment due to their hidden sin.

So I'm not surprised that when Jesus spoke of the fall of the temple that his Disciples immediately looked at a future outcome, as opposed to something more immediate that they had trouble grasping. Jesus clearly said all this would take place, ie the fall of the temple and its preliminary signs, in "this generation." Jesus did not ignore the question about his 2nd Coming, but he seemed to place it in the category of future expectation that provided a larger context, but not an explicit time frame.

Jesus seemed to focus the sense of his coming on a more imminent kind of divine coming in judgment in his own generation, destroying the temple, the city of Jerusalem, and producing an age-long period of judgment for the Jews until the time when Messiah would restore Israel. In the 3 synoptic Gospels, we see the same fall of the temple predicted in "this generation." And all 3 versions produce the exact same order of Jesus' address:

1) The temple will literally be destroyed.
2) Christians will be hated, Israel's religion will "grow cold," ignoring the Gospel testimony, and Jewish believers will have to endure for salvation.
3) The Jewish People will endure great tribulation, an age-long punishment.
4) The Abomination of Desolation, from Dan 9.26-27, or the desolation of the City and the Sanctuary.
5) The Jewish believers will flee to the mountains.
6) The temple will fall in "this generation."

Matt 24. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
...9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains...
21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again...
34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Mark 13. 2 “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.” ...
12 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 13 Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.
14 “When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
15 Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out....
18 Pray that this will not take place in winter, 19 because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again.
...30 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Luke 21. 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”
12 “But before all this, they will seize you and persecute you. They will hand you over to synagogues and put you in prison, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name. 13 And so you will bear testimony to me. 14 But make up your mind not to worry beforehand how you will defend yourselves. 15 For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict. 16 You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers and sisters, relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death. 17 Everyone will hate you because of me. 18 But not a hair of your head will perish. 19 Stand firm, and you will win life.
20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near.
21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city.
22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!
There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled...
32 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

I say all this to make the point that the "abomination of desolation" mentioned in Matt 24 and Mark 13 are sandwiched between #2 and #5, between the condition of Israel and of the Jewish Church and the need for believers to flee to the mountains. And in Luke 21 Luke uses a reference to Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, in place of the "abomination of desolation," again sandwiched between #2 and #5.

This for me positively identifies the AoD with the Roman encirclement of Jerusalem in 66-70 AD. It was after 66 AD that Jewish believers fled to Pella in the mountains. And it was directly before the Romans came to encircle Jerusalem that God found unbelieving Israel to be out of compliance with their covenant with God, their religion growing cold, and their turning to persecute believers in Jesus.

Therefore, this Address is all about a prophetic judgment Jesus was proclaiming against Israel in the same vein that the Prophets before him declared an imminent judgment upon Israel for their sins, when the Babylonians were about to destroy Jerusalem.

You dwell on 1/3 of the questions and ignore the other 2/3. No one is prognosticating how Jesus would answer. We can only point out the answers in relation to the 3 questions.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You dwell on 1/3 of the questions and ignore the other 2/3. No one is prognosticating how Jesus would answer. We can only point out the answers in relation to the 3 questions.

No, I haven't ignored the time of the coming of the Kingdom. Jesus relegated that to the indefinite future so as to focus on the more immediate event facing his own generation and his own people.

That indicates his priority, that we deal, 1st of all, with right now, leaving the unfolding of future events, and their timing, to God. The fact you want to focus on future events, and guess about them and when they will happen, reflects the problem I think most futurists have, which is the temptation to focus on the wrong things, to guess, to speculate, to predict--the very things Jesus tried to get his disciples to avoid. Stop it!

The big thing about Jesus' coming back and coming Kingdom is that it is the goal that drives us now. But it is what we're doing now that will get us there, right? We have to navigate through the problems that beset us and divert us today, and let God worry about the future.

 

[David in NJ]

Scripture is not confined to this train of thought = Matthew 24 pertains only to the nation Israel = false

I heard a Pastor preach on the radio that ( exact words from the pastor) "Matthew 24: 1-4 does not apply to the Church because we won't be here and therefore we cannot be deceived as Jesus warned the Disciples."

Well that pastor and all who believe this are deceived/confused already and need to repent for such teaching violates clear commands from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself and the teachings/writings of the Apostles.

There is no pre-trib rapture of the Church - This is a deception/error that the Apostle Paul clearly refuted in 1 Thessalonians and 2Thessalonians.

Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you will not grieve like the rest, who are without hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him. By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise. After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.
Therefore encourage one another with these words. 1 Thess 4:13-18

 

[Timtofly]

I'm submitting this in a more comprehensible form, which is only possible when I'm not trying to unravel other views at the same time as stating my own views.

This is the order taking place in the Olivet Discourse:
1) The sins of Israel, leading to the 70 AD end of Jerusalem, and an age-long Jewish punishment--the Great Tribulation (not the reign of Antichrist, but rather, Israel's NT punishment).

2) The sins precede the judgments God brings against Israel, which are first warnings, and then full-scale judgment. First there are wars, earthquakes, famines, and pestilences as "early warning" signs of the impending destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

And then there is the destruction of Jerusalem and an age-long Jewish diaspora. The exposure of Israel's sins, along with these "early warning" signs anticipate the full-fledged destruction of Israel's covenant with God and their age-long judgment. They won't be restored until the end of the age.

3) Matthew indicates that the "birth pains" will consist of these "early warning" judgments, accompanied by sins which will "then" or "at that time" be recognized as the precipitators of these warning judgments.

The sins of Israel continue well past the time of the "birth pangs," leading to Jerusalem's demise. But they initially appear contemporaneous with the "early warning" judgments to explain why Jerusalem is soon to be judged.

The "birth pains" themselves consist of things, like "wars," that continue well beyond the judgment of Jerusalem in 70 AD. But they specifically exist in Israel before 70 AD as a warning that the destruction of Jerusalem is soon to happen. And they explain why it will happen.

"Wars and rumors of wars" cease to be "early warning" signs, or "birth pangs," after they have led to the destruction of Jerusalem. But they continue on throughout history, for other reasons, validating Israel's continuing diaspora, or their punishment called, the "Great Tribulation."

I guess this birth pain symbolism was in another thread, but it just shows a time of sorrow and pain, very generic in the OD. The earth has had this pain since the fall when Adam brought sin into the world. According the the 4th commandment, 6 days shalt thou labor. 6000 years of labor pains, this earth has been groaning under. Of course human labor is not usually connected with female birth agony, but their roots are the same.

"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

"And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

Adam would rule over the woman, and in the same curse, the earth would rule over man, because it would never be tamed, nor stop groaning in travail because of sin.

So the beginning of sorrow in the OD, is not really anything new, nor a good indication of a time stamp. Now with modern technology, we may think we have earth tamed. So when God removes all technology at the 6th Seal is that before or after Satan and the FP set up the AoD?

 

[Timtofly]

The "birth pains" themselves consist of things, like "wars," that continue well beyond the judgment of Jerusalem in 70 AD. But they specifically exist in Israel before 70 AD as a warning that the destruction of Jerusalem is soon to happen. And they explain why it will happen.

How many nations or empires were at war in the first century?

 

[Timtofly]

I don't think you know what you're talking about. I was referring to Historical Interpretation, which recognizes prophecies that have already been fulfilled. This I'm distinguishing from "Historicism" as a system of interpretation, which can be confused with how some Christians in history have interpreted the Antichrist, for example, as the RCC.

I interpret the Abomination of Desolation as the Roman Army, which destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. I don't know of any Christian scholars who would deny this, just as they would not deny that Jesus already came and fulfilled prophecy by dying on the cross.

However, I view myself as a Futurist, because I believe the book of Revelation largely refers to a future, as yet unknown Antichrist, who will preside over 10 nations which have emerged out of the former Roman Empire.



That may be true, but it fails to distinguish between Preterism, of any kind, and Historical Interpretations of Prophecy that are not Preterism of any kind. I already explained this to you. Preterists interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. Partial Preterists accept that a few things are still future, in particular Christ's 2nd Coming.

I do not interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in ancient Rome. I interpret most of Revelation as fulfilled in a future Antichrist. I explained that to you. If you have trouble understanding that, then you don't really understand the peculiarities of these schools of interpretation.

Don't try to fit me into a particular school unless you know how they differ from one another. The respectful way is to learn first, and then proclaim something--not the reverse order.

Except they did not flee because of the AoD. That is a proven historical fact. They fled in 66 AD because of the surrounding Roman armies approaching. One does not have to manufacture a fake AoD to prove a fake historical point. No one fled in 70AD. They were slaughtered or became slaves. The point of fleeing was accomplished, or so we are told by Josephus himself, who also never mentioned the AoD when it came to 70AD. And Josephus also gave us the original AoD that Jesus mentioned in the OD that had already occurred, Antiochus Epiphanies. Do you think Jesus already knew that many would read both Daniel and Josephus eventually?

One can also see the need to flee here:

"And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. If any man have an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints."

"And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live."

This image will also be the AoD and AC. The FP will cause the saints to flee Jerusalem. The Saints being the 144k. Next we see them here:

"And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads."

 

[Timtofly]

I've explained this to you, indicating I have a good awareness of the definition of PP. I have good friends in the PP camp., and they know I'm *not* PP! Brother, it is *you* who don't understand PP, in its differentiation from my position. I hold to a future Antichrist, and PP most often does not (there are rare exceptions).



I'm aware that a good number of Christians assign the label "heretic" to Origen and others. However, they are Church Fathers. Origen was one of the most dedicated and most prolific Christian authors in history. He obviously would hit some areas that are questionable, and difficult, and would misrepresent the orthodox Christian position of today. I think most of us have made mistakes. Hindsight is 20 20 right?



I saved space by not quoting the whole thing. You do the work, brother, instead of putting it all on me! I gave you the reference. Here's a fuller quote:

Athenasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) On the Incarnation of the Word, Sec. 39. XXXIX.

Do you look for another ? But Daniel foretells the exact time.
Objections to this removed.

But perhaps, being unable, even they, to fight con-
tinually against plain facts, they will, without denying
what is written, maintain that they are looking for these
things, and that the Word of God is not yet come.
For this it is on which they are for ever harping, not
blushing to brazen it out in the face of plain facts.
2. But on this one point, above all, they shall be all
the more refuted, not at our hands, but at those of
the most wise Daniel, who marks both the actual
date, and the divine sojourn of the Saviour, saying :
" Seventy 1 weeks are cut short upon thy people, and
" upon the holy city, for a full end to be made of sin,
" and for sins to be sealed up, and to blot out iniquities,
" and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring
" everlasting righteousness, and to seal vision and pro-
" phet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies ; and thou shalt
" know and understand from the going forth of the
" word to restore 2 and to build Jerusalem unto Christ
"the Prince." 3. Perhaps with regard to the other
(prophecies) they may be able even to find excuses
and to put off what is written to a future time. But
what can they say to this, or can they face it at all ?
Where not only is the Christ referred to, but he that is...

...to be anointed is declared to be not man simply, but the
Holy of Holies; and Jerusalem is to stand till his
coming, and thenceforth, prophets and vision cease in
Israel. 4. David was anointed of old, and Solomon and
Ezechias ; but then, nevertheless, Jerusalem and the
place stood, and prophets were prophesying, Gad and
Asaph and Nathan, and, later, Esaias and Osee and
Amos and others. And again, the actual men that were
anointed were called holy, and not Holy of Holies. But
if they shield themselves with the captivity, and say that
because of it Jerusalem was not, what can they say about
the prophets too ? For in fact when first the people went
down to Babylon, Daniel and Jeremy were thei-e, and
Ezechiel and Aggams and Zachary were prophesying.

XL.
Argument (1) from the withdrawal of prophecy and destruction
of Jerusalem, (2) from the conversion of the Gentiles, and
that to the God of Moses. What more remains for the
Messiah to do, that Christ had not done ?

So the Jews are trifling, and the time in question,
which they refer to the future, is actually come. For
when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, save when
Christ came, the Holy of Holies ? For it is a sign, and
an important proof, of the coming of the Word of God,
that Jerusalem no longer stands, nor is any prophet
raised up nor vision revealed to them and that very
naturally. 2. For when he that signified was come,
what need was there any longer of any to signify him ?
When the truth was there, what need any more of the
shadow ? For this was the reason of their prophesying

68 Refutation of the Jews.

at all namely, till the true Righteousness should come,
and he that was to ransom the sins of all. And this
was why Jerusalem stood till then namely, that there
they might be exercised in the types as a preparation for
the reality. 3. So when the Holy of Holies was come,
naturally vision and prophecy were sealed and the king
dom of Jerusalem ceased. For kings were to be anointed
among them only until the Holy of Holies should have
been anointed ; and Jacob prophesies that the king
dom of the Jews should be established until him, as
follows : " The ruler 1 shall not fail from Juda, nor the
"Prince from his loins, until that which is laid up for
; him shall come ; and he is the expectation of the
" nations." 4. Whence the Saviour also himself cried
aloud and said : " The 2 law and the prophets prophesied
until John."

But what I had quoted did indeed connect to Dan 9! I don't know how you missed it? The destruction of Jerusalem is stated clearly in Luke 21, and certainly was in Athanasius' mind and thinking, though it doesn't appear to be directly referenced. Instead Dan 9 is connected to the general *time* of Christ's 1st Coming.



I didn't know about Justin Martyr's reference--can you give me the quotation or the source? My feeling is that 2 or 3 Church Fathers held a *minority opinion* and cannot prove that the Church Fathers, overall, did not see the AoD as the fall of Jerusalem in 70 or thereabouts.

You're welcome on my providing my proof texts, but I didn't want to. Sometimes others argue without doing the work themselves, expecting me to prove what I believe but proving nothing themselves. That's not proper, as I see it.

Clement was the only one of your sources that applied the AoD to Rome. The rest were just quoting Scripture, and mentioned the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

 

[Timtofly]

No, I haven't ignored the time of the coming of the Kingdom. Jesus relegated that to the indefinite future so as to focus on the more immediate event facing his own generation and his own people.

That indicates his priority, that we deal, 1st of all, with right now, leaving the unfolding of future events, and their timing, to God. The fact you want to focus on future events, and guess about them and when they will happen, reflects the problem I think most futurists have, which is the temptation to focus on the wrong things, to guess, to speculate, to predict--the very things Jesus tried to get his disciples to avoid. Stop it!

The big thing about Jesus' coming back and coming Kingdom is that it is the goal that drives us now. But it is what we're doing now that will get us there, right? We have to navigate through the problems that beset us and divert us today, and let God worry about the future.

The church can change the future, no?

Did Jonah change the future?