Are all amils also preterists (full or partial)?

[arc111]

I beg to differ, I believe context is indicating that the actual temple stones and the actual outer walls of Jerusalem could be referred to and so there is a strong possibility that these verses have been fulfilled, because the temple walls and the outer walls are gone now.

Sir, I would like for you to investigate this yourself please.

From wikipedia: "In 1967 Israel captured Old Jerusalem (and the Temple Mount) from Jordan. It was found that the wall extended all the way around the Temple Mount and is part of the city wall near the Lion's Gate."

It may appear that I have an agenda, but I am only hoping to reveal what is true. IT IS VERY COMMON KNOWLEDGE AMONG ALL PARTIES THAT THE EASTERN WALL IN PARTICULAR SERVED AS BOTH TEMPLE WALL AND CITY WALL, AND THAT MUCH OF IT REMAINS FROM THE DAYS OF JESUS.

Sir, I would ask you, how many and how large are the Herodian stones that must remain in place to indicate that the prophecies have not yet been fulfilled? THERE ARE MANY SUCH STONES CONSTITUTING THE CITY WALL (LUKE 19) AND THE TEMPLE BUILDINGS (LUKE 21/MARK 13/MATT 24) THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN 'TOPPLED' TO THIS DAY. THEY WERE CERTAINLY NOT TOPPLED WITHIN 40 YEARS OF WHEN JESUS SPOKE THE WORDS.

Either Josephus was wrong or modern archaeologist are wrong. Josephus, imo, was trying to appease Titus to make it appear as though Titus were the one to fulfill Daniel 9. (And Titus probably was a precursor to the actual prophecy, but Josephus embellished the tale, imo).

I do not desire to be classed as a 'hyper-literalist'. I focus on the stones in this way because they present a delimma to those who insist that the so-called Olivet Discourse was literally fulfilled. And remember, the entire discourse began with a discussion of 'the stones'.

Youtube video showing the contemporary wall, which consists of thousands of original untoppled Herodian stones. Beneath is a sketch from Dr. Ritmeyer showing the parts of the wall that are untoppled from the days of Jesus. ("secrets of jerusalems temple mount). The stones in darker blue are untoppled Herodian stones. Note particularily the very tall courses at the Northeast corner of the wall.


kfb 002.jpg

Praise Jesus / Yeshua / the Holy One of Israel!!

[arc111]

How about YOU tell us.

The Beast and False Prophet of Revelation are yet future and have not been revealed yet. I have never pretended to know who these are.

I have heard Nero, Titus, Caligula, Julian the apostate and many others. It is interesting that I have rarely heard who their 'false prophets' were supposed to be.

You are very defensive. I am not attacking you. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. I am only discussing what I hold to be true, and it relates to our well being. God has said "I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you" regarding Abraham and his descendants.

I am convinced that God still maintains a love for the Jewish people today although they remain in unbelief. Romans 11:28 says that "Many of the people of Israel are now enemies of the Good News, and this benefits you Gentiles. Yet they are still the people he loves because he chose their ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."

Because He loves them, He will honor the promises that He made to their ancestors. Preterism is often taught in a way that demands that the physical/genetic descendants of Jacob were forever uprooted at the 70 AD Temple destruction. To say that God no longer has a special love for these people is akin to cursing them imo.

And so, as a Christian, I am defending the descendants of Jacob. Jesus IS the messiah whom they seek, and Jesus IS the messiah who will one day return and redeem them.

[arc111]

Well the wild beast in ch 13 is the Roman emperor and the roman empire. It arises in opposition to Christ following the persecution of the early church in the wilderness which is patterned on Elijah's flight into the wilderness of 3 1/2 years.

Its blasphemy reflects emperor worship which was such a problem to the early church, and its worst aspects are patterned on the reign of Caligula who for a period of 3 1/2 years made great claims to be worshipped. He almost died from a grave illness but 'miraculously' (in his own view) came to life again. The second beast represents the Roman high priest who furthered Caligula's claims by conjuring and producing fire and such like tricks. The wild beast had seven horns which represented seven wmperors, five of which were past when John wrote. The mark of the beast was connected with the enforced emperor worship. Those who refused to worship were imprisoned or put to death. Those who worshipped were forever marked with the beast's name 666. In some cases it was probably a literal physical mark, but simply sacrificing to the emperor was enough to mark a man as belonging to the devil. At certain times only those who had sacrificed could legally buy and sell.

Of course the wild beast continued on in history in any ruler who sought to make Christians commit idolatry or worship falsely. Such a situation may well arise again. But it is not necessary for the fulfilment of the prophecy.

The wild beast in ch 17 is an advance on this one, being inspired by Satan himself.

Now Brother, it appears to me that if we are free to interpret prophecy this loosely that we could produce fanciful interpretations that would render prophecy useless and meaningless. 1 Peter 1 says : "16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”[b] 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

The words of prophecy should be considered as completely reliable. Not guess-work.

The Jews missed their Messiah not because they over-literalized the words of the ancient prophets, but because they were blinded to the precise and literal prophecies regarding the 'suffering messiah'. The prophecies of Is. 53:1-12 were written and fulfilled very literally, but the Jews at the time of Jesus were blinded to them.

Why would the prophecies of a suffering messiah be so very literal while the prophecies of the reigning messiah be so spiritualized? Does it not make better sense that Revelation 19:11 IS the messiah whom they were expecting? At this time, at His appearing, will they not 'look upon Him whom they pierced" and weep?

Why will they weep? It is because they recognize that the Reigning Messiah is the very same as the Suffering Messiah whom they pierced and rejected for so long!

[DurbanDude]

Sir, I would like for you to investigate this yourself please.

From wikipedia: "In 1967 Israel captured Old Jerusalem (and the Temple Mount) from Jordan. It was found that the wall extended all the way around the Temple Mount and is part of the city wall near the Lion's Gate."

I'm open to what you are saying, but I'm trying to find out where this wall is situated in Jerusalem and where the evidence is that this is Herod's wall. The way I understand it, the western wall was left standing according to Josephus. However this wall was neither a temple wall nor an outer wall. Herod built walls around the temple, and also the inner city and the new city.



Correct me if I am wrong, isn't the youtube video of Herod's wall showing the wall on the edge of the temple mount just above the words "Mount Moriah", ie the northern wall of the temple mount that includes the "Golden Gate"

[arc111]

So, in your belief...even Daniel's 70 weeks are not fulfilled. Right?

Sorry, but when Jesus said, "IT IS FINISHED" he meant it.

Do you imply here that 'all things are finished' upon Jesus' proclamation? Obviously not 'everything' was finished. As the true Passover Lamb, dying on the cross as the bleating of the Jewish passover lambs could be heard emanating from the Temple, Jesus said "IT IS FINISHED". Never again would the sacrifice of a lamb be counted as atonement for sin. Never again could an earthly Priest enter into the Holy of Holies to sprinkle the blood of a lamb to make man right with God. Effectively the Jewish priesthood was finished, but that does not mean that the Jews are finished. It does not mean that Jerusalem is finished. There are still unfinished plans for them.

There will never again be God approved stone-temple blood sacrifices. But! When Jesus the Reigning King returns He will certainly have the authority to build Himself a house! I suppose that He will build where the Temple original stood, because you see, that WAS the house of the Lord!

King Jesus will be the Lord of His own house, and will modify it as He sees fit. He said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath, and I suppose that He will also proclaim that He is the Lord of His own house! Perhaps blood will be forbidden on the premises altogether. Perhaps He will make it a house of light instead of a darkened tent. From my understanding, this will be a time of celebration, not of death (speaking of the Millennial Kingdom).




You must also believe there will be yet another temple built by man. So, in the rapture-any-minute-pre-trib belief, its not really finished at all. And, all the poor sub-set of believers you call the 'tribulation saints that you say will be killed just all die for their faith, but its in vain.

THEY got left behind.

And yet, Jesus said this is what would happen:

Luke 17:26-30
26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.

27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;

29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Those 'left behind' will not be able to reproduce and repopulate or finally come to know Christ Jesus. Like in Noah's day...and in Lot's day...they shall all be facing total destruction

[petepet]

The Beast and False Prophet of Revelation are yet future and have not been revealed yet. I have never pretended to know who these are.

Well I tend to agree with John the Apostle who says that the Beast contains within it seven kings, five have fallen, one is, and one is yet to come. This will then be followed by an eighth who will arise from the abyss and who is 'of the seven'. (17.8, 10-11). So whatever the Beast represents it is not just the antichrist.

Initially the Beast is Rome (the woman sits on seven hills and is drunk with the blood of martyrs), The kings of the earth certainly committed fornication with Rome, honouring the emperors as gods.

The five 'kings' who had fallen were the emperors from Augustus onwards who were now in the past They may well be Augustus, Tiberius, Hadrian, Caligula, and Claudius, this would make Nero the reigning monarch. All these were of course antichrists. They set themselves up as alternatives to Christ

Even if we do not accept that interpretaion it is clear that the Beast includes past, present and future kings. So it does not indicate one person. (It also includes the ten coming kings). Thus the Beast is not The Antichrist, (except in so far as all the kings are antichirists), although the eighth king may well be.

Who are 'the false prophet'? Initially the high priests of Rome. Subsequently whoever is the religious leader under the the coming Antichrist.

I have heard Nero, Titus, Caligula, Julian the apostate and many others. It is interesting that I have rarely heard who their 'false prophets' were supposed to be.

See above.

I am convinced that God still maintains a love for the Jewish people today although they remain in unbelief. Romans 11:28 says that "Many of the people of Israel are now enemies of the Good News, and this benefits you Gentiles. Yet they are still the people he loves because he chose their ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."

Note that this verse follows the statement that there has been a hardening in part of Israel. Thus it indicates two groups, the hardened and the election (which is a term earlier used of Jews who believe in the Messiah). The hardened are enemies of the Gospel. The election (Jews who believe in the Messiah) are beloved for the fathers' sakes. This does not say then that unbelieving Jews are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

I realise that you probably did not read my necessarily long post but there is only one real Israel and that is the Israel that believes in the Messiah. As a result of His coming Jews were divided into two, those who rejected the Messiah and were therefore rejected by God (and broken off from the true Vine and from the olive tree)_ and those who believed in the Messiah forming the remnant, the true Israel. Judaism rejected the believers in the Messiah. The believers in the Messiah in the end rejected Judaism. We have to choose which was the true Israel, the 'congregation' founded on the Messiah (Matt 16.18), or the 'congregation' that rejected the Messiah. I know where my vote goes.

Eventually many Gentiles united with these believing Jews as proselytes (as had always happened). Forming Christ's new congregation, the true Israel. Theyb did not replace Israel. They WERE Israel, the remnant accoding to the election of grace.

After the Exile large numbers of Jews were rejected from Israel. They were cast out. They were never again seen as part of Israel. The same happened as a result of the coming of the Messiah. Those who rejected Him were rejected by God. They are no longer a part of the true Israel.

Because He loves them, He will honor the promises that He made to their ancestors. Preterism is often taught in a way that demands that the physical/genetic descendants of Jacob were forever uprooted at the 70 AD Temple destruction. To say that God no longer has a special love for these people is akin to cursing them imo.

True they are cursed and God did curse them. Galatians 3.10; Romans 9.3.

But it was not the destruction of the Temple that ended the age of the Jews. It was the coming of the Messiah which introduced a new Israel based on a remnant of the old, the method God has always used.

And so, as a Christian, I am defending the descendants of Jacob.

The Jews are not the descendants of Jacob. Only relatively few are blood descendants of Jacob. They are a mixed and conglomerate people. Many are descended from the servants of Abraham and Jacob. (Abraham had 318 young men born in his house). Many are descendants of the mixed multitude (Exodus 12.38). Many are descendants of the Edomites and large number of Gentiles forced to become Jews by the High Priests John Hyrcanus and Aristobulus. Many are descendants of Gentile proselytes. And so we could go on. Read my long post.

Jesus IS the messiah whom they seek, and Jesus IS the messiah who will one day return and redeem them.

The Redeemer has already come to Zion. Those who believe in Him will become a part of Israel. Those who do not will be ever rejected.

[petepet]

[QUOTE=arc111;2718124]
[/quote}

Now Brother, it appears to me that if we are free to interpret prophecy this loosely that we could produce fanciful interpretations that would render prophecy useless and meaningless. 1 Peter 1 says : "16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”[b] 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

The words of prophecy should be considered as completely reliable. Not guess-work.

Lol if we all knew precisely what the words of prophecy meant this thread, and all related threads, would not exist. I see all teaching concerning the millennium as 'cunningly devised fables' coming from Darby and his ilk.

The Jews missed their Messiah not because they over-literalized the words of the ancient prophets, but because they were blinded to the precise and literal prophecies regarding the 'suffering messiah'. The prophecies of Is. 53:1-12 were written and fulfilled very literally, but the Jews at the time of Jesus were blinded to them.

Well one thing they clearly did not do was accept Daniel's seventy seven as indicating the year in which the Messiah would come. If you want to see some cunningly deviced fables I suggest you read the teaching of the Rabbis both before and after Christ.

But remember that when John wrote what I suggested was CURRENT HAPPENINGS withon his lifetime. It would have been extraordinary if he had not referred to the rulers of his day. It was because of them that Christians were being persecuted. John wrote to prepare Christians for persecution by the emperors. I do not think that the identification of the Beast with the Roman Empire (whatever else it may mean) is anything but obvious. It is only the generations leading up to the modern generation who sees the Roman empire as past history. For Christians it was the reality fo over 500 years.

Why would the prophecies of a suffering messiah be so very literal while the prophecies of the reigning messiah be so spiritualized? Does it not make better sense that Revelation 19:11 IS the messiah whom they were expecting? At this time, at His appearing, will they not 'look upon Him whom they pierced" and weep?

I don't follow your point. Did I deny that? Lol read what I said again. But they never accept him as Messiah. At that point they are judged.

[divaD]

What I find interesting, the same folks that argue with a gap in the 70 weeks, these same folks put a huge gap in Luke 21. How so?

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

This allegedly occurs around 70 AD.

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.


If everything written was fulfilled around 70 AD, then the parts about Christ's 2nd coming would have also had to be fulfilled, since it says all things which are written, not some things that are written.

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

Clearly none of this occured around 70 AD. According to Matt 24 tho, this part seems to occur immediately after the tribulation of those days..those days being the keywords.


Matthew 24:29 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:

So tell me there's not a huge gap here. If the tribulation of those days is referring to the events surrounding 70 AD, then why didn't immediately after that 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, but instead, this is still a future event?

[David Taylor]

Are all amils also preterists (full or partial)?

Millennialism and Preterism are really apples and oranges.

All 'preterist' means, is that some scripture is to be interpreted as having occurred, or was written addressing some past, prior, historic event.

All millennialists (whether pre, a, or post) are preterists to some degree or the other, because everyone takes certain scripture passages and interpret them to be in the past. Most of the bible itself is preteristic, a record of past events.

So what you really have as a distinction, is the question of whether or not are amills full-preterists....which is a viewpoint that all bible prophecy was concluded by 70 A.D. I would say that while full-preterists are never premill; and most would say they are amill or postmill; you would also find that the vast majority of amillennialists who would say they are not full-preterist.

The full-preterist view is a very recent viewpoint, and one that is held by a very small subset of Christendom.

Amill and Postmill have always been the historic widely held viewpoints of all Christendom over the first 19 centuries A.D., with Premillennialism becoming a widely held viewpoint over the last century A.D. While some ECF were a variation of Premill, there are no writings from that time that show it to have ever been a widely and dominate view back then, and even that variant of Premillennialism was more like modern Amill than modern Premill in how it interpreted most endtime events.

Partial-Preterists are simple people who generally believe some or most of the olivet discourse and some of Revelation was written to the 1st century church, not the 21st century church; however, Partial-Preterists still hold a future expectation to many other passages and events.

If we are in the 'millennium' now, does it not demand that the tribulation already happened, and that it was in fact relative to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem?

Defining the term 'the tribulation' in a strict biblical sense is difficult to begin with. There are many more scriptures that mention tribulation as a constant companion to believers in all ages, than of a codified, defined, future block of time that scripture presents. Many try to identify 'the tribulation' as a 7 year period, but the bible itself doesn't do this. Many try to identify the seals, trumps, and bowls as 'the tribulation', but the bible itself doesn't do this. So anyone who attempts to be strictly dogmatic about a 'tribulation period' is going beyond what scripture details; and into the realm of fiction and speculation.

Scripture tells us things will get progressively worse and there will be growing apostasy prior to Christ's future return; but scripture itself does not confirm any future specific defined tribulation period range or event.

Many scholars interpret the Olivet discourses 'tribulation' period being referenced to the 1st century events; some also apply it to the entire NT era prior to Christ's return. I believe the most reasonable interpretation of the Olivet discourse is that Jesus was asked 2 questions, and His reply answers both of them thereafter (when would the temple and jerusalem be destroyed (near-term 70 ad) and when would be your return from Heaven in power and glory (future-term).

Why would any amil reject partial preterism? I don't recognize the distinction. (I do recognize the distinction of full preterism).

Just curious.

BTW, I am pre-mil rapturist (rapture before the millennium, not sure of when)

I'm Amill, and I hold to some preteristic and some futuristic interpretations of scripture. It depends on the context, intent, and the passage in question.

I believe the Olivet Discourse, as well as Revelation are both preteristic and futuristic; it depends on the verses being examined.

The XXX-Mill question fundamentally just answers whether or not one believes the 2nd Coming is the climax of human mortal history where sin and death end and the eternal state begins; or the second coming is just another event on the timeline of human mortal history where sin and death continue to plague humanity.

Preterism/vs/Futurism however, is moreso a methodology of interpreting whether or not any given passage or verse is to be interpretted in a historical or future setting from our present perspective.

[petepet]

[QUOTE=divaD;2718147]

What I find interesting, the same folks that argue with a gap in the 70 weeks, these same folks put a huge gap in Luke 21. How so?

Very simple, because Luke does. His gap (if you call it that) is clearly stated. 'They will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all nations, and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.'

As Jerusalem was certainly trodden down of the Gentiles up to 1967, and in my view is still trodden down by the Gentiles (old Jerusalem is the Arab quartere), then clearly Luke proposed a long period during which this would happen. I don't call it a gap because he laid down no timeline. Jesus is simply outlining history. But certainly a long period is required. And this long period was part of the tribulation promised to the Jews, the great and long tribulation..

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

This allegedly occurs around 70 AD.

It is not 'allegedly'. This was what happened.

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.


If everything written was fulfilled around 70 AD, then the parts about Christ's 2nd coming would have also had to be fulfilled, since it says all things which are written, not some things that are written.

Yes, all things that were written about the city of Jerusalem were fulfilled in 70 AD. The remainder of prophecy does not relate to the city of Jerusalem. It relates to the people of God and the heavenly Jerusalem.

But I'm glad you said that because 'all things that are written' cannot occur until the new heaven and the new earth are in place. So if you are consistent on your interpretation you will have to agree that there cannot be a millenium because all things have to be fulfilled at the coming of Christ.

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

Clearly none of this occured around 70 AD. According to Matt 24 tho, this part seems to occur immediately after the tribulation of those days..those days being the keywords

.

No of course it didn't occur in 70 AD. It could not happen until the great and long tribulation of the Jewish people ended at the time when Jerusalem ceased to be trodden down by the Gentiles as Matthew indicates if we take him alongside Luke.

Matthew 24:29 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:

So tell me there's not a huge gap here. If the tribulation of those days is referring to the events surrounding 70 AD, then why didn't immediately after that 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, but instead, this is still a future event?

There is no gap. Luke makes clear what happens. We are not left with a gap in which nothing happens. Which is why we know that the great and long tribulation includes what is described in Luke. Matthew foreshortened his account (unless you believe Luke was wrong)

[arc111]

I'm open to what you are saying, but I'm trying to find out where this wall is situated in Jerusalem and where the evidence is that this is Herod's wall. The way I understand it, the western wall was left standing according to Josephus. However this wall was neither a temple wall nor an outer wall. Herod built walls around the temple, and also the inner city and the new city.

Well, imo, the western wall is the wall that God wants the world to know is still standing from the days of Jesus. Everyone is familiar with it. It IS testimony that AD 70 is not the fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse...at least imo.

Josephus wrote : "Now as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done), [Titus] Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and Temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as they were of the greatest eminence; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison [in the Upper City], as were the towers [the three forts] also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall [surrounding Jerusalem], it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it [Jerusalem] had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind."

From my reading of this, it is that it was not the Western Wall of the Temple that was left, but rather the Western Wall of the CITY and the 3 towers associated with it (near Herod's palace). (The so-called "Tower of David" is alledgedly one of the towers that was left. Only the modern base of this tower is actually Herodian construction). He says that the rest of the walls were completely removed so that you couldn't even locate where they used to be. I can't even imagine how this could be correct. It doesn't even appear that Josephus records that the so-called Western "wailing" Wall was left standing.

It is possible that the Roman army pushed material from the tops of the walls over to such a height that the bases of the walls were covered with rubble from the upper courses. In which case, a casual observerver could think that every wall was removed.

It is also possible that as Josephus' writtings were copied and passed down that error crept in. In any event, Josephus appears to be at odds with modern archaeologists. Jesus didn't say that every stone would be buried, He said that every stone would be toppled. His words have NOT been literally fulfilled by any means.

[arc111]

[QUOTE=petepet;2718163]

Very simple, because Luke does. His gap (if you call it that) is clearly stated. 'They will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all nations, and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.'

As Jerusalem was certainly trodden down of the Gentiles up to 1967, and in my view is still trodden down by the Gentiles (old Jerusalem is the Arab quartere), then clearly Luke proposed a long period during which this would happen. I don't call it a gap because he laid down no timeline. Jesus is simply outlining history. But certainly a long period is required. And this long period was part of the tribulation promised to the Jews, the great and long tribulation..


It is not 'allegedly'. This was what happened.



Yes, all things that were written about the city of Jerusalem were fulfilled in 70 AD. The remainder of prophecy does not relate to the city of Jerusalem. It relates to the people of God and the heavenly Jerusalem.

But I'm glad you said that because 'all things that are written' cannot occur until the new heaven and the new earth are in place. So if you are consistent on your interpretation you will have to agree that there cannot be a millenium because all things have to be fulfilled at the coming of Christ.



.

No of course it didn't occur in 70 AD. It could not happen until the great and long tribulation of the Jewish people ended at the time when Jerusalem ceased to be trodden down by the Gentiles as Matthew indicates if we take him alongside Luke.




There is no gap. Luke makes clear what happens. We are not left with a gap in which nothing happens. Which is why we know that the great and long tribulation includes what is described in Luke. Matthew foreshortened his account (unless you believe Luke was wrong)

Are you saying that Israel has been (and continues to be) in the 'Great tribulation' wiile simultaneously the rest of the nations are in the '1000 year reign of Christ'? The Tribulation and the Millennium are concurrent? Hmmmmmm.... that's something to think about.

I do agree with you in believing that the current age is still considered "the times of the Gentiles".

[petepet]

For interest I have put together an account combining Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 (based on Matthew).

The words in italics and bold are common to all three. I would be pleased to receive constructive criticism,

<p> 18 “When therefore you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not in the holy place (let him who reads understand), that is to say, when you see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand.”
<p> 19 “Then let those who are in Judaea flee to the mountains, let him who is on the housetop not go down to take out things that are in his house, and let him who is in the field (countryside) not return back to take his cloak.”
<p> 20 “For these are days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.”
<p> 21 “But woe to those who are with child and to those who are breast feeding in those days!”
<p> 22 And pray that your flight be not in the winter, neither on a sabbath,”
<p> 23 “For then will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the creation which God created, until now, no, nor ever shall be, for there will be great distress on the land, and wrath to this people.”
<p> 24 “And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations, and Jerusalem will be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. And except those days had been shortened, no flesh would have been saved, but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.”
<p> 25 Then if any man shall say to you, ‘Lo, here is the Christ’, or, ‘Here’; believe it not. For there will arise false Christs, and false prophets, and will show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if it were possible, even the elect. But take heed. Behold, I have told you beforehand.”
<p> 26 “If therefore they shall say to you, ‘Behold, he is in the wilderness’, go not forth, ‘Behold, he is in the inner chambers’, believe it not.”
<p> 27 “For as the lightning comes forth from the east, and is seen even to the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man.”
<p> 28 “Wherever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.”
<p> 29 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days there will be signs in the sun, moon and stars, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give her light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and on the earth there will be distress of nations, in perplexity for the roaring of the sea and the billows, men fainting for fear, and for expectation of the things which are coming on the world, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken,”
<p> 30 “And then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then will all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
<p> 31 “And He will send forth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”
<p> 32 “But when these things begin to come about, look up, and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”
<p> 33 “Now from the fig tree learn her parable. When her branch is now become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that the summer is near, even so you also, when you see all these things, know you that He is near (Luke - the Kingly Rule of God is near), even at the doors.”
<p> 34 “Truly I say to you, This generation will not pass away, until all these things are accomplished.”
<p> 35 “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.”

[divaD]

The Tribulation and the Millennium are concurrent? Hmmmmmm.... that's something to think about.

Since I know you are addressing Petepet, what is ironic is this. Some, but not all amils teach the little season following the 1000 years is the great trib. Now if I were amil, I would think that would be the correct way to understand it. But as one can see, it would be a total contradiction if the great trib runs concurrent with the 1000 years, and is also the little season that follows.

But let's try to determine some things that occur within this 1000 years, regardless if the 1000 years are the present times, or whether it's yet future.


Revelation 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

This implies as of the start of the 1000 years, everything to do with worshiping, not worshiping the beast, this would now be in the past, and a new age has begun. If we look back a few chapters, we see this.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

This looks like great tribulation to me.

Luke 21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
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.

The remnant in Revelation 12:17 would be, not the unbelieving Jews, but the ones who have the testimony of Jesus Christ. In another passage it states that those days are cut short for the elect's sakes. I would think the elect would be those that have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.


So I would conclude, that during the 1000 years, no one is suffering any kind of tribulation, especially from satan, since Rev 20 depicts him being all tied up and cast into a pit. Even if that's not to be understood literally, still, the point would be, what it represents in the literal sense.

[divaD]

But I'm glad you said that because 'all things that are written' cannot occur until the new heaven and the new earth are in place. So if you are consistent on your interpretation you will have to agree that there cannot be a millenium because all things have to be fulfilled at the coming of Christ.

This part really caught my attention. In all fairness, you make a valid point. A little rethinking on my part is in order.