If the prophetic clock was stopped as you claim, then why was Luke 19:44 fulfilled in 70AD?
ECT Israel's Prophetic Clock stopped in 70AD, not in Mid Acts
- Thread starter tetelestai
- Start date
If the prophetic clock was stopped as you claim, then why was Luke 19:44 fulfilled in 70AD?
Once again, you fail to understand that the passage in Jeremiah pertained only to the captives taken away to Babylon.
There are no Jews being held captive today.
genuineoriginal
New member
Once again your Replacement Theology is preventing you from seeing that the current Diaspora is a repeat of the Babylonian one, complete with a repeat of the destruction of the Temple and the desolation of Jerusalem.
Just like the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem was only the beginning of the seventy years of exile, the Roman siege of Jerusalem was only the beginning of a much longer period of exile, known as the "great tribulation."
Just like there was a return to the land of Israel after the end of the Babylonian exile, there will be a return to the land of Israel after the end of the "great tribulation."
FTFY, and you are welcome.
You are mistaken because the Jews living in exile are all the Jews living outside of the land of Israel.
This is known as the Diaspora (Greek for scattering).
Nope.
The New Covenant has replaced the Old Covenant.
In the NC, there is no longer a distinction between Jew and Gentile.
Yet for some reason, you keep going back to the OC.
The first temple was destroyed, and the Jews taken captive because they didn't let the land rest as required by the law of Moses.
The second temple was destroyed because the Jews rejected their Messiah.
The Jews had to return from Babylon and rebuild the temple in order for the promised Messiah to be born.
There is no prophecy concerning the Messiah that needs to be fulfilled. Therefore, there is no reason for the Jews to return to Jerusalem.
Wrong again.
The "great tribulation" occurred in the first century, and came to an end in 70AD when the OC came to an end. We now live in the NC.
Wrong again.
In the NC there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. We are all one new man in Christ.
Christ Jesus fulfilled the law and prophets.
How many times does the Apostle Paul have to tell you that in Christ there is no difference between Jew and Gentile?
You are a denier of the NC.
Aletheiophile
New member
I agree with Tetelestai. It's important to remember that within the first year of the early church that already a third of Jerusalem had believed unto Christ. And many more were to come after that. Whatever remained had already rejected Christ.
There is no functional Judaism without the temple. If there is no functional Judaism, and Jewish identity is based on affiliation with YHWH, then the Jews of today cannot be true Jews. Aside from all of the intermarriage that had already happened by the time of Christ, and the mixing that happened since then, there is no longer such thing as pure ethnic Jews.
God did not create a people unto himself for the sake of their physicality, but for the physical purity of Messiah. That was accomplished. As Paul says, the promise is unto the seed SINGULAR, and thus Christ. The promise is not for a plural people, but for Christ, and all who are in Him.
It's not replacement theology. Did the post-flood peoples replace the pre-flood peoples? No, a remnant was chosen and a people multiplied from the remnant. Did Isaac replace Ishmael? No, Isaac was chosen and a people muliplied from him. Did Jacob replace Esau? No, he was chosen and a people multiplied from him. The same with the house of Judah, and ultimately the remnant of Judah that chose Christ. What we see with all of these examples is that the majority demonstrate willful disobedience and unrighteousness, in fact a rejection of God. The only second chance for any outside the remnant is repentance and alliance with the God-chosen remnant. All lead to the New Covenant in Christ. Christ is the final remnant. It is not about individuals, only Christ. All Christ. Only Christ.
There is no functional Judaism without the temple. If there is no functional Judaism, and Jewish identity is based on affiliation with YHWH, then the Jews of today cannot be true Jews. Aside from all of the intermarriage that had already happened by the time of Christ, and the mixing that happened since then, there is no longer such thing as pure ethnic Jews.
God did not create a people unto himself for the sake of their physicality, but for the physical purity of Messiah. That was accomplished. As Paul says, the promise is unto the seed SINGULAR, and thus Christ. The promise is not for a plural people, but for Christ, and all who are in Him.
It's not replacement theology. Did the post-flood peoples replace the pre-flood peoples? No, a remnant was chosen and a people multiplied from the remnant. Did Isaac replace Ishmael? No, Isaac was chosen and a people muliplied from him. Did Jacob replace Esau? No, he was chosen and a people multiplied from him. The same with the house of Judah, and ultimately the remnant of Judah that chose Christ. What we see with all of these examples is that the majority demonstrate willful disobedience and unrighteousness, in fact a rejection of God. The only second chance for any outside the remnant is repentance and alliance with the God-chosen remnant. All lead to the New Covenant in Christ. Christ is the final remnant. It is not about individuals, only Christ. All Christ. Only Christ.
genuineoriginal
New member
Find the text of the New Covenant and read it again.
You are making a mistake in thinking that God will not fulfill His promises concerning the children of Israel.
The destruction of the second Temple was not the "great tribulation" any more than the destruction of the first Temple was the 70 year exile.
Paul was a minister of the New Covenant. All you have to do is read his epistles to find out about the New Covenant.
Paul makes it clear there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, that those who have faith in Christ Jesus are the children of Abraham, and that the Israel of God is those who have faith in Christ Jesus.
You however, are a Zionist, and a Judaizer. You want to put new wine in old wineskins.
Every promise was fulfilled in Christ Jesus.
The "great tribulation" was what happened to the Jews, Jerusalem, and Judaea leading up to, and culminating in 70AD.
Aletheiophile
New member
Paul clearly states that the promise was to Abraham's seed SINGULAR, and thus Christ. It's not about a physical ethnic people. You've missed the point way into paganism and heresy.
Aletheiophile
New member
Right, it's singular in both the Hebrew and the Greek.
It's always singular in the Hebrew-zera and the Greek-sperma.
But that doesn't mean that the words are never applied plurally. They are.
There's more than one promise to Abraham.
In Galatians, Paul is giving assurance to Gentiles who are being told by Judaizers that in order to benefit from Israel's Messiah, they must submit to the law and be circumcised.
His reference to Christ as the one seed in blessing the nations does not cancel GOD's other promises to Abraham, which were promised 400 years before.
Joshua 21:43-45 tells us those promises were fulfilled when the Israelites crossed the Jordan into the Promised Land.
(Joshua 21:45) Not one of all the Lord’s good promises to Israel failed; every one was fulfilled.
In reading verse 45, how can you take promises given beforehand, and then claim they are still unfulfilled?
Aletheiophile
New member
But Paul explicitly says, "He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." (KJV)
The Seed is Christ. The Promise is Christ. The Covenant is Christ. The Righteousness is Christ. The Law is Christ. Christ is THE All in All. The thesis of the entire letter to the Galatians is Christ. Anything else in the letter is subordinate to Christ.
And of course there is still a semi-distinction in Paul's letter to the Galatians...the Temple was still standing. But once the Temple is destroyed, there is no more Judaism or Jews to whom God has promises still standing. If you want to claim that all the Promises to Abraham are not fulfilled in Christ, then you deny the Gospel. Promise in the Greek is literally to "announce concerning oneself." Christ is the ultimate annunciation of God. There is no promise outside of Christ. And if you want to use the Hebrew, promise is merely the one of the verbs for speaking. Christ is the speech and discourse of God. It stands in Greek and Hebrew.
Last edited:
As with all schools of thought, given that individual minds are involved, the result at times, will be different understandings even within a same school's adherents.
MAD is no different in this, and Galatians 3 is one of those areas a few (not many) within MAD differ on.
I tend to be of the school of thought within MAD that the Apostle Paul is simply bringing out the fact that just as it had been the single seed: Christ, Who had actually made the promise to Abraham's multiplied seed possible; it is Christ Who now makes the Gentile promise - that Paul alone is uniquely asserting - also possible.
Here that is...again...
Romans 4:9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
Here is my question again.
You have said over and over again that Israel's "prophetic clock" was stopped somewhere in Mid-Acts.
Yet, you won't tell us why Luke 19:44 was fulfilled in 70AD.
How could Israel's prophetic clock have been stopped in Mid-Acts, and Luke 19:44 fulfilled in 70AD?
Your fellow Darby follower musterion is in the same boat as you. His excuse is that there were still some stones still standing in 70AD, and therefore he claims Luke 19:44 wasn't fulfilled in 70AD.
His excuse is lame, but at least he addressed the question.
Why are you so afraid to answer the question?
Could it be that you can't?
C'mon Danoh, this tread is based on your claim that Israel's prophetic clock was stopped in Mid-Acts.
The least you can do is attempt to answer the question (which is the topic of the thread)
Answer Tet's questions so he can respond from his Preterist garbage.
Don't answer his question and receive the other side of his duplicity.
You know where you can shove your would be double bind, o duplicitous one.
Just be honest Danoh, and say you have no answer.
At least STP at times says "I don't know" when he can't answer a question.
You are like Little Johnny W when you can't answer a question. You attack the person who asks the question you can't answer.
You have stated over and over again that Israel's prophetic clock stopped in Mid-Acts. Other MADists have said the same thing.
So, surely you must have an explanation of why Luke 19:44 was fulfilled in 70AD when Israel's clock was allegedly stopped years before 70AD?
C'mon Danoh, you can always resort to musterion's lame excuse, and claim some stones were still standing.
Just tell us?
ClimateSanity
New member
Prove that Lyke 19:44 is strictly about the temple. Otherwise, your question is based on a false premise.
(Heb 10:37) For, “In just a little while,
he who is coming will come
and will not delay.”
According to Danoh, the above prophecy was postponed because Israel's "prophetic clock" was stopped in Mid-Acts.
Yet, for some reason, Danoh can't explain to us how and/or why Luke 19:44 was fulfilled in 70AD if Israel's prophetic clock was stopped.
he who is coming will come
and will not delay.”
According to Danoh, the above prophecy was postponed because Israel's "prophetic clock" was stopped in Mid-Acts.
Yet, for some reason, Danoh can't explain to us how and/or why Luke 19:44 was fulfilled in 70AD if Israel's prophetic clock was stopped.