ECT Why two towers = failure preterism fails.

[Interplanner]

(sorry about the typo in the title. It was meant to be:
Why "two towers = failed preterism" fails.)


There are undoubtedly things about 'preterism' that are false.

However, the idea that the two standing towers in Jerusalem overturns the river of passages saying that the events in Judea from 66-72 were the desolation of Jerusalem is much more of problem. They are also time bound. They are part of the 490 years and they were said to happen when babies during the crucifixion became adults.

There is no point in saying yes or no about preterism because all that would have to be defined. But the passages are certainly about the destruction of Jerusalem because the NT is history first and then a 'theology.'

 

[Wick Stick]

So you're saying you have a problem of Fawlty Towers?

 

[musterion]

There are undoubtedly things about 'preterism' that are false.

You don't believe that for a second.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

There are undoubtedly things about 'preterism' that are false.

However, the idea that the two standing towers in Jerusalem overturns the river of passages saying that the events in Judea from 66-72 were the desolation of Jerusalem is much more of problem. They are also time bound. They are part of the 490 years and they were said to happen when babies during the crucifixion became adults.

There is no point in saying yes or no about preterism because all that would have to be defined. But the passages are certainly about the destruction of Jerusalem because the NT is history first and then a 'theology.'

I have no idea what you just said, but yeah, preterism is nutty.

 

[tetelestai]

Why two towers = failure preterism fails.

First off, there were three towers not two towers. They were Phaselus, Hippicus, and Mariamne.

Herod named Hippicus after a friend, Phasael after his brother, and Mariamne after his wife.

So, was "not one stone left upon another" just hyperbole? Because the three towers (and a foundation wall) remained does that mean the prophecies were not fulfilled in 70AD?

Some argue that Jesus was only referring to the temple itself when He said "not one stone would be left standing upon another". In Matt 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 that appears to be the case.

In Luke 19:44 it's not clear whether Jesus is referring to all of Jerusalem or just the temple itself.

However, as you pointed out, all the other prophecies were fulfilled in 70AD. The Romans surrounded the city, the Christians fled to the hills, The Romans built embankments, etc. Not to mention the "this generation" verses.

So, if Jesus was just referring to the temple, than that prophecy for sure was fulfilled in 70AD. If He was referring to all of Jerusalem, then I see it as hyperbole.

As I said earlier, mysterboy, Danoh, STP, heir, and all the other Darby followers cannot under any circumstances have Jesus' prophecies being fulfilled in 70AD, or their entire MAD falls apart like a house of cards.

 

[musterion]

Towers left standing post-70 = Luke 19:44 unfulfilled = preterism fails.

 

[tetelestai]

Towers left standing post-70 = Luke 19:44 unfulfilled = preterism fails.

Nope.

Your pride can't handle the fact that your "prophetic clock" theory, and your "age of grace" theory are destroyed with the events that took place in 70AD. Not to mention your MAD.

We all know defending your MAD is more important than truth for you.

 

[musterion]

There are undoubtedly things about 'preterism' that are false.

However, the idea that the two standing towers in Jerusalem overturns the river of passages saying that the events in Judea from 66-72 were the desolation of Jerusalem is much more of problem. They are also time bound. They are part of the 490 years and they were said to happen when babies during the crucifixion became adults.

There is no point in saying yes or no about preterism because all that would have to be defined. But the passages are certainly about the destruction of Jerusalem because the NT is history first and then a 'theology.'

Time for me to admit error, as I always do whenever I see it in myself.

I gave you too much credit. I insisted you were smarter and/or more honest than Tet.

I was wrong.

I don't know about the honesty thing -- I find both of you dishonest when it suits you to be -- but you're definitely the dimmer of the two. Like some MADs, you tend to obfuscate your lack of foundation on certain topics with walls of text, hoping no one notices.

But we do notice. Nothing -- not one word -- in your OP follows from the title of this thread.

You did not prove, or try to prove, that the remaining towers cannot disprove preterism.

Now in YOUR mind, I'm sure that it's an irrelevant trifle you can explain away by putting a figure of speech into the mouth of Christ. But it doesn't change the fact that you did not address what you claim this thread would address. And you don't see that it doesn't. Which would make you incredibly stupid.

Alternatively, you do realize it but think everyone else on TOL who would read your post is too stupid to notice you did not actually address anything to do with the title. Which would also be a very stupid thing to do, proving (once again) your stupidity.

 

[musterion]

Nope.

Your pride can't handle the fact that your "prophetic clock" theory, and your "age of grace" theory are destroyed with the events that took place in 70AD. Not to mention your MAD.

We all know defending your MAD is more important than truth for you.

Same with you. Stupid. Just one stone left upon another either makes Christ a false prophet, or the prediction did not come to pass in 70. You can pick which one is the case because there's no third option.

 

[tetelestai]

Same with you. Stupid. Just one stone left upon another either makes Christ a false prophet, or the prediction did not come to pass in 70. You can pick which one is the case because there's no third option.

(Luke 21:5-6 KJV) And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,

6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

In the above passage, Jesus only refers to the temple.

Was Luke 21:5-6 fulfilled in 70AD?

 

[musterion]

(Luke 21:5-6 KJV) And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,

6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

In the above passage, Jesus only refers to the temple.

Was Luke 21:5-6 fulfilled in 70AD?

In Luke 19:44, He was speaking of, and addressing, Jerusalem. Preterism loses.

 

[tetelestai]

In Luke 19:44, He was speaking of, and addressing, Jerusalem. Preterism loses.

That wasn't the question.

Was Luke 21:5-6 fulfilled in 70AD?

Also, where in Luke 19:44 does it specifically say everything in Jerusalem?

(Mark 14:58) We heard him say, 'I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.'"

In the above, Jesus says He will destroy the temple. He didn't say anything about destroying all of Jerusalem.

Was the Mark 13:58 prophecy fulfilled in 70AD?

 

[patrick jane]

There are undoubtedly things about 'preterism' that are false.

However, the idea that the two standing towers in Jerusalem overturns the river of passages saying that the events in Judea from 66-72 were the desolation of Jerusalem is much more of problem. They are also time bound. They are part of the 490 years and they were said to happen when babies during the crucifixion became adults.

There is no point in saying yes or no about preterism because all that would have to be defined. But the passages are certainly about the destruction of Jerusalem because the NT is history first and then a 'theology.'

This only comes into play when you take the DofJ and put in in 72 AD, because by that time the stones were brought forth. In accordance with 2P2P
Isaiah 25 is relevant. With the babies that became adults becoming hardcore atheists and prognosticators, leaving shards of glass everywhere, even the red dirt prophecy.

 

[tetelestai]

Towers left standing post-70

Maybe your own words will help you answer the Luke 21:5-6 question:

The question is not, Was the Temple destroyed in AD 70? Only the ignorant would say it wasn't.

 

[Danoh]

That wasn't the question.

Was Luke 21:5-6 fulfilled in 70AD?

Also, where in Luke 19:44 does it specifically say everything in Jerusalem?

(Mark 13:58) We heard him say, 'I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.'"

In the above, Jesus says He will destroy the temple. He didn't say anything about destroying all of Jerusalem.

Was the Mark 13:58 prophecy fulfilled in 70AD?

You absolute imbecile - THEY are accusing Him of having said that.

:doh:

 

[Tambora]

Was the Mark 13:58 prophecy fulfilled in 70AD?

Mark 13:58 ??????

 

[tetelestai]

You absolute imbecile - THEY are accusing Him of having said that.

What makes you think it wasn't true?

The temple built with human hands was destroyed in 70AD, and the new temple that Jesus built was built in three days.

Never mind that the statement is another death knell to MAD.

(1 Cor 6:19) Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;

 

[tetelestai]

Mark 13:58 ??????

14:58

 

[Tambora]

14:58

Mark 14:57-59 KJV
(57) And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
(58) We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
(59) But neither so did their witness agree together.

 

[tetelestai]

Mark 14:57-59 KJV
(57) And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
(58) We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
(59) But neither so did their witness agree together.

Was the temple made with human hands destroyed?

Was Jesus raised from the dead in three days?
days.”

What did Jesus say that made these guys say what they did?