The point you miss is that the emphasis is on "this present evil age" Paul wrote that in the 50's AD.
Again, the emphasis is on the time that was a "wicked generation" or "evil age"
You have to twist the logic of the verse too much to get there.Galatians 1:4
who gave Himself for our sins to rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father.
We cannot say this passage is pointing out the "time," and argue that the time applies only until 70 AD, without ALSO applying "gave Himself for our sins" to the time until 70 AD.
That's like saying, "gave Himself for our sins to rescue us FROM the recession of 2008, according to the will of our God and Father."
It begs the question about saving us from any future recessions or times. The point preterism tries to make with that verse simply isn't there IMO.
We all know that Christ died in that age "when the fullness of time had come" We could say that Christ died for our sins to rescue us from the world too because that is what salvation is, but in Galatians, Paul is specifically speaking about the time of end of the age of Judaism and the Law.
Galatians 1:4 says nothing about "the time of the age of Judaism and the Law." The "present evil age" was not Judaism and the Law but our world. We were not bound to the Law until 70 AD, we were freed from the Law by cross of Christ, 30 years before 70 AD. When Paul spoke in Galatians, Christ had ALREADY rescued us from the Law, thus it could not be PRESENT for the Christian. It was a done deal, already, unrelated to the Romans sacking Jerusalem.ALREADY rescued from the Law:
Gal 3:24 The law, then, was our guardian until Christ, so that we could be justified by faith.
Gal 3:25 But since that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
Why you deny yourself the reality of living in the "world to come" I have no idea.
I just did a funeral today Lehigh. If this is the world to come, I'm sorely disappointed in it.
"world" is interchangeable with "age."
That would be convenient wouldn't it?
This is the new heavens and earth that both O.T. and N.T. wrote about. We are the temple of God. The kingdom is spiritual. Your either "where righteousness dwells" or you aren't. And it is not a place, but a state of being.
Good analogies, but to say this NEGATES the literal meaning is contradicted by Scripture. Look at two verses in particular, in the first Jesus said, "in my Father's house are many dwelling places, if it were not so I would have told you. I GO to prepare a place for you. (He literally WENT) And if I GO to prepare a place for you, I will come back and receive you to myself, that where I am, there you may BE also.
In the second Scripture, an angel explained "This same Jesus has been taken from you into heaven (very literally) will come IN THE SAME WAY you've seen Him going into heaven."
Either Jesus is confused and the angels are lying, or Jesus went and prepared a place other than here, and someday he will return literally and take us to be there.
This did not happen in 70 AD.
Of course Peter's and Paul's ,etc. days were more evil than we have now. Satan was loosed and even inhabited people spiritually. He was the great deceiver and even fooled Israel into worshiping the beast.(Caesar) But Jesus crushed him in that "age" which Paul said was
"soon" in Romans 16:20.
So you believe Satan used to be a real being but isn't anymore? Interesting.
Again, what facts do you have that show Satan inhabited people spiritually but doesn't today? What part of this age makes you believe that Satan is less active on this earth? Since more Christians have been killed in the last century than the rest of history combined, is that evidence that Satan is LESS active on this earth? Since more Jews have been killed in the last century than all those killed in 70 AD, does that mean Satan is LESS active on this earth?
I don't see it.
"If only in this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied above all men." I think that line is still true.
How can we believe the physical burning and destruction of walls and mortar and wood, coupled with the killing of Jewish men, women and children with swords and spears, equals the beginning of "the coming age?"
Wasn't the "coming age" supposed to be one of victory? Wasn't that when God would be king over all the earth after defeating His enemies?
Because if we are going to say this is merely spiritual....
Then how come we tie the spiritual event directly to a physical assault on innocent people in 70 AD? Shouldn't it be tied to some spiritual event instead?