Christian Forums

I do believe in fulfilled (or nearly fulfilled) eschatology. I have a friend who is a Jehovah Witness who comes by regularly and we like to talk about the Bible. I asked her, along with another friend, how JWs deal with Matthew chapter 24 verse 21, since they do believe that Jesus, in at least the first half of chapter 24, was speaking to his disciples specifically about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce. So one friend said that the tribulation would obviously be greater than the worldwide flood, being greater than any other time. She said it is by this that we know that the great tribulation Jesus referred to was not that of 70 ce.

How would you answer?


Thanks!

Apocalyptic language sounds impressive but it has always referred to a handful of countries in the Middle East.

Quote from: raggthyme13 on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:09:04
I do believe in fulfilled (or nearly fulfilled) eschatology. I have a friend who is a Jehovah Witness who comes by regularly and we like to talk about the Bible. I asked her, along with another friend, how JWs deal with Matthew chapter 24 verse 21, since they do believe that Jesus, in at least the first half of chapter 24, was speaking to his disciples specifically about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce. So one friend said that the tribulation would obviously be greater than the worldwide flood, being greater than any other time. She said it is by this that we know that the great tribulation Jesus referred to was not that of 70 ce.

How would you answer?


Thanks!

The seven-year period of tribulation spoken of in the Book of Daniel can be traced accurately and exactly to be the seven years beginning in A.D. 63 and ending in A.D. 70. Historical records tell us that in year 63 A.D. the Jewish people revolted against Rome, which gave way to a hellish seven year period in which millions of Jewish people died, and ended with the destruction of the Temple and the city of Jerusalem. Josephus, in his volume Wars of the Jews documents in detail this terrible period of time and points out numerous instances of prophetic fulfillment. In addition, the seventy weeks of Daniel are not a future event, rather it is presented as a judgment on Israel:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression" (Daniel 9:24)
The Great Tribulation is not a future period of time; it was a period of time ending in A.D. 70 with the destruction of the Temple, and can be documented well with historical documents.

Quote from: Happy22 on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:57:35

Quote from: raggthyme13 on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:09:04
I do believe in fulfilled (or nearly fulfilled) eschatology. I have a friend who is a Jehovah Witness who comes by regularly and we like to talk about the Bible. I asked her, along with another friend, how JWs deal with Matthew chapter 24 verse 21, since they do believe that Jesus, in at least the first half of chapter 24, was speaking to his disciples specifically about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce. So one friend said that the tribulation would obviously be greater than the worldwide flood, being greater than any other time. She said it is by this that we know that the great tribulation Jesus referred to was not that of 70 ce.

How would you answer?


Thanks!

The seven-year period of tribulation spoken of in the Book of Daniel can be traced accurately and exactly to be the seven years beginning in A.D. 63 and ending in A.D. 70. Historical records tell us that in year 63 A.D. the Jewish people revolted against Rome, which gave way to a hellish seven year period in which millions of Jewish people died, and ended with the destruction of the Temple and the city of Jerusalem. Josephus, in his volume Wars of the Jews documents in detail this terrible period of time and points out numerous instances of prophetic fulfillment. In addition, the seventy weeks of Daniel are not a future event, rather it is presented as a judgment on Israel:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression" (Daniel 9:24)
The Great Tribulation is not a future period of time; it was a period of time ending in A.D. 70 with the destruction of the Temple, and can be documented well with historical documents.

Agreed. However, how would you answer about the flood verses this great tribulation? If you do believe in a worldwide flood, how was the 7 year period of time in ad 70 greater tribulation than the flood of Noah? This is the answer I am after for my friend, and for myself.

"How would you answer?"

The person that you are speaking with may be a JW [this religion is very apostate by much of its teaching], but happens to be correct about 70 AD .... Jesus was not speaking about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, but about the future time of Jacob's [Israel's] trouble to be experienced by a future returned remnant of the nation at the end of this present age

70 AD was definitely not the coming unprecedented great tribulation of the Lord's promised judgment upon an unbelieving world [much like the judgment of the flood for the same intransigent behavior] described in the prophetic scriptures .... this is obvious to anyone who knows all of the related scriptures

So you really have no litigmate answer other than to agree in my opinion

Attempting to support the preteristic view of 70 AD is an impossible task if one interprets the prophetic scriptures literally and makes comparisons with accurate and factual recorded history

The preteristic view depends largely upon relegating portions of literal biblical prophetic description to allegory in order to prove out the theology

This should never be done in my opinion

Making agrument with a JW is futile, so do not expect to gain much influence

Better to give strong witness related to Jesus Christ and your friend's need for a personal relationship with Him

Members of the JW organization typically do not have it and are consequently in a lost position with no hope beyond the grave

You can tell her that when one gets to the end with nothing to show [none of us will], it will be all about who one knows .... not about how much one thinks they know

Quote from: raggthyme13 on Thu Aug 01, 2013 - 02:56:58

Agreed. However, how would you answer about the flood verses this great tribulation? If you do believe in a worldwide flood, how was the 7 year period of time in ad 70 greater tribulation than the flood of Noah? This is the answer I am after for my friend, and for myself.

What worse tribulation could happen to the world, than the death of Jesus? A brand new Covenant was began at the destruction of the Temple.
Luke's account of the Olivet Discourse is Luke 21:35, "For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth." What are we to make of that "global" statement? Biblical Analysis of a Global Flood - The Problem of the Language and Teaching of Jesus
Preterists recognize that the Olivet Discourse is the key to understanding New Testament prophecy properly. A cursory reading of Matthew 24 shows that Jesus uses the Greek equivalent of the same terminology in Genesis 7 throughout the Olivet Discourse. One example in Luke's account of the Olivet Discourse is Luke 21:35, "For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth." What are we to make of that "global" statement? Dispensationalists and most other futurists place the Olivet Discourse in the future precisely because it contains many "global" indicators. Not only is the "face of the earth" language prominent, there is reference to the "whole world,"[1] "earth,"[2] as well as the mention of absolute destruction of human life if the days of tribulation were not cut short.[3] Also in the Olivet Discourse is phenomenon that appears from a surface, literal reading to be global.[4] Preterists who remain dedicated to Creation Science may object, but the Olivet Discourse should be taken globally once a commitment to plain literalism is made in the Genesis flood account.

Note how the very same type of global language is Henry Morris' clinching reason why the flood account must be global in nature:

Our third and impelling reason for interpreting our universal terms of Genesis 6-9 literally is that the physical phenomena described in those chapters would be quite inconceivable if the Flood had been confined to one section of the earth.[5]

Many Creation Science advocates continue to reject preterist claims that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the regional destruction of Judea and Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They do so because they are logically consistent in applying their literal hermeneutic. If the flood of Genesis 7 is global by virtue of the language in the account, then consistency demands the Great Tribulation must be global as well! That is the main reason so many Christians continue to place the events spoken of in Matthew 24 into our future. The language and physical phenomena is every bit global in Matthew 24 as it is in Genesis 6-9.

What I am pointing out is a problem for preterists who hold to a global interpretation of the Genesis flood and then switch to a regional interpretation of the Olivet Discourse. Literal-futurists who believe in a global flood are more consistent in the application of their hermeneutic principles. But preterists know Luke 21:35 was fulfilled in A.D. 70. If it wasn't, then Jesus was mistaken.[6] Shouldn't Jesus' use of global language in reference to a regional destruction in A.D. 70 aid our understanding of the same type of biblical language in Genesis 7?

Know that Jesus was projecting the end of this present age in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 with respect to a regathered generation of Israelites in the land at the time .... not 70AD

The time frame for His focus is still pending and His discourse is all about Israel and the 70th week decreed for the nation .... this short time frame of 2520 days is yet to be fulfilled

Replacement theologists see the church in the discourse .... it is not there

The Lord is speaking to His early followers who were all Israelites with regard for their nation and its ultimate destiny

They wanted to know when He would restore the kingdom to Israel upon the earth and they had knowledge of the OT visions of the prophets in relationship to this coming event still pending today [Genesis 17:7-8; Isaiah 11; 13:27; Jeremiah 30; 31; Ezekiel 36; 37; 38; 39; Daniel 9:24-27; Joel 2:3; Micah 4; 5; Zechariah 12; 13; 14; Matthew 24:29-31 Acts 1:6; Revelation 7:1-8; 14:1-7]

One needs to understand that the visions of the Bible prophets and the Lord's discourse regarding the end of this present age are all focused upon Israel and the nation's ancient enemies who are the Muslims of the Middle East today [Psalms 83; Ezekiel 36; 38; 39]

There was a worldwide flood just as recorded in Genesis 6 .... and the Lord's next intervention and judgment will also be worldwide, but with a focus upon the geographical region of the Middle East, Israel, and the surrounding post flood populations whose descendants are still in there today

Quote from: Bible Linker on Fri Aug 02, 2013 - 07:54:32


The Lord is speaking to His early followers who were all Israelites with regard for their nation and its ultimate destiny

They wanted to know when He would restore the kingdom to Israel upon the earth

Jesus told them, His Kingdom was not of this world. Do you think Jesus will change His mind?

Quote from: Bible Linker on Fri Aug 02, 2013 - 07:54:32
Know that Jesus was projecting the end of this present age in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 with respect to a regathered generation of Israelites in the land at the time .... not 70AD

The time frame for His focus is still pending and His discourse is all about Israel and the 70th week decreed for the nation .... this short time frame of 2520 days is yet to be fulfilled

Replacement theologists see the church in the discourse .... it is not there

The Lord is speaking to His early followers who were all Israelites with regard for their nation and its ultimate destiny

They wanted to know when He would restore the kingdom to Israel upon the earth and they had knowledge of the OT visions of the prophets in relationship to this coming event still pending today [Genesis 17:7-8; Isaiah 11; 13:27; Jeremiah 30; 31; Ezekiel 36; 37; 38; 39; Daniel 9:24-27; Joel 2:3; Micah 4; 5; Zechariah 12; 13; 14; Matthew 24:29-31 Acts 1:6; Revelation 7:1-8; 14:1-7]

One needs to understand that the visions of the Bible prophets and the Lord's discourse regarding the end of this present age are all focused upon Israel and the nation's ancient enemies who are the Muslims of the Middle East today [Psalms 83; Ezekiel 36; 38; 39]

There was a worldwide flood just as recorded in Genesis 6 .... and the Lord's next intervention and judgment will also be worldwide, but with a focus upon the geographical region of the Middle East, Israel, and the surrounding post flood populations whose descendants are still in there today

Bible Linker,

Your doctrine is Scofieldism pure and simple.  Made popular in the early 1800's and gain strength in the early 1900's through modern day fundamentalism in America.  There many good people in this movement, but very shadow in their understanding of the scriptures.  They interpret Genesis 12:1-3 and forward (concerning the promises made to Abraham and his seed) literal to mean his fleshly seed, and seek no other interpretation, regardless the many times that Israel must be interpreted to mean the elect, both Jews and Gentiles~and not to his fleshly seed.

I will have more to say concerning this later.  I was first taught this lie many years ago until I try to defend it with the scriptures and could not do so.  Neither can anyone else, and the reason why is that it is not in the scriptures, but a system built upon sound bites only and nothing more.  The NT will interpret the OT for us, not the other way around.  Base upon Paul teachings and Jesus', we know how we must understand Israel, Jerusalem as they used it in Luke 21; Romans 11; Galatians 6; and John from Revelation.

RB

"Jesus told them, His Kingdom was not of this world. Do you think Jesus will change His mind?"

No

His eternal kingdom is certainly not of this present world

But He has an earthly kingdom that will come before eternity begins

It will last for 1000 years with its center at Jerusalem, Israel

This kingdom will be populated with mortals over which He will rule

If you are a biblical Christian you will rule over the same with Him during the period

Quote from: Bible Linker on Fri Aug 02, 2013 - 10:46:44
"Jesus told them, His Kingdom was not of this world. Do you think Jesus will change His mind?"

No

His eternal kingdom is certainly not of this present world

But He has an earthly kingdom that will come before eternity begins

It will last for 1000 years with its center at Jerusalem, Israel

This kingdom will be populated with mortals over which He will rule

If you are a biblical Christian you will rule over the same with Him during the period

Do you believe Jesus failed in His mission?

If Jesus is in your heart now, how can He return?

"Your doctrine is Scofieldism pure and simple"

I don't have a doctrine Red .... neither do I follow or necessarily hold any of the "doctrines" of the divisions of the professing church .... most of professing Christianity is largely apostate today

My views are learned strictly from the scriptures of the Lord's Word

Too bad that you lost your way and were turned off by those who dabble with scripture

... you should dump your current views which are just another diversion exchanged for what you use to follow .... both are of limited scope with significant flaws in my opinion

I would suggest that you return to the drawing board and study the scriptures alone for a period of time with the Lord's leading 

"Do you believe Jesus failed in His mission?"

Jesus never fails at any thing He sets out to do

If Jesus is in your heart now, how can He return?

You underestimate the Lord by your own limitations .... He can do both

I am not on this post to entertain your preterism .... I posted to answer the question of the OP

Maybe that is what you should be doing in respect for the poster

If you want me to help you sort out your current view of preterism for you, you will have to ask me questions on the prescribed End Times part of this forum

.... I will be there for a while

The Bible points out the tribulation as an apocalyptic "week."  Nothing about Noah's story is similar to that.  Noah's flood isn't portrayed as a time of tribulation.  It's a quick, clean judgment on the world.

Quote from: HRoberson on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:33:40
Apocalyptic language sounds impressive but it has always referred to a handful of countries in the Middle East.

Not necessarily. It could be foreshadowing prophecy of future things yet to come.

Answer about the flood...

It will be topped when the Great Tribulation happens in the end...

Daniel 12:11-12 (NASB95)
11 "From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.
12 "How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days!

1290 from the end of time there will be a cessation of temple sacrifices... meaning there will be a temple and the sacrifices will be reinstated up to that point.

And the literal fulfillment of the past prophetic references to the passing of heaven and earth will come to pass. 

Quote from: JohnDB70X7 on Thu Aug 22, 2013 - 22:23:43

Quote from: HRoberson on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:33:40
Apocalyptic language sounds impressive but it has always referred to a handful of countries in the Middle East.

Not necessarily. It could be foreshadowing prophecy of future things yet to come.

My point was that despite the expansive language, the objective area of discussion has always been limited to the Middle East.

Quote from: Happy22 on Thu Aug 01, 2013 - 18:30:27

Quote from: raggthyme13 on Thu Aug 01, 2013 - 02:56:58

Agreed. However, how would you answer about the flood verses this great tribulation? If you do believe in a worldwide flood, how was the 7 year period of time in ad 70 greater tribulation than the flood of Noah? This is the answer I am after for my friend, and for myself.

What worse tribulation could happen to the world, than the death of Jesus? A brand new Covenant was began at the destruction of the Temple.
Luke's account of the Olivet Discourse is Luke 21:35, "For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth." What are we to make of that "global" statement? Biblical Analysis of a Global Flood - The Problem of the Language and Teaching of Jesus
Preterists recognize that the Olivet Discourse is the key to understanding New Testament prophecy properly. A cursory reading of Matthew 24 shows that Jesus uses the Greek equivalent of the same terminology in Genesis 7 throughout the Olivet Discourse. One example in Luke's account of the Olivet Discourse is Luke 21:35, "For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth." What are we to make of that "global" statement? Dispensationalists and most other futurists place the Olivet Discourse in the future precisely because it contains many "global" indicators. Not only is the "face of the earth" language prominent, there is reference to the "whole world,"[1] "earth,"[2] as well as the mention of absolute destruction of human life if the days of tribulation were not cut short.[3] Also in the Olivet Discourse is phenomenon that appears from a surface, literal reading to be global.[4] Preterists who remain dedicated to Creation Science may object, but the Olivet Discourse should be taken globally once a commitment to plain literalism is made in the Genesis flood account.

Note how the very same type of global language is Henry Morris' clinching reason why the flood account must be global in nature:

Our third and impelling reason for interpreting our universal terms of Genesis 6-9 literally is that the physical phenomena described in those chapters would be quite inconceivable if the Flood had been confined to one section of the earth.[5]

Many Creation Science advocates continue to reject preterist claims that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the regional destruction of Judea and Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They do so because they are logically consistent in applying their literal hermeneutic. If the flood of Genesis 7 is global by virtue of the language in the account, then consistency demands the Great Tribulation must be global as well! That is the main reason so many Christians continue to place the events spoken of in Matthew 24 into our future. The language and physical phenomena is every bit global in Matthew 24 as it is in Genesis 6-9.

What I am pointing out is a problem for preterists who hold to a global interpretation of the Genesis flood and then switch to a regional interpretation of the Olivet Discourse. Literal-futurists who believe in a global flood are more consistent in the application of their hermeneutic principles. But preterists know Luke 21:35 was fulfilled in A.D. 70. If it wasn't, then Jesus was mistaken.[6] Shouldn't Jesus' use of global language in reference to a regional destruction in A.D. 70 aid our understanding of the same type of biblical language in Genesis 7?

Happy, I'm a bit slow.. are you saying you believe the flood of Noah was regional?

QuoteSo one friend said that the tribulation would obviously be greater than the worldwide flood, being greater than any other time. She said it is by this that we know that the great tribulation Jesus referred to was not that of 70 ce.

How would you answer?

How does she justify such a statement in light of Christ's admonition to "flee Judea" and "not enter the city?"

How does she further justify such a statement in light of Luke 21:20-22?

Quote from: raggthyme13 on Wed Jul 31, 2013 - 16:09:04
I do believe in fulfilled (or nearly fulfilled) eschatology. I have a friend who is a Jehovah Witness who comes by regularly and we like to talk about the Bible. I asked her, along with another friend, how JWs deal with Matthew chapter 24 verse 21, since they do believe that Jesus, in at least the first half of chapter 24, was speaking to his disciples specifically about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce. So one friend said that the tribulation would obviously be greater than the worldwide flood, being greater than any other time. She said it is by this that we know that the great tribulation Jesus referred to was not that of 70 ce.

How would you answer?


Thanks!

I can't really say that I'm a preterist , haven't studied it enough to say. However, as to your question, I believe that nothing is greater than mans rejection of God. Those of the nation of Israel that rejected the Lord when He came in the flesh, as He had promised He would, were cut off from Him. They broke their covenant with Him. 70 AD was the very end of the old covenant. The idea that a greater end is coming is just the result of men rejecting the importance of it.

Hebrew word for the earth is "erets" and "adamah" and both have multiple meanings:

776. erets
Strong's Concordance
erets: earth, land
Original Word: אָ֫רֶץ
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: erets
Phonetic Spelling: (eh'-rets)
Short Definition: land
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
a prim. root
Definition
earth, land

NASB Translation
common (1), countries (15), countries and their lands (1), country (44), countryside (1), distance* (3), dust (1), earth (655), earth the ground (1), earth's (1), fail* (1), floor (1), ground (119), land (1581), lands (57), lands have their land (2), open (1), other* (2), piece (1), plateau* (1), region (1), territories (1), wild (1), world (3).

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
common, country, earth, field, ground, land, nations, way,

From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land) -- X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X natins, way, + wilderness, world.

127. adamah
Strong's Concordance
adamah: ground, land
Original Word: אֲדָמָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: adamah
Phonetic Spelling: (ad-aw-maw')
Short Definition: land
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from the same as adam
Definition
ground, land

NASB Translation
country (1), dirt (1), dust (3), earth (32), farming* (1), fields (1), ground (64), land (112), lands (2), soil (7).

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
country, earth, ground, husbandman ry, land

From 'adam; soil (from its general redness) -- country, earth, ground, husband(-man) (-ry), land.


Now the Hebrew word for mountain(s) is "har"  and it too has mulitple meanings:

2022. har
Strong's Concordance
har: mountain, hill, hill country
Original Word: הָר
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: har
Phonetic Spelling: (har)
Short Definition: mountains
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
of uncertain derivation
Definition
mountain, hill, hill country

NASB Translation
hill (16), hill country (91), hills (8), hillside* (1), mount (118), Mount (5), mountain (156), Mountain (2), mountains (161).

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
hill country, mountain, promotion

A shortened form of harar; a mountain or range of hills (sometimes used figuratively) -- hill (country), mount(-ain), X promotion.


Yes, I am in the camp of full preterists that are convinced Noah's flood was regional. And guess what, both secular history, archaeology, and Hebrew hermeneutics are supportive.