Did the disciple that Jesus loved not die? John 21:18-23

[lea]

John 21:
18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird yourself and walk wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to go." 19 Now this He said, signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He *said to him, "Follow Me!"

20 Peter, turning around, *saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper and said, "Lord, who is the one who betrays You?" 21 So Peter seeing him *said to Jesus, "Lord, and what about this man?" 22 Jesus *said to him, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!" 23 Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?"


This is clear and plain evidence that Jesus returned in the clouds around AD 70.

Jesus told Peter the manner he would die and glorify God. And we know that was true. Peter was crucified upside down. I read it was because he said he was not worthy that he should die as the Lord did.
Now I ask you, Jesus also said of the disciple He loved that he would remain till He came.

If the prediction the Lord gave about Peter was true, then that very disciple that Jesus loved must have lived at least till AD 70.

This reminds me of a similar prediction by Jesus in Matt.24:34- Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.

[robycop3]

  No, Jesus has NOT yet returned. Remember, He said EVERY EYE would see His return. And He will take over the rule of the world when He does return.

[lea]

  No, Jesus has NOT yet returned. Remember, He said EVERY EYE would see His return. And He will take over the rule of the world when He does return.

First of all, you did not even consider the scriptures I gave and told me to remember Rev.1:7 which says, 7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.

So who are the "tribes of the earth?" Israel. Who are "even they who pierced Him?" The Romans who wrote in their annuls about seeing armies of angels in the sky around AD 67.

You're overlooking so many verses that state how all the things in the book of Revelation began and ended with "the time is near" "the things that must soon take place,"etc.

Remember what God said to Israel in Deut. 18:22- that if a prophet's words don't come to pass or come true, the predictions are not from God. In Revelation, Jesus said He was the spirit of prophecy. So He must be a true prophet.

Also, Peter said: 2Pet.3:13, But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells. Does the Holy Spirit help you get it?
If the new heaven and earth didn't come yet, then no one has been made righteous in Christ today!

[3 Resurrections]

Hi lea,

You asked if the disciple Jesus loved did not die.  Yes, he did.  He died ONCE back in John chapter 11, and was raised from the dead 4 days later by Jesus, NEVER TO DIE AGAIN. 

This is why the beloved disciple (Lazarus) that Jesus referred to in John 21:22 was going to "remain" on the earth, living until Jesus came bodily in AD 70 to stand on the mount of Olives, as Zechariah 14:4-5 predicted.

There were others raised from the dead by Jesus and the disciples during Christ's earthly ministry and afterward who would also stay alive, like Lazarus, and who would also  "remain" on the earth as resurrected persons until that AD 70 coming of Christ (like the Matthew 27:52-53 group of saints raised along with Christ, for example). 

Paul spoke in I Thess. 4:15 and 17 of those who were then "alive" and who would "remain" until the coming of the Lord.  They were saints who by that point in time had been MADE ALIVE by the resurrection process - which for Christ and His saints is NOT a condition which can be lost (Romans 6:9).


You are on target with identifying "every eye" seeing Christ's coming return with clouds as being the "tribes of the earth" in ISRAEL of the first century.  That first-century generation of the tribes of Israel as well as the Romans both shared responsibility for "piercing" the Savior.  They are specified as the ones in the particular group of "every eye" that would see Christ's physical return.

Did you know, lea, that a record of armored angel troops in the clouds was not the first time that this phenomena occurred?  It's recorded that it also happened once back in Maccabean times, as the Israelites were battling for their independence.

[lea]

I appreciate you identifying "the disciple that Jesus loved" as Lazarus but I do not agree with him never physically dying again.
Some Preterists believe there was an literal "rapture" of the living in AD70. However, nowhere is it recorded that living bodies were seen ascending. Also, just as in Matt.27, when those saints came out of the grave and appeared to many, we don't hear of anyone missing Lazarus & co. in AD70!

I don't believe there was a "rapture" of the living in AD70. Paul did not mean this in 1Thess.4 or 1 Cor.15.

But perhaps it can be for another Preterist topic here.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi again lea,

If you are convinced that Lazarus died again a second time, then what do you do with the text that says "...it is appointed unto men ONCE TO DIE" (not twice), "but after this the judgment." ?

If Lazarus had died again after Jesus raised him from the dead, his resurrection would not have been any kind of display of God's glory at all, (as Jesus repeated to Martha in John 11:40) if Lazarus' resurrection wasn't a permanent condition.  Also, what kind of reassurance would that be for us throughout all eternity, if our resurrection were a condition that could at any moment be lost to us once again by the possibility of our dying again another time?  The gift of God is supposed to be "ETERNAL life through Jesus Christ our Lord" - not a temporary benefit.

Your objection is that we have no record of living bodies seen ascending in AD 70.  Remember this, we have absolutely no recorded observation of an eye-witness seeing Jesus ascend to the Father on the day of His resurrection, either.  Yet we know that he did ascend that same morning, as He promised to Mary Magdalene in John 20:17, and returned to earth soon after offering His blood sacrifice to God on heaven's mercy seat.

In the same way, we must believe on faith scripture's promises that this predicted rapture of the RESURRECTED SAINTS (not ordinary living saints who hadn't died yet) actually did occur as foretold for that generation. 

The resurrected body is not necessarily visible at all times, you know, just as Christ's resurrected body could vanish from sight by His own volition.  There are manifold examples in scripture of God choosing to grant to certain individuals vision or hearing of something miraculous, but withholding that same perception from others.  Selective revelation by Gods choice.

The AD 70 rapture occurred at Jerusalem's Mount of Olives location where all the resurrected saints were gathered together to join Christ from all points of the compass.  It would have happened in the "twinkling of an eye".  If you blinked, you would have missed seeing it, I would think. 

Not all humanity on the earth at that time would have witnessed this local event - especially since Zechariah 14:7 prophesied  that this coming of Christ to the Mount of Olives was going to happen at "evening time".  Jesus only promised that "some" of those standing in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28 would live to see Him returning with the angels and with rewards.  I believe what Jesus promised came true before that first-century generation passed, even though I never saw the physical rapture of the resurrected saints happen, and have no record in my hands of anyone seeing the actual event take place in real time.

"Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed", Jesus said.  I plant the foot of faith on those words in John 20:29. 

I believe.

[lea]

Yes, man is appointed to die once but I think Lazarus was an exception because he was the subject of a miracle Jesus performed. Besides, he was only dead 4 days! We shouldn't be insecure about Jesus' miracle. Lazarus went on to live at least another 40 years. And I'm not questioning whether God's glory and Jesus' miracle was made proof to the Pharisees and high priests that after the 3rd day of death, that Jesus could raise the dead.
I think Jesus giving up the ghost and going to the Father was totally spiritual. No one could see that.

In your first post you said:
"This is why the beloved disciple (Lazarus) that Jesus referred to in John 21:22 was going to "remain" on the earth, living until Jesus came bodily in AD 70 to stand on the mount of Olives, as Zechariah 14:4-5 predicted."
Seriously? ....I couldn't disagree more. Zech.14 speaks of those who fought against the "NEW" Jerusalem. This is figurative language describing real places in Israel as a guide. It is spiritual Jerusalem that the prophet is talking about. God came down many times in the O.T.  It is figurative language.

See 1Cor. 15:51 regarding "the twinkling of an eye"  1Cor. 15, 50Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— 52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
We could not see the dead rise first to heaven and the living in Christ changed. Just as we cannot "see"
anyone change at the moment they become Christians today. Paul said it was like a twinkle of the eye because he had to give it a time reference to the believers. Also at the last trumpet in those days.

[lea]

3 R's, I found an excellent explanation on the subject scripture of "appointed once to die"

https://www.anewdaydawning.com/blog-1/?tag=appointed+unto+a+man+once+to+die

[3 Resurrections]

Hi lea,

Your link reads like a modern-day Sadducee when he denies that death is a one-time occurrence for saints such as Lazarus.  This flies in the face of Jesus' words to the Sadducees of His day regarding the "children of the resurrection".   Those worthy to obtain the resurrection from among the dead "...neither marry nor are given in marriage:  NEITHER *CAN* THEY DIE ANYMORE: for they are equal to the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection."

A second death is not even a remote possibility for a child of God, once they have been raised from the dead.  Lazarus was in an incorruptible state, once Jesus had displayed the power of God in raising him.  As were all those examples of the First-fruits saints raised with Christ in Matthew 27:52-53.  They never died again either.  Jesus declared it to be impossible.

[3 Resurrections]

And lea, there is no such thing taught in scripture as a translation change for the bodies of living saints who have never died, such as in I Cor. 15 or anywhere else.  Only the DEAD are changed into an incorruptible state in that text.  ALL must pass through the death process of the body that single time. 

As for the Zechariah 12-14 chapter prophecy about Jerusalem, that is not the NEW Jerusalem that would be under attack, and then "taken" and destroyed.  It was a prophecy of PHYSICAL, AD 70 OLD Jerusalem being taken down, so that the spiritual New Jerusalem would be left established without a rival.

It's true that God came down in the OT many times in judgment of the nations in a figurative sense.  But that changed after Jesus became incarnate and established the New Covenant with Himself permanently occupying a resurrected human/divine form as our high priest mediator. 

For any appearances that Christ made after His resurrection, He never discarded that bodily-resurrected form - it became part of His identity then and always.  So any return of Christ to earth would necessarily have to be with Him still retaining that same bodily-resurrected form. 

Zechariah 14:4-5 described the time and the place that Jesus would return for His second coming in AD 70.  The direction of the EAST of Jerusalem mentioned in Zech. 14:4 was very important.  EAST was always emphasized in the OT as having great sacred significance; particularly the eastern gate of Zerubbabel's rebuilt temple in Ezekiel 46:1-3. 

If Christ's return was to be only a spiritual one, the direction of the compass would have no relevance, don't you think?  Besides, there would be no need for a "spiritual" return of Christ if He had ALREADY granted His Spirit, the Comforter, to be within His saints after He left this earth in Acts 1.

[lea]

Zechariah 14:1-7 is primarily a prophecy predicting the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. There is first the natural and then the spiritual. First, God defeated His adulterous Bride, earthly Jerusalem. Then He began to war against the heathen enemies of His true Bride, the heavenly Jerusalem.  The warfare spoken of in Zechariah 14:1-2 is about physical warfare and the destruction of physical Jerusalem. Then the warfare of Zechariah 14:3-7 is about spiritual warfare in which the Lord himself fights for spiritual Jerusalem, His Bride, the Church.

The Mt. of Olives is an allusion to where Jesus warned the disciples to flee from Judea when they saw the Roman armies (the abomination that causes desolation) encroaching the city.

The Church historian Eusebius recounts that the Jerusalem Christians were warned in a vision to depart Jerusalem because its destruction was near. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, writing in about AD 75, "many of the most eminent of the Jews swam away from the city" in AD 64 (Jewish War II.20.1). In other words, this "exodus" from Jerusalem occurred three-and-a-half years before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Eusebius describes it like this:

"The whole body, however, of the Church at Jerusalem, having been commanded by a divine revelation, given to men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the city, and dwelt at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called Pella. Here those that believed in Christ, having removed from Jerusalem, as if holy men had entirely abandoned the royal city itself, and the whole land of Judea; the divine justice, for their crimes against Christ and his Apostles finally overtook them, totally destroying the whole generation of these evildoers form the earth" (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3,5).

And thus was fulfilled the words of Christ: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place" (Matthew 24:34) (Taylor Marshall, Eusebius on the Flight from Jerusalem in AD 64).

[lea]

Hi lea,

Your link reads like a modern-day Sadducee when he denies that death is a one-time occurrence for saints such as Lazarus.  This flies in the face of Jesus' words to the Sadducees of His day regarding the "children of the resurrection".   Those worthy to obtain the resurrection from among the dead "...neither marry nor are given in marriage:  NEITHER *CAN* THEY DIE ANYMORE: for they are equal to the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection."

A second death is not even a remote possibility for a child of God, once they have been raised from the dead.  Lazarus was in an incorruptible state, once Jesus had displayed the power of God in raising him.  As were all those examples of the First-fruits saints raised with Christ in Matthew 27:52-53.  They never died again either.  Jesus declared it to be impossible.

Lighten up brother!
You do take scripture out of context. First, they cannot die anymore refers to the apostles and disciples (including us today) that we cannot die spiritually.

How you get Lazarus to be immortal physically is just your imagination working overtime.

34 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi lea,

How can I possibly be taking Luke 20:35-36 out of context when the very question the Sadducees were testing Christ with concerned the BODILY DEATH of the 7 men and the one wife they had all been married to, one after another?  Their debate with Christ was to entrap Him with a question with the intent to DISPROVE a bodily resurrection.   

He did not fall for their ploy, but instead described what the after-physical-death experience would be like.  And one of the conditions for an after-physical-death experience of the saints is that there is NO POSSIBILITY of a child of God PHYSICALLY DYING AGAIN for a second time after they are resurrected.  "...Neither CAN they die anymore..."

That immortality applies both physically AND spiritually.  The saints were and are given an immortal soul in the present life as a pledge (an "arrabon" - the "earnest of the Spirit") of their incorruptible body which they ultimately received or will receive in an individual resurrection like Lazarus, or in one of the three bodily resurrection events (AD 33, AD 70, or AD 3033).

Lazarus was indeed physically immortal after his resurrection, according to Christ's testimony in Luke 20:36.  And we know for certain that he was a child of God, because there is multiple, repeated testimony that Christ loved him and his sisters.

"The ungodly are NOT so, but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.  Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.  For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall PERISH." (Ps. 1:4-6). No immortal existence of either body or soul is destined for the ungodly "goats" and "tares".

[lea]

Third resurrection in 3033?!! 

I guess I must repeat myself. Luke 20:33-36,  33 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife does she become? For all seven had her as wife."

34 Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36 nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

Don't you see, if there is no marriage going on in heaven when we die- then, my friend, we do not keep our physical bodies for heaven. We receive a new spiritual body in heaven as St. Paul said.
Even Jesus' appearance changed in heaven as St. John notes in Revelation.

I'll post again the link concerning "it's appointed unto man once to die."
https://www.anewdaydawning.com/blog-1/?tag=appointed+unto+a+man+once+to+die

If you still can't understand from that about Lazarus' physical body not being immortal, then maybe someone else can comment on this.

[3 Resurrections]

Hey lea,

Having no marriage in heaven does NOT require the absence of physical bodies, any more than a bachelor or spinster having never married on this earth exists in a bodiless state.  Christ never married, but His was definitely an incarnate, physical form while on earth, and He "continueth ever" in His resurrected physical state to this day in heaven (Hebrews 7:23-25).

Even the angels have a certain tangible type of celestial-flesh form, but with different qualities than that of us terrestrial-fleshed creatures on earth, as Paul noted in I Cor.15:40.  That's how Genesis 6:1-4 could describe those celestial-fleshed angelic sons of God actually having physical relations resulting in children born to them and their terrestrial-fleshed wives.  Against God's commands for them, of course, but still an unfortunate physical possibility for those rebellious angels.

If we are to resemble the celestial-fleshed  elect angels after death, with no marrying or giving in marriage, (or offspring), and no capability of physically dying again, this does NOT require the absence of a physical form, any more than the angels lack a kind of tangible physical form made of celestial type flesh.

Just like Christ our "fellow- heir", the First-born of those from among the dead, we will one day share the same type of resurrected form that He was raised with, before He ascended for the final time, and even after that; the same flesh and bone form (without blood animating it), but in a glorified state, and with a new powerful display of capabilities and qualities.

Among those new qualities, in the resurrected state, like the resurrected Christ, we too will have the option of invisibility, the ability to CHANGE THE APPEARANCE of that resurrected physical form that is changed and rendered incorruptible.  Self-levitation will be another option, and the ability to transport ourselves at virtually the speed of thought; the option of eating and drinking if desired, and above all, physical death will never have power over our physical bodies again. 

As "fellow-heirs", Christ and the saints share the SAME inheritance of all these things.  Why would you wish to cheat the saints of the full measure of that inheritance as spelled out in the gospels?  This is stingy of you.  God is more generous than the typical Full Preterist allows Him to be.  And it isn't even necessary to do so in order to believe scripture's teaching of the first-century coming return of Christ in AD 70.

[lea]

You just don't get, do you? Jesus' body is not like our bodies. We simply live on in heaven with a new spiritual body. Like the angels, we will have substance but is not the same sinful flesh we had on earth.

You say full preterists are stingy or limit our inheritance. First of all, I think one of the tenets of Christianity is everlasting life after death.
I fall on my knees when I think of God's blessing for us!

Also, God said heaven is His throne and the earth his footstool. Does God have feet? No it is spiritual language. So, "His feet will stand on Mt. Olives" from Zechariah 14 is not physical feet. It is a stance in prophetic language. The mountain is the Lord's.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi lea,

Your question: "Does God have feet?"

Answer: Yes, Jesus the Son of Man and the Son of God does have human feet.  He still does today, just as John saw His feet with the appearance of brass in a furnace in Rev. 1:15, who then was walking among the golden candlesticks in Rev. 2:1.

It was those literal feet of Christ that literally stood on the literal Mount of Olives on Pentecost Day in AD 70.  Just as Zechariah predicted in Zech 14:4-5(LXX), that literal mountain experienced a literal earthquake, and produced literal rubble that slid down the mountainside, and filled up the Kidron valley as far as Azal.  That's why Zechariah described the mountain as "removing" toward the north and south, and "cleaving" to the east and west.  He was describing a landslide of rubble produced by an earthquake that affected the Mount of Olives.  There is an earthquake fault line that runs up this valley, and seismic activity is not at all unusual for this zone.

That layer of literal rubble that slid down the Mount of Olives at Christ's return in AD 70 and filled up the Kidron valley still lies there today.  Actually, there are TWO layers according to archaeologists, dated from King Uzziah's time and also from the AD 70 era - just as scripture describes it. 

I have read that Don Preston teaches that Christ's physically-resurrected body simply vaporized, so to speak, when He ascended in Acts 1, as no longer needed.   (Perhaps you ascribe to the same view, lea?)  I'm thinking Don Preston teaches this because there are too many verses that say that our resurrected body is a copy of Christ's, (Phil. 3:21, I John 3:2, Romans 8:29, etc.), and this would be a problem for Don if he thought that Christ still retained His physically-resurrected body as shown to the disciples and handled by them.  So he conveniently disposes of Christ's physically-resurrected body, making it just a "spiritual" body after the ascension, and then he can say that we, like Christ, won't have a renovated body of flesh either.

Couldn't disagree with him more on that point.  Christ is still called the "Son of Man" in John's visions, because He is still retaining the glorified human body He arose with, and uses it as our human/divine representative high priest before the Father.

Christ was called the "FIRST-born among many brethren". Since when do brothers in a family not share a physical, human resemblance?  Christ as the "FIRST-born from among the dead" (Col. 1:18), would share the same physical resemblance with the "SECOND-born", the "THIRD-born", the "FOURTH-born", and so forth throughout the entire group of siblings.

It's a "CHANGED" body turned incorruptible that we will receive back again in the resurrection - not another spiritual body EXCHANGED as a replacement, with the former one dumped like garbage.

[lea]

It doesn't matter to this argument that Jesus has literal feet.  Zech.14 is prophetic language. The same time frame and same occurrences are prophesied in Isaiah 2-4.
Isa.3:13 KJV, same as the NKJV,
13 The Lord standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people.

14 The Lord will enter into judgment with the ancients of his people, and the princes thereof: for ye have eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses.

15 What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord God of hosts.

And the mountain which would cleave is prophetic also. Zech.14 notes that the split between who are "true" Israel, the Israel of God and the old covenant peoples of God.

The prophecy is an allusion to Jesus' Mt of Olives warning to flee to the mountains when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies (the abomination of desolation).

The prophetic valley in Zech.14 would be the split between the believers and the unbelievers- who were to experience God's wrath and destruction.

Again, Jesus' rise from the dead with all the scars, was to prove and recognize that He does and indeed does raise the dead. However, we won't have the same flesh that He did. Jesus is the exception in that "His body did not see decay." Acts 2:31 Foreseeing this, David spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that He was not abandoned to Hades, nor did His body see decay.


2Cor.5, 1-5  2 Corinthians 5 (NKJV)
Assurance of the Resurrection

5 For we know that if our earthly [a]house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven, 3 if indeed, having been clothed, we shall not be found naked. 4 For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened, not because we want to be unclothed, but further clothed, that mortality may be swallowed up by life. 5 Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as [c]a guarantee.(emph. mine)

The "judgment seat of Christ" chapter is not a "corporate" resurrection. It's individual for us also to receive rewards or not.

[robycop3]

  The "tribes of the earth" are ALL the different peoples, not just Israel. And Jesus has NOT yet returned.

Proof?

  The earth keeps right on keepin' on. When Jesus returns, he will be in His full glory & power, as He said. And He will take over rule of the earth.

  And the thingie about John ? People overlook that little word "IF". Jesus was presenting a hypothetical situation, I. E. "What if?" He did NOT say John wouldn't die.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi robycop3,

You should do some research into the identity of exactly who it was that the "beloved disciple" in John 21:24 truly was.  There is solid scriptural evidence that the beloved disciple who Jesus desired to remain until He came again was Lazarus (aka John Eleazar, which the secret gospel of Mark said was the name of the man Jesus raised from the dead.  The name Lazarus being the Greek version of the name Eleazar.)

That would mean that the gospel of John was originally authored by Lazarus, as well as the three epistles of John...and also Revelation.  This makes total sense, because the one giving John the visions in Revelation  identified himself to John in Rev.22:9 as "thy FELLOWSERVANT AND OF THY BRETHREN THE PROPHETS...". So John was in the same state as the one giving him the visions.  Both of them were in the same glorified state of a bodily-resurrected person. 

This tallies with the history written by Tertullian and Jerome that we have about the author of Revelation.  He was cast into a vat of boiling oil by Nero's orders and emerged unhurt by the experience.   Since this failed to kill him, he was sent to Patmos instead.  The record of this event was in the original edition of Foxe's  Book of Christian Martyrs. 

Now, if this astounding occurrence was an actual fact, it really is not so miraculous a story, if the resurrected Lazarus (John Eleazar) was the author of Revelation.  It merely proves that the incorruptible condition of a bodily-resurrected saint cannot be destroyed by any means at all - even an attempt to deep-fry that individual. 

So, it truly would have been impossible for the bodily-resurrected, beloved disciple Lazarus (John Eleazar) to die again before Jesus returned.

And Jesus actually DID take to Himself all the kingdoms of the world in AD 70.  He accomplished this by destroying the Satanic  realm and by getting rid of the Divine Council which had been the system in place prior to that time.  According to Hebrews 2:5, the condition of the world to come after AD 70 would not be subjected to the oversight of any Divine Council anymore as in OT times, whether those angels were the righteous ones (the Watchers, as in Daniel 4:13&17), or harassment by the ones who had turned evil.  "For unto the angels He hath NOT PUT INTO SUBJECTION THE WORLD TO COME, of which we speak." 

By destroying the entire Satanic and demonic  realm by imprisoning them all in Jerusalem from AD 66-70, (Rev. 18:2 and Isaiah 24:21-22), the returning Christ confiscated all of the kingdom powers of the Divine Council (which Satan had once boasted to Christ in Luke 4:5-7 that he possessed), and claimed them for His own.  Whether you believe it or not, the current world conditions are purged of the presence of the Satanic and demonic realm.  What is left is the evil coming from the hearts of men, producing all kinds of tragic effects for mankind.  We need no demonic or Satanic inspiration to instigate corrupt activity - we are more than capable of doing this ourselves.

And I might want to ask you just what "tribe" you consider yourself to be in?  God only segregates the people of the world into "sheep" or "goats".  "Sons" or "bastards".  "Wheat" or "tares".  The "tribes" were linked to Old Covenant Israel, and were used for the "gates" of the New Jerusalem - but the FOUNDATIONS of that city and its gates were the 12 Apostles of the Lamb, with Christ being the chief cornerstone of the New Jerusalem which we live in today as sons of God.

[lea]

3R's, So even if Lazarus remained until Jesus came in AD70, does that mean that the apostle John wouldn't? The church historians say he lived till AD100.

You sound as if you believe that the gospel of John, his three epistles and revelation were written by Lazarus?  Is God the maker of confusion?  Why throw the name John around when "John" was only distinguished between John the Baptist and St. John in the bible?

And please stop with your attempts to prove that Lazarus was in his resurrected state receiving the Revelation.
John was "in the Spirit" on the Lord's day. Not in an incorruptible heavenly state as you say.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi again lea,

Yes, I agree with Full-Preterist Pastor D Curtis on this John = Lazarus position that he presents on his Berean Bible Church website.   Pastor D Curtis builds the case with  scriptural proof that Lazarus was the author of the gospel, the 3 epistles, and Revelation also.  The only point where I differ from Pastor Curtis is when he writes that Lazarus died again a second time.  It's impossible for incorruptible resurrected flesh to die another time according to Jesus.

There were more than just the two individuals (John son of Zebedee and John the Baptist) that were given the name of "John" in scripture.  You will remember those who "had John as their minister" (referring to John Mark).  Even one of the high priest's relations was named "John" in Acts 4:6. 

Also, we have a record in Eusebius of Papias' comments that names James and John the sons of Zebedee as separate and distinct from a certain John the presbyter (who I suspect was John Mark, sister's son to Barnabas).  So the name John in those days was not as rare as we have been taught to think. 

The APOSTLE John, son of Zebedee, I believe was martyred as well as his brother before AD 70, because Christ said in Matt. 20:22-23 that he and his brother James were destined to drink of the same cup as Himself.

But John Eleazar (or Lazarus, the beloved disciple) was destined to remain on the earth until Christ bodily returned in AD 70.  Part of his assignment during this time given to him by Christ was to watch over Mary, Jesus' mother, as if he were her son until her death.  Who better could Christ have entrusted with the care of His own mother than a man He had raised from the dead who could never get sick, commit a sin, or die ever again? 

The resurrected Lazarus was Jesus' senior care plan for Mary.  And since Lazarus knew that he himself was a target for the high priests who wished they could kill Lazarus to get rid of his testimony to Jesus' power to raise the dead, (not that this was even possible), Lazarus adopted some different names to protect Mary from likewise becoming a target for persecution by the Jews who hated Christ and everyone connected with Him. 

I believe the name "Barnabas" was one of those aliases, since Lazarus could well be called the "Son of consolation" for Mary after Christ had ascended and left her in the consoling care of the beloved disciple.  Barnabas was a fearless supporter of the newly-reformed Paul, when every one of the disciples were afraid to trust the man who had once persecuted them.  The "BELOVED Barnabas" (Acts 15:25) was described as "a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith" (Acts 11:24), so if Barnabas is also the beloved Lazarus, then it would not be surprising that the author of Revelation was "in the Spirit" on the Lord's day. 

We have two scripture texts that affirm that the beloved disciple was an impeccable source that could be unfailingly relied upon to bear record of the truth -  something that could only be true of an incorruptible resurrected saint. 

One is in John 21:24.  "This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: AND WE KNOW THAT HIS TESTIMONY IS TRUE." 

And this one in III JOHN  12.  "Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record, AND YE KNOW THAT OUR RECORD IS TRUE."

Without any doubt whatsoever, John Eleazar (Lazarus) could not possibly lie or give false testimony, and all those who knew his history  of being raised from the dead were aware of this fact.

[lea]

Hello, 3R's, I see you found D. Curtis' comments on who wrote Revelation. Well, I looked at that several years ago and disagreed with him on that opinion and still do. He is correct about Lazarus dying again though. You seem to cause confusion with your post on all the "Johns" in the bible with this, imho.

Notice how even Jesus didn't call Lazarus "John" but did address him as Lazarus?  Did Jesus say, John, come out and take off the grave clothes! I don't think so.

True, it was Lazarus at the cross with Mary, as seen in John 19: 25 but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" 27 Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!" And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

Now you think John the apostle died before AD70 based on Matt.20:22-23? I disagree and agree with the consensus that John lived till 100AD.

Matthew 20:22-23,

22 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said to them. "Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?"

"We can," they answered.

23 Jesus said to them, "You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father."

That does not mean that the Zebedee brothers would drink the "whole" cup that Jesus would to me, even though that James was murdered early on- but John the apostle would also suffer from persecution for believing in Jesus. John would drink "from" My cup, as we read in Revelation 1:9, 9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 

Next, please go back to the link that gives the interpretation for "it is appointed for man to die once."
Although you loathe it because you can't overcome it and even called it sounding like a modern day Sadducee. Anyone can denigrate an opinion different from their own, but I don't take it personally.
https://www.anewdaydawning.com/blog-1/?tag=appointed+unto+a+man+once+to+die

Finally, 3R's, the purpose of my starting this thread was to point out that the disciple that Jesus loved was to live at least until Jesus came again. So, my point was to note that this disciple would die and not live forever, just as John says that Jesus didn't say he wouldn't die (as some of the disciples were saying) but that he would tarry until He came. Now, you contradict scripture, just like those naive disciples believed, that he wouldn't die!
By saying that Lazarus would live to see His coming, imho, meant that Jesus would indeed come in Lazarus' lifetime because Lazarus would die a person's life expectancy in the natural.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi lea,

Sorry for the delay responding - I've been sledgehammering and jackhammering a concrete slab carport and making many runs to the landfill some 30 miles away - plus holiday workroom deadlines.

Did you ever read the paragraph by Papias (found in Eusebius' history) that discriminates between John the Apostle (brother of James) and another disciple that he called "John the Presbyter"?  It is John the PRESBYTER who Papias claimed was still alive as he was writing.  I'm inclined to think that this "John the Presbyter" was John whose surname was MARK - the one named John who was an assistant to his uncle Barnabas and Paul, ministering in Acts 13:5 to the Jews in the synagogues of Salamis, Cyprus (which was Barnabas' home turf - Acts 4:36).

Under his uncle Barnabas' personal tutelage, the young John Mark eventually developed into a profitable minister of the gospel, as Paul later testified in II Tim. 4:11 and Col. 4:20.  So, age-wise, John Mark could have reasonably been still alive in AD 100, and Papias could have had personal encounters with him.

So let's not mix up the three men called John. 

(#1)  John the APOSTLE, son of Zebedee, was prophesied by Jesus in Matt. 20:22-23 to be martyred like his brother James (who was killed early on by Herod in Acts 12:1-2 around AD 40).

(#1)  John the PRESBYTER referred to by Papias was likely John surnamed Mark - Barnabas' nephew - who probably was the one living into AD 100, and whose tomb is in Ephesus.

(#3)  John the REVELATOR, the "companion in tribulation" that was inflicted by the Jews against Christians following the AD 57 riot in Ephesus, was different than either one of the men named John above.  That's because he purposefully went by several different aliases, to protect the woman Jesus had put under his care.

Just to make sure that you are thoroughly confused, the following lists all of the names John the REVELATOR employed, or identities he had.

(#1)  The rich young ruler of the Sanhedrin having great possessions that JESUS LOVED, described in John Mark's gospel (Mark 10:21).

(#2)  Joses, the Levite surnamed Barnabas (meaning "Son of Consolation" for Mary).  Barnabas was rich enough to have property in Cyprus that he sold in Acts 4:36-37 and gave to the disciples.  In Acts 15:25, he significantly is called "Our BELOVED Barnabas".  He is called an APOSTLE in Acts 14:14, a PROPHET in Acts 13:1, and "a good man, full of the Holy Ghost and of faith" in Acts 11:24.

(#3)  Lazarus, that JESUS LOVED, son of Simon the Pharisee who was a leper, was sitting at the table with Jesus in John 12:1, and again as the beloved disciple at Jesus' side during the Last Supper (John 13:23).  His family was wealthy, as indicated by his sister Mary's expensive gift of perfumed ointment that anointed Christ.

(#4)  John Eleazar, the name given in the secret gospel of Mark to the one Jesus raised from the dead - aka Lazarus.  I find it significant that John Eleazar (as Barnabas) would have shared a similar family name with his nephew John Mark.

(#5)  John the "beloved disciple", author of Revelation, was also called a prophet by the angel and the man giving him the visions and interpreting them (Rev. 10:11 and Rev. 22:9), just like the "beloved Barnabas" was a prophet (Acts 13:1).

The reason all of these identities sound confusing to you, lea, is because Lazarus WANTED his multiple aliases to be confusing for the Jewish leadership who hated both him and Christ, and would have liked to kill him (John 12:10-11).  Lazarus did not fear for his own safety's sake, (because that was never in any jeopardy as a resurrected saint), but he didn't want Mary, Jesus' mother, to be targeted for persecution by association with him under that name of Lazarus. 

That's why the book of John never refers to the "beloved disciple" by his actual name, but repeatedly refers to him as "the beloved disciple" or "the disciple whom Jesus loved".

Jesus had committed His mother Mary's care to Lazarus at the cross, and Lazarus faithfully discharged that duty until her death around the early AD 40's.   It was after Mary's death when Lazarus / Barnabas was freed up to begin ministering with Paul in Acts 11:22.

You have claimed that I have contradicted scripture by my saying that Lazarus never died again.  You are reading something into the John 21:23 text that is NOT THERE.  While it is true that Jesus did NOT say that the beloved disciple WOULDN'T die, He also did NOT say that he WOULD die.  He said nothing at all one way or another on this point. 

That's because He wanted the main focus of His statement to be on THE TIME OF HIS RETURN - not on the status of the beloved disciple.  The sole emphasis of His statement was to reveal that the beloved disciple would "remain" until the TIME OF HIS RETURN.  You are trying to prove your point that Lazarus died again by using an argument from the negative, which we can't really rely on for a good exegesis of the verse.

And I am somewhat puzzled, lea, as to why you would perceive the word "Sadducee" to be a denigration, when one of their main tenets was to deny a physical resurrection of the saints' bodies.  Isn't that your position also?  Why would you be reluctant to attach yourself to the Sadducee title if that particular view about the resurrection is your sincere belief?

I remember on one of your replies to my post about the "Paradigm for the 3 resurrections" where you were denying that our physical dead bodies are ever raised to life again in an incorruptible state.  You  said "...we are to spit on our flesh".  I'm sorry, but the only time I ever read of Jesus spitting on anybody's flesh was to make mud of His spittle to anoint the eyes of the blind man and heal him of his blindness.  Jesus has always been heavily invested in the RENOVATION and the HEALING - not the DEMOLITION of the bodies of His saints.  "But there shall not an hair of your heads perish", even if they died, was His promise to His disciples in Luke 21:18.

[lea]

3R's,
Remember, God is not the author of confusion! (1Cor.14:33) And your post is rife with it. Jesus never implied that the Zebedee brothers would be martyred in Matt.20, but that they would indeed drink "from my cup." For their testimony they would be persecuted, and that is all that one can deduce about those verses.

You don't seem to discern even simpler things in scripture! 

"But there shall not an hair of your heads perish", even if they died, was His promise to His disciples in Luke 21:18.

This is before the disciples would flee the city to escape the great tribulation in Jerusalem. If you read all of Luke 21, instead of taking something out of context to mean what you think it means, one can see that Jesus' was saying they would not be harmed. " Not a hair on your head will be lost."

Paul gave a similar statement to the sailors of the shipwreck in Acts 27:33,34:  33 And while the day was coming on, Paul besought them all to take some food, saying, This day is the fourteenth day that ye wait and continue fasting, having taken nothing. 34 Wherefore I beseech you to take some food: for this is for your safety: for there shall not a hair perish from the head of any of you. Emph. mine.
This had to do with them being SAVED!

[robycop3]

  In your zeal to push the false preterist doctrine, you're overlooking that big little word "IF" (ean in the Greek) in Jesus' words. He was presenting a rhetorical/hypothetical situation to the disciples, telling them that it should be nothing to them IF He wanted that man to live til He returned. He did NOT say that disciple WOULD live til He returned !

  Now, is the disciple John alive on earth now? Of course not ! And how about Lazarus? Newp !

  And Jesus did NOT return in 70 AD.

Proof?

He isn't ruling the earth right now, as proven by the prevalence of sin.

  And Scripture says NOTHING about an invisible return  It says He will be SEEN BY ALL, even those who pierced Him, so the souls of the dead in hades, both in torments & paradise, will see His return as well. And it'll be during the reign of the beast/antichrist/man of sin & his sidekick, the false prophet, immediately after the great trib ends, as Jesus said.

  Prets have one little prob with their doctrine - the prophesied events simply HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED ! ! A reading of the Revelation will show you a brief description of those plagues.

  Preterism is simply FALSE, a jeezit invention.

   

[robycop3]

First of all, you did not even consider the scriptures I gave and told me to remember Rev.1:7 which says, 7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.

So who are the "tribes of the earth?" Israel. Who are "even they who pierced Him?" The Romans who wrote in their annuls about seeing armies of angels in the sky around AD 67.

You're overlooking so many verses that state how all the things in the book of Revelation began and ended with "the time is near" "the things that must soon take place,"etc.

Remember what God said to Israel in Deut. 18:22- that if a prophet's words don't come to pass or come true, the predictions are not from God. In Revelation, Jesus said He was the spirit of prophecy. So He must be a true prophet.

Also, Peter said: 2Pet.3:13, But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells. Does the Holy Spirit help you get it?
If the new heaven and earth didn't come yet, then no one has been made righteous in Christ today!

In your zeal to push the false preterist doctrine, you're overlooking that big little word "IF" (ean in the Greek) in Jesus' words. He was presenting a rhetorical/hypothetical situation to the disciples, telling them that it should be nothing to them IF He wanted that man to live til He returned. He did NOT say that disciple WOULD live til He returned !

  Now, is the disciple John alive on earth now? Of course not ! And how about Lazarus? Newp !

  And Jesus did NOT return in 70 AD.

Proof?

He isn't ruling the earth right now, as proven by the prevalence of sin.

  And Scripture says NOTHING about an invisible return  It says He will be SEEN BY ALL, even those who pierced Him, so the souls of the dead in hades, both in torments & paradise, will see His return as well. And it'll be during the reign of the beast/antichrist/man of sin & his sidekick, the false prophet, immediately after the great trib ends, as Jesus said.

  Prets have one little prob with their doctrine - the prophesied events simply HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED ! ! A reading of the Revelation will show you a brief description of those plagues.

  And "all the tribes of the earth" are JUST THAT, not only the tribes of Israel. If that was what Jesus meant, He would've said "all Israel" or similar.

  And it was JOSEPHUS who wrote of seeing angels in the sky over Jerusalem. Funny, several hundred thousand other people in the area didn't see them! Josephus was writing to entertain his patron, Vespasian, as well as recording some Jewish history. (Embellished by him, of course !)

  And OF COURSE the new heavens & new earth haven't come yet! Whatever gave you such a silly notion ??

  Preterism is simply FALSE, a jeezit invention.

  Most of your post is koo-koo, outta touch with reality !

[lea]

robycop3-

Sending Out the Twelve

5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven [c]is at hand.' 8 Heal the sick, [d]cleanse the lepers, [e]raise the dead, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. 9 Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts, 10 nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor staffs; for a worker is worthy of his food.

11 "Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. 12 And when you go into a household, greet it. 13 If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet. 15 Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!
Persecutions Are Coming

16 "Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless[f] as doves. 17 But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues. 18 You will be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak. For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; 20 for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.

21 "Now brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. 22 And you will be hated by all for My name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. 23 When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes. emph.mine

Who is Jesus addressing here? The 12 apostles. Get your time frame in order. Something you haven't learned yet because you haven't studied. You listened only to the futurist sermons about doomsday prophesies only. I say this as constructive criticism. . Futurism is erroneous: pessimistic and violent. So good luck.  All your opinions can be discounted by scripture and history.

Was Jesus saying "if" in the above scripture? No. He spoke affirmatively.
And in John 21, Did Jesus state something as "if" about Peter's death? No. And I believe He put the "if" there about John for Peter's sake. How could the Lord tell Peter something direct like "he will tarry till I come?" That would certainly break my heart if I were Peter. Do you catch my drift on that?!

And not only Josephus' testimony about chariots of angelic beings in the clouds but Tacitus, Roman historian recorded the phenomenon at that time also.

The tribes of the earth were the tribes of Israel. The prophecy as in Zech.12:10 identifies those who pierced Him.Mourning for the Pierced One

10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. 
Peter announced to them in Acts 3: 17 "Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send [c]Jesus Christ, who was [d]preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since [e]the world began. 22 For Moses truly said to the fathers, 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. 23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.'
Read Zech.13 regarding the 1/3 of Israel that would be saved from "the great" tribulation.

  And Jesus did NOT return in 70 AD.

Proof?

He isn't ruling the earth right now, as proven by the prevalence of sin.

Every knee should bow: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Yes, there are still those in "sin." I don't think we're supposed to have some kind of utopia as you suggest.

Now, who is unrealistic? You twist prophetic language into literal beings, etc. in the N.T.  Yet you accept the O.T. prophecies as being figurative!

[robycop3]

  What Jesus meant when He sent out the apostles is that He would return to Jerusalem & gather them together there, which He did. Remember, He sent His disciples out near the beginning of His ministry, not the end of it. And He had not yet told them of His coming death, resurrection, & glorious return. And they didn't make it to all the cities in the land before Jesus gathered them together with Him.

  And Tacitus SUPPOSEDLY wrote that the temple had been thrown open & THE GODS (not God!) said, "We are departing!" (However, there's evidence that this account is a later forgery.)

  And again, 'the tribes of the earth" are JUST THAT ! !  Had Jesus meant "the tribes of Israel", that's what He would've said ! He meant EVERYONE, including the souls of the dead in hades.

  And NO; Jesus is NOT ruling the earth right now! Remember, several Scriptures say that when He returns, He shall rule WITH A ROD OF IRON, meaning strictly and completely. That'll be the "Millenium".

  And Scripture IS mostly-literal. You prets need to try to make it symbolic to attempt to sustain your false doctrine. Well, it WON'T WORK! While some Scripture is clearly symbolic, most is quite-literal, & what symbolism there is always represents something literal. If Scripture were as symbolic as prets try to make it, then anyone could make it say whatever THEY want, insteada what GOD said.

[lea]

by robycop3,

What Jesus meant when He sent out the apostles is that He would return to Jerusalem & gather them together there, which He did. Remember, He sent His disciples out near the beginning of His ministry, not the end of it. And He had not yet told them of His coming death, resurrection, & glorious return. And they didn't make it to all the cities in the land before Jesus gathered them together with Him.

Wrong again! Read v.22 of Matt.10 above again: 22 And you will be hated by all for My name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.emph mine.
Jesus was telling them the future of what would transpire in the interim period between His ministry and his coming again at the END! Which was the end of the Old Covenant that would "pass away" (Rev.21)
Now according to you, all this would happen in 40 days when He returned to the apostles and even before Pentecost! Not. Examine Matt.10 again. Now is the time to see the future Jesus was referring to!!!!

  And Tacitus SUPPOSEDLY wrote that the temple had been thrown open & THE GODS (not God!) said, "We are departing!" (However, there's evidence that this account is a later forgery.)

Says you! I've never heard anyone else ever deny Tacitus' account in the annuls of Roman history!

  And again, 'the tribes of the earth" are JUST THAT ! !  Had Jesus meant "the tribes of Israel", that's what He would've said ! He meant EVERYONE, including the souls of the dead in hades.

I think you didn't read Zech.12-13 which identifies who would mourn on the earth.
"including the dead souls in hades?" Preposterous! No the "tribes of the earth" were the living ones scattered about in other countries, not just Judah in Jerusalem.

  And NO; Jesus is NOT ruling the earth right now! Remember, several Scriptures say that when He returns, He shall rule WITH A ROD OF IRON, meaning strictly and completely. That'll be the "Millenium".

Now that is just fantasy. That's where the "thousand years" is prophetic, not literal! Besides, Jeremiah 33:20-21 explains why Christ Rules From a Heavenly, Not Earthly, Throne. https://revelationrevolution.org/jeremiah-3320-21-explains-christ-rules-heavenly-earthly-throne/

  And Scripture IS mostly-literal. You prets need to try to make it symbolic to attempt to sustain your false doctrine. Well, it WON'T WORK! While some Scripture is clearly symbolic, most is quite-literal, & what symbolism there is always represents something literal. If Scripture were as symbolic as prets try to make it, then anyone could make it say whatever THEY want, insteada what GOD said.

We "prets' do not hold all scripture to be prophetic either. I wasn't speaking about narrative language. We were discussing prophetic language, similar to O.T. prophetic, symbolic language. Would you say the "red dragon" of Rev.12 is literal? Are we to believe it would literally chase after the woman or chase after and pursue the woman as a devil in the spirit realm tries to kill and destroy those faithful?

Pick up a pret book about the end times. Don K. Preston is a good author. Kurt Simmons is another.
All your time being attached to dispensationalism or whatever fiction you hold to about the end time prophecies will go right out the window! I dare you to have a mind for yourself robycop3.

[robycop3]

 Sorry, Chief! YOU'RE the one not thinking for himself here !

by robycop3,Wrong again! Read v.22 of Matt.10 above again: 22 And you will be hated by all for My name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.emph mine.
Jesus was telling them the future of what would transpire in the interim period between His ministry and his coming again at the END! Which was the end of the Old Covenant that would "pass away" (Rev.21)

  You've added someone's private interp to Scripture. The "endures" was to the end of the endurer's own life. read it in proper context.

Now according to you, all this would happen in 40 days when He returned to the apostles and even before Pentecost! Not. Examine Matt.10 again. Now is the time to see the future Jesus was referring to!!!!

Says you! I've never heard anyone else ever deny Tacitus' account in the annuls of Roman history!I[/quote]

You simply showed us you didn't look too hard. Try studying up about Poggio Bracciolini and John Wilson Ross.

think you didn't read Zech.12-13 which identifies who would mourn on the earth.
"including the dead souls in hades?" Preposterous! No the "tribes of the earth" were the living ones scattered about in other countries, not just Judah in Jerusalem.

  First, Jesus said EVERY EYE SHALL SEE Him, even those who pierced Him." I didn't say the dead shall mourn for Him. But again, "all the tribes of the earth" are JUST THAT! You're trying to change Jesus' words to suit your pret junk.

Now that is just fantasy. That's where the "thousand years" is prophetic, not literal! Besides, Jeremiah 33:20-21 explains why Christ Rules From a Heavenly, Not Earthly, Throne. https://revelationrevolution.org/jeremiah-3320-21-explains-christ-rules-heavenly-earthly-throne/We "prets' do not hold all scripture to be prophetic either. I wasn't speaking about narrative language. We were discussing prophetic language, similar to O.T. prophetic, symbolic language. Would you say the "red dragon" of Rev.12 is literal? Are we to believe it would literally chase after the woman or chase after and pursue the woman as a devil in the spirit realm tries to kill and destroy those faithful?

  Just goes to show you don't know symbolic, or "prophetic", if you prefer, from literal.  Just like the brast & the harlot in Rev. 17, what symbolism there is, stands for LITERAL things. Satan is the dragon, the woman is Israel, her child is Jesus.  The thousand years is LITERAL, as is the coming physical, visible return of Jesus. He often told His disciples He'd physically return.

  And the beast/antichrist/man of sin will be a literal man; both he & his empire are described as beasts in Revelation. The "mark of the beast" will be literal, most likely some sorta microchip.

Pick up a pret book about the end times. Don K. Preston is a good author. Kurt Simmons is another.

  I've read their garbage before. It's phony as a Ford Corvette.

All your time being attached to dispensationalism or whatever fiction you hold to about the end time prophecies will go right out the window! I dare you to have a mind for yourself robycop3.

  Been using mine a lot more & longer than YOU have, or you wouldn't bel;ieve that pret trash. Preterism spread by a Spaniah jeezit, alcazar, to help keep the pope as being labeled the antichrist.

  Prets have one little prob with their doctrine: THE EVENTS THEY SAY HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED, SIMPLY HAVE NOT YET OCCURRED ! !  Thus, they try to reduce many Scriptures to "symbolic/figurative" status to attempt to salvage their garbage & get some gullible people to believe it. Well, it doesn't work with me ! I'll call you every time !

[lea]

by robycop3,

THE EVENTS THEY SAY HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED, SIMPLY HAVE NOT YET OCCURRED !

  You can lead a "dispy" to knowledge but you can't make him think about it.

  Microchip? Keep in touch!  (with reality too)

[3 Resurrections]

Hey robycop3,

Apologies to lea for veering off-topic a bit, but I don't think you ever answered my question.  Just what tribe of the world do you consider yourself to be a member of?  Since you insist that the "tribes of the earth" references in scripture cannot possibly be talking about the tribes of the land of Israel, then surely you can name the particular tribe of the world that you identify with, yes? 

Perhaps your answer would be that the word "tribes" is sort of, ummm, SYMBOLIC of the different nations of the world?  Oh but wait, I forgot...you said that things symbolic should always stand for LITERAL things.  Okay then, you must be a LITERAL member of a tribe somewhere, so which one would that be?

[robycop3]

Hey robycop3,

Apologies to lea for veering off-topic a bit, but I don't think you ever answered my question.  Just what tribe of the world do you consider yourself to be a member of?  Since you insist that the "tribes of the earth" references in scripture cannot possibly be talking about the tribes of the land of Israel, then surely you can name the particular tribe of the world that you identify with, yes? 

Perhaps your answer would be that the word "tribes" is sort of, ummm, SYMBOLIC of the different nations of the world?  Oh but wait, I forgot...you said that things symbolic should always stand for LITERAL things.  Okay then, you must be a LITERAL member of a tribe somewhere, so which one would that be?

  I'm not sure. My earliest known ancestors were 12th C. highwaymen in Britain. So, I'd say they were Angles, Saxons, Normans, or Jutes. And I do know I'm 1/16 Ute Indian. Other than that, I don't know or care. I can't do anything about it !  I'm just a fairly-large white dude with average skin color for a white person, with dark, straight hair & hazel eyes. I'm not interested enough to pay for a DNA test.

  But I agree that by "tribes", Jesus was referring to nations. After all, many of what we call Indian "tribes" were actually NATIONS. The Iroquois were known during the colonial years to the French as the Iroquois League, and later as the Iroquois Confederacy, and to the English as the Five Nations, comprising the Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, and Seneca, all nations using the same or very-similar language.  After 1722, they accepted the Tuscarora people from the Southeast into their confederacy, as they were also Iroquoian-speaking, and became known as the Six Nations. They're still called that today, with about 125 K people in the US & Canada. However, many members of these nations refer to their nation as a "tribe".

[lea]

  I'm not sure. My earliest known ancestors were 12th C. highwaymen in Britain. So, I'd say they were Angles, Saxons, Normans, or Jutes. And I do know I'm 1/16 Ute Indian. Other than that, I don't know or care. I can't do anything about it !  I'm just a fairly-large white dude with average skin color for a white person, with dark, straight hair & hazel eyes. I'm not interested enough to pay for a DNA test.

  But I agree that by "tribes", Jesus was referring to nations. After all, many of what we call Indian "tribes" were actually NATIONS. The Iroquois were known during the colonial years to the French as the Iroquois League, and later as the Iroquois Confederacy, and to the English as the Five Nations, comprising the Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, and Seneca, all nations using the same or very-similar language.  After 1722, they accepted the Tuscarora people from the Southeast into their confederacy, as they were also Iroquoian-speaking, and became known as the Six Nations. They're still called that today, with about 125 K people in the US & Canada. However, many members of these nations refer to their nation as a "tribe".

So you give some "interpretation" from secular history instead of recognizing what scripture tells us?
The 12  "tribes" of Israel are just that. The "tribes of the earth."