Dating Revelation - combined internal evidences for AD 60

[fastfredy0]

Re: Dating Revelation

Where is the "dating" advice on this thread?

 

[Josheb]

Question . are both in need of what is called dispensationalism?

I am not in need of it. I think Dispensationalism is a corrupt theology. I also think Dispensational Premillennialism (DP) is objectively untenable when compared with plainly read scripture. It's methods (like the claim to read scripture literally) are applied with shoddy inconsistency. I was a Dispensational Premillennialist for more than 20 years (even before I became a Christian). Since learning to her theologies and other eschatologies existed I have read Darby, Bullinger, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie, Pentecost, Walvoord, Smith, Lindsay, MacArthur, Camping, the Messianics (Roth, Cahn, etc.), Ice, Vlach, Blaising, Bock, Saucy, and many others in their own words. I did not read about Dispensationalism from others outside the paradigm; I read the Dispensationalists in their own words. I've read the ECFs in chronological order and verified (or, more accurately, failed to verify) the claims Dispensationalists make about the ECFs. I have been marking predictions DPers have been making since I first read Smith and Lindsay in the late 1970s and studied the predictions they've made since the early 1800s. They have a 100% fail rate and no one within Dispensationalism does anything to correct that problem. It indirectly leads to compromises in core Christian doctrine like Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology and they are thoughtlessly unaware of those problems or feebly denying them.

The entire paradigm is wanting.

if so can and will they both put aside their differences and defend it ?

I doubt it.

If you've kept up with the debate between dispies and non-dispies then you are aware their seminaries do not share common ground. As I write this the differences have taken form in the debate over "discontinuity" versus "continuity" (check the publication dates on those books). Dispensationalism is openly and unabashedly discontinuous. When it comes to DPism, I am polite and respectful, but I am also blunt. There is no disputing many of the problems, so the common response is ad hominem.


Ad hominem is indefensible.

Another common response is constantly change the subject. Another common response is to say, "Well that is not what I believe," or "I am not that kind of Dispensationalist" (because there a pretribbers, mid-tribbers, post-tribbers, etc.) and the difference is used to avoid the core substantive issues in Dispensationalism as a whole.




For example (and I will try to keep this brief because it is completely off-topic), Dispensationalism holds there are two completely groups of God's people (Israel and the Church) and God has completely different objectives for ech group that are completely different from one another. Dispensationalists also claim to hold to a traditional soteriology whereby we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and NOT by works (and some of them are monergists and some are synergists). The problem ensues when the assert an eschatology that expects and requires Israel to regain its geographical boundaries, rebuild its temple, reconstitute the Mosaic Law, re-establish the Levitical priesthood and reconstitute the animal sacrifices before Israel will come to a saving knowledge of Christ. It does not seem to occur to any of them these things are all works! Every one of those items is works of the flesh, works of the law. Leading Dispensationalists (all of the ones I have listed from Chafer on) uniformly say a Jew can come to Christ anytime the exact same way Gentiles do but leading up to and during the millennium Israel will come to salvation in Christ through the works I just listed. What this means - the logically necessary conclusion of their own beliefs - is that Israel comes to salvation by grace plus works and NOT by grace alone. The New Testament is uniformly adamant in repudiating and rejecting works-based salvation.

Dispensationalism compromises long-held core doctrine of salvation by grace through faith and not by works.

There are other core doctrines it compromises, too. Many dispensationalists have a Jesus who is not yet king. He will not be king until he establishes his physical earthly kingdom. The kingdom does not yet exist, and Jesus is not yet king over the earth. This is hugely contrary to orthodox Christianity going all the way back to the New Testament and it defies the logical necessity of Christ's divinity alone making him king! Mainstream orthodox Christianity has long emphasized Christology and soteriology above all other doctrines, but Dispensationalism openly emphasizes (its version of) ecclesiology and eschatology over other doctrines. Until the 19th century eschatology was a minor doctrine comparatively rarely mentioned in theological discourse. They have brought a very, very, very, very, very, very (I cannot emphasize this enough to communicate the reality) minor doctrine to the forefront and not a single eschatological prediction ever made by any Dispensationalist has ever come true. Every single one of them has demonstrably proven to be a false teacher when it comes to end times predictions. They may teach weel in some other area of doctrine but when it comes to end times predictions every single one of them is a false teacher and no one does anything to correct it. It is a theology populated by people who tolerate false teaching!

And I can PROVE every single word I just posted.

Most of us know these things to be true without thinking about it because we here it every day on Christian radio. Christian radio is heavily populated by Dispensational Premillennialists. For every Riddlebarger, Horton, or Sproul there are five or six Dispensationalists. David Jeremiah often says he believes Jesus will return before he dies. He has been saying that since I first heard the man in the 1990s. He is 82 years old. If he lives to be 100 then what he's necessarily teaching is Jesus will return within the next 18 years. Possible? yes. Likely? NO!!! Especially not within the Dispensational paradigm because it is not likely Israel will get its land back, build a stone temple, rebuild its temple, reconstitute the Mosaic Law, re-establish the Levitical priesthood and reconstitute the animal sacrifices in the next 18 years. Dr. Jeremiah will die having taught his audience false claims and he;'ll be dead so no one on this side of the grave can or will be able to hold him accountable. If what Dispensationalism teaches is true and correct, then 1800+ years of Christian thought, Christian doctrine, and Christian practice is wrong. The differences are irreconcilable. Dispensationalism cannot be correct and everyone else, too.

Dispensationalism is a wretched theology.


And the above is just a sampling of its many, many very real and very serious problems. If you'd like to know more then let me know and I'll start a new op (or maybe several) specifically on the problems with Dispensational Premillennialism.

 

[CrowCross]

Yes, that has been repeated ad nauseam but ad nauseam arguments are always and everywhere fallacious. All I read is a confession of fallacy.

Yes, I know it has...and it will continue until the preterist can show what is mentioned in Revelation has already happened. [edit by Mod] Please keep the posts about the posts, and not the posters.

 

[Marty]

Yep.

And the distinctions between the two are very significant, very important, and the two positions are not to be conflated.

Yes, that has been repeated ad nauseam but ad nauseam arguments are always and everywhere fallacious. All I read is a confession of fallacy.


This op is about internal evidence and ragging on preterists is not only off-topic it is another fallacy (ad hominem and red herring). It has absolutely no place in this thread. Anyone - no matter their eschatological orientation - should and can objectively look at the information stated in scripture alone and reach logically necessary conclusions.


John was told to write down the things he'd seen things which were, and things that would come afterward. That verse (Rev. 1:19) tells us some of the content in Revelation had already occurred. Some of Revelation was stuff John had already seen. Other content was stuff that was, stuff that existed in the first century. It does not matter whether the book was written in 70 AD or 95 AD; much of its content was content John had already seen and events that were occurring at the time of his writing. That is not a preterist view. It is not a dispensationalist view. It has absolutely nothing to do with eschatological bias and everything to do with reading, believing, and accepting what is explicitly stated in the book of Revelation itself.

John said he was a partaker in the tribulation. We either believe and accept what he wrote, or we do not. It has absolutely nothing to do with doctrine. If what he wrote is correct, then the tribulation was already happening when the book of Revelation was penned. It does not matter whether the book was written in 70 AD or 965 AD. The tribulation had already begun if John was a partaker. It has nothing to do with my being partial-preterist, someone being full-preterist, or someone being anti-preterist. It has everything to do with what John wrote being read exactly as written, literally, with the normal meaning of those words in ordinary usage. Since the tribulation is supposed to last seven years and John was living it, the tribulation has come and gone. Once the seven years is taken literally and John's claim to share in the tribulation is accepted the necessary conclusion is the tribulation has come and gone.

To the degree Revelation is about the tribulation then all that tribulation content in Revelation has also come and gone. It is a matter of logical necessity, not doctrinal biases.

Revelation contains letter written to congregations existing during the first century. There's not a single word in any of those letters indicating the events described are in their far, far distant future and at least one of the churches is told in present-tense language they have persevered and already earned their crown. If what John wrote to those churches was happening at that time then that part of Revelation has come and gone. Understanding those words exactly as written has nothing to do with eschatological orientation or doctrinal bias.

Revelation reports a woman giving birth to a son who is persecuted. If that son is Jesus (or Israel or the Church) then that event has already come and gone because Jesus was born before the book of Revelation was written. It has absolutely nothing to do with eschatological orientation or doctrinal bias and everything to do with what is stated in the text of scripture. Likewise, if the binding of satan in Revelation 20 occurred when satan fell then it too has already happened, and it had happened prior to Revelation being written. It has nothing to do with eschatological orientation or doctrinal bias and is a question only of whether or not the Revelation 20 binding is related to Isaiah and Jude. Noting more.


If we look elsewhere in scripture, such as Matthew 23-24 we find the disciples asking Jesus about the sign for the end of the age and we find Paul telling the Corinthians the ends of the ages had come (circa 57 AD). To the degree the book of Revelation pertain is to the end of the age then all that end-of-age content had come in the first century circa 57 AD. The ends of the ages had befallen the first century Christian by 57 AD and that, therefore, lends itself to an early dating of Revelation over a late dating. It has absolutely nothing to do with eschatological orientation or doctrinal bias and everything to do with reading, believing, and accepting what is plainly and explicitly stated internally in scripture alone.





No matter how this is considered the facts of scripture are this: scripture itself makes explicit statements indicating some of or much of Revelation had already occurred and/or was already happening at the time John was writing what he'd seen. It has nothing to do with eschatological orientation or doctrinal biases. Those who ignore what is explicitly stated are wrong - no matter their eschatology or biases.

Fantastic post

 

[Josheb]

Yes, I know it has...and it will continue...

But it should not continue under any circumstances and attempts to shift the onus is just another falacy.

until the preterist can show what is mentioned in Revelation has already happened.

Done.

If you can't do that...you MUST admit your theolgy needs to be revisited.

No, it has been done and rejected anyway.

The rest of your post really added nothing.

Then I will not expect to receive another post from you.

 

[Josheb]

Thou shall not lie.

Correct. Therefore, as I have already stated, I shall not expect to receive another post from you .

 

[Mr GLee]

I am not in need of it. I think Dispensationalism is a corrupt theology. I also think Dispensational Premillennialism (DP) is objectively untenable when compared with plainly read scripture. It's methods (like the claim to read scripture literally) are applied with shoddy inconsistency. I was a Dispensational Premillennialist for more than 20 years (even before I became a Christian). Since learning to her theologies and other eschatologies existed I have read Darby, Bullinger, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie, Pentecost, Walvoord, Smith, Lindsay, MacArthur, Camping, the Messianics (Roth, Cahn, etc.), Ice, Vlach, Blaising, Bock, Saucy, and many others in their own words. I did not read about Dispensationalism from others outside the paradigm; I read the Dispensationalists in their own words. I've read the ECFs in chronological order and verified (or, more accurately, failed to verify) the claims Dispensationalists make about the ECFs. I have been marking predictions DPers have been making since I first read Smith and Lindsay in the late 1970s and studied the predictions they've made since the early 1800s. They have a 100% fail rate and no one within Dispensationalism does anything to correct that problem. It indirectly leads to compromises in core Christian doctrine like Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology and they are thoughtlessly unaware of those problems or feebly denying them.

The entire paradigm is wanting.

I doubt it.

If you've kept up with the debate between dispies and non-dispies then you are aware their seminaries do not share common ground. As I write this the differences have taken form in the debate over "discontinuity" versus "continuity" (check the publication dates on those books). Dispensationalism is openly and unabashedly discontinuous. When it comes to DPism, I am polite and respectful, but I am also blunt. There is no disputing many of the problems, so the common response is ad hominem.


Ad hominem is indefensible.

Another common response is constantly change the subject. Another common response is to say, "Well that is not what I believe," or "I am not that kind of Dispensationalist" (because there a pretribbers, mid-tribbers, post-tribbers, etc.) and the difference is used to avoid the core substantive issues in Dispensationalism as a whole.




For example (and I will try to keep this brief because it is completely off-topic), Dispensationalism holds there are two completely groups of God's people (Israel and the Church) and God has completely different objectives for ech group that are completely different from one another. Dispensationalists also claim to hold to a traditional soteriology whereby we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and NOT by works (and some of them are monergists and some are synergists). The problem ensues when the assert an eschatology that expects and requires Israel to regain its geographical boundaries, rebuild its temple, reconstitute the Mosaic Law, re-establish the Levitical priesthood and reconstitute the animal sacrifices before Israel will come to a saving knowledge of Christ. It does not seem to occur to any of them these things are all works! Every one of those items is works of the flesh, works of the law. Leading Dispensationalists (all of the ones I have listed from Chafer on) uniformly say a Jew can come to Christ anytime the exact same way Gentiles do but leading up to and during the millennium Israel will come to salvation in Christ through the works I just listed. What this means - the logically necessary conclusion of their own beliefs - is that Israel comes to salvation by grace plus works and NOT by grace alone. The New Testament is uniformly adamant in repudiating and rejecting works-based salvation.

Dispensationalism compromises long-held core doctrine of salvation by grace through faith and not by works.

There are other core doctrines it compromises, too. Many dispensationalists have a Jesus who is not yet king. He will not be king until he establishes his physical earthly kingdom. The kingdom does not yet exist, and Jesus is not yet king over the earth. This is hugely contrary to orthodox Christianity going all the way back to the New Testament and it defies the logical necessity of Christ's divinity alone making him king! Mainstream orthodox Christianity has long emphasized Christology and soteriology above all other doctrines, but Dispensationalism openly emphasizes (its version of) ecclesiology and eschatology over other doctrines. Until the 19th century eschatology was a minor doctrine comparatively rarely mentioned in theological discourse. They have brought a very, very, very, very, very, very (I cannot emphasize this enough to communicate the reality) minor doctrine to the forefront and not a single eschatological prediction ever made by any Dispensationalist has ever come true. Every single one of them has demonstrably proven to be a false teacher when it comes to end times predictions. They may teach weel in some other area of doctrine but when it comes to end times predictions every single one of them is a false teacher and no one does anything to correct it. It is a theology populated by people who tolerate false teaching!

And I can PROVE every single word I just posted.

Most of us know these things to be true without thinking about it because we here it every day on Christian radio. Christian radio is heavily populated by Dispensational Premillennialists. For every Riddlebarger, Horton, or Sproul there are five or six Dispensationalists. David Jeremiah often says he believes Jesus will return before he dies. He has been saying that since I first heard the man in the 1990s. He is 82 years old. If he lives to be 100 then what he's necessarily teaching is Jesus will return within the next 18 years. Possible? yes. Likely? NO!!! Especially not within the Dispensational paradigm because it is not likely Israel will get its land back, build a stone temple, rebuild its temple, reconstitute the Mosaic Law, re-establish the Levitical priesthood and reconstitute the animal sacrifices in the next 18 years. Dr. Jeremiah will die having taught his audience false claims and he;'ll be dead so no one on this side of the grave can or will be able to hold him accountable. If what Dispensationalism teaches is true and correct, then 1800+ years of Christian thought, Christian doctrine, and Christian practice is wrong. The differences are irreconcilable. Dispensationalism cannot be correct and everyone else, too.

Dispensationalism is a wretched theology.


And the above is just a sampling of its many, many very real and very serious problems. If you'd like to know more then let me know and I'll start a new op (or maybe several) specifically on the problems with Dispensational Premillennialism.

Thanks very informative.

The amil position works the best

I do not think people are going to vanish 1000 years and then return as if there was no change. The thousand is a metaphor. God does not number people or reveal the literal last day under the Sun. The Spirt of Christ (Holy Spirit of God) will leave like a thief in the night on the last day under the sun .

Some are looking for a fleshly body in which Christ (the father) worked in to both reveal his will and empower mankind to do it to his good pleasure . Jesus our brother in the lord replied . Not as I will but you father the one with power to raise . God is not a man (creation)

Jesus said whosoever does the will of the father the same are his brothers and sisters. he will receive a new body on the last day under the Sun just as the rest

2 Corinthians 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

 

[Wordsmith]

Of course that statement is quite specific. It is specifically related to "those who pierced Him" and the Israelite tribes who would be mourning because of seeing Him return. "...And every eye shall see him, EVEN or NAMELY those who pierced Him" limits this "every eye" to the generation of Israelites who put Christ to death seeing this return of Christ to the Mount of Olives.

You make a lot of assumptions here and state them as fact.

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

"Every eye shall see Him" is separate from "THEY ALSO which pierced Him". No even every is not just those that pierced Him it is every eye !

Nothing in this text limits "every eye" you added that and Jesus did not return in 70 AD.

Acts 1:11
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

The above coming of Jesus did not happen anywhere in our past! Nor was there any other coming after He ascended to heaven.

You are reinterpreting Rev. 1:7 to fit your false narrative.

 

[Josheb]

The amil position works the best

I agree, for the most part.

I believe the "cultural mandate" and the "great commission" were given for a purpose and neither has ever been recanted by God. I, therefore, believe the gospel will continue to succeed, overcome, and prosper all over the world and one day - even though weeds still exist among the wheat at the time of harvest - Christ, his people, the gospel, his commands, will one day be known by all nations and rule the world. I think a hybrid version Amillennialism (absent some of the Idealist recapitulation) with elements of Oostmillennialism (absent the utopianism, and absent the politics of Reconstructionism) is what scripture asserts.

I do not think people are going to vanish 1000 years and then return as if there was no change. The thousand is a metaphor. God does not number people or reveal the literal last day under the Sun. The Spirt of Christ (Holy Spirit of God) will leave like a thief in the night on the last day under the sun .

I might offer a slightly different explanation but otherwise, I completely agree. I do not find that view consistent with whole scripture.

Some are looking for a fleshly body in which Christ (the father) worked in to both reveal his will and empower mankind to do it to his good pleasure...............

.....and thereby limiting God unnecessarily and inconsistently with whole scripture .


Anything more about dating Revelation?

 

[3 Resurrections]

"Every eye shall see Him" is separate from "THEY ALSO which pierced Him".

The word "also" which you have emphasized is not in the original Greek. The Greek word here is "kai" which can be translated in one of two ways. It can either mean "in addition to" or it can mean "even, or namely", in an explanatory sense. That means there is a 50/50 chance it can be interpreted either way. But since we know that this Revelation 1:7 verse is directly quoted from Zechariah 13:10, that Zechariah 13 context involves certain tribes of Israel doing the mourning in the city of Jerusalem (the families of Levi, Shimei, the house of David, and Nathan). These were the "tribes of the earth" (tes ges - the land of Israel) which would be mourning - not the Inuit, Cherokee, etc. tribes across the whole globe, which would have used the oikoumene term instead.

Acts 1:11
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

The above coming of Jesus did not happen anywhere in our past!

Jesus said He would, and in the lifetime of some of those standing in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28. He fulfilled His promise to the letter in AD 70, and in the "same manner" as when He bodily left this planet in Acts 1.

Anything more about dating Revelation?

Yes, but it may be a couple days from now due to my work schedule. I'd like to cover some of Revelation's internal evidence of the "doctrine of Balaam" when compared to other time-relevant texts regarding this cult written about in other NT epistles.

 

[Wordsmith]

But since we know that this Revelation 1:7 verse is directly quoted from Zechariah 13:10,

There is no Zechariah 13:10 !

 

[CrowCross]

Jesus said He would, and in the lifetime of some of those standing in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28. He fulfilled His promise to the letter in AD 70, and in the "same manner" as when He bodily left this planet in Acts 1.

There are those who also say the coming of the Son of man here meant is, his resurrection from the dead. His ascension into heaven, and sending the Holy Spirit.
Then there are those who simply see it as the transfiguration which comes next in Matt 17.... 2 There He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light.
Some say it refers to the destruction of Jerusalem but the context here is not speaking about the judgement of Israel.

 

[3 Resurrections]

There is no Zechariah 13:10 !

Sorry, thanks for catching the typo...I'm on the run with appointments today. It's Zechariah 12:10.

 

[Wordsmith]

The word "also" which you have emphasized is not in the original Greek. The Greek word here is "kai" which can be translated in one of two ways. It can either mean "in addition to" or it can mean "even, or namely", in an explanatory sense. That means there is a 50/50 chance it can be interpreted either way.

Revelation 1:7 From the Greek Interlinear

Behold ,He is comes with the clouds, and shall see Him every eye, and they which Him pierced, and shall wail on count of Him all the tribes of the earth Yea amen.

1. He is come with the clouds,
2. And shall see every eye, ( every eye means , every eye)
3. And they which Him pierced
4. And shall wail on count of Him all the tribes of the earth. (All the tribes of the earth is not limited one local because you need it to)
5. Yea amen

There is a zero chance of correctly interpreting this passage as you claim.

If Jesus came in 70 AD there should be overwhelming historical evidence fo such an event.

Hebrews 9:27-28​

27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

The judgement referred to above did not happen in 70 AD

If Jesus came in 70 AD that would be the second time we have no third in scripture.

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

No gathering of the elect by the angels happened in 70 AD

Sorry, thanks for catching the typo...I'm on the run with appointments today. It's Zechariah 12:10.

Not relevant.

Zechariah 12 describes the Lord defending Jerusalem not its destruction in 70 AD

 

[3 Resurrections]

Not relevant.

Zechariah 12 describes the Lord defending Jerusalem not its destruction in 70 AD

Zechariah 12 begins the prophecy for Israel regarding the "siege both against Judah and Jerusalem" (Zech. 12:2). All 16 references to "in that day" in this Zechariah 12-14 prophecy are related to events surrounding this desperate period of Judah and Jerusalem's destruction in the AD 70 era. The Old Jerusalem was being destroyed, leaving the blessing of the New Jerusalem intact. Don't confuse the two that are both spoken of in this prophecy.

The judgement referred to above did not happen in 70 AD

If Jesus came in 70 AD that would be the second time we have no third in scripture.

Yes, Christ did come as He said He would in that first-century generation, and before some of those individuals He spoke to had died (Matthew 16:27-28). That was the second coming, and yes, scripture does present a third coming, only you have never considered it before, so you automatically dismiss the idea.

Let me ask you this. After Christ returns in Zechariah 14:4-5 to the Mount of Olives with His angels, why is there a "year to year" (Zech. 14:16) ongoing history of mankind still being described where the nations are plagued with "no rain" if they do not come up to (New) Jerusalem to worship the Lord? This means that the end of mankind's history does not finish with Christ's second coming in this prophecy. Ordinary history on this planet extends beyond that return of Christ for many years. So there must be a third coming of Christ for judgment when the end of that "year to year" timespan concludes. That is because all must have their turn at the judgment seat of Christ ("For we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ..."). A third return of Christ with a third bodily resurrection event is necessary for those who will have lived and died during that "year-to-year" timespan following Christ's second coming back in AD 70 .

 

[Mr GLee]

You make a lot of assumptions here and state them as fact.

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

"Every eye shall see Him" is separate from "THEY ALSO which pierced Him". No even every is not just those that pierced Him it is every eye !

Nothing in this text limits "every eye" you added that and Jesus did not return in 70 AD.

Acts 1:11
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

The above coming of Jesus did not happen anywhere in our past! Nor was there any other coming after He ascended to heaven.

You are reinterpreting Rev. 1:7 to fit your false narrative.

God is not a man. (Creation)

The Son of man Jesu was here 33years. He died and his flesh has returned like any human .

One demonstration of him and the father was promised. God is not a man

trying to make him one is to blasphemy the Holy Spirit of God .

2 Corinthians 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

How long is henceforth? Certainly not until every eye see the corrupted body.

All die not receiving the new body .

 

[Wordsmith]

The Son of man Jesu was here 33years. He died and his flesh has returned like any human .

False!

Show this from scripture!

 

[Wordsmith]

Zechariah 12 begins the prophecy for Israel regarding the "siege both against Judah and Jerusalem" (Zech. 12:2). All 16 references to "in that day" in this Zechariah 12-14 prophecy are related to events surrounding this desperate period of Judah and Jerusalem's destruction in the AD 70 era. The Old Jerusalem was being destroyed, leaving the blessing of the New Jerusalem intact. Don't confuse the two that are both spoken of in this prophecy.

Zechariah 12​

1 The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

Did not happen in 70 AD

4 In that day, saith the Lord, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.

Did not happen in 70 AD

5 And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the Lord of hosts their God.
6 In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.
7 The Lord also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.
8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

Did not happen in 70 AD

9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

Did not happen in 70 AD

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
12 And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;
13 The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
14 All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.

It is not I confusing what is spoken of in Zachariah!

Nothing in Zachariah 12, 13 or 14 refers to 70 AD!

 

[Mr GLee]

False!

Show this from scripture!

Thanks It takes a little digging but I can try .

Jesus testifies whosoever does the will of the father the same are his new family a new creation They call no man on earth Holy Father>

Matthew 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Mark 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

That whosoever is the same family is presented in the old testament

Genesis 37:9-11King James Version And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth? And his brethren envied him; but his father observed the saying.
A picture of the bride's new born again family.


Revelation 12:1-2 King James Version And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

God is not a man as us . He created man to teach us how to walk by faith as a labor of love . . .the unseen eternal things of God .He has not left his children as orphans without any instructions as to how can we walk by the things not seen Hid from natural mankind. They give a clearer vision I would think make us aware of the accuser of the believers


2 Corinthians 4:17-18 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

 

[Wordsmith]

Thanks It takes a little digging but I can try .

Jesus testifies whosoever does the will of the father the same are his new family a new creation They call no man on earth Holy Father>

Matthew 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Mark 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

That whosoever is the same family is presented in the old testament

Genesis 37:9-11King James Version And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth? And his brethren envied him; but his father observed the saying.
A picture of the bride's new born again family.


Revelation 12:1-2 King James Version And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

God is not a man as us . He created man to teach us how to walk by faith as a labor of love . . .the unseen eternal things of God .He has not left his children as orphans without any instructions as to how can we walk by the things not seen Hid from natural mankind. They give a clearer vision I would think make us aware of the accuser of the believers


2 Corinthians 4:17-18 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Nothing here supports your claim "He died and his flesh has returned like any human" !