• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.

Review of TIJ's Fall of Jerusalem series (3 eps)

EarlyActs

Well Known Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2023
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
267
Points
83
Because of my book last year on the zealot revolt, THE COVENANT REVOLT, a few lines of episide 1 and its grip on history captured my attention. The status of Rome in the previous generation is explained, including the fateful loss of the republic in 44 BC, when Julius made himself emperor. Visually, the series seems to have an original workup of animation.

Ep 2 began promisingly, with the host referencing 'a group of Jews were not surprised when the spring of 70 came and a major conflict was underway.' In fact, the script truly jumps from the status of Rome to April 70 with very little development of the real theology and eschatology of Temple Judaism at the time. (This expression comes from Josephus' reference to orthodox vs. zealot vs. Essene vs. Christian sects at the time).

Instead the author also makes Mt 24 jump to the future almost immediately with a dual-fulfillment view. Once that corner is turned, he's gone historically. Piles of statistics come out this that is is the most war-torn century, most famine-afflicted, etc., and even thinks that covid was a serious disease (it was flu and was manipulated for election interference).

As for the dual-view itself, one problem is how a person gets away from the 1st century catches. They are numerous. A dual fulfillment would have to have a normal temple violated by Jews, which deflates the importance of what happened in the 1st century.

We then have the chapter's own time signal: 'immediately after...' That is, it is difficult to take a dual fulfillment seriously when there is such language. Something else must have happened since the world has continued on since the devastating event.

Unfortunately, for me, this turned the series into a visually helpful low information tour of a very high information topic. Yes, he does reference the stunning delaration of Lk 19 about the coming decimation of the temple etc., but it hardly stands alone. There is especially tons of material in Luke, with Paul close by, authoring.

Three things provide a clarifying resolution to 'immediately after...'. 1, a phrase in Mt 24, just a few verses away, says that only the Father knows the final day. Obviously, he dated everything before v29 to that generation of Israel, but something happens at v29: the scope is suddenly the whole universe and is final.

2, Mk 13 has its 4 options for the return of the Master in the parable which employs that theme. If the ensuing period of the church is the "day" we see that there is a wide choice of time when the Master might return.

3, 2 Peter 3 is actually concerned with this issue, answering it. In fact, it is concerned to finalize many high-level issues from creation to the end! Skeptics were already saying that any further coming of Christ should have happened by then. No reference to the 4 year conflict (actually 3.5) in Judea was mentioned, so it seems safe to say that Peter viewed the Judean and the universal as back to back. So Peter uses very elastic frameworks to demonstrate that the universal coming is still ahead, an event of fire. Certainly the Judean event appeared to kick that off. But a delay in the universal judgement would end salvation, and God wants all people to be saved.
 
Back
Top