Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: HarleyD; xzins
The "return" of our Lord in 70AD was the ushering in of the Church age.

That happened on Penetecost.

I think this is a reasonable interpretation if you hold to a view that the Old Testament was one age and the New Testament is a new age.

The New Testament began with the Birth of Christ and the ministry of John the Baptist.

Did Jesus return in 70AD? It seems to me this is around the time the Gentiles were becoming accepted into the church, the death of Peter and Paul, etc.

Esigesis.

Did every eye see him? No. 70AD is not the coming of Christ. The Church came well before 70AD. There were dozens of active and vital Gentile Churches before 70AD. All of Paul's letters were addressed to Gentile Churches scattered throughout the world. So the Church age did not begin in 70AD. By 70AD we were already into the second generation of Christians.

The Church age began with Pentecost and will continue until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled.

Something important happens after that.

90 posted on 04/13/2007 8:56:34 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]


To: P-Marlowe

Eschatological Miscellany http://www.tektonics.org/esch/hcesh.html

Did Hebrews and the Catholic Epistles Wrongly Place Themselves in the “Last Days”?
James Patrick Holding

This portion of our study shall be relatively short, as there is little to consider that we have not already covered; what is left is a matter of application. Since as we have determined the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in 70 AD, it is obvious that some references — (as in Paul) http://www.tektonics.org/esch/paulend.html — can be resolved on that basis. But let’s look at cites individually.

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds...

“Last days” — but of what? As shown in our Olivet essay, most likely that “last days” of the age of the law, ushering in the age of the Messiah. This fits in of course with Hebrews’ theme of the superiority of the new covenant. This is confirmed in our next cite:

Hebrews 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

As in the Olivet Discourse, the word “world” in “end of the world” is aion, or age — a period of time, in other words, the age of the law vs. the age of the Messiah. (”World” in “foundation of the world” however is kosmos, the created order.)

Hebrews 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.

As noted in previous essays, the events of 70 AD constituted a “coming” — Hebrews clearly anticipates this.

James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

“Coming” here is parousia, the word used by Matthew to refer to events of 70 AD. It is interesting that James, who shows affinities with Matthew’s gospel and the Sermon on the Mount as recorded there, also uses the same term. Indeed, it is used in the works of James, John and Peter, the Jewish “inner circle” — but not in Hebrews, which may have been written by Luke. (Hebrews uses erchomai above; a common word, but it is the one Luke uses also.)

1 Peter 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you...

Last times — of what? Again, the age of the law.

1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

“All things! That means the end of the whole sausage, Holding!”

If it does, then what’s the point in being sober and watching? The phrase “all things” is used 171 times in the KJV NT, and I challenge anyone to find a place where it clearly would not have “exceptions”. This is a phrase that clearly and contextually means, “all that is relevant in this context.” If it meant the end of the created order, what do we make of Mark 4:34? “But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.” All things? Including for example the mating habits of sea slugs? I guess the disciples are still sitting there now. And our next verse shows this further:

2 Peter 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

The word here too is parousia, and this fits in nicely with Jewish scoffers in the 50s and early 60s, within the predicted “generation,” figuring that with the Romans still wagging their tails there isn’t much to worry about where Jesus’ predictions were concerned. (Parousia is also used in 2 Pet. 1:16.)

2 Peter 3:10, 12 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up...Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Problem here? No more so than it was in Olivet when we hear of the moon turning to blood and such. This is just the usual Jewish apocalyptic hyperbole, representing the refashioning of the social and political order — not a literal description of history as it shall happen. See more here. http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tillpfft.html

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.(cf. 4:3)

The last time, or hour — of what? Once again, of the age of the law — and this fits in very well with Jesus’ Olivet prediction of false Christs.
1 John 2:28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

This one also fits 70 AD; the word “coming” is parousia.

Since we have laid our groundwork elsewhere, little else needs be said in conclusion. Hebrews and the Catholic epistles provide no grounds for supposing an erroneous view of a “soon return” of Christ in the way critics think.


95 posted on 04/13/2007 9:10:07 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (To have no voice in the Party that always sides with America's enemies is a badge of honor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins
That happened on Penetecost.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. The Gentiles were not officially included until Cornelius, and even then there was discussions.

154 posted on 04/13/2007 1:05:20 PM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson