Deathisdefeated

O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

Hi everybody, a new member with the same old questions here. I have been aware of preterism for a couple of years now and though I find much of it appealing I however have challenges with primarily 2 issues, one being the resurrection and the other being the end of the old covenant. These may even be the same question. Searching for discussions about these issues has led me here, Im sure it will be beneficial, so just bear with me guy.

 

How is 1 Cor 15:12-13 " Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised" to be understood 

Views: 8609

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

{{{{by Patricia Watkins

For your other Hebrews 9:9 verse, I'm not familiar with Don Preston's view on this one, but I presume he considers "a time of reformation" in this verse to be the end of AD 70, yes?  I place the "time of reformation" in Hebrews 9:9 to the AD 33 crucifixion and ascension.  The change in the law took place at that time with the change in the high priesthood (Hebrews 7:12) over to Christ, "made a high priest after the order of Melchizedek".    That meant th:e New Covenant was launched on Resurrection morning when Christ first ascended to the Father that day to be installed as our high priest forever, and then left that heavenly Holy of holies to return to earth again that same morning.  Hebrews 9:11-17 states this as an already established New Covenant high priesthood role for Christ, beginning after His death, resurrection, and ascension that first day of the week.  After that point, the Old Covenant was no longer in force for anybody, neither Jew Nor Gentile.}}}} 

Hebrews 9:9 was written to 'Hebrews' years after The Cross and the 'Present Age' in that scripture was the Mosaic Age. The Mosaic Law was not 'changed' or fulfilled on Terra Firma earth as long as The Mosaic Temple Stood. Jesus was made a high priest after the order of Melchizedek when He went INTO The Holy of Holies IN HEAVEN and not before. The New Covenant Betrothal  was 'launched' at Pentecost (not Passover week)

{{{by Patricia Watkins

I disagree with Brother Les' view that the two covenants were in force at the same time during the transitional AD 30-70 period.  "NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO MASTERS..."  This rule applies to the two covenants also. }}}}

Now I can see one of the reasons that you may be so confused.

There were no 'two Masters', only one. God/The Lord/Jesus Christ made the Sinai Covenant and God/The Lord/Jesus Christ made the new Covenant on Pentecost. The One who made the Sinai Covenant was Crucified on The Cross to Fulfill it as The Wife (Judah) killing her Husband (God) as the final sacrifice of The Old Covenant. Then The Covenant TERMS went to PROBATE COURT for Judgments as that Covenant was waxing old and Fading away... Old Covenant/ old Heaven and Earth/ Old People.

The New Covenant Betrothal happened at/on Pentecost, to a New People, who were 'not a People'. God had said that many of the OC people were 'not His People as He had 'given them a Bill of Divorce. Now at 'The End of Ages', God Betrothed these 'not a People' to be His Bride, if they would repent of their falling away.

Two Covenants/Two Ages/ within the same timelines, about the Same Peoples that were made up of 'All Israel', Most being The Sons of Darkness and only a Remnant being The Sons of Light.

http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/philippians/3_12-16.htm

Just a note here, Brother Les, about your comment saying "Jesus was made a high priest after the order of Melchizedek when He went INTO The Holy of Holies IN HEAVEN and not before."  

Definitely agreed.  But this was not on Pentecost.  It was on His resurrection morning, when Jesus told Mary Magdalen in John 20:17"...Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them I ASCEND UNTO MY FATHER, and your Father, and to my God, and your God."  Between the time when He said this to Mary, and shortly after when He met the group of women on the road who were then allowed to hold Him by the feet, Jesus had already ascended to His Father and gone into the heavenly Holy of Holies and "offered Himself without spot to God", along with His blood being applied on the heavenly mercy seat.  This is the occasion of His becoming our high priest after the order of Melchizedek.  Not at Pentecost.

Christ did not wait to come out of the Holy of Holies in AD 70, as I have heard Full Preterists assert.  He came out of heaven's Holy of Holies that first day of the week after His resurrection and immediately returned to earth where He encountered the group of women on the road that morning.

Christ's first high priestly act in the heavenly Holy of Holies that morning was the point of "change in the priesthood", which at that point had necessitated a "change in the law" (Hebrews 7:12).  Meaning the New Covenant was officially launched along with Christ's high priesthood on that morning, the first day of the week after Christ's Saturday evening resurrection.  Not at Pentecost.

We know that, according to Daniel 9:27's prophecy of the 70th week, Christ the Messiah was going to "confirm the (New) Covenant with many" (of Daniel's people) "for ONE WEEK" (of 7 years).  That means 7 years from the start of Christ's miraculous ministry in AD 30, past the middle of the "week" of 7 years, (at the crucifixion), plus another 3 1/2 years after that by the apostles' ministry to the Jews.  Sounds as if a "betrothal" period for the New Covenant (if you want to call it that) was promised and started 3 1/2 years BEFORE Christ's death.  A total of 7 years to confirm the New Covenant with the Jewish people from AD 30-37. 

After those 7 years, the Apostle Paul was commissioned by God in the Jerusalem temple to take the gospel "far hence unto the Gentiles" (Acts 22:21).  That New Covenant "betrothal" then switched its emphasis over to the Gentiles, after FIRST being offered to the Jews who in large part rejected it (with the exception of the "remnant" - Rom. 9:27 cp. Is. 10:22).

By the way, wasn't a betrothal covenant under Jewish law considered just as legally binding as the actual marriage?  

 (((((by Patricia Watkins

Christ did not wait to come out of the Holy of Holies in AD 70, as I have heard Full Preterists assert.  He came out of heaven's Holy of Holies that first day of the week after His resurrection and immediately returned to earth where He encountered the group of women on the road that morning.)))))

You are misinformed by so many things in your post that I am sad for you. As an example above.... I believe that it is Peter who said (you can look it up) Jesus was in The Grave/Sheol with The Dead Saints there and preaching to them. Jesus was NOT in The Holy of Holies when He was In The Grave.... He was in Hell, with the dead Saints in Abrahams 'Bosom'.... And He most certainly did not come out of The Grave as The High Priest....

Where do you get the inspiration to make stuff up like this?

And Also... The 'Gentiles' that the Apostle Paul were going to were of The Displaced of Israel (Northern Kingdom) who had became 'as Gentiles'. yes, there were 'Greek' proselytes, But the 'Prophets' for told that All Israel, Ephraim and Judah would unite as on stick.

Hi again Brother Les,

Thank you for responding, but I'm afraid you aren't reading what I wrote carefully enough.  I know it's easy to get lost in the mass of stuff I put out.  Sorry about that.

Agreed:  You're right that Jesus didn't come out of the grave as High Priest.  Not till the next morning, the first day of the week, did that change take place in the high priesthood and the law.  It's true as you say, Jesus was NOT in the Holy of Holies while in the grave.  He was indeed in the spirit, preaching in Sheol to the "spirits in prison" (i.e., "those who are dead" - I Peter 3:19, 4:6) during those 3 days / 3 nights while Christ's fleshly body was in the sepulchre.

After those 3 days / 3 nights, He bodily arose from the grave on Saturday evening, "leading a multitude of captives" along with Him from the dead (Eph. 4:8).  That "multitude of captives" was the group of Matthew 27:52-53 saints that Full Preterists don't like to talk about.  These resurrected saints went into the city of Jerusalem and "were seen of many" in those physically-resurrected, incorruptible body forms.

These 144,000 "First-fruits" resurrected Matthew 27 saints "stood on Mount Zion" (the temple) in Jerusalem with the Lamb (Rev. 14:1) at some time during that Saturday night.  The next morning, Jesus met Mary and told her He was then going to ascend to the Father (John 20:17).   

She was not supposed to touch Him yet, so that He could remain ceremonially pure, in order to offer Himself "without spot to God", along with His blood in heaven, right after meeting Mary.  

Shortly after that meeting with Mary, we read that Christ was found again on the road, meeting a group of women who were NOW allowed to touch Him and hold Him by the feet (Matt. 28:9).  This permitted freedom to finally make physical contact with the resurrected Savior proves that Jesus had just made His sacrifice on heaven's mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies, and had that blood accepted by the Father.  After that point (when Jesus had become our high priest, changing the law), all saints were then legally considered vicariously pure in God's eyes, and physical contact with the Savior would no longer be considered a defilement from then on.

I've covered the absolutely necessary terms for Christ's ceremonial purity on resurrection day that first day of the week at this link, which you or others might find interesting:

http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/theology/why-did-jesu...

Lots of symbolism for maintaining absolute purity, as stipulated for the role of high priest, which Jesus fulfilled down to the last letter - even with His dead body. 

And the prophecy of Ephraim and Judah united as Israel in one stick in Ezekiel 37:15-28 ?  That was the post-exilic return, when the formerly-divided kingdom under Rehoboam had united as one nation in Jerusalem under the leadership of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zerubbabel.  

After the beginning of his conversion, the apostle Paul did attempt to reach his fellow-Jews with the gospel, but in AD 37, God's command to him was to then go "far hence to the Gentiles", to those who were formerly "alienated" as the pagan nations of "sinners of the Gentiles" in the whole habitable world. 

Ethnic Israelites had Daniel's prophesied ONE WEEK of seven years from AD 30-37 to get on board with the New Covenant being offered only to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (as Christ said He was doing in Matt. 15:24).  After that 7 years in AD 37, it was the pagan Gentile nations which had the gospel evangelism concentrated on them, instead of on Daniel's people.  This offer of the gospel to the pagan Gentiles is portrayed in Rev. 14:6: "Having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth" (the category of ethnic Israelites in Judah FIRST), "and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people" (followed by the category of the pagan Gentiles).

 ((by Patricia WatkinsAnd the prophecy of Ephraim and Judah united as Israel in one stick in Ezekiel 37:15-28 ?  That was the post-exilic return, when the formerly-divided kingdom under Rehoboam had united as one nation in Jerusalem under the leadership of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zerubbabel.  ))

We have went over a lot in your post before, still clinging to your own interpretation. As for the two sticks becoming one, we have gone over this before. Jeremiah and Hosea had proclaimed that the Northern kingdom (Ephraim/Israel) were given a Bill of Divorce. God Divorced 'her' from the OC. Making your interpretation not possible. God could only 're-marry' 'her' as a new people, by a new name, under a new Covenant marriage contract. As you said before, 'Betrothal' is as if they were 'marriage', but the marriage contract was not ' complete' until the 'consemation of the marriage' (AD 70

Hi Brother Les,

The Northern kingdom was indeed "divorced" by God.  But that did not erase from existence all the individual people who had been within that kingdom.

Ephraim and Judah's individual people who had been scattered all over the nations of the world at that time were encouraged by Cyrus to "go up to Jerusalem" in Ezra 1:3.  This regathering of these individual people in the post-exilic return created one united group in Jerusalem. 

The language God uses for that occasion of their re-unification is that "a nation is born in a day".  That particular "day" when this united nation was "born" was probably the occasion when these ethnic Jews made a covenant with God in the 24th day of the 7th month (Neh. 9:1), to walk in His laws.  See Nehemiah 9:38.  "And because of all this we make a sure covenant, and write it; and our princes, Levites, and priests, seal unto it."  

After Nehemiah 10 gives the list of all the heads of families that sealed themselves unto this covenant, Nehemiah 10:29 says that even the rest of the people, including their wives, and their sons and daughters all "entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the LORD our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes;"  

The whole "wolf dwelling with the lamb" analogy in Isaiah 11 was a prediction of the two formerly-antagonistic Ephraim and Judah kingdoms being re-united in the post-exilic return, with "their young ones lying down together", as the children of these two formerly-divided kingdoms living in peace with one another in the post-exilic nation of Israel.

There are layers of prophetic fulfillment for these things, since this language can also be applied to the Jews and Gentiles being united into the New Covenant of the "One New Man". 

 (((by Patricia WatkinsHi Brother Les,

The Northern kingdom was indeed "divorced" by God.  But that did not erase from existence all the individual people who had been within that kingdom.

Ephraim and Judah's individual people who had been scattered all over the nations of the world at that time were encouraged by Cyrus to "go up to Jerusalem" in Ezra 1:3.  This regathering of these individual people in the post-exilic return created one united group in Jerusalem. )))

Nehemiah was the Babylonian Exile. Individuals can always come to worship Father God, but as of that time All were still DEAD very DEAD all went to Sheol. The OC House of Israel was gone forever. NO House of Israel, No possible way to have any 'type' of reconciliation. No WAAAY to put 'sticks' together, because the 'stick' at that time did not exists. You are plugging 'in' 'fulfillments' with in the OT that are not 'fulfillments' until the End of The Age fulfillments of the NT..

Unchecked Copy BoxJer 3:7 - And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it.
Unchecked Copy BoxJer 3:8 - And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Unchecked Copy BoxJer 3:9 - And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks.

Jer 3:10 - And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.

The only Fulfillment that matter in the marriage paradigm was the New Covenant fulfillment....

Unchecked Copy BoxJer 31:30 - But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Unchecked Copy BoxJer 31:31 - Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Jer 31:32 - Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

Unchecked Copy BoxJer 31:33 - But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people

 

Unchecked Copy BoxHeb 8:7 - For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Heb 8:8 - For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Unchecked Copy BoxHeb 8:9 - Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Heb 8:10 - For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Book of Jeremiah and Hebrews Divorce and remarriage. New Holy People, New Name, new Covenant. Resurrected from The Death, Redeemed from being cast out. Salvation for evermore.

Hi Patricia

The main challenge I have with what you are saying is that the feast of Tabernacles was not an OT shadow of a NT reality. This I cannot accept.

That the feast would continue to be kept in the restoration of Israel is in no means an indication that its was not a shadow of new testament realities just like Isaiah speaks of continued gathering on sabbaths and new moons.

Since my question however had to do with how you find 3rd resurrection past AD70, I hear your reasoning and do not agree with it.

I believe that all old testament shadows were fulfilled by AD70 thus cannot agree with you.

Thanks though for your thoughts and do start a separate post on ages.

Hi IT Guy,

Your quote: "...what you are saying is that the feast of Tabernacles was not an OT shadow of a NT reality." 

Nope, didn't say that at all.  It IS an OT shadow of a NT reality.  That NT reality is set for its final fulfillment in our future, that's all.  The resurrected OC saints already had their fulfillment of arriving in the promised land of heaven back in AD 70 when they received their permanent, incorruptible "tabernacles" of a glorified body to house their spirits. 

We are told exactly what point in time those resurrected individual saints were able to enter into God's presence in heaven with those glorified bodies, as found in Revelation 15:8.  "And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."  That was in AD 70.   According to Rev. 11:18-19, it was the "time of the dead", when "the temple of God was opened in heaven", and rewards for God's servants, prophets, and saints were given out.

What God did back then for the resurrected saints in AD 70, He will replicate by eventually giving us, the NC saints, the same shared inheritance of a glorified, resurrected body form like Christ's - the "Firstborn of many brethren".  The mere fact that every dead saint from AD 70 onward has yet to receive this inheritance of their dead physical body form changed and made incorruptible like Christ's REQUIRES another future fulfillment of this process in a 3rd resurrection event.  The future bodily resurrection of all NC saints is so certain that Romans 4:17 says that "...God, who quickeneth the dead...calleth those things which be not as though they were."  Our future bodily resurrection is as certain as if it were fulfilled already.

I would continue to ask you and any Full Preterists reading this to offer an interpretation of what Zechariah 14:16-19 symbolizes from year to year in post-AD 70 times.  We know for certain that the OC animal sacrifices will NOT EVER be reinstated after Christ's ultimate sacrifice, so Zechariah 14:16-19 MUST be symbolic of something. 

Brother Les offered a brief explanation of how he sees this symbolism.  I agreed with him that it does represent "booths" of individual saints who "tabernacle" in the New Jerusalem, but that this also indicates the saints' temporary condition of living in our physical bodies until those bodies are changed to permanently-incorruptible ones in the final 3rd resurrection at the end of the NC Age.  Do you have an alternate opinion on these Zechariah 14:16-19 verses, IT Guy?   

     I appreciate these back and forth refinements of how all was fulfilled into a new covenant reality, but why is there a hesitation to embrace "full preterism" (as in ALL was fulfilled by 70A.D.)?  the closing comment re "3rd resurrection at the end of the NC Age" seems the source of this hesitation.

     where does this idea source from?  if death and sin are forever defeated, why would such a spiritual "new heavens and new earth" come to an end?  is this a materialist neo-pharisee hang-over for another 'end' to come?  if "it is finished" and the "perfect has come" and yahshua the anointed king and high priest was victorious and all was fulfilled what need is there for a new "age" to come or for such a "perfect" restored "'paradise" to come to an end?

     if i was to presume ( my apologies in advance for the offense ) but is it fear of what is "lost" (i.e. our failures, sin) that one fears losing?  is it so bad to be reconciled to abba in heaven with all "impurities burned away" in the "consuming fire" of sanctification for his glorification?

    consider the collective admonitions from paul's epistles re the struggle between the flesh and spirit, putting away childish things and moving on into (spiritual) maturity, about crucifying the 'old man' (from adam) so one can grow in the "new spirit" one is born anew in the image of the 2nd Adam.  like yahshua was born of adam and the spirit (i.e. a 'son of man', half of adam's descent and half descent of spirit), are we not likewise created "new" when one is "born again" by water and the spirit (John 3:3,5)?  does not this "transformation" happen at the time of such a birth (the old dies, is buried and the new is born - Rom 6)?  So could it be reasoned that the struggles we have with the "flesh" we inherent from the sin-nature of Adam (material) and the "new spirit within us" (spirit) is only "ended" when the body we inherent from "adam" goes back to dust, while the new "perfect" spiritual body lives on (since death was defeated)? see the gist of where this is going?

     so is there an "end to the N.C. age" or only an end of the half we inherited from Adam at "death", while the other half (i.e. the new "transfigured"/perfected body of the spirit) lives on in the presence of abba in the spiritual kingdom?  If we have "eyes to see", and have our senses trained, can we not see this "spiritual" kingdom of the "new jerusalem" (i.e. us "living stones") and the "new heavens and "new earth" now, even if not in 100% perfection yet until we shed the "old man" completely?  have we not entered this "spiritual kingdom" already before death of the physical body?  would we see it more if we worked toward helping others "see" and "enter" it while working to build it thru one's "deeds" (works) defined in one's duties as a "royal priesthood of a set-apart nation"?

    why MUST we have the perfection now, immediately, instead of focusing instead on one's "agape" obedience -- e.g. making one's "calling and election sure", perfecting one's agape-duty thru fulfillment of the two great commandments, furthering said kingdom and will of abba for the glorification and furtherance of his kingdom so it might fill the earth?  if we are members of the "body" under the "headship of the anointed king of kings and high priest" should we really be engaged in "ecclesiastical refinements" while waiting for the end, or rather about the father's business as the returned prodigal son by seeking first his kingdom, and do one's duty to fulfill the testitator's will for "his kingdom come?"

     ultimately doesn't this whole matter come down to avoidance or obedience to one's duty to one's creator, instead of worrying about what is to come?  when does one begin to put behind the 'waiting for the end' before perfecting one's obedience?  wont one constantly be learning, growing in understanding and wisdom but when does it result in "overcoming the world (order)" for the glorification and furtherance of abba's kingdom "on earth, as it is in heaven"? 

Hi M. Todd,

I don't hesitate to embrace "that ALL things which are written may be fulfilled."  These "ALL things" were specific to what was prophetically written pertaining to the "days of vengeance" in the AD 70 era, according to the context of Luke 21:22.  

If I were you, I would acknowledge that not everything prophetic was "WRITTEN"; some prophecies were deliberately NOT WRITTEN down in Rev. 10:4, but were SEALED UP for later fulfillment after the AD 70 days of vengeance were completely fulfilled.

M. Todd, have you got an interpretation of what Zechariah 14:16-19 means for a post-AD 70 reality under the New Covenant?  What does that symbolic instruction mean to you when it says to remember the Feast of Tabernacles in order to receive the blessing of rain in the history of mankind "from year to year" following AD 70?

You are also presuming that the infinite God cannot possibly do "one better" than what He has already accomplished by establishing the NHNE reality we are currently in.  God can ALWAYS exceed His previous blessings.  That's why He's God, and we're not.  God doesn't ever hit a sort of glass ceiling where He can't top His own performance by continually kicking things up another notch.

You think that the NHNE is as good as it will ever get for the children of God?  That's an artificial limitation on God's powers that doesn't exist.  Think bigger thoughts, because God is always bigger than we think. 

You also put an artificial limit on God's restorative powers over our human fleshly bodies.  Jesus promised His disciples in Luke 21:18 that, even though they would be put to death for His sake, yet "there shall not an hair of your head perish".  What that tells me is that Christ is vitally concerned with changing the physical bodies He had paid for with His blood, and in which we now "tabernacle", into a state of glorified incorruptibility, just like our brother Christ Jesus' own glorified, resurrected body form.

Even Paul, (who we would have to say had reached some level of spiritual maturity) - even Paul was hoping to share in Christ's "power of His resurrection" in Paul's future, which he had not attained yet in Phil. 3:10-14.  Paul wanted to "arrive at" (katantao) the point in time when the resurrection of the dead would take place.  God fulfilled this desire for Paul to be able to participate in the bodily resurrection by having Paul martyred under Nero in AD 67, just in time to "arrive at" the time for the AD 70 bodily resurrection.  

This is why  Paul welcomed the prospect of his own death by martyrdom with open arms, knowing that the "prize of the high calling" of a perfected incorruptible body in God's presence was worth relinquishing everything he had.

The "duty" I have to my Creator is to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ".  Head knowledge combined with a grace-filled life.  I do not "worry about what is to come", M. Todd, simply because I try to describe what God has written about our future prospects in scripture. 

Because I can follow the clear track of God fulfilling His every word to His people so far through the ages of the past, this gives me confidence and a peace that there is nothing which will occur in this world in the future that is outside the detailed plans God has formulated for this world's history - all the way to the culmination of fallen man's history in this world at the end of the 7th millennium. 

Hi Patricia

Sometimes it gets very hard to communicate something when people are in different worldview. Words have meaning in the larger context of a worldview and without coming into the other persons worldview it may be impossible to comprehend the responses being given.

The issue of whether FOT was a NC shadow or not is semantics with worldview issues chipping in. But let me pose this as a curve ball question: Will those who were resurrected and raptured by/in AD70 experience the anti type, the reality of the FOT or they will only witness it but not partake of it?

As for Zech 14 you should know by now that exegesis is not my strong point. But to hold onto the mentioning of that feast and make it a special indicator is unwarranted in my view. The post exilic world was revealed to prophets in the cultus and pictures they were familiar with but to read more into references of OT practices in my view is stretching it.

Consider the following text 

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

I would find it reading too much, if someone wants to build a doctrine from that verse of some other symbolism for new moons and sabbaths that extends beyond AD70, and that is what I feel you are doing with Zech 14. Of course I could be wrong but thats how it feels to me.

RSS

Olivet Discourse Movie

How the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century.
Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21
Riley O'Brien Powell

Events

Forum

Delivered from the Law

Started by Internet_Troll in Questions and Best Answers We Can Give!. Last reply by Internet_Troll Apr 15. 13 Replies

FEAR obviously struck..

Started by Julia A Waldron in Eschatology. Last reply by John Mar 24. 1 Reply

For the Preterist

Started by Julia A Waldron in Eschatology. Last reply by Julia A Waldron Mar 24. 22 Replies

Isaiah 2:2-4 Used to refute preterism

Started by Steve G. in Eschatology. Last reply by Patricia Watkins Aug 13, 2018. 1 Reply

This Site Active?

Started by Doug in Eschatology. Last reply by Patricia Watkins Jul 29, 2018. 28 Replies

Gen 1 vs Isa 51

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Internet_Troll May 3, 2018. 4 Replies

The sin of the Gentiles

Started by Internet_Troll in Questions and Best Answers We Can Give!. Last reply by Brother Les Jan 18, 2018. 3 Replies

Adam as Israel

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Internet_Troll Nov 5, 2017. 9 Replies

Though he dies yet shall he live

Started by Internet_Troll in Questions and Best Answers We Can Give!. Last reply by Internet_Troll Apr 25, 2017. 8 Replies

The parousia and judgment of nations

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Joseph Rehby Jul 6, 2017. 16 Replies

Preterist Networking

Started by Judy Peterson in Prayer Requests. Last reply by Judy Peterson Apr 8, 2018. 21 Replies

The 10 Tribes of Israel

Started by Internet_Troll in Questions and Best Answers We Can Give!. Last reply by Judith Ann Maness Aug 4, 2018. 10 Replies

Online Teaching Elders

Started by Eohn Rhodes in Eschatology. Last reply by Doug Dec 22, 2015. 4 Replies

Who is the abomination of desolation ?

Started by Stairway To Heaven in Eschatology. Last reply by Brother Les Dec 11, 2015. 3 Replies

Divine council

Started by Sharon Q in Eschatology. Last reply by Sharon Q Oct 3, 2015. 5 Replies

© 2019   Created by Tim Martin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service