Not One Stone Left Upon Another

Jesus predicted it 37 years before it happened. Herod Agrippa II and his sister Bernice, who heard Paul's testimony at Caesarea (Acts 26), tried hard to prevent it, as did the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (our main source of first-century information). But the fall of Jerusalem and the burning of the Temple in A.D. 70 happened nevertheless, and it was a catastrophe with almost unparalleled consequences for Jews, Christians, and, indeed, all of subsequent history. It compelled a whole new vector for synagogue (not Temple) Judaism, it submerged the Jewish homeland for the next 19 centuries under foreign domination, it helped foster the split between church and synagogue, and it set the stage for rampant prophetic speculation about the End Times that continues to the present day. Few episodes in history have had that sort of impact.

BTW, I might add that many futurists recognize the foolishness of trying to claim that Matthew 24 has no real relationship to AD70, so they have invented the theory that it has two fulfillments, once in AD70 and once at the end of the age.

Of course they still need to resurrect Rome, rebuild the temple, etc. That’s what gets John Hagee and his friends all excited about events in the Middle East. They are looking intently for a revived Rome and the rebuilt temple which will signal the soon annihilation of millions of Israeli citizens under their Antichrist.

I’ll take a pass on their brand of theology.

At least us “replacement theologians” not out to see most of the Jewish population killed off.

All we can offer them is the hope of the gospel, being regrafted into the root, identifying with our father Abraham, and sharing in the promises that have been secured by Messiah Jesus. The only place we can offer them is the New Jerusalem in heaven where all the saints of God are now reigning with Him.

The real thing we “replace” is the abject pessimism of futurist dispensationalism with an optimistic expansion of Christ’s kingdom today and until He returns. This is real good news for both “Jew and greek”.

No thesis necessary -- only the logical reading and comparison of the Luke to Matthew in the light of subsequent history.

Odd brand of "logic". By what system of logic are you permitted to ignore the obvious parallels between the two narratives to conclude they are speaking of entirely different events? (The Greek wording is identical in many verses.)

Which confirms that there is no logical thesis that demands we accept a highly questionable conclusion.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.