“When the LORD returns to Zion, they will see it with their own eyes. Burst into songs of joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, for the LORD has comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem.”
How can you not see this as a promise specifically to the nation and people of Israel? There is also the passage in Zechariah, 12:10 – 13:1:
“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.
“On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo.
“The land will mourn, each clan by itself, with their wives by themselves: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, and all the rest of the clans and their wives.
"On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and impurity.”
This clearly refers to a future occurrence, at which the majority of Jews will recognize Jesus as the messiah. It is a promise to Israel.
Wow, now THAT is a new one on me! I didn't know any dispensationalists believed that.....I know I never did...
I see an overlap in Romans, the wrath of 70AD on the Jews, and grace to all who believed.
To believe the preterist view is to use extra-biblical information rather than the Word of God.
Perhaps you have been misled as to what exactly the Preterist view is, or perhaps you are just repeating what you have heard from somewhere else, but you couldn't be more wrong! I'll use myself as an example. I believe the preterist view, and I believe it based solely on the Word of God.
The Word is clear as to why God is now dealing with Jew and Gentile on equal footing rather than dealing with the Jew only. Unfortunately, people read the Scriptures, or more likely, what someone has written about the Scriptures, with biases that cloud and distort the true meaning. If 70 AD concluded the Jewish program and God said the church, the Body of Christ is now Israel, why does John not mention this in the book of the Revelation?
You're kidding, right? A brief review of Preterist belief will answer that one for you. The Woman and Babylon are both symbolic pictures of the Jews and/or Jerusalem in Revelation.
There is nothing in Scripture about the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, therefore any meaning attached to that event is based on the will of man, not of God, and is from extra-biblical sources, such as Josephus. You know what it says about adding to the Word of God!
Again I ask, you are kidding, right??? Have you ever even read Matthew? Try starting with Chapter 23 and see what Jesus said about the Temple...