Abraham and Isaac for starters. Try also Mt 1:23
See Col. 1:6.
States nothing about the gospel being preached to the WHOLE world before AD 70
But in the light of well-defined biblical language, the reference is rather to a coming in terms of the events of his providence in judgment against his enemies and in deliverance of his people.
So, details - how did he judge His enemies and deliver his people in AD70? You have made the claim that this portion of Mt 24 is about the destruction of Jerusalem. Are you now backing away and trying to present a spiritualization of the prophecy? If so, a 'spiritualization' cannot morph into a physical and real prophetic event.
Coming in the Clouds
Which your source spends a lot of time on. While it is an oft used metaphor, the disciples question was regarding a very real, physical return. Don't forget, when Jesus ascended to heaven in a cloud an angel told His disciples that He would return the same way (Acts 1:11). How in vs 30 do the tribes of the earth 'mourn' a metaphor?
No, the rest of the article is spiritualization, plain and simple and you've failed to show how that portion of Mt 24 was specifically fulfilled in the events of AD 70 as you claimed they were.
Jesus’ comments in Matthew 24 were given to believers, specifically the disciples at Olivet, not unbelievers. “Therefore you [disciples] also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you [disciples] do not expect. “ Perhaps your dispensational presups prevent you from reading the text plainly.
Interesting that you selectively choose when and when not to spiritualize your interpetation of Jesus' words and prophecies. But then what should they 'watch' for, since in your eschatological world, prophecies from Christ are spiritualized and diluted?
Such is the nature of the discussion about the rapture. If folks don’t accept the dispie presups, which most do not, then all the handwaving about history sans Church doesn’t make any sense.
As pointed out before - your theology is inconsistent in this regard. The only way you can make your theology work is to a priori dismiss NT prophecy via spiritualization or write it off as an oblique reference to a historic event. This steals away from the OT prophecy concerning Christ.
IOW, don't take Paul's words literally. Read them dispensationally.
If so, a 'spiritualization' cannot morph into a physical and real prophetic event.
Contra dispensational thinking, spiritual is both physical and real. The error of dispensationalism is in trying to read the biblical prophecies like they read the evening newspaper.
prophecies from Christ are spiritualized and diluted?
It is another error of dispensationalism to see the spiritual as somehow diluted.
As pointed out before - your theology is inconsistent in this regard.
Hardly. It is simply contrary to the erroneous views of dispensationalism.
Can you be more specific? Exegete a passage a demonstrate the theory conclusively.
As pointed out before - your theology is inconsistent in this regard. The only way you can make your theology work is to a priori dismiss NT prophecy via spiritualization or write it off as an oblique reference to a historic event. This steals away from the OT prophecy concerning Christ.
= = =
I love how you say things so clearly.