Hi John,

I have to say that I have never doubted that in 70AD the Temple was destroyed and the city of Jerusalem plundered and made desolate by the Romans. It is interesting that you question this.

My first thought of why there was no account of this happening in the NT, is that the books, therein, were written before 70AD. With the exception of the Book of Revelation, which most believe was written in 96AD…that is still disputed though, and there is good evidence that it too was written before 70AD. That is a whole new study that I won’t get into here. But, I will give a few excepts from a study done by a man named Matt Slick, about the other books.

######################

Destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. , Luke and Acts

Link of article or video : http://www.carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom

“None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1). This prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and burned the temple. The gold in the temple melted down between the stone walls and the Romans took the walls apart, stone by stone, to get the gold. Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after 70 A.D. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events then anything to bolster the Messianic claims -- such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said -- would surely have been included. But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels (at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before 70 A.D.

Similarly, this argument is important when we consider the dating of the book of Acts which was written after the gospel of Luke, by Luke himself. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus' ascension. Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of 70 A.D. which would have been extremely relevant and prophetically important and would require inclusion into Acts had it occurred before Acts was written. Remember, Acts is a book of history concerning the Christians and the Jews. The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not recorded is very strong evidence that Acts was written before A.D. 70. We add to this the fact that Acts does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of [the apostle] James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65),"1 and we have further evidence that it was written early.

######################################

To me this is the most compelling argument for the account of what happened in 70AD not being included in the Word of God.

JESUS IS ALL AND EVERYTHING!!

Patti C.

For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!

PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER










Hi Patti,




You make an erroneous assumption !




I read EVERY WORD of the article otherwise I would have NOT COMMENTED on it. This is A FORUM !




If you ONLY want to hear comments which agree with you, don't post them on A FORUM.




I am NOT attacking you, but rather I am NOT AGREEING WITH THE IDEAS YOU PUT FORWARD. Do you NOT know the difference ?




We don't attack people personally on a forum, but we do banter about differing ideas. That is what a forum is !




A wise person once said, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen !"




YBIC,




Bruce Warner, Scripturalist

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven

Right and this is why I'm rejecting the doctrine, it's not in the bible. So the Lord definitely isn't teaching this doctrine to anyone, someone else is. So all you're really doing is telling me, "Here are my reasons for why the Lord isn't testifying with me about this..." and I'm saying, "I don't think I really need to hear your reasons for why the Lord doesn't establish this doctrine- the very fact that He's not testifying with you proves your doctrine isn't His."

The last post the author makes the case that this "70ad fulfilment" is so important that should anyone have been around they would surely have recorded it, because that's how important it would be. That's how important this event would be if it were the fulfilment of the Revelation. Someone would have to write the account which would be included in our bibles as the testimony of God to the fulfilment of His Word.

But since there's not a peep in the Word of God about it, the author then concludes that- no one must've been around during the time (I guess the Lord fell asleep?), so the gospels must've been written earlier..." when actually he should be thinking, "God didn't bother to have anyone record anything about this in His Word, so it must not be as important as I've thought it was, and in fact must have nothing to do with the Word of God" ; as we have agreed this doctrine is not proceeding from the mouth of the Lord, true? This is not of the Word of God, then how can it possibley be "of faith" when faith comes by hearing the Word of God; if faith comes from hearing the Word of God, and this doctrine is not in the Word of God, then what else can I possibley conclude but that the doctrine is not of faith? And if it's not of faith, then what is it?

Just to note when I say, "your doctrine is not His" I'm meaning in this particular - not that I'm saying "then this man is a false prophet" or "this man is not a Christian" or anything. Just, these meaning- in regard to this specific doctrine right here.

I see what both you and Patti are saying and my personal belief is that most of Revelation is yet to be fulfilled however, I do tend to think that the prophecy regarding the destruction of Jerusalem has already been fulfilled because of the reasons Patti stated above but there are also unfulfilled prophecies regarding their situation as well that are prophesied about and are yet future. I do understand you believe you cannot trust these conclusions because they are not found in scripture. My question to you though would be, when unfulfilled future prophecies of the Bible are fulfilled how are you going to believe them if their fulfillment isn't already written about in scripture? My point is what if you are not personally there to witness the fulfillment, if they happen in the future their fulfillment isn't going to be written in the Bible. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you but it sounds like you are saying the only way you will believe a prophecy is already fulfilled is if it's fulfillment is written about in scripture or you witness it first hand to where no secular sources of reporting it qualify, is that a fair assessment?

Bear in mind I'm not saying I don't trust the conclusions, I'm saying I don't trust your sources from which you're drawing the conclusions. Also bear in mind that if we were talking about history or something, I wouldn't have any problem with citations of Josephus and such. But when we walk into the proverbial sanctuary of the Lord to talk about His Word and everything that entails then we should be leaving Josephus et. al. at the door. Only the Word of God should ever be brought in here.

So again it's the source- I'm not saying "It's all lies!" but I am saying "It may as well be treated as such": Josephus and friends may well have written an exacting true account of the event- but it's not in the scripture and as such is factually not of faith, and not testified by the Lord. Even if it's true (and I don't doubt that it is, not that I'm saying "It never happened" that it's also possible that it never happened, and is complete fiction: I simply cannot determine this in any regard thus it's instability and uncertainty, as always with the word of men) then it was a earthly sign for the generation witnessing it that the old covenant and all with it were to be swept away. Whatever the sign may have been to them, it wasn't to us or anyone after because if it meant the fulfilment of the Word of God (specially the Revelation) then the Lord would've testified to its completion and we'd be reading in the book of Titus "and thus is came to pass according to the Word of the Lord; that He would throw down the stones of the temple" but this book is fiction and doesn't exist, of course.

About the recognition of the fulfilment, I would yes either have to experience it first hand or get a direct "It is done" from the Word of God. Again, it's not that I'm saying "everything not of the bible is false and a lie" but that I can't be sure of it, and as such it's no good to me in most matters, and just right out in biblical matters.

When Jesus was talking about the temple I think He is teaching beyond the physical, and about the spiritual- so He's prophesying about the spiritual temple, and not the physical temple; just as when he cursed the fig tree, He was prophesying about the spiritual fig tree, not that physical tree and its lack of physical figs that was literally in front of Him. After all, Jesus said "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up" and He wasn't speaking of the physical temple even though they thought He was.

Got it. One point to consider though, when you have extra biblical sources confirming biblical assertions it in some cases strengthens the case for the assertion. Otherwise you could argue circular reasoning, corroboration or collusion.

For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!

PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER

RE: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED..........







So what, FOR THE MOST PART, do you think is fulfilled, and what FOR THE LEAST PART do you think is YET TO BE FULFILLED ?




Let's get to the meat of it rather make such a vague statement !







Bruce Warner, Scripturalist for the Lord

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven

Bruce,

If you have been reading my studies you know what I think has been fulfilled, and have proven biblically why I have come to those conclusions.

I think it would be good for you to state what you think has been fulfilled or not, and prove it the same way.

Just making a list without supporting evidence from His Word really serves no purpose.

JESUS IS ALL AND EVERYTHING!!

Patti C.