ezrider
Member
Again, the events of 70 AD are not mentioned in the Olivet Discourse.
Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
You keep making this same statement over and over again, but you have failed in identifying for me what this gross misunderstanding of the scripture is. I do not know what preterists teach, nor what they use to try and justify their theology. What is the misunderstanding that you speak of? Because simply posting some scriptures out of Zechariah and the gospels just isn't identifying it for me. What is it that preterists believe about these particular scriptures?
When you bring up the olivet discourse, you seem to place an extreme amount of significance on whether Jesus was speaking to the disciples in the Temple, or whether he was speaking to them in the garden. What is the significance of where the disciples heard his words?
When Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables, but then spoke privately with the disciples afterword; was he then teaching the disciples a different parable? Or was he expounding on the parable he had already given them?