The "END" in the Old Testament

**Edward Goodie** · 01-25-2012, 03:04 PM

In another group, I challenged some members to show me where the "end," IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY, was mentioned in the Old Testament. I received no answer. So now I open it for a more public challenge to all the futurists on this board.

Determining the foundation and manner of the "end" is vitally important because Paul himself proclaimed that he taught nothing but from the Law and prophets, and especially in relation to the resurrection (Acts 24:14, Acts 26:22). As well, it is vitally important because Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets.

So, what are the specific Scriptures where the "end" of human history is taught in the Old Testament (Tanuch or Law and Prophets?

Will I get an answer this time around?

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 01-25-2012, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by Edward Goodie

In another group, I challenged some members to show me where the "end," IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY, was mentioned in the Old Testament. I received no answer. So now I open it for a more public challenge to all the futurists on this board.

Determining the foundation and manner of the "end" is vitally important because Paul himself proclaimed that he taught nothing but from the Law and prophets, and especially in relation to the resurrection (Acts 24:14, Acts 26:22). As well, it is vitally important because Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets.

So, what are the specific Scriptures where the "end" of human history is taught in the Old Testament?

Will I get an answer this time around?

This one's worth watching.

**Edward Goodie** · 01-25-2012, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by RAM

This one's worth watching.

RAM, I doubt any of the futurists on this board will be able to respond either...let me go get my popcorn too. Better get something to drink; it's gonna be a longggggggggg wait.

**CWH** · 01-26-2012, 06:45 AM

Originally Posted by Edward Goodie

In another group, I challenged some members to show me where the "end," IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY, was mentioned in the Old Testament. I received no answer. So now I open it for a more public challenge to all the futurists on this board.

Determining the foundation and manner of the "end" is vitally important because Paul himself proclaimed that he taught nothing but from the Law and prophets, and especially in relation to the resurrection (Acts 24:14, Acts 26:22). As well, it is vitally important because Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets.

So, what are the specific Scriptures where the "end" of human history is taught in the Old Testament?

Will I get an answer this time around?

You don't need to wait too looong! Neither do I see anything or verse in the Bible that mentions the end IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY as AD 70! And I am challenging the preterists here to show me any verse in the Bible that indicate the word AD 70 all this while and I received NO Answer! How can something be of "perfect" clarity and say that all these happened in AD 70 if one don't see words like AD 70, Nero Caesar, Roman armies etc. Why Jesus could not be more precise and told us that the Temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed in AD 70or 40 years later by the Roman armies led by General Titus? He preferred to make us guessing and speculating. This is unlike the book of Daniel in which certain passages are very clear with the mention of Nebuchadnezar, Greece, Persia etc.

May God show us His Wisdom.

**Brother Les** · 01-26-2012, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by CWH

You don't need to wait too looong! Neither do I see anything or verse in the Bible that mentions the end IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY as AD 70! And I am challenging the preterists here to show me any verse in the Bible that indicate the word AD 70 all this while and I received NO Answer! How can something be of "perfect" clarity and say that all these happened in AD 70 if one don't see words like AD 70, Nero Caesar, Roman armies etc. Why Jesus could not be more precise and told us that the Temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed in AD 70 or 40 years later by the Roman armies led by General Titus? He preferred to make us guessing and speculating. This is unlike the book of Daniel in which certain passages are very clear with the mention of Nebuchadnezar, Greece, Persia etc.

May God show us His Wisdom.

Hello CWH, you ask 'why is the AD70 DATE not in the Bible'....? The dating system that we use today was not in place during the era that WE call the First Century

. As for knowing the 'Date' of the Day of The Lord, which is known as a time period of Judgement is plainly spoken of in Daniel of when it would happen. The time stamp dating system used in the Bible is based on the Eastern Oriental mind set. You on the other hand are asking people to show you dates from the Western mind set dating system. A person can not find something that is not there. We live in the Western world dating system and overlay that on the Bible to determine dates. Do you use the Jewish year of 5772? We all know (or should know) what a Biblical Generation is. And that term of 'This Generation' was used over and over again in the NT and audience relevance dictated that to be the (that)generation of those who spoke and wrote in the time frame of what the Western world calls The First Century.

**CWH** · 01-26-2012, 07:56 AM

Originally Posted by Brother Les

Hello CWH, you ask 'why is the AD70 DATE not in the Bible'....? The dating system that we use today was not in place during the era that WE call the First Century

. As for knowing the 'Date' of the Day of The Lord, which is known as a time period of Judgement is plainly spoken of in Daniel of when it would happen. The time stamp dating system used in the Bible is based on the Eastern Oriental mind set. You on the other hand are asking people to show you dates from the Western mind set dating system. A person can not find something that is not there. We live in the Western world dating system and overlay that on the Bible to determine dates. Do you use the Jewish year of 5772? We all know (or should know) what a Biblical Generation is. And that term of 'This Generation' was used over and over again in the NT and audience relevance dictated that to be the (that)generation of those who spoke and wrote in the time frame of what the Western world calls The First Century.

Then show me reference to the First Century in the Bible. There are also reference of generation meaning age. "This generation" may not be necessary be the generation that Jesus spoke to; same as "earth" does not necessary mean Israel. That I have argued in several debates in this forum which I do not now have the time and energy to debate further.

May God Bless with His Truth.

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 01-26-2012, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by CWH

You don't need to wait too looong! Neither do I see anything or verse in the Bible that mentions the end IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY as AD 70!

And there's good reason for that. No one here has suggested that human history ended in 70 AD.

Originally Posted by CWH

And I am challenging the preterists here to show me any verse in the Bible that indicate the word AD 70 all this while and I received NO Answer!

You been answered a hundred times. Jesus said the Temple would be destroyed, and that happened in 70 AD. Pretty simple stuff.

Originally Posted by CWH

How can something be of "perfect" clarity and say that all these happened in AD 70 if one don't see words like AD 70, Nero Caesar, Roman armies etc. Why Jesus could not be more precise and told us that the Temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed in AD 70or 40 years later by the Roman armies led by General Titus? He preferred to make us guessing and speculating. This is unlike the book of Daniel in which certain passages are very clear with the mention of Nebuchadnezar, Greece, Persia etc.

I agree with you that the Bible is a confused mess not worth trying to understand on many points, but the events of 70 AD should not be included in that list since there is nothing more plain and obvious than the fact that Christ's prediction of the destruction of the Temple was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Like I said, it's pretty simple stuff.

Richard

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 01-26-2012, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by CWH

Then show me reference to the First Century in the Bible. There are also reference of generation meaning age. "This generation" may not be necessary be the generation that Jesus spoke to; same as "earth" does not necessary mean Israel. That I have argued in several debates in this forum which I do not now have the time and energy to debate further.

May God Bless with His Truth.

Dates in the Bible are often indicated by referencing events. For example, Amos talked about "two years after the earthquake" and Luke talked about the fifteenth year of a kings reign, etc. The date of 70 AD was referenced when Christ predicted the destruction of the Temple. This is trivial stuff understood by anyone with the slightest knowledge of Scripture.

As for "this generation" - it's meaning is perfectly plain and obvious. You deny it only because you do not want to believe what the Bible actually teaches.

**RamblinMan** · 01-26-2012, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Edward Goodie

In another group, I challenged some members to show me where the "end," IN RELATION TO THE END OF HUMAN HISTORY, was mentioned in the Old Testament. I received no answer. So now I open it for a more public challenge to all the futurists on this board.

Determining the foundation and manner of the "end" is vitally important because Paul himself proclaimed that he taught nothing but from the Law and prophets, and especially in relation to the resurrection (Acts 24:14, Acts 26:22). As well, it is vitally important because Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets.

So, what are the specific Scriptures where the "end" of human history is taught in the Old Testament?

Will I get an answer this time around?

As I recall the Jewish people viewed the world as "this age" and the "age to come". This age was in essence the age of man and the next was the Age under Messiah with the Jewish nation in ascendancy over the the Gentiles. The END of this age from the OT perspective was the arrival of Messiah on the Day of the Lord. The "Last Day" of this Age would be marked by the Resurrection of the Dead and the Judgment. Then, the "Age to Come" would begin.

Does that mesh with your thoughts or with whatever it is you are asking?

P.S. There is no end to the human race since God promised to make Abraham's descendants as numerous as the stars

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 01-26-2012, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by RamblinMan

As I recall the Jewish people viewed the world as "this age" and the "age to come". This age was in essence the age of man and the next was the Age under Messiah with the Jewish nation in ascendancy over the the Gentiles. The END of this age from the OT perspective was the arrival of Messiah on the Day of the Lord. The "Last Day" of this Age would be marked by the Resurrection of the Dead and the Judgment. Then, the "Age to Come" would begin.

Does that mesh with your thoughts or with whatever it is you are asking?

Hi Ramblin Man,

Welcome to our forum!

Here's a little "welcome" song for you:

I agree with your observation that the Jews (and indeed, the Bible) view the world as "this age" and "the age to come" - that latter being the "Messianic age." It seems obvious that the "Messianic age" began when the Messiah appeared in the first century, and the end of the previous age was marked when the Messiah "came in power" and destroyed the Temple in 70 AD.

Christ began the Olivet Discourse with a prediction about the destruction of the Temple and said that it "all these things" would happen during the lifetime of his first century audience which he referred to as "this generation." The disciples understood that the destruction of the Temple would be the sign of his coming in power. That's why they connected his coming with the destruction. But then Paul said some things about the "appearing" of Christ that sound like they haven't happened yet. So I have concluded that we have only two choices. We either reinterpret what Paul said, or we conclude that biblical eschatology is logically incoherent. The Futurist solution, which is to deny that the Olivet Discourse was actually fulfilled, does too much violence to the integrity of Scripture to be a viable solution.

One possible solution is to understand that we shouldn't expect to see the resurrected saints running around down here on planet earth any more than we see Christ, whom we know has already been resurrected. So the resurrection could have happened "in the heavenlies" and not manifest down here on earth. But there are other problems for which I've never seen a solution, so I have concluded that biblical eschatology is logically incoherent.

All the best,

Richard