Israel
Walter Copes (wcopes@communique.net)
Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:59:10 -0500
To: cf01@zeus.odyssey.net (Chris Foster)
From: wcopes@communique (Walter Copes)
Subject: National Israel
CF> Let's agree that we can disagree :-)
Let us do so and still maintain a spirit of harmony as a member
of the body of Christ.
CF> You will have to argue your post-70 AD point with Jesus, for He
CF> said to those disciples standing there hearing his answer to
CF> thier question...This generation shall not pass till all these
CF> things be fulfilled.
Not really. The point of Daniel 9:24 and the 70 week must be
harmonized with all this. The time period from 445 BC when the decree
was issued to 70 AD is 75 weeks not 70. You have stated repeatedly
that the 70 weeks were consecutive from beginning to end.
CF> IMHO this is why they preached the imminent coming.
It Jesus returned in 70 AD why did John (John 85-90 AD, 1,2,3
John 90-95 AD, Revelation 95 AD) ignore such a momentous event as the
Second Advent of Christ?
Why then did the preaching of imminence continue beyond 70 AD?
The early church held to the doctrine of imminency. Clement wrote in
the FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS:
Ye see how in a little while the fruit of the trees come to
maturity. Of a truth, soon and suddenly shall His will be
accomplished, as the Scriptures also bear witness, saying
"Speedily will He come, and will not tarry"; and "The Lord
shall suddenly come to His temple, even the Holy One, for
whom ye look." [Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, THE
ANTE-NICENE FATHERS, I, 11.]
Again, Clement writes:
If therefore we shall do what is just in the sight of God,
we shall enter into His kingdom, and shall receive the
promises, which neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, nor
have entered into the heart of man. Wherefore, let us every
hour expect the kingdom of God in love and righteousness,
because we know not the day of the Lord's appearing. [cited
by J. F. Silver, THE LORD'S RETURN, p. 59.]
In the DIDACHE we read:
Watch for your life's sake. Let not your lamps be quenched,
nor your loins unloosed; but be ye ready, for ye know not
the hour in which our Lord cometh. [Alexander Roberts and
James Donaldson, THE ANTE-NICENE FATHERS, Vii, 382.]
Cyprain says: "It were a self-contradictory and incompatible
thing for us, who pray that the kingdom of God may quickly come, to be
looking for a long life here below..." [Cited by J. F. Silver, THE
LORD'S RETURN, p. 67]. These give evidence that the exhortation to
watchfulness addressed to the church became the hope of the early
church and that they lived in the light of the expectation of the
imminent return of Christ.
CF> I am not saying the word of God is irrevelant, but that it is not
CF> written addressed to the United States of America 1996 but it was
CF> written to those in the first century. The historic situation
CF> being that of the first century, and the people in whom it was
CF> written were contemporary.
However, the 2nd century church was in a unique position. Some of
the leaders knew the Apostle John and were taught by him. If the
doctrine was taught prior to 70 AD but not after how is it that we
find the doctrine in the 2nd century?
> Nor is there a record of astronomical events which would fulfill
> the sun being darkened and the moon not shinning.
CF> When Peter used the words of verse 29 in Acts 2 while preaching
CF> salvation to 'ye men of Israel', and after they responded in
CF> verse 41, they began to sell all of their things, Lands, houses,
CF> etc. Why?
Probably because God knew what was coming and moved on them to do so.
When the time came they had no worldly possession such as land and
houses to hold them back. They left the city and were not killed in
the destruction of Jerusalem.
CF> Because they were expecting some thing.... something imminent
CF> ......What was it?......The prophecy of Jesus Christ recorded
CF> in Matt 24, Luke 21, Mark 13.
Possibly. It is also possible that little thought was given to
the prophecy until the event became imminent. They then remembered the
prophecy and evacuated the city and were thus saved.
CF> Each record of Jesus' prophecy in the gospels ends with, 'This
CF> generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled'.
This would also fit if there is to be another destruction of the
city. Certainly there are prophecies in the Old Testament as well as
Revelation which point to this.
CF> There are already too many kooks that are preaching the end is=7F
CF> near sell all you have. We both agree that is stupidity at it's
CF> highest!
I certainly agree. However, this should not deter us from seeking
the truth of Scripture in the matter. Rather we should be cautious
about any conclusion reached instead of attempting to make it instant
doctrine.
CF> But I believe that for those in first century Jerusalem hearing
CF> Peters prophetic words, 'the sun shall be turned into darkness
CF> and the moon into blood' it was not so stupid!
Certainly not. But what did the terms mean to them in the context
of their culture?
CF> I believe that Matthew 24 is yet another instance where the Bible
CF> is precise about time and the events that were to transpire.
I certainly agree. And the events will be (or were) literal in
nature. However, 24:30-31 must be questioned. Did this event occur.
Did ALL the tribes of the earth morn? No. Did they (all the tribes of
the earth) see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with
power and great glory? There is no record either scriptural or histor-
ical which indicates that such a momentous event happened. Why? Surely
such an important event would leave a scriptural record (John wrote
all his books 85 AD to 95 AD). Why did he ignore such an important
event and reman silent about it.
CF> It seems to me a puzzle of arbitrary words and times and gaps
CF> when not taken in the plain sense. I guess it's ok for some
CF> folks but I have difficulty with it.
You are already force to have a gap or else to have 75 weeks
instead of 70 weeks.
WC> Nor the stars (meteors?, asteroids?) falling to the earth. This
WC> becomes especially telling when all three events were to occur as
WC> a sign.
CF> I think we should let the Bible interpret the Bible here. Does
CF> Jesus mean *star* as in meteor? Strongs tells me the word star
CF> means a star, not comet nor meteor.
Then you have a very serious problem. In relation to other stars
the sun is rather small. Yet the sun has a diameter of 865,000 miles.
The diameter of the earth is 8000 miles. Its temperature is around
11,000 degrees F. It is considered as a yellow dwarf. There are other
dwarf stars which are as small as 1100 miles in diameter. Their tem-
perature range from 35000 to 60000 degrees F. One of the larger ones
is 2.4 billion miles in diameter. The density of the small dwarfs is
several million tons per cubic inch.
I do not for instant believe that a star will ever fall to the
earth. At best the earth may fall into a star. The results will be the
same whether is 2.4 billion miles in diameter or 1100 miles. The earth
would cease to exist in a small fraction of a second. It would be
turned into individual atoms and they would be stripped of electrons.
If we are to understand what is meant by "stars falling" we had
better to it in terms of the context of the times. An object 10 miles
across striking the earth would destroy all life on an entire conti-
nent (if it fell on land) or create mile high (or higher) tidal waves
if it fell into the ocean. It would penetrate the earth to such a
depth that core magma would be spewed into the atmosphere. Civiliza-
tion as we know it would cease to exist.
CF> You believe it means meteor, but you have no Biblical text, nor
CF> word study that will support you.
You will have to give some indication of supernatural interven-
tion that a true star can fall to the earth and the earth not cease to
exist.=7F
CF> This is a conjecture pure and simple.
No, it is not conjecture. It is rather knowledge and some compre-
hension of what a star truly is. Stars do not have solid matter. They
are composed of gas--primarily hydrogen or helium. The sun (a yellow
dwarf) is composed of hydrogen with traces of other elements. It is a
true hydrogen bomb. The hydrogen combines (burns) and forms helium.
The energy that is released we detect as light and heat. The core
temperature is in the millions of degrees.
CF> I am not against your looking for the right Biblical answer, my
CF> point is simply that there is no *Bible* for your conclusion.
Perhaps. But you will have a very difficult time convincing me
that a star can fall to the earth and the earth not be instantly
vaporized.
CF> I think the scriptures will give us enough examples to understand
CF> the use of star in this verse.
When the earth falls into a star and emerges intact will life still on
the planet then the pages of history will be replete with the account
of the miracle of God and how He protected the earth against awesome
temperature and gravity of the star. Every human will know that God
did it.
> The event of verse 30 has yet to occur. Nor were the elect gath-
> ered from the four winds.
CF> (Matthew 24:22) Don't you believe the *elect* are Christains?
Certainly. But they have not been gather. They remain scattered
across the face of the earth. Nor were they gathered to Jerusalem in
70 AD. Rather they were fleeing to other places. Nor were they gath-
ered in judgment with some on the right and some on the left. Nor were
all the nations gathered for judgment (25:31-32). Nor is it plausible
to separate the two chapters. They for a single unit of prophecy.
CF> Again the scriptures proclaim that the generation in which Jesus
CF> is speaking to would not pass away before;
CF> a. the temple would be destroyed. Fact 70 AD. What more do you
CF> need?
One of the questions asked of Jesus was what would be the signs
of His coming. Why MUST that coming be at the same time as when Jeru-
salem was destroyed? There are clearly other factors stated in the
Olivet Discourse which have yet to be fulfilled i.e., 25:31-32.
CF> c. Whatever Daniels prophecy is that must take place, it must be
CF> in tune with the words of Jesus when he said *this generation
CF> shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.*
I agree. How is 25:31-32 to be reconciled with "this generation
shall not pass...?" Certainly the nations were not gathered for judg-
ment in 70 AD. If it all had to be fulfilled then this too must be
accounted for. I do not believe of New York second that there was such
a judgment. Yet if I accept you position such a judgment MUST have
occurred. But there is neither scriptural nor historical evidence that
it happened in 70 AD.
CF> I hold that 70 weeks equal 490 years no more no less.
So do I. However, there must be a gap of a minimum of 5 weeks
even historically for 70 AD is 75 weeks plus another 5 years from the
decree to rebuild Jerusalem.
CF> It is *only* when you force 70 weeks to stop and start instead of
CF> allowing time to continue in any *normal* sense that you can
CF> project Jesus words into a future beyond 70 AD.
There is already the problem here that 70 AD is 5 plus weeks over
the 70 prophesied in Daniel. One either has a gap of 5 weeks and 5
years or the prophecy is false.
CF> If Daniels prophecy goes beyond 490 years from the going forth to
CF> rebuild until... then 490 years of time cannot take place without
CF> interruption.
The problem here is that it is not 490 years to 70 AD but 530
years. That is a 30 year gap even accepting 70 AD as the event.
CF> Matthew 16:27-28 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of
CF> his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man
CF> according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some
CF> standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the
CF> Son of man coming in his kingdom.
However, He did not reward every man according to his works at
that point in time (70 AD). All the nations were not gathered for
judgment at that time.
CF> Your argument is not with me.
The argument is actually one of interpretation. I have interpret-
ed it one way and you another. Therein is the rub. We do not disagree
over what the Scripture say we disagree over interpretation of what
they say.=7F
CF> You hold that the Son of man has not come in the glory of his
CF> Father with the angels.
This is correct. There are some other passages that amplify this
event. For instance, when He returns in power and glory He will do so
at the head of an army and the mount of Olives will be split in twain.
(Revelation 19:11-14; Zechariah 14:4).
CF> Do you also hold they did not *see* the Son of man coming in his
CF> kingdom? Are you want of a gap here also?
Not in 70 AD because ALL the tribes of the earth did not mourn.
The Romans rejoiced that they had achieved a great victory.
CF> If I understand your theory correctly, you will answer the above
CF> by having the scriptures predict a double fulfillment.
WC> Rather I would expect a complete fulfillment rather than a par-
WC> tial fulfillment.
CF> The destruction of Jerusalem was not complete?
The destruction of Jerusalem was complete. However, the Mount of
Olives did not split in two. The nations of the earth were not gath-
ered to be judged. All the tribes of the earth did not mourn. Thus if
one part of the prophecy fails the whole is a false prophecy. The
other explanation is that the events were not the events of the proph-
ecy.
WC> At this time there is no way I will believe that Jesus came back
WC> as promised as stated in Zechariah 14:3-10. Nor did the events
WC> stated in 14:11-20 occur at any time during the 1st Century
WC> either to the Jewish nation nor to the Church.
CF> That OK by me. I believe that Jesus came not to do away with the
CF> scripture but to fulfill.
None of these passages say that Jesus did away with Scripture.
They simply point out the events of the Second Coming did not occur in
70 AD.
CF> I think you may have misunderstood my point. Jesus is answering
CF> the disciples questions concerning the destruction of the Temple
CF> and Jerusalem. What more can I say. He is not addressing any
CF> other issue.
Sure He is. He is addressing the three questions asked. One of
the questions concerned the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.
The other two concerned the signs of the time of His coming and the
third the end of the age. Jesus answered all three questions. There is
no requirement that all three happen at the same point in time.
CF> He is giving the answer to when will it take place, what signs do
CF> the people he is addressing look for and what of the end of the
CF> Old Testament age.
Why must it be the end of the Old Testament age?
CF> You do not believe that Jesus *is* (at this moment) the chief
CF> cornerstone and that in the plan of God it was always thus?
WC> Absolutely!! However, during His ministry on this was not the
WC> case.
CF> Are you promoting Sabelianism who said Jesus was not Messaih un-
CF> til his baptism and that he knew not who he was before the dove
CF> set upon him?
I made no such statement. I said that He was not recognized
(except by John the Baptist) as being the Messiah. We have the advan-
tage of 20-20 hindsight.
CF> Do I misrepresent the scriptures with gaps? Yes! How did I ar-
CF>rive at such gaps. By forcing them upon the text.
I have not forced the gap. The events of history have. From the
time of the decree to 70 AD is 75 weeks plus 5 years.
CF> You and I agree on the issue of Eternal Security. Why? Because
CF> we both believe there are conditional clauses that qualify the
CF> promises of God. Do you want to say that God did not give the
CF> land to Abraham? Didn't they inhabit it? YES. But they lost out
CF> with God because of the conditional clauses.
If we use the logic used here to fulfill prophecy that Abraham
possessed all the land as promised we can continue. Abraham (and his
descendants) lived in the Promised Land. The land they lived on was an
area within the area promised therefore they possessed all the prom-
ised land. The promised land is within the land of the Middle East
therefore they possessed all the Middle East. The Middle east is an
area within the continents of Asia and Africa. Therefore they pos-
sessed the continents of Asia and Africa. Asia and Africa are an are
on the planet earth. Therefore they possessed all the earth.
In any case God did not tell Abraham IF they would obey they
would possess all the promised land. There is no IF clause in the
promise to Abraham concerning the land.
WC> Romans 11:11 lets us know that God's rejection of the nation of
WC> Israel is not final.
CF> This is the very centerpeice of our discussion! Restoration to
CF> what? Salvation or the promise of the physical land?
It will be both. Their spiritual salvation will result in God
fulfilling the promise of the land. There was no IF clause attached to
the promise God made to Abraham concerning the land. In fact, there
was no IF clause in any of the Abrahamic Covenant.
CF> Restored to the position of the people of God or a restored land
CF> mass. I get a head ache trying to follow you.
They will be restored to the position of the people of God and
restored to the land. God will keep His unconditional promise to Abra-
ham.
CF> God is granting special favor to the Jews concerning salvation.
Special favor? How so? There is but one way.
CF> God is not granting special favor with the Jews concerning sal-
CF> vation but only the promise of the Land.
God will keep His unconditional promise to Abraham concerning the
land. God is perfectly capable of starting this process outside the
present covenant. It no more detracts from privileges and promises of
the Church than rise of Hitler's Germany did. God is not doing it for
the sake of today's Jews. He is doing it for the sake of Abraham and
the unconditional promise He made to him. I have no problem with it at
all. It does not in the slightest diminish any Scriptural promises
made to the church nor does it change in the slightest the plan of
Salvation.
Walter Copes
The joy of the Lord is my strength
(wcopes@communique.net)
Walter L Copes=20