Panel Discussion

So, let's just continue our relaxed conversation about eschatology, and I'm glad,

Jonathan, you joined us because you are going to be the question asker,

I guess. You and Jonathan were going to be the question askers, and that's beneficial to having this conversation.

So, before anybody jumps in, before you start asking any questions, I thought that I would

I would kind of start where I was or where I am now. I know

Jonathan, I heard Jonathan make the comment about centralizing or basing our eschatology maybe on one part of it or one verse.

And I kind of resemble that remark in a way, because when

I began to look at Matthew Chapter 24, which I would like for us to do, if we don't do anything else,

Dan and Jeff, I think it would be beneficial in at least this conversation to give us some direction and kind of stay in one place to kind of look at Matthew 24, starting at the beginning.

But I began to look at Matthew 24, and you know how you have a lot of evangelists that will make the comment or make the claim, they'll say,

Jesus is either liar, lunatic, or Lord, and you need to decide which side of the fence that you're on.

You need to make sure that you're on the right side of the fence in that decision. And I think the same thing is similar in this discussion.

I look at Matthew 24, and not just verse 34, but you start in verse 33, and he says,

I'm speaking to you, I'm to you, I'm speaking to you. And he repeats you several times.

And it just, to me, makes it so clear who his audience is. And then he goes to Matthew 24, 34, all these things must take place before this generation passes.

And so, if he is speaking to that generation, and he's referring to all those things that he just spoke about, then, you know, he's either liar, lunatic, or Lord.

And it happened, you know, within that timeframe of the first century.

And then everything else, Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, everything else has got to fall into place of interpreting the

New Testament prophecy in light of the New, and understanding it in light of Jesus' conversation in Matthew chapter 24.

Does that make sense? Yeah, so this would be more of a preterist conversation, in my opinion, versus post -millennialism.

Which I don't know where, am I the only post -millennial partial preterist, or I don't know where everybody stands.

You post, okay. Yeah. And so, to me, this is... I do kind of understand where Rush Denny is coming from, with his idealism, but for the most part,

I understand the partial preterist position to be accurate. Yeah. Yeah, so Rush Denny kind of...

Like, I'm a post -millennial, but I'm not a theonomist. So, yeah, I'm a weird basket up here, man.

But yeah, so I would say that I'm heavy when it comes to preterism, and this right here just seems to be preterist text.

I mean, the discourse starts in Matthew 21, so that's the context is

Matthew 21 on 25. And so, like, if you want the big picture of it, but if there's any kind of little questions within that,

I mean, I'm willing to throw my hat in the ring and answer the questions. I have a question. What's a theonomist?

A theonomist is someone who wants to bring over the

Mosaic law. I'll call it the Mosaic law. So, theonomist, so the, theist,

God, onomist is law. So, some would say you're either a theonomist, which is you're for God's law, or you're an autonomist, which is for man's law.

I like to call myself a Christonomist. I believe that we look at the law in light of the work of Christ, what

Christ has done. And so, I hold to the three uses of the law whenever I handle the law.

Which I don't want to, because I'm just going to be doing a message on it in about four to five weeks.

So, I don't want to give away a whole lot of my message. Hopefully, you'll watch it. But that's just the gist of it.

So, when I read my Bible and it says, and I'm dealing with the Mosaic law, or I'm dealing with law and gospel distinction,

I'm looking at it in light of the fulfillment of Christ and what he has said.

Because, like, you got Matthew chapter five, where it says that he didn't come to abolish the law. Then you got

Ephesians chapter two, where it says that Christ abolished the law. So, we have to figure out, well, what part are these two speaking of?

I've always looked at Christ as a fulfillment of the law. Yeah. So, that would be my stance.

As a post -mill, I believe that, so, well,

I'm also, you know, I hosted a Baptist covenant theology, and I'm sure if he's Presbyterian, he hosts covenant theology, he would agree with me here that Adam was given the covenant of works, and Adam failed to keep the covenant of works.

But he, if, scare quotes, he would have kept that covenant, he would have earned eternal life for himself and for his posterity.

The Jews were given the law, Galatians chapter three says that the law was added to the covenant because of transgressions.

So, the Jews were given the law, and it was to live in the land, keep this law and live in the land.

So, as a post -mill, I see this as Jesus leaves his throne, he becomes a man, he takes on flesh, the hypostatic union, truly

God, truly man, and he lives the life I could not live, and he dies the death that I should die.

In living this life, he kept the covenant, the covenant of works.

The covenant of grace is the covenant of works fulfilled. He kept the covenant of works, and by doing so, he earned eternal life for all those who believe in him.

If you put your faith in Christ, you have, right now, present tense, eternal life.

He kept the law, he kept the covenant that Adam could not keep.

And as for the law, the law promises were earthly land promises.

He kept the law, and in doing so, not only did he earn the land, but he earned the entire world.

The meek shall inherit the earth. Okay, now that's post -mill right there, baby. I think

I understand. I thought there's some other questions

I'd have involved in that that don't have anything to do with eschatology, so I'll table those until another time.

Is that fair? Yeah. Yeah, man. That's fantastic. Did you have any discrepancies coming from a different perspective?

Well, you know, I suppose I've always considered man's final state that a

Christian would find herself in was God's original plan. Ultimately, I look at the relationship

God had with Adam in the garden is, I mean, obviously it was one that wasn't perfect because Adam failed.

I mean, obviously there was room for man's mistakes, whereas our final condition being justified in Christ, being identified with this in Christ, where there is no mistake, where there is no sin, there is no shade of turning, was

God's original intention from the beginning. And so that when

I hear of the law, I think a lot of what Paul talks about in Romans, I've always looked in Galatians, we look at the law as a means to point people to the cross, always as a means to taking people to Christ.

In other words, without a law, there's no power in sin.

There's no condemnation in sin if there's no law, if there's no transgression.

Does that make sense? There's not something to break. You can go as fast as you want to down the highway if there's no law to break.

As soon as there's a law comes up, there's a limit. Then there's transgression, there's an area of transgression. That's why

Paul says that we don't get rid of the law, rather the law is established because he wouldn't have known sin if it hadn't been for the law.

And I'm flaking on you as far as which scripture that is. I want to say it's in Romans 6, where he says that we establish it.

And I'm not saying that you establish the law as a means of earning anything, but rather without the law, then we can't ever point somebody to the cross because there would be no error.

There'd be no reason for it. You wouldn't be able to point men to their need of a savior, in other words.

Have you ever heard of the, there's two things. There's the three distinctions of the law, and then there's the three uses of the law.

I don't think I have. So the three distinctions of the law would be moral, civil, and ceremonial.

Well, I have heard of that. The civil law, the ceremonial law, and the moral law. So if you could picture a spout,

I'm trying to figure out this camera angle. So if you could picture a spout, and the spout is the moral law.

And as it comes, and as the law comes out of the spout, it separates into two.

One is civil, and one is ceremonial. The Ten Commandments, the Decalogue, is broken down in civil and ceremonial.

The first four point to our duty to God. This is ceremonial.

And the last six points to our duty to neighbor. And Jesus kept this law.

He loved his father with all of his heart, with all of his mind, with all of his strength.

And in doing so, he kept the ceremonial law. He loved his neighbor with all of his heart.

All right. But even though he loved God, he still became the ceremonial sacrifice.

The lamb that was slaughtered before the foundation of the world. John says, look, behold, the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

So he became that sacrifice. As the high priest, he made that sacrifice. And even though he loved his neighbor with all of his heart, he stood in our stead and took our punishment.

Now, with that in mind, you go to the three uses of the law.

And so depending if you're Reformed, Baptist, I don't know how the Presbyterians would organize it.

But I would do a little different than the Lutherans. So the first use and the second use can be interchangeable.

So I would say the first use of the law is. Let me see if I can find it here.

So the first use of the law, I would call it gospel. It's from Adam to Christ.

I use the law to show people's deadness and sin. And to bring them to Christ by preaching the gospel.

The second use of the law is more civil. It's kind of like if you put a bridle around a horse, you're able to ride this horse and steer him in the direction that you want to go.

The second use of the law in this way is used to restrain man from evil. We look at the law.

We look at God's law. We see that God says it's, you know, it's not good to murder.

And we say, OK, it's not good to murder. We're not going to murder. So it kind of restrains us from evil.

And the third use of the law is what I was highlighting a minute ago. And it's about obedience. But in this we use

Christ as a flashlight. And so when we use him as a flashlight, the law becomes useful for Christian living.

We look at the law in light of what Christ has already done.

And we apply basically general equity. Does that make sense?

Yeah, I'm going to say yes. There's a lot there. Like there's like 10 sermons right there.

At least. Jeff, are you are you close to.

I know Jeff Durbin has been preaching a lot on this. Are you is what you described close to what where Jeff Durbin is.

I think Jeff would be more of a Bonson theonomist than me. So I'm all about general equity.

I am not about establishing the mosaic law in America or anywhere else.

And it's not that I don't love God's law. But I know that if the mosaic law was established when

I was 10 for our country to to excuse me to enforce,

I would not be here tonight talking with you. I would have been put to death. Yeah.

All right. And I think if we're honest, we all probably would have been put to death. Oh, yeah. Well, the reason why that means our kids are going to be put to death.

Yeah. Well, the reason why I ask is because I use the term general general equity.

And when I listen to his sermons on it, that's the description that he gives and the explanation that he gives.

Well, the form of 1689 and I say this with all due respect. I love Jeff. He is more 20th century.

I think it's what it's called when it comes to 1689. I am a 1689 federalist.

And so his view of covenant theology would line up very well with Presbyterianism, with just baptism kind of stamped on it like a little bandaid added to it.

And my 1689 version of covenant theology is totally different.

And it's probably the only one that can meet up with Presbyterianism in an alley and have a good fight.

And just for clarification, just for clarification, when you say 1689, you're talking about deriving from the 1689

London Baptist Confession. Yes. So like the framers of the 1689, the original framers, they had a covenant theology because the first,

I mean, the first London Baptist was a good confession, but they had not worked out their covenant theology.

And so in which the 1689 should have been printed in 1677, but there was a lot of persecution at the time.

But in this, they actually worked through their covenant theology.

And if you ask me, it's really good, man.

I can't wait to teach on it in a couple of weeks. Awesome. Well, if you don't mind, if I could get us back on track.

But I mean, I'd love to continue on that subject as well. But back on Matthew 24, me,

I think it's a good place to start. It's where I started. And you were talking about, you know, preterist versus being post meal.

And for me, you know, I had to become a preterist before post meal or at least it kind of bled together and came in at the same time.

So. How do you how do you feel about walking through Matthew 24? And we don't have to.

I don't know. That would take a really long time if we. Yeah, it would take a long time if he was to go through and cross reference everything.

Right. I'm happy. I'm sure other people are here that are preterist.

We're happy to answer some questions if you have some specific questions or I can give you just a quick rundown.

I mean, I don't know. I don't want to I don't want to steal anyone's time or anything like that.

But let me let me start off. And John, you can throw in some of your questions as well. If you start at the beginning of Matthew, chapter 24,

I've got this question before looking at verse three.

Of course, the context is Jesus and his disciples. Jesus is speaking with his disciples and addressing them.

And they're asking him questions. And as he was sitting on the

Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately saying, tell us, when will these things be?

And what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age? Now, what was presented to me was, yeah, but he's they're asking him three different questions.

Yeah, but they're asking him three different questions like they couldn't wrap their mind around around the fact that in once you get to.

Thirty three and thirty four. He's including. All three questions.

How would you answer somebody who who is still trying to look at the fulfillment of some of these questions in the future?

And the distinction that there's three different questions. And show them that Jesus actually addresses all three questions here in Matthew 24.

Well, personally, I would go to Matthew 23. And in here you have the seven or eight woes, depending on your translation.

Right here in verse. You see, let's just start at thirty three.

He says, you serpents, you brood of vipers. How are you to escape from being sentenced to hell?

Therefore, I send you prophets and wise men and scribes and some whom you will kill and crucify.

And some you will fall in the synagogues and persecute from town to town so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth.

From the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Barakaya, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.

And right here, truly, truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

This generation being the near demonstrative. The generation here is the Greek word,

Gania. Verse 37. Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that stones the prophets, that kills the prophets and stones those who were sent to it.

And again, this is a lure into the some stories, some parables told in Matthew 21.

How often I would have gathered your children together as a hen gathered her brood under her wings and you were not willing.

Right here. See, your house is left to you desolate. Something is desolate.

You figure this out in Daniel 9. It means that the city is surrounded and the temple is destroyed.

For I tell you that you will not see me again until you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord. So that's the context. Jesus leaves the temple and he points out these great buildings.

And then his disciples asked him them questions. They asked him these questions because he said to them, your house is left to you desolate.

Speaking of the temple. So Jesus leaves the temple and as he's going away, when his disciples came and pointed out to him the buildings of the temple.

Meaning, you mean all this is going to be destroyed? You're saying that this is going to be desolate? But he answered them, you see all these things, do you not?

Truly I say to you, they will not be left here one stone upon another and they won't be thrown down.

And now when you get to those questions. And as he said on the Mount of Olives, his disciples came to him privately saying, tell us when will these things be?

Okay, so that's one question. What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?

Now, do you find it weird that they're asking him what will be the sign of your coming when he's standing right there before them?

He's already there. Why are they asking him about a coming? Because this coming to them is not him coming in their presence.

He's already there. This is a triumphant coming and judgment.

Your house is going to be left to you desolate. This is a judgment language.

This is not him physically coming. He's physically standing before them. Like a lot of people, they don't see that.

He's in their presence. Are you following me? He's in their presence.

Like if you were if you were over here at my house and we're talking and, you know, in the sound of nowhere,

I say, so when you coming? Yeah. I'll admit I've never

I've probably never dug into these few verses quite this hard. One of the things that I see in verse thirty nine of twenty three.

Thirty nine of twenty three. Mm hmm. Well, I tell you, you'll you'll never see me again until you say blessed to see who comes in the name of the

Lord. You suppose they're asking a question, assuming that he's going to be leaving.

You dig what I'm saying there? Well, he's he's telling them in Jerusalem, Jerusalem City, who kills the prophet stones, those who who are sent to her.

How often I wanted to gather your children together as hands gather her cheeks under her wings.

Yet you are not willing to see your house is left desolate. I tell you, you'll never see me again until you say which to him, say you'll never see me again.

If I were to say you're not going to see me again. Obviously, I'll have to be in front of you to make that statement to tell that to you.

And then it would to me, the assumption would be to everyone who heard that I'm going to go.

Yeah. And then he says. I'll tell you, you'll never see me again until until you say blessed to see who comes in the name of the

Lord. Do you suppose that maybe some of the language used in verse or chapter twenty four when he says when they ask what will be a sign of your coming?

You think that that's in any way related to what he's already said to them prior to the end of twenty three? Well, personally, right here, his indictment has been to the

Pharisees. This is a personal indictment to the Pharisees, Sadducees and the scribes.

You start back in chapter twenty one or or even right here. It says, woe to you, scribes,

Pharisees, you hypocrites. So he's not generally talking to his disciples. And so what what

I believe here, where he talks about blessed as he comes in the name of the Lord, is that that this is speaking salvificly.

If you do not call upon the name of the Lord, you will never see Christ. For all who call upon the name of the

Lord shall be saved. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. So I think this is speaking of unless because even these hypocrites, these

Pharisees and scribes, if they were to call upon the name of the Lord. They would be saying

Jesus would save them from the wrath of God. Because I think it's in chapter twenty one.

They did say the crowd screamed Hosanna, blessed as he comes in the name of the

Lord. So I don't think it's necessarily pointing back to that triumphant entrance as much as I do as this being salvific.

The only way anyone can be saved from this coming wrath is if they call upon him as Lord.

And which I could show you in Joel and Isaiah chapter thirteen, Joel chapter two and Isaiah chapter thirteen.

If y 'all wanted to go there, how this lines up with them calling on him as Lord.

Then I'd look for you to chime in if you have anything. I'm processing.

Yes, I believe that it is three questions, but I think the three questions are.

They're not speaking about three different events. I think it's speaking about the same thing. Right. So when will these things be is talking about the destruction of the temple and what will be the sign of your coming is him coming in judgment to destroy the temple and the end of the age.

Hebrews chapter nine makes it clear that the that the temple. The temple is the then standing temple was symbolic for the present age.

We can go there if I want to. The temple was standing. It says that it is symbolic for the present age.

No more temple. That age has ended. And so and all that took place in one event.

So it is three questions, but it's speaking about the one event whenever he is going to come and destroy the temple.

And again, if I want to go to these cross references, I'm happy to do it. We got Isaiah 13.

I was still looking at the end of thirty nine because my Bible cross references it back to Psalm 18 or Psalm 118.

And I was trying to I was trying to get my mind wrapped around because I want to catch it in context.

And and I don't have a whole lot of computing capacity between my ears. So I was trying to make sure before I before I brought it up that it that it cracked right with Matthew.

Because, you know, for me, if I'm not careful, if I start going back and forth and I can take something out of context, especially if I'm looking for it in the wrong light.

And I don't want to do that. You know, I mean, I trust that you'll hold me accountable when I do that. So he's he's he's lamenting over Jerusalem.

And then he says, for I tell you, I'll never see me again until until you say, blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord. And my Bible takes me to Psalm 118. Verse 26 is where he's according to the composers of this

Bible or the footnotes of this Bible. So I go back to Psalm 118 and it's it's a

Thanksgiving or Thanksgiving for victory song. That's the one that starts out. I'll give thanks to the

Lord for his good and faithful love and endurance forever. And 26 explicitly is the one that it says where he's quoting from, which says, blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord for the house of the Lord. We bless you, the Lord. And then 27 says the Lord is

God and has given us give us by the festival sacrifice. You are my

God and I will give you thanks. So to your credit to me, and I just skimmed it,

I didn't read it all just to find out how it fit. But in theory, I can understand where one can say, blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord, can be a salvific in that sense with this song.

But it tracks funny because he's lamenting. And this song is a Thanksgiving song.

Yeah. You see what I'm saying? Yeah. And I will also add that not all cross references like, you know, cross references are good, but they can be not so good, too.

That's why I was I was trying. I was I was hesitant to even sing because without spending time.

I mean, it's just five minutes is all I was looking at it. What have brought that up?

But I didn't know if one of the cross surfaces you was going to make was going to have some songs in it.

I just think it is interesting that when you brought up. Blessed is he who asks for the same or blesses cause name of the

Lord being salvific. And then and my Bible having that in bold typically means this is a prophecy fulfilled or it is a call from an

Old Testament scripture. I usually look for that where I can find that.

Yeah. Yeah. So I'm not saying that it's not from Psalm 118. I haven't really dug into Psalm 118.

I mean, my I have it in here, too. And I'm sure that there's some some gleaming to do.

So my point of reference would be to to only be pointing to judgment passages or passages that is concerning this day.

Like I believe Joel chapter two that's quoted from the apostle

Peter and Acts chapter two. Yeah. And at the very end of it.

Well, I mean, I know that I'll know this song and it shall come to pass afterwards.

I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh. Your sons and daughters shall prophesy. Your old man shall dream dreams and your young man shall see visions.

Even on the males and female servants in those days, I will pour out my spirit and I will show wonders in the heavens and the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke.

The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before that great and awesome day of the

Lord comes and it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the

Lord shall be saved. Now, that's where Acts stops the quotation.

But here's the rest of the verse for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, there shall be those who escape as the

Lord has said, and among the survivors, those whom the

Lord calls. So this is speaking about a coming judgment when he when he's quoting this, it's speaking about a coming judgment that is coming upon Jerusalem.

And whenever we get over further and Matthew, I'll explain to you the sun, moon and stars being darkened.

And Matthew 24, 24, excuse me, 24, 29.

And after those days, the sun will be dark and the moon will not give us light and the stars will fall from heaven.

That has to do with this Joel chapter 2 too. Very clearly explained.

That's not what you think. I'm sorry if I'm not explaining this adequately.

No, no, no. You're fine. Like I said, I try to think before I talk.

I don't always do that. I try to. I really I really think that was good insight and good question from you,

John. And I think that was a good explanation. At least somebody who's dissenting can say,

I see where you're coming from. Then you just jump in there any time.

All right. Excuse me one second. I got to grab something. Okay. It actually makes a lot of sense that this would be coming from Psalm 118.

Psalm 113 through Psalm 118 are the Psalms of the Senate, where Psalms are sung by the people of Israel while they're going up to those three main days.

In the Old Testament. Man, my brain is escaping me.

All of those three feast days pointed to the time of atonement that was fulfilled in Christ.

So when you look at when he says Jerusalem, Jerusalem who killed the prophets and stone those sent to her.

You see the history of Israel as a people who are rejecting the message of the prophets.

Trust in Messiah that's to come. Trust in Messiah that's to come. And then here he says from Psalm 118, blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord. You won't see me again until that happens.

So what you find is you find something that is salvific in nature. But it's kind of seated in a time of judgment.

So there's a people who are being judged for their unbelief of the message of the gospel that was given to them at their time.

Which is why Jesus later on in verse 24 verse 2 says, do you not see all these things?

I tell you, truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn out.

He's talking about the destruction of the temple, that Old Testament system that was rejected.

The gospel that was preached through that Old Testament system was rejected by the Jews. And yet there was salvation that came because Christ was coming to shed his own blood on the cross for the sins of men.

So all of this was happening at one time. There was a people who rejected the old covenant message. And then there was a people who were being saved by trusting in what that old covenant actually pointed to.

Which was Christ and his death upon the cross, his resurrection, his atonement for sins.

Does that kind of make sense? Yes, I understand where you're coming from. Okay. If you want to,

John, if you have any more questions, just anytime you have a question, just jump right in there. Ask a question.

If there's any more references from Jeff that you wanted to give us.

I mean, I think we've actually explained verse 3. Okay.

I mean, to the best of our ability, I mean. That's fine.

I was cross -referencing. When you said Joel was cross -referencing, was cross -referencing verse 29 back to Joel of chapter 24?

Well, so I wasn't saying that it was cross -referencing. I was just pointing to a time that we can understand that the house was left to them desolate.

So Joel is speaking about a time of judgment when the house is taken down.

And the blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord of how at that moment was the time where they could call upon the name of the

Lord. And at that moment, the Lord saved whom he called. Does that make sense?

Yeah, it makes sense. There was another one back to Isaiah, and I was trying to read and see.

But again, I don't think that it pies well.

I'm not actually certain. Isaiah what? 13. Yeah, Isaiah 13 speaks,

I don't have it there, but it's speaking about the judgment upon, well, the oracle to Babylon for taking

Israel company. Now, I really don't want to answer that question until we get into verse 29 of Matthew 24.

Yeah, that's when I was. I was in 29 of 24. OK, OK. So that's what

I was. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because that's kind of where we left off. And you said Joel was also talking about you said the sun will be darkened.

We can talk about some of that. So I went ahead and flipped over to that. OK. I was reading it and was looking at some of the

Old Testament references to it. There's there's a lot of them, actually.

Yes, I'm here. It's really just speaking about the sun, moon and star language. You know, like I walk outside right now.

I see stars. I see the moon. I know, you know, 12 hours from now, I'm going to see the sun.

And I can look at the Bible and say, well, that ain't happened yet. So right is the wrong. And so my interpretation is that which

I think is the biblical interpretation is that this is not speaking of a literal sun, moon and stars.

And I would be happy to walk through that with y 'all to show y 'all that that that this cannot be speaking of a literal sun, moon and stars.

Yeah, I think you'll be your perspective. Go ahead. Yeah. So.

So, again, if you go back to Joe real quick, it speaks of. Verse thirty one of chapter two, it says the sun will be darkened, the moon to blood before the great and awesome day of the

Lord comes. And then Isaiah 13 also, if someone wants to read that and hope that would be great.

I will go against Babylon that Isaiah, son of Amistad, lift up a banner on a barren mountain, call out to them, wave your hand and they will go through the gates of the nobles.

I have commanded my chosen ones. I have also called my warriors who exult in my triumph and my triumph to excuse my wrath.

Listen, a turmoil on the mountains like that of a mighty people. Listen, an uproar among nations, excuse me, an uproar among kingdoms like nations being gathered together.

The Lord of hosts is mobilizing an army for war. They are coming from a far land, from the distant horizon.

The Lord and the weapons of his wrath to destroy the whole country. Well, for the day of the

Lord is near. It will come like a destruction from the almighty. Therefore, everyone's hands will become weak.

Everyone's every man's heart will melt. They will be horrified. Pain and agony will seize them.

They will be in anguish like a woman in labor. They will look at each other, their faces flushed with fear.

Look, the day of the Lord is coming, cruel with rage and burning anger to make the earth desolate and to destroy sinners on it.

Indeed, the stars of the sky and its constellations will not give their light. The sun will be dark when it rises and the moon will not shine.

I will bring disaster on the world and their own iniquity on the wicked.

I will put an end to the pride of the arrogant and humiliate the insults of tyrants.

I will make man scarcer than gold and mankind more rare than gold.

Therefore, I will make the heavens tremble and the earth will shake from its foundations, the wrath of the

Lord of hosts. And on the day of his burning anger, like wandering gazelles and like sheep within a shepherd, each one will turn to his own people.

Each one will face his own land. Whoever is found will be stabbed and whoever is caught will die by the sword.

Their children will be smashed to death before their eyes. Their houses will be looted. Their wives will be raped.

Look, I am stirring up medis against them who cannot be bought off with silver and who have no desire for gold.

Their bows will cut young men into pieces. They will have no compassion on little ones.

They will not look with pity on children. And Babylon, the jewel of the kingdom, the glory of pride of the

Chaldeans, will be like Sodom and Gomorrah. When God overthrew them, it will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation.

A no -man will not pitch his tent there. Shepherds will not let their flocks rest there.

But wild animals will lie there and owls will fill the houses. Ostriches will dwell there and wild goats will leap about.

Hyenas will howl in the fortress and jackals in the luxurious palaces. Babylon's time is almost up and her days are almost over.

All right, so this is a judgment concern in Babylon for coming into Israel and making that land desolate.

And what it did was it put... I about gave it away.

I don't want to give it away yet. So now let's go to Revelation chapter 12. We're going to turn to Revelation chapter 12 and then we'll turn to Genesis.

Genesis is going to give us the interpretation. But I just want to go to Revelation chapter 12 and let you see it again. So Revelation chapter 12 beginning in verse 1 says,

A great sign appeared in heaven. A woman clothed with the sun and with the moon under her feet.

And on her head was a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains in the agony to give birth.

All right, let's just stop right there for a minute. Does anyone have an interpretation for this that they'd like to try a hand at?

I know we've all heard a lot of things. I mean four years ago you had the stars lining up and you had the king planet and the

Virgo planet and then Jupiter was in the constellation. The Revelation 12 constellation sign.

Which that's the prophecy that took place four years ago that turned me away from pre -millennialism.

Now the answer to everything that we just read about the sun, moon and stars is going to be found in Genesis.

Let me see. Genesis 28 I believe. No, hold on. Yeah. Genesis 28.

While we're in Revelation, there was also a cross -reference to chapter 6 verse 12 starting at 12 and going to 12 -13.

And that's the sixth seal being opened. So do you think that there's any correlation between Revelation 12,

Revelation 6, Joel 2, Isaiah 13 and Matthew 24?

You think all these are the exact same event? We'll read that in just a minute.

Okay. Mark your page. I like rabbit trails.

So where are we going in Genesis? I'm trying to find it real quick. Genesis.

Give me a second. I should have it marked but I don't.

Okay, here we go. Genesis 37. Beginning in verse 9.

I thought we was going here but I wasn't going to say anything. Yeah, beginning in verse 9. It says,

Then he dreamed another dream and he told his brothers and said, Behold, I have dreamed another dream.

Behold, the sun, the moon and the eleven stars were bowing down to me. Now here's the interpretation.

But when he told his father and his brothers, his father rebuked him and said, What is this dream that you dream?

May your mother and your brothers indeed come and bow ourselves to the ground before you.

I see what you're doing with that. I would have to disagree.

Let me finish and then you can disagree. Let me finish. And so we have in Revelation chapter 12.

We have a woman that's clothed. A woman appears in heaven. She's clothed with the sun.

She's standing on the moon and she has a crown of 12 stars on her head. And she's pregnant.

Genesis chapter 3. Verse 15. The Proto -Evangelion. That there was going to be an offspring that would come from the woman.

And he will bruise the head of the serpent. All right. This woman here is a picture of Israel.

She's clothed in Jacob. She's standing on Rachel and she has the crown of the tribes of Israel on her head.

And she's given birth to a male child who is Christ. He is the offspring, the promised offspring that would bruise the head of the serpent.

And when we walk through Isaiah, I mean we walk through Isaiah chapter 13. And it said in verse 10 for the heavens will be shaken.

I mean the heavens and the constellations will not give their light. And the sun will be dark and will not rise.

And the moon shall not give its light. This is speaking about what took place when they took

Israel captive. They put out the light. This is judgment language upon the nation of Israel.

The same thing that we had in Joel. It says the sun shall turn to darkness and the moon to blood before the great and awesome day of the

Lord. Now if you go right back to Matthew chapter 24. And read this again.

And the next verse is going to show my interpretation is true. That I believe shows my interpretation is true.

I don't want to sound arrogant. Please forgive me. It says immediately after the tribulation in those days, the sun,

Jacob, will be darkened. The moon, Rachel, will not give its light. And the twelve stars will fall.

Israel, the tribes of Israel, will fall from heaven. And the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Now let me ask you a question. What would happen if one star was to fall and hit earth?

Just one. What happens if one star falls and hits earth? There wouldn't be an earth.

There wouldn't be an earth. Most stars are bigger than earth. The nearest star is the sun. That's correct.

Alright. So if the stars, the moon was to actually not give its light.

The sun would go dark. The moon would not give its light. And the stars would fall from heaven.

How is there a planet earth for the next verse to really take place? Then will appear in heaven the sign of the

Son of Man. There is no heaven. We can't see nothing. There's no sky.

There's nothing left. We're all dead. How can the next verse be literal?

Well, I don't think. I've never heard. I've heard very few people use any of these texts and talk about.

I mean, okay, back up. So your dispensation of premillennialists that write books like covers and covers and covers of books and sell them all over the place.

Have have viewed those as being literal and how they were darkened and like they act as if they've been dimmed.

But I've never heard or used any of these scriptures and thought of them as being anything other than spiritual imagery.

Because whenever I see when I see him talk about the star, the stars will fall.

The first thing I think of is whenever the angels fail in the beginning with Lucifer.

That's the first thing I've always thought about was. Go ahead. No, I'm sorry.

I was going to get us on another rabbit trail. I'm sorry. That's kind of where I always that's kind of where I've always went to it, you know.

And I and I've always looked at chapter 12. All right.

First of all, full disclosure, every chapter. Of Revelation, every every chapter in the

Bible, when I when I look at it, I look for Christ. So if you're not talking to somebody who goes to the book of Revelation to try to find where the

Antichrist is and how we will know who he is, I don't look at the book of Revelation that way.

Because of the title of the book of Revelation. Well, this Bible doesn't say it when my King James Bible does.

King James Bible says Jesus Christ. Exactly. This is about who Jesus is.

This is a revealing, a deeper revealing of who Christ is. If you think about it, with the exception of the four gospel accounts and his actual words to us, the disciples, they're taking everything else we have about God is in some form of imagery.

Or even when Jesus is speaking, he speaks in parables a lot of times. So I think that the book of Revelation is a is exactly that it is a revelation of Christ is a revelation of God.

And, you know, so whenever I sing, I've always saw Christ being the one to crush

Satan's head and bruise his own heel. I've always saw where the fulfillment of Abraham's prophecy was

Christ, where the revelation is about Christ. I don't I'm not looking at the stars to try to determine where we're at in some kind of global timeline just for the sake of getting that out full disclosure.

You understand? I don't see how some of that.

I like the Genesis 37. I can see where that dream that Jacob had.

Jacob got to Saul in a sense fulfilled in his lifetime because his family came to him to survive.

Jacob actually saw these dreams come to come to pass, much like he saw the baker and the cupbearer's dream come to pass.

Now, would you say that the 11 stars in his dream were the representation of his brothers?

I would say that. All right. So he is the 12th star that makes up the 12 tribes of Israel.

I agree. And so what I'm saying is this, is that when the

Bible speaks of sun, moon and stars in this apocalyptic imagery, that it's speaking specifically of Israel.

And especially when it talks about the desolation, like in Isaiah chapter 13, it's speaking about Israel being desolate.

Their land, they're being taken from their land and their temple is going to be destroyed. That's what the desolation represents.

And at that moment, the sun, moon and stars are darkened. The prophecy in Joel is speaking about a coming desolation.

The sun will be darkened, the moon will be turned to blood. And right here in Revelation chapter 12, we have the woman that is a representation of Israel.

It's giving birth to a male child, represents the sun, moon and stars. And then right here in 24, after the tribulation, what happens after the tribulation?

The sun will be darkened, the moon will turn to blood. The moon will not give us light and the stars will fall.

This is the desolation. Israel is being taken out of their land. And so what my interpretation is, is that the sun, moon and stars is

Israel and it's always in a judgment form of them being removed from their land.

And which happened in 70 AD. It's on the record books. Imagine this, if you will.

Imagine if I was to write a biography of New York City over the last 30 years.

And you read it because you like me, we're friends. And you took the time to read my biography.

But nowhere in it did I mention 9 -11. Did I truly write an accurate biography of New York City over the last 30 years?

I suppose not. I think that would have been the largest event that ever happened. So when

I read Revelation, there is no mention of the temple being destroyed.

But there is mention of a temple that's standing. Okay. And when that temple was destroyed, that's the biggest news that hit the blog.

Oh, I see what you're doing. So you're talking about the timeline of when Revelation was written.

Yeah, well, so I see Revelation as a pre -70

AD book. Basically an exposition of Matthew 24, if you will.

It's going deep into what took place in Matthew 24, but it's in an apocalyptic language.

So if that's the case, again, just ask. And there's no wrong answer here.

I'm John writing this letter to whom then?

To the seven churches. The seven churches. So what seven churches he's writing to?

What relevance does the temple and or its destruction bear on the

Christian? Those seven churches. The passing of the old age. Whenever this because there seems to be what some would say the passing of a baton.

You know, so if I was to hand you a pencil and you grab the pencil for a minute, we both have the pencil.

And when I let go, you would be the one with the pencil. And so there seems to be a time on Earth where both the old covenant age and the new covenant age were on the

Earth at the same time. And so once the temple falls, Hebrews chapter 9, the temple is symbolic for the then present age.

Once it falls, there's only one age on the Earth. That's why Paul says we have come to the ends of the ages.

Upon us has come the ends of the ages or the two ages are on the

Earth. OK, I don't I don't have I don't have problems with that kind of thing, because I believe that.

Go ahead, brother. I think that's a legitimate question. Well, just for the disclosure,

I lean I lean post meal. But I think that's a legitimate question that someone on the other side could ask.

And you can tell me if you think I'm wrong or right. But you're looking at the seven churches that were the recipients of Revelation.

And if I'm not mistaken, they were in Asia Minor. And then you have you have the warning, which when you when you see

Jerusalem surrounded, flee, flee to the mountains.

So you're saying it's the exposition of 1924, which was written to churches in Asia Minor.

But then you have the warning when you see Jerusalem. I think the audience is those who are in Jerusalem.

When you see it surrounded, flee to the mountains. Get out. Don't look back.

Second, I'm kind of being devil's advocate because I'm coming from your side.

Well, he's done his stuff there. We see it in both the

Gentile and the Hebrew audiences. If you look at the book of Hebrews, it talks about there being an issue of understanding where there's going to be a passing from the

Old Covenant to the New Covenant. You see the very same thing in the book of Galatians, which is written to a largely

Gentile audience. I was going to go there next. What happens when there's a passing from the

Old Covenant to the New Covenant? How does that transition take place? You see that as an issue for both the

Hebrews who were potentially in Jerusalem, potentially abroad, and the

Gentiles as well. It was an issue for all of them, for all of Christianity at that point, because it was such a seamless transition that the folks who were in the

Old Covenant and understood it as Jews. The folks who were being brought in as Gentiles would have all had the same questions going on.

There's some evidence, and I'll let you get into your specifics, but I figured I'd... To answer that verse, the sister verse to it in Luke, verse 20, it says,

But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, know that its desolation is near. Let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city not depart.

And let those who are out in the countries depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it.

Okay. I hope that answers that question. Absolutely. To some,

I can see that, where the church, for no other reason...

What real relevance does any of the letters, especially Hebrews... It was written to a specific group of Hebrews who had been baptized into the church.

A lot of the things going on there was dealing with the time of persecution of Nero.

What relevance does that have with me? I think it has plenty of relevance. Personally, I think it has plenty of relevance.

Certainly. I'm not saying that there is no relevance to any of this.

Quite the opposite. What I'm talking about is, if you're going to write somebody a letter, to kind of use your analogy of New York, right?

If I'm writing a people a very important thing, to me,

I'm only going to include to them the most pertinent of information. Especially if it's the last thing

I can ever say to the world, right? When I see the veil rent at Jesus' death, when

Jesus says that we'll be the temple of the Holy Spirit, I see less and less.

The more Christ preaches, and then at his resurrection, I see almost no relevance to a believer, to a building.

Unless you're going to use your building as your timeline for your eschatology. I'll give you that.

If you're going to use the destruction of the building as a timeline for your eschatology, then that building does have relevance.

That one particular building would then have relevance. The book of Hebrews, the temple has relevance.

Because the sin of them crucifying, once again, the Son of God, was them who were not resting in Christ, and they were going back to the temple and making animal sacrifices.

Well, but see, now Paul was arrested going back to the temple. Yeah. Right? Absolutely.

Wasn't Paul arrested when he went back to the temple to make sacrifices? And I've never understood why he did.

Does it say Paul made sacrifice? Yeah. When he returns. Does it say that?

I mean, because there's a difference. I mean, does it say like he was sacrificing an animal?

Or having an animal sacrifice? Before I speak any more on it, I want to make sure that I'm reading. I know y 'all don't know me very well.

Brother Robert knows me well enough to know that I don't like to take anything out of context. I'm strictly important. I don't want to do that.

So before I say anything else, I want to. Because the animal sacrifice, that is the abomination that causes the desolation.

After Christ has made his sacrifice as the high priest, and then that continuing sacrifice takes place, that would be the reason

God sends in Rome. Rome came because of the rebellion, the

Jewish rebellion, but God sent them for a different purpose. Hey, before you go any further, let me speak to what you just said,

John. You can be assured that anybody that you see on the screen with us,

I'm friends with them according to scripture, because they're going to have a similar attitude. Yeah.

Hey, man, I misspoke. I misspeak a lot. So please. I'll come back and listen to this later.

I was like, oh, my mind.

I hear him saying something about he went up with the young man to the temple because he cut his hair.

He was fulfilling vows at that point. I just think it like if he makes any sacrifice and it blows

Galatians, it blows Hebrews. Agreed. I didn't understand why he went back during that time.

So that's been a question I've had, honestly, for years. I know he circumcised

Titus because Titus wasn't. I mean, yeah, because Titus was. Was it

Timothy? Who did he circumcise? Was it Timothy? No, it was Timothy. He circumcised

Timothy because Timothy was a Jew. He would not circumcise

Titus because Titus is not a Jew. Are you guys trying to find the reference to that?

Yeah, I mean, I think it's in twenty one, but I want to make sure I catch it. I'm a slow reader.

I said twenty six verse twenty one or chapter twenty one and verse twenty six chapter twenty one.

Then the next day, Paul took me and shaving, having purified himself along with them and enter the complex and announcing to the completion of the purification days when when the offering of each of them would be made as seven days were about to end.

The Jews of the province of Asia saw him in the temple complex and stirred up the whole crowd and seized him shouting.

So it doesn't say that he made a sacrifice in there, but I've always been curious about that.

Yeah, it's just having having purified himself along with him. What does that mean?

And enter to the temple announcing the completion of the purification days when the offering of each of them would be made an offering for each of them would be made.

So it doesn't say that he made an offer, but it does say when an offering for each of them would be made.

So and this is I mean, I suppose I could go get the. And a literary Bible and see which what the

Greek says about that. I don't read Greek, but I do have a strong that would break it down.

And perhaps I should have done that before I brought this question up. So I feel like I've stuck my thumb in my eye. As the seven days were about to end, the

Jews from the province of Asia had started. So, you know, it appears as though Paul is taking part in some kind of a

Jewish tradition of some kind. If I if I may be that way,

I've always wondered, to some degree, with Christ being the perfect sacrifice, a sacrifice that was intended to completely do away with sin and renew life is found in him.

What the what business or to what end is a synagogue or a a temple or a church building or anything?

How how could we put so much stock in a material thing when when we're to be a temple of the

Holy Spirit? Well, in order to enter the temple, like I'm trying to trace back and I did a

Jewish study for three years. I'm trying to but this was, you know, 12 years ago.

So forgive me. In order to enter the temple synagogues and stuff like that, there was a washing, a purifying that you would have to go through.

And so I think that this is just, you know, again, the Greek word for that purification should be something like baptism, but not representing a

Christian Baptist. I mean, baptism. I said Baptist. But just it bleeds out of me.

Yeah, I'm almost useless at 11 o 'clock at night. So, yeah. Yeah.

So I think that this is just a him taking that purification in order to get in there. And what does he do when he's in the temple?

He always witnesses, preaches Christ. Yeah, I mean, we see that we see that everywhere he goes. He goes to the synagogue and he ministers in the synagogue first and then outside the synagogue in every town that they came.

He had a pattern that he followed. And that's 13. They actually the people in the synagogue asked him, did he have anything that he wanted to say?

And so he got up and spoke. So my point is, it's kind of where, where's the relevance of the temple?

If, like I said, if we're not using it as a timeline stone, capstone to mark eschatology, where would the relevance of the temple be?

A while ago, you said that it would be an abomination to make desolation if you were to make a sacrifice. Yeah, the sacrifice.

Yeah. So. The Jews, the

Jews know the temple as the place where heaven and earth met. So like in Matthew, it talks about heaven and earth will pass away.

This is a direct reference to temple language because they consider the temple is where heaven, where God from heaven met with man on earth.

OK, but again, Paul has spent the bulk of his ministry trying to make people understand that the law is necessary to to know your sin.

And after that, it can really be of no benefit. Of course, once you once you're in Christ, you can't go back and try to keep the law.

Right. I mean, we'd all be in agreement with that. Yeah. That's why I'm not a theonomist.

So. So in any case. Yeah. So nor am I. Apparently, I had to learn a new word today.

So my point is, if you're if you're going to make the bulk of your ministry.

Used in a way to to have people quit putting so much stock in their own works and their own completion of a law that, after all, was only meant to point to Calvary.

How how can you later on or any of the disciples?

I know John Revelation. And how can you point back to a building as being so important?

So whenever I think about an abomination, it makes desolation again. I'm thinking where it matters.

It matters here. Right. If we're going to be a temple of the Holy Spirit, we don't want to render this temple desolate.

We shouldn't have anything in this temple in higher regard than Christ. Christ needs to be seated at the top of this temple.

That needs to be where all your worship is focused on. And to put something above Christ, an antichrist, if you would, above him would be to render this temple desolate.

You follow my train of thought? Mm hmm. So to me, I'm having a really hard time trying to wrap my mind around how a is important as the temple was for pre pre

Christ incarnate Jews. It's importance to the church post resurrection.

I don't see any relevance to the building at all.

In my opinion, it's given us a timestamp. OK, so that's the purpose of the of the temple for the preterist is a timestamp.

Yes. And I also point out like like this is what gives me my interpretation.

So if you look at Daniel, chapter nine, verse one, it says in the first year of Darius King, I mean, son of Asherah.

I think I got that name right. Asherah by the descent, a maid who was king over the realm of the

Chaldeans in the first year of his reign. I, Daniel, perceived in the books a numbers of years that according to the word of the

Lord to Jeremiah, the prophet must pass before before the end of desolations in Jerusalem, namely 70 years.

So this is speaking of whenever they're they're already in captivity, they're in Babylon and he's reading it and it says that it's going to be for 70 years.

Now, if you read all this, it really goes deep into my point. But I just want to jump over to the verse for the sake of time for 17 and 18 will kind of give us an interpretation.

It says now, therefore, oh, God, listen to my prayer, the prayer of your servant and to his plea for mercy and for your own sake.

Oh, Lord, make your face shine upon your sanctuary, the temple, which is desolate.

Oh, my God, incline your ear, open your eyes and see our desolation, the city that is called by your name.

There's their temple, their sanctuary has been desolated. It has been torn down.

And that's where you get Nehemiah. Then they go back, trowel and sword, rebuilding the temple.

This is where it's time. So so my point over here, Matthew 24, was that the sun, moon, stars, like it's all pointing to those three questions about the destruction of the temple.

Jesus coming in judgment and it will happen at the end of the age. Well, how do you know it's the end of the age?

Because the temple falls. Hebrews chapter nine. Yeah. As far as timeline things.

Yeah, I have. I really have a problem with saying that.

So that's what I'm saying. Revelation and Revelation. If Revelation was written after 80, 70.

Why doesn't it tell us about the temple being destroyed? Like if I was to write if I was to write a biography of Hebrews and I didn't mention 9 -11.

But did I truly explain to you what happened the last 30 years? And you said

I'm saying I do to a point that the book of Revelation is about revealing

Christ. More so than trying to nail. Go ahead, brother.

Robert. And I think. And I think we're missing what ties all that together to help answer your question, because what you were saying earlier,

I think could be. Understandable. Yeah. And you're kind of looking at it as I'm going to kind of generalize what you're saying.

It's a it's a time stamp. The building is a is a time. We use it as a timestamp.

And this is this is kind of the preterist. You know, this is the preterist view.

This is how the preterist view the temple. We use it as a timestamp, you know, and we could go that route.

However, if it wasn't such a prevalent subject in Old Testament prophecy in and brought out in in the

New Testament, the desolation of the temple, desolation of Jerusalem.

The abomination of desolation. I mean, it's Old Testament. It's New Testament. It's revelation.

And I think here's where it's all tied together, where you're talking about revelation is about the revelation of Jesus Christ.

The reason it's more than just a timestamp is because it's an ending of the age.

And and Jesus is bringing forth this this new covenant. And he's he's fulfilled the law.

He's not abolished law. He's fulfilled the law. And he is ushered in, you know, this this new covenant, because there's the the timestamp.

The building is the sign of the end of the age. And then you have

Christ. And I think that's why it's more than just a timestamp. When you look at revelation as the book of revel revealing

Christ. And that's why the the temple is so important in that conversation.

It's because it's a symbol of ending that age. I think

I understand where you're coming from. OK, I think I said I'm after 11 o 'clock.

I'm about worthless when it comes to using my brain much more than a hat rack. I just I can see a couple a couple of small things where I would find some disagreement.

I believe that the that first of all, yes, the last day or the end age, the last age has been post -resurrection.

I don't think anybody, a New Testament Christian, would at all have to have any problem with that. Whenever you've got a premillennial dispensational, definitely doesn't say it that way.

They don't say that. My pastor is a premillennial dispensational premillennialist. And he would consider what we've lived in the last day since Peter said so.

He's a dispensational, a true dispensational. He believes in the church age, that there are seven dispensations.

And right now we're living in the age of grace, which is the church age. I've heard that before.

And to some end, I understand. So we would see that there's only two ages,

Old Covenant, New Covenant. And that the Old Covenant, whenever the temple fell, they can no longer perform animal sacrifices.

And so it was the end of the Old Covenant system. And so now we're in the New Covenant age, where Jesus is our, which he was at that time as well, is our sacrifice.

And the only, I suppose, the other leg where I'd have a problem with using that logic entirely is there's a great period of time prior to the temple being established where there were faithful and righteous people because of their faith in Christ, prior to faith in God.

And then after Jesus's resurrection, everybody that is preached to, the first people who are converted are all

Jewish, right? At least that's the way I understand the Bible is. Yeah. But after those initial conversions,

Jew or Gentile alike, every single person who is brought into the fold is brought in by the exact same way, through faith and grace, a lot of work.

There was no more animal sacrifices for the church after Christ's sacrifice period.

And even though there was a group of people who were still considered

Jews who were making sacrifices, God was not obviously honoring those sacrifices because the supreme sacrifice had already been made.

So I suppose it goes right back to a little bit of the point is to, if anything,

I can see God destroying the temple, being an act of grace on the

Jewish people so that they couldn't offer sacrifices anymore because the sacrifice had been made.

Yeah, so to that point earlier, I said that the sacrifices that they were making were the, is the abomination that causes desolation.

So when Daniel chapter 9 speaks about the abomination of desolation, the abomination was them making a sacrifice after Jesus had already made a sacrifice.

And so like this would separate me and my new friend Dan here, who is the

Presbyterian on covenant theology. So I would say that anyone who has ever been saved was only saved one way, and that is through the new covenant,

Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. So we see the covenant of grace as only a promise given in the new covenant,

I mean, given in the old covenant. And when you trace the offspring, the covenant of grace is the offspring, and it was only a promise until the fulfillment.

So in Genesis chapter 3, 15, the promise was an offspring would come.

The fulfillment of it would be when he bruised the head of the serpent. And to Abraham, the offspring would be someone that would bless, an offspring would come from Abraham.

That's the promise. The fulfillment of it would be when all nations are blessed. And when

Christ came, now anyone who believes in him can become a Christian, can enter the new covenant.

So that's the fulfillment. And then you have the offspring of Judah would come.

The fulfillment, all the obedience of the people would belong to him. And so forth with David. There's going to be an offspring that comes from David.

That's the promise. And the fulfillment of the promise would be he would sit on the throne of David. And that took place at the resurrection of Jesus Christ when he enters into the heavenly temple and he sits down at the right hand of the

Father. And so the covenant of grace is a promise and it's inaugurated, established at the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

So Abraham, Adam, whoever it was who believed in the old covenant did not get saved by the old covenant, but they were saved by believing in the promise of the offspring who was to come.

That's why I can say that I and Abraham got saved the same way in the same person.

He looks forward to a promise and I'm looking back at the fulfillment. I've said the same thing from the pulpit.

I have no problem with that statement. So that's covenant theology. That's not dispensationalism. I mean, call it the rose.

I don't care. I mean, I think Paul makes that statement abundantly clear in Romans.

Romans and Galatians. Yeah. So I don't have I don't have a problem. I didn't know it was called covenant theology so much as I've always referred to as faith.

It was Abraham believed. He believed and was credited.

He didn't make a sacrifice. He didn't make a sacrifice. Abraham was living before sacrifices was even established in the temple, before the temple was built, before there was a moving temple in the wilderness, for any of that.

So, again, Abraham needed no temple. His children didn't.

And I can't do this much longer because everybody's going to bed around me. I would love to talk about stuff like this more often.

Except for it being a timestamp marker in the timeline, I just or provident grace of God destroying the temple so that more

Jews could be saved as a matter of not giving them a place to sacrifice.

Kind of like destroying whenever good kings would destroy the groves and the high places to stop people from having a place to go and do abominable things.

That could be a sign of grace that God was given to Israel. But the temple,

I know it meant a lot to the old covenant Jew, but to the Christian, to a people who are who are living temples, living epistles.

Yeah, I fail to see where it's very I can see why if I was writing a letter.

To to a brother in Christ somewhere about really, really important things that I knew from walking with God for however long,

I wouldn't tell him about the time that a church burnt down in turn or destroyed, even though it was very important to my people.

I wouldn't. What about Revelation chapter 11? Because he meant he tells him to measure the temple.

So he mentions the temple. He identifies that the temple is standing because he tells him to measure it.

So why would he tell him to measure the temple? He would mention something, but not completely.

It's almost like the same thing he told Ezekiel, though, isn't it? I mean, that's the same language that you read in Ezekiel and Ezekiel is measuring the temple.

Well, yes, I would say Ezekiel's temple as the kingdom of God, like us, me and you.

We are little temples. God once tabernacled in tents and in temples, and now he tabernacles in men.

So you wouldn't, which I like I said, I haven't. It's been a little bit since I have poured through Revelation and never poured through Revelation.

It's going to surprise you. Not one time in my life have I poured through Revelation to try to get a good grasp on eschatology.

I poured through Revelation because I believe it gives me a better understanding of God's gospel.

And read that way. It has been it has been very beneficial to me.

I much less stress on my life than a lot of fellows who are very upset about the way things are going and are always looking for some some sign of relief coming.

And I'm very well certain. I'm 100 percent certain that relief's coming.

I will quit breathing on this earth one of these days and then I'll open my eyes in glory. I'm not looking for a way out.

God give me this earth as an inheritance. He's given me this place to live.

And honestly, he's given me a mission to do. And one of the things that I will say. Then I'm going to say nothing else, probably.

While I disagree on some of the post -millennium and some of the preterist arguments and some of the points,

I don't see them. One of the things that I would say is there's been more work done for the kingdom of God by people who aren't looking for a pre -tribulation rapture.

Because people with their hands in their pockets looking eastward for God to come take them out of a mess that they've allowed to happen around them by keeping their mouth shut and by not being faithful to the

Great Commission. It's not it's not biblical lifestyle. I can't see where that's a bit. God has given us a job to do.

He's empowered us to do this job. And he's commanded us to do this job and to to firmly plant our hands in our pockets and saying, oh, please come,

Lord Jesus, quickly so I can get out of here and you can judge the earth. And then I can come back and you set your temple to me.

That's never made any sense. That's never made any sense whatsoever. I would not consider myself at all a pre -dispensational pre -millennialist so much as I would probably consider myself a historical pre -millennialist.

But I do appreciate the work done here from post -millennialists who have a more usable version.

My biggest problem, I've told Brother Robert this, I believe, is when people try to hitch their gospel message to their eschatology and they wind up rendering the gospel powerless because their gospel now has got a timeline it's applied to.

My understanding of the Bible and my understanding of the Nicene Creed that you talked about the other day was that what went in the word was in the word because it was timeless and it applied to everybody.

If there was something that was in the word that was for a specific people, like maybe the book of the Maccabees, it didn't go into the

Bible the way it was in the old Torah. Am I wrong in that? Well, it wasn't directly connected.

It was kind of like if I carry my Bible, but I also carry my 1689.

So they would carry the Maccabees under the

Torah. They wouldn't carry it connected on top or inside.

What I'm saying is this was 13 years ago when I studied the Jewish. Well, the book of the

Maccabees is in the Catholic Bible. Yeah. And it's in the wisdoms. There's a book of wisdoms or something like that in there as well.

I perused through a Holy Death of Peace edition. It was like 1990 something model one time.

It got work and a file cabinet. And I was surprised at what was in the book. And and doing some research,

I found that the reason that didn't make it into what I'm going to call the Christian Bible, because I don't believe that the

Catholics are Christian. So the rocks that the the the text that were included in this

Bible were texts that were believed to be timeless, that there that there may have been historical books like the

Maccabees that were accurate left out because they weren't pertinent to us today because of whatever reason they dictate.

Whereas Ezekiel and Daniel and all your minor prophets, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, all those are pertinent because they have principles and implications that apply expressly to the gospel presentation.

The gospel presentation is better understood in light of having these Old Testament documents to go with. With that,

I yield my time. I wanted to share something real quick before we go any further.

Just just listening to what we're doing and and looking at Scripture. That's one of the things that that brought me so much joy when

I came to learn and came to lean to believe in post -millennialism and preterism is because growing up,

I would have never I would have never claimed one form or one eschatology over another.

Because I only ever knew of one. And but I still didn't completely hold on to it because it never really made sense to me.

And when I just like everybody else, you know, I feel like it's bad to make umbrella comments, but, you know, in this scenario,

I think you can just like most everybody else. You've heard sermons and preaching on the rapture and premillennial dispensational type sermons.

And when I would hear those sermons, when I would hear that explanation, you know,

I would hear, you know, this means this and this means this and this means this or, you know, look in the look in the newspaper or watch on TV.

And this is what you see here in Revelation or but when

I began to look and listen to things about post -millennialism, what people did was not go to the newspaper and not just give me their own words or ideas of this is what this has to mean.

What was so appealing to me in explaining post -millennialism and preterism was let's let the

Bible interpret the Bible. Scripture interprets Scripture in its context. Here's where we see this type language in the

Old Testament. Let's look at the Bible. And we kept going to Scripture, kept going to Scripture, kept going to Scripture.

And that brought me so much joy that we were interpreting our eschatology based on the

Bible, based on what the rest of the Bible said. And that's why it was so appealing to me.

That's why it brought me and is still bringing me so much joy. And I just wanted to share that as a bit of a testimony.

And we've been on here a long time. I know you got to go, John. I think we can hit on one more thing really quickly.

And this is one of the few questions from Matthew 24 that I actually did write references down to.

I need to go through and write references down to all the questions. But verse 14 and we'll end on this one so that everybody can go on to bed and get some rest.

If anyone wants my opinion on most of Matthew 24,

I did a sermon series, a quick sermon series through it. I'd be happy to link to it.

Okay. That'd be fantastic. Yeah, just put it in our group chat. And John, I'm going to put you in our group chat.

I don't think you're in there yet, but I'm going to put you in our group chat. But Matthew chapter 24, verse 14 says,

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for witness to all the nations, and then the end shall come.

So all my life, I've always understood this verse to be a big motivator to send missionaries into the uttermost parts of the earth.

So that because once everyone has heard, once every people group has heard, then

Jesus will come back, the rapture will happen. But then I heard explanation from Scripture.

Dan, I want to, before we end, I want to give you a chance if you're able to respond to this and give testimony from Scripture, an answer from Scripture to this fulfillment.

You know, we say we believe this was fulfilled at this time because we're preterists.

Are you able, can you give us some evidence on how this was fulfilled? Man, I just looked that up.

You go to Colossians chapter one, verse 21.

And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet he has now reconciled you in his fleshly body through death in order to present you before him, holy and blameless and beyond reproach.

If indeed you continue the faith firmly established and steadfast and not move from the hope of the gospel that you have heard.

The hope of the gospel that you've heard, which was past tense proclaimed in all creation under heaven and of which

I, Paul, was now made a minister. So I believe what was referenced in Matthew 24 of the gospel going out to the whole world.

Paul actually in Colossians one says has happened.

The gospel went out to the whole world. While you're in Colossians, can you read verses five and six?

Yeah, absolutely. I can do that. Because of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel, which has come to you just as in all the world.

Also, it is constantly bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you since the day you heard of it and understood the grace of God in truth.

So there you have it twice in Colossians one, that the gospel, at least at the time of Paul, Paul had considered it as going throughout the whole world.

Yeah, the whole world here is the Roman Empire. The Greek word is not

Cosmo, it's oikomene, and it just means the known land at the time.

Are you talking about in 24 or are you talking about in Paul's? I'm talking about 24, where it talks about the gospel will go out to all the world.

Jesus talking about, he's just talking about Rome. Yeah, well, he's just talking about the because the

Rome had had the Roman providence. They were over 10 nations.

I'll do you one better than that. Romans one. Romans one and Romans 16.

Starting at 18 for the wrath of God is revealed against heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth and unrighteousness because that which is known to God is evident within them.

For God has made it evident to them since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes, eternal power, divine nature, and clearly seen being understood through what has been made so that they are without excuse.

Paul. Paul acts as if I get I get asked all the time.

If God's good, then how come the Native Americans weren't given an opportunity to know who

God is. And I think the short answer is everybody who has been made, which includes everybody.

God's God's given every man a measure of faith and every man with a work in mind to know that you do. It takes a special kind of stupid to think we just popped up one day.

Everybody knows that we were created. They still call even scientists call the world creation as if it's the work of an act rather than some cosmic accident.

And I think that everybody who has ever been made understands that they have been made by God.

Now, that's different than saying they've heard the gospel. Of course, I think it's different than saying that they know

God knows that there is a God, but not everyone knows God.

I think I would take a different interpretation than most reform folks when it comes to Romans chapter one.

Because Romans chapter one, a lot of reform, especially presuppositional people, which I am a presupp, would say that Romans one is dealing with the

Greek. But actually Romans one is dealing with the Jew in chapter two.

And my interpretation picks up with the Greek and Galatians.

It makes clear that the Greeks did not know God covenantally.

The Jews know God, knew God covenantally, but everyone knows there's a

God because of creation. Everyone knows that buildings don't build themselves. Paintings don't paint themselves.

Like someone had to, to create. That's why they don't want to live in waters. Well, I mean.

You might want your brother right now. Yeah, well, exactly. Well, he's done a lot for me. I was telling my brother the other night, you know, you know, he's helped me when

I came to faith. He helped me out a lot to understand the gospel. But I definitely disagree with his response when he calls people to respond to the gospel.

I would do it a little differently than Brother Ray. All right.

Before you, Jeff, if you could read your reference in Romans chapter 16,

I'll read mine in Romans 10 verses 16 through 18 real quick.

Yeah, I mean, like in Romans 16, it just talks about the nation.

I mean, 16, it says, but, but now it's the doxology.

So I'll start at 25, 25, 26 and 27. Now to him who is able to strengthen you, according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery of the mystery that was kept secret from long ages.

But now has been disclosed through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal

God to bring about the obedience of faith to the only wise

God be glory forever through Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen.

And then Romans 10, 16 through 18. However, they did not all heed the glad tidings where Isaiah says,

Lord, who has believed our report? So faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of Christ.

But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? Indeed, they have. Their voice has gone out into all the earth and their words to the ends of the world.

So, yeah, yeah. You know, for those who are looking for the gospel to go to the whole world, and this is a fulfillment to be looked for a fulfillment happening in the future.

We've given evidence that at least Paul was under the impression that the.

Verse 14 had been fulfilled, the gospel had gone out into that world.

So, John, I know you you need to head off and most of us probably need to go get some rest.

We've got to get up in the morning, but I really appreciate you guys. And hopefully we can do this so many more times.

I'm free on Thursdays. OK. And Thursdays are fine for me and anybody else that when you can come.

It's fantastic when you can be here. If you can't, we all understand how life is. But I appreciate everybody's attitude.

And like I said earlier, John, it's my intention. To to surround myself with with people who have an attitude of.

Reverence for God's word interpreted in in its context and looking for Jesus in the words of the

Bible and a desire to see souls saved and God glorified. And so and those people who have a love for everyone, love for especially the brethren and are patient with one another.

And so that's my desire is to surround myself with people like that.

And I believe that you guys are that you are good ambassadors for Christ, representatives of his.

And I bless you for that. And thank you for that. And thank you for opening your arms to me.

And allow me to have a conversation with you all. And I'm I'm being kind of formal because we might post this as a video because I think this is terrific information for you.

And, John, I want, you know, John, if I said anything out of the way, brother, I apologize.

I'm going to apologize for I'm big boy. I don't want to I don't want to upset people.

And I am one. To me, there's nothing wrong with disagreement. Absolutely. You know, everybody always says iron and sharpen iron.

But the only way that iron sharpens iron is based friction between the same way. They don't. Yeah, they don't.

They don't really do nothing. And if nothing else, you've you've you've caused me to look at at scriptures, maybe maybe a little bit more harshly as to be able to, if nothing else, to defend the way that I see it, which is always a good thing.

And Robert, I appreciate you sharing your time, especially with the Pentecostal boy. I'm a

Pentecostal man. Yeah, well, I still am.

Well, if you watch me preach, man, I still preach like a Pentecostal. I got a little shake and ride on railing.

I'm probably the most docile I've ever seen. I don't I don't get very. This is about me as excited as I get.

I tell people, I tell people, if you're looking for a really intelligent pastor, my church might not be the church for you.

If you like someone that's theologically sound and has a twitch when he speaks. Come on in.

Mercy. Well, I hope that I can walk with you guys in the

Lord as long as he allows. So I appreciate you guys. I'm going to pray for us and then we can we can hop off here.

So if you would pray with me. Father, we we thank you so much. We are.

Undescribably without words.

To describe our thankfulness, our realization of our.

Step of our need for you and our need for Christ. And we're so thankful that you would.

Reveal yourself and that you would. Come to this earth that you would send your son to rescue your enemies and that you would reveal yourself through your word and that you would bring us to yourself and allow us to sit at your table and eat with you.

And that you would join us and meet with us as we discuss your word and father.

I'm thankful for the humility that that your spirit is working in my brothers here.

That we can sit down and humbly look at your word, knowing that we don't have all the answers, but that we want to know you more.

And we want to love you more and we want to obey you more because that's what the spirit is worked inside of us, not because of anything that we've done.

And I'm thankful that you brought us together. And father, would you?

Will you hold us together? Despite the busyness of life.

I know that you've given us all. Family responsibilities. But I pray that you would hold us together and keep us together throughout this life that you've given us.

And help us to walk together in truth and accountability and love and patience with one another for your glory and for the fame of Jesus Christ.