Davo, thank you for your reply. Do you believe in universal reconciliation: that Jesus is reconciling ALL things and persons back to God and thus eliminating sin in all its forms whether in the physical realm or the spiritual realm? Acts 3:21 springs to mind: ‘’ He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything,…’’
How do you understand Acts 17:31: ‘‘For He has set a day when He will judge the world with justice by the man He has appointed…’’
The judgment against the Jews and Jerusalem in 70 A.D cannot be what Paul is referring to in Acts 17? So what is Paul referring to?
So simple? It all makes me think of Dr Gordon Moyes who was the Superintendant of Wesley Mission in Sydney. I recall him speaking years ago when the controversy over the millennial question was to the fore. On being asked of his view he stated that he was a prelacterian. When asked what this view ment he explained that a prelacterian is one who puts the milk in the cup prior to pouring the tea! I have read some of the above and I think I like what Sherman wrote which was not so much an anwer as a menu. For the rest I guess what ever will be will be. I do tend to think of the LOF as a description of God in judgment who is a consuming fire but then He appeared to Moses as a non consuming fire so I guess it’s a bit in the eye of the beholder. Cheers Chris
I accept “universal reconciliation”… I understand God views and holds humanity in toto as reconciled to Him through the completed work of Christ, regardless of man’s knowledge or acceptance of such reality.
I understand reconciliation to be a completed and established fact, i.e., it is no ongoing… to quote Jesus “it is finished”. The effects of reconciliation however are what I see as ongoing.
Further… there is NO “sin” that separates man from God still left to be dealt with. Jesus “once for ALL … put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” Heb 9:26 Jesus bore the FULL LIABILITY for humanity’s guilt as touching sin and our sullen state as a consequence before God… Jesus rectified this. BECAUSE this is so “we” can now take FULL ACCOUNTABILITY for our own errant actions, i.e., the “sins” we inflict or afflict upon each other – hence James’ injunction around the “confession of sin”…
Jas 5:16aConfess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.
From the “fulfilled” perspective this restoration was Israel’s promised Act 3:25] covenant renewal “in Christ” as then outworked through “His Body” of “firstfruits saints” in that 40yr transitional period AD30-70, none other than Jesus’ “this generation”. This generation emulated Moses’ 40yr transitional generation from bondage to liberty where those of FAITH went on into the FULNESS of redemption. In Moses ALL of old covenant Israel was redeemed, the good, the bad and the ugly… ALL redeemed. However, ONLY those of faith i.e., “faithfulness” truly gained the full benefits of their redemption in terms of experiencing LIFE in ‘the Land of Promise’.
Likewise in Jesus’ day… those who faithfully endured to the end would be saved Mt 24:13], and so enjoy the fullness of “their rewards” in the Parousia Mt 16:27] even though as a whole corporately ALL Israel was saved as per Rom 11:26.
Well as a pantelist AD70 is exactly where this fits. Noting the specifics of the translation brings this out.
Act 17:31…because He has appointed a day on which He is about to judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained.
The highlighted “about to” typically and wrongly translated “will” provides the timeframe wherein said “judgement” would occur and it wasn’t that far on their horizon. Again, judgment was on sin as it related under the old covenant “world” and mode of existence Heb 9:15], something “we” were never under. There are further examples of this HERE.
So we know then, that for the Jews who rejected their Messiah (the majority) that God judged them in 70 AD by destroying their whole way of life and by the killing of millions of Jews- hence a typical Biblical ‘day of the Lord’: violent destruction with mass killing. Isn’t Paul warning these non believers that they too (the whole world) are going to be judged in a similar way? If Jews were literally judged for their sins and the people in Noah’s day too, then will not God judge the whole earth a final time prior to Jesus completing the work of making all things new? What does Paul mean in verse 31, as far as these guys (who aren’t going to be affected by the stuff going on in Jerusalem), are concerned? True, Paul is warning them of an imminent judgment. So why is the judgment so violent for the Jews and not violent for everyone else.
Quite simply this… “to whom much had been given, and summarily trampled underfoot, much would be required”. OC Israel had all this Rom 3:1-2; 9:4-5; 11:29; Act 7:38; Deut 4:5-8. Don’t forget… in terms of OC sanctions the likes of AD70 had already been forestalled in their history according to the likes of the Assyrian decimation and the Babylonian deportation. Ad70 was to be the mother-load of all judgements BECAUSE IT was the ending of all things LAW, the very thing they trusted in but the very thing that could not save.
This is WHY both Jesus and Paul warned Israel so vehemently of the impending disaster. Now the reality was all said conflict and conflagration associated with the AD 66-70 Roman-Jewish wars was NOT limited to Palestine. The early church spread beyond the borders of Palestine was viewed by the-powers-that-be as nothing more than an aberrant “Jewish sect” and all too often suffered fiery trials because they confessed “Jesus is Lord” as opposed to “Caesar is Lord”. And as conflict with Jerusalem intensified towards the end there would in all likelihood be blowback along the way.
When you understand Jesus’ “making all things new” in terms of promised COVENANT renewal then it IS easy to see “the world” as NOW judged by God and found to be BECAUSE OF Christ, NOT GUILTY!!
I follow you. But what about when it says that judgment BEGINS at the house of God? I always assumed this meant that God’s wrath is first poured out against Israel in 70 AD, and then at some future point the same kind of violent outpouring would happen to the whole world. See my last point in this reply.
Yes, but In what way was Athen’s judged and all the non believers, whom Paul is clearly talking about? Did it make any difference to Greece or the other countries that Jerusalem had fallen?
This is by far the strangest, and if not most weird (I’m trying not to insult you ) aspect of what you are presenting. Jesus has made SOME things new with His New Covenant, but He hasn’t made this world new*** yet***. Evil and sin still reign in this world. The prince of this world is still in control and most people are walking off the edge of a cliff it seems. I agree that the Kingdom is ‘here’ in the sense that believers are in the Kingdom. It’s a spiritual Kingdom whilst we are still on this earth. Jesus lives in us and we are the light to the world, and thus God’s Kingdom is represented on this earth through the living stones that are building up the temple, Jesus’ body. But don’t you think the Kingdom rule will COMPLETELY fill this earth, as the waters cover the sea? Won’t God’s will be done on earth as it is in Heaven COMPLETELY? If God has judged this earth and found us ‘not guilty’ as you say, then why hasn’t Jesus eliminated sin and evil from this earth? Sin and evil being the wages of guilt surely? Why are there still freak floods, storms, earthquakes destroying people? Why is disease killing people? Why does evil permeate every square inch of this earth? In what way does Jesus mean that the meek will inherit the earth? What earth?
I follow you. But what about when it says that judgment BEGINS at the house of God? I always assumed this meant that God’s wrath is first poured out against Israel in 70 AD, and then at some future point the same kind of violent outpouring would happen to the whole world. See my last point.
Yes, if you look at Matt 24.36 on, and the parallel in Luke 17.22 on, it describes the second coming not 70AD. The suddenness of judgment completely unexpected as opposed to the slow strangulation of 70AD, which was slow and torturess plus in 70AD you easily could see the day and hour as opposed to the second coming.
Thanks Steve. I actually think Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in the years leading up to 70 AD. ‘When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies’, ‘this generation will see all these things’ etc. There is the view that Jesus might be talking initially about Jerusalem’s impending doom, but then broadens out to include a ‘secondary’ fulfilment? So you have a ‘two-fold’ scenario: what happens to Jerusalem is like the minor fulfilment and then the major one is the ‘world wide’ destruction scenario. I don’t know. Much of what Davo is saying does make a lot of sense.
Thanks Steve. I actually think Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in the years leading up to 70 AD. ‘When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies’, ‘this generation will see all these things’ etc. There is the view that Jesus might be talking initially about Jerusalem’s impending doom, but then broadens out to include a ‘secondary’ fulfilment? So you have a ‘two-fold’ scenario: what happens to Jerusalem is like the minor fulfilment and then the major one is the ‘world wide’ destruction scenario. I don’t know. Much of what Davo is saying does make a lot of sense.
Hi Catherine,
IMHO the Preterists don’t make any distinction in Matt 24 from which it appears there are two separate discourses. If you match it up against Luke 17 and Luke 21 it appears Matthew put the two together. Up to Matt 24.34 it appears to be about the destruction of Jerusalem but after 24.35 the topic appears to be the second coming as Jesus talks about sudden destruction and no one could know the day or hour , certainly not 70AD at least IMO.
I’m not sure Steve. Those verses do seem strange in relation to 70 AD. What is interesting to me, is that Jesus likens the coming destruction to the flood of Noah, and NOT to the previous temple destruction. I understand the flood of Noah to be over the whole planet, and not just local. Also, surely the flood was far worse than the destruction of the first temple etc, as it destroyed everything almost. So Jesus is comparing this coming destruction which He says is going to be worse than the flood?
I’m not sure Steve. Those verses do seem strange in relation to 70 AD. What is interesting to me, is that Jesus likens the coming destruction to the flood of Noah, and NOT to the previous temple destruction. I understand the flood of Noah to be over the whole planet, and not just local. Also, surely the flood was far worse than the destruction of the first temple etc, as it destroyed everything almost. So Jesus is comparing this coming destruction which He says is going to be worse than the flood?
Hi Catherine,
I never thought about the universality of the flood verses the locality of the 70AD destruction but that may be significant. What strikes me that Matt 24.36 on is not 70AD is mainly the suddeness of destruction. They were eating and drinking they bought and they sold they got married in other words they were blissfully living life and suddenly destruction came. 70AD was not sudden, it was slow and painful, it took three years and people starved to death.
Additionally Jesus said no one not even Jesus himself knew the day or the hour but not the case with 70AD. Anyone could see the Roman army marching toward Jerusalem from Rome which probably took weeks, maybe months so the day and hour could be known IMHO.
I think the key is realizing Matt 24 is two different discourses that Matthew put together. Luke has them separately in 17 and 21.
Actually the quote you reference refers to the firstfruit saints of that era being “the house of God” and their call to faithfulness in the face of potential apostasy where certain members were returning to the likes of law-righteousness 2Pet 2:19-22; Heb 6:4-6; 10:29].
1Pet 4:7For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
Those NOT obeying “the gospel of God” were for the most part their fellow Israelites.
The effect of the coming Judgement, which was to be ALL inclusive, to quote N.T. Wright was to “put the world to rights”. IOW… the Judgement was primarily about consummating the work of the Cross, i.e., mankind’s restored relation with God. Paul was dispelling their “ignorance”, claiming they were also were “the offspring of God” and the He was in fact within their very graspAct 17:27-28] if they could but “repent”, THAT IS… have a change of mind to believe such wondrous things – Good News indeed!
Well on the surface no… just like in kind how Jesus’ crucifixion seemingly didn’t make a hill of beans difference to anyone beyond the walls of Jerusalem at the time, and yet what the world was blindly unaware of in no way diminished the redemptive magnitude of God workings ON THE WORLD’S BEHALF.
The PROMISE to Israel was “Behold, I will do a NEW thing”, which is what John picks up on with “Behold, I make all things NEW”; not some things new but all things new. This is talking about Israel’s covenant renewal. Just as Jesus was “the resurrection” or “the way” or “the truth” or “the life” etc Jesus WAS also “the new creation”. Or to put it another way, Jesus was new or true Israel, thus “if any man be in Christ he is a NEW creation”, that is, he is “the Israel of God”.
I can appreciate you seeing this as “weird”, however, once or when you start to grasp biblical eschatology through the prism of Israel’s promised covenant renewal then a lot of the apparent “weird” eschatological oddities start making sense.
“It seems”. Again these are the unfortunate assumptions fostered by the futurist mindset. There will always by evil and sin in this world, but to say they reign is to give them oxygen they don’t deserve. The Cross and Parousia of Christ was NEVER about extinguishing the existence of sin or evil off this planet, no, the Cross and Parousia of Christ was all about removing the LIABILITY of such being laid to man’s charge… Jesus according to Heb 9:26 “put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” – fundamentally I believe this to be true, period.
This doesn’t mean “sin” is non-existent, rather it means sin is NO LONGER the barrier it once was. IOW, the sails of sin have had the knife of God run right down them; they are merely flapping in the breeze in terms of condemnation. Religianity however is forever stitching them back up in terms of “sin consciousness” – the very essence and fruit of law consciousness Heb 10:1-2; 2Pet 1:9].
Again this was never his intent. I can only assume you actually believe the opposite to be the case and that we are all “STILL guilty!”
It is impossible to be half pregnant; it is possible to be pregnant and not know it, but you cannot be HALF pregnant… humanity is NOT partially or half reconciled. Humanity is FULLY reconciled… that most don’t know it, or the rest who should know better deny it, simply means we have a message worth sharing.
I hate to say this, as part of me feels like I am going apostate, but I am leaning more and more towards our actions determining our fate. There are just too many perplexing things in this world. How can I point a finger at someone of another religion who is doing his best to communicate to his God and obey him? Isn’t that what we are doing?
For whatever reason, I do not believe it can be disputed that God certainly must not have meant for us to know in this life. Isn’t it clear? No, it isn’t. The only thing that is clear is how we treat other people. Beyond that, Jews are convinced that G-d or HaShem loves them and has a personal relationship with them. Christian’s say “No you don’t because that can happen only through Jesus”. Christian’s say they have the Holy Spirit living in them. How? "They can feel it. Perfectly valid, they say to themselves but when others can feel it from another faith, they say “No, that is demonic” and the wheel turns… I do find it odd that both Islam and Christianity are pretty much the most brutal when it comes to tolerance. They must be two of the most intolerant groups in the world at this point. Both unwavering and both willing to condemn others who don’t believe or think the same way.
Maybe I just lack faith, but the more I step outside and explore other religions, the more truth I find in them. It is a scary feeling to wonder if everything you believed in from the beginning could be wrong. But the reality is, do we want what is comfortable to us, or are we truly interested in the truth? I find many stop short of searching for the truth by limiting the search within the scope of ones religion. Sort of like “I know the the truth is found in Christianity, so I have no need to look outside of it” and then you can claim “I found the truth and so and so” - Maybe the truth transcends religion.
When we really listen to what Jesus says, he is very clear that we are to be 'perfect or ‘complete’ as God is in heaven. That means, loving our enemies, feeding those who are hungry and making sure we are perfect in moral character before we judge another person. That appears to me, a universal truth that is practiced in many religions. I think what I am getting at is this: God is either gracious, not gracious, or doesn’t exist. If he is gracious, we can be sure he will be fair to all. If he is not gracious, I wouldn’t feel particular safe in any believe system and if he doesn’t exist, none of this really matters except leaving a good and positive legacy for those who come after us.
I do find it odd that both Islam and Christianity are pretty much the most brutal when it comes to tolerance. They must be two of the most intolerant groups in the world at this point. Both unwavering and both willing to condemn others who don’t believe or think the same way.
I don’t know how you could compare Christianity to Islam? Historically Christianity has been brutal particularly in the middle ages but that really had nothing to do with Jesus , it was because of power hungry corrupt people. There will always be corrupt evil people who will use religion or anything they can to advance their agenda. Islam on the other hand sometimes encourages submission by any means although the Quran does contradict itself depending on when Muhammed dictated his revelations.
Jesus Christ never encourages submission by any means other then persuasion and belief and faith. It was Jesus who revealed a loving gracious God, and if not for Jesus you would not know much about the character of God. Because of Jesus we have the opportunity and real hope that everyone ultimately may be saved.
Other religions have their benefits but really have no concrete plan for mankind or any real relationship with a God you can know.
I suspect that Jesus is saving all kinds of people (hopefully everyone ) from ‘other religions’, including Christian religions. If I may quote C.S. Lewis from ‘The Last Battle’:
“Then I fell at his feet and thought, Surely this is the hour of death, for the Lion (who is worthy of all honour) will know that I have served Tash all my days and not him. Nevertheless, it is better to see the Lion and die than to be Tisroc of the world and live and not to have seen him. But the Glorious One bent down his golden head and touched my forehead with his tongue and said, Son, thou art welcome. But I said, Alas Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash. He answered, Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me. ‘’
I would like to ‘proclaim’ the hope which I have in Jesus, my Lord and Saviour: I believe God’s eternal plan for mankind by His Son Jesus and by the power of the Holy Spirit, is the reconciliation of ALL creation back to God, so that God will be All in All. This is being accomplished presently, through Jesus whose life was poured out for us. Jesus paid the ‘bride price’ with his life and once He is married to ALL His bride, He will destroy all forms of sin and evil, whether spiritual or physical. At a future time, there will be no more murder, no more disease, no more child abuse, no more hunger, no more hatred, NO MORE REBELLION. The Father’s desire will be completely done in all creation: ‘‘your will be done on earth as it is in heaven’’.
Do you believe in universal reconciliation: that Jesus is reconciling ALL things and persons back to God and thus eliminating sin in all its forms whether in the physical realm or the spiritual realm? Acts 3:21 springs to mind: ‘’ He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything,…’’
) aspect of what you are presenting. Jesus has made SOME things new with His New Covenant, but He hasn’t made this world new*** yet***. Evil and sin still reign in this world. The prince of this world is still in control and most people are walking off the edge of a cliff it seems. I agree that the Kingdom is ‘here’ in the sense that believers are in the Kingdom. It’s a spiritual Kingdom whilst we are still on this earth. Jesus lives in us and we are the light to the world, and thus God’s Kingdom is represented on this earth through the living stones that are building up the temple, Jesus’ body. But don’t you think the Kingdom rule will COMPLETELY fill this earth, as the waters cover the sea? Won’t God’s will be done on earth as it is in Heaven COMPLETELY? If God has judged this earth and found us ‘not guilty’ as you say, then why hasn’t Jesus eliminated sin and evil from this earth? Sin and evil being the wages of guilt surely? Why are there still freak floods, storms, earthquakes destroying people? Why is disease killing people? Why does evil permeate every square inch of this earth? In what way does Jesus mean that the meek will inherit the earth? What earth? 
