PaulThomson said:
Your interpretation of the transition from the Old Covenant to the New relies on your parsing terms in an ad hoc manner that is convenient for the outcome you desire. You may be correct in the way you are dividing of the word of truth, but it seems rather a contrived version of history to me. It is clear that many elements of the Old Covenant are still present in the world as Judaism, and it has not even yet passed away completely, even though in God's economy it is already obsolete and powerless.
Okay. I read Matt. 21. Are you claiming that Jesus, the landowner, returned to Jerusalem in 70 AD? His appearing as lightning fills the sky from east to west so that every eye would see Him happened in 70 AD? I can't see how that can be historically correct.
You are free to believe that. It doesn't make sense to me, though.
We at least agree there.