O
The Old Covenant was NOT replaced at the cross. Read Hebrews 8 where the writer compares the two. There would have been no need for a new if the old had been sufficient. But it was lacking. Notice verse 8 for the timing. The writer says that even THEN the Old was growing old, becoming obsolete, and READY to pass away. Why would he write such a thing if the Old Covenant ended at the Cross? It sounds as though it was very much still around. It became obsolete and passed away in A.D. 70 when the Temple and everything having to do with Judaism and the Mosaic Law were burned "with fervent heat" (2 Peter 3). The "end of all things was AT HAND." The end of those "all things" occurred with the destruction of the Temple.
I think you may have a point here, sort of. I've always wondered about Hebrews 8:13. AD 70 could be the point at which it finally disappeared.
There's no question that the old covenant ended when Christ died and rose from the dead. With the introduction of the new, the old ended but not everyone accepted it. It wouldn't totally disappear until AD 70.
That presents a problem for those who think prophesy has ceasedI found this and wanted to share- a lot of great resource.
best wishes
https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Last-Days
Acts 2:16-18
but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: ‘And it shall be in the last days,’ God says,
‘That I will pour forth of My Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
And your young men shall see visions,
And your old men shall dream dreams;
Even on My bondslaves, both men and women,
I will in those days pour forth of My Spirit
And they shall prophesy.
Source: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Last-Days
I think you may have a point here, sort of. I've always wondered about Hebrews 8:13. AD 70 could be the point at which it finally disappeared.
There's no question that the old covenant ended when Christ died and rose from the dead. With the introduction of the new, the old ended but not everyone accepted it. It wouldn't totally disappear until AD 70.
Those who think everything ended in 70 ad are right but only half right. The are not allowing for prophesy to fully fulfill itself.
God offered the messiah to the Jews. They rejected Him, and suffered their tribulation in 70 ad.
BUT - God then offered the Christ to the world, and now the world is rejecting Him. Thus the world will suffer it's tribulation in the days to come.
Another clue lay in the fact that the Jews thought their Messiah would be a political figure who'd save them from Godless Romans.
Christians now look for a political figure who'll save them from Godless liberals.
The fat lady ain't sung yet. Stand-by for more to come!
For Judaism, it never ended. They lost the temple and priesthood then but they still believe the covenant is valid and are awaiting the first coming of the messiah, a false messiah.
Often quoted when questioned about God's timing isThe Third Day is also implied in the parable of Good Samaritan. Jesus himself as the Good Samaritan gave the inn keeper two dinarius to take care of the wounded man and promised to come back in the Third Day and reward the inn keeper. Two dinarius are two days' wages, one day for one millenium, so He will return after two millienia. Also, consider the "birth pang" comparison, I mentioned this in my timeline thread that 41 weeks of gestation are 41 jubilee cycles, which are about 2009 years, and that's the length of the church age. Jesus will return when that time's up.
Yes, there had been a lot of Antichrist figures and these signs of times over the last 2000 years, but all of them were on a regional and temporal scale. That's why they're compared with birth pangs - it feels like water's broke and the baby is coming out, but it's a false alarm, the time has not come yet. However, now you see things happening on a GLOBAL scale, and a global government will rise and rule over the entire earth, then you know the time is near. This "Revived Roman Empire" is predicted in the prophecies. Bible is not being interpreted to fit the circumstance, circumstance is being interpreted to fit the Bible.
Often quoted when questioned about God's timing is
2Pe_3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
That was the institution of the new. Hebrews 9 explains it wellThere's no question that the old covenant ended when Christ died and rose from the dead.
You believe you have God's schedule figured out?It's possible to figure out God's schedule, but it's IMPOSSIBLE to convert it into a date on Gregorian calendar.
We won't know the date but we'll know the season.It's possible to figure out God's schedule, but it's IMPOSSIBLE to convert it into a date on Gregorian calendar.
You believe you have God's schedule figured out?
I quoted Pet 3:8 for the fun of it... One cant help but notice when it is used and when it is not .
First time i heard something like that was about mid 1950s . Been a long time ago cant remember where i heard it... again not a date but claiming the 2000 would be the day of rest . their for rapture would be happening just before the "day of rest "This schedule of 7000 year master plan is nothing new, not any kind of date-setting, it’s a very ancient Jewish belief, and it generally lines up with biblical chronology.