When was the A.O.D fulfilled?

[Timtofly]

It already has.

There will be a second coming of Christ.

I did not say the entire prophecy was fulfilled about the second coming and the end of the world.

I disagree. We have not come to this part of the highlighted prophecy yet….

Luke 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

The Temple was only destroyed once in either prophecy. Why are you including the time prior to Daniel's prophecy by 70 years?

Will the Temple be destroyed again the second time?

Because the armies in Luke was the prophecy about the Temple being destroyed. The AoD had nothing to do with the Temple being destroyed. The Temple was not destroyed by the AoD prophecied by Daniel in 167BC. The AoD made the Temple a desecration, not destroyed.

So why would a future AoD destroy the Temple?

I agree that Jerusalem has been trodden underfoot since the first century. That is not the same as the AoD concerning Revelation 11:2

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months."

This is the Temple Jesus sets up at the Second Coming. This is when the AoD will happen to desecrate that Temple. That is when all in Judaea should also flee.

When you turn Matthew 24 and Mark 13 into something they are not, you are missing this time mentioned in Revelation 11.

 

[covenantee]

Armies are not something that "stands in the Holy Place".

As the Roman armies invaded Jerusalem, were they lying down, or were they standing?

Armies are what brings anything that represents an abomination.

The Roman armies brought their idolatrous ensigns which were an abomination to the Jews.

No one will know what that AoD is until they see it.

The Judean Christians saw it and knew it. That's why they fled.

No one saw an AoD in 70AD.

The Judean Christians saw it and knew it. That's why they fled.

The Holy Place stopped being a thing in 30AD, when Jesus said it was finished.

Jerusalem was known as the holy city until it was destroyed.

You cannot even define what an AoD is.

But Luke can. Luke 21:20. The Roman armies. He doesn't care that you don't believe him.

All the foolish people took refuge in Jerusalem, thinking they were safe, when they should have remembered that it was about to be destroyed.

None of the Judaean Christians were foolish. They all fled and survived.

I am going by Scripture and what history tells us.

You're going by your own Darby/Scofield modernist revisionist dispensational delusions and futurized fantasies, nothing more.

 

[Stewardofthemystery]

Will the Temple be destroyed again the second time?

It has already been destroyed twice, first by the Babylonians and second by the Roman army.

Because the armies in Luke was the prophecy about the Temple being destroyed. The AoD had nothing to do with the Temple being destroyed.

I disagree, the destruction of the Temple in 70 ad started the time clock on the 1335 days.(sign of time)

So why would a future AoD destroy the Temple?

What Temple? The AOD prophecy is fulfilled.

I agree that Jerusalem has been trodden underfoot since the first century. That is not the same as the AoD concerning Revelation 11:2

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months."

Most people take that time of 42 months as being literal, I do not. I believe it is “a sign of time” that is to be spiritually discerned.

This is the Temple Jesus sets up at the Second Coming. This is when the AoD will happen to desecrate that Temple. That is when all in Judaea should also flee.

When you turn Matthew 24 and Mark 13 into something they are not, you are missing this time mentioned in Revelation 11.

Jesus returns at the 1335 day mark, which is after the 1,260 day mark, so how can Jesus set up a Temple before He returns? It makes no sense.

 

[Phoneman777]

Nothing about the redeemed dead in the OT applies to the redeemed post the Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus.

You have only misinterpreted NT verses to support this claim.

Those born from above would never taste death, walk through the valley of the shadow of death, nor exist as a soul without a body.

"...though he were dead, yet shall he live." - Jesus

Not "spiritual" but "literal" death, contextually by the entire reason of their conversation: a 4 day dead dude.

There are not any souls who never existed.

Look, my point is impossible to miss, yet you've somehow managed to...please try and focus, OK?

Solomon says the guy "that not hath been" is to be praised more than the guy who yet lives or the guy who's passed - away because "he hath not seen the evil" of this world.

QUESTION:
Why the flip would Solomon say those who've never existed are better off than those who've died and presumably are "present with the Lord"?

ANSWER:
Because dead saints are not yet "present with the Lord" - they're naked/unclothed in the grave waiting for a resurrection body - which is why Paul said he'd rather be absent from the body and "clothed upon" with his resurrection body so he could be "present with the Lord" and skip the "naked/unclothed" part.

You are so stuck in the past, Jesuit Preterist would be proud of you.

Jesuit Preterists have zero in common with me. The pope, however, would be confused as to why you guys aren't catholic.

There is no Scripture that claims a soul ceases to exist.

Genesis 2:7 KJV defines a living Soul as the result of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life. It's not reasonable to argue that this living Soul continues to exist at the disunion of the two.

Now, what doesn't exist is a Scripture that says soul continues to exist when it soul dies. That's paganism.

That would be like saying when Jesus died on the Cross, God ceased to exist

His humanity ceased to exist - His divinity continued to exist as it's always existed, from everlasting to everlasting.

The term immortal means life or the opposite of death.

That's a false equivalence.

The opposite of "life" is "death" aka "no life". It's a shame I have to argue with such "intelligent people" that death is the opposite of life, not the continuation thereof.

You wrongly emphasize some physical part of existence is included in that term. There is no such thing as an immortal body. Not found any where in Scripture. You are as as wrong as most human theology.

Do you read the Bible with your eyes open?
Paul plainly says there is the "earthly house" and the "eternal house not made with hands" aka "immortal body".

a soul in a dead body.

The Bible declares the "Soul" is a "whole" comprised of its parts: Body and Breath of Life. You're claim that 1 Thessalonians 5:23 KJV refers to "three parts" denies this.

Sadly, the first casualties of the war on truth is always textual harmony/consistency.

The dead do not know anything in sheol, not because they do not exist

My point exactly!

Of course spirits can move freely even in sheol

Spirits don't go to sheol - they "return to God Who gave it".

All the rest of the OT waited as souls in a location that Jesus called Abraham's bosom.

No texts teach that.

Souls do not cease to exist.

They absolutely cease to exist when the union of the Body and the Breath of Life is broken - because they come into existence at the union of the Body and Breath of Life (Genesis 2:7 KJV).

upon his soul leaving one physical body

Saying "a soul leaves the body" is like saying "the car leaves the engine" or "

Or do you think all will physically die, and then cease to exist, and then pop into existence with a different body?

Moses was definitely in heaven with his immortal body along with Elijah and Enoch - the rest of us get our immortal bodies resurrection morning.

Paul did not use the word translated but the word changed. Don't you think they are the same thing?

Yes

We all (the entire church) will have been changed. That is looking back at the last 2 millennia.

Going back to Adam and Eve and David, who's still waiting in his grave.

You may not be deceived by Satan's words "you surely won't die", but you have not accepted the words of Jesus saying "you won't taste death".

Let's be clear: "Some of you will not taste death UNTIL you see the Lord in glory" referred to Peter, James, and John in the Mount where they SAW the Lord Jesus glorified.

If you claim you will be among "the dead" who know nothing, you are denying your second birth from above. You literally already know nothing.

Claiming the dead know nothing is not a denial of the "born again" experience. Your problem is you keep misapplying verses which speak of "spiritual death" and "literal death".

 

[Timtofly]

It means they are buried.
Like Abraham was buried and Isaac was buried and Jacob was buried.

You dig a hole and you lower someone into the ground and cover them up with dirt.

They are asleep in the dust of the earth.

Daniel 12:2
2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise[a] will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to



Do you understand the concept of sleeping in the dust of the earth as the word of God says here in daniel.12:2 or is it beyond your comprehension ?

That only applied to the OT.

Do you understand the NT, or is that beyond your comprehension?

"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens"

The redeemed in this life are not placed into the ground. The mortal body is placed into the ground as a remembrance of who that person once was.

The lost are remembered as well. Do you think the lost are in heaven, currently?

Daniel is saying that some lost will be redeemed at that GWT Judgment. Why do you think you will still be dead throughout the Millennium Kingdom, Day of the Lord, reign of Christ on the earth?

I can understand if you claim you are an Amil. But you think you will still be in a grave somewhere a thousand years from now. You deny the resurrection that happened at the Cross. You deny people are currently physically enjoying Paradise.


You lump the redeemed and unredeemed as still dead even after the Cross for over 3,000 years. Why?

 

[tailgator]

That only applied to the OT.

Do you understand the NT, or is that beyond your comprehension?

"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens"

The redeemed in this life are not placed into the ground. The mortal body is placed into the ground as a remembrance of who that person once was.

The lost are remembered as well. Do you think the lost are in heaven, currently?

Daniel is saying that some lost will be redeemed at that GWT Judgment. Why do you think you will still be dead throughout the Millennium Kingdom, Day of the Lord, reign of Christ on the earth?

I can understand if you claim you are an Amil. But you think you will still be in a grave somewhere a thousand years from now. You deny the resurrection that happened at the Cross. You deny people are currently physically enjoying Paradise.


You lump the redeemed and unredeemed as still dead even after the Cross for over 3,000 years. Why?

False
Daniel 12:1 applies to all of Israel who's names are written.
People such as John,Peter,James,Stephen.


Daniel 12:1-2 is not fulfilled till the time of the end.The time of the end when the man of sin is destroyed in Daniel 11:45,at Christs coming has not been fulfilled yet .


Daniel 12:1
12 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered.


These people's who names are written in the lambs book of life have not risen from their graves yet and them that are alive have not been delivered out of the great tribulation in Daniel 12:1 yet.

 

[Phoneman777]

Of course, that is exactly what should happen. Have you driven a vehicle to heaven lately?

Did the Christian's desire to be "present at the Cracker Barrel" eliminate having to drive there from the pew?

Neither does Paul's desire to be "present with the Lord" eliminate him having to wait like Job in the grave "until my change come".

 

[Phoneman777]

Take it up with the Apostle Paul.

Nah, you do that. I've shown you there's only two bodies God's Bible knows about.

Do you really think Paul imagined that when he died, he would not, at that very moment be present with the Lord in heaven?

He absolutely knew that. When will you guys realize that verse 8 is merely his desire, not his expectation?

Did Paul say "...but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up by going straight to heaven"?

No, he says "...might be swallowed up of LIFE". If we're not "clothed upon" WE...HAVE...NO...LIFE.

Does it sound to you like Paul believed after he died he would not be present with the Lord even for a moment?

Yes - though he makes it clear he'd rather be present up there as soon as he is absent down here, just like I often would rather be absent from work and present in my house...but I still have to drive home.

he would not have longed for his body to die so he could be eternally present

Please stop twisting Paul! He plainly says he longed to be "clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life":

Spiritual Israelite explains the reason Paul longed to be "clothed upon" was because he knew he'd die and go straight to heaven and miss having a body.

I asked him, if you were naked with your skin covered in lotion and saw an opportunity to escape from Buffalo Bob's "Shirt & Skirt Shoppe" would you give a flip about whether or not you had clothes on?

No, the only reasonable explanation for why Paul desperately wanted to be "clothed upon" is because he knew the only "life" that is "present with the Lord" is he who is "clothed upon" in an immortal body!

You believe this because you are consumed with physical mortal bodies of flesh and have not understanding of the eternal spiritual realm of heaven.

No, you do not believe as I because it's YOU who lacks understanding of these realms.

As I've already shown you ALL life comes from spirit! Without spirit there is no life, and for those who are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, being unclothed from this natural body of death, is to be clothed a spiritual body in the eternal Kingdom of God in heaven.

No, there we are clothed upon in our mortal body, we die and lie naked and unclothed dead in the grave, and "at the last trump" we put on our immortal clothes and go to be "present with the Lord".

If you believe that why do you argue for the unbiblical doctrine 'soul sleep'?

UnBiblical?
"Our friend Lazarus sleepeth".
"Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death".'
"Whether we wake or sleep..."

God doesn't esteem the First Death as "death" but "sleep" - because the day is coming when all will awake. The Second Death is indeed "death" because those who die it will never wake up:

"...and shall swallow down, and shall sleep a PERPETUAL sleep, and not wake, saith the Lord".

Again, your argument is not with me, but with the Word of Christ. Because Christ tells us that wherever He is, we shall be there also.

That's AFTER He comes for us - not at death.

When we die our spirit returns to the Father who is in heaven

Yes, exactly as it was when it came forth from God and went up our nostrils - without even the tiniest speck of humanity attached to it.

when we die in Him, we are received in heaven an eternal spiritual body of believers alive there.
And our eternal spirit shall then return with Christ to give our new immortal and incorruptible resurrected body life forever on the new earth. Christ will not be returning with the dead, but all the spiritual body alive with Him in heaven.

See you think that because you think "the spirit shall return to God" means "rwb shall return to God".

rwb - why can't you return to the moon? So, what makes you think you can "return" to a heaven you've never been to?

 

[Phoneman777]

Paul did not say persevered.

Neither did I - see for yourself.

 

[Timtofly]

As I've already shown you ALL life comes from spirit! Without spirit there is no life, and for those who are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, being unclothed from this natural body of death, is to be clothed a spiritual body in the eternal Kingdom of God in heaven.

That "spiritual body" is still physical. A body is always physical. The natural body is death. The heavenly is life. Spiritual in this case is not the opposite of physical. It is the opposite of natural, ie from Adam. Spiritual just means from God, not that the heavenly body is not physical.

Adam as a son of God had that spiritual body, until he disobeyed. The instant Adam disobeyed, the soul went from God's permanent incorruptible physical body to a temporal corruptible physical body of death. That was physical death. Spiritual death was the complete separation of one's spirit from one's body and soul.

The instant Adam disobeyed God, Adam physically and spiritually died. Only the soul remained from the original Adam.

So redemption is the soul leaving the body of death for that original body of life. But there is not a body waiting for you in heaven. God creates out of dust, which we know now, are electrons and protons, a permanent incorruptible physical body for the soul, at the moment of physical death.

The day of redemption is the soul leaving this body of death, causing that body to stop living. Not that the body causes the soul to cease to exist. That is why we have the Holy Spirit sealing us until the day of redemption:

"And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."

Ephesians 4:30

The day of redemption is not a single day, at the Second Coming. Some interpret 1 Corinthians 15 that way:

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.”

Jesus did not need to be redeemed, made alive. Paul is talking about the same day of redemption here as in Ephesians 4. The OT were redeemed, made alive, at the Cross. That was their day of redemption. They left death behind and entered into life. The order is all who have been made alive since the Cross. The next group are those alive on the earth, not physically dead people.

Who are Christ's at His coming needing to be made alive out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh, since all have already been made alive at the point of physical death? Why would people need to be sealed, who are already in heaven? Jesus comes at the Second Coming, and that is when those on earth are redeemed and made alive. They will be still sealed by the Holy Spirit until the Second Coming. Otherwise they are made alive upon physical death.

The soul does not take death with them into heaven. The soul does not cease to exist either. Physical death can only be the point of redemption. That is when death is swallowed up by life. Life is not put on hold with God. The OT and all of the NT to this day are all in Christ the firstfruits.

 

[Harvest 1874]

For those truth seekers who have been given the eye to see and the ear to hear we refer you to our blog post entitled, "The Abomination of Desolation" for a more sound understanding of this issue. Do not allow yourselves to be decieved and turned to fables, and/or the vain imaginings of men.

 

[Timtofly]

As the Roman armies invaded Jerusalem, were they lying down, or were they standing?

The Roman armies brought their idolatrous ensigns which were an abomination to the Jews.

The Judean Christians saw it and knew it. That's why they fled.

The Judean Christians saw it and knew it. That's why they fled.

Jerusalem was known as the holy city until it was destroyed.

But Luke can. Luke 21:20. The Roman armies. He doesn't care that you don't believe him.

None of the Judaean Christians were foolish. They all fled and survived.

You're going by your own Darby/Scofield modernist revisionist dispensational delusions and futurized fantasies, nothing more.

Did any one flee after the armies set up their camps in 70AD?

The Romans already set up their ensigns when Pilate became governor. Did people flee before Jesus was baptized? The Jews complained and Pilate removed them. No one called them the AoD. They did offend the Jews though.

No one fled in 70AD. They fled in 66AD, before the Romans started leveling several cities in Judaea. The foolish fled to Jerusalem, not the mountains. No one was allowed to leave Jerusalem after Passover, in 70AD. Many were allowed in and then trapped.

Jerusalem is still the holy city. The Temple was not an Holy Place after God tore the veil when Jesus declared, "It is finished". Being destroyed did not take away the holy status, of Jerusalem. The holy status was only put on hold until the city was rebuilt, not transferred to another city. It has been trampled underfoot since 70AD.

Luke never defined the armies as an AoD, because no one did, not even a single historian. Not even Josephus. That is your own human imagination at work. The closest thing to an AoD would be the ensigns, but you have determined nothing was set up. Are you flip flopping on the ensigns now? You do realize that ensigns are not human soldiers, but an idolatrous symbol. They did not place anything in the Temple, not even an ensign, as the Temple was destroyed before they could. Now that millions were dead, how did that help your Judean Christians, since they already fled in 66AD? Can you make up your mind if they fled in 66AD, before many were killed or in 70AD after near a million were killed?

I am just going by Scripture and Josephus. Did Josephus follow Darby and Scofield? Did Luke and Jesus follow Darby and Scofield? How foolish is your broken record argument? Do you follow Darby and Scofield as you keep talking about them?

 

[Timtofly]

It has already been destroyed twice, first by the Babylonians and second by the Roman army.

I disagree, the destruction of the Temple in 70 ad started the time clock on the 1335 days.(sign of time)

What Temple? The AOD prophecy is fulfilled.

Most people take that time of 42 months as being literal, I do not. I believe it is “a sign of time” that is to be spiritually discerned.

Jesus returns at the 1335 day mark, which is after the 1,260 day mark, so how can Jesus set up a Temple before He returns? It makes no sense.

We are talking about the prophecy in Daniel and the NT, not the first time Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians. That would be prophecy covered in other OT prophets prior to the Assyrians being sent as punishment to disperse the ten northern tribes.

The 1335 days happened in 167BC called Hanukkah.

The AoD was only fulfilled in 167BC, that Daniel wrote about. The one Jesus mentioned is still future. There has been one AoD already 2 centuries prior to 70AD.

When those 42 months happen, I don't think people will be concerned if they are spiritual or not. Those 42 months are when people will chop off their heads or marked by God, as removed from the Lamb's book of life. No one has been removed, because the Lamb's book of life is still sealed. Only when the 7th Seal is opened up, can living humans have their name removed from the Lamb's book of life, and tossed into the LOF.

The Second Coming is an unknown. There is no countdown letting people know when the Second Coming will happen. Not even Jesus set a time frame for the Second Coming. Jesus and all His angels will be on the earth at the Second Coming.

No one was counting down the days, until Jesus was born, nor baptized, nor crucified. All that was a mystery. Yet people think they know that Jesus was crucified at some certain point of a 70 week countdown.

The AoD has nothing to do with being prepared for a first coming nor a second coming. In the fulness of God's timetable things happen according to God's will. God is not bound by any prophetic time frame.

 

[tailgator]

We are talking about the prophecy in Daniel and the NT, not the first time Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians. That would be prophecy covered in other OT prophets prior to the Assyrians being sent as punishment to disperse the ten northern tribes.

The 1335 days happened in 167BC called Hanukkah.

The AoD was only fulfilled in 167BC, that Daniel wrote about. The one Jesus mentioned is still future. There has been one AoD already 2 centuries prior to 70AD.

When those 42 months happen, I don't think people will be concerned if they are spiritual or not. Those 42 months are when people will chop off their heads or marked by God, as removed from the Lamb's book of life. No one has been removed, because the Lamb's book of life is still sealed. Only when the 7th Seal is opened up, can living humans have their name removed from the Lamb's book of life, and tossed into the LOF.

The Second Coming is an unknown. There is no countdown letting people know when the Second Coming will happen. Not even Jesus set a time frame for the Second Coming. Jesus and all His angels will be on the earth at the Second Coming.

No one was counting down the days, until Jesus was born, nor baptized, nor crucified. All that was a mystery. Yet people think they know that Jesus was crucified at some certain point of a 70 week countdown.

The AoD has nothing to do with being prepared for a first coming nor a second coming. In the fulness of God's timetable things happen according to God's will. God is not bound by any prophetic time frame.

The AOD Daniel wrote about takes place at the time of the end when the king of the north goes forth to destroy and annihilate many in Daniel 11:44

Daniel 11:44
But reports from the east and the north will alarm him, and he will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many.


It causes the great tribulation ,such tribulation as has not been from the time that there was a nation on the earth until that time

Daniel 12.1
And at that time Michael the great prince shall stand up, that stands over the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of tribulation, such tribulation as has not been from the time that there was a nation on the earth until that time: at that time thy people shall be delivered, even every one that is written in the book.


Jesus spoke of this great tribulation in the gospel.

Mathew 24
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.



These people are delivered out of great tribulation when the abomination of desolation spoken by Daniel is used by the armed forces of the north.


Revelation 7

9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.

11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,

12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.

13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?

14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb

 

[covenantee]

Did any one flee after the armies set up their camps in 70AD?

They had already fled in 66 AD.

No one called them the AoD.

Jesus did and Luke confirmed Him.

No one fled in 70AD. They fled in 66AD

Of course.

The foolish fled to Jerusalem, not the mountains.

Scripture says nothing about where the foolish fled.

Jerusalem is still the holy city.

It's not. It is permeated with antichrist. The only holy city is the New Jerusalem.
Revelation 21:2
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Luke never defined the armies as an AoD

Jesus did and Luke confirmed Him.

How foolish is your broken record argument?

I'll take broken record truth over Darby/Scofield hallucination
all day
every day.

 

[Davidpt]

Luke never defined the armies as an AoD, because no one did, not even a single historian. Not even Josephus. That is your own human imagination at work.

Exactly!

The AOD is apparently connected, for one, with 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves, and that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not connected with 70 AD.

 

[covenantee]

Exactly!

The AOD is apparently connected, for one, with 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves, and that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not connected with 70 AD.

Exactly nonsense. Nothing whatever to do with 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

 

[Timtofly]

You have only misinterpreted NT verses to support this claim.

"...though he were dead, yet shall he live." - Jesus

Not "spiritual" but "literal" death, contextually by the entire reason of their conversation: a 4 day dead dude.

Look, my point is impossible to miss, yet you've somehow managed to...please try and focus, OK?

Solomon says the guy "that not hath been" is to be praised more than the guy who yet lives or the guy who's passed - away because "he hath not seen the evil" of this world.

QUESTION:
Why the flip would Solomon say those who've never existed are better off than those who've died and presumably are "present with the Lord"?

ANSWER:
Because dead saints are not yet "present with the Lord" - they're naked/unclothed in the grave waiting for a resurrection body - which is why Paul said he'd rather be absent from the body and "clothed upon" with his resurrection body so he could be "present with the Lord" and skip the "naked/unclothed" part.

Jesuit Preterists have zero in common with me. The pope, however, would be confused as to why you guys aren't catholic.

Genesis 2:7 KJV defines a living Soul as the result of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life. It's not reasonable to argue that this living Soul continues to exist at the disunion of the two.

Now, what doesn't exist is a Scripture that says soul continues to exist when it soul dies. That's paganism.

His humanity ceased to exist - His divinity continued to exist as it's always existed, from everlasting to everlasting.

That's a false equivalence.

The opposite of "life" is "death" aka "no life". It's a shame I have to argue with such "intelligent people" that death is the opposite of life, not the continuation thereof.

Do you read the Bible with your eyes open?
Paul plainly says there is the "earthly house" and the "eternal house not made with hands" aka "immortal body".

The Bible declares the "Soul" is a "whole" comprised of its parts: Body and Breath of Life. You're claim that 1 Thessalonians 5:23 KJV refers to "three parts" denies this.

Sadly, the first casualties of the war on truth is always textual harmony/consistency.

My point exactly!

Spirits don't go to sheol - they "return to God Who gave it".

No texts teach that.

They absolutely cease to exist when the union of the Body and the Breath of Life is broken - because they come into existence at the union of the Body and Breath of Life (Genesis 2:7 KJV).

Saying "a soul leaves the body" is like saying "the car leaves the engine" or "

Moses was definitely in heaven with his immortal body along with Elijah and Enoch - the rest of us get our immortal bodies resurrection morning.

Yes

Going back to Adam and Eve and David, who's still waiting in his grave.

Let's be clear: "Some of you will not taste death UNTIL you see the Lord in glory" referred to Peter, James, and John in the Mount where they SAW the Lord Jesus glorified.

Claiming the dead know nothing is not a denial of the "born again" experience. Your problem is you keep misapplying verses which speak of "spiritual death" and "literal death".

How can one misinterpret: "It is finished"?

Death was defeated, but not removed from those in Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

The OT Covenant was fulfilled. The veil of the Temple removed. God no longer came once a year to the Holy of Holies, but each person was their own priest acting under the power of the Holy Spirit and the second birth.

So explain why death itself had no more power over those souls slain by God under the alter? They were covered by the Lamb of God. They were now in heavenly places as symbolized under that heavenly alter. They had a physical body in Paradise, because death had been swallowed up in life.

The soul dying means it is physically dead, no body, and spiritually dead, no spirit. But a literal dead soul is as pointless as calling the soul something the body has.

You keep saying if the body dies, the soul ceases to exist. No, that is the point the soul is physically dead, without a body. The body does not continue on, but ceases to exist as it turns to dust. The soul is you, and you will either suffer in sheol, or experience Paradise with a physical body. The only reason why the body does not enter sheol is because it returns to dust. It is pagan to preserve a body and hang on to that death. There is nothing pagan about a soul always existing.

This body is not changed, but literally destroyed back into the molecules of creation. Genesis 2:7 does not state the soul ceases to exist if the body is taken away by God. That is your personal imagination forced into the text.

No such thing as an immortal body. You cannot find that in Scripture, but pull that out of the same pagan imagination that told you the soul stops existing.

"But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God."

Luke 9 covers the mount of Transfiguration, but that is not how all accounts portray it. Yes, 3 disciples saw what it means to have the spirit as a covering over the body. So seeing the kingdom of God was showing them proof they would not taste death. You said until they see His glory. No the verse says until they see the kingdom of God. What part of the kingdom of God did they see on the mount of Transfiguration?



"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

Matthew 16:27-28

“For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.”

This was not about the mount of Transfiguration, even though it was within the same time frame of Luke, after the feeding of the 5,000. This may have applied to John and his being taken in the Spirit to the literal Day of the Lord, including the Second Coming. Yet John was allegedly boiled in hot oil, thus tasting death prior to being on Patmos. This verse claims some would not taste death until the Second Coming. That has not happened yet. Can you point to someone still alive today, who has not physically died?



"Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death."

John 8:51-52

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.”

How can you spin this to mean the mount of Transfiguration? Jesus clearly explains that tasting death, is seeing death, and those who are born from above will never see death. Are you going to accuse these Jews of twisting Jesus' words? The chapter is Jesus going back and forth with the learned Jews what He was all about. Why do you seem to be on their side instead of seeing that those born from above of the heavenly kingdom of God will not see, nor taste death, period? Do you not think they could quote Solomon and Job just as easily as you can?

"And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Mark 8:38

“Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

While covering the same territory as Luke, Jesus still ties the thought in with the Second Coming. Then Jesus proceeded to show 3 disciples what they should expect at the Second Coming. Part of what to expect is never tasting death, because of the second birth.

None of these verses give one hint that the soul ever ceases to exist.

 

[Timtofly]

False
Daniel 12:1 applies to all of Israel who's names are written.
People such as John,Peter,James,Stephen.


Daniel 12:1-2 is not fulfilled till the time of the end.The time of the end when the man of sin is destroyed in Daniel 11:45,at Christs coming has not been fulfilled yet .


Daniel 12:1
12 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered.


These people's who names are written in the lambs book of life have not risen from their graves yet and them that are alive have not been delivered out of the great tribulation in Daniel 12:1 yet.

Nope. The last day Resurrection for the OT, redeemed, in Abraham's bosom, was the Cross.

Those found in sheol are still in the Lamb's book of life. They will be judged after the Millennium.

You do understand that millions of Israelites are still in sheol yet to be redeemed?

The ones who have been redeemed were already resurrected along with Lazarus. God always had a faithful remnant of Abraham's seed, who were in Abraham's bosom, but the vast majority are still in sheol to this very day. Those are the ones who will stand as dead, with millions of Gentiles after the 1,000 year reign. Many will be tossed into the LOF. Some will be redeemed.

Those in Abraham's bosom were already redeemed at the Cross, and ascended to Paradise on Sunday morning as the firstfruits of that heavenly country.

Why would you think, you, yourself will be stuck in Abraham's bosom until the GWT Judgment along with Daniel's people still in sheol?

Daniel saw all the way to the end at the GWT. Daniel did not see the Second Coming, as 1,000 years prior to the GWT event.

The time of Jacob's Great Tribulation is at the Second Coming, not just right before the GWT Judgment.

John pointed out that people were resurrected a thousand years before the end, and clearly stated:

“But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.”

How can you say all come out of the dust at the same time?

 

[Timtofly]

Did the Christian's desire to be "present at the Cracker Barrel" eliminate having to drive there from the pew?

Neither does Paul's desire to be "present with the Lord" eliminate him having to wait like Job in the grave "until my change come".

Being redeemed and the Cross is not the same as driving to Cracker Barrel after church.

Paul cannot drive himself to heaven, now, can he?

Your anology fails as I pointed out, that you have not provided proof that you have ever driven to heaven in a vehicle.

Jesus said that no one would see death after the Cross who have experienced the second birth. That is way more hope, than expecting an instant lunch at Cracker Barrel.