The Preterists and Matthew 24:34

[Danoh]

No problem. I too enjoy the dialogue because you are able to always be civil, unlike many others who cannot control their emotions.

You mean because he remains civil while you constantly talk down in practically your every post.

Hypocrite.

 

[Right Divider]

What might that different sense be? In what sense do we currently belong to Christ's Kingdom if Christ's Kingdom does not yet exist?

Yes, we are spiritually seated with Christ right now.

Here is where I disagree. You seem to think that these things won't really be reality til they show up here on earth. My question is: where is the greater reality? In Heaven or on Earth?

You are just confused about what you think that I think.

The earth is still filled with sin and violence. THIS is NOT the kingdom of Christ and God on earth where HIS will is done AS IN HEAVEN.

Luk 19:11-12 KJV And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. (12) He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.​

Jesus is talking about returning WITH His kingdom TO the EARTH. When He does this and rules with an iron rod, there will be no sin allowed. It will be a very different world then.

Psa_2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Rev_2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
Rev_12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Rev_19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
​

 

[Christian Liberty]

"This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

The Temple was destroyed within a generation, almost, if not, exactly.

Preterism doesn't work because the majority report from the historical record indicate's plainly that the Church did not interpret the event's of A.D. 70 in the way in which Preterist's explain. Its intractable. Its a fatal flaw that require's a story about a cover-up that rival's that of the X-File's Special Agent Fox Mulder. That secretly, Jesus told the Church to hush about His 2nd Coming already happening, and here we are today set to raise the curtain on this above-top Church secret? Are we supposed to tell the world that He already came? How can we do that when people see that we all still bleed? The 2nd Coming is the end of death.


Daniel

According to partial preterism, "all these things" means everything in Matthew 24 up until verse 34 (or according to some, everything up until Matthew 25:30, I'm not sure which I hold to yet.) Neither of these views says that Christ's return has already happened, or that he won't come back in the future. Matthew 25:31-46 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 clearly detail a coming that hasn't happened yet (there are undoubtedly others, but these are two that immediately came to mind.)

Full Preterism doesn't work. Full preterism says that ALL prophecies have already been fulfilled. Partial Preterism says "some" or "most" which makes more sense. There are some things that are still future, but let's not imagine that everything we see in the newspaper is prophetic, because a lot of this stuff happened in the 1st century.

 

[Christian Liberty]

It has been shown several times on TOL that Christ's foretelling of these events hinges on a conditional particle in the Greek that goes largely unacknowledged in all English translations; that IF a certain condition was met, the generation standing before Him would have lived to see those events come to pass. However, that condition did not come to pass, so that generation did not see what He said they might.

Even if that were true, Jesus specifically prophesied the destruction of the temple, which already happened. And since the New Covenant will last forever and the temple is us, there's no way a new temple can be rebuilt by God's people. Sorry, but this still already happened. Stop playing games with the text.

 

[Dan Emanuel]

According to partial preterism, "all these things" means everything in Matthew 24 up until verse 34 (or according to some, everything up until Matthew 25:30, I'm not sure which I hold to yet.) Neither of these views says that Christ's return has already happened, or that he won't come back in the future. Matthew 25:31-46 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 clearly detail a coming that hasn't happened yet (there are undoubtedly others, but these are two that immediately came to mind.)

Full Preterism doesn't work. Full preterism says that ALL prophecies have already been fulfilled. Partial Preterism says "some" or "most" which makes more sense. There are some things that are still future, but let's not imagine that everything we see in the newspaper is prophetic, because a lot of this stuff happened in the 1st century.

Almost everybody is partial something. I was addressing preterism.


Daniel

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So, you believe Jesus was instructing his disciples to pray for something that couldn't happen?

Of course not. Here Peter offers them the kingdom so if corporate Israel would have just repented then the Lord Jesus would be sent back usher in the times of refreshing:

" Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you" (Acts 3:19-20).​

Corporate Israel did not repent so the Lord Jesus was not sent back. The preterists say that the lord Jesus was sent back.

Either way, I think your statement that the Father's will has never been done on earth is strongly misguided.

The Lord Jesus spoke of the Father's will being done on the earth as it is in heaven.

If someone get's saved or healed, has the Father's will been done? Why must it be an all or nothing proposition. Are you suggesting that if not every aspect of the Father's will is being accomplished, then the Kingdom is not here on earth??

Paul described the age in which we are living in the following verse:

"Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of God and our Father" (Gal.1:4).​

If His kingdom is here then we must imagine that it is an evil kingdom. And if the kingdom age is here on the earth then why would He want to deliver us from it?

Again, I point you to the rebellion of nations at the end of the millenial reign. Do you think the Father's will is being done when all these people reject Christ as King? If not, what happens to the Kingdom during this time of rebellion?

The kingdom on earth will be over by the time of the rebellion.

Paul said the Kingdom of God is righteousness, peace, and joy. When we pursue these things, we are pursuing the Kingdom. When Jesus told his disciples to "Seek first the Kingdom" do you maintain that Jesus was talking about seeking his future reign on the earth? Or was Jesus giving them a daily instruction about seeking the rule and presence of God in their life?

None of that changes the fact that the earthly kingdom will not even be nigh at hand until the Lord Jesus returns to the earth:

"And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" (Lk.21:27-31).​

And that will not happen until the Lord Jesus returns to the earth and then begins to sit upon His throne:

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory" (Mt.25:31).​

You think the harvest of Matthew 13 hasn't happened yet because it is a "worldwide" harvest.

I believe the Matthew 13 harvest is speaking of removing the wicked weed "pretenders" from God's Kingdom. At the same time, the true seed are preserved. This judgement was primarily focused on the unbelieving Jews to whom Jesus said the Kingdom would be taken from.

This passage says nothing about about "pretenders." Instead, it is a world wide harvest and all of the unrighteous will be taken out:

"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13:37-43).​

Here we can see that the Lord Jesus speaks of a harvest that will happen at the "end of the age", the "end of this age." He also makes it clear that the harvest will take place in the field, and He says that the "field is the world." we can akso understand that all of the unrighteous through out the world will be gathered and cast into a furnace of fire.

This judgement was primarily focused on the unbelieving Jews to whom Jesus said the Kingdom would be taken from.

No, the Lord Jesus speaks of a world wide harvest and all the unrighteous through out the world will be taken out. That did not happen at the end of the age so this prophecy remains in the future.

I am not quite sure what you believe the fulfillment of Matthew 13 will look like.

This describes what will happen to the unrighteous when the earth is harvested:

"And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs" (Rev.14:19-20).​

The righteous will remain on the earth.

I am leaving for west Texas early tomorrow for my 50th high school reunion so it will be a week before we can resume our discussion. I hoped to get around to answering the rest of your points before I left but I couldn't find the time. Sorry!

 

[Aaron the Tall]

You are just confused about what you think that I think.

The earth is still filled with sin and violence. THIS is NOT the kingdom of Christ and God on earth where HIS will is done AS IN HEAVEN.

Luk 19:11-12 KJV And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. (12) He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.​

Jesus is talking about returning WITH His kingdom TO the EARTH. When He does this and rules with an iron rod, there will be no sin allowed. It will be a very different world then.

Psa_2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Rev_2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
Rev_12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Rev_19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
​

Maybe you could clear up for me what you believe. Do you believe Christ currently is King of a Kingdom?

The parable you mentioned says the nobleman went away to receive a Kingdom. If this is talking about Christ going away to heaven (which I agree), then hasn't he received a Kingdom already?

I agree that when Christ returns to earth there will be no more sin. That will mark the final stage of Kingdom growth.

Tell me, do you think there will be growth of the Kingdom of God? Will it be a seed that grows to be the tallest tree? Will it be a rock that grows into a mountain? Or will it achieve instant fullness when Christ returns, sets up the Kingdom, and immediately dispatches all the unrighteous?

I Cor 15:25 says Christ "must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." According to this passage, there will be enemies of Christ while he is reigning as King of the Kingdom - and there will be a process of subduing them. I don't see how you can fit this verse into your paradigm that Christ's return to earth will bring an instant end to sin and unrighteousness on the earth.

I'm also confused on how you think these verses fit into your paradigm:

Rev_12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Rev_19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

If this is describing Christ's final return to earth, it says he will smite the nations, and then rule over them. So, is this saying that when Christ sets up His Kingdom on earth, He will strike the wicked nations and then rule over the wicked nations? Does that mean there will be wicked people living in the Kingdom? Or does Christ forcibly turn the wicked people into Christians who can live in the Kingdom? Or does that mean these wicked people will forcibly be hindered from committing any sins?

Lastly, if Christ does not currently possess a Kingdom to which we belong, than we must still be in the kingdom of darkness, if in fact Colossians 1:13 is true.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

I hope you had a great reunion - I'm just approaching my 25th!

Of course not. Here Peter offers them the kingdom so if corporate Israel would have just repented then the Lord Jesus would be sent back usher in the times of refreshing:

" Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you" (Acts 3:19-20).​

Corporate Israel did not repent so the Lord Jesus was not sent back. The preterists say that the lord Jesus was sent back.

So, when Jesus told the disciples to pray "thy Kingdom come..." they were actually praying "may all of corporate Israel repent and receive you." Is that right?

If Jesus wanted all Israel to repent in order that his plan of initiating the Kingdom would be fulfilled, why did he teach in parables? Mark 4:11 says "To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God; but those who are outside get everything in parables." Jesus said some of the Jews listening to his message were OUTSIDE the Kingdom.

As is typical of discussions like this, the list of related topics grows and grows. I'm sure we differ on our ideas of who God's chosen people really are. I started a thread on Israel a couple months ago: here.

I'm curious of your interpretation of this verse:

"therefore I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it."(Matt 21:43)

It doesn't say the Kingdom will be postponed, it says it will be taken away from the unbelieving Jews.

My questions are:
1.) When was the Kingdom of God given to another nation?
2.) What does it mean for this other nation to have the Kingdom of God?
3.) In what sense did the Jews "have" the Kingdom before this indictment by Jesus? Did Jesus just mean they "had the promise" of an earthly Kingdom of God?
4.) If "having" the Kingdom just meant they "had the promise" of a Kingdom, then how could Jesus say the Kingdom would be taken away from them, since according to you they STILL have the promise of a Kingdom if they only repent.

Paul described the age in which we are living in the following verse:

"Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of God and our Father" (Gal.1:4).​

If His kingdom is here then we must imagine that it is an evil kingdom. And if the kingdom age is here on the earth then why would He want to deliver us from it?

No no no - you can't have it both ways! You said Paul THOUGHT he was living at the end of the age! That means he THOUGHT he was living in an evil age - but that the Kingdom age was right around the corner! That means Paul THOUGHT he was describing an age that would have been long since past when you and I came around!

The kingdom on earth will be over by the time of the rebellion.

I understand why you have to believe that, but what exactly is that supposed to mean? Does that mean Christ will no longer be King on earth at that time?

I Cor 15:25-28 says Christ will reign until all enemies are under his feet - and the last enemy that will be abolished before Christ hands the Kingdom to the Father is death. In your Revelation scenario, death isn't destroyed until the Great White Throne Judgement, which occurs AFTER the rebellion.

Something isn't jiving here.

This passage says nothing about about "pretenders." Instead, it is a world wide harvest and all of the unrighteous will be taken out:

"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13:37-43).​

There were tares sewn amongst the wheat. The tares were not evident until the plants were mature. They were "pretenders" amongst the good seed. Likewise, Jesus called the pharisees children of the devil. They were pretenders amongst good seed.

Is the Kindom that the evil ones will be taken out of the same Kingdom of Heaven Jesus says the parable is about in vs. 24?

 

[Right Divider]

Maybe you could clear up for me what you believe. Do you believe Christ currently is King of a Kingdom?

Christ has always had a kingdom, since He is God.

The parable you mentioned says the nobleman went away to receive a Kingdom. If this is talking about Christ going away to heaven (which I agree), then hasn't he received a Kingdom already?

Once again, in what sense?

It also says that He comes back after receiving this one.

I agree that when Christ returns to earth there will be no more sin. That will mark the final stage of Kingdom growth.

"Kingdom growth"? I'm not sure what you're referring to here.

Tell me, do you think there will be growth of the Kingdom of God? Will it be a seed that grows to be the tallest tree? Will it be a rock that grows into a mountain?

Or will it achieve instant fullness when Christ returns, sets up the Kingdom, and immediately dispatches all the unrighteous?

I Cor 15:25 says Christ "must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." According to this passage, there will be enemies of Christ while he is reigning as King of the Kingdom - and there will be a process of subduing them. I don't see how you can fit this verse into your paradigm that Christ's return to earth will bring an instant end to sin and unrighteousness on the earth.

I'm really not sure where you're going with this.

Matthew 26:29 KJV
29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
​

I'm also confused on how you think these verses fit into your paradigm:

If this is describing Christ's final return to earth, it says he will smite the nations, and then rule over them. So, is this saying that when Christ sets up His Kingdom on earth, He will strike the wicked nations and then rule over the wicked nations? Does that mean there will be wicked people living in the Kingdom? Or does Christ forcibly turn the wicked people into Christians who can live in the Kingdom? Or does that mean these wicked people will forcibly be hindered from committing any sins?

Lastly, if Christ does not currently possess a Kingdom to which we belong, than we must still be in the kingdom of darkness, if in fact Colossians 1:13 is true.

Once AGAIN, there are different meanings to "kingdom" based on the CONTEXT in which the word is used. The one which the Lord Jesus Christ will establish on the earth is yet future.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Christ has always had a kingdom, since He is God.

Of course - in some sense this is a bit of semantics. Christ is God and God has always ruled. However, there are scriptures that speak of Christ receiving a Kingdom - so in another sense, the Kingdom of God manifests in a new way through Christ. The difference is that the Kingdom is now ruled by the God-Man, the corporate head of all mankind - and therefore the benefits of the Kingdom can be shared with mankind in a new way, as can the rule of the Kingdom.

It also says that He comes back after receiving this one.

It says he was made King and then he returned. That is different than what Jerry seems to be saying, that Christ is made King when he returns to earth.

If the nobleman in the parable was made King while he was away, that means his Kingdom rule began the moment he became King - not the moment he returned. His people were expected to obey his orders while he was away.

You are saying that Christ's Kingdom can't be here on earth because not everybody is obeying him - but according to the parable, the nobleman's Kingdom rule is established when he is crowned. He is King over his land before he returns to it.

Yes, the earth will be different when the King physically returns to earth. And just in the parable, those who rejected the King's rule while he was away will be punished.

"Kingdom growth"? I'm not sure what you're referring to here.

Christ told parables about the Kingdom starting small and growing bigger. The Kingdom is like a mustard seed that grows, it is like leaven that expands. Daniel described the Kingdom as a rock that came to earth and grew to be a mountain. Jesus' rule is described as reigning UNTIL his enemies are put under his feet. This is Kingdom growth.

The dispensational idea of the Kingdom seems to be that it begins when Christ comes to earth - smashes all the enemies - and then sets up a millennial reign with the saints over his born-again people.

That is not a picture of Kingdom growth - that is immediate Kingdom fullness from the moment it arrives.

You seemed to doubt that Christ's Kingdom is here on earth because men still do evil. Well Christ's rule is described as a process of putting his enemies under his feet - that means there will still be evil enemies while Christ is ruling.

Once AGAIN, there are different meanings to "kingdom" based on the CONTEXT in which the word is used. The one which the Lord Jesus Christ will establish on the earth is yet future.

So, how many meanings of the Kingdom are there? And what is the current meaning of the Kingdom?

 

[Nimrod]

Psalms 2

As for me, I have set my King
on Zion, my holy hill.”
I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.

Paul quotes Psalms 2 in Acts 13:33

And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm,

“‘You are my Son,
today I have begotten you.’


Paul shows Psalms 2 was fulfilled in his time.
Kingdom was fulfilled when Christ was raised.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Psalms 2

As for me, I have set my King
on Zion, my holy hill.”
I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.

Paul quotes Psalms 2 in Acts 13:33

And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm,

“‘You are my Son,
today I have begotten you.’


Paul shows Psalms 2 was fulfilled in his time.
Kingdom was fulfilled when Christ was raised.

Yes.

As Jesus said, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

The time established for the coming Kingdom was fulfilled. God set the timeline, God knew the timeline - God's established plan would not be derailed because a certain majority percentage of Israel did not accept Jesus.

The gospel, or good news - was not that Jesus would die - it was that the Kingdom plan of God was ready to be initiated.

The timeline of the coming Kingdom was laid out in Daniel 2. According to the vision of the statue, it would arrive during the fourth kingdom from King Nebuchadnezzar's - which was the Roman Empire.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Psalm 2:5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Psalm 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

 

[Right Divider]

Of course - in some sense this is a bit of semantics. Christ is God and God has always ruled. However, there are scriptures that speak of Christ receiving a Kingdom - so in another sense, the Kingdom of God manifests in a new way through Christ. The difference is that the Kingdom is now ruled by the God-Man, the corporate head of all mankind - and therefore the benefits of the Kingdom can be shared with mankind in a new way, as can the rule of the Kingdom.

That's an interesting story. Is there any scriptural support?

It says he was made King and then he returned. That is different than what Jerry seems to be saying, that Christ is made King when he returns to earth.

If the nobleman in the parable was made King while he was away, that means his Kingdom rule began the moment he became King - not the moment he returned. His people were expected to obey his orders while he was away.

The King is in exile. That's the issue.

You are saying that Christ's Kingdom can't be here on earth because not everybody is obeying him - but according to the parable, the nobleman's Kingdom rule is established when he is crowned. He is King over his land before he returns to it.

I said no such thing. But the fullness of the Kingdom certainly cannot be with the King in exile.

Yes, the earth will be different when the King physically returns to earth. And just in the parable, those who rejected the King's rule while he was away will be punished.

Yes.

Christ told parables about the Kingdom starting small and growing bigger. The Kingdom is like a mustard seed that grows, it is like leaven that expands. Daniel described the Kingdom as a rock that came to earth and grew to be a mountain. Jesus' rule is described as reigning UNTIL his enemies are put under his feet. This is Kingdom growth.

Once Christ pulls the weeds (tares), then the Kingdom will really grow.

The dispensational idea of the Kingdom seems to be that it begins when Christ comes to earth - smashes all the enemies - and then sets up a millennial reign with the saints over his born-again people.

Sounds more like a straw-man or fringe teaching to me.

That is not a picture of Kingdom growth - that is immediate Kingdom fullness from the moment it arrives.

Who teaches this?

You seemed to doubt that Christ's Kingdom is here on earth because men still do evil. Well Christ's rule is described as a process of putting his enemies under his feet - that means there will still be evil enemies while Christ is ruling.

You seem to think that the world is getting better all of the time. I'd say that it's the exact opposite.

So, how many meanings of the Kingdom are there? And what is the current meaning of the Kingdom?

Its meaning is ALWAYS based on the CONTEXT in which it's used.

 

[surrender]

It has been shown several times on TOL that Christ's foretelling of these events hinges on a conditional particle in the Greek that goes largely unacknowledged in all English translations; that IF a certain condition was met, the generation standing before Him would have lived to see those events come to pass. However, that condition did not come to pass, so that generation did not see what He said they might.

What condition was not met?

 

[surrender]

The kingdom of God is not of this world.

Christ Jesus, nor any other Saint is ever coming back to planet earth to set up a kingdom.

Is there a "second coming" to expect in the future?

If his return in 70 AD (the coming of the Son of man) was the second coming, what do you make of 1 Thess. 4:16-17?
And what do you make of 1 Cor. 15:51-52?

 

[musterion]

What condition was not met?

What was the #1 thing preached by John the baptizer, Christ Himself and then Peter?

 

[musterion]

Psalm 2:5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Yeah, yeah, that happened in 70 A.D.

Psalm 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

Well, uh...that...uh...you see...

Look over there! It's Darby!

 

[surrender]

What was the #1 thing preached by John the baptizer, Christ Himself and then Peter?

What? Repent & believe? Lots did.

 

[musterion]

What?

I was answering your question ("What condition was not met?") with a question. What was the one thing demanded of Israel during the Gospel period and early Acts?