Home > Debates > Preston’s First Affirmative

Preston’s First Affirmative

McDonald- Preston Formal Written Debate

Disputants:

Jerry McDonald

Don K. Preston

Preston’s First Affirmative

 

 

Resolved: The Bible teaches that the Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection and Judgment occurred at the time of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.

 

Affirm: Don K. Preston

 

Deny: Jerry D. McDonald

 

I am pleased to engage in this discussion with brother McDonald. I pledge to the reader to conduct myself honorably, with Christian decorum so that the reader can focus on the issues.

 

It is my responsibility to define my terms:

 

The Bible”: By the Bible is meant the 66 books of the canonized scripture. While other works contribute to our understanding ancient times, they are not determinative of truth.

 

Teaches”: By teaches, I means communicates and conveys truths.

 

That the Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection and Judgment:– The constituent elements that Biblically are posited at the end of the age.

By “Second Coming” I mean the revelation of Christ that stands in contrast to his incarnate human form, and is the revelation of his Deity as the King of kings, and Lord of lords.

By the resurrection of the dead, I mean the restoration of the life lost in Adam.

By the judgment, I mean the time when Christ would “reward every man according to his works.”

 

Occurred: I mean “Took place,” “came to pass,” “was accomplished.”

 

At the time of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70: By “at the time of” I mean just that. I do not mean that the fall of Jerusalem was the second coming. I mean that those things occurred at that time.

 

Let me present my first affirmative arguments. First, some groundwork.

 

Fact: Paul (and all of the NT writers) had one hope (Ephesians 4:4).

 

Fact: That one hope, their one eschatological hope was nothing but the reiteration of God’s Old Covenant promises made to Old Covenant Israel, i.e. they preached nothing but the hope of Israel.

1.) Paul said his gospel of the resurrection of the just and unjust was found in Moses, the law and the prophets (Acts 24:14-15).

2.) Paul said his hope of the resurrection was the hope of the twelve tribes, “the promise made to the fathers, to which hope, our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain”  (Acts 26:6-7).

3.) Paul said he preached nothing that was not found in Moses and the prophets (Acts 26:21-23).

4.) Peter’s eschatology was likewise that which was given in the OT prophets (1 Peter 1:10f; 2 Peter 3:1-2, 13).

5.) John’s eschatology, found in Revelation, would be the fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Revelation 10:7; 22:6).

 

It is therefore prima facie established that the eschatology of the NT writers was nothing different from the OT promises made to Old Covenant Israel. There is, in fact, no “New Testament eschatology.” There is no Biblical eschatology different from Israel’s promises. All Biblical eschatology is the reaffirmation of God’s Old Covenant promises made to Old Covenant Israel. This is indisputably true and has profound implications.

 

If the one eschatological hope of the NT writers was nothing but the hope of Old Covenant Israel, found in the OT scriptures, this means that all NT prophecies of the coming of the  Lord, the resurrection and judgment must be viewed through the prism of God’s promises to Israel.

 

This will be, as I will demonstrate repeatedly, problematic for brother McDonald. The traditional view of the churches of Christ– the view of Jerry McDonald–  is that God was through with Israel and the Law of Moses– all of it– at the cross.

 

However, Jesus said “Not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the law until it is all fulfilled” (Matthew 5:18). So, let me offer an argument:

 

Not one jot or one tittle of Torah would pass until it was all fulfilled.

 

But, Torah predicted the second coming of Christ, the judgment and the resurrection.

 

Therefore, not one jot or one tittle would pass from Torah until the second coming of Christ, the judgment and the resurrection were fulfilled.

 

The major premise is undeniable. The minor is irrefutable. The conclusion is inescapable.

 

With these preliminaries in mind, I will present an affirmative based on the second coming of Christ for the wedding. To aid the understanding let me give some background.

 

In Hebraic thought, nothing epitomized covenant more than marriage.

                                                                       

Fact: God was married to Israel: Your maker is your husband” (Isaiah 54:5). He married her by giving her Torah at Sinai (Jeremiah 31:32). The language of Sinai is couched in marital terms. (I will use the terms “Torah” or simply “the law” to designate the entirety of the Law of Moses, just as Jesus  did).

 

Fact: Due to her spiritual “adultery” God divorced the ten northern tribes: “Bring charges against your mother, bring charges for she is not my wife, nor am I her husband” (Hosea 2:2; cf. Jeremiah 3:1-8).

 

Fact: Until the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies God could not divorce Judah although she became worse than the ten tribes (Jeremiah 3:8-11).

In the last days and the fulfillment of the Messianic promises, God would divorce Judah in the judgment of  “the city where the Lord was slain” (Revelation 11:8). When Jerusalem / Judah / Babylon fell (divorced and slain) the wedding of the Lord would take place:

“Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.” And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. Then he said to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!’” (Revelation 19:7-8).

 

Fact: In spite of the fact that He had divorced the ten northern tribes, abandoning them and “killing them” (Hosea 6:5) God promised that in the last days, “”I will betroth you to me forever. Yes I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, and in loving kindness and mercy. I will betroth you to me in faithfulness and you shall know the Lord” (Hosea 2:19-20).

 

Fact: The time of the marriage (remarriage) of God and Israel would be at the coming of the Lord at the time of judgment:

The Gentiles shall see your righteousness, and all kings your glory. You shall be called by a new name, Which the mouth of the LORD will name. You shall also be a crown of glory In the hand of the LORD, And a royal diadem In the hand of your God. You shall no longer be termed Forsaken, Nor shall your land any more be termed Desolate; But you shall be called Hephzibah, and your land Beulah; For the LORD delights in you, And your land shall be married. For as a young man marries a virgin, So shall your sons marry you; And as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, So shall your God rejoice over you…. Go through, Go through the gates! Prepare the way for the people; Build up, Build up the highway! Take out the stones, Lift up a banner for the peoples! 11  Indeed the LORD has proclaimed To the end of the world: “Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Surely your salvation is coming; Behold, His reward is with Him, And His work before Him.’” 12  And they shall call them The Holy People, The Redeemed of the LORD; And you shall be called Sought Out, A City Not Forsaken.”

 

Fact: Just as God married Israel by giving her Torah, the time of the remarriage of Israel would be when God made the New Covenant with them:

“And it shall be, in that day,” Says the LORD, “That you will call Me ‘My Husband,’ And no longer call Me ‘My Master,’ For I will take from her mouth the names of the Baals, And they shall be remembered by their name no more. In that day I will make a covenant for them With the beasts of the field, With the birds of the air, And with the creeping things of the ground. Bow and sword of battle I will shatter from the earth, To make them lie down safely. “I will betroth you to Me forever; Yes, I will betroth you to Me In righteousness and justice, In lovingkindness and mercy; I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness” (Hosea 2:16-20).

 

Fact: The making of the New Covenant would be with the house of Israel and the house of Judah (Jeremiah 31:31). The New Covenant was a promise to Old Covenant Israel, for Old Covenant Israel. It was to be a change of covenants. The promise of the New Covenant was not made to the church disconnected from “the house of Israel and the house of Judah.”

 

Fact: The time of the remarriage would be when “all Israel”would be saved, under Messiah  (I will get to Romans 11:25f later): 

“Yet the number of the children of Israel Shall be as the sand of the sea, Which cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall come to pass In the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ There it shall be said to them, ‘You are sons of the living God.’ Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel Shall be gathered together,And appoint for themselves one head; And they shall come up out of the land, For great will be the day of Jezreel! (Hosea 1:10-11). Notice that this is the restoration of all twelve tribes, under Messiah. It is not the return from Babylon.

 

Fact: This restoration of Israel under Messiah would be “in the last days”:

For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. 5  Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD and His goodness in the latter days” (Hosea 3:4-5).

           

Summary: God was married to Israel. The ten tribes apostatized and God divorced them. He could not divorce Judah until Messiah came, fulfilling His Messianic promises. When God divorced Israel, He departed. In the last days, God would return and remarry Israel– all twelve tribes– under Messiah, at the time of His coming in judgment. (This would be the time of the divorcing of Judah, so that all twelve tribes could enter the New Covenant, transformed into the body of Christ).

 

Now, let’s look at Jesus.

 

One of Jesus’ favorite themes was that of the Wedding. Where did Jesus get the marriage concept? Did he invent it as part of the “New Covenant” having nothing to do with Old Covenant Israel’s promises? Patently not.

 

Jesus came to confirm the OT promises made to Old Covenant Israel: “Jesus Christ has become the servant of the circumcision to confirm the promises made to the fathers” (Romans 15:8).

 

Jesus did not come to destroy Torah– he came to fulfill (Matthew 5:17). This means he came to fulfill God’s Old Covenant promises, to Old Covenant Israel.

 

Jesus said he came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24); He came to gather together the children of God scattered abroad (John 11:52).

 

Now, if God was through with Israel at the cross, when did He marry her, in fulfillment of those OT promises? If God had no covenant relationship with Judah after the cross, as Jerry McDonald believes (and as I once did)  then God’s promise to make the New Covenant with her and with Israel was invalidated!

 

Remember, the promise of the marriage was to Judah and Israel! And, he could not marry Judah until He first killed / divorced her as he had done to the ten tribes. Until the divorcement of Judah, she was not free to marry her Messiah. (Until that “divorcement” the transformation of “all Israel” into the body of Christ could not be complete).

 

The divorcement of Judah was critical. As YHVH had to have “just cause” to divorce Israel, there had to be “just cause” to divorce Judah, so that the remarriage of  “all Israel” could take place. What was that “just cause?”

 

Matthew 22:1f explains:

A king prepared a wedding banquet for his son.

He sent his servants to tell those “who had been invited” to tell them, “All things are ready, come to the wedding.”

Those who had been invited spurned the invitation and killed the servants.

The king was angry, sent out his armies to destroy those wicked men and burn their city.

The wedding took place.

 

Who “had been invited” to the wedding? Old Covenant Israel. This was her promise.

When was the declaration and invitation “All things are ready” made? See below.

Who were the servants sent with the invitation? It was Jesus’ apostles and servants.

 

What is the period of the “invitation”? This is crucial– While the period from John the Immerser was included (i.e. “The kingdom has drawn near” Matthew 3:2), the period from John to Pentecost did not exhaust that period of invitation. What a short period of “invitation” that would have been.

That time of invitation included the time from Pentecost, when the gospel of the kingdom was preached – of necessity– to the Jew first (Romans 1:16; Acts 13:46). (Ask yourself the question: If God was through with Israel at the cross, why was it {Divinely} necessary to preach the gospel to them first? If God was truly through with them He owed them no priority privileges!)

As the gospel was preached to “the Jew first” they spurned the invitation– eliciting the warning: “Seeing then that you count yourselves unworthy of eternal life, henceforth, we turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46– Note that a remnant of Israel in almost every city did accept the gospel).

 

Paul warned the Jews that rejection of the offer of the “wedding” would bring covenant wrath– Mosaic Covenant wrath– on them: “Take heed therefore, so that the thing spoken of in the prophets may not come on you: ‘Behold, you despisers, marvel, and perish; For I am accomplishing a work in your days, a work which you will never believe, though someone should describe it to you” (Acts 13:41).

 

Paul is quoting from Habakkuk 1:5 and the prediction of the Babylonian destruction of Judah. That destruction came as a direct result of her violation of Torah. God brought covenant wrath on Judah then, as promised in Leviticus 26/Deuteronomy 28-30– the Law of Blessings and Cursings. So, Paul was telling his post cross, Jewish audience that if they spurned the invitation to the promised wedding, that Mosaic Covenant wrath would be poured out on them, just as it was in 586 BC!

 

For the reader: How could Paul threaten his Jewish audience with Mosaic Covenant wrath, if the Mosaic Covenant had been annulled decades before? How could he appeal to the provisions for covenant wrath found in Deuteronomy 28-30 if Torah was abrogated at the cross? Paul was appealing to his audiences’ knowledge and awareness of covenant thought, language and history, and he was drawing directly from Torah. Very clearly, for Paul, the provisions of Torah were still binding and about to be imposed on the rebellious Jews.

 

Now, it is axiomatic that if a law or covenant has been abrogated, stricken from the books, that none of its provisions– whether positive or negative– are applicable and binding from the point of its abrogation / annulment.

 

The point is that the preaching of the gospel to the Jew first, from Pentecost onward is the time contemplated in the parable of Matthew 22. The Jewish rejection of that wedding invitation gave God just cause to divorce her, and invite others to the wedding. That invitation had to be preached “into all the world, (which included the diaspora of Israel–1 Peter 1:1; James 1:1-2)– as a witness to the nations” before the end, “the divorcement” of Judah, could happen. God could not divorce Judah until just cause was given– as depicted in the parable. That “just cause” was rejection of the invitation and persecution of the servants.

 

Now, while much more could be, and perhaps will be, said in this regard, I will now present some arguments based on these indisputable facts.

 

Argument:

 

The promise of the marriage was an Old Covenant promise given to Old Covenant Israel.

Not one jot or one tittle of Torah could pass until all of Torah– inclusive of the marriage– was fulfilled.

The time of the marriage, as promised in Torah, would be at the second coming of Christ (Isaiah 62:10-12; Matthew 25:1-13).

Therefore, not one jot or one tittle could pass from Torah until the marriage, at the second coming of Christ, was fulfilled.

 

Argument:

 

The marriage (re-marriage) of God and Israel would be at the coming of the Lord, at the time of judgment and reward (Isaiah 62:2-11).

Jesus’ second coming– for his marriage– at the time of judgment and reward was to be in the lifetime of the first century generation (Matthew 16:27-28– Jesus’ promise in Matthew 16:27 is a direct allusion to Isaiah 62:11).

Therefore, the marriage (re-marriage) of God and Israel occurred at the second coming of Christ at the time of judgment and reward in the lifetime of the first century generation.

 

This argument alone falsifies any claim that God was through with Israel at the cross. God was not, through with Israel at the cross (Romans 11:1-3). His covenant promise to remarry her was not completed until Christ’s second coming.

 

Argument:

The promise of the remarriage of Israel is the promise of the coming of the Lord– Isaiah 62.

But, the promise of the marriage at the coming of the Lord is the promise of the second coming of Christ at the time of the resurrection.

Therefore, the promise of the remarriage of Israel– the Old Covenant promise  made to Old Covenant Israel– would be fulfilled at the second coming of Christ at the time of the resurrection.

If therefore, the second coming of the Lord, at the time of the resurrection has not occurred, then God’s covenant promises made to Old Covenant Israel remains valid. If God’s Old Covenant promise made to Old Covenant Israel remains valid, then Old Covenant Israel patently remains as God’s covenant people!

 

Let me flesh this out a bit more and ask Jerry to give particular attention to this:

 

Argument:

The coming of Christ for his wedding– in fulfillment of the OT promises made to Old Covenant Israel– would be at his second coming (Matthew 25:1-13).

But, the time of the wedding of the Son would be at the time of the destruction of the city of those who had been invited, but rejected the invitation and killed the servants of the king (Matthew 22:1-10).

Therefore, the second coming of Christ– for his wedding– would be at the time of the destruction of the city of those who had been invited, but rejected the invitation and killed the servants of the king.

 

Argument:

The second coming of Christ– for his wedding– would be at the time of the destruction of the city of those who had been invited, but rejected the invitation and killed the servants of the king.

But, the city that had been invited to the wedding, and that killed the servants sent to invite her to the wedding was Old Covenant Jerusalem.

Therefore, second coming of Christ– for his wedding– was at the destruction of Old Covenant Jerusalem.

 

Questions for Jerry:

Is the wedding of the son in Matthew 22 the same as the wedding of Christ at his second coming in Matthew 25? Yes or No? If your answer is No, provide scriptural proof.

 

Was the wedding of the son in Matthew 22 postponed until some yet still future time?

 

Since you, Jerry McDonald, say that God was through with Israel / Judah at the cross, and that after the cross there are no Old Covenant promises to Old Covenant Israel that remain valid, please tell me, clearly, without evasion or obfuscation: When did God remarry (or will He remarry) Old Covenant Israel, in fulfillment of her Old Covenant promises?

 

Now, it is abundantly clear that God did not remarry Israel on Pentecost. What He did do was betroth her. (This means that Hosea 2:19– a promise made to Old Covenant Israel– was being fulfilled on Pentecost, after the promises of Torah had supposedly been annulled). Notice some facts:

Remember that Paul said he preached nothing but the hope of Israel found in the Old Testament prophets.

Paul wrote to the Corinthians (comprised of the righteous remnant of Old Covenant Israel that had now accepted their Messiah), and said “I am jealous over you with a Godly jealousy, for I have espoused (betrothed) you as a chaste virgin unto Christ.” The wedding clearly had not yet taken place.

Let me express some thoughts here:

Paul preached nothing but the hope of Israel found in Torah (The Law of Moses–Acts 24:14-15; 26:5f; 26:21f; 28:18f).

Paul had betrothed the Corinthians to Christ (This included a righteous remnant of Old Covenant Israel that had accepted their Messiah).

Therefore, the betrothal of the Corinthians (which included a righteous remnant of Old Covenant Israel that had now accepted their Messiah) was in fulfillment of God’s  Old Covenant promises of Moses and the prophets.

Israel’s promises were being fulfilled! God was not through with her at the cross, He was fulfilling those OT promises.

But the wedding–the wedding of “all Israel”– had not taken place, and would not take place until Christ’s second coming! Notice Ephesians 5:25-27:

 

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her,  that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.”

 

Paul says Christ had sanctified the church– “Sanctification” was a part of the Jewish wedding process.

He had washed her and cleansed her– part of the sanctification process.

That he might (first aorist subjunctive) present it to himself.

This is the promise of the parousia (the second coming of Christ of Matthew 25– the wedding of Matthew 22). I have consulted over 50 commentaries and they all agree that the “presentation” Paul refers to is the parousia, the second coming.

 

So, the wedding had not taken place. This means that the New Covenant was not finalized. Torah said the New Covenant would be in the day in which Israel called YHVH “My husband.” (2:16-19; Isaiah 62:4-5.  (A thought here that I will return to. Hosea said this would be in the day in which God would take away the  “feasts, new moons and Sabbaths” (2:11)).

 

The marriage covenant was initiated at the betrothal, and finalized at the wedding.

The righteous remnant of Israel was betrothed at Pentecost.

The wedding of Israel would be at the second coming.

Therefore, the New Covenant was not finalized until the parousia of Christ.

 

If therefore, Christ has not come “the second time” the New Covenant is not yet finalized. God’s Old Covenant promise, made to Old Covenant Israel, remains unfulfilled. Old Covenant Israel still awaits her marriage. And remember, the promise of the wedding was a promise that God made to both houses of Israel, for her last days– not for the end of the Christian age.

 

Revelation and the Wedding

 

Fact: Revelation is concerned with the fulfillment of the Old Covenant prophecies. The sounding of the seventh trumpet would be the fulfillment of the mystery of God as foretold by the prophets (Revelation 10:7). So, just like Jesus came to fulfill Israel’s promises, and just like Paul preached nothing but the hope of Israel, John’s eschatology (his one hope) was the fulfillment of God’s Old Covenant promises found in the prophets.

 

Fact: Revelation 7 and 14 depicts the righteous remnant of Old Covenant Israel– the 144,000– out of the twelve tribes of Israel. In addition to the righteous remnant from the twelve tribes, there was a numberless multitude. The focus however, is clearly on the righteous remnant of the twelve tribes. The righteous remnant constitutes “all Israel.”

 

Fact: The righteous remnant are promised to be led to the living waters, entrance into the New Creation and the time of the wedding when their suffering would be avenged. These were Old Covenant promises made to Old Covenant Israel. The promise of the living waters and the New Creation are from Torah (Isaiah 49:8-12; Isaiah 65-66). Thus, the righteous remnant (the 144,000, as well as the numberless multitude) were anticipating the fulfillment of God’s Old Covenant promises, made to Old Covenant Israel.

 

Let’s look at a few things– all related to the wedding.

 

The sounding of the seventh trumpet is the time of the fulfillment of the Old Covenant prophets (Revelation 10:7).

There was to be “no more delay” in the fulfillment of those prophecies (Revelation 10:6).

But, the time of the sounding of the seventh trumpet would be when, “the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ”; the time of the outpouring of the Wrath of God, the time for the judgment of the dead, and the rewarding of the prophets (Revelation 11:15-19)

Therefore, there was to be “no more delay” in the fulfillment of the prophecies of “the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ”; the time of the outpouring of the Wrath of God, the time for the judgment of the dead, and the rewarding of the prophets.

Of course, this is precisely what God Himself said, “These things must shortly come to pass…the time is at hand”; and it was Jesus’ promise, “Behold, I come quickly and my reward is with me” which is a direct reiteration of Matthew 16:27 and thus, Isaiah 62:11!

This demands that all of the constituent elements of Revelation 11:15-19 were imminent, near, and to be fulfilled quickly with no more delay.

 

I asked Jerry to tell me if Revelation 11:15-19 was fulfilled or not. He responded: “Revelation 11:15-19 is a vision John had regarding the seven churches in Asia (Rev. 1:4,11) and the persecution that they were enduring. All of the things you listed above are to be kept in the context of the apocalyptic vision, not applied when and where you please.”

Well, if Revelation 11:15-19 was written to the seven churches about their specific situation and you cannot apply these promises to “when and where you please” (and of course you can’t), then it is entirely inappropriate to rip verse 15-19 away from the seven churches and say those promises are still unfulfilled 2000 years later! But let’s look closer.

 

Argument:

The time of the sounding of the seventh trumpet is the time of the resurrection, the time of the judgment of the dead.

But, the sounding of the seventh trumpet is directly connected to the time of the judgment of the city “where the Lord was slain” Old Covenant Jerusalem (Revelation 11:8).

Therefore, the time of the resurrection, the time of the judgment of the dead, is directly connect to the time of the judgment of the city “where the Lord was slain,” Old Covenant Jerusalem.

 

Let me confirm this:

 

Daniel 12 foretold the following:

The Great Tribulation (Daniel 12:1)– which of course, Jesus cites in Matthew 24 and applies it to his generation (Matthew 24:21-34).

The resurrection of the just and unjust” (v. 2).

The time when the righteous would shine in the kingdom (v. 3).

The end of the age (v. 4).

The Abomination of Desolation (v. 9f) – which Jesus applied to the events leading up to the destruction of the power of the holy people (Matthew 24:15f).

The prophets would receive their reward (12:13).

 

In Daniel 12:6 an angel asked, “When shall these things be, and when shall all of these things be fulfilled?”

Another angel answered: “It shall be for a time, times and half time, and when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, all of these things shall be fulfilled.”

 

The question was when ALL, not some, not most, but ALL of those things would be fulfilled.

The answer was that ALL, not some or most, but ALL of those things, would be fulfilled when the power of the holy people was completely shattered.

 

Fact: Israel’s only “power” was her covenant relationship with God– i.e. Torah.

According to Jerry McDonald, Torah– Israel’s power– was removed (shattered) at the cross.

If so,

The Great Tribulation occurred before the cross.

The resurrection of the just and unjust occurred at the cross.

The kingdom was established at the cross.

The end of the age occurred at the cross.

The prophets received their reward at the cross.

 

All of these are patently false, since Jesus posited the Great Tribulation in the days leading up to the AD 70 judgment of Jerusalem.

It is false because Paul posited the resurrection of “the just and unjust” – in fulfillment of the Law and prophets– in his future– well after the cross (Acts 24:14f).

It is false because Jesus posited the harvest at the end of the age at his parousia, and he said this would be when Daniel 12:3 would be fulfilled (Matthew 13:39-43– Matthew 13:43 is a direct citation of Daniel 12:3).

It is false because the prophets would receive their reward future to John– but imminently– in Revelation 11.

It is false because  Israel’s power was not completely shattered at the cross.

 

So, let me offer this argument:

Revelation 11:15-19 predicted the time of the resurrection and the rewarding of the dead, in fulfillment of the mystery of God foretold in the prophets (Revelation 10:6-7).

The promise of the resurrection and the rewarding of the dead was an Old Covenant promise, made to Old Covenant Israel (Daniel 12:2-13).

Not one jot or one tittle would pass from the Old Covenant until it was all fulfilled (Matthew 5:17-18–(not some or most, but ALL).

Therefore, not one jot or one tittle would pass from the Old Covenant until the fulfillment of Revelation 11:15-19.

 

Argument:

The resurrection of Daniel 12 is the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15– the end of the age resurrection the time of the kingdom, the resurrection to everlasting life.

The resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15 would be at the second coming of Christ for his wedding– of Matthew 25.

But, the wedding of Matthew 25 is the wedding of Matthew 22 which would occur at the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matthew 22:1-10).

Therefore, the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15, the end of the age resurrection and the kingdom, the resurrection to everlasting life, would occur at the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.

 

Let’s continue with the wedding concept.

 

The resurrection of the just and unjust is the time of the second coming of Christ.

The second coming of Christ is his coming for the wedding (Matthew 25:1-13; Ephesians 5:25f).

The time of the resurrection of the just and unjust would be at the end of the age when the power of the holy people was completely shattered (Daniel 12:3-7).

The power of the holy people was completely shattered in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem.

Therefore, the second coming of Christ for the wedding, at the resurrection of the just and unjust, was when the power of the holy people was completely shattered in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem.

 

Argument:

The time of the wedding is the time of the second coming of Christ in judgment of Babylon– (Revelation 19:1-16).

Babylon was the city “where the Lord was slain” i.e. Old Covenant, first century Jerusalem.

Therefore,  the wedding of Christ at his second coming occurred at the time of the judgment of Old Covenant, first century Jerusalem.

 

Let me confirm this:   

The time of the wedding of the Son would be when Jerusalem was destroyed (Mt. 22).

But the time of the wedding would be when “Babylon” of Revelation was destroyed (19:1-7).

Therefore, Babylon of Revelation was Jerusalem.

 

Now, unless Christ was to get married twice, to two different brides, at two different times, in fulfillment of Old Covenant promises made to Old Covenant Israel, then it stands as prima facie demonstrated that the second coming of Christ, at the time of the resurrection of the just and unjust, occurred in AD 70. Let me make a few additional points.

 

Revelation 19:1-2 directly cites Deuteronomy 32:43 as fulfilled in the judgment of Babylon: “He has avenged the blood of His servants on her!” Watch closely:

 

Deuteronomy 32– The Song of Moses– is undeniably part of the Law of Moses– Torah.

Deuteronomy 32 is concerned with the fate of Israel– it is not about the church or the church age.

It is concerned with Israel’s last days:

32:20: “I will hide my face from them, I will see what their latter end shall be, for they are a perverse generation.” (Note that this “latter end” of Israel would include the calling of the Gentiles, v. 21f– fulfilled in Paul’s ministry).

32:29: “O, that they were wise, O that they would consider their latter end.”

 

In Israel’s last days, Israel would  turn from YHVH and be like Sodom (v. 32, cf. Revelation 11:8). In her last days, God would judge His people (v. 36) and, “I will render vengeance to My adversaries I will repay those who hate me…For He will avenge the blood of His saints and render vengeance to His adversaries” (v. 41, 43).

 

So,

In Israel’s last days, God would avenge the blood of the saints.

Revelation 19 says that in the last days judgment of Babylon, Deuteronomy 32:43 would be fulfilled.

Therefore, the judgment of Babylon belongs to Israel’s last days– in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 32.

 

The judgment of Babylon– the avenging of the blood of the saints– belongs to Israel’s last days in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 32.

But, Deuteronomy 32 was part of Torah, God’s Covenant with Israel.

Therefore, Deuteronomy 32, part of Torah, God’s Covenant with Israel would remain valid until the judgment of Babylon.

 

Since Torah would remain valid until the avenging of the blood of the martyrs in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 32– and other OT prophecies– this means that the Mosaic Covenant was not abrogate at the cross. It would remain valid until the judgment of Babylon. If therefore, one makes Babylon to be Rome, or the Roman Catholic church, then Torah remains valid and binding until the destruction of Rome or the RCC. The avenging of the martyrs blood belongs to Israel’s last days, and fulfillment of the Law of Moses.

 

Note the following:

In Israel’s last days God would avenge the blood of the martyrs (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Jesus said that all of the blood of the all of the martyrs– all the way back to creation– would be avenged in the AD 70 judgment of Jerusalem (Matthew 23:34-37).

Therefore, Israel’s last days extended to the time of the avenging of the blood of the martyrs in the AD 70 judgment of Jerusalem.

 

This proves definitively that the Old Covenant age did not end at the cross. Deuteronomy 32 was an Old Covenant promise, made to and about Old Covenant Israel, and was not fulfilled until AD 70. Thus, Torah was not removed at the cross. The Law of Moses was not fulfilled until the avenging of the blood of the martyrs in AD 70.

 

Unless Jerry McDonald can prove that Revelation 19 has nothing to do with Deuteronomy 32 my argument stands.

Unless he can prove that Revelation 19 has nothing to do with fulfilling the mystery of God found in the Old Covenant as Revelation 10:6-7 affirms, then my argument stands.

Unless he can prove that Deuteronomy 32 foretold a different avenging of the martyrs from that foretold by Jesus and John, my argument stands.

 

There is more here in regard to the avenging of the blood of the martyrs– and the wedding.

Jesus identified Old Covenant Jerusalem as the city that had killed the prophets (Matthew 23:29f). They were going to kill him and they were going to kill the apostles and prophets that he sent to them (Luke 11:49f). In killing his apostles and prophets, Jerusalem would fill the measure of her sin, and be judged in Jesus’ generation (Matthew 23:33-36).

 

Paul, writing in the early AD 50s said Old Covenant Jerusalem had killed the Old Covenant prophets. They had killed the Lord and they were killing Jesus’ apostles and prophets In doing so, she was filling the measure of her sin, and judgment was about to fall (1 Thessalonians 2:15-16).

 

John said Babylon had killed “the prophets” (16:5f– Rome, the Catholic Church, etc. never killed an OT prophet). It is “where the Lord was slain (11:8). She was guilty of killing the apostles and prophets of Jesus (18:20, 24). Her cup of sin and the blood of the martyrs was now full, and judgment was coming shortly: “Behold, I come quickly!”

 

If Babylon of Revelation was not Old Covenant Jerusalem, Jerry McDonald must prove that whoever he identifies as Babylon was guilty of doing the things described here.

 

Babylon was clearly Old Covenant Jerusalem. Now watch.

 

Consider Revelation 6 and Revelation 16 as they relate to the vindication of the martyrs. In chapter 6:9-11, the martyrs cried out for vindication. They were told to rest for only a little while. Vindication was coming soon. Revelation 16 is the fulfillment of that prayer.

 

In Revelation 16:7 the angel praises God for judging those who, “shed the blood of the saints and prophets.” This is the answer of the martyr’s prayer in chapter 6. That promised vindication was coming soon.

 

The time of the avenging of the martyrs is the time of the judgment of Babylon (Revelation 19:1-2).

The time of the judgment of Babylon is the time of the wedding (Revelation 19:7f).

The time of the wedding of Christ is the second coming and the resurrection.

But, the time of the avenging of all of the martyrs was to be in the judgment of Old Covenant Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matthew 23:33-37).

Therefore, the wedding of Christ at the second coming and resurrection was to be (was) in the judgment of Old Covenant Jerusalem in AD 70.

 

Notice the perfect correlation with Matthew 22.

The promise of the wedding belonged to Old Covenant Israel.

The first century is the time for the fulfillment of the promises: “All things are ready, come to the feast” (Matthew 22:1-3).

Those invited killed the servants sent to them.

God destroyed their city, avenging the blood of his servants– this was in AD 70.

The wedding took place as scheduled!

 

In Revelation John anticipated the fulfillment of the OT promises.

He said fulfillment was near.

Babylon had killed the prophets, Jesus and Jesus’ apostles and prophets– and was guilty of all the blood shed on the earth.

In the judgment of Babylon, all of the blood shed on the earth, of the apostles and prophets, was avenged.

The wedding– the time of the resurrection and parousia of Christ– took place.

 

Notice also:

 

The sounding of the seventh trump is the time of the resurrection (11:15-19).

The sounding of the seventh trump is the time of the fulfillment of all things written in the prophets (Revelation 10:6-7).

The sounding of the seventh trump is the time of the avenging of the martyrs: “the time of the dead that they should be judged and the prophets rewarded (16:6, 17).

The martyrs would be avenged in the judgment of Babylon (16:6-17; 19:1-2).

The martyrs would be avenged in fulfillment of Torah– Deuteronomy 32:43; Revelation 19).

The time of the avenging of the martyrs is the time of the wedding of Christ at his coming (19:1-7).

The avenging of the martyrs was in AD 70 in the judgment of Jerusalem (Matthew 23:29-38).

 

The martyrs would be avenged in fulfillment of God’s Old Covenant promises concerning Israel’s last days (Deuteronomy 32:19, 29-43).

The martyrs would be avenged in the first century judgment  of Old Covenant Jerusalem (Matthew 23:33-37).

The time of the destruction of Jerusalem is the time of the resurrection (Daniel 12:2-7).

The time of the destruction of Jerusalem would be, “when all things that are written must be fulfilled” (Luke 21:22).

The time of the destruction of Jerusalem would be the time of the wedding of the Son (Matthew 22:1-7).

 

The correlations here are precise. It will not do for Jerry McDonald to simply claim that Revelation is something different because it was written after AD 70. That is presuppositional, and has to be proven, not claimed.

To negate my affirmative, Jerry McDonald must prove the following:

 

That NT eschatological promises are not the reiteration of the hope of Israel.

He must prove that the promise of the remarriage promises in Torah are not the same wedding promise iterated by Jesus.

He must prove that the wedding of Matthew 25 – which is the second coming of Christ at the time of the resurrection– is not the wedding of the Son in Matthew 22.

He must prove that the avenging of the martyrs in Revelation is not the avenging of the martyrs foretold in Deuteronomy 32 (other OT prophecies or Matthew 23) – for Israel’s last days– even though John is clearly citing Deuteronomy 32.

He must prove that although Deuteronomy 32 foretold the application of Mosaic Covenant wrath, in Israel’s last days, that Torah was actually removed at the cross, and yet, God was applying those provisions for Covenant wrath almost forty years after the covenant was supposedly annulled.

He must prove that although Jesus and Paul identified Jerusalem as the city guilty of killing the OT prophets, of Jesus and Jesus’ apostles and prophets, that John in Revelation has another, different city in mind, a different judgment, unrelated to Israel’s promises, divorced from Israel’s last days in mind.

He can’t prove any of these things.

 

Final Argument:

The indisputable fact is that the parousia of Christ was near when John wrote: “Behold, I come quickly and my reward is with me” (Revelation 22:12).

The coming of Christ to reward every man is the time of the resurrection.

Therefore, the time of the resurrection was coming quickly when John wrote.

 

No eschatology that delays that judgment coming by 2000 years can be true.

 

Summary

We have proven the following beyond successful disputation:

All eschatological promises found in the NT are the expression of the hope of Israel found in Torah.

We have proven that not one iota of Torah– none of it– could pass until all that it foretold was fulfilled.

We have proven that the promise of the “remarriage” of Israel is one of those promises.

We have proven that the marriage was the promise of the New Covenant, that would not be finalized until the marriage – not just the betrothal– occurred.

We have proven that the marriage of Israel would take place at the coming of the Lord in judgment– the time of the resurrection.

We have proven that God’s covenant with Old Covenant Israel would therefore stand fast until He had finalized that New Covenant.

We have proven that the avenging of the martyrs would occur at the first century judgment of Jerusalem– in AD 70.

We have proven that the marriage would take place at the time of the avenging of the martyrs in the first century judgment of Jerusalem.

We have proven that the OT positively posits the resurrection– and thus the second coming of Christ– at the time when Israel’s power– Torah– would be shattered– that was in AD 70.

We have proven that the sounding of the seventh trump is the time of the resurrection and second coming, when all things foretold by the prophets would be fulfilled.

We have proven that Jesus said “all things that are written must be fulfilled” in the AD 70 judgment of Old Covenant Jerusalem– which is precisely what Revelation 10:6-7; 11:15-19 teaches.

 

In this first affirmative, I have fully established my proposition. I have not gone one step beyond the evidence of scripture.

I have in fact taken the evidence of scripture, and with careful exegesis, proper logic and hermeneutic, fully proven my affirmative case.                                       

 

Additional questions (making a total of five questions for Jerry):

Please answer plainly without evasion or obfuscation and give scriptural proof for your answers:

1.) Scripture said that the New Moons, Feast Days and Sabbaths of Israel’s festal calendar were “shadows of good things to come” (Colossians 2:14-17; Hebrews 9:6f; 10:1-3). What did the following feast days foreshadow and typify:

Feast of Trumpets (Rosh Ha Shanah)

Day of Atonement

Feast of Harvest / Booths (Succot)

 

  1. What did the seventh day Sabbath and the other festal Sabbaths foreshadow, and has that which the Sabbath (Sabbaths) foreshadowed been completely fulfilled?

McDonald’s First Rebuttal

Advertisements
Categories: Debates
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: