Was the Marriage of the Lamb In 70AD
A Response by Pastor G. Reckart
Copyright 2002 All Rights ReservedAmillennialist Claim The Marriage of The Lamb Is Already Fulfilled
Is Matthew 22:1-13 Fulfilled In Revelation 19:1-21
Mike Blume wrote:
"Jesus said in Matthew 22 that He would destroy the city and then have the wedding afterwards with others. This has to be 70 AD, because this corresponds to His question to the pharisees as to what should be done to the keepers of the vineyard who slew the son of the Lord. This regarded 70 AD judgment. Matthew 19 through 24 regards 70 AD fulfillment. It must!"Response by Pastor Reckart:
The marriage of the Lamb was not in 70AD! Revelation 19:1-21 was not fulfilled in 70AD!
Revelation 19:1 shows there are resurrected people in heaven. If as you say this chapter was fulfilled in 70AD then you have admitted both a rapture and a resurrection. Both of which you say you deny. Which is it Brother? Was there a resurrection and a rapture for these in verse 1 to be in heaven? Or is this symbolic?Now about Rev. 19:
Verse 7:
If you have this fulfilled in 70AD and the marriage of the Bride took place at that time, then you and Smith have the obligation to say that those who made this resurrection and rapture are the Bride; that is those in the early church up to 70AD are the Bride, but we who are after 70AD are not the Bride since the marriage took place in 70AD and WE WERE NOT THERE! So, now you guys are forced to tell us who we are! Since the Bride is so by Covenant, and we have supposed this Covenant was the New Covenant even as the Old Covenant was the marriage to Israel at Sinai; this being true and the New Covenant produced the wedding of the Bride in 70AD, what Covenant do we have right now? It cannot be the New Covenant! And not being the New Covenant since it was consumated in 70AD with the Bride at that time, we have no blood Covenant since the New Covenant is the New Testament in his blood. To have the New Covenant ended in 70AD with the wedding of the Bride, where is our New Testament? We do not even have a Bible since all of it would have been written to furnish the Bride for the wedding in a pure and holy spiritual condition in 70AD. You guys leave us without a Covenant, without a Bible, without a part in the Bride, and in fact outside of the New Testament Church.Verse 14:
The armies that were in heaven followed him; this is not Titus and his army! Titus never followed Jesus! The army is from heaven (not Rome) and came forth to smite the nations (verse 15)! If you can get this in 70AD I have not seen the evidence. The winepress here is not Titus and his armies slaughtering a million Jews in Jerusalem by starvation and they dumped the dead bodies over the wall. The winepress is without the City and Josephus does not tell us of multitudes slain of the nations in that winepress by an army from heaven. He tells us only of Jews slain in the City (dumped over the walls), other deaths in that abomination of desolation, and the murder of a few who tried to escape. But nothing of Gentile nations being stomped out by God and his armies from heaven. These armies of heaven come from heaven. This is not the same as saying: "he shall send forth "his" armies and destroy those murderers." I disagree that he calls the Romans "his" army. The army of the Romans is not the same as those from heaven who are the angelic host. This angelic host (or armies) is already noted in the Scripture. Why is he called the Lord of "HOST" if there is not a heavenly army?Verses 17 & 18:
There is no record in Josephus that vultures and wild beast ate or devoured the flesh of Jews who died as a result of seeing Jesus and his armies come from heaven and slaying these who are dead. Again, whom Titus killed cannot be the same as those whom Jesus kills when he appears to stomp out the winepress of his indignation.Verses 19 & 20
Here the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies, come forth to fight against the Lamb and his armies. This is a mexican stand-off. This could not have happened in 70AD. In that war it was Titus against a lot of revolting Pharisees and Saducees; the war was between Roman soldiers and the renegades of the Jews. This does not fit the description of the war the beast and kings of the earth wage against Jesus and his heavenly host. Titus never made a war against Jesus or the angels of heaven. Josephus never mentions any such battle with a heavenly host.
In verse 20 the beast and the false prophet are snatched up alive and cast into the lake of fire that burns with fire and brimstone. You have the beast as John Levi Gischala in Jerusalem and then later move the beast from Jerusalem to Rome and being Nero, so does Smith! How could Nero be the beast in Jerusalem to fight Jesus and the heavenly angels? Nero was stabbed to death in 68AD and did not live to see 70AD and the consummation of the desolation, at the end of which Jesus would have come with his holy angels. You have Nero dead nearly two years before you and Smith have the visible appearing of Jesus and his angels in 70AD. How then could Nero be cast alive into the Lake of Fire in 70AD at the appearing of Jesus? Where is the false prophet who would have done miracles in the sight of the Beast if this really took place? No, Nero had no such prophetic side-kick to call fire down from heaven. Verse 20 just does not fit 70AD either.Verse 21
The remnant were slain by the sword (or word) that came out of the mouth of he who sat on the horse. That remnant means all those who were not killed in the stomping out in the winepress did not escape judgment.Revelation 19:1-21 was not fulfilled in Jerusalem in 70AD! Is the marriage of Matthew 22 and the marriage of Revelation 19 the same?
Matthew 22:
Verse 3:
If this invitation to the wedding was the preaching of the Gospel before 70AD, then two things must also be true:
1.) the Gospel preached as the invitation has no merit or purpose once the wedding has occurred and all those invited attended;
2.) The same Gospel would have ended with the wedding feast and there is no such Gospel to the nations after 70AD. Meaning the preaching of that same Gospel and to invite souls to join the Church to be a part of the Bride would be false.
If the Gospel is not the invitation, what then is the invitation?Verse 6:
And the remnant took his servants and treated them spitefully and slew them"--I see this as the killing of the two witnesses which proceeds the seventh trumpet and the return of the Lord from heaven. Why cannot these servants be the two witnesses of Revelation?Rev. 11:3? I know the amills spiritualize these as the two olive trees and make them into different things (old and new testaments, John the baptist and Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Elijah and William Branham, etc. etc), but these are two literal men (the text will not allow them to be spiritualized)! We know that after the two witnesses cease their testimony and they are caught up, that judgment falls that SAME HOUR on Jerusalem and a 10th part of the City fell. Who were these two witnesses IN JERUSALEM from 66AD to 70AD who brought calamity upon Jerusalem if this was fulfilled in 70AD? Josephus does not record them! In the chronology of the times, there follows the two witnesses the wrath of God, concluded with the blessed hope and glorious appearing of the Lord with his heavenly host. There is no way this occurred in 70AD! Impossible. It may well be we have a shadow and a type here as I do see Jerusalem destroyed in 70AD but more then a tenth fell. There must be two events here, two different Jerusalems. One in 70AD and another one at the end of the Church age. There was no recorded earthquake at that event in 70AD. Josephus the eye-witness does not record such a catastrophic event. But in the Revelation 11 event there is a great earthquake. 70AD does not qualify. This leaves us with the choice that the 70AD destruction is God's type of what will consummate the endtimes at the very end of the tribulation at the third Woe!
Verse 13--all those who had not on a wedding garment were lost and their souls cast into hell (the lake of fire). This means after 70AD all who did not make the wedding of the early Church Bride did not stand a chance of being saved. The time of the giving of wedding garments was over. The door was shut (Matt. 25:10--you claim the Matt 25:10 account is the same as the Matt 22 account). A man was seen without a wedding garment (Matt 22:12). Once the wedding took place all others were damned. How can we after 70AD get a wedding garment? How can we have salvation after 70AD if this is true? What would be the plan of salvation? By what means would it be obtained, preached, etc., if all who miss the wedding feast are to be damned, cast out into outer darkness where there is weeping an gnashing of teeth?
Mike Blume wrote:
Jesus said in Matthew 22 that He would destroy the city and then have the wedding afterwards with others.Response by Pastor Reckart: You cannot have this that easy. The narrative does not need to be in chronological order. Jesus did not answer the questions of the Apostles in Matthew 24:2 in chronological order. How can those go into highways and invite souls after the destruction if they made the rapture and resurrection and were in the wedding number in Revelation 19 in heaven as the Bride? If they missed the rapture and the resurrection in 70AD and missed being a part of the Bride, how then can they go back out and preach to get souls to get into an already missed event. The ministry to go into the highways would have followed the end of the destruction in 70AD.
Mike Blume wrote:
This has to be 70 AD, because this corresponds to His question to the pharisees as to what should be done to the keepers of the vineyard who slew the son of the Lord.Response by Pastor Reckart: That is not true. The keepers of the vineyard who slew the King's son are indeed the Jews. The King's son was slain around 30AD. But the pronouncement of judgment upon that city does no make it mean it all took place in 70AD. It must be accepted that the guilt of the slaying of Jesus is upon all Israel. He died for the nation, therefore, if he took their sins collectively they were guilty collectively. I believe the nation is mentioned as being guilty. So the keepers of the vineyard or the land of Israel would be the politicians and religious political leaders of any generation.
The word "generation" really means "birth" something birthed or born; a circle, round, a revolution, and also includes a span of time and people as in "to the third generation or to the tenth generation"; those birthed accordingly etc. The entire 7 days (whether 24 hours or 7,000 years each) of creation, is called generations (Gen 2:4). Each new day birthed a circle of time and events of the creation day. Each day a revolution of time and birthing a new part of the creation. Genesis 5:1 says the "this is the book of the generations of Adam" (those birthed in the lineage of Adam). Moses wants us to understand not separate epochs of time here but the flesh descendants of Adam and this linage is called the "generations of Adam" that span time and distance. Even so, the generations of Jacob are the 12 tribes birthed throughout time and distance. To speak of one generation birthed of this lineage does not mean so much the time of their generation as it does their generation in the flesh. The Jews were to be delivered in the 4th generation and in this case a generation was 100years. To say then: "this generation (the present birthed people of this seed), shall not pass," is to say this seed of Jacob (circle of number) or this generation of Adam (circle of number), or this generation of Jews (circle of number), speaking of their whole lineage as a nation (circle of number), must be considered with great weight. For indeed, the generations of Jacob, that is his seed according to the flesh (the whole circle of souls), the Jews, Israel according to the old covenant and promises, shall not cease from the world until all things are fulfilled. There will always be a recognized seed of Jacob till the end of the world. This does not give them special favor except through Acts 2:38. Right now they are here and have the ability to be saved,but in the endtime, at the final wrap-up, they who have continued to reject the Gospel and who know not God in the person of Jesus Messiah shall be consumed. At that time it can no longer be said this generation of Jacob, these Jews, these of the ancient Israel shall continue any longer! Both the circle of time and lineage will have come to its end. Both come to an end at the same time. Jews continued beyond 70AD so that "generation" has not ceased or ended or passed! But when Jesus comes, there will no longer be a special generation of the tribes of Jacob of the flesh who were once recognized as the chosen people of God. The Church is the Israel of God! Then, at that time, he will gather all in one both in heaven and in earth (Eph 1:10-12).Mike Blume Wrote: This regarded 70 AD judgment. Matthew 19 through 24 regards 70 AD fulfillment. It must!
Response by Pastor Reckart:
No it must not!Mike Blume wrote: And Rev. 18 shows the destruction of the whore that Jesus claimed was that generation of Jerusalem in His day guilty of shedding all blood on the earth, and Rev 19 follows that destruction of the city with the wedding, just as Matthew 22 shows.
Response by Pastor Reckart: been through this already.
Mike Blume wrote: How can Jerusalem of our day be the whore, if Jesus told that generation in His day that they were the guilty generation?
Response by Pastor Reckart: Come Blume! The nation and people and Jerusalem will always be the whore (Isa 57:3-Rev 18:23)! God divorced Israel for her whoredom (Jer. 3:8). The Church is not the new Bride for nothing! God will not turn back to the whore after he has divorced Israel, died in the cross to terminate that marriage, and espoused himself to the Bride through the New Covenant at Calvary. Are you saying that after 70AD the Jews who reject the Church are not the whore system? Are you saying the Talmudic/Kabbalistic system today in not the sorcery of the whore system? Would you identify then the present Jews, Israel, and the Talmudic-Kabbalistic system, since it would not qualify to be identified as part and parcel with the whore?