Roy says he has no hope of immortality and heaven because it is as “implausible” (remember his so-called “answers” to my four questions) as putting oil in a Race horse, but that even though he has no such hope, his horse might still win the Triple Crown. I doubt that he can get a horse to cross over his silly AD 70 mark. Imagine a man trying to convince you that there are no verses that give you any hope of immortality, that all verses about immortality were realized in AD 70 and were not extended to anyone living beyond that point! This is the hopeless twilight zone of Roy’s AD 70 doctrine.

I think Roy is the one being “embarrassed” because he posits that Luke 21:22 is about ALL THINGS (which has to include all the things about Jesus’ birth, death, and resurrection would be fulfilled when Jerusalem is surrounded by armies. If “all things” doesn’t mean “all things” then what does it mean in Luke 21:22? What does it mean in John 19:28? What does it mean in Luke 18:31? Roy is embarrassed that his assertion is exposed!

Roy claims he would equally say “all things were fulfilled” in AD 33 when Jesus went to Jerusalem to die on the cross (John 19:28; Luke 18:31), but out the other side of his mouth would argue that “all things” were not fulfilled until AD 70, 40 years later. We will take his word that he would not explain EITHER passage, because explaining either context would have him “reconstructing” either text and making a “bald-faced liar” (his words) out of himself, exposing the fact that he “reconstructs” texts every time him explains what “all things” means in a given text. Notice how foolish his attempt to deceive the reader into thinking he stays true to the text. Turning his argument around:

• Jesus says: “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man will be accomplished.” Jesus said ALL things would be accomplished on this trip to Jerusalem (AD 33).

• Roy says: All things were NOT accomplished then, but forty years later.

• Terry says what Jesus said. Roy says that Terry and Jesus LIED. Or, Roy LIED and said I both lied and “reconstructed the text.” Either way, Roy’s verbiage is exposed.

Daniel 12:1-2

Roy says: Dan.12:1-2 is the only prophecy of a RJUJ synchronous with the Opening-Of-The-Books-Judgment;

Since OUTCOMES are mentioned with end of life topics it does not mean that the RJUJ happens at the same moment as “deliverance” from the mentioned despairing moment that may take them out.

“At that time” applies to the “deliverance,” and the hope of resurrection is brought into view so they could see beyond the time of trouble. Mentioning the topic does not mean it happens at the same moment as the deliverance from the trouble.

Daniel mentioned the RJUJ so that those who were “delivered” from trouble by means of death could see a brighter future that made death a doorway to good things. Daniel did not say the resurrection happens at the same moment as the deliverance from TOT. That is all in Roy’s head!

The “abomination of desolation” was set up in the day of Antiochus Epiphanes. The events describing the “abomination of desolation” (11:31) were fulfilled in more than one event. The Jews thought it was fulfilled in the times of Antiochus (1 Maccabees 1:54). “ 57 On the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred and forty-fifth year, king Antiochus set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God, and they built altars throughout all the cities of Juda round about:

58 And they burnt incense, and sacrificed at the doors of the houses, and in the streets.

59 And they cut in pieces, and burnt with fire the books of the law of God:”.

Daniel 11:31 is speaking in the context of these events as confirmed in the historical Jewish writings. It is not unusual to see a prophecy have more than one application (Hosea 11:1 notes Israel coming out of Egypt and then also applies to Jesus in similarity). So, Jesus makes a second application to the coming destruction in AD 70. That still does not say or imply that the RJUJ happens DURING these troublesome events.

No one doubts the tribulation predicted by Daniel and Jesus applies to the events leading up to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. But what is not stated is that RJUJ happens at the SAME moment of that destructive event.

The abomination of desolation was set up more than once, and would again, but that brings on death, but not the resurrection of the just and unjust in the same moment.

Nothing in the text of Dan.12 or Matthew 24 says anything about the timing of the resurrection of the just and unjust. Telling the final outcome of those actors in the play described does not tell WHEN the resurrection and final immortality are given.

About the only point Roy got right was that I believe Matt.24:3-34 is about one of Jesus’ many visits as “LORD of HOSTS” to bring down a city or nation. But that means it couldn’t be the SECOND coming, and it certainly was not the day all Christians were raised or changed to become immortal.

Roy pretends to have read nothing into the text. He read timing of the resurrection into it, and he read his implication that unless you agree with his timing that immortality was given in AD 70 then you make a liar out of Roy, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Look at Roy’s words not found in the text: “synchronous,” “during the period of time,” “imply that the RJUJ happens DURING these troublesome times.” Jesus and the Holy Spirit are fine. But Roy keeps a big question mark over his head.

Roy posits that the only promised change to immortality happened in a single moment in AD 70. There is no promise of ANOTHER moment of change for the living or the dead. Roy’s hopeless doctrine sent him scrounging for a translation that might rescue his doctrine that the resurrection happened in AD 70. Thus, Young’s Literal Translation.

(Act.24:14-15 YLT) “About to Come”

The age of immortality where you don’t marry and can’t die but become like the angels is the hope that keeps us looking forward. Roy has no hope, because he teaches that the only hope anyone had was all realized in AD 70. Roy went to YLT to produce the “about to be” phrase. But that is about like Jesus was “about to come” since the days of Adam (Romans 5:14). Insist that “mello” always means “about to come” and insist that it is close proximity to human timing, and you have Jesus “about to come” for over 4,000 years. So, the hope of Israel was in Paul, and Paul told us it was a hope for immortality (Rom.8:11,23-24). Paul did not rise from the dead in AD 70 with an immortal body. Thus, we join in the same hope to come. The phrase is not always about timing but always about CERTAINTY, “certainly to come.”

Sadducee Heresy

Jesus did not agree with the Sadducees (Matt.22:23-33) regarding resurrection, like Roy does, that there will be no resurrection from mortality to immortality. Jesus saw it taught even in Exodus 3. Paul used the difference between the Sadducees and the Pharisees to state his own agreement that the Pharisees were correct on this issue, that there will be a resurrection of the just and unjust. But Daniel did not posit WHEN the resurrection would take place, but that those who died during the tribulation would be raised (timing completely up to God). Jesus said nothing about Daniel’s “resurrection” statement coming true during that generation. Roy did not show a verse showing this. He mixed it in with his mixed salad to add some flavor. He says his argument is “fatal” to my paradigm, but I don’t feel it.

Corporate Resurrection?

RR: This is why his questions on mortality/immortality &etc., are implausible, i.e., he is misconstruing Paul’s resurrection-doctrine of a corporate-resurrection into an individual out-of-casket corpse-revivifying resurrection. That was not Paul’s “hope of the resurrection.”

SO, Roy is saying that “mortality” is not personal and individual, but that the ONLY mortality and immortality is “corporate” or collective, combined with a group. Amazing! Paul said life would be given to your “mortal bodies” (Rom.8:11). Were the brethren at Rome in more than one “corporate” body (bodies=plural)? No! These were all in the ONE body of Christ (12:5) already. They were all baptized into Christ (6:3-6), and were not baptized into bodies (plural). They had hope of life being given to their mortal BODIES (8:11). Mortality has to do with our individual bodies, not the corporate body of Christ. Paul was already in the corporate body of Christ while still hoping for his “tent” from heaven after he put off THIS tent (2 Cor.5:1f). He was in a mortal tent, would put it off at death, and would be receiving in the future a better tent (immortal). This is nothing more than Roy “reconstructing the texts.”

Ezekiel 38-39 Battle of Gog and Magog

If Roy is saying that Ezekiel is speaking of AD 70, then the army doing battle against Israel is defeated (Ezekiel 38:17 -39:10). So, Roy is equating “Gog” with the Roman army, and instead of Israel being defeated, he has Rome being defeated, but Israel being spared. Ezekiel 38-39 is about the fall of Gog who attacks God’s people, and it is not about the fall of Jerusalem, but of the victory of God’s people. Roy would have Gog being Rome, and Rome being destroyed in AD 70. Gog’s armies are destroyed (Ezekiel 38:22) in the battle mentioned here. Were Rome’s armies destroyed in AD 70? No! They are doing the destroying. Roy hopes we won’t notice his misuse of Ezekiel 38-39. The battle is against Israel (spiritual Israel, not earthly Israel) and the battle is WON in behalf of God’s Israel (39:2-5). Roy needs Rome to fall in AD 70, but this “Gog” is clearly not the Roman army, and this Israel is clearly not the defeated and destroyed Israel in AD 70. After the fall of THIS Gog (which Roy posits in AD 70) the children of Israel burn their weapons and gear for SEVEN YEARS (39:9) afterwards (putting Roy’s time-line to AD 77 (thus, not everything is fulfilled in AD 70, and thus, according to Roy’s logic chain, the Law of Moses, is still binding 7 years after Jerusalem is destroyed. Another cog in his logic wheel!). If this is AD 70 stuff, then Gog is buried in Israel in AD 70 in such mass graves that travelers have a hard time getting through the pile of buried bodies. [If this is end of time stuff... LOLOLOL]

We all see that didn’t happen in AD 70. John has it happening a LONG time after the fall of the HARLOT which Roy admits is Jerusalem centered JUDAISM. Roy’s argument here only further destroys his entire paradigm.

Roy said: After the millennium ends, and after satan is loosed, then AFTER that, the battle of Gog and Magog occurs which you ADMIT was a judgment against Israel when the Lord came in His glory UPON JERUSALEM.

But the Israel in this vision WINS when Gog falls. So, this is not the defeated Israel of AD 70, nor is this picturing the fall of Rome in AD 70. Didn’t happen! Roy has Jerusalem falling in AD 70, the beast (Rome) falling exactly when Jerusalem falls, the 1000 years happening all in AD 70, Satan and his followers cast into the lake of fire in AD 70, the battle of Gog and Magog happening in AD 70, the Law of Moses ending in AD 70, death and Hades ending in AD 70, while death (spiritually and physically) continued past AD 70. And Roy wants you to think that Terry “reconstructs the text.” Amazingly pathetic!

My understanding is that the covenant with Israel was fulfilled by Jesus and nailed to the cross (Eph.2:15; John 19:28), God removing Himself from the temple by tearing the veil of the temple from top to bottom in AD 33 (Matt.27:51), and that brethren were “dead to the Law” (Rom.7:4) long before AD 70. The only one in self-contradiction is Roy Runyon. He has Israel AND Gog destroyed in AD 70 and NO prophecy about anything POST AD 70, while he squirms to correct the order of events as detailed in Rev.17-20, and trying to get Rome destroyed, Jerusalem destroyed, death and Hades destroyed, and Satan with all the wicked of the ages all destroyed in AD 70. Talk about “convoluted fairy tales!”

The Parousia/Elousatai

Roy keeps mixing together his soup with ingredients thrown together that do not belong together.

First, neither Jesus nor Daniel told WHEN the resurrection of the just and unjust would take place, only THAT is would happen and in view of such would temper the gloomy side of the picture.

Secondly, “the end” of Israel happened during the Babylonian period (Ezekiel 7:2-4). Paul was not talking about THAT “end” in 1 Cor.15:23. Nor is Paul talking about “the end” of Judaism under the Romans. There are various “ends” talked about in scripture. 1 Corinthians 15:23ff is about the end of mortality, not the end of Judaism. Judaism is nowhere in the discussion of resurrection to immortality. Roy reads it INTO (eisegesis) the text and “reconstructs the text.”

Thirdly, when “things equal to the same thing are equal to each other,” as Roy says, then “Parousia” and “elousatai” (Acts 1:11) are equal to each other and it doesn’t matter which word is used. There are different ends and different comings, and when Roy realizes it, he will see how silly his arguments have been.

Levirate Marriage

I don’t disagree that the Sadducees were setting up their argument by use of the Levirate marriage to spoil the whole idea of a resurrection. So, I’m still in context. The thing is that Jesus didn’t think much of the Levirate marriage argument because in the coming age you don’t marry PERIOD, and so no marriage, levirate or otherwise, can be a problem with resurrection to immortality. Thanks for referencing the Benton-Baisden Debate.

RR: So, Terry avers “this age” encompasses from Creation to his mythological end of time.

How long have we been marrying and dying and been unlike the angels? Are we still marrying, dying, and being unlike the angels? Yes! Roy “avers” that we are now in the age of no marrying, no dying, and we are like the angels. That shows how much he has been blinded by the doctrines of realized eschatology. Notice this argument from Roy:

RR: In reality, Terry ignores the “exact words” of Jesus, because He said, “those who are counted worthy to attain that age←[heaven/immortality], and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage,” (Luk.20:35); thus, once again, the inescapable conclusion is that during “this age” (of mortality [sic]) in order to be counted worthy to attain the ‘age of immortality’ we must not marry nor be given in marriage. Terry refutes his own objection.

TB: What in the world? Can you believe the audacity and ignorance of this argument from Roy? Unbelievable! Roy shoots himself in the foot here. He now says that the Levirate marriage “MUST NOT” take place in “this age” (Judaism). Jesus is clearly saying to the Sadducees that their argument does not nullify the resurrection at all because in the age of the resurrection you don’t marry or die but are like the angels. During THIS age of mortality you do marry and die. During this age of mortality we are seeking to attain the next immortal age in good shape. Roy further loses all credibility with this backfiring argument!

I don’t “ignore” the Levirate marriage law from which the Sadducees built their phony argument against the resurrection. It’s just that Jesus made the whole argument IRRELEVENT because in the resurrection there will not be marriage or death. All of that is irrelevant. Roy is devastated by Jesus’ argument, as were the Sadducees.

Summary

Roy admits that the new heavens and earth began BEFORE the slaying of Judah in AD 70. (2 Cor.5:17). ALL THINGS HAVE (present tense) become new BEFORE AD 70. He admits that marriage was still going on before, during, and after AD 70. Therefore, the resurrection to immortality did not happen in the first century. So, as we observed earlier, THIS AGE includes ALL the ages of mortality, and THAT AGE we are still trying to attain is the age of immortality where you don’t marry, and you don’t die. Roy could not finagle his way out of the devastating words of Jesus. My proposition is proven TRUE.

1. The graves are still being filled with mortal bodies.

2. The church was raised spiritually long before AD 70 (Eph.2:1-10).

3. Immortality would have to mean no one dies spiritually (once-saved-always-saved) if the church became incorruptible and spiritually immortal in AD 70.

4. We are still marrying and dying, continued proof that we are still in the age of mortality (Luke 20:34-35).

5. Our mortal bodies are still mortal bodies (Rom.8:11,23,24).

6. Mortality would end with Jesus coming and us seeing Him AS HE IS (1 Cor.15:23; 1 John 3:1-2; Phil.3:20f). Didn’t happen in AD 70.

7. There is a last day for mortality (John 6:39,44,54; 11:24; 1 Cor.15:23; Luke 20:34,35).

8. HOPE is based on promises that have not been realized. Roy confesses hopelessness.

9. Much was to happen AFTER the fall of the Harlot (Jerusalem) via Rev.17-20.

10. NOBODY saw Him AS HE IS AND BECAME LIKE HIM in AD 70.

Roy has blown it on all ten points, and even his “implausible” answers to my 4 questions were nothing but hopeless and implausible answers.