Roy Runyon's Errors
1) Coming in Glory
Roy claimed that the Lord "coming in glory" happened one time in the destruction of Jerusalem. But the truth is that He came in glory every time He brought His judgment of wrath upon a city or nation (Isa.13; 19). His glory was seen in every judgment. He is known as "the Lord of Hosts' (which means He is always associated with His Mighty Angels) in every such judgment. No one denies that the Lord again displayed His glory by means of the way He used the Roman army to bring down Jerusalem in AD 70. That, again, showed the behind-the-earthly-scenes judgment and actions of the Lord of Hosts. When He came as "Lord of Hosts" upon Jerusalem by means of the Babylonians, it displayed His glory and that He was combined with His mighty angels as "the Lord of Hosts" (Isa.1:9; Jer.6:6). The book of Lamentations is written to mourn the devastation. It had experienced "the day of His fierce anger"(Lam.1:12;2:21) and this destruction was viewed as "the Lord trampled as in a winepress." Jerusalem was "like Sodom" in their destruction and desolation (Lam.4:6). Did we see the "glory" of the Lord in this case? This too was "the end" of Judaism (Lam.4:18). God " set" His "glory" among the nations; " all the nations shall see My judgment which I have executed" (Ezek.39:21) and the house of Israel "shall know that I am the Lord." So, the Lord of Hosts (mighty angels) came in His "glory" upon Jerusalem. His glory was seen among the nations and Israel was made to know that the Lord brought this destruction to pass. So, coming in glory with His mighty angels (hosts) is not a one- time thing that only happened in AD 70. The Lord of Hosts (1 Sam.6:2; 7:26; 2 Kings 19:31; Psa.24:7-10; 59:5; Isa.1:9) was seen in His glory in every judgment upon cities or nations. His "glory" is seen even in nature (Psa.19:1f) and without displaying His wrath. His glory was seen in Jesus (John 1:14) and in every miracle Jesus performed (Luke 2:9; John 2:11; 11:40). Thus, coming in judgment on Jerusalem during the Babylonian period and the Roman period (AD 70) were certainly occasions when He came in glorious display of justice, judgment, and wrath. But these local displays are but a foretaste of the glory displayed when "we SEE HIM AS HE IS" (1 John 3:1-2; 1 Thess.4:13-18). That coming will be visible (not invisible or behind the scenes). We shall actually SEE HIM AS HE IS. That did not happen during the Babylonian period nor the Roman period of AD 70. Thus, Roy's main argument is dismantled. He wanted to make the Lord coming in His glory with His Hosts a one-time event that happened only in AD 70. He tied together a string of verses that did not and could not prove HIS proposition that what happened in AD 70 was THE SECOND coming of the Lord. It was not!
2) Quoting Daniel 7:13?
He tried to make Dan.7:13 the only verse that Matt.24:30 could possibly be about. Roy even claimed that Jesus was QUOTING this verse in His Olivet Discourse (Matt.24:30), but there is no QUOTE of Dan.7:13 at all. Dan.7:13 is not about Jesus coming TO Jerusalem, but rather Jesus ascending TO the Father (the Ancient of Days). Jesus was entering "His glory" (Luke 24:26) when He was "carried up into heaven" (v.51). He came TO the Ancient of Days in glory. Similar words do not make it a QUOTE, and do not mean that there was only ONE time the Lord was seen or visualized as coming somewhere in glory with His mighty host. Roy built his argument on a faulty assumption making a faulty connection.
3) Speaking SOLELY From LOM?
He argued that Paul SOLELY spoke about what was in the Law of Moses and the Prophets (OT), and then shot his own argument in the foot by admitting that Titus 1:2 shows Paul referencing things BEFORE (antecedent to) the giving of the LOM. Further, he referenced Jude and Peter talking about Michael disputing over the body of Moses, a thing nowhere found in the LOM. Roy goes outside the OT to frame an argument that Jude and Peter were only talking about JUDAISM, which Roy called the "body of Moses. There is no reference to the "body of Moses" as Judaism in the entire Bible. There is no reference to this particular dispute in the entire Bible. At best, Roy ASSUMED the point he needs to prove, and that is that Jude and Peter are talking only to Jews about the judgment on Judaism, rather than something much bigger than the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. At any rate, Roy shot his own argument in the foot when he claimed that the apostles SOLELY spoke of things in the LOM and implied that unless the OT said anything about something like the End of Time, or anything about the coming at the end of time, then we cannot believe that the apostles could talk about such things in the NT. Clearly that assumption was wrong as Paul and Jude talked about things not found in the OT (Titus 1:2; Jude 9).
4) Fulfillment Dilemma
He contended that the Law of Moses could not talk about things that would be "fulfilled" beyond AD 70, because his argument is that EVERYTHING had to be fulfilled (every prophecy of any kind had to be completely fulfilled) before the LOM could be abolished. And he uses Luke 21 to contend that everything was fulfilled in AD 70, so that AD 70 is the time when the LOM was done away or abolished. This argument does not meet the smell test because it means that the OT cannot talk about things beyond AD 70 but it does. It speaks of the fall of Rome (Dan.2:44,45) which was way beyond AD 70, and it speaks of "forever" things that cannot be fulfilled until forever is complete. But forever things are never complete, and therefore it is not true that every topic in the OT HAS GOT TO BE FULFILLED before it can be taken out of the way or abolished. Paul said it was abolished at the cross (Eph.2:15; Col.2:13-16), and Roy's "paradigm" says it was fulfilled and abolished at AD 70, not at the cross. The premise is wrong that every kind of prophecy had to be fulfilled, and the assumption is wrong that every kind of prophecy WAS fulfilled in AD 70.
He said the Song of Moses (Deut.32) "predicted the judgment of Old Covenant Israel in Israel's last days" and that Peter was "quoting" this text and applying it to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. First, the judgment in AD 70 is not the only coming in judgment on Jerusalem. Nehemiah applied the "latter end" in Deuteronomy 31:29 and 4:30 to the coming of the BABYLONIANS (605BC -586BC). See Nehemiah 1:8. The song of Moses would be remembered "when evils and troubles have come upon them (Deut.31:21). Nehemiah reminded them of why the Babylonian Captivity and destruction took place. So, Deut.32 has more than one application (Remember also that Roy doesn't agree with the truth of dual applications, but he was proven wrong on that. See the exchange on Hosea 11:1 with Matt.2:15). Yet, Nehemiah was referencing Deut.32 and said it was fulfilled in the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem. Jeremiah was referencing Deut.32:37-38 and applied it to the BABYLONIAN captivity in Jeremiah 2:28. Thus, while Deut.32 does also apply to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, it was also fulfilled in the Babylonian period. And the Babylonian period was "latter days" to the time of Moses. But we see the fulfillment of what was said about "latter days" fulfilled as early as the period of the Judges (Judges 2:14-15). But Judges says the calamities that happened in that period was because the Lord had sworn (Deut.32:40-41). So, Deut.32 has multiple times of application, not just AD 70.
5) Gathering While "gathering unto the Messiah" was in the last days of Judaism, this gathering was happening from Pentecost forward and is still happening. If the gathering only took place in AD 70, then no one is gathering in Christ now. Eph 1:10 - that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ , both which are in heaven and which are on earth - in Him. NKJV. This gathering is "in Christ" and is still going on, thus not just in the last days of Judaism's temple system, but in the last days of earth time and mortality. We were being gathered together in Christ 40 years before AD 70 , during the AD 70 judgment on the Jews, and all this time after AD 70 (Heb.12:22-24). We are still part of the "general assembly" or gathering. If the "gathering" is only associated with the fall of Jerusalem, then the gathering ceased when the Lord brought down His final and only judgment in AD 70. Unless Roy is ready to contend that no one is now being gathered in Christ, then he cannot argue that Matt.25:31ff is about the events of AD 70. Further, Jesus tells us that Satan and all his angels were cast into the everlasting fire, but not when Jerusalem fell (Matt.25:41). Rev.17-20 has Satan cast into the lake of fire long over a 1000 years AFTER the harlot (Jerusalem) fell. So, Roy can't make Matt.25:31ff happen in AD 70. He can't be gathered "in Christ" after AD 70 if Matt.24:31 and 25:31ff are saying the gathering and judgment of all people of all nations was finalized in AD 70. He is now without Christ in no man's land.
6) Kingdom Unconsummated?
Roy ASSUMED that the coming in the destruction of Jerusalem is the event that "consummates the establishment of the everlasting kingdom ." In other words, he wants us to think that for forty years (Pentecost to AD 70) the brethren were not really in the kingdom of Christ (Col.1:13) because it had to be "consummated" or completed. If one was "complete in Christ" (Col.2:10) and at the same time "translated into the kingdom" of God's dear Son, then the kingdom was complete in Christ from Pentecost forward. The kingdom of Christ did not reach a "complete" stage in AD 70. They would see the already complete kingdom of Christ triumph over the corrupt harlot of Judaism in AD 70 and keep marching forward, but not the kingdom coming into consummation. You can talk about the completion of God's plan to destroy the temple system of Judaism, bring THAT plan to consummation, but the kingdom was complete in Christ long before AD 70 (Col.1:13; 2:10), and the bringing down of a persecutor does not consummate the kingdom, it just shows the kingdom is made near to some unbeliever's realization.
Roy tried to make the kingdom come with power in AD 70 INSTEAD of Acts 2 by asking me, "Where is the evidence for anyone but Judas dying prior to the Ascension?" We don't know how many died before Pentecost of Acts 2. If Judas died before then, then Jesus could not say "all of you will see the kingdom come with power," rather He would say "some" of you, as He did. But there may have been some elderly people present (Mark 8:34) in addition to Judas that would not make it till Pentecost. Roy semi admits the kingdom came with power on Pentecost in some incomplete or unconsummated way, but thinks it really came with power in AD 70 in a complete and consummated way. But only John saw it come and maybe a few other older people. He has Jesus sitting in a position higher in authority than every name that is named (Eph.1:20-21), higher than ALL DOMINION, and this long before AD 70, but somehow what happens in AD 70 is going to give Him "complete" dominion, something He lacked until AD 70. No! Paul got it right! Jesus was already completely head over all things to the church, the church/kingdom was already complete in Him (Col.1:13; 2:10), and the coming on Jerusalem did not complete JESUS or His kingdom, but rather it completed God's plan to bring vengeance on Jerusalem centered Judaism.
7) About to Come
He appealed to a version of Matt.16:27 that said, "For the Son of Man IS ABOUT to come." Not many versions thought "mello" (Greek) emphasizes timing as much as certainty. The same word is used in Rom.5:14 and speaks of Adam being a type of Jesus who "was to come." But the word "mello" is there too, and it would mean that Jesus was "about to come" ever since the days of Adam. That was over 4000 years before Jesus came. So, if 4000 years is Jesus "about to come" the first time, then 2000 years is nothing. He is "about to come" in the similar timing as the first time He was "about to come."
8) The End
Roy tried to make "the end" found in 1 Cor.15:24 to be synonymous with "the end" found in Matt.24:6. If "the end" is always synonymous to the same EVENT, then "the end" already happened in the days long before Jesus came the first time (Gen.6:13; Ezekiel 7:2-4). No! The context determines what "the end" means. In Matthew 24:6 it regards the end of the temple in Jerusalem. In 1 Cor.15:24 it regards the end of mortal life on earth. Roy finds similar phrases and asserts that they are all talking about the same EVENT, and we have shown that this is his pattern of reasoning on many things.
Similarity of Words but Different Events
He uses this argument of similarity of language to make his argument that Daniel 7:13; Luke 9:26. And Matt.25:31ff are all talking about the SAME EVENT. No! Dan.7:13 is about the glorious EVENT of His ascension TO the Ancient of Days, Luke 9:26 is about His final coming to judge all people, and Matthew 25:31ff is about final judgment. Other verses are about His coming in glory on cities and nations like Jerusalem, Babylon, Egypt, etc. See earlier point on this. Similarity of language does not mean that the Lord came only ONE time in His glory and that He never will come in any glorious way other than what He did in gloriously bringing down Jerusalem, is just another assumption based argument. Thus, Roy has failed to prove his proposition.
Conclusion:
When the end of mortality (1 Cor.15; 1 John 3:1-2; Phil.3:20f) happens there will be no more marrying and giving in marriage (Matt.22:28-30). The very presence of death and marriage will always be reminders that Roy is preaching a false message. If people are still walking this earth, marrying, and dying, then it is all testimony to the false doctrine of Realized Eschatology. As long as there is marriage and dying, AD 70 was not the end of mortality.
The last enemy, death, is still around. 1 Cor.15:22-26 show that when Jesus comes that last enemy will be destroyed. It will be destroyed as soon as we rise from the dead with an immortal, incorruptible body, and when the living are instantly changed to immortal (15:54ff). That did not take place in AD 70. All the original Christians died before, during, and after AD 70, and death has not ceased in ANY way. Physical death has continued since AD 70 AND spiritual death has continued since AD 70. If Roy says that the last enemy was spiritual death, and spiritual death was destroyed in AD 70, then the only logical conclusion is that there is no more spiritual death since AD 70. No need to preach the gospel any more. No one is spiritually dead, and therefore cannot be brought to spiritual life by the gospel. But, get this, the gospel was bringing spiritual life to spiritually dead people long before AD 70 (Eph.2:1-10; Rom.1:16-17; 6:3-6). But, if there is no more spiritual death AFTER AD 70, then the gospel can no longer do what it was doing before AD 70. No one can be "gathered" into Christ now.
It is also a fatal flaw in Roy's doctrine that no Christians at Thessalonica or anywhere else were "caught up to meet the Lord in the air" (1 Thess.4:13-18) and remained there in AD 70. Remember, they were already spiritually "raised" with Christ at baptism (Rom.6:3-6; Eph.2:1-10), but were promised that when Christ returns they would be "caught up to meet the Lord in the air and ever be with the Lord". That did not happen in AD 70. So, several factors of the real SECOND coming of the Lord did not happen in AD 70.
No one "saw Him as He is" and became "like Him" (1 John 3:1-3) in AD 70. The disciples had seen Him in His mortal flesh but had not seen Him in His IMMORTAL AND GLORIFIED state. That change happened in the ascension when taken out of their sight (Acts 1:9-11). How is He now? We don't know, and nobody knew during or after AD 70. Nobody "saw Him as He is" and nobody was changed to become like Him.
The order of events described in Rev.17-20 totally destroy Roy's doctrine. The harlot (Jerusalem) is destroyed by the beast (Rome) in Rev.17-18. After AD 70 the beast was brought down (Rev.19). After the beast is taken down, long after AD 70, we see Satan bound for 1000 years. After all this time well beyond AD 70 (over 1300 years beyond AD 70) Satan is released for short time, and then AFTER all that time death and hades are cast into the lake of fire (Rev.20:10-15). Roy's paradigm has well over 1300 PLUS years all happening in the same time of AD 70. Revelation 17-20 absolutely destroys any credibility to Roy's doctrine.