All right, get a piece of paper, get something to write with. Get a piece of paper, get something to write with. Before we do the normal introduction, get a piece of paper and something to write with. And I just want you to write down 70 A.D. 70 A.D. 70 A.D. I want you to write it as large as you can write it. 70 A.D. I want you to put it on your refrigerator. I want you to put it everywhere. Just make a piece of paper. Basically, you're making a little poster. Put it all over your house. 70 A.D. Put it in your car. Put it everywhere. 70 A.D. 70 A.D. Grab a piece of paper, write 70 A.D., put it in the front of your Bible, put it in the middle of your Bible, put it at the end of your Bible. 70 A.D., 70 A.D., 70 A.D., 70 A.D. I want you to write it down, and at this point you may be like, why? Why am I writing down 70 A.D.? Well, we're going to be talking about it for the next hour, but I'm going to start by asking you a question. What is the significance of 70 A.D. on biblical interpretation? What is the significance of the date 70 A.D. on biblical interpretation? How often, how frequent, when you're reading and studying your Bible, you're like, oh, wait, wait, wait, wait, I better remember 70 AD. How frequently, how often do you hear your pastor mention 70 AD? When you, if you were participating in the Sermons 2.0 Sermon Challenge of 2024, how frequently was 70 AD mentioned in the sermons you were listening to? Now you, I think many Christians, have made it 10, 15, 20 years in their Christian life with barely ever hearing anything about 70 AD. And I'm going to make a very Some may say radical, some may say a very extreme statement, but I think there's a lot to back this up. I will say 70 A.D. may be one of the most significant and important things to know when it comes to biblical interpretation. The fact that so many churches, so many pastors ignore 70 A.D. I think is one of the leading causes to the Bible being handled in an incorrect manner. If pastors and Bible teachers and Christians would understand the significance of 70 A.D., it would transform how they handle Scripture. But time and time again, 70 A.D. gets completely ignored, and in many cases it leads to a complete mishandling of significant parts of the Bible. You cannot forget 70 A.D. And I'm going to explain to you how 70 AD is absolutely significant just in the book of Hebrews. That's all we're gonna focus on right now. Just the book of Hebrews. Now, yesterday we reviewed a sermon from a church, the 2819 church, and they were in Matthew 21. They're going to Matthew 24. When they get to Matthew 24, we will review their sermon on Matthew 24, and we will see if they mention 70 AD. If they do not, then it'll be another example of pastors and churches, no matter how popular they may be, mishandling text because they will just, they just will not understand the significance of 70 AD. If you've ever, if you've ever been a part of a study, I cannot stress, and I hate to say this, I'm just, I'm going to say I don't care who gets offended. If you've ever gone to church and your church studied the book of Hebrews and they did not interpret the book of Hebrews in light of 70 AD, they misinterpreted the book of Hebrews. If you're in a church and they're teaching the book of Hebrews and they're not interpreting a lot of 70 AD, you just as well go home and not even bother coming back until they're done because you're being given a false interpretation of the book of Hebrews. It's that simple. Without 70 A.D., you cannot understand the book of Hebrews correctly. You will make it about us and once again, miss the entire meaning of the book. And I'm going to try to demonstrate that. But before we start all of that, and I really want you to write 70 A.D. down anywhere and everywhere. You need to have it right there at the front of your Bible. You need to have it everywhere. Because if you don't, it's gonna lead to all of these problems. But before we get to that, I guess I will go ahead and say welcome everyone. It is Thursday, February the 6th, 2025. It is currently 11.15 a.m. Central Time. And I am coming to you live from the Theology Central Studio, located right here in Abilene, Texas. I'm gonna call this the 70 AD Studio, right? Because I cannot stress the importance of it, all right? Let's start. If you have a Bible, open it up to the Book of Hebrews. That's where we're going to be. I wanted to do this... I wanted to do this maybe in just like one episode. I think this may... we may have to turn this into a mini-series. We may have to turn this into a mini-series. I know we still need to work on AI versus Lordship Salvation. We need to still do some work on that. But I think this is important. Here's what happened, all right? So, I think I will do it this way. I have here in front of me, you can hear it, Sword of the Lord newspaper. This is January the 3rd, 2025 edition of the Sword of the Lord newspaper. I think I've already referenced this edition multiple times because what happens when I get a Sword of the Lord newspaper, I go through the thing over and over and over and over again. I will pick it up and just go through page after page and just look and look and look. I mean, sometimes one issue of the Sword of the Lord newspaper can lead to, I don't know, five, ten hours of broadcasting. It's really crazy. Even though I may disagree with a lot. One of the reasons I always want a subscription to the Sword of the Lord newspaper is because whether I agree or disagree, it always just gives me so much to think about and unpack and interpret. Well, there's been this article that I've been keeping the paper folded with this article open Well, since I received the issue of Sword of the Lord newspaper for January the 3rd, 2025, it's been a while. I've just had it here and I keep saying, I'm going to do a broadcast on it. I'm going to do a broadcast on it because it brings up this concept that I'd never heard before, right? That there's these different things that we get after salvation. And I'm like, well, this is kind of, it raises this question. I don't think I've ever heard it this way. And then all of a sudden I was like, wait a minute, there's a bigger problem here. So at some point I will go through the article and get to the problem I first was going to address. I'm not going to get to it now because then everyone will be focused on that. But the more I looked at it, I'm like, well, there's a bigger problem here. So here is the article, all right? I'm just going to go through a little bit of it here, right? The article is found on page 21 of the January 3, 2025 issue of the Sword of the Lord newspaper. It is entitled, 17 Things That Come With Christ. 17 things that come with Christ. And now, I was a student at a Bible Institute, and I can't remember how many we had to, there was 25 maybe, 30, I can't remember. There's like 25 or 30 things that follow our salvation, or that comes with our salvation, or that we receive in light of our salvation, right? And we had to find all the scriptures for it, and we had to do this kind of like mini project. I really liked it. I really enjoyed it. I utilized it early on in my ministry as a pastor. I thought it was really good, and I had a good time with the project. I don't remember everything about it, but when I saw 17 things that come with Christ, it reminded me a little bit of that course that I had to take. And I'm like, That's interesting. I remember that. Maybe this will be, you know, maybe I will enjoy this like I did that. So, I started reading. Right under the title, 17 Things That Come With Christ, we have a quote from the book of Hebrews. Uh-oh. Now, as soon as I see Hebrews, my mind, as soon as I see a verse from the book of Hebrews, it's a second, my mind immediately goes 70 AD. As soon as I see a verse, any verse from Hebrews, 70 AD. I cannot see a verse from the book of Hebrews and not think 70 AD. If you don't do that, I know you may disagree. I'm just going to be bold here. You're wrong. If you disagree with me that you should see 70 AD with every verse in the book of Hebrews, I'm sorry, we're not going to get along here because I am dogmatic about it. I'm sick and tired of hearing sermons on the book of Hebrews and 70 AD is not mentioned. What are you doing? You are mishandling it. So that's where my mind immediately goes. But I went ahead and read the partial quote here of the verse. But beloved, we are persuaded better things of you and things that accompany salvation, Hebrews 6.9. Now immediately, you hear me stressed it. Who are the we? And who are the you? Well, I can tell you the you is not you, right? I can tell you that. The you is to a specific audience, which, I don't know, the book is called The Book of Hebrews. I would believe it would be written to Jewish individuals, right? I don't think it requires a lot to figure that out, right? But then look at how the article begins. Good news. exclamation point. When you received Christ, you received not only eternal life, but also many other things that came with Christ. At that time, you may have been unaware and unknowing. Even now, you may be unaware and unknowing of all the bundled things you receive with Christ. Inconceivable! Now, here's an article taking a verse from the book of Hebrews, taking the you in the book of Hebrews and making that you about you and making it about me. And I get sick and tired of this happening. This is where I get frustrated with pastors and the book of Isaiah, the book of Jeremiah. It's just everything is you, you, you, you. And it's like, no, what about the original recipients? So this article turns into about us. Well, what I want to do, and at some point we're going to take this article apart, and we will talk about the things that they say are applicable to us, and we'll get into it, but you can't open up the book of Hebrews and not see 70 AD. I wish there was a, with modern technology, with modern technology, I wish when you opened up the book of Hebrews, alarms would go off. 70 A.D. and red lights would start flashing. 70 A.D. 70 A.D. and then you close it. What was that? And every time you open up your Bible, warning sirens would go off in 70 A.D. and red lights would start flashing. It would just start yelling 70 A.D. That's what we need. All right. I think people would be like, this Bible is broken. No, this Bible is trying to get you to interpret it the correct way. So I'm going to try to demonstrate to you the absolute significance of 70 AD when it comes to the book of Hebrews. And I'm going to do so by focusing on five specific passages that everyone debates. Now, in my early Christian life, these five passages in the book of Hebrews, everyone argued about. Does it prove you can lose your salvation? No, it proves you could claim to be saved, but not saved unless you do this. And everyone starts arguing from a soteriological point of view. And it drives me crazy when everyone's arguing about it from a soteriological point of view, because I want to scream, I don't know, could we consider 70 AD? But nobody wants to listen. Now, what are these five passages? I'm just going to go through these quickly. All right. The first one is Hebrews chapter 2. Hebrews chapter 2, verse 1. Therefore, we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him? God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and diverse miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to his own will. How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?" Now, of course, the we becomes us. We take it out of its context. That's one of the—this is what is called a warning passage. Most believe the book of Hebrews contains at least five warning passages, where there's a warning. How shall you escape if you neglect so great of salvation? And we make it about us, we make it about lost people, and we remove it from its context. I believe that should be first and foremost interpreted in light of the historical context, which is 70 AD, and we will explain. So there's the first passage, Hebrews 2. How will you escape if you neglect so great a salvation? I think it has to be first understood in light of 70 AD. The second one is Hebrews chapter 3. So the first is Hebrews 2, 1 through 4. The second one is Hebrews chapter 3. Hebrews 3, starting in verse 7-19, wherefore, I'll just read a little bit of it. You can just write down the reference, Hebrews 2, 1-4, Hebrews 3, 7-19. Above all of these passages, you should just write down maybe in pencil, 70 AD. Hebrews 3.7, Wherefore, as the Holy Ghost saith today, if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the day of provocation and the day of temptation in the wilderness, when your fathers..." See, there is the first clue, hermeneutically speaking. See, wait, now it's been talking about we and you, we and you, and immediately what do you see? When your fathers tempted me and proved me and sold my works 40 years. Who are your fathers? Oh, that's Israel. Oh, so the you there is referring to Jews, Hebrews, Israelites. That's who the book is to. It's not even that you don't even need to go to Bible college or seminary to figure this out. This is basic reading comprehension. See, that article took Hebrew 6-9 and you became you. But just the context here. The you The you here clearly now is referring to Israel. When your fathers tempted me, wherefore I was grieved with that generation that said they do all away err and their heart and they have not known my way, so I swear in my wrath they shall not enter into my rest. Take heed, brethren." Who had the brethren there? Who's the brethren? "...lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief and departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily while it is called today, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin." So this idea of departing from the living God, do not have a heart of unbelief and depart from the living God. Again, this will be talking about us and how we can depart from God and how we can have unbelief. Well, does this mean departing from God in a soteriological way so that you lose your salvation? And you can hear all of the debates in Christianity. Well, that cannot be understood. In fact, I don't even know why we make it about us. It's about Israel. You can see right there from the context. But Hebrews 2, 1-4, that's warning passage number one. Warning passage number two is Hebrews 3, 7-19. Warning passage number three, the one that really gets all of the attention, I believe, is Hebrews 6, starting in verse four. Hebrews 6, verse 4, for it is impossible for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away to renew them again under repentance, seeing they crucified themselves, the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame. Well, this turns into, again, being interpreted from a soteriological perspective. And it becomes about can people, are these people, were they saved? Were they not saved? Did they lose their salvation? And it turns into all of this. But once again, You've got to interpret it in light of 70 A.D. That's the correct way to interpret it, all right? So, warning passage number one is Hebrews 2, 1-4. Warning passage number two is Hebrews 3, 7-19. Warning passage number three, and if we go, oh, if we continue reading here in Hebrews 6, Yeah, I think that's good. We could read a little bit more, but you get the basic idea. Hey, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance. And they're like, well, if they fall away, in other words, then can you be saved again? Can you not be saved? I've heard all of the debates about this. Usually it's people arguing about it. I hate to say they shouldn't be arguing about it because they obviously don't have the hermeneutical knowledge to be arguing about it because they keep ignoring 70 AD. All right, so warning passage number one, Hebrews 2, 1-4, warning passage number two, Hebrews 3, 7-19, warning passage number three, Hebrews 6, 4-8. The next one is Hebrews chapter 10. Hebrews 10, verse 26, for if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour their adversaries. Wait, if you sin willfully after you receive the knowledge, there's no more sacrifice for your sin? Do you sin willfully? I sin willfully. Don't you sin willfully? What do we mean by this? So then it turns into this never-ending debate. Well, it means this. It doesn't mean this. I can. Before you even get into that, go to 70 AD and start there. So warning passage number one is Hebrews 2, 1 through 4. Warning passage number two is Hebrews 3, 7 through 19. Warning passage number three is Hebrews 6, 4 through 8. Warning passage number four is Hebrews 10, 26 through 31. And then last but not least, Hebrews chapter 12. Hebrews 12, 25 through 29. Hebrews 12, 25 through 29. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh, for if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall we not escape if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven. Say, hey, don't turn away or we're not going to escape. Escape what? What is it referring to? Does it refer to losing salvation? And we could go all the way, Hebrews 12, 25, all the way down to 29. Verse 26, whose voice then shook the earth, but now he hath promising, yet one more I shake, not the earth only, but also heaven, and the word yet once more significant, the removing of those things that are shaken as of things that are made, that these things which cannot be shaken may remain. Wherefore we receive a kingdom which cannot be moved. Let us have grace whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear, for our God is a consuming fire. There's a lot going on there. Once again, it's considered one of the warning passages. So, what are the warning passages one more time? Hebrews 2, 1-4, Hebrews 3, 7-19, Hebrews 6, 4-8, Hebrews 10, 26-31, and Hebrews 12, 25-29. My argument is you cannot understand any of those warning passages even remotely correctly if you interpret them apart from 70 AD. if you do not have 70 AD as your hermeneutical lens, I'm sorry, you're going to rip these verses out of context, you're going to make them about us, you're going to probably end up in some kind of arguments about salvation, losing salvation, and all of that, and I think you're misinterpreting the entire situation. So, what we need to do then, My argument is you can't interpret Hebrews without 70 AD, so I am going to then set up, start, I'm going to at least start here by trying to demonstrate the timing of the writing of the book and the siege of Jerusalem. Now, the siege of Jerusalem goes from 66 AD to 70 AD. I'm going to put forth the argument that the writing of Hebrews occurs pretty close, maybe even during, it's either right before 66, right before the siege begins, or I think even more likely, the writing of Hebrews occurs during the siege of Jerusalem, which would put it somewhere 66, 67, 68, 69. While the siege of Jerusalem is happening, Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the writer of Hebrews, I know some say it's Paul, whoever the writer is, writes Hebrews to the Jews and they are literally living in the midst of the siege of Jerusalem. Oh wait, that's going to be the most significant religious event in many cases, not only religious, geopolitical, physical. I mean, this is going to change their entire world. All right. I cannot stress to you the importance of 70 AD. So I'm going to try to prove this, okay? So I'm going to be utilizing a lot of things here. I will argue that Hebrews was likely written very close to 70 AD, and as I've already stated, I believe it was... in fact, I'm almost dogmatic about it. I think it was written during the Roman siege of Jerusalem. I'm almost... I will be almost emphatic. You can't read Hebrews and not almost see on every page, hey guys, look what's happening around you. Look what's happening around you. Everything's about to be destroyed. You need something better. Now, I may not be able to pinpoint an exact date, but I think there are several factors which would strongly suggest it was written just before or maybe the, or during the final years leading up to the temple's destruction. I think, again, I believe 60, it's somewhere, I think it was written somewhere after 66, before 70 obviously, before the destruction of the temple. So I think somewhere between 66 and 69, maybe 66 and 68. I think it was written during the siege. I don't think there's any way to get around it. So what is the evidence I have that Hebrews was written close to 70 AD? Number one, the first piece of evidence. If you read the book of Hebrews, you will notice that it clearly indicates that the temple system was still functioning. If you look at Hebrews 10, 11, If you look at Hebrews 10, 11. Now see, some people think, well, this is just some dating thing. Who cares about the date? I don't care. I don't care. Give me something practical. Come on, don't get all academic on me. Well, this is the key to understanding the entire book. Hebrews 10, 11 says, and every priest standeth daily, ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. It literally speaks as if this is happening at that time. from another translation, and every priest standeth daily, ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifice, which can never take away sins. There's no way to get around this. This screams, I don't think it just suggests, it screams that the Levitical priesthood was still active, meaning that the temple had not yet been destroyed. He didn't say, don't you remember when the priests used to do this? It's spoken of in the present tense. If Hebrews was written after 70 AD, the author would have likely pointed to the actual destruction of the temple as evidence that the old covenant was abolished. But he speaks of it as still ongoing, but about to end. Look at Hebrews, I think is it chapter eight? I think it's Hebrews chapter eight, verse 13. in that he saith a new covenant he hath made the first old now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away it's the old is ready to vanish away it's not gone yet look if if if the writer of hebrews is trying to say hey the old is about to go this is all about to go he would have just said it's already gone it's been destroyed 70 A.D. is the end of the Jewish system. It's gone. The Jewish system that exists today, the Jewish religious system today, it's but a shell of itself. There's no priest. There's no sacrifice. Judaism today is not Judaism as found in the Bible. It's a shell of itself. Nobody can argue otherwise. They have no sacrifice. They have no priest. They have no temple. They have nothing that's required. Hebrews is saying, hey, the sacrifices were still happening, but it's telling them this is about to go away. It's about to vanish away. How is it going to vanish away? In the most literal way possible, the entire temple is going to be destroyed. It's gone. Israel's going to be, in a sense, figuratively speaking, wiped off the face of the earth. The temple was still standing. It was still functioning. That's my first evidence that clearly this is written before 70 AD. There's no way to get around it. And because it's saying, hey, it's about to vanish, well, that'll lead to my second piece of evidence. So number one, the temple system was still standing, still functioning. Number two, Hebrews 8.13, which I just read to you, suggests the old covenant was about to disappear. Let me read it again, Hebrews 8, 13. In that he saith a new covenant, he hath made the first old, now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. The phrase ready to vanish away implies that the Jewish system was still standing but was on the verge of being removed. This fits perfectly with a pre-AD70 time frame, especially during the growing tensions of the Jewish-Roman War, which again was 66 AD to 70 AD. Hey guys, it's about—just look out your window! I don't know if they could have just looked out the window and saw it, but they had to know the siege of Jerusalem was underway. Read Josephus. If you agree with his account or you believe he embellishes some, there's all lots of arguments about the accuracy of Josephus, but Josephus at least gives you some idea of what was happening. Guys, it's all about to go away. So what is my proof that Hebrews is to be understood in light of the context of 70 AD about its timing of its writing? The temple is still standing according to Hebrews itself, and Hebrews itself is suggesting the Old Covenant is about to disappear. How about number three? The growing pressure on Jewish Christians seems to match the pre-siege context. If you look at things like Hebrews chapter 10, I think it's verse 32. It says, But call to remembrance the former days in which afterward you were illuminated, you endured a great fight of affliction, partly wished while you were made a gazing stock, both by reproach, affliction, partly while you became companions of them that were used. For you had companions of me and my bonds, you took joyfully the spooling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that you have in heaven a better enduring substance. cast not away therefore your confidence, but it seems to speak that they were going through some pressure, they were going through some persecutions. Well, this pressure that was being placed on them seems to fit the pre-siege context. Hebrews 10, 32 through 34, which we just read, seems to speak of persecution, imprisonment, and the plundering of their possessions. This speaks of the intensifying persecution of Jewish Christians around this time. And I don't think you can get around that. They were facing pressure from Jewish authorities to return to Judaism. I'm gonna go into greater detail on this one, The Jews were facing pressure from the authorities to return to Judaism. Hey, you are a Jew, return to Judaism. And I think the reason they would have been facing that pressure, especially between 66 and 69 AD, is we're under siege. How dare you go to Christianity? How dare you go to this Messiah who wasn't the Messiah? He didn't defeat our enemies. If he was the Messiah, we wouldn't be under siege from the Romans. He would be ruling and reigning in Jerusalem. He died, he was crucified. Stop going back. You are disloyal to your country. You're disloyal to your family. You're disloyal to your religion. Return to Judaism. That would explain the pressure in the historical context. I'll go into greater detail about that. There's no way to get around that. They would have been suffering possibly economic and social penalties for leaving the Jewish system. This would then explain the urgency of the warnings. Not only was apostasy spiritually dangerous, but staying within Judaism was about to become physically dangerous due to the war. So in some ways, they could have been tempted. There was two things going on. Hey, do I want to be associated with Judaism? I mean, we're under siege. Maybe I want to run to Christ or run to Christianity to get away from it. But then the Jews would have been like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, no, no, no. You better stay with us. Your country is under attack. We're under siege. You need to be loyal. They would have been pulled in two different directions. That fits all, and that all of Hebrews fits this whole thing. Because Hebrews is saying, whoa, whoa, no, no, no. Don't go back there. Don't go back to Judaism. Stay with Christ. They would have had other people saying, no, come back to Judaism. Hebrews is the book for them. So, what is the evidence that this was written close to 70 AD? Number one, the book itself speaks of the temple system still standing, functioning. Number two, it suggests that the Old Covenant was about to disappear, but it had not been gone yet. Number three, you have this growing pressure and persecution on Jews. It seems to match the context of the pre-siege. Number four, Jesus, or Jesus, in the book of Hebrews, the urgency aligns with Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem's fall. Now this becomes very key, right? Remember I said 70 AD, 70 AD, you can't understand anything. If we understand Hebrews in the context of 70 AD, then this makes perfect sense because we have Jesus himself who gave prophecy about the coming destruction of the temple, which everyone seems to conveniently make it about us and make it about the second coming. And Matthew 24, go to Matthew 24, all of this fits together like a puzzle. So long as you get away, if you just don't go to church and you don't listen to sermons, you can do better in understanding this. Matthew 24, I hate to say that, Matthew 24. And Jesus went out and departed from the temple. And this is Matthew 24, verse one. And his disciples came to him to show him the building of the temple. And Jesus said, see you not all these things? Verily I say unto you, that there shall not be left here one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down. And then they wanna know, what are you talking about? Please tell, when is this going to happen? Because for them, the destruction of the temple is basically the end of the world. And Jesus then tells them all the signs. Those signs are pointing to 70 AD. 70 AD. Jesus warned not only here in Luke chapter 21, and I quote, this is Luke 21, 20 through 24, and when you shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then knoweth that the desolation thereof is nigh. Jesus instructed his followers to flee Jerusalem when they saw these signs. If Hebrews was written during or just before the siege, its repeated warnings would make even more sense. The Jews who rejected Christ were about to face God's judgment through Roman destruction. If Jewish Christians went back to the temple system, they would be destroyed along with it. Don't go back to Judaism. It's going to be destroyed. If you go back to Judaism, you're going to be wiped off the face of the earth. You're not going to have a sacrifice for sins. You're not going to have anything. It's going to be gone. Flee. Listen to what Christ said. Get out of Jerusalem. Run for your life. Get out. Go. Don't stand. If you stick around, whoever sticks around is going to be taken. Go. So when you take Jesus' prophetic words in Luke 21, Matthew 24 about the coming destruction, You look at the warnings in Hebrews, it all fits together. 70 AD, 70 AD. If you've got to listen to Christ, you've got to flee to him, and you've got to get out of Jerusalem, you're going to die. And the temple is going to be destroyed. You may think God's going to protect it. It's all coming down. So, What is the evidence that this was written close to 70 AD? Number one, the temple system was still functioning. It was still standing. Number two, Hebrews 8.13 says that the old covenant's just about to disappear. Number three, the growing pressure on Jewish Christians matches the pre-siege context. Number four, the warnings and the urgency in Hebrews aligns perfectly with Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem's fall in Luke 21 and Matthew 24, all right? Now, could Hebrews have been written during the siege? during the siege. Now, what I did here is I went to look at another source that was not as convinced as I am. I am utterly convinced it was written during the siege. I don't know how you can get around it. It has to be. So, the argument here is, well, it's possible it was written during the siege, but we don't have enough evidence to confirm it. However, if it was written between A.D. 66 and 70, it would have been during the Jewish revolt, A.D. 66. It would have been the beginning of Titus's military campaign. And what's the other person? Vespasian, I think was his name. Their military campaigns. And then, of course, the siege of Jerusalem itself in 70 AD. If Hebrews was written during this time, the warnings about judgment would have been unfolding right before their eyes. And I think that's what was occurring. All right. So I think, so AI said this, the AD 66 through 70 timeframe is most likely, is most likely making Hebrews a document written on the sea, on the edge of one of the most pivotal moments in biblical history, the fall of Jerusalem and the definitive end of the old covenant system. So AI says it's most likely that this is the time frame. And all of that other evidence, the internal evidence of the book screams it. Now, if that's the context, if 66 to 70 is the context, that would have had a significant impact on the Jews at the time. So let's put this then all together. Hebrews. are written to Jews during the siege of Jerusalem. If Jerusalem was under siege, 66 to 70 AD, which is a historical fact, there would have been immense pressure on Jewish Christians to return to Judaism. And this would have been done as a sign of loyalty, a sign of loyalty to Israel, a sign of loyalty to their fellow Jews, a sign of loyalty to their culture. And this would add another layer of urgency to the Jews. See, the Jews are being tempted. They're facing a strong temptation to be pulled back because it would have been like, don't look around, we're under siege. And you're going to turn your back on your country? You're going to turn your back on your family? You're going to turn your back on your culture? How dare you do that? The siege created a nationalistic and religious crises for the Jews at that time. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the book of Hebrews. I am so sick and tired of listening to sermons and it's like, Hebrews is about us and about us and about us and just stop it for crying out loud. If you don't know how to teach the book, don't. The siege created a nationalistic and religious crisis. There's no way to get around this. The Jewish-Roman war between AD 66 and AD 70 was a nationalistic and religious struggle against Rome. The Jews saw the war as a fight for survival and there was a strong pressure to unite under Judaism to resist Roman oppression. Jewish Christians would have been seen as traitors for following Christ instead of standing with the Jewish nation and its religious system. The Jews would have, you are a traitor. And the writer of Hebrews like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, no, no, no. Don't go back. If you go back, you're placing yourself under judgment and the specific judgment that's being referred to. We want to make it about heaven or hell. It's the judgment that's coming upon Jerusalem. God is going to wipe them off. They, they rejected the Messiah. They rejected their King and judgments coming upon them. going to be destroyed. Again, I don't believe God is done with Israel because he's going to fulfill his promise, but they are set aside. The Gentiles are engrafted in, and at the time of the Gentiles are fulfilled, then God will return back to Israel. He will keep his promise. But at this time, so the writer of Hebrews is like, no, no, no, don't go back there. Don't go back to Judaism. You need something better. There's something better. So it takes everything Judaism would offer and say, no, you have a better this. You have a better priest. You have a better high priest. You have a better this. You have something better than the prophets. You have something better than Moses. You have something better than this. You have something better than this. Don't go back!" But then their families and everyone around them would be like, you are a traitor. Can you imagine living in such a difficult circumstance? Well, you would need the book of Hebrews specifically for them. What would be some of the pressures that they would have been facing? Religious pressure. The temple was the center of Jewish faith and rejecting it was seen as rejecting God, Israel, and their Jewish identity. You're rejecting everything. You're rejecting God. You're rejecting your nation. You're rejecting your identity of who you are. There would have been political pressure. Christianity was seen as disloyalty to the Jewish cause. To not participate in temple rituals would be seen as siding with Rome. Basically, you'd be like, you're going for the Romans. You're going for the very countries trying to come kill us. How dare you? Can you imagine the social and family pressure? Jewish Christians would have been urged to return to the synagogue and temple worship and sacrifice to show solidarity with... Don't you care about your own family? And food and resources would have been scarce during the siege. Josephus speaks of this. Staying with the Christian community might have been socially and economically costly. Oh, you're going to go stay with the Christians? Well, then we're not going to feed you. We're not going to give you any food. And there's limited food going around. And I believe, well, you can read Josephus, I believe Josephus speaks of possible cannibalism happening during the siege. I would have to verify that. I don't have Josephus in front of me, and it's been a while since I've read it, so don't, I'm not citing that as a fact. I'm saying that as a question mark, so you can go verify that. I could look it up right now, but we're already at 45 minutes, so you can do some research on that. You can see, then, the context. Hebrews is like, don't go back. Everything around them would be like, go back, and they're caught in the middle. Now, Hebrews then comes along and warns against returning to the old system. That's what Hebrews is. Don't go back. Now, in that context, all of those warnings, now they make a lot of sense, don't they? Now those warnings make perfect sense. And the next time you're in Sunday school or some small group and Christians start arguing about the warnings in Hebrews, I hate to say it, but there's times I've almost wanted to stand up and just scream, shut up. All of you stop talking. Nobody here knows what you're talking about. And it's not because I'm smarter. It's not even anything to do with that. It's just, it's basic historical context. I get so sick of Christians saying, well, you need the proper context, you need the proper context, and then over and over and over ignore the proper context. And this is not even a difficult context to demonstrate. Almost anything you look up will say Hebrews was written somewhere in the 60s. They may make it early 60 AD, 64 AD, I think it's between 66 and 70 AD, but it's going to be somewhere Very close, within 9, 8, 7, 5, 4, 3 years of the temple being wiped off the face of the earth. But again, you know why Christians don't interpret Hebrews that way? They don't interpret Matthew 24 and the passage in Luke that way. They make it about the end times. And you know what pastors and churches are preoccupied with? They're preoccupied with their stinking self, and they've got to make every passage about me, me, me, me, me, me, me. You've got to make it all about themselves. Now if you look at these, if you look at these warnings, now if you go to these warnings, They make more sense, right? Hebrews 2, 1 through 4, don't neglect salvation. We already read Hebrews 2, 1 through 4. Don't neglect salvation. Well, what does this mean in the context of the siege? The pressure to return to Judaism was strong, but abandoning Christ would mean judgment. Don't neglect salvation. One, listen to what Christ has said earlier. When you see these signs, get out of Jerusalem. Don't neglect it. Stay with Christ. Or if you go back and you stay here and you're going to get wiped off the face of the earth. Hebrews 3, 7 through 19, don't harden your hearts like Israel in the wilderness. Just as Israel perished in the wilderness, those who reject Christ now will perish in the siege. Stay with Christ and get out. Go. Leave. If you stay, judgment's coming. Hebrews 6, 4-8, those who fall away cannot be renewed. Those who return to Judaism might not get another chance before destruction comes. Not only that, the idea here is those who fall away cannot be renewed. If you go back to Judaism, you're not going to have a system where you can do anything to be renewed, right? There's not going to be any more animal sacrifice. You're not going to have a priesthood. Everything's going to be destroyed. There's not going to be another sacrifice for sin. You're not going to have anything. Hebrews 10, 28-31, no more sacrifice for sins. If they return to the temple system, they would be left with nothing after it was destroyed. There's no chance for renewal. There's no blood. There's no sacrifice. There's no priest. Hebrews 12, 25-29, God is shaking the earth. The coming destruction was a final shaking of the old covenant system. The entire argument of Hebrews is that Jesus is greater than the Jewish system, so returning to Judaism in this moment of crisis would be a fatal mistake, both spiritually and physically. That's the book! It drives me crazy! So if you put it in this context, everything makes sense. And then again, let's put it back in it. Again, I believe this is all written during the siege. I think this is all, and if it's written during the siege, there's all these implications. Again, I'll go back to Jesus' prophecy and the escape of Christians. In Luke 21, 20 through 24, Jesus explicitly warned his followers about the coming destruction of Jerusalem and told them to flee when they saw it surrounded. When you see these signs, get out. Early Christian tradition, I don't know if this is fact, records that many Christians fled I think it was called Pella, P-E-L-L-A, when the Roman siege began. So many Christians thought, we got to go, we got to go, we got to get out. We were told by Jesus himself to get out. This would mean that Jewish Christians who remained in Jerusalem were facing intense pressure from fellow Jews to stay and fight rather than flee. Stay! Fight! Well, but Jesus said to flee. Well, who are you going to follow? You're going to turn to your dead supposed Messiah? Or are you going to stay and fight for your nation, your family, and your identity, and your culture? You see the pressure? I believe it was written during the siege. And if it was written during the siege, then the siege created a nationalistic and religious crises, all right? They would have faced immense pressure. Once we understand then all the pressure that we're facing, everything that was going on, then the Hebrew warnings make, all the Hebrew warnings are about returning to Judaism. That's what it's about. In the context of 70 AD. If it's written during the siege, then Jesus' prophecy to get out of Jerusalem, it's not about the second coming, it's about right there. It all makes sense. So the real danger that they're being warned of is that judgment was coming, literal physical judgment. was coming, and those who stayed with Judaism would face not just spiritual loss, but physical destruction. This aligns perfectly with the warnings in Hebrews. They were not just theological, but eschatological. Destruction was coming, and eschatological not in the second coming, but eschatological in that, hey guys, this is coming. destruction, this judgment was foretold, it was prophesied. This is a fulfillment of the prophecy Jesus gave during His ministry. To stay within Judaism was to remain under God's judgment. To hold on to Christ was the only way to escape. Literally hold on to Christ, to His words, and get out. So then how do we understand Hebrews? Hebrews was a, I think we could say it this way. It was a final, or Hebrews was a last warning. Let's go with that. It was a last warning before disaster. The siege of Jerusalem intensified the pressure for Jewish Christians to return to Judaism as a sign of loyalty to Israel. Hebrews was written as a final warning, do not go back. Judaism is ending. Christ is your only hope. Those who held on to Christ and fled were spared. Those who rejected Christ and stayed face God's judgment in 70 A.D. This makes Hebrews one of the most—this is A.I. now—this makes Hebrews one of the most urgent and historically significant books in the entire New Testament. as it was written on the brink of one of the most catastrophic events in Jewish history. And yet, Christians think it's all about us. Now, I thought I was going to do maybe a part two, a part three. I don't think I need to do a part one, part two, part three. I've got plenty of notes here. I got plenty of notes I didn't even get to. I skipped a bunch of notes. Here, I skipped a bunch of these, but I have a whole thing. Now, I'm looking at all of those warning passages and light of 7080, which I have already kind of done. I could go back through it again, but I think I've already demonstrated it. I mean, I got a lot more I could go into, but I think that just gives you the framework. And if you put it all together, Matthew 24, is that like Luke? Was that Luke 21? I think it's Luke 21. Let me look here. I have to look at my notes. Going by memory here. Is it Luke 21, where he says, I think it's Luke 21. Yeah, Luke 21, where Jesus says no stone and all of that. Let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains, let them which are in the midst depart. Okay, like, and when you shall see Jerusalem come past with armies, then you know that the desolation therefore is nigh. Christians take that and make that about some second coming and what do you, it's about 70 AD for crying out loud. You take Luke 21, Matthew 24, 70 A.D., Hebrews, all of Hebrews and all those ones, 70 A.D., and put it all together, now you have some capacity to interpret Scripture correctly and lie, not only if it's textual, but historical context. Now you say, well, how is it applicable to us? Well, it tells us there's no point in going back to Judaism, right? People who want to return back to Judaism, and Judaism, and Judaism, and seem drawn back to wanting to do Passover, and wanting to do this, and wanting to supposedly explore their Jewish roots of Christianity. I got no problem understanding it, but we don't go back to that. That's gone. It's vanished. It disappeared. We look to Christ. Christ is better than all of that. Now you may want to look at how it pointed to Christ. Okay. But it was written to a specific people and a specific context for a specific reason. You've got to be careful when you go take a book who is written to a specific people and a specific situation for a specific reason and then just throw them out and move us in and then turn it into some kind of debate about salvation and eternal security, not eternal security. Whenever I see that, I'm just like, you know what? I'm just walking away. You people have no clue what you're talking about. And I know it comes across as arrogant, and I'm not trying to be. It's just I get sick and tired of it. This information about Hebrews' connection to 70 AD is not hidden in some dusty library somewhere that you have to, you know, cut through a jungle to find this hidden library from antiquity, and you've got to break in, and hopefully you can grab the book before the large bull— Okay, I'm using Raiders of the Lost Ark. You get the idea! You don't have to do that. You can just simply, you can just simply do a little bit of research and go, huh, 70 AD, what happened 70 AD? The temple was destroyed. Hmm, this is written to the Jews. Maybe we should interpret it that way. It doesn't require Bible college. It doesn't require, you can use a Bible dictionary. Most study Bibles, their introduction's gonna connect it to 70 AD. You don't need anything. You know what you do need to do is not go to church and listen to sermons. No, I'm not saying that every church does it. I'm saying that I'm baffled by how frequently I hear Hebrews taught with very little reference to 70 AD. They may throw a little bit of lip service to it. And the same thing with Matthew 24 and Luke 21. I've said it before, the sermon, because it's almost designed to always be about us, is almost inevitably the culprit and actually keeping people from the true meaning of the text. All right, 58 minutes, I'm gonna stop. You could hear the iPad there, that's my daughter calling me. So she's probably gonna call me about some political rant. So I'm gonna go listen to her. All right, so thank you for listening. Now my rant is over. Ladies and gentlemen, 70 AD. If you don't know what happened, if you don't understand the significance of that, learn that. Don't ever forget the significance of 70 A.D. on biblical interpretation. If you interpret the Bible with very little knowledge or even acknowledgement of what happened in 70 A.D., inevitably, you're going to misinterpret Scripture. God bless.