Matthew & Mark 21st century judgments, Luke 1st century judgments

[seeker_truth]

Did Matthew & Mark write of judgments that were to fall upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem in the 21st century, while Luke wrote of similar judgments that fell upon Jerusalem and the nation of Judah in the 1st century?

Could it be that simple, and the reason for so many end time theories? IMHO, Yes..

Everyone with a bit and piece to the end time puzzle, and no one able to see the whole picture..

[John146]

Did Matthew & Mark write of judgments that were to fall upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem in the 21st century, while Luke wrote of similar judgments that fell upon Jerusalem and the nation of Judah in the 1st century?

Could it be that simple, and the reason for so many end time theories? IMHO, Yes..

Everyone with a bit and piece to the end time puzzle, and no one able to see the whole picture..

How did you come to this conclusion, though? Are you saying that you believe Matthew 24-25 and Mark 13 recorded an entirely different discourse than the one Jesus gave as recorded in Luke 21? Were there two separate occasions when the disciples made remarks to Jesus about the temple buildings with Him telling them that they would be destroyed with no stone left upon another to which they responded with questions that He then answered?

[billy-brown 2]

How did you come to this conclusion, though? Are you saying that you believe Matthew 24-25 and Mark 13 recorded an entirely different discourse than the one Jesus gave as recorded in Luke 21? Were there two separate occasions when the disciples made remarks to Jesus about the temple buildings with Him telling them that they would be destroyed with no stone left upon another to which they responded with questions that He then answered?

Yeah . . . what he said . . .^^^

[DurbanDude]

Did Matthew & Mark write of judgments that were to fall upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem in the 21st century, while Luke wrote of similar judgments that fell upon Jerusalem and the nation of Judah in the 1st century?

Could it be that simple, and the reason for so many end time theories? IMHO, Yes..

Everyone with a bit and piece to the end time puzzle, and no one able to see the whole picture..

I believe there is alot of truth in what you are saying. Luke definitely focusses more on the events surrounding 70AD. Just as per the rest of what is written in the gospels, they all recorded what they could (in Luke's case he apparently researched it) and what they felt was important to write down. Thus it was the same Olivet discourse, yet Luke focusses on Jesus answer concerning the destruction of the temple more than the others, yet Matthew 24 clearly includes the answers concerning the end of the world and the second coming, we know this because the discourse is introduced in Matthew 24:3 as the answer to these questions. Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple (Luke 21:5,6), and records Jesus'answer to that question. Only from verse 25 does Luke start referring to the end-times, and it is described as occurring at the end of the dispersion period of Israel.(verse 24). Until then Luke's specific focus is on the 70AD event which was the main dispersion event.

[John146]

I believe there is alot of truth in what you are saying. Luke definitely focusses more on the events surrounding 70AD. Just as per the rest of what is written in the gospels, they all recorded what they could (in Luke's case he apparently researched it) and what they felt was important to write down. Thus it was the same Olivet discourse, yet Luke focusses on Jesus answer concerning the destruction of the temple more than the others, yet Matthew 24 clearly includes the answers concerning the end of the world and the second coming, we know this because the discourse is introduced in Matthew 24:3 as the answer to these questions. Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple (Luke 21:5,6), and records Jesus'answer to that question. Only from verse 25 does Luke start referring to the end-times, and it is described as occurring at the end of the dispersion period of Israel.(verse 24). Until then Luke's specific focus is on the 70AD event which was the main dispersion event.

How then do you explain the similarities between Matthew 24:4-22 and Luke 21:8-24? You are saying that those two passages are speaking of entirely different events? I don't see how that could be.

Also, you said that Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple yet you say that he did record things beginning in verse 25 that were regarding the end of the age, which would be future to 70 AD. And I would agree with that. So, you can try to say that Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple, but the fact is that he records part of Jesus' answer to the question regarding His coming and the end of the age as well. So, it doesn't matter if the question regarding His coming and the end of the age is specifically mentioned in Luke 21 since part of His answer to that question is recorded there.

[christseeker]

Did Matthew & Mark write of judgments that were to fall upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem in the 21st century, while Luke wrote of similar judgments that fell upon Jerusalem and the nation of Judah in the 1st century?

Could it be that simple, and the reason for so many end time theories? IMHO, Yes..

Everyone with a bit and piece to the end time puzzle, and no one able to see the whole picture..

No I believe they all wrote about the 1st century, not about the 21st. I believe people put the idea that things are going to happen now onto the text

[Beckrl]

Did Matthew & Mark write of judgments that were to fall upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem in the 21st century, while Luke wrote of similar judgments that fell upon Jerusalem and the nation of Judah in the 1st century?

Could it be that simple, and the reason for so many end time theories? IMHO, Yes..

Everyone with a bit and piece to the end time puzzle, and no one able to see the whole picture..

If that's how you would have to read it so that it would fit your theology, But Matthew, Mark and Luke all recorded the same Olive Discourse. Matthew would give the same events but with alittle more info in certain areas. While Luke would do the same likewise given alittle more info in certain areas that Matthew and Mark don't record. That's in no way indicates that there should be two are even three different time periods for these events to happen.

So if you would like to use the analogy of the big picture puzzle than you can fine peices from Matthew and then Mark and Luke. Putting all of them together you can come to the one big picture. That of the destruction of the Earthy Jerusalem that makes the way for the Heavenly New Jerusalem with in the first century.

[DurbanDude]

How then do you explain the similarities between Matthew 24:4-22 and Luke 21:8-24? You are saying that those two passages are speaking of entirely different events? I don't see how that could be..

21:7 And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?

21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
There were many claiming to be christ to free Jews from the Romans, especially during the Jewish rebellion
21:9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass;
The Jews had succesful and then unsuccesful skirmishes across the area and even in the Meditteranean. If unified they could have won that war, they were intelligent and numerous and committed. Only their own betrayal and infighting and lack of central leadership stopped them. Everyone wanted to be the Messiah and lead the Jews to success.
but the end is not by and by.
21:10 Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:
21:11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.
These verses highlightedin red are clearly about the end, let's say its a parenthesis in between the 70AD events with mention of the "end" and then going back to "before all these"
21:12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.
21:13 And it shall turn to you for a testimony.
21:14 Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer:
21:15 For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.
This is what happened to those same 12 disciples during that first 40 years as recorded in Acts
21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
also happened to these disciples, before and after 70AD
21:17 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.
21:18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
21:19 In your patience possess ye your souls.
21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
Can be interpreted as "all manner of things........be fulfilled"
21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Clearly referring to 70AD and not the end-times attack on Israel which ends suddenly at the second coming. We are still in the times of the gentiles, leading up to the last period of tribulation. From this point on the final period is referenced. The prophecy is not about two seperate periods, but links the whole period into one timeline. First the disciples would be persecuted and stand before kings. Then Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed. Then there would be the long period of dispersion. Then the end will come.

Also, you said that Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple yet you say that he did record things beginning in verse 25 that were regarding the end of the age, which would be future to 70 AD. And I would agree with that. So, you can try to say that Luke only mentions the one question concerning the temple, but the fact is that he records part of Jesus' answer to the question regarding His coming and the end of the age as well. So, it doesn't matter if the question regarding His coming and the end of the age is specifically mentioned in Luke 21 since part of His answer to that question is recorded there

True, yes Luke was obviously recording the answers to the other questions as well , even if he does not list the other questions. Let's just say that its a matter of emphasis, Luke mentioned and emphasized the first question, yet Matthew mentioned and emphasized all 3 questions. Yes there is an overlap of similar language, this is because the events leading up to 70AD and the events leading up to the final war are similar. Both involve persecution, both involve a war, both involve a proliferation of false christs, both events involve mainly Judah, in both wars it is recommended to leave the valleys and Jerusalem.Both events are described from memory of certain wording being used by Jesus. Jesus' prophecy flows from one war to the other war, so the recorders have recorded both events in the same terminology. Luke 21 flows best because the time of the gentiles and the dispersion is the obvious seperator between 70AD and the future, yet Matthew has many verses that could be applied equally to both events.

[John146]

21:7 And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?

21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
There were many claiming to be christ to free Jews from the Romans, especially during the Jewish rebellion
21:9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass;
The Jews had succesful and then unsuccesful skirmishes across the area and even in the Meditteranean. If unified they could have won that war, they were intelligent and numerous and committed. Only their own betrayal and infighting and lack of central leadership stopped them. Everyone wanted to be the Messiah and lead the Jews to success.
but the end is not by and by.
21:10 Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:
21:11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.
These verses highlightedin red are clearly about the end, let's say its a parenthesis in between the 70AD events with mention of the "end" and then going back to "before all these"
21:12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.
21:13 And it shall turn to you for a testimony.
21:14 Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer:
21:15 For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.
This is what happened to those same 12 disciples during that first 40 years as recorded in Acts
21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
also happened to these disciples, before and after 70AD
21:17 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.
21:18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
21:19 In your patience possess ye your souls.
21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
Can be interpreted as "all manner of things........be fulfilled"
21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Clearly referring to 70AD and not the end-times attack on Israel which ends suddenly at the second coming. We are still in the times of the gentiles, leading up to the last period of tribulation. From this point on the final period is referenced. The prophecy is not about two seperate periods, but links the whole period into one timeline. First the disciples would be persecuted and stand before kings. Then Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed. Then there would be the long period of dispersion. Then the end will come.

I agree with this, but I don't see how it differs from Matthew 24 or Mark 13.

True, yes Luke was obviously recording the answers to the other questions as well , even if he does not list the other questions.

Therefore, to point out that just one of the questions is mentioned there was kind of...pointless, wouldn't you agree?

Let's just say that its a matter of emphasis, Luke mentioned and emphasized the first question, yet Matthew mentioned and emphasized all 3 questions.

And you determine this how?

Yes there is an overlap of similar language, this is because the events leading up to 70AD and the events leading up to the final war are similar. Both involve persecution, both involve a war, both involve a proliferation of false christs, both events involve mainly Judah, in both wars it is recommended to leave the valleys and Jerusalem.Both events are described from memory of certain wording being used by Jesus. Jesus' prophecy flows from one war to the other war, so the recorders have recorded both events in the same terminology. Luke 21 flows best because the time of the gentiles and the dispersion is the obvious seperator between 70AD and the future, yet Matthew has many verses that could be applied equally to both events.

Nah. There's only one Olivet Discourse and it's recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. They each are describing the same events.

[DurbanDude]

Therefore, to point out that just one of the questions is mentioned there was kind of...pointless, wouldn't you agree?

.

No, I am agreeing with the gist of the OP regarding the point that Luke 21 emphasized 70AD, and Matthew 24 does not focus as much on 70AD.

And you determine this how?

By verse by verse analysis of Luke 21 (as shown above)and Matthew 24. As shown above, I believe most of v8-24 are about 70AD, about 14 verses. I believe Matthew 24 only has from verse 4-12 of which only about 7 verses are about 70AD.

[seeker_truth]

If that's how you would have to read it so that it would fit your theology, But Matthew, Mark and Luke all recorded the same Olive Discourse. Matthew would give the same events but with alittle more info in certain areas. While Luke would do the same likewise given alittle more info in certain areas that Matthew and Mark don't record. That's in no way indicates that there should be two are even three different time periods for these events to happen.

So if you would like to use the analogy of the big picture puzzle than you can fine peices from Matthew and then Mark and Luke. Putting all of them together you can come to the one big picture. That of the destruction of the Earthy Jerusalem that makes the way for the Heavenly New Jerusalem with in the first century.

Ouch..Never had a thought of developing my own private interpretation or Eschatology...Just throwing a piece of meat into the ring of discussion, in hopes of providing a full satisfying meal.

[seeker_truth]

How did you come to this conclusion, though? Are you saying that you believe Matthew 24-25 and Mark 13 recorded an entirely different discourse than the one Jesus gave as recorded in Luke 21? Were there two separate occasions when the disciples made remarks to Jesus about the temple buildings with Him telling them that they would be destroyed with no stone left upon another to which they responded with questions that He then answered?

First, I came to understand the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the nation of Judah, under King Nebuchadnezzar, when I read the books, Zechariah and Jeremiah, which opened up the Book of the Revelation, and in turn, the end time...There truly is nothing new under the sun.. Only different centuries and gentile players, who are brought forth by the Lord, to fulfill judgments against a rebellious nation.

While studying the three Gospels, I found that there were several different places where Jesus spoke and taught them on the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the nation; two descriptions of two different events that would take place in two different centuries, the 1st century, and an end time period, which has yet to happen..

[Gilligan]

Even if Matthew and Mark don't refer to 70 A.D., that doesn't mean a 21st century fulfillment, could be 35th century (or any other).

[John146]

No, I am agreeing with the gist of the OP regarding the point that Luke 21 emphasized 70AD, and Matthew 24 does not focus as much on 70AD.

But I see no basis for that claim. I don't see any real evidence being offered to back up that claim.

By verse by verse analysis of Luke 21 (as shown above)and Matthew 24. As shown above, I believe most of v8-24 are about 70AD, about 14 verses. I believe Matthew 24 only has from verse 4-12 of which only about 7 verses are about 70AD.

How exactly did you determine that Matthew 24:15-22 is speaking of something entirely different than Luke 21:20-24? Do you believe there is just one Olivet Discourse? If so, do you believe Jesus said what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24 separately from Matthew 24:15-22? Do you think He said "let those who are in Judea flee into the mountains" and "woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days" twice?

[John146]

First, I came to understand the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the nation of Judah, under King Nebuchadnezzar, when I read the books, Zechariah and Jeremiah, which opened up the Book of the Revelation, and in turn, the end time...There truly is nothing new under the sun.. Only different centuries and gentile players, who are brought forth by the Lord, to fulfill judgments against a rebellious nation.

While studying the three Gospels, I found that there were several different places where Jesus spoke and taught them on the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the nation; two descriptions of two different events that would take place in two different centuries, the 1st century, and an end time period, which has yet to happen..

You didn't answer my other questions. I asked if you are saying that you believe Matthew 24-25 and Mark 13 recorded an entirely different discourse than the one Jesus gave as recorded in Luke 21? Yes or no? And I asked if you think there were two separate occasions when the disciples made remarks to Jesus about the temple buildings with Him telling them that they would be destroyed with no stone left upon another to which they responded with questions that He then answered? Yes or no?