Time of trouble

[markedward]

Do you not believe Jesus had Dan 12 in view when he stated this?

I don't.

2. The "wise" in Daniel 11:33-35 that "fall by captivity, sword and flame ad plundering" were people that were literally killed or were persecuted by Antiochus' regime. So how is it that the "wise" that "rise from the dust" are not people who literally rise from the dead?

This would be like asking why Ezekiel used bodily resurrection language for the return from the Babylonian exile in chapter 37 when he wasn't expecting people to literally bodily rise from the dead at that time. It's metaphor for national restoration. Ezekiel saw national restoration, so he used bodily resurrection language. Same thing with Daniel.

Since none of the passages that you mentioned speak of a future bodily resurrection in your opinion but only a national restoration, do you believe the resurrection of the dead at the end of the age was referred to directly in the Old Testament at all?

I see Scripture (particularly in some Psalms) mentioning here and there the idea of God's love for his people being so great that not even death could stop them from experiencing his love... which is definitely grounds for resurrection (i.e. God's overturning death so his people could experience his love), but outright 'resurrection', perhaps only briefly in Daniel (the very last couple of verses).

If not, where did the idea come from and how did the Jews, Pharisees, disciples and others in the New Testament get the idea?

The definitive concept of 'resurrection' came about after the Babylonian exile, after all of the Hebrew Scriptures had been written... with the possible exception of Daniel (which, in the view I somewhat lean toward, the book was written shortly before or during the Maccabean Revolt, but the contents would trace back to the historical Daniel).

I would speculate that the Jews, having their Scriptures using bodily resurrection language as metaphor for national restoration, and also having their Scriptures depicting God's love as being so great that not even death could come between him and his people, would have certainly been yearning, searching for a meaning on this. In the so-called 'intertestamental' period, God inspired the people, revealing to them 'resurrection'... that God's love would literally overcome death and raise his people to eternal life.

I am curious to know how you interpret Daniel 11:36-45 as Antiochus Epiphanes, especially since verse 45 signifies him dying once he sets up his camp in Israel. From History, we know that Antiochus Epiphanes did not die in Israel...

The text doesn't explicitly state that he would die in Israel, but I agree that it is difficult to interpret in full accordance with my position. Either way... I take it on faith. (Oh, God no, anything but taking Scripture on faith without absolutist evidence! Seriously.)

The rest of the interpretation I find to be far too strong, far more consistent with the internal context (the text never indicates a massive leap of thousands of years between verse 35 and 36), the historical context (everything else in 36-45 perfectly fits Antiochus IV Epiphanes, as well as the various other visions in chapters 7-9 that corroborate the details), and how the Jews themselves interpreted the text (the different books titled 'Maccabees' repeatedly look to the visions of Daniel, particularly that of chapter 11, including verses 36-45, as having been fulfilled with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and that events at that time).

How can you not interpret verse 13 the same way as verse 2? Why would Daniel's resurrection be literal and the "wise" remnant "rising from the dust" be symbolic when only separated by a few verses... It seems like a continuous stream of thought IMO...

'Continuous stream of thought' would be not breaking chapter 12.1-3 off of chapter 11.36-45. 'Continuous stream of thought' would be not breaking chapter 11.36-45 off of chapter 11.1-35. And yet everyone does this anyway. I don't think the person who snaps the 'continuous stream of thought' of Daniel 11.1-12.3 in half , separated by a gap of several thousand years without any indication from the text doesn't have the justification to wonder over an apparent 'break' someone else does. It's a double standard.

To answer your question... it simply is what it is. Chapter 11.1-12.3 is one whole, continuous stream of thought, and as such 12.1-2 must be interpreted in the same context as 11.36-45, which must be interpreted in the same context as 11.1-35. The whole thing is about the coming of Alexander, the splitting of his kingdom, the rise of the Seleucids (in Syria) and the Ptolemies (in Egypt) from the remnants of Alexander's kingdom, their centuries-long feuding, culminating in the rise of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his persecution of the saints of Israel amidst his arrogant attempts at conquering Egypt and other lands, including his desecration of the temple in Jerusalem, and ending with the subsequent liberation of the Jews from their Syrian oppressors, bringing an end to the spiritual exile Daniel had been told about by Gabriel in chapter 9, and hence, bringing about a national restoration / resurrection of the people.

If 12.1-3 does have literal bodily resurrection in mind (apparently paralleled by Daniel's commendation at the end of the book), it is remote and secondary to the contextually more relevant topic: God's restoration of Israel in light of its spiritual exile that ended with the Maccabean Revolt.

[Vanderhoven7]

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Would you also put verse 34 as meaning 70 AD? If not, how can all things that are written, be fulfilled twice, and at different times? Had it said some things, instead of all things, then that would be different.

Hi DivaD

As I see it, Matthew 24:34 is the time text. Everything that Jesus predicted up to that point in the text was fulfilled in the first century (coming in judgement against Israel for rejecting their Messiah) culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem (in other words it would all happen to His own generation). Everything after verse 35 applies to the second coming (Parousia).

"This generation" everywhere else in the gospels always refers to Christ's own (Christ rejecting) generation. Just using Matthew's gospel for example:


The Greek word genea appears 10 times in Matthew's gospel. Only once is it used to mean “one set of parents to the next”. In 6 of the instances Matthew places the definite article “this” (houtos) before generation “houtos genea “(ghen-eh-ah') It seems to me that in every instance, “this generation” covers the same group of people - “Christ's contemporaries”

Mt 11:16 But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places, who call out to the other children, (the persons then living contemporary with Christ)


Mt 12:41 The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.
(the persons then living contemporary with Christ)

Mt 12:42 "The Queen of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. (the persons then living contemporary with Christ).

Mt 12:45 "Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself.... That is the way it will also be with this evil generation ." (the persons then living contemporary with Christ)

Mt 17:17 And Jesus answered and said, "You unbelieving and perverted generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you? ..." (the persons then living contemporary with Christ)

Mt 23:36 "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
(the persons then living contemporary with Christ)

In Context Mat 23:29-36
29. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous, 30 and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye witness to yourselves, that ye are sons of them that slew the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. :33 Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of Gehenna? 34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: some of them shall ye kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city: 35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

In Matthew 24, Jesus proceeds to give details to His disciple about this judgement culminating with the exact same timing reference.

Mt 24:34
"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Vander

[divaD]

Here is something interesting..maybe. I can't believe I never noticed this before. Notice the following.

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Some are saying that verse 34 has to be meaning 70 AD. But notice what it is connected with...Heaven and earth shall pass away. IOW, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled, has to be linked and not separated from this part..Heaven and earth shall pass away. To try and prove this, let's go to Genesis 2.

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations(towldah) of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

towldah
or toldah {to-led-aw'}; from 'yalad' (3205); (plural only) descent, i.e. family; (figuratively) history:--birth, generations.
http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednameb...EB84.htm#S8435


Notice what it says...These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created.

Compare that with...This generation(genea) shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled..Heaven and earth shall pass away,

genea
from (a presumed derivative of) genoV - genos 1085; a generation; by implication, an age (the period or the persons):--age, generation, nation, time.
http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednameb...gs/B40C024.htm

So IOW, Genesis 2 might be understood like such..These are the BIRTHS of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

And Matthew 24:34-35 might be understood like this...This AGE shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

In Genesis 2 you have the birth of the heavens and earth. In Matt 24 you have the death of the heaven and earth, which is brought about by all these things being fulfilled. This of course would have to be connected with the new heavems and a new earth.

Getting back to why Matthew 24:34 should be understood as this age and be linked to heaven and earth passing away, let's go to 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.


The first earth age perished, meaning the flood in Noah's day. But the heavens and the earth, which are now..meaning the present earth age...by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. Then 2 Peter 3:10-13 tells us when this earth age will pass, which then brings in the new heavens and a new earth. So putting it all together, Matt 24 is speaking of the day of the Lord in verse 34-36, and it's unreasonable to separate this generation shall not pass from heaven and earth shall pass away.

[Vanderhoven7]

Matthew 24:35 is dealing with the surety of Christ's words, not the timing of Israel's judgement (divine vengeance) predicted to occur to His own Christ rejecting generation


Matthew Henry Mat 24:35 -
Heaven and earth shall pass away ... -
Christ here assures us of the certainty of them (Mat_24:35); Heaven and earth shall pass away; they continue this day indeed, according to God's ordinance, but they shall not continue for ever (Psa_102:25, Psa_102:26; 2Pe_3:10); but my words shall not pass away. Note, The word of Christ is more sure and lasting than heaven and earth. Hath he spoken? And shall he not do it? ...Every word of Christ is very pure, and therefore very sure.

Barnes: Mat 24:35 -
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away - You may sooner expect to see the heaven and earth pass away and return to nothing, than my words to fail.

Marcellus Kik writes: "To give emphasis to His prophecy, Christ adds in verse 35: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words will not pass away." We today can give witness that His words have not passed away but have been wonderfully fulfilled. And if His words regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple have been fulfilled, even so His words regarding the Second Coming (Parousia) be fulfilled. The fulfillment of Matthew 24:4-35 is a lesson to all that Matthew 24:36-25:46 will also be fulfilled."

Vander

[markedward]

Some are saying that verse 34 has to be meaning 70 AD. But notice what it is connected with...Heaven and earth shall pass away. IOW, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled, has to be linked and not separated from this part..Heaven and earth shall pass away.

That's not what he was saying. Compare this to Luke 16.17, where Jesus says 'It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void'. His point is that the universe (heaven and earth) would sooner come to an end, than for the Law to be nullified.

Jesus is stating that the universe (heaven and earth) would sooner come to an end, than his words would ever fail to be true. The 'heaven and earth' statement has nothing to do with do with when his prophecy would be fulfilled, but with the validity of his words.

So to paraphrase what Jesus has said: 'This generation will not pass away until all my words here are fulfilled. The universe would sooner end than my words fail to be fulfilled.'

[Vanderhoven7]

DivaD

Like you, I see two judgments being dealt with in Matthew 24.

Where do you see the line drawn between what Christ is predicting for His own generation and (ours perhaps)?

I see it at verse 35. How about you?

[Vanderhoven7]

MATTHEW 24 Re: OLIVET DISCOURSE; Parallels: Luke 21, Mark 13

CENTRAL QUESTION:


Which "generation" was Christ referring to in Matthew 24:34? (the time text)

- To which generation was Christ referring in Matthew 23:36?

- If the judicial sentence & prophetic woe of Mat.23:36
applies to Christ's generation, would not the exact same
terminology in Mat.24:34 have the same application?


LET'S CONSIDER ALL POSSIBLE GENERATIONAL APPLICATIONS.

CHRIST COULD HAVE INTENDED BY VERSE 34 THAT:


a. "all these things" were to happen to the 20th century generation exclusively.

- Impossible: conversation centers on "these stones" which were knocked down in 70 AD.
- Impossible Lu.21:23-24 states that subsequent to great distress, Jews were to be led captive to all nations
which occurred immediately after the 70 AD destruction.


b. "all these things" were to happen to both Christ's generation and our generation. (dual fulfillment theory)

- Impossible: -these buildings and are already destroyed.
- Impossible -Jews are not to be led captive into all nations again at Christ's second coming.
- Impossible -Matt.24:21 precludes dual fulfillment.


c. "all these things" were to happen to Christ's generation exclusively.

- possible, but only if it can be shown that "all these things" declared before verse 35 actually
did happen to the generation Jesus addressed ?


Was Matthew 24: 1 - 35 entirely fulfilled in the first century?

[John 8:32]

Was Matthew 24: 1 - 35 entirely fulfilled in the first century?

Nope, type and anti-type. Then and now.

[The Beginner]

I don't.
I see Scripture (particularly in some Psalms) mentioning here and there the idea of God's love for his people being so great that not even death could stop them from experiencing his love... which is definitely grounds for resurrection (i.e. God's overturning death so his people could experience his love), but outright 'resurrection', perhaps only briefly in Daniel (the very last couple of verses).

Would you not also see a resurrection in Job 19:24-25?

[25] For I know [that] my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the earth;[26] And after my skin is destroyed, this [I know], That in my flesh I shall see God, - Job 19:25-26 NKJV

The definitive concept of 'resurrection' came about after the Babylonian exile, after all of the Hebrew Scriptures had been written... with the possible exception of Daniel (which, in the view I somewhat lean toward, the book was written shortly before or during the Maccabean Revolt, but the contents would trace back to the historical Daniel).

If this Pseudo Daniel wrote the book, do you believe this to be a God inspired book? In other words do you believe that the prophecies in Daniel were actually prophecy or history?

'Continuous stream of thought' would be not breaking chapter 12.1-3 off of chapter 11.36-45. 'Continuous stream of thought' would be not breaking chapter 11.36-45 off of chapter 11.1-35. And yet everyone does this anyway. I don't think the person who snaps the 'continuous stream of thought' of Daniel 11.1-12.3 in half , separated by a gap of several thousand years without any indication from the text doesn't have the justification to wonder over an apparent 'break' someone else does. It's a double standard.

Bro, I apologize if my "continuous stream of thought" phrase came across insulting... It was not my intention.
I do however, think there is a difference in our approaches to the thought...

Our ideas breaking of a "continuous stream of thought" are vastly different.
You say that I am breaking it because I see a gap between verses that seemingly skip thousands of years and it is unwarranted by the text... That is different than what I am saying of you. My criticism is that your using two different hermeneutics over the same concept within the same book and chapter. In one place to "rise from the dead" is literal and the in the other it is not... That is my point...

To answer your criticism, I would say that the skipping of years within Daniel 11 happens often. We see it in verses 1-21 that not every chronological king is listed in the Selucids or Ptolemy Empires. There are gaps and they skip years and decades at times. I also believe that this is a consistent hermeneutic throughout Daniel's prophecies. Though I realize you would strongly disagree, I see Dan 2, 7, 8 giving historic chronological kingdoms and then giving a near/far prophecy in the final kingdom. This is how I see Daniel 11, starting in verse 21 as a near/far prophecy beginning with Antiochus and ultimately fulfilled in Antichrist. This IMO explains why many things in the last half of the chapter that were not fulfilled by Antiochus...I realize you do not believe in near/far prophecy nor anything I just said... but there ya go ...

If 12.1-3 does have literal bodily resurrection in mind (apparently paralleled by Daniel's commendation at the end of the book), it is remote and secondary to the contextually more relevant topic: God's restoration of Israel in light of its spiritual exile that ended with the Maccabean Revolt.

Can you give a little more on this... It sounds like your saying the opposite of what you are suggesting above... Is Daniel 121-3 and 12:13 on the issue of resurrection the same hermeneutically or not?

[John 8:32]

Add to the scripture in Job, this nugget...

Job 14:14 If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.
Job 14:15 Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee: thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands.

[Vanderhoven7]

Was Matthew 24: 1 - 35 entirely fulfilled in the first century?

Nope, type and anti-type. Then and now.

There has to be a basis other than speculation before I could buy that idea.

But if that is true, what is the anti-type of:

..........a. "not one of these stones" being left on another?

..........b. running to the hill-country beyond Judea to escape the tribulation of those days? (Where might Christians living in Boston flee to? Should Bostonians be praying that their flight not be in winter and take extra jackets with them when they work on their roofs?)

..........c. "Jews, who aren't slain by the sword being scattered into all nations?

Vander

[John 8:32]

Was Matthew 24: 1 - 35 entirely fulfilled in the first century?



There has to be a basis other than speculation before I could buy that idea.

But if that is true, what is the anti-type of:

..........a. "not one of these stones" being left on another?

..........b. running to the hill-country beyond Judea to escape the tribulation of those days? (Where might Christians living in Boston flee to? Should Bostonians be praying that their flight not be in winter and take extra jackets with them when they work on their roofs?)

..........c. "Jews, who aren't slain by the sword being scattered into all nations?

Vander

Then that leaves you with the Preterist view that all is fulfilled and the Bible was not written to us today. Suit yourself.

[Vanderhoven7]

Then that leaves you with the Preterist view that all is fulfilled and the Bible was not written to us today. Suit yourself.

Not at all John.

Verse 36 on "But of that day...." speaks of the second personal coming of Christ to earth for His church and subsequent world judgment. The Parousia is still to come. It will come at a day unexpectedly, during normal times when people are asleep in bed or at work in the fields or marrying etc. just as in the days of Noah....it will come as a snare on the whole world and to run from it would be futile.

Jesus separated the two judgments; one being local and applicable to His contemporaries; the other to affect all of humanity at an undisclosed date impossible of anticipation.

[John146]

MATTHEW 24 Re: OLIVET DISCOURSE; Parallels: Luke 21, Mark 13

CENTRAL QUESTION:


Which "generation" was Christ referring to in Matthew 24:34? (the time text)

- To which generation was Christ referring in Matthew 23:36?

- If the judicial sentence & prophetic woe of Mat.23:36
applies to Christ's generation, would not the exact same
terminology in Mat.24:34 have the same application?


LET'S CONSIDER ALL POSSIBLE GENERATIONAL APPLICATIONS.

CHRIST COULD HAVE INTENDED BY VERSE 34 THAT:


a. "all these things" were to happen to the 20th century generation exclusively.

- Impossible: conversation centers on "these stones" which were knocked down in 70 AD.
- Impossible Lu.21:23-24 states that subsequent to great distress, Jews were to be led captive to all nations
which occurred immediately after the 70 AD destruction.


b. "all these things" were to happen to both Christ's generation and our generation. (dual fulfillment theory)

- Impossible: -these buildings and are already destroyed.
- Impossible -Jews are not to be led captive into all nations again at Christ's second coming.
- Impossible -Matt.24:21 precludes dual fulfillment.


c. "all these things" were to happen to Christ's generation exclusively.

- possible, but only if it can be shown that "all these things" declared before verse 35 actually
did happen to the generation Jesus addressed ?


Was Matthew 24: 1 - 35 entirely fulfilled in the first century?

That isn't all possible generational applications. Why do you assume that the word "generation" can only refer to people who live during a certain time period (usually of around 40 years or so)? Do you not know that the word (Greek: genea) has other definitions besides that? Look at this verse:

Matt 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. 39But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

Notice that Jesus compared "this generation" to "the men of Nineveh". He was not comparing two time periods, He was comparing two people groups: believing Ninevites and unbelieving Jews. So, in that passage "this generation" was not a reference to people living only in that particular time period but was a reference to unbelieving Jews.

I believe every time Jesus said "this generation" He was not speaking of a particular time period but of the unbelieving Jewish people in general. You asked about Matt 23:36. Let's look at the verse in context.

Matt 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? 34Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: 35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. 37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Notice that He speaks of "this generation" as being those who He would send "unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify". Then He speaks of "Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets". So, He was directly associating "this generation" with "Jerusalem" or more specifically Jewish unbelievers who killed the prophets. But it wasn't just the Jews of that time period who killed the prophets of God. Their descendants also killed the prophets so Jesus was referring to a type of people and not just to those who are alive at that time.

Notice that Jesus referred to them as a "generation of vipers". He was not identifying them by the time period in which they were living, He was identifying them by their wickedness. Notice He was even holding them responsible for "the blood of righteous Abel". The Jews living then obviously didn't kill Abel so that means He was referring to a type of people (who were like Cain - wicked) rather than just people who were alive during a certain period of time. That can be seen from the passage in Matthew 12 as well. He contrasted "this generation" with the Ninevites. He was not contrasting chronological generations there, He was contrasting two different types of people with "this generation" being unbelieving Jews and the other type of people being believing Ninevites.

The context of Christ's use of the phrase "this generation" just does not support the idea that He was referring to a chronological generation rather than to a certain type of people. He said He didn't know the day or hour of His coming (Matt 24:36, Matt 25:13), so how could He have known that His coming would occur and "this generation" would pass away within about 40 years? I don't think that makes sense. I believe He was saying that "this generation" would not pass away until His coming occurred at the end of the age, whenever that might be (He didn't know). So, for all He knew His coming and "this generation" passing away wouldn't occur for thousands of years. All He knew is that the things He talked about, particularly in relation to His coming, would have to occur first before "this generation" would pass away.

[John146]

Not at all John.

Verse 36 on "But of that day...." speaks of the second personal coming of Christ to earth for His church and subsequent world judgment.

I agree. But wasn't He speaking of the day He had previously mentioned in verses 27-31? I have to disagree with your contention that He didn't start talking about His second coming until verse 35. However, I do agree that He spoke both of events related to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple buildings as well as to His future second coming at the end of the age. I don't see the breaking point between the local 70 AD event and global second coming event as being verse 35. I would put it at verse 22. At verse 23, He started talking about things that would occur after 70 AD up until His future second coming.