PDA

View Full Version : The End Of The Age Is At Hand



immortality
Oct 22nd 2008, 04:16 AM
The Day Of The Lord And The End Of The Age Are At Hand


"Behold, I am coming like a thief." [rev 16:15]]
"...the Day of the Lord will come like a thief." [2 pet 3:10]



"Behold, I come quickly..." [rev 22:12]

"Near is the great day of the Lord, Near and coming very quickly..." [zeph 1:14]



i have done some rather extensive research in various subjects to see how they may relate to bible prophecy. when i began, i was quite skeptical of most of the material and additionally, felt overwhelmed and confused. however, as i progressed, the puzzle pieces that were fitting together were too astonishing to simply ignore.

one of the things the holy spirit does is inform believers of what is going to happen in the future. i truly believe it was god's intention that i research these things. it seems as though it was his way of saying, "here, consider what is before you. these things are soon going to take place."

the myan civilization was apparently obsessed with earthly and cosmic cycles and were able to forecast events with amazing accuracy (apparently even their own demise). contrary to what most people think, the myans did not forecast the end of the world, but rather the end of an age. this transition from one age to another, however, would involve cataclysmic events during our passing through what scientists refer to today as the galactic plain.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4538/horizon012907azb5.jpg

the bible says there will be an end to this present age:

"...what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” [mat 24:3]
"...I am with you each and every day until the end of the age." [mat 28:20]

jesus makes it clear that the coming gog-magog war will create an unprecedented period of distress. then he says the following:

“Immediately after the suffering of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man arriving on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet blast, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." [mat 24:29-31]

when describing these cosmic changes in the beginning of the passage, jesus is repeating the prophesies predicted by various old testament prophets, such as:

"The sunlight will be turned to darkness, and the moon to the color of blood, before the day of the Lord comes–that great and terrible day!" [joel 2:31]

"For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine." [isa 13:10]

now let's look at the description of the sixth seal of revelation and see if it describes these same events:

"Then I looked when the Lamb opened the sixth seal, and a huge earthquake took place; the sun became as black as sackcloth made of hair, and the full moon became blood red; and the stars in the sky fell to the earth like a fig tree dropping its unripe figs when shaken by a fierce wind. The sky was split apart like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place. Then the kings of the earth, the very important people, the generals, the rich, the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. They said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one who is seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, because the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to withstand it?” [revelation 6:12-17]

it is therefore logical to conclude that the opening of the sixth seal marks the beginning of the "day of the lord", or the tribulation period comprised of judgments that take place prior to the second coming of jesus. the description of the "great earthquake" and sky being "split apart" and "rolled up like a scroll" is most likely describing a geographical pole shift. isaiah 24:20 seems to add significantly to this theory:

"The earth reels to and fro like a drunkard And it totters like a shack, For its transgression is heavy upon it, And it will fall, never to rise again."

we need to understand that a pole shift is an extremely cataclysmic natural disaster, which if were to occur, could wipe out everything on the planet.

"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare." [2 peter 3:10]

these "rich" and "powerful" people described in the sixth seal who are apparently going to "hide" themselves in the earth are people of the upper echelons of society, such as the government.

my research has concluded, as preposterous as it may sound, that the united states government, among others, have been furiously constructing underground "bases" or bunkers. some people would go as far to say that there are actually underground "cities" in existence. if indeed these events are going to happen, surely the government is informed about them and will want to take necessary precautions for the survival of themselves and/or others.

these acts of taking refuge from the devastation of the pole shift has also been prophesied elsewhere:

"And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he arises to shake terribly the earth. In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he arises to shake terribly the earth." [isaiah 2:20]

also, could the FEMA concentration camps that are constructed all around the united states be for possible minor and precursor natural disasters before the pole shift? it is a possibility. they could also be utilized after the devastation of a terrorist attack, the upcoming gog-magog war, or both. or perhaps they are meant for something much more sinister than we can currently imagine.

another controversial subject is that of what is commonly known as nibiru or "planet-x". if we are going to pass through this "galactic plain", it will have enormous gravitational effects on surrounding heavenly bodies. and if indeed this planet-x exists, it would be pulled or "sucked" into close proximity to earth. the most prominent belief is that it is actually a 'brown dwarf star' and not a planet. brown dwarf stars are supposedly red in color due to its gas consisting of mercury. if this heavenly body were pass by earth, the red color would fill the sky. could this be what causes the "blood red moon"?

one of my christian brothers from the website "you tube" has made a great video regarding this subject that i encourage you to consider:

Nibiru And Jesus Prophecy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YtnyKrUUiY)

i am not a psychic, but i know there are going to be many people who will refute everything that has been said in this post merely because the words "mya", "FEMA camp", or "planet x" have been used. they are unfortunately doing so to their dismay. and this is fine with me, as i am not here to force people to accept my beliefs. i'm only sharing my insight in hopes of planting a seed. it is ultimately god's job to water it and make it grow.

the fact of the matter is that the end of the age is here, and we will begin witnessing the precursor events very soon (we already are with this current economic crisis). what will matter during these upcoming times is not if your eschatology is flawless, but rather if you have god on your side.

but the question is: will you indeed have god on your side during these future events? are you a "foolish virgin"? do you falsely believe yourself saved? what makes you so sure? just because you attend church regularly, read christian books, or are a member of a christian forum does not mean you are saved. in fact, many people do such things to ease their religious conscience.

now is the time to make sure you are a genuine child of god - that you genuinely have oil (the holy spirit) in your lamp (body). now is the time to make sure your faith has been sown on good soil during this period of what could be described as the calm before the storm.

Roelof
Oct 22nd 2008, 05:16 AM
immortality

What do you mean by "The End of the age?"
I also have done a lot of research into the Last Days and would like to discuss some of it with you

JohnnyClayton
Oct 22nd 2008, 06:39 AM
I would love to discuss it with both of you. You have my attention.

Veretax
Oct 22nd 2008, 01:49 PM
Can you provide some citations on these FEMA camps you speak of?

SpokenFor
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:15 PM
I've come to these same conclusions myself lately, but was afraid to post them here.

I think we are going to see a lot of very fast-paced changes happening globally in the next few short years in terms of politics, economy, spiritual upheaval, etc.

We all need to be reading our Bibles and praying daily and making sure our foundation is sure. Converting to Islam or whatever at sword point or in fear is not an option.

markedward
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:16 PM
these "rich" and "powerful" people described in the sixth seal who are apparently going to "hide" themselves in the earth are people of the upper echelons of society, such as the government.Did you read the whole passage?

Revelation 6:15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.

You kind of ignored the "every slave and every free man" part. It's not just "the rich and powerful". It's everyone.


Nibiru And Jesus Prophecy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YtnyKrUUiY)The only problem with this sort of interpretation is that many of the instances in which we find prophecies in the OT about cosmic catastrophes (sun turning black, moon not shining, stars falling, etc.), they were almost all in reference to ancient, now-nonexistent nations. Jesus prophesied in like-kind as they did, but it is a big error to ignore that when Isaiah prophesied such-and-such about the sun/moon/stars, he was prophesying it over ancient [Nation]. And such cosmic prophesies were made over at least a few other ancient nations, all concerning different time periods. So to claim that when Jesus prophesied it that it means a giant planet is going to wreak havok on our solar system requires ignoring the context of those ancient prophesies that were fulfilled millenia ago; if Jesus was prophesying in like-kind, and Jesus' means that a giant planet is gonna fly by, then wouldn't that mean multiple giant planets flew by in the BC era since similar things were prophesied a number of times?

He also mentions that the moon that was blood red couldn't only refer to how it looks as a result of volcanoes erupting or from the planet reflecting light on it, and that Jesus prophesied it and "science is catching up". It seems like he doesn't know that the moon can appear red during certain lunar eclipses or solar eclipses. This doesn't even require any "science" to "catch up", since lunar eclipses have existed since... I dunno... as long as the moon orbited the earth? This doesn't require science. People in ~30 AD knew what a red moon looked like. Jesus could have just as easily been talking about an eclipse of the moon and/or sun in that case, not a "maybe" planet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_eclipse#Lunar_eclipse_photo_galleries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse#Types
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse#Historical_eclipses

Late in the video he attributes the "new heavens and new earth" to the alleged shift of the earth's axis and orbit caused by the passing planet. So according to him, a re-tilted earth results in a "new heaven and new earth" perspective. This is drastically taking Revelation 21 out of context. For one, just because the earth tilted a little and moved back a few degrees from the sun (how is this not going to destroy out atmosphere and thus everyone in it?) doesn't mean that we see a "new heaven". All of the other stars in the universe are going to remain where they were. Other than us, nothing else would have moved, so no, this would not equate us seeing a "new heaven". Second, the entirety of Revelation 21 is speaking of spiritual matters - no more sun for God's light filled everything, no more tears or death, New Jerusalem descending from heaven, the wicked will be outside of the city, etc. The man in the video is trying to hard to make the whole Revelation fit "scientifically" that he doesn't even pay attention to what the actual context of the chapter is.

Plus, the guy (and you) keep using words like "supposedly" and "possibly" and "if" about this planet... meaning you don't even know. It's all guesswork.


but the question is: will you indeed have god on your side during these future events? are you a "foolish virgin"? do you falsely believe yourself saved? what makes you so sure? just because you attend church regularly, read christian books, or are a member of a christian forum does not mean you are saved. in fact, many people do such things to ease their religious conscience.This almost seems accusatory, as if you know each and every person who is reading this and somehow have the justification to cast doubt on their salvation. Speak for yourself, but not others on this matter.

Romulus
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:26 PM
Please see the scripture below:

Matthew 12

32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Jesus spoke this Himself. There was an age that was currently happening and would change soon. We must see the context of who Christ is addressing. He is not addressing the 21st Century. He is addressing the 1st century and was very clear that an age is and would soon change. There are only 2 ages in scripture. The Old Covenant age and the New Covenant age. The Old Covenant age is and the New Covenant age (in Christ) was soon to be.

Matthew 24 I believe to be addressing the fall of the temple. This cannot be future. When Jesus stated that the then standing temple would be destroyed the disciples immediately understood that the destruction of the temple was the end of the Old Covenant age. The temple was the last sign of the Old Covenant. With it's destruction it was proof that God no longer dwelled in houses of stone but in his children who are now part of His kingdom.......us.

If we keep audience relevance in mind a picture emerges of the 1st century and not our time.

:hmm:

SpokenFor
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:43 PM
I thought the Preterist viewpoint was not allowed to be discussed on this messageboard?:hmm:



Revelation 6:15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.

You kind of ignored the "every slave and every free man" part. It's not just "the rich and powerful". It's everyone.

Yup...EVERYONE is going to try to hide somehow...it's just that the rich and powerful are going to have bunkers and the rest of us schmucks won't.

Veretax
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:46 PM
I thought the Preterist viewpoint was not allowed to be discussed on this messageboard?:hmm:



Yup...EVERYONE is going to try to hide somehow...it's just that the rich and powerful are going to have bunkers and the rest of us schmucks won't.


In a word or two what's a Preterist?

SpokenFor
Oct 22nd 2008, 02:56 PM
In a word or two what's a Preterist?

Wiki definition:
"Preterism is a variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days or End Times refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth. Because of its claims that Israel was supplanted by the Christian church at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Preterism has sometimes been identified as replacement theology. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning "past". Adherents of Preterism are known as Preterists. fulfilled."

Romulus
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:08 PM
I thought the Preterist viewpoint was not allowed to be discussed on this messageboard?:hmm:


Full Preterism is not allowed since it states all scripture was fulfilled. Partial-Preterism is allowed since it does not deny that the physical second coming of Christ, Final Judgement, and the resurrection of the dead are future events.

I am Full Preterist but I can comment using the Partial-Preterist view which I do agree with and am simply silent on the other issues I disagree with.

You will find many Partial-Preterists here and they are not breaking any rules by this view.

God Bless!

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:12 PM
but the question is: will you indeed have god on your side during these future events? are you a "foolish virgin"? do you falsely believe yourself saved? what makes you so sure? just because you attend church regularly, read christian books, or are a member of a christian forum does not mean you are saved. in fact, many people do such things to ease their religious conscience.




This almost seems accusatory, as if you know each and every person who is reading this and somehow have the justification to cast doubt on their salvation. Speak for yourself, but not others on this matter.



I don't think it did. They were questions, not statements. Maybe we should define what an accusation is?
Main Entry: ac∑cu∑sa∑tion
1 : the act of accusing (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accusing) : the state or fact of being accused (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accused) 2 : a charge of wrongdoing

If you believe that, then you must also believe that Paul, and even John, were accusatory?

2 Corinthians 13:2-6




2I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare:
3Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, which to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you.
4For though he was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of God. For we also are weak in him, but we shall live with him by the power of God toward you.
5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? 6But I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates.


He told us to examine oursleves...

1 John 2


1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
3And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
6He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
7Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.
8Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.
9He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
10He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
11But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
12I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.
13I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
14I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
17And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
18Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
20But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.
21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
22Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
24Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.
25And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.
26These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.
27But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
28And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming. 29If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.



The whole point of 1 John is to teach us how to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith.

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:15 PM
Full Preterism is not allowed since it states all scripture was fulfilled. Partial-Preterism is allowed since it does not deny that the physical second coming of Christ, Final Judgement, and the resurrection of the dead are future events.

I am Full Preterist but I can comment using the Partial-Preterist view which I do agree with and am simply silent on the other issues I disagree with.

You will find many Partial-Preterists here and they are not breaking any rules by this view.

God Bless!

If you agree with the partial preterist view, why are you a full preterist? :) :hmm:

Romulus
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:24 PM
Wiki definition:
"Preterism is a variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days or End Times refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth. Because of its claims that Israel was supplanted by the Christian church at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Preterism has sometimes been identified as replacement theology. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning "past". Adherents of Preterism are known as Preterists. fulfilled."

Just a note of clarity. Preterism (full + Partial) does not believe that the Church replaced Israel. Gentiles were always meant to be part of the one vine. Just because the majority of Israel rejected the Gospel does not mean that the emerging Church replaced them, not at all.

Anyway, why must we forget the remnant that DID accept the Gospel. Remeber Peter, James, and the rest of the disciples and all the converts? They were all Jews. Israel did receive the Gospel. The ones who did not were not Israel. Christ was looking for the Israel of faith. Why else would Jesus state that Abraham was not their Father since they would not accept Him? Jesus said "if Abraham was your Father, you would accept me"? It was because the Israel of the flesh was not Israel. Faith in Christ is what made Israel.

Believing Israel became the first and then believing gentiles were grafted in making one people of God. There was no replacement.

Also, for clarity there are two branches of Preterism. Partial is allowed(Most fulfilled, some yet to be fulfilled), Full is not(all scripture fulfilled.)

:)

Romulus
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:27 PM
If you agree with the partial preterist view, why are you a full preterist? :) :hmm:

I don't want to derail this thread but I do agree with most of PP view so we are in agreement on about 80%. It is simply other future events I do not. It goes the other way around as well. :)

God Bless!

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 03:31 PM
I don't want to derail this thread but I do agree with most of PP view so we are in agreement on about 80%. It is simply other future events I do not. It goes the other way around as well. :)

God Bless!


LOL, I didn't want to derail it either, but I couldn't resist the question. I am sure we're going to have some lively conversations in the future. God Bless to you as well.

Semi-tortured
Oct 22nd 2008, 05:34 PM
Once again, the whole Horizon Project stuff (after doing some digging) is ridiculous. The Earth would be wiped out. Nothing survives. Jesus returns to an empty planet to rule bacteria? Then you bring up the Nibiru (Planet X) stuff which is an entirely different conspiracy theory that is not related to the Horizon Project. The Horizon Project is about our entire solar system moving through a plane of the universe causing a pole shift while Nibiru is a huge planet traveling through our solar system. And both happen to be landing on 2012; a year that happens to coincide with a "prophecy" made by a pagan people group that took part in human sacrifices and worshiped several gods. Which conspiracy theory are you subscribing to? Maybe both? That would be a wild ride. And then the cherry on top of this nutty sundae is you insinuating that your views are truth and that if we don't buy into them we are the virgins with no oil in our lamps. :rolleyes:

immortality
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:06 PM
immortality

What do you mean by "The End of the age?"
I also have done a lot of research into the Last Days and would like to discuss some of it with you
a lot of conjecture can be made regarding what the end of the age in fact implies. but one thing is for certain: we are apparently nearing the climax of all things very soon. in other words: planetary distress at its finest.

what needs to be clarified is that there is not going to be one single, definitive event on the year 2012. rather, we will begin seeing cataclysmic disasters transpire possibly years before that date. in fact, through my research i have concluded that two or more pole shifts may occur between now and then - the first one most likely in the year 2009.

so generally, the end of the age represents continual, cascading and increasingly more severe events (economic, political, military, etc) ultimately culminating in the cyclical destruction of planet earth. humanity can currently be described as resting on the hill of a roller coaster, bracing themselves for the plunge. it will only get worse from here on out. that is the hard truth.


Can you provide some citations on these FEMA camps you speak of?
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Detainment Camps
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7763

FEMA Camp Video Footage - Concentration Camps In America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4&mode=related&search

Oliver North questioned over plans to suspend American Constitution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8tQAYYtLok


You kind of ignored the "every slave and every free man" part. It's not just "the rich and powerful". It's everyone.

i wanted to clarify that it's the government, or "the powers that be", who are responsible for the construction of these underground shelters.

yes, scripture says there will be a plethora of different people who will ultimately take refuge. perhaps there will be a time in the near future when the government comes out publicly and says there is an impending disaster, where failing to retreat into these hideouts will result in certain death. if such an event were to happen, let me just say i wouldn't be so fast to accept the offer...


Did you read the whole passage?This almost seems accusatory, as if you know each and every person who is reading this and somehow have the justification to cast doubt on their salvation. Speak for yourself, but not others on this matter.

the cherry on top of this nutty sundae is you insinuating that your views are truth and that if we don't buy into them we are the virgins with no oil in our lamps. :rolleyes:
time is short. make sure you are right with god. that is all i meant by those statements.

markedward
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:15 PM
i wanted to clarify that it's the government, or "the powers that be", who are responsible for the construction of these underground shelters.Scripture doesn't say this, though. You're adding something completely unfounded into the text. It says "these people and these people and these people and these people hid in the caves and among the rocks". It does not say "the rich and powerful built underground caves to hide in".

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:20 PM
LOL, I didn't want to derail it either, but I couldn't resist the question. I am sure we're going to have some lively conversations in the future. God Bless to you as well.

I am PP too...just so you know...;)

I something think everyone should put their end time views next to their AV or in their signature so people have at least and idea of how they are viewing a certain passage in the bible. I see some events (many) as still future...I see alot as past too.

Anyway...back to the topic...or at least the title! "the end of the age" never meant the end of the world from the bible's standpoint.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
A period of time or a dispensation. In the above sense the word occurs only once in the King James Version, in the sing, as the translation of dor, which means, properly, a "revolution" or "round of time," "a period," "an age" or "generation of man's life"; almost invariable translated "generation," "generations" (Job 8:8), "Inquire, I pray thee, of the former age"); we have the plural as the translation of aion, properly "duration," "the course or flow of time," "an age or period of the world," "the world" (Ephesians 2:7, "in the ages to come"; Colossians 1:26, "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations,"

It was the end of the age for the old covenant...for the Old Mosaic laws. Ushing in a new age...a new covenant sealed by the blood of Christ. When the end of that age happened, it happened with the destruction of the temple. Animal sacrifices could no longer be carried out along with many other rituals.


Verse 28. For wheresoever the carcass is
πτωμα, the dead carcass. The Jewish nation, which was morally and judicially dead.

There will the eagles
The Roman armies, called so partly from their strength and fierceness, and partly from the figure of these animals which was always wrought on their ensigns, or even in brass, placed on the tops of their ensign-staves. It is remarkable that the Roman fury pursued these wretched men wheresoever they were found. They were a dead carcass doomed to be devoured; and the Roman eagles were the commissioned devourers. See the pitiful account in Josephus, WAR, b. vii. c. 2,3, 6,9, 10, and 11.

Verse 29. Immediately after the tribulation, generally understand this, and what follows, of the end of the world and Christ's coming to judgment: but the word immediately shows that our Lord is not speaking of any distant event, but of something immediately consequent on calamities already predicted: and that must be the destruction of Jerusalem. "The Jewish heaven shall perish, and the sun and moon of its glory and happiness shall be darkened-brought to nothing. The sun is the religion of the Church; the moon is the government of the state; and the stars are the judges and doctors of both. Compare Isaiah 13:10; ; Ezekiel 32:7,8, Lightfoot.

In the prophetic language, great commotions upon earth are often represented under the notion of commotions and changes in the heavens:-

The fall of Babylon is represented by the stars and constellations of heaven withdrawing their light, and the sun and moon being darkened. See Isaiah 13:9,10.

The destruction of Egypt, by the heaven being covered, the sun enveloped with a cloud, and the moon withholding her light. Ezekiel 32:7,8.

The destruction of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes is represented by casting down some of the host of heaven, and the stars to the ground. See Daniel 8:10.

And this very destruction of Jerusalem is represented by the Prophet Joel, Joel 2:30,31, by showing wonders in heaven and in earth-darkening the sun, and turning the moon into blood. This general mode of describing these judgments leaves no room to doubt the propriety of its application in the present case.

The falling of stars, i.e. those meteors which are called falling stars by the common people, was deemed an omen of evil times. The heathens have marked this:-

Saepe etiam stellas, vento impendente videbis Praecipites coelo labi, noctisque per umbram Flammarum longos a tergo albescere tractus. VIRG. Geor. i. ver. 365.

And oft before tempestuous winds arise The seeming stars fall headlong from the skies, And, shooting through the darkness, gild the night With sweeping glories, and long trails of light. Dryden.


Then shall the end come.
When this general publication of the Gospel shall have taken place, then a period shall be put to the whole Jewish economy, by the utter destruction of their city and temple.

The Adam Clarke Commentary (http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=024)

God bless

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:25 PM
a lot of conjecture can be made regarding what the end of the age in fact implies. but one thing is for certain: we are apparently nearing the climax of all things very soon. in other words, planetary distress at its finest.

what needs to be clarified is that there is not going to be one single, definitive event on the year 2012. rather, we will begin seeing cataclysmic disasters transpire possibly years before that date. in fact, through my research i have concluded that two or more pole shifts may occur between now and then - the first one most likely in the year 2009.

so generally, the end of the age represents continual, cascading and increasingly more severe events (economic, political, military, etc) ultimately culminating in the cyclical destruction of planet earth. humanity can currently be described as resting on the hill of a roller coaster, bracing themselves for the plunge. it will only get worse from here on out. that is the hard truth.


Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Detainment Camps
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7763

FEMA Camp Video Footage - Concentration Camps In America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4&mode=related&search

Oliver North questioned over plans to suspend American Constitution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8tQAYYtLok



i wanted to clarify that it's the government, or "the powers that be", who are responsible for the construction of these underground shelters.

yes, scripture says there will be a plethora of different people who will ultimately take refuge. perhaps there will be a time in the near future where the government comes out publicly and says there is an impending disaster, where failing to retreat into these hideouts will result in certain death. if such an event were to happen, let me just say i wouldn't be so fast to accept the offer...



time is short. make sure you are right with god. that is all i meant by those statements.

Maybe you need to read up on the Great Depression in the '30...famine, dust bowls, disease and in this case it wasn't just American affected either but many nations. Plus a mad man marking people (tattoos) and killing millions in horrible ways on the heels of that! The World War two! Every nation in the world was involved in that one and millions died in it! If I had lived then I think I would have been convinced the world was ending. It was horrible.

God bless

John146
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:33 PM
I am PP too...just so you know...;)

I something think everyone should put their end time views next to their AV or in their signature so people have at least and idea of how they are viewing a certain passage in the bible. I see some events (many) as still future...I see alot as past too.

Anyway...back to the topic...or at least the title! "the end of the age" never meant the end of the world from the bible's standpoint.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
A period of time or a dispensation. In the above sense the word occurs only once in the King James Version, in the sing, as the translation of dor, which means, properly, a "revolution" or "round of time," "a period," "an age" or "generation of man's life"; almost invariable translated "generation," "generations" (Job 8:8), "Inquire, I pray thee, of the former age"); we have the plural as the translation of aion, properly "duration," "the course or flow of time," "an age or period of the world," "the world" (Ephesians 2:7, "in the ages to come"; Colossians 1:26, "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations,"

It was the end of the age for the old covenant...for the Old Mosaic laws. Ushing in a new age...a new covenant sealed by the blood of Christ. When the end of that age happened, it happened with the destruction of the temple. Animal sacrifices could no longer be carried out along with many other rituals. The new covenant of grace by way of the shed blood of Christ was ushered in at the cross, not in 70 AD.


Verse 28. For wheresoever the carcass is
πτωμα, the dead carcass. The Jewish nation, which was morally and judicially dead.

There will the eagles
The Roman armies, called so partly from their strength and fierceness, and partly from the figure of these animals which was always wrought on their ensigns, or even in brass, placed on the tops of their ensign-staves. It is remarkable that the Roman fury pursued these wretched men wheresoever they were found. They were a dead carcass doomed to be devoured; and the Roman eagles were the commissioned devourers. See the pitiful account in Josephus, WAR, b. vii. c. 2,3, 6,9, 10, and 11.

Verse 29. Immediately after the tribulation, generally understand this, and what follows, of the end of the world and Christ's coming to judgment: but the word immediately shows that our Lord is not speaking of any distant event, but of something immediately consequent on calamities already predicted: and that must be the destruction of Jerusalem. "The Jewish heaven shall perish, and the sun and moon of its glory and happiness shall be darkened-brought to nothing. The sun is the religion of the Church; the moon is the government of the state; and the stars are the judges and doctors of both. Compare Isaiah 13:10; ; Ezekiel 32:7,8, Lightfoot.

In the prophetic language, great commotions upon earth are often represented under the notion of commotions and changes in the heavens:-

The fall of Babylon is represented by the stars and constellations of heaven withdrawing their light, and the sun and moon being darkened. See Isaiah 13:9,10.

The destruction of Egypt, by the heaven being covered, the sun enveloped with a cloud, and the moon withholding her light. Ezekiel 32:7,8.

The destruction of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes is represented by casting down some of the host of heaven, and the stars to the ground. See Daniel 8:10.

And this very destruction of Jerusalem is represented by the Prophet Joel, Joel 2:30,31, by showing wonders in heaven and in earth-darkening the sun, and turning the moon into blood. This general mode of describing these judgments leaves no room to doubt the propriety of its application in the present case.

The falling of stars, i.e. those meteors which are called falling stars by the common people, was deemed an omen of evil times. The heathens have marked this:-

Saepe etiam stellas, vento impendente videbis Praecipites coelo labi, noctisque per umbram Flammarum longos a tergo albescere tractus. VIRG. Geor. i. ver. 365.

And oft before tempestuous winds arise The seeming stars fall headlong from the skies, And, shooting through the darkness, gild the night With sweeping glories, and long trails of light. Dryden.


Then shall the end come.
When this general publication of the Gospel shall have taken place, then a period shall be put to the whole Jewish economy, by the utter destruction of their city and temple.

The Adam Clarke Commentary (http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=024)

God blessDo you believe the following has already occurred?

Matthew 13
24Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
36Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.


Matthew 13
47Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Is Jesus saying that He would only be with His people until 70 AD in the following passage?

Matthew 28
18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

immortality
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:36 PM
Scripture doesn't say this, though. You're adding something completely unfounded into the text. It says "these people and these people and these people and these people hid in the caves and among the rocks". It does not say "the rich and powerful built underground caves to hide in".

if the bible included all specifics, it would be a much larger book.

gotta go, take care everyone.

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:55 PM
Originally Posted by markedward
Scripture doesn't say this, though. You're adding something completely unfounded into the text. It says "these people and these people and these people and these people hid in the caves and among the rocks". It does not say "the rich and powerful built underground caves to hide in".


if the bible included all specifics, it would be a much larger book.

Oh my.

I believe the bible warns about not adding to it in more places then just Revelations...or taking away from it. Extra bibical items is what has lead to so many cults...

c. And be turned aside to fables: Once people leave the word of God, they start embracing the most fantastic fantasies. When a man rejects God's truth, it isn't that he believes in nothing: he will believe in anything.

i. How about this: our destiny, when we die, is to make it through a series of heavens and after-lifes, until one day we become god over our own planet, like Elohim is god over earth, living on a planet named Kolob. When we are gods over our own planets, we spend the rest of eternity have celestial relations with a harem of goddess wives, producing spirit babies to populate the earth we are god over. Joseph Smith and the Mormons have turned aside to fables!David Guzik's Commentaries on the Bible (http://www.studylight.org/com/guz/view.cgi?book=2ti&chapter=004)

2 Timothy 4:2-4
2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

PLEASE PLEASE be very very careful where you go with this...very careful.

I believe the bible explains itself and we don't need to look to outside things seeking for other things to explain it to us. I am not posting this to get after you...right now it really does not matter to me if we don't agree on the end times stuff...its much more important you stick with sound doctrine!

Tread carefully.

I am praying for you.

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 07:59 PM
The new covenant of grace by way of the shed blood of Christ was ushered in at the cross, not in 70 AD.

Do you believe the following has already occurred?

Matthew 13
24Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
36Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.


Matthew 13
47Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Is Jesus saying that He would only be with His people until 70 AD in the following passage?

Matthew 28
18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Yes I know it was...but the Jews were still doing their thing having rejected Christ as the Messiah. Do you not think God was extremely offended they continued this after what Jesus did? Don't you think He would have halted this at some point in time?

While the spiritual part of it came into effect actually at the Last Supper but fulfilled on the cross...the literal had to happen too. Of course the harvest hasn't happened yet and yes Jesus is still with us.

God bless

John146
Oct 22nd 2008, 08:10 PM
Yes I know it was...but the Jews were still doing their thing having rejected Christ as the Messiah. Do you not think God was extremely offended they continued this after what Jesus did? Don't you think He would have halted this at some point in time? Yes, they stubbornly tried to keep living under the old covenant, not realizing or acknowledging that it was already made obsolete by Christ on the cross. And they paid the price for that rebellion in 70 AD. But the old covenant was made old and obsolete by the better new covenant well before 70 AD. If the old covenant is to be thought of as an age (which is debatable), then we have to realize that it ended at the cross.


While the spiritual part of it came into effect actually at the Last Supper but fulfilled on the cross...the literal had to happen too. Of course the harvest hasn't happened yet and yes Jesus is still with us.

God blessThe harvest is the end of the age, according to Matthew 13. So, why are you trying to say the end of the age has already occurred? It hasn't. When Jesus spoke of "this age and the age to come" it was always in terms of this temporal age that we're still living in contrasted with the eternal age to come.

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 08:15 PM
I am PP too...just so you know...;)

I something think everyone should put their end time views next to their AV or in their signature so people have at least and idea of how they are viewing a certain passage in the bible. I see some events (many) as still future...I see alot as past too.

Anyway...back to the topic...or at least the title! "the end of the age" never meant the end of the world from the bible's standpoint.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
A period of time or a dispensation. In the above sense the word occurs only once in the King James Version, in the sing, as the translation of dor, which means, properly, a "revolution" or "round of time," "a period," "an age" or "generation of man's life"; almost invariable translated "generation," "generations" (Job 8:8), "Inquire, I pray thee, of the former age"); we have the plural as the translation of aion, properly "duration," "the course or flow of time," "an age or period of the world," "the world" (Ephesians 2:7, "in the ages to come"; Colossians 1:26, "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations,"

It was the end of the age for the old covenant...for the Old Mosaic laws. Ushing in a new age...a new covenant sealed by the blood of Christ. When the end of that age happened, it happened with the destruction of the temple. Animal sacrifices could no longer be carried out along with many other rituals.


Verse 28. For wheresoever the carcass is
πτωμα, the dead carcass. The Jewish nation, which was morally and judicially dead.

There will the eagles
The Roman armies, called so partly from their strength and fierceness, and partly from the figure of these animals which was always wrought on their ensigns, or even in brass, placed on the tops of their ensign-staves. It is remarkable that the Roman fury pursued these wretched men wheresoever they were found. They were a dead carcass doomed to be devoured; and the Roman eagles were the commissioned devourers. See the pitiful account in Josephus, WAR, b. vii. c. 2,3, 6,9, 10, and 11.

Verse 29. Immediately after the tribulation, generally understand this, and what follows, of the end of the world and Christ's coming to judgment: but the word immediately shows that our Lord is not speaking of any distant event, but of something immediately consequent on calamities already predicted: and that must be the destruction of Jerusalem. "The Jewish heaven shall perish, and the sun and moon of its glory and happiness shall be darkened-brought to nothing. The sun is the religion of the Church; the moon is the government of the state; and the stars are the judges and doctors of both. Compare Isaiah 13:10; ; Ezekiel 32:7,8, Lightfoot.

In the prophetic language, great commotions upon earth are often represented under the notion of commotions and changes in the heavens:-

The fall of Babylon is represented by the stars and constellations of heaven withdrawing their light, and the sun and moon being darkened. See Isaiah 13:9,10.

The destruction of Egypt, by the heaven being covered, the sun enveloped with a cloud, and the moon withholding her light. Ezekiel 32:7,8.

The destruction of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes is represented by casting down some of the host of heaven, and the stars to the ground. See Daniel 8:10.

And this very destruction of Jerusalem is represented by the Prophet Joel, Joel 2:30,31, by showing wonders in heaven and in earth-darkening the sun, and turning the moon into blood. This general mode of describing these judgments leaves no room to doubt the propriety of its application in the present case.

The falling of stars, i.e. those meteors which are called falling stars by the common people, was deemed an omen of evil times. The heathens have marked this:-

Saepe etiam stellas, vento impendente videbis Praecipites coelo labi, noctisque per umbram Flammarum longos a tergo albescere tractus. VIRG. Geor. i. ver. 365.

And oft before tempestuous winds arise The seeming stars fall headlong from the skies, And, shooting through the darkness, gild the night With sweeping glories, and long trails of light. Dryden.


Then shall the end come.
When this general publication of the Gospel shall have taken place, then a period shall be put to the whole Jewish economy, by the utter destruction of their city and temple.

The Adam Clarke Commentary (http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=024)

God bless


you may be right about putting our endtimes views next to our names...and then again, that could be a bad thing. I think after a few posts, we know who believes what, for the most part.
When I say the endtimes, the end of time, the end of the age, or, for that matter, the end of the world ( as we know it) I am referring to that time when the seven year tribulation will begin, at the end of which Jesus will come back to rule and reign on earth, etc. etc... God Bless.

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 08:23 PM
Yes, they stubbornly tried to keep living under the old covenant, not realizing or acknowledging that it was already made obsolete by Christ on the cross. And they paid the price for that rebellion in 70 AD. But the old covenant was made old and obsolete by the better new covenant well before 70 AD. If the old covenant is to be thought of as an age (which is debatable), then we have to realize that it ended at the cross.

The harvest is the end of the age, according to Matthew 13. So, why are you trying to say the end of the age has already occurred? It hasn't. When Jesus spoke of "this age and the age to come" it was always in terms of this temporal age that we're still living in contrasted with the eternal age to come.

Cause I am talking about the end of the age in regards to Jerusalem only...not the age of the world.

God bless

moonglow
Oct 22nd 2008, 08:24 PM
you may be right about putting our endtimes views next to our names...and then again, that could be a bad thing. I think after a few posts, we know who believes what, for the most part.
When I say the endtimes, the end of time, the end of the age, or, for that matter, the end of the world ( as we know it) I am referring to that time when the seven year tribulation will begin, at the end of which Jesus will come back to rule and reign on earth, etc. etc... God Bless.

I don't know...I can't figure out most people's end time view just by reading their post...there are too many anymore! :rolleyes:

God bless

theBelovedDisciple
Oct 22nd 2008, 08:48 PM
I guess I have a question as to the year 2012? what makes this so special as to all these events happening..... Where does this wisdom come from? or revelation? are people date setting? These are questions I would like to have answered..

teddyv
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:04 PM
I guess I have a question as to the year 2012? what makes this so special as to all these events happening..... Where does this wisdom come from? or revelation? are people date setting? These are questions I would like to have answered..
The main interest in 2012 stems to the fact that the Incan calendar ends in this year. I don't know specifics, but google it and you'll find lots of info. Some say because the calendar ends, the world ends:rolleyes:.

faroutinmt
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:09 PM
As others have pointed out, the events described by Jesus in Matthew 24 are clearly His answer to the disciples question as to when the temple would be destroyed. Jesus told them of the destruction of the temple, and they asked when it would happen.

Jesus' description of the sun, moon, etc. were obvious allusions to events which happened in the old testament. The destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians was described figuratively by the sun blackening. The sun did not actually turn black. Neither will it do so in the future. It was figurative language.

Most of today's prophetic predictions are pure speculation and are not based on solid biblical interpretation.

The destruction of the temple in 70 AD was a "sign" which showed that the old covenant age had come to an end and that the new covenant age had begun.

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:15 PM
As others have pointed out, the events described by Jesus in Matthew 24 are clearly His answer to the disciples question as to when the temple would be destroyed. Jesus told them of the destruction of the temple, and they asked when it would happen.


Clearly this is just speculation as to your particular biblical interpretation because it is NOT clear to all people at all. :) God Bless.

faroutinmt
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:37 PM
Clearly this is just speculation as to your particular biblical interpretation because it is NOT clear to all people at all. :) God Bless.

Check it out for yourself. Look at the end of Matthew 23 and read without stopping into Matthew 24. You will see that Jesus told His disciples the there was a day coming in which that temple would be destroyed. Then His disciples asked when it would occur. Jesus then begins to tell them about the destruction of the temple. He tells them all the events which would be occurring which would let them know when the temple was about to be destroyed. Those very events did, in fact, occur in AD 70.

If you read it carefully, you will see what I mean. The reason it is not clear to people is because they overlook the fact that all the events in Matthew 24 have to do with the destruction (not rebuilding) of the temple. People don't want to read and consider verses 2 & 3.

Jesus' words in that chapter are a direct answer to the disciples' question regarding the destruction of that temple. That is the context of the chapter. If you see that, there is no way you can project it 2,000 years into the future.

Read it, if you will, and let me know what you see. :)

jesuslover1968
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:44 PM
Check it out for yourself. Look at the end of Matthew 23 and read without stopping into Matthew 24. You will see that Jesus told His disciples the there was a day coming in which that temple would be destroyed. Then His disciples asked when it would occur. Jesus then begins to tell them about the destruction of the temple. He tells them all the events which would be occurring which would let them know when the temple was about to be destroyed. Those very events did, in fact, occur in AD 70.

If you read it carefully, you will see what I mean. The reason it is not clear to people is because they overlook the fact that all the events in Matthew 24 have to do with the destruction (not rebuilding) of the temple. People don't want to read and consider verses 2 & 3.

Jesus' words in that chapter are a direct answer to the disciples' question regarding the destruction of that temple. That is the context of the chapter. If you see that, there is no way you can project it 2,000 years into the future.

Read it, if you will, and let me know what you see. :)


Thank you for your concern. I have read it. Many many times, actually. The question you need to ask yourself is, " what did the disciples really ask Jesus?" ( hint, Matt. 24: 3) Then, after you have reread it, which I just did, by the way, tell me honestly that you believe everything in Matthew 24 has already happened...then we can agree to disagree and go on. :) Matthew 24:30 would be a good place to start. God Bless.

Veretax
Oct 22nd 2008, 10:00 PM
what do you mean the son has never been blacked out? Isn't that what happens in a Solar eclipse?

markedward
Oct 22nd 2008, 10:32 PM
Yes Veretax, it does.

In fact, the moon can also appear red during a solar eclipse, depending on what kind of eclipse it is.


He also mentions that the moon that was blood red couldn't only refer to how it looks as a result of volcanoes erupting or from the planet reflecting light on it, and that Jesus prophesied it and "science is catching up". It seems like he doesn't know that the moon can appear red during certain lunar eclipses or solar eclipses. This doesn't even require any "science" to "catch up", since lunar eclipses have existed since... I dunno... as long as the moon orbited the earth? This doesn't require science. People in ~30 AD knew what a red moon looked like. Jesus could have just as easily been talking about an eclipse of the moon and/or sun in that case, not a "maybe" planet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_eclipse#Lunar_eclipse_photo_galleries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse#Types
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse#Historical_eclipses

Not that I believe Jesus (or John) was prophesying an eclipse of any kind, but that's at least much more believable than trying to explain everything away (including the nonsense idea of the "new heaven and new earth" being explained by the earth tilting out of its normal orbit of the sun) with a giant hypothetical planet flying through the solar system.

immortality
Oct 23rd 2008, 02:58 AM
also worth mentioning is that these upcoming cataclysms will undoubtedly involve the entire world, or "the whole earth". peter says the planet will eventually be left completely "bare".

true christians would of course be exempt from experiencing such horrible wrath. in fact, jesus says they will actually have the opportunity to "escape" the devastation.

"For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth. Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man." [luke 21:35-36]

"Because you have obeyed my command to endure, I will keep you from the hour of testing that is coming to the whole world to test those living on the earth." [rev 3:10]

additionally, the following scripture is mentioned not too long after the the sixth seal:

"After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands..." [rev 7:9]

jesus promised in luke 21 that people will be able to escape the wrath and "stand before the son of man". in revelation 7 there are numerous individuals "standing before the throne and before the lamb". coincidence? hardly.

this "great multitude" can only be the raptured/resurrected "invisible church" of true and genuine christians. as we have examined, believers are promised to be rescued from the day of the lord's wrath. the day of the lord begins within the sixth seal, therefore the great multitude must be taken off of the earth before this period of judgment begins.

"For God has not destined us to receive wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus..." [1 thes 5:9]

Veretax
Oct 23rd 2008, 11:56 AM
The context of Jesus remarks in luke were relating to the coming destruction of the temple. I'm not saying that means that God won't withhold his wrath from Christians, but its important to recognize the context of that statement.

John146
Oct 23rd 2008, 01:40 PM
The context of Jesus remarks in luke were relating to the coming destruction of the temple. I'm not saying that means that God won't withhold his wrath from Christians, but its important to recognize the context of that statement.Some of the Olivet Discourse certainly had to do with the destruction of the temple. But not all of it.

This was fulfilled around 70 AD:

Luke 21
20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21Then 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.
22For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23But 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.
24And 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.

This part is clearly specifically about tribulation that occurs in Jerusalem and does not refer to global tribulation. What is described in the above passage is exactly what occurred around 70 AD.

The following passage, however, speaks of global tribulation.

Luke 21
25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
35For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Notice the references to "the distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth". That's clearly referring to a global event.

If you read Acts 1:9-11 it says that Jesus would return in the same manner that He left. He left visibly in a cloud (of angels). He will return visibly in a cloud.

Veretax
Oct 23rd 2008, 01:59 PM
Right, I'm not saying that passage should be ignored just because it is talking about the Temple, there is a clear message in scripture about God preserving or keeping his remnant, Noah, Lot, Israel in Egypt, Israel in Captivity in Babylon, etc. So I'm not denying that it probably is at large part of how God Operates. I was only pointing out the context of the verse, and I agree the later part of that chapter does seem to speak further into the future.

immortality
Oct 23rd 2008, 04:54 PM
I guess I have a question as to the year 2012? what makes this so special as to all these events happening..... Where does this wisdom come from? or revelation? are people date setting? These are questions I would like to have answered..

the winter solstice (december 21st) of the year 2012 is merely the transition point on the myan calendar from the present age of pisces to the age of aquarius. therefore, when we as christians talk about the "end of the age", there is no date setting involved.

as mentioned previously, one single event or cataclysm does not mark the end of the age. rather, it is a vast amount of events which eventually culminate in the destruction of the planet. jesus said it will be similar to birth pains; the unfavorable events will become dramatically more severe as time progresses.

faroutinmt
Oct 23rd 2008, 05:09 PM
Thank you for your concern. I have read it. Many many times, actually. The question you need to ask yourself is, " what did the disciples really ask Jesus?" ( hint, Matt. 24: 3) Then, after you have reread it, which I just did, by the way, tell me honestly that you believe everything in Matthew 24 has already happened...then we can agree to disagree and go on. :) Matthew 24:30 would be a good place to start. God Bless.

We can certainly agree to disagree on such an issue as this. :)

Here are my thoughts on Matthew 24:3: "...the disciples came to Him privately, saying, 'Tell us, when will these things be? (what things are the disciples referring to? Jesus had just told them that the temple would be destroyed. Just before they went to the Mount of Olives, they had all been in the temple. Jesus had just told the chief priests and pharisees the parable relating how God would bring judgment upon their city and take the kingdom of God away from them and give it to another nation (ch 21, the middle of ch 21 thru the end of ch 23 all takes place in the temple). He also had pronounced judgments upon Jerusalem at the very end of chapter 23. These are the things the disciples were referring to in their question to Jesus.) And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?' "

Remember that the disciples, at this point, did not yet understand that Jesus was going to the cross, was going to rise again, and ascend to heaven. So, they could not have been asking about a future, physical return to earth from heaven. They still believed that Jesus was going to set up a physical kingdom in their day and reign as the Messiah. This is what they were referring to: His coming to set up His kingdom in their day, and the end of the present age, and the beginning of His earthly reign.

Of course, Jesus was setting up His kingdom, but not in the way they expected. His is a spiritual kingdom, where He reigns in the hearts of His people.

The destruction of Jerusalem would be the "sign" that the old covenant age had indeed ended, that His kingdom was established, and the new covenant age had begun.

John146
Oct 23rd 2008, 05:21 PM
We can certainly agree to disagree on such an issue as this. :)

Here are my thoughts on Matthew 24:3: "...the disciples came to Him privately, saying, 'Tell us, when will these things be? (what things are the disciples referring to? Jesus had just told them that the temple would be destroyed. Just before they went to the Mount of Olives, they had all been in the temple. Jesus had just told the chief priests and pharisees the parable relating how God would bring judgment upon their city and take the kingdom of God away from them and give it to another nation (ch 21, the middle of ch 21 thru the end of ch 23 all takes place in the temple). He also had pronounced judgments upon Jerusalem at the very end of chapter 23. These are the things the disciples were referring to in their question to Jesus.) And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?' "

Remember that the disciples, at this point, did not yet understand that Jesus was going to the cross, was going to rise again, and ascend to heaven. So, they could not have been asking about a future, physical return to earth from heaven. They still believed that Jesus was going to set up a physical kingdom in their day and reign as the Messiah. This is what they were referring to: His coming to set up His kingdom in their day, and the end of the present age, and the beginning of His earthly reign.

Of course, Jesus was setting up His kingdom, but not in the way they expected. His is a spiritual kingdom, where He reigns in the hearts of His people.

The destruction of Jerusalem would be the "sign" that the old covenant age had indeed ended, that His kingdom was established, and the new covenant age had begun.Do you believe the end of the age that the disciples asked about in Matthew 24:3 is the same end of the age that Jesus had already taught them about in the parable of the wheat and tares (Matthew 13:24-30,36-43) and the parable of the fishing net (Matt 13:47-50)? And do you believe it is the same end of the age that He mentioned in Matthew 28:20?

faroutinmt
Oct 23rd 2008, 05:23 PM
what do you mean the son has never been blacked out? Isn't that what happens in a Solar eclipse?


In Isaiah 13:10, the prophet speaks of the stars, the moon, and the sun being darkened and ceasing to give their light. These were figurative descriptions of the destruction of Babylon by the Medes. It was symbolic language describing one nation being destroyed by another.

In Ezekiel 32:7,8, the same figurative language is used to describe the destruction of Pharaoh and Egypt by the Babylonians. Again, symbolic language is used to describe one nation being destroyed by another.

In Matthew 24:29, Jesus make use of the same figurative language to describe the same type of events: the destruction of one people (Jerusalem) by another (the Romans).

Consider this, if the stars truly were to fall from heaven, where exactly would they fall to? If they fell to earth, there would be nothing left of this planet. The sun is an average sized star. Imagine stars, like the sun, falling to earth. Since premillenial dispensationalists assert that Christ will come to rule on earth after the tribulation, there will be no earth to come to if the stars fall upon it.

David Taylor
Oct 23rd 2008, 07:56 PM
As others have pointed out, the events described by Jesus in Matthew 24 are clearly His answer to the disciples question as to when the temple would be destroyed. Jesus told them of the destruction of the temple, and they asked when it would happen.


Matthew 23-25 involve two questions and answers to both of those questions.

1 question as you correctly identified, was when will Herod's Temple be destroyed. (and it was answered). The other question however, was also given and answered throughout the rest of chapters 24 and 25; namely when will be your coming and the end of the world/age?

Much of Matthew 24 and 25; as well as Luke 17's parallel weren't fulfilled in answering question #1 in 70 A.D.; but will be answered in fulfilling question #2 at the Lord's Glorious Return.




The destruction of the temple in 70 AD was a "sign" which showed that the old covenant age had come to an end and that the new covenant age had begun.

Naw.

Christ said those who wanted a sign, none would be given to them except for the sign of Jonah....3 days and 3 nights....HHHmmmmm.

Jesus spoke of the sign of the new covenant as being his death, burial, and resurrection....the same sign that Jonah pointed forward to.

AD 70 in regards to the new covenant, was meaningly. Calvary is the focal point of the New Covenant; not 70 AD.

Matthew 12:38 "Master, we would see a sign from thee. But 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 Jonah: For as Jonah 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."

Matthew 26:26 "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

jesuslover1968
Oct 23rd 2008, 08:03 PM
We can certainly agree to disagree on such an issue as this. :)

Here are my thoughts on Matthew 24:3: "...the disciples came to Him privately, saying, 'Tell us, when will these things be? (what things are the disciples referring to? Jesus had just told them that the temple would be destroyed. Just before they went to the Mount of Olives, they had all been in the temple. Jesus had just told the chief priests and pharisees the parable relating how God would bring judgment upon their city and take the kingdom of God away from them and give it to another nation (ch 21, the middle of ch 21 thru the end of ch 23 all takes place in the temple). He also had pronounced judgments upon Jerusalem at the very end of chapter 23. These are the things the disciples were referring to in their question to Jesus.) And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?' "

Remember that the disciples, at this point, did not yet understand that Jesus was going to the cross, was going to rise again, and ascend to heaven. So, they could not have been asking about a future, physical return to earth from heaven. They still believed that Jesus was going to set up a physical kingdom in their day and reign as the Messiah. This is what they were referring to: His coming to set up His kingdom in their day, and the end of the present age, and the beginning of His earthly reign.

Of course, Jesus was setting up His kingdom, but not in the way they expected. His is a spiritual kingdom, where He reigns in the hearts of His people.

The destruction of Jerusalem would be the "sign" that the old covenant age had indeed ended, that His kingdom was established, and the new covenant age had begun.


so you don't believe that Jesus is going to come back physically?

faroutinmt
Oct 24th 2008, 12:57 AM
Matthew 23-25 involve two questions and answers to both of those questions.

1 question as you correctly identified, was when will Herod's Temple be destroyed. (and it was answered). The other question however, was also given and answered throughout the rest of chapters 24 and 25; namely when will be your coming and the end of the world/age?

Much of Matthew 24 and 25; as well as Luke 17's parallel weren't fulfilled in answering question #1 in 70 A.D.; but will be answered in fulfilling question #2 at the Lord's Glorious Return.






Naw.

Christ said those who wanted a sign, none would be given to them except for the sign of Jonah....3 days and 3 nights....HHHmmmmm.

Jesus spoke of the sign of the new covenant as being his death, burial, and resurrection....the same sign that Jonah pointed forward to.

AD 70 in regards to the new covenant, was meaningly. Calvary is the focal point of the New Covenant; not 70 AD.

Matthew 12:38 "Master, we would see a sign from thee. But 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 Jonah: For as Jonah 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."

Matthew 26:26 "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

It was the disciples who asked Jesus, in Matthew 24:3, for a sign of the end of the age. Jesus did not tell them that His death, burial, and resurrection would be the sign. He pointed them to the destruction of Jerusalem.

I agree that Calvary is the focal point of the New Testament and not 70 AD. 70 AD was only a sign of the end of one age and the beginning of another. Neither do I believe that all prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD.

In Matthew 24: 34 Jesus said that generation would not pass away until all those things took place. Indeed, everything Jesus predicted prior to that statement did take place in that generation.

faroutinmt
Oct 24th 2008, 12:58 AM
so you don't believe that Jesus is going to come back physically?

I do believe that Jesus will come back physically. I am not a hyper-preterist.

faroutinmt
Oct 24th 2008, 01:02 AM
Some of the Olivet Discourse certainly had to do with the destruction of the temple. But not all of it.

This was fulfilled around 70 AD:

Luke 21
20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21Then 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.
22For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23But 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.
24And 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.

This part is clearly specifically about tribulation that occurs in Jerusalem and does not refer to global tribulation. What is described in the above passage is exactly what occurred around 70 AD.

The following passage, however, speaks of global tribulation.

Luke 21
25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
35For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Notice the references to "the distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth". That's clearly referring to a global event.

If you read Acts 1:9-11 it says that Jesus would return in the same manner that He left. He left visibly in a cloud (of angels). He will return visibly in a cloud.

You skipped over verse 32, which comes after verse 28. It says that generation would not pass away until all those things took place. He did not say some of those things.

jesuslover1968
Oct 24th 2008, 02:30 AM
Of course, Jesus was setting up His kingdom, but not in the way they expected. His is a spiritual kingdom, where He reigns in the hearts of His people.


ok, I got that idea from this sentence. Glad to know that at least. :)

jesuslover1968
Oct 24th 2008, 02:33 AM
Some of the Olivet Discourse certainly had to do with the destruction of the temple. But not all of it.

This was fulfilled around 70 AD:

Luke 21
20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21Then 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.
22For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23But 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.
24And 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.

This part is clearly specifically about tribulation that occurs in Jerusalem and does not refer to global tribulation. What is described in the above passage is exactly what occurred around 70 AD.

The following passage, however, speaks of global tribulation.

Luke 21
25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
35For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Notice the references to "the distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth". That's clearly referring to a global event.

If you read Acts 1:9-11 it says that Jesus would return in the same manner that He left. He left visibly in a cloud (of angels). He will return visibly in a cloud.


Wow. If i'm not just unusually tired, I think I totally agree with you!! :pp

Romulus
Oct 24th 2008, 01:40 PM
Matthew 23-25 involve two questions and answers to both of those questions.

1 question as you correctly identified, was when will Herod's Temple be destroyed. (and it was answered). The other question however, was also given and answered throughout the rest of chapters 24 and 25; namely when will be your coming and the end of the world/age?

Much of Matthew 24 and 25; as well as Luke 17's parallel weren't fulfilled in answering question #1 in 70 A.D.; but will be answered in fulfilling question #2 at the Lord's Glorious Return.


Hi David!

Why would the disciples ask two questions? All Jesus stated was that "one day not one stone would be upon another". I don't see any reason whatsoever for the disciples to ask about a different event that didn't have anything to do with the destruction of the temple. Remember Jesus had spoke against Israel in the chapter before and prophecied that "your house is left to you desolate". That was about the temple, and that's it. Matthew 24 is about the judgement that was to occur against the temple and Israel.

If the disciples thought that the destruction of the temple and the "end of the age" were separate events, what reason would they have to ask about that event in conjuncture with the temple? Again, Jesus only spoke about the temple. He didn't speak about a totally different topic, only one. The reason why the disciples asked about His coming in judgement and the end of the age because they believed they were one and the same event when the temple would be destroyed and Christ's Kingdom would be inaugerated.

If we go back to Jesus's statement, Jesus made one comment about the temple and the question asked was about only what Jesus stated, nothing more.

P.S. If anyone states "the kingdom did not come in 70 A.D." please understand that as a Full-Preterist I cannot comment since it is forbidden to do so. Leaving comments where we/I cannot possibly respond can be frustrating but it is what I have agreed to do. Please leave comments and arguments that we/I can respond to.

God Bless! :)

vinsight4u8
Oct 24th 2008, 01:53 PM
Jesus told His generation that they would not see any signs from heaven - and the only sign they would view is the sign of Jonas.

Yet the end times - brings many signs!

Jesus was referring to the generation that will see the signs - when ye see ...
all those things
then know

His generation was not to be witnessing them happen - as first would come wars - then rumours of wars - and still the end was not to be yet. It was not even time to be troubled yet.
But then would come a time of - nation against nation - kingdom against kingdom - and this is known as the beginning of sorows.

jesuslover1968
Oct 24th 2008, 01:53 PM
Hi David!

Why would the disciples ask two questions? All Jesus stated was that "one day not one stone would be upon another". I don't see any reason whatsoever for the disciples to ask about a different event that didn't have anything to do with the destruction of the temple. Remember Jesus had spoke against Israel in the chapter before and prophecied that "your house is left to you desolate". That was about the temple, and that's it. Matthew 24 is about the judgement that was to occur against the temple and Israel.

If the disciples thought that the destruction of the temple and the "end of the age" were separate events, what reason would they have to ask about that event in conjuncture with the temple? Again, Jesus only spoke about the temple. He didn't speak about a totally different topic, only one. The reason why the disciples asked about His coming in judgement and the end of the age because they believed they were one and the same event when the temple would be destroyed and Christ's Kingdom would be inaugerated.

If we go back to Jesus's statement, Jesus made one comment about the temple and the question asked was about only what Jesus stated, nothing more.

P.S. If anyone states "the kingdom did not come in 70 A.D." please understand that as a Full-Preterist I cannot comment since it is forbidden to do so. Leaving comments where we/I cannot possibly respond can be frustrating but it is what I have agreed to do. Please leave comments and arguments that we/I can respond to.

God Bless! :)



3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?


I see three questions here, not just one, or even two.
1) when shall these things be.
2) ...the sign of thy coming...
3) and of the end of the world

Romulus
Oct 24th 2008, 02:19 PM
3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?


I see three questions here, not just one, or even two.
1) when shall these things be.
2) ...the sign of thy coming...
3) and of the end of the world

Of course I agree but Jesus only had one statement:

"one day, not one stone will be upon the other"

All Jesus said was that the temple would be destroyed. He said nothing more. The resulting question(s) were not about anything else but the statement Jesus stated above. There is no mention about 2 events, only 1 event. The resulting questions were about the temple, not about an event 2000+ years later.

Do you see anything grammatical on Christ's part, to suggest any other event but the temple?

If not, the resulting questions from the disciples were about the same event that Jesus spoke about, which was the destruction of the temple a generation later in 70 A.D.

:)

Romulus
Oct 24th 2008, 02:25 PM
Jesus told His generation that they would not see any signs from heaven - and the only sign they would view is the sign of Jonas.

Yet the end times - brings many signs!

Jesus was referring to the generation that will see the signs - when ye see ...
all those things
then know

His generation was not to be witnessing them happen - as first would come wars - then rumours of wars - and still the end was not to be yet. It was not even time to be troubled yet.
But then would come a time of - nation against nation - kingdom against kingdom - and this is known as the beginning of sorows.

1) In every other place that "this generation" is used in scripture, it meant a generation then living, contemporaries.

2) The plain reading of the text is referring to the generation now living.

3) Who heard the olivet discourse first, was it the 21st century or the 1st century?

If Jesus meant a generation 2000+ years later, He would have said so and used the words "that generation". He did not. He said "this generation" and spoke this to the disciples. Even scripturally Jesus had spoken in just the chapter before to Israel that

"your house is left to you desolate"

Do you see any warrant whatsoever to change the plain meaning of "this generation" when every other place in scripture it means contemporaries. Why change the meaning only in this scripture? :hmm:

Also, if Jesus meant the generation then living would witness the events(which I believe He did) then what words would He have used? In other words, take my p.o.v. If Jesus did mean the 1st century, would the above scripture be satifactory in stating this?

Marc B
Oct 24th 2008, 02:37 PM
Some of the Olivet Discourse certainly had to do with the destruction of the temple. But not all of it.

This was fulfilled around 70 AD:

Luke 21
20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21Then 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.
22For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23But 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.
24And 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.

This part is clearly specifically about tribulation that occurs in Jerusalem and does not refer to global tribulation. What is described in the above passage is exactly what occurred around 70 AD.

The following passage, however, speaks of global tribulation.

Luke 21
25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
35For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Notice the references to "the distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth". That's clearly referring to a global event.

If you read Acts 1:9-11 it says that Jesus would return in the same manner that He left. He left visibly in a cloud (of angels). He will return visibly in a cloud.

I'm glad somebody got it right. Add to that the passages in Matthew 24:21-22. For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

That describes the end times ahead of us. The reason the days will be shortened is because if they weren't we would annhilate ourselves in nuclear holocaust. In 70 AD we had no way of destroying all life on earth.

Romulus
Oct 24th 2008, 03:10 PM
I'm glad somebody got it right. Add to that the passages in Matthew 24:21-22. For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

That describes the end times ahead of us. The reason the days will be shortened is because if they weren't we would annhilate ourselves in nuclear holocaust. In 70 AD we had no way of destroying all life on earth.

Hi Marc B,

Jesus states specifically that:

"when you see the abomination that causes desolation, standing where it ought not to, then let those who are in Judea, flee to the mountains".

If this was a worldwide event, why is Christ only giving a warning to Judea?

Why not Russia, or South America, or at least save Greece? A worldwide event would not save a small area like Judea from the coming destruction and why single out a small area like Judea as compared with the rest of the world.

The only answer that makes sense is that the tribulation that was to occur was a localized event in..........Jerusalem. This now makes perfect sense for those in Judea to flee when the abomination is seen. Worldwide event, makes no sense. Plus if Judea was only meant(which scripture states it was) would not Jesus have stated exactly what He said exactly as worded? Would there have been better words to explain a localized event or was the scripture enough to state this?

It is a historical fact that according to Luke 21,

"when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, know that it's desolation is near, then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains"

That this was fulfilled already just as Jesus said within a generation(40 years.) In December 66 A.D. Titus and the Roman military(abomination) surrounded Jerusalem and for no reason whatsoever left. This was the last time anyone had to escape before the destruction. Those in Judea who heeded Christ's warning fled Jerusalem to the mountains of Pella. In February 67 A.D. Titus returned and began the siege(tribulation) against Jerusalem that lasted for 42 months/3.5 years and ended on August 31, 70 A.D.

Does it seem plausible that by chance the believers fled to the mountains exactly as Jesus warned them and that the siege of Jerusalem lasted 42months/3.5 years?

That is quite a coincidence. :hmm:

jesuslover1968
Oct 24th 2008, 05:43 PM
Of course I agree but Jesus only had one statement:

"one day, not one stone will be upon the other"

All Jesus said was that the temple would be destroyed. He said nothing more. The resulting question(s) were not about anything else but the statement Jesus stated above. There is no mention about 2 events, only 1 event. The resulting questions were about the temple, not about an event 2000+ years later.

Do you see anything grammatical on Christ's part, to suggest any other event but the temple?

If not, the resulting questions from the disciples were about the same event that Jesus spoke about, which was the destruction of the temple a generation later in 70 A.D.

:)


actually, I do. :)

John146
Oct 24th 2008, 09:53 PM
You skipped over verse 32, which comes after verse 28. It says that generation would not pass away until all those things took place. He did not say some of those things.The Greek word for generation does not have to mean 40 years and I don't believe it does in that case. I don't have time right now to go into depth on that, but I have done so before a few times. Why don't you explain to me how there was a distress of nations in 70 AD and how the angels gathered the elect in 70 AD.

John146
Oct 24th 2008, 09:55 PM
I'm glad somebody got it right. Add to that the passages in Matthew 24:21-22. For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

That describes the end times ahead of us. The reason the days will be shortened is because if they weren't we would annhilate ourselves in nuclear holocaust. In 70 AD we had no way of destroying all life on earth.I guess you must have misunderstood. I'm saying that the Olivet Discourse prophesied both a local tribulation period in Jerusalem that occurred in 70 AD as well as a global tribulation period that is yet to come before the end of this age. The disciples did ask about when the temple would be destroyed so we shouldn't think that Jesus didn't answer that question at all. Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20, and Luke 21:20-24 all answer that question.

faroutinmt
Oct 24th 2008, 10:39 PM
The Greek word for generation does not have to mean 40 years and I don't believe it does in that case. I don't have time right now to go into depth on that, but I have done so before a few times. Why don't you explain to me how there was a distress of nations in 70 AD and how the angels gathered the elect in 70 AD.

There was distress of nations due to the fact that the Jewish nation was about to be destroyed. Also, during the siege of Jerusalem, Nero died. The nation of Rome was in serious trouble and was on the verge of collapse. Even Vespasian had leave control of the siege to Titus to return to Rome. There was truly great distress in Judah and the whole Roman empire during this time.

I've heard the whole argument over the word generation supposedly meaning race instead of generation. But, everywhere Jesus uses the word generation, He is always referring to that generation. It is easy to see His meaning in the context. There is nothing in the context of the whole passage which would indicate that generation would mean anything other than generation.


Jesus said that that generation would not pass away until those things took place. If you were so say that the word generation means race, you would have to also conclude that when all those things do come to pass, the Jewish race would pass away. Truly, that generation did indeed pass away after all those things took place.

The word angel is also translated messenger in other places in the new testament. During that time, God began to gather together all His elect by His messengers. He is still doing so today. His elect was and is being gathered together through the messengers who go out into all the world and preach the gospel.

John146
Oct 28th 2008, 05:39 PM
Wow. If i'm not just unusually tired, I think I totally agree with you!! :ppThere's a first time for everything, I guess. :D

One thing that would surprise me that you agreed with me on is that Luke 21:20-24 was fulfilled in 70 AD. Is that what you believe?

John146
Oct 28th 2008, 05:48 PM
There was distress of nations due to the fact that the Jewish nation was about to be destroyed. Where is your evidence for this?


Also, during the siege of Jerusalem, Nero died. The nation of Rome was in serious trouble and was on the verge of collapse. Even Vespasian had leave control of the siege to Titus to return to Rome. There was truly great distress in Judah and the whole Roman empire during this time. This is your evidence for there being the distress of nations? I'm not convinced.


I've heard the whole argument over the word generation supposedly meaning race instead of generation. But, everywhere Jesus uses the word generation, He is always referring to that generation. It is easy to see His meaning in the context. There is nothing in the context of the whole passage which would indicate that generation would mean anything other than generation. I disagree. First of all, Jesus has not yet come. Also, the angels have not yet gathered the elect. Also, the end of the age has not yet come.


Jesus said that that generation would not pass away until those things took place. If you were so say that the word generation means race, you would have to also conclude that when all those things do come to pass, the Jewish race would pass away. Truly, that generation did indeed pass away after all those things took place.The Jews are still around. All races will pass away when Christ returns.


The word angel is also translated messenger in other places in the new testament. During that time, God began to gather together all His elect by His messengers. He is still doing so today. His elect was and is being gathered together through the messengers who go out into all the world and preach the gospel.I thought you said it all had to come to pass within that long ago generation? If the gathering is still going on today then it didn't all come to pass in that generation. You just exposed a weakness in your view without even realizing it.

The gathering of the elect is the same gathering of the elect that occurs at the end of the age that Jesus talked about in the parable of the wheat and tares (Matt 13:24-30,36-43). Are you going to try to say that the parable of the wheat and tares is not talking about angels gathering people at the end of the age for judgment? That has not yet taken place.

jesuslover1968
Oct 28th 2008, 05:49 PM
There's a first time for everything, I guess. :D


yes there is...:lol:

Dani H
Oct 29th 2008, 02:55 AM
Matthew 24:14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=24&verse=14&version=50&context=verse)
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

There's your timeline.

Have a great day. :)

Romulus
Nov 10th 2008, 03:55 PM
Matthew 24:14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=24&verse=14&version=50&context=verse)
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

There's your timeline.

Have a great day. :)

Then the timeline began in the 1st century:

1 Colossians

23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

jesuslover1968
Nov 10th 2008, 04:13 PM
One thing that would surprise me that you agreed with me on is that Luke 21:20-24 was fulfilled in 70 AD. Is that what you believe?


I missed this part of your question awhile back, but think it's important to answer it. Yes, I do agree with you, but I wanted to make it clear that that DOESN'T mean I think God is done with Israel yet, just with the particular judgements He had set for that particular time. Do you see what I am saying?

jesuslover1968
Nov 10th 2008, 04:16 PM
Then the timeline began in the 1st century:

1 Colossians

23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.





So why are we still here?

Romulus
Nov 10th 2008, 08:36 PM
So why are we still here?

Hi Jesus Lover,

Rather then answer that question (which is usually the response when I mention this scripture) what do you think the above scripture means?

Did Paul really mean what he said?

jesuslover1968
Nov 10th 2008, 09:29 PM
Hi Jesus Lover,

Rather then answer that question (which is usually the response when I mention this scripture) what do you think the above scripture means?

Did Paul really mean what he said?


Of course he did. But it was for his time, not the time now. As time has continued, so has the world become more populated. I believe that the scripture in question is speaking of the endtimes, not the time Paul himself spoke of.


Matthew 24:10-14
10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Romulus
Nov 11th 2008, 03:57 PM
Of course he did. But it was for his time, not the time now. As time has continued, so has the world become more populated. I believe that the scripture in question is speaking of the endtimes, not the time Paul himself spoke of.


You are correct, it was for his time. :) We have to take into account what Jesus spoke below (as you quoted.)

Matthew 24:10-14
10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Jesus spoke the Olivet Discourse around 30 A.D. This is when Jesus prophecied that the Gospel would be preached in all the "world" which is the Greek word "oikoumene" which means "known world" and most often the Roman world. Paul spoke his scripture anywhere from 57 A.D to 62 A.D. while in prison which was almost 30 years later.

Since Jesus said this prophecy first and Paul made his statement, how can this possibly be in the 21st century? Paul meant what he said. Jesus Himself stated that "this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened". A biblical generation is 40 years.

Paul spoke that the Gospel in his time was preached in all the world (known.) This is scripture fulfillling exactly what Jesus spoke. If we ignore it, and look for a fulfillment in the 21 st century or later, this scripture means absolutely nothing so does the meaning of Generation in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and pretty much everywhere else the word is used.

Best way to look at it is simply 2 statements. Forget your endtimes view, see the two as stand alone scriptures.

1) 14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

2) This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

Just by these scriptures can we not see fulfillment by scripture alone?

Éσяєяυииєя
Nov 12th 2008, 03:39 AM
Sorry I do not get what you are saying, can you explain me?


....shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

2) This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

If that was done already according to your speech.


So why are we still here?

Thanks ahead

DurbanDude
Nov 12th 2008, 09:17 AM
There was distress of nations due to the fact that the Jewish nation was about to be destroyed. Also, during the siege of Jerusalem, Nero died. The nation of Rome was in serious trouble and was on the verge of collapse. Even Vespasian had leave control of the siege to Titus to return to Rome. There was truly great distress in Judah and the whole Roman empire during this time.

I've heard the whole argument over the word generation supposedly meaning race instead of generation. But, everywhere Jesus uses the word generation, He is always referring to that generation. It is easy to see His meaning in the context. There is nothing in the context of the whole passage which would indicate that generation would mean anything other than generation.


Jesus said that that generation would not pass away until those things took place. If you were so say that the word generation means race, you would have to also conclude that when all those things do come to pass, the Jewish race would pass away. Truly, that generation did indeed pass away after all those things took place.

The word angel is also translated messenger in other places in the new testament. During that time, God began to gather together all His elect by His messengers. He is still doing so today. His elect was and is being gathered together through the messengers who go out into all the world and preach the gospel.

To faroutinmt and Romulus:

I have heard many arguments from preterists showing how the following verses have already been fulfilled by 70 AD. Obviously if we could all get the balance of literalism perfect we would all agree more on this site, but I for one would rather see a more literal fulfilment of the following verses than anything that happened up to 70 AD. A more literalist interpretation of the following verses would expect globalised troubles on WW2 or worse scale compared to your interpretation of internal troubles of one Roman Empire? Not a satisfying fulfilment to me, sorry.

24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

This hasn't happened yet , any common sense reader would agree, the bible speaks for itself here.70 AD was a period of great Jewish tribulation, and a typical troubled period of Roman history among many troubled Roman times. Nothing really significant world-wide.

jesuslover1968
Nov 12th 2008, 02:28 PM
Sorry I do not get what you are saying, can you explain me?



If that was done already according to your speech.



Thanks ahead


Me too...don't understand his answers...

DurbanDude
Nov 12th 2008, 02:57 PM
Then the timeline began in the 1st century:

1 Colossians

23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.






I understand what Romulus is saying and think that he makes a good point. I often agree with some of what preterists say, maybe this makes me a partial partial preterist? :D

If we agree that the preaching of the gospel to all nations is one of the last milestones before the end of the age, and Romulus shows that this occurred in 1 Collossians v23 nearly 2000 years ago, then this strongly supports his preterist view that the end of the age is past and prophecy is historical.

As for why we are still here, it follows that a full preterist is very similar to a believer in "kingdom now" theology. I don't understand this fully, they seem to believe that the gospel has already won the spiritual war and the new kingdom is now ruling on earth, and as more become believers us Christians can usher in the dominance of Christianity and Christ's kingdom in every sphere on earth. In other words we are here to dominate earth politically, economically and spiritually, its just a matter of time, we are already in the millenium of Christ's rule.

I completely disagree with this perspective but it can be a source of interesting debate, they obviously over emphasize certain verses about the kingdom being within us , and the kingdom being here on earth already.

Éσяєяυииєя
Nov 12th 2008, 04:34 PM
...In other words we are here to dominate earth politically, economically and spiritually, its just a matter of time...

I do not agree with it either,
Such as in the dark ages, and the mixture of "the Church and State" and the Inquisition...

Take care

jesuslover1968
Nov 12th 2008, 04:49 PM
I understand what Romulus is saying and think that he makes a good point. I often agree with some of what preterists say, maybe this makes me a partial partial preterist? :D

If we agree that the preaching of the gospel to all nations is one of the last milestones before the end of the age, and Romulus shows that this occurred in 1 Collossians v23 nearly 2000 years ago, then this strongly supports his preterist view that the end of the age is past and prophecy is historical.

As for why we are still here, it follows that a full preterist is very similar to a believer in "kingdom now" theology. I don't understand this fully, they seem to believe that the gospel has already won the spiritual war and the new kingdom is now ruling on earth, and as more become believers us Christians can usher in the dominance of Christianity and Christ's kingdom in every sphere on earth. In other words we are here to dominate earth politically, economically and spiritually, its just a matter of time, we are already in the millenium of Christ's rule.

I completely disagree with this perspective but it can be a source of interesting debate, they obviously over emphasize certain verses about the kingdom being within us , and the kingdom being here on earth already.


Oh, I understand WHAT he is saying, I just don't understand why. I do not understand why anyone believes in preterism, period, whether it be partial or full. I guess I am hoping that someone will miraculously be able to make me see why they believe what they believe, in light of the Word of God. :)

Éσяєяυииєя
Nov 12th 2008, 05:10 PM
I am not of that thinking but as said they could use this verse:

Asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He replied to them by saying, The kingdom of God does not come with signs to be observed or with visible display,

Nor will people say, Look! Here [it is]! or, See, [it is] there! For behold, the kingdom of God is within you [in your hearts] and among you [surrounding you]. Luke 17:20,21.

But further in the same chapter it says:

And they will say to you, Look! [He is] there! or, Look! [He is] here! But do not go out or follow [them].

For like the lightning, that flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other, so will the Son of Man be in His [own] day. Ditto 23,24.

See you

jesuslover1968
Nov 12th 2008, 05:16 PM
I am not of that thinking but as said they could use this verse:

Asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He replied to them by saying, The kingdom of God does not come with signs to be observed or with visible display,

Nor will people say, Look! Here [it is]! or, See, [it is] there! For behold, the kingdom of God is within you [in your hearts] and among you [surrounding you]. Luke 17:20,21.

But further in the same chapter it says:

And they will say to you, Look! [He is] there! or, Look! [He is] here! But do not go out or follow [them].

For like the lightning, that flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other, so will the Son of Man be in His [own] day. Ditto 23,24.

See you


Yes, but surely they don't base their whole belief on just a few verses from the whole Bible?

John146
Nov 12th 2008, 08:48 PM
To faroutinmt and Romulus:

I have heard many arguments from preterists showing how the following verses have already been fulfilled by 70 AD. Obviously if we could all get the balance of literalism perfect we would all agree more on this site, but I for one would rather see a more literal fulfilment of the following verses than anything that happened up to 70 AD. A more literalist interpretation of the following verses would expect globalised troubles on WW2 or worse scale compared to your interpretation of internal troubles of one Roman Empire? Not a satisfying fulfilment to me, sorry.

24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

This hasn't happened yet , any common sense reader would agree, the bible speaks for itself here.70 AD was a period of great Jewish tribulation, and a typical troubled period of Roman history among many troubled Roman times. Nothing really significant world-wide.I'm not even a preterist but I can clearly see that the tribulation spoken about in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24 is focused solely on the Jerusalem area and not worldwide. Jesus clearly didn't come after THAT tribulation but He will come after a worldwide time of tribulation that immediately precedes His coming.

You can see the reference to two different tribulation events most clearly in Luke 21:20-28. Verses 20-24 focus on the tribulation that occurred in Jerusalem in 70 AD (only Jerusalem and Judea are mentioned), which fulfilled Jesus' prophecy regarding the timing of the destruction of the temple while verses 25-28 focus on the "distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth" which has not yet occurred and will fulfill Jesus' prophecy regarding the timing of His coming and the end of the age.

DurbanDude
Nov 13th 2008, 07:21 AM
I'm not even a preterist but I can clearly see that the tribulation spoken about in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24 is focused solely on the Jerusalem area and not worldwide. Jesus clearly didn't come after THAT tribulation but He will come after a worldwide time of tribulation that immediately precedes His coming.

You can see the reference to two different tribulation events most clearly in Luke 21:20-28. Verses 20-24 focus on the tribulation that occurred in Jerusalem in 70 AD (only Jerusalem and Judea are mentioned), which fulfilled Jesus' prophecy regarding the timing of the destruction of the temple while verses 25-28 focus on the "distress of nations" and "those things which are coming on the earth" which has not yet occurred and will fulfill Jesus' prophecy regarding the timing of His coming and the end of the age.

I agree with you about some of those verses, it is clear in Luke 21:20-24, but subject to debate in the other verses you refer to, a lot of what Jesus prophesied was about the destruction of the temple in 70AD by the Roman armies , happy to agree.

Romulus
Nov 13th 2008, 03:02 PM
To faroutinmt and Romulus:

I have heard many arguments from preterists showing how the following verses have already been fulfilled by 70 AD. Obviously if we could all get the balance of literalism perfect we would all agree more on this site, but I for one would rather see a more literal fulfilment of the following verses than anything that happened up to 70 AD. A more literalist interpretation of the following verses would expect globalised troubles on WW2 or worse scale compared to your interpretation of internal troubles of one Roman Empire? Not a satisfying fulfilment to me, sorry.

24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

This hasn't happened yet , any common sense reader would agree, the bible speaks for itself here.70 AD was a period of great Jewish tribulation, and a typical troubled period of Roman history among many troubled Roman times. Nothing really significant world-wide.

I think the issue that most people have is the global scale destruction and celestial events that seem to be prophecied as occurring literally. This cannot literally happen. The explanation for this type of language would have been understood by a 1st century Jewish audience. Not, a 21st Century Christian audience. A Jew who knew their Torah (Old Testament) backwards and forwards, upon hearing Christís words would have been immediately been reminded of the Book of Isaiah. This language was used many times in the Old Testament to proclaim judgement upon a sinful nation. The Jew hearing this would have been led to the following scripture:

Isaiah 13
A Prophecy Against Babylon
1 An oracle concerning Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw:
2 Raise a banner on a bare hilltop,
shout to them;
beckon to them
to enter the gates of the nobles.
3 I have commanded my holy ones;
I have summoned my warriors to carry out my wrathó
those who rejoice in my triumph.
4 Listen, a noise on the mountains,
like that of a great multitude!
Listen, an uproar among the kingdoms,
like nations massing together!
The LORD Almighty is mustering
an army for war.
5 They come from faraway lands,
from the ends of the heavensó
the LORD and the weapons of his wrathó
to destroy the whole country.
6 Wail, for the day of the LORD is near;
it will come like destruction from the Almighty. [a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2013&version=31#fen-NIV-17913afen-NIV-17913a)]
7 Because of this, all hands will go limp,
every man's heart will melt.
8 Terror will seize them,
pain and anguish will grip them;
they will writhe like a woman in labor.
They will look aghast at each other,
their faces aflame.
9 See, the day of the LORD is coming
óa cruel day, with wrath and fierce angeró
to make the land desolate
and destroy the sinners within it.
10 The stars of heaven and their constellations
will not show their light.
The rising sun will be darkened
and the moon will not give its light.
11 I will punish the world for its evil,
the wicked for their sins.
I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty
and will humble the pride of the ruthless.
12 I will make man scarcer than pure gold,
more rare than the gold of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble;
and the earth will shake from its place
at the wrath of the LORD Almighty,
in the day of his burning anger.
14 Like a hunted gazelle,
like sheep without a shepherd,
each will return to his own people,
each will flee to his native land.
15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
all who are caught will fall by the sword.
16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
their houses will be looted and their wives ravished.
17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
who do not care for silver
and have no delight in gold.
18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
they will have no mercy on infants
nor will they look with compassion on children.
19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms,
the glory of the Babylonians' pride,
will be overthrown by God
like Sodom and Gomorrah.
20 She will never be inhabited
or lived in through all generations;
no Arab will pitch his tent there,
no shepherd will rest his flocks there.
21 But desert creatures will lie there,
jackals will fill her houses;
there the owls will dwell,
and there the wild goats will leap about.
22 Hyenas will howl in her strongholds,
jackals in her luxurious palaces.
Her time is at hand,
and her days will not be prolonged.

This prophecy was fulfilled when Cyrus the Mede of the Medo-Persian empire conquered Babylon in 530 B.C. (I dispute this year) beginning the second great empire of Danielís statue after Babylon (Head of Gold.) The first bolded area noting the celestial events of Godís judgement found also against other heathan nations in Isaiah and Psalms. The celestial events were not literal but yet the empire of Babylon was judged. The second bolded area notes that the Medes were to accomplish Godís will and they did. The Babylon spoken of here is not Iraq today. We must see that Babylon, the empire existed in the time of Isaiah and that is who the judgement was to befall. Babylon was guilty of destroying the temple and Jerusalem. This prophecy was fulfilled and yet none of the celestial events ever happened. It is Biblical literature. There are other nations shown the same judgement such as Edom and Nineveh, both who donít exist anymore and were judged by God.

If none of the celestial events were to be literally fulfilled in the Old Testament then it must be the same scenario in the New Testament. Again, God always used heathan nations to judge other nations. In the New Testament, God used Rome to enact his judgement (coming) upon unfaithful Israel just as he used the Medes to judge Babylon.

Let us also use logic. If the sun would not give itís light, scientifically what would happen? I am no scientist but I know that the earth and all the surrounding planets would freeze in just a few minutes. The galaxy would die if the sun stopped shining. How can this be literal anyway?

The worldwide tribulation is also hinted at as being local and not world wide:

Then let those that are in Judea, flee to the mountains

If this was a worldwide event why did Jesus only give the warning to Judea? Why not another nation such as in Greece or Russia etc. It only makes sense when we see that Jerusalem which was condemned in the chapter before was the place that this tribulation was to occur and "it's house left to you desolate".

Historically this occurred already. Titus and his military in Nov/Dec 66 A.D. surrounded Jerusalem and then for no reason whatsoever left. This sign to those that heeded Christ's warning was the last time that anyone had to escape the coming siege. The people that realized the fulfillment escaped the city to the mountains of Pella. In Feb. 67 A.D. Titus and Rome returned and began the 3.5 year/42 month siege of Jerusalem that ended on Aug 30/31 70 A.D. exactly a generation later after Jesus spoke the Olivet Discourse.

This was the end of the age, the Jewish(Old Covenant) age. The temple was the last sign of the Old Covenant age and with it's destruction it ended the Old Covenant age. Just as Jesus spoke in the trial before the Sandhedrin:

[B]Matthew 26

62Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?" 63But Jesus remained silent.
The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ,[e (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2026&version=31#fen-NIV-24115e)] the Son of God."
64"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

They indeed did witness Christ's fulfillment of the Old Covenant and that God no longer dwelled in houses of stone, but within those that proclaimed Jesus is Lord. The cloud judgement is again an allusion to the Old Testament. Israel was judged and it's beloved city and temple was destroyed because of their rejection of God's Son, again judgement on an unfaithful nation.

The end of the Old Covenant age had occurred and the sign of the New Covenant age had come.

DurbanDude
Nov 13th 2008, 04:57 PM
If none of the celestial events were to be literally fulfilled in the Old Testament then it must be the same scenario in the New Testament. .

I agree that we have to apply the same set of rules , however I do not agree with what you saying the set of rules are.

I am sure that we both agree that prophecy does not always reflect the logic of man , you seem to indicate this by regarding the prophecies as using exaggerated language and therefore don't need to be literally fulfilled.

I believe that where prophecy differs to our logic is the principle of progressive fulfilment , often when there is a future prophecy involving judgement and a military attack on Israel , the prophecy will also prophesy about the more important day of the Lord in the far future. I believe this principle applies to many prophecies by Jesus in the gospels and also Isaiah Chapter 13, which is mainly about the day of the Lord (see verse 9)

John146
Nov 13th 2008, 05:44 PM
I think the issue that most people have is the global scale destruction and celestial events that seem to be prophecied as occurring literally. This cannot literally happen. The explanation for this type of language would have been understood by a 1st century Jewish audience. Not, a 21st Century Christian audience. A Jew who knew their Torah (Old Testament) backwards and forwards, upon hearing Christ’s words would have been immediately been reminded of the Book of Isaiah. This language was used many times in the Old Testament to proclaim judgement upon a sinful nation. The Jew hearing this would have been led to the following scripture:

Isaiah 13
A Prophecy Against Babylon
1 An oracle concerning Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw:
2 Raise a banner on a bare hilltop,
shout to them;
beckon to them
to enter the gates of the nobles.
3 I have commanded my holy ones;
I have summoned my warriors to carry out my wrath—
those who rejoice in my triumph.
4 Listen, a noise on the mountains,
like that of a great multitude!
Listen, an uproar among the kingdoms,
like nations massing together!
The LORD Almighty is mustering
an army for war.
5 They come from faraway lands,
from the ends of the heavens—
the LORD and the weapons of his wrath—
to destroy the whole country.
6 Wail, for the day of the LORD is near;
it will come like destruction from the Almighty. [a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2013&version=31#fen-NIV-17913afen-NIV-17913a)]
7 Because of this, all hands will go limp,
every man's heart will melt.
8 Terror will seize them,
pain and anguish will grip them;
they will writhe like a woman in labor.
They will look aghast at each other,
their faces aflame.
9 See, the day of the LORD is coming
—a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger—
to make the land desolate
and destroy the sinners within it.
10 The stars of heaven and their constellations
will not show their light.
The rising sun will be darkened
and the moon will not give its light.
11 I will punish the world for its evil,
the wicked for their sins.
I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty
and will humble the pride of the ruthless.
12 I will make man scarcer than pure gold,
more rare than the gold of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble;
and the earth will shake from its place
at the wrath of the LORD Almighty,
in the day of his burning anger.
14 Like a hunted gazelle,
like sheep without a shepherd,
each will return to his own people,
each will flee to his native land.
15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
all who are caught will fall by the sword.
16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
their houses will be looted and their wives ravished.
17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
who do not care for silver
and have no delight in gold.
18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
they will have no mercy on infants
nor will they look with compassion on children.
19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms,
the glory of the Babylonians' pride,
will be overthrown by God
like Sodom and Gomorrah.
20 She will never be inhabited
or lived in through all generations;
no Arab will pitch his tent there,
no shepherd will rest his flocks there.
21 But desert creatures will lie there,
jackals will fill her houses;
there the owls will dwell,
and there the wild goats will leap about.
22 Hyenas will howl in her strongholds,
jackals in her luxurious palaces.
Her time is at hand,
and her days will not be prolonged.

This prophecy was fulfilled when Cyrus the Mede of the Medo-Persian empire conquered Babylon in 530 B.C. (I dispute this year) beginning the second great empire of Daniel’s statue after Babylon (Head of Gold.) The first bolded area noting the celestial events of God’s judgement found also against other heathan nations in Isaiah and Psalms. The celestial events were not literal but yet the empire of Babylon was judged. The second bolded area notes that the Medes were to accomplish God’s will and they did. The Babylon spoken of here is not Iraq today. We must see that Babylon, the empire existed in the time of Isaiah and that is who the judgement was to befall. Babylon was guilty of destroying the temple and Jerusalem. This prophecy was fulfilled and yet none of the celestial events ever happened. It is Biblical literature. There are other nations shown the same judgement such as Edom and Nineveh, both who don’t exist anymore and were judged by God.

If none of the celestial events were to be literally fulfilled in the Old Testament then it must be the same scenario in the New Testament. Again, God always used heathan nations to judge other nations. In the New Testament, God used Rome to enact his judgement (coming) upon unfaithful Israel just as he used the Medes to judge Babylon.

Let us also use logic. If the sun would not give it’s light, scientifically what would happen? I am no scientist but I know that the earth and all the surrounding planets would freeze in just a few minutes. The galaxy would die if the sun stopped shining. How can this be literal anyway?

The worldwide tribulation is also hinted at as being local and not world wide:

Then let those that are in Judea, flee to the mountains

If this was a worldwide event why did Jesus only give the warning to Judea? Why not another nation such as in Greece or Russia etc. It only makes sense when we see that Jerusalem which was condemned in the chapter before was the place that this tribulation was to occur and "it's house left to you desolate".

Historically this occurred already. Titus and his military in Nov/Dec 66 A.D. surrounded Jerusalem and then for no reason whatsoever left. This sign to those that heeded Christ's warning was the last time that anyone had to escape the coming siege. The people that realized the fulfillment escaped the city to the mountains of Pella. In Feb. 67 A.D. Titus and Rome returned and began the 3.5 year/42 month siege of Jerusalem that ended on Aug 30/31 70 A.D. exactly a generation later after Jesus spoke the Olivet Discourse.

This was the end of the age, the Jewish(Old Covenant) age. The temple was the last sign of the Old Covenant age and with it's destruction it ended the Old Covenant age. Just as Jesus spoke in the trial before the Sandhedrin:

[B]Matthew 26

62Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?" 63But Jesus remained silent.
The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ,[e (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2026&version=31#fen-NIV-24115e)] the Son of God."
64"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

They indeed did witness Christ's fulfillment of the Old Covenant and that God no longer dwelled in houses of stone, but within those that proclaimed Jesus is Lord. The cloud judgement is again an allusion to the Old Testament. Israel was judged and it's beloved city and temple was destroyed because of their rejection of God's Son, again judgement on an unfaithful nation.

The end of the Old Covenant age had occurred and the sign of the New Covenant age had come. Certainly, there is symbolism in the part that speaks of stars falling and so on, but I have a big issue with the suggestion that 70 AD was the end of the "Old Covenant Age". No, it was not! For one thing, scripture doesn't teach an old covenant age, per se. Christ spoke of this age and the age to come and He did not speak of them in terms of the old covenant age and new covenant age. In this age, people marry and die and in the age to come, people will not marry or die (Luke 20:34-36). When Jesus spoke of the end of the age He was speaking of the end of this temporal age and not the end of the so-called old covenant age.

Also, the old covenant was made obsolete AT THE CROSS. When do you believe the new covenant began? Did the new covenant not replace the old covenant? That's what is taught in Hebrews 8-10. So, the old covenant ended whenever the new covenant was established and it was established AT THE CROSS by the shed blood of Christ.

If you believe the end of the age occurred in 70 AD then explain to me how the following has already been fulfilled:

Matthew 13
36Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 13
47Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 28
19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Romulus
Nov 13th 2008, 09:44 PM
I agree that we have to apply the same set of rules , however I do not agree with what you saying the set of rules are.


I am crushed!!!!! :lol::lol: Just kidding!



I am sure that we both agree that prophecy does not always reflect the logic of man , you seem to indicate this by regarding the prophecies as using exaggerated language and therefore don't need to be literally fulfilled. That is correct.




I believe that where prophecy differs to our logic is the principle of progressive fulfilment , often when there is a future prophecy involving judgement and a military attack on Israel , the prophecy will also prophesy about the more important day of the Lord in the far future. I believe this principle applies to many prophecies by Jesus in the gospels and also Isaiah Chapter 13, which is mainly about the day of the Lord (see verse 9)



You are correct that Isaiah is talking about "the day of the Lord". I hope that we can agree there were several days of the Lord regarding judgement. The area I disagree in is dual fullment. I am curious as to where in the scriptures you see that the same event would happen twice? There is grammatically nothing that I see to suggest that the event would happen now and then 2000+ years later. If God wanted to express this I believe He would have explicately said so that it would. Grammatically I only see one event in the Judgement of Babylon, Edom, and Nineveh. Matthew 24 and Luke 21 and Mark I only see one event. The destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.

I do believe you see multiple fullfillments because Jesus did not literally come on the clouds but the temple was destroyed. If we agree on the temple and the timing, why must we see the cloud coming as future. It must have occurred at the same time. If it was not to, then why did not scripture state this was a separate event?

Again, Jesus only stated one fact:

There will be a day that one stone will not be left on another.

Jesus stated noting more but that the temple would be destroyed. The disciples asking when this would be, and what would be the sign of His coming and the end of the age is all one event since Jesus prophecied only about the temple. The disciples would have absolutely no reason to bring up a separate event in the same conversation.

It is like saying

Jesus: the empire state building will be destroyed

Disciples: When will the ESB be destroyed and what will be the sign it will happen and by the way when will you come back and destroy the entire world?

Doesn't make sense to me.

Éσяєяυииєя
Nov 13th 2008, 10:24 PM
нi яσмυℓυѕ,

In Luke 21, Jesus seems to have blended together the destruction of Jerusalem and His 2nd coming, to avoid the desciples, some disappoitment or dejection.

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

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.

For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. Luke 21:20-22, 26-28.

Behold, I have told you before.

Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Matthew 24:25-28.

And there are many promises yet to be fulfilled:

And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins [Jesus], and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.

They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea. Isaiah 11:5-9


ƒαяєуєωєℓℓ

http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/4775/file0007we3.th.jpg (http://img397.imageshack.us/my.php?image=file0007we3.jpg)

Partaker of Christ
Nov 14th 2008, 12:09 AM
Originally Posted by DaniHansen [/URL]
[URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=24&verse=14&version=50&context=verse"]Matthew 24:14 (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1844743#post1844743)
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

There's your timeline.



Then the timeline began in the 1st century:

1 Colossians

23if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.



If that be true, then the end came somewhere betwen AD57 - AD 62?

Partaker of Christ
Nov 14th 2008, 12:21 AM
I am crushed!!!!! :lol::lol: Just kidding!





You are correct that Isaiah is talking about "the day of the Lord". I hope that we can agree there were several days of the Lord regarding judgement. The area I disagree in is dual fullment. I am curious as to where in the scriptures you see that the same event would happen twice? There is grammatically nothing that I see to suggest that the event would happen now and then 2000+ years later. If God wanted to express this I believe He would have explicately said so that it would. Grammatically I only see one event in the Judgement of Babylon, Edom, and Nineveh. Matthew 24 and Luke 21 and Mark I only see one event. The destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.

I do believe you see multiple fullfillments because Jesus did not literally come on the clouds but the temple was destroyed. If we agree on the temple and the timing, why must we see the cloud coming as future. It must have occurred at the same time. If it was not to, then why did not scripture state this was a separate event?

Again, Jesus only stated one fact:

There will be a day that one stone will not be left on another.

Jesus stated noting more but that the temple would be destroyed. The disciples asking when this would be, and what would be the sign of His coming and the end of the age is all one event since Jesus prophecied only about the temple. The disciples would have absolutely no reason to bring up a separate event in the same conversation.

It is like saying

Jesus: the empire state building will be destroyed

Disciples: When will the ESB be destroyed and what will be the sign it will happen and by the way when will you come back and destroy the entire world?

Doesn't make sense to me.

"Again, Jesus only stated one fact:

There will be a day that one stone will not be left on another."

But, is there not even to this day, some stones left on another?

Was there some part of the Temple walls rebuilt after AD70?

Partaker of Christ
Nov 14th 2008, 12:27 AM
I am crushed!!!!! :lol::lol: Just kidding!





You are correct that Isaiah is talking about "the day of the Lord". I hope that we can agree there were several days of the Lord regarding judgement. The area I disagree in is dual fullment. I am curious as to where in the scriptures you see that the same event would happen twice? There is grammatically nothing that I see to suggest that the event would happen now and then 2000+ years later. If God wanted to express this I believe He would have explicately said so that it would. Grammatically I only see one event in the Judgement of Babylon, Edom, and Nineveh. Matthew 24 and Luke 21 and Mark I only see one event. The destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.

I do believe you see multiple fullfillments because Jesus did not literally come on the clouds but the temple was destroyed. If we agree on the temple and the timing, why must we see the cloud coming as future. It must have occurred at the same time. If it was not to, then why did not scripture state this was a separate event?

Again, Jesus only stated one fact:

There will be a day that one stone will not be left on another.

Jesus stated noting more but that the temple would be destroyed. The disciples asking when this would be, and what would be the sign of His coming and the end of the age is all one event since Jesus prophecied only about the temple. The disciples would have absolutely no reason to bring up a separate event in the same conversation.

It is like saying

Jesus: the empire state building will be destroyed

Disciples: When will the ESB be destroyed and what will be the sign it will happen and by the way when will you come back and destroy the entire world?

Doesn't make sense to me.

If "this generation" who see all these things, were those who were there at that time.

Why would the disciples after the resurrection, then ask:

Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

DurbanDude
Nov 14th 2008, 08:07 AM
You are correct that Isaiah is talking about "the day of the Lord". I hope that we can agree there were several days of the Lord regarding judgement. The area I disagree in is dual fullment. I am curious as to where in the scriptures you see that the same event would happen twice? There is grammatically nothing that I see to suggest that the event would happen now and then 2000+ years later. If God wanted to express this I believe He would have explicately said so that it would. .

Interpret your way or interpret my way, neither is grammatically correct , and in neither do we see God expressing Himself explicitly, so if you criticise my thinking on those grounds, the same applies to your thinking. Am I making sense here? Gramatically there is nothing in the gospels to suggest that we have to take certain phrases literally (No stone left standing/ armies surrounding Jerusalem/ Judea) and other phrases only figuratively. If parables or normal imagery eg beasts, horns, candlesticks, vines, horses were used then gramatically I would say that the language of the end-times areas of the gospels is figurative like a lot of Revelation and Daniel. There are some parables , but there is no indication that the sections you describe as figurative are figurative.

When the phrase "the day of the Lord" is used in conjunction with apocalyptic language , then I do see only one "day of the Lord".



I do believe you see multiple fullfillments because Jesus did not literally come on the clouds but the temple was destroyed. If we agree on the temple and the timing, why must we see the cloud coming as future. It must have occurred at the same time. If it was not to, then why did not scripture state this was a separate event?

Again, Jesus only stated one fact:

There will be a day that one stone will not be left on another.

.

My answer above covers this , I disagree , many facts were stated , you are just assuming the others are figurative because you have no proof they occurred.





It is like saying

Jesus: the empire state building will be destroyed

Disciples: When will the ESB be destroyed and what will be the sign it will happen and by the way when will you come back and destroy the entire world?

Doesn't make sense to me.

It makes sense to me, even in the way you have described it. I agree that the disciples would have associated the events as together, only in retrospect do we see that they are separate. The reason they were expecting all to happen soon is because of the same misinterpretations they had regarding Jesus as you are having regarding the temple. They originally expected the prophecies of the gentle sacrificial Messiah to be in conjunction with the prophecies of the God-like Messiah who would wipe out their enemies with His coming. The last thing they expected is that when Jesus was taken from them Israel and Jerusalem would still have thousands of years of trouble ahead. They were initially expecting one coming , yet the old testament prophesied two comings. You point to the Roman abomination and attack on Jerusalem , I believe there is another future antichrist abomination when a man stands in the temple grounds and declares himself God, and there will be a final attack on Jerusalem from Gog of the far north of Israel, and its Arabic allies.