Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 117

Thread: 2nd Coming backdrop

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    2nd Coming backdrop

    I just explained to a brother what I believe is essential to understand the Olivet Discourse. As I've said elsewhere the Main Subject is the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. But equally important is the fact the 2nd Coming is made the backdrop to the events coming in the generation of Jesus' apostles. Unless this is understood, these 2 events, the 2nd Coming and the desolation of the temple in 70 AD, cannot be properly understood.

    Jesus' Disciples fully understood, from the Prophets, that there was coming the "Age to Come," also known as the "Messianic Kingdom." When Jesus said that Jerusalem would be desolated, they wanted to know how this fits in with the restoration of Israel in the Age to Come?

    Jesus' reply involved explanation that before the restoration of Israel could occur, he would return in judgment, to destroy his enemies. In the same way, his own generation would suffer judgment for the way they would treat him.

    And so, Jesus explained that to properly prepare for his Coming, they must recognize that it is a Coming in judgment. Preparation requires repentance and righteous living, in response to his Gospel. In the same way, they could avoid judgment in their own generation, simply by adhering to the repentance preached by John the Baptist, and by attending to the words of the Gospel.

    Sometimes it may seem confusing, trying to determine what Jesus was applying to his 2nd Coming, and what he was applying to the events of his own generation. But it is clear that the Main Subject involved the events of his own generation, which is always what a prophet focuses on. He is not about projecting far off into the future unless it benefits the present generation.

    And so, the coming down off the housetops, and fleeing, the "abomination of desolation," and the gathering of eagles, were all about the events about to transpire in Jesus' generation. But they were explained in the context of *judgment,* in the light of what the 2nd Coming would be. Preparation for both events involve the same things--repentance from sin, and righteous living, or attending to the Gospel of Christ.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,414

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I just explained to a brother what I believe is essential to understand the Olivet Discourse. As I've said elsewhere the Main Subject is the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. But equally important is the fact the 2nd Coming is made the backdrop to the events coming in the generation of Jesus' apostles. Unless this is understood, these 2 events, the 2nd Coming and the desolation of the temple in 70 AD, cannot be properly understood.

    Jesus' Disciples fully understood, from the Prophets, that there was coming the "Age to Come," also known as the "Messianic Kingdom." When Jesus said that Jerusalem would be desolated, they wanted to know how this fits in with the restoration of Israel in the Age to Come?

    Jesus' reply involved explanation that before the restoration of Israel could occur, he would return in judgment, to destroy his enemies. In the same way, his own generation would suffer judgment for the way they would treat him.

    And so, Jesus explained that to properly prepare for his Coming, they must recognize that it is a Coming in judgment. Preparation requires repentance and righteous living, in response to his Gospel. In the same way, they could avoid judgment in their own generation, simply by adhering to the repentance preached by John the Baptist, and by attending to the words of the Gospel.

    Sometimes it may seem confusing, trying to determine what Jesus was applying to his 2nd Coming, and what he was applying to the events of his own generation. But it is clear that the Main Subject involved the events of his own generation, which is always what a prophet focuses on. He is not about projecting far off into the future unless it benefits the present generation.

    And so, the coming down off the housetops, and fleeing, the "abomination of desolation," and the gathering of eagles, were all about the events about to transpire in Jesus' generation. But they were explained in the context of *judgment,* in the light of what the 2nd Coming would be. Preparation for both events involve the same things--repentance from sin, and righteous living, or attending to the Gospel of Christ.
    Hebrews 1:3; "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."

    Hebrews 8:1; "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens."

    Acts 3:21; "Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began."

    That is the beauty of scripture. One does not have to write much. Our Lord Jesus Christ does NOT RETURN in 70 AD. He is honored in heaven at the right hand of the Father, He does not give up His Priestly duty in 70 AD to "return for judgement", and He MUST REMAIN in heaven until Israel's RESTITUTION - NOT JUDGMENT! JUDGMENT is given to the Gentiles until "the times of the gentiles are full". So Rome does the chastising in 70 AD.

    As to "this generation" - if you are correct it must be full of old men, for they are held responsible for Abel's death. Notice what our Lord Jesus says of "THIS generation" in Luke 11:50-51;

    50 "That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
    51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


    So either Cain is a Jew and still alive at our Lord's time, or "THIS generation" points to WHAT is generated and not a lifespan.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    154

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    I have to mostly disagree with the OP; our Lord Jesus' Olivet discourse (Matt.24; Mark 13) is giving signs of the very end of this world that are linked to the Seals of Revelation 6.

    About the only events in His Olivet discourse that appear to line up with 70 A.D. and the Romans is the destruction of the 2nd temple and His forecast of Jerusalem being laid even with the ground, like in Luke 19:43-44. This the Romans did in 70 A.D., but in Jesus' Olivet discourse there is no specific prophecy about Jerusalem being laid waste, the prophecy is instead about the temple mount buildings which Christ's Apostles pointed to:

    Matt 24:1
    24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.
    KJV


    The beginning subject in Matthew 24 is about the "buildings of the temple", not the whole city of Jerusalem like Luke 19:43-44 spoke of. It's these buildings on the temple mount that Jesus was addressing in this next verse:

    Matt 24:2
    2 And Jesus said unto them, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
    KJV


    Did He say there Jerusalem would be destroyed with that? No, He pointed to the buildings on the temple mount His Apostles asked Him about. And that is why His Apostles then asked Him this next question about events for the very end of this world, not in 70 A.D.:

    Matt 24:3
    3 And 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?"
    KJV


    Men's doctrines have tried to toy with this 3rd verse, trying to treat that "end of the world" idea as meaning only about the end of the age of His Apostle's era, simply because of the Greek word aion. That's so they can try to tie their question to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and not to the time of Jesus' 2nd coming. And if you'll notice, Christ's disciples there asked Him about the time of His 2nd coming linked to that end of the world. So no, the subject is not about 70 A.D., it's about the very end of this world, our time, or maybe our children's time. And do the orthodox Jews in today's Jerusalem have another temple on the temple mount? Not yet, but they have had the plans and materials to build it ready for quite a while now, even the cornerstone cut at least a decade ago. Eyes open.

    If one continues in Matthew 24 and Mark 13, we find Jesus quoting from the Book of Daniel about the "abomination of desolation" event, which involves the placing of an idol abomination in the temple on the temple mount in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV served as the blueprint for this, as he conquered Jerusalem with an army, went inside the 2nd temple and sacrificed swine on the altar, and then setup an idol in Zeus worship. That was back in 165 B.C., though, about 200 years before Jesus warned of the "abomination of desolation" in His Olivet discourse. That means of course, to look for another ensample of that event sometime in the future.

    What the Romans did in 70 A.D. does not qualify, because per the Jewish historian Josephus (100 A.D.), the temple burned down before the Romans could get control of it. So they did no "abomination of desolation" event in the 2nd temple. And since the temple was destroyed then, and another Jewish temple there has never been built again since, it means to look to the end of this world for this prophecy to be fulfilled with another temple there. So the orthodox Jews in today's Jerusalem that plan to build another temple there, like the Temple Mount Faithful group, ought to get your attention about these events right away. Eyes open.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Hebrews 1:3; "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."

    Hebrews 8:1; "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens."

    Acts 3:21; "Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began."

    That is the beauty of scripture. One does not have to write much. Our Lord Jesus Christ does NOT RETURN in 70 AD. He is honored in heaven at the right hand of the Father, He does not give up His Priestly duty in 70 AD to "return for judgement", and He MUST REMAIN in heaven until Israel's RESTITUTION - NOT JUDGMENT! JUDGMENT is given to the Gentiles until "the times of the gentiles are full". So Rome does the chastising in 70 AD.

    As to "this generation" - if you are correct it must be full of old men, for they are held responsible for Abel's death. Notice what our Lord Jesus says of "THIS generation" in Luke 11:50-51;

    50 "That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
    51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


    So either Cain is a Jew and still alive at our Lord's time, or "THIS generation" points to WHAT is generated and not a lifespan.
    1st let me be clear. I am *not* advocating Preterism, the belief that Jesus returned in his own generation! He was predicting 2 separate events, 1st the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and following that the 2nd Coming in a far off, future time. He was comparing the 2 events because in predicting the 1st event his Disciples were confused and asked about the 2nd event, about how these 2 events were compatible.

    Jesus' answer was that unlike their expectation that his 1st Coming would mean salvation for Israel, actually both events would bring judgment to the world and to Israel. As the 2nd Coming brings judgment to the world on behalf of Israel, so the 1st Coming brings judgment to Israel. Both events brought judgment to Man! This is how Jesus compared these 2 events, and straightened out his Disciples' misperceptions about them.

    2ndly, with respect to what was being brought to bear in his own generation, Jesus mentions previous generations not because previous generations are being judged, but rather, because the present generation consisted of a kind of summary judgment of all previous sin. The rejection and crucifixion of Jesus was a summary of all previous sin.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace View Post
    I have to mostly disagree with the OP; our Lord Jesus' Olivet discourse (Matt.24; Mark 13) is giving signs of the very end of this world that are linked to the Seals of Revelation 6.

    About the only events in His Olivet discourse that appear to line up with 70 A.D. and the Romans is the destruction of the 2nd temple and His forecast of Jerusalem being laid even with the ground, like in Luke 19:43-44. This the Romans did in 70 A.D., but in Jesus' Olivet discourse there is no specific prophecy about Jerusalem being laid waste, the prophecy is instead about the temple mount buildings which Christ's Apostles pointed to:

    Matt 24:1
    24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.
    KJV


    The beginning subject in Matthew 24 is about the "buildings of the temple", not the whole city of Jerusalem like Luke 19:43-44 spoke of. It's these buildings on the temple mount that Jesus was addressing in this next verse:

    Matt 24:2
    2 And Jesus said unto them, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
    KJV


    Did He say there Jerusalem would be destroyed with that? No, He pointed to the buildings on the temple mount His Apostles asked Him about. And that is why His Apostles then asked Him this next question about events for the very end of this world, not in 70 A.D.:

    Matt 24:3
    3 And 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?"
    KJV
    I'm not angry that you disagree with my OP--I'm just asking that you try to understand my perspective (without referring to my views as "Man's doctrines")? There is no division between the prophecy of the destruction of the temple and the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem. In history, the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and the ravaging of Jerusalem, together with the deportation of the Jews, was an ongoing prophecy up until 135 AD. The accounts in Matthew and Mark are very comparable with the account in Luke. Matthew and Mark describe the Abomination of Desolation, and Luke talks about the desolation of the temple together with the encircling of Jerusalem by an Army. The desolation of both the temple and Jerusalem are described together.

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    The prophecy of the "end of the world," or Jesus' 2nd Coming, is a subject brought up by the Disciples, and not Jesus. Jesus was predicting the coming of judgment against the Jewish People. He was being asked, by his Disciples, to compare this prophecy of Jerusalem's judgment with the judgment of the 2nd Coming? Thus, Jesus provided 2 sets of signs, and not just 1, to compare the 2nd Coming with the event he was predicting to take place in his own generation. "All these things," to take place in his own generation, referred to the judgment of Jerusalem which he was predicting primarily. The events of the 2nd Coming would be in the distant future, following the devastation of 70 AD.

    Men's doctrines have tried to toy with this 3rd verse, trying to treat that "end of the world" idea as meaning only about the end of the age of His Apostle's era, simply because of the Greek word aion. That's so they can try to tie their question to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and not to the time of Jesus' 2nd coming. And if you'll notice, Christ's disciples there asked Him about the time of His 2nd coming linked to that end of the world. So no, the subject is not about 70 A.D., it's about the very end of this world, our time, or maybe our children's time. And do the orthodox Jews in today's Jerusalem have another temple on the temple mount? Not yet, but they have had the plans and materials to build it ready for quite a while now, even the cornerstone cut at least a decade ago. Eyes open.

    If one continues in Matthew 24 and Mark 13, we find Jesus quoting from the Book of Daniel about the "abomination of desolation" event, which involves the placing of an idol abomination in the temple on the temple mount in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV served as the blueprint for this, as he conquered Jerusalem with an army, went inside the 2nd temple and sacrificed swine on the altar, and then setup an idol in Zeus worship. That was back in 165 B.C., though, about 200 years before Jesus warned of the "abomination of desolation" in His Olivet discourse. That means of course, to look for another ensample of that event sometime in the future.

    What the Romans did in 70 A.D. does not qualify, because per the Jewish historian Josephus (100 A.D.), the temple burned down before the Romans could get control of it. So they did no "abomination of desolation" event in the 2nd temple. And since the temple was destroyed then, and another Jewish temple there has never been built again since, it means to look to the end of this world for this prophecy to be fulfilled with another temple there. So the orthodox Jews in today's Jerusalem that plan to build another temple there, like the Temple Mount Faithful group, ought to get your attention about these events right away. Eyes open.
    Jesus was predicting a different kind of AoD in his own generation, as opposed to the AoD of Antiochus 4. Thus, the elements involved were different, although using the same terminology meant similar issues were involved. The differences were, as you noted, one was a sacrilege in the temple and the other was a destruction of the temple. Both, however, were pagan challenges upon the God in His Holy Place. Thus, they used the same terms, the AoD, and yet were different prophecies. One was prophesied in Dan 8 and 11, while the one we are discussing was prophesied in Dan 9 alone. Two very different prophecies utilized different elements and yet spoke of similar issues.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    The reason I propose that Jesus used the 2nd Coming as a *backdrop* to his prophecy of the desolation of the temple is because he started out, in his Discourse, describing the destruction of the temple. It was *Jesus' Disciples* who introduced a new element, the 2nd Coming, asking that Jesus explain these 2 events together.

    So let me explain why this happened. Jesus' Disciples, like the Jews in general, understood that in the eschaton Israel would finally be completely liberated from pagan oppression by the Gentiles. Thus, Jesus' Disciples saw his 2nd Coming as being the ultimate liberation of the Jewish People from the pagan Gentiles.

    But Jesus was here predicting the destruction of Jerusalem at his initial appearance! The Disciples must've thought, "How can Jesus come to us, as Messiah, and not bring deliverance to Israel? And so, they wondered, "How can this prediction of the destruction of the temple be the 2nd Coming? How can you not deliver Israel from the pagans?

    Jesus' answer was to reassert his prediction of the fall of Jerusalem, and then to compare this event with his 2nd Coming. These were to be *2 separate events.* One would take place in "this generation," whereas the other event would take place on an *unknown day* in the far off future, terminating a long period of Jewish dispersion.

    But it is the way Jesus explained this that is interesting to me. Jesus depicted his initial appearance not just as salvation for his people, but more, as judgment to Israel. And he also depicted his 2nd Coming not just as salvation for Israel, but also as judgment against the *entire world,* including Israel! And so, the view that Messiah comes to save is not wrong, but is often misunderstood. It is not just salvation, but it is also judgment. One cannot have salvation without judgment taking place 1st!

    And so, Jesus compared this fall of Jerusalem as the initial judgment against the Jews after his initial appearance, and compared this with the 2nd Coming, in which the Gentile nations would be punished. All nations would be judged by Messiah. Escape from judgment, or salvation, would take place only by repentance and acceptance of his righteousness.

    In this way you may see that Jesus asserted the certainty of the fall of Jerusalem in his own generation without making this event incompatible with who he will be at his 2nd Coming. Both events will bring judgment against unrepentant people, both in Israel and in the entire world. We should not just see Jesus' initial appearance and 2nd Coming as salvation. Rather, we should see these 2 events as a salvation from judgment, along with imminent judgment upon those who persist in ungodly living.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    154

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I'm not angry that you disagree with my OP--I'm just asking that you try to understand my perspective (without referring to my views as "Man's doctrines")? There is no division between the prophecy of the destruction of the temple and the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem. In history, the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and the ravaging of Jerusalem, together with the deportation of the Jews, was an ongoing prophecy up until 135 AD. The accounts in Matthew and Mark are very comparable with the account in Luke. Matthew and Mark describe the Abomination of Desolation, and Luke talks about the desolation of the temple together with the encircling of Jerusalem by an Army. The desolation of both the temple and Jerusalem are described together.
    Sorry, but the idea that our Lord Jesus' Olivet discourse was history and is to be applied to the time of His Apostles, is... a doctrine of men. It's an idea that leaves the actual Scripture in so many ways that it cannot be considered anything else, regardless of how popular it may be. So by your asking someone like me to try and understand your perspective would be like knowingly admitting error if I agreed.

    I just showed from the Scripture, that Jesus was not pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem in Matthew 24, but to the buildings on the temple mount, which was where His disciples were pointing to.

    And furthermore, the "abomination of desolation" has NOTHING to do with the destruction of the city and temple. Anyone who understands the Book of Daniel where Jesus quoted about it would understand that. It has to do with spiritual desolation inside the temple in Jerusalem, not destruction of it! Antiochus IV (165 B.C.) served as the pattern. Obviously you are not willing to admit that history nor meaning but blatantly serve men's doctrine on the matter, teaching just the opposite meaning.

    Jesus was predicting a different kind of AoD in his own generation, as opposed to the AoD of Antiochus 4. Thus, the elements involved were different, although using the same terminology meant similar issues were involved. The differences were, as you noted, one was a sacrilege in the temple and the other was a destruction of the temple. Both, however, were pagan challenges upon the God in His Holy Place. Thus, they used the same terms, the AoD, and yet were different prophecies. One was prophesied in Dan 8 and 11, while the one we are discussing was prophesied in Dan 9 alone. Two very different prophecies utilized different elements and yet spoke of similar issues.
    That is just as big of a joke.

    Matt 24:15
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
    KJV


    It is the abomination spoken of by the prophet Daniel, our Lord Jesus said. Daniel never spoke of destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.

    For something to 'stand' in the "holy place", it means something placed in a standing temple in Jerusalem; that's where Jesus was pointing to with the "abomination of desolation".


    Dan 12:11
    11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
    KJV

    Dan 11:31
    31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
    KJV

    Dan 9:26-27
    27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."
    NIV



    And so others also know the attempt to change the meaning of AOD by men's doctrines, the "holy place" Jesus referred to is in regard to the temple at Jerusalem. It is the same holy place referred to in Acts 21:28. Per Daniel, there is an object to be placed there.


    More info on the coming abomination in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem for the end...

    Ezek 8:3-6
    3 And He put forth the form of an hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the inner gate that looketh toward the north; where was the seat of the image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy.

    4 And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there, according to the vision that I saw in the plain.

    5 Then said He unto me, "Son of man, lift up thine eyes now the way toward the north." So I lifted up mine eyes the way toward the north, and behold northward at the gate of the altar this image of jealousy in the entry.

    6 He said furthermore unto me, "Son of man, seest thou what they do? even the great abominations that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go far off from My sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations."
    KJV



    Our God is a jealous God.

    He doesn't want us to worship anyone or anything else, but Him.

    The "house of Israel" referred to there is about the ten scattered tribes of Israel after... they had been scattered among the Gentiles. By that time in Ezekiel, he was already captive to Babylon, and many of his brethren of the ten northern tribes were captive but a ways north while the house of Judah were captive at Babylon. What does this mean for the end? It means this Ezekiel 8 & 9 prophecy is most likely about the end. The leaders of the house of Israel are there in the temple in Jerusalem, worshiping everything except our Heavenly Father through His Son, and there the house of Judah is with them taking of the same false worship!

    Then in Ezekiel 9, God tells His angels to go put a mark (Hebrew letter tau, which was written as a cross) on the foreheads of all those who sigh for the abominations, and then go and destroy those not sealed with God's Sealing.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace View Post
    Sorry, but the idea that our Lord Jesus' Olivet discourse was history and is to be applied to the time of His Apostles, is... a doctrine of men. It's an idea that leaves the actual Scripture in so many ways that it cannot be considered anything else, regardless of how popular it may be. So by your asking someone like me to try and understand your perspective would be like knowingly admitting error if I agreed.

    I just showed from the Scripture, that Jesus was not pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem in Matthew 24, but to the buildings on the temple mount, which was where His disciples were pointing to.
    False. Jesus talked about the "abomination of desolation," which in Luke 21 is described as a hostile Army encircling Jerusalem.

    And just prior to Matthew's account of the Olivet Discourse in Matt 24 Matthew talks about the abandonment of Jerusalem, due to its rejection of their Messiah. The destruction of the temple is part of the desolation of Jerusalem!

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    And furthermore, the "abomination of desolation" has NOTHING to do with the destruction of the city and temple. Anyone who understands the Book of Daniel where Jesus quoted about it would understand that. It has to do with spiritual desolation inside the temple in Jerusalem, not destruction of it! Antiochus IV (165 B.C.) served as the pattern. Obviously you are not willing to admit that history nor meaning but blatantly serve men's doctrine on the matter, teaching just the opposite meaning.
    False. I fully admitted that Antiochus 4 was an AoD. I'm just saying that the Roman desolation of Jerusalem was a slightly different kind of AoD. Both desolations were destructive with respect to the Jewish people. And both events led to sacrilege being committed against God in His holy temple. However, one was an act of sacrilege within the temple, and the other challenged the existence of the temple altogether. Both constituted a challenge to God in His temple.

    You are ignoring 2 important points here with respect to a correlation between the AoD and the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
    1) Dan 9 correlates the AoD with the time immediately after the "cutting off" of Messiah, which could only be the 70 AD event.
    2) The Abomination of Desolation is referenced by Jesus in association with the impending judgment upon his own generation, which again can only be the 70 AD event.

    If this is "man's argument," it must be a "man" who literally believes the Scriptures! It is not "God's argument" to ignore these Scriptural arguments and treat them as beneath the dignity of Scriptural consideration.

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    That is just as big of a joke.

    Matt 24:15
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
    KJV


    It is the abomination spoken of by the prophet Daniel, our Lord Jesus said. Daniel never spoke of destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.
    False.

    Dan 9.26 The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

    If you think such discussion is a "joke," why even discuss this with me? If these arguments are so "obviously settled," why even argue with those who are supposedly "blind to the truth?"

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    For something to 'stand' in the "holy place", it means something placed in a standing temple in Jerusalem; that's where Jesus was pointing to with the "abomination of desolation".

    Dan 12:11
    11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
    KJV

    Dan 11:31
    31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
    KJV

    Dan 9:26-27
    27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."
    NIV



    And so others also know the attempt to change the meaning of AOD by men's doctrines, the "holy place" Jesus referred to is in regard to the temple at Jerusalem. It is the same holy place referred to in Acts 21:28. Per Daniel, there is an object to be placed there.

    No, per Daniel 8 and 11 the AoD was something for Antiochus 4, which certainly involved his placing sacrilegious objects in the temple. But in Dan 9 the AoD is said to be the actual *destruction* of both the city of Jerusalem and the temple.

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace
    More info on the coming abomination in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem for the end...

    Ezek 8:3-6
    3 And He put forth the form of an hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the inner gate that looketh toward the north; where was the seat of the image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy.

    4 And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there, according to the vision that I saw in the plain.

    5 Then said He unto me, "Son of man, lift up thine eyes now the way toward the north." So I lifted up mine eyes the way toward the north, and behold northward at the gate of the altar this image of jealousy in the entry.

    6 He said furthermore unto me, "Son of man, seest thou what they do? even the great abominations that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go far off from My sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations."
    KJV



    Our God is a jealous God.

    He doesn't want us to worship anyone or anything else, but Him.

    The "house of Israel" referred to there is about the ten scattered tribes of Israel after... they had been scattered among the Gentiles. By that time in Ezekiel, he was already captive to Babylon, and many of his brethren of the ten northern tribes were captive but a ways north while the house of Judah were captive at Babylon. What does this mean for the end? It means this Ezekiel 8 & 9 prophecy is most likely about the end. The leaders of the house of Israel are there in the temple in Jerusalem, worshiping everything except our Heavenly Father through His Son, and there the house of Judah is with them taking of the same false worship!

    Then in Ezekiel 9, God tells His angels to go put a mark (Hebrew letter tau, which was written as a cross) on the foreheads of all those who sigh for the abominations, and then go and destroy those not sealed with God's Sealing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,414

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Because you set forth your ideas, and not God's, I at first thought to sit out on this one. You refer to no scripture and expound no scripture. Your monologues are purely your opinions. But in retrospect I will answer some of your points.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    1st let me be clear. I am *not* advocating Preterism, the belief that Jesus returned in his own generation!
    You do. You have not ceased to advocate that "this generation" was the company of people alive and present with our Lord Jesus, and would be alive to witness what was predicted. If you would now like to change that belief, I applaud you.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    He was predicting 2 separate events, 1st the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and following that the 2nd Coming in a far off, future time. He was comparing the 2 events because in predicting the 1st event his Disciples were confused and asked about the 2nd event, about how these 2 events were compatible.
    You have consistently upheld that Matthew 24 and 25 and Luke 17 predict 70 AD. Again, if you wish to modify this - wonderful.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Jesus' answer was that unlike their expectation that his 1st Coming would mean salvation for Israel, actually both events would bring judgment to the world and to Israel.

    As the 2nd Coming brings judgment to the world on behalf of Israel, so the 1st Coming brings judgment to Israel. Both events brought judgment to Man! This is how Jesus compared these 2 events, and straightened out his Disciples' misperceptions about them.
    Not so. Our Lord Jesus' 1st Coming brought judgement on Himself so that all men, Israelite and Gentile, might escape Judgement. Our Lord's Second Coming is to SAVE Jerusalem, and SAVE the earth from the polluting Gentile Government. The judgement on "the whole earth" takes place BEFORE Christ's Second Coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    2ndly, with respect to what was being brought to bear in his own generation, Jesus mentions previous generations not because previous generations are being judged, but rather, because the present generation consisted of a kind of summary judgment of all previous sin. The rejection and crucifixion of Jesus was a summary of all previous sin.
    Pure private interpretation. This concept has not a single scripture to back it. "Kind of summary" .... This epitomizes man's thoughts. Here are the direct sayings of God in Luke 11:50-51;

    50 "That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
    51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


    And the "generation" is DEFINED by verses 47-49;

    47 "Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
    48 Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
    49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:"


    It is not the genration only of Christ's time. Their FATHERS are included. And it was their FATHERS that GENERATED them. The DISPOSITION of the fathers is GENERATED and so the sons ALSO KILL the prophets sent by God. And their sons will mill the Apostles. Paul is a prime example. He joins in with all his energy to kill and silence the "sent ones" who declare the Good News. The serpentine nature of the fathers is GENERATED and so those GENERATED have the same serpentine nature. And throughout the centuries of the age of Israel's chastisement, they continue this serpentine GENERATION until the same GENERATION embrace the Beast and rejoice at the death of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, 2,000 years later.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Not so. Our Lord Jesus' 1st Coming brought judgement on Himself so that all men, Israelite and Gentile, might escape Judgement. Our Lord's Second Coming is to SAVE Jerusalem, and SAVE the earth from the polluting Gentile Government. The judgement on "the whole earth" takes place BEFORE Christ's Second Coming.
    Well stated, though I would add there is another judgement AFTER the MK.

    Pure private interpretation. This concept has not a single scripture to back it. "Kind of summary" .... This epitomizes man's thoughts. Here are the direct sayings of God in Luke 11:50-51;

    50 "That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
    51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


    And the "generation" is DEFINED by verses 47-49;

    47 "Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
    48 Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
    49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:"


    It is not the genration only of Christ's time. Their FATHERS are included. And it was their FATHERS that GENERATED them. The DISPOSITION of the fathers is GENERATED and so the sons ALSO KILL the prophets sent by God. And their sons will mill the Apostles. Paul is a prime example. He joins in with all his energy to kill and silence the "sent ones" who declare the Good News. The serpentine nature of the fathers is GENERATED and so those GENERATED have the same serpentine nature. And throughout the centuries of the age of Israel's chastisement, they continue this serpentine GENERATION until the same GENERATION embrace the Beast and rejoice at the death of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, 2,000 years later.
    Almost completely agree.
    The ONLY difference I have is that there is a generation which will say "Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord". They will include the 144K who are firstfruits of the Jews who have the partial blindness lifted.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Because you set forth your ideas, and not God's, I at first thought to sit out on this one. You refer to no scripture and expound no scripture. Your monologues are purely your opinions. But in retrospect I will answer some of your points.
    False, I have been arguing this for some time, and have offered all of the pertinent Scriptures. The Olivet Discourse is obviously being referenced. If you think *interpretations* are incompatible with Scripture quotations, we will be arguing nothing here!

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls
    You do. You have not ceased to advocate that "this generation" was the company of people alive and present with our Lord Jesus, and would be alive to witness what was predicted. If you would now like to change that belief, I applaud you.
    Why don't you just applaud the fact I'm not a Preterist? I'm an historical interpreter of this passage, with respect to the destruction of the temple and the AoD. It was fulfilled in the generation of Jesus, in 70 AD. This was precisely what Jesus predicted, and you should applaud me for getting it right. On the other hand, I cannot applaud you for wanting to make it all about the Antichrist and the 2nd Coming. It is actually about both, about the generation of Jesus and the 2nd Coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls
    You have consistently upheld that Matthew 24 and 25 and Luke 17 predict 70 AD. Again, if you wish to modify this - wonderful.
    I do not. Obviously, I have a different interpretation than you do. Why should I go against my better judgment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls
    Not so. Our Lord Jesus' 1st Coming brought judgement on Himself so that all men, Israelite and Gentile, might escape Judgement. Our Lord's Second Coming is to SAVE Jerusalem, and SAVE the earth from the polluting Gentile Government. The judgement on "the whole earth" takes place BEFORE Christ's Second Coming.
    Jesus brought judgment at his 1st Coming, and he intends to bring judgment at his 2nd Coming. That's why he compared the 2 events. That's why he used the 2nd Coming as a backdrop to his prediction of Jewish judgment in his own generation. The Jews *knew* the 2nd Coming, or the coming of the Messiah, would mean judgment upon Israel's enemies. What they didn't realize, however, is that Messiah's 1st Coming would also be judgment against the Jews!

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls
    Pure private interpretation. This concept has not a single scripture to back it. "Kind of summary" .... This epitomizes man's thoughts. Here are the direct sayings of God in Luke 11:50-51;

    50 "That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
    51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


    And the "generation" is DEFINED by verses 47-49;

    47 "Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
    48 Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.
    49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:"


    It is not the genration only of Christ's time. Their FATHERS are included. And it was their FATHERS that GENERATED them. The DISPOSITION of the fathers is GENERATED and so the sons ALSO KILL the prophets sent by God. And their sons will mill the Apostles. Paul is a prime example. He joins in with all his energy to kill and silence the "sent ones" who declare the Good News. The serpentine nature of the fathers is GENERATED and so those GENERATED have the same serpentine nature. And throughout the centuries of the age of Israel's chastisement, they continue this serpentine GENERATION until the same GENERATION embrace the Beast and rejoice at the death of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, 2,000 years later.
    I don't think you understand what Jesus is saying in these Scriptures. He is saying that all of the sins of Israel in history are being summarized in Jesus' death. There are plenty of Scriptures to prove that. Your failure to see that is what causes you to think I'm making this up.

    Romans 3.25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,414

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    False, I have been arguing this for some time, and have offered all of the pertinent Scriptures. The Olivet Discourse is obviously being referenced. If you think *interpretations* are incompatible with Scripture quotations, we will be arguing nothing here!



    Why don't you just applaud the fact I'm not a Preterist? I'm an historical interpreter of this passage, with respect to the destruction of the temple and the AoD. It was fulfilled in the generation of Jesus, in 70 AD. This was precisely what Jesus predicted, and you should applaud me for getting it right. On the other hand, I cannot applaud you for wanting to make it all about the Antichrist and the 2nd Coming. It is actually about both, about the generation of Jesus and the 2nd Coming.



    I do not. Obviously, I have a different interpretation than you do. Why should I go against my better judgment?



    Jesus brought judgment at his 1st Coming, and he intends to bring judgment at his 2nd Coming. That's why he compared the 2 events. That's why he used the 2nd Coming as a backdrop to his prediction of Jewish judgment in his own generation. The Jews *knew* the 2nd Coming, or the coming of the Messiah, would mean judgment upon Israel's enemies. What they didn't realize, however, is that Messiah's 1st Coming would also be judgment against the Jews!



    I don't think you understand what Jesus is saying in these Scriptures. He is saying that all of the sins of Israel in history are being summarized in Jesus' death. There are plenty of Scriptures to prove that. Your failure to see that is what causes you to think I'm making this up.

    Romans 3.25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
    I have read and noted your reply.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    154

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    False. Jesus talked about the "abomination of desolation," which in Luke 21 is described as a hostile Army encircling Jerusalem.

    And just prior to Matthew's account of the Olivet Discourse in Matt 24 Matthew talks about the abandonment of Jerusalem, due to its rejection of their Messiah. The destruction of the temple is part of the desolation of Jerusalem!



    False. I fully admitted that Antiochus 4 was an AoD. I'm just saying that the Roman desolation of Jerusalem was a slightly different kind of AoD. Both desolations were destructive with respect to the Jewish people. And both events led to sacrilege being committed against God in His holy temple. However, one was an act of sacrilege within the temple, and the other challenged the existence of the temple altogether. Both constituted a challenge to God in His temple.

    You are ignoring 2 important points here with respect to a correlation between the AoD and the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
    1) Dan 9 correlates the AoD with the time immediately after the "cutting off" of Messiah, which could only be the 70 AD event.
    2) The Abomination of Desolation is referenced by Jesus in association with the impending judgment upon his own generation, which again can only be the 70 AD event.

    If this is "man's argument," it must be a "man" who literally believes the Scriptures! It is not "God's argument" to ignore these Scriptural arguments and treat them as beneath the dignity of Scriptural consideration.



    False.

    [I]Dan 9.26 The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

    If you think such discussion is a "joke," why even discuss this with me? If these arguments are so "obviously settled," why even argue with those who are supposedly "blind to the truth?"
    That doctrine of man is a joke, because in Luke 21 Jesus was not talking about the AOD with the army surrounding Jerusalem in Luke 21:20. He was giving 'new' information there different from the AOD that He only mentioned in the Matthew 24 and Mark 13 version of His Olivet discourse. The doctrine of men you follow has instead taken that Luke 21:20 verse and ADDED the idea of the "abomination of desolation" to it, when the verse says nothing about the "abomination of desolation" from the Book of Daniel. The difference with Scripture comparison is EASY...

    Luke 21:20-21
    20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
    21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
    KJV

    Matt 24:15-16
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
    16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
    KJV

    Mark 13:14
    14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
    KJV



    The desolation by armies spoken of in Luke 21:20 is NOT what the "abomination of desolation" from the Book of Daniel is about. Jesus did not point to the Book of Daniel there. That info about the army surrounding Jerusalem is about a future siege upon Jerusalem, the final one (28th), because Jerusalem has been conquered by invaders many times in its history. The Zephaniah 3:8 event will be the final one, which is what Jesus was pointing to in Luke 21:20.

    So by that, Jesus was showing those in Judea when that occurs, to flee for two main reasons - 1. because of the pseudo-Christ the orthodox unbelieving Jews are going to setup there, and 2. the invading armies out of the northern quarters belonging to that Antichrist with their eventual destruction because of Jesus' 2nd coming of Zech.14.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Quote Originally Posted by DavePeace View Post
    That doctrine of man is a joke, because in Luke 21 Jesus was not talking about the AOD with the army surrounding Jerusalem in Luke 21:20. He was giving 'new' information there different from the AOD that He only mentioned in the Matthew 24 and Mark 13 version of His Olivet discourse. The doctrine of men you follow has instead taken that Luke 21:20 verse and ADDED the idea of the "abomination of desolation" to it, when the verse says nothing about the "abomination of desolation" from the Book of Daniel. The difference with Scripture comparison is EASY...

    Luke 21:20-21
    20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
    21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
    KJV

    Matt 24:15-16
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
    16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
    KJV

    Mark 13:14
    14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
    KJV



    The desolation by armies spoken of in Luke 21:20 is NOT what the "abomination of desolation" from the Book of Daniel is about. Jesus did not point to the Book of Daniel there. That info about the army surrounding Jerusalem is about a future siege upon Jerusalem, the final one (28th), because Jerusalem has been conquered by invaders many times in its history. The Zephaniah 3:8 event will be the final one, which is what Jesus was pointing to in Luke 21:20.

    So by that, Jesus was showing those in Judea when that occurs, to flee for two main reasons - 1. because of the pseudo-Christ the orthodox unbelieving Jews are going to setup there, and 2. the invading armies out of the northern quarters belonging to that Antichrist with their eventual destruction because of Jesus' 2nd coming of Zech.14.
    You do not get to decide what the "Doctrine of Man" is and what the "Doctrine of God" is. God gets to decide that, brother. For me, I incline towards what the Scriptures are saying more explicitly to me. I'm not just going to accept *your word* for what the "Doctrine of God" is. This is an extraneous kind of criticism that is absolutely unnecessary in these discussions. We *all* want to believe in "God's doctrines" and not in "Man's doctrines." You should not set yourself up as sole arbiter of what is truly "from God!"

    So let's move on to discuss what sounds more explicitly Scriptural, shall we? Jesus refers his Olivet Discourse back to Dan 9 and the AoD in that passage. That is where Jerusalem and the temple get "desolated" in the generation in which Messiah is "cut off." Luke 21 mentions the "encirclement of Jerusalem by foreign armies" in the very same place in the Discourse that Matthew 24 and Mark 13 mention the AoD. All versions mention a "desolation." Matthew and Mark mention specifically the Abomination of "Desolation," which is, like Luke 21, a "desolation."

    All of these versions describe the same things because they represent the exact same Discourse. The AoD is not something separate, and the encirclement of Jerusalem by foreign armies is not something separate. They are all referring to the same "desolation" of Jerusalem and the temple, as spoken of in Dan 9. This is not the "Doctrine of Man," brother. What is the "Doctrine of Man" is the incessant accusation and criticism that divides honest brothers who are trying to determine what God's word is actually saying!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,536

    Re: 2nd Coming backdrop

    Men like Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Victorinus all wanted to see Daniel's 70th Week, the Abomination of Desolation, and the Great Tribulation as something future and fulfilled in the time of Antichrist. And yet Antichrist is not mentioned in any of these.

    The 70th Week of Daniel is the 1st Coming of Christ, the AoD is the Roman destruction of the temple in 70 AD, and the Great Tribulation is the Jewish Diaspora of the NT age.

    The 2nd Coming of Christ is used by Jesus as a backdrop to the events he predicted would take place in *his generation.* He was specifically warning his Disciples and Apostles about what would happen *in their own time and experience.* He was telling them of the judgment to befall *their own generation* because of their wickedness in rejecting Christ and persecuting them.

    So Jesus made it clear that just as the 2nd Coming would bring judgment against the pagan world so his 1st Coming would bring judgment to Israel in his own time. This is the pattern of history in the NT age, a time of historical judgment, to be completed only at the 2nd Coming, following world judgment. Nothing could be clearer to me! Jesus used the 2nd Coming as a backdrop for his prediction of imminent judgment in his own generation!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: Jan 3rd 2018, 12:22 AM
  2. Is Jesus coming with Heaven at “His coming”?
    By Soldier_of_Faith in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Oct 24th 2017, 06:55 AM
  3. Changes coming up.
    By Old man in forum Prayer
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Mar 11th 2016, 11:57 PM
  4. Jesus 1st coming/2nd coming??
    By Joe King in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Jul 19th 2009, 08:16 PM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: Jul 8th 2009, 11:32 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •