Jesus said understand it and know it! Do you?

We disagree on the implications of the infinitive verb. While it can mean incomplete actions, such as a mortgage payment made to fulfill the requirements of a mortgage, a payment made to fulfill the mortgage is different; it indicates completion. So too, Jesus' words indicate completion, not "partial payment". One would only conclude the 'partial payment' idea if one already believed that concept.


The unrepentant Jews who survived this holocaust were led away into slavery; that was a specific event, though it may have taken weeks to complete. As for the "trodding down", it need only have begun. I don't agree that event needed to be completed for Jesus' words to be valid; His use of "until" allows the completion to take place over a longer period. Again, it seems that you are forcing an a priori interpretation onto the text.


That's all circular and a priori argumentation.


I don't agree that Revelation was penned in 95. I believe that John wrote it closer to 65.


22:7 certainly appears to describe the events of 70. However, 22:8 leads to 9, wherein the servants are sent out to spread the good news. I don't see how this puts any of the other events described in ch. 24 out of sequence.


If, as I believe, John wrote Revelation in about 65, the temporal indicators in ch. 1 fit perfectly with the events of 66-70, and there is no problem with the sequence of events in 24.


Again, this is circular reasoning.


Likewise; I appreciate your explanation.

Can you explain (in your viewpoint) what it looks like for "the beginning of birth pangs" (Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5-8 / Lk21:8-11) to take place and unfold upon the earth AFTER the 70ad events (spelled out in vv.12-24a,b [not c] of Lk21)??

... as v.12 discloses: "But BEFORE ALL THESE [before all these birth pangs-->Lk21:8-11/Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8<--BEFORE ALL THOSE]"... the 70ad events in vv.12-24a,b [not c] must take place PRIOR TO those "beginning of birth pangs"

How can this be explained, according to your viewpoint?

What do you see (and "when") as "the beginning of birth pangs" (in relation to the events of 70ad)?

Exactly what Jesus described, as recorded in all three accounts.

I'm assuming you agree with me that Luke 21:8-11 / Matthew 24:4-8 / Mark 13:5-8 ALL [alike] speak of / describe "the beginning of birth pangs" [SAME events].


My question is: what does Lk21:12 MEAN by saying (of those ^ ), "But BEFORE ALL THESE..."

... "But before all these...," what is it that the text is saying must take place "BEFORE" all these?? ["BEFORE" all these beginning of birth pangs--what is it that the text is saying must occur / take place "BEFORE" those?]

No, because I don't believe that the "beginning of birth pangs" did take place after 70 AD.


Luke does not say that these signs are the beginning of birth pangs (I noted previously that he did). Matthew does, and Mark does, though Mark does not put a temporal indicator on the next section about persecution. Matthew says then persecution will come, while Luke says before this persecution will come.

So, we have an apparent contradiction. Historically, there was persecution beginning from Stephen's martyrdom as well as the 'birth pangs' events between 30 and 70. I would have to do a little more digging to sort out the apparent contradiction, but I am confident that the texts do not indicate two completely separate sets of events.


Exactly what Jesus described, as recorded in all three accounts.

I am curious......are you also an amillennialist?

^ @Dino246 , so what I gather of what you are saying, your "sequence / chronology" of the events spelled out in Lk21 goes like this:

1) [But BEFORE all these "beginning of birth pangs"]--the "persecution of Christians"--vv.12-19 (where v.19 ends with the words, "in your patience, possess ye your souls");


2) [insert here, per your interpretation of the "sequence"-->]"the beginning of birth pangs" - Lk21:8-11 / Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5-8;


3) the events of or surrounding 70ad (including the "see"-then-"flee") STARTING in v.20<--what in the text (transitioning from v.19 to v.20) makes you know that, in some intervening time-period (however brief), "the beginning of birth pangs" have taken place (and supposedly CONCLUDED by the 70ad events)?
Verse 20 starts off with "And when ye shall see..." (which you are equating with the AOD [singular/singular] of Matt24:15, "spoken of by Daniel the prophet"--which was "where" in Daniel, spoken of, in your view? [and, you mean, occurring in 70ad, right?]);

--Do you believe "the BEGINNING of birth pangs" are just the "BEGINNING" of NO more of them that will [that is, will not] follow on from "THESE"?

--Or do you believe "the BEGINNING of birth pangs" (Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5 / Lk21:8-11) lead to even MORE "birth pangs" (coz THOSE were just "the BEGINNING of" them)?

--Do the "more of them" come (and conclude) BEFORE or (further occur) AFTER the 70ad events, in your view?

--Do you agree that "the BEGINNING of birth pangs" EQUAL [/ ARE] the SEALS of Rev6?

--What then constitutes the "For THEN shall be GREAT tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be" (is this referring to the FULL-BLOWN "birth pangs" taking place AFTER the [supposed] "AOD [singular/singular]" in 70ad [according to your viewpoint]?)

--Or was EVERYTHING concluded by the point in time surrounding the 70ad events (having to do with the "that all things having been written may be FULFILLED [completely and entirely, in and by 70ad, according to your viewpoint]")?



Just trying to ascertain your viewpoint a little better (for now).

Thanks. = )

I'll respond to your post on one condition: that you remove all marks of emphasis (bold, italic, and capitalization). Frankly, it's hard to read, and I'm not in the mood to wade through it.

I don't subscribe to labels, because of exactly that kind of assumptive question. That you ask as you do tells me that you are dismissive of any person who holds an opinion with which you disagree. I see no reason to continue conversing with you.

In Mark 13:14 But when you 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 Judea flee to the mountains: I thank I understand it. You find it spoken of in Danial 9:27 and Danial 12:11. I thank Paul explained it best in 2nd Thessalonians 2:1-12 Satan sets himself up in the Tempel of God proclaiming that he is God; but he is the antichrist or the instead of Christ cuts of the daily sacrifice and causes many to say they are Christians to follow after him. Remember that this is Jesus speaking in Mark 13 and it is Jesus that says let the reader understand; I thank we all need to understand it. Mark 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: I thank this has to do with Israel becoming a nation again, and the vision of the 2 baskets of figs in Jeramiah 24.

[emphasis mine ^ in bold, to show the part I'm addressing in particular ^ ]
Sure. I can try to get to that tomorrow or Monday, when I have more time to re-quote my post you are talking about and undo all emphasis, which, quite frankly, is quite a time-consuming task... but I will gladly attempt it, so as to make it easier for you to read and comprehend what I've put... provided I don't forget to do so, which is also quite possible. Not purposely forget, mind you. I'll be sure to remove every stitch of emphasis.

My last attempt at revising my post #33 in post #35--to remove all emphasis--had me missing some spots of editing. Again, it's a time-consuming and tedious task to remove all emphasis that has already been put. lol. But I will attempt to remove all emphasis as best I can.

[emphasis mine ^ in bold, to show the part I'm addressing in particular ^ ]

Sure. I can try to get to that tomorrow or Monday, when I have more time to re-quote my post you are talking about and undo all emphasis, which, quite frankly, is quite a time-consuming task... but I will gladly attempt it, so as to make it easier for you to read and comprehend what I've put... provided I don't forget to do so, which is also quite possible. Not purposely forget, mind you. I'll be sure to remove every stitch of emphasis.

My last attempt at revising my post #33 in post #35--to remove all emphasis--had me missing some spots of editing. Again, it's a time-consuming and tedious task to remove all emphasis that has already been put. lol. But I will attempt to remove all emphasis as best I can.

I don't subscribe to labels, because of exactly that kind of assumptive question. That you ask as you do tells me that you are dismissive of any person who holds an opinion with which you disagree. I see no reason to continue conversing with you.

No... but if for some reason I do find myself in Judea, I would get out of there. Do you think the first century Christians outside of Judea went to Judea, and then fled to the mountains? I pretty sure they just stayed where they were.

No... but if for some reason I do find myself in Judea, I would get out of there. Do you think the first century Christians outside of Judea went to Judea, and then fled to the mountains? I pretty sure they just stayed where they were.

No... but if for some reason I do find myself in Judea, I would get out of there. Do you think the first century Christians outside of Judea went to Judea, and then fled to the mountains? I pretty sure they just stayed where they were.

Dino 246 Jesus said there SHALL NOT be one stone left standing upon another. What do you thank the west wall is? Do you thank God would use some little tin horned General do his work? Jesus will destroy it with His coming.