End times madness w Matt. 24 Part 1

[Bookends]

One thing which might help. the word you is not in the origional text. but was interpreted.

English says you will hear. the greek word is just hear, in the present tense, in other words, at the present time these things are happening, you will hear of these things. even in their days, they heard of them, but it does not mean it was just directed at them.

also note. He did not tell them to run to the hills, or do anything, he said let them. Jesus knew these words would be written, Thus anyone who read those words, it would be directed at them.

we see the exponential increase of the things Jesus said, So when we read "will hear" present tense, it could most definately be speaking to us.

According to my concordance, it is there. "Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible", the greek word is "Humin" and simply means "you"... And we really don't have an exact copy of the original text, just copies of copies, and some copies have small differences, however, putting together and comparing all what we do have the a true rendering and autograph of the text emerges. All the old and modern versions I read, has "you" there...Also to add to whom Jesus was talking, He made it clear that "they will not pass" until all this things are fulfilled.

As far as "them" is concerned, when Jesus spoke it was still a future event, just not necessarily our future. Your point is noted but it doesn't account to or change anything.

I'm not sure what verse you are referring to on your third point.

 

[Bookends]

rebuttal to the rest.

4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.


This shows that many people will come claiming to be the messiah. How many people in the time between Jesus assention and AD 70 saying they were the messiah? I notice bookend spoke of false prophets, which would not have been unusual in this time period, since there were always false prophets. But how many people actually came claiming to be the messiah? If we look at the past 100 years, how many people have we read about who claimed to be the returning messiah come to take his control, who led many people to their deaths, or how about came to be the prophet who preceded messiah. My point, the last 100 years has had more fulfillment than the 305 or so years in the first centruty.

wars and rumors of wars, Again lookk at the last 100 years, how many wars have there been, yet how many in those 30 some years.

Just because it happens more now doesn't mean anything, it should happen more now anyway, faster media, radio, tv, etc., there are more people in the world to say now then back then... the fact that men did claim to be Christ in that day confirms that it could have been meant for that day too. Not a very good arguement IMO.

7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.

Kingdom against kingdom. There was but ONE kingdom in those years, Rome, No jew reading this would have understood this to mean in that time frame, for kingdoms did not change, like they have since the fall of the roman empire.The greek word means a part of the world ruled by a king which goes against another part, this did not happen in those 30 some years. Yes, may may have tried to go against rome, but not kingdoms. Jesus did not say many kingdoms would go against rome, but against each others.

kingdom =
#0932 βασιλεία basileia 1) royal power, kingship, dominion, rule 1a) not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom 1b) of the royal power of Jesus as the triumphant Messiah 1c) of the royal power and dignity conferred on Christians in the Messiah's kingdom 2) a kingdom, the territory subject to the rule of a king 3) used in the N.T. to refer to the reign of the Messiah

I know you don't like the online Lexicons I use, but that's all I have,
besides my "Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible".. Tell me what
use and I'll see if I can a hold of it.

I have not got to reading all about Roman History yet, but from what I
heard between the time of Christ and 70AD the Roman empire was on the
brink of collapse because of different rulers of various regions of Rome
wanted to control their own area, until the a Caesar regained control to
unite the union. There is nothing new under the sun my friend.

Again, if we look at it, the last 100 years have seen a MAJOR increase in these things, far more that those 30 some years.

Again, there is nothing new under the sun. I may or may not comment on all your rebuttals but I will read them. I need to be care not to let this site occupy all my time.

 

[Bookends]

What does this have to do with the return of Christ?

2nd advent, nothing.

1. Daniel said the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city, we know this as rome

Satan was behind Rome, correct, but God allowed Satan and Rome to destroy Jerusalem. Satan doesn't care who he gets to kill, and Satan can only kill who God allows him to kill.

2. Jesus said when I come back (the return he spoke of in Matt 24) we would see him come as he left, in the clouds, When the disciples were told this as Jesus ascended, they would have then understood (if they did not already) that this is what Jesus meant in matt 24 when he said you will see the son of man coming in the clouds

Don't confuse His coming in judgment for 70AD and his 2nd Advent. I'm sure they knew the OT better then we do, and would have understood what "coming in the clouds" meant.

3. Jesus did not come in the clouds to destroy the city.

Not literally,or where you could see him. No, it's judgment language, Christ came in judgment.

conclusion. we can not make the destruction of 70 ad be the fulfiment of the return of Christ.

I don't, that would be a full preterist or a hyper-preterist.

What coming of Christ is this in Revelation 2:16, 16 Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth. and “Now to you I say, and to the rest in Thyatira, as many as do not have this doctrine, who have not known the depths of Satan, as they say, I will put on you no other burden. 25 But hold fast what you have till I come. 26 And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations— I suppose this is the Christ's 2nd Advent to you as well?

If we look at what Jesus said concerning his return. What he said when he left, and what the OT say concerning his return to destroy the gentile nations who treated the nation of Isreal poorly, and to restore them to her rightful place AFTER they repent. then nothing you posted here has any bearing, It is NOT about who goes to heaven, never was, never will be. Unless of course you think whoever endures to the end will be saved means what those we are speaking to think it means, and only those who endure and do righteous deeds will get to heaven, neither of us believe this.

What verse are you referring to in the OT? To be saved in the end is to be an overcomer and is to endure persecution, it separates the spurious Christian from a true Christian, it just means our heart lean toward God and trusts in Him in all circumstances, not that we don't sin, we do, those with a false faith will not endure but cave in. Again I think you are confused on who the gentiles are in this age, all those in Christ are not gentiles. I see myself as a spiritual Jew, of the spiritual SEED of abraham. I've been adopted into the spiritual nation of Israel.

so this must be talking a future time, and not speaking of spiritual life, but physical life. And if it is speaking of physical life, then it must be a time of great tribulation where there is a great risk of men ALL over the world being killed, And their physical life should be spared for some reason, If it is the final end where God stops time on this earth, then saying they will be spared makes no sens, because all life on this earth ceases to excist, and eternity begins. Who would care if they lived or not? and why would Jesus want those who are here at that time to endure till the end?

When Christ comes, I will have a spiritual and physical body living on this earth recreated. I really have no idea what you trying to say here.


Peace bro, I love you in Christ...I'd done for awhile...

 

[Abiding]

ABIDING:

I will start at the beginning with you. No skirting.

According to 1 Peter 3:15
Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

15 But hallow ye the Lord Christ in your hearts, and evermore be ye ready to [do] satisfaction to each man asking you reason of that faith and hope that is in you, but with mildness and dread,

I would like to call you out according to the above. I will do my best to obey the same with "mildness and dread"

Your questions are marked as "Q:"
Feel free to comment on my comments.
Do not add things that aren't there.
Compare, question, answer and come to a conclusion.
This is based on the sceintific approach.
No, I don't like 'the church of scientology'. Don't assume.


I will use the version of your choice and correct with tranlation from Greek.

Matthew 24
Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

24 And Jesus went out of the temple [And Jesus gone out of the temple, went]; and his disciples came to him, to show him the buildings of the temple.
2 But he answered, and said to them, See ye all these things? Truly I say to you, a stone shall not be left here on one stone, that not it shall be destroyed [Truly I say to you, a stone shall not be left here on a stone, which shall not destroyed].
3 And when he sat on the mount of Olives, his disciples came to him privily, and said [saying], Say to us, when these things shall be, and what token of thy coming, and of the ending of the world.

Mark 13

Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

13 And when he went out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, Master, behold[a], what manner stones, and what manner buildings.
2 And Jesus answered, and said to him, Seest thou all these great buildings? there shall not be left a stone on a stone, which shall not be destroyed.[b]
3 And when he sat in the mount of Olives against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him by themselves,
4 Say thou to us, when these things shall be done, and what token shall be [and what sign shall be], when all these things shall begin to be ended.

Luke 21

Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

21
5 And when some men said of the temple, that it was appareled with good stones and gifts [that it was adorned with good stones and gifts], he said,
6 These things that ye see, days shall come, in which a stone shall not be left on a stone, which shall not be destroyed.[b]
7 And they asked him, and said [saying], Commander, when shall these things be? and what token shall be, when they shall begin to be done?

================================================================

Ok. We will stop there. Let's not bite off more than we can chew. If you have any objection to the version I use, state it asap. Don't drop back later and excuse.

Establish the discussion, and render it.


1) Jesus is shown the Temple and it's other buildings.
2) Jesus utters the temple prophecy.
3) Jesus and his diciples leave the temple grounds and walk 'a Sabbath's day's journey" (approx. half an hour) to the Mt. of Olives.
4) There's no recorded discussion between Jesus and His disciples during this time. We can only speculate. I won't.
4) Jesus is approached by His diciples and questioned. First, question first. Jerusalem's destruction.
================================================================
We begin. What are the similarities and differences?

Matthew says His diciples came "privately". We can see why Matthew says this, by comparing Mark's account. Luke doesn't say anything other than "diciples". But Mark identifies them by name. Only four came to ask questions? The others stayed off from the discussion. (You'd think they'd want to know, I know I would. So where were they?)

Q: Why only these four?

My personal belief is that, and you can dispute this if you like, because these four were first chosen and had spent a deal more time following Jesus already, they had the courage to ask. Jesus words were apostacy punishable by death. Anyone listening and believing it would be likewise stoned. My humble understanding of human nature would suggest the others were in fear. Agreed.

The two-part question about the temple and His return is different in the three versions. Just as we see the difference between the three accounts of who asked the questions as I have discussed, here there's a difference also. Im not seeing two questions. Im seeing one request, to answer one question.

Q: What was the first thing the FOUR diciples were concerned with and why?
Id guess they would have been concerned how to carry about without a Temple. But really, It seems they just wanted a heads up, having just heard the judgement of chapter 23 Matt. Thanks for calling me out i love attention. And thanks for the obsufiaction...i also love a mystery.

We will move to the next part of the question after the first has been exhaustively discussed.

Oh goody! cant wait.

 

[Abiding]

Luke 19:13 says to "engage in business till I come" - ie. be busy with Gods work.There is no verse saying that we should go to prophecy conferences and start buying gold and army supplies and geuss the time of His coming.Some christians have made a mistake in this regard.

Is it wrong for me to stock up on bagals?

 

[Abiding]

Originally Posted by Abiding
do we have to read it all over again?

1. In you shall all the nations of the world be blessed. How is this going to happen? Who did it happen by?

all the nations are blessed by the offer of eternal life through Christ, who came from who?? Abraham??
yes
Correct

2. And to you AND YOUR DESCENDANTS after you, I give this land as an ETERNAL covenant.
exactly eternal just like Abraham who looked for it in the eternal state through Christ. Heb 11
Disagree, Abraham was never going to see jerusalem, it would not be possessed by Isreal for another 400 and some years after it was promised. And it did not just concern a city, it was all the land of palestine, as god said "All the land you see" Abraham could not see heaven, finally, no matter what God promises us hear on Earth, our focus should still be on the heavenly, yet it does not take away what God said is ours while here.

To who? all nations? To all peoples? To gentile and jew. Concerning salvation? The answer would be a resounding NO to all of the questions asked.
to the elect only
No, To Isreal Only, even if a Gentile converted, he was not part of the promise made through abraham issac and jacob (unless like some they married into the family)

Why would God do that? I don;t know. why don't ask him. I am not in the place where I would question God as to how he does things.
cute
Cute maybe, but true.

Did you answer yet? Does all Israel mean all? even the children of the flesh?
I answered you already, What did Paul say, All Isreal is those blinded in part, who were cut off, who are our enemy, but to be beloved because of the very covenant we are discussing. In other words, it is a group of people who today have rejected Christ, but at some point will repent and turn to God. If one would remove their blinders while reading romans 11 they would see this. It means they as a nation repent and come to God. it DOES NOT mean god just forgives them because they are isreal. It is as God said in the OT, he removes their blindness, and they FINALLY see truth, repent, turn to God, and confess their sin and the sins of their fathers. How does God do it? The same way he brings many of us to him, tribulation and distress, only this tribulation will be th emost severe the world has ever seen.

Who it is not;
1. Any gentile whatsoever
2. Any of the nation of Israel who die having rejected God and his plan of salvation.


Yes they were cut off. And Paul said they WOULD be put back in, But again, you refuse to see this.
that jab was dishonest im not the one saying people are hardened and going to hell for the last 2000 years till the gentiles to come in. All the believing remnant of Israel has been grafted back in since the beginning

It was dishonest? Paul said those who were our enemy today because they reject the gospel will one day all repent and be saved, And you don;t see it so I call you out on it and I am dishonest?

To the gentiles come in, all Isreal will go to hell? Who said that? Are you listening to a thing I am saying? The time of the gentiles are the 4 gentile kingdoms spoken of to daniel, it has nothing to do with who is saved or not.

They have been grafted back on? Paul is talking about people groups, not individual people from those people groups. Just because Isreal as a people group was cut off does not mean all of them are not saved, Many have been saved, in the time of paul and even today, but this is nOT what paul is talking about.

Oh is this so? So they lived in their land under THEIR KING, they had NO ENEMIES, and lived IN PEACE? oh wait, no they did not know that. You keep saying it was fulfilled, But in order for it to be fulfilled the thing which followed would have to be FULFILLED,
Im saying the fulfillment was partially fulfilled, then through Christ fully fulfilled, although
along with the gentiles(who are children of Abraham and heirs of the promises) await the consumation at the second advent

This is not what Jeremiah said, I cant twist what jeremiah said and make him say something he never said, or take it symbolically. He said they will come;
1 After they repent
2. From all the earth where they were for punishment for their sin
3. Only isreal, not anything to do with gentile believing or not
4. the two kingdoms of isreal, The church is one entity, not two. The church is not slaves of the gentiles because of her sin and rejection of Gods commands,
5. Restored to her land, NOT HEAVEN.
6. Live in peace with no enemy
7. Have a king, who will rule on DAVID's throne, David had an earthly throne, not a heavely one.

You want to get mad at me because I take Jeremiah literally? I am sorry, I have seen nothing which would make me change my mind,

Not to mention. PAUL SAID THEY WILL STILL IN UNBELIEF. I guess it is STILL IN EFFECT would you not say? especiialy since they are to beloved because of the fathers.. why? The promise still stands!
No i dont believe this is still the case. But then Paul also said this promise was not to the children of the flesh...thats what most people are looking for.

lol. Paul saids that concerning salvation. NOT CONCERNING the promise made to the fathers. Your trying to twist the two. The promise of salvation was NEVER TO THE JEW ONLY. Not even in the OT. Jonah was sent to a gentile nation, who he was scared of and did nto think would repent because they were not jew, AND THEY REPENTED! It was NEVER ABOUT SALVATION.

Fulness of the gentiles came as the church?? DO WHAT? who just a few posts ago said that I WOULD SAY the church was the gentile?? wow.. who is backsliding now??
Dont understand this one. The partial hardening was to last until the gentiles came into the church with the full blessings. Others teach this means until every gentile ever finally believes.But the text does not teach this.
The text does nto teach what your saying either, Many gentiles were saved, even in the old covenant, it was not specifically Isreal, it never was. The text is talking about people groups. NOT INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE. The jew in the OT were given the oracles of God and supposed to give it to the gentile to bring them to God, they failed. Now it was taken away, and given to the gentile.

The fullness of the gentile DID Not happen when romans was written. Paul said so.. The gentiles are the four kingdoms, is the final gentile kingdom ended yet? if it did, why are we still here??
I do see i spoke wrong...but yes soon i believe around the time of writing the book of romans and later the fullness of the gentiles was complete. Now the times of the gentiles, your right this hadnt happened yet when romans was written.

It has not happened yet even today, Jerusalem is STILL in Gentile Control. Daniels 4th beast is still in power (although fractured) and will soon be restored greater than it was before, until it is crushed completely by Christ in his return.


lol, Well you continue to believe that. I will believe what the OT states, the fullness of the gentiles will come in WHEN CHRIST DESTROYS THE GENTILE NATIONS, Just like Jeremiah, Daniel and othe prophets said it would!!
I dont believe the fulness of the gentiles was ever mentioned in the OldTestament. I believe your thinking the times of the gentiles.

lol. what do you think fullness means? it means the TIME has been fulfilled. It means complete, Do you think no gentile will be saved after this time? again, you need to stop thinking of what you are taught or read dispys believe, For that matter, even they do not teach only jews will be saved then. The Church is not gentile or jew, it is one all people. and it will not be full until the last person alive before the end is saved.


What age? the church age started at the ressurection of Christ, what age ended in AD 70? Many gentiles were already grafted in by 70 AD, in fact there were more genitle believers than jewish at this time. how would I believe this is the end of the age? talk about going WAY out there>
I believe the church started on the day of Pentecost. The" age" that Israel would
be in"the house that was left desolate in Matthew 23:39; Dan 9:27b with the Old Covenant. Which ended at the stoning of Steven and consumated(Dan 9:27b) in 70ad.

Well we are not even close to agreeing here. The church started when Christ arose, and gave the command to go into the world. The age of the gentile started when Babylon (the first beast) gained world power, and will end when the final beast (rome) is destroyed in the great battle won by Christ,


No you showed me what is promised to ALL PEOPLE. I am promised that kingdom, I am promised that city, I am a gentile. Jerusalem and palestine was NOT PROMISED TO ANY GENTILE. thus YOU CAN't fulfill a promise in that way.
The book of Hebrews teaches all this...The land is Zion..heavenly Jerusalem...why is it written to the Hebrews?

Why?
1. They were trying to go back to law
2. They were still thinking being a jew gave them an automatic trip to heaven.
3. They were still looking to the earthly kingdom not realising this meant absolutely NOTHING if they were not born again, and given access to the heavenly kingdom.

They were just like the pharisees, and the author was trying to correct them. The blood of bull and goat never took away sin, why? it was ALWAYS about Christ. It is not about the earthly kingdom, which Yes God promised, and will fulfill, it is about the heavenly kingdom, which if you do not stop trying to earn your way in by law, you will have no access to.

EG, now this is a real mess. If i try to answer things here it will just get messier
I need to learn better how to dialogue here in this forum...i see you misunderstand me
alot and im sure its my fault. I think i will try to do shorter bits.

That way we both can be understood. In our different positions.
But for me right now its all muddled.

 

[apocalypse]

Abiding. You haven't answered.

 

[apocalypse]

OK. I see it. There's so much up on the board.

 

[DesertJoe]

2nd Peter 3:
1Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. 2I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.
3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

Sure sounds like these days. Remember that however Jesus comes, His coming is imminent... meaning it could be thousands of years in the future or in the next five minutes. The real question is this... are you & I ready. Do not scoff at the imminence of His return. God bless you.

 

[apocalypse]

Abiding. Unfortuantely, liberal use of "QUOTE" can put alot up on the page. It leads to alot of work editing out what you don't need.

I trust you trust that I will cut and paste without doctoring. It's just easier.
==============================================================================

The two-part question about the temple and His return is different in the three versions. Just as we see the difference between the three accounts of who asked the questions as I have discussed, here there's a difference also. Im not seeing two questions. Im seeing one request, to answer one question.

I realize you don't see the two questions. This is why I asked you two start from the beginning. I know this is the crux of the matter. Note: I used to be of the same opinion as you. In reflection, I now see why I was doing it.

If this point cannot be established, then the rest is pointless. This is the sticking point.

Please note the red highlight in my own post that you quoted. This needs to be addressed. Please go back and look at this.


I am of the belief that Christ knew that 2000 plus years with crusades, dusty monastaries and scribes (with their own viewponts) were involved, never mind the nuns who burned documents for heat. I believe He directed that three separate accounts would carry through time to assure that Christians prior to the second coming would benefit and be able to discern the truth. Look at the difference between Matthew, Mark and Luke regarding the two part question. Check the Greek.


Also, please note the word "and" between the two questions. This "and " that. Two distinct things.


Merriman Webster ; "and"—used as a function word to indicate connection or addition especially of items {plural} within the same class or type ; used to join sentence elements of the same grammatical rank or function

In the first question, you advance the idea that when He was asked "Tell us, when will these things be...." that "these things" was not the temple destruction that Jesus just 'dropped the bomb' on them with, but rather "judgement of chapter 23 Matt."

However, in matthew 23:37-39 that you make reference to, Jesus talkes about "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killers of the prophets.. your house is abandoned to you." Sorry, but it's still talking about the Temple and Jerusalem. "These things" is still the "not a stone upon a stone" prophecy. There's no getting around that. The four disciples were asking, "Tell us when Jerusalem will be destroyed?"


Q: What was the first thing the FOUR diciples were concerned with and why?
Id guess they would have been concerned how to carry about without a Temple. But really, It seems they just wanted a heads up, having just heard the judgement of chapter 23 Matt. Thanks for calling me out i love attention. And thanks for the obsufiaction...i also love a mystery.

You suggest the disiciples "would have been concerned how to carry about without a Temple".
You are suggesting that they didn't comprehend the annihilation that was to come, and how the Jews were to be treated. You mean you really believe they thought the Temple would get sacked and the inhabitants would be left to live life as usual, just minus the Temple?

Cmon', please clarify this.

 

[Abiding]

Abiding. Unfortuantely, liberal use of "QUOTE" can put alot up on the page. It leads to alot of work editing out what you don't need.

I trust you trust that I will cut and paste without doctoring. It's just easier.
==============================================================================

The two-part question about the temple and His return is different in the three versions. Just as we see the difference between the three accounts of who asked the questions as I have discussed, here there's a difference also. Im not seeing two questions. Im seeing one request, to answer one question.

I realize you don't see the two questions. This is why I asked you two start from the beginning. I know this is the crux of the matter. Note: I used to be of the same opinion as you. In reflection, I now see why I was doing it.

If this point cannot be established, then the rest is pointless. This is the sticking point.

Please note the red highlight in my own post that you quoted. This needs to be addressed. Please go back and look at this.


I am of the belief that Christ knew that 2000 plus years with crusades, dusty monastaries and scribes (with their own viewponts) were involved, never mind the nuns who burned documents for heat. I believe He directed that three separate accounts would carry through time to assure that Christians prior to the second coming would benefit and be able to discern the truth. Look at the difference between Matthew, Mark and Luke regarding the two part question. Check the Greek.


Also, please note the word "and" between the two questions. This "and " that. Two distinct things.


Merriman Webster ; "and"—used as a function word to indicate connection or addition especially of items {plural} within the same class or type ; used to join sentence elements of the same grammatical rank or function

In the first question, you advance the idea that when He was asked "Tell us, when will these things be...." that "these things" was not the temple destruction that Jesus just 'dropped the bomb' on them with, but rather "judgement of chapter 23 Matt."

However, in matthew 23:37-39 that you make reference to, Jesus talkes about "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killers of the prophets.. your house is abandoned to you." Sorry, but it's still talking about the Temple and Jerusalem. "These things" is still the "not a stone upon a stone" prophecy. There's no getting around that. The four disciples were asking, "Tell us when Jerusalem will be destroyed?"


Q: What was the first thing the FOUR diciples were concerned with and why?
Id guess they would have been concerned how to carry about without a Temple. But really, It seems they just wanted a heads up, having just heard the judgement of chapter 23 Matt. Thanks for calling me out i love attention. And thanks for the obsufiaction...i also love a mystery.

You suggest the disiciples "would have been concerned how to carry about without a Temple".
You are suggesting that they didn't comprehend the annihilation that was to come, and how the Jews were to be treated. You mean you really believe they thought the Temple would get sacked and the inhabitants would be left to live life as usual, just minus the Temple?

Cmon', please clarify this.

Oh! your really then asking me for speculation. i was a bit apprehensive to do that in this forum
because you can get clobbered for that. Right?
Please clarify this!

 

[apocalypse]

Forgot to add something. Getting old 'ya know.

In the first verse of Matthew 24, likewise in the other two accounts, a disciple begins to boast of the temple's glory. He directs Jesus attention to the construction and proudly so.

If, as you say, they question Jesus rearding something OTHER than the prophecy of the judgement he spoke "not a stone on a stone shall remain in it", but the judegemnet in 23 ( I pointed out this is one and the same) then...
Q: Why is this disciple boasting about the Temple if he already comprehended it was to be destroyed?

Catch 22.

 

[Abiding]

Forgot to add something. Getting old 'ya know.

In the first verse of Matthew 24, likewise in the other two accounts, a disciple begins to boast of the temple's glory. He directs Jesus attention to the construction and proudly so.

If, as you say, they question Jesus rearding something OTHER than the prophecy of the judgement he spoke "not a stone on a stone shall remain in it", but the judegemnet in 23 ( I pointed out this is one and the same) then...
Q: Why is this disciple boasting about the Temple if he already comprehended it was to be destroyed?

Catch 22.

I see the "boasting" as you say happened before the discourse. And before Jesus told them
one stone would be left upon the other. And still cant see a point yet. Im older than you so
can i buy a vowel?

 

[apocalypse]

Abiding. Quote:
I see the "boasting" as you say happened before the discourse. And before Jesus told them
one stone would be left upon the other. And still cant see a point yet. Im older than you so
can i buy a vowel?

I tried to explain it it out as clearly and slowly as I can. You propose a catch 22 situation and you don't see it.
I am going to knock off to bed for tonight after this and catch up tomorrow. However, why don't you take the question in question LOL and in your own words, be wordy if you ahve to spell out what you belive the four disciples were asking Jesus. What was on their mind.

Instead of me proposing stuff and trying to get you to follow.

Then I can just highlight in color what you said that's mutually exclusive.

Good night.

 

[Abiding]

Abiding. Quote:
I see the "boasting" as you say happened before the discourse. And before Jesus told them
one stone would be left upon the other. And still cant see a point yet. Im older than you so
can i buy a vowel?

I tried to explain it it out as clearly and slowly as I can. You propose a catch 22 situation and you don't see it.
I am going to knock off to bed for tonight after this and catch up tomorrow. However, why don't you take the question in question LOL and in your own words, be wordy if you ahve to spell out what you belive the four disciples were asking Jesus. What was on their mind.

Instead of me proposing stuff and trying to get you to follow.

Then I can just highlight in color what you said that's mutually exclusive.

Good night.

Well i feel your leading me into your catch 22 which
anyone could do will some skill and practice...but
anyway im not seeing the point yet..ill reread a couple
more times..maybe ive missed something.
Very well have a mice rest

 

[Ariel82]

mice rest? lol

i don't see why anyone thinks its two questions when you put all three gospels aligned its pretty clear in all of them except in Matthew that its one question. Since they are all telling of the same event. two out of three should help you understand the third.

Matthew: "Say to us, when these things shall be, and what token of thy coming, and of the ending of the world."

Mark: 4 Say thou to us, when these things shall be done, and what token shall be [and what sign shall be], when all these things shall begin to be ended.

Luke: 7 And they asked him, and said [saying], Commander, when shall these things be? and what token shall be, when they shall begin to be done?

"If this point cannot be established, then the rest is pointless. This is the sticking point."

never read the Wycliffe Bible before. should be interesting to watch.

Hi Abiding, can I have bagel?

 

[apocalypse]

Abiding. I am heading off to work, But I will check during the day as time permits.

I will get it started by posting what I read in all three accounts as the verbal exchange.

In my own words.

Jesus condemns the Jewish leaders in the Temple area. I will refer to Matthew 23 as I did above because you mentioned it.

Jesus says "Your house is abandoned to you" meaning God has left you by yourselves, He doesn't come here anymore. 'You're on your own'.

Then a disciple boasts 'Lord, look at our beautiful temple. Whadaa ya say Lord? Ain't that nice?'

Jesus replies, 'Yes, I see. I'm not blind. How about you. Do YOU see. Take a good look. It's going to get crushed to powder.'

Half an hour walk to the Mount. Nobody asks anything along the way. These good Jewish men have just heard the worst kind of apostacy. They have followed Jesus because they really like what He has been saying and doing. But this is hard to take, like a doctor telling you your loved one is very ill and going to die. Not what you want to hear. Hard to accept.

Now on the Mount, only four have the courage to ask when the Temple is going to be sacked. "Lord, when will the Temple get sacked, and since we have been wrong about everything, (thinking that everyone ELSE would be sacked including these oppressive Romans and the Temple would become the center of the world be means of the Messiah) since we are upside down obviously, then when will you, the Messiah return to fulfull the prophecies which we have always known and accepted?

Then he begins with a warning of "deception". Fear mongering "false prophets" and their "rumors" about "war and pestillence" which mean noting as they "shuold not fear".

 

[Kerykeion]

Hello my friends,
I am a simple messenger. The final commandment has been given. The unholy alliance of the deceiver and betrayer must be broken. The sacred Trees must be removed from chains and restored. This is the word. You will see it done. The true Chrism must be offered to all as it was. And it shall be known to the lost and deceivers of children that they will not be forgiven.

The holy word was removed and tortured. All were warned of the consequence. The anointing is false and shall not be counted until corrected.

This is your message, you will spread the word. The guidance of Miss Benet, Mr. Simpson, and Mr. Griffiths should be studied and observed closely. The ancient artworks are mostly in tact..open the eyes of the blind and those in unnatural slumber. Cast out the wolves that lead the flocks.



I don't really have a clue why this came to me but I was compelled to write it... I don't even go to church...I'd appreciate being left alone. thanks.

 

[Abiding]

Anyway back at the ranch...ok go on..i cant
really join in till your done with your speculations,
then make your point.

 

[RickyZ]

You have to look at the relationship of time to eternity and the effect that has on 'history repeating itself'. That's why prophecys are not fulfilled once, but repeatedly. And that's why it applies to today.

Moreover, Jesus says that in the end many are going to turn away from Him because they are NOT prepared to face it. So end times theology is not madness. It's a warning to prepare for what's coming.