My Commentary is Done! I need your help

[dizzle]

Hello one, hello all. First (cough - Mickey) this is NOT a debate thread. It is a celebration thread - I finally finished getting my Matthew 24 commentary coded and up at

www.preteristlist.com/docs/warrenend.html

However this involved a lot of late nights etc, and I am sure there is a ton of cleaning up to do such as:

wierd coding
endnotes not properly linked (when you see it you will see what I mean)
broken links
atrocious grammar (remember though this is written in very casual conversational style)

etc

Please take a bit to review, even if it is just a random portion and let me know any things you find that I may wish to revise.

This will be an evolving cyber-commentary so any resources etc that might be helpful to me, throw them my way.

[Ted]

DeeDee,

All in all, well done. You nicely assemble OT references showing the Jewish method of expression contra- LaHaye, Ice, et al. That said, we need to talk.

Ted

p.s. Thanks for your oblique reference to my book in your discussion of Matt 24:38-42.

[dizzle]

DeeDee,

All in all, well done. You nicely assemble OT references showing the Jewish method of expression contra- LaHaye, Ice, et al. That said, we need to talk.

Ted

p.s. Thanks for your oblique reference to my book in your discussion of Matt 24:38-42.

Did I endnote your book? If not, I would be more than glad to if it was an influence on my thought in that section.

PM me on what we need to talk about - if it an exegetical issue I am taking somewhat of a break as this project has been on my plate for over a year now and I am taking a breather.

Thanks for the compliments

[InChristAlways]

Hello one, hello all. First (cough - Mickey) this is NOT a debate thread. It is a celebration thread - I finally finished getting my Matthew 24 commentary coded and up at

www.preteristlist.com/docs/warrenend.html (http://www.preteristlist.com/docs/warrenend.html)

However this involved a lot of late nights etc, and I am sure there is a ton of cleaning up to do such as:

wierd coding
endnotes not properly linked (when you see it you will see what I mean)
broken links
atrocious grammar (remember though this is written in very casual conversational style)

etc

Please take a bit to review, even if it is just a random portion and let me know any things you find that I may wish to revise.

This will be an evolving cyber-commentary so any resources etc that might be helpful to me, throw them my way.That is great DEE!!! I have been working on my own for awhile and I do have some stuff put up on a revelation forum[link below] but I am anxious to read yours in the spirit and hopefully you may view some things that I haven't. Glad to see you worked on it as I believe more need to do that. Translation is such an important part of it, as earth, world, land, country are generally mistranslated. Thanks and God bless.
http://newjerusalemministriesboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=82

BTW, one question on the "beheading". It is a different word used than the one for John the baptist and this word is only used once in the bible and I would really like to know in your view what the greek word #3990 symbolizes to you.

Rev 20:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev020.html#4) And 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) I saw 1492 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1492) thrones 2362 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2362), and 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) they sat 2523 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2523) upon 1909 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1909) them 846 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=846), and 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) judgment 2917 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2917) was given 1325 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1325) unto them 846 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=846): and 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) [I saw] the souls 5590 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=5590) of them that were beheaded 3990 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=3990) for 1223 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1223) the witness 3141 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=3141) of Jesus 2424 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2424), and 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) for 1223 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1223) the word 3056 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=3056) of God 2316 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2316),

Luk 9:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk009.html#9) And 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) Herod 2264 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2264) said 2036 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2036) , John 2491 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2491) have 607 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=607) 0 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=0) I 1473 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1473) beheaded 607 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=607) : but 1161 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1161) who 5101 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=5101) is 2076 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2076) this 3778 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=3778), of 4012 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=4012) whom 3739 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=3739) I 1473 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1473) hear 191 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=191) such things 5108 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=5108)? And 2532 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2532) he desired 2212 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=2212) to see 1492 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=1492) him 846 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?strongs=846).

[dizzle]

Feel free to post any of your work here, we certainly would not recommend that above forum for eschatology as it is run by a hyper-preterist and promotes hyper-preterism which in the view of this forum is outside any acceptable view of Christian doctrine - just an FYI to anyone who may go to view.

I don't unfortunately have an opinon on beheading other than it means what it normally means - off with the head.

[InChristAlways]

Feel free to post any of your work here, we certainly would not recommend that above forum for eschatology as it is run by a hyper-preterist and promotes hyper-preterism which in the view of this forum is outside any acceptable view of Christian doctrine - just an FYI to anyone who may go to view.

I don't unfortunately have an opinon on beheading other than it means what it normally means - off with the head.Hi Dee. I understand, but that link is direct to the folders I have on revelation and really nothing to do with "hyperpreterism", just analyzing and interpreting the "symbology" in revelation and comparing it to the OT jewish symbology.
Have you ever looked at the parable of the rich man and lazarus? It is almost like jeremiah 17 and in fact has a lot to do with revelation itself[lake of fire and the jewish rulers and priests of the house of Judah]. Pretty interesting.

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4 And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

LUKE 16:27 "Then he said, 'I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.'" (NKJV)


Yielding himself to his destiny, the rich man asks one more thing of his forefather Abraham. He pleads with him to send someone to warn his brothers, so that they may escape "this place of torment" (basanou), the testing and punishment that he was undergoing. The fact that the rich man has five brothers is a vital clue to his true symbolic identity. Judah was the son of Jacob through Leah (Gen. 29:35). He had five full-blooded brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, and Zebulun (Gen. 35:23).

While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Christ was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who He was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the house of Judah, the Jews!

[Sheepdog]

dang. last time i looked you only covered a few sections. that was fast.

i actually want to read through it from top to bottom. i'll give you my thoughts along the way.

[Sheepdog]

in the section on Matt. 24:3:

We have to ask at this point (and there is a BIG hint above) why did Matthew include a reference to Christ's "coming" when, as we have seen, there is nothing in the context so far that refers to Christ's Second Coming, and the author Gospel authors didn't record the disciples even asking a thing about that event?

should be "other." wouldn't be a big deal except that it could be confusing for some.

[Sheepdog]

re: vv. 4-5:

Now do these warning apply to the future (to them or to us) or to His immediate listening audience?

seems the parallelism is off here. is this intentional or a goof?

[Sheepdog]

However, this being said, I do affirm that we have no undisputed recorded instance of anyone actually mouthing those exact words, "I am the Messiah" before AD70. However, that is an argument from silence as we do not have a tape recorder for the every word of every would-be contender, but for purposes of this discussion, I will stipulate for the sake of argument there were in fact none who did - in those exact words.

edit: nevermind, you do make the point i was going to suggest.

Holding's material on modesty in self-references in the ANE might be poingant here too.

[dizzle]

in the section on Matt. 24:3:



should be "other." wouldn't be a big deal except that it could be confusing for some.

Other? where? I am confused.

[dizzle]

re: vv. 4-5:



seems the parallelism is off here. is this intentional or a goof?

I will fix it - thanks. I have a printed out copy (105 pages) and am making notes for corrections.

[Sheepdog]

A very useful book for this subject is Bandits, Prophets,< Messiahs

just being a librarian. :wink:

[dizzle]

Yeah I know about that one, but I can't get that to disappear. Can you look at the code and see what you would suggest?

[Sheepdog]

Other? where? I am confused.


sorry. the word in question is "author", which i colored in green.

[Sheepdog]

I will fix it - thanks. I have a printed out copy (105 pages) and am making notes for corrections.

no problem. i like to help (i've proofread a bit for Matt Slick and Holding)

Yeah I know about that one, but I can't get that to disappear. Can you look at the code and see what you would suggest?

i see what it is. from the source:
"Bandits, Prophets,&lt; Messiahs"


i think this is what you wanted:
"Bandits, Prophets, &amp; Messiahs"

[Sheepdog]

They explained that htey had done nothing, but had been forced to put up with the swarm of visotors on account of the festival, so that far from joining the rebel attack they were themselves beseiged, as were the Romans.... Varus dispatchedparts of his army arouond the countryside to go after those responsible for the revolt, and amount the many apprehended he imprisoned those who seemedto have taken a less active role, and crucified those most responsibile - about two thousand in all."

this is part of the third quote regarding Athronges in Judea in the Figures Pre-Dating Christ's Earthly Ministry section. (very good stuff by the way, i'm tempted to suggest you give this false messiah section it's own link in the table of contents). The words in bold are misspellings.

[Sheepdog]

The Anonymous Samaritan (~ AD35)

"Nor was the Samaritan nation free from disturbance. For a man who had no qualms about deceitk and freely used it to sway the crowd,...

under "Figures After Christ's Death and Prior to the Jewish War"

one of the first quotes under the same heading:

Imposters and demagogues, under the guise of divine inspiration, provoked revolutionary actions and impelled the masses to act like madmen. They led them out into the wilderness so that htere God would show them signs of imminent liberation." (Wars 2.259)cited in [Hor BPM 161]

did you copy some of these from books? i hate copying quotes by hand.

[Sheepdog]

The Anonymous Egyptian (Jew) (~ AD56)

"At this time, a certain main from Egypt arrived at Jerusalem, ...




... In the aftermath, the Egyptian escapede with a few of his followers, but most of them were killed or captured; the rest scattered and hid out in their homes. (Jewish Wars 2.261-63)cited in [Hor BPM 169]

[Sheepdog]

last quote in that section:

Most importantly for this study they note, "Most significant is the clear pattern of symbolic correspondence between teh great historical acts of redemption and the new, eschatological acts anticipated by these prophetic movments. As was the mighty act of God in the formative history of early Israel, so would be God's imminent eschatological act of deliverance. Just as Moses lead the people through the divided waters and into the wildernessk so would the prophet Theudas lead a new exodus through the waters of the Jordan and into the wilderness. As God's agent Joshua led the battle of Jericho, so the prophet from Egypt would lead the people to the Mount of Olives, expecting the walls of Jerusalem to fall so they could 'liberate' the city." [Hor BPM 169-171]

[Sheepdog]

Simon son of Gioras (AD68)

First Crossan notes that Simon "was ritually executed as the official Jewish leader during the Roman triumph towards it end." [Cr THJ 202]

...

[one of the later quotes under the same section:]

"Contrary to expecation, Simon invaded Idumea without bloodshed. In a surprise attack, hefirst overpowers the small town of Hebron where he seized a great deal of booty and carried away a vast quantity of grain.

[Sheepdog]

This should bring to mind the promised Covenant curses that God had threatened upon Israel should she apostasize from Him.... quite frighteningly literally [Ge PT 49]

:

this is towards the end of the Famines and Pestilences section. looks like the colon was left outside of the paragraph break (the </p> tag).

[Sheepdog]

last quote in the section regarding supernatural and natural signs:

Historians have linked the appearance of Halley's Comet not only with the death of Nero, but with the destruction of Jerusalem four years later. A seventeenth-century print graphically depicts the phenomenon as it passes over Jerusalem. The following caption accompanies the print: "Halley's Cometn of AD 66 shown over Jerusalem... The Comet was regarded as an omen predicting the fall of the city to the Romans which occurred four years later." [De LDM 81-82]

[Sheepdog]

under Matt. 24:14:

Colossians 1:23:if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which [ color=red]was preached to every creature under heaven,[ /color] of which I, Paul, became a minister.

i'm sure TWeb originally parsed that as blue. :brow:

[Sheepdog]

further down, in a list of "all the nations" passages:

"And all the nations shall ser him and his son, and his grandson until the time of his own land comes." (Jer. 27:7)

[Sheepdog]

Under the A-bomb passage (snicker snicker)

In futurist circles, well more particularly dispensationalist circles, one hears that this refers to the antichrist who will disrupt a seven year treaty with the Jews halfway through and desecrate the Temple. This warrants a whole refutation of Daniel 9, but for purposes of this discussion.

the last sentence seems to be an unfinished thought. :huh:

[Lindum]

Hi DDW,

I'll leave the content to others since it is over my head!...

One coding error:
<h2 class="pap"><a name="preface">Introduction</a></h2>

should be:

<h2 class="pap"><a name="introduction">Introduction</a></h2>

And if you want to be pedantic about it, the table of "historical nuggets" really ought to have a "summary" attribute.
Apart from that, as xhtml transitional, it looks perfect code-wise. Good job!

Cheers.

[Sheepdog]

under Matt. 24:16, down a ways:

Ezekiel is warning about the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians. [Ho CA]. The context of this passage is the Jews and Jerusalem. But even the futurists believe that the future Great Tribulation will be worse than that. So the "literalist" is in a pickle. Was God wrong in this passage or in Matthew 24:21? So how is this "apparent contradiction" reconciled?? (see also[Ho Hyp])

[Ho Hyp] isn't linked to anything.

[InChristAlways]

Hi DEE. What are your thoughts on the way earth, world, land, ground, country and AGE are used in support of orthodox "preterism" both in the OT and NT.
Notice how often and how #2889(WORLD) is used in revelation[only 3 times].
If God wanted to say the hour of trial and testing would come upon the whole world, why did he use different greek words for "world"? The KJV is the worst at translating these words and can see why most dispensationalists use it, though it is not my intention to put down any bible, just what I have come across when seeing the way those words are mistranslated in the KJV. God bless.

Matthew 2:6 'But you, Bethlehem, [in] the land (#1093) of Judah, Are not the least among the rulers of Judah; For out of you shall come a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel.' "

Matthew 14:34 When they had crossed over, they came to the land(#1093) of Gennesaret.

Revelation 3:10 `Because thou didst keep the word of my endurance, I also will keep thee from the hour of the trial that is about to come upon all the world(#3625), to try those dwelling upon the earth/land(#1093).

Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdoms of this world(#2889) have become [the kingdoms] of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!"

3625 oikoumene oy-kou-men'-ay feminine participle present passive of 3611 (as noun, by implication, of 1093); land, i.e. the (terrene part of the) globe; specially, the Roman empire:--earth, world.

1093 ge ghay contracted from a primary word; soil; by extension a region, or the solid part or the whole of the terrene globe (including the occupants in each application):--country, earth(-ly), ground, land, world.

2889 kosmos kos'-mos probably from the base of 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.

[Sheepdog]

another one under a quote of Joel 2:2:

In this verse the specific enemy is not identified, but it is obvious that Joel is speaking to the people back then the obvious choices either Assyria or Babylon [Ho CA]. Jesus' language is OBVIOUSLY proverbial and hyperbolic clearly alludes to the former passages.

[Sheepdog]

under the quote of 1 Maccabees 9:27

Additionally, it is the reason and repercussions of this judgment that make it the greatest ever. "Greatest" is not measured solely in terms of lives lost, but in terms of eternal and covenantal significance. This was the greatest loss that could ever happen to the Jewish people. They recognized that the removal of the Temple was the ultimate sign of God's judgment and the worst possible calamity that could ever happen to them. This was the ultimate judgment upon ethnic Israel, it has never been worse, and it will not never be worse. It was God's covenant lawsuit against them, the culmination of the curses of Deut. 28.

double negative

[Sheepdog]

after a quote of Luke 21:24:

Luke, first, shows that he did not anticipate a world-wide fulfillment here as in the whole planet but rather a Jerusalem-only context - that would be rather odd if this was a world-wide conflagration of the Great Tribulation as promulgated by modern evangelicalism. This verse falls in the exact spot in the discourse as Matthew's comment. The context does not allow for a world-wide conflagration, it's context is limited to Judea, to such an extent that if one could flee to the hills they could escape (Matthew 24:16).

looks like two neurons crossed or something. i make odd mistakes like this a lot as well.

[Sheepdog]

after a quote of 1 Thess 1:14-16:

I quote David Chilton:

"Josephus bears eloquent testimony to this, writing repeatedly of God's wrath against the apostasy of the Jewish nation as the cause of their woes: 'These men, therefore, trampled upon all the laws of man, and laughed at the laws of God; asn as for the oracles of the prophets, they ridiculed them as the tricks of jugglers; ... 'Neither did any other city ever suffere such miseries, nor did any age ever breed a generation more fruitful in wickedness than this was, from the beginning of the world. [Ch TGT 117]"

not sure about the last one, it looks like olde English or something :shrug:

[Sheepdog]

dang, i need a break :glasses:

[dizzle]

Hi DDW,

I'll leave the content to others since it is over my head!...

One coding error:
<h2 class="pap"><a name="preface">Introduction</a></h2>

should be:

<h2 class="pap"><a name="introduction">Introduction</a></h2>

And if you want to be pedantic about it, the table of "historical nuggets" really ought to have a "summary" attribute.
Apart from that, as xhtml transitional, it looks perfect code-wise. Good job!

Cheers.

What is a summmary attribute? I am still learning so please educate me.

[dizzle]

Thanks Sheepdog and everyone looking at this - the corrections are invaluable. My plain text editor doesn't have a spell checker which would have been extraordinarily helpful


InChristAlways - I just don't have time to get into exegesis too much right now. This project has occupied me since 10/03 and I am burnt out in addition to writing an article that I have been putting off for a long time - I need an exegetical break.

[Sheepdog]

But as an interesting sidenote, if someone wants to insist that the fig tree here is Israel, it is interesting to see if they are consist in this use of a fig tree by Jesus:

this is in the section under Matthew 24:32-33

[Sheepdog]

Thanks Sheepdog and everyone looking at this - the corrections are invaluable. My plain text editor doesn't have a spell checker which would have been extraordinarily helpful


it's not a problem at all. i wanted to read it anyways, and like i said i like to be helpful.


I presume the summary attribute in XHTML is the same as in HTML 4.0 (except there it is optional). here is what my favorite HTML reference site says:
The TABLE element takes an optional SUMMARY attribute to describe the purpose and/or structure of the table. The overview provided by the SUMMARY attribute is particularly helpful to users of non-visual browsers. With simple tables, a good CAPTION is usually a sufficient summary, but complex tables may benefit from a more detailed overview via the SUMMARY attribute. The following example uses SUMMARY to describe a table. Note that the summary could also be included in a paragraph before the table, which is helpful since few browsers support SUMMARY.

<TABLE SUMMARY="This table gives the character entity reference,
decimal character reference, and hexadecimal character
reference for symbols and Greek letters.">
...
http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/tables/table.html

[Sheepdog]

from the list of people who have supported the "this generation" interpretation of ... "this generation" :hehe:

John Lightfoot: "Hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses are not to be understood of the last judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of Jerusalem. There were some among the disciples, particularly John, who lived to see these things come to pass. With Matthew 16:28 compare John 21:22. And there were some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these things that lived until the city was destroyed." [ i]A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica[ /i] cited in [Sch M24GT 54-55]

You missed some BB markup in the above.

Thomas Newton: "It is to me a wonder how any man can refer part of the foregoing discourse to the destruction of Jerusalem, and part to the end of the world, or any other distant event, when it is said so positively here in the conclusion, all these things shall be fulfilled in this generation." cited in [Bra M24F 198-199]

the citation is not linked.

[Sheepdog]

in Proof #3:

But one cannot just look at this verse, but it is necessary to back up a few verses:

: But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues. ...

the about Scripture reference is, well, referencless :shrug:

[Sheepdog]

PROOF NUMBER FOUR: The context of the Olivet Discourse is a clear first century Judean context, NOT the "end of the world" it is made out to in modern prophecy thought.

missing word (i presume "be")

[Sheepdog]

in fact...

PROOF NUMBER FOUR: The context of the Olivet Discourse is a clear first century Judean context, NOT the "end of the world" it is made out to in modern prophecy thought.

But after that I will tie up some loose ends, specifically dealing with those (now in the rarity) who will claim that generation means "race" or something similar and other less common explanations.

Could "generation" in Matthew 24:34 mean "race?"

i don't understand the middle sentence above. did you mean "before that," or are your arguments mixed up a bit?

[Sheepdog]

going back into librarian mode:

Tony then sez: "Here we see the "truth" of the matter. We have two distinct generations coexisting at the same time. ..."

"truth" above should be in single quotes ( ' ' ) since it is embedded in a quote itself.

[InChristAlways]

Matthew 24:38-44: For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. So how in the world can THIS refer to the first century? Actually quite easily, and I am focusing in on the "one taken and the other left" portion as the other concepts have been dealt with already above. First of all, even in a futurist context, this cannot be referring to the "Rapture". The comparison is to the days of Noah in which the godly were preserved, and the ungodly were "taken" in judgment. With all due respect to Tim LaHaye, if this is future, you will definitely want to be one of those "left behind."........................................


Hi DEE, The above is towards the end of your commentary. This passage is parallel to reve 14, the ones taken, in my view, are the elect being reaped and taken to "safety" from Jerusalem, while the ones left are the ones doomed for the wrath, trapped in the Great City, just as Noah was taken into the ark, while the ones left got "flooded". But in either case, I don't suppose one can be wrong either way the way it is worded as it is still a seperation of the sheep/wheat and tares/goats.

This is how one site explains it in the greek word usage. Any views on this?

(2) The verb paralambavnw used to describe those who are taken away in vv. 40 and 41 is used by Matthew sixteen times in his Gospel. It is used twice in chap. 1 to refer to the positive event of Joseph taking Mary to be his wife (1:20, 24) and four times in chap. 2 to mean “take to safety” (2:13, 14, 20, 21). Seven other occurrences have a neutral meaning of “take with/along” and refer simply to accompaniment (4:5, 8; 12:45; 17:1; 18:16; 20:17; 26:37). The sole reference that can be taken negatively is in 27:27 where the guards take Jesus into the palace to beat and mock him. It is within the general contours of Matthew’s use to see paralambavnw as having a positive nuance here. Thus those who are taken would be taken for salvation.

(3) The verb ajfivhmi (afihmi) used to describe those who are left behind in vv. 40 and 41 often means “abandon” or “forsake”; Matthew uses it that way in 4:20, 22; 8:22; 19:27, 29; 23:23, 38; 26:56; and 27:50. When it has a positive nuance it takes on the technical meaning of forgive, usually of sins (see 6:12, 14, 15; 9:2, 5, 6; 12:31, 32; 18:21, 27, 32, 35) but also of debt (18:27, 32). There is no mention of sins or debt in conjunction with ajfivhmi in this context, so it is difficult to see this verb as fitting the contours of Matthew’s positive use of the word. Most likely the verb fits Matthew’s negative use meaning “abandon” or “forsake.” This would imply that those left behind are left for judgment.


The Bible makes it abundantly plain that Jesus' coming is not a secret event (Revelation 1:7; Psalm 50:3; I Thessalonians 4:16-17; Matthew 24:27). When the Bible speaks of those being left, it does not say they will be left alive on earth. The extended passage in Luke 17:26-37 describes the event in detail. In Noah's day there were two classes, “one taken (saved), one left (destroyed by the flood)(verse 27). In Lot's day there were two classes, (one taken out of the city and saved, one left in the city and consumed by the fire). It will be similar when Jesus comes (Luke 17:30-37). One class will be taken to heaven with Jesus and the other class will be destroyed. In Luke 17:37, the question is raised, “Where, Lord? Where are these people left.” The Bible answer is plain, “Whithersoever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.” Revelation 19:11-18 clarifies the point that the wicked are destroyed when Jesus comes, (see also II Thessalonians 1:7-9,2:8).


Sheep/Wheat/Taken?

reve chapt 14:14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat [One] like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle. 15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, "Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe."

Goats/Tares/Left?

reve 14:17 Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. 18 And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, "Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe." 19 So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw [it] into the great winepress of the wrath of God.

[Sheepdog]

Well, I have already shown how connected Matthew 24:34 and Luke 21:31 to Matthew 16:28 indisputably shows what "generation" means in this context. An examination of its usage in the NT will also show that it means the s ordinary meaning in most of it's usages there as well (there is only one possible exception).

you have a rogue "s" floating around in there.

[Sheepdog]

Also let's notice something that is implied in what Jesus said, he said that "this generation will not pass away UNTIL all these things take place," which implies that after these things take that generation WOULD pass away. Now this objection would not harm Tony's case as he is an amill historicist who would say that this event is concurrent with the destruction of the wicked, but for the dispensationalist, it would mean that Jesus is implying that the Jews as a race will pass away after this event which is unacceptable and for the historic premill it would mean that this event makes the destruction of "children of the devil" or the Jews neither of which work in their system.

the last sentence runs on. consider splitting into multiple sentences (also, it seems to be missing puncuation towards the end).

[Sheepdog]

Now onto to the fatal flaw in the typical use of "race" by a dispensationalist in addition to the arguments above. ... Jerry in his obfuscation has laid the guilt of the ages upon unbelieving Jews of ALL TIME, instead of the unique generation that Jesus said would "fill up" those iniquities because the murder of Him would be the greatest of all crimes. It was THEM that filled up on the measure of their father's guilt, not my unbelieving Jewish next door neighbor Murray Goldstein.

who's Jerry? :huh: (i take it this was pasted from an earlier debate).

[Sheepdog]

In one debate I personally had [DDW BR], my dispensationalist opponent claimed some heavy gun support for the rendering of "this generation" as "this race" by insinuating that Greek scholar Thayer concurs. This error has been perpetrated in some dispensationalist circles by an erroneous reference in the Scofield Reference Bible. : doh: Thayer actually defines "genea" as "the whole multitude of men living at the same time" and cites Matthew 24:34 as an example of such!! [Th GEL 112].

:doh: :wink:

[Sheepdog]

Consider once again the utter inanity that this position puts in the mouth of Christ. The dispensationalist agrees that Jesus is prophesying concerning the Jewish people. ... Jerry has Jesus completely ignoring their question and giving a prediction that even Benny Hinn could get right.

another ethereal Jerry reference

[Sheepdog]

Whoa there Tommy back up that horse a bit. You wouldn't want to make your audience thing that all who claim the label preterist believe this now would you?

think! :bunny:

[Sheepdog]

Immediately the problems start! Actually that is a bit of exaggeration, but this verse to me (rather than the following one) is the beginning of the transition into a possible blended reference, and is a prime example of the "now/not yet" phenomena of Scripture. Since I don't think that I have lectured you guys on this in this thread so far, I will necessarily digress:

:juggle:

[Sheepdog]

In context we see that that disciples could not possibly have understood at all a "second coming" in this passage, and the "coming" that Jesus already addressed was the coming in judgment to destroy the temple, the city, and the apostates, thus, there is zero referent for a "that" other than "that" event which He was already talking about. ... "[T]his, referring to something comparatively near at hand, just as ekeinos [that] refers to something comparatively father away." [cited by De LDM 193 endnote 12][De LDM 193 endnote]

you seem to have two citations going here (not sure if it is intentional or not).

Now DeMar says of this issue this very flawed statement (though this is not the only thrust of his argument):

"The description of the Great Tribulation leads up to the heart of the discourse which is found in 24:2931. ...

Didn't know Matt. 24 had 2900+ verses :tongue:

[Xavier]

:bow: :sheep:

[Sheepdog]

There is no need to repeat the signs already given. Life was not to be totally disrupted as these signs increased. ... Here in America we here constantly that we are living in the signs of the end times by those who sincerely believe that, but realistically, people are living, giving and being given in marriage, etc.

should be "hear."

[Sheepdog]

:bow: :sheep:

:lol:


:smug:

[Sheepdog]

Now Kenneth Gentry has answered this by noting that identical phrases and terminology can be used for different events and that it is proper to use similar or identical terminology due to the fact that the two events (AD70 and the Second Coming) are organically related [Ge Tran].

no linkage.

[Sheepdog]

In a first century context, this is referring to the fact that families and friends (those working together, those sleeping together) will be irrevocably divided and judgment will be meted out on group in the course of life, and the other will be preserved.

"...on one..."?

[Sheepdog]

ok, last ones. in the Appendix:

Then I discovered the Internet (some of the sequence of events at this point gets a bit muddled, but this is substantially correct). ... I say "tried" because I will never forget one anguished conversation with my husband when I said to him, "I wish I never believed this stuff (referrign to Christianity)!"

Although, i'm tempted to say leave that one, because it actually adds to the franticness of this section.

and the last big paragraph:

Anyways over the course of several more years I came into my current position. .... These types of WATCH OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! blatant warnings were not in place as I entered the forest to Grandma's Housse, and that is my goal.

Awesome stuff DD. very scholarly IMO, and well researched and organized. I think you managed to find every nail in the coffins of futurism and neohymeneanism and sledgehammered them in.

[dizzle]

who's Jerry? :huh: (i take it this was pasted from an earlier debate).

You think Mickey is bad? (yeah that is a debate I had with Jerry Shugart thatyou can find at

http://www.tektonics.org/esch/tolpret.html

Be ready to want to bang your head into the wall. And you will see from my flame-throwing abilities in that debate that you guys are enjoying a kindler, gentler, Dee Dee.

You will see that somewhere in the formatting JP's webmaster has a stray blue tag. You might want to PM him the fixed code.

[dizzle]

another ethereal Jerry reference

Jerry is very ethereal. Mickey may wonder why I don't have the willpower to go round and round with him - been there and done that with Jerry Shugart. Personally I am sure he is a nice guy, and I know he loves the Lord, but his eschatology is whacked.

If you want to have a chuckle, search that debate for the word "horse."

[dizzle]

Although, i'm tempted to say leave that one, because it actually adds to the franticness of this section.

I got a bit more to add to that section but I wanted to get it up briefly what my path has been. There is the story to tell about how when I called Chori he asked me if I a Bible handy, and I said, "Sure, I have a Scofield's Reference Bible right here" (long long pause on Chori's end). How I got to meet Chori (which was also the first time I met JP), some things he said to me after the flurry of attacks when his book came out.


Awesome stuff DD. very scholarly IMO, and well researched and organized. I think you managed to find every nail in the coffins of futurism and neohymeneanism and sledgehammered them in.

Thank you! I have quite a bit more to add as time goes on but that is the bulk.

[Lindum]

Hi DDW,

What is a summmary attribute? I am still learning so please educate me. The table summary would be something like:

<table summary="Table of historical nuggets">

It is not required for valid html, but is beneficial as an accessibility feature for screen readers and the like.

Cheers.

[Sheepdog]

You think Mickey is bad? (yeah that is a debate I had with Jerry Shugart thatyou can find at

http://www.tektonics.org/esch/tolpret.html

Be ready to want to bang your head into the wall. And you will see from my flame-throwing abilities in that debate that you guys are enjoying a kindler, gentler, Dee Dee.

You will see that somewhere in the formatting JP's webmaster has a stray blue tag. You might want to PM him the fixed code.

dang, i may have glanced over that in the past. i'll read through it later today.

If you want to have a chuckle, search that debate for the word "horse."

:lol:

looks like a missing anchor closing tag somewhere. something i'll be happy to fix.

[dizzle]

I have been going through and making some of the changes. I am up to page 14 - please continue to advise

[InChristAlways]

I have been going through and making some of the changes. I am up to page 14 - please continue to adviseHi Dee. Where are the page numbers? I don't see any.

[dizzle]

Oh sorry ICA - my printer numbered the pages in a printout I did. Online there are no page numbers.


Sheepdog, I made all of your changes found.

[Sheepdog]

cool. i have not noted anything else i'd add or change.

[dizzle]

I have been find a lot of minor changes going through page by page - I am uploadng in batches.

But EGAD! I had 70AD and you guys let that slide!

[dizzle]

I did the first pass through. I changed some of the formatting on the verse quotes as well. Grey boxes and purple boxes. CSS is pretty cool for that.

[dizzle]

I am starting on adding scripture reference index for the rest of the passages, this may take several weeks.

[Stephen]

Awesome job DD. I haven't gotten to read it all yet, but can I assume it's taken from the stuff in our Tennis Court thread? If it gets published, I'll buy it :wink:

[dizzle]

Yeah it was taken from that thread though I added some stuff.

[Abigail]

John 14 NOT 4

[Stephen]

Hey Dee,Dee

I was browsing your site today, and I noticed that when you click the link for your Matt. 24 commentary, it opens in a new window rather than in the frame. Was that intentional, or did you just not add a target= tag to the link?

Stephen

Edit: Nevermind, I checked the src and you wrote target=blank, so I guess it was intentional. My bad

[dizzle]

yes it was intentional - the commentary is meant to stand alone from the site. All articles open in a new window so as not to be restricted in the smaller frame window.

[InChristAlways]

The Gospel writers did not include everything that Jesus ever said in did ~ they chose (or more appropriately the Holy Spirit chose through them) what they wanted to record and very often what order they wanted to record it in. Hi DEE. I won't be posting regular here, just on your commentary for possible errors unless you want me to PM them to ya.
Did you mean to put "and" in place of "in"?

[dizzle]

you may post on this thread any grammatical errors such as that, thank you, I will fix it

[InChristAlways]

We today, two thousand years removed have a hard time really grasping just how heavy this was, and the utter shock this must have caused His disciples. This was made all the more shocking that Jesus was in the Temple itself as He was saying these things. I think there should be a comma between removed-have and might sound better as
"We today, "being" 2000yrs removed, have..........

[InChristAlways]

Matthew 23:39: ...you shall see Me no more till you say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!"Now what in the world does this mean? Well one thing it cannot be referring to is "physical sight" as they certainly "saw" Him after that statement. It certainly is a promise of the withdrawal of Himself in some way until they repented, without any assurance that they would in fact repent. It is an utterly conditional promise


Comma between sight-is? And might sound better saying "to is His "physical bodily appearance".....

[InChristAlways]

Luke 21:7: So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?"In Mark and Luke any references to "coming" are tm. That is strange if this passage were talking about the Second Coming ~ that would mean Mark and Luke entirelly omitted the Main Event. If we line up Matthew, Mark, and Luke we appear to have these equivalent phrases (and yes of course this is not absolutely determinative) It kind of sounds like the sentence is "cut off" but I don't know what the little "tm" signifies heh. What do those 2 letters mean btw? Trademark?

[dizzle]

thank you I will take a look at all of those

[InChristAlways]

Figures After Christ's Death and Prior to the Jewish WarIn addition to kingly messianic claims, there were also messianic prophets who made claims to be harbringers of divine acts of deliverance. Josephus notes: harbingers Crossan particularly notes the Davidic parallels in the Messianic contenders, most specifically in Simon who started for Jerusalem from Hebron just as David as done, has references to his "wives, and who like David progressed from bandit to general to King." [Cr THJ 204-206] (http://www.preteristlist.com/docs/warrenend.html#crthj) Horsley and Hanson note similar Davidic patterns including: both were popular leaders that were a threat to the current establishment; in narratives their physical characteristics and prowess are mentioned; the political state was one of crisis; initially joined by bands of discontents that was joined later by large numbers of the more respectable; and, both captured Hebron.[Hor BPM 121-122] (http://www.preteristlist.com/docs/warrenend.html#horbpm) "were"

[dizzle]

Comma between sight-is? And might sound better saying "to is His "physical bodily appearance".....



I made all the changes suggested, thank you, except this one. I think the grammar is right, and just FYI I was not referring to his physical bodily appearance but physical sight as opposed to spiritual insight.

Thanks for the grammar suggestions.