Matthew 24 - Problems for Preterists

[malcolm]

This is a post which I originally made at another message board, and Dee Dee kindly invited me to post it here to give her a better opportunity to respond.

Some of this is based on a debate which Dee Dee was/is involved in, so my apologies to those who may read this and feel like they've missed something.

At this point, I just want to focus on Matthew 24.

Mat 24:1-2 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

First of all, I agree with you. Jesus was obviously talking about the temple he'd just stood in. Most of the events He then describes in Matthew 24 took place during the period around 70AD when that temple was destroyed and would have had particular relevance for this living at that period.

However, there are also some rather obvious indications that some of these events would also take place throughout future history, building up to an ultimate fulfillment in His second coming, and that some of these events would only take place during this "ultimate" fulfillment period.

I'm interested to see how you "interpret" these verses:

Mat 24:5-6 For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ, ' and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.

Aren't these things still happening?

Mat 24:7-8 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

Again, aren't these things still happening?

Mat 24:9 "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me.

Christians were undoubtedly persecuted and put to death for their faith prior to the temple destruction of 70AD. But were they really "hated by all nations?"

Mat 24:10-13 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.

Yet again, we see the same thing happening today, and throughout Christian history. Isn't it strange that, if these things were completely fulfilled in the 1st Century, they would still be happening now - and, in fact, more now than ever before?

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

Again, the gospel was certainly preached prior to 70AD, but "in the whole world" and "to all nations?" This was Jesus speaking here, remember - not an average local who had a limited understanding of geography.

Mat 24:21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again.

"Never to be equalled again." Are you really saying that the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in 70AD represent distress so great that it had never been, and will never be, equalled?

Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

This seems very clear. When the Son of Man comes, nobody is going to miss it or mistake it or be in any doubt about it. You'd think, if this happened in 70AD, we'd have heard about it, wouldn't you?

Mat 24:34 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

ALL these things. Did the "generation" (if you want to take it literally) really see ALL those things happen?

That'll do for now. The basic problem with your position, Dee Dee, is that it is an "extreme" based on human wisdom and opinion, rather than a balanced position based on the whole Word of God and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Eccl 7:18 It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. The man who fears God will avoid all extremes.

I look forward to your answers. :)

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Darth Xena]

Great Malcolm!! Thank you for posting those here. I will be getting to them as soon as possible. I will probably take a few at a time to stay within the post size limits and to make it manageable for us to interact.

[joelkaki]

However, there are also some rather obvious indications that some of these events would also take place throughout future history, building up to an ultimate fulfillment in His second coming, and that some of these events would only take place during this "ultimate" fulfillment period.

I am unaware of such indications in Scripture. One important point that needs to be kept in the forefront in discussions as these is that THE BIBLE IS OUR GUIDE, NOT THE NEWSPAPER.

Malcolm, you go on to point out that many of the conditions described in Matthew 24 are the same as today. With the time controlled in verse 34--this generation--we know that Jesus was prophesying something in the first century. You cannot just decide that because we see similar things in the paper and on TV, it must have been part of Jesus prophecy. Jesus did not tell us that the things prior to verse 34 would be near the end of time, he told us they would be in the first century. We cannot decide that he was also referring to us because the newspaper articles seem similar. That is not good biblical hermeneutics (did I spell that right?).


Joel

[Hitch]

malcolm:
This is a post which I originally made at another message board, and Dee Dee kindly invited me to post it here to give her a better opportunity to respond.

Some of this is based on a debate which Dee Dee was/is involved in, so my apologies to those who may read this and feel like they've missed something.

At this point, I just want to focus on Matthew 24.

Mat 24:1-2 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

First of all, I agree with you. Jesus was obviously talking about the temple he'd just stood in. Most of the events He then describes in Matthew 24 took place during the period around 70AD when that temple was destroyed and would have had particular relevance for this living at that period.

However, there are also some rather obvious indications that some of these events would also take place throughout future history, building up to an ultimate fulfillment in His second coming, and that some of these events would only take place during this "ultimate" fulfillment period.

I'm interested to see how you "interpret" these verses:

Mat 24:5-6 For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ, ' and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.

Aren't these things still happening? Nope. None of thoses folks He was speaking to are alive today. And if you're going to be 'literal' when someone is speaking saying 'you' the listeners are the obect not people unborn for thousands of years.

Mat 24:7-8 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

Again, aren't these things still happening?

Nope. The 'birth pangs' speak to a begining,,, what began was the overtaking of the globe by the church which had already started but greatly expanded only after complete seperation form Israel.

Mat 24:9 "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me.

Christians were undoubtedly persecuted and put to death for their faith prior to the temple destruction of 70AD. But were they really "hated by all nations?"

Once again , a general application can be made so long as we recognize these things were personally spoken to real persons.

Mat 24:10-13 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.

Yet again, we see the same thing happening today, and throughout Christian history. Isn't it strange that, if these things were completely fulfilled in the 1st Century, they would still be happening now - and, in fact, more now than ever before?

Well ya got a problem. Jesus took pains to set all this in the context of the Destruction. You are taking pains to remove it as far as possible from where Christ put it... Not a good idea

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

Again, the gospel was certainly preached prior to 70AD, but "in the whole world" and "to all nations?" This was Jesus speaking here, remember - not an average local who had a limited understanding of geography.

This one gets tireing the DFs really need to read the NT;

Rom 10:17-18
17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18 But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: "Their sound has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world."
(NKJ)

Col 1:5-6
5 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel,
6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;
(NKJ)

Titus 2:10-12
10 not pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things.
11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,
12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age,
(NKJ)


Mat 24:21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again.

"Never to be equalled again." Are you really saying that the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in 70AD represent distress so great that it had never been, and will never be, equalled?[quote]

YUP.
In two ways. Fisrt as in the above quoted Scriptures ,, strict literalism is an interpretive mistake. Second, Dan and Christ spoke of the same thing. Christ actually refers to Dan and says 'the time is fulfilled'... so I'll go to Dan and bring up the contextual portion;

Dan 12:1
1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
(KJV)

Ya dont think 'nation' is used genericly do ya? It means Israel the nation Dan would be concerned with. So what could be the worst trouble that could come upon the nation of Israel? The recompense for regicide, just as Jesus had prohesied in M23. Or is 'wrath to the uttermost' not really such a bad thing?[quote]



Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

This seems very clear. When the Son of Man comes, nobody is going to miss it or mistake it or be in any doubt about it. You'd think, if this happened in 70AD, we'd have heard about it, wouldn't you?

Ya remember the ones He warned to run for the hills of Judah? They could look back from their camps and see the smoke of the burning Temple rise as it proclaimed that the so called foolish carpenter's son was indeed a True Prophet of God. and you have heard of the Destruction ,,,havent you?


Mat 24:34 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

ALL these things. Did the "generation" (if you want to take it literally) really see ALL those things happen? Just a s literally as this;



Matt 26:64
64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(KJV)

So is the High Priest still alive? Or is your interpretive method faulty?



That'll do for now. The basic problem with your position, Dee Dee, is that it is an "extreme" based on human wisdom and opinion, rather than a balanced position based on the whole Word of God and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. LMAO

Eccl 7:18 It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. The man who fears God will avoid all extremes.

I look forward to your answers. :)

love in Christ,
Malcolm Take care

Hitch

[Darth Xena]

Dear Malcolm:

Okay, I am ready to begin tackling your questions. However, I do have to say at the outset, though, I think it is very important that you need to deal with the timing text, namely Matthew 24:34. The reason that I say this is because even if you prove that certain things did not happen that should have happened, this does not prove futurism or disprove preterism, it merely demonstrates Jesus to be a false prophet if He did in fact say that certain things would happen, and they did not. We cannot put the cart before the horse and determine what the time text means ex post facto based only upon whether the prophecy came true or not or we would be no better than defenders of numerous prophetic charlatans throughout the ages.

So goes with the Olivet Discourse. The disciples asked certain questions (it does not matter how many etc) and Jesus provided a lengthy response and capped it off with the time limitation (this generation will not pass away until all these things take place). Any prophecy could be true if you don’t allow a time statement to be the test of its truth or falsity. I could tell you that America is going to be destroyed in one week, and if it does not happen, I could tell you that there is an indefinite gap between the sixth and seventh day. What point then was there for giving you a time period?? Skeptics see through these Physic Friends Network methods.

At this point, I just want to focus on Matthew 24.

Mat 24:1-2 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

First of all, I agree with you. Jesus was obviously talking about the temple he'd just stood in. Most of the events He then describes in Matthew 24 took place during the period around 70AD when that temple was destroyed and would have had particular relevance for this living at that period.

Okay then I see we are in agreement in a crucial point, in fact a very crucial point. Jesus is not talking about some future rebuilt Temple, He is talking about the Temple that is front of Him right then and there.

However, there are also some rather obvious indications that some of these events would also take place throughout future history, building up to an ultimate fulfillment in His second coming, and that some of these events would only take place during this "ultimate" fulfillment period.

You see though Malcolm, this is simply not possible, and let me explain why by repeating my conclusion from the debate in the other forum….

Now we know when the city and Temple were destroyed. It was in 70AD. If that is “one” of “all these things,” then ALL of the rest of that passage, at least up to Matthew 24:33, Luke 21:31, and Mark 13:31 happened in the first century as well. It is inescapable. The destruction the then existing Temple is a completely unique, datable, and nonrepeatable event. If the prophecy was not primarily fulfilled in the first century, it can never be. This also ties in with the “abomination of desolation” and Daniel 9. Jesus in identifying what Temple He was referring to totally destroys any notion that the Temple being referred to in Daniel 9 is any other Temple than the one that existed when Christ gave His Discourse. There is NO way around this. THIS IS WHERE I LAY DOWN THE GAUNTLET. It is an intractable problem for futurism.

Do you see the problem Malcolm? You have conceded that the destruction of the Temple is one of “all these things” and it is equally apparent that all of the events MUST happen within the space of one generation, no matter where one places that generation…. So since the only unique and unrepeatable event happened in the generation that lived back then it either all did or the prophecy failed.

[Darth Xena]

To continue:

I'm interested to see how you "interpret" these verses:

Mat 24:5-6 For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ, ' and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.

Aren't these things still happening?
Sure, but I would say, so what? That means that they are useless then as specific signs, but only as general ones. The fact is, as I stated above, that there was one unmistakebble event, one nonrepeatably unique event, and that was the destruction of the Temple then statnding, and that is indispuatably past.
The question you should be asking is did those things happen then, and the answer is a resounding yes! If you require proof of that, I can provide it, not only from within the Bible, but from secular history as well. The Apostle John also tells us when this passage was being fulfilled as well here…

1 John 2:18 – Little children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even so now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

John taught that the signs of the false messiahs back then proved that it was the last HOUR back then.

I could move on with the rest of your points but I would like to pause here and see where we are at.

[malcolm]

joelkaki:
Malcolm, you go on to point out that many of the conditions described in Matthew 24 are the same as today. With the time controlled in verse 34--this generation--we know that Jesus was prophesying something in the first century. You cannot just decide that because we see similar things in the paper and on TV, it must have been part of Jesus prophecy.

I can't? Why not?

Jesus did not tell us that the things prior to verse 34 would be near the end of time, he told us they would be in the first century.

He also told us they would be near the end of time.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[malcolm]

Hitch:
Nope. None of thoses folks He was speaking to are alive today. And if you're going to be 'literal' when someone is speaking saying 'you' the listeners are the obect not people unborn for thousands of years.

I was referring to His predictions, not the people He was speaking to.

This one gets tireing the DFs really need to read the NT;

What's a DF?

Ya remember the ones He warned to run for the hills of Judah? They could look back from their camps and see the smoke of the burning Temple rise as it proclaimed that the so called foolish carpenter's son was indeed a True Prophet of God. and you have heard of the Destruction ,,,havent you?

The Scripture says:

Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Perhaps you got confused and were thinking of something else.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[malcolm]

Dee Dee Warren:
Okay, I am ready to begin tackling your questions. However, I do have to say at the outset, though, I think it is very important that you need to deal with the timing text, namely Matthew 24:34.

It's very important we deal with that text. Whether or not it is strictly a "timing text" in the sense that you are advocating is a separate point.

So goes with the Olivet Discourse. The disciples asked certain questions (it does not matter how many etc) and Jesus provided a lengthy response and capped it off with the time limitation (this generation will not pass away until all these things take place).

Well then, all you need to do is adequately show how "all these things" took place within the first century. Presumably, you must believe they did, otherwise you are calling Jesus a false prophet, right?

Any prophecy could be true if you don’t allow a time statement to be the test of its truth or falsity.

On the surface of things, that's a good point. But, go a little deeper, and its not quite so simple to apply to Biblical prophecy.

I could tell you that America is going to be destroyed in one week, and if it does not happen, I could tell you that there is an indefinite gap between the sixth and seventh day. What point then was there for giving you a time period??

I could predict that you are going to sin within the next week. I would be completely accurate in that prediction. Yet it would not exclude the fact that you will also sin during the week after.

Okay then I see we are in agreement in a crucial point, in fact a very crucial point. Jesus is not talking about some future rebuilt Temple, He is talking about the Temple that is front of Him right then and there.

Yes. And He is also talking about some future rebuilt temple.

Now we know when the city and Temple were destroyed. It was in 70AD. If that is “one” of “all these things,” then ALL of the rest of that passage, at least up to Matthew 24:33, Luke 21:31, and Mark 13:31 happened in the first century as well. It is inescapable.

So all you have to do is adequately show this, which was part of the reason behind my original post.

Jesus in identifying what Temple He was referring to totally destroys any notion that the Temple being referred to in Daniel 9 is any other Temple than the one that existed when Christ gave His Discourse.

No, it simply makes it iron-clad that Daniel 9, and Jesus Himself, were referring to the existant temple at that time. It doesn't destroy or exclude any notion of a future temple.

It is pointless trying to use human wisdom to understand the things of God.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[malcolm]

Dee Dee Warren:
Sure, but I would say, so what? That means that they are useless then as specific signs, but only as general ones. The fact is, as I stated above, that there was one unmistakebble event, one nonrepeatably unique event, and that was the destruction of the Temple then statnding, and that is indispuatably past.[/b]

So are you saying that, since Matthew 24 has been completely fulfilled in the first century, it is now completely irrelevant?

The question you should be asking is did those things happen then, and the answer is a resounding yes! If you require proof of that, I can provide it, not only from within the Bible, but from secular history as well.

Well, that's one of the questions I am asking. And, for now, I'd prefer if you just answer it on the basis of the Scriptures I pointed out in Matthew 24.

1 John 2:18 – Little children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, [b]even so now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

John taught that the signs of the false messiahs back then proved that it was the last HOUR back then.

He also provides a good example of the typological nature of Jewish prophecy - many antichrists leading up to one ultimate antichrist.

So who was the antichrist, by the way? And, who were the "many antichrists" who came before him?

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Hitch]

malcolm:
Hitch:
Nope. None of thoses folks He was speaking to are alive today. And if you're going to be 'literal' when someone is speaking saying 'you' the listeners are the obect not people unborn for thousands of years.

I was referring to His predictions, not the people He was speaking to.

This one gets tireing the DFs really need to read the NT;

What's a DF?

Ya remember the ones He warned to run for the hills of Judah? They could look back from their camps and see the smoke of the burning Temple rise as it proclaimed that the so called foolish carpenter's son was indeed a True Prophet of God. and you have heard of the Destruction ,,,havent you?

The Scripture says:

Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Perhaps you got confused and were thinking of something else.

love in Christ,
Malcolm LOL You're not up to this league.

[yxboom]

malcolm DF = "Dispy Futurist" (I think it's meant to be derrogatory) :hrm:

[Lizard]

yxboom:
malcolm DF = "Dispy Futurist" (I think it's meant to be derrogatory) :hrm:

Well at least when I use it, I do not intend for it to be derrogatory.

When I am derrogatory, it is usually more obvious. :D

[Hitch]

More fomally Dispensational/Futurist


?Gee maybe its descriptive....and much easier to type. Ya know like PM rather than Post Mellinnialist. But by all means feel free to spin it any way you like.

H

[malcolm]

Hitch:
LOL You're not up to this league.

Very true. Perhaps you should try coming down to my level.

Mat 18:3 And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[malcolm]

yxboom:
malcolm DF = "Dispy Futurist" (I think it's meant to be derrogatory) :hrm:

Thank you. I still don't really know what it means, but then I was never very good with labels. Labels are the tools of people who want to divert attention away from the facts.

Anyway, whether or not it was intended to be derogatory or not really doesn't make much difference. People have called me a lot worse.

The only labels which matter are "in Christ" or "not in Christ." Eventually, it all comes down to that bottom line.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Darth Xena]

Dear Malcolm:

In my response to you I brought up the very important issue of Matthew 24:34, and its placement as a time delimiter for the entire passage. You responded….

It's very important we deal with that text. Whether or not it is strictly a "timing text" in the sense that you are advocating is a separate point.

Perhaps now is a good time to deal with it… it is the timing texts that are the foundation of preterism for as you pointed out that many of the things Jesus prophesied are happening today… and they have been happening for the past two thousand years, making them totally useless as signs without a boundary… and Jesus provides that boundary in 24:34. They would all happen before the people then living… died.

Joel had said…..”Jesus did not tell us that the things prior to verse 34 would be near the end of time, he told us they would be in the first century.”

To which you responded

He also told us they would be near the end of time.

Where? He did no such thing, and I can prove to you that even within your own system you cannot possibly believe that, and in fact, if I remember correctly you are premillennial so you have already contradicted yourself…. In your system it would not be near the end of time either, which would be one thousand years away.

Okay, moving on…

Well then, all you need to do is adequately show how "all these things" took place within the first century. Presumably, you must believe they did, otherwise you are calling Jesus a false prophet, right?

That is the point, and why this issue is so important. Jesus made it very clear that He was putting His prophetic reputation on the line. He solemnly declared that he people then living would not die until all those things happened…. If He was wrong, He was a false prophet under Deuteronomy 18:22.

In order to deflect the force of what I am saying you had said…

I could predict that you are going to sin within the next week. I would be completely accurate in that prediction. Yet it would not exclude the fact that you will also sin during the week after.

This is inapplicable to this conversation. What would be applicable would be if you were to predict that I would sin next week, and I somehow managed not to, but then did sin the following week. You could not point to my sin outside the scope of your original prophecy and say that you are not a false prophet, yet that is what you are doing with this passage. Jesus said all of those things would happen within a certain time frame, what happens outside of that time frame is completely irrelevant, and in fact, one of “all these things” – the ONLY uniquely nonrepeatable thing out of all them – did happen within that time frame. It can never be repeated in the way that Jesus prophesied, thus the prophecy is now unfulfillable in any other generation than the one that existed back then. This is an impossible dilemma for futurism….but you say…

Yes. And He is also talking about some future rebuilt temple.

And show me where in the text it says that… let me show you all the references to the Temple in that prophecy, and you show me where it is at all possible at all that He is referring at all to any future Temple….

First using Mark as a source: Then as He went out of the temple (the Temple that existed back then), one of His disciples said to Him, “Teacher, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!” ( they are asking about the Temple that existed back then) And Jesus answered and said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone shall be left upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” (referring to the Temple that existed back then!)
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, (that existed back then) Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be?….” (it matters not that they asked Him more questions, obviously one of the things that they wanted to know was when the Temple that existed back then would be destroyed)

Next using Luke as a source: Then, as some spoke of the temple, (the Temple that existed back then) how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said, “These things which you see— (the Temple that was before their very eyes right then) the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.” So they asked Him, saying, “Teacher, but when will these things be? (again, part of “these things” MUST include the destruction that He just prophesied that prompted their questions to begin with)

Lastly using Matthew as a source: Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. (the Temple that existed back then) And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? (the Temple that existed back then) Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here ( notice the word “here” it is referring to those actual stones, the ones that existed then) upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

All these of the Synoptics of the Olivet Discourse contain the very solemn declaration by Jesus, “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.” (Matthew 24:34, Luke 21:32, Mark 13:31)

Any future Temple has to manufactured out whole cloth. There is absolutely no mention, not one iota of a hint of a future Temple.

Now I am asking you not to get impatient with me that I have not yet shown how all the rest of the passage did in fact happen… I am hoping that we have the time with each other to go through it thoroughly, but what I am doing is laying down the foundation that even if I could not explain how the rest of the things happened (but I can) that would not matter…. They had to have, or Jesus was a false prophet. There is no way to project the primary fulfillment of this passage out into the future.

So here is what I propose… and I hope it is okay with you… I would like you to respond to what I just said on the Temple and the timing issue, and then for you to pick out one thing at a time of all of the other things that were to happen before verse 34, and I and the other preterists here will go through them one at a time… Does that sound fair? If not, tell me… otherwise I await your response to the Temple issue and your selection of your first section….

[malcolm]

Dee Dee,

Thanks for your response. First of all, I'd just like to say that it is very refreshing to debate with someone who actually takes the time to deal with things logically and methodically, instead of just spouting out their opinions and expecting everyone to bow to their superior knowledge. You may have a few pride issues ;) and we may still end up totally disagreeing at the end of this but, compared to some of the the people I've encountered elsewhere, it's actually a pleasure to argue with you!

Anyway, let's get to it. Your text in bold.

So here is what I propose… and I hope it is okay with you… I would like you to respond to what I just said on the Temple and the timing issue, and then for you to pick out one thing at a time of all of the other things that were to happen before verse 34, and I and the other preterists here will go through them one at a time… Does that sound fair?

Fine with me.

...it is the timing texts that are the foundation of preterism...

Or, perhaps more accurately, it is the idea that these texts actually are timing texts in the way you perceive, that is the basis for preterism?

... for as you pointed out that many of the things Jesus prophesied are happening today… and they have been happening for the past two thousand years, making them totally useless as signs without a boundary…

This depends on your understanding of prophecy. If you (correctly) understand prophect to be primarily typological, then all these things make perfect sense - and there is no need for futurism, preterism, or any other related ism.

Joel had said…..”Jesus did not tell us that the things prior to verse 34 would be near the end of time, he told us they would be in the first century.”

Actually, to be strictly accurate, He doesn't. Nowhere does he mention "the first century." This is simply a conclusion you have drawn from analysing what He did say.

Where? He did no such thing, and I can prove to you that even within your own system you cannot possibly believe that, and in fact, if I remember correctly you are premillennial so you have already contradicted yourself…. In your system it would not be near the end of time either, which would be one thousand years away.

Well, I can admit when I'm wrong. My statement that "He also told us they would be near the end of time" was innaccurate and I duly withdraw it.

He solemnly declared that the people then living would not die until all those things happened…. If He was wrong, He was a false prophet under Deuteronomy 18:22.

Again, this is a matter of interpretation. Since there are numerous problems associated with it, it cannot be treated as a primary fact until it has been tested.

In order to deflect the force of what I am saying you had said…

I could predict that you are going to sin within the next week. I would be completely accurate in that prediction. Yet it would not exclude the fact that you will also sin during the week after.

This is inapplicable to this conversation.

No, it's inapplicable to your perspective on the conversation. The point is, it is a logically consistent statement which reflects an alternative perspective. I think I am now familiar with the basis of your position. This is simply an opportunity for you to become acquainted with mine.

Sorry, but you can't just dismiss it - any more than you would accept me simply saying that Matthew 24:2 and Matthew 24:34 are not timing verses.

Jesus said all of those things would happen within a certain time frame

Again, sorry to be picky, but actually He didn't. This is just an inference you have drawn based on your interpretation of the passage, which is in turn based on your preconceptions regarding the passage. I'm not saying I don't also have my own preconceptions and interpretation, but the point here is to discuss whose preconceptions and interpretations are correct! :huh:

...what happens outside of that time frame is completely irrelevant...

Only from your perspective.

...and in fact, one of “all these things” – the ONLY uniquely nonrepeatable thing out of all them – did happen within that time frame.

Well, if you are referring to the destruction of the temple in 70AD, I would strongly dispute that it was the "ONLY uniquely nonrepeatable thing out of all of them."

It can never be repeated in the way that Jesus prophesied, thus the prophecy is now unfulfillable in any other generation than the one that existed back then. This is an impossible dilemma for futurism….but you say…

... good thing I'm not a futurist! :p

And show me where in the text it says that…

This was in reference to my statement that "He is also talking about some future rebuilt temple." Here is the Scripture in the text where it says that:

Mat 24:2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

let me show you all the references to the Temple in that prophecy, and you show me where it is at all possible at all that He is referring at all to any future Temple…

I agree with all your passages. The temple "back then" was destroyed just as Jesus predicted. As I've pointed out before, however, this does not preclude a temple in the future being destroyed also.

Just one question, though, now that I think of it: where in Matthew 24:4-51 does Jesus again mention the destruction of the temple?

Any future Temple has to manufactured out whole cloth. There is absolutely no mention, not one iota of a hint of a future Temple.

Actually, Matthew 24:15 is the only reference to any temple between verse 4 and the end of the discourse. There's certainly no specific mention of a temple being destroyed other than verse 2.

Now I am asking you not to get impatient with me that I have not yet shown how all the rest of the passage did in fact happen… I am hoping that we have the time with each other to go through it thoroughly...

No problem. I am certainly willing to take all the time that is required.

but what I am doing is laying down the foundation that even if I could not explain how the rest of the things happened (but I can) that would not matter…They had to have, or Jesus was a false prophet. There is no way to project the primary fulfillment of this passage out into the future.

Actually, there's a very easy way. You just either don't see it or don't agree with it. That's why we're having this discussion. :)

The problem is that there are a lot of avenues opening up here. I suspect that there are numerous points or questions you could respond with to what I have just written - and there are several options for how I could proceed from here also. For now, though, I'll simply go along with your suggestion and pick out one of the things that you claim happened in the first century, and await your explanation of how you support that claim.

The most obvious one first: "Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man."

If you'd rather put this on hold until you have dealt with some of my other points, that's fine. We'll have to deal with this eventually anyway, so if you'd prefer to get some other things cleared up first, I'll quite understand. As I said, I'm willing to put in the time to go through all this thoroughly if you are!

[Darth Xena]

Dear Malcolm:

Great!! This week is going to be pretty busy for me, I may not get a chance to respond until the weekend.

[malcolm]

Dee Dee,

No problemo. I'm frequently busy myself so I quite understand. I'll check this thread regularly and keep up with it as best I can.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Darth Xena]

Thank you Malcolm.. and I genuinely thank you for coming here to discuss this.

[malcolm]

Just bumping this so Dee Dee doesn't forget about it. :)

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Darth Xena]

Oh Malcolm, I just saw you online, and did not forget!! Actually I am planning on getting to it this weekend, sorry for the delay. I just wrote a comprehensive response to Rusty that took some time... you may not agree with me (understatement right?) but you know I do put some research into my inane ramblings. LOL!!

[Darth Xena]

Dear Malcolm:

Thanks for your response. First of all, I'd just like to say that it is very refreshing to debate with someone who actually takes the time to deal with things logically and methodically, instead of just spouting out their opinions and expecting everyone to bow to their superior knowledge.

Why thank you!!

You made a statement that ALL prophecy is primarily typological, and by typological you go on to make it clear that you mean not applying to any one particular event or person. This is just not supportable, nor held by any majority of scholarship. For example, are you going to state that the Bethlehem prophecy was not completely fulfilled in the first century? Are that the coming of Messiah in Daniel 9 was not completely fulfilled in the first century? If not, then you cannot hold to your own proposition. When there is a definite timing verse then the prophecy is limited in its direct fulfillment to that period of time.

Deuteronomy 18:21-22 – [I]And if you say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has spoken?” – when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken, the prophet has spoken presumptuously, you shall not believe him.

Jesus said that certain things would take place within a certain time frame. He either was correct, or was a false prophet. You do keep alluding to the idea that He did not prophesy a certain time frame, but the prima facie reading of the text is that He did, so the burden of proof is upon you to prove otherwise, and you cannot simply cite nonfulfillment as proof, for that is begging the entire question in the first place. If you are going to dispute that Matthew 24:34 and its parallels are a timing text, I think you need to get down to brass tacks and do it.

Well, I can admit when I'm wrong. My statement that "He also told us they would be near the end of time" was inaccurate and I duly withdraw it.

Thank you…

Well, if you are referring to the destruction of the temple in 70AD, I would strongly dispute that it was the "ONLY uniquely nonrepeatable thing out of all of them."

Okay, I’ll bite.. name another (besides the destruction of the city which I hold to be part and parcel of the destruction of the Temple)…..

Also, clarification on some sloppy use of terminology is in order by me.. I tend to lump anything that is not preterism as futurism, and I apologize for that. When I mead the statement…

It can never be repeated in the way that Jesus prophesied, thus the prophecy is now unfulfillable in any other generation than the one that existed back then. This is an impossible dilemma for futurism….

What I meant, and still strenuously maintain, is that this is an impossible dilemma for any nonpreterist interpretation of the passage.


I agree with all your passages. The temple "back then" was destroyed just as Jesus predicted. As I've pointed out before, however, this does not preclude a temple in the future being destroyed also.

If a future Temple is destroyed, it has nothing to do with this prophecy for Jesus made it clear what Temple He was talking about. The prophecy is not a blanket prophecy about any and all Temples that may ever exist, it was a prophecy about the Temple that existed back then.

Just one question, though, now that I think of it: where in Matthew 24:4-51 does Jesus again mention the destruction of the temple?

The whole context of the Discourse is the destruction of the Temple, the prophesy of which prompted the disciples’ questions in the first place. Jesus told the Jewish leaders of that day that the guilt of the ages was laid on them (another intractable problem for nonpreterist interpreters), that their house (i.e. the Temple) would be left to them desolate, and then lays out the explicit prophesy of its destruction. The rest of the Discourse is explaining to the disciples the events leading up to and including said destruction since that is the backdrop for the whole conversation to begin with.

Luke makes the destruction even more explicit in Luke 21:20-24 which is so clear that many commentators readily concede this is clearly about 70AD, but it is impossible to concede that point and still divorce the rest of the passage from the first century.

[Darth Xena]

Dear Malcolm:

I had also invited you to bring up verses that occur prior to verse 34 that you do not believe were fulfilled for my commentary.. in response you brought up….

The most obvious one first: "Mat 24:27 For as lightning that comes from the east
is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man."

Well this is part and parcel of the whole “coming” language in the passage so I will deal with that more in a block rather than just this one specific verse…..

“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Again this all happens before verse 34 (the time text) so it also happened within that generation.

I am not exactly sure exactly what part of these verses you are having problems with believing already happened, so I am going to take some guesses. I am guessing that you are assuming that this is speaking of a visible bodily coming, and since that did not happen in AD70 (and I concede that such an event did not), then this is not fulfilled. Well, I submit to you that this not speaking of a visible bodily coming at all.

If we, again, let the Bible interpret the Bible, it is crystal clear what is going on. Jesus is speaking in the idioms and language of an OT prophet, in fact, if you look at the NAS version, you will see that these verses are indicated as an exact quote of Isaiah 13:9-10 which is very, very important when interpreting this passage. Because it is a quote of an OT passage, that is the framework in which it must be understood.

Here is the Isaiah passage:

“Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate; and He will destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light; The sun will be darkened in its going forth, and the moon will not cause its light to shine.

This passage, in its original context, is speaking of a past historical judgment upon ancient Babylon. Jesus is giving apostate Judaism a back-handed slap by comparing them to Babylon (i.e. their designation in Revelation as Mystery Babylon) and stating that they will suffer the same fate.

Or how about this an interesting passage:

David is here describing how God delivered him from Saul, and he says ( Psalm 18:7, 9 and 2 Samuel 22:8-12),

Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven quaked and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up from His nostrils, and devouring fire from His mouth; Coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with darkness under His feet. He rode upon a cherub, and flew; and He was seen upon the wings of the wind. He made darkness canopies around Him, dark waters and thick clouds of the skies. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled.

This passage, and others like it, bear remarkable similarities to the Olivet Discourse. Now, no one believes that YHWH actually saddled up ole Gabriel and rode on him to Dodge to rescue David. No one believes that the heavens bowed down and the whole wide world shook. No one. The Bible interprets the Bible. Throughout the whole OT, “collapsing universe,” “decreation,” and “lights out’ imagery is used to describe God’s temporal judgments.

Take a look at these:

Ezekiel 32:7-8- When I put out your light, I will cover the heavens, and make its stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of the heavens I will make dark over you, and bring darkness upon your land,’ says the Lord GOD.

Again, this is a past judgment on Egypt.

Isaiah 34:4-5 – All the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll; all their host shall fall down as the leaf falls from the vine, and as fruit falling from a fig tree. “For My sword shall be bathed in heaven; Indeed it shall come down on Edom, and on the people of My curse, for judgment.

And this is a past judgment on Edom.

Or how about this oracle against ancient Egypt:

Ezekiel 32- Son of man, take up a lamentation for Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say to him… I will cover the heavens, and make its stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of the heavens I will make dark over you, and bring darkness upon your land,’ Says the Lord GOD.

or


Jeremiah 4:23-26 (go back to verses 14 and 16 to see the context) – I beheld the earth, and indeed it was without form, and void; and the heavens, they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, and all the hills moved back and forth. I beheld, and indeed there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens had fled. I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land was a wilderness, and all its cities were broken down at the presence of the LORD, at His fierce anger.

This is a historical judgment on Israel couched in language of bringing the world back to the primeval chaos (the words ‘without form and void’ are a direct allusion to Genesis 1:2).

And Amos 8:9

And it shall come to pass in that day,” says the Lord GOD, “That I will make the sun go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in broad daylight

which is a description of past judgment on the northern Kingdom

Or these descriptions of God and His might:

Psalm 68:4 – Sing to God, sing praises to His name; Extol Him who rides on the clouds.

Psalm 104:3 – He lays the beams of His upper chambers in the waters, who makes the clouds His chariot, who walks on the wings of the wind.

or of a past “day of the Lord”

Ezekiel 30:3 – For the day is near, even the day of the LORD is near; It will be a day of clouds.

No one believes in these past historical judgments recorded by the OT that the stars of heaven and their constellations and the sun and the moon did not give their light. These heavenly bodies are often used in Scripture as symbolic of power and governments (especially Israel… remember the “woman” in Revelation clothed with the sun and having twelve stars about her head?) When empires and nations fall, collapsing universe imagery is often used in Scripture. The Jewish (Ancient Near East) way of expressing things was way different from our nonpoetic way of thinking. In a mostly oral culture it assisted in memory and transmission.

As my friend JP Holding commented, “We are not dealing with literal events here, but apocalyptic imagery -- material like that found in Ezekiel, in which God sits on a physical throne, and angels are amalgamated zoos, and eating a scroll is not only possible but gives you heartburn. None of these things literally happened to Babylon, Edom, etc. -- and Isaiah, et al. did not think that they would. We should no more expect blood on the moon or falling stars than we should expect, from Daniel, four literal monsters literally dripping and slathering their way out of the Mediterranean like Godzilla.”

Chilton gives this extreme example to prove a point: The Book of Revelation describes a woman clothed with the sun, standing on the moon, and laboring in childbirth while a dragon hovers nearby to devour her child. A radically speculative interpreter might turn first to news of the latest genetic experiments, to determine whether a woman’s size and chemical composition might be altered sufficiently for her to be able to wear the sun, he might also check to see if the Loch Ness monster has resurfaced recently. A Biblical interpreter, on the other hand, would begin to ask questions: Where in the Bible does this imagery come from? Where does the Bible speak of a woman in labor, and what is its significance in those contexts? If we are going to understand the Bible, we must acquire the habit of asking questions like this…. In order to understand the meaning of Jesus’ expressions in this passage, we need to understand the OT much more than most people do today. Jesus was speaking to an audience that was intimately familiar with the most obscure details of OT literature. They had heard the OT read and expounded countless times throughout their lives, and had memorized lengthy passages. Biblical imagery and forms of expression had formed their culture, environment, and vocabulary from earliest infancy, and this had been true for generations. The fact is that when Jesus spoke to His disciples about the fall of Jerusalem, He used prophetic vocabulary. There was a “language” of prophecy, instantly recognizable to those familiar with the OT. As Jesus foretold the complete end of the OT system, which was in a sense, the end of a whole world – He spoke of it as any of the prophets would have, in the stirring language of covenantal judgment. “ (end of Chilton quote)

Also we must keep in mind that the disciples were having a hard time even understanding that Jesus had to go, much less come back in the sense that futurism is requiring of this passage. Why did Jesus’ pronouncement of judgment upon the Temple prompt the disciples to ask of His “coming”?? Because they understood such an event to be the definitive establishment of the Messianic Kingdom and Christ’s acting as Messianic judge.

They connected this event with Daniel 7:13-14 as follows:

I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed.

Notice the direction of this “coming” is not down but UP!! Okay I was going to add some more but this is enough for my prima facie case.

[malcolm]

Thanks for these responses, Dee Dee. I should be able to reply properly within the next few days. Since I've just been banned from another Theology message board (not exactly sure why, but never mind) I should have a little more time to spend here! Every cloud has a silver lining, as they say! :wink:

[Darth Xena]

Hey no problem Malcolm... you know that I am not the quickest responder so take your time. And while you are here, check out some of the other areas and have a good time.

[malcolm]

Hi Dee Dee,

I'm afraid I've not had as much time as I was hoping for this week. I'm going to try and answer your first post now, and get to the second part as soon as I can.

Bold text originally posted by Dee Dee Warren:
You made a statement that ALL prophecy is primarily typological, and by typological you go on to make it clear that you mean not applying to any one particular event or person. This is just not supportable, nor held by any majority of scholarship.

No, that's not the meaning of typological. What it refers to is the fact that Hebrew prophecy is primarily pattern-based, and not necessarily restricted to Western preconceptions of timed fulfillment. In other words, a prophecy may have only one fulfillment, or it may have multiple fulfillments, or it may have several fulfillments leading up to one ultimate fulfillment. Which of these is the case depends on various other factors. Messianic prophecies, for example, can often relate to both the first coming of Jesus Christ and His second coming.

This is not some new or random method of interpretation. It is actually interpreting prophecy in light of its original context. Regarding a "majority of scholarship," I doubt there's any need to point out to any Christian that the majority is not always correct. This view is certainly supported by a high level of scholarship, however, in both the Messianic Jewish field and Gentile Christian theology.

For example, are you going to state that the Bethlehem prophecy was not completely fulfilled in the first century? Are that the coming of Messiah in Daniel 9 was not completely fulfilled in the first century? If not, then you cannot hold to your own proposition. When there is a definite timing verse then the prophecy is limited in its direct fulfillment to that period of time.

Again, this is simply a matter of perspective. What you are determined to see as a "definite timing verse" is the result of your own mindset that such timing verses are required or even relevant in the original prophetic context of Scripture.

Deuteronomy 18:21-22 – And if you say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has spoken?” – when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken, the prophet has spoken presumptuously, you shall not believe him.

A very valid Scripture. Of course, there is no direct indication given here as to how long the "waiting period" is to see if the prophecy comes to pass. So it's not strictly relevant.

Jesus said that certain things would take place within a certain time frame. He either was correct, or was a false prophet.

Or you are mistaken in assuming that Jesus' timeframe was the same as your perception of it.

You do keep alluding to the idea that He did not prophesy a certain time frame, but the prima facie reading of the text is that He did, so the burden of proof is upon you to prove otherwise, and you cannot simply cite nonfulfillment as proof, for that is begging the entire question in the first place.

Actually, nonfulfillment, in combination with a clear acceptance that Jesus obviously wasn't a false prophet, is rather good proof. If Jesus was not a false prophet (which He clearly wasn't) and if some of what He said did not come to pass in the 1st Century (which I maintain it clearly didn't) then that provides very strong support for the proposition that our understanding of what you call "timing verses" needs to be brought into line with the Word of God rather than our own opinions and human logic.

If you agree that Jesus was not a false prophet, then all I have to do is show that certain things He predicted in Matthew 24 did not take place in the 1st Century in order to show that your basic perspective and understanding of Biblical prophecy is incorrect.

Okay, I’ll bite.. name another (besides the destruction of the city which I hold to be part and parcel of the destruction of the Temple)…..

This was in relation to the destruction of the temple being the "ONLY uniquely nonrepeatable" event in the discourse. Others would be "being hated by all nations," the gospel being preached to the "whole world," and the coming of Christ.

What I meant, and still strenuously maintain, is that this is an impossible dilemma for any nonpreterist interpretation of the passage.

It is certainly an impossible dilemma from your perspective as a preterist. However, what seems an impossible dilemma from one perspective can be very easily solved simply by shifting your perspective. To say that it is an impossible dilemma for any nonpreterist interpretation of the passage is simply not true. From a nonpreterist interpretation of the passage (such as mine) it simply isn't a dilemma at all.

If a future Temple is destroyed, it has nothing to do with this prophecy for Jesus made it clear what Temple He was talking about. The prophecy is not a blanket prophecy about any and all Temples that may ever exist, it was a prophecy about the Temple that existed back then.

That's your interpretation, and you are of course entitled to it. But it doesn't constitute proof of anything. Which temple was Jesus referring to in John 2:19? The literal temple He was standing in? That would be the obvious interpretation, and it would be partially correct. But, of course, John 2:21 gives us another perspective.

The whole context of the Discourse is the destruction of the Temple, the prophesy of which prompted the disciples’ questions in the first place.

I think Jesus was quite capable of talking about whatever He wanted to, regardless of what questions the disciples asked. He demonstrated this on any number of other occasions. It's hardly a stretch to suspect that it might also be the case here. I'm not saying that's the case, though. It's just a thought.

Jesus told the Jewish leaders of that day that the guilt of the ages was laid on them (another intractable problem for nonpreterist interpreters), that their house (i.e. the Temple) would be left to them desolate, and then lays out the explicit prophesy of its destruction. The rest of the Discourse is explaining to the disciples the events leading up to and including said destruction since that is the backdrop for the whole conversation to begin with.

Again, you state your position very firmly, but just because you say something firmly doesn't make it true. I'm not sure you really answered my question, though. Where in Matthew 24:4-51 does Jesus explicitly refer to the destruction of the temple?

Luke makes the destruction even more explicit in Luke 21:20-24 which is so clear that many commentators readily concede this is clearly about 70AD, but it is impossible to concede that point and still divorce the rest of the passage from the first century.

Again, it may very well have been fulfilled to some degree in 70AD. But, oddly enough, I don't see Jesus mentioning the destruction of the temple in Luke 21:20-24 either. Of course, commentators say a lot of things and they frequently contradict each other, so I'm not too concerned with their opinion. And, again, you're quick to say that something is impossible when there's really no need to view it that way at all.

Well, that's one down. One to go! :smile:

[malcolm]

Okay, here goes with the second part ...

Bold text originally posted by DDW
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Again this all happens before verse 34 (the time text) so it also happened within that generation.

Well, that's not a very good start. You're just restating your preconceived position that verse 34 is a timing text in order to support your interpretation that all this happened in the 1st Century. To use a little formula analogy:

You say that X=7. Then you say that since 3 comes before 7, then that means that 3 comes before X. Of course, what you haven't done is proved that X really equals 7 in the first place. Given that technique, I could prove whatever you want! :smile:

I am not exactly sure exactly what part of these verses you are having problems with believing already happened, so I am going to take some guesses. I am guessing that you are assuming that this is speaking of a visible bodily coming, and since that did not happen in AD70 (and I concede that such an event did not), then this is not fulfilled. Well, I submit to you that this not speaking of a visible bodily coming at all.

Interesting. You concede that Jesus did not return "visibly" and "bodily" in AD70. Since the "visible" part is so obvious in Matthew 24:27, I can only assume that it is the "bodily" part that you take issue with.

If we, again, let the Bible interpret the Bible, it is crystal clear what is going on. Jesus is speaking in the idioms and language of an OT prophet, in fact, if you look at the NAS version, you will see that these verses are indicated as an exact quote of Isaiah 13:9-10 which is very, very important when interpreting this passage. Because it is a quote of an OT passage, that is the framework in which it must be understood.

Fair enough, but I don't see Matthew 24:27 anywhere in Isaiah 13:9-10.

Here is the Isaiah passage:

“Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate; and He will destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light; The sun will be darkened in its going forth, and the moon will not cause its light to shine.

This passage, in its original context, is speaking of a past historical judgment upon ancient Babylon. Jesus is giving apostate Judaism a back-handed slap by comparing them to Babylon (i.e. their designation in Revelation as Mystery Babylon) and stating that they will suffer the same fate.

Ah, so repeating a prophecy is okay. But the idea that it is basically the same prophecy with multiple fulfillments is not. Again, just a difference in perspectives and understanding of prophecy. Again, I would point out that your interpretation of Jewish prophecy is not in line with Jewish interpretation. In other words, you are failing to take into account the nature of Biblical prophecy itself.

Or how about this an interesting passage:

David is here describing how God delivered him from Saul, and he says ( Psalm 18:7, 9 and 2 Samuel 22:8-12),

(other scriptures ...)

No one believes in these past historical judgments recorded by the OT that the stars of heaven and their constellations and the sun and the moon did not give their light. These heavenly bodies are often used in Scripture as symbolic of power and governments (especially Israel… remember the “woman” in Revelation clothed with the sun and having twelve stars about her head?) When empires and nations fall, collapsing universe imagery is often used in Scripture. The Jewish (Ancient Near East) way of expressing things was way different from our nonpoetic way of thinking. In a mostly oral culture it assisted in memory and transmission.

But then there are those who believe that the temple was literally destroyed in 70AD. Of course, rather a lot of people do believe that Jesus was literally born of a virgin in Bethlehem and was God incarnate, and suffered and died and rose again. So how do you pick and choose which Scriptures you take literally, and which you pass of as symbolic. Quite apart from the idea that some of them might actually be both.

As my friend JP Holding commented, “We are not dealing with literal events here, but apocalyptic imagery -- material like that found in Ezekiel, in which God sits on a physical throne, and angels are amalgamated zoos, and eating a scroll is not only possible but gives you heartburn. None of these things literally happened to Babylon, Edom, etc. -- and Isaiah, et al. did not think that they would. We should no more expect blood on the moon or falling stars than we should expect, from Daniel, four literal monsters literally dripping and slathering their way out of the Mediterranean like Godzilla.”

Again, all very well, but the fact is that you do appear to believe that Jesus will return bodily at some point in the future (unless I've totally misunderstood that part of your "orthodox preterism"). You can argue about symbolism and imagery all you want - and some of your points are perfectly valid - but it still doesn't alter the plain fact that if Matthew 24:27 is referring to the visible and bodily return of Jesus Christ, then your whole position falls apart. Therefore, according to your perspective, Matthew 24:27 simply cannot be referring to the bodily return of Jesus Christ.

Again, Scripture does[i] talk of the visible and physical return of Jesus Christ. Matthew 24:30 says that the Son of Man "will appear in the sky" and that He will be seen "coming on the clouds, with power and great glory." And then Matthew 24:31 talks of the angels gathering His elect. Sorry, but you still haven't really explained any of this.

In order to understand the meaning of Jesus’ expressions in this passage, we need to understand the OT much more than most people do today.

A correct understanding of the nature of OT prophecy would be a good start! :smile:

[I] I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed.

Notice the direction of this “coming” is not down but UP!!

Ummm, sorry, but where does it say "up." Can't seem to see it.

Okay I was going to add some more but this is enough for my prima facie case.

Hmmmm. I can see this is really only getting started! :smile:

[malcolm]

Dee Dee,

My apologies, but personal circumstances currently require me to withdraw from participation on any message boards. I'm sorry we will not have the chance to continue this interesting discussion, but perhaps we may have opportunity to resume it at some point in the future. Thank you for your time and willingness to debate.

[kendemyer]

Dear Malcolm,

Thank you for posting to this board. I found your material to be top notch.

Sincerely,

Ken

[Darth Xena]

More trolling from Ken.

[kendemyer]

TO: Malcolm

I especially liked the part of your initial post when you said:

Yet again, we see the same thing happening today, and throughout Christian history. Isn't it strange that, if these things were completely fulfilled in the 1st Century, they would still be happening now - and, in fact, more now than ever before?



Have some pearls!


TO: Dee Dee

I was merely thanking Malcolm and praising his material. I see nothing wrong with this.


Sincerely,

Ken

[Darth Xena]

Why don't you ask in the Locker Room if your behaviour this evening is considered appropriate forum behaviour? Going through a forum in one note and reviewing numerous dead threads, in most cases just to ra ra without really interacting.

[kendemyer]

TO: Dee Dee

If the threads were dead then I will dub them the "Lazarus threads" in some cases because they seem quite alive judging from the activity currently by TWEB members.

Sincerely,

Ken