Is Matthew 24 future or fulfilled? (page 2)

godrulz

Yes, we can make the Bible say whatever we want by prooftexting out of context (eisegesis). The Bible has one intended interpretation based on context, grammar, literal, historico-cultural issues. Once we know what it meant to the original audience (one meaning), we can make application by way of principle(s) to our lives.

wobble

Thanks Mad Sweeney for pointing out how easy it is to make "facts" appear to support your belief, until you use your critical thinking skills.

I also found that John Gill's statement that when the Romans returned "not a Christian was found in the city" stood out as plain nonsense that cannot be proven. the Romans weren't searching for Christians, they came to suppress a revolt, out of the thousands that died, who checked to see if christians were among them ?

Utter tripe.

Vanderhoven7

The fact is that over a million Jews perished in Jerusalem...whereas Christians en masse fled the city.

http://www.preteristarchive.com/JewishWars/articles/1998_scott_flee-pella.html

PSacramento

It was colorful language and we seem to forget that Jesus, like his contemporaries, spoke in colorful language when saying a parable or a prophecy.

And let us also not forget that we have the written account of what was understood not what was said per verbatium.

Personally it makes sense that Christ was mentioning the fall of Jerusalem AND hinting at the second coming too and both got "blended" in, it seems that there was some confusion with 1st century Christians that Christ would came back in ther lifetime, enough that Paul, Luke, Peter and probably others made it clear that other things needed to happen AND that NO ONE knew the time, not even Christ.

wobble

Van sounds like that old Peter Cook/ Dudley Moore sketch "That's a fact that is"

Those "facts" do not address the questions in my post. That is quite a long paper, full of nothing in the way of proof, and stooping to Ad Hominem attacks on scholars who do not share his views, hardly credible academic stuff.

Vanderhoven7

<<It was colorful language and we seem to forget that Jesus, like his contemporaries, spoke in colorful language when saying a parable or a prophecy.>>

True, and also it is language that the Holy Spirit has used to describe other conflagrations in scripture.

<<And let us also not forget that we have the written account of what was understood not what was said per verbatium. Personally it makes sense that Christ was mentioning the fall of Jerusalem AND hinting at the second coming too and both got "blended" in, it seems that there was some confusion with 1st century Christians that Christ would came back in ther lifetime, enough that Paul, Luke, Peter and probably others made it clear that other things needed to happen AND that NO ONE knew the time, not even Christ.>>

I would agree with everything except the word "blended". It seems to me that in Matthew 24 Jesus separated both subjects; His second personal coming (parousia) to earth from His coming in judgment on Jerusalem as per23:36. With regard to Jerusalem's destruction, "All these things Jesus reported would happen to"this generation", not, "these generations". The tribulation Jesus spoke of would not be repeated.

Vander

EntirelyPossible

I really can't trust Matthew 24 until I know who wrote it. Work on that and get back to me.

Vanderhoven7

<<Yes, we can make the Bible say whatever we want by prooftexting out of context (eisegesis). The Bible has one intended interpretation based on context, grammar, literal, historico-cultural issues. Once we know what it meant to the original audience (one meaning), we can make application by way of principle(s) to our lives.>>

Totally agree!

But, to apply Jesus' response till verse 35 to our generation is exactly that, prooftexting out of context.

godrulz

Who said our generation? These signs will be during the future Tribulation of Rev. 6-19 (Daniel's 70th week with gap of Church Age between 69-70) immediately preceding Armageddom/Second Coming/Millennium. This could be 100 year away or start soon. The rapture of the Church will start the 7 year period. There is no historical fulfillment for most of Mt. 24-25, even if you allegorize the passage like WT does with prophetic Scripture.

shepherd

@Vanderhoven7

Did you even bother to read the page you link to?

It states in the conclusion:

"Did the Jerusalem Christians flee to Pella just before the Romans destroyed their city? There is no way to know for sure. We can only deal in probabilities. If we accept as reliable the accounts of Eusebius and others, the issue is settled...for when evidence is incomplete, selected and biased reading and interpretations of data can usually yield the desired conclusion."

How did this produce your statement "The fact is that over a million Jews perished in Jerusalem...whereas Christians en masse fled the city."? It's the ABSENCE of facts that makes the result unknown. The first clear reference comes from the fourth century church historian Eusebius. Yes, hundreds of years later a Christian historian says it happened, and from that you conclude it's a fact?

Maybe Christans did run away, maybe many non Christians did too, but there in no EVIDENCE whatsoever that this was done in obedience to any words spoken by Jesus decades before, therefore it cannot be said to be a fact.

Is Matthew 24 future or fulfilled?

Share this