Matthew 24:29

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eyedoc84 said:
Fair enough, I was asking because when I’ve explored it, usually both texts are explained as the same event. “Christ” came in judgment by using Titus to destroy the city and the temple. The problem with that, as I see it, is verse 29 says AFTER the tribulation Christ comes. So they clearly can’t be the same thing.
Click to expand...

Bingo
 
Eyedoc84 said:
Fair enough, I was asking because when I’ve explored it, usually both texts are explained as the same event. “Christ” came in judgment by using Titus to destroy the city and the temple. The problem with that, as I see it, is verse 29 says AFTER the tribulation Christ comes. So they clearly can’t be the same thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, I see that.

Gentry tells us it's a spiritual coming in judgment:

Yet there was to be a “coming” of Christ in that day. . . . This, however, is a spiritual judgment-coming rather than a bodily coming. Such a judgment-coming was to be witnessed by the Sanhedrin who abused Him during the ecclesiastical trials leading up to His crucifixion. Notice what Christ says to His abusers: “The high priest answered and said to Him, ‘I adjure you by the living God that You tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.’ Jesus said to him, ‘It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven’ ” (Matt. 26:63–64). Here the high priest and the other members of the Sanhedrin present were told that they would see His coming. The coming to be witnessed by the Sanhedrin is of the sort attributed to Jehovah in Isaiah’s prophecy against Egypt: “The burden against Egypt. Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud, and will come into Egypt” (Isa. 19:1). The Lord did not physically ride on a cloud down into Egypt! Neither was the “coming of the Son of Man” that the Sanhedrin would see a physical coming. Nor is the “coming as lightning” mentioned in Matthew 24:27 a physical coming. It is manifestly a judgment-coming against those who called for His blood to be upon them and their children (Matt. 27:25). Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., “Lightning, Eagles and Jerusalem”
 
JM said:
I can spot Federal Vision when I see it.
Click to expand...

The concern isn't necessarily FV. There are many issues and not merely with Doug Wilson, but the other man you mentioned.

For difficult passages, find those who are historical, not living and who have been proven. Example, John Gill and Matthew Henry.
 
Romans922 said:
The concern isn't necessarily FV. There are many issues and not merely with Doug Wilson, but the other man you mentioned.

For difficult passages, find those who are historical, not living and who have been proven. Example, John Gill and Matthew Henry.
Click to expand...
I am a Gillite and have read Gill's theological works, his sermons, tracts and commentaries. His work on Matthew is solid.
 
Yes, Gentry sees it as spiritual. But the tribulation can’t be the coming because they are separated by the word “after”.

“Immediately after Christ spiritually comes in judgment upon Israel to destroy the temple and city in those days, He will come upon Israel in spiritual judgment to destroy the temple and city”

Did he rebuild the city and temple and destroy it again?

Maybe Gentry addresses this text more clearly somewhere, but as enticing as his view appears sometimes, all I’ve ever read from preterists seems to gloss over the “Immediately after”

I think either Calvin is right that the tribulation of verse 29 is describing the entirety of the church age and all Christ has mentioned, or the word “immediately” is used to describe suddenness and unexpectedness of the final coming in judgment. Dr. Bob Godfrey sees the “soon” referent in Rev as meaning “prophetically soon”, I.e. there is nothing left on the prophetic time scale before He comes. Also to speak encouragement and warning to believers/unbelievers. “Immediately” here could be similar.
 
Posting that I was "moving toward" Postmil has inspired some great posts. Thank you all. James Hamilton has a work on Revelation that blends allegory with classic Post Trib Premil. Anyone read it? It's been on my list for a while. I ask because commentators like Gill use allegory liberally when dealing with Matthew 24.

Thanks,

jm
 
Romans922 said:
The concern isn't necessarily FV. There are many issues and not merely with Doug Wilson, but the other man you mentioned.

For difficult passages, find those who are historical, not living and who have been proven. Example, John Gill and Matthew Henry.
Click to expand...

Agreed. While FV is soul-killing, Wilson has many other problems.
 
JM said:
Again, how do you decide when you'll use a allegorical or poetic interpretation over a literal? I mentioned it above but 70 a.d. was a covenantal judgment, the ending of God's covenant with Israel, it was the ending of an age unlike previous judgements.
Click to expand...

Just watched this video and he asks a similar question as to why do orthodox preterists accept a literal reading of Matthew 24 until they arrive at v. 29 and on.

(starts at 7:50)

 
JM said:
Just watched this video and he asks a similar question as to why do orthodox preterists accept a literal reading of Matthew 24 until they arrive at v. 29 and on.

(starts at 7:50)

Click to expand...

Same principle on Revelation: Everything happened until AD 70 until we get to the end of chapter 20 and with no explanation or change in the text, it is suddenly punted to the end time when Jesus bodily returns.
 
Eyedoc84 said:
I think either Calvin is right that the tribulation of verse 29 is describing the entirety of the church age and all Christ has mentioned, or the word “immediately” is used to describe suddenness and unexpectedness of the final coming in judgment.
Click to expand...

There are several difficulties with that. First, that means that a Christian today is suffering because of Titus's actions in the temple, and that just doesn't wash. The Great Tribulation is linked to the abomination of desolation. Second, the tribulation is "cut short," which is hard to square with its lasting the entire church age. That also means that the word "immediately following" also equate to the entire church age, and that just doesn't make sense.
Eyedoc84 said:
Dr. Bob Godfrey sees the “soon” referent in Rev as meaning “prophetically soon”, I.e. there is nothing left on the prophetic time scale before He comes.
Click to expand...

2 Thess. 2 says at least two conditions must happen before Jesus returns: the apostasia and the revelation of the man of lawlessness.
 
No it doesn’t mean that Christians are suffering today because of Titus. That is no where in the text. Kurschner is stretching because of his futurist commitments.

A consistent futurist reading must push all of the Oliver discourse into the far future, which has Jesus never actually addressing the issue He brought up, namely the destruction of the temple the apostles were gawking at. It also requires a rebuilt temple, and a non-applicability to the apostles themselves, or anyone living outside the “last generation”.
 
Jacob, just out of curiosity, do you think the discourse in Luke is the same conversation as Matthew? When I was a futurist, I thought they were different conversations, with Luke’s taking place while still on or near the temple grounds, and Matthew’s later on the Mount.
 
Also, for clarification, in Calvin’s view the great tribulation of verse 21 relates to 70AD and is not the same as the tribulation always facing the church in verse 29.
 
Eyedoc84 said:
Jacob, just out of curiosity, do you think the discourse in Luke is the same conversation as Matthew? When I was a futurist, I thought they were different conversations, with Luke’s taking place while still on or near the temple grounds, and Matthew’s later on the Mount.
Click to expand...

I lean towards part of Luke being different than Matthew. The language is different, for one.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
I don't see how he can make that distinction.
Click to expand...

Because the word for tribulation is used many times in the NT, and refers often to the trouble Christians face throughout the age, and Jesus in the Olivet Discourse refers to many things that could be considered “tribulation” that don’t have anything to do with the destruction of the temple.
 
Eyedoc84 said:
Because the word for tribulation is used many times in the NT, and refers often to the trouble Christians face throughout the age, and Jesus in the Olivet Discourse refers to many things that could be considered “tribulation” that don’t have anything to do with the destruction of the temple.
Click to expand...

That's true, but the mega thlipsis in that chapter isn't referring to generic tribulation that Christians face. It's very clearly anchored to the abomination of desolation.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
That's true, but the mega thlipsis in that chapter isn't referring to generic tribulation that Christians face. It's very clearly anchored to the abomination of desolation.
Click to expand...

Yes the great tribulation is linked to the abomination of desolation. But just because the word tribulation shows up again doesn’t mean it must refer to the same thing. Jesus mentions many “tribulating” things throughout the discourse that aren’t necessarily related to that particular event. Many happen before the AoD and many happen after, continuing until the end of the age.
 
Jacob, do you believe Jesus addresses the destruction of the second temple at all in Matthew, or is He referring to a future third temple?
 
Eyedoc84 said:
Jacob, do you believe Jesus addresses the destruction of the second temple at all in Matthew, or is He referring to a future third temple?
Click to expand...

I think part of it is a referent to 2T. As to a future third temple, I usually avoid those questions because if I say something like "Unbelieving rabbis today want to construct said temple" (which they do), people usually interpret it as I'm wanting to sacrifice the Red Heifer.

That said, under no circumstances can the destruction of the 2T remotely qualify as suffering beyond which this world will ever know.
 
So your view would be more of 70AD is a foreshadowing event that Jesus wanted them to be on the lookout for but the full fulfillment will be end of age?

In your view is the AoD an idol in a physical temple in Jerusalem or an idol in the end times church in Jerusalem?

I won’t accuse you of believing in a restoration of the sacrificial system.
 
I agree in general with the take on “generation” and “soon”. I disagree with their premillennialism. I know absolutely nothing about either man’s ministry, but I would probably also take issue with their theology of Israel and application of OT prophecy.
 
Is "this generation" (Matthew 24:34)
Eyedoc84 said:
I agree in general with the take on “generation” and “soon”. I disagree with their premillennialism. I know absolutely nothing about either man’s ministry, but I would probably also take issue with their theology of Israel and application of OT prophecy.
Click to expand...
Richardson is a Dispey Light, he leans toward PreWrath and teaches the antichrist is Islamic. PreWrath makes some great points about Matthew 24 and Revelation 6, it differs from Historicism, but they are similar in that 'something' happens in Revelation 6. In the case of PreWrath the Rapture happens. In Historicism chapter 6 on is a basic chronological outline of Church history.

Denver, would you say the first resurrection mentioned in Revelation 20:4 is a spiritual one? If so, do you understand v.5 to be spiritual or literal? How do you determine which resurrection is spiritual vs. literal and at what point did it change within the context of chapter 20?

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Question on Matthew 24
Replies
27
Views
10K
Peairtach
Peairtach
N
  • Locked
Matthew 24 -- Postmil vs Amil
Replies
4
Views
3K
Peairtach
Peairtach
MOSES
  • Locked
Matthew 24 - The sign of Christ's coming
Replies
14
Views
5K
MOSES
MOSES
Herald
  • Locked
Comparative Analysis: Matthew 24 & 25 and 1 Thessalonians 4
Replies
8
Views
2K
BobVigneault
BobVigneault
Calvibaptist
  • Locked
Daniel 9:24-27
Replies
4
Views
2K
Calvibaptist
Calvibaptist
Back
Top