Matthew 24:29

[JM]

How was Matthew 24:29 fulfilled in 70 a. d.?

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

Thank you,

jm

 

[arapahoepark]

How was Matthew 24:29 fulfilled in 70 a. d.?

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

Thank you,

jm

Most of us preterists believe yes. The answer to the second question starts in verse 36. That particular viewed as a poetic rendering of the end of old administration in lieu of other Old Testament prophetic poetry.

 

[Jonathan95]

That type of description appears when referring to the judgment of the Lord. The sacking of Jerusalem in AD 70 was God's judgment. That's how I read it.

Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Ezk 32:7 And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.

Zeph 1:14-18
14 The great day of the Lord is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the Lord: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly.

15 That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness,

16 A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers.

17 And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the Lord: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.

18 Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the Lord's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.

Amos 5:20

20 Shall not the day of the Lord be darkness, and not light? even very dark, and no brightness in it?

 

[JM]

So, it was fulfilled poetically?

"Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

Was Christ's judgment in 70 a.d. in the same manner as His ascension?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[Jonathan95]

So, it was fulfilled poetically?

"Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

Was Christ's judgment in 70 a.d. in the same manner as His ascension?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

My understanding is that the text you've quoted from Acts 1 is referring to the second coming which is different from the AD 70 judgment of Jerusalem.

 

[JM]

I've been listening to Jeff Durbin and Doug Wilson a lot lately and trying to find some answers to difficult passages. If Christ's covenantal judgment was poured out on Israel how is it not related to His Second Coming? What is the reason for dividing the Second Coming from the judgment upon Israel? Doesn't 1 Cor 15:23-24 link Christ's Second Coming with His judgment? How does this understanding affect the idea of God's wrath being poured out in Revelation 6 or Revelation 19:11-21 (Christ on a White Horse)?

Yours in the Lord,

jm
PS: I lean toward Historicism, Amil.

 

[arapahoepark]

So, it was fulfilled poetically?

"Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

Was Christ's judgment in 70 a.d. in the same manner as His ascension?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

No.
As with Jonathan 's quotations, were the stars darkened when those things were fulfilled?

 

[Jonathan95]

Hmm, idk much about differing views on eschatology but I'll do my best and just tell you what I get based on my own reading.

If Christ's covenantal judgment was poured out on Israel how is it not related to His Second Coming?

The Lord has judged Israel repeatedly. When the Chaldeans destroyed Jerusalem that wasn't connected with His second coming so I don't connect the Romans destroying Jerusalem with His second coming either.

Doesn't 1 Cor 15:23-24 link Christ's Second Coming with His judgment? How does this understanding affect the idea of God's wrath being poured out in Revelation 6 or Revelation 19:11-21

The second coming will be a judgment upon the land and it's wicked inhabitants. I'm not seeing a disconnect. The Lord has judged people before, judges people now, and will judge people when Christ returns. Not all judgment has to be connected with the second coming right?

 

[JM]

No.
As with Jonathan 's quotations, were the stars darkened when those things were fulfilled?

That's my point. Those things did not happen in 70 a.d. so how were they fulfilled?

How did you determine when to use a poetic interpretation?

 

[Jonathan95]

Those things did not happen in 70 a.d. so how were they fulfilled?

Those things did happen. Because the same term is used with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. The "skies being darkened" etc. seems to be a reference to the darkness you experience during the judgment of God upon you. And that's exactly what Jerusalem experienced during the sacking both times. It was "dark days" for them indeed.

 

[JM]

Hmm, idk much about differing views on eschatology but I'll do my best and just tell you what I get based on my own reading.

I have shelves of books on eschatology. Each system has a weakness.

The Lord has judged Israel repeatedly. When the Chaldeans destroyed Jerusalem that wasn't connected with His second coming so I don't connect the Romans destroying Jerusalem with His second coming either.

Yes, I understand. Most Historicists hold to a similar view of Matthew 24.

The second coming will be a judgment upon the land and it's wicked inhabitants. I'm not seeing a disconnect. The Lord has judged people before, judges people now, and will judge people when Christ returns. Not all judgment has to be connected with the second coming right?

The land? Not sure I understand what you're getting at. According to Pastor Durbin 70 a.d. was a special, covenantal judgment against Israel but when I read Revelation I see Christ's judgment being poured out on all including gentile sinners.

 

[Jonathan95]

I have shelves of books on eschatology. Each system has a weakness.



Yes, I understand. Most Historicists hold to a similar view of Matthew 24.



The land? Not sure I understand what you're getting at. According to Pastor Durbin 70 a.d. was a special, covenantal judgment against Israel but when I read Revelation I see Christ's judgment being poured out on all including gentile sinners.

By land I just meant judgment upon the earth. Idk if that clears up the rest of what I've written. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.

 

[JM]

Those things did happen. Because the same term is used with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. The "skies being darkened" etc. seems to be a reference to the darkness you experience during the judgment of God upon you. And that's exactly what Jerusalem experienced during the sacking both times. It was "dark days" for them indeed.

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.

 

[JM]

By land I just meant judgment upon the earth. Idk if that clears up the rest of what I've written. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.

It's not you and I appreciate the back and forth. Sometimes reading many perspectives as I have isn't always a good idea. Some forms of eschatology are easy to spot frauds but those within the realm of church orthodoxy have aspects and arguments I find compelling. If I use a sliding scale of certainty with 10 being the most sure and 1 being the least I'm sitting around a 5 when it comes to eschatology.

 

[Jonathan95]

Again, how do you decide when you'll use a allegorical or poetic interpretation over a literal?

Oh I see what you're asking. Well I'm not really sure. I guess I didn't really think I was choosing between one or the other. Let's say it was literal and it got really dark and the stars stopped shining/were covered with dense clouds, etc.
How does that give more context to related passages? You don't have to answer, I don't wanna derail but you probably know more seeing as how you're currently reading a bunch of different viewpoints on the subject.

If anything I can look it up at some point on my own. Thanks JM!

 

[Wretched Man]

It's not you and I appreciate the back and forth. Sometimes reading many perspectives as I have isn't always a good idea. Some forms of eschatology are easy to spot frauds but those within the realm of church orthodoxy have aspects and arguments I find compelling. If I use a sliding scale of certainty with 10 being the most sure and 1 being the least I'm sitting around a 5 when it comes to eschatology.

I would encourage you to read Kim Riddlebarger’s A Case For Amillenialism. Jeff Durbin is a big Postmillennialist and the only way they can really make their case is to push for full preterism.

As an amillennialist, I am a partial preterist. One of the key factors to consider in Jesus’s statement in your OP is that he was responding to three questions posed at him (Matthew 24:3: “As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”)”.

Some of the events he described would come within their lifetime (AD 70) and others would not come till the end times.

 

[arapahoepark]

That's my point. Those things did not happen in 70 a.d. so how were they fulfilled?

How did you determine when to use a poetic interpretation?

"Coming on the clouds of heaven" is also figurative (probably the word I should have used) of judgment, similar to a thundering storm Theophany.
Verse 36 seems to switch to the second question of the disciples regarding His coming and return at the end.

 

[JM]

I would encourage you to read Kim Riddlebarger’s A Case For Amillenialism. Jeff Durbin is a big Postmillennialist and the only way they can really make their case is to push for full preterism.

As an amillennialist, I am a partial preterist. One of the key factors to consider in Jesus’s statement in your OP is that he was responding to three questions posed at him (Matthew 24:3: “As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”)”.

Some of the events he described would come within their lifetime (AD 70) and others would not come till the end times.

I've read it. Twice. Recently read his work on the Man of Sin.

 

[Eyedoc84]

I find this verse one of the hardest to interpret in all eschatology. Calvin thinks the “tribulation” in this verse encompasses all of what has gone before, not just the Jewish tribulation of AD70. Consonant with the teaching of Paul and Jesus that it is with much tribulation that we must enter the kingdom.

 

[JM]

I see myself moving toward Postmill orthodox Preterism. I've bounced between Amil and Postmil for years and normally just excepted the Historicism found in the Reformers but over the last 6 months I've had more time to sit and read massive amounts of scriptures so when I returned to the study of eschatology I had already noticed a shift in my thinking.

I appreciate the back and forth, it's helpful.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[Romans922]

NOTE: if you are a preterist you best distinguish what kind. A preterist is a heretic, and a partial preterist is not (I'd say confused...lol). But please always distinguish, thanks.

 

[Jonathan95]

NOTE: if you are a preterist you best distinguish what kind. A preterist is a heretic, and a partial preterist is not (I'd say confused...lol). But please always distinguish, thanks.

This is because a full preterist believes that the second coming has already taken place correct?

 

[Romans922]

I've been listening to Jeff Durbin and Doug Wilson a lot lately and trying to find some answers to difficult passages.

Please stop, if you are looking for answers to difficult passages those are not the men you should be going to for answers.

This is because a full preterist believes that the second coming has already taken place correct?

Yes.

 

[Eyedoc84]

I see myself moving toward Postmill orthodox Preterism. I've bounced between Amil and Postmil for years and normally just excepted the Historicism found in the Reformers but over the last 6 months I've had more time to sit and read massive amounts of scriptures so when I returned to the study of eschatology I had already noticed a shift in my thinking.

I appreciate the back and forth, it's helpful.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

JM, I too at times have been attracted to preterism. Can I ask a few questions?

What is the great tribulation of Matthew 24:21?

What is the meaning of the astronomical signs and the coming of the Son of Man in the clouds in verses 29-30?

Are these the same event in your view?

 

[RamistThomist]

I'm not amil, but Riddlebarger dismantles Preterism from that perspective. Alan Kurschner takes it out from the premil perspective. The problem is that on a preterist gloss, the abomination of desolation was caused by Titus (or more bizarrely, if you are Biblical Horizons guy, some Jewish priest). That event ramps up the Great Tribulation. This means either 1) the tribulation is still ongoing, in which case the reason a believer in China today is suffering is because of Titus's actions in the Temple or 2) the Great Tribulation ended with Christ's return, which is what heretical full preterists believe. Partial Preterists want their cake and eat it too.

This is the KEY question to ask the person who thinks the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24:15 was caused by Titus | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES

How many times have you been told that the abomination of desolation, as well as the great tribulation, in Matthew 24:15–21 is not an event that will be fulfilled in the future? Many times. Most amillennialists and historical premillennialists think that the abomination of desolation in Matt...

www.alankurschner.com

 

[JM]

NOTE: if you are a preterist you best distinguish what kind. A preterist is a heretic, and a partial preterist is not (I'd say confused...lol). But please always distinguish, thanks.

I thought only orthodox partial preterism was allowed to be discussed on this forum. I would not be discussing any other kind.

Edited: I did you use 'orthodox' preterism in post #20.

 

[JM]

Please stop, if you are looking for answers to difficult passages those are not the men you should be going to for answers.

I can spot Federal Vision when I see it.

 

[JM]

I'm not amil, but Riddlebarger dismantles Preterism from that perspective. Alan Kurschner takes it out from the premil perspective. The problem is that on a preterist gloss, the abomination of desolation was caused by Titus (or more bizarrely, if you are Biblical Horizons guy, some Jewish priest). That event ramps up the Great Tribulation. This means either 1) the tribulation is still ongoing, in which case the reason a believer in China today is suffering is because of Titus's actions in the Temple or 2) the Great Tribulation ended with Christ's return, which is what heretical full preterists believe. Partial Preterists want their cake and eat it too.

This is the KEY question to ask the person who thinks the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24:15 was caused by Titus | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES

How many times have you been told that the abomination of desolation, as well as the great tribulation, in Matthew 24:15–21 is not an event that will be fulfilled in the future? Many times. Most amillennialists and historical premillennialists think that the abomination of desolation in Matt...

www.alankurschner.com

Yes, that's why I brought up Matthew 24 again. Historicists hold to a similar understanding of Matthew 24 that never sat right with me. The abomination of desolation has more culprits than Dispensationalists have dates for the rapture!

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near." Luke 21:20

 

[JM]

JM, I too at times have been attracted to preterism. Can I ask a few questions?

I believe it's best to ask those who have a more settled, consistent view.

God bless.

 

[Eyedoc84]

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.