a non-eschatological Coming?

[Randy Kluth]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

 

[Ronald D Milam]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

The three mentions of false christs/prophets are the three different time period Jesus is speaking of in verses 5, 11 and 24.

When will these things be (Temples Destruction) what will be the sign of your coming (the Second Coming) and the end of the age (age of man).

This is about the coming of the Kingdom, not the Rapture per se, but he throws that in in verses 36-51 but for all we know those verses could go with Ch. 25 or be a separate teaching all together.

Verses 4-6 is about 70 AD........The end is not yet (70th week end, Jesus' return) but is by and by. The false christs mentioned here are about the John 5:43 prophecy by Jesus unto the Pharisees, they would put forth messianic figures to save them from what they understood to be the Fourth Beast (Rome). But what they did not understand was the Church Age would be inserted because of unrepentance by Israel, until Israel decided to repent, therefore ONLY THEN could the Kingdom Age come to pass, you can't have Jesus ruling from Jerusalem when Israel refused to repent.

{{{ What I only understood recently is all of Matt. 24 is given for the Disciples sake. So they would understand what to do during the 70 AD events, what to do when they faced death and how they could understand when the 70th week would come (when the Gospel had reached all of the world, thus they could never be deceived. }}}

Verses 7-14 were the Church Age, and we are given all the signs coming in that 2000 year age period, but its all given for the disciples sake, Jesus wanted them to understand they were going to die at the hands of false prophets, not Christian fakes per se, but at the hands of these people who served Jupiter and Zeus etc. etc. when these so called holy men started losing people to Christianity it infuriated them, thus they made the Romans do something about it, thus they would kill the Disciples one by one. So, why did Jesus tell them this? He wanted them to be braced for this hard truth, they would have to lay down their lives just like he did, he did not want them to become another Judas, thus he says you must ENDURE until the end.

Then the 70th week is verses 15-31, they knew they would not be here when the Gospel went unto all the world.

 

[Truth7t7]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

Sounds like "Reformed Eschatology" in removing the "Literal" second coming seen in Matthew 24:29-30 so that the Reformed Preterist 70AD interpretation of Matthew 24 could be established

 

[Randy Kluth]

Sounds like "Reformed Eschatology" in removing the "Literal" second coming seen in Matthew 24:29-30 so that the Reformed Preterist 70AD interpretation of Matthew 24 could be established

I've been influenced, to some degree, by both Reformed Theology and Preterist Eschatology. But I'm really a Futurist who has adopted bits and pieces of several positions. After all, would any of them have survived if there wasn't any truth in them?

But you're right--my position is not the typical Futurist position. I allow for traditional historical interpretation of Daniel 9, as it pertains to the Olivet Discourse. It is all focused on the literal destruction of the city and the sanctuary in the generation of Messiah.

And I take an almost Preterist position that Christ posed his Coming as something immediate and connected to the 70 AD event. It's just that I would call it the OT concept of the "Lord's Coming," as a judgment event that was historical and not eschatological.

However, I remain a Futurist in believing in the Coming of the Son of Man at the end of the age, just as Dan 7 depicts it. The purpose, then, of Jesus here is to focus on more immediate needs to repent and to preach the Gospel, rather than try to second guess future prophecies and the timing of the end of the world.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The three mentions of false christs/prophets are the three different time period Jesus is speaking of in verses 5, 11 and 24.

When will these things be (Temples Destruction) what will be the sign of your coming (the Second Coming) and the end of the age (age of man).

This is about the coming of the Kingdom, not the Rapture per se, but he throws that in in verses 36-51 but for all we know those verses could go with Ch. 25 or be a separate teaching all together.

Verses 4-6 is about 70 AD........The end is not yet (70th week end, Jesus return) but is by and by. The false christs mentioned here are about the John 5:43 prophecy by Jesus unto the Pharisees, they would put forth messianic figures to save them from what the understood to be the Fourth Beast (Rome). But what they did nit understand was the Church Age would be inserted because of unrepentance by Israel, until Israel decoded to repent, therefore ONLY THEN could the Kingdom Age come to pass, you can't have Jesus ruling from Jerusalem when Israel refused to repent.

{{{ What I only understood recently is all of Matt. 24 is given for the Disciples sake. So they would understand what to do during the 70 AD events, what to do when they faced death and how they could understand when the 70th week would come (when the Gospel had reached all of the world, thus they could never be decieved. }}}

Verses 7-14 were the Church Age, and we are given all the signs coming in that 2000 year age period, but its all given for the disciples sake, Jesus wanted them to understand they were going to die at the hands of false prophets, not Christian fakes per se, but at the hands of these people who served Jupiter and Zeus etc. etc. when these so called holy men started losing people to Christianity it infuriated them, thus they made the Romans do something about it, thus they would kill the Disciples one by one. So, why did Jesus tell them this? He wanted them to be braced for this hard truth, they would have to lay down their lives just like he did, he did nit want them to become another Judas, this he says you must ENDURE until the end.

Then the 70th week is verses 15-31, they knew they would not be here when the Gospel went unto all the world.

The Olivet Discourse is something I've spent much of my life looking at--sounds like an exercise in futility except that there is much here that I think most Christians are confused about. I want not just to understand it for myself, but also to help others get it straight. It seems like it's taken me a lifetime to get where I'm at, and even then I believe there are some things that aren't perfect in my understanding.

But I've had to re-work everything. Many years ago I read lots of books on prophecy, both commentaries on Revelation and books on Israel's future restoration. There were so many different views that I've given up hoping for us all to come to a single view. But I've been able to draw upon many different schools to adopt any bit that I saw had real value, and as such, my position today is likely to be questioned by all schools!

I'm very resistant to the idea that Christ's Coming is non-eschatological in the Olivet Discourse. But I've been forced into that position by the one weakness that prevailed upon my position. Luke 17 positively indicates that "in that day, ie in the day of Christ's Revelation," certain things would happen that I could only see happened in Jesus' time! That means Jesus was correcting the notion that his Coming should only be looked at in an eschatological, predictable way.

Instead, Jesus wanted the Jews of his time to wake up and smell the coffee. The Romans were soon to come with judgment, and Israel's sins were being covered over by false religious works. And so, Jesus wanted his disciples to separate themselves from the sins of Israel and expect persecution--not just from pagan foreigners but also from the Jewish people themselves!

Much of the Discourse, therefore, talks about the imminent threat of Roman judgment, and about the signs immediately suggesting that this is happening soon, that Israel's sins are so glaring that they are calling for imminent destruction. Then the Abomination of Desolation, the Roman Army, will come to surround Jerusalem and ultimately to destroy it. There would be, however, time for believers to escape to the hills.

This destruction of Jerusalem would spell the end of Israel's exclusive place as God's people. While they, as a people, would be judged throughout the entire NT age, other nations would be given their place as God's people. The Church would be encased in the Roman Empire, and in many European states until like Israel, they apostacize and turn into AntiChristianity.

The Jewish Church would remain a small remnant within Israel until Messiah comes back to judge the wicked among them and to restore the nation to godliness. The same would, I presume, take place for the Christian nations.

The false Christs that Jesus warned about were warnings still taking place before the cross, when Israel was still God's exclusive people. These false prophets would try to perpetuate Rabbinic Judaism and the hope of overcoming the Romans against the sins of Israel. Jesus positively predicted the fall of Judaism, along with the temple worship, trusting his Kingdom only to those who would follow him instead of the fallen Jewish temple system.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

YOu cover several issues here and not just Jesus' physical return.

Jesus focused on both His return and how to live until He returns.

Being saved puts us on the path to live true holiness. Holiness is the outward sign of teh new nature given us at salvation. but it is a process as Rom. 12 shows we must unlearn the old and learn the new!

Yes we gentile believers can quickly revert to paganish ways. That is why vigilance and revival should be the norms in every church. When we relax and sit down spiritually- we automatically go backwards because as believers we swim against the current, so when we rest on our past victories, we go backwards without even realizing it many times.

 

[Randy Kluth]

YOu cover several issues here and not just Jesus' physical return.

Jesus focused on both His return and how to live until He returns.

Being saved puts us on the path to live true holiness. Holiness is the outward sign of teh new nature given us at salvation. but it is a process as Rom. 12 shows we must unlearn the old and learn the new!

Yes we gentile believers can quickly revert to paganish ways. That is why vigilance and revival should be the norms in every church. When we relax and sit down spiritually- we automatically go backwards because as believers we swim against the current, so when we rest on our past victories, we go backwards without even realizing it many times.

Yes, I like how you put this. I see the prophetic content as being a blend of both exhortation to holiness and prediction of an imminent event, ie the fall of Jerusalem. This is what confused the "sign" of Christ's Coming, the notion that people could look beyond the dangerous sins of their own times to some eschatological formulation. Instead, we should expect judgment when we see sins invading our culture today. Thanks for that!

 

[Truth7t7]

I've been influenced, to some degree, by both Reformed Theology and Preterist Eschatology. But I'm really a Futurist who has adopted bits and pieces of several positions. After all, would any of them have survived if there wasn't any truth in them?

But you're right--my position is not the typical Futurist position. I allow for traditional historical interpretation of Daniel 9, as it pertains to the Olivet Discourse. It is all focused on the literal destruction of the city and the sanctuary in the generation of Messiah.

And I take an almost Preterist position that Christ posed his Coming as something immediate and connected to the 70 AD event. It's just that I would call it the OT concept of the "Lord's Coming," as a judgment event that was historical and not eschatological.

However, I remain a Futurist in believing in the Coming of the Son of Man at the end of the age, just as Dan 7 depicts it. The purpose, then, of Jesus here is to focus on more immediate needs to repent and to preach the Gospel, rather than try to second guess future prophecies and the timing of the end of the world.

Just as stated, you follow the standard preterist reformed eschatology, simple

No you cant remove the literal second coming seen in Matthew 24:29-39 below, through symbolic allegory

Yes those do so, because it's impossible to have a 70AD great tribulation and a future second coming seen, taking place "Immediately After" this 70AD tribulation

Reformed eschatology intentionally removes the literal second coming seen, making way for their 70AD great tribulation in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem

Yes the Preterist reformed eschatology "Falls" on this one fact alone, removing the literal second coming seen below, through symbolic allegory, hard to believe!

Matthew 24:21 & 29-31KJV
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

29 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:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, I like how you put this. I see the prophetic content as being a blend of both exhortation to holiness and prediction of an imminent event, ie the fall of Jerusalem. This is what confused the "sign" of Christ's Coming, the notion that people could look beyond the dangerous sins of their own times to some eschatological formulation. Instead, we should expect judgment when we see sins invading our culture today. Thanks for that!

In the Lke poortion of the Olivet discourse we see the focus on teh 70 AD fall of Jerusalem due to the unpardonable sin in Matt. 12 which was the national rejection of Jesus as messiah based on demon possession. In Matthew we see the focus more on the last days before Jesus physically returns. But for both events He exhorts us to stay faithful and be watchful.

 

[amigo de christo]

Sounds like "Reformed Eschatology" in removing the "Literal" second coming seen in Matthew 24:29-30 so that the Reformed Preterist 70AD interpretation of Matthew 24 could be established

And as such , dont fall for it . The early church both looked and longed for His second coming . AND SO DO THE LAMBS of TODAY .

 

[amigo de christo]

Just in case anyone dont know this , the social gospel is false . Thus let none heed it .

 

[bbyrd009]

In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom

The kingdom of heaven is within

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The kingdom of heaven is within

So God teh Father lives in you as well as teh new Jerusalem described in REv. 21?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Just as stated, you follow the standard preterist reformed eschatology, simple

No you cant remove the literal second coming seen in Matthew 24:29-39 below, through symbolic allegory

I specifically told you I'm *not* doing this. So now you're saying I *am* doing this? Go figure!

Yes those do so, because it's impossible to have a 70AD great tribulation and a future second coming seen, taking place "Immediately After" this 70AD tribulation

Are you kidding? That's exactly what Jesus said! He said this Great Tribulation is a punishment of the Jewish People by dispersion, beginning in 70 AD. It would last the *entire NT age* and end only at the Return of Christ from heaven. How is this "impossible?" On the contrary, it is the *only* possible meaning!

Reformed eschatology intentionally removes the literal second coming seen, making way for their 70AD great tribulation in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem

I don't care about "schools of theology" here--I told you I'm not embracing Reform Theology, although there are truths contained in it.

Yes the Preterist reformed eschatology "Falls" on this one fact alone, removing the literal second coming seen below, through symbolic allegory, hard to believe!

Matthew 24:21 & 29-31KJV
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

And I told you I'm not a Preterist. So here you are, ignoring my arguments, and capitulating to the human temptation to resort to name calling. Go figure! I'd hoped better.

If there is something that is truly inconsistent about what I said, and you continue to see that after re-reading what I said, I'll be glad to indulge your concerns. Just don't state that I'm saying the opposite of what I said I believe.

 

[Randy Kluth]

And as such , dont fall for it . The early church both looked and longed for His second coming . AND SO DO THE LAMBS of TODAY .

I agree--we shouldn't remove the *literal meaning* of the 2nd Coming--it's literal historical reality as it will take place *in the future.* Of course, if you're accepting a misrepresentation of what I said, then you're basically sanctioning a misrepresentation of what I believe. And I find that sad.

For the sake of clarity, let me reiterate, because it can get confusing. I believe in the 2nd Coming of Christ at the end of the age. But I believe that Jesus informed his disciples that he would be coming in the form of judgment in 70 AD, which the OT Scriptures refer to as "the Day of the Lord." Just look up "day of the Lord" and its many iterations in the OT Prophets!

That interpretation of the "Lord's Coming" never meant a literal physical coming of God to earth at the time of national or international judgment. It just meant that God would visit a nation (or nations) on a particular day of His wrath, to bring destruction down upon that nation.

This is what Jesus was saying. He would indeed come at the end of the age. But the major concern in his time was for the Jews to correct their ways, repent of their sins, and not come under the imminent judgment about to be shown through the Roman armies.

This was a different kind of non-eschatological "coming of Christ," much like the OT representations of the "day of the Lord" when God brought judgment down upon Israel through the Assyrians and through the Babylonians.

Please get this right before misrepresenting my position along with someone else who misrepresents my position.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The kingdom of heaven is within

The Kingdom of God, in the time of Jesus' earthly ministry, was *in their midst.* In other words, Jesus was in their midst and as such represented the Kingdom of God in their midst. He was the King of the heavenly Kingdom, which was near, and yet not yet here. This is, I believe, the proper way to view it.

 

[amigo de christo]

I agree--we shouldn't remove the *literal meaning* of the 2nd Coming--it's literal historical reality as it will take place *in the future.* Of course, if you're accepting a misrepresentation of what I said, then you're basically sanctioning a misrepresentation of what I believe. And I find that sad.

For the sake of clarity, let me reiterate, because it can get confusing. I believe in the 2nd Coming of Christ at the end of the age. But I believe that Jesus informed his disciples that he would be coming in the form of judgment in 70 AD, which the OT Scriptures refer to as "the Day of the Lord." Just look up "day of the Lord" and its many iterations in the OT Prophets!

That interpretation of the "Lord's Coming" never meant a literal physical coming of God to earth at the time of national or international judgment. It just meant that God would visit a nation (or nations) on a particular day of His wrath, to bring destruction down upon that nation.

This is what Jesus was saying. He would indeed come at the end of the age. But the major concern in his time was for the Jews to correct their ways, repent of their sins, and not come under the imminent judgment about to be shown through the Roman armies.

This was a different kind of non-eschatological "coming of Christ," much like the OT representations of the "day of the Lord" when God brought judgment down upon Israel through the Assyrians and through the Babylonians.

Please get this right before misrepresenting my position along with someone else who misrepresents my position.

I had no idea what you believed or did not believe . I was simply responding to the other person .
I am curious though about one thing . And its very important you answer this question .
Please tell me you do realize that the social all inclusive gospel is a lie and deadly dangerous .
You can put my heart a bit at ease by letting me know . That is one super fast spreading gospel and its a lie from hades too .
Just in case you have not heard of it , its all tied into the big UNITY we are one movement .
Its blended into it . Its more on the liberal side but the conservative churches have sucked it up and bought it as well .
I truly dont know whether or not you believe it . I am simply letting all that has breath know its false and to flee it
and anyone attached to it . Warn the peoples and let us point them to the biblical Christ and all bible sound doctrine .

 

[Truth7t7]

I specifically told you I'm *not* doing this. So now you're saying I *am* doing this? Go figure!



Are you kidding? That's exactly what Jesus said! He said this Great Tribulation is a punishment of the Jewish People by dispersion, beginning in 70 AD. It would last the *entire NT age* and end only at the Return of Christ from heaven. How is this "impossible?" On the contrary, it is the *only* possible meaning!



I don't care about "schools of theology" here--I told you I'm not embracing Reform Theology, although there are truths contained in it.



And I told you I'm not a Preterist. So here you are, ignoring my arguments, and capitulating to the human temptation to resort to name calling. Go figure! I'd hoped better.

If there is something that is truly inconsistent about what I said, and you continue to see that after re-reading what I said, I'll be glad to indulge your concerns. Just don't state that I'm saying the opposite of what I said I believe.

Your claim the great tribulation seen in Matthew 24:21 is fulfilled over centuries in the church age 1900 years and counting, this is a big smile to say the least!

Daniel's Abomination of Desolation seen in Matthew 24:15 & Daniel 9:27 is a future event and hasn't taken place anytime in history as claimed

When this Abomination takes place, the great tribulation starts, and the human man that starts it, will be present on earth to witness the second coming and his final judgement in destruction by the Lord at the "Consummation" (The End)

To claim "The Great Tribulation" represents history over the past 1900 years and counting isnt found to be supported by scripture

Daniel's (Little Horn)

This "Future" figure will be present on earth to see the (Second Coming) of Jesus Christ and final judgement, as this figure will be slain by Jesus Christ and cast into the lake of fire (Future) unfulfilled

"Future" (Second Coming, Final Judgement) Below

Daniel 7:8-11KJV
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[ScottA]

What is missing in most interpretations of end time events, is any accurate understanding of the convergence of time with eternity, i.e., between mankind and the ways of this world, and God.

Jesus came preaching and explaining what the kingdom of God is like--because He brought it with Him right then and there...and because it is simply the hardest thing for people to imagine, and still is.

And, yes, He spoke in parables--because our need was for Him to draw pictures. That is how inept we are. And the "beliefs" and conjecture of men thinking like men has offered little or nothing. Most try to fit God's reality into something worldly, something that makes sense to flesh and time bound souls--which could not be further from the truth.

I have continued the sketches eluded to in the scriptures and explained this problem and what is missing, for thirty-some years. The reason the prophets (including Jesus) were killed for their attempts to elaborate upon the spiritual image of the kingdom, is--most won't hear of it.

Paul, after attempting to elaborate and "press on", simply finished, saying, "Then comes the end."--because no one really wants to press on or hear anything outside the realm of their own understanding.

I have tried.

PS, Oh, and @Randy Kluth ...could you change the title of the tread to "Hey, Listen Up!"

 

[ewq1938]

However, I remain a Futurist in believing in the Coming of the Son of Man at the end of the age, just as Dan 7 depicts it. The purpose, then, of Jesus here is to focus on more immediate needs to repent and to preach the Gospel, rather than try to second guess future prophecies and the timing of the end of the world.

All partial preterists are futurists in a very tiny sense concerning this unbiblical third coming. There was no coming of Christ in 70AD. He didn't need to because the Romans didn't need any help. The Olivet Discourse is also not about 70AD in the slightest. The only people being persecuted in the Olivet Discourse are Christians not Jews of Judaism.