Search results

In Matthew 24 verse 17 and 18 are meaning during great tribulation. The 2nd coming is nowhere in view at this point. In Matthew 24 the 2nd coming is meaning verse 30 and that verse 29 indicates it is after the tribulation of those days. What tribulation of those days? How can it not be meaning...

Luke 17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. Like I pointed out in another post, this verse is key the fact it says this---one of the days of the Son of man. The first thing to keep in...

No, I have A) involving while He is away during His ascension, and I have B) involving His return in the end of this age. Yet, some of it could probably overlap with when He walked the earth---such as this part--They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage...

But when you look at it like that, how then do you explain something like the following? Genesis 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man...

Interpreting Matthew 24 in light of Luke 17. Except most probably won't read all of it because it is a bit lengthy. I can't fault them for that since I'm the same way at times in regards to other's posts if they are a bit lengthy. Unfortunately, there was no way to say all of these things below...

That's an interesting point. What then do you make of Matthew 24:15-21 in light of that?

Years ago, the fact I have never in my life ever taken Matthew 24:15-21 to be involving the first century leading up to 70 AD, my position at the time for decades was this. Since Matthew 24:15-21 isn't involving the first century leading up to 70 AD, neither is Luke 21:20 involving the first...

Believe it or not I see that somewhat making sense. But I haven't had time to really think about in depth.

You lost me. I don't have a clue what you are meaning here. As to Mark 13:20 it is for the elect's sake these days are shortened. And since the elect can't be meaning the unbelieving Jews, I'm unable to comprehend that if this is meaning the first century, that in what way would it have been...

I don't think that's recorded in the Bible but could be something an early church father said in one of their writings. Or maybe even something the historian Josephus said in one of his writings. I'm not sure one way or the other. Maybe someone else is and will chime in.

I get it that that sounds Jewish and first centuryish. How do we make sense of the following verse if we apply this to the first century? Mark 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the...

I did say I don't see it being the case in our day and time. I never said it was not the case thousands of years ago, though. Per your view of these things what do you do with Ezekiel 38-39, for instance? That's involving the last days, the same last days we are currently in. I don't see...

I don't share your thoughts on that since I don't see unbelieving Jews having anything to do with persecuting Christians one way or the other. Meaning in our day and time. That aside. Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy...

Once again, you are applying that to the wrong era of time. Not according to me but according to Jesus in Matthew 24:29. He places those events after tribulation is in the past, not during it. Obviously then, the day of the Lord is in view in those verses that you submitted per Luke 21. The DOTL...

You would think that if these things are to be taken literally rather than spiritually, it would be much easier to explain how the literal fits it better. Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso...

Here's a discussion I had with chatgpt. The reason for me having discussions with chatgpt like this is because chatgpt can actually reason through these things with you. Take Google, for instance. Google is not going to reason through any of these things with you if you query it. It's just going...

I certainly see it as problem, though. Here is what the text plainly says. Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes, when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place. Then let them which be in...

Unfortunately, I'm uncertain what point you are attempting to make here? Whatever point it is, I guess it went over my head.

Exactly. Which was my point all along. Therefore, unless there is a way to spiritualize that verse and still make sense of it, the only option remaining, 1948 then explains it. That is if we also factor in Ezekiel 38-39 as well. According to those 2 chapters they are first back in their land...

Actually, the fact they were back in their land when Christ walked the earth, could be the fulfillment of this. Except we know by comparing to what happened in history that it can't be since what happened in 70 AD contradicts what you have underlined in verse 15. And if the first century can't...