Search results

Had to give it a shot @Davidpt . Here’s what ChatGPT said in regards to @Spiritual Israelite ’s question: “It’s not very reasonable to conclude that Luke 21:20–24a is not parallel to Matthew 24:15–22 and Mark 13:14–20, or that only Luke records Jesus’ answer to the disciples’ first question...

How do you know scripture repeatedly uses stone imagery to represent God’s covenant community?

Where is any of this taught in Matthew 24?

Because we all have to negotiate with text, whether we will admit it or not. It just depends what you are willing to negotiate on.

you’ve never explained “how you know” they misunderstood in Matthew 24. you have explained how “you know” they misunderstood in other contexts by providing several fantastic examples with clear textual indicators where either the audience is corrected by Jesus or the the misunderstanding is...

Would the temple have been called the holy place prior to the death of Christ?

Nice attempt to shift the discussion, but this still doesn’t address the central issue YOU brought up I never argued that everything in Matthew 24 must be interpreted with rigid literalism. That’s a position you introduced, not me. YOUR claim is that the disciples misunderstood Jesus in...

So your position is not that Jesus ignored it, but that Matthew ignored it?

Then I would say that your eschatological framework overrides the natural context and the grammar of the Olivet discourse. If you believe you can insert gaps into the 70 weeks prophecy, then you don’t really have a leg to stand wondering how @Spiritual Israelite can insert a gap into the OD...

So is it your position, that Christ simply ignored the first question posed by the disciples and only answered the 2nd question in Matthew 24?

Christian Jews still followed the law of Moses zealously and worshipped in the physical temple. See acts 21. Matthew, written decades after the cross, still referred to the physical city of Jerusalem as the “holy city”. Jesus told them to flee a specific location - Judea. Jesus told them to...

1.) the context of Jesus’ response in the olivet discourse is set up by the question posed by the disciples: the destruction of the PHYSICAL TEMPLE. 2.) the author of Matthew mentions the book of Daniel in regards to the abomination of desolation of the “holy place”. In Daniel, this...

No, my argument is that BECAUSE Matthew consistently marks misunderstanding, through correction, explanation, or even explicit commentary by the author of the gospel, THEN the absence of any such marker in Matthew 24 makes the claim of “misunderstanding” textually unsupported and less likely...

1.) in Matthew 24, Jesus does not introduce a new or symbolic meaning of “holy place.” The author of Matthew explicitly anchors it to “the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel” IN RESPONSE TO THR DISCIPLES QUESTION ABOUT THR DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE. That directs us back to Book of...

Again, how do you know the question was asked out of ignorance? Where is the textual indicator that they asked out of ignorance in the same manner as the wonderful examples as provided by @TribulationSigns ? I honestly have no idea what you are saying here. According to thayers Greek lexicon...

1.) Location change is irrelevant due to the very fact that the disciples, on the mount of olives, asked “when will these things be”, IN REGARDS TO Jesus’ statement at the temple about the physical temple being destroyed. So for example, If we were out at a friends house, and i told you I’m...

Not feigning ignorance, but attempting to understand your thought process for how you “know” when the disciples misunderstood. @TribulationSigns gave several fantastic examples where the text itself makes it clear to us, that WHEN WE READ these stories, the disciples definitely misunderstood...

No, i never asserted this Strawman argument you created.

You’re absolutely right that the disciples often misunderstood. I didn’t ask this question because I was unaware of this. I wanted to understand your thought process for how you “knew” they misunderstood, and you answered exactly as i hoped. SO HERE IS THE IMPORTANT THING you should recognize...

Your argument doesn’t make sense . Jesus also didn’t use the word “spiritual stones” in his response to the disciples question, so your argument is hypocritical. Its untenable to argue Jesus wasnt talking about the physical temple because you don’t believe the word temple is found in jesus...