Search results

In Daniel 7: 9-10, the vision displays a traditional courtroom scene - thrones are placed, then Ancient of Days takes his seat first, then the court is seated, and then books are opened for judgement. So when reading Daniel 7:21-27. It seems the ancient of days comes, then grants the authority...

There’s nothing hard about understanding that the phrase “yet a little while” modifies “hiding until the wrath of the Lord passes”, grammatically indicating duration, WITHIN Isaiah 26:20. But arguing that “yet a little while” means duration in the setting of Hebrews 10:37, doesn’t make any...

Your interpretation is really hard to follow. Could you please be more specific about what grammatical error you see in “yet a little while” modifying “and the coming one will come and will not delay” in Hebrews 10:37? What else in the sentence does that adverbial phrase “yet a little while...

I think understanding the disciples misunderstandings is important for deriving context At this point, They probably didn’t understand that Christ was going to go to heaven and then return. So when they asked about “sign of your coming”, were they asking about Christ coming in his...

Grammatically, In Isaiah 26:20 LXX, the adverbial phrase “a little while” modifies the imperative “hide…until”, expressing the duration of the hiding — the people are to remain hidden for a little while, until the Lord’s wrath has passed. Grammatically, In Hebrews 10:37, the phrase “yet a...

Right, IN THE CONTEXT of Isaiah 26:20 it is about hiding from God's wrath for a little while. Hebrews 10:37 doesn't sit in the context of isaiah 26:20. Hebrews 10:37 sits in the context of "the day drawing near", God's vengeance on "his people" for trampling the son of God, and the saints...

Your argument didn’t really make sense. The majority of the quote in Hebrews 10:37 is from Habakkuk 2:3-4, not Isaiah 26:20. So I’m not sure why you are claiming it’s about the how long the wrath of God is? The author of Hebrews is not using Isaiah 26:20, in Hebrews 10:37, to argue God’s wrath...

Agreed While Jesus’ teaching does matter, I disagree that trying to understanding the disciples perspective in these accounts means nothing.

this is a debate forum, so it should be pretty obvious by now that you are going to run into those who continuously promote different viewpoints than you. The promises of a new heavens and earth and the restoration of all things were made long before the first century. Jesus affirmed those...

I’m having a hard time following your response here. My question was specific: What external framework is being applied to Matthew 24:1–34 to conclude that it has been fulfilled? Simply labeling opposing views as “misinterpretations” or “false claims” isn’t an actual framework—it’s a judgment...

can you be a bit more specific? If the conclusion that Matthew 24:1-34 was fulfilled within Jesus’ generation isn’t derived from the immediate context, grammar, syntax, and linguistics of the passage itself, then what external framework or lens is being used to come to that conclusion that...

Ok, so then from the disciples’ perspective - which likely wasn’t fully aware of the ascension to heaven and return at the time of the OD- when they asked “what is the sign of your coming?”, they weren’t asking “what is the sign of your return from heaven”, but more likely asking “what is the...

Right, this explanation of Jesus ascending to heaven and returning was given many days AFTER the olivet discourse. so if the disciples didn’t yet understand that, what does the question about “thy coming” mean from their perspective, at the time of the olivet discourse ?

I’m not asking what end of the age means. I’m asking what “thy coming” means from the perspective of disciples, if they didn’t yet fully understand that Christ was to ascend and then return. In other words, in Matthew 24:3, how can the parousia (coming), be understood as a return from heaven...

the point is, I’m trying to understand their question from their perspective.

I think they were probably referring to Christ coming into his kingdom/the kingdom of God coming with power, without fully knowing that Christ was going to ascend and then return.

the resurrection takes place after the olivet discourse.

“The sign of your coming” - what does this mean, if the disciples didnt yet understand that Christ was to ascend and then return.

So if they didn’t have the understanding that Christ was to ascend and then return, at the time of the Olivet discourse, what were the disciples asking in vs 3?

In the olivet discourse of Matthew, when the disciples asked “what will be the sign of your coming?”, did they already fully comprehend at this point that Christ was going to go ascend to heaven and then return? in other words, IF, at the time of the Olivet discourse, the disciples did not know...