Search results

Please give an example, instead of a generic statement. What “grammar rule” did I create? you are giving me your framework again. I don’t agree with your framework. If the antecedents to “all these things” in Matthew 23:34 includes both the gathering, and the great tribulation of Jerusalem in...

The parable of the fig tree in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:32; Mark 13:28; Luke 21:29) is framed as an analogy about timing, not identity. Jesus doesn’t say, “When you see the fig tree, know that Israel is about to blossom.” He says, “When you see its leaves, you know that summer is near...

You’re making a subjective interpretational claim, not providing “evidence”. The fact that the disciples were not “gathered” according to your premillennial framework doesn’t objectively prove that AD 70 was not a fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse, nor does it justify labeling it “deception”...

Your entire premise falls apart if you can’t demonstrate which specific descendant of ephraim first went into slavery in Egypt.

You stated “70ad is deception”. Pointing out that subjectively calling it deception is not a red herring. I could easily subjectively say dispensational premil is deception for claiming the events of the OD did not occur in the first century, despite it being evidenced by the destruction of temple.

That’s simply not true, I do take all other scripture into consideration, but in proper order. Proper exegesis begins with understanding a text on its own terms—its context, grammar, syntax, audience relevance, linguistics, and historical setting. Only after that should we test how it fits...

No Christians were gathered into heaven within Jesus’ first century generation?

And I could subjectively say dispensational premil is a deception, but that’s just a poor argument. Which descendant of ephraim was the first be enslaved? The prophecy is four generations/ 400 years in bondage in Egypt , not four generations born in Egypt

My argument isn’t that Christ returned in 70ad. My argument is that Christ came on the clouds WITHIN the first century generation. That being said, Of course there are zero inspired scriptures, written post the first century generation of Jesus, that claim Christ had already come on the clouds -...

GRAMMATICALLY it does. According to your subjective frame work it doesn't. Argue it Grammatically then. There should be clear grammatical clues for multi thousand year gaps within the events of the olivet discourse. You know, like the clear grammatical gap within the 70 week prophecy (this...

nice ad hominem. Paul was an intellectual.

The parable of the fig tree is an analogy. Just as when a fig tree sprouts leaves you know summer is near, so also when you see "all these things", know it is near, right at the door, or as Luke puts it, the kingdom of God is near. What are the antecedents to "all these things"?

Grammatically, "all these things" also includes the fall of temple. So from a contextual, grammatical, and linguistical standpoint - This generation will not pass away until the temple is destroyed and the son of man comes on the clouds. None of this demonstrates that Jesus' first century...

I agree There are no scriptures that specifically, explicitly, nor clearly state Christ would come in 70ad. There are only scriptures that state Christ would come before this generation passed away - Matthew 24:34 Please provide specific, clear, and explicit scriptures that contradict the...

Your response is high on rhetoric and emotion, but low on direct textual engagement. You rely heavily on an external framework to claim I’m wrong. I do not accept your external framework or how you apply it to the Olivet Discourse—just as you would likely reject a premillennial's external...

You’re right—Jesus didn’t come on the clouds according to YOUR framework. But that’s the issue: you’re interpreting the Olivet Discourse through a futuristic lens instead of letting the passage speak on its own terms. Accusing me of ignoring “all of Scripture” doesn’t address the specific...

Again, the majority of biblical dictionaries, lexicons, scholarly commentaries, and English translations have genea, especially in Matthew 24:34, meaning generation - as in a group of contemporaneous people. My justification for the definition is based on expert scholarly consensus. This is an...

CONTEXTUALLY, the olivet discourse is Jesus’ RESPONSE to 2 questions - “when will these things be (the destruction of the 2nd temple) and what is the SIGN of your coming/end of the age? GRAMMATICALLY , the antecedents to the phrase “all these things” in verse 34 refers to the entirety of the...

CONTEXTUALLY, the olivet discourse is Jesus’ RESPONSE to 2 questions - “when will these things be (the destruction of the 2nd temple) and what is the SIGN of your coming/end of the age? GRAMMATICALLY , the antecedents to the phrase “all these things” in verse 34 refers to the entirety of the...

In the context of the Olivet Discourse, the evidence indicates that the Greek word γένεα (genea) means “generation,” understood as a group of people living at the same time. Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines genea as “the whole multitude of men living at the same time Matthew 24:34" BDAG...