Search results

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...

Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any...

I think I got along way better with David Taylor than I did @WPM, though.

Except I'm not taking these things in the literal sense in Matthew 24:15-20. Therefore, literal mountains is a moot point. Literal mountains only make sense per that context if the first century leading up to 70 AD is what is in view in those verses. Some argue that the first century leading up...

At least we agree there is no pretrib rapture. Except we should know that Luke 17 is connected with abominations the fact Jesus used the days of Lot as an example, and that it was because of abominations taking place at the time being why God had to destroy that place.

Nothing bizarre about it. You just don't understand that some of us have a history with each other that goes way back. I don't think any of us hate each other though it is possible that @WPM might hate me. I don't think he's ever had anything good to say about me. But it is what it is, I guess.

I remember those days back then on bibleforums.org. He had some issues with me back then and I with him. And it still continues to this day. I went by the username divaD at the time, David spelled backwards. I guess because the username David was already taken by someone else at the time.

Unless you haven't noticed, both Luke 17 and Revelation 18, for example, involve fleeing. Do you take the fleeing in those chapters in the literal sense as well? Luke 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded...

If I take the time to do it, I'm thinking I can prove that both Matthew 24 and Luke 21 are indeed involving the same Discourse. Even though I think they are, that still doesn't have to mean that what Luke 21 is involving in regards to fleeing is what Matthew 24 is involving in regards to...

To begin with you are not applying this to the correct era of time, thus this has zero to do with tribulation. Try comparing the following instead. Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the...