A Biblical Lesson on Spiritual Discernment

[Davidpt]

Greetings David, I hope your wife is feeling better.

The reason is that some who are Amill as far as time (a thousand years) is concerned, are also Preterit when it comes to what shall become of apostate Israel. Since they have embraced the doctrine of Preterism (although in some cases Partial only), embracing Preterism in any manner appears to make them more concerned about what shall become of apostate Israel, which keeps them from spiritually discerning how much of what Christ says applies not to ethnic Jews, but to His church on earth as the Gospel of the Kingdom of God through Christ is being proclaimed.

Can you explain why you equate time marching on as a gap of 2000 years? I view the Olivet Discourse from Matthew, Mark, and Luke are all speaking of the same thing but framing them slightly differently or from differing points of view, not altogether different views. I do appreciate how you are applying spiritual understanding that is not limited to Amillennialists but is the way much of the Bible should be understood by all believers when speaking of the spiritual reality of the Kingdom of God in heaven.

Quoting you "Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

All of these things literally happened 2000 years ago---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations"

How do you justify saying that ALL literally happened 2000 years ago? Where do we read the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled 2000 years ago? Is Luke writing of what shall befall the physical nation, or is he writing of a spiritual, even holy nation? OR is he referring to both the siege and also Jerusalem from above which has been being trodden down by gentiles (unbelievers) since Christ came with the spiritual Kingdom of God?

My wife is not sick or anything, it's just that she is aging. When I was 25 I married a woman 15 years older than me. I am now 68 and that she is 84

Maybe 'gap' is the wrong term? I'm simply saying that between Luke 21:20 and verse 27 there are 2000 years involved. But between Mathew 24:15 and verse 30 this same 2000 years is simply not there. If Christ returns within 2000 years of that of 70 AD, that is where I'm getting this 2000 years figure from, per my interpretation of Luke 21.

I have never taken Matthew 24:15-26 to be involving 70 AD ever. Not one time. Initially, for decades even, since I did not take Matthew 24:15-26 to be involving 70 AD, neither did I take Luke 21:20 to be involving 70 AD. At the time, in my mind, that was the only way I could remain consistent. Eventually Luke 21:24 caused me to think differently about verse 20 since some of verse 24 literally fits with 70 AD and leading up to it.

So I then started reasoning things in an entirely different manner, where many see this as me being inconsistent the fact I'm treating Luke 21:20 literally but not doing the same with Matthew 24 despite both accounts have some of the same things in common, such as, those in Judea are to flee to the mountains, woe to them that are with child, etc.

There is simply no way, in my mind, that Matthew 24:15-26 could possibly be involving 70 AD. Yet, in my mind, Luke 21:20 can possibly be involving 70 AD and likely is.

 

[Davidpt]

How do you justify saying that ALL literally happened 2000 years ago? Where do we read the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled 2000 years ago? Is Luke writing of what shall befall the physical nation, or is he writing of a spiritual, even holy nation? OR is he referring to both the siege and also Jerusalem from above which has been being trodden down by gentiles (unbelievers) since Christ came with the spiritual Kingdom of God?

Notice what I said and what I quoted from verse 24 and didn't quote from verse 24. I did not quote until the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled. I only quoted the parts regarding falling by the sword and being led captive into all nations, that that was literally true 2000 years ago. It was not literally true 2000 years ago that the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled. We are still living in the times of the Gentiles as we speak.

Which then obviously means this generation has not passed away yet since it can not pass away until after the times of the Gentiles have been fulfilled first. Yet, Preterists insist this generation already passed away 2000 years ago, despite that it can't even pass away to begin with until all is fulfilled, including the times of the Gentiles. But not all interpreters that agree with them in regard to Matthew 24:15-21 also agree with them about this generation passing away, though. IMO, Preterism in regard to some of the Discourse is one of the easiest things to debunk except Preterists of course deny anything has been debunked.

 

[IndianaRob]

I don’t understand how “the times of the gentiles be fulfilled” would ever be interpreted as a time when Gentiles will not be saved.

The end of the times of the gentiles is talking about the gentile armies God used to judge Israel. That time ended in 70AD with the destruction of Israel.

 

[Davidpt]

I don’t understand how “the times of the gentiles be fulfilled” would ever be interpreted as a time when Gentiles will not be saved.

The end of the times of the gentiles is talking about the gentile armies God used to judge Israel. That time ended in 70AD with the destruction of Israel.

Except you ignore or simply do not discern that Jerusalem is still being trampled by Gentiles, spiritually speaking. IOW, as of Luke 21:20 Jerusalem is meaning literal Jerusalem. As of Luke 21:24 anything alluding to Jerusalem, such as Matthew 24:15 is not meaning the literal city nor a literal temple that once stood there. Nor is it meaning a rebuilt temple in the future. Revelation 11:2 is pertaining to the 42 month reign of the beast recorded in Revelation 13. And that Matthew 24:15-26 is pertaining to this same 42 month reign, not 70 AD nor anything else unrelated to the 42 month reign of the beast.

 

[IndianaRob]

Except you ignore or simply do not discern that Jerusalem is still being trampled by Gentiles, spiritually speaking. IOW, as of Luke 21:20 Jerusalem is meaning literal Jerusalem. As of Luke 21:24 anything alluding to Jerusalem, such as Matthew 24:15 is not meaning the literal city nor a literal temple that once stood there. Nor is it meaning a rebuilt temple in the future. Revelation 11:2 is pertaining to the 42 month reign of the beast recorded in Revelation 13. And that Matthew 24:16 is pertaining to this same 42 month reign, not 70 AD nor anything else unrelated to the 42 month reign of the beast.

I don’t see it that way but out of curiosity, how is Jerusalem being trampled by the Gentiles spiritually?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I can't help it if you can't understand how the AOD spoken by the prophet Daniel is the key given by Christ.

Translation: You are not able to address what I said.

 

[rwb]

Maybe 'gap' is the wrong term? I'm simply saying that between Luke 21:20 and verse 27 there are 2000 years involved. But between Mathew 24:15 and verse 30 this same 2000 years is simply not there. If Christ returns within 2000 years of that of 70 AD, that is where I'm getting this 2000 years figure from, per my interpretation of Luke 21.

David, I'm really trying to understand the point you're making, but call me dense because I'm just not getting your point? Could you say it in another way? Sorry.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Please allow me and enjoy your popcorn, RWB.

Covenantee...your question assumes these terms must all be understood literally. Nope! Throughout Scripture, God uses physical places, objects, and events to represent spiritual realities. Jesus frequently taught this way (John 6:63), and the New Testament often interprets Old Testament language spiritually (Galatians 4:24–26; Hebrews 12:22–24). Here is how I understand these terms:

1. Judaea – Symbolically represents the visible New Testament congregation (the church), just as Jerusalem and Zion often represent God's covenant people (Hebrews 12:22–24; Galatians 4:26; 1 Peter 2:9–10).

None of those passages mention a spiritual Judea! Stop twisting scripture to make it fit your doctrine! You have no shame!

2. Flee – To depart from an apostate congregation after God's judgment has come upon it. This parallels God's command, "Come out of her, my people" (Revelation 18:4; 2 Corinthians 6:17).

LOL. That wouldn't have helped anyone to avoid being destroyed in the city of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

3. Mountains – The Kingdom of God, God's place of refuge. Throughout Scripture, God's holy mountain represents His kingdom and His dwelling with His people (Isaiah 2:2–3; Micah 4:1–2; Hebrews 12:22). Believers flee to Christ and His true kingdom wherever the Gospel is faithfully proclaimed. If there is no faithful church to attend to, worship christ at your home, restaurant, etc. with same minded believers during the darkest hour when the church is under judgment, knowing that His coming is near.

LOL again! If it was talking about God's kingdom, it would have said to flee to God's holy mountain, not to flee to the mountains. Goodness sakes. Your willingness to twist scripture to make it say whatever you want it to say is disgusting.

4. Housetop – The place from which God's truth is openly proclaimed. Jesus said, "What ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops" (Matthew 10:27). Selah!

5. House – The visible church or congregation, which Scripture repeatedly calls the house of God (1 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 3:6; 1 Peter 2:5).

6. Field – The world, particularly the mission field where God's servants labor in the Gospel. Jesus Himself identifies "the field" as "the world" (Matthew 13:38; Matthew 9:37–38).

7. Clothes – The garments of Christ's righteousness (Isaiah 61:10; Revelation 19:8). The warning not to return for one's clothes signifies not returning to an apostate church once God has removed the Gospel and the day of salvation there has ended.

8. Woe – God's judgment upon His covenant people, the false prophets and christs, just as Jesus repeatedly pronounced "woe" upon the unfaithful religious leaders and Jerusalem (Matthew 23; Luke 21:23).

9. Child – The children within the visible congregation, especially those who have not yet been sealed by God before His judgment falls (Revelation 7:1–4; Revelation 9:4).

10. Suck – A picture of spiritual nourishment. The woman represents the covenant community, but during God's judgment there is a spiritual famine in which the children can no longer suck the sincere milk of the Word (Amos 8:11–12; 1 Peter 2:2). Selah!

11. Days – The appointed period of God's judgment upon the visible church (Matthew 24:22; Luke 21:22), right prior to His Second Coming.

12. Flight – The same spiritual command as "flee": depart from the desolate congregation under God's judgment (Revelation 18:4).

13. Winter – A picture of the end of the harvest season. The spiritual harvest of salvation has ended, leaving only winter—a time when the gathering of God's elect is complete (Proverbs 10:5; Jeremiah 8:20; John 4:35–38).

14. Sabbath – The spiritual rest that comes when God's work of gathering all His elect is complete. The Sabbath always pointed to rest in Christ (Hebrews 4:3–11; Colossians 2:16–17). When the Great Commission has accomplished God's purpose and no more elect remain to be gathered, "the night cometh, when no man can work" (John 9:4). This is not referring to the Jewish Sabbath observed in A.D. 70 as you think!

15. Day – The Day of God's visitation and judgment, when Christ comes to judge His NEW TESTAMENT HOUSE for faithfulness (1 Peter 4:17; Luke 17:30; 2 Thessalonians 1:7–10). Just like Christ did with the Old Testament congregation at the Cross!

The real question is not whether these words have literal meanings—they do. The question is whether Jesus is using them prophetically to describe spiritual realities. The rest of Scripture repeatedly shows that He does. The New Testament consistently interprets Old Testament places, institutions, and events as types and shadows pointing to Christ, His Kingdom, and His Church (Hebrews 8:5; Hebrews 10:1; Galatians 4:24–26).

How's that for spiritual discernment by comparing Scripture with Scripture?

Selah!
@rwb

LOL! What a joke this is. You are displaying the opposite of spiritual discernment by spiritualizing the literal text for no good reason at all. Unbelievable! You should be embarrassed.

 

[covenantee]

You left out one thing that you must also identify, the AOD that is mentioned first, is it spiritual or physical? Why does Christ tell us of the AOD "spoken of by Daniel the prophet"?

Why does Mark & Matthew associate fleeing from Judaea to the mountains when understanding the AOD spoken of by Daniel the prophet?

Mark 13:14 (KJV) But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Since Luke makes no mention of AOD spoken by the prophet Daniel, but instead say "YE (first century disciples Christ was speaking to) shall see" does this seeing mean with physical sight? Because the Greek word translated into English 'see' is defined from εἴδω eídō - which means - to know.

If Luke is saying they would literally see with physical sight these armies encompassing Jerusalem why isn't 'see' translated from the Greek word ὀπτάνομαι optánomai which is to gaze with eyes wide opened. Instead 'see' is translated from a word that most often means knowing with mental clarity, not necessarily with physical vision.

Luke 21:20 (KJV) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

For the Preterit this doesn't matter, nor become a question for them. Because their doctrine does not come FROM the Bible but must be read into the Bible from extrabiblical resources of past history.

The Preterit tells us this passage below from Luke describes what happened when the Roman Army (past history) came to destroy the city and temple. But Luke makes no mention of any physical army. He says "thine enemies" will lay THEE even with the ground, and THY children within thee, and not one stone shall be left standing upon another. WHY? Because they had rejected Him "thou knewest not the time of thy visitation." Most interesting with this passage is how the context shows us these words were not spoken to the disciples of Christ. According to Luke Christ was speaking to some of the Pharisees telling THEM what would happen to THEM.

Luke 19:39-40 (KJV) And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples. And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

Luke 19:41 (KJV) And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Luke 19:42-44 (KJV) Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

The Preterit wants us to believe that Christ was speaking to His disciples warning them to flee from Jerusalem forty years after the cross when they would literally see the Roman Army coming. Does the Preterit really believe the disciples of Christ did not know the time of their visitation?

If not for extrabiblical written past historical events, Preterism would never have been forced into the text of Holy Scriptures. Some folks would rather have past history inform their biblical doctrines, then to allow the Bible to inform them while realizing that not everything written in the Bible can be physically defined. Why? Because when Christ came to earth a man, He came with the SPIRITUAL Kingdom of God from heaven. That's why the BIBLE tells us there are some things difficult to understand and must be spiritually not physically discerned. Spiritual understanding of some things is not the same as 'mystical' understanding that Gnostics possess.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (KJV) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

So your claim is that no one must ever allow literal history to agree with Scripture, because then "their doctrine does not come FROM the Bible".

But instead we are to believe without question the suppositions and speculations of gnostic futurism because that ALWAYS INFALLIBLY comes from the Bible.

We await further lessons in "spiritual discernment".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You left out one thing that you must also identify, the AOD that is mentioned first, is it spiritual or physical? Why does Christ tell us of the AOD "spoken of by Daniel the prophet"?

Why does Mark & Matthew associate fleeing from Judaea to the mountains when understanding the AOD spoken of by Daniel the prophet?

Mark 13:14 (KJV) But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Since Luke makes no mention of AOD spoken by the prophet Daniel, but instead say "YE (first century disciples Christ was speaking to) shall see" does this seeing mean with physical sight? Because the Greek word translated into English 'see' is defined from εἴδω eídō - which means - to know.

If Luke is saying they would literally see with physical sight these armies encompassing Jerusalem why isn't 'see' translated from the Greek word ὀπτάνομαι optánomai which is to gaze with eyes wide opened. Instead 'see' is translated from a word that most often means knowing with mental clarity, not necessarily with physical vision.

Luke 21:20 (KJV) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

For the Preterit this doesn't matter, nor become a question for them. Because their doctrine does not come FROM the Bible but must be read into the Bible from extrabiblical resources of past history.

The Preterit tells us this passage below from Luke describes what happened when the Roman Army (past history) came to destroy the city and temple. But Luke makes no mention of any physical army. He says "thine enemies" will lay THEE even with the ground, and THY children within thee, and not one stone shall be left standing upon another. WHY? Because they had rejected Him "thou knewest not the time of thy visitation." Most interesting with this passage is how the context shows us these words were not spoken to the disciples of Christ. According to Luke Christ was speaking to some of the Pharisees telling THEM what would happen to THEM.

Luke 19:39-40 (KJV) And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples. And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

Luke 19:41 (KJV) And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Luke 19:42-44 (KJV) Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

The Preterit wants us to believe that Christ was speaking to His disciples warning them to flee from Jerusalem forty years after the cross when they would literally see the Roman Army coming. Does the Preterit really believe the disciples of Christ did not know the time of their visitation?

What in the world are you talking about here? You don't even understand what you're arguing against. That passage is not talking about the disciples of Christ not knowing the time of their visitation and no one is saying that. Jesus warned believers in Judea to flee to the mountains once they saw things that would indicate that the destruction and desolation of Jerusalem and the temple buildings was about to happen. Why do you make something simple so convoluted?

If not for extrabiblical written past historical events, Preterism would never have been forced into the text of Holy Scriptures. Some folks would rather have past history inform their biblical doctrines, then to allow the Bible to inform them while realizing that not everything written in the Bible can be physically defined. Why? Because when Christ came to earth a man, He came with the SPIRITUAL Kingdom of God from heaven. That's why the BIBLE tells us there are some things difficult to understand and must be spiritually not physically discerned. Spiritual understanding of some things is not the same as 'mystical' understanding that Gnostics possess.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (KJV) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Spiritual discernment is not about spiritualizing as much of the Bible as you can! Spiritual discernment involves being able to discern which text is literal and which is figurative. You and your buddy @TribulationSigns are constantly spiritualizing literal text. That's the opposite of spiritual discernment.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

So your claim is that no one must ever allow literal history to agree with Scripture, because then "their doctrine does not come FROM the Bible".

But instead we are to believe without question the suppositions and speculations of gnostic futurism because that ALWAYS INFALLIBLY comes from the Bible.

We await further lessons in "spiritual discernment".

Or should we say spiritual obtuseness.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

What are you talking about? This is assumption without any biblical verification. Luke makes no mention of Daniel, so how can he provide the synoptic interpretation of Matthew and Mark as well as interpreting Daniel. It's hard to provide a general summary when you leave out that which was spoken by the prophet Daniel.

Are you implying that you view my doctrine as a gnostic futurist? Perhaps you could be defined a futurist because you push fulfillment for AOD 40 years into the future???


When did I say, "all is spiritual" and must be spiritually discerned?

It appears you want to change the discussion from the AOD because you cannot give an adequate answer for that which was spoken by the prophet Daniel. Since you have yet to show how the crux of the discourse hinges on our understanding of the AOD spoken by the prophet Daniel, I'm sorry, but I'm not yet ready to move on.

You are diverting attention away from the fact that you have no explanation for what Jesus was talking about when saying that those in Judea would need to flee to the mountains and why it would be particularly difficult for nursing mothers and pregnant women and why He said to pray that their flight wouldn't have to be during the winter or on the Sabbath. Your buddy @TribulationSigns offered some ridiculous, out of context explanations for these things. Are you going to just go with what he says or are you going to think for yourself and study the scriptures for yourself like the Bereans and see if what he says makes any sense (it doesn't)?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Please allow me and enjoy your popcorn, RWB.

10. Suck – A picture of spiritual nourishment. The woman represents the covenant community, but during God's judgment there is a spiritual famine in which the children can no longer suck the sincere milk of the Word (Amos 8:11–12; 1 Peter 2:2). Selah!

Matthew 24:19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!

This shows your utter LACK of spiritual discernment. This is not saying woe to children here, this is saying woe to women who are pregnant and woe to women who are nursing babies. But, you're trying to relate this verse to the children instead. Wrong! It's clearly saying woe to the women who are pregnant or nursing children. Why? Because it obviously would be difficult for them to flee to the mountains if they are pregnant or have to bring babies that they are nursing with them.

Selah!

11. Days – The appointed period of God's judgment upon the visible church (Matthew 24:22; Luke 21:22), right prior to His Second Coming.

Judgment upon the visible church? Where does scripture speak of "the visible church"? Nowhere! He brought judgment upon rebellious Jerusalem in 70 AD! As Jesus said that His Father would do.

Matthew 22:1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.” ’ 5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. 7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

Jesus as Jesus indicated in this parable, the king (God the Father) "sent out his armies" and "destroyed those murderers and burned up their city" for having rejected his son (Jesus Christ). Exactly as Jesus prophesied in Luke 19:41-44, Matthew 24:1-2 (Mark 13:1-2, Luke 21:6-7) and Luke 21:20-24 (Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20) as well. His prophecy was fulfilled exactly as He prophesied, but you want there to be some future fulfillment as well. No. It was fulfilled already as He prophesied. You need to accept that instead of blatantly twisting the text to make it say what you want it to say.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Exactly! The Preterit consistently remains within the Old Covenant prophetic physical world without understanding that when Christ came, He ushered in the Spiritual Kingdom of God from heaven. Just as the physical things of Old Covenant Israel point to spiritual realities once the promised Messiah, the Prince the prophet Daniel foretells has come, now these things like the "holy place" must be spiritually, not physically discerned.

WPM and I are not preterists, so you are wasting your time with this nonsense. We are fully aware and do not deny the spiritual kingdom of God/Christ that was ushered in at Christ's first coming. Your attempt to lump us in with preterists instead of addressing what we actually believe is ridiculous.

 

[rwb]

Notice what I said and what I quoted from verse 24 and didn't quote from verse 24. I did not quote until the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled. I only quoted the parts regarding falling by the sword and being led captive into all nations, that that was literally true 2000 years ago. It was not literally true 2000 years ago that the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled. We are still living in the times of the Gentiles as we speak.

Okay, I think I understand. I too believe we are still living in the times of the Gentiles and will be until the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven is complete when the last person to be saved has been born again. Then when the last/seventh trumpet begins to sound that time shall be no longer, this age of time will end for building the spiritual Kingdom of God as the Gospel is proclaimed, and the only time left then shall be Satan's little season.

 

[rwb]

WPM and I are not preterists, so you are wasting your time with this nonsense. We are fully aware and do not deny the spiritual kingdom of God/Christ that was ushered in at Christ's first coming. Your attempt to lump us in with preterists instead of addressing what we actually believe is ridiculous.

Like I've said before, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....it's a DUCK!

 

[rwb]

So your claim is that no one must ever allow literal history to agree with Scripture, because then "their doctrine does not come FROM the Bible".

But instead we are to believe without question the suppositions and speculations of gnostic futurism because that ALWAYS INFALLIBLY comes from the Bible.

We await further lessons in "spiritual discernment".

No, that is not what I claim! What I perceive from Preterits is that THEY use past history to prove a doctrine because the doctrine they espouse cannot be found in Scripture but must be read INTO the Bible!

 

[Davidpt]

David, I'm really trying to understand the point you're making, but call me dense because I'm just not getting your point? Could you say it in another way? Sorry.

In Luke 21, I understand verse 20 to refer to the events surrounding 70 AD, while I understand verse 27 to refer to the Second Coming at the end of this age. Under that interpretation, there is obviously a gap of at least 2,000 years between verses 20 and 27, assuming the Second Coming occurs sometime within that general timeframe after 70 AD.

However, Matthew 24:15-30 does not appear to allow for such a 2,000 year gap between verse 15 and verse 30. If verse 15 is referring to 70 AD, then verse 29 creates a problem. Verse 29 states that 'immediately after the tribulation of those days' the cosmic signs will occur, followed by the coming of the Son of Man in verse 30.

The problem is that if verses 15-21 (and the related warning section in verses 23-26) refer to 70 AD, then verse 29 would require the events of verse 30 to occur immediately after a period that ended 2,000 years earlier. But 2,000 years cannot reasonably be described as 'immediately after'. Nor does anyone understand 70 AD itself as involving a 2,000 year era of time before the coming described in verse 30. IOW, no one thinks 70 AD is still ongoing until verse 29 is fulfilled if they take verse 30 to be meaning the 2nd coming. Therefore, verses 15-21, plus the warning verses 23-26, can't mean 70 AD if verse 30 is meaning the 2nd coming. And clearly it is.

Even the way Preterists try and reason verses 15-30, there is no way to make sense of it. First there is verses 15-26, then immediately after those verses there is verse 29, and at this point the coming in verse 30 hasn't even occured yet. First, everything pertaining to verse 29 have to be fulfilled, then they see the sign of the coming of the Son of man, then they see the coming of the Son of Man. To accomplish what per this scenario? Great tribulation would now be in the past and verse 29 would now be in the past. What then is the coming pertaining to post all these earlier events, per this Preterist scenario?

The key point is that the wording of Matthew 24:29–30 requires a close connection in time between the events described. The “immediately after” in verse 29 indicates that there are not years, decades, centuries, or millennia separating the tribulation described earlier from the signs and coming that follow. Therefore, if verses 15–21 refer to 70 AD, then the timing of verse 29–30 creates a significant difficulty, because a 2,000-year interval would not fit the meaning of “immediately after.”

 

[rwb]

I don’t see it that way but out of curiosity, how is Jerusalem being trampled by the Gentiles spiritually?

Gentiles or those of the nations of the world in unbelief trample spiritual Jerusalem from above, heavenly Jerusalem. Spiritually speaking born again believers have entered into Jerusalem, we are "spirits of just men made perfect" when we have been born again. But as Paul below tells us "the desolate hath many more children than she which has a husband" we, born again believers have Christ as our Husband, and are children of the promise, but the children of the promise, born of the Spirit are persecuted by those born of the flesh. It is in this manner spiritually speaking that Jerusalem is being trampled by those in unbelief. This is why Paul writes for us to "Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman."

Hebrews 12:22-24 (KJV) But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Galatians 4:26-29 (KJV) But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

Galatians 4:30 (KJV) Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Like I've said before, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....it's a DUCK!

Then you are a DUCK as well since you also believe some Bible prophecy has been fulfilled. QUACK QUACK!