Interesting preterist argument

[Davy]

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"?

The subject of the 'parable of the fig tree' goes all the way back into Old Testament times. Have you never read Jeremiah 24 about the two baskets of figs God showed him? The fig tree sprouting leaves is specific to a certain 'people' related to the Old Testament prophecies. You have obviously missed it, which is OK if you don't know, because many do not know. But to act like you do know what that parable is about, and even act a bit smart-ellish about it, that irritates folks who do know, and are trying to be of help.

 

[claninja]

The subject of the 'parable of the fig tree' goes all the way back into Old Testament times. Have you never read Jeremiah 24 about the two baskets of figs God showed him? The fig tree sprouting leaves is specific to a certain 'people' related to the Old Testament prophecies. You have obviously missed it, which is OK if you don't know, because many do not know. But to act like you do know what that parable is about, and even act a bit smart-ellish about it, that irritates folks who do know, and are trying to be of help.

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. So also, when you see all these things, know that it is near.” This is a straightforward timing analogy — like saying, “When the leaves sprout, you know the season is about to change.”

• He even includes “all the trees” in Luke 21:29: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees; as soon as they come out in leaf, you see for yourselves and know that the summer is already near.”

To argue beyond the simple analogy of timing is to force your framework onto the passage, which is classic eisegesis.

 

[grafted branch]

About death , people still die.
They die everyday, millions of people are born, live a while, but they all do die.
Death being no more is at the end as death is the last enemy to be destroyed.
Since people still die today, the last enemy death has not been destroyed, therefore it is not the end yet.

Christ is the first fruits of those who have 'fallen asleep' in the Lord
Christ died, God raised Him up in a bodily resurrection
Believers who die in the Lord, their life is hidden with Christ in God, we were raised spiritually so that our home is now in heaven, we are no longer of this earth.
When Christ appears (second coming) we will appear with Him in our own glorified body, one like He has,

This Christ as our risen hope, has to do with our own resurrection, being give a glorified body like He has.

1 Cor 15

The Risen Christ, Our Hope​

12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have [c]fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

The Last Enemy Destroyed​

20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have [d]fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

*********************
Obviously, we have not appeared with Christ yet as we do not have glorified bodies yet as we are still Hidden with Christ.
Colossians 2
11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body [h]of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the [i]handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.

Colossians 3
If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

****************************
Now about the glorious liberation of the creation, that has also not yet happened. But it will when God makes all things new, new earth, new heavens, at Christ's return
Right now, still, the creation is subjected to futility, it waits for the revealing of the glorified sons of God in the new earth.
Creation fell, creation will be fixed, it is still a fallen world today. Evil terrible things take place on the earth today.
We DO NOT SEE it today but we hope for it with perseverance.

Romans 8
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of [f]corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now.

23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.

24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?

25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.

I think we all will agree that everyone still physically dies. Adam died because of his sin and the wages of sin is death. Adam was expelled from the garden lest he eat of the tree of life and live forever.

Christ paid for our sins and we have eternal life, we will never die. Since we currently do physically die it would seem that the eternal life we have is not physical life (at least for now).

Ok, if Adam would’ve physically lived forever had he not sinned and our sins are currently paid for, why is it we physically die? Couldn’t someone claim that physical death is proof that Jesus didn’t pay for our sins and He was not the Messiah? Should we come to the conclusion that Adam would’ve physically died no matter what, if he voluntarily stopped eating of the tree of life, prior to his sin?

I’m not trying to debate this, just wondering what your thoughts are on this.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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 within a broader theological framework. Reversing that process—starting with a systemic framework and forcing the text to conform to it—is not exegesis; it’s literally the definition of eisegesis.




You do realize that grammatical rules are simply the basic tools we use to understand and communicate language, right? They’re not “my rules”—they’re the foundational structure of how reading and writing work. In order to understand any text, biblical or not, we have to know what words mean and how they function in sentences and paragraphs. This is not some advanced or obscure or “nerdy” method—it’s the same basic grammar taught in school from elementary through high school. Without grammar, we can’t make sense of meaning in any consistent or reliable way.

Without any “nerdy” man made tools of translation, grammar, syntax, linguistics, or context, can you read and understand the following?

“καὶ ἐὰν ἔχω προφητείαν καὶ εἰδῶ τὰ μυστήρια πάντα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γνῶσιν, ⸄καὶ ἐὰν⸅ ἔχω πᾶσαν τὴν πίστιν ὥστε ὄρη μεθιστάναι, ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω, οὐθέν εἰμι.”

You are boring. You go beyond basic grammar rules and create your own. Deny it if you want, but you do.

I believe the gathering of the elect by the angels from the four winds in Matthew 24:31 is grammatically included, along with the destruction of Jerusalem, in the phrase “all these things” of verse 34. That means it falls within the same generational time frame as the destruction of Jerusalem.

There was no gathering of any elect by angels in 70 AD. That is talking about the gathering of the church (church = the elect) at Christ's future second coming. The dead in Christ will be resurrected at that time and then will be gathered along with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air (1 Thess 4:14-17). That has absolutely not happened yet. You need to give up the preterist charade.

Additionally, I understand the gathering in the same thematic framework as Matthew 22:7–10, where—after the city is destroyed—the servants (a clear parallel to the angels) gather both good and bad into the wedding hall. This fits the narrative structure and audience expectation without needing to force an arbitrary, multi-thousand-year delay between events.

No, the servants in that parable are human beings who preach the gospel which offers salvation to people. It says the servants talk to people directly and invite them to the wedding, so that is not talking about angels.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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. So also, when you see all these things, know that it is near.” This is a straightforward timing analogy — like saying, “When the leaves sprout, you know the season is about to change.”

• He even includes “all the trees” in Luke 21:29: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees; as soon as they come out in leaf, you see for yourselves and know that the summer is already near.”

To argue beyond the simple analogy of timing is to force your framework onto the passage, which is classic eisegesis.

I do agree with you about this. The fig tree does not represent anything in particular there. Jesus was simply saying that just as you know summer is near when a fig tree's leaves start coming out, you know His coming is near when you see "all these things" happening. There's no reason to read any more into it than that.

 

[Davy]

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.”

That's where you are so... in error.


For Brethren in Christ:
I don't know why it seems claninja is trying... to hide what the Jeremiah 24 Chapter prophecy is pointing to, but the fact that claninja just mentioned... that last statement above about the fig tree in relation to Israel about to blossom, reveals at least some familiarity of what I've been talking about. So I will summarize here for those brethren interested in learning Christ's "parable of the fig tree" that He commanded His disciples (and us) to learn...

Christ's "parable of the fig tree" involves the FINAL GENERATION on earth that will SEE His future 2nd coming. And that generation that SEES His future coming will also SEE ALL THESE THINGS He gave in His Olivet discourse, meaning ALL the SIGNS of the end He gave. That is the gist of what He said above.

Yet Lord Jesus did NOT give an actual detail of what that "parable of the fig tree" is about, i.e, in what way it is being used as a symbol for something. The reason is we are supposed to already know about the figs per the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah. claninja is simply being coy, and doesn't actually know what was shown in the Book of Jeremiah about it, and is obviously in Biblical ignorance about the Jeremiah prophecy.

The Parable...

Jer 24:1-3
24 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.

Two symbolic baskets of figs, Jeremiah is shown by vision from God.

And notice that part in bold above is specifically pointing to those of the "house of Judah" (Jews) that were carried to Babylon for 70 years by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. That means God is pointing to a specific 'group' here, and not... to all 12 tribes of Israel, but to Judah and certain others only.

2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.
3 Then said the LORD unto me, "What seest thou, Jeremiah?" And I said, "Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil."
KJV

We well know that figs are not naughty or evil, so that has to mean the figs are being used as a symbol for two different groups of peoples, the one group of figs as "good figs, very good", but the other group of figs as "evil, very evil."

Jer 24:5-9
5 Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good.

Those carried away captive to Babylon along with the Jews of Judah, by Nebuchadnezzar, is about the foreigners and bondservants that lived among the Jews of the southern "kingdom of Judah", or "house of Judah" at Jerusalem/Judea.

In Ezra 2 about a small group of the Jews returning to Jerusalem after the Babylon captivity, it is shown how some of those foreigners had crept into the priesthood, and had to be cast out. Recall Judges 2 & 3 where God had commanded the children of Israel to literally wipe out specific nations of the land of Canaan, but failed. Thus many of the Canaanites became bondservants to Israel. In 1 Kings 9 under Solomon's reign those Canaanite bondservants are still there among the children of Israel.

6 For I will set Mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up.

That is one of the most important revelations of the parable of the fig tree. God said He would bring both symbolic baskets of figs, the two groups of peoples, the remnant of Judah and the foreigners that went captive to Babylon with Judah, and set them back in the holy land, and not pull them down, and will plant them and not pluck them up.

When was that fulfilled, or has it been fulfilled yet? And the hinge-point is where God said He would set them in the land and NOT pluck them up anymore, i.e., not scatter them or remove them again.

That did not happen in 70 A.D. when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the 2nd temple, for they scattered the Jews out of the holy land then, called the Diaspora. And only in the latter centuries did the Jews start returning to Jerusalem and the holy land, in small groups, UNTIL... 1948 when Israel was made a nation against by United Nations charter vote of the nations.

Since then, the Jews in the nation of today's Israel have NOT been plucked up. And if that continues, which looks like it will, that GENERATION of 1948 will REPRESENT the fig tree of the parable being set out.

7 And I will give them an heart to know Me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be My people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto Me with their whole heart.

Of course in the above verse, our Heavenly Father is speaking of the good basket of figs, those of Judah in the holy land that love Him, and keep His commandments.

8 And as the evil figs, which cannot be eaten, they are so evil; surely thus saith the LORD, So will I give Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, that remain in this land, and them that dwell in the land of Egypt:
9 And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them.
KJV

Then for the evil basket of figs, the "crept in unawares" of Jude 4, the Canaanite foreigners that crept into Israel's priesthood and positions as scribes and bondservants of Israel, God said He would give to Zedekiah, king of Judah, and those Jews in Jerusalem that remain in the holy land, and in Egypt. And, that God would deliver some of them also through the countries to be a reproach and a curse.

So have no doubt brethren that we are living in the LAST GENERATION on earth today that will SEE Christ's future return.

 

[claninja]

You go beyond basic grammar rules and create your own. Deny it if you want, but you do.

Please give an example, instead of a generic statement. What “grammar rule” did I create?

There was no gathering of any elect by angels in 70 AD. That is talking about the gathering of the church (church = the elect) at Christ's future second coming. The dead in Christ will be resurrected at that time and then will be gathered along with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air (1 Thess 4:14-17). That has absolutely not happened yet. You need to give up the preterist charade.

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 first century, why would I Interpret the gathering as going beyond the first century generation and therefore beyond the thematic narrative of Matthew 22:7-10 - the city destroyed followed by the servants of the king gathering the good and bad into the wedding hall?

No, the servants in that parable are human beings who preach the gospel which offers salvation to people. It says the servants talk to people directly and invite them to the wedding, so that is not talking about angels.

That’s just one possible interpretation. It doesn’t address the thematic narrative of the king sending his troops to destroy the city followed by the king sending his servants to gather the good and the bad into the wedding hall.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

you are giving me your framework again. I don’t agree with your framework.

Yep. So, as long as our frameworks differ, we will never agree on this. So, what's the point of continuing to discuss it then? There is none.

If the antecedents to “all these things” in Matthew 23:34 includes both the gathering, and the great tribulation of Jerusalem in the first century, why would I Interpret the gathering as going beyond the first century generation and therefore beyond the thematic narrative of Matthew 22:7-10 - the city destroyed followed by the servants of the king gathering the good and bad into the wedding hall?

You are comparing a gathering by angels to human servants preaching the gospel. It's an invalid comparison. Matthew 24:29-31 is the same event as 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 which has not yet occurred.

That’s just one possible interpretation. It doesn’t address the thematic narrative of the king sending his troops to destroy the city followed by the king sending his servants to gather the good and the bad into the wedding hall.

I don't know what you're talking about. It's clear to me that the parable is about the offer of salvation going out to all people, starting in Jerusalem and Israel before going to the highways (Gentile nations) and that is still ongoing today.

 

[Jay Ross]

So many experts blowing their trumpets about what the Matt 24:32 prophecy of the fig tree budding means.

Here is my two cents worth.

The Fig tree represent the nation of Israel. From nature we know that trees, like the fig tree, will bud in the early spring, usually four to five days before the end of the "official Winter Season," and from this signpost, we know that the Summer Season will begin, round 96 days after the trees/fig trees begin to bud. What happens during the Summer Season, in this case of 1,000 years, the harvest of souls from the sea of humanity begins and continues for 1,000 years when the Bottomless pit is unlocked and releases the imprisoned entities for the little while period to do their thing in an attempt to install Satan as the King over all of the earth, during the Little While period.

In God's eyes the 1,000 years plus the short Little While period of time, nominally 24 years is a generation/age, which will be the last generation/age before the final judgement.

Shalom

PS: -The beginning of the Summer Season also marks when God will begin gathering the Nation of Israel to Himself. There is so much happening around the year 1948 + 96. In other words, around the year 2044 AD.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

So many experts blowing their trumpets about what the Matt 24:32 prophecy of the fig tree budding means.

Here is my two cents worth.

The Fig tree represent the nation of Israel. From nature we know that trees, like the fig tree, will bud in the early spring, usually four to five days before the end of the "official Winter Season," and from this signpost, we know that the Summer Season will begin, round 96 days after the trees/fig trees begin to bud. What happens during the Summer Season, in this case of 1,000 years, the harvest of souls from the sea of humanity begins and continues for 1,000 years when the Bottomless pit is unlocked and releases the imprisoned entities for the little while period to do their thing in an attempt to install Satan as the King over all of the earth, during the Little While period.

In God's eyes the 1,000 years plus the short Little While period of time, nominally 24 years is a generation/age, which will be the last generation/age before the final judgement.

Shalom

PS: -The beginning of the Summer Season also marks when God will begin gathering the Nation of Israel to Himself. There is so much happening around the year 1948 + 96. In other words, around the year 2044 AD.

In my opinion that wasn't even worth two cents. All Jesus is doing in Matthew 24:32-33 is comparing the nearness of His return in relation to when "all these things" happen to how we know summer is near when a fig tree's leaves start to grow. That's it. There is no basis whatsoever for reading all these other things that you talked about into what He said. You have a doctrine all to yourself with you constantly trying ot predict what year things will happen and all that nonsense, so you apparently think you have a monopoly on the truth. But, God doesn't reveal the truth to only one person.

 

[Jay Ross]

In my opinion that wasn't even worth two cents.

I love your negative opinions which have no scriptural basis.

All Jesus is doing in Matthew 24:32-33 is comparing the nearness of His return in relation to when "all these things" happen to how we know summer is near when a fig tree's leaves start to grow. That's it.

Did Jesus state that He was returning at the beginning of the Summer Season? Do you have any scriptures that justify your stated claim in the quote above from your post?

There is no basis whatsoever for reading all these other things that you talked about into what He said. You have a doctrine all to yourself with you constantly trying to predict what year things will happen and all that nonsense, so you apparently think you have a monopoly on the truth.

Now if we do not see the events surrounding the gathering of the kings of the earth at Armageddon around the year 2044 AD, plus or minus a couple of years either side, then I will have been shown to be wrong. However, if Armageddon happens around the year 2044 AD, then I will have been shown to have been right in my understanding of the events that will take place around that year.

But, God doesn't reveal the truth to only one person.

Then why do we have all of the prophets in the Old Testament.

God reveals His truth over time to the prophets of His choosing, here a little, there a little.

Now if I am right about what Matt 24:32 heralds will happen with His brush strokes on His canvas will you apologies for your negative posts towards me.

We all need to be patient to see if what I am posting consistently will unfold the way I am posting.

Shalom

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Did Jesus state that He was returning at the beginning of the Summer Season?

No, He did not. Why do you ask?

Do you have any scriptures that justify your stated claim in the quote above from your post?

Did you read Matthew 24:32-33? That is the scripture being discussed. The context is in relation to knowing when Jesus's return is near.

Matthew 24:32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door.

Jesus compared the nearness of His return to the nearness of summer. He indicated that a way to know that summer is near is when a fig tree's leaves start coming out. Similarly, when "all these things" start to happen then you know His return is near. Very simple. But, naturally, you make it as convoluted as possible because that's what you do.

Now if we do not see the events surrounding the gathering of the kings of the earth at Armageddon around the year 2044 AD, plus or minus a couple of years either side, then I will have been shown to be wrong.

LOL. How old are you? Are you likely to be around at that point or not? Regardless, you will definitely be proven wrong. I'm just letting you know that ahead of time.

However, if Armageddon happens around the year 2044 AD, then I will have been shown to have been right in my understanding of the events that will take place around that year.

I don't know why you think you can determine things with this much detail, but you are sadly mistaken.

Then why do we have all of the propshets in the Old Testament.

God reveals His truth over time to the prophets of His choosing, here a little, there a little.

Now if I am right about what Matt 24:32 heralds will happen with His brush strokes on His canvas will you apologies for your negative posts towards me.

I would, yes, but I have no concern at all about you being right about any of this.

We all need to be patient to see if what I am posting consistently will unfold the way I am posting.

LOL. Okay, sure. As if I will even remember this discussion in 2044, if I am still around.

 

[ewq1938]

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,

Yes it does. The elect were not gathered together by angels in the first century. The elect died, in dif places and in dif ways and no return of Christ took place.

What is objective is that the temple and the city were indeed destroyed within Jesus’ first-century audience, just as he prophesied in the OD.

He spoke about those BEFORE the OD. You cannot just add any teaching or prophecy to the OD.

 

[Jay Ross]

How old are you? Are you likely to be around at that point or not?

I retired at the end of 1999, so you work out how old I might be and whether or not I might be still around. I am simply not presuming that I might be.

He indicated that a way to know that summer is near is when a fig tree's leaves start coming out.

How many days are between an early Spring budding of leaves on a fig tree and when the Summer Season actually starts? This is not as convoluted as you are suggesting. Then if we apply the year for a day rule, then we know how many years are being referred to by Christ.

Did you read Matthew 24:32-33?

Yes, I have many times but what has verse 33 to do with verse 32. Both verses are pointing to very different outcomes. Verse 32 is pointing to the start of the Seventh Age while verse 33 is pointing towards the very end of the Seventh Age.

Oh well you have given me a good laugh with your supposed understanding.

 

[claninja]

Yep. So, as long as our frameworks differ, we will never agree on this. So, what's the point of continuing to discuss it then? There is none.

This doesn’t answer my clarifying question. What grammar rules did I create?

You are comparing a gathering by angels to human servants preaching the gospel. It's an invalid comparison. Matthew 24:29-31 is the same event as 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 which has not yet occurred.

Grammatically, the antecedent of “all these things” in verse 34 includes all the events described in the Olivet Discourse, due to the continuous flow of the narrative. Any insertion of a subjective, multi-thousand-year gap between these events disrupts that flow and relies on a prior interpretive framework — eisegesis, not exegesis. Therefore, both the destruction of Jerusalem and the gathering of the elect are events that Jesus declared would occur before “this generation” passed away.

I’m comparing the thematic narrative of the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall by the servants of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem, to the gathering of the elect by the angels of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem.

I don't know what you're talking about. It's clear to me that the parable is about the offer of salvation going out to all people, starting in Jerusalem and Israel before going to the highways (Gentile nations) and that is still ongoing today.

it’s a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering of good and bad into the wedding hall.

The olivet discourse is not the only text that contains a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering.

 

[claninja]

Yes it does. The elect were not gathered together by angels in the first century. The elect died, in dif places and in dif ways and no return of Christ took place.

Jesus said they would be - “this generation will not pass away until all these things happen”.

Additionally, the Olivet discourse is not the only passage that discusses a post-destruction-of-Jerusalem gathering. See Matthew 22:7-10.

He spoke about those BEFORE the OD. You cannot just add any teaching or prophecy to the OD.

You cannot take away from any teaching or prophecy of the OD.

Contextually, the Olivet Discourse is Jesus answering to two specific questions from His disciples:

1. “When will these things be?”
2. “What will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3)

Grammatically, the antecedent to “these things” is the destruction of the temple in verse 2:

• “Truly, I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another.”

Therefore, the content of Jesus’ response — the entire Olivet Discourse — must at least in part be answering question 1, regarding the timing of the destruction of the temple.

If you claim that verses 4–34 are completely unrelated to verses 1–3, then you must demonstrate contextually or grammatically why Jesus suddenly shifts from the subject of the temple’s destruction to something entirely different — without any textual marker to indicate such a shift.

To dismiss the connection between the questions and the discourse on the basis that “certain events didn’t happen” — according to your own theological expectations — is the very definition of eisegesis: reading one’s system into the text, rather than drawing meaning from the text itself.

 

[Davidpt]

This doesn’t answer my clarifying question. What grammar rules did I create?



Grammatically, the antecedent of “all these things” in verse 34 includes all the events described in the Olivet Discourse, due to the continuous flow of the narrative. Any insertion of a subjective, multi-thousand-year gap between these events disrupts that flow and relies on a prior interpretive framework — eisegesis, not exegesis. Therefore, both the destruction of Jerusalem and the gathering of the elect are events that Jesus declared would occur before “this generation” passed away.

I’m comparing the thematic narrative of the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall by the servants of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem, to the gathering of the elect by the angels of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem.



it’s a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering of good and bad into the wedding hall.

The olivet discourse is not the only text that contains a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering.

When are Preterists going to convincingly prove that the times of the Gentiles are already fulfilled, and was fulfilled before this generation in question allegedly passed in 70 AD?

What some are not factoring in here is this. In order to see something fulfilled in the Discourse does not require that one has to actually be alive at the time in order to do so. For example, 70 AD. Clearly, I wasn't alive when that happened. Clearly, I can see it has already been fulfilled, though. That means we can check that one off the list, in regards to all these things in verse 34.

What I haven't seen evidence of being fulfilled yet is the times of the Gentiles. Nor have I seen evidence that Matthew 24:14-31 has been fulfilled. Some of you, apparently including @Spiritual Israelite, seem to think one can't see any of these things as fulfilled unless they are/were living during the era of time some of these things are/were fulfilled.


Clearly, all these things in verse 34 is meaning everything Jesus predicted would take place prior to Him having said that in verse 34. You don't appear to be disputing that. But even so, the way you try and get around some of these things, though you agree, for example, that verses 30-31 in Matthew 24 is among these things that need to be fulfilled first, you disagree that it involves His coming in the end of this age and the rapture of the church.

One reason why you are misinterpreting verses 30-31, IMO, is because you are applying verses 14-29 to the wrong era of time. Ironically, even though @Spiritual Israelite is also applying some of those verses to the wrong of era time, mainly meaning verses 15-21 in his case, he is correctly interpreting verses 30-31. Except his hermeneutic is questionable since he is inserting a 2000 year gap between verse 21 and 29 that the text knows nothing about. The way to solve this, verse 21 does not fit 2000 years ago, it fits the final days of this age instead.

But what if you did agree that verses 30-31 do indeed involve those things, His coming in the end of this age and the rapture of the church? Would you still be arguing that this generation in question already passed away 2000 years ago? If no, there you go then. No wonder, someone such as me, is arguing that this generation did not pass away 2000 years ago, because, for one, per my opinion regarding some of these things, verses 30-31 haven't even been fulfilled yet. Not to mention, neither have the times of the Gentiles. Obviously, when the times of the Gentiles have been fulfilled, this indicates we are no longer in the times of the Gentiles from that point on.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes, I have any times but what has verse 33 to do with verse 32. Both verses are pointing to very different outcomes. Verse 32 is pointing to the start of the Seventh Age while verse 33 is pointing towards the very end of the Seventh Age.

They are directly related. You have to be completely lacking in discernment to not see that. Jesus was obviously comparing the nearness of summer when a fig tree's leaves come out to the nearness of His return when "all these things" started happening.

Oh well you have given me a good laugh with your supposed understanding.

Your understanding of things is the most laughable thing I've seen on this entire forum, which is really saying something. The "Seventh Age"? LOL. Nice made up theory there.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

When are Preterists going to convincingly prove that the times of the Gentiles are already fulfilled, and was fulfilled before this generation in question allegedly passed in 70 AD?

What some are not factoring in here is this. In order to see something fulfilled in the Discourse does not require that one has to actually be alive at the time in order to do so. For example, 70 AD. Clearly, I wasn't alive when that happened. Clearly, I can see it has already been fulfilled, though. That means we can check that one off the list, in regards to all these things in verse 34.

What I haven't seen evidence of being fulfilled yet is the times of the Gentiles. Nor have I seen evidence that Matthew 24:14-31 has been fulfilled. Some of you, apparently including @Spiritual Israelite, seem to think one can't see any of these things as fulfilled unless they are/were living during the era of time some of these things are/were fulfilled.

What is your problem? Why are you lumping me in with preterists? I'm not a preterist. I do not say I "can't see any of these things as fulfilled unless they are/were living during the era of time some of these things are/were fulfilled."? Why do you lie about me all the time? Do you have no conscience about lying?

Clearly, all these things in verse 34 is meaning everything Jesus predicted would take place prior to Him having said that in verse 34. You don't appear to be disputing that. But even so, the way you try and get around some of these things, though you agree, for example, that verses 30-31 in Matthew 24 is among these things that need to be fulfilled first, you disagree that it involves His coming in the end of this age and the rapture of the church.

One reason why you are misinterpreting verses 30-31, IMO, is because you are applying verses 14-29 to the wrong era of time. Ironically, even though @Spiritual Israelite is also applying some of those verses to the wrong of era time, mainly meaning verses 15-21 in his case, he is correctly interpreting verses 30-31. Except his hermeneutic is questionable since he is inserting a 2000 year gap between verse 21 and 29 that the text knows nothing about. The way to solve this, verse 21 does not fit 2000 years ago, it fits the final days of this age instead.

You see a 2000 year gap between the tribulation and wrath described in Luke 21:20-24a and the return of Christ, so how is that any different? You are a total hypocrite.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This doesn’t answer my clarifying question. What grammar rules did I create?

For example, you try to say that "all these things" must refer to literally everything He had previously said. That is a grammar rule that you made up. It can't possibly mean that and I've shown that in relation to Luke 21:36 how that would mean we should pray to be worthy to escape His second coming and the gathering of the elect. To get around that you then make up another rule (not a grammar rule, but just a ridiculous man-made rule) that something Jesus is quoted as saying in Luke 21 can't be applied to anything He was quoted as saying in Matthew 24 or Mark 13, which is utterly ludicrous since there is just one Olivet Discourse. Before saying what He is quoted as saying in Luke 21:36, He had talked about His coming and the gathering of the elect. So, you can't try to say that "all these things" would not include the gathering of the elect if you insist that it refers to everything He had previously mentioned.

Grammatically, the antecedent of “all these things” in verse 34 includes all the events described in the Olivet Discourse, due to the continuous flow of the narrative.

No, that is not true. That is your own grammar rule that you made up. The fact of the matter is that "all these things" only relate to whatever things that would happen which would indicate that His return is near, and what happened in 70 AD was not that. He did not return in 70 AD. Period. You can't possibly convince me otherwise, so just give up the preterist charade already. It's a false doctrine.

Any insertion of a subjective, multi-thousand-year gap between these events disrupts that flow and relies on a prior interpretive framework — eisegesis, not exegesis.

Wrong. This is another grammar rule that you have made up. I don't need to interpret scripture according to your flawed grammar rules that you rely on far more than you do spiritual discernment. I thought you said spiritual discernment plays a role in how you interpret scripture? Clearly, it does not because you don't allow for anything to be true outside your man-made grammar rules.

Therefore, both the destruction of Jerusalem and the gathering of the elect are events that Jesus declared would occur before “this generation” passed away.

Wrong. There was no gathering of the elect in 70 AD. That is a ridiculous claim. The elect will be gathered and caught up to Him when He returns in the future.

I’m comparing the thematic narrative of the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall by the servants of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem, to the gathering of the elect by the angels of God - following the destruction of Jerusalem.

There was no gathering of the elect by the angels following the destruction of Jersusalem. You are just making things up. I can't take this preterist nonsense seriously.

it’s a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering of good and bad into the wedding hall.

The olivet discourse is not the only text that contains a post-judgment-of-Jerusalem gathering.

There was no "post-judgment-of_Jerusalem" gathering.