Matthew 24:30 may have a significant mistranslation

[Spiritual Israelite]

To say that sinful man was Raised unto Glorified Eternal Body BEFORE CHRIST is a extremely dangerous HERESY.

It is satan's lie from the Garden = "you will become as God" = apart from CHRIST

i urge you by the Glory of the Holy Spirit of TRUTH to run from 70AD heresy..........

@amigo de christo @Spiritual Israelite @ProDeo

Agree. What other context can the following verse mean except that Christ was the first to be resurrected with a glorified, immortal body?

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Obviously, there were others, like Lazarus, who were bodily resurrected before Jesus was, so that means He was the first to rise from the dead in a certain sense. What else can that be except that He was the first to rise unto bodily immortality? That is what Paul indicates in 1 Corinthians 15:20 as well and he indicates in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 that at Christ's second coming, the dead in Christ will be resurrected unto bodily immortality, also.

 

[David in NJ]

Agree. What other context can the following verse mean except that Christ was the first to be resurrected with a glorified, immortal body?

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Obviously, there were others, like Lazarus, who were bodily resurrected before Jesus was, so that means He was the first to rise from the dead in a certain sense. What else can that be except that He was the first to rise unto bodily immortality? That is what Paul indicates in 1 Corinthians 15:20 as well and he indicates in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 that at Christ's second coming, the dead in Christ will be resurrected unto bodily immortality, also.

HalleluYAH

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, Christ was not the first human to be physically resurrected to an eternally glorified incorruptible form. That happened on several occasion in the OT as well as in the NT to quite a few individuals, even before Christ was raised from the dead.

Nonsense. You obviously don't have any understanding of the following verse...

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

In what sense do you think that Christ was the first to rise from the dead, if not in the sense of being the first to rise from the dead with an incorruptible, immortal body?

You see, there is a difference between the "First-fruits" title (which was a title shared by the 144,000 Matt. 27:52-53 saints also) and the unique title of the "First-born" / "First-begotten". The "First-born" title is unique to Christ alone for all time, because He was the first to ASCEND in a glorified, resurrected human body form to the Father in heaven. That was when Christ became the "First-begotten" of the dead to arrive in heaven and stand before the Ancient of Days in that glorified resurrected form. No other resurrected individual ever did that before Christ accomplished this FIRST in AD 33.

Acts 26:23 says He was the first to rise from the dead, period, not the first to rise from the dead and then ascend to heaven. So, He was the first to rise from the dead with an incorruptible and immortal body. Who else did before Him? No one. Who else has since? No one. the dead in Christ will be resurrected unto bodily immortality at His future second coming.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Let me get your thoughts on this, I see a repeating pattern in Revelation 12, would Michael taking a stand in Daniel 12:1 aline with Revelation 12:17?

Here is a summary of the Revelation 12 pattern.

Vs 4 Stars of heaven cast to earth (Satan's influence over the centuries in getting 1/3 of the angels to eventually fall into sin)
Vs 4 devour her child (Satan's influence in Herod attempting to kill Jesus the young Messiah)
Vs 6 woman fled into wilderness (immediate persecution for the early church after Christ's ascension, fleeing Jerusalem into the countryside)
Vs 7 war in heaven between dragon and Michael (war in heaven during the 3 days / 3 nights - ended with Christ's resurrection-day ascension)

Vs 9 dragon cast out of heaven to the earth (Satan's "short time" begins of renewed deception on earth in AD 33 after losing the war in heaven)
Vs 13 persecuted the woman (the Jewish leaders and Saul's persecution of the saints, even to distant regions until his conversion)
Vs 14 woman fled into wilderness (the 3-1/2 years of persecution when the church scattered everywhere until Saul / Paul's conversion)
Vs 17 dragon makes war (war against "the remnant of the woman's seed", probably against the many resurrected Jewish Matt. 27:52-53 saints)

The pattern is cast out, persecution, fleeing, and war.

In your quote above, I put in parentheses my own understanding of the events each verse is describing. There definitely are repeating patterns throughout Revelation - some flashbacks, some presented chiastic style, and some showing recapitulation. For certain, not everything is strictly chronological from beginning to end in Revelation - or Daniel for that matter.

But the dragon making war on earth against the remnant of the woman's seed in Rev. 12:17 is not the same event as the war in heaven in Rev. 12:7 between righteous and wicked angelic forces. The pattern IS similar, but the events are different ones.

Michael "standing up" in that first-century time period just represents an increase in Michael's activity at the time. This is rather like the Psalm 68:1, "Arise, O Lord, let thine enemies be scattered..." showing a request for God to become increasingly active in getting rid of the Psalmist's enemies.

 

[3 Resurrections]

To say that sinful man was Raised unto Glorified Eternal Body BEFORE CHRIST is a extremely dangerous HERESY.

No, it just goes against man's tradition. Anybody raised to life again bodily has been raised, not by their own power, but by the power of the Holy Spirit. What is heretical is to say that once resurrected, that person can die again. Scripture declares this to be impossible.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that Christ HAD to be the first to rise from the dead bodily in a glorified state - not even in Acts 26:23 where Christ by rising from the dead was the first to proclaim light unto the Gentiles.

What IS heresy is to say that anyone ascended to heaven in a glorified resurrected body form before Christ as the "First-born" did this. Not even Enoch did this.

 

[amigo de christo]

To say that sinful man was Raised unto Glorified Eternal Body BEFORE CHRIST is a extremely dangerous HERESY.

It is satan's lie from the Garden = "you will become as God" = apart from CHRIST

i urge you by the Glory of the Holy Spirit of TRUTH to run from 70AD heresy..........

@amigo de christo @Spiritual Israelite @ProDeo

SPECIALLY WHEN IT SAYS JESUS WAS THE FIRST BORN from the dead . In fact HE IS the ressurection the life .
No man , woman or child rose from the dead in glorified bodies
BEFORE CHRIST . HE WAS THE FIRST to do so and shall be with even the last to do so .
by man came death
BY CHRIST came life to restore man to GOD .
THERE was only death before Christ WHO IS THE LIFE .
And had come to awaken man out of death and into LIFE ETERNAL .
T he prophets are dead , moses is dead , YEt you say HE who BELEIVES IN ME shall never die
Death did come upon all of man and thereafter WILL BE THE JUDGMENT .
FOLKS BETTER R UN to JESUS is all i can say , because without him the dead are gonna be
JUDGED and the second death awaits them .
Budda cant give life
muhammed cannot save one .....
The false religoins cannot save anyone or themselves .
WHO can save oneself . WHO david . I will tell us what JESUS said .
WHEN asked from his own desciples who were very alarmed and had said BUT LORD WHO THEN CAN be saved .
HE DARN SURE DIDNT PREACH INTERFIATH
HE said WITH man this is IMPOSSIBLE . AS IN IMPOSSIBLE . BUT NOT WITH GOD
and GOD has chosen HOW to save humanity .
AND HOW did HE and WHAT DID HE
choose on how to save man .
BY THE PREACHING OF THE ONE TRUE GOSPSEL of JESUS THE CHRIST
that all who do BELEIVE , And lets us say it again , BELEIVE IN HIM will be saved .
THE WHORE IS A LIAR . and this sheep dont heed whores and their inclusive lies .

 

[David in NJ]

No, it just goes against man's tradition. Anybody raised to life again bodily has been raised, not by their own power, but by the power of the Holy Spirit. What is heretical is to say that once resurrected, that person can die again. Scripture declares this to be impossible.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that Christ HAD to be the first to rise from the dead bodily in a glorified state - not even in Acts 26:23 where Christ by rising from the dead was the first to proclaim light unto the Gentiles.

What IS heresy is to say that anyone ascended to heaven in a glorified resurrected body form before Christ as the "First-born" did this. Not even Enoch did this.

Place your trust in CHRIST = God's Word of TRUTH = John 3:10-13

Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things?
Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness.
If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

Believe the TRUTH and flush that 70AD heresy to where it belongs.
No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

@3 Resurrections = we love you and want only the BEST for you which is CHRIST and His TRUTH

 

[David in NJ]

SPECIALLY WHEN IT SAYS JESUS WAS THE FIRST BORN from the dead . In fact HE IS the ressurection the life .
No man , woman or child rose from the dead in glorified bodies
BEFORE CHRIST . HE WAS THE FIRST to do so and shall be with even the last to do so .
by man came death
BY CHRIST came life to restore man to GOD .
THERE was only death before Christ WHO IS THE LIFE .
And had come to awaken man out of death and into LIFE ETERNAL .
T he prophets are dead , moses is dead , YEt you say HE who BELEIVES IN ME shall never die
Death did come upon all of man and thereafter WILL BE THE JUDGMENT .
FOLKS BETTER R UN to JESUS is all i can say , because without him the dead are gonna be
JUDGED and the second death awaits them .
Budda cant give life
muhammed cannot save one .....
The false religoins cannot save anyone or themselves .
WHO can save oneself . WHO david . I will tell us what JESUS said .
WHEN asked from his own desciples who were very alarmed and had said BUT LORD WHO THEN CAN be saved .
HE DARN SURE DIDNT PREACH INTERFIATH
HE said WITH man this is IMPOSSIBLE . AS IN IMPOSSIBLE . BUT NOT WITH GOD
and GOD has chosen HOW to save humanity .
AND HOW did HE and WHAT DID HE
choose on how to save man .
BY THE PREACHING OF THE ONE TRUE GOSPSEL of JESUS THE CHRIST
that all who do BELEIVE , And lets us say it again , BELEIVE IN HIM will be saved .
THE WHORE IS A LIAR . and this sheep dont heed whores and their inclusive lies .

CHRIST WAS THE FIRST to do so and shall be with even the last to do so .

IAM the Alpha and the Omega , the Beginning and the End

 

[kdx]

I completely disagree. That was written after the old covenant was already made obsolete by the sacrifice of Christ and His shed blood that established the new covenant and made the old covenant and its animal sacrifices obsolete.

Jesus and the apostles didn't abolish the Old Testament worship, but they followed it (yes, even the apostles after the Great Commission). Here is an extract of John Owens introduction to the Epistle of the Hebrews, which he assumed was written by Paul:

IV. He takes it for granted, in the whole Epistle, that the Judaical church-state did yet continue, and that the worship of it was not yet disallowed of God; suitably to what was before declared concerning his own and the other apostles’ practice. Had that church-state been utterly abolished, all observation of Mosaical rites, which were the worship of that church as such, had been utterly unlawful, as now it is. Neither did the determination recorded Acts 15 abolish them, as some suppose, but only free the Gentiles from their observance. Their free use was yet permitted unto the Jews, Acts 21:20, 22–26, 27:9; and practised by Paul in particular in his Nazaritical vow, chap. 21:26, which was attended with a sacrifice, Num. 6:13–21. Nor was Mosaical worship utterly to cease, so as to have no acceptance with God, until the final ruin of that church, foretold by our Saviour himself, Matt. 24, by Peter, 2 Epist. 3, by James also, chap. 5:6–9, and by our apostle in this Epistle, chap. 10:37, 12:25–27, was accomplished. Hence it is that our apostle calls the times of the gospel “The world to come,” Heb. 2:5, 6:5,—the name whereby the Jews denoted the state of the church under the Messiah,—proper unto it only whilst the legal administrations of worship did continue. Thus, as de facto he had showed respect unto the person of the high priest as one yet in lawful office, Acts 23:5, so doctrinally he takes it for granted that that office was still continued, Heb. 8:4, 5, with the whole worship of Moses’ institution, chap. 13:11, 12. And this dispensation of God’s patience, being the last trial of that church, was continued in a proportion of time answerable to their abode in the wilderness upon its first erection; which our apostle minds them of, chap. 3, 4. The law of Moses, then, was not actually abrogated by Christ, who observed the rules of it in the days of his flesh; nor by the apostles, who seldom used their liberty from it, leaving the use of it to the Jews still; but having done its work whereunto it was designed, and its obligation expiring, ending, and being removed or taken away, in the death and resurrection of Christ, and promulgation of the gospel that ensued thereupon, which doctrinally declared its ἀνωφελείαν, or uselessness, God in his providence put an end unto it as to its observation, in the utter and irrecoverable overthrow of the temple, the place designed for the solemn exercise of its worship. So did it “decay, wax old,” and “vanish away,” chap. 8:13. And this also God ordered, in his infinite wisdom, that their temple, city, and nation, and so, consequently, their whole church-state, should be utterly wasted by the pagan Romans, before the power of the empire came into the hands of men professing the name of Christ; who could neither well have suffered their temple to stand as by them abused, nor yet have destroyed it without hardening them in their impenitency and unbelief.

John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, hg. von W. H. Goold, Bd. 18, Works of John Owen (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1854), 12.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

“Same context” is not a requirement that words like γῆ, which have multiple meanings, must then have the same usage simply due to proximity.

γῆ in Matthew 24:30 doesn’t contain any extra clues to require it to be understood in a broader sense, like acts 1:8 does.

As to Matthew 24:35, I understand the phrase to possibly be hyperbolic for the purpose of comparison, like Matthew 5:18, though I’m not dogmatic about that.

• 18For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished

Both Matthew 24:30 and Matthew 24:35 relate directly to the second coming of Christ, so why wouldn't the word be used in the same context in each verse? I see no reason why not.

I have no idea what you believe about how it works, I was just explaining one argument. I’m sorry if that came off as a strawman.

I had never said I believe that, somehow, everyone in the world will see Jesus in the sky over Jerusalem. That obviously makes no sense and is not reasonable. I'm not going to claim I know exactly how it will work, but with Jesus being God, I have no trouble believing that He will have a way of making Himself visible to everyone in the world. You have to allow for the event to have a supernatural aspect to it. Or, for all anyone knows, He could make a trek around the entire world, making Himself visible. Who knows. I just know that His second coming will be a global event since passages like 2 Peter 3:10-13 make that very clear.

I think it’s relevant for understanding how to interpret Matthew 24:30. Every eye around the world cannot practically see Jesus descend from one point in the sky over Jerusalem (or wherever). So I think we can rule out that hyper literal meaning of the passage.

Yep. Never said otherwise.

γῆ has multiple meanings. Just because γῆ in vs 30 is found close in proximity to vs 35, doesn’t mean they have the same usage.

It isn't just that they are found in close proximity, but they are both used in relation to the second coming of Christ. So, to me, that means they must have the same context since they are used to refer to things that are related to the same event.

 

[David in NJ]

Jesus and the apostles didn't abolish the Old Testament worship, but they followed it (yes, even the apostles after the Great Commission). Here is an extract of John Owens introduction to the Epistle of the Hebrews, which he assumed was written by Paul:

IV. He takes it for granted, in the whole Epistle, that the Judaical church-state did yet continue, and that the worship of it was not yet disallowed of God; suitably to what was before declared concerning his own and the other apostles’ practice. Had that church-state been utterly abolished, all observation of Mosaical rites, which were the worship of that church as such, had been utterly unlawful, as now it is. Neither did the determination recorded Acts 15 abolish them, as some suppose, but only free the Gentiles from their observance. Their free use was yet permitted unto the Jews, Acts 21:20, 22–26, 27:9; and practised by Paul in particular in his Nazaritical vow, chap. 21:26, which was attended with a sacrifice, Num. 6:13–21. Nor was Mosaical worship utterly to cease, so as to have no acceptance with God, until the final ruin of that church, foretold by our Saviour himself, Matt. 24, by Peter, 2 Epist. 3, by James also, chap. 5:6–9, and by our apostle in this Epistle, chap. 10:37, 12:25–27, was accomplished. Hence it is that our apostle calls the times of the gospel “The world to come,” Heb. 2:5, 6:5,—the name whereby the Jews denoted the state of the church under the Messiah,—proper unto it only whilst the legal administrations of worship did continue. Thus, as de facto he had showed respect unto the person of the high priest as one yet in lawful office, Acts 23:5, so doctrinally he takes it for granted that that office was still continued, Heb. 8:4, 5, with the whole worship of Moses’ institution, chap. 13:11, 12. And this dispensation of God’s patience, being the last trial of that church, was continued in a proportion of time answerable to their abode in the wilderness upon its first erection; which our apostle minds them of, chap. 3, 4. The law of Moses, then, was not actually abrogated by Christ, who observed the rules of it in the days of his flesh; nor by the apostles, who seldom used their liberty from it, leaving the use of it to the Jews still; but having done its work whereunto it was designed, and its obligation expiring, ending, and being removed or taken away, in the death and resurrection of Christ, and promulgation of the gospel that ensued thereupon, which doctrinally declared its ἀνωφελείαν, or uselessness, God in his providence put an end unto it as to its observation, in the utter and irrecoverable overthrow of the temple, the place designed for the solemn exercise of its worship. So did it “decay, wax old,” and “vanish away,” chap. 8:13. And this also God ordered, in his infinite wisdom, that their temple, city, and nation, and so, consequently, their whole church-state, should be utterly wasted by the pagan Romans, before the power of the empire came into the hands of men professing the name of Christ; who could neither well have suffered their temple to stand as by them abused, nor yet have destroyed it without hardening them in their impenitency and unbelief.

John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, hg. von W. H. Goold, Bd. 18, Works of John Owen (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1854), 12.

SEE Post 227

God is Offering you a way of FREEDOM from doctrines of men and into His TRUTH = "Thy Word is Truth"

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus and the apostles didn't abolish the Old Testament worship, but they followed it (yes, even the apostles after the Great Commission).

Do you know why Paul followed it? Not because he believed he had to. Read this...

1 Corinthians 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. 20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. 22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

Here is an extract of John Owens introduction to the Epistle of the Hebrews, which he assumed was written by Paul:

I'm talking to you, not John Owens. I'd prefer you use your own words to describe what you believe and why.

IV. He takes it for granted, in the whole Epistle, that the Judaical church-state did yet continue, and that the worship of it was not yet disallowed of God; suitably to what was before declared concerning his own and the other apostles’ practice. Had that church-state been utterly abolished, all observation of Mosaical rites, which were the worship of that church as such, had been utterly unlawful, as now it is. Neither did the determination recorded Acts 15 abolish them, as some suppose, but only free the Gentiles from their observance. Their free use was yet permitted unto the Jews, Acts 21:20, 22–26, 27:9; and practised by Paul in particular in his Nazaritical vow, chap. 21:26, which was attended with a sacrifice, Num. 6:13–21. Nor was Mosaical worship utterly to cease, so as to have no acceptance with God, until the final ruin of that church, foretold by our Saviour himself, Matt. 24, by Peter, 2 Epist. 3, by James also, chap. 5:6–9, and by our apostle in this Epistle, chap. 10:37, 12:25–27, was accomplished. Hence it is that our apostle calls the times of the gospel “The world to come,” Heb. 2:5, 6:5,—the name whereby the Jews denoted the state of the church under the Messiah,—proper unto it only whilst the legal administrations of worship did continue. Thus, as de facto he had showed respect unto the person of the high priest as one yet in lawful office, Acts 23:5, so doctrinally he takes it for granted that that office was still continued, Heb. 8:4, 5, with the whole worship of Moses’ institution, chap. 13:11, 12. And this dispensation of God’s patience, being the last trial of that church, was continued in a proportion of time answerable to their abode in the wilderness upon its first erection; which our apostle minds them of, chap. 3, 4. The law of Moses, then, was not actually abrogated by Christ, who observed the rules of it in the days of his flesh; nor by the apostles, who seldom used their liberty from it, leaving the use of it to the Jews still; but having done its work whereunto it was designed, and its obligation expiring, ending, and being removed or taken away, in the death and resurrection of Christ, and promulgation of the gospel that ensued thereupon, which doctrinally declared its ἀνωφελείαν, or uselessness, God in his providence put an end unto it as to its observation, in the utter and irrecoverable overthrow of the temple, the place designed for the solemn exercise of its worship. So did it “decay, wax old,” and “vanish away,” chap. 8:13. And this also God ordered, in his infinite wisdom, that their temple, city, and nation, and so, consequently, their whole church-state, should be utterly wasted by the pagan Romans, before the power of the empire came into the hands of men professing the name of Christ; who could neither well have suffered their temple to stand as by them abused, nor yet have destroyed it without hardening them in their impenitency and unbelief.

John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, hg. von W. H. Goold, Bd. 18, Works of John Owen (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1854), 12.

It's one thing for the continued observance of the old covenant law to continue, and another thing altogether to think that the old covenant was still in effect and expected to be followed by God. It was not. Scripture says it was made obsolete. That means it was effectually put to an end and no longer in effect. It was no longer required by God to perform old covenant animal sacrifices and such. The tearing of the veil of the temple in two when Jesus died signified that. God's people were put under the new covenant after Christ's death and were no longer under the old covenant at that point.

 

[amigo de christo]

SEE Post 227

God is Offering you a way of FREEDOM from doctrines of men and into His TRUTH = "Thy Word is Truth"

To the trenches the battle rages on my friend . TIS CHRIST JESUS for the sheep and in the bible we shall remain .

 

[ProDeo]

No, Christ was not the first human to be physically resurrected to an eternally glorified incorruptible form. That happened on several occasion in the OT as well as in the NT to quite a few individuals, even before Christ was raised from the dead.

Please quote those OT passages.

 

[kdx]

Do you know why Paul followed it? Not because he believed he had to.

He knew too that he didn't have to. But still, as you can see from the extract I have given, it was at that time (until 70 AD) still accepted with God. If you felt like you should keep the Law of Moses, the Old Covenant, without trusting in it, but while nonetheless trusting in Christ alone, then it's all fine. And this you can see by the apostles.

I'm talking to you, not John Owens. I'd prefer you use your own words to describe what you believe and why.

That little section explains pretty good (with all the scriptures) why I believe what I believe, I couldn't say it any better. So why not quote it.

It's one thing for the continued observance of the old covenant law to continue, and another thing altogether to think that the old covenant was still in effect and expected to be followed by God.

If the Old Covenant (which is Gods covenant) still continues, then it is still in effect. And this you can see by the practice of the apostles. But of course they didn't trust in it for their salvation, this is where the newly established New Covenant comes in, which they also observed and were a part of. The problem is when you are trusting in the Old Covenant for your salvation, and have no regard for the New. This we also find in the New Testament written (the Judaizers who said circumcision is necessary to be saved). But if you are Christs, then go ahead and observe the Old Covenant aswell; no problem there. It has nothing to do with your salvation, and was instituted and still in being at that time, until 70 AD when God put a stop to it.

It was no longer required by God to perform old covenant animal sacrifices and such.

That's true. But that doesn't negate my point. God didn't require it anymore, but he still accepted it if you really wanted to observe it, if you at the same time trusted in his Son and were part of and observed the New Covenant, too.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Do you believe that in 70 AD all believers were resurrected, and the living ones caught up to heaven? If so, then who would be left on earth to preach the gospel?

No, it was only bodily resurrected believers who were caught up to heaven with Christ in AD 70. Any believers who had not yet died stayed on the planet. The typical "rapture" teaching needs some revision. Those "living" and "remaining" believers in 1 Thess. 4 who were to be caught up were those who had already been made "alive" by resurrection (such as Lazarus, the beloved disciple, and the Matt. 27:52-53 saints, Dorcas, etc.). These resurrected saints had "remained" on the earth serving in the early church, but were caught up into the clouds together with the rest of the newly-resurrected saints in AD 70.

A question for you (and others): Why would Christ warn His disciples to watch for the AOD of "Jerusalem surrounded by armies" so that they could immediately flee for the mountains to avoid the "great tribulation" days? Christ was going to return "Immediately after the tribulation of those days". Why was it necessary for the believers to flee from Judea and Jerusalem if the living believers were merely to be caught up to heaven with the returning Christ? It wouldn't have mattered what location they were in if the living were going to be raptured along with the resurrected saints. They would have been "caught up" to heaven anyway, regardless of where they happened to be located on earth, so there would have been no need to flee for the mountains.

God intended for a great number of living believers to survive the "great tribulation" between AD 66-70 and His second coming return back in AD 70 so that the church growth would continue to increase on earth. And it did. We have historians' records of believers who returned from distant Pella to Jerusalem after the war ended, to live again in the city and do evangelism.

 

[ProDeo]

That "everlasting fire" that was "prepared for the Devil and his angels" in Matt. 15:41 was the "furnace of fire" which was in Jerusalem, according to Isaiah 31:9. God's fire was in Zion, and His furnace in Jerusalem, it says.

The wicked who were cast "alive" into that "Lake of Fire" environment in Jerusalem were the living wicked individuals in AD 66-70 under those siege conditions with the Zealot factions battling each other for power in the city. Also, the entire Satanic realm of Satan, the devils, and the unclean spirits were ALL imprisoned within Jerusalem's walls for the duration of that siege. Isaiah 24:21-23 predicted this punishment for the wicked angelic "host of high ones", as well as Revelation 18:2 when Mystery Babylon / Old Jerusalem became "a habitation for devils and a prison for EVERY unclean spirit". God used the fiery conflagration of Jerusalem's "Lake of Fire" conditions and the plagues in the disintegrating city of Jerusalem to torment both the living besieged inhabitants as well as the unclean spirits who were possessing those individuals.

First of all you have to proof "Babylon the great" is Jerusalem.

Secondly,

Matt 25:31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
Matt 25:32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

There is no shred of evidence we live in Christ 1000 year reign, or that the final judgement Matt 25 speaks about already took place, that Christ sits sits on his glorious throne on Earth.

How do you plea ?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Bad translation of this verse. The word "First" applies to the verb "to shew light unto the people and to the Gentiles" - NOT to the verb "rise from the dead". Christ was the first to do this after He had risen from the dead with His command, "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature...". Not just to the lost sheep of the house of Israel anymore, but to the Gentiles as well. And Christ was the FIRST to command that this gospel evangelism be done in Gentile lands.

 

[CTK]

No, it was only bodily resurrected believers who were caught up to heaven with Christ in AD 70. Any believers who had not yet died stayed on the planet. The typical "rapture" teaching needs some revision. Those "living" and "remaining" believers in 1 Thess. 4 who were to be caught up were those who had already been made "alive" by resurrection (such as Lazarus, the beloved disciple, and the Matt. 27:52-53 saints, Dorcas, etc.). These resurrected saints had "remained" on the earth serving in the early church, but were caught up into the clouds together with the rest of the newly-resurrected saints in AD 70.

A question for you (and others): Why would Christ warn His disciples to watch for the AOD of "Jerusalem surrounded by armies" so that they could immediately flee for the mountains to avoid the "great tribulation" days? Christ was going to return "Immediately after the tribulation of those days". Why was it necessary for the believers to flee from Judea and Jerusalem if the living believers were merely to be caught up to heaven with the returning Christ? It wouldn't have mattered what location they were in if the living were going to be raptured along with the resurrected saints. They would have been "caught up" to heaven anyway, regardless of where they happened to be located on earth, so there would have been no need to flee for the mountains.

God intended for a great number of living believers to survive the "great tribulation" between AD 66-70 and His second coming return back in AD 70 so that the church growth would continue to increase on earth. And it did. We have historians' records of believers who returned from distant Pella to Jerusalem after the war ended, to live again in the city and do evangelism.

For what it is worth...

In Paul’s comments, “alive and remain” simply means still living at the Lord’s coming—ordinary believers who haven’t died. Paul even includes himself in the “we,” not a special class of previously resurrected people. The sequence is plain: the Lord descends, the dead in Christ rise first, and then those living are caught up together with them to meet the Lord and be with Him forever. That doesn’t fit the idea that “alive and remaining” refers to folks like Lazarus or the saints of Matthew 27 who had already been raised earlier.

Scripture treats Lazarus and Dorcas as restored to mortal life (they eat, walk, and later die again); it never says they lived on for decades awaiting a unique AD 70 catching-up. Matthew’s brief note about “many bodies of the saints” being raised is a sign tied to Jesus’ death and resurrection, not the start of a new, separate category of semi-glorified believers who linger until 70. The New Testament reserves the general resurrection/glorification for the Lord’s return (1 Cor 15:20–23, 51–54).

Because Jesus’ warnings in Luke 21 and Matthew 24 about the abomination/desolation and “Jerusalem surrounded by armies” concern a local judgment on Judea in that generation. Fleeing spared lives during the Roman siege—an event most agree took place in AD 70. Those instructions make perfect sense even if the Parousia (the appearing described in 1 Thess 4; Acts 1:11) is a different event. Put simply: the flight sayings address survival in a specific war, while the catching-up addresses the worldwide gathering at the Lord’s appearing. Conflating the two collapses categories the texts keep distinct.

The New Testament’s language for the Lord’s appearing is universal, public, and consummating: “this same Jesus… will come in the same way you saw Him go” (Acts 1:11); “every eye will see Him” (Rev 1:7); He comes with “a cry of command… the trumpet of God,” the dead raised, the living transformed, and “we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thess 4:16–17; 1 Cor 15:52–54). If that occurred in AD 70, it’s hard to explain why the post-70 churches—who certainly remembered the war—continued to look ahead to Christ’s future appearing and a still-future resurrection, rather than celebrating it as already accomplished.

Paul order of events shows that all who belong to Christ (dead and living) are gathered at His coming (1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 4:16–17). That’s why the New Testament ties the catching-up to the end (final resurrection, judgment, new creation), not to the fall of Jerusalem. The growth of the church after 70—which I’m glad we all acknowledge—fits perfectly if AD 70 was the fulfillment of Jesus’ Jerusalem prophecies and a sign of God’s faithfulness, but not the day of the universal resurrection and catching-up.

 

[3 Resurrections]

No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

Of course that was true - but that was at the time Christ was then speaking to Nicodemus. That statement did not remain true. We can see in Scripture exactly when resurrected mankind was first allowed access into heaven's temple, and it was when the seventh plague had been poured out in Revelation 15:8. That plague was performed back in the first century in AD 70 and is already fulfilled. Which means resurrected mankind was able to enter heaven's temple back then.