Olivet Discourse revisited

[Davy]

"Tribulation" is a motif in the Bible, indicating a nation going through problems. Whether this problem is due to God's anger against them or not is determined by the context.

That kind of deluded statement makes you sound like a university professor who teaches the subject of religion, and because of much time covering many... various religions, has become confused with much study of so many of them, that he becomes enamored with the vain idea that they are all equal to each other, when that is not the case with God's Word, which is about the Truth, and is not a religion.

The "great tribulation" that Jesus forewarned His faithful Church about was in connection with events for the very end of this world...

Matt 24:21-28
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

What time period was that, "since the beginning of the world to this time"? And you're trying to say Jesus was only comparing that coming "great tribulation" with all the PAST TRIBULATIONS UPON A NATION? You obviously... FAILED to understand what Jesus said there.


22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, "Lo, here is Christ, or there"; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, "Behold, He is in the desert"; go not forth: "behold, He is in the secret chambers"; believe it not.

That "false Christs" in the Greek is pseudochristos, from 2 Greek words: pseudo (false) and christos (singular Christ). The context of those above verses are about a SINGULAR FALSE MESSIAH with the ability to do miracles so powerful, that IF it were possible, he would deceive even Christ's very elect. NO SUCH FALSE MESSIAH HAS COME YET TODAY TO FULFILL THAT.

This is the reason why the next Sign Jesus gave in comparison to that coming false Messiah, is about the Sign of HIS COMING AT THE END OF THIS WORLD.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
KJV

And then He warns against being deceived like a dead carcase that will be gathered to wheresoever the fake Christ's servants are gathered (given at the end of Luke 17 also in warning to the Church about being 'taken'.)

 

[Randy Kluth]

You're trying to use men's secular type thinking with that again. It's like I said, either we listen to God in His Word, or to man.

You're begging others to believe what you haven't proven. If I'm properly representing the Scriptures then I am listening to God and His Word.

Nope, you left God's Word again and went with man's word. It's doctrines of men that came up with that idea about the Roman army and the 'birth pangs' prophecy, because the prophets taught the 'birth pangs' prophesy in conjunction with Signs of the very end. Men's doctrine that you have instead listened to is trying to apply 70 A.D. to those 'birth pangs'.

Again, what I said about the "birth pangs" is precisely what the Scriptures says and what Jesus said. You disagree--fine.

Notice how Apostle Paul used that idea in conjunction with the "day of the Lord" coming "as a thief in the night", which is the timing of Jesus' future coming...

1 Thess 5:1-3
5 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.

2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
KJV

That travail upon a woman with child is about that birth pangs prophesy regarding the END of this world.

I've addressed this a number of times before. The use of the term "birth pangs" can be used in either context, the end of the age or the time of God's judgment against Israel in 70 AD. In both cases, they represent the signs of impending judgment. They emphasize the critical nature of our awareness of social evil around us and of the need to maintain strict holy lives in its midst.

The term "birth pangs" is also used in the OT Prophets in connection with historical judgments fulfilled long before 70 AD and the end of the age. So the term means what it does depending on the context in which it is used. It is an interpretive fallacy to try to make a term carry a single context with it wherever it is used. It has not always applied only to the "endtimes" in biblical prophecy!

Uh... what? Jesus never said that by just having good works that we wouldn't be deceived. That must be something else you've picked up from those preachers you listen to. And I know, a lot of brethren actually believe that if they only focus on doing good, that they won't be subjected to the coming "great tribulation", and don't have to know the things Lord Jesus and His Apostles warned us about for the 'end'.

No, I picked up the idea that we are to focus on doing good works in order to properly be prepared for the 2nd Coming. This is what *Jesus' said*--not "my preachers!"

Matt 24.45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time?

Matt 10.42 And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.”

No, those in Christ have to 'discipline' theirselves in His Word to know how to make a 'stand' for Him in the "evil day" (future "great tribulation"). It's not just about having good works, it's about being prepared HOW Lord Jesus and His Apostles said to be prepared. And that is why... Lord Jesus gave us the Signs of the end per His Olivet discourse and His Book of Revelation. And much of it was first written in the Old Testament prophets too. So WOW! God really made sure the subject of the events for the very end were well covered in MANY Books of His Word! And that's what makes the Preterist/Historicist doctrines that try to treat most all Bible prophesy as being past history, which is the idea you are pushing here about Jesus' Olivet discourse, as a joke.

"Signs" were given to us to enable us to understand the fight we are in. It is a battle over spirituality and ethics. We prepare not by consulting our horoscope, but rather, by living godly lives as a testimony to the truth of Christ.

The Bible is not a code book for interpreting prophecy as a way of knowing what is around the corner. That ignores the fact that preparation for Christ's Coming is how we live our lives and what spirit we are to be living in.

It is not a judgmental spirit, but a spirit of love, desiring all to come to the knowledge of the truth, and so be saved. It is about walking with God.

 

[Randy Kluth]

That kind of deluded statement makes you sound like a university professor who teaches the subject of religion, and because of much time covering many... various religions, has become confused with much study of so many of them, that he becomes enamored with the vain idea that they are all equal to each other, when that is not the case with God's Word, which is about the Truth, and is not a religion.

Please stick to the subject. "Tribulation" is a regular motif in Scriptures. It represents the state of national Israel when they break, as a majority, their covenant with God under the Law. They are then thrown into a troubled state in which they are no longer blessed, but rather, cursed.

Since the entire nation suffers this state of "tribulation" there are an innocent, righteous few who have to undergo and experience the same treatment, even though they do not deserve it. God leaves them there as a witness to the right way to live, to convict the majority of how they should've been living to avoid this "tribulation."

"Tribulation" can mean a number of things, however. It can indicate trouble brought on Israel in their innocence or even in their righteousness by corrupt pagan powers. This "tribulation" is therefore not always a *punishment* or "curse" from God.

In the Olivet Discourse, "great tribulation" is depicted in the character of God's *punishment* upon Israel for breaking their covenant with God. They've rejected their Messiah, and so suffer the loss of their capital city, the temple--the center of their religion, and their homeland. If this is not plain to you, it is to me. It's precisely what Luke 21 says. You have only to read it.

The "great tribulation" that Jesus forewarned His faithful Church about was in connection with events for the very end of this world...

Matt 24:21-28
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

What time period was that, "since the beginning of the world to this time"? And you're trying to say Jesus was only comparing that coming "great tribulation" with all the PAST TRIBULATIONS UPON A NATION? You obviously... FAILED to understand what Jesus said there.

Yes, the NT Jewish Diaspora was to be the *worst judgment* in Israel's entire history. By comparison, the Babylonian exile lasted about 70 years, whereas the NT Jewish Diaspora has lasted 2000 years! It has convinced Christians for centuries that God's covenant with Israel has ended, and that the Jewish Hope must be interpreted differently.

That "false Christs" in the Greek is pseudochristos, from 2 Greek word: pseudo (false) and christos (singular Christ). The context of those above verses are about SINGULAR FALSE MESSIAH with the power to do miracles so powerful, that IF it were possible, he would deceive even Christ's very elect. NO SUCH FALSE MESSIAH HAS COME YET TODAY TO FULFILL THAT.

Since the context of the Olivet Discourse was the 70 AD destruction of the temple, the "birth pang" signs that preceded it centered on "false prophets" in Jesus' day, who tried to convince others that God would defeat the Romans and save Israel from them. It was a false message.

This is the reason why the next Sign Jesus gave in comparison to that coming false Messiah is about the Sign of HIS COMING AT THE END OF THIS WORLD.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
KJV

And then He warns against being deceived like a dead carcase that will be gathered to wheresoever the fake Christ's servants are gathered (given at the end of Luke 17 also in warning to the Church about being 'taken'.

Those in Israel who were "taken" and "left" were descriptive of God's judgment against the Jewish People. Some indeed were taken away in exile, while others were left to manage the fields as servants of Rome.

The Romans had on their standards the eagle, which they worshiped. When they gathered around Jerusalem they appeared like eagles surrounding a prey, in order to pounce on it and ultimately devour it. Jerusalem was the "carcass" or "corpse." The Roman Army were the "eagles" or "vultures."

 

[Davy]

You're begging others to believe what you haven't proven. If I'm properly representing the Scriptures then I am listening to God and His Word.

You are wrong. I'm only recommending that brethren 'stay' in God's Word for themselves, instead of turning to a bunch of malarkey form men's doctrines like you follow. And no, you are pushing ideology that originates from OUTSIDE of God's written Word. You just have not learned yet that I'm someone you cannot just blow smoke upon, because I'm a strong student in God's Word for myself with His help by The Holy Spirit.

Again, what I said about the "birth pangs" is precisely what the Scriptures says and what Jesus said. You disagree--fine.

Not what the Scriptures point to, as I showed in my previous posts, which is NOT what you followed from God's Word. The travail with child metaphor Jesus and His Apostles, especially gave about the end time events.

Here's a little example from the OT prophets about the birth pangs metaphor, and this has NOT happened yet to this day...

Isa 13:6-11
6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

7 Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt:

8 And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames.

9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and He shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
KJV

Will you fib against that above Scripture too, and say some silliness like that was past history?? If you try to deny that "pangs" and "as a woman that travaileth" is not in connection with that future "day of the Lord" DESTRUCTION EVENT, then it would mean to lie against the Word of God there.

So thus far, not much of what you've said has proven any of your Preterist position.

 

[Davy]

Please stick to the subject. "Tribulation" is a regular motif in Scriptures. It represents the state of national Israel when they break, as a majority, their covenant with God under the Law. They are then thrown into a troubled state in which they are no longer blessed, but rather, cursed.

Since the entire nation suffers this state of "tribulation" there are an innocent, righteous few who have to undergo and experience the same treatment, even though they do not deserve it. God leaves them there as a witness to the right way to live, to convict the majority of how they should've been living to avoid this "tribulation."

"Tribulation" can mean a number of things, however. It can indicate trouble brought on Israel in their innocence or even in their righteousness by corrupt pagan powers. This "tribulation" is therefore not always a *punishment* or "curse" from God.

In the Olivet Discourse, "great tribulation" is depicted in the character of God's *punishment* upon Israel for breaking their covenant with God. They've rejected their Messiah, and so suffer the loss of their capital city, the temple--the center of their religion, and their homeland. If this is not plain to you, it is to me. It's precisely what Luke 21 says. You have only to read it.

Yes, the NT Jewish Diaspora was to be the *worst judgment* in Israel's entire history. By comparison, the Babylonian exile lasted about 70 years, whereas the NT Jewish Diaspora has lasted 2000 years! It has convinced Christians for centuries that God's covenant with Israel has ended, and that the Jewish Hope must be interpreted differently.

Since the context of the Olivet Discourse was the 70 AD destruction of the temple, the "birth pang" signs that preceded it centered on "false prophets" in Jesus' day, who tried to convince others that God would defeat the Romans and save Israel from them. It was a false message.

Those in Israel who were "taken" and "left" were descriptive of God's judgment against the Jewish People. Some indeed were taken away in exile, while others were left to manage the fields as servants of Rome.

The Romans had on their standards the eagle, which they worshiped. When they gathered around Jerusalem they appeared like eagles surrounding a prey, in order to pounce on it and ultimately devour it. Jerusalem was the "carcass" or "corpse." The Roman Army were the "eagles" or "vultures."

Trying to reason with someone like you is useless, you aren't interested in staying in God's Word as written, therefore you deserve to stay deceived and unprepared for what is coming in our near future.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You know, prophesy first given in the Old Testament and shown as fulfilled in the New Testament is supposed to be the order of interpretation we follow in God's Word, not the other way around like you're trying to do.

My point is this, in Jeremiah 46:10, the phrase "day of the Lord" is applied about the historical event of the Jew's captivity to Babylon by king Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah's day. Yet in 1 Thessalonians 5 and 2 Peter 3:10, Apostles Paul and Peter were using that "day of the Lord" phrase when pointing to the very end of this present world. So didn't Paul and Peter know that "day of the Lord" already happened in history back in Jeremiah's day??

What it means is, we CANNOT look at terms in the OT prophets and think they have all been completed back in history. Also, this means God's Word uses some of those prophetic terms as a multi-fulfillment. Daniel 11 about Antiochus IV is one such example. The disciplined Bible student will recognize some of the prophetic parameters about the "vile person" were never fulfilled by Antiochus.

And one the greatest mistakes with men's doctrines saying that Daniel 11 prophecy about the "vile person" has already been fulfilled is the fact that Lord Jesus quoted that prophecy of the "abomination of desolation" event around 200 years after Antiochus had been dead! Nor did the Romans in 70 A.D. fulfill it either, because the temple burned down before they could get control of it. The AOD from Daniel 11 REQUIRES a standing temple in Jerusalem.

How terms like "day of the Lord" should be interpreted is not based on a successive series of applications in history, from OT to NT. The "day of the Lord" as applied to the Babylonian Judgment would be applied in exactly the same way today, if today we are referring to that event! To say that the "day of the Lord" can no longer refer to a previous event called the "day of the Lord" is therefore ludicrous. And that kind of interpretation is usually considered a fallacy.

Words and phrases carry their context with them only when it is clear that the term has obtained a technical meaning where it is obvious it is being used as such. Determining when a phrase is being used as a Proper Noun can only be assumed by the way it is being used in context or by the use of capital letters as in our language.

The Day of the Lord must therefore be interpreted in each case it is being used to determine its proper context. It does not always refer to the endtimes. And it certainly does not *always* refer to the endtimes/time of Antichrist when the term is used in the NT.

 

[Randy Kluth]

That the event of "great tribulation" is not about Christian suffering sure is a bunch of deceived baloney.

That is not an argument! That is an assertion, and it is a *judgmental* assertion, as well. You lack the proper spirit in discussing a biblical subject with fellow Christians.

The coming "great tribulation" will have this kind of far reach by the coming "dragon", and these are what Jesus told John...

Rev 13:4-9
4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, "Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?"

5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

That's equal to 1260 days, by the way, and represents the latter half of Daniel's symbolic "one week" of Daniel 9:27. Revelation 11 already revealed that period also for the end in the 6th trumpet - 2nd woe timing, with Jesus' return shown on the 7th trumpet - 3rd woe.

6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

How... will he do that blasmphemy? By claiming to be GOD, like Apostle Paul showed in 2 Thess.2.

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

9 If any man have an ear, let him hear.
KJV

Those verses is red are proof AGAINST WHAT YOU SAID that the "great tribulation" will not be upon Christians. It will be upon ALL NATIONS and PEOPLES, not just in Jerusalem and the Jews.

Where does the Bible use "great tribulation" to describe the reign of Antichrist? You are asserting things without proof.

We both recognize that the Church emerges from the great tribulation of the present age. But this is not specifically descriptive of only the Reign of Antichrist. Rather, the term originates with the judgment God sent upon Israel for failing their covenant under the Law. It originates with Israel's NT Diaspora.

The sins and judgment of Israel have followed Christianity in the nations where it has gone. Many nations have become Christian, and those very nations, like Israel, have fallen into sin and now are experiencing various forms of "tribulation." The Reign of Antichrist will be but the final form of this "tribulation."

The "tribulation" does affect Christians who are living holy lives. But the main import of the term involves trouble sent by God upon an ungodly, rebellious world who turn against the light of Christ. No doubt this is "tribulation" for Christians, but the cause of the tribulation are the world's sins. It is a *punishment* from God against the pagan world for their recalcitrance and resistance to the truth.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You are wrong. I'm only recommending that brethren 'stay' in God's Word for themselves, instead of turning to a bunch of malarkey form men's doctrines like you follow. And no, you are pushing ideology that originates from OUTSIDE of God's written Word. You just have not learned yet that I'm someone you cannot just blow smoke upon, because I'm a strong student in God's Word for myself with His help by The Holy Spirit.

Don't brag. Let your learning speak for itself.

Not what the Scriptures point to, as I showed in my previous posts, which is NOT what you followed from God's Word. The travail with child metaphor Jesus and His Apostles, especially gave about the end time events.

Here's a little example from the OT prophets about the birth pangs metaphor, and this has NOT happened yet to this day...

Isa 13:6-11
6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

7 Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt:

8 And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames.

9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and He shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
KJV

Will you fib against that above Scripture too, and say some silliness like that was past history?? If you try to deny that "pangs" and "as a woman that travaileth" is not in connection with that future "day of the Lord" DESTRUCTION EVENT, then it would mean to lie against the Word of God there.

As I said, the term "day of the Lord" means what it does *in context.* The context of Isa 13 is explicitly this:
Isa 13.1 A prophecy against Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw.

The prophecy about Babylon was clearly fulfilled in OT times, and not in the endtimes! If in the prophecy the context changes to include the endtimes, then the words should indicate that.

As I said, the term "day of the Lord" can refer to any judgment of God in history, depending on the context in which it is used. The term does not carry with it an "endtimes" context unless the term acquires special status as a Proper Noun, indicated by capital letters. And that feature didn't exist in the original language.

So thus far, not much of what you've said has proven any of your Preterist position.

The argument ceases to be credible when one resorts to name calling. I consider this cheap "name calling" because I've repeatedly proven that I am *not* a Preterist, though I have nothing against Partial Preterists who have that conviction.

The point is to identify a person properly, by using the terms properly, and you clearly are unwilling to do that. Preterists tend to view nearly *all* prophecies as past tense.

I don't do that in the least. I'm a futurist by sentiment and by my positions. I just am not a Dispensationalist, though I have nothing against Dispensationalists either.

Viewing the Olivet Discourse as focused on the *past tense* destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is as clear as Isa 13 is clear about the prophecy being about ancient Babylon.

You skirt biblical facts by camouflaging them with cheap insults. Get back on track with solid Christian argumentation, or go away.

 

[covenantee]

Trying to reason with someone like you is useless, you aren't interested in staying in God's Word as written, therefore you deserve to stay deceived and unprepared for what is coming in our near future.

The arrogance and ignorance wherein you claim to be the sole possessor of truth is typical one-man cultism.

Throughout orthodox Christian history, God has vested and invested His truth and wisdom in countless individuals whose faith, vision, and sacrifice, often to the death, has preserved and sustained that truth and wisdom, and His true Church, over the centuries. We are the spiritual beneficiaries today.

Only a cultic fool denies and rejects those realities.

 

[Keraz]

Where does the Bible use "great tribulation" to describe the reign of Antichrist?

It doesn't, because the Seven Trumpets and the Seven bowls, as described in Revelation, are God's punishments on those who follow the 'beast' and take his mark.
The Christians in the place of safety; Revelation 12:14, will not experience them.

The only Judgment/punishment that we will be in, will be the Sixth Seal, the time of testing and we must stand firm in our faith through it. Luke 21:25-26
Then comes Revelation 7:1-14, where all God's people are gathered into all of the holy Land, literally or Spiritually robed in white and praising Jesus. Ezekiel 34:30-31

 

[Randy Kluth]

It doesn't, because the Seven Trumpets and the Seven bowls, as described in Revelation, are God's punishments on those who follow the 'beast' and take his mark.
The Christians in the place of safety; Revelation 12:14, will not experience them.

I'm not sure about Rev 12, but you may be right. Nevertheless, we may or may not agree that the "great tribulation" is a punishment visited by God upon the unbelieving world of Judaism. And it may very well be expanded to include the post-Christian world, ie that world that had been Christianized and has now fallen into disrepair.

If Tribulation, used as such, refers to a punishment from God, then certainly it is not to be applied to the obedient and faithful Church. As Christians we only experience "tribulation" because we live in an ungodly world under punishment from God.

The "6th Seal" does refer to a final period of wrath from God to be poured out upon the whole world. And faithful Christians will be exempt, during this period, from divine punishment not because they do not suffer it, but only in the sense that we are the recipient of Eternal Life and have hope in the resurrection to immortality. My opinion...

 

[Timtofly]

I already know what your position is. It is the *Scriptural basis* for your belief that I have a problem with, Timothy!

Taken directly from Luke and Matthew. They are Scripture.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Taken directly from Luke and Matthew. They are Scripture.

Yes, we all use Scripture. I'm having problem determining that you Scriptural argument is valid. You said,
"Vengeance was Luke in the first century.
Tribulation will be Matthew at the Second Coming."

Though both statements are true, you are arguing, based on these statements, that the Christian experience of "tribulation" in the Early Church is different from the "tribulation" experienced by the Jewish People as a whole after 70 AD. You argue that "tribulation" implies "divine vengeance," which is correct, but then argue that Christians do not experience "divine vengeance," and thus do not experience "tribulation."

On its face we already know that is not true, biblically. The Scriptures indicate Jesus never promised his disciples freedom from suffering and tribulation. He did not come to "take us out of the world," but instead keeps us and our testimony while we are in the world.

But biblically, Luke 21 makes it clear, at least to me, that the "great tribulation" Jesus spoke of in that Discourse was applied as a form of "divine vengeance" directed at the Jewish People as a whole. The fact Christians suffered the effects of this time of punishment does not mean they were the objects of this punishment--just that they are unfortunate casualties, or "collateral damage," from the attack God sent upon the nation. God did not wish to protect believers from all suffering--only from suffering that was the product of divine wrath.

For example, God may send an earthquake upon an ungodly city. The city may be wrecked as a result of this act of "divine vengeance." However, a few good, righteous people may be in the city, and God wishes to keep them there as a testimony to righteousness. The fact they go through this "tribulation" does not mean God's wrath is directed at them. They may even be spared the worst of the trouble because they obey God and listen to His counsel. Some may actually die in the earthquake, which was attributed not to their sins, but to the sins of the majority. However, they do go through this "tribulation," while at the same time not experiencing "God's wrath."

We often do suffer in this world not as a result of our own sins, but to suffer some of the sins that others have brought upon us. This is precisely what Christ did, coming in to this world, not to suffer for his own sins, but to endure the waywardness of Man, and to forgive those willing to repent in his name.

 

[covenantee]

The fact Christians suffered the effects of this time of punishment

The Judean Christians did not suffer the effects of the destruction of Jerusalem. They fled, as Jesus had warned them to (Matthew 24:16), and survived.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Taken directly from Luke and Matthew. They are Scripture.

Yes, we all use Scripture. I'm having problem determining that you Scriptural argument is valid. You said,
"Vengeance was Luke in the first century.
Tribulation will be Matthew at the Second Coming."

Though both statements are true, you are arguing, based on these statements, that the Christian experience of "tribulation" in the Early Church is different from the "tribulation" experienced by the Jewish People as a whole after 70 AD. You argue that "tribulation" implies "divine vengeance," which is correct, but then argue that Christians do not experience "divine vengeance," and thus do not experience "tribulation."

On its face we already know that is not true, biblically. The Scriptures indicate Jesus never promised his disciples freedom from suffering and tribulation. He did not come to "take us out of the world," but instead keeps us and our testimony while we are in the world.

But biblically, Luke 21 makes it clear, at least to me, that the "great tribulation" Jesus spoke of in that Discourse was applied as a form of "divine vengeance" directed at the Jewish People as a whole. The fact Christians suffered the effects of this time of punishment does not mean they were the objects of this punishment--just that they are unfortunate casualties, or "collateral damage," from the attack God sent upon the nation. God did not wish to protect believers from all suffering--only from suffering that was the product of divine wrath.

For example, God may send an earthquake upon an ungodly city. The city may be wrecked as a result of this act of "divine vengeance." However, a few good, righteous people may be in the city, and God wishes to keep them there as a testimony to righteousness. The fact they go through this "tribulation" does not mean God's wrath is directed at them. They may even be spared the worst of the trouble because they obey God and listen to His counsel. Some may actually die in the earthquake, which was attributed not to their sins, but to the sins of the majority. However, they do go through this "tribulation," while at the same time not experiencing "God's wrath."

We often do suffer in this world not as a result of our own sins, but to suffer some of the sins that others have brought upon us. This is precisely what Christ did, coming in to this world, not to suffer for his own sins, but to endure the waywardness of Man, and to forgive those willing to repent in his name.

The Judean Christians did not suffer the effects of the destruction of Jerusalem. They fled, as Jesus had warned them to, and survived.

That's true. Jesus at that time promised those who obeyed him an escape from the wrath to take place in Jerusalem. But that did not mean they escaped the Jewish tragedy overall. The Jewish People, both believer and unbeliever, suffered the consequences of divine punishment inflicted upon the Jewish People in 70 AD. They *all* lost their homeland. They *all* were exiled in an age-long Diaspora.

For believers, this was not fatal. Believers have always lived like sojourners in a foreign land. They seek a heavenly city, and not purely an earthly one.

But good point. Believers do not experience the Wrath of God intended for the rebellious and unrepentant. But we do suffer the curses that come down upon the country we live in, even though God is punishing the corruptions in the country, and not us when we live in righteousness.

God does not spare us the tribulations of this world. We suffer along with the whole human race, experiencing the net effects of trouble brought on by believers nearby us and even far away from us.

The COVID pandemic was brought on by ungodly people. And yet even the righteous suffer indirectly from the sins of those who brought on us all this tragedy.

I lost a good Christian friend to COVID. He was not being punished for his sin, as I see it. Rather, He was a testimony of light in a dark world. And he was extremely forgiving of his family, which at times were wayward. His wife had been wayward and lived like a pagan, and his marriage had ended in divorce to protect the children from the effects of drug abuse in the home.

But this brother's love for his kids was undying. I will never forget this brother, who died way too early in his life.

 

[Timtofly]

Though both statements are true, you are arguing, based on these statements, that the Christian experience of "tribulation" in the Early Church is different from the "tribulation" experienced by the Jewish People as a whole after 70 AD. You argue that "tribulation" implies "divine vengeance," which is correct, but then argue that Christians do not experience "divine vengeance," and thus do not experience "tribulation."

No, that is adding to what I even said. You are viewing the argument that way.

All on earth would continually experience tribulation for the next, it has been, 1993 years and still ongoing. Tribulation is not a respector of people's belief system. Vengeance is the result of an action of any person in retribution, by any other person. Tribulation is just produced by many actions humans tend to enjoy.

All I said is that Luke was talking about the first century, and Matthew about the Second Coming, yet to happen.

 

[covenantee]

No, that is adding to what I even said. You are viewing the argument that way.

All on earth would continually experience tribulation for the next, it has been, 1993 years and still ongoing. Tribulation is not a respector of people's belief system. Vengeance is the result of an action of any person in retribution, by any other person. Tribulation is just produced by many actions humans tend to enjoy.

All I said is that Luke was talking about the first century, and Matthew about the Second Coming, yet to happen.

The consequences of Messiah's vengeance described in Luke were the tribulation and affliction described in Matthew and Mark.

All at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

 

[Randy Kluth]

No, that is adding to what I even said. You are viewing the argument that way.

All on earth would continually experience tribulation for the next, it has been, 1993 years and still ongoing. Tribulation is not a respector of people's belief system. Vengeance is the result of an action of any person in retribution, by any other person. Tribulation is just produced by many actions humans tend to enjoy.

All I said is that Luke was talking about the first century, and Matthew about the Second Coming, yet to happen.

Yes, I may have gotten your statements a bit messed up, but I was trying to show how your differentiation between Vengeance and Tribulation does not work in the context in which the Olivet Discourse mentioned them. You apply Luke to 70 AD/Jewish Diaspora and apply Matthew to the 2nd Coming, but the point is, you were applying "vengeance" to Luke and "tribulation" to Matthew, which did not fit the context of the Olivet Discourse as I see it.

As I see it, the Olivet Discourse, no matter which version, Luke or Matthew, applied to the 70 AD event, while relegating Christ's 2nd Coming to the end of the age. Both vengeance and tribulation therefore refer to the same experience, which began in 70 AD and ends at the 2nd Coming. It is God's vengeance against the Jewish People for rejecting His Son. It is a tribulation experience in all versions for the Jewish People, costing them a nation and a covenant relationship with God.

This is, as I said, also a tribulation experience for Jewish believers, even though it cannot be said to be God's vengeance against them. It is a display of God's vengeance against unbelieving Jews which also catches up believers in the same ordeal.

It is something God calls all Christians to experience who live in this ungodly world--we must suffer a measure of tribulation, whether suffering the side effects of God's judgment upon the world or the persecution that ungodly sinners direct towards those with faith.

It is all called "tribulation" and is something both believers and unbelievers experience. However, it is not God's Wrath being directed against the believers.

The word "tribulation" is not synonymous with "wrath." However, the tribulation against the Jewish People was a display of divine wrath against the Jewish People generally, even though the element of "wrath" was not directed against believers specifically. Believers are "collateral damage" in this display of God's wrath against Jewish sin. They suffer "tribulation," but not "wrath."

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Trying to reason with someone like you is useless, you aren't interested in staying in God's Word as written, therefore you deserve to stay deceived and unprepared for what is coming in our near future.

That is how the rest of us feel about you.

 

[Randy Kluth]

That is how the rest of us feel about you.

"If you reject my interpretation of God's Word, then you must be rejecting "God's Word!," is a very, very shallow and insulting argument. I agree that Davy should reevaluate his approach to Christian discussion and debate. Differences can be discussed in a spirit of Christian comradery. Yes, it's sometimes difficult for all of us, but we should make an honest effort. Right?