Preterism misrepresents Scripture

[Spiritual Israelite]

If the events and phenomena that Jesus predicted occurred exactly at the time and in the manner that He predicted, there is nothing that disqualifies them as evidence, irrespective of where they occurred.

He didn't specify any particular war, nation, famine, pestilence or earthquake, so how do you know that the things He "predicted occurred exactly at the time and in the manner that He predicted"? It seems to me that He was speaking in a general sense and the reference to birth pains suggested that those things would continue happening in increasing frequency and/or intensity before the end. Is that something that describes what was happening before 70 AD? I don't believe so.

And, again, these things were global. Why would global things be used as evidence of the approach of a local event?

Note also that Jesus' predictions of deceivers, and of the persecution of His disciples, included local events recorded in the book of Acts.

Yes, of course those things were occurring back then, but Jesus was making the point about these things happening with more frequency as things get closer to the end and the scope of what He was saying appears to be global rather than just local. Notice He talked about being hated in all nations because of Him, so He was not just talking about the persecution of the disciples.

And, the destruction of Jerusalem was an event of both local and global significance.

Maybe, but it's still just something that happened in and around Jerusalem. So, I'm still not seeing why and how global events would be signs of an approaching local event.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If I may...

Just as the crucifixion event was local and yet extends to include the greater context of all who are born from the beginning of the world unto the end, so too are many biblical enactments, each having a smaller local context and also a larger all inclusive context.

So then, yes Jesus spoke of the end of days, but also the end of the days of the twelve and of that generation, even specifically.

That is what we're all saying, but we're disagreeing on which verses relate to which.

Which begs the question many do not ask nor have the answer to, nor even believe that this method by God is perhaps ever correct...and yet it is established as true and correct by the precedence of the cross.

What question is that? You have a tendency to be very vague with your comments. Can you try to be more specific, please?

 

[ScottA]

So then, yes Jesus spoke of the end of days, but also the end of the days of the twelve and of that generation, even specifically. Which begs the question many do not ask nor have the answer to, nor even believe that this method by God is perhaps ever correct...and yet it is established as true and correct by the precedence of the cross.

What question is that? You have a tendency to be very vague with your comments. Can you try to be more specific, please?

It was a hypothetical question which I referred to by way of answering it. That is:

Is any passage of scripture really ever only local; or to the contrary, because it has been entered into the greater context of scripture, is it not rather true that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work", and therefore perhaps local in some cases, but always applicable in that greater context of God?​

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

More evidence.

PERSECUTION AGAINST THE DISCIPLES

Matthew: "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.., And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold" (24:9-12).

Mark: "They shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten; and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony.., whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak but the Holy Ghost... And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake" (13:9-13).

Luke: "They shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake. And it shall turn to you for a testimony...I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist...and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake" (21:12-17).

The book of Acts gives a complete account of how the disciples were persecuted in the very ways Jesus had predicted. Let us take, for example, Acts 4: "And they laid hands on them [Peter and John], and put them in prison" (verse 3). They were brought before "rulers" (verses 5-7). And it turned into an opportunity to testify. Peter explained that "there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (verse 12). They were given a mouth of wisdom which their adversaries could not gainsay, for the men of the council "marveled" (verse 13). They were then commanded "not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus" (verse 18). As Jesus had said, they were hated for his name's sake.

The same things are seen in Acts 5. Certain authorities "laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison" (verse 18). Later they were brought "before the council" (verse 27) and told to answer for continuing to teach in the name of Jesus (verse 28). Again they had opportunity to testify (verses 29-32). They were "beaten" (verse 40). As they departed from the "council", they rejoiced "that they were counted worthy to suffer for his name"(verse 41).

Or take Acts 6. There arose certain ones of the "synagogue" that disputed with Steven. "And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke" (verses 9,10). Persecution resulted and he was brought into the "council " and questioned (verse 12). Again there was the opportunity to testify, the words of that testimony being given in Acts 7. Stephen was killed for his stand (verses 54-60). Jesus had said that some of them would be killed.

Notice Acts 8. "There was a great persecution against the church." Christians were put in "prison", but the result was that the word was preached (verses 1-4).

In Acts 16, Paul and Silas were beaten and cast into "prison." But it turned into an opportunity to testify and the Philippian jailor and his family were converted as a result (verses 22-34). In Acts 21, persecution resulted in Paul being beaten, brought before rulers, before whom he testified (Acts 22). In Acts 22:19 we read that Christians were "imprisoned and beat in every Synagogue."

In Acts 24, Paul was brought before Felix, the governor, and testified. He was given a mouth of wisdom which his adversaries could not gainsay—though they obtained an orator to speak against him. Paul's words even made Felix to "tremble." In Acts 25 and 26, Paul was brought before king Agrippa, the chief captains, and the principal men of the city. He was given a mouth of wisdom, for Agrippa said to Paul, "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian" (verse 28).

Jesus said the disciples would be afflicted, beaten, imprisoned; they would be hated for his name's sake and some would be killed; they would be brought before councils, rulers, and kings, for a testimony; they would be given a mouth of wisdom which their adversaries could not gainsay. Surely these things came to pass in those years—unmistakably fulfilled in every detail.

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many ...but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved" (Mt. 24:11,13). Peter, who was present when Jesus gave this prophecy (Mk. 13:3), later wrote about "false prophets" that had risen and of "many" that followed their pernicious ways (2 Peter 2). John, who also heard Jesus give this prophecy, recorded the fulfillment: "Many false prophets are gone out into the world" (l John 4:1). "Many deceivers are entered into the world" (2 John 7).

Paul also spoke of "false apostles, deceitful workers" (2 Cor. 11:13). He mentioned Hymenaeus and Philetus who taught false doctrines and overthrew the faith of some (2 Tim. 2:17, 18). By the time of his epistle to Titus, there were "many...deceivers ...who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not" (Titus 1:10, 11).

The waters of truth were muddied by betrayals, false prophets, iniquity, and the love of many waxing cold.

Source: "Great Prophecies of the Bible" by Ralph Woodrow

You are not getting my point. I don't deny that those things were happening back then. We all know that. But, was Jesus only making the point that those things would occur before the end or is there more to it than that?

Jesus talked about the things He referenced as happening more frequently as time went on. That's why He talked about the wars, famines, earthquakes, etc. as the beginning of birth pains. Birth pains start slowly and then increase in frequency as time goes on. So, that is the context of what He was talking about.

I'm not saying that these things weren't happening in the first century, I'm saying that these things, in and of themselves, would not be a sign that the end is near (as Jesus indicated), but these things happening more frequently and/or with more intensity would be a sign that the end is near. That would include the increase in wickedness and in the number of those turning away from the faith that Jesus mentioned. And an increase in the amount of persecution happening against the church globally. I say "globally" because the context of what He was talking about was global and not just local. So, to me, He was giving global signs that would be evidence of the nearing of a global event. If He was only referring to the local event in Jerusalem there, then, in my view, He would not have referred to global things as evidence of the approaching of the local event.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It was a hypothetical question which I referred to by way of answering it. That is:

Is any passage of scripture really ever only local; or to the contrary, because it has been entered into the greater context of scripture, is it not rather true that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work?"​

Of course all scripture, including scripture about things that happened locally in Jerusalem long ago are "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness...". We all know this. What does this have to do with what the rest of us have been talking about in this thread?

 

[ScottA]

Of course all scripture, including scripture about things that happened locally in Jerusalem long ago are "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness...". We all know this. What does this have to do with what the rest of us have been talking about in this thread?

You said, "Why would global things like those be used as evidence for the approaching local event in Jerusalem? I don't believe that makes sense."

To which I submitted that no scripture is actually only to be considered "local" (as if only for "private interpretation"), but that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God and profitable for doctrine..." etc..

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You said, "Why would global things like those be used as evidence for the approaching local event in Jerusalem? I don't believe that makes sense."

To which I submitted that no scripture is actually only to be considered "local" (as if only for "private interpretation"), but that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God and profitable for doctrine..." etc..

I'm just not seeing your point at all. Do you not believe scripture ever speaks of things that would happen only in Jerusalem? Do you not believe that Jesus said that the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed? If you do believe that, then do you think that other things happening around the world had anything to do with that?

 

[WPM]

If the events and phenomena that Jesus predicted occurred exactly at the time and in the manner that He predicted, there is nothing that disqualifies them as evidence, irrespective of where they occurred.

Note also that Jesus' predictions of deceivers, and of the persecution of His disciples, included local events recorded extensively in the book of Acts.

And, the destruction of Jerusalem was an event of both local and global significance.

Jesus said in Matthew 23:37–39: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

Jesus, first of all, speaks about the destruction of the temple in AD70, as a result of Israel's unbelief. He then talks about a future climactic day in the future when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Here were two key events that would happen in the then future. The disciples were obviously inquisitive as to when these would happen. They then asked two questions in Matthew 24 in response to our Lord’s words. Matthew 24:3 records:

1. “Tell us, when shall these things be?”
2. “and what shall be the sign of thy coming [Gr. parousia], and of the end [Gr. sunteleías, meaning completion, or consummation] of the world (age)?”

This proves that the disciples were enquiring about the realization of these two aforementioned days. They wanted to know about their fulfillment. Sadly, Preterists and Premillennialists each ignore the other's events relating to the past and the future. Both are therefore missing the context and meaning. The context proves that Israel will be forced to cry "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" at Christ's future "parousia," at "the end of the age.”

Christ addressed both questions and both eras in chapter 24. However, because of the intermingling of His response, many Bible students suffer great confusion in identifying what aspect of the teaching relates to AD 70 and what relates to the second coming. Jesus addresses the greatest event first. He talks about the trying events that will precede His glorious return, and then reassures:

Jesus’ response to His disciples in Matthew 24:6 and 13-14 is notable: “ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end [Gr. télos] is not yet ... But he that shall endure unto the end [Gr. télos], the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end [Gr. télos] come.”

Jesus then changes track and refers to the events that surround the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24.

“The end of the age” is normally described as “the end.” Those that endure to the end are promised a glorious reward. The true child of God will persevere to the end because that is his nature. The false professor will not.

This is talking about the perseverance of the saints until the coming of Christ at the end. The Greek word interpreted “endure” is hupomenō actually meaning to tarry, remain, suffer, undergo, or bear (as in trials).

This definitely does not relate to the saints in Jerusalem in AD70 who safely escaped before the city was taken.

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70(Matthew 24:14)? Of course not!

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

The Gospel had only spread to the known world. Many people groups have only heard the Gospel in this past 100 years. Some have still to hear it!

The fact that the end has not yet come, is proof that we are still in the Gospel era. The great commission is still active. Evangelism is still alive, active and spreading.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus said in Matthew 23:37–39: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

Jesus, first of all, speaks about the destruction of the temple in AD70, as a result of Israel's unbelief. He then talks about a future climactic day in the future when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Here were two key events that would happen in the then future. The disciples were obviously inquisitive as to when these would happen. They then asked two questions in Matthew 24 in response to our Lord’s words. Matthew 24:3 records:

1. “Tell us, when shall these things be?”
2. “and what shall be the sign of thy coming [Gr. parousia], and of the end [Gr. sunteleías, meaning completion, or consummation] of the world (age)?”

This proves that the disciples were enquiring about the realization of these two aforementioned days. They wanted to know about their fulfillment. Sadly, Preterists and Premillennialists each ignore the other's events relating to the past and the future. Both are therefore missing the context and meaning. The context proves that Israel will be forced to cry "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" at Christ's future "parousia," at "the end of the age.”

Christ addressed both questions and both eras in chapter 24. However, because of the intermingling of His response, many Bible students suffer great confusion in identifying what aspect of the teaching relates to AD 70 and what relates to the second coming. Jesus addresses the greatest event first. He talks about the trying events that will precede His glorious return, and then reassures:

Jesus’ response to His disciples in Matthew 24:6 and 13-14 is notable: “ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end [Gr. télos] is not yet ... But he that shall endure unto the end [Gr. télos], the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end [Gr. télos] come.”

Jesus then changes track and refers to the events that surround the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24.

“The end of the age” is normally described as “the end.” Those that endure to the end are promised a glorious reward. The true child of God will persevere to the end because that is his nature. The false professor will not.

This is talking about the perseverance of the saints until the coming of Christ at the end. The Greek word interpreted “endure” is hupomenō actually meaning to tarry, remain, suffer, undergo, or bear (as in trials).

This definitely does not relate to the saints in Jerusalem in AD70 who safely escaped before the city was taken.

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70(Matthew 24:14)? Of course not!

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

The Gospel had only spread to the known world. Many people groups have only heard the Gospel in this past 100 years. Some have still to hear it!

The fact that the end has not yet come, is proof that we are still in the Gospel era. The great commission is still active. Evangelism is still alive, active and spreading.

Agree. Well said.

I'm doing some research on the words sunteleías (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:3) and télos (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:6,13-14) and it seems that they are synonyms that can be used interchangeably, similar to how we have English words that mean the same thing and can be used interchangeably.

I just see no reason at all to conclude that "the end" (telos) in verses 6, 13 and 14 is a reference to something besides "the end of the age" just because a synonym for "the end" referenced in verse 3 is used in verses 6, 13 and 14. The first use of the word meaning "the end" was used by the disciples and the other 3 uses of another word meaning "the end" were used by Jesus. Now, if Jesus Himself used two different words meaning "the end" then I might think the context would be different in each case. But, that isn't the case. It seems to me that Jesus just chose to use a different word that meant the same thing ("the end"), which is not at all uncommon in discussions using the English language and is probably the case in other languages as well.

 

[ScottA]

I'm just not seeing your point at all. Do you not believe scripture ever speaks of things that would happen only in Jerusalem? Do you not believe that Jesus said that the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed? If you do believe that, then do you think that other things happening around the world had anything to do with that?

Yes, I submit the Temple in Jerusalem and Jerusalem was only a mockup or manifestation--and of the world, of what is greater in heaven...just as Jesus spoke of the Temple referring rather to His own body.

But men are prone to obsess with the things of this world to a fault, looking to the object rather than the subject thereof. That is the point.

 

[WPM]

Agree. Well said.

I'm doing some research on the words sunteleías (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:3) and télos (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:6,13-14) and it seems that they are synonyms that can be used interchangeably, similar to how we have English words that mean the same thing and can be used interchangeably.

I just see no reason at all to conclude that "the end" (telos) in verses 6, 13 and 14 is a reference to something besides "the end of the age" just because a synonym for "the end" referenced in verse 3 is used in verses 6, 13 and 14. The first use of the word meaning "the end" was used by the disciples and the other 3 uses of another word meaning "the end" were used by Jesus. Now, if Jesus Himself used two different words meaning "the end" then I might think the context would be different in each case. But, that isn't the case. It seems to me that Jesus just chose to use a different word that meant the same thing ("the end"), which is not at all uncommon in discussions using the English language and is probably the case in other languages as well.

They are synonymous. The Greek word used in Matthew 24:3 for “the end” is sunteleia meaning the entire completion or consummation of a dispensation. The word telos is coupled with and prefixed to the popular Greek word sun (Strong’s 4862) – denoting union and togetherness. The word carries the same meaning of the end or consummation.

 

[ScottA]

Jesus said in Matthew 23:37–39: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

Jesus, first of all, speaks about the destruction of the temple in AD70, as a result of Israel's unbelief. He then talks about a future climactic day in the future when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Here were two key events that would happen in the then future. The disciples were obviously inquisitive as to when these would happen. They then asked two questions in Matthew 24 in response to our Lord’s words. Matthew 24:3 records:

1. “Tell us, when shall these things be?”
2. “and what shall be the sign of thy coming [Gr. parousia], and of the end [Gr. sunteleías, meaning completion, or consummation] of the world (age)?”

This proves that the disciples were enquiring about the realization of these two aforementioned days. They wanted to know about their fulfillment. Sadly, Preterists and Premillennialists each ignore the other's events relating to the past and the future. Both are therefore missing the context and meaning. The context proves that Israel will be forced to cry "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" at Christ's future "parousia," at "the end of the age.”

Christ addressed both questions and both eras in chapter 24. However, because of the intermingling of His response, many Bible students suffer great confusion in identifying what aspect of the teaching relates to AD 70 and what relates to the second coming. Jesus addresses the greatest event first. He talks about the trying events that will precede His glorious return, and then reassures:

Jesus’ response to His disciples in Matthew 24:6 and 13-14 is notable: “ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end [Gr. télos] is not yet ... But he that shall endure unto the end [Gr. télos], the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end [Gr. télos] come.”

Jesus then changes track and refers to the events that surround the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24.

“The end of the age” is normally described as “the end.” Those that endure to the end are promised a glorious reward. The true child of God will persevere to the end because that is his nature. The false professor will not.

This is talking about the perseverance of the saints until the coming of Christ at the end. The Greek word interpreted “endure” is hupomenō actually meaning to tarry, remain, suffer, undergo, or bear (as in trials).

This definitely does not relate to the saints in Jerusalem in AD70 who safely escaped before the city was taken.

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70(Matthew 24:14)? Of course not!

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

The Gospel had only spread to the known world. Many people groups have only heard the Gospel in this past 100 years. Some have still to hear it!

The fact that the end has not yet come, is proof that we are still in the Gospel era. The great commission is still active. Evangelism is still alive, active and spreading.

Well said!

That is a good and accurate telling of what most of Christendom has believed-- but there is an error in what most have believed, which Jesus only eluded to, saying, "the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect."

The error is that "lie" that was to be believed causing "great delusion." --Most have believed what they "expected." Which, not seeing what they expected of His return, they believe a "lie." These are foretold biblical facts.

In an appeal to those who have an ear to hear (now that what was foretold has come to fruition), I will ask a question: When Jesus said, "he that shall endure unto the end"-- were the apostles excluded, because the "end" that most believe to be the end is still future? Certainly not! So...what end was Jesus actually referring to that would come to all who would live during the times He was referring to? There is only one end that qualifies--which is the end of each individual life. Which is in accord with what Paul said after naming the groups that would be included, qualifying his point, saying, "but each one in his own order." But the greater point is, that where Paul first states them by group and then separates each one as referring to one event in each one's own order, Jesus, after describing what can only be defined as Paul stated it as being individual by time, then equates them all as being one "end."

Now, anyone who is able to hear and unscramble these biblical facts, has no choice but to conclude that the things of time are only of this world, while written within the timeline of their revelation "here a little, there a little" is the greater reality that the things of God, such as salvation, are not worldly events on that same worldly timeline. Just as it is also correct to say, we "were" crucified with Christ, though we did not even exist yet in that time in history.

Who is even prepared to imagine all Godly events as not actually occurring on a timeline--not in the world per se, but in the kingdom?

Revelation 18:4​

And I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.​

 

[rwb]

They are synonymous. The Greek word used in Matthew 24:3 for “the end” is sunteleia meaning the entire completion or consummation of a dispensation. The word telos is coupled with and prefixed to the popular Greek word sun (Strong’s 4862) – denoting union and togetherness. The word carries the same meaning of the end or consummation.

The difference is "the end" of telos is determined according to context. It means "the end" of whatever is in view. Where "the end" from sunteleia is always the end of the world.

 

[covenantee]

He didn't specify any particular war, nation, famine, pestilence or earthquake, so how do you know that the things He "predicted occurred exactly at the time and in the manner that He predicted"?

So your claim is that because He didn't specify any particular war, nation, famine, pestilence or earthquake, therefore His predictions were useless.

If His predictions about the period leading up to 70AD were useless, then there is no reason to believe that those predictions will be less useless about any period at the end of the age.

And He was simply wasting His time and ours.

And what we have is an example of inspired useless Scripture.

 

[covenantee]

They are synonymous. The Greek word used in Matthew 24:3 for “the end” is sunteleia meaning the entire completion or consummation of a dispensation. The word telos is coupled with and prefixed to the popular Greek word sun (Strong’s 4862) – denoting union and togetherness. The word carries the same meaning of the end or consummation.

They are not synonymous as Jesus used them. You'll have to disprove post 115 first.

 

[covenantee]

Agree. Well said.

I'm doing some research on the words sunteleías (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:3) and télos (translated as "the end" in Matthew 24:6,13-14) and it seems that they are synonyms that can be used interchangeably, similar to how we have English words that mean the same thing and can be used interchangeably.

I just see no reason at all to conclude that "the end" (telos) in verses 6, 13 and 14 is a reference to something besides "the end of the age" just because a synonym for "the end" referenced in verse 3 is used in verses 6, 13 and 14. The first use of the word meaning "the end" was used by the disciples and the other 3 uses of another word meaning "the end" were used by Jesus. Now, if Jesus Himself used two different words meaning "the end" then I might think the context would be different in each case. But, that isn't the case. It seems to me that Jesus just chose to use a different word that meant the same thing ("the end"), which is not at all uncommon in discussions using the English language and is probably the case in other languages as well.

Here's how "sunteleias" is translated in the NASB:

Matthew 24:3
And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

You need to correct your misquote.

Jesus is not the author of confusion, which is why He used two different terms in different contexts.

And no, they are not synonyms, as Jesus used them.

You'll have to disprove post 115.

 

[covenantee]

However, because of the intermingling of His response, many Bible students suffer great confusion in identifying what aspect of the teaching relates to AD 70 and what relates to the second coming.

There is no intermingling in verses 1-28. Great confusion results from thinking that there is.

Jesus addresses the greatest event first.

No. He addresses the events in the order of the questions posed about them. The first event is the physical destruction of the temple, which Jesus addresses in His descriptions of the events and phenomena leading up to the "telos" end of physical Jerusalem and Israel in 70AD; in the verses up to verse 28.

Jesus then changes track and refers to the events that surround the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem in Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24.

He does not change track and derail Himself. He remains on the same track up to verse 28.

“The end of the age” is normally described as “the end.”

Not in Jesus' usage. Disprove post 115.

This is talking about the perseverance of the saints until the coming of Christ at the end. The Greek word interpreted “endure” is hupomenō actually meaning to tarry, remain, suffer, undergo, or bear (as in trials).

Thanks for confirming Scripture and history. The Jerusalem Christians tarried, remained, suffered, underwent, and bore trials during the more than 30 years leading up to 70AD; before they fled as Jesus had warned. Their persecutions are extensively described and documented in the book of Acts, fulfilling Matthew 24:9.

This definitely does not relate to the saints in Jerusalem in AD70 who safely escaped before the city was taken.

It certainly does.

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

"to save, to keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction"

Recognizing the advance of Titus and the Roman armies, and their relevance to Jesus' warnings (Matthew 24:15,16), resulted in the flight of the Judean Christians, rescuing and saving them from danger and destruction.

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)? Of course not!

It ushered in the "telos" physical end of Jerusalem and Israel. Unless you reject history.

 

[covenantee]

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70(Matthew 24:14)? Of course not!

You'll have to argue with the Apostle Paul, Bro. Woodrow, et al. Colossians 1:23, "every creature", is a particularly pointed rebuttal of your denial.

GOSPEL TO BE PREACHED TO THE NATIONS

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then [not until then] shall the end come" (Mt. 24:14). Unless we take this verse clear out of its setting, "the end" in view here is the end or destruction which was to come upon Jerusalem and the temple. This was the question that Jesus was answering in the verses before, and the verses that follow are still speaking about Jerusalem and Judea. Jerusalem would be destroyed, but "first" the gospel would be preached unto all nations (Mk. 13:10).

It was a tremendous prophecy. Picture the scene. Here on the mount of Olives, Jesus was speaking these words to seemingly insignificant men. Who would have supposed that the names of these humble men would become known around the world and that even in our day—almost 2,000 years later—the seeds of truth that they planted would still be producing fruit? Who would have supposed that this unpopular gospel that Christ committed to these men would ever spread beyond that immediate area? Such a vast preaching program unto all nations seemed almost impossible of fulfillment. But it was fulfilled, and in a very real sense the gospel did go to all nations before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. D..

On the day of Pentecost when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, there were present in Jerusalem "devout men, out of every nation under heaven" (Acts 2:5). They heard the gospel preached by Peter and 3,000 were converted that day. Many of these, no doubt, returned to their various countries and preached the gospel.

Later when persecution came against the church, the believers at Jerusalem were scattered and "went every where preaching the word", throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1,4). Philip took the message to the city of Samaria with great results (verses 5-8). Later he was directed to a high ranking government official from Ethiopia who was gloriously converted (verses 26-40). It is believed that this man took the message to the continent of Africa and many were converted because of his influential testimony.

Peter took the message to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius, an event that was a turning point in the missionary activities of the church (Acts 10, 11). The book of Acts gives a sketch of the mighty missionary work that advanced rapidly.

The message spread to Rome. By the time of Nero, the Christians had grown so numerous that they aroused the jealousy of the government. The story of the great fire in Rome in 64 A. D. —for which the Christians were falsely blamed—is well known. In writing to the Christians at Rome, Paul opens his epistle by saying, "Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world" (Rom. 1:8), and his closing words talk about the gospel as having been "made known to all nations for the obedience of faith" (16:26).

Concerning even far away England, Newton says: "There is absolute certainty that Christianity was planted in this country in the days of the apostles, before the destruction of Jerusalem." Eusebius and also Theodoret inform us that the apostles preached the gospel in all the world and some of them "passed beyond the ocean to the Britannic isles."

By the time Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians, he could say: 'The gospel...is come unto you, as it is in all the world" (Col. 1:6). Likewise, in verse 23, he mentions '"the gospel which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven."

By 70 A. D., the gospel had gone forth to the world for a witness. No longer was God's message to man confined to one nation or race.


Source: "Great Prophecies of the Bible" by Ralph Woodrow

 

[WPM]

Here's how "sunteleias" is translated in the NASB:

Matthew 24:3
And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

You need to correct your misquote.

Jesus is not the author of confusion, which is why He used two different terms in different contexts.

And no, they are not synonyms, as Jesus used them.

You'll have to disprove post 115.

I already did. You are yet to address it. Like Full Preterists, you see AD70 as the end of some imaginary age that does not exist. The old covenant ended at the cross. The end of this age occurs at the second coming. You invent some imaginary age which you conveniently deem "the end of the ... Mosaic age" that cannot be found in God's Book but belongs in the Full Preterist manuals.

 

[WPM]

There is no intermingling in verses 1-28. Great confusion results from thinking that there is.

No. He addresses the events in the order of the questions posed about them. The first event is the physical destruction of the temple, which Jesus addresses in His descriptions of the events and phenomena leading up to the "telos" end of physical Jerusalem and Israel in 70AD; in the verses up to verse 28.

He does not change track and derail Himself. He remains on the same track up to verse 28.

Not in Jesus' usage. Disprove post 115.

Thanks for confirming Scripture and history. The Jerusalem Christians tarried, remained, suffered, underwent, and bore trials during the more than 30 years leading up to 70AD; before they fled as Jesus had warned. Their persecutions are extensively described and documented in the book of Acts, fulfilling Matthew 24:9.

It certainly does.

"to save, to keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction"

Recognizing the advance of Titus and the Roman armies, and their relevance to Jesus' warnings (Matthew 24:15,16), resulted in the flight of the Judean Christians, rescuing and saving them from danger and destruction.

It ushered in the "telos" physical end of Jerusalem and Israel. Unless you reject history.

My last posts disprove that.