What were the disciples asking when they inquired about “what will be the sign of your coming”?

[Marty fox]

That's meaningless. Does that change the fact that the old covenant was made obsolete by the death of Christ? No.

Of course but Jesus was talking about the destruction of the temple in the Olivet discourse.

It ended at the cross but they still went on participating in the old covenant age practices so God but a physical end to it.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Of course but Jesus was talking about the destruction of the temple in the Olivet discourse.

So? What is your point?

It ended at the cross but they still went on participating in the old covenant age practices so God but a physical end to it.

Again, that is meaningless as it relates to when the old covenant actually ended and was made obsolete, which was at the cross. By trying to make 70 AD the end of the old covenant age, you are promoting something not taught anywhere in scripture. If there was such thing as an old covenant age, then it ended when Jesus died on the cross.

When Jesus comes in the future it will mark the end of this temporal age during which people get married and they die, which is how Jesus described "this age" (Luke 20:34-36). So, the end of the age in the Olivet Discourse is the end of this temporal age that we're still living in.

 

[Marty fox]

To clarify my position Revelation is the revelation of Jesus Christ as in who He is and what He did. Jesus is God and He ushered in the New Covenant. That is what Revelation is it also is about the events of 70AD and the end of our World.

 

[claninja]

No, that is not likely.

Agreed

Their perspective at that time means nothing. Jesus's perspective is what matters.

While Jesus’ teaching does matter, I disagree that trying to understanding the disciples perspective in these accounts means nothing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

While Jesus’ teaching does matter, I disagree that trying to understanding the disciples perspective in these accounts means nothing.

Why is that? Are you somehow not aware that the disciples were mistaken about a number of things at that time? Should we go by their understanding at the time or by what Jesus understood instead? For example, the disciples at that time probably would have assumed the gathering of the elect would only involve the gathering of Jews, but they would later come to understand that the elect include Gentile believers.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Luke 12:38 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

The Greek word there is "kai", which does not mean "or". The word "kai" should be translated as "AND" (meaning in addition to something) or "EVEN" (meaning namely, or specifically).

The parable was intended to include TWO comings of the Lord "in the second AND (kai) the third watch" - not just one coming. The lord in the parable was returning from the marriage feasts (PLURAL in the Greek). The Apostles understood it this way also, which is why they asked the Lord "speakest thou this parable unto US or even unto ALL? Christ's disciples would experience the second coming in their first-century time frame (the second watch), but there would be one more additional coming beyond that one (in the third watch). For those servants who would be found faithfully watching on BOTH those occasions, they would all be blessed.

Jesus will return to burn up the entire surface of the earth with fire just like the entire surface of the earth was flooded with water in Noah's day.

"The earth abideth forever". God has no intention of incinerating this entire planet in the future.

I agree that the final coming of Christ in our future will rid the planet of all remaining human evil at that time. But that doesn't apply to the planet itself. The dirt under our feet is not evil. Neither is it in need of being burned up to purify it. If Peter had wanted to say that the entire globe would be incinerated in 2 Peter 3:10-13, he would have used the word "kosmos" or "oikoumene" in that text - NOT "tes ges", which scripture usually applies specifically to the "land" of Israel - the promised land. "The earth and the works that are therein" (such as the Jerusalem temple) were burned up back in AD 70, which manifested Isaiah 65's "new heavens and new earth". Certain conditions that had existed in the heavens and the earth were changed back in AD 70 at "the ends of the ages" which Paul said had come upon them at that time (1 Cor. 10:11- written around AD 57).

...when the old covenant actually ended and was made obsolete, which was at the cross.

I'd pinpoint this transition to the New Covenant just a bit later on with its being launched at Christ's resurrection-day ascension and the "change in the priesthood" - but I agree that the official transition to the New Covenant did not begin in AD 70. God was merely "taking out the trash" in the AD 70 period by burning up all the features of a dead, decaying physical temple system.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The Greek word there is "kai", which does not mean "or".

It usually means "and", but it can mean "or" and it does mean "or" in Luke 12:38. As if Jesus was talking about possibly coming at both the second watch and third watch? LOL! He only talked about coming once, so you make a fool out of Him to act as if He was talking about coming twice.

The word "kai" should be translated as "AND" (meaning in addition to something) or "EVEN" (meaning namely, or specifically).

Not in Luke 12:38. That makes complete nonsense out of the verse since Jesus only ever talked about coming again ONCE.

The parable was intended to include TWO comings of the Lord "in the second AND (kai) the third watch" - not just one coming.

LOL. Ridiculous! Nowhere else in scripture is that nonsense taught, but you think Jesus taught it in that verse? Get serious. I need to stop wasting time refuting 100% utter nonsense, so I'm not going to waste my time reading more of the nonsense that only you believe. You lone wolves with doctrines all to yourself are full of yourselves. You think you alone have the truth. You can't be any more arrogant than that. You think God reveals things only to you. No, He does not. Nowhere does it talk about Jesus coming again twice. It's impossible to take you seriously at all when you resort to this kind of complete nonsense.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Jesus only ever talked about coming again ONCE.

Jesus spoke to those in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28 about His coming return with the angels, to give rewards to all according to their works. Some of these people He promised would still be alive to see that happen. This was a first-century second coming of Christ which would be "in like manner" as Christ's ascension into heaven in Acts 1. But Christ never limited His coming return to one occasion ONLY. You will never find a Scripture which states this limitation.

Jesus also described normal history on this planet still continuing even AFTER His second coming return. He said He would return "immediately after the tribulation of those days" (Matt. 24:29) of what He had just called the "great tribulation" in Matt. 24:21. This time would be like none before, and none after it. In other words, normal history with continued periodic episodes of tribulation for the saints would occur after that "great tribulation", but none of them would ever be like that previous "great tribulation" which had been "immediately" followed by Christ's return.

Zechariah 14:16 also speaks of the "year to year" progress of history among the nations after Christ's second coming return to the Mount of Olives in Zechariah 14:4-5.

Since Scripture predicts this progress of normal history still continuing AFTER Christ's second coming, and since "we must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ...", that means of necessity that a THIRD coming must take place in which you and I are to participate, since the second coming with its resurrection already took place back in AD 70 on the very day that Daniel 12:11-13 had predicted. Every saint who will have died since that AD 70 resurrection will participate in the final resurrection in our future. ALL the saints will eventually be resurrected. God never promised that this would be ONLY one simultaneous event. The words "First resurrection" in Revelation 20:5 preclude that. Since there was a "first resurrection", of necessity there must be at the very least a second one.