What ELSE Happens at the Gathering of the Saints?

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Montana Marv.

Roy

A quote of yours from above; An interesting word in the Tanakh (the OT) to which one should pay close attention is the Hebrew word "checed," translated in the KJV as "lovingkindness." This word does have that meaning that God gives His grace, mercy and love, but the word has more meaning than that in Hebrew! The word "checed" also means "covenant-keeping!" God is a gracious God to be sure, but He also keeps His covenants! So, when the Scriptures say,...

So in this matter of Covenant keeping: We know that God never breaks His Covenants. And it seems that Israel also knows this. Then why would the "he" (if this is indeed Christ, which I think not) in Dan 9:27 ever need to confirm, make strong, re affirm an old Covenant. Christ does not need to confirm, make strong or re affirm any Covenant which He has already made; It is a done deal. It was in the written in God's Word. It is there for all to see.

In Christ

Montana Marv

The need for Him to "make the (Davidic) Covenant strong" is because they didn't recognize Him or remember Him as God's Messiah to be King of Y'hudah and then of Yisra'el! And, that's not because they didn't know who He was once. There were PLENTY who had come to the place where Yeshua` was born that night. When he was brought to the Temple to be circumcised, Shim`own (Simeon) made a prophecy concerning Him in Luke 2:25-35 and elderly Hannah (Anna) also "gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem" in Luke 2:36-38, and I seem to remember that later all of Yerushalayim was stirred up when the Magi came to look for the One who was "born King of the Jews" (Matt. 2:1-3)! The very offer of Himself as God's Messiah IS making the Covenant strong! The Covenant was not made BY Him with the Jews nor was it made WITH Him! It was a Covenant made by God with David, His ancestor! Therefore, it was IMPORTANT that He bring up the Covenant to them, again, when He offered Himself as God's Messiah to be their King! Understand, yet?

[Montana Marv]

Shalom, Montana Marv.

Roy

A quote of yours from above; An interesting word in the Tanakh (the OT) to which one should pay close attention is the Hebrew word "checed," translated in the KJV as "lovingkindness." This word does have that meaning that God gives His grace, mercy and love, but the word has more meaning than that in Hebrew! The word "checed" also means "covenant-keeping!" God is a gracious God to be sure, but He also keeps His covenants! So, when the Scriptures say,...

So in this matter of Covenant keeping: We know that God never breaks His Covenants. And it seems that Israel also knows this. Then why would the "he" (if this is indeed Christ, which I think not) in Dan 9:27 ever need to confirm, make strong, re affirm an old Covenant. Christ does not need to confirm, make strong or re affirm any Covenant which He has already made; It is a done deal. It was in the written in God's Word. It is there for all to see.

In Christ

Montana Marv

The need for Him to "make the (Davidic) Covenant strong" is because they didn't recognize Him or remember Him as God's Messiah to be King of Y'hudah and then of Yisra'el! And, that's not because they didn't know who He was once. There were PLENTY who had come to the place where Yeshua` was born that night. When he was brought to the Temple to be circumcised, Shim`own (Simeon) made a prophecy concerning Him in Luke 2:25-35 and elderly Hannah (Anna) also "gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem" in Luke 2:36-38, and I seem to remember that later all of Yerushalayim was stirred up when the Magi came to look for the One who was "born King of the Jews" (Matt. 2:1-3)! The very offer of Himself as God's Messiah IS making the Covenant strong! The Covenant was not made BY Him with the Jews nor was it made WITH Him! It was a Covenant made by God with David, His ancestor! Therefore, it was IMPORTANT that He bring up the Covenant to them, again, when He offered Himself as God's Messiah to be their King! Understand, yet?

Roy

Christ made no such covenant with many for one seven. It is not in Scripture, It is not in Scripture. You are just pulling things out of thin air, to fit your doctrine. He, Christ came in His first Advent to offer Himself up as the "Sacrificial Lamb' to take away the sins of the world. At His second Advent, He will come as "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" and rightly sit on King Davids throne Forever. Here is when Israel will accept Jesus as their King. He laid down His Life for us (Jew and Gentile).

In Christ

Montana Marv

[rollinTHUNDER]

They will never "nullify" or "disqualify" Matthew's account. All three accounts are true and correct. They don't "nullify" each other; they SUPPLEMENT each other! Information that one account may have missed, another account will supply. My point is this: IF we do not look at all three TRUE accounts and how they supplement each other, then OUR interpretation of ONE account may become "slanted" away from the truth, not because IT is wrong, but because WE are wrong in how we interpret that account! An enormous amount of prophecy buffs spend an inordinate amount of time in Matthew to the neglect of Mark and Luke!

You are completely missing the point. It is your interpretation that is tripping you up, because you believe these things were already fulfilled in the 1st century. But in reality, after asking when the temple would be destroyed, the disciples asked Christ about His coming and the time of the end. He did not return after the temple was destroyed, nor was that the end. If the old covenant existed for 2000 years, then why should we believe the new covenant will be fulfilled in about 40 years? You fail to see the forest for the trees. The greek is not helping you in the least. Yes, I can see where some things were mentioned about the first century, but how many times did He tell them the end is not yet?

Timing is everything. If you will compare the three accounts together, especially in the Greek first, you will find that where Matthew and Mark talk about the prophecy in Dani'el (by Gavri'el, not by Dani'el, btw), the "abomination of desolation" (which is from Dan. 9 and not Dan. 11 or 12), you will find Jerusalem being surrounded by armies (troops) in Luke's account! Do you really think that's just a coincidence?! These are NOT two different things; they are being EQUATED!

You are letting the greek trip you up. Again, they are talking about the time of the end, just before His return. It does appear that Luke focused more on the Roman armies in the 1st century, but the end is still not yet almost 2000 years later. You've got to recognize that Christ' prophecy about His coming and the time of the end runs for about 2000 years. You don't believe that He already returned do you?

Furthermore, there is NO "Great Tribulation" in any of the three accounts. Even in Matthew's account, the "Great Tribulation" is NOT THERE! It is merely a POTENTIALLY "great pressure" or "great distress" IF they had to escape during the rainy season or on a Shabbat! They didn't have to do either (because they prayed as instructed), and such a "GREAT pressure" or "GREAT distress" WAS AVOIDED!!! IT DIDN"T HAPPEN!!! Therefore, it DIDN"T EXIST!!! And, if it was to exist, it would have happened in the first century, NOT IN OUR TIME! Horses have a will of their own, but they are dumb animals. A savvy person, if led to MUDDIED water, can go ELSEWHERE to drink!

A great pressure or great distress? What? What translation do you study anyway? Of course it didn't happen yet, but you assume that it was avoided because they prayed. Nonsense! Jesus talked about a great tribulation that has not been seen since the beginning of the world. Daniel said it would be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time. Don't expect me to believe this trouble/tribulation was the Roman armies on horseback in the 1st century. Don't look now, but there are nuclear missiles all around this globe and God will gather all nations around Jerusalem at the time of the end.

Did you notice, also, that after Daniel mentions that time of trouble, the very next verse mentions a resurrection? Did you notice that immediately after the tribulation of those days, Christ mentioned that He would send the angels to gather His elect? You might want to wake up. This did not happen in 70 AD.

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, rollinTHUNDER.

They will never "nullify" or "disqualify" Matthew's account. All three accounts are true and correct. They don't "nullify" each other; they SUPPLEMENT each other! Information that one account may have missed, another account will supply. My point is this: IF we do not look at all three TRUE accounts and how they supplement each other, then OUR interpretation of ONE account may become "slanted" away from the truth, not because IT is wrong, but because WE are wrong in how we interpret that account! An enormous amount of prophecy buffs spend an inordinate amount of time in Matthew to the neglect of Mark and Luke!

You are completely missing the point. It is your interpretation that is tripping you up, because you believe these things were already fulfilled in the 1st century. But in reality, after asking when the temple would be destroyed, the disciples asked Christ about His coming and the time of the end. He did not return after the temple was destroyed, nor was that the end. If the old covenant existed for 2000 years, then why should we believe the new covenant will be fulfilled in about 40 years? You fail to see the forest for the trees. The greek is not helping you in the least. Yes, I can see where some things were mentioned about the first century, but how many times did He tell them the end is not yet?

Sometimes it is just so frustrating to talk to y'all. I have NOT missed the point, and it is not my interpretation that is tripping me up but your theology - your eschatology - that is tripping YOU up! As I've tried to say in many different ways to no avail because you (and others, like Montana Marv) are not listening, NOT EVERYTHING WAS FULFILLED IN THE FIRST CENTURY!!! HOWEVER, there IS a portion that WAS fulfilled in the first century, and it is your dad-burn theology that keeps getting in the way of simply reading the text!!!!! I KNOW He didn't return after the destruction of the Temple! And, I KNOW that Matt. 24:29-31 have not yet been fulfilled! I AM NOT A PRETERIST!!! On the other hand, there IS a portion that was to be fulfilled in the first century, and Yeshua` prophesied about those things particularly for the sake of those who were actually with Him that day! Those portions are NOT DIRECTLY FOR US!!! We may get some benefit out of those portions second hand, but they were not written for OUR benefit! When you see the words "ye" and "you" in the King James Version, these are second-person, plural pronouns directed at the disciples who were actually present that day! Other pronouns, such as "they" and "them" which are third-person, plural pronouns, were used for portions not directed to those who were with Him but to future disciples, such as we are. HOWEVER, it is NOT a good technique to use solely an English version of the Bible whenever one intends to acquire a detailed understanding of a passage of Scripture! One should ALWAYS test his or her conclusions against the Greek text, as well, to be sure that the translators communicated Yeshua`s words correctly and that you are understanding what the translators meant in using certain English words!

Look at the beginning of Matthew 24: See the words "Jesus answered and said unto them" and the word "you" in verse 4? He is NOT talking to us today, 2000 years later; He is talking DIRECTLY to the disciples who were on the Mount of Olives with Him that day! One can confirm that these are the correct pronouns with which to translate this verse by checking against the Greek: The word translated "unto them" is the Greek word "autois," which is the masculine gender, plural number, dative case of "autos." It means "to or for them." The "you" is translated from the Greek word "humas," which is the accusative case of the plural number of the word "su," meaning "you." So, He was not only said to be speaking "to them," but He uses the second-person, plural, accusative word "humas" when He said, "Take heed that no man deceive YOU!" Then, look at verse 5: See the words "many" twice in this verse? Now, He is not singling them out but He has broadened the scope to include "MANY" people, including them to whom He was talking! Because of other facts that we can learn about the Jewish mentality and the Greek language as it reflected Jewish thought, "name" (Greek: "onomati") refers to "authority."

The phrase "shall come in my name" can be either positive (if someone has been given that authority) or negative (if someone is usurping that authority). In this particular case, He is speaking negatively. The Greek phrase is "Polloi gar eleusontai epi too onomati mou." Literally, this translates to "Many for will-come upon the name of-me." We would clean this up to "For many will come upon my authority." What is interesting to consider is that the word "epi" means "above, over, or upon." Can you see how "over my authority" or "above my authority" might make better sense in this passage? Then, the last phrase, "pollous planeesousin," literally translates to "many they-will-mislead." We would reverse the order, putting the pronoun "they" first since it is the subject and "many" is the direct object: "they will mislead many." Thus, verse 5 is more nebulous, extending to MANY people's claim of being the Messiah, and is therefore NOT restricted to His immediate disciples' lifetimes!

However, verse 6 goes back to the present again with "ye shall hear" and "see that ye be not troubled." These are actually just the verbs, "melleesete" and "throeisthe," and the pronoun comes from the ending of the verb. Verses 7 and 8 become nebulous and vague about pronouns again.

In verse 9, Yeshua` looks directly at them again: "Tote paradoosousin humas eis thlipsin, kai apoktenousin humas; kai esesthe misoumenoi hupo pantoon toon ethnoon dia to onoma mou." However, verses 10 through 14 become nebulous again! "Many will be offended"; "they will deliver up one another"; "they will hate one another"; "many false prophets will arise and mislead many"; "he who endures to the end"; and "these glad tidings of the Kingdom shall be proclaimed in all the habitable earth."

In verse 15-21, He is speaking directly to His students again: "ideete; feugetoosan; mee katabainetoo; mee epistrepsatoo; proseuchesthe; humoon" translated "ye shall see," "let them flee," "don't let him come down," "don't let him return," "ye pray," and "your [flight]," respectively. Then, verse 22 becomes vague again: "if those days had not been shortened," "there would not be any flesh rescued," and "those days shall be shortened."

Then, in verse 23, 25 and 26, He is specifically talking to His listeners again: "Tote ean tis humin eipee, 'Idou, hoode ho Christos,'..." translated to "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here's the Messiah,'...", "mee pisteuseete" translated to "don't you believe it", "Idou, proeireeka humin" translated to "Look I've told you ahead of time," "ean oun eipoosin humin, 'Idou, en tee ereemooestin,'..." translated to "if therefore they-say to-you, 'Look, in the wilderness,'...," "mee exeltheete" translated to "don't go out," and "mee pisteuseete" translated to "don't you believe it!" However, the end of verse 23, verse 24, and verses 27-31 are all nebulous and vague again! Yeshua` has opened His prophecy to the future and disciples that He will have that were NOT present with Him at the time!

Can you understand this? Some of it was to the actual people who were present with Him and listening to His prophecy for the first time; some of it is talking about the future beyond His listeners! However, it's not so cut-and-dry as to say "from verse 15 on it's all about the future." It doesn't work that way! That's too simplistic, and not in keeping with Jewish thought. Prophecies in Scripture FREQUENTLY slide back and forth on the timeline of history.

Timing is everything. If you will compare the three accounts together, especially in the Greek first, you will find that where Matthew and Mark talk about the prophecy in Dani'el (by Gavri'el, not by Dani'el, btw), the "abomination of desolation" (which is from Dan. 9 and not Dan. 11 or 12), you will find Jerusalem being surrounded by armies (troops) in Luke's account! Do you really think that's just a coincidence?! These are NOT two different things; they are being EQUATED!

You are letting the greek trip you up. Again, they are talking about the time of the end, just before His return. It does appear that Luke focused more on the Roman armies in the 1st century, but the end is still not yet almost 2000 years later. You've got to recognize that Christ' prophecy about His coming and the time of the end runs for about 2000 years. You don't believe that He already returned do you?

The Greek is not difficult to understand, and it is not "tripping me up." And, of course I don't believe that He has already returned! However, I recognize that the prophecy of Yeshua` covers about 2,000 years! So, it started in the first century but it is continuing through today and will continue until the Messiah returns!

Furthermore, there is NO "Great Tribulation" in any of the three accounts. Even in Matthew's account, the "Great Tribulation" is NOT THERE! It is merely a POTENTIALLY "great pressure" or "great distress" IF they had to escape during the rainy season or on a Shabbat! They didn't have to do either (because they prayed as instructed), and such a "GREAT pressure" or "GREAT distress" WAS AVOIDED!!! IT DIDN"T HAPPEN!!! Therefore, it DIDN"T EXIST!!! And, if it was to exist, it would have happened in the first century, NOT IN OUR TIME! Horses have a will of their own, but they are dumb animals. A savvy person, if led to MUDDIED water, can go ELSEWHERE to drink!

A great pressure or great distress? What? What translation do you study anyway? Of course it didn't happen yet, but you assume that it was avoided because they prayed. Nonsense! Jesus talked about a great tribulation that has not been seen since the beginning of the world. Daniel said it would be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time. Don't expect me to believe this trouble/tribulation was the Roman armies on horseback in the 1st century. Don't look now, but there are nuclear missiles all around this globe and God will gather all nations around Jerusalem at the time of the end.

Did you notice, also, that after Daniel mentions that time of trouble, the very next verse mentions a resurrection? Did you notice that immediately after the tribulation of those days, Christ mentioned that He would send the angels to gather His elect? You might want to wake up. This did not happen in 70 AD.

First, I prefer the KJV as far as an English version, but I study out of the Greek. Therefore, for me, the words are "thlipsis megalee," regardless how they are interpreted into English. It didn't happen in the first century, but the "thlipsis megalee" that Yeshua` was talking about WILL NEVER HAPPEN AT ALL!!! Why is that so difficult to grasp?! It was a simple conditional statement, and its realization is a simple syllogism! IF they didn't pray, THEN there would be a GREAT TRIBULATION."

Let p = your flight is in the rainy season

Let q = your flight is on the Shabbat

Let r = great tribulation shall occur

Then the heart of Yeshua`s statement in verses 20 and 21 was,...

Pray that ~(p or q).

If p or q, then r.

Notice that p and q still involve the words "YOUR!" He was still speaking directly to the students who were present with Him on the Mount of Olives and were actually listening to His prophecy as He spoke it for the first time!

And, lastly, history tells us ~r, i.e., that such a "great tribulation" did not occur.

~r

Therefore, ~(p or q) = ~p and ~q.

Their flight was not in the rainy season, and their flight was not on the Shabbat.

Why are people so desperate to find Yeshua` speaking of a future "great tribulation?" Is it just because they need to feel justified in their eschatology?

IF one wants to see a future "great tribulation," one merely has to go to Rev. 7:14 and to Dani'el 12:1, but Yeshua`s prophecy was NOT talking about that "great tribulation!" THAT'S ALL! Oh, and by the way, just because two passages have phrases that almost seem like the same thing DOESN'T mean that the two are equated! Yeshua`s words in Matthew 24:20-21 are not the same as those in Dani'el 12:1.

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Montana Marv.

Shalom, Montana Marv.

Roy

A quote of yours from above; An interesting word in the Tanakh (the OT) to which one should pay close attention is the Hebrew word "checed," translated in the KJV as "lovingkindness." This word does have that meaning that God gives His grace, mercy and love, but the word has more meaning than that in Hebrew! The word "checed" also means "covenant-keeping!" God is a gracious God to be sure, but He also keeps His covenants! So, when the Scriptures say,...

So in this matter of Covenant keeping: We know that God never breaks His Covenants. And it seems that Israel also knows this. Then why would the "he" (if this is indeed Christ, which I think not) in Dan 9:27 ever need to confirm, make strong, re affirm an old Covenant. Christ does not need to confirm, make strong or re affirm any Covenant which He has already made; It is a done deal. It was in the written in God's Word. It is there for all to see.

In Christ

Montana Marv

The need for Him to "make the (Davidic) Covenant strong" is because they didn't recognize Him or remember Him as God's Messiah to be King of Y'hudah and then of Yisra'el! And, that's not because they didn't know who He was once. There were PLENTY who had come to the place where Yeshua` was born that night. When he was brought to the Temple to be circumcised, Shim`own (Simeon) made a prophecy concerning Him in Luke 2:25-35 and elderly Hannah (Anna) also "gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem" in Luke 2:36-38, and I seem to remember that later all of Yerushalayim was stirred up when the Magi came to look for the One who was "born King of the Jews" (Matt. 2:1-3)! The very offer of Himself as God's Messiah IS making the Covenant strong! The Covenant was not made BY Him with the Jews nor was it made WITH Him! It was a Covenant made by God with David, His ancestor! Therefore, it was IMPORTANT that He bring up the Covenant to them, again, when He offered Himself as God's Messiah to be their King! Understand, yet?

Roy

Christ made no such covenant with many for one seven. It is not in Scripture, It is not in Scripture. You are just pulling things out of thin air, to fit your doctrine. He, Christ came in His first Advent to offer Himself up as the "Sacrificial Lamb' to take away the sins of the world. At His second Advent, He will come as "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" and rightly sit on King Davids throne Forever. Here is when Israel will accept Jesus as their King. He laid down His Life for us (Jew and Gentile).

In Christ

Montana Marv

I never said He DID! The Messiah didn't need to make such a covenant because the covenant WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE!!! He just CONFIRMED it, made is STRONGER! It IS in Scripture, It IS in Scripture! This isn't out of "thin air"; it's part and parcel of God's promises to David and to His seed after him! Indeed, it was GOD HIMSELF who confirmed this covenant when He said, "This is my Son in whom I am well pleased!" WAKE UP!

In the Messiah's love,

Roy

[rollinTHUNDER]

First, I prefer the KJV as far as an English version, but I study out of the Greek. Therefore, for me, the words are "thlipsis megalee," regardless how they are interpreted into English. It didn't happen in the first century, but the "thlipsis megalee" that Yeshua` was talking about WILL NEVER HAPPEN AT ALL!!! Why is that so difficult to grasp?! It was a simple conditional statement, and its realization is a simple syllogism! IF they didn't pray, THEN there would be a GREAT TRIBULATION."

Let p = your flight is in the rainy season

Let q = your flight is on the Shabbat

Let r = great tribulation shall occur

Then the heart of Yeshua`s statement in verses 20 and 21 was,...

Pray that ~(p or q).

If p or q, then r.

Notice that p and q still involve the words "YOUR!" He was still speaking directly to the students who were present with Him on the Mount of Olives and were actually listening to His prophecy as He spoke it for the first time!

And, lastly, history tells us ~r, i.e., that such a "great tribulation" did not occur.

~r

Therefore, ~(p or q) = ~p and ~q.

I'll leave it to you to watch after your own P's and Q's, but I'm not buying any of this nonsense. Of course their flight was not in the rainy season or on the sabbath. But it wasn't because they prayed it away as you claim. This great tribulation is still in the future is the reason that it did not happen (yet). That's the trouble with you preterists, you try to spiritualize everything you don't understand. You may want to try exercising a little faith sometime, whether you can understand what God's Word is saying or not, because what you're doing is called "unbelief."

Their flight was not in the rainy season, and their flight was not on the Shabbat.

Why are people so desperate to find Yeshua` speaking of a future "great tribulation?" Is it just because they need to feel justified in their eschatology?

Who is desperate? God's Word says it, and I take it literally and believe it, whether I understand it or not makes no difference at all. Most people call this faith, which is believing in promises unseen.

IF one wants to see a future "great tribulation," one merely has to go to Rev. 7:14 and to Dani'el 12:1, but Yeshua`s prophecy was NOT talking about that "great tribulation!" THAT'S ALL!

Well at least we're starting to make a little progress here. I'm glad to see that you are finally able to see the time of trouble that was not seen since there was a nation in Daniel 12:1 is, in fact, the great tribulation. Congatulations!!!

But unfortunately, you're still having trouble recognizing that Jesus pointed us back directly to Daniel, when He started talking about the great tribulation. I don't know how you could possibly miss this. Well, actually I do, because you're letting your understanding of the greek trip you up.

Oh, and by the way, just because two passages have phrases that almost seem like the same thing DOESN'T mean that the two are equated! Yeshua`s words in Matthew 24:20-21 are not the same as those in Dani'el 12:1.

Yes, but sometimes it does mean that they are equated, as in this case. The words are a little different, but mean the exact same thing. I wonder if you will be able to see it if I spell it out for you?

Tribulation = trouble and trouble = tribulation. That isn't so difficult, unless you start claiming they prayed it away, to attempt to add support for your belief, that it was already prevented in the past. You can spiritualize this all you want, but I call this unbelief or lack of faith. Now let's take the next step.

Great tribulation = time of trouble not seen since there was a nation, no , nor shall ever be again = seems very great to me = unprecedented. Nowhere do I find that they prayed it away in any Scripture. That's just ridiculous spiritualizing or figurative interpreting to preterists = unbelief.

I don't know how you can miss it. Not only are both, Daniel and Christ, referring to the same period of time, but they both mention the abomination of desolation, during the time when both of them are leading up to the end of this age.

Christ is very effectively killing two birds with one stone, as we say today. Not only was He answering His disciple's question, but He was also providing the answer to Daniel's question as well.

Daniel 12:8-9

And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? [9]And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

It was some 500 years later, when Christ came, ushering in the new covenant in the last days that would run for approximately 2000 years, before the end would come, when Christ will return with His saints to rule and reign for 1000 years. He is the only one that provided the answer that Daniel's was not permitted to know.

Matthew 24:3

And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Both questions pertain to the time of the end. And the one who answers them is the same one that will be returning with His saints as the King of kings and the Lord of lords, Who will literally rule reign on the earth for 1000 years.

Cheerio

[Retrobyter]

Shabbat shalom, rollinTHUNDER.

First, I prefer the KJV as far as an English version, but I study out of the Greek. Therefore, for me, the words are "thlipsis megalee," regardless how they are interpreted into English. It didn't happen in the first century, but the "thlipsis megalee" that Yeshua` was talking about WILL NEVER HAPPEN AT ALL!!! Why is that so difficult to grasp?! It was a simple conditional statement, and its realization is a simple syllogism! IF they didn't pray, THEN there would be a GREAT TRIBULATION."

Let p = your flight is in the rainy season

Let q = your flight is on the Shabbat

Let r = great tribulation shall occur

Then the heart of Yeshua`s statement in verses 20 and 21 was,...

Pray that ~(p or q).

If p or q, then r.

Notice that p and q still involve the words "YOUR!" He was still speaking directly to the students who were present with Him on the Mount of Olives and were actually listening to His prophecy as He spoke it for the first time!

And, lastly, history tells us ~r, i.e., that such a "great tribulation" did not occur.

~r

Therefore, ~(p or q) = ~p and ~q.

I'll leave it to you to watch after your own P's and Q's, but I'm not buying any of this nonsense. Of course their flight was not in the rainy season or on the sabbath. But it wasn't because they prayed it away as you claim. This great tribulation is still in the future is the reason that it did not happen (yet). That's the trouble with you preterists, you try to spiritualize everything you don't understand. You may want to try exercising a little faith sometime, whether you can understand what God's Word is saying or not, because what you're doing is called "unbelief."

“The trouble with us preterists”? You don’t know what you’re talking about.

First, as you should WELL-KNOW by now, I am not a full preterist; at best (or worst?) I’m a partial preterist in the sense that I am not afraid to acknowledge that some portions of Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 have ALREADY BEEN FULFILLED!!! It’s NONSENSE to push the whole of the prophecy off into the future!

Second, the trouble with many futurists is that they want to sensationalize the prophecies and create an unnecessary fervor, like Mr. Jerry B. Jenkins and Dr. Tim LaHaye have! HOW WILL YOU EVER COME TO REALIZE that some of the prophecies have already been fulfilled or at least partially fulfilled? What will it take? How can you see a prophecy coming true when you can’t even see or admit that prophecies that have already come true? You will miss them as you take it up in committee to discuss whether an event was the fulfillment of a prophecy or not! You’ll still be debating the minor points when Yeshua` arrives!

Their flight was not in the rainy season, and their flight was not on the Shabbat.

Why are people so desperate to find Yeshua` speaking of a future "great tribulation?" Is it just because they need to feel justified in their eschatology?

Who is desperate? God's Word says it, and I take it literally and believe it, whether I understand it or not makes no difference at all. Most people call this faith, which is believing in promises unseen.

First, it DOES make a difference whether you understand the prophecy or not. Do you think Yeshua` spoke His words in vain? Do you think that any of the prophets spoke their prophecies in vain? Don’t you think the prophecies were spoken and written down for us to understand and take heart from their promises?

Second, that’s a misquotation of Hebrews 11:1 (which is also missed by just about every other English version of the Bible)! Look carefully at Hebrews 11:1:

Heb 11:1

11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

KJV

It’s not just hoping for something or not seeing something! That’s NOT what faith is all about! It’s SUBSTANCE and EVIDENCE! Faith is TRUST! If a person wants to increase his faith, He simply has to get a better look at God and His Messiah! God is TRUSTWORTHY! He’s “FAITHFUL!” What substance? Why, the very paper and ink on which are written for us God’s Word! What evidence? Simply read the rest of the chapter! Every person listed learned to trust God for the challenges in his or her life!

Why are people faithless? Because they don’t KNOW God! They don’t know His power nor do they know His heart! Often, they’ve never taken the time to get to know Him! Consequently, they either don’t think He CAN help them, or they think He WON’T help them! And, it’s truly hard to love Someone you’ve never even taken the time to know!

Take God’s Word literally, yes! But, you don’t need to take a blind “leap of faith” to believe God’s Word! In fact, to do so might put you at risk in claiming promises that don’t belong to you! Despite the little song, “Every promise in the book is mine,” it’s not true. There are some promises that God made to others that He does not extend to us. We can show this is true in stating the obvious and absurd ones first.

God did NOT say to us,…

Genesis 12:2-3

2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

KJV

Therefore, this promise was not made to us; it was made solely to Avraham! We cannot lay claim to this promise, and there are many such cases in Scripture!

There are times when Yeshua` was not speaking to us! He was speaking to the men and women who walked with Him and listened to Him speaking His lessons and prophecies! Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are one such event! When Yeshua` used the words that were translated for us as “ye,” “you,” and “your,” He was not talking to us! He was talking to those around Him at the time!!!

IF one wants to see a future "great tribulation," one merely has to go to Rev. 7:14 and to Dani'el 12:1, but Yeshua`s prophecy was NOT talking about that "great tribulation!" THAT'S ALL!

Well at least we're starting to make a little progress here. I'm glad to see that you are finally able to see the time of trouble that was not seen since there was a nation in Daniel 12:1 is, in fact, the great tribulation. Congatulations!!!

But unfortunately, you're still having trouble recognizing that Jesus pointed us back directly to Daniel, when He started talking about the great tribulation. I don't know how you could possibly miss this. Well, actually I do, because you're letting your understanding of the Greek trip you up.

Actually, I have a better understanding of the passages BECAUSE of the Greek! It doesn’t “trip me up,” as you say; it keeps me from BEING tripped up by the rhetoric of an eschatology that no longer matches up with the Scriptures! It keeps me from falling into the mindless ruts out of which a person will have severe trouble climbing!

When a person becomes so crystallized in his thinking that he can’t even consider an alternative, then the only thing God has left to do is BREAK the pottery! It’s not quite impossible for God to make the shards of pottery malleable as clay once again, but it will TAKE LOTS OF TIME and LOTS OF ENERGY to re-work the shards, breaking and grinding them and mixing them with water into a workable clay! Back in 1978, I had to go through such a process. It was EXTREMELY difficult to undergo, excruciatingly painful, sorrowful, and trying. God was with me through the process, but I had to cling to Him everyday for all I was worth in order to make it through those days.

Yeshua` does point us back to Dani’el, but not to chapters 11 and 12. He points us back to chapter 9. The abominationS that were so detestable to God were the rejections of His Son! It was FOR those abominations that Yeshua` left them “desolate” (Matt. 23:37-39 cp. Dan. 9:27). And, in turn, that desolation was an abomination to the Jews. It was disheartening, devastating, and sickening to see the Temple being destroyed so soon after having its renovation, started by Herod the Great, finally completed!

Oh, and by the way, just because two passages have phrases that almost seem like the same thing DOESN'T mean that the two are equated! Yeshua`s words in Matthew 24:20-21 are not the same as those in Dani'el 12:1.

Yes, but sometimes it does mean that they are equated, as in this case. The words are a little different, but mean the exact same thing. I wonder if you will be able to see it if I spell it out for you?

Tribulation = trouble and trouble = tribulation. That isn't so difficult, unless you start claiming they prayed it away, to attempt to add support for your belief, that it was already prevented in the past. You can spiritualize this all you want, but I call this unbelief or lack of faith. Now let's take the next step.

Great tribulation = time of trouble not seen since there was a nation, no , nor shall ever be again = seems very great to me = unprecedented. Nowhere do I find that they prayed it away in any Scripture. That's just ridiculous spiritualizing or figurative interpreting to preterists = unbelief.

I don't know how you can miss it. Not only are both, Daniel and Christ, referring to the same period of time, but they both mention the abomination of desolation, during the time when both of them are leading up to the end of this age.

Christ is very effectively killing two birds with one stone, as we say today. Not only was He answering His disciple's question, but He was also providing the answer to Daniel's question as well.

Daniel 12:8-9

And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? [9]And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

It was some 500 years later, when Christ came, ushering in the new covenant in the last days that would run for approximately 2000 years, before the end would come, when Christ will return with His saints to rule and reign for 1000 years. He is the only one that provided the answer that Daniel's was not permitted to know.

Matthew 24:3

And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Both questions pertain to the time of the end. And the one who answers them is the same one that will be returning with His saints as the King of kings and the Lord of lords, Who will literally rule reign on the earth for 1000 years.

Cheerio

I am so sorry for you, for you will have to be broken if you persist in this crystallized way of thinking. Let’s start at the end of what you’ve just written. What’s wrong with this sentence, “And the one who answers them is the same one that will be returning with His saints as the King of kings and the Lord of lords, who will literally rule [and] reign on the earth for 1000 years”? Try comparing the rhetoric of this eschatological viewpoint with Luke 1:30-33:

Luke 1:30-33

30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.

31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS (pronounced “Yay-SOOS,” by the way, from the Greek transliteration of Yeshua`, spelled iota-eta-sigma-omicron-upsilon-stigma).

32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

KJV

I don’t deny the Millennium (the “chilia etee” in Rev. 20), but how do you rectify it with these verses? This is just one, small example of what I am talking about!

Second, you need to understand that those in the first century were ALREADY IN the “time of the end!”

Hebrews 1:1-4

1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

KJV

Hebrews 9:24-26

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

KJV

Acts 2:14-21

14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.

16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:

20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

KJV

We don’t have to wonder if we are in the “last days”; according to the Scriptures, WE ALREADY ARE and have been for almost 2000 years!

Finally, thank you for your condescension: “tribulation = trouble, trouble = tribulation,” and your “Great tribulation = time of trouble not seen since there was a nation, no, nor shall ever be again = seems very great to me = unprecedented.” I’m not impressed or affected by your shallow arguments here. However, you are neglecting the deeper issue! Yeshua` said IN A CONDITIONAL STATEMENT, “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: For THEN shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Matthew 24:20-21, KJV)

He was NOT saying that it was an inescapable period, i.e. that the “great tribulation” MUST come! He was saying that it was a period CONTINGENT UPON whether or not they prayed as instructed, i.e. that the potential “great tribulation’s” VERY EXISTENCE would be determined by God’s mercy as they reminded Him in prayer that they needed His intervention and protection in the middle of His wrath!

And so, I’m saying this: Any future “great tribulation” cannot be found in THIS particular event, because Yeshua` was not talking about a thing that HAD TO BE; He was talking about a thing that MIGHT HAVE BEEN!

[rollinTHUNDER]

First, as you should WELL-KNOW by now, I am not a full preterist; at best (or worst?) I’m a partial preterist in the sense that I am not afraid to acknowledge that some portions of Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 have ALREADY BEEN FULFILLED!!! It’s NONSENSE to push the whole of the prophecy off into the future!

Hello Retrobyter,

I'm not a big fan of real long posts. So, if you don't mind, I'm gonna cut this down to size.

Yes, I realize you are a partial preterist now. I think we both agree that there are past and future fulfillments. The difference appears to be that you believe most of Matt. 24 & 25 has already been fulfilled, while I believe that most of it (not all), will be fulfilled in the future.

Second, the trouble with many futurists is that they want to sensationalize the prophecies and create an unnecessary fervor, like Mr. Jerry B. Jenkins and Dr. Tim LaHaye have!

I, too, recognize this, and I believe that because they have done this, it has given many believers a false sense of security, which I'm hoping that my book will reverse. They don't seem to realize that many of their beliefs are based on false assumptions and misconceptions. I believe this led further to the fulfillment of Paul's prophecy in 2 Tim. 4:1-4, when many would no longer teach the truth of God's Word, but instead teach myths/fables.

HOW WILL YOU EVER COME TO REALIZE that some of the prophecies have already been fulfilled or at least partially fulfilled? What will it take? How can you see a prophecy coming true when you can’t even see or admit that prophecies that have already come true? You will miss them as you take it up in committee to discuss whether an event was the fulfillment of a prophecy or not! You’ll still be debating the minor points when Yeshua` arrives!

Trust me, I recognize that many prophecies have already been fulfilled. In particular, I understand that the Temple was already destroyed by the Roman armies in AD 70, and that God punished that wicked generation of Jews, for failing to recognize their time of visitation. That much was never in doubt. What is up for debate is the time of His coming, and the end of the world or age, depending on what translation one uses.

Now I'll answer the next part. Then I'll get to the rest later on this evening, Lord willing.

[rollinTHUNDER]

First, it DOES make a difference whether you understand the prophecy or not. Do you think Yeshua` spoke His words in vain? Do you think that any of the prophets spoke their prophecies in vain?

Certainly not, and certainly not.

Don’t you think the prophecies were spoken and written down for us to understand and take heart from their promises?

Absolutely.

Second, that’s a misquotation of Hebrews 11:1 (which is also missed by just about every other English version of the Bible)! Look carefully at Hebrews 11:1:

Heb 11:1

11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

KJV

I was just making a generalized statement, not trying to define what faith is. However, I was out of line there. I should not have questioned your faith, and for that, I sincerely apologize. You are not a full preterist, so I hope you will forgive me. It's just that we interpret this prophecy very differently, which may lead to an interesting discussion.

Gotta go now, hopefully I'll finish the rest later.

[rollinTHUNDER]

“The trouble with us preterists”? You don’t know what you’re talking about.

It's hard to get a firm grip as to where you preterists are coming from. And I recently learned that not all of you partial preterists understand the prophecies the same way. But then again, many futurists are no different.

I had a discussion with another partial preterist via PM and he had views that were way out there. I must say, though, that it appears that you are much closer to the truth than he was or is. You think futurists sensationalize a lot, well you don't even want to know some of the things he believes, as he tends to spiritualize everything he doesn't understand, so it fits in nicely with what he believes. So you can't say that futurists are the only ones doing it. But I agree that pre-trib scholars are no better, as they cling to several false assumptions and misconceptions that lead to mere myths or fables. Okay, that's enough about the other guys.

I'm sorry this post is not as interesting as I believe the next one will be. But you'll have to excuse me for a few hours so I can get a little rest. I've been up for over 37 hours now and I'm going to need a clear head to give a good answer for the next post, because it's more challenging. Thanks for your patience.