The Imminency Of Christ's Sign Return For The Rapture Of The Church

[not an echo]

On 7/22/2020 at 5:19 AM, Diaste said:

On 7/21/2020 at 2:33 PM, not an echo said:

The facts of history from the first century unto our day align with the opening portion of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and substantiate that our Lord sure knew what He was talking about!  These facts should bear up our hope and strengthen our faith.  We who truly believe in the imminency of Christ's return are not looking for any unfulfilled sign(s) to first be fulfilled.  Nor are we looking for any sign(s) that will help toward pinpointing the time of His return.  However, we do have for signs the continued fulfilling of the things He warned of, which are continuing confirmations that He is indeed coming back!

 

It's not the same thing. What we see going on in the world is the condition of mankind and always has been. There have always been wars, famine, earthquakes, pestilence, etc, etc. None of it is worse or better than before, perhaps going back to the fall. You think there were no wars, famine, earthquakes or pestilence before the flood? How bad was it that God had to destroy everyone but 8 people and a boatload of animals?

Jesus didn't say much about the 'last days' in the Olivet discourse, if anything. He was asked about the end of the age and the sign of His coming. His answer concerned the end of the age and it seems out of place to apply Matt 24:4:8 to a span of 2000+ years. It seems quite clear the generation that sees all these things is the terminal generation. That idea applies to the answer Jesus gave to the question He was asked. Therefore Matt 24:4-8 cannot refer to 20 centuries and can only be referenced to the terminal generation. Forty generations saying "The end is near!" based on Matt 24:4-8 means every generation was wrong. Again, Matt 24:4-8 cannot apply to the past 2000 years.

What you are saying here: "we do have for signs the continued fulfilling of the things He warned of" and here, "which are continuing confirmations that He is indeed coming back" would apply to every believer since the ascension and makes the 'signs' meaningless since Jesus has not yet returned. 

Hello once again Diaste,

I'm sorry for such a delay in getting back to you.  Hope all is well.  I've been spread thin for a good while and always have to budget my time it seems, especially on the forums.  For some time, I have been giving attention to just one of my threads, as you may have noticed.

Concerning your first paragraph, I do hear what you are saying, but I would like for you to try once again to hear what I have said.  Things could have been a lot different, but they are not, and for me, this continues to be very, very huge.  Can you imagine someone speaking matter-of-factly about how cars of the future will all be battery powered, and things turning out such, that 100 years from now, everyone is sporting around in flying cars like the Jetsons---with nuclear power?  Or perhaps, having to walk and ride horseback again because the world's industries have been so hopelessly incapacitated?  There are about a zillion possibilities concerning what things could be like 10 years from now, not to mention 2000.  I wouldn't want to lay down money on what things will be next year!  People get it wrong all the time.  And even the psychics, I don't know of any that picked up on the corona virus!  Seems they have all gone into hiding.

Well, the merits of other arguments notwithstanding, a greater argument (as I see it) is that Jesus knew that His followers could easily anticipate that things in this world would change for the better, especially after His resurrection and what would happen on the Day of Pentecost---but it was not to be so.  In hindsight, it is easy to see Jesus conveying that, to whatever extent the forces of evil had been active up to that time, they were going to continue to be so, and especially in some Christianity-specific ways.  Connected with His opening statement (Matt. 24:4-5), things could have turned out such that none would even presume to profess themselves to be some kind of Messiah, or Christ, but many have since that time, even in our own generation.  Wingnut- told me that about a hundred had been on this forum over the years, professing such.  Concerning wars, Christianity could have had such a far reaching impact that these would, in our generation, be considered something of the long distant past, but it's not quite that way, is it?  Or, we could have annihilated ourselves, which would mean that we wouldn't even be discussing this.  Also, modern man (with much pride) could have made such advances that things such as world hunger and pestilences are no longer a concern.  Or, there could have been a relaxing along all of the earth's fault lines to the point that earthquakes never happen any more.  Things could have turned out a lot differently, but they have not.  Christians could have become so very respected that none would even think in terms of persecuting, much less martyring them.  On the other hand, they could have faded from history like a little cult that never really got established---kinda like that Hale-Bopp Comet crew.  Again, things could have turned out a lot differently, but they haven't.  Isn't that something?  Things could have turned out such that of Jesus Christ, history would bear out that He didn't know what He was talking about.  Atheists, agnostics, and unbelievers ought to really take note.  Jesus hit all His nails right on the head---and I mean right on.

Moreover, does it not seem quite appropriate, even obligatory, that in such a talk with His disciples, Jesus would warn them of things they and His Church would be facing?  He was speaking these things to the pillars of His Church the very week He was to be crucified.  Early in the era of the Church our brothers and sisters in Christ might not have made all the connections, but now we have the perspective of retrospect.  As we say of hindsight, it is 20/20, and some 2000 years of hindsight has confirmed to my satisfaction that Jesus did indeed speak of things very relevant to the era of the Church.  What He said for openers has fit every century of the Church era, if not every decade, if not every year.  From a world wide perspective, it seems to me that what He said fits every day.

Concerning your second paragraph, first of all, the disciples asked Him, "when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3).  Though Jesus did not explicitly answer the first question they had on their minds (concerning the temple), He did tell them about things that were going to begin to take place, yet quickly pointing out that "the end is not yet" (vs. 6).  According to my math, trying to make the things Jesus was talking about in His opening to be also a part of what He was talking about much later, when He said, "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors" (vs. 33), just don't add up.  According to my understanding, "all these things" (vs. 33) would surely include what He had just got through talking about (vss. 29-31), which, as I see it, presents a real problem for those that believe that His Sign Appearance is His Second Advent.  That understanding has Jesus saying that when you see His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near, or, when you see the end, the end is near.  Just don't make sense to me.  What makes much more sense is realizing that the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in Heaven" is His 6th Seal appearance of Revelation 6:16, separate and distinct from His Second Advent, which takes place some seven years later, in Revelation 19:11-15.  So much comes together so much better when so understood.

Further, can you imagine John when he received The Revelation, or after entering into Heaven, finding that what Jesus had told him and the others in the opening of His discourse had not been for them after all, nor for anyone else after all, but for some generation some 2000+ years in the future?  Diaste, I've just got to tell you, I need a lot of help trying to download that program.

Concerning your third paragraph, I just have to disagree.  What Jesus said, even if not understood as I am understanding it, has continued to confirm and strengthen the faith of Christians for as long as I can remember (I'm 62).  And, I believe I can safely say that this has been the case for many many generations preceding ours, if not back to the time of Christ.

On 7/22/2020 at 5:19 AM, Diaste said:

Quote

Now, from our perspective, would He be coming as a thief?  No, because we are expecting Him!  Like the little boy in the above illustration, we should have high expectations!

But you, brothers, are not in the darkness so that this day should overtake you like a thief. For you are all sons of the light and sons of the day; we do not belong to the night or to the darkness. So then, let us not sleep as the others do, but let us remain awake and sober. For those who sleep, sleep at night; and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and the helmet of our hope of salvation.

This is the real reason Jesus does not come like a thief. I feel this 'expectation by condition' is shallow understanding. I guarantee Jesus will not come before the beast is revealed and the world swears an oath to a false god.

Unless I am mistaking you someway, I'm in agreement with your first sentence.  Hey, I truly do like to be able to agree, rather than disagree!  Not for sure just what you are getting at in your second sentence.  And concerning your third sentence, if you are talking about Christ's Second Advent, I am in full agreement, with the guarantee part as well---Scripture being the basis of my guarantee of course.  And, based on Scripture, I guarantee that Christ will make His Sign Appearance (Matt. 29:30) at the opening of the 6th Seal, at which time the 144,000 will be sealed and the Church will be gathered (Rev. 6:12-7:17).  I'll even make that a money-back guarantee!  Give me your money, and if it don't happen like this, I'll give you your money back!   Hey, ain't studying out prophecy and looking forward to our Lord's return rewarding or what?!

Edited February 3, 2023 by not an echo

[Diaste]

4 hours ago, not an echo said:

Moreover, does it not seem quite appropriate, even obligatory, that in such a talk with His disciples, Jesus would warn them of things they and His Church would be facing?  He was speaking these things to the pillars of His Church the very week He was to be crucified.  Early in the era of the Church our brothers and sisters in Christ might not have made all the connections, but now we have the perspective of retrospect.  As we say of hindsight, it is 20/20, and some 2000 years of hindsight has confirmed to my satisfaction that Jesus did indeed speak of things very relevant to the era of the Church.  What He said for openers has fit every century of the Church era, if not every decade, if not every year.  From a world wide perspective, it seems to me that what He said fits every day.

 I apologize, I didn't mean to say that Matt 24:4-11 could never apply to any other generation than the terminal generation; it can and has so if I conveyed that I was wrong. It surely is true about many generations both before and after the Olivet Discourse. There is a difference in context however, based on Matt 24:13-14, that sets the timing of 4-11 and sets it apart from the 4000 years or more of continued 4-11 fulfillment:

"But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."

Jesus is saying 4-11 is in the context of the one 'who perseveres to the end' which cannot hold true for every generation. And that end will not come till the Gospel is preached(published) in all nations, the same end the Disciples just asked about. So while you are correct, and I agree, this specific answer is in the context of the end of the age. It's why I have asked in a general sense, "What's different about it?"

Why would Jesus talk about something that had been happening for two millennia before the Olivet Discourse, as a way of answering a question about the end of the age and the Sign of His coming? 

All of that is why I conclude that 4-11 is something different that we can look for or, it's conditions that exist, and an escalation, during the time of the end of the age. There are a couple technical points as well in the language that support this.

 

4 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning your second paragraph, first of all, the disciples asked Him, "when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3).  Though Jesus did not explicitly answer the first question they had on their minds (concerning the temple),

A popular notion but unfounded. 

"As Jesus left the temple and was walking away, His disciples came up to Him to point out its buildings.

“Do you see all these things?” He replied. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”"

This is the 70 AD prophecy and it's not connected to the question the Disciples had about the end of the age. "As Jesus left the Temple..." is the context and location.

For the end of the age question the location is the Mount of Olives. The Mount of Olives is about a 1/2 hour walk from the Temple Mount. If the Temple was located in the city of David it's a little longer. The scripture says, "While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. " We have no idea when this happened. It could have been a half hour later but we don't know that. If it was 1/2 hour later who knows how the conversation might have turned. Since the time is not recorded it could have been the next day, a week later, a month. We don't know.

It's clear the Temple prophecy was given earlier and is not connected to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus may have given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked. Something prompted the question and Jesus made no mention of the Temple in what followed.

4 hours ago, not an echo said:

  According to my understanding, "all these things" (vs. 33) would surely include what He had just got through talking about (vss. 29-31), which, as I see it, presents a real problem for those that believe that His Sign Appearance is His Second Advent.  That understanding has Jesus saying that when you see His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near, or, when you see the end, the end is near.  Just don't make sense to me.  What makes much more sense is realizing that the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in Heaven" is His 6th Seal appearance of Revelation 6:16, separate and distinct from His Second Advent, which takes place some seven years later, in Revelation 19:11-15.  So much comes together so much better when so understood.

Why not? I don't think it should be assumed the end is happening then. Precisely Jesus says,

"So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near, right at the door." It cannot be understood this means His physical presence as then it would not be 'near' it would be 'here'. So then we must think 'all these things' that tell us Jesus is 'near, right at the door', are the things immediately prior to His physical presence. So from Matt 24:4-30 are all the things we will see. It's just taking away from scripture to think the parables and the analogies are all incorrect.

It's not true this is the end either. Jesus coming is not called the end. This is the end, "Then he will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

How is it then we are told He is near when these things take place but then that nearness is 7 years away? 

So Jesus appears after the Signs, the whole world sees Him and they all mourn, all in Matt 24, but Jesus has not come? So He arrives but doesn't arrive? Or He arrives but then then only arrives 7 years later?

"They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory." Are you saying this is 7 years after the Sign of His coming?

Your idea here is illogical.

 

 

[not an echo]

On 7/22/2020 at 6:01 AM, Diaste said:

On 7/21/2020 at 4:34 PM, not an echo said:

I have to disagree with your reasoning here, as there is a lot of difference between one's referring to our Lord as "Jesus" and one's willingness  to refer to Him as "Jesus Christ."  The latter recognizes Him as the Messiah, and this is what the orthodox Jew rejects.  This is something interesting to note in the book of Acts, beginning on the Day of Pentecost, when 3000 orthodox Jews accepted that Jesus was the Christ!  Note Peter's words in Acts 2, beginning here...

 22  Ye men of Israel, hear these words;  Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

and summed up here...

 36  Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord AND CHRIST.

Note also the other many occasions of the word Christ in Acts, and especially 17:3 and 18:5, 28.

As I see it, not only have there been many messianic claimants since the time of Jesus Christ, of which He warned relating to the era of the Church (Matt. 24:5), there will be the same after the Church is gone (Matt. 24:23-25), of which the Antichrist will be the preeminent.  Understanding this helps us to better understand that Jesus' parable of the fig tree is for the Israelites that will be left behind after the Church is gathered.

Not sure what argument you're making. If, as you say, Orthodox Jewry rejects the idea of Jesus as the Messiah, then they will reject any rumor the Messiah is in the desert, a hidden room, etc. In fact Orthodox Jewry is going to reject any claim to Messianic stature unless that person fits their idea of the Messiah.

I agree with you that "Orthodox Jewry is going to reject any claim to Messianic stature unless that person fits their idea of the Messiah."  Of course, this is a big part of the reason Orthodox Jewry rejected Jesus as their Messiah.

On 7/22/2020 at 6:01 AM, Diaste said:

Quote

As I've indicated elsewhere Diaste, if the rapture (or the gathering) don't occur until the time of Christ's Second Coming, this would be tantamount to Noah not entering the ark till the 40th day of rain.  For Noah and his family, the escape or deliverance was pre-flood, not mid, or post. 

Yes. Salvation from the flood was before the flood began. The mistake is thinking the entire 70th week is wrath when it's not. Only the vials are wrath. The seals and trumps are within the last week and are not wrath. We will all be here for the seals and trumps, if we have not passed before then, but taken before the vials of wrath begin. 

Pretrib and other doctrines get it wrong through the false equivalency of 70th week=God's wrath. Then to skirt the fact of the 2nd coming after GT, as Matt 24 says, they make up a secret 'coming like a thief' rapture that appears no where in scripture. 

The post trib/prewrath view states wrath begins late in the week and the time before the Signs of His coming is what we are told we will overcome in the name of Jesus, and the power of the Spirit, for the glory of our Father.

What came before the flood was not wrath therefore no salvation from wrath. Notice how when those 8 people were saved it was from an event that was destroying everyone else. The seals don't destroy everyone, the trumps don't destroy everyone; only the vials are wrath which brutally punish the rebels and in the end slay them all. 

Post trib/prewrath follows this example of the flood as well as Lot; righteous Lot who suffered and was taken out by angels a moment before God's wrath destroyed Sodom, exactly like it will occur in the end of the age.

Without spending the time it would take to go back and refresh my memory, I think we have discussed much of this before.  I don't really know if we made any good headway back then, other then I'm sure we understand each other a little better and we were able to maintain some  brotherly respect, which is important to me.  I do remember a time when I savored the thought of one day pushing you into the Crystal River!  Just so you know, that day is probably still a coming, but it will all be in good fun. 

Annnyway, since the last time we had some lengthy discussions, I believe I started my thread entitled, A Totally Different Pre-Daniel's 70th Week Rapture Interpretation (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/253935-a-totally-different-pre-daniels-70th-week-rapture-interpretation/).  I would like to encourage you to examine it, if you haven't.  In my second post of that thread, I am also keeping a running list of all my other threads (with the links) related to how I understand things.  With this being said, I'm minded to try to keep my present reply to a couple of things that I'm not sure if we have discussed.  Then, we can go from there.

Concerning your first paragraph, I see the coming of the flood in Noah's day as being much more equivalent to the Day of the Lord than to Daniel's 70th Week.  I understand Daniel's 70th Week as being a part of the Day of the Lord.  So, to get more precise, whereas I am pre-Daniel's 70th Week in my rapture view, I am also pre-the Day of the Lord.  As I have often said, I see the Day of the Lord as beginning when the 7th Seal is removed, which will take place the same day that the 6th Seal is opened, which makes the statement of those left behind, "For the great day of His wrath is come" (Rev. 6:17) true indeed.  To me, this is a very key understanding.  I do not see Daniel's 70th Week as beginning until Revelation 11, at least several months after the rapture (Rev. 9:5, 10), possibly longer (Rev. 9:15).  Also, for clarification, I understand the word "day" in the phrase the Day of the Lord as representing a period of time, like the day of the computer or the Ford Mustang, instead of a particular day, like Monday, or Labor Day.

Further, and having been mindful of how I understand you to see things, the statement of those left behind, "For the great day of His wrath is come" is certainly from the perspective of those left behind.  They have never seen anything like this, and there is more to come on this particular day, again, as I see things.  Because there are no time frames relating to the first four trumpets, these can be sounded the same day that the 7th Seal is opened as well.  I talk about this in my thread entitled, The First Four Trumpets ( https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/249206-the-first-four-trumpets/).

Backing up from it all, within the bounds that Scripture affords, it is quite possible that everything from the opening of the 6th Seal through the sounding of the 4th Trumpet can happen in the course of one day, and I believe it will.  With this understanding, I do see a relative subsiding and stabilization of things after this (like the eye of a hurricane, if you will), which would facilitate the rise of the Antichrist to power.  From another angle, if the rapture were to occur today, it is not necessary (according to Scripture), nor likely, that the Antichrist will confirm his infamous covenant with Israel tomorrow.  Some amount of time would seem to be necessary for things to stabilize somewhat, or to fully prepare the stage of the Bible lands for the final week of Daniel's 70 Weeks' prophecy to formally commence.  Just such a period of time is spoken of in connection with the 5th and 6th Trumpets.

Then, with the sounding of the 7th Trumpet, we find the second time that the word wrath is spoken of in The Revelation, something that you have held to with a death grip, and I understand.  There's some things that I hold to with a death grip.  Hopefully these death grips won't kill us!  When the word wrath is used this time, it is the 24 elders in Heaven that are speaking of it, and they say, "Thy wrath is come" (Rev. 11:18).  So, there is the perspective of those left behind as they are screaming concerning this, and there is the perspective of the 24 elders in Heaven as they are speaking concerning this.  Interestingly, in the chapter following the elders statement (chp. 12), John records this:

 10  And I heard a loud voice saying in Heaven, NOW is come salvation, and strength, and the Kingdom of our God, and power of His Christ:  for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accursed them before our God day and night.

 11  And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony;  and they loved not their lives unto the death.

 12  Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them.  Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea!  for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath BUT A SHORT TIME.

This, especially what I've put in bold, reminds me of the announcer's (Bruce Buffer's) words at the beginning of a main event after he says, I-I-I-I-I-I-IT'S  T-I-I-I-I-I-I-IME!!!  Only this time, it's time for the biggest showdown that there ever has been, the true main event for the true WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP TITLE.  God's wrath, versus Satan's wrath.  Just a little sidebar---It ain't gonna be any contest.  This will be me as I'm watching it   and this will be you  

We know that many, myself included, see the sounding of the 7th Trumpet as marking the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week.  Moreover, from my perspective, this would be at a time when there has arguably been some 3-1/2 years of recovery, before what we know comes next---the time in which the seven vials of God's wrath will be poured out.  There's a lot more that can be said right here Diaste, but I'm feeling inclined to leave off for now to see if this will help us come a little closer together in our understanding.  Whereas I can kinda see where you have been coming from, I'm not able to see the thing of blending the 7th Trumpet with the 6th Seal.  These puzzle pieces do not go together just because there is a side that fits.  But, I believe that there may be something here that will help us all come a little closer to getting this thing in true focus.  Maybe not, but I'm trying, which I believe the Father would have us to do.  Hey---and just so you know---even if we come to a place where we do see things more eye to eye, I'm still kinda savoring the thing of pushing you into the Crystal River.  Might as well get ready. 

Well, got a lot of mowing and other stuff to do... 

Edited February 3, 2023 by not an echo
add link

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

We know that many, myself included, see the sounding of the 7th Trumpet as marking the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week.  

You'll have to help me out here. Don't believe I have heard this before.

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

Whereas I can kinda see where you have been coming from, I'm not able to see the thing of blending the 7th Trumpet with the 6th Seal.  These puzzle pieces do not go together just because there is a side that fits.  But, I believe that there may be something here that will help us all come a little closer to getting this thing in true focus.  Maybe not, but I'm trying, which I believe the Father would have us to do.  Hey---and just so you know---even if we come to a place where we do see things more eye to eye, I'm still kinda savoring the thing of pushing you into the Crystal River.  Might as well get ready

For starters Paul speak to the last trump near the coming of the Lord at the end of the age. We know of one trump that is clearly the last trump during the end of the age near to the return of Jesus; the 7th trump. If this is indeed the last trump Paul is referring to then it must come near to the 6th seal as this is when the sign of Jesus appearing occurs and it is said the wrath of the Lamb and the wrath of the One on the throne begins. Therefore the 7th trump will occur in between the 6th and 7th seal.

Some out there try to find yet another trump as the last trump citing things like "the trump of God" and "the Lord will sound the trump" and say this is different than an angel sounding a trump, and that an angel holding a trump makes the trump 'of the angel' and not the 'trump of God'. 

God giving a command to sound the trump is God sounding the trump, it's by His command, His plan, His obligation and responsibility; therefore He sounded the trump by command. When president Trump gave the order to kill the Iranian General he didn't pull the trigger or push the button to send the bullet or the missile and take out the General; but it is said, "When the President killed the General..." No one credits the service member with the command, the plan or the kill. Same thing.

And it is the trump of God no matter who is holding the trump as the angels were given the trumps. They didn't make the trumps in their basement. They didn't save their money and go down and buy then from the Trumpet Store; they are given the trumps, from God, therefore they are the trumps of God.

[not an echo]

On 9/10/2020 at 6:28 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/10/2020 at 1:19 AM, not an echo said:

Moreover, does it not seem quite appropriate, even obligatory, that in such a talk with His disciples, Jesus would warn them of things they and His Church would be facing?  He was speaking these things to the pillars of His Church the very week He was to be crucified.  Early in the era of the Church our brothers and sisters in Christ might not have made all the connections, but now we have the perspective of retrospect.  As we say of hindsight, it is 20/20, and some 2000 years of hindsight has confirmed to my satisfaction that Jesus did indeed speak of things very relevant to the era of the Church.  What He said for openers has fit every century of the Church era, if not every decade, if not every year.  From a world wide perspective, it seems to me that what He said fits every day.

 I apologize, I didn't mean to say that Matt 24:4-11 could never apply to any other generation than the terminal generation; it can and has so if I conveyed that I was wrong. It surely is true about many generations both before and after the Olivet Discourse. There is a difference in context however, based on Matt 24:13-14, that sets the timing of 4-11 and sets it apart from the 4000 years or more of continued 4-11 fulfillment:

"But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."

Jesus is saying 4-11 is in the context of the one 'who perseveres to the end' which cannot hold true for every generation. And that end will not come till the Gospel is preached(published) in all nations, the same end the Disciples just asked about. So while you are correct, and I agree, this specific answer is in the context of the end of the age. It's why I have asked in a general sense, "What's different about it?"

Why would Jesus talk about something that had been happening for two millennia before the Olivet Discourse, as a way of answering a question about the end of the age and the Sign of His coming? 

All of that is why I conclude that 4-11 is something different that we can look for or, it's conditions that exist, and an escalation, during the time of the end of the age. There are a couple technical points as well in the language that support this.

I again can see where you are coming from, but I would like for you to consider further...

Concerning the latter part of your first paragraph, in a loose general sense, it can be argued that what Jesus warned of in verses 4-11 had taken place in the prior millennia, but the thing of experiencing persecution and martyrdom for His name's sake had not (vs. 9).  This was to be a new thing, Christianity-specific, Church era-specific.  And, as the disciples were told later that they would be witnesses unto Him, "both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8), it's easy to make the connection between this expansion of the Gospel message and what Jesus had said in His Olivet Discourse.  Couple this with the testimony of history and it's in our face that, whatever the disciple's personal concerns, Jesus outlined something much more involved, that being what His Church could expect to come to pass, leading into the fulfilling of Daniel's 70th Week, the climax of which would be His Second Advent (Matt. 24:23-28).

The most direct answer that Jesus gave His disciples was His answer to their question, "and what shall be the sign of Thy coming" (Matt. 24:3).  His answer to this question is the event of which He speaks in verses 29-31, which He elaborates on further through to the end of the chapter.  Based on other evidences and especially The Revelation, this event will intersect the end of the era of the Church and the fulfilling of Daniel's 70th Week, as I show in the diagram below:

                                                           

Concerning your second paragraph and "the one 'who perseveres to the end,' is this end the end of the world, the end of the age, the end of the era of the Church, or the end of one's life?  Does this promise only hold meaning for those who endure to "the end of the age"?  Did it not hold meaning for Steven, or Paul, or Peter, or John Huss, or any of the other millions of martyrs from then unto our day who have endured to the end?

And, if it is yet believed that this means "to the end of the age,"  when does this start---when the Gospel has been preached in all the world?  Who in the past would have known when this would be?  For any given generation, a concept of the extent of the world and its population extended only as far as man had multiplied upon the earth and the next related discovery.  This being such, the possibility of the worldwide reach of the Gospel held relevance for every generation of Christians, even in the time of Paul, who wrote these words in Colossians 1:

  3   We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,

  4   Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints,

  5   For the hope which is laid up for you in Heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the Gospel;

  6   Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world;  and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

I can see this possibility being just as real for every generation since, except perhaps for those who realized what was discovered in 1492!  I bet there were some Christians of that generation that said, "We got to get busy guys!  The world just got a lot bigger!"

It has never ceased to amaze me how that Jesus' choice of words in His Olivet Discourse can hold such relevance for every generation of the Church.  His words were so very Divine!

On 9/10/2020 at 6:28 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/10/2020 at 1:19 AM, not an echo said:

Concerning your second paragraph, first of all, the disciples asked Him, "when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3).  Though Jesus did not explicitly answer the first question they had on their minds (concerning the temple),

A popular notion but unfounded. 

"As Jesus left the temple and was walking away, His disciples came up to Him to point out its buildings.

“Do you see all these things?” He replied. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”"

This is the 70 AD prophecy and it's not connected to the question the Disciples had about the end of the age. "As Jesus left the Temple..." is the context and location.

For the end of the age question the location is the Mount of Olives. The Mount of Olives is about a 1/2 hour walk from the Temple Mount. If the Temple was located in the city of David it's a little longer. The scripture says, "While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. " We have no idea when this happened. It could have been a half hour later but we don't know that. If it was 1/2 hour later who knows how the conversation might have turned. Since the time is not recorded it could have been the next day, a week later, a month. We don't know.

It's clear the Temple prophecy was given earlier and is not connected to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus may have given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked. Something prompted the question and Jesus made no mention of the Temple in what followed.

I just can't get on board with you here Diaste.  We have got to know that what Jesus said about the temple would have the disciples curious in a big time way.  This would be huge, very huge.  If He had of "given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked,"  I submit that they would have been too preoccupied with other thoughts for anything else to register.  If the President has an inside scoop that the U.S. Capital is going to be utterly destroyed and He says something about this to his staff, do you they they are going to be much interested in anything else till they know more about this?  In accord with both Matthew and Mark's accounts, the disciples' first question is reflective of their concern:  "Tell us, when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3, Mk. 13:4).  Moreover, Luke's account reinforces the context of their question, as the place of their asking of the question and Jesus' answering of it is not by him given, but just the dialog.  It matters less if it was on the Mount of Olives or along the way that the disciples asked Jesus this question, and more what was going on in their minds and how He answered them.  And, what did they have on their mind?  They were done ready to be the big wigs in Jesus' administration!  The temple complex was fixing to be their new stomping grounds---in their minds.  Hey, they were "IN" and basking in their aspirations concerning it all---what they thought was going to be their new world.  They didn't have a clue.  And now, Jesus is saying that the temple is coming down, every single stone of it!  Whaaat!!!  I don't know if there is a real good place to stop, but I've got to stop somewhere.  I guess I'll push the pause button here.

On 9/10/2020 at 6:28 AM, Diaste said:

Quote

  According to my understanding, "all these things" (vs. 33) would surely include what He had just got through talking about (vss. 29-31), which, as I see it, presents a real problem for those that believe that His Sign Appearance is His Second Advent.  That understanding has Jesus saying that when you see His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near, or, when you see the end, the end is near.  Just don't make sense to me.  What makes much more sense is realizing that the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in Heaven" is His 6th Seal appearance of Revelation 6:16, separate and distinct from His Second Advent, which takes place some seven years later, in Revelation 19:11-15.  So much comes together so much better when so understood.

Why not? I don't think it should be assumed the end is happening then. Precisely Jesus says,

"So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near, right at the door." It cannot be understood this means His physical presence as then it would not be 'near' it would be 'here'. So then we must think 'all these things' that tell us Jesus is 'near, right at the door', are the things immediately prior to His physical presence. So from Matt 24:4-30 are all the things we will see. It's just taking away from scripture to think the parables and the analogies are all incorrect.

It's not true this is the end either. Jesus coming is not called the end. This is the end, "Then he will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

How is it then we are told He is near when these things take place but then that nearness is 7 years away? 

So Jesus appears after the Signs, the whole world sees Him and they all mourn, all in Matt 24, but Jesus has not come? So He arrives but doesn't arrive? Or He arrives but then then only arrives 7 years later?

"They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory." Are you saying this is 7 years after the Sign of His coming?

Your idea here is illogical.

I'm gathering that your question, "Why not?" is in response to my statement, "Just don't make sense to me."  I believe for the time it would be simpler for me to understand what you are getting at if I knew your answer to this:  Do you think the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" in verse 30 is part of the "all these things" that Jesus speaks of in verse 33?

Concerning your statement, "It's just taking away from scripture to think the parables and the analogies are all incorrect,"  I hope you don't think that I am suggesting that anything in the Bible is incorrect!  NO.  It's all correct.  It's just our understanding that is sometimes incorrect.

Concerning your question, "How is it then we are told He is near when these things take place but then that nearness is 7 years away?"  consider:  On a 2000 mile trip, if I am seven miles away from my destination, I am near.  On a 2000 hour project, if I am seven hours away from completion, I am near completion.  It's often a relative thing.  If 2000 years has passed since Christ's First Advent, if He makes a Sign Appearance some seven years before His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near.  For those who end up taking the mark of the beast, seven years will end up being a little too near.

Edited September 12, 2020 by not an echo
diagram

[JohnR7]

On 7/4/2020 at 10:59 PM, not an echo said:

Concerning the teaching that Christ's return for the Church is imminent, I have long believed that He can come at any time and have often expressed this with words such as, "even before I finish this sentence!" 

The rapture is progressive. When people die they go to be with Him. Unless the Father brings us back to life here.  Looking back on our life is a lot different then trying to figure out the future. 

[Diaste]

11 hours ago, not an echo said:

I again can see where you are coming from, but I would like for you to consider further...

Concerning the latter part of your first paragraph, in a loose general sense, it can be argued that what Jesus warned of in verses 4-11 had taken place in the prior millennia, but the thing of experiencing persecution and martyrdom for His name's sake had not (vs. 9).  This was to be a new thing, Christianity-specific, Church era-specific. 

A roadblock to understanding is dispensationalism. It's not real. We become Israel or we have no inheritance.

11 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning your second paragraph and "the one 'who perseveres to the end,' is this end the end of the world, the end of the age, the end of the era of the Church, or the end of one's life?  Does this promise only hold meaning for those who endure to "the end of the age"?  Did it not hold meaning for Steven, or Paul, or Peter, or John Huss, or any of the other millions of martyrs from then unto our day who have endured to the end?

Context is king. Dispensationalism is black stain on interpretation and understanding. Israel of God is the context, eternity is the focus, Life in Christ is the truth, death in Christ is life eternal. Physical death is not the end. Therefore the end of the AGE is the context. 

 

 

11 hours ago, not an echo said:

I just can't get on board with you here Diaste.  We have got to know that what Jesus said about the temple would have the disciples curious in a big time way.  This would be huge, very huge.  If He had of "given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked,"  I submit that they would have been too preoccupied with other thoughts for anything else to register.  If the President has an inside scoop that the U.S. Capital is going to be utterly destroyed and He says something about this to his staff, do you they they are going to be much interested in anything else till they know more about this?  In accord with both Matthew and Mark's accounts, the disciples' first question is reflective of their concern:  "Tell us, when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3, Mk. 13:4).  Moreover, Luke's account reinforces the context of their question, as the place of their asking of the question and Jesus' answering of it is not by him given, but just the dialog.  It matters less if it was on the Mount of Olives or along the way that the disciples asked Jesus this question, and more what was going on in their minds and how He answered them.  And, what did they have on their mind?  They were done ready to be the big wigs in Jesus' administration!  The temple complex was fixing to be their new stomping grounds---in their minds.  Hey, they were "IN" and basking in their aspirations concerning it all---what they thought was going to be their new world.  They didn't have a clue.  And now, Jesus is saying that the temple is coming down, every single stone of it!  Whaaat!!!  I don't know if there is a real good place to stop, but I've got to stop somewhere.  I guess I'll push the pause button here.

It's a fact. We have no clue about the passage of time between Jesus' egress from the Temple to when the Olivet discourse was given. It's purely speculation to make up a story based on wishes and hope. Was the private meeting after the Sermon on the Mount? When did Jesus exit the Temple and give the 70 AD prophecy? Who knew what and when and why? These questions must be answered by evidence, not hopeless guesses.

11 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning your question, "How is it then we are told He is near when these things take place but then that nearness is 7 years away?"  consider:  On a 2000 mile trip, if I am seven miles away from my destination, I am near.  On a 2000 hour project, if I am seven hours away from completion, I am near completion.  It's often a relative thing.  If 2000 years has passed since Christ's First Advent, if He makes a Sign Appearance some seven years before His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near.  For those who end up taking the mark of the beast, seven years will end up being a little too near.

True, and I have argued for the relative nature of time in certain context. The problem is no such separation as you suggest can be seen here:

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: 

and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, 

and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

Immediately. And then. And then. And they will see...

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: 

and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, 

and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 

And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

All of it takes place right then.

Edited September 12, 2020 by Diaste

[RonaldBruno]

On 7/4/2020 at 9:59 PM, not an echo said:

Concerning the teaching that Christ's return for the Church is imminent, I have long believed that He can come at any time and have often expressed this with words such as, "even before I finish this sentence!"  Understandably, if so, it would seem that this teaching should also hold for all centuries of the Church Era, from the first century to the actual century of His return.

Did the first century Christians believe that Christ's return for the Church was imminent?  Consider Paul's words in I Thessalonians 4:

 13  But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

 14  For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.

 15  For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

 16  For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God:  and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

 17  Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air:  and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

 18  Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Should Paul's words be taken as applying to the Thessalonians personally?  I believe so.  Consider the very next verses, which open chapter five:

  1   But of the times and seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.

  2   FOR YOURSELVES KNOW PERFECTLY that the Day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

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

  4   BUT YE, BRETHREN, are not in darkness, that that day should OVERTAKE YOU as a thief.

Notice also that in the above joining references, Paul made a very close connection between the rapture and the Day of the Lord, which he says, "so cometh as a thief in the night" (vs. 2).  We know that when Christ returns for the rapture of the Church, He will come suddenly and unexpectedly, or as a "thief" (Matt. 24:42-44;  Mk. 13:32-37;  Lk. 12:39-40).  Indeed, because the rapture and the beginning of the Day of the Lord so closely coincide, the Day of the Lord will come just as suddenly and unexpectedly, again, as Paul says, "as a thief in the night."  These words support that there will be no sign(s) that will indicate that Christ's return, nor the Day of the Lord, is on the verge of taking place.  To the contrary, Jesus said that "in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh" (Matt. 24:44).  This world will by no means be expecting the rapture event, nor be prepared for the Day of the Lord, which scripturally can commence right afterwards---even on the same day.  But, we as Christians should be ever watchful and ready, knowing that this can happen at any time.

There are several other references that give support to the view that even first century Christians should have been prepared for Christ to come for the Church at any time.  Consider Paul's words, again to the Thessalonians, in I Thessalonians 1:

  9   For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;

 10  AND to wait for His Son from Heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

And, his words to the Thessalonians once more, in II Thessalonians 3:

  5   And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ.

And, his words to the Philippians, in chapter three:

 20  For our conversation is in heaven;  from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:

 21  Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself.

And, his words to Titus, in chapter two:

 11   For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

 12  Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

 13  LOOKING for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

Note also that James writes similarly, in James 5:

  7   Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord.  Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.

  8   Be ye also patient;  stablish your hearts:  for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

In light of the foregoing, it should not be too difficult to reason that first century Christians would have rightly viewed Christ's return as being imminent.  But, there are valid questions that yet deserve addressing and bear upon some specifics.  Consider with me:

     1.  Jesus informed Peter (a revelation) concerning the manner of his (Peter's) death (Jn. 21:18-19).  We know that Peter understood this and was mindful that he would die---something he later alluded to (II Peter 1:13-14).  So, as far as Peter is concerned, it would seem that he would not have viewed Christ's return as being imminent, but rather, his own death.

     2.  John certainly understood what Jesus was saying to Peter (Jn. 21:20-24).  This means that he would have also had to be mindful of the fulfillment of Jesus' words.  I think John could have still felt that Jesus would come in his own lifetime (yes!), but probably not that His coming was imminent---at least, not until after Peter's death.  It would also seem evident that the rest of the apostles would have had this mindset.

     3.  Just prior to His ascension, Jesus told the apostles to tarry in Jerusalem, to "wait for the promise of the Father,"  which was the power of the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:4-5).  He told them that after this, they would be witnesses unto Him (another revelation), "both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8).  It seems that the apostles would have been bound to expect that what Jesus was saying to them would be fulfilled.  Of course, they might have expected Him to return at any minute and for His words to be fulfilled in some way that they could not at the time comprehend.  But, I think this is not necessarily so, and especially for Peter.

     4.  Concerning Paul, the Lord told Ananias, "For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for My name's sake" (Acts 9:16).  Paul had to realize that some pretty tough times were ahead for him.  I would think that until he had suffered some such, Christ's return would not have been imminent in his mind.  Jesus also informed Paul that he would be going to Rome (yet another revelation/Acts 23:11).  Until he arrived there, would Christ's return have been imminent in his mind?  I do believe that Paul felt that Christ would return in his lifetime (again, yes!), but I am doubtful that he would have felt that His return was imminent, at least not until the revelations concerning what he would experience were fulfilled.  Whereas Peter would have known that he (Peter) was going to die before Christ's return, Paul did not have this particular revelation concerning himself, except perhaps near his life's end (II Tim. 4:6).

As can be seen, there are evidences that seem to support that Christ's return would not have necessarily been imminent in the minds of the apostles, at least not in the earlier days of their ministry.  I say "seem" to allow for some angle that I may have yet to consider.  Based upon Scripture, I do feel comfortable in saying that, except for Peter, the apostles looked for Jesus to come in their lifetime, especially as they grew older.  And very probably, after Peter's death, they would have seen His return as being imminent.  Furthermore, after Peter's death, I would have to believe that Christians should have viewed Christ's return as imminent.  And note, they did not know when  Peter would die, just that he would.

In summing everything up, at the very least, the post-Apostolic, late first century Church should have viewed Christ's return for the Church as being imminent.  In my comprehension of what is revealed in Scripture, since that time until now, the only correct view of Christ's return for the Church is that it has been imminent.  Because of this, the only kind of rapture view that I can see that will harmonize with the scriptural evidence is a pre-Daniel's 70th Week rapture view.  Said another way, as I see it, any other kind of view meets it Waterloo (like Napoleon) in the truth of the imminency of Christ's return.  Finally, the mindset of present day Christians should be that Christ can come for the Church at any time, even before I finish this senten

"Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev. 22:20). 

You claim there won't be preceding signs? What about what we are going through right now: pestilence, lawlessness ...?

Matt. 24:6-14 informs us of preceding signs before his return, the last one being the gospel being preached to every nation - then the end will come. NO OTHER CENTURY COULD HAVE CLAIMED THAT PREREQUISITE SIGN. 

So the big question is, "Are we experiencing the period of time referred to as the "beginning of sorrows"?

We see pestilence that has crippled the world with fear of a virus.

We see lawlessness in the streets that has also threatened to grow in November.

We also have a peace treaty made with UAE and just the other day an additional country joining.

There is no argument that the gospel has recently been preached to every nation and tribe.

So we as Christians are not in the dark about these things pertaining to His return. The world will interpret these events as nothing that hasn't happened before, natural, normal, especially wars and pestilence, famine and earthquakes. This is somewhat reasonable, but we see them happening more frequently. The 20th century certainly had more deaths due to wars than the previous 1800 years combined.

I'm not sure about this observation, but another thread revealed a very interesting insight about the 1st Horseman. He goes out to conquer and is given a crown. Coronavirus got it's name because it looks like a crown. This virus, in a sense went out and conquered the world, not completely defeating us, but at no time in history did any thing like this have an effect and render us capive and impotent, as prisoners, panicked and cowering in fear and in hiding. Certainly Satan is behind this! It wasn't meant to defeat us ... there are three more horsemen and they will kill 1/3 of the population.

 

In the midst of these catasptrophes an angel is still spreading the gospel. (Rev. 14:6)

So idea that nothing precedes the rapture is certainly at odds with what  Jesus said.

Another thing to add to this conundrum is the the true placement of the "Last Trumpet". It's blown by an angel, not a man during some earthly trumpet feast. It is Trumpet #7.

The Pre-tribbers must deny and refute this, because it messes up their whole theology. Don't bother trying, it is a no win argument - been there. So just take all this with you. As things happen (events pile up that we can identify as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th trumpet events) and we are still here, you will concede and gladly get on board with #7.

Edited September 13, 2020 by RonaldBruno

[Montana Marv]

52 minutes ago, RonaldBruno said:

In the midst of these catasptrophes an angel is still spreading the gospel. (Rev. 14:6)

So idea that nothing precedes the rapture is certainly at odds with what  Jesus said.

If an angel is proclaiming the Gospel, guess what? you are not doing your job (you are hiding your light under a basket or you have lost your saltiness; both not worthy of the Kingdom), or you are not here.  Not many choices.

In Christ

Montana Marv

[RonaldBruno]

11 hours ago, Montana Marv said:

If an angel is proclaiming the Gospel, guess what? you are not doing your job (you are hiding your light under a basket or you have lost your saltiness; both not worthy of the Kingdom), or you are not here.  Not many choices.

In Christ

Montana Marv

How rude and judgemental. Nothing  to say  so you attack.