Matthew 24:32-35 The Fig Tree Parable

[Dad Ernie]

Here is my opinion...and heavy emphasis on the word "opinion"...I am aware we are dealing with an interpretative issue here...I am teaching Eschatology with a group of 30 in a weekly Bible study...So I am greatly concentrating on this and doing a lot of reading and slowly forming an opinion that is apt to change with new information.

If there are any obvious holes in my exegesis please point them out to me? I'm here to learn from anybody and everybody.

Greetings David from New Bern,

You have summed up pretty well what I believe. My only comments are:

Regarding the perception of the Apostles - at that time, they were still expecting Jesus to "take over" and begin His reign. They still believed that national Israel was "God's chosen people" and that Jesus would be reigning in the Herodian Temple. They were undoubtedly astonished at Jesus saying that of the temple, no stone will be left unturned. How could this be of such a glorious temple of God? Well, if you read Daniel 9, we see a prophecy of the destruction of the temple and until the CONSUMMATION, it will remain unbuilt. That is NO MORE TEMPLE EVER. Later in the Epistles we find out that "You are the TEMPLE of the Holy Ghost which is in you." You would do well to study the words "heiron" and "naos", both enterpreted "temple", however, the "naos" is the Holy of Holies, the Holy place and the altar before the "naos". Please check this out, it will enlighten you.

Second, we see the mention of the 144,000 in Rev 7. So consider also the word "all" as in "all Israel" in Romans 11:26. The word "all" is not the all you think it is. It is from the Greek:

3956 pas {pas}

including all the forms of declension; TDNT - 5:886,795; adj

AV - all 748, all things 170, every 117, all men 41, whosoever 31,

everyone 28, whole 12, all manner of 11, every man 11,

no + 3756 9, every thing 7, any 7, whatsoever 6,

whosoever + 3739 + 302 3, always + 1223 3, daily + 2250 2,

any thing 2, no + 3361 2, not tr 7, misc 26; 1243

1) individually

1a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things,

everything

2) collectively

2a) some of all types

++++

... "the whole world has gone after him" Did all the world go after

Christ? "then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan."

Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem, baptized in Jordan? "Ye are of God,

little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Does

the whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" are

used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is very

rarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words are

generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts

-- some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has not

restricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile ...

C.H. Spurgeon from a sermon on Particular Redemption

The 144,000 can truly be said to be the "all Israel", as noted in Spurgeon's explanation above.

Lastly, do not forget, that the Apostles at that time could not understand the concept that the Kingdom of God was being removed from National Israel and given to a "peoples" that would produce fruit, namely the Kingdom of God went to the gentiles. So in Rev 7, do not omit the multitudes beyond number of "gentiles" that are included WITH the 144,000. For further info consider Eph. 1-3.

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

[David from New Bern]

Dad Ernie

When the promise was made to "save all of Israel"...I take it that is what you are commenting on at length in your prior post. My understanding this is prophetic of a promise to save 100% of the remnant (144,000) that will be supernaturally perserved and protected through the roughest part of the tribulation (the last 3.5 years). Are yu agreeing with that or taking a different interpretation?

[EricH]

If you examine the text of Mt. 24 with all references to the Fig Tree in the Gospels, you will see that they reference Israel.

I think this might be slightly overstated:

Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you."

John 1:43 NASB

Clearly not a reference to Israel, but to an actual tree under which Nathaniel was sitting. Same with John 1:50

The context has to be the determining factor. It is simply not demanded here, but makes better sense as a sign of anticipation

Greetings EricH,

Some time back, probably before your time, we had a member on this forum who was very knowledgeable about the Jewish perspective of the scriptures. He has sadly since passed on, and we who knew (of) him and his posts miss him very much. But here is the gist of what He said about Nathaniel:

In Jewish customs, it was common for Pharisees and religious men and leaders to sit under the "fig tree" and study and contemplate the scriptures. Thus the "fig Tree" came to represent Israel as they believe that Israel is the vineyard of God. So when Jesus said about Nathaniel, "in him there is no guile", Jesus made reference to "all Israel", again having an oblique reference to the "fig tree".

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

Thats probably a stretch. There is no reason to believe He was not sitting under an actual fig tree. A Jewish perspectiv on the scriptures does not always equate to a correct one. This seems to me to be more the case of one reading into the text, than letting the text dictate our conclusions

[Guest shiloh357]

Christ is already reigning. I believe 1000 years represents all time from Christs resurrection to the end. Remember 1000 yrs is as a day. Saints will not reign with Christ for only 1000 years, but for eternity.

Christ does not say that his reign will take place on earth. Why would he prepare mansions in heaven, come to earth and gather the believers, lock up satan, take the believers to heaven, turn around and bring them back to earth again and then after 1000 years let satan out again?

"My kingdom is not of this world" (Jn. 18:33). This statement leaves no room for doubt that Jesus is King, He does indeed have a kingdom, and it is not of this world. Many think Jesus' reign is yet to be. They look for a coming earthly kingdom. Yet Jesus says He has a kingdom and it is one that is not of this realm.

Not at all. 1,000 years does not mean eternity, and there is no way to stretch in that way. The Bible makes it clear that Jesus is going to return to the earth and reign from Jerusalem. Zecahriah 14 tells us that His foot will touch the Mount of Olives. The Bible does not use 1,000 years in relation to the millenium in a figurative sense.

When the disciples were watching Jesus ascend, the angels stood by them and said that Jesus would return in like manner (bodily form) as you have seen Him go." The Bible does not teach ANYWHERE that 1,000 years began at Christ's resurrection. That sounds like preterism.

Jesus has not officially been coronated King. That will happen, but at present Jesus is operating in the office of High Priest. He will operate as King when He reigns from Jerusalem on the throne of David. This is outlined for us in the last nine chapters of Ezekiel, which occur after Jesus returns and saves Israel from destruction (Ezek. 38,39, Zechariah 14).

The literal reign on earth is further illuminated for us in the last verses of Isaiah 66, when all flesh from all over the world, will come and worship the Lord on Mt. Zion. They will be able to look at the carcasses of the transgressors who didn't make it.

[Openly Curious]

When the promise was made to "save all of Israel"...I take it that is what you are commenting on at length in your prior post. My understanding this is prophetic of a promise to save 100% of the remnant (144,000) that will be supernaturally perserved and protected through the roughest part of the tribulation (the last 3.5 years). Are yu agreeing with that or taking a different interpretation?

hello david

i think since christ has came into the world and gave his own body as sacrifice for sins that now when scriptures speaks of "Isarael" it is speaking of spiritual israel all those who are born again being from every tribe and race of people the holy nation the royal priesthood the peculiar people of the family of G-d they are in every generation all the way to the end as you have stated in the 144,000 that kept themselves pure before the lord during that awful time on earth in the future. which is reference to the real jews that see they were wrong and jesus truly is the messiah and will turn to him with all their hearts during that time.

so in that regards "save all of Israel" is referring to every person jew, gentile, male, female that has accepted christ as their saviour it is those who make up the holy nation spiritual israel which means the children of God begotten through his only Son we have been adopted into the family of G-d.

In Galatians 6:16 is a favorite verse of mine it says "And as many as walk according to this "rule", peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God."

I like the verses that proceed this one but this one says the Israel of G-d speaking of the child of G-d as we are now the "apple" of G-d's eye just as the nation of israel was the apple of G-d's eyes but through their rejection salvation has literally come unto the whole world to all those in every generation that will say yes to his lordship and walk according to the new man created in christ jesus.

It is these that are the fruits as christ was the firstfruit taken up then at rapture should we be alive or dead we will be taken out then in revelation the believers at that time will be taken out. It is these throughout the generations from christ that are the "elect" who are called according to his purpose from every tribe and tongue and nation.

blesssings

Openly Curious

[Guest shiloh357]

i think since christ has came into the world and gave his own body as sacrifice for sins that now when scriptures speaks of "Isarael" it is speaking of spiritual israel all those who are born again being from every tribe and race of people the holy nation the royal priesthood the peculiar people of the family of G-d they are in every generation

No, Israel and the Church are separate entities in the New Testament. The NT treats Israel as Israel and the Church as the Church. To claim that Israel is the Church provides some very large problems.

First of all Romans 9,10 and 11 provide Paul's most complete treatise on Israel. If the Church and Israel are the same, we could just replace the word "Israel" with the word "Church" and it should make sense, right??? Lets try that with some test verses and see if it does...

God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against the Church?

(Romans 11:2)

What then? the Church failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,

(Romans 11:7)

Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon the Church until the fulness fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

(Romans 11:25)

You also have a problem when you try to allegorize or spiritualize Israel as the Church where Bible prophecy comes into play. God prophesies about the rebuilding and restoration of national Israel. There is a distinct theological problem if the Church is Israel. If the Church is Israel, then the Old Testament prophecies about israel should apply to the Church, but they don't. There is no logical, historic, or linguistic way to make the Church, Israel prophetically.

so in that regards "save all of Israel" is referring to every person jew, gentile, male, female that has accepted christ as their saviour it is those who make up the holy nation spiritual israel which means the children of God begotten through his only Son we have been adopted into the family of G-d.

That is not what Paul was saying at all. Paul begins his treatise in Romans 9 about the salvation of the Jewish people, and he ends his treatise on the same line of thought, the salvation of the physical seed of Abraham. There is no spiritualization or allegorization on Paul's part, here.

I like the verses that proceed this one but this one says the Israel of G-d speaking of the child of G-d as we are now the "apple" of G-d's eye just as the nation of israel was the apple of G-d's eyes but through their rejection salvation has literally come unto the whole world to all those in every generation that will say yes to his lordship and walk according to the new man created in christ jesus.

No, the apple of God's eye, is national Israel. Zechariah 2:8 was written the restored nation of Israel, not to the Church. If you apply proper hermeneutics and utilize context, you can only interpret it as Israel, not the Church.

[Openly Curious]

i think since christ has came into the world and gave his own body as sacrifice for sins that now when scriptures speaks of "Isarael" it is speaking of spiritual israel all those who are born again being from every tribe and race of people the holy nation the royal priesthood the peculiar people of the family of G-d they are in every generation

No, Israel and the Church are separate entities in the New Testament. The NT treats Israel as Israel and the Church as the Church. To claim that Israel is the Church provides some very large problems.

First of all Romans 9,10 and 11 provide Paul's most complete treatise on Israel. If the Church and Israel are the same, we could just replace the word "Israel" with the word "Church" and it should make sense, right??? Lets try that with some test verses and see if it does...

God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against the Church?

(Romans 11:2)

What then? the Church failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,

(Romans 11:7)

Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon the Church until the fulness fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

(Romans 11:25)

You also have a problem when you try to allegorize or spiritualize Israel as the Church where Bible prophecy comes into play. God prophesies about the rebuilding and restoration of national Israel. There is a distinct theological problem if the Church is Israel. If the Church is Israel, then the Old Testament prophecies about israel should apply to the Church, but they don't. There is no logical, historic, or linguistic way to make the Church, Israel prophetically.

so in that regards "save all of Israel" is referring to every person jew, gentile, male, female that has accepted christ as their saviour it is those who make up the holy nation spiritual israel which means the children of God begotten through his only Son we have been adopted into the family of G-d.

That is not what Paul was saying at all. Paul begins his treatise in Romans 9 about the salvation of the Jewish people, and he ends his treatise on the same line of thought, the salvation of the physical seed of Abraham. There is no spiritualization or allegorization on Paul's part, here.

I like the verses that proceed this one but this one says the Israel of G-d speaking of the child of G-d as we are now the "apple" of G-d's eye just as the nation of israel was the apple of G-d's eyes but through their rejection salvation has literally come unto the whole world to all those in every generation that will say yes to his lordship and walk according to the new man created in christ jesus.

No, the apple of God's eye, is national Israel. Zechariah 2:8 was written the restored nation of Israel, not to the Church. If you apply proper hermeneutics and utilize context, you can only interpret it as Israel, not the Church.

shiloh357

it is a shame that you don't see your own place within the royal family of G-d.

1 Peter 2:9-10--"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal Priesthood, an holy "nation" a peculiar people, that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. (vs 10) which in time past were not a people but are now the people of G-d. **** which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (Hosea 1:10 ; 2:23, Romans 9:25-26, 1 Peter 2:10)

it is also a shame that you do not know that G-d "forknew" even yourself before you were even formed in the belly and included you in his divine plan. It is a shame that you do not see yourself precious in the eyes of God as his chosen people out of all the nations of the earth but yet he still chose you and eye and watches over us as he did the nation of israel and still G-d has plans for the nation of israel in history still to come. but each to his own blessings

OC

[Openly Curious]

'KatyAnn'

Do you honestly believe that Christ is not already King of King and Lord of Lords? He certainly is my King and Lord.

[Guest shiloh357]

Where does the Bible make it clear that Christ will rule from earthly Jerusalem. It says he will reign from New Jerusalem which descends from heaven.

Do you honestly believe that Christ is not already King of King and Lord of Lords? He certainly is my King and Lord.

1. No, the Bible says that the millenial reign of Christ will be from Jerusalem in Rev 20: 4-6. New Jerusalem occurs after the final judgement, and after the creation of the New Heavens and the New Earth. The reign of Christ from Jerusalem is the final stage of Israel's restoration. Israel is restored to the Land in preparation for the second coming of Christ. After Jesus returns, He will establish His own Temple which we read about in the last nine chapters of Ezekiel.

Jesus reigning in the throne of David occurs in the present Jerusalem after Jesus returns and saves Israel/Jerusalem from destruction in Rev. 9, Zech 14, and Ezek38, and 39. You are confusing the millenium and the New Jerusalem. Those are two different events in time at least 1,000 years apart from each other. The New Jerusalem will descend out of Heaven after the New Earth and New Heaven are created.

2. Secondly, I did not say that Jesus is not a King. I am saying that He is operating currently, according to the book of Hebrews in the office as High Priest. He is not currently operating in the office of King. That is still yet to come.

[Guest shiloh357]

shiloh357

it is a shame that you don't see your own place within the royal family of G-d.

1 Peter 2:9-10--"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal Priesthood, an holy "nation" a peculiar people, that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. (vs 10) which in time past were not a people but are now the people of G-d. **** which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (Hosea 1:10 ; 2:23, Romans 9:25-26, 1 Peter 2:10)

it is also a shame that you do not know that G-d "forknew" even yourself before you were even formed in the belly and included you in his divine plan. It is a shame that you do not see yourself precious in the eyes of God as his chosen people out of all the nations of the earth but yet he still chose you and eye and watches over us as he did the nation of israel and still G-d has plans for the nation of israel in history still to come. but each to his own blessings

OC

Trying to apply that passage to this discussion is nonsensical. It does not even address the issue. Peter is not saying that the Church is "chosen" as opposed to, or in replacement of the Jews. He is making a spiritual application. While a valid application, Peter's intention is not to declare that the Church is the "new chosen people."

You obviously only read what you wanted to read from my previous remarks. I am not going to waste time repeating myself.