As I already wrote - that is apocalyptic language. The wording of the text doesn't prove my interpretation to be wrong. My interpretation may clash with your presumption - but there's nothing that conflicts with my interpretation there.
There is a conflict because you deny a visible second coming while Christ says it will be visible.
I don't doubt a future physical coming of Jesus, but you are denying that Jesus and His apostles prophesied correctly when they stated "these things will be fulfilled in this generation" (speaking of the 1st century).
He was not speaking of the first century and none of the things he spoke of on the MT of Olives has happened yet.
Oh really?
How much of Matthew 24 is fulfilled
consigliere31 said: ↑
How can anyone not see that Luke 21 is about the destruction of Jerusalem that was about to come in that generation as Jesus said it would.
PujolsNonRoidHomerHitter said: ↑
i don't see how one could ever say none . . . obviously the historical overthrow of Jerusalem ad 70 has to be in play as well as numerous other happenings. the big question among theologians is this a now and not yet sort of prophecy? was the physical destructions a type of the destructions to come at the end?
=====================
Current Poll Results: Amount of Matt 24 fulfilled
08/28/13
I view all of it fulfilled 37 24.18%
I view it as mostly/partially fulfilled 62 40.52%
I view it as none of it is fulfilled 21 13.73%
===============================
http://www.bible.ca/pre-destruction70AD-george-holford-1805AD.htm\
Proof that Matthew 24 was fully fulfilled in 70 AD!
Also see: Rapture refuted
=====================
Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke's Temple/Jerusalem Discourses harmonized- Poll Thread
Matthew 24:3
Yet of Him sitting on the Mount of the Olives, the Disciples came toward to Him according to own saying "be telling to us!
when shall these be being?
and what the sign of Thy parousia<3952> and consummation<4930> of the Age?
Luke 21:31
Thus also ye whenever ye may be seeing these-things becoming ye are knowing that nigh/egguV <1451> is the Kingdom of the God.
James 5:8
be patient! also stand-fast the hearts of ye,
that the Parousia <3952> of the Lord has-neared/hggiken <1448> (5758);
====================================
Revelation 1:3
Blessed/happy the one reading and the ones hearing the words of the Prophecy and keepings in it having been written/gegrammena <1125> (5772),
For the Time/Season is nigh<1451>.
=========================
Hugo Grotius Study Archive
He considers that there are no grounds for expecting the Lord’s personal, visible presence on earth, but rather a presence of the Spirit and its power in his ordinances with his saints living on earth
Hugo Grotius
1583 – 1645
FIRST PROTESTANT TO ADOPT MODERN PRETERIST THEOLOGY
“Christ, if I am capable of discerning any thing, distinctly answers two distinct questions. – The coming of Christ many do not distinguish from the end of the world, being, I apprehend, deceived by the ambiguity of the word; for it is most certain, that the word parousia [or coming] has a diversity of acceptation. –
here interpret it, not of the Judgment, but of THE KINGDOM of the Messiah.”
Grotius Believed in the First-Century Return Of Christ
Although most famous for his theories of natural law, Grotius was also considered to be a great theologian. While occasionally writing about Christianity and religion, his intention for law was to write of it as independent of religious opinions.
Dividing Line Between Destruction of Jerusalem and General Judgment in the Olivet Discourse: Matthew 24:36
(On
Matthew 12:31)
“This form of speech is a common Hebraism: the Jews often said, this shall be, and that shall not be; not intending however to affirm absolutely that the first should be, but merely to show that the last was much more unlikely or difficult, than the first. The sense, is this: any crime which may be committed, even all calumnies, (or blasphemies,) which hold the first rank among crimes, may be forgiven more readily than the calumny, (or blasphemy,) against the Spirit of God. See a similar comparison, 1 Sam. ii. 25.’ Annot. in. loc.)
(On
Matthew 12:43)
“Christ appears to have had reference to the character of the Jewish people, at the two periods of their captivity in Babylon, and their destruction by Titus. Before their captivity, the people were exceedingly wicked, as may be seen in the Prophets ; during their exile many began to reform, and under a superintending Providence, returned to their native land. But in the days of the Asmonaeans, having again plunged into excessive wickedness, they added to their other crimes, a contempt of the Messiah, who came to them with a message of. mercy, and exercising miraculous power. Having done this, they were abandoned by God, and became the most wicked of all men, as Josephus has described them in his history of their last days.” (Annot. in loc.)
(On Matthew 24:3)
“Christ, if I am capable of discerning any thing, distinctly answers two distinct questions. – The coming of Christ many do not distinguish from the end of the world, being, I apprehend, deceived by the ambiguity of the word; for it is most certain, that the word parousia [or coming] has a diversity of acceptation. – I here interpret it, not of the Judgment, but of THE KINGDOM of the Messiah.” (Matt. xxiv. 3.)
(On
Matthew 24:6-7)
“Christ declares, that greater disturbances than those which happened under Caligula, should fall out in the latter times of Claudius, and in the reign of Nero. That of ‘nation against nation’ portended the divinations, insurrections, and mutual slaughter of the Jews and those of other nations, who dwelt in the same cities together; as particularly at Caesarea,”
===========================
Richard Baxter (1615-1691)
“I must in Gratitude profess that I have learnt more from Grotius then from almost any Writer that ever I read.” (
Calendar I, no. 234 n.1)
J.P. Dabney (1829)
Matthew 10 “23. Till the Son of man be come :
Le Clerc supposes that this coming, in the present instance, can only well be referred to the destruction of the Jewish state and of Jerusalem ; and so also
Whitby. Grotius would understand it of the full effusion of the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost ; while Priestley, less naturally and probably than either, applies it to Christ’s second coming, to raise the dead and judge the world. For this explication, he assigns no reasons.” (Annotations on the New Testament: compiled from the best critical authorities, p. 18)
Matthew 16: “28. Coming to his kingdom : so Wakefield. ” Or, — coming to reign, meaning probably till they shall see the Christian religion established in the world.” Mss. Notes. See Note on Ch. x. 7- This coming of Christ, however, is very variously understood. Hammond refers it to the great destruction of Jerusalem (as in Matt. xxiv. 3) ; Whitby, to the last day, from the similarity of the language used, to that of Matt. xxv. 31; 2 Thes. i. 7 ; Matt. xiii. 41. Grotius supposes it to signify the first manifestation of Christ’s power, by his resurrection, ascension, and sending the Holy Spirit, which our Lord declares would speedily take place. It is the common opinion of critics, that in the minds of the disciples, the destruction of the Jewish state and the final judgment were frequently conjoined, from the near resemblance in the language used by our Saviour, in respect to both. ” (ibid, p. 28)
Philip Doddridge
“Grotius has done more to illustrate the Scriptures, by what is generally called profane learning, than perhaps almost all the other commentators put together ; nevertheless, he too often gives up prophecies, which, in their original sense, relate to the Messiah His notes on some texts are large and learned dissertations, which might have profitably been published by themselves.” (Lectures on Preaching, 5th vol, p. 471)
Robert Fleming
“After I had finished the foregoing discourse [
i.e., “Apocalyptical Key” (1701)] and that all the sheets were almost printed, I was earnestly urged by a friend to say something to secure the foundation I go upon: especially because the learning of Grotius and Dr. Hammond had influenced many to follow another way of interpreting the Revelation, as the reputation of Mr. Baxter had swayed others to think well of the same. And when I urged that Dr. More, in his
Mystery of Iniquity, and Dr. Cressener, in his
Demonstration of the First Principles of the Protestant Interpretations of the Apocalypse, had done this sufficiently already; he replied, that these books were both voluminous and dark, and not easy to be purchased by every one; and that, therefore, some short account of this matter at this time seemed to be necessary. I urged many things against this, as, hat this advice came too late and that, should I contract never so much, it would swell this part of my book too much to keep a due proportion with the other discourses; and, indeed, make the whole too bulky. But after all, importunity; and the respect I bore my friend, prevailed with me to say something to all those things that he thought I ought to premise. Therefore, not to spend any longer time in giving the reasons why I did not speak to these things before in their proper place, or why I do so now, I shall give my thoughts of this book, and the first principles of the right interpretation of it, in some propositions, which do gradually lay the foundation of what I advanced before.” (Postscript, Apocalyptical Key)
========================
=============================
JOSEPHUS, OLIVET DISCOURSE AND BOOK OF REVELATION
Was Flavius Josephus familiar with the Apocalypse of John?
John's Revelation - “And there were noises and thundering and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such a mighty and great earthquake as had not occurred since men were on the earth.” (16:18)
Josephus - “for there broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with continued lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowings of the earth, that was in an earthquake. These things were a manifest indication that some destruction was coming upon men, when the system of the world was put into this disorder; and any one would guess that these wonders foreshowed some grand calamities that were coming” (“Wars of the Jews” 4:4:5) John's
==========================
Josephus Parallels? Revelation 16:19 and Wars of the Jews 5:1:1
Revelation - "Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And great Babylon was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath.” (16:19)
Josephus - “it so happened that the sedition at Jerusalem was revived, and parted into three factions, and that one faction fought against the other; which partition in such evil cases may be said to be a good thing, and the effect of divine justice.” (5:1:1)
==============================
Josephus Parallels? Revelation 16:21 and Wars of the Jews 5:6:3
John's Revelation - “And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent.” (16:21)
Josephus - “Now the stones that were cast were of the weight of a talent, and were carried two furlongs and further. The blow they gave was no way to be sustained, not only by those that stood first in the way, but by those that were beyond them for a great space. As for the Jews, they at first watched the coming of the stone, for it was of a white color, and could therefore not only be perceived by the great noise it made, but could be seen also before it came by its brightness;” (5:6:3).........
