Question for Amillennialists

[claninja]

The word eggizō means “impending” or “approaching" not imminent.

i understand that your personal eschatology makes it difficult to accept the actual definition of words when in certain Greek tenses. Eggizo absolutely does mean literally near or imminent when In the perfect tense.

Helps word studies - eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence.

and yes eggizo can absolutely mean impending:

occurring or likely to occur soon

Definition of IMPENDING

occurring or likely to occur soon : upcoming… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

And funny enough, the Antonym of impending is far off or distant.

But, if you Can you provide any scholarly work that demonstrates eggizo on the perfect indicative active should not be understood as imminent, that would be so very helpful? Or are you , your own authority on the Greek and such a request is “arbitrary”?

If the apostles believed that the coming of the Lord had drawn near or was “impending” how in the world could they understand the millennium to be 1,000 plus year prior to coming of Christ?

The teaching of the gospels were at least 40 years before AD 70.

I absolutely agree. And interestingly enough there are absolutely zero passages in the gospels that state the coming of Christ was near. So I have no idea where you get the idea that I said 40 years was “at hand” or “in a little while”……

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I’ll stick with the Greek, which i know from previous experience, you only accept scholarly definitions when they agree with your position but reject when they contradict your position.

“1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence”

Look, buddy. Jesus did not come in any way, shape or form in 70 AD. You have no way around that no matter what you do. There was no gathering of the elect in 70 AD and no resurrection of the dead, which are both things that are said to occur when He comes again. So, He has not come yet at all. His glorious appearing will occur in the future and it's sad that you don't even look forward to that and think He already came.

As to the parable of the 12 virgins- in Galilean wedding traditions, not knowing the day nor hour did NOT mean not knowing the general time frame. The son, bride, and guests all knew the general time frame, just not the day nor hour. Only the father of the groom knew that.

And to the “long time”. Yes, as a partial preterist, I agree 40 years between the ascension of Christ and the coming of jesus in judgement on Jerusalem was a long time. Most of the passages I have provided about “at hand” were written literally near to the destruction of Jerusalem.

You agree with who? I didn't say that I believe 40 years is a long time. I don't believe that. Oh brother. This is hopeless.

As to Peter, as even you have said before, this just means God is outside of time.

Yes, and why did Peter point that out in relation to how long it was taking for the Lord to fulfill the promise of His coming again?

Of course there would be skeptics scoffing “where is his coming?!?!?” if the apostles believed Christ would come in their lifetime and it was getting closer to the end of their lives. LOL It would make zero sense for skeptics to scoff “where is His coming?!?!” if the apostles taught Christ wasn’t coming for a 1,000 years (or symbolic for multi thousand years).

You completely missed the point. Are you even trying? Did you actually read what I said? I didn't say that the apostles taught that Christ's wasn't coming for 1,000 years. I said they didn't know when He was coming. In terms of Peter, I said that he didn't know when He was coming and the reason why he pointed out that no one can say that the Lord is being slow to return is because it could potentially be a long time until He returns. So, his point was that no matter how long it took for Him to return, no one could say He was being slow because He's not being slow from His eternal perspective outside of time. I don't believe Peter would have bothered saying that if it was a certainty that He was going to come in their lifetimes. Why would he bother?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

And I think it’s foolish to build a theology off of interpreting symbolic passages in revelation without gospel and epistolic evidence, but to each their own…..

You have to be kidding here. People like sovereigngrace and myself often tell others about how important it is to have clear and straightforward scriptures as the foundation of our doctrine rather than debatable passages contained within highly symbolic books like Zechariah, Daniel and Revelation. Our beliefs are not based on Revelation 20. We interpret Revelation 20 in light of other scripture. Just because you don't accept the passages we use to support our understanding of Revelation 20 doesn't mean we build our theology off of Revelation 20. That's ludicrous.

Other passages talk about Christ having begun to reign after His resurrection. Unlike you, we see how it indicates that the thousand years has a beginning and an ending, so we the beginning of the thousand years as occurring upon His resurrection. We also see other scripture which talks about the resurrection of the dead occurring when He returns and He hasn't returned yet. So, we see the resurrection of the dead occurring after the end of the thousand years and after Satan's little season. Your view, in contrast, makes complete nonsense out of "the thousand years" and pretends as if it doesn't exist at all even though it explicitly indicates that it comes to an end and is followed by a "little season" of time before the end. Your view of the thousand years can't be taken seriously.

Your whole post is an opinion piece which provides zero scholarly evidence that the perfect indicative active of eggizo means the polar opposite of near. Then you have to throw in the whole “God’s time argument”, which is not a serious argument. There are so many better options for your position, such as the prophetic perfect idiom….not sure why you never use that……..

So Is it your position that the apostles did NOT believe the coming of the Lord was imminent, but instead believed it was at least a minimum of 1,000 (or symbolic for a long time)?

Do the early church fathers teach that Christs coming was at least a thousand years away?

What they may have believed and what they knew are two different things. They certainly could have believed that His coming was soon, but if they listened to Jesus then they also would have known that it could be a long time before He came (Matthew 25:1-13). How long? No one knew. That's the point. You act as if they knew how long, or at least close to how long, it would be. No, they did not.

 

[sovereigngrace]

i understand that your personal eschatology makes it difficult to accept the actual definition of words when in certain Greek tenses. Eggizo absolutely does mean literally near or imminent when In the perfect tense.

Helps word studies - eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence.

and yes eggizo can absolutely mean impending:

occurring or likely to occur soon

Definition of IMPENDING

occurring or likely to occur soon : upcoming… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

And funny enough, the Antonym of impending is far off or distant.

But, if you Can you provide any scholarly work that demonstrates eggizo on the perfect indicative active should not be understood as imminent, that would be so very helpful? Or are you , your own authority on the Greek and such a request is “arbitrary”?

If the apostles believed that the coming of the Lord had drawn near or was “impending” how in the world could they understand the millennium to be 1,000 plus year prior to coming of Christ?



I absolutely agree. And interestingly enough there are absolutely zero passages in the gospels that state the coming of Christ was near. So I have no idea where you get the idea that I said 40 years was “at hand” or “in a little while”……

It is quite ironic that Preterists are quick to rubbish the interpretation of eggizō as simply “approaching” yet are quick and comfortable to stretch out the word to mean 40 years down the road. That is hardly imminent! What they are in fact doing is playing games with the English language in order to support their theological bias. They are trying to force a manufactured meaning on this word in the sacred text so as to reinforce Preterism. No one could argue with any credence that a 40-years equates to imminent.

The question is: are we looking at this subject from God's perspective in heaven or from man's perspective on earth? A “brief period of time” would surely be something closer to a few hours, days or weeks rather than 40 years. For us mere earthlings who are promised approximately 70 years on this earth, 40 years is a long time. It is not “a brief period of time.” It is therefore far off in earthly terms.

When it comes to His return, we are exhorted to always be prepared. The closeness is relative, because we are talking about One who lives in eternity.

Since when is 40 years+ later imminent?

Imminent means “about to happen.” AD70 was hardly about to happen. AD70 was 10-40 years later. This is how Preterist play with the English language in order to support their theory and ignore what the sacred text is actually saying.

When it comes to words like "near" or "shortly" they are spoken from God's heavenly perspective where a thousand years on earth is like one eternal day.

One thing He did not say is that one eternal day is like 40 years. Anyway, 40 years does not fit the whole 1 day/thousand years instruction. In fact, it totally negates the Preterist argument. 2 Peter 3 is teaching that a long time with us is a short time with the Lord. 40 years would not have been enough time for the mockers and scoffer to deride the reality of the glorious return of Christ. But a two thousand years wait fits effortlessly and comfortably into the narrative and fits the context. The whole 1 day/thousand years narrative totally negates the Preterist argument.

 

[claninja]

It is quite ironic that Preterists are quick to rubbish the interpretation of eggizō as simply “approaching” yet are quick and comfortable to stretch out the word to mean 40 years down the road. That is hardly imminent! What they are in fact doing is playing games with the English language in order to support their theological bias. They are trying to force a manufactured meaning on this word in the sacred text so as to reinforce Preterism. No one could argue with any credence that a 40-years equates to imminent.

The question is: are we looking at this subject from God's perspective in heaven or from man's perspective on earth? A “brief period of time” would surely be something closer to a few hours, days or weeks rather than 40 years. For us mere earthlings who are promised approximately 70 years on this earth, 40 years is a long time. It is not “a brief period of time.” It is therefore far off in earthly terms.

When it comes to His return, we are exhorted to always be prepared. The closeness is relative, because we are talking about One who lives in eternity.

Since when is 40 years+ later imminent?

Imminent means “about to happen.” AD70 was hardly about to happen. AD70 was 10-40 years later. This is how Preterist play with the English language in order to support their theory and ignore what the sacred text is actually saying.

When it comes to words like "near" or "shortly" they are spoken from God's heavenly perspective where a thousand years on earth is like one eternal day.

One thing He did not say is that one eternal day is like 40 years. Anyway, 40 years does not fit the whole 1 day/thousand years instruction. In fact, it totally negates the Preterist argument. 2 Peter 3 is teaching that a long time with us is a short time with the Lord. 40 years would not have been enough time for the mockers and scoffer to deride the reality of the glorious return of Christ. But a two thousand years wait fits effortlessly and comfortably into the narrative and fits the context. The whole 1 day/thousand years narrative totally negates the Preterist argument.

Lol, Where are you getting this idea that anyone claims that 40 years + is imminent? That’s just completely untrue, and a strawman…………come on, do better SG.

Apparently, this how you deflect from providing any scholarly evidence to support your erroneous claim that eggizo, in the perfect indicative active, doesn’t mean imminent……..

 

[claninja]

I wasn't intending to say that exactly. I would never say that a time is coming at which point people should stop praying. Obviously, that would be ludicrous. But, since Satan will be unrestrained during that time it will be much more difficult for people to resist him and that relates to the mass falling away that Jesus talked about (Matthew 24:10-12) and Paul wrote about (2 Thess 2:3, 1 Timothy 4:1-2).


Yeah, that's just not going to happen as I have already told you several times before when we have discussed this. I believe there are passages that relate to his binding and I have shared those, but you have decided that no two passages can relate to each other unless they have the same wording. Oh well. I can't force you to change your rigid approach to interpreting scripture.


Here you are repeating yourself. Let me just make something clear here (as I have done with you in the past - your memory seems to be not so good). I will never provide a passage that has the same wording as we see in Revelation 20 regarding Satan being bound in the abyss because there are none. Does that mean there aren't any passages related to his binding that don't refer to it with the exact words you're looking for? No.


But it indicates that things like his loss of power over death and the destruction of his works would be true for "a thousand years" which is said to have a beginning and an ending. You turn the thousand years into nothing. I can't take that seriously.


You know darn well that I do not deny anything you said there and you know darn well that what you said makes sense to me. But, we're talking about Satan's binding here. Where does it say he would be bound from making war against the church? Nowhere.

He has always persecuted the church, but the difference between what he has already been doing for a long time and what he will be able to do during a future time (if it hasn't already begun) is that he will be able to do those things unrestrained. Because of the increase in wickedness and the mass falling away from the faith, there will not be much resistance to his efforts to unite his followers against the church around the world. That is not like what has been the case for the past almost 2,000 years when he has faced much resistance. He has had plenty of resistance during that time because of the preaching of the gospel through the power of the Holy Spirit. But, with many falling away and the gospel message being largely silenced during his "little season", he would be able to wreak havoc similar to how he was able to do in Old Testament times.

Right, so it’s completely untrue that I would be “ignoring” 1 Peter 5:9, as I believe the saints to whom Satan wars against could rely upon the words of Peter to “flee from the devil and pray for brothers and sisters suffering around the world”.

Good to know, you have zero epistolic or gospel evidence. If you did that would really nail down amil against premil. Can you imagine if the gospels and epistles stated Satan was locked in the abyss for a long time to prevent warring against the church but then would be released just prior to the coming of Christ?! Man, that would a real win for amil. Unfortunately, for amil, it’s pretty clear that Satan was hindering the gospel, leading believers astray, working through the sons of disobedience, blinding unbelievers, prowling like a lion, throwing saints in prison, and even killing them……

As to the falling away: The persecution of the saints and The falling away were events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Matthew 24:9-10 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10And then many will fall away

“Then shall many be offended — That is, shall stumble and fall, or shall be turned out of the right way. By reason of persecution, many apostatized from the faith, particularly those mentioned by Paul, 2 Timothy 1:15; and 2 Timothy 4:10. And shall betray one another — To illustrate this, it is sufficient to cite one sentence out of Tacitus. Speaking of the persecution under Nero, he says, “At first several were seized, who confessed, and then by their discovery a great multitude of others were convicted and barbarously executed.” Benson

“Many shall be offended - See the notes at Matthew 5:29. Many shall stumble, fall, apostatize from a profession of religion. Many who "professed" to love me will then show that they had no "real" attachment to me; and in those trying times it will be seen that they knew nothing of genuine Christian love. See 1 John 2:19.
Shall betray one another - Those who thus apostatize from professed attachment to me will betray others who really love me. This they would do to secure their own safety, by revealing the names, habitations, or places of concealment of others.” - Barnes

“
And then shall many be offended,.... That is, many who had been hearers of the apostles, and professors of the Christian religion; who were highly pleased with it, and were strenuous advocates for it, whilst things were tolerably quiet and easy; but when they saw the apostles, some of them beaten, and imprisoned; others put to death, and others forced to fly from place to place; and persecutions and affliction, because of Christ and his Gospel, likely to befall themselves, would be discouraged hereby, and stumble at the cross; and fall off from the faith of the Gospel, and the profession of it:
and shall betray one another; meaning, that the apostates, who would fall off from the Christian religion, would prove treacherous to true believers, and give in their names to the persecutors, or inform them where they were, that they might take them, or deliver them into their hands themselves: these are the false brethren, the Apostle Paul was in perils among”- John Gill

The falling away was already occurring in the first century, it’s how they knew it was the last hour:

1 Timothy 5:15 For some have already turned aside to follow Satan.

2 Timothy 1:15 You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes


1 John 2:19 19They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.

 

[DavidPT]

Matthew 24:9-10 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10And then many will fall away

Why don't you also consider interpreting Matthew 24:9 in light of Luke 21:24 as well? The keywords being 'all nations', as in global, rather than 'some nations', as in local in relation to them at the time, meaning in the first century prior to 70 AD. During that era of time 'all nations' were not yet relevant, obviously. All nations didn't begin to become relevant until Luke 21:24 was fulfilled first, in regards to this---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations.

Matthew 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations : and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.


As of the latter, Luke 21:24, this now makes 'all nations' relevant. Meaning this part---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations-- and that it can't be meaning prior to 70 AD, it has to be meaning because of 70 AD, thus is then involving a period of time post 70 AD, a period of time involving all nations rather than just some nations that were local to them at the time. IOW, it initially involves local then it gradually expands to global. Which then results in the following over time, meaning post 70 AD.

Revelation 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations , and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Revelation 7:13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Where else in the NT does it record anything about great tribulation?


Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened

It is ludicrous, regardless that some of you flat out disagree, that 'great tribulation' per Revelation 7:14 is not connected to 'great tribulation per Matthew 24:15-21.

Some of you insist that you interpret Scripture with Scripture whenever possible, so why are you not also doing that with Matthew 24:15-21 and what Revelation 7 records? Seriously, how can there be two entirely different great tribulations, where one great tribulation happens to unbelieving people, Jews in this case, and another great tribulation happens to believers? Yet, look what Matthew 24:22 records---but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened

Who does the 'elect' sound like here? Unbelieving Jews in the first century? Or Revelation 7:9?
Because, whoever they are meaning, it is for their sake these days involving great tribulation shall be shortened, otherwise there should no flesh be saved. If we have great tribulation in Matthew 24:15-21 involving unbelieving Jews in the first century leading up to 70 AD, that means we have to take the elect in verse 22 to be meaning them. I see that making zero sense that the elect in verse 22 is meaning unbelieving Jews.

The fact, at the time, most Christians, if not all Christians, fled to safety before Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed, before countless Jews were slaughtered, how is it then reasonable that it was for the sake of Christians that these days were cut short when most of them, if not all of them, fled to safety? How does that add up to this in regards to Christians that fled to safety---And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved?

Simply don't apply Matthew 24:15-21 to the first century and 70 AD, now there is no longer an issue with Matthew 24:22.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Lol, Where are you getting this idea that anyone claims that 40 years + is imminent? That’s just completely untrue, and a strawman…………come on, do better SG.

Apparently, this how you deflect from providing any scholarly evidence to support your erroneous claim that eggizo, in the perfect indicative active, doesn’t mean imminent……..

You are all over the place. You are contradicting everything you previously said. This is classic Preterism! You said the Lord came in AD70, which is ridiculous. You then applied various Scriptures with eggizō in it to that event, wrongly arguing that the word meant imminent. It is up to you to explain this mess, not me.

 

[claninja]

You are all over the place. You are contradicting everything you previously said. This is classic Preterism! You said the Lord came in AD70, which is ridiculous. You then applied various Scriptures with eggizō in it to that event, wrongly arguing that the word meant imminent. It is up to you to explain this mess, not me.

lol, sure, just point to where I said 40 + years was at hand…….. your attempted straw man is just plain sad.

I’ve already pointed to helps word studies that shows eggizo in the perfect tense means imminent. but you say it doesn’t without any evidence……so…….I take it, that’s just your personal opinion biased by your eschatological view…….

1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence.

 

[claninja]

Why don't you also consider interpreting Matthew 24:9 in light of Luke 21:24 as well? The keywords being 'all nations', as in global, rather than 'some nations', as in local in relation to them at the time, meaning in the first century prior to 70 AD. During that era of time 'all nations' were not yet relevant, obviously. All nations didn't begin to become relevant until Luke 21:24 was fulfilled first, in regards to this---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations.

Matthew 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations : and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.


As of the latter, Luke 21:24, this now makes 'all nations' relevant. Meaning this part---And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations-- and that it can't be meaning prior to 70 AD, it has to be meaning because of 70 AD, thus is then involving a period of time post 70 AD, a period of time involving all nations rather than just some nations that were local to them at the time. IOW, it initially involves local then it gradually expands to global. Which then results in the following over time, meaning post 70 AD.

Revelation 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations , and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Revelation 7:13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Where else in the NT does it record anything about great tribulation?


Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened

It is ludicrous, regardless that some of you flat out disagree, that 'great tribulation' per Revelation 7:14 is not connected to 'great tribulation per Matthew 24:15-21.

Some of you insist that you interpret Scripture with Scripture whenever possible, so why are you not also doing that with Matthew 24:15-21 and what Revelation 7 records? Seriously, how can there be two entirely different great tribulations, where one great tribulation happens to unbelieving people, Jews in this case, and another great tribulation happens to believers? Yet, look what Matthew 24:22 records---but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened

Who does the 'elect' sound like here? Unbelieving Jews in the first century? Or Revelation 7:9?
Because, whoever they are meaning, it is for their sake these days involving great tribulation shall be shortened, otherwise there should no flesh be saved. If we have great tribulation in Matthew 24:15-21 involving unbelieving Jews in the first century leading up to 70 AD, that means we have to take the elect in verse 22 to be meaning them. I see that making zero sense that the elect in verse 22 is meaning unbelieving Jews.

The fact, at the time, most Christians, if not all Christians, fled to safety before Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed, before countless Jews were slaughtered, how is it then reasonable that it was for the sake of Christians that these days were cut short when most of them, if not all of them, fled to safety? How does that add up to this in regards to Christians that fled to safety---And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved?

Simply don't apply Matthew 24:15-21 to the first century and 70 AD, now there is no longer an issue with Matthew 24:22.

No idea what you are talking about here Dave….Matthew 24:9 is about the persecution the apostles would face, Luke 21:24 is about the Jews who were sold into slavery after the destruction of Jerusalem……

 

[sovereigngrace]

lol, sure, just point to where I said 40 + years was at hand…….. your attempted straw man is just plain sad.

I’ve already pointed to helps word studies that shows eggizo in the perfect tense means imminent. but you say it doesn’t without any evidence……so…….I take it, that’s just your personal opinion biased by your eschatological view…….

1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence.

Seriously? You have been arguing this for years

My argument has been that the PERFECT tense of “has drawn near”, such as found in James 5:8-9 and 1 peter 4:7, means literally soon. Such is consistent with helps-word studies definition:

“eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser).”

1 peter 4:7 and James 5:8-9 were written only a few years prior to, if not during, 66-70ad. Thus, again, the PERFECT tense of eggizo means literally soon.

When the disciples were to see “these thing beginning to occur, then they would know their redemption is drawing near”

so what are “these things”? The events of the entire discourse or just the events of the destruction of Jerusalem?

after looking at verse 36, I don’t think it involves the entire discourse. In vs 36, jesus states “watch and pray that you may be worthy to escape all these things”.

1.) That, then, doesn’t seem like it can include persecution because the apostles rejoiced at being “worthy” to suffer for Christ.

Acts 5:41 41Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name

2.) the coming of false prophets to claim “the time has drawn near” in the PERFECT tense and wars and rumors of wars prior to the destruction of Jerusalem did not indicate the end would come all at once.

Luke 21:8-9 And he said, “See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is at hand!’ Do not go after them. 9And when you hear of wars and tumults, do not be terrified, for these things must first take place, but the end will not be at once.”

3.) additionally, the only part of the discourse where Jesus mentions fleeing is in regards to the armies surrounding Jerusalem to destroy it. It seems this where they should be wanting to be worthy of escaping Judea:

Luke 21:21 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it,

thus, i would argue “when ‘these things’ begin to occur”, refers to the beginning of the Jewish Roman war.

 

[claninja]

Seriously? You have been arguing this for years

None of this even remotely indicates that I believe 40+ years is imminent, so I have no idea what you are talking about…….

 

[sovereigngrace]

None of this even remotely indicates that I believe 40+ years is imminent, so I have no idea what you are talking about…….

What does Luke 21:25-28, 36 refer to?

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh [Gr. eggizō - present active indicative] … Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

 

[Truth7t7]

If Revelation 20 is undeniably showing that satan is not battling any saints until the thousand years have expired, why then are some of these Amils around here having satan in constant battle with the saints throughout the thousand years? Clearly, these past 2000 years, satan has been battling saints, and that some of these Amils around here insist these same 2000 years are meaning the same era of time satan is in the pit.

Satan is "Currently" bound from "One Specific Purpose", And One Only?

"Deceive The Nations" To Battle

The Non-Literal 1,000 Years (Revelation) 20:1-6 Are Taking Place Now In The Lords Spiritual, And Will Cease At The Future Second Coming

If A Tribulation Saint Were To Die One Day Before The Second Coming, He Enters Into The Non-Literal 1,000 Year Reign

Many That Promote Millennialism Falsely Teach, Satan Cant Be Presently Bound Because Evil Exist In The World?

Satan Is Presently Bound As Is Clearly Seen In (Revelation) 20:7-8 Below That Interprets (Deceive The Nations) Is To Battle, Not General Evil In The World Presently.

Satan Is Loosed At The End Of The Tribulation When The 6th Vial Is Poured Out As Seen In (Revelation) 16:12, The Deception Is Devils In False Miracles Going Forth To The Kings Of The Earth, To Gather Them To The Final Battle

(Revelation) 20:1-9KJV
1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

(Revelation) 16:12-14 & (Revelation) 20:7-8 Same Deception In Gathering The Nations To The Very Same Final Battle In "Parallel" Teachings Of The Same Event

(Revelation) 16:12-17KJV
12 And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
17 And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.

 

[Truth7t7]

No idea what you are talking about here Dave….Matthew 24:9 is about the persecution the apostles would face, Luke 21:24 is about the Jews who were sold into slavery after the destruction of Jerusalem……

Luke 21:24 didn't take place in 70AD as you claim, it's a future event unfulfilled as scripture clearly teaches below

The verses below are speaking to those who will be present on earth to be eyewitnesses of the "Future" Fulfilling of the Gentiles, The Great Tribulation, and Second Coming of Jesus in the Heavens

Luke 21:22-28KJV
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

 

[DavidPT]

No idea what you are talking about here Dave….Matthew 24:9 is about the persecution the apostles would face, Luke 21:24 is about the Jews who were sold into slavery after the destruction of Jerusalem……

The point I was trying to make, the fact Matthew 24:9 mentions 'all nations', is that it is obviously looking beyond just the first century because all nations are not even relevant until some of them were dispersed into all nations as the result of 70 AD. IOW, though Matthew 24:9 was applicable in the first century, it's equally applicable post that period of time since the text indicates one shall be hated of all nations for His name's sake. And here we are some 2000 years later, and clearly the gospel has spread globally as opposed to how it initially spread, mainly locally. And clearly, even today, throughout the planet some ppl clearly hate Christians, thus being hated by all nations for His name's sake.


I'm merely pointing out that it is not reasonable to interpret some of these things in a vacuum, as if some of these things can't be equally applicable throughout the past 2000 years leading up to our day and time, that they only apply to the first century and don't go beyond that.

Once again, the fact Matthew 24:9 mentions all nations, that is a clue to us that being hated for His name's sake is going to be a problem for other Christians as well, and not just those living in the first century since 'all nations' obviously means globally not just locally.

 

[claninja]

What does Luke 21:25-28, 36 refer to?

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh [Gr. eggizō - present active indicative] … Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

That answer is literally found in the post #211 from your copied and pasted posts of mine: destruction of Jerusalem. So again………

1.) When the “destruction of Jerusalem” begins to occur - your redemption, or relief from Jewish persecution and old covenant polity, draws nigh/ approaches.

“Redemption.—The word, familiar as it is to us, is, in the special form here used, another of those characteristic of St. Paul’s phraseology (Romans 3:24; Romans 8:23; 1Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:7, et al.). It occurs also in Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 11:35. In its primary meaning here it points to the complete deliverance of the disciples from Jewish persecutions in Palestine that followed on the destruction of Jerusalem. The Church of Christ was then delivered from what had been its most formidable danger.” - ellicot

“When Christ came to destroy the Jews, he came to redeem the Christians that were persecuted and oppressed by them; and then had the churches rest. When he comes to judge the world, he will redeem all that are his from their troubles” Matthew Henry

“Your redemption draweth nigh - See the notes at Matthew 24:33. This is expressed in Luke 21:31 thus: "the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" - that is, from that time God will signally build up his kingdom. It shall be fully established when the Jewish policy shall come to an end; when the temple shall be destroyed, and the Jews scattered abroad. Then the power of the Jews shall be at an end; they shall no longer be able to persecute you, and you shall be completely delivered from all these trials and calamities in Judea.”- Barnes

“redemption—from the oppression of ecclesiastical despotism and legal bondage by the total subversion of the Jewish state and the firm establishment of the evangelical kingdom (Lu 21:31).” - jamiesson

“for your redemption draweth nigh; not the redemption of their souls from sin, Satan, the law, the world, death, and hell; for that was to be obtained, and was obtained, before any of these signs took place; nor the redemption of their bodies at the last day, in the resurrection, called the day of redemption; for this respects something that was to be, in the present age and generation; see Luke 21:32 but the deliverance of the apostles and other Christians, from the persecutions of the Jews, which were very violent, and held till these times, and then they were freed from them: or by redemption is meant, the Redeemer, the son of man, who shall now come in power and glory, to destroy the Jews, and deliver his people;” - Gill

“, deliverance[redemption) from many miseries, Luke 21:12; Luke 21:16-17. Deliverance from the miseries which befell the Jews. [So long, to wit, as the shadows of the Levitical law, along with the City and Temple, were standing, the kingdom of GOD, or the free exercise of the Christian religion, did not as yet enjoy unrestricted scope.” - Bengels

“There is no doubt that the first reference in this verse is to the earlier part of the prophecy - the fate of the city and the ruin of the Jewish power. "Your redemption" would then signify "your deliverance from the constant and bitter hostility of the Jewish authority." - pulpit

2.) Pray that your are counted worthy/have the strength to escape “the destruction of Jerusalem”

None of this indicates that I believe 40+ years = imminent. So I still have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[claninja]

The point I was trying to make, the fact Matthew 24:9 mentions 'all nations', is that it is obviously looking beyond just the first century because all nations are not even relevant until some of them were dispersed into all nations as the result of 70 AD. IOW, though Matthew 24:9 was applicable in the first century, it's equally applicable post that period of time since the text indicates one shall be hated of all nations for His name's sake. And here we are some 2000 years later, and clearly the gospel has spread globally as opposed to how it initially spread, mainly locally. And clearly, even today, throughout the planet some ppl clearly hate Christians, thus being hated by all nations for His name's sake.


I'm merely pointing out that it is not reasonable to interpret some of these things in a vacuum, as if some of these things can't be equally applicable throughout the past 2000 years leading up to our day and time, that they only apply to the first century and don't go beyond that.

Once again, the fact Matthew 24:9 mentions all nations, that is a clue to us that being hated for His name's sake is going to be a problem for other Christians as well, and not just those living in the first century since 'all nations' obviously means globally not just locally.

So the Jews were sold into literally every single nation on the entire planet in the first century? I don’t think so, Dave, I think it’s important to understand the hyperbolic language of first century literature, and how Rome was viewed as the “whole world”.

 

[sovereigngrace]

That answer is literally found in the post #211 from your copied and pasted posts of mine: destruction of Jerusalem. So again………

1.) When the “destruction of Jerusalem” begins to occur - your redemption, or relief from Jewish persecution and old covenant polity, draws nigh/ approaches.

“Redemption.—The word, familiar as it is to us, is, in the special form here used, another of those characteristic of St. Paul’s phraseology (Romans 3:24; Romans 8:23; 1Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:7, et al.). It occurs also in Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 11:35. In its primary meaning here it points to the complete deliverance of the disciples from Jewish persecutions in Palestine that followed on the destruction of Jerusalem. The Church of Christ was then delivered from what had been its most formidable danger.” - ellicot

“When Christ came to destroy the Jews, he came to redeem the Christians that were persecuted and oppressed by them; and then had the churches rest. When he comes to judge the world, he will redeem all that are his from their troubles” Matthew Henry

“Your redemption draweth nigh - See the notes at Matthew 24:33. This is expressed in Luke 21:31 thus: "the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" - that is, from that time God will signally build up his kingdom. It shall be fully established when the Jewish policy shall come to an end; when the temple shall be destroyed, and the Jews scattered abroad. Then the power of the Jews shall be at an end; they shall no longer be able to persecute you, and you shall be completely delivered from all these trials and calamities in Judea.”- Barnes

“redemption—from the oppression of ecclesiastical despotism and legal bondage by the total subversion of the Jewish state and the firm establishment of the evangelical kingdom (Lu 21:31).” - jamiesson

“for your redemption draweth nigh; not the redemption of their souls from sin, Satan, the law, the world, death, and hell; for that was to be obtained, and was obtained, before any of these signs took place; nor the redemption of their bodies at the last day, in the resurrection, called the day of redemption; for this respects something that was to be, in the present age and generation; see Luke 21:32 but the deliverance of the apostles and other Christians, from the persecutions of the Jews, which were very violent, and held till these times, and then they were freed from them: or by redemption is meant, the Redeemer, the son of man, who shall now come in power and glory, to destroy the Jews, and deliver his people;” - Gill

“, deliverance[redemption) from many miseries, Luke 21:12; Luke 21:16-17. Deliverance from the miseries which befell the Jews. [So long, to wit, as the shadows of the Levitical law, along with the City and Temple, were standing, the kingdom of GOD, or the free exercise of the Christian religion, did not as yet enjoy unrestricted scope.” - Bengels

“There is no doubt that the first reference in this verse is to the earlier part of the prophecy - the fate of the city and the ruin of the Jewish power. "Your redemption" would then signify "your deliverance from the constant and bitter hostility of the Jewish authority." - pulpit

2.) Pray that your are counted worthy/have the strength to escape “the destruction of Jerusalem”

None of this indicates that I believe 40+ years = imminent. So I still have no idea what you are talking about.

Talk about rewriting Scripture. Your unhealthy fixation with the coming of Titus and obsession with AD70 exposes your theology. You butcher the meaning of the text and their relationship to Christ and His real coming.

What is more, you miss the point. Your false Preterist insistence on Jesus predicting an imminent coming in 40 years is exposed, after you denying it.

 

[Christian Gedge]

What does Luke 21:25-28, 36 refer to?

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh [Gr. eggizō - present active indicative] … Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

Lukes description has an interesting comment not found in Matthew and Mark: “the sea and the waves roaring.” Its context suggests a major celestial disturbance. Is there any historical record of violent tidal activity in AD 70? If not, can any preterist suggest a figurative meaning? Ive never heard one.