The Earth will Burn

expos4ever said:

Well I am not just claiming - I provided an actual argument that you need to engage with if this discussion is to be productive.

I never said He is not coming in the future - I believe that He is. But what Jesus was referring to in the specific statement to Caiaphus ("you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds") cannot be a reference to second coming.

Unless Caiaphus is still alive......

Click to expand...

I think Jesus was speaking to Satan.

Douggg said:

I think Jesus was speaking to Satan.

Click to expand...

It is clear he is speaking to Caiaphus:

The high priest stood up and came forward and questioned Jesus, saying, “Do You not answer? [aa]What is it that these men are testifying against You?” 61 But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and [ab]saying to Him, “Are You [ac]the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” 62 And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

This is a conversation between Jesus and Caiaphus (the high priest).

expos4ever said:

It is clear he is speaking to Caiaphus:

The high priest stood up and came forward and questioned Jesus, saying, “Do You not answer? [aa]What is it that these men are testifying against You?” 61 But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and [ab]saying to Him, “Are You [ac]the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” 62 And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

This is a conversation between Jesus and Caiaphus (the high priest).

Click to expand...

Jesus was also speaking in a conversation to Peter when Jesus said...

Matthew 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Douggg said:

Jesus was also speaking in a conversation to Peter when Jesus said...

Matthew 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Click to expand...

Jesus is talking to Peter and clearly discerning Satan's influence. But He (Jesus) tells us that this is what He is doing with the "Get behind me Satan" line.

There is nothing like this in the Mark 14 account - I see no justification whatsoever for the move you are making here. Jesus is having a conversation with Caiaphus.

expos4ever said:

Jesus is talking to Peter and clearly discerning Satan's influence. But He (Jesus) tells us that this is what He is doing with the "Get behind me Satan" line.

There is nothing like this in the Mark 14 account - I see no justification whatsoever for the move you are making here. Jesus is having a conversation with Caiaphus.

Click to expand...

You don't think Caiaphas was being influenced by Satan to have Jesus killed?

Luke 22:2 And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.

3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

4 And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.

_____________________________________________________

Do you think that Satan desired to kill Jesus when he took him to the high place and challenged Jesus to jump off the cliff?

_______________________________________________________

Satan is going to be present, there on the temple mount, when Jesus returns coming in the clouds of heaven.

keras said:

Again correct, as the Anti-Christ man, controlled by Satan will be the ruler of all the holy Land and the world, for the final 1260 days before Jesus Returns. Revelation 12:12

Click to expand...

There are three mouths, Revelation 16:13, that convince the kings of the earth to gather their armies to fight against Jesus.

1. the beast
2. the false prophet
3. the dragon.

________________________________________
1. the beast - which I think you are calling the Anti-Christ man ( but no longer the Antichrist, at that point, Keras).

2. the false prophet - a man.

3. the dragon - Satan, which he has a mouth, because he will be incarnating the statue image of the beast - which speaks (Revelation 13:15).

________________________________________

The person in question will be controlling Israel for the full seven years. Partly, as being the Antichrist (King of Israel) for about 3 years, and then the remainder as the beast (King of the Roman Empire end times).


little horn, leader of the EU, then...
after Gog/Magog, the prince who shall come....
then anointed the King of Israel, becoming the Antichrist.....
then betrays the Jews, claims to be God, the revealed man of sin..... (no longer the Antichrist)
then killed by strangers (Ezekiel 28:1-10)
then brought back to life (Isaiah 14:15-20)...
As the beast, in Revelation 13, dictator of the EU, Revelation 17:12-13.

keras said:

Interpret for us;
2 Peter 3:7 By Gods Word, the present heavens and earth are reserved for burning; they are being kept until the Day of Judgment, when the godless will be destroyed.

Click to expand...

Jerusalem, 70AD....

"For our God is a consuming fire." - Hebrews 12:29

In Scripture the metaphor of fire is interesting, used both to describe the destruction of wickedness and the purification of the righteous. In the Apocalypse Jesus tells the Christians of Laodicea to ask for gold purified by fire.

"I will turn my hand against you and will smelt away your dross as with lye and remove all your alloy." - Isaiah 1:25

"Each one's work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done." - 1 Corinthians 3:13

What comes to the earth is the fire of judgment, the fire of purification. When Christ comes, in glory, as judge, all must stand before Him. Fire comes, and the dross is consumed; but what is left is silver and gold, pure.

When God brings fire to the earth, He brings fire to beatify it.

-CryptoLutheran

In this thread I have argued thus:

1. Jesus tells Caiaphus in a two-way conversation that "you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds". This cannot be denied - it is there in the text.

2. Therefore, since Caiaphus is presumably now pushing up daisies, this "coming on the clouds" bit cannot refer to a second coming which has not happened as of 2020 AD.

3. I pointed out that Daniel 7 has an image of a "son of Man" ascending on the clouds" to be enthroned after defeating the beasts. It does not take a lot of thinking to conclude that when Jesus says that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", this is a reference to Jesus' resurrection victory, not even a week away.

The response to this argument has been, frankly, far-fetched. In order to make this "coming on the clouds" stuff be a reference to a second coming, my opponents on this matter need to replace Caiaphus in the two-way conversation; to concede that Jesus was talking to Caiaphus, as the text clearly shows, would be to admit that "coming on the clouds" cannot be a second coming reference since Caiaphus is obviously now stone dead, and will not see Jesus's return.

So what is their move? They superimpose Satan on Caiaphus, arguing that Satan is the real audience Jesus is engaged with. Sounds reasonable at first - Satan will indeed see Jesus' second coming. But it is really rather implausible. If I say to my friend Fred "you will see me going to the store this afternoon", and suppose I believe Fred is possessed by Satan, do you really think I am saying "Satan, you will see me going to the store this afternoon"? Possible, but not likely.

But lest we forget - I have produced a clear Biblical precedent - Daniel 7 - for how the term "coming on the clouds" is used in Scripture: it refers to an upward motion of vindication after victory, not the downward return of a second coming. And, the fact that Jesus goes on to exactly mimic the Daniel 7 pattern at the cross / resurrection by defeating the true beasts - death and sin - seals the deal: Jesus is referring to his resurrection and enthronement as Lord of all creation when He uses the term "coming on the clouds".

Read Daniel and look me in the eye and say that Jesus is not referring to His imminent victory over the reals beasts - sin and death - when He says He will be "coming on the clouds".

expos4ever said:

In this thread I have argued thus:

1. Jesus tells Caiaphus in a two-way conversation that "you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds". This cannot be denied - it is there in the text.

2. Therefore, since Caiaphus is presumably now pushing up daisies, this "coming on the clouds" bit cannot refer to a second coming which has not happened as of 2020 AD.

3. I pointed out that Daniel 7 has an image of a "son of Man" ascending on the clouds" to be enthroned after defeating the beasts. It does not take a lot of thinking to conclude that when Jesus says that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", this is a reference to Jesus' resurrection victory, not even a week away.

The response to this argument has been, frankly, far-fetched. In order to make this "coming on the clouds" stuff be a reference to a second coming, my opponents on this matter need to replace Caiaphus in the two-way conversation; to concede that Jesus was talking to Caiaphus, as the text clearly shows, would be to admit that "coming on the clouds" cannot be a second coming reference since Caiaphus is obviously now stone dead, and will not see Jesus's return.

So what is their move? They superimpose Satan on Caiaphus, arguing that Satan is the real audience Jesus is engaged with. Sounds reasonable at first - Satan will indeed see Jesus' second coming. But it is really rather implausible. If I say to my friend Fred "you will see me going to the store this afternoon", and suppose I believe Fred is possessed by Satan, do you really think I am saying "Satan, you will see me going to the store this afternoon"? Possible, but not likely.

But lest we forget - I have produced a clear Biblical precedent - Daniel 7 - for how the term "coming on the clouds" is used in Scripture: it refers to an upward motion of vindication after victory, not the downward return of a second coming. And, the fact that Jesus goes on to exactly mimic the Daniel 7 pattern at the cross / resurrection by defeating the true beasts - death and sin - seals the deal: Jesus is referring to his resurrection and enthronement as Lord of all creation when He uses the term "coming on the clouds".

Read Daniel and look me in the eye and say that Jesus is not referring to His imminent victory over the reals beasts - sin and death - when He says He will be "coming on the clouds".

Click to expand...

There are multiple reasons to question such a view. Unfortunately Preterists are slow to address these issues.

Is it not obvious that the disciples two questions in Matthew 24:3 are in response to our Lord’s statement in Matthew 23:37–39?

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)?

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70 (Matthew 24:14)?

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)?

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

sovereigngrace said:

There are multiple reasons to question such a view.

Click to expand...

I hope to address your points, but you are evading my argument. Even if your points are valid, you still need to deal with the details of the argument I have provided. Just as I need to deal with yours. And I hope to do so.

Lost4words said:

Jerusalem, 70AD....

Click to expand...

Not so! Preterists are fixated with the coming of Titus and AD70 just like Premils are fixated with their millennial kingdom, both see it everywhere, where it is not. They insert it into the sacred text where it does not belong

2 Peter 3:3-13 tells us: “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

How can anyone survive this? They cannot! It's impossible! The second coming is shown to be the end for the wicked, the righteous inherit the new heavens and new earth; not some suppose future thousand years that is polluted by sin, sinners, Satan, death and ongoing corruption. The appearing of Christ spells the end for all unrighteousness. Anything that is not glorified is consumed. Peter demonstrates here that when Jesus comes back the heavens, earth and all that is on the earth, and the elements are going to dissolve. His glory and unchallenged reign will be set up on the new renewed earth.

· All creation is judged at the one final future coming of Christ.
· It is a perfect glorified age, which allows only perfect glorified inhabitants.
· Another proof that there will be no thousand years after the second coming is that time terminates with Christ’s coming. The age to come is eternal.
· It is an age is belongs exclusively to the glorified saints (the meek).
· Many Scriptures speak of the inter-Advent period as “the last days” (plural) and describe the second coming as “the last day” (singular). It is described as “the end.”

The detail that accompanies the second coming depictions give no opportunity for survivors. All the wicked are destroyed. The detail is climactic. The second coming is final and all-consummating. This current earth is completely regenerated.

When Peter states, “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness” (2 Peter 3:9) he was (1) speaking of His climactic coming and (2) referring to “the last days scoffers” mocking the promise of the Lord’s return (2 Peter 3:3-4). He then goes on to show how these foolish individuals will be finally and totally destroyed along with this current earth (and the element and the heavens) at Christ’s coming (2 Peter 3:7). After, outlining the awful end of the wicked, Peter then turns to the believer and presents the great hope of the righteous, saying, “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” (2 Peter 3:13). The coming of Christ therefore brings completely differing outcomes for these two diverse companies. Christ’s coming will witness the eternal banishment of all wickedness from off the face of the earth. A new earth – free of all sin, death, rebellion and the wicked – will then be gloriously ushered in.

expos4ever said:

In this thread I have argued thus:

1. Jesus tells Caiaphus in a two-way conversation that "you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds". This cannot be denied - it is there in the text.

2. Therefore, since Caiaphus is presumably now pushing up daisies, this "coming on the clouds" bit cannot refer to a second coming which has not happened as of 2020 AD.

3. I pointed out that Daniel 7 has an image of a "son of Man" ascending on the clouds" to be enthroned after defeating the beasts. It does not take a lot of thinking to conclude that when Jesus says that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", this is a reference to Jesus' resurrection victory, not even a week away.

The response to this argument has been, frankly, far-fetched. In order to make this "coming on the clouds" stuff be a reference to a second coming, my opponents on this matter need to replace Caiaphus in the two-way conversation; to concede that Jesus was talking to Caiaphus, as the text clearly shows, would be to admit that "coming on the clouds" cannot be a second coming reference since Caiaphus is obviously now stone dead, and will not see Jesus's return.

So what is their move? They superimpose Satan on Caiaphus, arguing that Satan is the real audience Jesus is engaged with. Sounds reasonable at first - Satan will indeed see Jesus' second coming. But it is really rather implausible. If I say to my friend Fred "you will see me going to the store this afternoon", and suppose I believe Fred is possessed by Satan, do you really think I am saying "Satan, you will see me going to the store this afternoon"? Possible, but not likely.

But lest we forget - I have produced a clear Biblical precedent - Daniel 7 - for how the term "coming on the clouds" is used in Scripture: it refers to an upward motion of vindication after victory, not the downward return of a second coming. And, the fact that Jesus goes on to exactly mimic the Daniel 7 pattern at the cross / resurrection by defeating the true beasts - death and sin - seals the deal: Jesus is referring to his resurrection and enthronement as Lord of all creation when He uses the term "coming on the clouds".

Read Daniel and look me in the eye and say that Jesus is not referring to His imminent victory over the reals beasts - sin and death - when He says He will be "coming on the clouds".

Click to expand...

You have a habit of not putting the exact reference in Scripture that you are talking about. That makes it harder to look up, especially when you use another translation. Could you please do that in future?

You are making a problem where there is no problem. After all, every eye is going to see him when He comes at the second coming.

Christ also speaks of that same last day, in Matthew 24:29-31, saying, “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 (or tote or at that time) shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn (or kopsontai), 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.”

Here, in our reading, Christ identifies His one final future post-tribulation Coming as the time when He rescues His elect and immediately pours out His vengeance upon the elements and the wicked. Christ’s appearing and the resulting catching away of the saints is the final procedure in the process of redemption, and closes forever man’s opportunity of salvation. This account shows the awful terror of the wicked when they realize their hopeless state – doomed and damned for all eternity.

The word interpreted “mourn” in the AV in this account is the Greek word kopsontai which refers to the most extreme form of agony and sorrow. It means to wail, to cut down, to mourn and lament. It means ‘to beat the breast in grief’. This anguish significantly occurs at the end of the tribulation – a time that sees the end of this current universe. We are looking at a people that lament and bewail in the most excessive way because they have missed the rapture. Like those in Noah's day, the ark door has closed and the wrath of God faces all left behind. The awareness of this causes the wicked to lament and bewail.

As we see throughout in Scripture, this Coming has a massive effect on the elements, immediately proceeding, during and following this Advent. It is also important to note at this juncture that the sun is completely darkened at the time just prior to the second coming and that Christ associates the destruction of the elements with the actual time of His Coming. The Greek word kopsontai, which describes the absolute horror that the wicked experience on this awful day is also found in Revelation 1:7. Speaking of this climactic last day, John says, “Behold, he (Christ) cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him (the Jews): and all kindreds of the earth (the Gentile nations) shall wail (or kopsontai) because of him”

expos4ever said:

In this thread I have argued thus:

1. Jesus tells Caiaphus in a two-way conversation that "you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds". This cannot be denied - it is there in the text.

2. Therefore, since Caiaphus is presumably now pushing up daisies, this "coming on the clouds" bit cannot refer to a second coming which has not happened as of 2020 AD.

3. I pointed out that Daniel 7 has an image of a "son of Man" ascending on the clouds" to be enthroned after defeating the beasts. It does not take a lot of thinking to conclude that when Jesus says that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", this is a reference to Jesus' resurrection victory, not even a week away.

The response to this argument has been, frankly, far-fetched. In order to make this "coming on the clouds" stuff be a reference to a second coming, my opponents on this matter need to replace Caiaphus in the two-way conversation; to concede that Jesus was talking to Caiaphus, as the text clearly shows, would be to admit that "coming on the clouds" cannot be a second coming reference since Caiaphus is obviously now stone dead, and will not see Jesus's return.

So what is their move? They superimpose Satan on Caiaphus, arguing that Satan is the real audience Jesus is engaged with. Sounds reasonable at first - Satan will indeed see Jesus' second coming. But it is really rather implausible. If I say to my friend Fred "you will see me going to the store this afternoon", and suppose I believe Fred is possessed by Satan, do you really think I am saying "Satan, you will see me going to the store this afternoon"? Possible, but not likely.

But lest we forget - I have produced a clear Biblical precedent - Daniel 7 - for how the term "coming on the clouds" is used in Scripture: it refers to an upward motion of vindication after victory, not the downward return of a second coming. And, the fact that Jesus goes on to exactly mimic the Daniel 7 pattern at the cross / resurrection by defeating the true beasts - death and sin - seals the deal: Jesus is referring to his resurrection and enthronement as Lord of all creation when He uses the term "coming on the clouds".

Read Daniel and look me in the eye and say that Jesus is not referring to His imminent victory over the reals beasts - sin and death - when He says He will be "coming on the clouds".

Click to expand...

I agree on Daniel 7:13-14, “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

When most people read this reference to the Son of Man coming with clouds they immediately assume that it relates to the second coming of the Lord. However, if they would carefully examine the wording of the passage and particularly the import of the reading, they would find that it makes absolutely no mention to Christ coming to earth in the clouds, but rather, it is speaking of Christ rising into the presence of His Father – the Ancient of Days – to receive His reward. The narrative expressly says, “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.” This glorious event occurred after the cross when He triumphantly entered into the portals of heaven in a cloud to sit at the right hand of majesty on high.

But this is definitely not talking about the coming of Titus in AD70 as Preterists claim.

sovereigngrace said:

I agree on Daniel 7:13-14,....
When most people read this reference to the Son of Man coming with clouds they immediately assume that it relates to the second coming of the Lord. However, if they would carefully examine the wording of the passage and particularly the import of the reading, they would find that it makes absolutely no mention to Christ coming to earth in the clouds, but rather, it is speaking of Christ rising into the presence of His Father – the Ancient of Days – to receive His reward. The narrative expressly says, “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.” This glorious event occurred after the cross when He triumphantly entered into the portals of heaven in a cloud to sit at the right hand of majesty on high.

But this is definitely not talking about the coming of Titus in AD70 as Preterists claim.

Click to expand...

We agree on Daniel, then. Good. But surely you would agree that when Jesus tells Caiaphus that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", Jesus is not referring to His second coming.

Are you sure you are not making a strawman argument - what Preterist would say that the Son of Man character is Titus?

expos4ever said:

We agree on Daniel, then. Good. But surely you would agree that when Jesus tells Caiaphus that Caiaphus will see Jesus "coming on the clouds", Jesus is not referring to His second coming.

Are you sure you are not making a strawman argument - what Preterist would say that the Son of Man character is Titus?

Click to expand...

Daniel 7:13-14 correlates with Acts 1:9-11, that depicts Christ’s ascension: “while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”

Was Jesus taken up literally into heaven in the presence of the disciples?
Was He taken up physically into heaven in the presence of the disciples?
Was He taken up bodily into heaven in the presence of the disciples?
Was He taken up visibly into heaven in the presence of the disciples?

The 11 disciples were direct material witnesses to the ascension of Jesus Christ up from the earth toward heaven. This passage tells us it is the actual “manner” or tropos (meaning style or mode) of His glorious ascent into heaven is the way He will return.

How did He go?

Literally, physically, visibly.

•Physically: “This same Jesus.”
•Visibly: “while they beheld,” “they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up” and “as ye have seen Him go.”
•Literally: “In like manner.”

Contrary to Pretrib and Preterist beliefs, the second coming of Christ is not a secret event. Such a mistaken view emanates from a wrong understanding of Scripture. Revelation 1:7 declares: “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him” (Revelation 1:7).

Did every eye see Jesus coming back in AD70? Of course not! That is absurd!
Upon His appearing, did the Jews wail over Him? Of course not! That is absurd! Equally, did the Gentiles also wail because of him? Of course not! That is absurd!

Here we see the most public event of all time - the literal, visible, physical return of the Lord Jesus Christ. This passage unmistakably shows that the glorious Second Advent will be the most amazing public event ever. To such an extent that “every eye shall see him.”

The Scriptures talks much about the unexpected nature of the second coming of Christ but nothing of a secret coming. This is clearly an arrival that will shake the world.

Jesus explains in Matthew 24:27: “For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”

Christ's coming shall be sudden as lightning. What is more sudden and spectacular than lightning? Lightning is not hid! It can be seen by all across the sky. This is no secret snatch in this text. This secret is only in regards the time of His coming, not the reality of it.

Jesus tells us in Matthew 26:64: “Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

This is repeated in Mark 14:62: “ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

Jesus said in Luke 21:26–27: “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.”

The scriptural references to Christ coming as a “thief in the night” simply refers to the unexpectedness or suddenness of that event and not to its secretiveness.

The only thing secret about the rapture is its date – it is classified. Jesus said in Mark 13:32-33, “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.”

1. Did Jesus Christ come literally with the coming of Titus in AD70?
2. Did Jesus Christ come physically with the coming of Titus in AD70?
3. Did Jesus Christ come visibly with the coming of Titus in AD70?
4. Did Jesus Christ come audibly with the coming of Titus in AD70?
5. Did Jesus Christ come bodily with the coming of Titus in AD70?

keras said:

The Earth will Burn: 2 Peter 3:7, Isaiah 66:15-16, Zephaniah 3:8, Isaiah 33:10-12, +

Click to expand...

expos4ever said:

God will not destroy the Earth - He will renew, transform, and redeem it. I do not dispute that there will be judgement and even fire. But it will be a purifying fire, not a destructive fire.

Click to expand...

I would also think that.

If God meant the whole global world would burn, He would have used the greek word #2889 for "world".

2889. kosmos kos'-mos probably from the base of 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.
==========================
The word below is used in Revelation, but appears to/could apply to a specific land or region in the global world, such as the Middle East being an example.
I just cannot view the whole global world engulfed in flaming fire, but I will continue to view this thread for other views.

1093. ge ghay contracted from a primary word; soil; by extension a region, or the solid part or the whole of the terrene globe (including the occupants in each application):--country, earth(-ly), ground, land, world.

2Pe 3:10
and it will come -- the day of the Lord -- as a thief in the night, in which the heavens with a rushing noise will pass away, and the elements with burning heat be dissolved, and land and the works in it shall be burnt up.
================
What land does this great City lie in?

Rev 18:8
because of this, in one day, shall come her plagues, death, and sorrow, and famine; and in fire she shall be utterly burned, because strong is the Lord God who is judging her;

Rev 19:2
because true and righteous are His judgments, because He did judge the great harlot who did corrupt the land in her whoredom, and He did avenge the blood of His servants at her hand;'

sovereigngrace said:

Is it not obvious that the disciples two questions in Matthew 24:3 are in response to our Lord’s statement in Matthew 23:37–39?

Click to expand...

And Matthew 23:34-36.

sovereigngrace said:

Did enduring until the coming of Titus in AD70 secure salvation (Matthew 24:13)?

Click to expand...

No.

sovereigngrace said:

Had every tribe, kindred and nation heard the Gospel by the coming of Titus in AD70 (Matthew 24:14)?

Click to expand...

The gospel had already been preached to the whole world prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70ad.

Colossians 1:23 If indeed you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope of the gospel you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being proclaimed all over the world.

sovereigngrace said:

Did the coming of Titus in AD70 usher in the end (Matthew 24:13)?

Click to expand...

End of the world? No. It would have only been the end for the nation of Israel in regards being able to practice in accordance with the laws of Moses.

sovereigngrace said:

When and how did Jesus "send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and … gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" back in AD70 (Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?

Click to expand...

After the destruction of Jerusalem, the wedding feast was ready, and the servants of the king began gathering the good and bad to the banquet of the son.

Matthew 22:7-10 The king was enraged, and he sent his troops to destroy those murderers and burn their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited were not worthy. Go therefore to the crossroads and invite to the banquet as many as you can find.’ So the servants went out into the streets and gathered everyone they could find, both evil and good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.