The Olivet Discourse

Status
Not open for further replies.

pasifika

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2019
2,368
634
45
Waikato
✟161,016.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you see why the statement I made about how Jesus must have ascended and then returned in John 20 is incorrect, you should be willing to show your reasoning behind this. Giving explanations about Christ ascending and returning after John 20 does absolutely nothing to address what I said about John 20.

You have made many accusations and condescending remarks about others on this forum. If you haven’t noticed it’s doubtful that there are any 2 believers that see every single verse in the same way. So I’m going to say this as kindly as possible because you may not be aware of it; it’s difficult to see the fruits of the spirt (Galatians 5:22-23) in your remarks.

My friend I am praying for you.
Hello, the problem of Jesus ascending and returned on the resurrection day in John 20 is that No ONE see Jesus ascending to the Father and No ONE see Him returned but the disciples were surprise to see Him standing among them in the house when all doors are locked...John 20:19,20
Jesus Ascension in Acts 1:9 were witness by His disciples and so His promise return being foretold by the apostles will be witness by All...
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I didn't bring up Hebrew 9:28 and ask for an explanation.

I asked about why you mentioned "spiritual manifestations" when i brought up Jesus' appearance after the Resurrection, when He seemed to go out of His way to prove He was in a physically tangible body ...one that was able to eat and drink (Acts 10:41). That's not a question you can answer with Bible verses, because I'm asking you to explain your own words.

You are a master at moving the goalposts every time your theology is exposed. Neither of us said anything about Christ’s physical appearance just after the resurrection. You were talking about examples after His ascension - “when Stephen saw Him at the right hand of the Father” or “Saul on Saul's way to Damascus.” I called these spiritual manifestation.
 
Upvote 0

agapelove

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2020
840
754
28
San Diego
✟50,506.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Thus, the overwhelming majority of OT scripture finds its fulfillment in Christ at His first coming (ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, sending of the Spirit, reign, and spread of the gospel), and secondly in the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem (the great tribulation, days of vengeance, coming of the vineyard owner).

However, under the partial preterist belief system, this does not preclude the fulfilment of a future coming of Christ, a future judgment of the righteous and unrighteous, or a future resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous.

Thank you this explanation!

I think it is easy to conclude that most (if not all) OT scriptures were fulfilled with the destruction of the old covenant in 70AD. Is the same true for most NT prophecies? For example, the Olivet Discourse and Revelations.

It seems that most partial preterists have no problem fulfilling majority NT prophecies in 70AD, while most Amils/Historicists/Idealists say those prophecies are continuously being fulfilled throughout the millenium (ie. 7 bowls, multiple antichrists, multiple tribulations, etc etc.) It appears like Amils cannot really agree which prophecies were fulfilled at what time and there are a variety of interpretations. Sorry if any of that is untrue.

Are partial preterists placing too much emphasis on 70AD and are Amils placing too little?
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You are a master at moving the goalposts every time your theology is exposed. Neither of us said anything about Christ’s physical appearance just after the resurrection. You were talking about examples after His ascension - “when Stephen saw Him at the right hand of the Father” or “Saul on Saul's way to Damascus.” I called these spiritual manifestation.
I also included His *physical* appearance after the Resurrection .

I will look up that post and link it since you've responded quite a few times already without actually answering my question (and maybe you've forgotten by now).The Olivet Discourse

.....where i posted:

mkgal1 said:
What do you call when He reappeared after His resurrection? Or when Stephen saw Him at the right hand of the Father? Or when He appeared to Saul on Saul's way to Damascus?

.....then, after you didn't answer my question again, I added:


mkgal1 said:
I asked about why you mentioned "spiritual manifestations" when i brought up Jesus' appearance after the Resurrection, when He seemed to go out of His way to prove He was in a physically tangible body ...one that was able to eat and drink (Acts 10:41). That's not a question you can answer with Bible verses, because I'm asking you to explain your own words.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There's a huge... difference in context with Scripture like Revelation 1:3 "at hand", vs. Matthew 24:33 "near".

In the Rev.1:3 example, it is presenting the events to follow in the WHOLE Book to be involved. That sets the context... of the "at hand" idea.

In Matt.24:33, what do you really think the context of "near" involved? It involved the SIGNS He was giving there in that Matthew 24 Chapter.

Thus it is truly... SILLY, and even IGNORANT... to try and remove those short adverbial clauses and apply a TOTALLY DIFFERENT TIME CONTEXT TO THEM.

(Faithful brethren that keep God's Word, those who push men's doctrines are easy to discover, because their ideas will always defy common sense, and even a show that they haven't really even studied the Scriptures they try to deceive with!)


Then let's Compare Matthew 24:33 to James 5:8-9

In James 5:8-9, James is Quoting Jesus words in Matthew 24:33, is he not?

Are they not discussing the very same "coming"?

As you appear to agree, Jesus said His Coming would not be "near and at the doors" BEFORE certain Signs were seen, and instead would only be “near and at the doors” AFTER certain signs were seen. (Matt 24:33)

James, Writing decades Later, Says Jesus' Coming was, at that time "near and at the Doors".

As you said, "it is truly... SILLY, and even IGNORANT... to try and remove those short adverbial clauses and apply a TOTALLY DIFFERENT TIME CONTEXT TO THEM." right?

Indeed it would be truly Ignorant and Silly to apply a totally different time context to the "near and at the doors" of Matt 24:33, than ought be applied to the "near and at the doors" James 5:8-9, Correct?

There are 4 options here:

1) James was Mistaken

2) James Was Lying

3) James Saw the Sings Jesus spoke of in Matt 24 and correctly Declared His coming was therefore "near and at the doors" the way Jesus meant "near and at the doors" to be understood in Matt 24:33.

4) Jesus, in Matt 24:33 Meant "near" in the way God views Time, not the way man views time, and therefore AFTER all the Signs of Matt 24 come to pass, there could still be thousands of years (near to God) left before His coming.



Which are you most comfortable with?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Your Preterism is akin to Full Preterism. You have to deny that because to be straight and honest would result in your banishment from this or any orthodox Christian board.
You should report me for promoting full preterism then.
Why havent you?
Its probably becasue you can't cite one single belief I have espoused that is exclusive to Full Preterism, and you would need to in order to be "Straight and Honest" in your report...

So instead you continue to throw the baseless accusation against me...
Why is that? Why does my partial preterism bother you sooo much that you feel the need to label it Full preterism even though you can't cite one sinlge full preterist view I have espoused??

Straw men are much easier to tear down i suppose....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Another passage I wanted to bring up (that goes along with Parousia70's point) is Matthew 24:6:

And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don’t panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won’t follow immediately.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You should report me for promoting full preterism then.
Why havent you?
Its probably becasue you can't cite one single belief I have espoused that is exclusive to Full Preterism, and you would need to in order to be "Straight and Honest" in your report...

So instead you continue to throw the baseless accusation against me...
Why is that? Why does my partial preterism bother you sooo much that you feel the need to label it Full preterism even though you can't cite one sinlge full preterist view I have espoused??

Straw men are much easier to tear down i suppose....

It is not my duty to police you. I have no problem with general classic partial Preterism. In fact, I have a lot of shared beliefs. But full preterism is heresy. To deny a future second coming, and a future literal physical resurrection/judgment is heresy.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Davy
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
But full preterism is heresy.
.....and no one here is advocating for full preterism. There have been numerous attempts to clarify that.

If you aren't "policing"....then why keep making the false accusations?
 
  • Useful
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
.....and no one here is advocating for full preterism. There have been numerous attempts to clarify that.

If you aren't "policing"....then why keep making the false accusations?

Do you believe in a literal physical future second coming, and a future literal physical future resurrection/judgment?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Do you believe in a literal physical future second coming, and a future literal physical future resurrection/judgment?
This sort of questioning sure seems like "policing" to me, and it's off topic. I'm presuming you'll call that "avoidance" an "admission"....but not answering off topic questions is not an admission. It's a desire to stay on topic.

Would you care to answer any of the questions asked of you? Because this is supposed to be a discussion (not a one-way interrogation).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If you see why the statement I made about how Jesus must have ascended and then returned in John 20 is incorrect, you should be willing to show your reasoning behind this. Giving explanations about Christ ascending and returning after John 20 does absolutely nothing to address what I said about John 20.

You have made many accusations and condescending remarks about others on this forum. If you haven’t noticed it’s doubtful that there are any 2 believers that see every single verse in the same way. So I’m going to say this as kindly as possible because you may not be aware of it; it’s difficult to see the fruits of the spirt (Galatians 5:22-23) in your remarks.

My friend I am praying for you.

I'm not here to stroke the fancy words of other brethren. The purpose of this Christian forum, as it should be with all others, is The Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Word. I recognize that not everyone posting on forums like this are at the same understanding in God's Word. That is more reason to 'keep' to God's Word, and not to men's ideas.

The idea that Jesus 'ascended' to The Father and then returned is NOT written in God's Word. What is... written is that after His resurrection His disciples saw Him over a period of 40 days, and then... He ascended to The Father, as written in Acts 1.

Those who push the false doctrine that Jesus' appearance after His resurrection represented His 2nd coming of Bible prophecy are of men's doctrine called Full Preterism, a false heretical doctrine.

My suggestion for you, is to leave... that doctrine of man, and instead get into study of The Bible for yourself. Then you won't make such grave error in Biblical understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Then let's Compare Matthew 24:33 to James 5:8-9

In James 5:8-9, James is Quoting Jesus words in Matthew 24:33, is he not?

Are they not discussing the very same "coming"?

As you appear to agree, Jesus said His Coming would not be "near and at the doors" BEFORE certain Signs were seen, and instead would only be “near and at the doors” AFTER certain signs were seen. (Matt 24:33)

James, Writing decades Later, Says Jesus' Coming was, at that time "near and at the Doors".

Nah, you can't apply the same context as in Matthew 24, because Jesus gave 'specific'... Signs with His Olivet discourse expression to recognize His coming being near.

All the doctrine you're pushing is doing is trying... to push an idea into The Scripture that does not exist. And it truly is silly, simply because the idea of 'near' in ANY language is linked to some kind of context time frame. Jesus gave His time frame by those Signs, and Apostle James would NEVER go against them!

But what the idea you're suggesting, is going against both what Jesus and James said.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This sort of questioning sure seems like "policing" to me, and it's off topic. I'm presuming you'll call that "avoidance" and an "admission"....but not answering off topic questions is not an admission. It's a desire to stay on topic.

Would you care to answer any of the questions asked of you, because this is supposed to be a discussion (not a one-way interrogation).

Only Full Preterists are uncomfortable with this simple question. Christians are happy to present an answer for the hope that is within.
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The Olivet Discourse <--------back to the topic

From Luke 24....there are these appearances recorded (after His Resurrection) and my point is, how are we numbering or limiting His comings?:

The Road to Emmaus
(Mark 16:12-13)

13That same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven milesb from Jerusalem. 14They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15And as they talked and deliberated, Jesus Himself came up and walked along with them. 16But their eyes were kept from recognizing Him.17He asked them, “What are you discussing so intently as you walk along?”

They stood still, with sadness on their faces. 18One of them, named Cleopas, asked Him, “Are You the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in recent days?”

Jesus Appears to the Disciples
(John 20:19-23; 1 John 1:1-4)

36While they were describing these events, Jesus Himself stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 37But they were startled and frightened, thinking they had seen a spirit.38“Why are you troubled,” Jesus asked, “and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39Look at My hands and My feet. It is I Myself. Touch Me and see—for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.” 40And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and feet.​
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Olivet Discourse <--------back to the topic

From Luke 24....there are these appearances recorded (after His Resurrection) and my point is, how are we numbering or limiting His comings?:

The Road to Emmaus
(Mark 16:12-13)

13That same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven milesb from Jerusalem. 14They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15And as they talked and deliberated, Jesus Himself came up and walked along with them. 16But their eyes were kept from recognizing Him.17He asked them, “What are you discussing so intently as you walk along?”

They stood still, with sadness on their faces. 18One of them, named Cleopas, asked Him, “Are You the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in recent days?”

Jesus Appears to the Disciples
(John 20:19-23; 1 John 1:1-4)

36While they were describing these events, Jesus Himself stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 37But they were startled and frightened, thinking they had seen a spirit.38“Why are you troubled,” Jesus asked, “and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39Look at My hands and My feet. It is I Myself. Touch Me and see—for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.” 40And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and feet.​


Acts 1:11: “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.”

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, he was taken up” - “as ye have seen Him go.”
Literally: “In like manner.”

There were 11 witnesses that saw Jesus taken up in a cloud into heaven. What witnesses do we have that actually saw Jesus come in AD70 literally, physically and visibly?

Christ's coming shall be sudden as lightning. What is more sudden, visible and spectacular than lightning (Matthew 24:27)? Lightning is not hid! It can be seen by all across the sky. This is no secret or figurative appearance in this text.

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 (Mat 24:31 and Mark 13:27)?
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
So, we're changing the subject?

How did He go? Instead of your commentary, here is the text from Acts to inform us:

The Ascension
(Mark 16:19-20; Luke 24:50-53)

6So when they came together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”7Jesus replied, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by His own authority. 8But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”9After He had said this, they watched as He was taken up, and a cloud hid Him from their sight.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
When a person focuses heavily on one detail in a passage (and their thoughts are influenced by extrabiblical teaching) other certain details can be completely overlooked and the main point of a passage is lost.....like this detail of Jesus' quotation of Isaiah 43 when addressing His disciples.


Acts 1:8 ~ But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth

Isaiah 43:10 ~ “You are My witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and My servant whom I have chosen, so that you may consider and believe Me and understand that I am He. Before Me, no god was formed, and after Me none will come.​

Isaiah 43:18 ~ Do not call to mind the former things; pay no attention to the things of old.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The idea that Jesus 'ascended' to The Father and then returned is NOT written in God's Word. What is... written is that after His resurrection His disciples saw Him over a period of 40 days, and then... He ascended to The Father, as written in Acts 1.

I completely agree that Jesus ascended in Acts 1 and the 2 men in white apparel said he would return in like manner. I personally don’t have a problem with people referring to Jesus’s return as “the second coming”; I think most of us understand this is what is being referenced. The only verses I posted about were in John 20.

So if Jesus didn’t ascend to the Father before He told Thomas to thrust his hand into His side, then why would he tell Mary the very specific reason that she couldn’t touch Him was because He had not yet ascended to the Father? If you don’t want me to believe man’s doctrines then can you give a reasonable explanation? I’m studying the bible as you suggested but I have an issue with understanding why Jesus would have told Mary what He did if He didn’t ascend. So if you have already studied this and know the answer are you willing to share it with me or not?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you this explanation!

No problem :)

I think it is easy to conclude that most (if not all) OT scriptures were fulfilled with the destruction of the old covenant in 70AD.

I would say most OT scripture was fulfilled at the 1st advent (Christ's ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, sending of the Spirit, spread of the Gospel, those being born again, and Jew and gentile coming together into one body with Christ as the head).


Luke 24:44 Jesus said to them, “These are the words I spoke to you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.”

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.

Acts3:24 Indeed, all the prophets from Samuel on, as many as have spoken, have proclaimed these days.

What was fulfilled in 66-70, were the days of vengeance as foretold in the OT.

Luke 21:20-22 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, you will know that her desolation is near.Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country stay out of the city. For these are the days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

Therefore the majority of OT scripture was brought to completion from the Birth of Christ to the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70ad.

Is the same true for most NT prophecies? For example, the Olivet Discourse and Revelations.

I would argue NT prophecies like the olivet discourse and Revelation are recapitulations of OT scripture pointing to the time frame of the Birth of Christ through the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70ad.

It seems that most partial preterists have no problem fulfilling majority NT prophecies in 70AD,

Correct. Partial preterists recognize that the OT prophets and even Revelation use parabolic language to describe future events per God's specific instruction, and even similar to the parables of Jesus

Numbers 12:6-8 And he said, “Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream. 7Not so with my servant Moses. He is faithful in all my house. 8With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”

hosea 12:10 spoke to the prophets; it was I who multiplied visions, and through the prophets gave parables.

matthew 13:34 All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable.

while most Amils/Historicists/Idealists say those prophecies are continuously being fulfilled throughout the millenium (ie. 7 bowls, multiple antichrists, multiple tribulations, etc etc.)

There is a verb tense in the greek called the perfect tense. It emphasized the ongoing result of a completed/fulfilled action. That is the similar preterist view point. The majority of OT scripture was brought to completion from birth of Christ to the destruction of Jerusalem, and the results of this fulfillment are ongoing today. I find that this leads to a lot less speculation.

Futurists, on the other hand, view scripture as being fulfilled over the centuries and even today, which results in a lot more speculation, IMHO.


It appears like Amils cannot really agree which prophecies were fulfilled at what time and there are a variety of interpretations.

Sometimes yes. There are a lot of disagreements on future "end times" scenarios because it's all speculation.

Are partial preterists placing too much emphasis on 70AD and are Amils placing too little?

Definitely possible.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.