The Olivet Discourse

Status
Not open for further replies.

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
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.

When a person focuses heavily on one event (namlely the destruction of Jerusalem) in scripture (and their thoughts are influenced by extrabiblical teaching) other certain details can be completely overlooked and the main point of Scripture is lost.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BABerean2
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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.

Don't you think James would have been Familiar with those signs Jesus gave and would have been able to recognize them? And don't you think James would know that Jesus' coming would NOT be "near and at the door" BEFORE those signs were seen??

You seem to be claiming James was ignorant of what those signs were.

Or, so you are saying the "Coming" in James 5:8-9 that James said was at that time "near and at the doors" is a contextually different event from the "Coming" in Matthew 24 that Jesus said would only be "near and at the doors" AFTER certain signs were seen?

the idea of 'near' in ANY language is linked to some kind of context time frame.
I agree.

Jesus gave His time frame by those Signs, and Apostle James would NEVER go against them!
I agree with this as well. But I'm not sure where you are getting I'm suggesting otherwise?

My contention is James did NOT go against Jesus, But AFFIRMED Him.

It is your view that appears to render them in opposition with one another....

You, in contrast, apparently to need to divorce the Coming in James 5:8-9 from the Coming in Matt 24 in order to prop up your bias... But the text simply does not allow it.

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

How so?

Where does scripture teach you to apply a polar opposite "Time frame context" to Jesus' use of "near and at the door" as it relates to His coming, than you do of James' Use of "Near and at the door" as it relates to the same coming?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
When a person focuses heavily on one event (namlely the destruction of Jerusalem) in scripture (and their thoughts are influenced by extrabiblical teaching) other certain details can be completely overlooked and the main point of Scripture is lost.

As Your thoughts are demonstrably influenced by extra biblical teaching, whats the lesson here?

That It's only OK when YOU do it?
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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?

I'll take a stab...

First I'll point out that your view above is at direct odds with this:

Hebrews 9:24
For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

How often does Jesus travel from earth into Heaven to present His perfect sacrifice for us?

Based on your statement and this passage from Hebrews, you must believe at least twice, right?

But scripture says only once:

25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

If I understand you correctly, you are asserting that, sometime after He came out of the tomb and appeared to Mary, but before he appeared to His apostles, that Christ ascended to heaven and presented Himslef as the firstfruits offering, then returned to earth once that offering was accepted By God.

If this is your position, I still don't see How you can reconcile it with Hebrews 9:24?
"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:"

The writer of Hebrews, writing in the 60's AD, some 30 years after your proposed "ascention & return" claimed that at the time he was writing, Christ was presently in heaven offering himself as the sacrifice for us.

Your view has Him offering Himself the 2nd day after Passover, returning, then ascending again and offering himself AGAIN, which the writer of Hebrews explicitly says CAN NOT BE:

Hebrews 9:25-26
"25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.'

As for why Jesus made the 'don't touch me statement', He actually told Mary not to "Cling to" Him.

John 20:17 NKJ
"Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'

The Greek for "Cling" or "Touch" here is "Haptomai" which means:
to fasten one's self to, adhere to, cling to.

This is not a simple finger extended "touching" of Christ being described here as Thomas did, this is Mary seeing the risin Christ and, not surprisingly, CLINGING to Him.

Jesus tells her not to Cling to Him, in effect because Both He and She had important work yet to do. They would have an eternity to cling to eachother, but Christ effectively told her to "let go" at that point because there was yet unfinished business they both needed to attend to.

Christ ascended to the Father once, and it is recorded for us at the beginning of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles.
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site 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.
Just to add to the quote above.....the carrying out of God's Divine judgment in accordance with the Old Covenant was commonly referred to as a "coming in the cloud".

Parousia70 wrote an excellent post many pages back that gave several examples of this language. Here is the link to that post: The Olivet Discourse

When the chief priests, in Jesus' day, declared that they had no god but Caesar.....they deemed the Temple a high place....void of the presence of God:

John 19:15 - At this, they shouted, “Away with Him! Away with Him! Crucify Him!” “Shall I crucify your King?” Pilate asked. “We have no king but Caesar,” replied the chief priests.
The prophet Micah had this to say about high places:

Micah 1:3 ~ For behold, the LORD is coming forth from His place.
He will come down and tread on the high places of the earth.

Micah 3:12 ~ Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest.

Bible Hub -
Ellicott: Shall become heaps.—So also, in after-days, the doom of Jerusalem was pronounced by our Lord: “The days will come when there shall not be left one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down.”

Benson: And Jerusalem shall become heaps — The word heaps alludes to the heaps of stones laid up together in fields newly ploughed. And the mountain of the house — That is, of the Lord’s house; as the high places of the forest — The place where the temple stood, which was upon mount Moriah, shall be overrun with grass and shrubs, like mountains situated in a forest. This is that passage, quoted Jeremiah 26:18, which Hezekiah and his princes took in good part, yea, it seems, they believed and laid it to heart, in consequence whereof they repented, and so the execution of it did not come in their days.

Matthew Henry: See the doom of wicked Jacob; Therefore shall Zion for your sake be ploughed as a field. This was exactly fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, and is so at this day. If sacred places are polluted by sin, they will be wasted and ruined by the judgments of God.

Micah 3:12 Commentaries: Therefore, on account of you Zion will be plowed as a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of ruins, And the mountain of the temple will become high places of a forest.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
When a person focuses heavily on one event (namlely the destruction of Jerusalem) in scripture (and their thoughts are influenced by extrabiblical teaching) other certain details can be completely overlooked and the main point of Scripture is lost.
I'm not pointing out or focusing on events of 70 AD here.

I wrote:

mkgal1 said:
...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.
Isaiah 43 is about life - new creation.
 
Last edited:
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
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.

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

Thank you again for your response.

Now I am even more confused. Are you saying the NT prophecies are just a recap of the OT prophecies? Are the NT prophecies - New Heavens and New Earth for example, future or past?
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm not pointing out or focusing on events of 70 AD here.

I wrote:


Isaiah 43 is about life - new creation.

You are fixated with the coming of Titus in AD70. That is all you want to talk about. You never want to talk about Christ and His literal physical climactic future return or the physical resurrection/judgment of mankind that accompanies it.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BABerean2
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you again for your response.

Now I am even more confused. Are you saying the NT prophecies are just a recap of the OT prophecies? Are the NT prophecies - New Heavens and New Earth for example, future or past?

Brace yourself!
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You are fixated with the coming of Titus in AD70. That is all you want to talk about. You never want to talk about Christ and His literal physical climactic future return or the physical resurrection/judgment of mankind that accompanies it.
First of all, "coming of Titus" is your strawman label. I've never brought up Titus.

And how is it "all i want to talk about" when I'm bringing up a different topic?Creation....which is opposite of destruction....and the revelation of Jesus as the one True God, is what I am bringing up. Your false accusation does nothing to change reality. Our discussion is written for everyone to read.
 
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
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
First of all, "coming of Titus" is your strawman label. I've never brought up Titus.

And how is it "all i want to talk about" when I'm bringing up a different topic? Creation....which is opposite of destruction. Your false accusation does nothing to change reality.

Then why will you not admit to a literal physical future second coming?

Why will you not admit to a literal physical future resurrection/judgement of mankind?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BABerean2
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
First of all, "coming of Titus" is your strawman label. I've never brought up Titus.

And how is it "all i want to talk about" when I'm bringing up a different topic? Creation....which is opposite of destruction....and the revelation of Jesus as the one True God, is what I am bringing up. Your false accusation does nothing to change reality. Our discussion is written for everyone to read.

You also promote universalism, believing that even Satan will be eventually reconciled to God.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BABerean2
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You also promote universalism, believing that even Satan will be eventually reconciled to God.
I don't believe I have ever posted that, because that is something not revealed to us. You seem to have misunderstood something.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't believe I have ever posted that, because that is something not revealed to us. You seem to have misunderstood something.

Ok, do you believe all mankind - wicked and righteous- will one day be reconciled to Christ?
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Ok, do you believe all mankind - wicked and righteous- will one day be reconciled to Christ?
The topic of this thread is the Olivet Discourse....not "what are mkgal1's beliefs?". What happened to your claim of not policing others?

We were all sinners in need of a Savior, though.

Romans 3:10 ~ As it has been written: "There is none righteous, not even one;
 
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

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
47
Washington
✟260,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'll take a stab...

First I'll point out that your view above is at direct odds with this:

Hebrews 9:24
For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

How often does Jesus travel from earth into Heaven to present His perfect sacrifice for us?

Based on your statement and this passage from Hebrews, you must believe at least twice, right?

But scripture says only once:

25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

If I understand you correctly, you are asserting that, sometime after He came out of the tomb and appeared to Mary, but before he appeared to His apostles, that Christ ascended to heaven and presented Himslef as the firstfruits offering, then returned to earth once that offering was accepted By God.

If this is your position, I still don't see How you can reconcile it with Hebrews 9:24?
"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:"

The writer of Hebrews, writing in the 60's AD, some 30 years after your proposed "ascention & return" claimed that at the time he was writing, Christ was presently in heaven offering himself as the sacrifice for us.

Your view has Him offering Himself the 2nd day after Passover, returning, then ascending again and offering himself AGAIN, which the writer of Hebrews explicitly says CAN NOT BE:

Hebrews 9:25-26
"25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.'

As for why Jesus made the 'don't touch me statement', He actually told Mary not to "Cling to" Him.

John 20:17 NKJ
"Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'

The Greek for "Cling" or "Touch" here is "Haptomai" which means:
to fasten one's self to, adhere to, cling to.

This is not a simple finger extended "touching" of Christ being described here as Thomas did, this is Mary seeing the risin Christ and, not surprisingly, CLINGING to Him.

Jesus tells her not to Cling to Him, in effect because Both He and She had important work yet to do. They would have an eternity to cling to eachother, but Christ effectively told her to "let go" at that point because there was yet unfinished business they both needed to attend to.

Christ ascended to the Father once, and it is recorded for us at the beginning of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles.

Thanks for giving an answer that I can examine. I’m going to briefly give the view that includes the idea that Jesus travels to heaven more than once so were on the same page.

The people who come out of the graves in Matthew 27:52-53 are the 144,000. They meet up with Jesus on mount Sion (Revelation 14:1), they ascend to heaven where He presents himself along with the 144,000 as first fruits (1 Corinthians 15:23, Revelation 14:4). He then returns to the disciples on earth.​

When I look at Hebrews 9:24 it could be viewed as Christ sitting at the right hand of God making intercession for us (Romans 9:34) and not the initial sacrifice. Verses 25 and 26 “now once in the end of the world” appearance would be the one time initial sacrifice. However this would then put a gap in between the sacrifice and sitting down of Hebrews10:12. If Christ’s one time sacrifice wasn’t made until His ascension in Acts 1, then the sacrifices in the temple on earth would’ve been still valid until that time and an explanation of why the veil was torn would be needed.

As for the explanation of why Jesus tells Mary not to touch or cling to Him, I have no counter argument for that and it does address my original question in a logical way.

I had heard this view some time ago and it seemed to make sense to me at the time but I haven’t worked through all the possible flaws of this view.
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
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?

The Acts 1 Scripture tells us. He APPEARED to His disciples for 40 days, and then while upon the Mount of Olives He 'ascended' to Heaven in their sight.

Adam Clarke's interpretation...

John 20:17
"[Touch me not] Mee (NT:3361) mou (NT:3450) haptou (NT:680), Cling not to me. Haptomai (NT:680), has this sense in Job 31:7, where the Septuagint use it for the Hebrew dabaq (OT:1692), which signifies to cleave, cling, stick, or be glued to. From Matt 28:9, it appears that some of the women held him by the feet and worshipped him. This probably Mary did; and our Lord seems to have spoken to her to this effect: "Spend no longer time with me now: I am not going immediately to heaven-you will have several opportunities of seeing me again: but go and tell my disciples, that I am, by and by, to ascend to my Father and God, who is your Father and God also. Therefore, let them take courage."
(from Adam Clarke's Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1996 by Biblesoft)
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Don't you think James would have been Familiar with those signs Jesus gave and would have been able to recognize them? You seem to be claiming James was ignorant of what those signs were.

I don't know how you get that. Didn't you read what I wrote? --

"Jesus gave His time frame by those Signs, and Apostle James would NEVER go against them!"

How is that saying James was not familiar with those Signs? It's saying just the opposite, that James would never go against... those Signs Jesus gave. So of course that means James had to have been familiar with them, and that was my point, i.e., that James knew, and he wouldn't go against them, because our Lord Jesus gave them to His disciples (and us if you claim to be one of His disciples).


Or, so you are saying the "Coming" in James 5:8-9 that James said was at that time "near and at the doors" is a contextually different event from the "Coming" in Matthew 24 that Jesus said would only be "near and at the doors" AFTER certain signs were seen?

I don't understand your confusion. All of Christ's disciples knew about His 2nd coming on the last day of this world. They all looked for it by the Signs He gave. And it's obvious today that it did not happen in their day, nor has it happened yet in our day. We still say, 'Jesus is coming' today, and He is. We are still living in the last days. And there will... be a specific day when this present world will end, literally.

My contention is James did NOT go against Jesus, But AFFIRMED Him.

It is your view that appears to render them in opposition with one another....

You, in contrast, apparently to need to divorce the Coming in James 5:8-9 from the Coming in Matt 24 in order to prop up your bias... But the text simply does not allow it.

You are obviously reading something else 'into' my posts that I did not say. You are confused.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The topic of this thread is the Olivet Discourse....not "what are mkgal1's beliefs?". What happened not policing others?

We were all sinners in need of a Savior, though.

Your avoidance is sufficient evidence! I was a police officer for 15 years and am very familiar with why people avoid answering simple questions that most normal people without anything to hide are happy to answer.
 
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

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I don't know how you get that. Didn't you read what I wrote? --

"Jesus gave His time frame by those Signs, and Apostle James would NEVER go against them!"

How is that saying James was not familiar with those Signs? It's saying just the opposite, that James would never go against... those Signs Jesus gave. So of course that means James had to have been familiar with them, and that was my point, i.e., that James knew, and he wouldn't go against them, because our Lord Jesus gave them to His disciples (and us if you claim to be one of His disciples).

Well then, you need an explanation, for Why James said Jesus' coming was at that time "near and at the door" when you yourself admit James knew full well His coming could NOT BE near and at the door before certain signs came to pass...

Was James mistaken?

I don't understand your confusion. All of Christ's disciples knew about His 2nd coming on the last day of this world. They all looked for it by the Signs He gave. And it's obvious today that it did not happen in their day, nor has it happened yet in our day.

Can we stick with scripture please?
"its obvious it didn't happen" is not a scripturally sound argument, as it relies solely on extra biblical teaching.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.