There is a gap between that of Luke 21:20 and the coming recorded in verse 27.

Timtofly said:

Israel is in Christ the same as the church is in Christ. The church is not in Israel, nor Israel in the church. They both are in Christ.

Click to expand...

Do obedient Israelites cease to be Israel when they become the church?

DavidPT said:

Let's suppose that one was living in the first century prior to 70 AD and that they are reading/hearing this prophecy at the time. Where would they have looked in Daniel that sheds more light on what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24:15? Keeping in mind, they didn't have hindsight at the time if these events were still future to them.

Click to expand...

The 1st century Jews associated Antiochus Epiphenes, in hindsight, as Daniel’s AOD.

Wouldn't the intelligent thing to do, be for them to consult all Scriptures in the book of Daniel involving abomination and desolation? So why is it that a lot of interpreters today think Jesus was only meaning a verse or two in the end of Daniel 9 when that is hardly the only Scriptures in Daniel dealing with this subject?

Click to expand...

Like many OT types that foreshadowed NT realities, Daniels AoD, even though the Jews understood as fulfilled in Antiochus Epiphenes, Jesus instructs His audience that such OT fulfillment was only typological, and the Antitype was yet future to them....

Jesus, in Luke, Extrapolates in the most detail on what/when the disciples would recognize as the fulfillment of the antitype, namely it would be when they saw "Jerusalem surrounded by Armies", and Jesus places further emphasis on the fact that such would be the antitype fulfillment when He instructs them that those would be "the days of vengeance in fulfillment of all things written"

DavidPT said:

There was no resurrection of the dead that followed after what happened in 70 AD. Therefore, Matthew 24:15-31 can't be involving what Luke 21:20 is involving.

Click to expand...

Wasn’t there?
The bible uses the term "resurrection" of national restorations, personal salvation/baptism, the transfer of departed souls in the O.T. Hades into God's heaven, and the final state of all things.

I believe the destruction of the Old Covenant nation is the primary sense of all of the apostles' eschatological teachings.

For example, I would characterize Luke 2:34-35 as speaking of Israel's first-century destruction and re-constitution via the Nazarene sect of King Jesus under the foretold NEW covenant.

Then, I am of the view that 1 Thess 4:13-17 is a discussion of when the O.T. dead would escape Hades/Sheol and be united to Christ in the heavenlies. In short, Paul says that their release from Hades was about to happen, as the impending historic change of the covenants (Heb 8:13/2 Cor 3:6-11) was to be marked by the Temple's profanation/desecration (2 Thess 2:3-4/Matt 23:33-24:2) and God's wrath on their disobedient Jewish countrymen (1 Thess 2:15-16/Mt 23:33-38/Acts 3:22-24).

It is even possible to understand resurrection in light of the AD 30-AD 70 period, as the word itself means "to stand" and receives multiple uses and meanings in scripture. (Like the examples I said before: the OT "national resurrections" of Israel; the "being raised" with Christ in baptism; the removal of the departed OT souls from Hades to Heaven; the final state).

Many of today's Christians have erred by not recognizing the link between the time statements and the end of the Old Covenant age, when God came in judgment upon Christ's enemies (Pharisees, Zealots, Sadducees, etc) at AD 70. The resurrection that was "near" and "soon" and "at hand" to first-century jews was the AD 70 end of their nation and covenant and priesthood and tribes and 1500-year dynasty under Moses. The old nation instituted by Moses gave way to the “raising” of the new and greater covenanted nation which was made worldwide in Christ Jesus.

Just about everyone who studies NT theology knows that a major change took place for the dead back in the first century. In OT times, the dead were *not* “raised” into Heaven but rather were prevented from doing so by the absence of a covenant that cleansed them fully. Moreover, nearly all christian groups admit that a change has occurred for the dead between the OT times and the NT times. What is entirely unclear however is precisely when that change took place. I am making the case that the bible teaches it took place when the Temple was destroyed during their "visitation" (Luke 19:40-44), in the days of vengeance (Luke 21:20-22).

The destruction of the Temple was hugely significant in that it was the historic signifier that the Old Covenant had vanished and the New had replaced it. Moreover, the destruction of the Temple was a key teaching of Christ, and one St. Paul picks up on at 2 Thess 2:3-4. And so I believe the most obvious and biblical understanding of 1 Thess 4 is that the dead in Hades were to be united to Christ when the Temple was profaned and desecrated. The "change" was huge, for it was the precise "change" that we think of when we distinguish the Old Covenant from the New Covenant.

What was to happen to the O.T-era dead was a central issue in the switch from the Old Covenant age to the New Covenant age. And in fact, nearly all christian groups admit that a major change took place for the dead during that time. Yet there is no agreement about what event marked their release from Hades. I believe the scripture is clear that the destruction of the Temple marked their release from Hades, and their raising into heaven, as St. Paul teaches.

I think Paul addresses it by saying the dead ones go first and living ones later. For sure, I believe we can all agree that faithful Christians do now go to heaven at death, and that this phenomenon began no later than AD 70. I believe St. Paul marks the change as having taken place with the destruction of the Old Covenant constitution and commonwealth.

parousia70 said:

Do obedient Israelites cease to be Israel when they become the church?

Click to expand...

They become the Church because that is what God has always wanted. The promises of OT are all fulfilled in Jesus and offer a new and living hope and a new Testament that we should rest in.

jeffweedaman said:

They become the Church because that is what God has always wanted. The promises of OT are all fulfilled in Jesus and offer a new and living hope and a new Testament that we should rest in.

Click to expand...

I agree.
But how do they cease being Israel?
Why would a faithful Israelite, who obediently follows Israel’s King, Jesus Christ, cease being counted among Israel, simply because of his obedience to Israel’s King?

Doesn’t scripture teach the opposite?
Doesn’t scripture clearly teach That it’s the wicked, unfaithful ones that lose their citizenship in the covenant nation, while the faithful, obedient ones remain as citizens?

parousia70 said:

Do obedient Israelites cease to be Israel when they become the church?

Click to expand...

Israel ceased being part of the church in the first century. Individually they can be part of the church through the Atonement Covenant. Israel being Israel is not the point until after the Second Coming.

Timtofly said:

Israel ceased being part of the church in the first century.

Click to expand...

Faithful, obedient Israel ceased being part of the Church in the first century? Or was it just the Wicked, disobedient among them that ceased being part of the Church?

My question is, When did the Faithful Obedient Israelites of the first century Cease Being Israel?

parousia70 said:

Faithful, obedient Israel ceased being part of the Church in the first century? Or was it just the Wicked, disobedient among them that ceased being part of the Church?

My question is, When did the Faithful Obedient Israelites of the first century Cease Being Israel?

Click to expand...

One cannot cease being a natural citizen of an ethnicity.

I pointed out that is not the point. The church existed way before Jacob, Israel was even born. God chose Israel into the historical church at the point He changed Jacob to Israel. Israel is not the church. The church contains a group known as Israel in it.

Obviously you do not mean faithful to the Law of Moses remnant as being your "faithful Israel". Those in the first century were faithful to the church despite the fact they had Jacob as their father.

Israel as a nation was cut off as part of the church. One would have to ask were the disobedient, in the historical OT, to the Law which was the old covenant, were they no longer genetically Israel, or individually cut out of the ethnicity. Being an Israelite in the OT was corporately being part of a congregation, unless you were judged no longer part of the group and sent away in disgrace, like the prodigal son. The northern ten tribes were judged by God and struck of all titles, yet they passed down the genetical inheritance of being a lost sheep of Israel. The Cross ended that relationship of Israel as part of the church corporately. Even the veil of the temple was torn ending the Law of Moses as means of a practicing congregation. The church ties severed until the Second Coming. That is why those of Israel have to join the church now as individuals.

Israel never replaced the church, and the church never replaced Israel.

DavidPT said:

I get that logic, thus why I initially interpreted all 3 accounts as parallel, except I applied everything to the end of this age because that is where I placed what is recorded in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 at. But at the time, though I was aware of Luke 21:24, it never really dawned on me until much later that that verse is proving 70 AD is meant in Luke 21:20, thus where I am today involving these accounts.

In Daniel 12 it involves pretty much everything Matthew 24:15-31 is involving. Both accounts involve abomination and desolation. Both accounts involve great tribulation followed by a resurrection of the dead. There was no resurrection of the dead that followed after what happened in 70 AD. Therefore, Matthew 24:15-31 can't be involving what Luke 21:20 is involving.

Daniel 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

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: )
--------------------------------------------------------

Matthew 24:21 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.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

(It looks like to me by Michael standing up at the time, this is what shortens these days, IOW, causes these days to cease before it gets to the point no flesh remains)

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

(there has to be a resurrection after great tribulation, something that never happened in the first century following 70 AD. How then could Matthew 24:21 possibly be involving the first century when nothing recorded in Daniel 12:1-2 is involving the first century?)

Click to expand...

Something is significant about Jerusalem at the end of the Age:

Revelation 11
7 And when they complete their testimony, the beast coming up out of the abyss will make war against them and will overcome them and kill them.
8 And their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Unless the above already happened, then the reason why we don't understand all things is because we are either not told all things, or we are told all things but they remain hidden from our dim eyes until God chooses to give us a full understanding.

Timtofly said:

One cannot cease being a natural citizen of an ethnicity.

Click to expand...

Ok.. How does one become a citizen of an ethnicity on the first place?

I pointed out that is not the point. The church existed way before Jacob, Israel was even born. God chose Israel into the historical church at the point He changed Jacob to Israel. Israel is not the church. The church contains a group known as Israel in it.

Click to expand...

As you point out, whether one is Israel, or not (or the church or not) is defined by ONE thing and ONE thing only:
The existence of an extant Covenant.

Obviously you do not mean faithful to the Law of Moses remnant as being your "faithful Israel".

Click to expand...

Obviously.

Israel as a nation was cut off as part of the church.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Again I'ts all about Covenant.

In Elijah's era, the multitude of Israelites who worshiped the false god Baal was so great that faithful Israel narrowed to a mere seven thousand men (1 Kings 19:1-18; Rom 11:2-4) and the rest were excommunicated out of the Covenant forever. That faithful remnant at that time constituted "Israel as a Nation", and from that time forward ONLY the descendants of those 7000 were Gods Covenanted Israel. The rest, again, were cut off forever.

That's how God preserves His remnant in times of Great Apostasy.

Scripture records numerous apostasies by--and subsequent excommunications of--seditious sons of Abraham, while a faithful remnant remained as National Israel... and through the remnant and the remnant alone, "All Israel" Carried on...

Examples may be multiplied: God struck down thousands of rebellious Israelites in the wilderness (Num 14:26-45; Num 21:5-9; Num 16:1-50), though the church (National Israel) was preserved and led to the Promised Land (Acts 7:38-45); In Isaiah's day, apostasy became so rampant that "National Israel" continued to exist through a small but faithful remnant (Isa 10:22-23; Isa 1:7-9; Rom 9:27-29); And again as mentioned above, in Elijah's era, the multitude of Israelites who worshiped the false god Baal was so great that "National Israel" narrowed to a mere seven thousand men (1 Kings 19:1-18; Romand 11:2-4). Lastly, at the close of the Old Testamental age, Israel was again reduced to a small remnant of faithful elect ones (Rom 11:5). The Jewish Pharisees and temple rulers grew wicked to the point of killing God's holy Messiah and apostles (1 Thess 2:14-16), and throngs wanted Caesar as king instead of Messiah, the son of David (Jn 19:15). Then, as in times past, "National Israel" survived and continued on EXCLUSIVELY through the faithful sons, the Nazarene Sect (The REMNANT), while the unfaithful apostates were "cut off" from among the people FOREVER.

St. Paul said that when the nation was in mass apostasy, the TRUE NATIONAL Israel was carried on not through the lineages of the wicked sons but rather through the OBEDIENT FEW (called the "remnant"), such as was true in Isaiah's day (Romans 9:27-29) and Elijah's day (Romans 11:3-5).

"Israel as a Nation" was not Cut off, rather Israel as a Nation, like so many times before, was reduced to a Faithful Remnant and that remnant obediently Followed their Messiah, Israel's rightful King, into the New Covenant.

Israel as a Nation survived *exclusively* in the sect of the Nazarenes. Like the 7000 in Elijah's day, "TRUE NATIONAL ISRAEL" was once again reduced to a tiny remnant, the faithful ones of the Nazarene sect, and they received with joy their promised New Covenant and obediently rejected all former biases against the non-Abrahamic families of earth so that Genesis 12:3 might finally be attained (Gal 3:7-9/Rom 4:13-18)---via the work of the Jewish Messiah.

Fullness of the Gentiles said:

Something is significant about Jerusalem at the end of the Age:

Revelation 11
7 And when they complete their testimony, the beast coming up out of the abyss will make war against them and will overcome them and kill them.
8 And their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Unless the above already happened, then the reason why we don't understand all things is because we are either not told all things, or we are told all things but they remain hidden from our dim eyes until God chooses to give us a full understanding.

Click to expand...

Did you know that Jesus was crucified near, but outside of Jerusalem?

Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

John 19:20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

The great city is not Jerusalem. If the two witnesses were two individuals who witness in earthly Jerusalem and are killed in the streets of Jerusalem then why do people around the world celebrate their deaths (Rev 11:9-10)?

Why would Jerusalem spiritually be called Sodom and Egypt exactly? The great city is also called Babylon in other parts of the book.

Revelation 18:10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

The great city is not the literal earthly Babylon, either. It has a larger scope than just earthly Jerusalem or earthly Babylon. It is global in scope. It spiritually has things in common with ancient Sodom, Egypt and Babylon. It is the spiritual counterpart to the heavenly new Jerusalem which symbolically represents the church.

parousia70 said:

Ok.. How does one become a citizen of an ethnicity on the first place?

Click to expand...

Why was Abraham called a Hebrew long before Jacob / Israel came along?


2 Corinthians 11:22
Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I.

jeffweedaman said:

Why was Abraham called a Hebrew long before Jacob / Israel came along?


2 Corinthians 11:22
Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I.

Click to expand...

National Israel was multi ethnic from its inception.
Hebrew dna was never a requirement for citizenship. Obedience to the covenant was the only requirement, and lack of obedience served to extinguish the citizenship of the ethnic Hebrew from the nation.

parousia70 said:

Ok.. How does one become a citizen of an ethnicity on the first place?


As you point out, whether one is Israel, or not (or the church or not) is defined by ONE thing and ONE thing only:
The existence of an extant Covenant.


Obviously.


I disagree. Again I'ts all about Covenant.

In Elijah's era, the multitude of Israelites who worshiped the false god Baal was so great that faithful Israel narrowed to a mere seven thousand men (1 Kings 19:1-18; Rom 11:2-4) and the rest were excommunicated out of the Covenant forever. That faithful remnant at that time constituted "Israel as a Nation", and from that time forward ONLY the descendants of those 7000 were Gods Covenanted Israel. The rest, again, were cut off forever.

That's how God preserves His remnant in times of Great Apostasy.

Scripture records numerous apostasies by--and subsequent excommunications of--seditious sons of Abraham, while a faithful remnant remained as National Israel... and through the remnant and the remnant alone, "All Israel" Carried on...

Examples may be multiplied: God struck down thousands of rebellious Israelites in the wilderness (Num 14:26-45; Num 21:5-9; Num 16:1-50), though the church (National Israel) was preserved and led to the Promised Land (Acts 7:38-45); In Isaiah's day, apostasy became so rampant that "National Israel" continued to exist through a small but faithful remnant (Isa 10:22-23; Isa 1:7-9; Rom 9:27-29); And again as mentioned above, in Elijah's era, the multitude of Israelites who worshiped the false god Baal was so great that "National Israel" narrowed to a mere seven thousand men (1 Kings 19:1-18; Romand 11:2-4). Lastly, at the close of the Old Testamental age, Israel was again reduced to a small remnant of faithful elect ones (Rom 11:5). The Jewish Pharisees and temple rulers grew wicked to the point of killing God's holy Messiah and apostles (1 Thess 2:14-16), and throngs wanted Caesar as king instead of Messiah, the son of David (Jn 19:15). Then, as in times past, "National Israel" survived and continued on EXCLUSIVELY through the faithful sons, the Nazarene Sect (The REMNANT), while the unfaithful apostates were "cut off" from among the people FOREVER.

St. Paul said that when the nation was in mass apostasy, the TRUE NATIONAL Israel was carried on not through the lineages of the wicked sons but rather through the OBEDIENT FEW (called the "remnant"), such as was true in Isaiah's day (Romans 9:27-29) and Elijah's day (Romans 11:3-5).

"Israel as a Nation" was not Cut off, rather Israel as a Nation, like so many times before, was reduced to a Faithful Remnant and that remnant obediently Followed their Messiah, Israel's rightful King, into the New Covenant.

Israel as a Nation survived *exclusively* in the sect of the Nazarenes. Like the 7000 in Elijah's day, "TRUE NATIONAL ISRAEL" was once again reduced to a tiny remnant, the faithful ones of the Nazarene sect, and they received with joy their promised New Covenant and obediently rejected all former biases against the non-Abrahamic families of earth so that Genesis 12:3 might finally be attained (Gal 3:7-9/Rom 4:13-18)---via the work of the Jewish Messiah.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you are not a big fan of Paul.

Spiritual Jew said:

Why would Jerusalem spiritually be called Sodom and Egypt exactly? The great city is also called Babylon in other parts of the book.

The great city is not the literal earthly Babylon, either. It has a larger scope than just earthly Jerusalem or earthly Babylon. It is global in scope. It spiritually has things in common with ancient Sodom, Egypt and Babylon. It is the spiritual counterpart to the heavenly new Jerusalem which symbolically represents the church.

Click to expand...

The Revelation does also call the holy city, New Jerusalem "the great city" - but only once:

Revelation 21
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God.

BUT that actually confirms what you said above, because of the thesis-antithesis comparison the Revelation makes between the two "cities".

Until now I've wrongly assumed that the Revelation calls three cities "the great city" or "that great city" (the third one being the literal Jerusalem on earth, and the other two being the holy city and New Jerusalem).

Thank you a second time in a day! That was a big "apocalypse" for me. You are correct.

Timtofly said:

Sounds like you are not a big fan of Paul.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you’re not.