Easter According to Daniel

[Christian Gedge]

This is the one that least of us agree on - the fourth goal of Daniel’s wonderful 70th week. (19 minutes into video if you don’t want to listen to the whole message) The Cross of Christ enabled the righteousness of Christ to be credited to those that believe on him irrespective of the wrongs they may have done.

This clause of Daniel’s prophecy has been subject to confusion because commentators have focused on second coming theories, failing to recognise the centrality of the Cross in Bible prophecy. What could ‘everlasting righteousness’ possibly mean, they ask, except the millennial reign of Christ? They miss the point.

Everlasting righteousness! Speaking of it, Isaiah said, “The righteous one, my servant, shall make many to be accounted righteous.” (Isaiah 53:11) Paul put it this way, “By the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous ... For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (Romans 5:18-19, 2 Cor. 5:21)

It is wonder enough that God does not impute sin to the believer’s account, but what is even more astonishing is that He actually credits to our account the righteousness of Christ instead. And the promise is now! It is not a dream for some future age to come. Why did God do this?

"God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement. (a propitiation) He did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.” (Romans 3:25,26)

 

[3 Resurrections]

Yes 3R, I agree with this. And I date it early AD 27. John imprisoned later in the same year. Thanks

I'm glad we agree that this occasion in Mark 1:14-15 where Jesus spoke of "the time is fulfilled" was referring to the end of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th week. However, we both posit a different year for Christ's statement here. By cross referencing the gospel accounts of other datable events in Jesus's ministry, we can know that this year in Mark 1:14-15 is AD 30 (not AD 27) when John was thrown into prison and when the public ministry of Christ began. Christ's baptism was in AD 27, but His public miraculous ministry did not begin until AD 30 at Cana where He performed His first miracle (John 2:11).

There is a three-year gap between Mark 1:13 and Mark 1:14 - between Christ's baptism in AD 27 when Satan "left Him for a season", and when Christ performed His first miracle in Cana in AD 30, causing His disciples to believe on Him. During this three year timespan, John the forerunner of Christ was winding down his ministry of making the people prepared for the Lord. Against the backdrop of John's ministry (who performed NO miracles), the contrast of Christ's public miraculous ministry in AD 30 blazed forth to manifest God's glory among the people.

 

[3 Resurrections]

There is a problem with saying the Abomination of desolation is Jerusalem surrounded by armies. In Mark 13:3 James is one of the disciples that Jesus spoke directly to on the mount of olives. Mark 13:14 says “when ye shall see the abomination of desolation”.

According to information I found on the internet James died in 44AD after being beheaded by king Herod, he was the first apostle to be martyred.

So either James saw the abomination which would’ve been before 44AD or when Jesus said “when ye shall see” he wasn’t referring to those directly in front of Him.

This isn't the problem that you suppose it is. Just because James was one person among all the disciples hearing this statement about the abomination of desolation doesn't require that he personally would live until that time to see it happening. After all, Christ said in Matthew 16:28 that "there be SOME here which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom". Not ALL of those disciples to whom Christ was speaking at that time would live to see this (including James, apparently), but "SOME" WOULD see it, including all those things leading up to His coming, such as the abomination of desolation ("Jerusalem surrounded by armies", as Luke 21:20 interpreted this).

I don’t think the AOD and Jerusalem surrounded by armies are the same event

Luke equated one with the other when He quoted the very same statement that Matthew 24:15-16 and Mark 13:14 recorded . I agree with Luke 21:20 and his interpretation of what the AOD was.

I don’t think Luke 21:20 should be interpreted as Peter, James, John and Andrew being told they would witness Jerusalem surrounded by armies in 66AD.

Peter would have still been alive when this AOD happened in AD 66, since Peter was martyred in 67 about the same time as Paul. Any disciples martyred before then would not have been among the group of "SOME" disciples who would not taste of death till they saw Christ coming in His kingdom. Speaking of those who would be martyred before then, Christ predicted to a group of the disciples in Luke 17:22 that "The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and ye shall NOT see it." Meaning that those particular disciples He was addressing would not be among the group of "SOME" disciples who would live to see Christ coming in His kingdom.

Mark 13:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies , then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Except not one person mentioned in Mark 13:3 was still alive in 70 AD, except for maybe John. Now what? Don't Preterists argue that pronouns in the Discourse are always meaning the ones Jesus was addressing at the time?

Christ was not just addressing Peter, James, John, and Andrew when He was speaking of these things. Look at the entire context of Mark 13, especially Mark 13:37. "And what I say unto you" (unto Peter, James, John, and Andrew), "I say UNTO ALL, 'Watch'." After all, Christ had just described the desperate case of pregnant and nursing women needing to flee Judea from this coming catastrophe. And of course, none of those listed 4 disciples could be described as being pregnant or nursing women, so this discourse was not just dedicated to this private audience of 4 disciples alone - it was being said "UNTO ALL" of that generation ("which shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled").

 

[grafted branch]

Luke equated one with the other when He quoted the very same statement that Matthew 24:15-16 and Mark 13:14 recorded . I agree with Luke 21:20 and his interpretation of what the AOD was.

Alright, let’s look at the statements in Matthew/Mark and compare them to Luke.

Matthew/Mark

• When you see the AOD flee, whoever reads let them understand. If the days don’t get shortened no one will be saved, for the elects sake the days are going to be shortened.

Luke

• When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies flee, these are the days of vengeance, that all that was written may be fulfilled.

I think we will agree that the days that get shortened are the days of vengeance. These days are shortened by either starting latter or ending earlier than the allotted amount of time for this event.

In Luke the elect are instructed to flee prior to Jerusalem being surrounded, it doesn’t seem likely that there would be an issue of the elect not being saved if the ending of the days of vengeance is what is shortened, the elect are already gone. Which leaves us with the beginning of the days of vengeance being delayed or shortened.

Matthew/Mark says let the reader understand, since Jesus is referring to the AOD spoken of by Daniel, it stands to reason that the seal put on the book of Daniel has been lifted here. Luke says he understands in Luke 1:3 and puts it in an orderly sequence. Luke leaves out the phrases about reading and understanding and the days being shortened.

How did Luke make things clearer when he left out the part about the days being shortened and the impact on the elect unless the beginning of the days of vengeance changed from the AOD to Jerusalem surrounded by armies?

 

[DavidPT]

This is the one that least of us agree on - the fourth goal of Daniel’s wonderful 70th week. (19 minutes into video if you don’t want to listen to the whole message) The Cross of Christ enabled the righteousness of Christ to be credited to those that believe on him irrespective of the wrongs they may have done.

This clause of Daniel’s prophecy has been subject to confusion because commentators have focused on second coming theories, failing to recognise the centrality of the Cross in Bible prophecy. What could ‘everlasting righteousness’ possibly mean, they ask, except the millennial reign of Christ? They miss the point.

Everlasting righteousness! Speaking of it, Isaiah said, “The righteous one, my servant, shall make many to be accounted righteous.” (Isaiah 53:11) Paul put it this way, “By the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous ... For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (Romans 5:18-19, 2 Cor. 5:21)

It is wonder enough that God does not impute sin to the believer’s account, but what is even more astonishing is that He actually credits to our account the righteousness of Christ instead. And the promise is now! It is not a dream for some future age to come. Why did God do this?

"God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement. (a propitiation) He did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.” (Romans 3:25,26)

Seventy weeks are determined--to bring in everlasting righteousness(Daniel 9:24)

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.


Scripture is supposed to interpret Scripture. It makes zero sense, that if everlasting righteousness was already brought in 2000 years ago, that some years later following that, Peter would still be looking for a place and time wherein dwelleth righteousness. This current age is not even remotely everlasting. How then can something everlasting fit a period of time that is not everlasting?

to bring in everlasting righteousness---wherein dwelleth righteousness---assuming these are not pertaining to the same events, obviously then, everlasting righteousness would undeniably trump the righteousness Peter was still looking for per 2 Peter 3:13. And since it would trump it, assuming this scenario, this proves that it is not reasonable that everlasting righteousness was already brought in 2000 years ago, and then a much lesser righteousness(2 Peter 3:13) follows that a few thousand years later. After all, nothing can trump everlasting righteousness, therefore, making the righteousness per 2 Peter 3:13 a lesser form of righteousness if 2 Peter 3:13 does not involve---Seventy weeks are determined--to bring in everlasting righteousness(Daniel 9:24)

IMO, based on 2 Peter 3:13 alone, there is no way that Peter thought all of Daniel 9:24 was already fulfilled before he said those things. Because if he did, this means there are contradictions in the Bible since this would mean he was contradicting that everlasting righteousness has already been brought in by insisting, a place and time wherein dwelleth righteousness, that this is still future, not already here instead.

 

[DavidPT]

Alright, let’s look at the statements in Matthew/Mark and compare them to Luke.

Matthew/Mark

• When you see the AOD flee, whoever reads let them understand. If the days don’t get shortened no one will be saved, for the elects sake the days are going to be shortened.

Luke

• When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies flee, these are the days of vengeance, that all that was written may be fulfilled.

I think we will agree that the days that get shortened are the days of vengeance. These days are shortened by either starting latter or ending earlier than the allotted amount of time for this event.

In Luke the elect are instructed to flee prior to Jerusalem being surrounded, it doesn’t seem likely that there would be an issue of the elect not being saved if the ending of the days of vengeance is what is shortened, the elect are already gone. Which leaves us with the beginning of the days of vengeance being delayed or shortened.

Matthew/Mark says let the reader understand, since Jesus is referring to the AOD spoken of by Daniel, it stands to reason that the seal put on the book of Daniel has been lifted here. Luke says he understands in Luke 1:3 and puts it in an orderly sequence. Luke leaves out the phrases about reading and understanding and the days being shortened.

How did Luke make things clearer when he left out the part about the days being shortened and the impact on the elect unless the beginning of the days of vengeance changed from the AOD to Jerusalem surrounded by armies?

The way to solve some of this, Luke 21:20 is not involving the same time period nor the same people Matthew 24:15 is involving. Luke 21:20 is meaning in a literal sense. Matthew 24:15 is not meaning in a literal sense, since Matthew 24:15 is not involving a literal city and a literal temple, but that Luke 21:20 is. Matthew 24:15 should be interpreted in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, for one. But Luke 21:20 should not be interpreted in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, though.

Even if one interprets Matthew 24:15 in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, it would be in vain if that person is interpreting 2 Thessalonians 2:4 in the literal sense. Preterists, as far as I can tell, do interpret 2 Thessalonians 2:4 in the literal sense. As do Dispensationalists and Pretribbers. Yet there are Amils who don't interpret 2 Thessalonians 2:4 in the literal sense, except most of them don't apply 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to Matthew 24:15. Speaking of myself, currently I'm Premil and that I do not interpret 2 Thessalonians 2:4 in a literal sense, and that I do apply it to Matthew 24:15 but not to Luke 21:20 as well.

 

[3 Resurrections]

In Luke the elect are instructed to flee prior to Jerusalem being surrounded, it doesn’t seem likely that there would be an issue of the elect not being saved if the ending of the days of vengeance is what is shortened, the elect are already gone.

You might be mistaken in who these "elect" are, for whom the days of vengeance are "shortened". There's no verse that specifically instructs the "elect" to flee. It was just believing disciples of that generation who were told to flee Judea for the mountains when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

These "elect" ones for whom the days of vengeance are shortened I believe are the same "elect" ones in the Luke 18 parable about the unjust judge. God had been bearing long with "His own elect", but that didn't mean He had no plans to avenge them. Because these dead martyrs had been persistently crying day and night over the millennia for vengeance for their shed blood, God was going to reward them for their persistence. Christ said God would "avenge them speedily" before His coming.

These "elect" ones begging for vengeance in Luke 18:7 are the very same souls in Revelation 6:9-11 under the altar who had been begging for vengeance for their shed blood - slain for their witness for the word of God through the ages. For the souls of those under the altar, every one of them were given white robes representing the righteousness of a bodily-resurrected state (the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints), but they were told to wait yet again for just "a little season" for the rest of their brethren who were "about to be" slain for their faith, just like they had once been killed for their testimony.

I believe it was for the sake of those resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints who remained on the earth that the days of vengeance were "shortened". Their reserved transport to heaven was on hold until Christ's return at the end of the days of vengeance, and they deserved to be avenged "speedily" so that they could join their Savior as soon as possible.

 

[3 Resurrections]

This current age is not even remotely everlasting. How then can something everlasting fit a period of time that is not everlasting?

Those who believe in Christ have everlasting life, even while living this mortal life in an age which is not everlasting of itself. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." (John 6:47).

 

[DavidPT]

Those who believe in Christ have everlasting life, even while living this mortal life in an age which is not everlasting of itself. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." (John 6:47).

In the here and now, and even in death, no one literally has everlasting life yet. It is merely a promise in the meantime that is not fulfilled until the last trump(1 Corinthians 15:51-57). Then it is a literal reality after that. But if it's already literally true, why then does mortality need to put on immortality at the last trump if one literally is already immortal prior to the last trump?. After all, one can't literally have and experience literal everlasting life unless they are literally immortal first.

 

[keras]

Those who believe in Christ have everlasting life, even while living this mortal life in an age which is not everlasting of itself. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." (John 6:47).

David PT is right, no one has immortality as yet, Only the Promise of it.
For now, we will all die, then our next conscious moment will be when we stand before God in Judgement; Revelation 20:11-15
THEN - all whose names are found in the Book of Life, will receive immortality

 

[grafted branch]

The way to solve some of this, Luke 21:20 is not involving the same time period nor the same people Matthew 24:15 is involving. Luke 21:20 is meaning in a literal sense. Matthew 24:15 is not meaning in a literal sense, since Matthew 24:15 is not involving a literal city and a literal temple, but that Luke 21:20 is. Matthew 24:15 should be interpreted in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, for one. But Luke 21:20 should not be interpreted in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, though.

Maybe, but for me the days being shortened is tied to a delay in vengeance which is seen elsewhere in the scriptures.

Revelation 6:9-11 has the fifth seal martyrs asking how long till they are avenged, which needs to be looked at in conjunction with Luke 21:22. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Whatever vengeance the fifth seal martyrs are asking for has to be fulfilled at Luke 21:22 because that’s where all things written pertaining to vengeance gets fulfilled. Since the fifth seal martyrs ask how long, there must be some kind of delay in the executing of the vengeance. This delay fits with the days being shortened in Matthew 24.

Also in Daniel 12:7 we have an event where the man clothed in linen lifts his hands unto heaven and swears by him that liveth forever that it shall be for time, times, and a half … when all these things shall be finished. In Revelation 10:5-6 the mighty angel lifted up his hands to heaven and swear by him that liveth for ever and ever that there should be time (delay) no longer. When I look at these verses I see a delay prior to a 3.5 year period when all these things are finished which would include the vengeance of Luke 21:22.

 

[DavidPT]

Alright, let’s look at the statements in Matthew/Mark and compare them to Luke.

Matthew/Mark

• When you see the AOD flee, whoever reads let them understand. If the days don’t get shortened no one will be saved, for the elects sake the days are going to be shortened.

Luke

• When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies flee, these are the days of vengeance, that all that was written may be fulfilled.

I think we will agree that the days that get shortened are the days of vengeance. These days are shortened by either starting latter or ending earlier than the allotted amount of time for this event.

In Luke the elect are instructed to flee prior to Jerusalem being surrounded, it doesn’t seem likely that there would be an issue of the elect not being saved if the ending of the days of vengeance is what is shortened, the elect are already gone. Which leaves us with the beginning of the days of vengeance being delayed or shortened.

Matthew/Mark says let the reader understand, since Jesus is referring to the AOD spoken of by Daniel, it stands to reason that the seal put on the book of Daniel has been lifted here. Luke says he understands in Luke 1:3 and puts it in an orderly sequence. Luke leaves out the phrases about reading and understanding and the days being shortened.

How did Luke make things clearer when he left out the part about the days being shortened and the impact on the elect unless the beginning of the days of vengeance changed from the AOD to Jerusalem surrounded by armies?

As to the days of vengeance in Luke 21, where, BTW, no such days are mentioned in Matthew 24 nor Mark 13, would it not be vengeance on unbelieving Jews?

When we get to Matthew 24, and that we then see it is for the elect's sake that great tribulation has to be shortened, why would we then think the elect are meaning the unbelieving Jews Luke 21 is involving? Since the elect can't be meaning unbelieving Jews in Matthew 24, but that the days of vengeance in Luke 21 is involving vengeance on unbelieving Jews in the first century, yet more proof that these accounts are not involving the same time period nor the same people.

This is what it says about the elect in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


Matthew 24:31 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.


Which seems more reasonable, A) or B) below?

A)

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the unbelieving Jews sake those days shall be shortened.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the unbelieving Jews


And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together unbelieving Jews from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Or B)

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the church's sake those days shall be shortened.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the church


And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together the church from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Preterists, and some Amils who are not Preterists, plus Pretribbers, all distort some of what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24 in regards to this in particular. These views have it involving unbelieving Jews though who it is really involving is the church.

If the days of vengeance also pertain to Matthew 24 though, it would involve vengeance on the church, while in Luke 21 it would involve vengeance on unbelieving Jews in the first century. Maybe when looking at it like that, the days of vengeance might also be meaning Matthew 24:15-21 after all...except I don't know for certain, unfortunately.

 

[3 Resurrections]

In the here and now, and even in death, no one literally has everlasting life yet. It is merely a promise in the meantime that is not fulfilled until the last trump(1 Corinthians 15:51-57). Then it is a literal reality after that. But if it's already literally true, why then does mortality need to put on immortality at the last trump if one literally is already immortal prior to the last trump?. After all, one can't literally have and experience literal everlasting life unless they are literally immortal first.

In the here and now, those who believe in Christ certainly do have everlasting life - of their spirits. The implanted Holy Spirit now indwells us (compared to "rivers of living water" in John 7:38 that spring up unto eternal life). That Spirit which gives our spirit everlasting life within is the guarantee that we will also receive everlasting immortal life of our physical bodies, which are also to be redeemed and made immortal in the next resurrection event.

David PT is right, no one has immortality as yet, Only the Promise of it.

That's just what I said above. But immortality of the resurrected bodies of the saints is something in addition to everlasting life that is already given to our spirit within while we are in this life.

 

[DavidPT]

Maybe, but for me the days being shortened is tied to a delay in vengeance which is seen elsewhere in the scriptures.

Revelation 6:9-11 has the fifth seal martyrs asking how long till they are avenged, which needs to be looked at in conjunction with Luke 21:22. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Whatever vengeance the fifth seal martyrs are asking for has to be fulfilled at Luke 21:22 because that’s where all things written pertaining to vengeance gets fulfilled. Since the fifth seal martyrs ask how long, there must be some kind of delay in the executing of the vengeance. This delay fits with the days being shortened in Matthew 24.

Also in Daniel 12:7 we have an event where the man clothed in linen lifts his hands unto heaven and swears by him that liveth forever that it shall be for time, times, and a half … when all these things shall be finished. In Revelation 10:5-6 the mighty angel lifted up his hands to heaven and swear by him that liveth for ever and ever that there should be time (delay) no longer. When I look at these verses I see a delay prior to a 3.5 year period when all these things are finished which would include the vengeance of Luke 21:22.

I think I somewhat grasp your reasoning concerning some of this, and if so, you are failing to factor in, that if the days of vengeance are pertaining to what happened to unbelieving Jews in the first century, none of the martyrs per the 5th seal would have been martyred as a result of 70 AD. Maybe it's like what I was thinking in my last post, the days of vengeance are being applied twice?

It is being applied to what happened in 70 AD to unbelieving Jews and it is also being applied to the church during great tribulation, and that the vengeance the souls during the 5th seal are awaiting, has zero to do with 70 AD, but has to do with being martyred for professing to be a Christian. And until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled, vengeance is put on hold in the meantime.

No way can---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled---be meaning before 70 AD. This is clearly meaning after 70 AD unless one wants to propose something preposterous, that the following was fulfilled between Christ's ascension back to heaven and 70 AD--- a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues(Revelation 7:9)---These are they which came out of great tribulation(Revelation 7:14). How is remotely reasonable that the great tribulation Revelation 7:14 is involving, that this is not the same great tribulation Matthew 24:21 is involving? And if Matthew 24:21 is involving the same great tribulation Revelation 7:14 is involving, Revelation 7:9 undeniably proves Matthew 24:21 can't fit 70 AD.

To try and make myself clearer here, regardless whether I am correct or not, the following is basically what I'm proposing.

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.


The days of vengeance involving unbelieving Jews pertains to 70 AD and leading up to. The days of vengeance against the church involves---Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled(Luke 21:24)---where, at this point this is no longer meaning in a literal sense involving the literal city Jerusalem before it was destroyed in 70 AD. Of course though, applying vengeance to the church is meaning those that oppose the church, not God's vengeance on the church. IMO, God's vengeance pertaining to those that have been persecuting the church, it begins with Luke 21:25 since that appears to be meaning the 6th seal.

 

[grafted branch]

As to the days of vengeance in Luke 21, where, BTW, no such days are mentioned in Matthew 24 nor Mark 13, would it not be vengeance on unbelieving Jews?

When we get to Matthew 24, and that we then see it is for the elect's sake that great tribulation has to be shortened, why would we then think the elect are meaning the unbelieving Jews Luke 21 is involving? Since the elect can't be meaning unbelieving Jews in Matthew 24, but that the days of vengeance in Luke 21 is involving vengeance on unbelieving Jews in the first century, yet more proof that these accounts are not involving the same time period nor the same people.

This is what it says about the elect in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


Matthew 24:31 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.


Which seems more reasonable, A) or B) below?

A)

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the unbelieving Jews sake those days shall be shortened.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the unbelieving Jews


And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together unbelieving Jews from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Or B)

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the church's sake those days shall be shortened.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the church


And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together the church from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Preterists, and some Amils who are not Preterists, plus Pretribbers, all distort some of what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24 in regards to this in particular. These views have it involving unbelieving Jews though who it is really involving is the church.

If the days of vengeance also pertain to Matthew 24 though, it would involve vengeance on the church, while in Luke 21 it would involve vengeance on unbelieving Jews in the first century. Maybe when looking at it like that, the days of vengeance might also be meaning Matthew 24:15-21 after all...except I don't know for certain, unfortunately.

This is how I see it, the vengeance on the unbelieving Jews could’ve taken place as soon as the first sacrifice was made after the veil was torn. If it would’ve taken place at that time the believing Jews would’ve fled Jerusalem prior to Pentecost. I think this is what was meant by no flesh being saved. So for the elect sake the days of vengeance on the unbelievers was delayed.

 

[3 Resurrections]

No way can---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled---be meaning before 70 AD. This is clearly meaning after 70 AD unless one wants to propose something preposterous, that the following was fulfilled between Christ's ascension back to heaven and 70 AD--- a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues(Revelation 7:9)---These are they which came out of great tribulation(Revelation 7:14)

Those "fellow-servants and brethren" in Revelation 6:11 were "ABOUT TO BE KILLED" soon after John was writing Revelation. And those particular "fellow-servants and brethren" in that Revelation 6:11 text were about to be given into the hands of the Beast to be put to death before AD 70.

But you are right that the other great multitude which no man could number in Revelation 7:14 was not only from Christ's ascension until AD 70. These saints were the children of God coming from creation forward who had all experienced tribulation. We are told that, "Yeah and ALL that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution". Christ said "In the world ye shall have tribulation..." Tribulation for believers is a given, to be expected by one and all to a greater or lesser degree coming from an unbelieving world who hates God and His children.

 

[grafted branch]

No way can---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled---be meaning before 70 AD. This is clearly meaning after 70 AD unless one wants to propose something preposterous, that the following was fulfilled between Christ's ascension back to heaven and 70 AD--- a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues(Revelation 7:9)---These are they which came out of great tribulation(Revelation 7:14)

If there was a resurrection in 70 AD then that’s what that multitude could be. I think this is one of the reasons some people have a 70AD resurrection.

 

[DavidPT]

If there was a resurrection in 70 AD then that’s what that multitude could be. I think this is one of the reasons some people have a 70AD resurrection.

How does that solve anything? Then you still have to explain how a multitude of this magnitude could have possibly been martyred within a 40 year window in the first century. That being the point I'm trying to make over all, that even though there was obviously martyring of saints between Christ's ascension through 70 AD, it wasn't even remotely on the level Revelation 7:9 is describing, unless I'm missing something here, and that history does record, that during this 40 year window, the following occurred--a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues(Revelation 7:9)---These are they which came out of great tribulation(Revelation 7:14)

If no man can number this multitude, it obviously can't be meaning in the tens, nor in the hundreds, nor probably in the thousands, it has to be meaning in the millions, if not billions. How many saints are you aware of that were martyred during this 40 year window in question? An amount man can number? Or an amount no man can number?

 

[grafted branch]

If no man can number this multitude, it obviously can't be meaning in the tens, nor in the hundreds, nor probably in the thousands, it has to be meaning in the millions, if not billions. How many saints are you aware of that were martyred during this 40 year window in question? An amount man can number? Or an amount no man can number?

Well, it’s a multitude that no man can number so we actually don’t know how large this group was.

In Revelation 11:1-2 John is told to measure the temple and them that worship there in. But the court which is without the temple leave out and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles.

In Revelation 7 the 144,000 are a number that can be counted and they are of the tribes of Israel, however when it comes to the Gentiles they can’t be counted. This is the same as Revelation 11:1-2. So the answer to your question is that we are not allowed to measure this number.

 

[DavidPT]

Well, it’s a multitude that no man can number so we actually don’t know how large this group was.

In Revelation 11:1-2 John is told to measure the temple and them that worship there in. But the court which is without the temple leave out and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles.

In Revelation 7 the 144,000 are a number that can be counted and they are of the tribes of Israel, however when it comes to the Gentiles they can’t be counted. This is the same as Revelation 11:1-2. So the answer to your question is that we are not allowed to measure this number.

The point is, no man can number them after they all, 'all' being a keyword here, having come out of great tribulation. Thus this is meaning at the end of great tribulation. Keeping in mind that Revelation is not chronological from start to finish and that in some contexts there are parentheticals like this. Therefore, great tribulation in Matthew 24 can't be meaning 70 AD since at the end of 70 AD one can't apply Revelation 7:9 and Revelation 7:14 to that. Is one going to argue that the number which no man can number, that came out of great tribulation, that this is meaning the unbelieving Jews that were slaughtered involving 70 AD?

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.

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

Revelation 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.


The idea is to square what is recorded in Matthew 24:21 with that of what is recorded in Revelation 7:9 and Revelation 7:14, thus Scripture interpreting Scripture, and not instead, having these accounts contradict each other.