How do you keep the Sabbath?

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Food for Thought:
Matthew 24:15 says, "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the Holy Place." (KNJV)

followed by this thought ...

Matthew 24:34 says, "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled."

Conclusion, the events discussed in Matthew 24:2-34 occurred during the first-century. The description is of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Did God cast Israel away? No. However, there were only a "remnant" (Romans 11:5) that has opened their heart to God and accepted His grace (the blessings offered through His Son Jesus). According to verse 17, those with hardened hearts were like the limbs broken off from a good olive tree, with limbs from a wild olive tree being grafted in (i.e. the Gentiles) to form a part of the good olive tree. True, according to verse 26a, all Israel will be saved. Considering the imagery used in the preceding verses (i.e. the olive tree with some branches broken off and some branches grafted in), Israel consists of both faithful and believing Jews and Gentiles. Combined, they are God's chosen people under the gospel of Christ.

That still does not answer Daniel 9:24-27, which was written to the Jews. The promise is to the people of Daniel:

Dan 9:24¶Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

2Th 2:3Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

That is what Matthew 24:15 is referring too. Daniel 9:27. Has the prince that is to come (Nimrod, Antichrist, son of perdition and about 40 odd other names) sat in the temple and declared himself God?
The execution of the Messiah, the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the flood (dispersal of Israel) of Daniel 9:26 is not the abomination of desolation.

Matthew 24:34 is the same as Mark 9:1. There is no doubt that John, Peter and James witnessed Jesus in the Kingdom.

Romans 9 – 11 reaffirms that Israel will come back into God's focus. The writers take 3 chapters to make that point.

If you remove the Jews from the equation, then Revelation 4 -23 make no sense, as the Church is in heaven.

Something to think about:
1Cr 10:32Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

In Jesus

BustedFlat

In a nutshell, Daniel 9:24-27 describes a (nonliteral) 70 week period. The 70 weeks are broken down into 3 periods. The first, a seven-week period, begins with Cyrus' decree to rebuild and restore Jerusalem and ends with the rebuilding of Jerusalem. The second, a sixty-two week period, begins with the rebuilding of Jerusalem and ends with during the coming of the Messiah. The third, a one-week period, begins with the coming of the Messiah and ends, according to Matthew 24:2-34 in the destruction of Jerusalem -- when the temple was totally destroyed (note verse 2).

Sorry, but I don't see where Daniel 9 helps your cause any at all.

Sorry, but I don't see how 2 Thess. 2:3 connects at all with what you are saying. What are you suggesting "that day" in that passage refers to? The context suggests it is the return of the Lord. Note 1 Thess. 4:13-18 where Paul also discusses the Lord's return. As for the falling away alluded to in 2 Thess. 2:3, Paul also discusses that in 1 Tim. 4:1-4.

Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with your understanding of Matthew 24:15. The desolation spoken of in that passage had not yet occurred, but would occur before that generation passed away (or died), according to 24:34.

Once again, I'm going to have to disagree with your understanding of Matthew 24:15. It is not connected at all with Mark 9:1. In Matthew 24, the discussion starts out with Jesus being shown Herod's renovations to the temple. Jesus response is that there won't be a stone left on top of another in verse 2. That is language that suggests its utter destruction. Frankly, that's about as low as you can tear a building down.

It's good to see you acknowledge Romans chapters 9-11. Now, did you ever consider the analogy about the olive tree, the branches that were broken off, the ones that were grafted in, and what the imagery really means? Please explain it to us. And, in context, please explain who the Israel is of 11:26? Is this physical Israel, or those who have the faith of Abraham per 4:11-12?

And, I don't have a clue what your point about Revelation is suppposed to mean. I suspect you are trying to use apocalyptic writings to interpret clear (non-symbolic) passages, instead of vice-versa.

 

[BustedFlat]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Sorry, but I don't see where Daniel 9 helps your cause any at all.

Dan 9:26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

You skip verse 26 and go to 27. How can there be sacrifices if the temple was destroyed?


Dan 9:27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


It is the people of the prince to come that will destroy the city and sanctuary, that happened with the Roman legions in 70 AD. But the covenant will be with the prince, himself, and during the 70th week for a 3 ½ year period there will be sacrifice and oblation, which means the temple will be standing.


This interval between the 69th and 70th week is hinted at in Isa 61:1,2 Lk 4:18-20 Rev 12:5,6 Isa 54:7 Hos 3:4,5 Amos 9:10,11 Acts 15:12-18 Micah 5:2,3 Zech 9:9,10 and Luke 1:21,23; 21:24

Sorry, but I don't see how 2 Thess. 2:3 connects at all with what you are saying. What are you suggesting "that day" in that passage refers to? The context suggests it is the return of the Lord. Note 1 Thess. 4:13-18 where Paul also discusses the Lord's return. As for the falling away alluded to in 2 Thess. 2:3, Paul also discusses that in 1 Tim. 4:1-4.

Mat 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)

2Th 2:3Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


The three verses all refer to the same thing: The abomination of desolation; and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation; he (the son of perdition) as God sitteth.


The falling away refers to the Rapture of the Church, before which the antichrist will not be reveled.


The first abomination of desolation was by Antiochus IV 175-164 BC. He made reading the Torah punishable by death. He slaughtered a sow on the Alter and erected an idol to Zeus in the Holy of Holies.

Jesus, in John 10:22, is celebrating the feast of re-dedication of the temple after the Macabbean Revolt of 165 BC. See the book of Zechariah Chapter 9.

Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with your understanding of Matthew 24:15. The desolation spoken of in that passage had not yet occurred, but would occur before that generation passed away (or died), according to 24:34.

Once again, I'm going to have to disagree with your understanding of Matthew 24:15. It is not connected at all with Mark 9:1. In Matthew 24, the discussion starts out with Jesus being shown Herod's renovations to the temple. Jesus response is that there won't be a stone left on top of another in verse 2. That is language that suggests its utter destruction. Frankly, that's about as low as you can tear a building down.

You can disagree all you like with my understanding, it does not change the fact that God has the power to do it. The word says that Peter, John and James witnessed Jesus in the Kingdom as Luke 9 and Matthew 24 allude to, and as John attests to throughout Revelation.

It's good to see you acknowledge Romans chapters 9-11. Now, did you ever consider the analogy about the olive tree, the branches that were broken off, the ones that were grafted in, and what the imagery really means? Please explain it to us. And, in context, please explain who the Israel is of 11:26? Is this physical Israel, or those who have the faith of Abraham per 4:11-12?

I acknowledge all 66 books of the bible, every word is the truth.


Rom 11:24For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [branches], be graffed into their own olive tree? 25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:


This is another reference to the rapture. The fullness of the Gentiles is not the same as the time of the Gentiles of Luke 21. This is when the number of saints reaches God's predetermined count and the Church is called to be with Him. At which point the blindness shall be lifted from Israel and the endtimes begin.

And, I don't have a clue what your point about Revelation is suppposed to mean. I suspect you are trying to use apocalyptic writings to interpret clear (non-symbolic) passages, instead of vice-versa.

The rapture happens. If the church replaced Israel then the chapters after Chapter 4 make no sense. Why the references to the twelve tribes? Why the importance of the 144000, from every tribe of Israel? This can not be those of the faith of Abraham, but of his blood.


The 70th week of Daniel is detailed in the Book of Revelation. I take that book as literal as I take the other 65.


In Recap: the 70th week starts with a convent between the prince who is to come, who is from the Roman Empire. The temple has to be standing in order to have sacrifice and oblation, and in order for the abomination of desolation to take place. Therefore the 70th week as described in Dan 9:27 could not have taken place before 70 AD as the temple was not yet destroyed as fortold in Dan 9:26. The events of Dan 9:27 have yet to pass as the temple has not been rebuilt.




In Jesus


BustedFlat

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Sorry, but I don't see where Daniel 9 helps your cause any at all.

Dan 9:26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

You skip verse 26 and go to 27. How can there be sacrifices if the temple was destroyed?

Nope, I didn't skip verses 26 & 27. Those passages discuss what occurs during the last week of the 70 week period discussed in Daniel 9. The week starts with the time of the Messiah and ends with desolation. Where we just can't seem to see eye-to-eye on things is that Matthew 24 has something to say about this desolation. The Lord speaks of this desolation (that which Daniel spoke of) in Matthew 24:15. "When you see" (NKJV) is future tense. Therefore, the desolation had not occurred. And, Matthew 24:34 tells us it (and the other things discussed in verses 2-31) will occur during that particular generation (the first-century). Now, the way I see it, is when the Lord specifically speaks about a particular passage of Scripture in the O.T. and tell us the passage has not yet been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled during that particular generation, then I can rest assured that it occurred when He said it would. And, that leaves me with little choice but to reject reasoning that contradicts what the Lord taught.

Dan 9:27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

It is the people of the prince to come that will destroy the city and sanctuary, that happened with the Roman legions in 70 AD. But the covenant will be with the prince, himself, and during the 70th week for a 3 ½ year period there will be sacrifice and oblation, which means the temple will be standing.

This interval between the 69th and 70th week is hinted at in Isa 61:1,2 Lk 4:18-20 Rev 12:5,6 Isa 54:7 Hos 3:4,5 Amos 9:10,11 Acts 15:12-18 Micah 5:2,3 Zech 9:9,10 and Luke 1:21,23; 21:24

Where specifically is this period between the 69th and 70th week in Daniel 9? I don't see any such period. All I see is a 70 week period broken down into three distinct periods: 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and 1 week.

Frankly, I think you are trying to insert passages into Daniel 9 that don't really fit at all. Acts 15:12-18 is such an example. It is one of the passages you cited. In that text the conversions of the Gentiles is discussed and declared to be the fulfillment of Amos 9:11 (another passage you cited). Therefore, that should be the end of the matter. It was for the apostles and church leaders in the first-century. God had in mind all along to call the Gentiles to be His people.

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Sorry, but I don't see how 2 Thess. 2:3 connects at all with what you are saying. What are you suggesting "that day" in that passage refers to? The context suggests it is the return of the Lord. Note 1 Thess. 4:13-18 where Paul also discusses the Lord's return. As for the falling away alluded to in 2 Thess. 2:3, Paul also discusses that in 1 Tim. 4:1-4.

Mat 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)

2Th 2:3Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

The three verses all refer to the same thing: The abomination of desolation; and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation; he (the son of perdition) as God sitteth.

The falling away refers to the Rapture of the Church, before which the antichrist will not be reveled.

Let me rephrase my original question. What sound scriptural basis is there to connect Matthew 24:15 with 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4? You see, listing the passages in consecutive order doesn't necessarily mean they are scripturally or contextually linked. It is clear that you want the passages to link, but you simply aren't making the connection between the passages. In Matthew 24, the temple is going to be torn down to the extent that a stone isn't left on top of another. And, in 2 Thessalonians 2, the Lord's return is under consideration. Now, please show us the specific Scriptures which say these events are linked. If you can't, I am inclined to file your reasoning in the "wishful thinking" file.

The first abomination of desolation was by Antiochus IV 175-164 BC. He made reading the Torah punishable by death. He slaughtered a sow on the Alter and erected an idol to Zeus in the Holy of Holies.

Jesus, in John 10:22, is celebrating the feast of re-dedication of the temple after the Macabbean Revolt of 165 BC. See the book of Zechariah Chapter 9.

For sure, "when you see" in Matthew 24:15 is future tense -- and occurs around 200 years after Antiochus. Therefore, that would mean that the actions of Antiochus aren't what was being discussed in Daniel 9:27, because Dan. 9:27 is the passage the Lord is discussing in Matthew 24:15, right?

 

[Simon_Templar]

Sunday is not, and never was intended to be a new sabbath. Sunday is a day of celebration because Jesus made it his day by the resurrection on that day.

Christians worship on sunday not to keep the sabbath, but to celebrate the resurrection and the new beginning in Christ.

Christians keep the sabbath by resting in Jesus Christ. He has become our sabbath rest. We enter into the rest of God through faith in God.

On the sabbath people rested from their own labors, but it was always permissable to do God's work even on the sabbath.
That is essentially the point, and it is why we as christians are to keep the sabbath every day. If we truly believe what Paul says "it is I who live no longer, but Christ that lives in me" we would realize that to truly be a Christian is to cease your own labors, and take up the work of God.

We layed our burdens and labors down when we came to the cross, and we took up the yoke of Christ. His yoke is easy, and his burden is light.

 

[BustedFlat]

Nope, I didn't skip verses 26 & 27. Those passages discuss what occurs during the last week of the 70 week period discussed in Daniel 9. The week starts with the time of the Messiah and ends with desolation.Where we just can't seem to see eye-to-eye on things is that Matthew 24 has something to say about this desolation.

It seems to me that we disagree on Daniel 27. I did not say you skipped both verses, my contention is you put 27 before 26.

When you explain how the events of Daniel 9:27 can happen after the temple was destroyed in Daniel 9:26 we can move on.


Without a temple, destroyed in Daniel 9:26 how can we have the events in 9:27? How can we have:
A) overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation (Daniel 9:27)
Also referred to as:
B) The abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15)
Or also explained as:
C)Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God (2Th 2:3)?

The importance of :

The first abomination of desolation was by Antiochus IV 175-164 BC. He made reading the Torah punishable by death. He slaughtered a sow on the Alter and erected an idol to Zeus in the Holy of Holies.

is it tells us that what Daniel is referring to is going to happen in the temple, as it happened in 165 BC.


I see none of the things in Daniel 9:27 having happened in the 1st Century.


I see no convent with a prince of Rome that was broken in less than a 7 year period.


I see nothing that can be tied to the stopping of the sacrifice and the oblation.


I see no temple standing to be desecrated in the manner of Antiochus. Also described in 2 Th 2:3.


When you can show me that these things happened after the destruction of the temple and city in 70AD (Daniel 9:26) then we can move on from here.







In Jesus


BustedFlat

 

[Simon_Templar]

DRA,

The portion of the olivet discourse in which Jesus says "this generation shall not pass away until all these things have come to pass" is a somewhat odd construction in greek. For that reason its a little difficult to translate accurately.

For example, the word "generation" there is "genea" in greek. It is traditionally translated "generation" yet in many of its usages, this translation doesn't fit well, and In the latin vulgate translation which was one of the first translations of the word out of greek, four different latin words were used to translate it, indicating that it has multiple meanings beyond the simple english "generation".

At the most basic level the greek word 'genea' simply means a people group who share some common bond. It doesn't always, or even most often, mean generation in the sense of "people currently alive". It often refers to a line of descendants who are of the same blood, or sometimes to a group of people who all share an ideological belief that unifies them, or sometimes a group of people who are commonly described such as "a wicked genea" and so on.

For example there are a few times in the NT where Jesus says things like "a wicked generation asks for a sign". What he was actually saying in the context is more likely a refrence to the pharisees an saducees as a group of wicked people (since they were the ones asking for the sign).

Further, the word translated "this" in greek is houtos. Its the demonstrative pronoun and can be translated as "this" or "that" just as easily. Most importantly, houtos frequently is used as a pronoun to refer to a person or place or thing which has been previously described.

thus even if the word Genea means "generation" there, the greek contsruction most of the sentance indicates that it most likely should be understood in the sense of "the generation which I have already described" rather than "the generation which is currently alive". The latter understanding is the least likely given the context and gramatical construction of the sentance.

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Nope, I didn't skip verses 26 & 27. Those passages discuss what occurs during the last week of the 70 week period discussed in Daniel 9. The week starts with the time of the Messiah and ends with desolation.Where we just can't seem to see eye-to-eye on things is that Matthew 24 has something to say about this desolation.

It seems to me that we disagree on Daniel 27. I did not say you skipped both verses, my contention is you put 27 before 26.

Thanks for the clarification.

Here's how I view verse 26. Going back to Daniel 9:24, Daniel has a vision of the events of a 70-week period. Verse 25 breaks the 70 weeks into two periods -- 7 weeks and 62 weeks. If I remember my math correctly, that would mean one week is left, right (pun intended)? Note the beginning of verse 26: "And after the sixty-two weeks ..." What comes after the 62 weeks? The final 1 week, right? Unless, of course, you feel inclined to insert another period of time into this text. If so, we need to go back to verse 24 and change the 70 weeks to read 70 weeks plus another period of time between the 69th and 70th week. So, do we go back and change the wording of verse 24 to suit some preconceived idea we have of what we thing the passage means, or do we accept what the passages says without inserting any ideas into the text itself? I am inclined to go with the latter idea. Therefore, the events of verses 26-27 occur during the final week of the 70-week period Daniel was discussing. The week begins with the Messiah being cut off, which I understand to be a reference to the death of Christ upon the cross, and the week ends with desolation, which Jesus explains in Matthew 24:15 to be the destruction of Jerusalem -- determined by the context (Matthew 24:2) and the time period given for the events to occur (Matthew 24:34). What I would like for you to do is to explain why you don't accept the Lord's explanation for the desolation spoken of in Daniel 9:27. Is it possible that the Lord has a better understanding of the events in Daniel 9 better than any of us? Therefore, shouldn't we respect and honor His explanation of what this desolation applies to? I believe we should. However, if you think we don't, then please explain further.

When you explain how the events of Daniel 9:27 can happen after the temple was destroyed in Daniel 9:26 we can move on.

Have you considered Genesis 1? Note verses 24-28. On the 6th. day God created land animals and man and woman. So, if He created them in chapter 1, what is the explanation for the account in chapter 2? Applying this principle to your question, please "explain how the events of Genesis 2 can happen after He created the first man and woman in Genesis 1?" Then we can move on. Now, perhaps you have a better idea where I'm coming from.

Without a temple, destroyed in Daniel 9:26 how can we have the events in 9:27? How can we have:
A) overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation (Daniel 9:27)
Also referred to as:
B) The abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15)
Or also explained as:
C)Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God (2Th 2:3)?

Okay, I see a problem. I see reluctance to accept that Jesus tells us what the abomination of desolation is referring to in Matthew 24:2,15 and the timing of the events in Matthew 24:34, all because someone wants to apply Matthew 24:15 to the events of 2 Thess. 2:3. In my mind it's a clear case of someone allowing their own interpretation of the meanings of passages to override what the Lord tells us the passages mean. Now, look closely at Matthew 24:15. See any references or links to 2 Thess. 2:3 by the Lord? Nope. So, why are you trying to dismiss and undermine what Matthew 24:15 says (in its context) in favor of your understanding of 2 Thess. 2:3? Is this the proper method of Bible interpretation?

The importance of :

Originally Posted by BustedFlat
The first abomination of desolation was by Antiochus IV 175-164 BC. He made reading the Torah punishable by death. He slaughtered a sow on the Alter and erected an idol to Zeus in the Holy of Holies.

is it tells us that what Daniel is referring to is going to happen in the temple, as it happened in 165 BC.

Okay, I see an obvious problem. The Lord spoke of Daniel 9:27 in the future tense in Matthew 24:15. You say Daniel 9:27 occurred some 200 years before. Therefore, if you are right, then the Lord must be mistaken. Do you care to explain how you came to know more about interpreting apocalyptic writings than the Lord does?

I see none of the things in Daniel 9:27 having happened in the 1st Century.

I see no convent with a prince of Rome that was broken in less than a 7 year period.

I see nothing that can be tied to the stopping of the sacrifice and the oblation.

I see no temple standing to be desecrated in the manner of Antiochus. Also described in 2 Th 2:3.

When you can show me that these things happened after the destruction of the temple and city in 70AD (Daniel 9:26) then we can move on from here.

In Jesus

BustedFlat

Once again, your understanding of other passages of Scripture is standing in the way of accepting what Jesus taught in Matthew 24:2-34. This reminds me of the Sadducees in Matthew 22:24. They had an understanding of Deuteronomy 25:5 that hindered their acceptance of the resurrection. In essence, Jesus points out they seem to have forgotten about the tense of the verb used in Exodus 3:6 when God said, "I am" the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The point is that God used the present tense of the verb even though Abraham, Issac, and Jacob had previously died.

Likewise, you are ignoring the verb tense in Matthew 24:15 to apply Daniel 9:27 in a different way than the Lord intended. Therefore, your conclusion can be no more accurate than the one reached by the Sadducees in Matthew 22.

 

[- DRA -]

DRA,

The portion of the olivet discourse in which Jesus says "this generation shall not pass away until all these things have come to pass" is a somewhat odd construction in greek. For that reason its a little difficult to translate accurately.

For example, the word "generation" there is "genea" in greek. It is traditionally translated "generation" yet in many of its usages, this translation doesn't fit well, and In the latin vulgate translation which was one of the first translations of the word out of greek, four different latin words were used to translate it, indicating that it has multiple meanings beyond the simple english "generation".

At the most basic level the greek word 'genea' simply means a people group who share some common bond. It doesn't always, or even most often, mean generation in the sense of "people currently alive". It often refers to a line of descendants who are of the same blood, or sometimes to a group of people who all share an ideological belief that unifies them, or sometimes a group of people who are commonly described such as "a wicked genea" and so on.

For example there are a few times in the NT where Jesus says things like "a wicked generation asks for a sign". What he was actually saying in the context is more likely a refrence to the pharisees an saducees as a group of wicked people (since they were the ones asking for the sign).

Further, the word translated "this" in greek is houtos. Its the demonstrative pronoun and can be translated as "this" or "that" just as easily. Most importantly, houtos frequently is used as a pronoun to refer to a person or place or thing which has been previously described.

thus even if the word Genea means "generation" there, the greek contsruction most of the sentance indicates that it most likely should be understood in the sense of "the generation which I have already described" rather than "the generation which is currently alive". The latter understanding is the least likely given the context and gramatical construction of the sentance.

I appreciate your comments and thoughts on Matthew 24:34. However, the word "generation," the Koine Greek word "genea" is not a stand alone word in this passage. It is preceded by the word "this," which was translated from the Greek word "houtos." "This generation" gives us the timing of the previous events Jesus discussed in Matthew 24.

As for the various committees of scholars that have translated this passage (Matthew 24:15), I am not aware of any great degree of difficulty they encountered with this particular text.

No doubt, the Koine Greek uses some words that have multiple meanings. Therefore, the translators have to use their understanding of which meaning fits the context. "This generation" was the understanding of the scholars that worked on the KJV, NKJV, NASV, NIV, and ESV, which are translations that I most commonly use. I don't have any reason to think they all erred in their tranlation of Matthew 24:15. I'm more inclined to believe that people might have a problem accepting what Matthew 24:15 teaches i.e. specifically, the timing of the events discussed in the preceding verses.

Just my two-cents worth.

 

[BustedFlat]

There are many books and chapters that are not in chronological order, but I see nothing in Daniel 9, but man's desire, to reorder it to have the outcome they want. Verse 26 is in the 62 week period and verse 27 is in the 70th week.

This is not the first time in the bible there was an interval breaking prophecy's time line.

I gave you a long list of passages that deal with this interval, some openly, some need some reading and understanding.
Here it is again (with links):

Isa 61:1,2 Luke 4:18-21 Rev 12:5,6 Isa 54:7 Hos 3:4,5 Amos 9:10,11 Acts 15:12-18 Micah 5:2,3 Zech 9:9,10 and Luke 1:21,23; Luk 21:24

Please read these passages with much prayer.


Brother:
We have taken this thread way off topic. I will ask that you pray and reread what I have written, as I think I have answered my reading of the texts. I will pray and reread and pray some more. If, after prayer, you want to start a new thread, or continue in PM I am very willing to do that.

In Jesus

BustedFlat

 

[- DRA -]

There are many books and chapters that are not in chronological order, but I see nothing in Daniel 9, but man's desire, to reorder it to have the outcome they want. Verse 26 is in the 62 week period and verse 27 is in the 70th week.

This is not the first time in the bible there was an interval breaking prophecy's time line.

I gave you a long list of passages that deal with this interval, some openly, some need some reading and understanding.
Here it is again (with links):

Isa 61:1,2 Luke 4:18-21 Rev 12:5,6 Isa 54:7 Hos 3:4,5 Amos 9:10,11 Acts 15:12-18 Micah 5:2,3 Zech 9:9,10 and Luke 1:21,23; Luk 21:24

Please read these passages with much prayer.


Brother:
We have taken this thread way off topic. I will ask that you pray and reread what I have written, as I think I have answered my reading of the texts. I will pray and reread and pray some more. If, after prayer, you want to start a new thread, or continue in PM I am very willing to do that.

In Jesus

BustedFlat

I think I found something we can agree upon.

From your signature ...

"God's word will never contradict itself. If I think it does then I need to prayerfully ask for guidance as it matters not what I think it says, the only thing that is important is what God said."

To that I add an !

 

[Simon_Templar]

I appreciate your comments and thoughts on Matthew 24:34. However, the word "generation," the Koine Greek word "genea" is not a stand alone word in this passage. It is preceded by the word "this," which was translated from the Greek word "houtos." "This generation" gives us the timing of the previous events Jesus discussed in Matthew 24.

As for the various committees of scholars that have translated this passage (Matthew 24:15), I am not aware of any great degree of difficulty they encountered with this particular text.

No doubt, the Koine Greek uses some words that have multiple meanings. Therefore, the translators have to use their understanding of which meaning fits the context. "This generation" was the understanding of the scholars that worked on the KJV, NKJV, NASV, NIV, and ESV, which are translations that I most commonly use. I don't have any reason to think they all erred in their tranlation of Matthew 24:15. I'm more inclined to believe that people might have a problem accepting what Matthew 24:15 teaches i.e. specifically, the timing of the events discussed in the preceding verses.

Just my two-cents worth.

Its not an errant translation, its a translation that is easily misunderstood. In the context "this generation" most likely does not mean "the current generation" houtos is very rarely used in that sense and is almost always used as an intensifier refering to an antecendent which comes before the noun described.
So it should be understood to mean "this generation" as in "the generation I just described" or "the generation I was just speaking about".

This is how the majority of greek scholars and commentators translate it in that specific passage.

The comments on genea were merely pointing out that it has a much broader meaning than simply our modern understanding of the word "generation". It can ostensibly include or refer to ANY group of people that share a common bond of some sort.

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

I appreciate your comments and thoughts on Matthew 24:34. However, the word "generation," the Koine Greek word "genea" is not a stand alone word in this passage. It is preceded by the word "this," which was translated from the Greek word "houtos." "This generation" gives us the timing of the previous events Jesus discussed in Matthew 24.

As for the various committees of scholars that have translated this passage (Matthew 24:15), I am not aware of any great degree of difficulty they encountered with this particular text.

No doubt, the Koine Greek uses some words that have multiple meanings. Therefore, the translators have to use their understanding of which meaning fits the context. "This generation" was the understanding of the scholars that worked on the KJV, NKJV, NASV, NIV, and ESV, which are translations that I most commonly use. I don't have any reason to think they all erred in their tranlation of Matthew 24:15. I'm more inclined to believe that people might have a problem accepting what Matthew 24:15 teaches i.e. specifically, the timing of the events discussed in the preceding verses.

Just my two-cents worth.

Its not an errant translation, its a translation that is easily misunderstood. In the context "this generation" most likely does not mean "the current generation" houtos is very rarely used in that sense and is almost always used as an intensifier refering to an antecendent which comes before the noun described.
So it should be understood to mean "this generation" as in "the generation I just described" or "the generation I was just speaking about".

This is how the majority of greek scholars and commentators translate it in that specific passage.

The comments on genea were merely pointing out that it has a much broader meaning than simply our modern understanding of the word "generation". It can ostensibly include or refer to ANY group of people that share a common bond of some sort.

Let's see ...

"This is how the majority of greek scholars and commentators translate it in that specific passage."

I suspect that "translate" is a word that can be easily misunderstood. I believe the message is clear how the translators of the various reliable English translations that are generally held to be very accurate translate the coupling of "houtos" and "genea" in Matthew 24:15. As previously stated, the KJV, NKJV, NASV, and ESV all translate the these words as "this generation." Which credible translations translate the words as you suggest they should be -- "the generation I just described" or "the generation I was just speaking about?"

On the other hand, if by "translate" you mean the understanding or what some scholars and commentators interpret "houtos genea" to mean, then they are welcome to show why their understanding of these words differs with the scholars that worked on the various committees e.g. KJV, NKJV, NASV, ESV.

Just for thought, take what prompted the discussion in Matthew 24 in verse 1. It was the disciples showing Jesus the latest renovations to the temple ... an ongoing process begun by Herod the Great. And, Jesus explained that it would be reduced to the point that a stone wouldn't be left on top of another (verse 2). When do you think that occurred? Was it in "this generation" in the sense of the present generation of those the Lord was speaking to, or to "the generation I just described" in the sense of some future generation?

Personally, I don't think "this generation" is too hard to understand in its context. Jesus was talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which included the destruction of the temple. I suspect the real problem lies elsewhere (i.e. if I accept what Matthew 25:34 says, then my understanding of other passages must be wrong. But since that can't be right (the possibility that I could be wrong in my understanding of some Scriptures), then there must be some angle I can use to cast doubt on the meaning of "this generation.").

 

[Simon_Templar]

much of the difficulty in understanding the Olivet discourse comes from the fact that the disciples actually asked Jesus two questions (or three possible) and Jesus is giving them two answers. This is why the three different accounts of the discourse in the three gospels seem to focus on different aspects of the olivet discourse.

The disciples asked the questions "when will the temple be destroyed?" "what are the signs of your coming? AND What are the signs of the end of the age"?) The last two are technically two questions, but Jesus seems to treat them as pretty much the same in his answer.

Matthew focuses on the question of what are the signs of the Jesus coming, and the end of the age.

Luke focuses on the question of when the temple will be destroyed.

Mark has elements of both, but is more like Luke's account.

In order to get the full understanding you have to take them all together, as they are all reporting one and the same conversation.

Looking specificly at the question we are discussing in Matt 24:34, the focus of the matthew account isn't the destruction of the temple, but rather the 2nd coming of Christ, and the end of the age.

Looking at the context of verse 34 we find immediately before it in verse 32-33
"“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates."

The parable of the fig tree is often used by people to refer to Israel becoming a nation again. It is alledged that the fig tree represents Israel. This is speculation and it really misses the point of the parable. This parable is present in the other gospel accounts as well but is more general in its scope (saying all the trees rather than just the fig tree).

The point of the parable is a simple agrigultural parable.. "when you see the trees bud, you know its spring time and the summer is near. Just like that, when you see these events happen, you know the end is near". The events referred to are not the fig tree itself, but rather the list of events right before the fig tree.

In other words, Jesus describes a series of events and he says "when you see these things happen, you know the end is near, just like you know summer is upon you when the trees blossom"

That is what comes immediately before the phrase "this generation shall not pass away before all these things come to pass".

The point here again is referring back to the things Jesus described. He is not saying that the apostles generation will not pass away before the end comes and he returns. He is saying that once those events start, they will finish within one generation.

He is reinforcing his point "when you see these events, you know the end is near, BECAUSE the generation that sees these events will not pass away before ALL of these events are fulfilled.

The specific signs included in this are the abomination of desolation, the great tribulation, and the second coming of Christ.
the point is that once you see those events begin, you know they will not stop, or tarry until they are completed when the Lord returns.

You will notice in Luke's gospel, that the description of the desctuction of Jerusalem is NOT followed by the statement "this generation will not pass away till all this has come to pass." Instead the description of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is followed by the words "They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

This statement clearly indicates the passage of at least SOME reasonable amount of time which is described as "the times of the gentiles"

and then more signs are described including the return of Christ again, THEN comes the statement "this generation..."

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Let's see ...

"This is how the majority of greek scholars and commentators translate it in that specific passage."

I suspect that "translate" is a word that can be easily misunderstood. I believe the message is clear how the translators of the various reliable English translations that are generally held to be very accurate translate the coupling of "houtos" and "genea" in Matthew 24:15. As previously stated, the KJV, NKJV, NASV, and ESV all translate the these words as "this generation." Which credible translations translate the words as you suggest they should be -- "the generation I just described" or "the generation I was just speaking about?"

On the other hand, if by "translate" you mean the understanding or what some scholars and commentators interpret "houtos genea" to mean, then they are welcome to show why their understanding of these words differs with the scholars that worked on the various committees e.g. KJV, NKJV, NASV, ESV.

Just for thought, take what prompted the discussion in Matthew 24 in verse 1. It was the disciples showing Jesus the latest renovations to the temple ... an ongoing process begun by Herod the Great. And, Jesus explained that it would be reduced to the point that a stone wouldn't be left on top of another (verse 2). When do you think that occurred? Was it in "this generation" in the sense of the present generation of those the Lord was speaking to, or to "the generation I just described" in the sense of some future generation?

Personally, I don't think "this generation" is too hard to understand in its context. Jesus was talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which included the destruction of the temple. I suspect the real problem lies elsewhere (i.e. if I accept what Matthew 25:34 says, then my understanding of other passages must be wrong. But since that can't be right (the possibility that I could be wrong in my understanding of some Scriptures), then there must be some angle I can use to cast doubt on the meaning of "this generation.").

much of the difficulty in understanding the Olivet discourse comes from the fact that the disciples actually asked Jesus two questions (or three possible) and Jesus is giving them two answers. This is why the three different accounts of the discourse in the three gospels seem to focus on different aspects of the olivet discourse.

The disciples asked the questions "when will the temple be destroyed?" "what are the signs of your coming? AND What are the signs of the end of the age"?) The last two are technically two questions, but Jesus seems to treat them as pretty much the same in his answer.

Matthew focuses on the question of what are the signs of the Jesus coming, and the end of the age.

Luke focuses on the question of when the temple will be destroyed.

Mark has elements of both, but is more like Luke's account.

In order to get the full understanding you have to take them all together, as they are all reporting one and the same conversation.

Looking specificly at the question we are discussing in Matt 24:34, the focus of the matthew account isn't the destruction of the temple, but rather the 2nd coming of Christ, and the end of the age.

Looking at the context of verse 34 we find immediately before it in verse 32-33
"“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates."

The parable of the fig tree is often used by people to refer to Israel becoming a nation again. It is alledged that the fig tree represents Israel. This is speculation and it really misses the point of the parable. This parable is present in the other gospel accounts as well but is more general in its scope (saying all the trees rather than just the fig tree).

The point of the parable is a simple agrigultural parable.. "when you see the trees bud, you know its spring time and the summer is near. Just like that, when you see these events happen, you know the end is near". The events referred to are not the fig tree itself, but rather the list of events right before the fig tree.

In other words, Jesus describes a series of events and he says "when you see these things happen, you know the end is near, just like you know summer is upon you when the trees blossom"

That is what comes immediately before the phrase "this generation shall not pass away before all these things come to pass".

The point here again is referring back to the things Jesus described. He is not saying that the apostles generation will not pass away before the end comes and he returns. He is saying that once those events start, they will finish within one generation.

He is reinforcing his point "when you see these events, you know the end is near, BECAUSE the generation that sees these events will not pass away before ALL of these events are fulfilled.

The specific signs included in this are the abomination of desolation, the great tribulation, and the second coming of Christ.
the point is that once you see those events begin, you know they will not stop, or tarry until they are completed when the Lord returns.

You will notice in Luke's gospel, that the description of the desctuction of Jerusalem is NOT followed by the statement "this generation will not pass away till all this has come to pass." Instead the description of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is followed by the words "They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

This statement clearly indicates the passage of at least SOME reasonable amount of time which is described as "the times of the gentiles"

and then more signs are described including the return of Christ again, THEN comes the statement "this generation..."

First off, thanks for explaining some of your reasoning.

However, you failed to address the questions I asked. Like, "Which credible translations translate the words as you suggest they should be -- 'the generation I just described' or "the generation I was just speaking about?"
And, "When do you think that [not a single stone of the temple wouldn't be left on top of another - Matthew 24:5] occurred? Was it in 'this generation' in the sense of the present generation of those the Lord was speaking to, or to 'the generation I just described' in the sense of some future generation?"

So, are you conceding that no credible translations translate "houtos genea" in the ways you suggest? If so, that means it really isn't a translation problem, but one of understanding what the expression means, right?

And, you say that "Luke focuses on the question of when the temple will be destroyed." Let's follow this reasoning ... if Luke is indeed addressing when the temple will be destroyed and "Matthew focuses on the question of what are the signs of the Jesus coming, and the end of the age," then the differences should be apparent in the texts, right?

Let's see ...

Matthew 24:4-34 says (NKJV),
4 And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. 9 Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. 11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. 15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened. 23 Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand. 26 Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together. 29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. 32 "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near--at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.

And, Luke 21:8-32,
8 And He said: "Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time has drawn near.' Therefore do not go after them. 9 But when you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified; for these things must come to pass first, but the end will not come immediately." 10 Then He said to them, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven. 12 But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake. 13 But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony. 14 Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what you will answer; 15 for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist. 16 You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death. 17 And you will be hated by all for My name's sake. 18 But not a hair of your head shall be lost. 19 By your patience possess your souls. 20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. 25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; 26 men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of heaven will be shaken. 27 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near." 29 Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.

I think it is pretty apparent the texts are discussing the same things. One example is the parable of the fig tree (which you discuss). Now, how is it that these texts line-up with each other like they do, yet you have concluded that one is talking about the Lord's return and the other about the destruction of the temple?

Now, back to Matthew 24 ...
BTW, is it just possible that the Lord is answering both questions asked by the disciples in verse 3? "Tell us, when will these things be" is answered in verses 4-34, and "And what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?" is answered in verses 35-51.