DavidPT
Well-Known Member
- Sep 26, 2016
- 8,602
- 2,107
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
It seems that to make Jesus' words about His second coming is what's taking the passage out of context. In this discourse....He's been referring to events that will happen within that generations lifetime (and is warning THEM to be watchful).
IOW....the assumption seems to be that any of this is about His second coming.
I used to believe the way you do (up until only a few months ago)....and it's actually amazing (and hopeful) to me just how much better Scripture flows together with the understanding that Jesus was warning 1st century followers (and His prophecy was fulfilled....and many were saved from death and destruction).
In your mind then, per the Discourse, nothing in the Discourse involves context having to do with the 2nd coming?
The coming in Matthew 24:30, you do realize is after the trib of those days, right? What was that coming in regards to then? If the trib of those days are meaning the events of 70 AD to some of you, the coming in Matthew 24:30 would be meaning after, and not during the events of 70 AD instead. What was that coming in regards to then?
Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
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.
BTW, if you used to believe similar to what I believe up until a few months ago, you apparently must have had a poor understanding of what you formerly believed since you ended up trading that in for something far less believable. No one is ever going to convince me that there is no 2nd coming context in the Discourse. IOW I'm not falling for that deception. But I'm not claiming there is no first century context in the Discourse then, because there most certainly is. But there is also 2nd coming context in it as well.
Last edited:
Upvote
0