Dispensationalist Only Matthew 24:34

[food4thought]

Hi brothers!

I was in the eschatology forum and was confronted with a question I wasn't really able to answer on my own. It has to do with the interpretation of what "this generation" means in Matthew 24:34. Here is the verse in it's immediate context:

Matthew 24:32-35 NASB "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; (33) so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. (34) "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (35) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.​

I have looked into this, and found several different answers, but I am unsure as to which one is the correct view. Here are the views I have considered:

1) The generation that sees "all these things" take place, as opposed to just the first part. In this view, "this generation" would be the future generation that witnesses the false Christs, persecution, the wars, the earthquakes, the abomination that causes desolation, and the destruction of the temple (a yet future one). "This generation" would see the coming of Christ described in Matthew 24:30-31 and elsewhere in Scripture.

Potential problems with view #1:

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead? Also, why did Jesus leave the text open to confusion with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD? Many of these prophecies were at least partially fulfilled in 70 AD, yet Christ did not return.

2) Generation is improperly translated, and should read "people" or "race". In this view, Jesus is saying that the people of Israeli descent would not disappear from earth until the coming of Christ. Jesus was referring to the people of Israel, not any specific generation.

Potential problems:

Why does every translation I found translate genea as "generation" in this passage? Also, if this view is correct, it states that the Israeli people will not be wiped out "until" (up to this point, but not necessarily after) Christ's coming... but we know from other Scripture that the Israeli people will be ascendant, and greatly blessed, immediately after Christ's return. The use of the word "until" is problematic for this view, and Jesus could have just as easily said "before" instead, clearing up any possible confusion.

3) Matthew 24 has a near and far fulfillment. This view would see Jesus' prophecy here as being partially fulfilled in 70 AD, and then completely fulfilled just before His return. This would be in line with the way prophecy was fulfilled in the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.), where Babylon fell to the Medo-Persians as predicted, yet many aspects of the prophecy were not fulfilled in history, and await their full completion in the future (Revelation 18).

Potential problems:

This is complicated, and very difficult to understand. And it still leaves open the question of why Jesus said what He said in verse 34. Why make it appear, as He did in verse 34, that all these things would take place in one generation? Did Jesus not know that there would be a time gap of nearly 2000 years between the near and far fulfillment? Also, what does this say about how we should interpret other NT prophecy, like the book of Revelation? Could there be further gaps of time in the fulfillment of Revelation's prophecies?

This is where I am at right now... uncertain. If anyone has some further insight into this passage, please feel free to post it. Also, if you have answers to my potential problems with any of the 3 views, definitely share them!

God bless you all, and thanks in advance for your replies;
Michael

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead?

Maybe He Did? He Spoke as the Father directed Him. Men messed up a lot ....

Also, why did Jesus leave the text open to confusion with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD?

He Spoke as ABBA YAHWEH directed Him.

Many of these prophecies were at least partially fulfilled in 70 AD, yet Christ did not return.

Some people think very differently. I don't know their 'theology', but they have posted that He did return.... (maybe at Pentecost?) ....

 

[food4thought]

Hi Jeff! Thanks for the reply!

Maybe He Did? He Spoke as the Father directed Him. Men messed up a lot ....

Not sure what you mean here... are you speaking of when it was written or when it was copied?

He Spoke as ABBA YAHWEH directed Him.

True, but it doesn't help answer my questions

Some people think very differently. I don't know their 'theology', but they have posted that He did return.... (maybe at Pentecost?) ....

I believe you're thinking of the Partial-Preterist position, which claims Christ returned at the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Those were the people I was having the discussion with in the eschatology forum.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead?

Maybe He Did? He Spoke as the Father directed Him. Men messed up a lot ....

Not sure what you mean here... are you speaking of when it was written or when it was copied?

The 'undertanding' today has changed a lot for multitudes from what the Father through Jesus spoke as recorded in the Bible.

At that time, everyone the Father or Jesus spoke to and revealed to them what they meant by "that generation" , they made clearly understood - no language barriers.

As time progressed, Yahweh Guards His Word and reveals His Understanding, His Meaning , to those He wishes to do so for. This is potentially separate from and not relying on any of man's wisdom nor man's understanding (i.e. scholarship/ education) ...

So , simply, when Jesus says "generation", He knows what He means, and so does everyone to whom He Reveals this. (in Hebrew et al, of course, it was an altogether different 'word' spoken, not English; SOMETIMES, learning the Hebrew reveals the meaning , as Yahweh Permits; but not always..... since even at the time with Yeshua,
others who were fluent in all the languages, refused to acknowledge Him, and they rejected all He Spoke, as they also rejected ABBA YAHWEH )

 

[Acts2:38]

Hi brothers!

I was in the eschatology forum and was confronted with a question I wasn't really able to answer on my own. It has to do with the interpretation of what "this generation" means in Matthew 24:34. Here is the verse in it's immediate context:

Matthew 24:32-35 NASB "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; (33) so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. (34) "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (35) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.​

I have looked into this, and found several different answers, but I am unsure as to which one is the correct view. Here are the views I have considered:

1) The generation that sees "all these things" take place, as opposed to just the first part. In this view, "this generation" would be the future generation that witnesses the false Christs, persecution, the wars, the earthquakes, the abomination that causes desolation, and the destruction of the temple (a yet future one). "This generation" would see the coming of Christ described in Matthew 24:30-31 and elsewhere in Scripture.

Potential problems with view #1:

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead? Also, why did Jesus leave the text open to confusion with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD? Many of these prophecies were at least partially fulfilled in 70 AD, yet Christ did not return.

2) Generation is improperly translated, and should read "people" or "race". In this view, Jesus is saying that the people of Israeli descent would not disappear from earth until the coming of Christ. Jesus was referring to the people of Israel, not any specific generation.

Potential problems:

Why does every translation I found translate genea as "generation" in this passage? Also, if this view is correct, it states that the Israeli people will not be wiped out "until" (up to this point, but not necessarily after) Christ's coming... but we know from other Scripture that the Israeli people will be ascendant, and greatly blessed, immediately after Christ's return. The use of the word "until" is problematic for this view, and Jesus could have just as easily said "before" instead, clearing up any possible confusion.

3) Matthew 24 has a near and far fulfillment. This view would see Jesus' prophecy here as being partially fulfilled in 70 AD, and then completely fulfilled just before His return. This would be in line with the way prophecy was fulfilled in the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.), where Babylon fell to the Medo-Persians as predicted, yet many aspects of the prophecy were not fulfilled in history, and await their full completion in the future (Revelation 18).

Potential problems:

This is complicated, and very difficult to understand. And it still leaves open the question of why Jesus said what He said in verse 34. Why make it appear, as He did in verse 34, that all these things would take place in one generation? Did Jesus not know that there would be a time gap of nearly 2000 years between the near and far fulfillment? Also, what does this say about how we should interpret other NT prophecy, like the book of Revelation? Could there be further gaps of time in the fulfillment of Revelation's prophecies?

This is where I am at right now... uncertain. If anyone has some further insight into this passage, please feel free to post it. Also, if you have answers to my potential problems with any of the 3 views, definitely share them!

God bless you all, and thanks in advance for your replies;
Michael

"3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"

The Disciples asked some questions.

Q1 = Tell us, when shall these things be?

What things? You might ask...

"24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
The temple and jerusalem was destroyed in 70ad. See also secular writing Josephus.

Q2= "and what shall be the sign of thy coming"

"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."

Does this refer to the second coming and the end of the world? You might ask. No, because genea in the context that it is in.

How does one truly know that?

Who is Jesus talking to when he answers this question? The disciples. Which this now leads us to another reason.

Q3 = "and of the end of the world?"

"36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (See all the way into Matthew 25 as well)

The word "but" is in contrast to verses 4-35.

So when Jesus is telling the disciples "this generation", he is talking directly to the disciples about their generation, which will not pass till verses 4-35 happen.

Then Jesus says "but of that day" (in contrast to the previous questions), there will be no signs, warnings, or announcements of that day. A thief does not give you a heads up of when he strikes, it just happens.

Jesus has no knowledge of that day, nor can he give them anything to go on. All he can do is tell us it WILL happen.

references to the wicked, adulterous, etc generation, and they ALL refer to the first century context:
Matthew 11:16
Luke 7:31
Luke 9:41
Mark 8:38/ Mark 9:1
Mark 13:28-30
Acts 2:40
Luke 21 is a direct parallel of Matthew 24
Matthew 12:38-40/ Matthew 12:45

These all refer to the first century generation, not some future 2000 years into the future people.

 

[food4thought]

"3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"

The Disciples asked some questions.

Q1 = Tell us, when shall these things be?

What things? You might ask...

"24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
The temple and jerusalem was destroyed in 70ad. See also secular writing Josephus.

Q2= "and what shall be the sign of thy coming"

"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."

Does this refer to the second coming and the end of the world? You might ask. No, because genea in the context that it is in.

How does one truly know that?

Who is Jesus talking to when he answers this question? The disciples. Which this now leads us to another reason.

Q3 = "and of the end of the world?"

"36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (See all the way into Matthew 25 as well)

The word "but" is in contrast to verses 4-35.

So when Jesus is telling the disciples "this generation", he is talking directly to the disciples about their generation, which will not pass till verses 4-35 happen.

Then Jesus says "but of that day" (in contrast to the previous questions), there will be no signs, warnings, or announcements of that day. A thief does not give you a heads up of when he strikes, it just happens.

Jesus has no knowledge of that day, nor can he give them anything to go on. All he can do is tell us it WILL happen.

references to the wicked, adulterous, etc generation, and they ALL refer to the first century context:
Matthew 11:16
Luke 7:31
Luke 9:41
Mark 8:38/ Mark 9:1
Mark 13:28-30
Acts 2:40
Luke 21 is a direct parallel of Matthew 24
Matthew 12:38-40/ Matthew 12:45

These all refer to the first century generation, not some future 2000 years into the future people.

So you see all of the chapter up to verse 35 as being fulfilled in the Jewish war around 70 AD?

 

[Dan Perez]

Hi brothers!

I was in the eschatology forum and was confronted with a question I wasn't really able to answer on my own. It has to do with the interpretation of what "this generation" means in Matthew 24:34. Here is the verse in it's immediate context:

Matthew 24:32-35 NASB "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; (33) so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. (34) "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (35) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.​

I have looked into this, and found several different answers, but I am unsure as to which one is the correct view. Here are the views I have considered:

1) The generation that sees "all these things" take place, as opposed to just the first part. In this view, "this generation" would be the future generation that witnesses the false Christs, persecution, the wars, the earthquakes, the abomination that causes desolation, and the destruction of the temple (a yet future one). "This generation" would see the coming of Christ described in Matthew 24:30-31 and elsewhere in Scripture.

Potential problems with view #1:

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead? Also, why did Jesus leave the text open to confusion with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD? Many of these prophecies were at least partially fulfilled in 70 AD, yet Christ did not return.

2) Generation is improperly translated, and should read "people" or "race". In this view, Jesus is saying that the people of Israeli descent would not disappear from earth until the coming of Christ. Jesus was referring to the people of Israel, not any specific generation.

Potential problems:

Why does every translation I found translate genea as "generation" in this passage? Also, if this view is correct, it states that the Israeli people will not be wiped out "until" (up to this point, but not necessarily after) Christ's coming... but we know from other Scripture that the Israeli people will be ascendant, and greatly blessed, immediately after Christ's return. The use of the word "until" is problematic for this view, and Jesus could have just as easily said "before" instead, clearing up any possible confusion.

3) Matthew 24 has a near and far fulfillment. This view would see Jesus' prophecy here as being partially fulfilled in 70 AD, and then completely fulfilled just before His return. This would be in line with the way prophecy was fulfilled in the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.), where Babylon fell to the Medo-Persians as predicted, yet many aspects of the prophecy were not fulfilled in history, and await their full completion in the future (Revelation 18).

Potential problems:

This is complicated, and very difficult to understand. And it still leaves open the question of why Jesus said what He said in verse 34. Why make it appear, as He did in verse 34, that all these things would take place in one generation? Did Jesus not know that there would be a time gap of nearly 2000 years between the near and far fulfillment? Also, what does this say about how we should interpret other NT prophecy, like the book of Revelation? Could there be further gaps of time in the fulfillment of Revelation's prophecies?

This is where I am at right now... uncertain. If anyone has some further insight into this passage, please feel free to post it. Also, if you have answers to my potential problems with any of the 3 views, definitely share them!

God bless you all, and thanks in advance for your replies;
Michael

Hi and the Greek word GENERATION / GENEA can also be translated by the following Enhlish words , GENERATION 37 X and TIMES 2X , and NATION 1X !!

All Greeks words usually . have more than one interpretation and where are what many say is the NEAR VIEW , and the near view is what is been spoken in Matt 24:32-34 , and also because Israel will be set aside in as written in Isa 6 , and in Like 13:6-9 and in 2 Cor 3:13-16 , and Acts 13:46 , Acts 18:6 and in Acts 28:28 !!

Because Israel has been set aside , Christ raised up a apostle with a different massage , Rom 16:25 and 26 , Eph 3:2-5 and Col 1 :25 and 26 !!

When the FULNESS OF THER GENTILES MAY COME IN , the departure of the BODY OF CHRIST will happen !!

Then the FAR VIEW comes into play in Rom 11:26 !!

If you look carefully you will see MANY , " NEAR VIEWS " and also many " FAR VIEWS "

Like Isa 6 , and Luke 13:6-9 and 2 Cor 13:15-16 !!

dan p

 

[Stone-n-Steel]

Hi brothers!

I was in the eschatology forum and was confronted with a question I wasn't really able to answer on my own. It has to do with the interpretation of what "this generation" means in Matthew 24:34. Here is the verse in it's immediate context:

Matthew 24:32-35 NASB "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; (33) so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. (34) "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (35) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.​

I have looked into this, and found several different answers, but I am unsure as to which one is the correct view. Here are the views I have considered:

1) The generation that sees "all these things" take place, as opposed to just the first part. In this view, "this generation" would be the future generation that witnesses the false Christs, persecution, the wars, the earthquakes, the abomination that causes desolation, and the destruction of the temple (a yet future one). "This generation" would see the coming of Christ described in Matthew 24:30-31 and elsewhere in Scripture.

Potential problems with view #1:

Why didn't Jesus say "that generation" instead? Also, why did Jesus leave the text open to confusion with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD? Many of these prophecies were at least partially fulfilled in 70 AD, yet Christ did not return.

2) Generation is improperly translated, and should read "people" or "race". In this view, Jesus is saying that the people of Israeli descent would not disappear from earth until the coming of Christ. Jesus was referring to the people of Israel, not any specific generation.

Potential problems:

Why does every translation I found translate genea as "generation" in this passage? Also, if this view is correct, it states that the Israeli people will not be wiped out "until" (up to this point, but not necessarily after) Christ's coming... but we know from other Scripture that the Israeli people will be ascendant, and greatly blessed, immediately after Christ's return. The use of the word "until" is problematic for this view, and Jesus could have just as easily said "before" instead, clearing up any possible confusion.

3) Matthew 24 has a near and far fulfillment. This view would see Jesus' prophecy here as being partially fulfilled in 70 AD, and then completely fulfilled just before His return. This would be in line with the way prophecy was fulfilled in the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.), where Babylon fell to the Medo-Persians as predicted, yet many aspects of the prophecy were not fulfilled in history, and await their full completion in the future (Revelation 18).

Potential problems:

This is complicated, and very difficult to understand. And it still leaves open the question of why Jesus said what He said in verse 34. Why make it appear, as He did in verse 34, that all these things would take place in one generation? Did Jesus not know that there would be a time gap of nearly 2000 years between the near and far fulfillment? Also, what does this say about how we should interpret other NT prophecy, like the book of Revelation? Could there be further gaps of time in the fulfillment of Revelation's prophecies?

This is where I am at right now... uncertain. If anyone has some further insight into this passage, please feel free to post it. Also, if you have answers to my potential problems with any of the 3 views, definitely share them!

God bless you all, and thanks in advance for your replies;
Michael

I think the gap of so long a time highlights the belief that prophetic fulfillment has been put on hold until the time of the gentiles are finished (Rom 11:25). For a short while after the resurrection Israel could have recognized their messiah through Peter (Luke 13:8,9 and Acts 3:19-21) but instead they stoned Stephen (Acts 7:54,55 and Psa 68:1-2) when he said he saw the Lord standing. All doubt of God dealing with Israel under the covenant of promise would have ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, 40 years after Jesus left. Cut off a branch and put it in the yard and it will look green for a while but is considered dead until it gets grafted back in.

 

[food4thought]

Hi Dan! Thanks for responding.

Hi and the Greek word GENERATION / GENEA can also be translated by the following Enhlish words , GENERATION 37 X and TIMES 2X , and NATION 1X !!

So do you think genea should be translated as "nation" in this passage? If yes, what about the potential problems I listed in my OP, do you see a way to answer those questions?

All Greeks words usually . have more than one interpretation and where are what many say is the NEAR VIEW , and the near view is what is been spoken in Matt 24:32-34 , and also because Israel will be set aside in as written in Isa 6 , and in Like 13:6-9 and in 2 Cor 3:13-16 , and Acts 13:46 , Acts 18:6 and in Acts 28:28 !!

Because Israel has been set aside , Christ raised up a apostle with a different massage , Rom 16:25 and 26 , Eph 3:2-5 and Col 1 :25 and 26 !!

When the FULNESS OF THER GENTILES MAY COME IN , the departure of the BODY OF CHRIST will happen !!

Then the FAR VIEW comes into play in Rom 11:26 !!

If you look carefully you will see MANY , " NEAR VIEWS " and also many " FAR VIEWS "

Like Isa 6 , and Luke 13:6-9 and 2 Cor 13:15-16 !!

dan p

Now I'm a bit confused... do you see the correct interpretation as #2 or #3 in my OP? Or some combination of the two? Again, if so, how do you reconcile my potential problems I listed for the two views?

 

[food4thought]

Hi, Stone-n-Steel. Thanks for the response!

I think the gap of so long a time highlights the belief that prophetic fulfillment has been put on hold until the time of the gentiles are finished (Rom 11:25). For a short while after the resurrection Israel could have recognized their messiah through Peter (Luke 13:8,9 and Acts 3:19-21) but instead they stoned Stephen (Acts 7:54,55 and Psa 68:1-2) when he said he saw the Lord standing. All doubt of God dealing with Israel under the covenant of promise would have ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, 40 years after Jesus left. Cut off a branch and put it in the yard and it will look green for a while but is considered dead until it gets grafted back in.

So are you saying that Jesus spoke entirely of the events in 70 AD? How does that line up with Jesus' statement in verses 29-31? I'm not sure what you are trying to say...

 

[Acts2:38]

So you see all of the chapter up to verse 35 as being fulfilled in the Jewish war around 70 AD?

It's not what I see or think, it's what does the scripture say? When I picked apart that chapter, what conclusion can be made by viewing the scriptures? The disciples asked specific questions and Jesus answered them in order.

Luke 21 is a direct parallel to Matthew 24. They are talking of the same event. See also Mark 13.

What conclusion do you draw from what scripture teaches here?

 

[food4thought]

It's not what I see or think, it's what does the scripture say? When I picked apart that chapter, what conclusion can be made by viewing the scriptures? The disciples asked specific questions and Jesus answered them in order.

Luke 21 is a direct parallel to Matthew 24. They are talking of the same event. See also Mark 13.

What conclusion do you draw from what scripture teaches here?

That's why I made this thread! I don't know what conclusions to draw! The passage seems pretty straightforward talking about the war around 70 AD and then moving forward to the 2nd coming, but then there's that verse 34 that makes it seem like He's speaking of all of that happening in one generation... and, TBH, I'm having a difficult time deciphering what you are trying to say.

 

[Dan Perez]

Hi Dan! Thanks for responding.



So do you think genea should be translated as "nation" in this passage? If yes, what about the potential problems I listed in my OP, do you see a way to answer those questions?



Now I'm a bit confused... do you see the correct interpretation as #2 or #3 in my OP? Or some combination of the two? Again, if so, how do you reconcile my potential problems I listed for the two views?

Hi and I believe that GENERATION / GENEA is the correct translation for Matt 24:34 !!

You can purchase a USED , STRONG'S CONCORDANCE from Amason which has every Hewbrew and Greek word in the bible !!

The verse 34 is speaking to that generation that resisted their MESSIAH and why in Matt 28:19 and 20 are sent to preach to those JEWS as Acts 3:20 -26 !!

The Prophecy of Acts 3:19 and 20 and Israel NEVER did repent , DID THEY !! NO !!

dan p

 

[food4thought]

Hi and I believe that GENERATION / GENEA is the correct translation for Matt 24:34 !!

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

You can purchase a USED , STRONG'S CONCORDANCE from Amason which has every Hewbrew and Greek word in the bible !!

I already have one. I did a word study on genea and determined that the translators preferred "generation" over "people/nation/race". However, the dictionary said "race" was the primary meaning, so I wondered why they translated it "generation" instead... the obvious, though not necessarily correct, answer was that "race" might be viewed as anti-Semitic.

The verse 34 is speaking to that generation that resisted their MESSIAH and why in Matt 28:19 and 20 are sent to preach to those JEWS as Acts 3:20 -26 !!

The Prophecy of Acts 3:19 and 20 and Israel NEVER did repent , DID THEY !! NO !!

dan p

I have no idea what you are trying to say here... sorry.

 

[Acts2:38]

TBH, I'm having a difficult time deciphering what you are trying to say.

I see. I was assuming you understood fully my first post. My mistake.

I will help point out scripture, but I want you to draw a conclusion from scripture without opinions, etc.

The 4 gospel books are parallels of each other, through different peoples eyes. So even if they seem different, they by no means contradict, and are of the same events. I mention this because you can use Mark 13 and Luke 21 and refer to Matthew 24 to help aid you. Also, for secular writings, Josephus's writings "the roman-jewish war" (to mention one) could help compare as well.

First, context/grammar is paramount. Which I am sure you know, and everyone should know.

Key things to note when it comes to context, is who is Jesus talking to in Matthew 24:1-35 right?
First century people, or is Jesus referring to people in the future?

Context:
verses 1-3 : The disciples show Jesus the temple and buildings - Jesus says they will be destroyed - the disciples ask Jesus questions "when...?"

Verses 4-35 : ---Notice who Jesus directs events to----
4) notice "...deceive you
6) "you" again
9) "deliver you up...kill you"
15) "You therefore shall see..."
20) "pray you...that its not on sabbath day"
23) "you"
25) "I told you before"
26) "you"
33) "when you see these things"
34) "I say to you, This generation...."

Jesus is talking to the disciples directly, and telling them "YOU" this or that.

Second, Matt 24 mentions false prophets and people saying "lo here is the Christ".
See what these writers have stated here:

This is copy pasted material here of secular writers

Josephus:

1. "The land was over run with magicians, seducers, and imposters, who drew the people after them in multitudes into solitudes and deserts, to see signs and miracles which they promised to show by the power of God"
2. The tyrannical zealots who ruled the city (Jerusalem) suborned many false prophets to declare that aid would be given to the people from heaven. This was done to prevent them from attempting to desert (flee the city), and to inspire confidence in God." Wars VI:5:2:3

Eusebius:

1. 325AD Eusebius (Regarding Simon, See Acts 8) "After the Lord was taken up into heaven the demons put forth a number of men who claimed to be gods. These not only escape being persecuted by you, but were actually the objects of worship - for example Simon, a Samaritan from the village called Gittho, who in Claudius Caesar's time, thanks to the art of the demons who possessed him, worked wonders of magic, and in your imperial city of Rome was regarded as a god, and like a god was honoured by you with a statue in the River Tiber between the two bridges. It bears this inscription in Latin, SIMONI DEO SANCTO. Almost all Samaritans, and a few from other nations too, ackowledge him as their principle god, and worship him." (p. 86)
2. 325AD Eusebius (Regarding Theudas see Acts 5:36) "When Fadus was procurator of Judea, an imposter called Theudas persuaded a vast crowd to take their belongings and follow him to the River Jordan; for he claimed to be a prophet, and promised to divide the river by his command and provide them with an easy crossing. A great many people were deceived by this talk. Fadus however did not allow them to enjoy their folly, but sent a troop of calvary against them. These attacked them without warning, killed many, and took many alive, capturing Theudas himself, whose head they cut off and conveyed to Jerusalem." (pp.84-85)
3. 325AD Eusebius (Regarding the Egyptian of Acts 21:38) "A greater blow than this was inflicted on the Jews by the Egyptian false prophet. Arriving in the country this man, a fraud who posed as a seer, collected about 30,000 dupes, led them round by the wild country to the Mount of Olives, and from there was ready to force an entry into Jerusalem, overwhelm the Roman garrison, and seize supreme power, with his fellow-raiders as bodyguards. But Felix anticipated his attempt by meeting him with the Roman heavy infantry, the whole population rallying to the defense, so that when the clash occurred the Egyptian fled with a handful of men and most of his followers were killed or captured." (pp. 96-97) ... "These works, that were done by the robbers, filled the city with all sorts of impiety. And now these impostors and deceivers persuaded the multitude to follow them into the wilderness, and pretended that they would exhibit manifest wonders and signs, that should be performed by the providence of God. And many that were prevailed on by them suffered the punishments of their folly; for Felix brought them back, and then punished them. Moreover, there came out of Egypt about this time to Jerusalem one that said he was a prophet, and advised the multitude of the common people to go along with him to the Mount of Olives, as it was called, which lay over against the city, and at the distance of five furlongs. He said further, that he would show them from hence how, at his command, the walls of Jerusalem would fall down; and he promised them that he would procure them an entrance into the city through those walls, when they were fallen down. Now when Felix was informed of these things, he ordered his soldiers to take their weapons, and came against them with a great number of horsemen and footmen from Jerusalem, and attacked the Egyptian and the people that were with him. He also slew four hundred of them, and took two hundred alive. But the Egyptian himself escaped out of the fight, but did not appear any more. And again the robbers stirred up the people to make war with the Romans, and said they ought not to obey them at all; and when any persons would not comply with them, they set fire to their villages, and plundered them. (Book XX, Chapter VIII, Section 6)

Irenaeus:

• 174AD Irenaeus "the Nicolaitans are the followers of that Nicolas who was one of the seven first ordained to the diaconate by the apostles [Acts 6:5]. They lead lives of unrestrained indulgence . . . teaching that it is a matter of indifference to practice adultery, and to eat things sacrificed to idols." (St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, i.xxvi.3

Third, what about the wars and rumors of wars?

Ceasars Nero, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius suffered violent deaths, in only 18 months

Josephus said in Antiquities 18:5:3, that Bardanes, and after him Volageses declared war against the Jews. (war) He also says that Vitellius, governor of Syria, declared war against Aretas, king of Arabia, but the death of Tiberius prevented war. (rumors)

Fourth, what about earthquakes?

1. Historians record 5: Crete 46AD, Rome 51AD, Apamaia 53AD, Laodicea 60AD, Campania 62AD
2. Bible mentions 2 earthquakes in Jerusalem : Mt 27:51; 28:2; Acts 16:26

Fifth, Famines?

1. Historians record: 30,000 died in Rome alone during one famine
2. Bible mentions in Acts 11:27 a great famine during reign of Claudius in (41-54 AD)

Note: The book of Acts was written around 65 ad sometime (before Jerusalem' destruction with 100% certainty).

Sixth, Jesus states they will be delivered up, betray, offended verse 9-10

Jesus will suffer and be rejected by this generation first: Lk 17:25
Pharisees will deliver up Christians: Mt 23:34-36
Christians will even betray Christians: Mt 10:34-39 + Lk 17:33; Jn 15:20-21
We know for a fact, most of the apostles were violently killed.
We know in scripture (Acts 7 for example) Christians like stephen were killed
Even secular historic writings confirm heavy persecution

Next, what about Matt24:14? was the gospel preached in all the world?

Colossians 1:23 - Would anyone like to contend that Paul, who was directed by the Holy Spirit, is lying? "Every creature under heaven" is hard to refute for those who say otherwise.

He also contends that the Christians in Rome had faith that was "spoken of throughout the world" Romans 1:8-9

We know that the Lord was able to "transport" people instantly to places that He wished, see Acts 8 with Philip and how he arrived to the Ethiopian Eunuch.

When know many deeds and miracles were done that were not recorded John 20:30 and John 21:25. Paul's claim is really not too far fetched in light of these scriptures

Next, Abomination of Desolation?

Destroying the temple surely would account for such a use of words. combine Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, then switch over to Luke 21:20.
Daniel 9:27 / Daniel 11:31 / Daniel 12:7-13 seems to be in fulfillment.

Next, why flee if this refers to the rapture and the end of all things? Matt 24:16-22

1. Jesus' command to flee the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, becomes even more clear when Jesus lists a series of things that can hinder the exit of the city.
2. small children (slow down make escape difficult)
3. winter (Danger of freezing, exposure, hypothermia, snow slow down)
4. Sabbath day (gates closed every sabbath in Jerusalem until 70AD: Neh 13:19-21
5. Historical Account: Josephus says the Roman general Vespasian, began the siege of Jerusalem and set up pagan symbols in the Temple. But hearing of the political tumult in Rome, returned to Rome to become the new emperor. He then sent his son Titus back to Jerusalem to finish the siege, and during the lull in the siege, Christians alert to the warnings of Christ, fled the city.

Historical account:

1. Josephus: "all the calamities which had befallen any nation from the beginning of the world were but small in comparison with those of the Jews" Wars 6:8:5; 9:2:3; 5:11:1.
2. Further, Josephus tells us that during the sieges grip, when there was no grain left, there was wholesale ransacking within the walls of Jerusalem; food was so short that any locked door meant someone was eating a meal inside; marauders would break down the doors, rush in, and grab the throats of those inside, hoping to squeeze a morsel of food from their throats. whole families perished during the siege. Tomb-robbing was rampant. Josephus mentions that he saw 600,000 bodies thrown out the gates of the city. One deserter was caught with gold he swallowed to smuggle out of the city. Suspecting that many Jews were attempting such, in one night the Romans killed 2000 Jews and ripped their stomachs open. Josephus tells of one mother who was so hungry that she roasted, her infant son and ate half of him, offering the other half to her neighbor. In short, there has been nothing in history to match the violence, savageness; famine, pestilence, despair present in the siege of Jerusalem. It was indeed the blackest and cruelest war in the annals of mankind, yet for those who were watchful, there was a way of escape.
3. "Now as soon as the army had no more people to slay to to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury...Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple" Josephus Wars 7:1:1.

Verse 22 "except those days be cut short..."
If God had not shortened the days, God tells us that the Roman armies would have exterminated the entire Jewish race. This has nothing to do with the second coming.

Verse 27-27 - Lightning, vultures, and corpses, oh my....
Not so much speed, or without warning, but rather in obvious view of everyone: see context. It will be something extremely obvious to all, like armies surrounding the city.
Jesus came in 70AD just like lightning: An event no one could miss!

Jesus was using a figure of speech where the spiritually dead Jews who rejected him were the corpse and the vultures are the Roman armies:

Corpse: a reference of some kind to the Jews, who were spiritually dead

Vultures: Roman armies that surrounded

Vultures do not follow armies around, and they don't show up until long after the battle is done, and once the battle did start, it would have been to late for Christians to flee.

And lastly, because this will be a long read:

Quick helpful reference chart Mat. 24

1. Key Text and The Context

a. "This generation shall not pass" v34 the "time-text" of the chapter

b. "but of that day and hour" v36 the "transition-text" of the chapter

c. The context: Culmination of prophecies and warnings

d. The disciples questions: 24:1-3

2. Signs of the Destruction of Jerusalem: 24:4-35

a. General Signs: 24:4-14

b. Specific Signs: 24:15-28

c. Apocalyptic Language: 24:29-33/ Similar language also used concerning:

i. The destruction of Babylon (Isaiah 13:10)

ii. The destruction of Edom (Isaiah 34:4-5)

iii. The destruction of Egypt (Ezekiel 32:7-8)

3. The End of the World: 24:36 through 25:46

a. Contrast between this (Mat.24:36-25:46) and the former section of Matthew 24 (Mat.24:4-35)

b. Jesus teaches the suddenness of the second coming (like a thief/ no signs, warnings, announcements).

 

[food4thought]

Thank you for such a well thought out reply, Acts2:38. It appears that your interpretation of Matthew 24 is in line with the Partial-Preterist I spoke to on the eschatology forum. I think your post has merit, but there are a few things I found that need to be discussed.

Next, Abomination of Desolation?

I don't think what happened during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD fulfills what the Bible indicates the Abomination of Desolation will be. If all we had to go on was Matthew 24, then you would be on solid ground, but there is at least one other passage that describes the event:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 NRSV Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one destined for destruction. (4) He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, declaring himself to be God.​

This passage describes an event that is obviously a reference to the Abomination of Desolation, and also obviously yet future.

c. Apocalyptic Language: 24:29-33/ Similar language also used concerning:

i. The destruction of Babylon (Isaiah 13:10)

ii. The destruction of Edom (Isaiah 34:4-5)

iii. The destruction of Egypt (Ezekiel 32:7-8)

I do not see these as "apocalyptic language"... I see them as pretty straightforward. As for the OT prophecies, I see these as having a near (partial) and far (complete) fulfilment. This is one of the potential ways we could reconcile verse 34 with verses 29-33... but it still has some questions that need answering (laid out in my OP).

Thanks again for your thoughtful response!

God bless;
Michael

 

[Acts2:38]

Thank you for such a well thought out reply, Acts2:38. It appears that your interpretation of Matthew 24 is in line with the Partial-Preterist I spoke to on the eschatology forum. I think your post has merit, but there are a few things I found that need to be discussed.

Hey, just trying to help. It is good to ask questions.

I do not identify as a partial preterist or even a full preterist. I would just say, realist.

I don't think what happened during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD fulfills what the Bible indicates the Abomination of Desolation will be. If all we had to go on was Matthew 24, then you would be on solid ground, but there is at least one other passage that describes the event:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 NRSV Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one destined for destruction. (4) He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, declaring himself to be God.
This passage describes an event that is obviously a reference to the Abomination of Desolation, and also obviously yet future.

1 and 2 Thessalonians is written in the early 50's AD.

Also, I am not sure if you know, but the Roman emperors of this time had a group called the "imperial cult". You can read up on such a group on the side, but just know that they pushed upon the masses that the Roman emperors were actually gods. Especially in the case of Domitian and others before him etc.

Also, I dont have Matthew 24 only. I have Luke 21 as well, that tells me specifically that the desolation is nigh when armies surround the city. So tying 2 Thess to this does not refute what I placed forth, in fact, it aids what I put forth as evidence (considering that 2 Thess was written almost 2 decades before 70 AD).

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

21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Now compare---
Mark 13:
14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:

16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.

Matthew 24:
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Combine the fact that there was "emperor worship" claiming the Roman ruler/s as a god with the fact that Luke 21 literally states that the desolation was nigh due to the armies surrounding Jerusalem and Matt24 and Mark13, and what do you get when you look at the 2 Thessalonians (50's AD) dilemma you have?

Daniel connects the appearance of the “abomination that makes desolate” with the first coming of Christ, not the Lord’s second coming (9:24-27)

I do not see these as "apocalyptic language"... I see them as pretty straightforward. As for the OT prophecies, I see these as having a near (partial) and far (complete) fulfilment. This is one of the potential ways we could reconcile verse 34 with verses 29-33... but it still has some questions that need answering (laid out in my OP).

I'm basically saying they are figurative/symbolic verses, and they are apocalyptic in that those on the receiving end of Gods wrath are doomed.

I would really find it hard to believe that anyone would not consider this figurative symbolic speech (ie "heavens rolled back like a scroll / the sword hath drunk its fill in heaven).

Also, I was merely using them as an example to what Matthew 24:27-32 was doing, figurative/symbolism.

By Dave Miller
"Consider for a moment what the Bible actually teaches on this matter. In Matthew 24, Jesus pinpointed numerous signs by which His disciples and Jewish Christians could recognize the occasion of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The signs that Jesus mentioned included “wars and rumors of wars” (vs. 6), “famines and earthquakes” (vs. 7), the Gospel preached to the whole world (vs. 14), and the approach of the Roman armies (vs. 15; cf. Luke 21:20). These events functioned as signals by which the faithful could identify the “end” (vss. 6,14) of the Jewish commonwealth. Jesus provided descriptive detail in response to the disciples’ question concerning the destruction of the temple (vss. 2-3). Just as tender branches and fresh leaves signal the approach of summer (vs. 32), so the multiple signs that Jesus pinpointed would signal the coming of Christ in judgment on the Jewish nation (vs. 33) in A.D. 70."

Though the destruction of Jerusalem was seen as a sort of “coming” of Christ (Matthew 10:23; 24:30,33; Luke 21:27), in judgment upon the Hebrew nation—such was emphatically distinguished from the event known as the “second” coming (Hebrews 9:28). The Lord cautioned that if any false teacher should attempt to proclaim his visible coming in connection with Jerusalem’s fall, the bogus prophet was to be ignored, because the second coming would be apparent universally (v 23-27), whereas the destruction of Jerusalem was but a local event. Jerusalem’s fall would only reflect a sign of Christ’s providential coming in destructive judgment upon the holy city (v 29-31), not the Savior’s visible, final coming, hence the complete contrast in verse 36 "BUT of THAT day..." only the Father knows.

Thessalonians also confirms that fact (just like Matthew 24:36 - Matthew 25) that this event will happen like a "thief in the night", of which there will be NO signs, NO warnings, and NO announcements. It is furthermore reinforced by the fact that before the contrast in v 36, Jesus applied ALL the SIGNS to "THIS generation" which is referring to the disciples and the people of their time (ie v 4-34 all of the 'you' this and 'you' that's)

Indeed, v 4-34 was the end for the jewish commonwealth, visited upon them by our Lord in Heaven, with many signs that did proceed it. Christs second coming will have no signs, no warnings, no announcements. That is why we must remain prepared at all times. "be ready in season and out"

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Indeed, v 4-34 was the end for the jewish commonwealth, visited upon them by our Lord in Heaven, with many signs that did proceed it. Christs second coming will have no signs, no warnings, no announcements. That is why we must remain prepared at all times. "be ready in season and out"

Not ahead of time, thus a surprise to most on earth.
"like lightning all the way seen east to west" when He Returns is a surprise, but seen, obviously.

 

[Acts2:38]

Not ahead of time, thus a surprise to most on earth.
"like lightning all the way seen east to west" when He Returns is a surprise, but seen, obviously.

Quick helpful reference chart Mat. 24

1. Key Text and The Context

• a. "This generation shall not pass" v34 the "time-text" of the chapter

• b. "but of that day and hour" v36 the "transition-text" of the chapter

• c. The context: Culmination of prophecies and warnings

• d. The disciples questions: 24:1-3

2. Signs of the Destruction of Jerusalem: 24:4-35

• a. General Signs: 24:4-14

• b. Specific Signs: 24:15-28

• c. Apocalyptic Language: 24:29-33/ Similar language also used concerning:

• i. The destruction of Babylon (Isaiah 13:10)

• ii. The destruction of Edom (Isaiah 34:4-5)

• iii. The destruction of Egypt (Ezekiel 32:7-8)

3. The End of the World: 24:36 through 25:46

• a. Contrast between this (Mat.24:36-25:46) and the former section of Matthew 24(Mat.24:4-35)

• b. Jesus teaches the suddenness of the second coming (like a thief/ no signs, warnings, announcements).

 

[food4thought]

Hey, just trying to help. It is good to ask questions.

I do not identify as a partial preterist or even a full preterist. I would just say, realist.

Sorry if I came across as accusatory... I was simply noting the similarity.

1 and 2 Thessalonians is written in the early 50's AD.

Agreed.

Also, I am not sure if you know, but the Roman emperors of this time had a group called the "imperial cult". You can read up on such a group on the side, but just know that they pushed upon the masses that the Roman emperors were actually gods. Especially in the case of Domitian and others before him etc.

Yes I was aware of that, but hadn't brought it to mind in relation to this. Thank you.

Still, if you read 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 carefully, it is speaking of the man himself, not an image, that would stand in the Most Holy Place.

Also, I dont have Matthew 24 only. I have Luke 21 as well, that tells me specifically that the desolation is nigh when armies surround the city. So tying 2 Thess to this does not refute what I placed forth, in fact, it aids what I put forth as evidence (considering that 2 Thess was written almost 2 decades before 70 AD).

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply Matthew 24 was the only mention you were using... I should have included Luke and Mark as well.

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

21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Now compare---
Mark 13:
14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:

16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.

Matthew 24:
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Combine the fact that there was "emperor worship" claiming the Roman ruler/s as a god with the fact that Luke 21 literally states that the desolation was nigh due to the armies surrounding Jerusalem and Matt24 and Mark13, and what do you get when you look at the 2 Thessalonians (50's AD) dilemma you have?

Only the details... man himself instead of image.

Daniel connects the appearance of the “abomination that makes desolate” with the first coming of Christ, not the Lord’s second coming (9:24-27)

Actually, he places it sometime between the 1st and 2nd comings. Also, verse 27 implies that the one who "makes desolate" will experience a "complete destruction". A man has yet to stand in the Most Holy Place and declare himself to be God, and then be completely destroyed.

I'm basically saying they are figurative/symbolic verses, and they are apocalyptic in that those on the receiving end of Gods wrath are doomed.

In Daniel, the one who is on the receiving end of God's wrath is the one who perpetrates the abomination of desolation (see also 2 Thessalonians 2:8), not the Jewish people. I don't see Daniel 9:27 as being fulfilled in history... verse 26, yes, but 27...? No.

I would really find it hard to believe that anyone would not consider this figurative symbolic speech (ie "heavens rolled back like a scroll / the sword hath drunk its fill in heaven).

I see your point... not sure if I am ready to agree on that yet, though.

Also, I was merely using them as an example to what Matthew 24:27-32 was doing, figurative/symbolism.

By Dave Miller
"Consider for a moment what the Bible actually teaches on this matter. In Matthew 24, Jesus pinpointed numerous signs by which His disciples and Jewish Christians could recognize the occasion of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The signs that Jesus mentioned included “wars and rumors of wars” (vs. 6), “famines and earthquakes” (vs. 7), the Gospel preached to the whole world (vs. 14), and the approach of the Roman armies (vs. 15; cf. Luke 21:20). These events functioned as signals by which the faithful could identify the “end” (vss. 6,14) of the Jewish commonwealth. Jesus provided descriptive detail in response to the disciples’ question concerning the destruction of the temple (vss. 2-3). Just as tender branches and fresh leaves signal the approach of summer (vs. 32), so the multiple signs that Jesus pinpointed would signal the coming of Christ in judgment on the Jewish nation (vs. 33) in A.D. 70."

Though the destruction of Jerusalem was seen as a sort of “coming” of Christ (Matthew 10:23; 24:30,33; Luke 21:27), in judgment upon the Hebrew nation—such was emphatically distinguished from the event known as the “second” coming (Hebrews 9:28). The Lord cautioned that if any false teacher should attempt to proclaim his visible coming in connection with Jerusalem’s fall, the bogus prophet was to be ignored, because the second coming would be apparent universally (v 23-27), whereas the destruction of Jerusalem was but a local event. Jerusalem’s fall would only reflect a sign of Christ’s providential coming in destructive judgment upon the holy city (v 29-31), not the Savior’s visible, final coming, hence the complete contrast in verse 36 "BUT of THAT day..." only the Father knows.

Thessalonians also confirms that fact (just like Matthew 24:36 - Matthew 25) that this event will happen like a "thief in the night", of which there will be NO signs, NO warnings, and NO announcements. It is furthermore reinforced by the fact that before the contrast in v 36, Jesus applied ALL the SIGNS to "THIS generation" which is referring to the disciples and the people of their time (ie v 4-34 all of the 'you' this and 'you' that's)

Indeed, v 4-34 was the end for the jewish commonwealth, visited upon them by our Lord in Heaven, with many signs that did proceed it. Christs second coming will have no signs, no warnings, no announcements. That is why we must remain prepared at all times. "be ready in season and out"

I hesitate to see 70 AD as a "coming" of the Lord... I need to study this more before I make any conclusions.