The irrationality being addressed is that the subject of Israel's destruction in 70 has been simmering since ch 21's parable of the tenants. It is in 22's parable of the wedding invites, and was just mentioned a few verses before their questions in 23. Why on earth Jesus would fly off to the distant future about all these things he said were just about to happen is irrational.
In Judaism, you were taught there were two ages: "this" vs "Messiahs." Their question is that: when does this one end and Messiah's begin. They knew the temple, the city, the old covenant, the Law were all due to end. Messiah's age had a new covenant and the Spirit would be poured out in it, and the confusion about Abraham's promises would be cleared up.
To fly off gives me the impression of futurism, literalism and D'ism that they find sound bytes in the Bible but don't really let it speak for itself. The more they do that, the less credible they are.
As I have mentioned in a thousand posts, Mt 24A (to v29) is set in 1st century Judea. We know this from the parallels to Mt 10, from the conditions addressed in the text, etc. The meaning of the 'end of the age' to someone raised in Judaism at that time needs to be addressed. It was understood in Judaism that the 490 years of Dan 9 were ending, even if the last week was irregular; for ex., Heb 9, Josephus in JW, Caiaphas in Jn 11.
'Gaia' often means just the land of Israel in the gospels, not the whole world.
Paul said twice that the whole world had been informed of the gospel; Col 1, I Tim 3.
You might check Gideon's chart on Dan 9 if you haven't ever heard this rendering. also the Zens summary of the 'time of unsurpassed trouble.' It is relative to Israel; he meant the experience would be worse than 586 BC.
Mt24B is then global, or universal--the final day of God's judgement. We must relate the two. Their understanding was that the final day would be 'right after' the DofJ. Most of the rest of Mt24B conveys this, but allows for delay expressly and in the parable of the attentive servants. 2 Pet 3 explains the delay in exactly the same way.
NT eschatology is therefore either near-future and Judean OR distant-future and universal. Meaning: there are no Judean details necessary for the final day of judgement. You will not find them in Rom 2, 8, I Cor 15, Heb 9, 2 Pet 3. And also meaning, we now know it is distant future by the simple fact that time has gone on.
BW documents that within 100 years early church fathers tried to assimilate a distant future return by revisiting OT prophecy and the Rev and coming up with the futurist system with Judean-based details in that distant future. He does good work, and makes it clear it is the ECFs position. I don't think you can find it in the NT.
The major church historian Latourrette writes that Mt24 itself reflects an unresolved position as though finalized after the DofJ when the world did not end. But of course we know that the original instructions were given during Jesus' final week of ministry and have to have that 'feel' to them.
Luke's material, mostly transcribed from Paul, is so intent on protecting Paul from connection to rebel forces in Judea and from Galileans that his several references to the DofJ seem to be unaware that a distant future would be an allowance. It is all resolved at the DofJ for him. There are other passages of Paul's as you may know that sound like the end of the world is quite soon.
In Judaism, you were taught there were two ages: "this" vs "Messiahs." Their question is that: when does this one end and Messiah's begin. They knew the temple, the city, the old covenant, the Law were all due to end. Messiah's age had a new covenant and the Spirit would be poured out in it, and the confusion about Abraham's promises would be cleared up.
To fly off gives me the impression of futurism, literalism and D'ism that they find sound bytes in the Bible but don't really let it speak for itself. The more they do that, the less credible they are.
As I have mentioned in a thousand posts, Mt 24A (to v29) is set in 1st century Judea. We know this from the parallels to Mt 10, from the conditions addressed in the text, etc. The meaning of the 'end of the age' to someone raised in Judaism at that time needs to be addressed. It was understood in Judaism that the 490 years of Dan 9 were ending, even if the last week was irregular; for ex., Heb 9, Josephus in JW, Caiaphas in Jn 11.
'Gaia' often means just the land of Israel in the gospels, not the whole world.
Paul said twice that the whole world had been informed of the gospel; Col 1, I Tim 3.
You might check Gideon's chart on Dan 9 if you haven't ever heard this rendering. also the Zens summary of the 'time of unsurpassed trouble.' It is relative to Israel; he meant the experience would be worse than 586 BC.
Mt24B is then global, or universal--the final day of God's judgement. We must relate the two. Their understanding was that the final day would be 'right after' the DofJ. Most of the rest of Mt24B conveys this, but allows for delay expressly and in the parable of the attentive servants. 2 Pet 3 explains the delay in exactly the same way.
NT eschatology is therefore either near-future and Judean OR distant-future and universal. Meaning: there are no Judean details necessary for the final day of judgement. You will not find them in Rom 2, 8, I Cor 15, Heb 9, 2 Pet 3. And also meaning, we now know it is distant future by the simple fact that time has gone on.
BW documents that within 100 years early church fathers tried to assimilate a distant future return by revisiting OT prophecy and the Rev and coming up with the futurist system with Judean-based details in that distant future. He does good work, and makes it clear it is the ECFs position. I don't think you can find it in the NT.
The major church historian Latourrette writes that Mt24 itself reflects an unresolved position as though finalized after the DofJ when the world did not end. But of course we know that the original instructions were given during Jesus' final week of ministry and have to have that 'feel' to them.
Luke's material, mostly transcribed from Paul, is so intent on protecting Paul from connection to rebel forces in Judea and from Galileans that his several references to the DofJ seem to be unaware that a distant future would be an allowance. It is all resolved at the DofJ for him. There are other passages of Paul's as you may know that sound like the end of the world is quite soon.
