There is a gap between that of Luke 21:20 and the coming recorded in verse 27.

[DavidPT]

I’d rather use scripture to interpret scripture.

An example of using Scripture to interpret Scripture might be like such. In Luke 21:24 Jesus indicated that Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Also in Luke 21 Jesus said later in verse 32---This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Using Scripture to interpret Scripture, we can know from these two passages that the times of the Gentiles have to be fulfilled before this generation can pass away, since verse 32 indicates all be fulfilled, which can't be meaning just some things, it clearly means all things.

Something else that has to be fulfilled as well, is this---and shall be led away captive into all nations(Luke 21:24). That captivity started with LUke 21:20 but it didn't end with that verse, thus their captivity was not fulfilled in the first century if it still continued beyond that century. Until their captivity ends it means it is is not entirely fulfilled yet. Jesus said all must be fulfilled before this generation can pass away.

 

[Timtofly]

Not everyone in the world were suddenly "not deceived" the day Christ bound Satan. Satan STILL rule over the unsaved world. He was only bound for the SAKE OF THE ELECT, not everyone in the world. Only those who God draws to hear the Gospel. It takes time for church to build into the world since the Cross.

According to John in the Revelation, not a single soul was on earth when Satan was bound. The final harvest was over, and all of Adam's flesh and blood no longer walked on this earth.

After Satan was bound, there was a resurrection. Those souls repopulate the earth, just like Noah did when Noah stepped off the ark.

Noah preserved Adam's sinful nature flesh and blood. The Second Coming puts an end to Adam's flesh and blood. No more sin, a sin nature, nor Satan. The people of the Prince, even those beheaded, get to fully enjoy the result of Daniel 9. The Second Coming brings Jesus the Christ, the Prince to end the 70th week. Only then will Daniel 9 be fulfilled.

 

[Timtofly]

And what will you do with Paul's letter to Thessalonica?

For we say this to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18Therefore, comfort one another with these words.
1 Thess 4

But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness, so that the day would overtake you like a thief; for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness; so then, let’s not sleep as others do, but let’s be alert and sober.
1 Thess 5:4-6

We = I (Paul) and you (people in Thessalonica).

Where is 2,000 years in it?

How was Paul alive and part of the remaining? Are you claiming Paul was still alive for 70AD?

 

[Timtofly]

Yet you have the apostles asking about the end of and age that hadn't even begun, nor had they any idea would begin or was even coming, when they asked about it's end.

Q: In what age was Jesus born?

A: The Old Testament Law Age:
"But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law [of Moses]" (Gal 4:4)

Q: At what point in that Old Testament age did Jesus appear, suffer, and die on the Cross?

A: "In these last days has spoken to us in His Son" (Hebrews 1:2). "But now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Heb 9:26). "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you" (1 Peter 1:20).

Q: What age were the apostles in at the time they asked Jesus, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

A: as demonstrated above, They were in the Old Testament Age. Therefore their statement logically spoke of the signs accompanying the end of that Age.

There is no way, contextually, that the apostles were asking, and Jesus was answering, about the end of an age tha hadn't even begun, nor did the apostles have any idea WOULD begin, when they asked about "the end of the age".

They were clearly asking, and Jesus was clearly answering, about the end of the age they were born into and living in, when they asked about it's end.

The text gives us no other option.

The end of the age was the Cross, not 70AD.

Nothing ended in 70AD in their question and Jesus' answer. Yes the Temple was destroyed, but the Temple ended at the Cross. The Cross was not the return at the end of the age. The Cross was the end of the age.

So Jesus answered what they were not even considering because their questions were not reasonable according to the knowledge they had. The Cross was not Jesus going away on a journey. The destruction of the temple was not about His return, nor His kingdom.

Yet no one who places 70AD as some fulfillment of prophecy are in the correct age either. The age they were thinking about ended 40 years before 70AD. The next age was not 40 years in length, so no prophetic age ended in 70AD.

The Cross was the end of the OT. The Cross was the beginning of the NT. Not even Pentecost was a beginning of an age. There were no gaps or overlaps of ages. Only the Cross was the defining point. Jesus said, "It is finished". That was it!

The last day resurrection was the moment of the Cross. Literally no more last day resurrections, period. The Second Coming is not a last Day resurrection, only the Cross. The GWT is not a last day resurrection, only the Cross. The GWT is not even in time. It is outside of creation.

The Second Coming is the end of the NT church age, but a change, not really a resurrection. The dead in Christ have been rising first, since Stephen saw Jesus standing there, in greeting calling his name. The living did not prevent that then, the living cannot prevent that now.

 

[Timtofly]

I recommend to read the text in wider context and you will see the problem: Some Thessalonians were worried about their dead relatives who died before the coming.

Paul could say "we will all die, because He will return thousands years after us". But he did not. Its not indicated anywhere in the text, only the opposite - the expectation of it happening in their lifes. Therefore I do not think your explanation fits the text.

Actually, no. Paul was comforting them. Its said in the text.

I do see a wider context, 2000 years wider. That is looking back, because the context could be even wider in 1000 more years. I doubt that long, but the point remains, the context is still relative today.

You are claiming the same thing they did. "It already happened and we all missed it."

So like Paul points out, you can be assured it is still future.

Paul does not know the timing of the Second Coming, so he could not have easily said that. Jesus does not know, the angels do not know. It has not happened yet, is all we know.

 

[Zao is life]

If it's figurative, then it doesn't have to agree with the literal logic that you're using such as saying it would then mean "there are 2 halves of the Spirit".

It could simply be figuratively referring to the gospel, through the power of the Holy Spirit, going out to both the Jews (the former sea) and the Gentiles (the hinder sea). Or at least something along those lines. If it's figurative then it makes no sense to think it would then result in literally referring to the Holy Spirit being divided in half. If it's figurative, it's figurative, and there's no reason to try to make figurative text have to fall in line with literal rules of logic.

I thought the above is exactly what @DavidPT was saying:

If we use John 7:38-39 to interpret Zechariah 14:8 this would indicate that the living waters recorded in the latter is meaning the Spirit. ..

.. As if there are 2 halves of the Spirit, thus rendering this verse nonsensical if Spirit is meant by living waters. If you disagree that it renders it nonsensical, then explain why it doesn't.

 

[Zao is life]

I’d rather use scripture to interpret scripture.

Then how did you come up with Jesus returned in the clouds whenever and on whichever day you say He did?

Comparing scripture with scripture is not enough to rightly divide the Word of God, as Preterism, Dispensationalism and so many other isms so clearly show.

 

[Zao is life]

Zechariah 14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified. )

I like this. It's made me realize Zechariah 14 is definitely talking about the NHNE. It also ties in with the links in the words which I made bold in the two passages below:

Revelation 7
13 And one of the elders answered, saying to me, Who are these who are arrayed in white robes, and from where do they come?
14 And I said to him, Sir, you know. And he said to me, These are the ones who came out of great tribulation and have washed their robes, and have whitened them in the blood of the Lamb.
15 Therefore they are before the throne of God, and they serve Him day and night in His temple. And He sitting on the throne will dwell among them.
16 They will not hunger any more, nor thirst any more, nor will the sun light on them, nor any heat.
17 For the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will feed them and will lead them to the fountains of living waters. And God will wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 21
1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. And the sea no longer is.
2 And I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down from God out of Heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her Husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of Heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they will be His people, and God Himself will be with them and be their God.
4 And God will wipe away all tears from their eyes. And there will be no more death, nor mourning, nor crying out, nor will there be any more pain; for the first things passed away.
5 And He sitting on the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And He said to me, Write, for these words are true and faithful.
6 And He said to me, It is done. I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who thirsts I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely.
7 He who overcomes will inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he will be My son.
8 But the fearful, and the unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, will have their part in the Lake burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.

So the saints who come out of the great tribulation are seen in New Jerusalem immediately following the close of this current Age. Not sure whether or not verse 8 above cancels out a literal thousand years in-between the return of the Lord and the second death (so no literal thousand years as the first 1,000 years of the NHNE). At first glance verse 8 above certainly seems to cancel out a literal thousand years. But that's also making an assumption (or not). (Sometimes being an agnosmillennialist isn't easy going).

More about Rivers & fountains of waters

​

 

[Hammster]

That would mean the earth currently has no leaders whatsoever. John's Revelation ends with no sun, moon, nor stars.

That’s not what it means at all. You should read what I actually write and deal with those arguments instead of trying to fit your view into what you think I’m saying.

 

[Hammster]

An example of using Scripture to interpret Scripture might be like such. In Luke 21:24 Jesus indicated that Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Also in Luke 21 Jesus said later in verse 32---This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Using Scripture to interpret Scripture, we can know from these two passages that the times of the Gentiles have to be fulfilled before this generation can pass away, since verse 32 indicates all be fulfilled, which can't be meaning just some things, it clearly means all things.

Something else that has to be fulfilled as well, is this---and shall be led away captive into all nations(Luke 21:24). That captivity started with LUke 21:20 but it didn't end with that verse, thus their captivity was not fulfilled in the first century if it still continued beyond that century. Until their captivity ends it means it is is not entirely fulfilled yet. Jesus said all must be fulfilled before this generation can pass away.

Actually, using scripture to interpret scripture would mean that you see how “this generation” is used in the gospels. Every single time it means the generation that is there at the time. To make it some other generation is simply reading your view into the text.

 

[Hammster]

Then how did you come up with Jesus returned in the clouds whenever and on whichever day you say He did?

Comparing scripture with scripture is not enough to rightly divide the Word of God, as Preterism, Dispensationalism and so many other isms so clearly show.

I believe I already addressed that with you here.

 

[Zao is life]

I believe I already addressed that with you here.

Not really. You have not explained how Isaiah 19 = "Christ returned in the clouds" in whatever century you have Him as having returned in the clouds.

 

[Hammster]

Not really. You have not explained how Isaiah 19 = "Christ returned in the clouds" in whatever century you have Him as having returned in the clouds.

I thought that maybe you’d read Isaiah 19 and see that the cloud language used was referring to destruction. It’s judgement language. So this is Jesus telling them that Jerusalem will be destroyed, and when it is, they can know it’s judgement. It’s the divorce of unfaithful Israel so that Christ can marry His bride, the church.

 

[Hammster]

Not really. You have not explained how Isaiah 19 = "Christ returned in the clouds" in whatever century you have Him as having returned in the clouds.

I thought that maybe you’d read Isaiah 19 and see that the cloud language used was referring to destruction. It’s judgement language. So this is Jesus telling them that Jerusalem will be destroyed, and when it is, they can know it’s judgement. It’s the divorce of unfaithful Israel so that Christ can marry His bride, the church.

 

[trophy33]

I do see a wider context, 2000 years wider. That is looking back, because the context could be even wider in 1000 more years. I doubt that long, but the point remains, the context is still relative today.

You are claiming the same thing they did. "It already happened and we all missed it."

So like Paul points out, you can be assured it is still future.

Paul does not know the timing of the Second Coming, so he could not have easily said that. Jesus does not know, the angels do not know. It has not happened yet, is all we know.

Where in the text you see 2,000 years gap?

 

[trophy33]

How was Paul alive and part of the remaining? Are you claiming Paul was still alive for 70AD?

Paul was not revealed yet he will be killed in Rome. The letter to Thessalonians is before that.

So he naturally included himself with the living.

 

[Norbert L]

how could there possibly not be a gap of at least 2000 years beyween those 2 events?

There is a historical gap of two thousand years that involves Mark 14:62.

"And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."

At no point in time in that generation did those accusers either see him sitting and coming with the clouds of heaven. They've been dead for about two thousand years.

 

[Hammster]

There is a historical gap of two thousand years that involves Mark 14:62.

"And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."

At no point in time in that generation did those accusers either see him sitting and coming with the clouds of heaven. They've been dead for about two thousand years.

Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
— Matthew 26:64
This was said to Caiaphas. Was Jesus misleading him?

 

[Norbert L]

Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
— Matthew 26:64
This was said to Caiaphas. Was Jesus misleading him?

I have no doubt Caiaphas will see Jesus sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.

In my view connecting the dots within a timeline is much harder to establish.

 

[Hammster]

I have no doubt Caiaphas will see Jesus sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.

In my view connecting the dots within a timeline is much harder to establish.

So a little misdirection from Jesus to both Caiaphas and His disciples to whom He said it would happen in “this generation” (keeping in mind that everywhere else “this generation” is used in the gospels it means that current generation).