This generation

[Hammster]

No, the context is the Second Coming and the state of mankind. Since you are postmillennial, I guess that means the mountain that grew from the stone or the mustard seed just meant the physical borders of Israel? You do not even hold your own eschatological view to the same point do you? You just got done saying the Gospel will fill the earth, by the time of the Second Coming, and then turn around and state the Second Coming only deals with national Israel or the geographical land of Israel, and not the world.

Or is it that your mustard seed or mountain, does not pertain to Israel at all? How can you claim one nation will be impervious to the effect of the Gospel, but all the rest will be totally saturated with faith? It is obvious there was no faith in Jerusalem in 70AD. Still does not mean the Second Coming happened then, because of that lack of faith. Either there will be a great revival, or people's hearts and minds will have become cold and hardened, and little faith will be left. It is not faith alone that brings salvation. It is the choice itself. Many could still be part of the church, and be lacking in faith and commitment, placing the Gospel under a basket and not let it be working with those around them.

The context is the Olivet Discourse, and what would happen within that generation. So the rest of your post has nothing to do with what I’ve said.

 

[sovereigngrace]

And that seems to be the extent of your rebuttals. “You’re just wrong”.

Not so. That is yours. Address the issues. They forbid your theories.

 

[Hammster]

Not so. That is yours. Address the issues. They forbid your theories.

Let’s compare:

Here’s my post.

Matthew’s focus is on the Jews in the audience, because his writing is focused on the Jews. So the statement is true concerning them at that time. Look at the parallel in Luke:


“Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets’; and He will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you are from; depart from Me, all you evildoers.’ In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out. And they will come from east and west and from north and south, and will recline at the table in the kingdom of God. And behold, some are last who will be first and some are first who will be last.”
— Luke 13:24-30

This also lines up with what Matthew records later in chapter 8.


I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
— Matthew 8:11-12

So when I look at the passage describing the kingdom as filling the world, I’m looking at them correctly.

In it I post scripture, and explain how Luke gives a fuller picture of what Christ said. I also showed where Matthew used the same language as Luke.

Here’s your “rebuttal”

That is not true. These are general truths that are still unfolding. Only Extreme Preterists would state such. Their theology depends upon it. That is because they are fixated with the coming of Titus and AD70. Like Dispies, they are obsessed with natural Israel and limit the Gospel relevance and application of Christ's teaching to them. The rest of us see the broad timeless truths where Christ preached about the Gospel expanse throughout the world and the period between His first Advent and His Second Advent. Anything that cuts across that is carefully and conveniently restricted to a narrow window in time. Thankfully, in real life, it is very rare to come across people who teach this. As a pastor, I only come across pastors or believers who believe this once in 15 years, and I move in broad circles.

One of us dealt with the text. The other one made accusations without dealing with the text. Let the reader decide.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The reason that Jesus would question whether He will find faith on the earth when He returns is because He surely knew about the mass falling away that would occur just before His return, as Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2. I see that time period as being the same as Satan's little season that occurs just before Christ's return during which a number of people "as the sand of the sea" throughout the world actively oppose the church with the goal of destroying it.

Yes, I agree that these ideas are all connected. There WAS going to be a "mass falling away" (the apostasia) before Christ's return, as 2 Thess 2 mentioned. And that time period WAS going to be "the same as Satan's little season" that would occur just before Christ's return. The opponents of the church WERE going to be numbered as many as the sand of the sea, with the goal of destroying it. Just as Christ said, the disciples would be "hated of all men" - both Gentile nations, the Christ-opposing Jews, and the corrupt members within the church itself.

But John said that "little season" of Satan's release on earth had already begun in his days, in Revelation 12:12. He gave the church a warning at that time, saying, "Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil IS COME DOWN UNTO YOU, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a SHORT TIME." That was a present reality for John's readers at that time. This is not a future "short time" for Satan's release on earth. It's a long past "short time" and "little season".

So, why would Jesus question if He would find faith in Israel when He surely would have known that a remnant would have faith? That makes no sense.

This simply means that faith would be a rarity among the Jews when Christ came. Since it was only going to be a remnant of those in Israel who would be believers, they would be few and far between. This is why Christ called those of His own time a "faithless and perverse generation" (Matthew 17:17). This specific case of one particular nation and one particular time (in the past) cannot possibly be indicative of the entire world at Christ's future return, because God promised a steadily increasing number of those composing the kingdom of God in this world: (the leaven example, the mustard seed, the unending increase of Christ's government and peace, and the steady growth of the stone kingdom in Daniel 2).

 

[rwb]

Yes, I agree that these ideas are all connected. There WAS going to be a "mass falling away" (the apostasia) before Christ's return, as 2 Thess 2 mentioned. And that time period WAS going to be "the same as Satan's little season" that would occur just before Christ's return. The opponents of the church WERE going to be numbered as many as the sand of the sea, with the goal of destroying it. Just as Christ said, the disciples would be "hated of all men" - both Gentile nations, the Christ-opposing Jews, and the corrupt members within the church itself.

But John said that "little season" of Satan's release on earth had already begun in his days, in Revelation 12:12. He gave the church a warning at that time, saying, "Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil IS COME DOWN UNTO YOU, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a SHORT TIME." That was a present reality for John's readers at that time. This is not a future "short time" for Satan's release on earth. It's a long past "short time" and "little season".

You're not carefully reading the text. In Rev 12:12 the Devil is filled with wrath because he knows he has but a "short time". But he is given a "little season" after he is loosed.
Why would John use different words to describe the same time period? You acknowledge the difference, but seem to think it doesn't matter?

So after the war in heaven and Satan is cast out into the earth and his angels cast out with him, the timing of this event is the birth of the man child (Christ), and the child was caught up to God and to His throne. Thus the beginning of the Messianic age/era.

Satan's little season will not come until the thousand years should be fulfilled. This little season is not used to persecute the church, trying to prevent the Kingdom from being complete. The little season is given so he can gather, from every nation throughout the four quarters of the earth together, and they will go upon the breadth of the earth, surround the saints, and beloved city, and fire will come down from God out of heaven to devour them. Then the devil will be cast into the LOF with the beast and false, who are already there.

Revelation 20:8-10 (KJV) And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

From the text it does NOT appear Rev 12 is the beginning of the "little season". How could the two be the same time period since Rev 12 clearly shows that Satan has not yet been bound? His binding is to prevent him from deceiving the nations, but the "short time" after the birth of Christ, Satan persecutes the WOMAN, and the REMNANT of her seed.

You must reconcile the contradiction your doctrine appears to force upon the Scripture. Because it's a long time past Satan's "short time", however the time of Satan's "little season" has possibly come, and we are living through it now, or his "little season" is future (I believe very near).

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Many Jews are called, few are chosen. But if you notice, the wedding feast was made up of mostly non-Jews.

Are you purposely trying to avoid addressing my point? Jesus was saying that many people (Jews and Gentiles) are called, but (relatively) few of them are chosen. That doesn't line up with your view that many will be called and many (most) will be chosen.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Yes, John sees the souls of the martyred saints. Soul = breath of life; i.e. spirit life as heart, life, mind. A living human soul without a living body is spirit.

Strong's Greek Dictionary
5590. ψυχή psyche (psychḗ)

ψυχή psychḗ, psoo-khay'
from G5594; breath, i.e. (by implication) spirit, abstractly or concretely (the animal sentient principle only; thus distinguished on the one hand from G4151, which is the rational and immortal soul; and on the other from G2222, which is mere vitality, even of plants: these terms thus exactly correspond respectively to the Hebrew H5315, H7307 and H2416):—heart (+ -ily), life, mind, soul, + us, + you.

Again, he didn't say he saw souls, he said he saw "THE souls" of martyred believers.

A living soul is a human body endowed with the breath of life (spirit). This describes the complete or whole living human as God created them.

The word soul has more than one definition. A whole person/human being can be referred to as a soul, but scripture indicates that human beings have a body, a soul and a spirit. I'm not going to say any more about this here since it doesn't really relate to the topic of this thread.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Then you are just studying wrongly. I used to be Amil.

So, you used to know the truth and then you were duped by false teaching. It happens a lot.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I’ll, then, refer you to my solid arguments throughout.

Where are these solid arguments that you speak of? I must have missed them somehow.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Each step of the prophetic time happened and will happen as God declared in His Word. The only thing not disclosed was the actual day and hour of the Second Coming. No one can declare a date, not even a past date.

Yes, both the particular day and the time of day of Christ's return was predicted in scripture. Daniel 12:11-13 wrote of a resurrection in which he himself would participate at the end of the 1,335th day. This was 1,335 days after Jerusalem would be surrounded by armies (the abomination of desolation as defined by Luke 21:20). This surrounding of Jerusalem by armies would take place during the same season when a daily sacrifice in the temple would be taken away. Both of these concurrent events already happened together in the same season back in AD 66 when Cestius Gallus and the Zealot armies squared off against each other in Jerusalem, during the season when the temple governor Eleazar had just gotten rid of the daily sacrifice for the Roman empire and its emperor.

Zechariah gave the particular time of day Christ would return. It would be towards evening time, between day and night when Christ would return (Zechariah 14:7).

Do you think the earth literally changed at 70AD?

Israel's topography was physically altered during the Jerusalem siege and invasion when the Romans built siege ramps, and a wall of circumvallation surrounding the entire city. Every tree for 10 miles around the city was cut down to be used for the siege wall, weaponry, and for the Roman troops' use. Likewise, the ravages of Israel's Zealot armies sweeping through Israel and its nearby nations created massive devastation of the landscape, according to Josephus. War conditions make havoc of a country's landscape - always. Not to mention the earthquake at Christ's return which dumped landslide rubble from the Mount of Olives into the Kidron Valley to an average depth of 40 feet.

Why would nothing in Scripture be available after 70AD? You only assume Jesus came in 70AD, because you throw every prophecy at that date in time

You mistake me. I have never said that nothing prophetic in scripture applies after AD 70. Revelation 10:4 and those "sealed up" prophecies assures us that there are prophecies that apply to the years following AD 70. Zechariah 14:16-19 also assures us of post-AD 70 prophecies and hints of a future resurrection for us at the time when the Feast of Tabernacles would have ordinarily taken place during the year.

70AD was not even the end of the OT economy. That was the Cross. Caiaphas the high priest responsible for the death of Jesus died in 36AD. God came in judgment 34 years before 70AD.

Yes, I agree with you on this point that the OT ended at the Cross - no mistaking that. Christ launched the New Covenant with His death, resurrection, and ascension on that resurrection day. And Caiphas did die soon after. But God coming in judgment was predicted by Paul to soon be coming in his own generation. Paul gave this warning to those on Mars Hill, to Felix, and to Timothy, that God had "set a day in which He is ABOUT TO JUDGE THE WORLD in righteousness..." (Acts 17:31).

"And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"

You should pay attention to the phrase "kings of the earth" in this text. These "kings of the earth" were the high priests of the land of Israel, according to scripture's definition. That means this prophecy had to take place while there were still high priests around to fulfill this prediction. And since we no longer have any of those high priests around, this shows us that this is a PAST fulfillment of this prophecy.

The Second Coming happens 1,000 years prior to the GWT just as sure as there have been 1992 years between the Cross and the Second Coming

You have your millennium timing wrong. According to John, the millennium years expired and were finished when the First resurrection had taken place. This "First resurrection was of "Christ the First-fruits" in AD 33, and those Matthew 27:52-53 saints who came out of their graves that same day. The millennium "expired" that same day.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Yes, I agree that these ideas are all connected. There WAS going to be a "mass falling away" (the apostasia) before Christ's return, as 2 Thess 2 mentioned. And that time period WAS going to be "the same as Satan's little season" that would occur just before Christ's return. The opponents of the church WERE going to be numbered as many as the sand of the sea, with the goal of destroying it. Just as Christ said, the disciples would be "hated of all men" - both Gentile nations, the Christ-opposing Jews, and the corrupt members within the church itself.

But John said that "little season" of Satan's release on earth had already begun in his days, in Revelation 12:12. He gave the church a warning at that time, saying, "Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil IS COME DOWN UNTO YOU, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a SHORT TIME." That was a present reality for John's readers at that time. This is not a future "short time" for Satan's release on earth. It's a long past "short time" and "little season".

I've already talked to you about this a few times. Look at the Greek word translated as "short" in Revelation 12:12 and compare it to the Greek word translated as "little" in Revelation 20:3. They are different words and you need to take that into consideration.

The Greek word translated as "short" in Revelation 12:12, which is "oligos" (Strong's G3641) can refer to an indefinite amount or a relatively (but not literally) small amount. It is used in the verses where Jesus said "many are called, but few (oligos) are chosen". Obviously, Jesus wasn't saying that literally few are chosen, but rather than relatively few are chosen in relation to the many who are called. The "short time" in Revelation 12:12 is in reference to the limited amount of time that Satan had left after being kicked out of heaven long ago until he is cast into the lake of fire for eternity.

The Greek word translated as "little" in Revelation 20:3 (mikros - Strong's G3398), however, is used to refer to a literally small amount. So, his little season is a literally small/little/short amount of time.

This simply means that faith would be a rarity among the Jews when Christ came. Since it was only going to be a remnant of those in Israel who would be believers, they would be few and far between. This is why Christ called those of His own time a "faithless and perverse generation" (Matthew 17:17). This specific case of one particular nation and one particular time (in the past) cannot possibly be indicative of the entire world at Christ's future return, because God promised a steadily increasing number of those composing the kingdom of God in this world: (the leaven example, the mustard seed, the unending increase of Christ's government and peace, and the steady growth of the stone kingdom in Daniel 2).

Christ's second coming and our being gathered to Him has clearly not yet occurred. Paul taught that a mass falling away would occur just before His second coming. So, Jesus questioning whether He would find faith on the earth before His future second coming lines up with what Paul taught.

 

[3 Resurrections]

You must reconcile the contradiction your doctrine appears to force upon the Scripture. Because it's a long time past Satan's "short time", however the time of Satan's "little season" has possibly come, and we are living through it now, or his "little season" is future (I believe very near).

There is no contradiction. It is indeed "a long time past Satan's 'short time'". Satan's "short time" of being released came after the thousand years was over and done. According to John, that millennium ENDED with the "First resurrection", which was of "Christ the FIRST-fruits" and those Matthew 27:52-53 saints raised that same day in AD 33. THAT RESURRECTION DAY in AD 33 was when the millennium ENDED. It had been a literal thousand years of a physical, stationary temple system authorized by God's design, when Satan's deception of the nations was bound. But it gave way for the superior, SPIRITUAL temple not made with hands, which was built on the foundation stone of "Christ the chief cornerstone" - with us believers as "living stones" built on top of that sure foundation.

Why would John use different words to describe the same time period? You acknowledge the difference, but seem to think it doesn't matter?

There is no difference between Satan's "short time" and Satan's "little season". Various translations use both terms alternately in these texts. God defined just how much time a "LONG season" lasted back in Joshua 24:7: "...and ye dwelt in the wilderness a LONG season" (of 40 years wilderness wanderings for Israel). If a "LONG season" is considered in scripture to consist of 40 years, then a "LITTLE season" of Satan being loosed would comparatively last less than 40 years, wouldn't it? That is the "short time" or "little season" which John in Revelation 12:12 said had already commenced while he was writing Revelation. So it would be less than 40 years after John wrote Revelation when Satan would be destroyed. This agrees with Romans 16:20, (written around AD 60) which promised the Roman believers that God would crush Satan under their feet "shortly".

The proof for Satan's first-century destruction is present in scripture, but most people would rather keep the idea of Satan still in existence, to act as a scapegoat for which they can blame the evil taking place in this world. Any evil in this world since AD 70 is solely the responsibility of sinful mankind alone, since that year was the time when God slew that dragon - that crooked serpent - and got rid of the members of the entire Satanic realm.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I've already talked to you about this a few times. Look at the Greek word translated as "short" in Revelation 12:12 and compare it to the Greek word translated as "little" in Revelation 20:3. They are different words and you need to take that into consideration.

Whether it is a "FEW years" or a time of "SHORT" duration - there is no difference. And the various translations acknowledge this by alternately using one or the other term in this text.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Christ's second coming and our being gathered to Him has clearly not yet occurred. Paul taught that a mass falling away would occur just before His second coming.

Clearly it did, judging by the physical evidence of the AD 70 earthquake landslide rubble lying in the Kidron Valley today, which Zechariah 14:4-5 in the LXX had predicted would happen at Christ's return. And you remember, I think, that I still claim scripture teaches a future return for us to gather those saints who have died since AD 70.

That predicted "apostasia" had already begun back in Paul's days, because he told Timothy that "all they which are in Asia be turned away from me". A disappointing result for Paul, I'm sure, since his evangelistic efforts had covered everyone who was in Asia at the time.

The word "apostasia" can also refer to a civil disruption in a country - not just a religious defection from the faith. A civil disruption in Israel occurred with the Zealot rebellion against Rome which broke out in early AD 66.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

So which one of us avoided the scriptural argument? My responses may be short. I do this all on my phone. But I don’t just blow off an argument and then criticize my opponent.

Finally, we have an explanation for all your one liner posts (that, honestly serve no real purpose). I was wondering if maybe you just wanted to put your record number of posts out of reach or something.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Whether it is a "FEW years" or a time of "SHORT" duration - there is no difference. And the various translations acknowledge this by alternately using one or the other term in this text.

You're not addressing my point at all here.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Clearly it did, judging by the physical evidence of the AD 70 earthquake landslide rubble lying in the Kidron Valley today, which Zechariah 14:4-5 in the LXX had predicted would happen at Christ's return.

Christ did not come in 70 AD and no one was gathered to Him at that time. What you're saying doesn't refute that whatsoever.

And you remember, I think, that I still claim scripture teaches a future return for us to gather those saints who have died since AD 70.

Yeah, at least you do believe that. But, the rest of what you believe...ugh.

 

[claninja]

Where did he use figurative language relating to the flood event? Regarding the flood he said in 2 Peter 3:6 - "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed". What is figurative about that?

When comparing the pre flood heavens and earth (figurative language) that were destroyed by the deluge (literal destruction) with the heavens and earth (figurative language) that “now exist” to be destroyed by fire (literal destruction).

Peter contrasts 2 different “heaven and earths”: 1 pre flood and 1 he was then living in.

Where did Peter say anything about earth being removed or heaven being rolled back like a scroll in 2nd Peter 3? He didn't. So, where are you getting the idea that Peter was using figurative language relating to heaven and earth in 2nd Peter 3?

I’ve already shown you that the Hebrew prophets often used the figurative language of “heavens and earth” being destroyed and “signs in the heavens” to represent the terror and collapse of kingdoms and religions. So I believe Peter is employing this same language. That’s where I’m getting it from.

 

[claninja]

Sure, but it was referring to God the Father, not the Son. It seems like you want to find a way around that.

no way “around it” when one is a trinitarian. That’s why the Sanhedrin cried “blasphemy” when Christ said they would from now on see him coming on the clouds.

The vineyard owner would “come” to destroy the wicked tenants. Do you agree the vineyard owner “came” to destroy the wicked tenants in 70ad?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

When comparing the pre flood heavens and earth (figurative language) that were destroyed by the deluge (literal destruction) with the heavens and earth (figurative language) that “now exist” to be destroyed by fire (literal destruction).

Peter contrasts 2 different “heaven and earths”: 1 pre flood and 1 he was then living in.

It's hard to tell what you're trying to say here. To me, it's clear that he was comparing a past global destruction event (the flood in Noah's day) that was caused by flood waters to a future global destruction event that will be caused by fire. This text isn't contained within a book like Daniel, Isaiah or Revelation where there's a bunch of figurative language. There's no basis for taking Peter figuratively here. Do you not think that Christ will destroy all His enemies when He returns? If you do, then how do you think He will do it?

I’ve already shown you that the Hebrew prophets often used the figurative language of “heavens and earth” being destroyed and “signs in the heavens” to represent the terror and collapse of kingdoms and religions. So I believe Peter is employing this same language. That’s where I’m getting it from.

Where exactly is he employing figurative language in 2nd Peter 3:10-12? He doesn't describe the heavens being shaken or rolling away like a scroll or anything like that there. Instead, he seems to be speaking straightforwardly and literally. If he was intending to write about something figuratively in the sense that you're talking about, then why did he not write about it in a similar way as it was written about figuratively before?

And what do you think he meant when he said this:

2 Peter 3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

In keeping with what promise? What is your understanding of the "new heaven and new earth where righteousness dwells"?