This generation

[parousia70]

Tribulation is not just "bad things happen"
Tribulation more specifically is persecution.
The Holocaust was worse than what was experienced around 70AD.
6 million Jews killed on an industrial scale, medically experimented on.

Women slew, cooked and ate their own babies in the Jerusalem seige of 66-70AD, the tribulation was so bad.

I don't remember hearing about women doing that in the holcaust.

How bad would would you say a tribulation needed to be to cook and eat your own Baby Jamdoc?

Body coun't does not equate to greatness of tribulation.

If two people are slowly tortured to death over the course of a few weeks, and a 100 are killed instantly in an explosion, which group suffered greater tribulation?

 

[JosephZ]

Tribulation is not just "bad things happen"
Tribulation more specifically is persecution.
The Holocaust was worse than what was experienced around 70AD.
6 million Jews killed on an industrial scale, medically experimented on.

30AD... Jesus is crucified by the Romans.

33/34AD... Stephen is martyred. Christian persecution by Jews intensifies

64-67AD...Peter and Paul executed in Rome

In AD 66... Florus the governor, who lived in Caesarea, came to Jerusalem with troops, entered the Temple treasury, and took a large amount of gold. When people gathered to protest, Florus unleashed his legionnaires on innocent civilians of the city. Hundreds of women were raped, whipped, and crucified. More than 3,500 people were killed, including women and children.

The Gentiles in Caesarea, hearing of the violence against fellow Romans in Jerusalem, rose against the Jews of that town. Within a day, 20,OOO Jews were killed. This slaughter of men, women, and children, young and old, was repeated in many places in the country and throughout the empire, including Syria and Egypt. 50,000 were killed in Alexandria alone. The land ran with blood.

Vespasian began his campaign in AD 67 in Galilee, where a young priest, Joseph, was in command. His army numbered more than 50,000 men. Vespasian took Sepphoris, Jotapata (where Joseph surrendered to the general and became the Roman scribe Josephus), and several other towns with brutal force. He also destroyed Gamla, where the Zealot movement began, putting 10,000 people to the sword. Most of the towns of the region were left as smoking ruins. Many men were executed, often crucified, and the women and children were sold into slavery. A few were saved for the games in the arena. Galilee was again Roman.

In AD 68... The situation in Jerusalem was horrible. Several factions of Zealots converged on the city, having been defeated elsewhere. They blamed each other for their defeats. One group controlled the Temple Mount and appointed their own priest. When the Sadducee priests resisted, they were slaughtered along with 8,500 of their supporters. The sewers of the city ran with Jewish blood. Simon Bar Giora, another self-proclaimed messiah, entered the city and fought the Zealots. Confusion and terror reigned. Jerusalem was divided into three sections, each fighting the other as the Romans tightened the noose. Apparently, the Christian community, possibly remembering Jesus' words (Matt. 24:15-16), fled to the mountain regions east of the country, beginning the long separation of Jew and Christian that would bear horrible consequences later.

AD 70... the killing between Jewish factions continued. People killed each other over scraps of food. Anyone suspected of contemplating surrender was killed. Because some Jews had swallowed gold coins before trying to escape, their fellow citizens began to disembowel those they caught, looking for money. In one night, 2,000 were ripped open. No one bothered to bury the dead. Many who did surrender were crucified just outside the walls so the hapless defenders could watch their agony. Josephus records that the Roman soldiers nailed people in various positions for their own amusement until they could not find enough crosses for the victims.

The famine took its toll as well. Josephus reports that 600,000 bodies were thrown out of the city. This may be an exaggeration, but gives a sense of the carnage.

On August 6, the sacrifices ceased in the Temple. The Temple itself was burned and destroyed on the ninth of the Jewish month of Ab (the end of August), the same day it had been destroyed by the Babylonians more than 600 years before.

On August 30, the lower city fell, and in September the upper. Titus ordered all buildings leveled, except for three towers in Herod's palace, which were left as evidence of his former strength. All the citizens of the city were executed, sold into slavery, or saved for the games in the arena. The slaughter was beyond description. Infants were thrown to their deaths from the top of the city walls, and people were burned alive; the alleys of the city were choked with corpses. Eleven thousand prisoners died of starvation waiting for their execution. Josephus records that more than 1 million perished and nearly 100,000 were sold into slavery. The Jews' holy city was gone and their Temple destroyed.

The Jewish Revolts

 

[DavidPT]

Peter does not say those exact words, but Isaiah 65 when describing the NHNE did say that sinners would still be present. And death would still be occurring, of both the righteous and the wicked. And childbirth as well (which does not take place for people in the eternal state). And prayers to God (which those in God's presence in heaven don't need to do).

2 Peter 3:13 also does not say:

Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth NOTHING BUT righteousness.

The way I tend to reason something like this, just because it is a place wherein dwelleth righteousness, this doesn't have to mean it's because there are no unrighteous ppl present. It just means everything will be dealt with righteously, unlike now, where we have crooked cops, crooked courts, so on and so on, thus things are not always dealt with righteously. Thus why I tend to think, though another subject altogether, one I don't really care to debate in here, the millennium is the first thousand years of the new heavens and new earth.

Why do some of these same interpreters insist everlasting righteousness has already been brought in(Daniel 9:24), which literally adds up to righteousness and unrighteousness co-existing at the same time, but then find it unreasonable that these can co-exist at the same time during the NHNE for a thousand years and a little season? But I'm not wanting to debate any of that in here either. I'm just pointing out that I don't understand this logic in light of how some of these same interpreters insist everlasting righteousness has already brought in, which already contradicts a place wherein dwelleth righteousness in the future since we should already be in a place like that if everlasting righteousness has already been brought in. Except Peter was still looking for a place like that and not instead already living in a place like that.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The way I tend to reason something like this, just because it is a place wherein dwelleth righteousness, this doesn't have to mean it's because there are no unrighteous ppl present. It just means everything will be delt with righteously, unlike now, where we have crooked cops, crooked courts, so on and so on, thus things are not always delt with righteously. Thus why I tend to think, though another subject altogether, one I don't really care to debate in here, the millenium is the first thousand years of the new heavens and new earth.

I think that's a very doctrinally biased way of looking at 2 Peter 3:13. It doesn't say "wherein righteousness is dealt with righteously", it says "wherein dwelleth righteousness". That means nothing if it's also wherein dwelleth wickedness, but it means a lot if it's wherein dwelleith righteousness and only righteousness. And why would you think it means anything other than that in light of this verse:

Revelation 21:4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

There will be no more death, mourning, crying or pain there, so how could there be wickedness there? Wickedness leads to death, mourning, crying and pain.

Why do some of these same interpreters insist everlasting righteousness has already been brought in(Daniel 9:24), which literally adds up to righteousness and unrighteousness co-existing at the same time, but then find it unreasonable that these can co-exist at the same time during the NHNE for a thousand years and a little season?

Because of the context. You're missing the context of both Daniel 9:24 and 2 Peter 3:13. Daniel 9:24 is in relation to what Jesus would bring about in His first coming while 2 Peter 3:13 has to do with what He will bring about at His second coming. He brought about the opportunity to have the future hope of eternal life with His first coming and His second coming will bring about that eternal life in a literal way in the new heavens and new earth.

In terms of everlasting righteousness occurring in a literal way the way you're thinking of, don't you believe that will occur 1000+ years after the second coming of Christ? That would place the end of the 70th week, in your view, 1000+ years after the second coming of Christ. I don't know how you can reconcile your understanding of Daniel 9:24 with your overall understanding of things.

 

[DavidPT]

Women slew, cooked and ate their own babies in the Jerusalem seige of 66-70AD, the tribulation was so bad.

Matthew 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

Even that, women eating babies, does not agree with this verse above. This verse goes on to say in the next verse below--- But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Matthew 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day

What does that have to do with mothers eating their babies? There is no connection. But why not? After all, these two verses involve mothers and their babies, and so does what you submitted involve mothers and their babies, yet I can't fathom that this is what the woe is in regards to, mothers eating their babies. I don't even think verse 19 should be taken in a literal sense. It just seems odd to me that if taken literally, why is there only a woe upon mothers nursing babies but no woe on anyone else as well? Why single these out, assuming this is meaning literally? What about disabled ppl? There were none of those back then? Why not a woe to them as well?

 

[parousia70]

Matthew 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days...

What does that have to do with mothers eating their babies?

It was in fulfillment of this:

Deuteronomy 28:52-53
52 “They shall besiege you at all your gates until your high and fortified walls, in which you trust, come down throughout all your land; and they shall besiege you at all your gates throughout all your land which the Lord your God has given you. 53 You shall eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of your sons and your daughters whom the Lord your God has given you, in the siege and desperate straits in which your enemy shall distress you.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Matthew 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

Even that, women eating babies, does not agree with this verse above. This verse goes on to say in the next verse below--- But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Matthew 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day

What does that have to do with mothers eating their babies? There is no connection. But why not? After all, these two verses involve mothers and their babies, and so does what you submitted involve mothers and their babies, yet I can't fathom that this is what the woe is in regards to, mothers eating their babies. I don't even think verse 19 should be taken in a literal sense. It just seems odd to me that if taken literally, why is there only a woe upon mothers nursing babies but no woe on anyone else as well?

He didn't say there wouldn't be woe on anyone else, but there would particularly be woe on mothers nursing babies and women who were pregnant because it would be very difficult for them to flee to the mountains like Jesus said people would need to do to in order to avoid the coming wrath.

Why single these out, assuming this is meaning literally? What about disabled ppl? There were none of those back then? Why not a woe to them as well?

You're being silly here. Do you really think Jesus should have listed all of the different types of people who would have trouble fleeing to the mountains? He just gave a couple of examples (nursing mothers and pregnant women) to get His point across and that was enough. It wasn't part of the point to spell out every type of person that would have trouble fleeing to the mountains.

 

[Jamdoc]

I think you missed the point. You had said this:

You seem to have been suggesting here that if Jesus didn't return in the lifetimes of "this generation" then He would've been giving false hope to people. Using that logic, it would mean He gave false hope to anyone who died after that and before 70 AD since they would have not have experienced His coming.

It's a good thing we know better because Paul answered that very question in 1 Thessalonians 4 (we may not agree on whether they go to heaven or not after meeting in the air, but the dead in Christ rising first so nobody misses out on the second coming is irrefutable)

 

[Jamdoc]

Women slew, cooked and ate their own babies in the Jerusalem seige of 66-70AD, the tribulation was so bad.

I don't remember hearing about women doing that in the holcaust.

How bad would would you say a tribulation needed to be to cook and eat your own Baby Jamdoc?

Body coun't does not equate to greatness of tribulation.

If two people are slowly tortured to death over the course of a few weeks, and a 100 are killed instantly in an explosion, which group suffered greater tribulation?

If that's your standard, then they did that in the Babylonian siege too.
and Jesus said that the Great Tribulation would be worse than anything before or after.

So, if that's your standard, it'd already occurred before.
I'm not saying the Holocaust is the Great Tribulation
I'm saying the Great Tribulation will be worse than the Holocaust and worse than AD70, which will look like footnotes comparatively.

 

[Hammster]

You're still not getting it.

Jesus didn't know when the timing was. So it was to the Apostles, and every generation afterward until He came.
You're assuming He knew it was going to happen in 70AD, so it was a message to the Apostles only.

No, it was to the disciples and those who shared it. The gospels were written and distributed well before 70 AD.

To which I ask you, why do you even read this passage if apparently it has 0 application to you?

The same reason I read all of the fulfilled prophesies.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
— 2 Timothy 3:16-17

What is the point of your belief system and eschatology?

To glorify God.

To not have any hope except dying?

No.

To believe God just gave up on the world?

No.

He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”
— Matthew 13:31-32

What's the point man?

To glorify God and reign with Christ as His kingdom grows.

Enlighten me what big motivation you have to believe these things?

It’s the truth.

What profit does it have?

It brings glory to God.


And you still haven’t addressed my grammatical argument.

 

[Hammster]

Sin still exists
Death still exists
After the New Heavens and New Earth, neither exist anymore in the text.
If it "happened" in AD70, then it's not truthful or has to be allegorized to meaninglessness.

and of course YOU will change the words of Jesus to claim it wasn't about the 2nd coming.
But we both know that's a lie.
Because from verse 29 on, it's about the Day of the Lord.

I don’t see “day of the Lord” in there. So I don’t think it’s me who is changing the words.

 

[Hammster]

In other words, 1074 geneá can refer to any generation. It can refer to the generation that was alive during 70 A.D, it can refer to a generation that lived prior to 1 A.D, and it can refer to the generation that will be alive when Christ comes to "gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other" (Matthew 24:31).

But when it’s this generation, it always means the generation which is being spoken to.

 

[Hammster]

Not the most important one, the one that from verse 29 on is about.
You can allegorize and stretch to claim the rest happened, although it's totally false because there's been worse tribulation and Jesus promised there wouldn't be. But the Day of the Lord? The second coming? Didn't happen.

He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”
— Matthew 13:31-32

“But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other. “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; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:29-34

It all happened. Do you know how I know? Because Jesus said it would happen to that generation. It’s right there in the text. Plain as day. You have to explain it away to make it fit your view.


And let’s not forget this:


Moreover, there shall be a great cry in all the land of Egypt, such as there has not been before and such as shall never be again.
— Exodus 11:6

Maybe Moses was wrong, or Jesus forgot about that part.

 

[Hammster]

No, I'm saying that I believe He implies that this generation would pass away when heaven and earth pass away.

No He doesn’t. That’s purely eisegesis.

 

[Jamdoc]

No, it was to the disciples and those who shared it. The gospels were written and distributed well before 70 AD.

The same reason I read all of the fulfilled prophesies.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
— 2 Timothy 3:16-17

To glorify God.


No.
No.

He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”
— Matthew 13:31-32


To glorify God and reign with Christ as His kingdom grows.

It’s the truth.


It brings glory to God.


And you still haven’t addressed my grammatical argument.

I have, repeatedly, and at this point you're either ignoring it, or are deliberately flaming and goading.
Because it's getting irritating.

It is to the apostles and EVERY GENERATION AFTER THEM UNTIL JESUS RETURNS.
BECAUSE JESUS DID NOT KNOW WHEN EXACTLY IT WOULD HAPPEN.

at this point I should just give up on you.

and no
none of that glorifies God because it shows God abandoning His creation to Satan to rule, allowing Evil to coexist with good after the supposed "Day of the Lord".
It shames God that you would take THIS FALLEN, CORRUPTED WICKED WORLD as the fulfillment of His promises.

 

[Jamdoc]

I don’t see “day of the Lord” in there. So I don’t think it’s me who is changing the words.

The Darkening of the Sun and Moon are always associated with the Day of the Lord, that's Old Testament prophecy and repeated in New Testament prophecy showing that it is still an awaited day in the Apostle's Time. The last book, Revelation, contains it as well.
Jesus most definitely spoke about the Day of the Lord.

again, either you're burying your head in the sand to not see what's plainly visible and understood to cling to preterism, allegorizing things to meaninglessness, or basically flaming and goading.

 

[Jamdoc]

He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”
— Matthew 13:31-32

“But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other. “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; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:29-34

It all happened. Do you know how I know? Because Jesus said it would happen to that generation. It’s right there in the text. Plain as day. You have to explain it away to make it fit your view.


And let’s not forget this:


Moreover, there shall be a great cry in all the land of Egypt, such as there has not been before and such as shall never be again.
— Exodus 11:6

Maybe Moses was wrong, or Jesus forgot about that part.

and sin and death still exist
proving you utterly, astoundingly
EMBARASSINGLY wrong.

 

[JosephZ]

and sin and death still exist
proving you utterly, astoundingly
EMBARASSINGLY wrong.

I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but perhaps the sin and death that was spoken of is that which resided in the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law has been done away with and as a result we have been set free from the power of sin and death.

Our sin and its penalty (Death) were taken away when Jesus was nailed to the cross and He sacrificed His life for us. There is no death for those who believe.

Truly, truly, I tell you, he who believes has eternal life. (John 6:47)

“For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.” (Romans 7:5-6)

“I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death.” (Romans 7:10–11)

"Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death." (Romans 7:24-25;8:1-2)

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come." (2 Corinthians 5:17)

 

[Jamdoc]

I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but perhaps the sin and death that was spoken of is that which resided in the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law has been done away with and as a result we have been set free from the power of sin and death.

Our sin and its penalty (Death) were taken away when Jesus was nailed to the cross and He sacrificed His life for us. There is no death for those who believe.

Truly, truly, I tell you, he who believes has eternal life. (John 6:47)

“For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.” (Romans 7:5-6)

“I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death.” (Romans 7:10–11)

"Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death." (Romans 7:24-25;8:1-2)

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come." (2 Corinthians 5:17)

Allegorizing to meaninglessness, and abandoning creation to be Satan's playground, to save only souls.
That's where that line of thought goes.

 

[jgr]

You left out

ALL THOSE WHO DIED IN CHRIST RAISED FROM THE DEAD IN 70 A.D, AND ALL WHO DIE IN CHRIST RAISED FROM THE DEAD SINCE THEN.

Oh but...

I have no idea what you're talking about.