twisted imminency doctrine

[claninja]

You seem to be ignoring that 1 Thess 4:14-17 is talking about all of the dead in Christ rising at the same time and then all being caught up to meet Jesus in the air at the same time along with those who are alive and remain after Jesus descends from heaven. What you're saying does not fit that scenario at all because you are talking about people's souls going to heaven at all different times. That doesn't line up with what is written in 1 Thess 4:14-17 whatsoever.

Also, why would you question if Paul was talking about the same event as Matthew 24:31 or not? Matthew 24:31 is clearly related to Christ's parousia and so is 1 Thess 4:14-17. You don't believe in more than one parousia of Christ, do you? If not, then what basis is there for not relating Matthew 24:27-31 directly to 1 Thess 4:14-17?

My position is that the first advent encompasses the ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, sending of the spirit, the events of the Olivet discourse. parousia (destruction of Jerusalem) , and gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall - this generation will not pass away). The 2nd advent then is the final judgement.


That being said. Paul’s language in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 doesn’t require that the living are almost simultaneously caught up around the same time as the dead because the Greek word for “then” or “afterwards” doesn’t require this meaning - see Albert Barnes commentary. Its meaning focuses on order without explicit length of time. For example - 1 Corinthians 15 — Christ the first fruits “then” the dead in Christ at his coming. The dead in Christ aren’t raised almost simultaneously with the resurrection of Christ, right?

So If Paul is talking about the parousia (destruction of Jerusalem) from Matthew 24 in 1 Thessalonians 4, then I believe he is referring to the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding feast (Matthew 22). Modern Christianity believes the dead rose to heaven in the first century. since Paul says they were sleeping in his day, then I think it occurred around 70ad. Thus the sequence of events - the dead at the destruction of Jerusalem (parousia) and “afterwards” the living

If Paul is not referring to Matthew 24 nor Matthew 22, but instead referring to literal dead bodies flying out of the ground and then the living almost simultaneously literally flying into the air, then he is talking about the 2nd advent.

Not bodily. Just my soul and spirit will go to heaven when I physically die. The dead in Christ will all be bodily resurrected (will bodily rise) at the same time when Jesus comes again from heaven in the future.

Great, we agree the dead rise to heaven upon death to be with the Lord, and this transition occurred during the first century.

 

[claninja]

What do you make of verse 14 then?

Daniel 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

According to Ephesians 1:19-23, what is described in Daniel 7:14 occurred upon the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. I assume you would agree that the timing of Daniel 7:14 is the same as the timing of verse 13, so why would you think that verse 13 is talking about a coming of Christ with His angels from heaven instead of Him ascending to heaven with the angels?

Daniel 7:13-14 is a prophetic vision about the son of man coming on the clouds to or like the ancient of days, and his eternal kingdom. This is contrasted with the four beasts whose kingdoms are not eternal. These verses are alluded to in the NT passages like Matthew 26:64, Matthew 24:30, Ephesians 1:19-23, and 1 Peter 3:22.

As Matthew alludes to Daniel 7:13 in the olivet discourse then I think the destruction of Jerusalem (the parousia or the coming of the son of man on the clouds) is part of/a result of/ a vindication of the first advent, that Christ is the son of man/the messiah/the one who comes on the clouds, just as the ancient of days came on the clouds in the OT

The kingdom and authority given to Christ at his resurrection and ascension, vindicated Him and His prophetic warnings in the destruction of Jerusalem/coming of the son of man on the clouds to judge those who were held accountable for all the righteous blood shed, and resulted in many nations being gathered into the eternal kingdom to worship him forever, all while the four beast kingdoms came on an end.

This is my opinion on the matter.

 

[DavidPT]

You are still using the English word generation. So can you clarify?

The following is basically what I'm meaning. I don't know if it will help clarify or not.

Let's start with the following in 2 Peter 2.

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;


This basically led to a new beginning at the time, the same way a NHNE in the future would be leading to a new beginning.

With 2 Peter 2:5 in mind let's now look at what 2 Peter 3 records then let's allow 2 Peter 2:5 to help us interpret some of that for us.

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.


Some interpreters mistakingly take verse 5 to be involving Genesis 1. But we know it's not referring to that by comparing with 2 Peter 2:5. Verse 6--- being overflowed with water--is referring to this in verse 5---the earth standing out of the water and in the water. And in verse 6 as well, meaning this---the world that then was--we know is referring to this in 2 Peter 2:5---spared not the old world. And that that verse goes on to say it was the world of the ungodly.

Which then means in 2 Peter 3:6 what perished at the time was not the literal earth but was the world of the ungodly. Which then led to a new beginning at the time, the fact all of the ungodly perished in the flood.

Therefore, in verse 7--the heavens and the earth, which are now---meaning the heavens and the earth after Noah's flood through now, is reserved for yet another judgment of the ungodly. In this case meaning when the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night. Which then leads to yet another judgment of the world of the ungodly, which had a new beginning after Noah's flood but continues until the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night. Which then eventually leads to this generation passing away, meaning the world of the ungodly so that there can be a new beginning in it's place, a NHNE.

In my view then, the generation that passes away is the generation of the ungodly which had a new beginning after Noah's flood and grew worse and worse as time went on. keeping in mind that the world of the ungodly involving Noah's flood already passed away. Therefore, it doesn't need to pass away again. That world has already been judged. What needs to still pass away is the world of the ungodly after Noah's flood through now so that a new beginning can happen, a NHNE.

Which could mean Premil isn't Biblical. I just don't know. I can see it causing issues for Premil, but at the same time there are too many things that don't make sense unless Premil is Biblical. But that is for another thread, I guess.

 

[claninja]

The following is basically what I'm meaning. I don't know if it will help clarify or not.

Let's start with the following in 2 Peter 2.

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;


This basically led to a new beginning at the time, the same way a NHNE in the future would be leading to a new beginning.

With 2 Peter 2:5 in mind let's now look at what 2 Peter 3 records then let's allow 2 Peter 2:5 to help us interpret some of that for us.

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.


Some interpreters mistakingly take verse 5 to be involving Genesis 1. But we know it's not referring to that by comparing with 2 Peter 2:5. Verse 6--- being overflowed with water--is referring to this in verse 5---the earth standing out of the water and in the water. And in verse 6 as well, meaning this---the world that then was--we know is referring to this in 2 Peter 2:5---spared not the old world. And that that verse goes on to say it was the world of the ungodly.

Which then means in 2 Peter 3:6 what perished at the time was not the literal earth but was the world of the ungodly. Which then led to a new beginning at the time, the fact all of the ungodly perished in the flood.

Therefore, in verse 7--the heavens and the earth, which are now---meaning the heavens and the earth after Noah's flood through now, is reserved for yet another judgment of the ungodly. In this case meaning when the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night. Which then leads to yet another judgment of the world of the ungodly, which had a new beginning after Noah's flood but continues until the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night. Which then eventually leads to this generation passing away, meaning the world of the ungodly so that there can be a new beginning in it's place, a NHNE.

In my view then, the generation that passes away is the generation of the ungodly which had a new beginning after Noah's flood and grew worse and worse as time went on. keeping in mind that the world of the ungodly involving Noah's flood already passed away. Therefore, it doesn't need to pass away again. That world has already been judged. What needs to still pass away is the world of the ungodly after Noah's flood through now so that a new beginning can happen, a NHNE.

Which could mean Premil isn't Biblical. I just don't know. I can see it causing issues for Premil, but at the same time there are too many things that don't make sense unless Premil is Biblical. But that is for another thread, I guess.

In Noah’s day, it was the ungodly group of people born and living around same time that died in flood. The flood didn’t wipe the ungodly that had died prior to the flood, only the ungodly that were alive when the flood happened.

generation means people born and living at the same time. you keep using this word. The English word generation doesn’t denote a single generation persisting throughout time. So you saying the generation (singular) beginning in Noah’s day (after the flood) till now is grammatically incorrect and doesn’t make sense from an English standpoint, as there have been many generations (plural) from Noah till today.

Are you saying all the generations (plural) of ungodly men will not pass away until the heavens and earth pass away?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That’s not true. This was addressed in post 68.

I see now that you did address it there, but I don't recall reading that. I was probably focused on what we were talking about as it relates to whether it talks about Him coming TO or LIKE the Ancient of Days instead and missed that part.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

My position is that the first advent encompasses the ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, sending of the spirit, the events of the Olivet discourse. parousia (destruction of Jerusalem) , and gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall - this generation will not pass away). The 2nd advent then is the final judgement.


That being said. Paul’s language in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 doesn’t require that the living are almost simultaneously caught up around the same time as the dead because the Greek word for “then” or “afterwards” doesn’t require this meaning - see Albert Barnes commentary. Its meaning focuses on order without explicit length of time. For example - 1 Corinthians 15 — Christ the first fruits “then” the dead in Christ at his coming. The dead in Christ aren’t raised almost simultaneously with the resurrection of Christ, right?

Come on. You have a way around everything. It's ridiculous. Paul is clearly referring to a one time event in 1 Thess 4:14-17 that will occur right after Jesus descends from heaven. At that time the dead in Christ will be resurrected and they, along with those who are alive and remain at the time, will all be caught up to meet Jesus in the air. What do you think, that each individual meets Jesus in the air after they die? Why would the resurrected dead in Christ not all meet Jesus at the same time as those who are alive? I can't take your view on this seriously and I honestly couldn't care less what Albert Barnes said about this.

So If Paul is talking about the parousia (destruction of Jerusalem) from Matthew 24 in 1 Thessalonians 4, then I believe he is referring to the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding feast (Matthew 22).

That is not at all in view in 1 Thessalonians 4. Not even close. How about you paraphrase 1 Thess 4:14-17 for me to show how it reads to you.

Modern Christianity believes the dead rose to heaven in the first century.

Not their bodies. Do you never differentiate between the body, the soul and the spirit?

since Paul says they were sleeping in his day, then I think it occurred around 70ad.

You think what occurred around 70 AD exactly?

Thus the sequence of events - the dead at the destruction of Jerusalem (parousia) and “afterwards” the living

Huh? I can't make any sense out of anything you're saying. When Jesus comes again, do you think only living believers will be caught up to meet Him? You don't think any of the dead in Christ will be raised and then meet Him at that time?

If Paul is not referring to Matthew 24 nor Matthew 22

He's not referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, if that's what you mean.

, but instead referring to literal dead bodies flying out of the ground and then the living almost simultaneously literally flying into the air, then he is talking about the 2nd advent.

Yet, he specifically refers to the parousia in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 when he says "we which are alive and remain unto the coming (parousia) of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.", so why would you try to get around that except to try to make it fit your preterist doctrine?

Great, we agree the dead rise to heaven upon death to be with the Lord, and this transition occurred during the first century.

You are funny. You're talking about their souls and spirits, not their bodies. The souls of the dead in Christ were collectively brought to heaven upon Christ's death and resurrection, so I don't know what you're talking about with "this transition". The soul of every believer from then on went to heaven to be with Christ when they died ever since.

In 1 Thessalonians 4, Paul is talking about the resurrection of the BODIES of the dead in Christ and that it will happen when Jesus comes again, just like he wrote about in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 as well. Why would you think that a reference to the dead in Christ rising in connection with the second coming of Christ wouldn't be a reference to their bodies being resurrected (rising), keeping in mind other passages like 1 Cor 15:22-23?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Daniel 7:13-14 is a prophetic vision about the son of man coming on the clouds to or like the ancient of days, and his eternal kingdom. This is contrasted with the four beasts whose kingdoms are not eternal. These verses are alluded to in the NT passages like Matthew 26:64, Matthew 24:30, Ephesians 1:19-23, and 1 Peter 3:22.

As Matthew alludes to Daniel 7:13 in the olivet discourse then I think the destruction of Jerusalem (the parousia or the coming of the son of man on the clouds) is part of/a result of/ a vindication of the first advent, that Christ is the son of man/the messiah/the one who comes on the clouds, just as the ancient of days came on the clouds in the OT

The kingdom and authority given to Christ at his resurrection and ascension, vindicated Him and His prophetic warnings in the destruction of Jerusalem/coming of the son of man on the clouds to judge those who were held accountable for all the righteous blood shed, and resulted in many nations being gathered into the eternal kingdom to worship him forever, all while the four beast kingdoms came on an end.

This is my opinion on the matter.

I don't see where Daniel 7:13-14 says anything about the Son of man being vindicated or where it indicates that it has anything to do with the destruction of Jerusalem. I think you're seeing things in the passage that are simply not there. All it refers to is what happened at the resurrection and ascension of Christ, as Paul describes as well in Ephesians 1:19-23. He was given all authority and a kingdom at that time and that is what Daniel 7:13-14 is about. Has nothing to do with 70 AD whatsoever.

 

[DavidPT]

Are you saying all the generations (plural) of ungodly men will not pass away until the heavens and earth pass away?

I'm pretty certain I'm not applying generation in the manner you think I am. Let me try explaining it like this then.

Let's start with prior to Noah's flood. Noah's flood destroyed the ungodly living among the godly at the time. Obviously, prior to the flood, those that were part of the ungodly, many of them already died before the flood ever happened. Therefore, God didn't need to destroy them in the flood as well since they were already dead. But even so, the world of the ungodly continued.

Then at some point God said enough, I have to cleanse the earth of the ungodly by destroying the ungodly still alive. And by doing so it led to a new beginning at the time. But as men began to repopulate the earth again, with it came more ungodliness which grows worse and worse, never gets better over time.

With some of what I said in mind, let's fast forward to now. Here it is 2025 and let's assume Christ returns in 2030, for instance.

Prior to the 20th century, assuming there is no one on the planet over 125 years old, this would mean every ungodly person that ever lived prior to the 20th century, these are already dead and gone. Assuming Jesus returns in 2030, for instance, He doesn't need to destroy any of the ungodly that lived prior to the 20th century. They are already dead, they are no longer among the living. The idea is to destroy all the ungodly still remaining alive, and by doing so it leaves no one but the godly remaining, the same way it initially left no one but the godly remaining after Noah's flood, which then led to a new beginning at the time.

Therefore, until all things are fulfilled first, the world of the ungodly still alive and present when Christ returns can't pass away in the meantime, the fact Christ has to destroy any remaining ungodly living among the godly.. No way in a million years, even if I'm wrong here about some or all of this, is Matthew 24:34 being applied to the first century. By wiping out the Jews that got wiped out at the time, hardly solved the problem of the ungodly living among the godly on the earth.

The ungodly isn't meaning only unbelieving Jews during the first century though unbelieving Jews at the time were among the ungodly. The ungodly means anyone ungodly, Jew or Gentile. And by making it about the Jews only is a form of antisemitism, IMO, therefore, ignores that the world of the ungodly also consists of Gentiles.

Once again, maybe Premil, my position, can't logically work with this. Or maybe it still can somehow and that I need to figure out how in the event I'm right about some or all of what I proposed above.

 

[claninja]

Come on. You have a way around everything. It's ridiculous. Paul is clearly referring to a one time event in 1 Thess 4:14-17 that will occur right after Jesus descends from heaven. At that time the dead in Christ will be resurrected and they, along with those who are alive and remain at the time, will all be caught up to meet Jesus in the air. What do you think, that each individual meets Jesus in the air after they die? Why would the resurrected dead in Christ not all meet Jesus at the same time as those who are alive? I can't take your view on this seriously and I honestly couldn't care less what Albert Barnes said about this.


That is not at all in view in 1 Thessalonians 4. Not even close. How about you paraphrase 1 Thess 4:14-17 for me to show how it reads to you.


Not their bodies. Do you never differentiate between the body, the soul and the spirit?


You think what occurred around 70 AD exactly?


Huh? I can't make any sense out of anything you're saying. When Jesus comes again, do you think only living believers will be caught up to meet Him? You don't think any of the dead in Christ will be raised and then meet Him at that time?


He's not referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, if that's what you mean.


Yet, he specifically refers to the parousia in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 when he says "we which are alive and remain unto the coming (parousia) of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.", so why would you try to get around that except to try to make it fit your preterist doctrine?


You are funny. You're talking about their souls and spirits, not their bodies. The souls of the dead in Christ were collectively brought to heaven upon Christ's death and resurrection, so I don't know what you're talking about with "this transition". The soul of every believer from then on went to heaven to be with Christ when they died ever since.

In 1 Thessalonians 4, Paul is talking about the resurrection of the BODIES of the dead in Christ and that it will happen when Jesus comes again, just like he wrote about in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 as well. Why would you think that a reference to the dead in Christ rising in connection with the second coming of Christ wouldn't be a reference to their bodies being resurrected (rising), keeping in mind other passages like 1 Cor 15:22-23?

In Matthew 24, the disciples asked when will these things be and what will be sign of your parousia and end of the age. Jesus said "this generation will not pass away until all these things take place". So IF paul is talking about the parousia of matthew 24 and believing it to occur in his lifetime (which makes sense then why Paul said "WE who are alive"), then I don't think he is talking about literal dead bodies being reanimated and flying out of graves and into the air —> because that didn’t happen in Paul's generation. That would still be a future event. Instead, I think he is potentially talking about the dead in christ, whose earthly tents were destroyed, rising to receiving their home in the heaven, not made by human hands like in 2 Corinthians 5---> this being related, in part, to the gathering of the elect into the wedding hall and given wedding garments following the destruction of Jerusalem/coming of Christ in judgment upon israel/parousia.

Since Paul taught that they slept in death until the parousia, I would disagree that they were collectively brought to heaven at Christ's ascension. Regardless of specifics, You, in general, still believe the dead saints rise to heaven to be with the Lord forever, and that this transition took place in the first century.

I don't see where Daniel 7:13-14 says anything about the Son of man being vindicated or where it indicates that it has anything to do with the destruction of Jerusalem. I think you're seeing things in the passage that are simply not there. All it refers to is what happened at the resurrection and ascension of Christ, as Paul describes as well in Ephesians 1:19-23. He was given all authority and a kingdom at that time and that is what Daniel 7:13-14 is about. Has nothing to do with 70 AD whatsoever.

OT:
Daniel 7:13-14 is PART of a series of visions that start with four beast kingdoms, where the fourth beast is ultimately judged. FOLLOWING the judgment of this fourth beast, Daniel sees a vision of a son of man coming to or like the ancient of days on the clouds, where he is given a kingdom/authority and the kingdom is everlasting and will never be destroyed, and all peoples worship him.

After seeing ALL these visions, Daniel asks for an explanation to ALL of it.

Daniel 7:15 As for me, Daniel, my spirit within me was anxious, and the visions of my head alarmed me. I approached one of those who stood there and asked him the truth concerning ALL this.

The explanation of the VISIONS (four beasts; son of man coming on the clouds) is that there would be 4 kings who shall rise out of the earth, but the saints would possess the kingdom forever. So right there, it's more than just the ascension. Unless, can you provide the explanation from the angel in daniel 7 where he states daniel 7:13-14 is about the crucifixion of the messiah and his subsequent resurrection? or are you seeing things in the passage that aren't actually there?

Daniel 7:17-18 These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth. 18But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever.’

So while you keep arguing that Daniel 7:13-14 is solely about the ascension, I completely disagree based upon the angels explanation of the visions. Daniel 7:13-14 is also about the saints possessing the everlasting kingdom where all nations worship Him following four earthly kingdoms. You would have to ignore the angel's interpretation to state 7:13-14 is solely about the ascension. You would also have to ignore much of Jesus' parables to claim the kingdom of daniel 7:14 is solely about the ascension.



NT:
So I think I can assume that we agree that the kingdom in Daniel 7 is the same kingdom Christ preached through parables in the NT, right? If not, let me know you don't believe its the same.

1.) The kingdom prophesied by daniel, and preached about by Christ, is indeed about the ascension IN PART:

Matthew 25:14 “For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servantsc and entrusted to them his property.
Luke 19:12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return.

2.) The kingdom prophesied by daniel, and preached about by Christ, is also, IN PART, about the destruction of Jerusalem, and the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall, and the transferring of a kingdom to a nation producing its fruit, and the events of the olivet discourse.

Matthew 22:7-10 The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.’ 10And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests.

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. 44He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.

Luke 21:31 So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that the kingdom of God is near.

3.) The kingdom is also other things, but I'm trying to the keep the focus on the main argument at hand.

Therefore, I believe Daniel 7:13-14 is about the ascension in part, the destruction of jerusalem in part, a nation producing its fruit receiving the kingdom in part, etc......because Christ teaches that's what the kingdom is about through the parables.

The vindication is not in Daniel 7:13-14. I meant that the destruction of Jerusalem was the historical, physical, and verifiable evidence that Christ is who said he was. He is the son of man who comes on the clouds.

But again the main point was that the Old greek text stated "one like a son of man coming on the clouds like the ancient of days and there were those present with him'. I think this is what Matthew was alluding to in vs like Matthew 24:30-31, Matthew 25: 31, and Matthew 16:27.

 

[claninja]

I'm pretty certain I'm not applying generation in the manner you think I am. Let me try explaining it like this then.

Let's start with prior to Noah's flood. Noah's flood destroyed the ungodly living among the godly at the time. Obviously, prior to the flood, those that were part of the ungodly, many of them already died before the flood ever happened. Therefore, God didn't need to destroy them in the flood as well since they were already dead. But even so, the world of the ungodly continued.

Then at some point God said enough, I have to cleanse the earth of the ungodly by destroying the ungodly still alive. And by doing so it led to a new beginning at the time. But as men began to repopulate the earth again, with it came more ungodliness which grows worse and worse, never gets better over time.

With some of what I said in mind, let's fast forward to now. Here it is 2025 and let's assume Christ returns in 2030, for instance.

Prior to the 20th century, assuming there is no one on the planet over 125 years old, this would mean every ungodly person that ever lived prior to the 20th century, these are already dead and gone. Assuming Jesus returns in 2030, for instance, He doesn't need to destroy any of the ungodly that lived prior to the 20th century. They are already dead, they are no longer among the living. The idea is to destroy all the ungodly still remaining alive, and by doing so it leaves no one but the godly remaining, the same way it initially left no one but the godly remaining after Noah's flood, which then led to a new beginning at the time.

Therefore, until all things are fulfilled first, the world of the ungodly still alive and present when Christ returns can't pass away in the meantime, the fact Christ has to destroy any remaining ungodly living among the godly.. No way in a million years, even if I'm wrong here about some or all of this, is Matthew 24:34 being applied to the first century. By wiping out the Jews that got wiped out at the time, hardly solved the problem of the ungodly living among the godly on the earth.

The ungodly isn't meaning only unbelieving Jews during the first century though unbelieving Jews at the time were among the ungodly. The ungodly means anyone ungodly, Jew or Gentile. And by making it about the Jews only is a form of antisemitism, IMO, therefore, ignores that the world of the ungodly also consists of Gentiles.

Once again, maybe Premil, my position, can't logically work with this. Or maybe it still can somehow and that I need to figure out how in the event I'm right about some or all of what I proposed above.

Correct me if i am wrong, but you seem to mean "kosmos", as in the worldy affairs or systems opposed to God, not the literal world or universe.

"the Greek word "kosmos" primarily refers to an ordered system or arrangement. In the New Testament, it is used to denote the universe as an ordered creation, the earth, the inhabitants of the earth, and the worldly affairs or systems opposed to God." Strong's Greek: 2889. κόσμος (kosmos) -- World, universe, order, adornment

2 Peter 3:6 and that by means of these the world (kosmos) that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

It was the ungodly worldly affairs or systems, of which many ungodly people had been a part of from Adam to Noah, that were destroyed in the in the flood.

And now that which is reserved for fire, the "kosmos" of which many ungodly people since Noah till today have been a part of, won't pass away until all these things occur --> is this what you believe Jesus meant in "this generation will not pass away until all these things occur"?

 

[DavidPT]

So, are you saying that you believe "this generation" refers to ungodly people in general or what?

That's basically what I'm saying, the fact 2 peter 2:5 and 2 Peter 3:6 indicated it was the world of the ungodly that perished at the time. Which then led to a new beginning at the time. But as men repopulated the earth, it led to more ungodliness post that of the flood. And the fact Mathew 24:35-36 is clearly meaning 2 Peter 3:10, for one, and that 2 Peter 3:10 is pertaining to 2 Peter 3:6, and that 2 Peter 2:5 helps us to interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6, therefore, Matthew 24:34 has to be involving what all these other passages I just brought up are involving. And it was the world of the ungodly that passed away per Noah's flood in order for there to be a new beginning. We also have to keep in mind 2 Peter 3:13 which speaks of a new beginning. But only after this present heavens and earth pass away first. Where it appears it does that during the day of the Lord involving the 2nd coming of Christ in the end of this age.

The fact I'm Premil it seems odd that I would interpret these things like I do. Yet I remain Premil because, in my mind, there are just way too many things I don't see being possible unless Premil is true.

 

[DavidPT]

Correct me if i am wrong, but you seem to mean "kosmos", as in the worldy affairs or systems opposed to God, not the literal world or universe.

"the Greek word "kosmos" primarily refers to an ordered system or arrangement. In the New Testament, it is used to denote the universe as an ordered creation, the earth, the inhabitants of the earth, and the worldly affairs or systems opposed to God." Strong's Greek: 2889. κόσμος (kosmos) -- World, universe, order, adornment

2 Peter 3:6 and that by means of these the world (kosmos) that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

It was the ungodly worldly affairs or systems, of which many ungodly people had been a part of from Adam to Noah, that were destroyed in the in the flood.

And now that which is reserved for fire, the "kosmos" of which many ungodly people since Noah till today have been a part of, won't pass away until all these things occur --> is this what you believe Jesus meant in "this generation will not pass away until all these things occur"?

That pretty much sums it up. Whether you agree or not, that's another story. But at least you seem to be understanding me correctly. Because clearly, in 2 Peter 3 there is the Greek word kosmos and ge to consider. And as far as the world of the ungodly, it is the kosmos of the ungodly not the ge of the ungodly.

 

[claninja]

That pretty much sums it up. Whether you agree or not, that's another story. But at least you seem to be understanding me correctly. Because clearly, in 2 Peter 3 there is the Greek word kosmos and ge to consider. And as far as the world of the ungodly, it is the kosmos of the ungodly not the ge of the ungodly.

I honestly think that’s a reasonable understanding of 2 peter 3 —> The Kosmos, following the flood, being reserved for fire, and being kept for the day of judgement upon the ungodly.

But I think it’s quite the stretch to then apply that to Matthew 24:34

Jesus could have just said “this kosmos won’t pass away until all these things happen”.

But let’s say Jesus did say or mean “this kosmos” or present heaven and earth of which the ungodly dwell won’t pass away until all these things happen. That statement is absolutely meaningless —> of course those things would happen prior to the end of the present heavens and earth.

If I said I’ll give you a hundred dollars, And you asked when, and I said before the world ends or sometime before all wicked people perish. my response is absolutely meaningless.