Instructions from Jesus about the End of Days

[whirlwind]

....he is quoting Daniel 7 where the "coming" is not a downward trip from heaven to earth, as in a second coming, it is an upward movement from earth to heaven - an exultation of vindication after suffering.

Is He? Where is that written? :naughty

 

[Drew]

....he is quoting Daniel 7 where the "coming" is not a downward trip from heaven to earth, as in a second coming, it is an upward movement from earth to heaven - an exultation of vindication after suffering.

Is He? Where is that written? :naughty

From Daniel 7;

I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

We have been through this before, so I am confused why you ask for this reference. The "son of man coming on the clouds" metaphor entails an upward travel from earth to heaven, not the other way around as would need to be the case if Matthew 24 were really about a 2nd coming.

 

[Sinthesis]

This is written to the generation of the fig tree.......

You are correct – He is speaking to the generation of the fig tree. But the generation of the fig tree is the generation of Jesus’ own day. One of the central themes of Jesus’ ministry is his announcement of judgement against the Israel of His time. Jesus symbolically enacts the coming destruction of the temple by entering it and flipping over the tables. And then we get the fig tree:

18Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
20When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked. 21Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. 22If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

I'll just add that the fig tree not producing fruit represented apostate Israel. Because it did not produce fruit, Temple Judaism's days were numbered.

I am almost certain you will challenge me on this, but I believe that the reference to the mountain being thrown into the sea has a cryptic second meaning – Jesus is referring specifically to Mount Zion and specifically the temple whose judgment He has just enacted. Note that the Jewish scriptures apply the term "Mount Zion" to the Temple Mount and the City of David. Jesus is saying that that the temple and all that it stands for – Jewish compromise with idolatry are about to be destroyed in judgement through the agency of Rome.

So it all fits together – the enacted judgement of the temple followed by the coded reference to the temple being cast into the sea. In such a context, it is clear that the fig tree generation is indeed the present generation. Jesus is talking about imminent judgement in Matthew 24, and making proper use of the “son of man coming on the clouds metaphor. He is not talking about a 2nd coming.

And:
Rev 8:8 - And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;

Rev 18:21 - And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast [it] into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Matthew 24:34
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Mark 13:30
Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

What is the subject here?????answer::::the sign of the coming of Christ and the end of the age/world......These things are written to the generation of the fig tree,,,,Christ is simplying saying that the generation of the fig tree will not pass until these things take place......

Your argument is based on an exceedingly shaky premise - that Matthew 24 deals with a physical return of Jesus. If that premise were true, you would almost certainly have a point. But we have every reason to doubt that premise. As I have already argued in a recent post, when Jesus says this:

At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory.

....he is quoting Daniel 7 where the "coming" is not a downward trip from heaven to earth, as in a second coming, it is an upward movement from earth to heaven - an exultation of vindication after suffering. Jesus knows His Old Testament - He would use the metaphor appropriately. So Jesus is not talking about his 2nd coming, He is talking about his vindication, resurrection, and installation as king. And that is happening very soon indeed, not 2000 plus years in the future.

This is written to the generation of the fig tree.......

You are correct – He is speaking to the generation of the fig tree. But the generation of the fig tree is the generation of Jesus’ own day. One of the central themes of Jesus’ ministry is his announcement of judgement against the Israel of His time. Jesus symbolically enacts the coming destruction of the temple by entering it and flipping over the tables. And then we get the fig tree:

18Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
20When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked. 21Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. 22If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

I am almost certain you will challenge me on this, but I believe that the reference to the mountain being thrown into the sea has a cryptic second meaning – Jesus is referring specifically to Mount Zion and specifically the temple whose judgment He has just enacted. Note that the Jewish scriptures apply the term "Mount Zion" to the Temple Mount and the City of David. Jesus is saying that that the temple and all that it stands for – Jewish compromise with idolatry are about to be destroyed in judgement through the agency of Rome.

So it all fits together – the enacted judgement of the temple followed by the coded reference to the temple being cast into the sea. In such a context, it is clear that the fig tree generation is indeed the present generation. Jesus is talking about imminent judgement in Matthew 24, and making proper use of the “son of man coming on the clouds metaphor. He is not talking about a 2nd coming.

When I get a chance I will go through your post and reply to everything.....

 

[Drew]

And:
Rev 8:8 - And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;

Rev 18:21 - And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast [it] into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.

So I take it that you see these texts as denoting judgment against apostate Israel with the "mountain" here being a cryptic allusion to Mount Zion and with Babylon representing apostate Jerusalem.

I would agree with such a reading if that is where you are coming from.

 

[whirlwind]

....he is quoting Daniel 7 where the "coming" is not a downward trip from heaven to earth, as in a second coming, it is an upward movement from earth to heaven - an exultation of vindication after suffering.

Is He? Where is that written? :naughty

From Daniel 7;

I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

We have been through this before, so I am confused why you ask for this reference. The "son of man coming on the clouds" metaphor entails an upward travel from earth to heaven, not the other way around as would need to be the case if Matthew 24 were really about a 2nd coming.

Drew, He was with the clouds of heaven returning to heaven. This is NOT the same time that He left heaven with the clouds of heaven. Yes...He is returning but that verse has nothing to do with when He came to earth. The event being written of in Daniel is AFTER the beast is slain. He isn't slain until AFTER Jesus comes in the clouds.

I'm not asking for the reference but I am asking why you are using it. :yes

 

[Drew]

Drew, He was with the clouds of heaven returning to heaven.

Precisely - the son of man is returning to Heaven, obviously from Earth. So when Jesus uses this term in relation to Himself in Matthew 24, He certainly cannot be making an allusion to a second coming - a trip that would be from heaven down to earth.

The event being written of in Daniel is AFTER the beast is slain. He isn't slain until AFTER Jesus comes in the clouds.

I suggest that your argument is based on an unsupportable belief - that the 4th beast is something in our future. I suggest that any Jew in the 1st century would see the 4th beast as Rome. But the way Jesus makes reference to Daniel 7 in Matthew 24 - after clear allusion to the destruction of the temple at the beginning of the chapter - suggests to me that Jesus sees Jerusalem as the 4th beast.

I'm not asking for the reference but I am asking why you are using it. :yes

I am using it because Jesus quotes from Daniel 7 here in Matthew 24:

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

The Danielic material is clearly about an upward ascent - the son of man comes up to the Ancient of Days.

This is one of many reasons why the Matthew 24 discourse cannot be about a second coming.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Drew, He was with the clouds of heaven returning to heaven.

Precisely - the son of man is returning to Heaven, obviously from Earth. So when Jesus uses this term in relation to Himself in Matthew 24, He certainly cannot be making an allusion to a second coming - a trip that would be from heaven down to earth.

The event being written of in Daniel is AFTER the beast is slain. He isn't slain until AFTER Jesus comes in the clouds.

I suggest that your argument is based on an unsupportable belief - that the 4th beast is something in our future. I suggest that any Jew in the 1st century would see the 4th beast as Rome. But the way Jesus makes reference to Daniel 7 in Matthew 24 - after clear allusion to the destruction of the temple at the beginning of the chapter - suggests to me that Jesus sees Jerusalem as the 4th beast.

I'm not asking for the reference but I am asking why you are using it. :yes

I am using it because Jesus quotes from Daniel 7 here in Matthew 24:

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

The Danielic material is clearly about an upward ascent - the son of man comes up to the Ancient of Days.

This is one of many reasons why the Matthew 24 discourse cannot be about a second coming.

Drew,,,where do you believe Christ is at this very moment....

 

[whirlwind]

Drew, He was with the clouds of heaven returning to heaven.

Precisely - the son of man is returning to Heaven, obviously from Earth. So when Jesus uses this term in relation to Himself in Matthew 24, He certainly cannot be making an allusion to a second coming - a trip that would be from heaven down to earth.

He is standing on earth speaking to the disciples. He then tells them that at the end of the age (the subject of this chapter) that WHEN HE RETURNS (the "sign of Thy coming") will be....."they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with pwoer and great glory."

In the Daniel verses it is AFTER HIS RETURN. What part of "coming in the clouds" do you see as returning in clouds? It is you, not Jesus, saying the Daniel verses have anything to do with His arrival.

The event being written of in Daniel is AFTER the beast is slain. He isn't slain until AFTER Jesus comes in the clouds.

I suggest that your argument is based on an unsupportable belief - that the 4th beast is something in our future. I suggest that any Jew in the 1st century would see the 4th beast as Rome. But the way Jesus makes reference to Daniel 7 in Matthew 24 - after clear allusion to the destruction of the temple at the beginning of the chapter - suggests to me that Jesus sees Jerusalem as the 4th beast.

:o

I'm not asking for the reference but I am asking why you are using it. :yes

I am using it because Jesus quotes from Daniel 7 here in Matthew 24:

No, He does not. Drew is quoting from Daniel....not Jesus. :yes

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

The Danielic material is clearly about an upward ascent - the son of man comes up to the Ancient of Days.

This is one of many reasons why the Matthew 24 discourse cannot be about a second coming.

Okay. If you see it that way then....I don't know what else to say.

 

[Ret]

Okay. If you see it that way then....I don't know what else to say.

...

 

[Drew]

Drew,,,where do you believe Christ is at this very moment....

I believe that He is "in Heaven". But I trust that you will not make the following (clearly invalid) argument:

1. Jesus is in Heaven now;

2. Jesus will return to earth in the future;

3. Therefore, any statement about Jesus "coming on the clouds of heaven†must be a reference to the second coming.

4. Therefore Matthew 24 is about the second coming.

Statements 1 and 2 are true, but statements 3 and 4 do not follow.

 

[Drew]

No, He does not. Drew is quoting from Daniel....not Jesus.

Incorrect. Jesus quotes Daniel 7 - check any Bible and its cross-references. I am not saying something that experts are not also saying.

Here is the text from the mouth of Jesus:

Then they will see THE SON OF MAN COMING IN CLOUDS with great power and glory.

Now here is the material from Daniel 7:

I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him

I do not think any credible expert will deny that Jesus is indeed quoting Daniel 7.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Drew,,,where do you believe Christ is at this very moment....

I believe that He is "in Heaven". But I trust that you will not make the following (clearly invalid) argument:

1. Jesus is in Heaven now;

2. Jesus will return to earth in the future;

3. Therefore, any statement about Jesus "coming on the clouds of heaven†must be a reference to the second coming.

4. Therefore Matthew 24 is about the second coming.

Statements 1 and 2 are true, but statements 3 and 4 do not follow.

SO if Matthew 24 isnt about Christ coming back then what is it about????? What time frame does Matthew 24 cover???????

 

[Drew]

Post 1 in a series of 2:

Many readers interpret the “coming on the clouds†image used by Jesus in the gospels as referring to His 2nd coming. I will argue presently, by appealing to the reasonable expectations of the audience to which these statements are made, that this interpretation is not likely to be correct. Note that I am only addressing one dimension of the problem – there are other dimensions (or aspects) in which other arguments can be made against this phrase denoting a 2nd coming. So to be clear: in the present post I will focus on how a 2nd coming intent behind the “coming on the clouds†image would make no sense to the people to whom Jesus was speaking, and therefore Jesus was clearly not talking about His 2nd coming when he used this image.

Here are two uses of this image. First from Matthew 24 in a teaching delivered to the disciples:

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. 30"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.

Now in Mark 14 in something that Jesus says to the high priest Caiaphus:

The high priest stood up and came forward and questioned Jesus, saying, "Do You not answer? What is it that these men are testifying against You?" 61But He kept silent and did not answer Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" 62And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN." 63Tearing his clothes, the high priest said, "What further need do we have of witnesses?

Many people think that both these texts are about Jesus’ return. As Bible scholars agree, Jesus quotes material from Daniel 7 in both cases. And following up the Daniel 7 reference gives one a whole set of reasons to doubt that any reference to a 2nd coming is intended when Jesus uses this image. But that set of argument is not the purpose of the present post.

Let’s look at the first statement. To whom was it made? The disciples. Where were they? They are on the Mount of Olives looking across to the Temple mount. What has happened in the recent past? Jesus has cleared the temple and made this clear allusion to His role as “replacing the templeâ€Â.:

“The stone which the builders rejected, this became the chief corner stoneâ€Â

The reason why the 2nd coming interpretation of the Matthew 24 statement about “coming on the clouds of the sky†has any leverage is because readers do not carefully consider the context of the discourse. Jesus has just entered Jerusalem triumphally. He has just cleared the temple and declared himself as its replacement. Any Jew who knew his Old Testament would know that these actions are an implicit claim of kingship. That is what a king does in the Jewish world – he goes to Jerusalem to get enthroned and he assumes authority over the temple. There is a whole raft of supporting examples of this including David (from the Bible) and such non-Biblical figures as Simon ben Kosibar (acclaimed to be the Messianic King some years after Jesus’ death by the great rabbi Akibar).

The situation could not be more highly charged with this question: Is this Jesus declaring Himself to be King through such actions. Given this matrix of expectation, it would be exceedingly odd for Jesus to then give His disciples a discourse about a 2nd coming in the distant future. They are charged with expectation that He will be declared King in the present – a discourse on a 2nd coming would make absolutely no sense to them at all. No – Jesus is answering their actual expectations and addressing events that will take place shortly, events related to His being enthroned as King. And the Scriptures are clear – Jesus becomes King at this resurrection, not at His 2nd coming.

There is still the matter of the “parousia†in the Matthew 24 discourse – the “coming†of Jesus. An objector to my assertion will no doubt argue that the Matthew 24 material cannot be about the events in the immediate future (from the perspective of Jesus at that time) since we all know that Jesus did not “come to us†in the sense of returning to us. Well, one needs to understand that “parousia†means “presence†– the word in and of itself does not necessitate a reading where Jesus descends to us from the heavens. And the word is often used in relation to the visit of a royal person. The Matthew 24 discourse is about events to take place shortly – Jesus’ enthronement as King and the judgement of God against Israel through the agency of Rome.

We need to remember that Jesus was not talking to us in the 21st century when He gave the Matthew 24 teaching. He was talking to disciples who had no clue at all about any 2nd coming – they came to Jerusalem with Jesus because they were expecting a coronation, not a crucifixion followed by a (much later) 2nd coming. To think that Jesus is teaching about a 2nd coming is deeply anachronistic – given the whole context that leads up to the discourse, Jesus must be addressing the matter of his coming enthronement. This interpretation, by the way, i entirely consistent with chasing up the Daniel 7 reference, a reference that does not work at all with a 2nd coming reading.

In a later post I will address the use of the “coming on the clouds†image in relation to Jesus trial before Caiaphus.

 

[Drew]

SO if Matthew 24 isnt about Christ coming back then what is it about????? What time frame does Matthew 24 cover???????

I believe it is about the events shortly following Jesus death, and in particular it is about the events of 70 AD. I am fully aware that this is, at present anyway, a minority opinion.

This means that I do not need to rationalize the statement about all this happening in the present generation.

 

[researcher]

SO if Matthew 24 isnt about Christ coming back then what is it about????? What time frame does Matthew 24 cover???????

I believe it is about the events shortly following Jesus death, and in particular it is about the events of 70 AD. I am fully aware that this is, at present anyway, a minority opinion.

This means that I do not need to rationalize the statement about all this happening in the present generation.

;)

 

[NIGHTMARE]

SO if Matthew 24 isnt about Christ coming back then what is it about????? What time frame does Matthew 24 cover???????

I believe it is about the events shortly following Jesus death, and in particular it is about the events of 70 AD. I am fully aware that this is, at present anyway, a minority opinion.

This means that I do not need to rationalize the statement about all this happening in the present generation.

Matthew 24:15 "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand"

Daniel 9:27; "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and the determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

I believe it is about the events shortly following Jesus death, and in particular it is about the events of 70 AD.

How are you going to fit the Abomination of the desolator into 70ad....??????????


Matthew 24:40 "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left."

2 in the field 1 taken 1 left,,,one was taken by the beast system/antichrist,,,,,,the antichrist wasnt here in 70ad,,,how you going to fit it in?????????

Matthew 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not have her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

How you gonna fit this into 70ad????????

Matthew 24:31 "And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

Ummmmmmmm you cant fit this into 70ad because aint no angels gathered me yet.. :D

Matthew 24:32 "Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:"

DO you understand this parable?????I have a feeling if you did you would understand that Matthew 24 Mark 13 and Luke 21 are future events.......Maybe you concentrated on Daniel 7 so much you missed everything else....anyhow...

Remember this???? Matthew 24:37 "But as the days of Noe were so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

And who are the so called scholars that agree with you??????????

 

[Sinthesis]

SO if Matthew 24 isnt about Christ coming back then what is it about????? What time frame does Matthew 24 cover???????

I believe it is about the events shortly following Jesus death, and in particular it is about the events of 70 AD. I am fully aware that this is, at present anyway, a minority opinion.

This means that I do not need to rationalize the statement about all this happening in the present generation.

;)

Ditto :D

 

[NIGHTMARE]

This means that I do not need to rationalize the statement about all this happening in the present generation.[/quote]
;) [/quote]
Ditto :D[/quote]

Are you saying that Matt 24 Mark 13 and Luke 21 are refering to the events of 70ad??????

Maybe you can tell me how the Abomination of the Desalator took place around 70ad??????

 

[Drew]

Matthew 24:15 "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand"

Daniel 9:27; "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and the determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Please tell me precisely why this cannot be a reference to something that has already happened.

Matthew 24:40 "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left."

2 in the field 1 taken 1 left,,,one was taken by the beast system/antichrist,,,,,,the antichrist wasnt here in 70ad,,,how you going to fit it in?????????

This text works perfectly well with the reading that I am proposing. Jesus is referring to the coming actions of Rome against Jerusalem, encourage his followers to flee. And one will be captured or killed ("taken" in the judgement executed by God using the agency of Rome) while another will escape.

It is critical to understand that just because such texts are consistent with an end time reading, this does not mean that they cannot be consistent with a "preterist" reading. Both interpretations cannot be correct, but further arguments need to be made. One cannot simply say "since this text can be integrated into an end times reading, it therefore cannot possibly refer to events of 70 AD". That would be incorrect logic. NM - I am not necessarily accusing you of this error of logic.

Matthew 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not have her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

We have been through before. There is tons of examples in the Old Testament of such "end of the world" language being used metaphorically to denote much more commonplace events and invest them with their theological significance. Just one example from Isaiah that I have repeatedly given:

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

What was going on? Babylon was being destroyed, never to be rebuilt. There are other examples of such metaphorical “end of the world†imagery being used to describe much more “mundane†events within the present space-time manifold.

In the Matthew 24 context, Jesus is using this same Biblically endorsed practice of describing the fall of Jerusalem such apocalyptic imagery. There are many other examples of end of the world language being used in the Old Testament to denote non end of the world events.