the Olivet Discourse understood

[Truth7t7]

Truth7t7, if you want to remove the smiley face, then edit that verse and put a space (with one press of the space bar on your keyboard) between the colon and the parenthesis.

Without a space it shows as a hypertext smiley face.

I have to do that edit every time I post that particular verse.

I'm aware, I was lazy ill correct it

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

True. And it is a probable corroboration of Daniel 9:27, in which the original text and many translations refer to the "wing of abominations" i.e. the wing(s) of the abominable Roman armies' idolatrous eagles.

I don't see that connection with the mention of the gathering of eagles or vultures. This other passage shows the context of the gathering of eagles or vultures and it doesn't have any connection with 70 AD:

Luke 17:33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.” [36] [e] 37 “Where, Lord?” they asked. He replied, “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.”

I believe the context of the eagles/vultures gathering is in the sense of them gathering where dead bodies will be when Jesus returns and believers are taken up to meet Him in the air while unbelievers are left to be killed.

 

[Truth7t7]

You are not reading these passages carefully. You are seeing one phrase that is contained in both passages and just assuming they are both related to the same event without reading the entire passages and looking at the context of each of them. In Matthew 24:30 Jesus is coming with the clouds of heaven FROM heaven. In Daniel 7:13-14 He is coming with the clouds of heaven TO heaven because He is going TO God the Father who is in heaven.

False, both verses are exactly the same context Daniel 7:13 & Matthew 24:30

You want to take the context of the second coming and final judgement seen in Daniel 7:9-11, then jump back thousand of years to the Lord's ascension in Dan 7:13 concerning the word "Came" "Wrong"

As stated Daniel 7:9-14 and Revelation 11:15-18 is the very same event in the future second coming and final judgement, the eternal kingdom is established "After" the final judgement and the event mentioned above takes place

It appears you want to apply this to Jesus establishing his earthly kingdom at the death, burial, resurrection, ascension, 100% "Wrong" it's the eternal kingdom when the kingdoms of this world become the Lord's, and all evil has been removed after the final judgement, its that simple

Daniel 7:13-14KJV
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
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.

Revelation 11:15-18KJV
15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,
17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.
18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

False, both verses are exactly the same context Daniel 7:13 & Matthew 24:30

You want to take the context of the second coming and final judgement seen in Daniel 7:9-11, then jump back thousand of years to the Lord's ascension in Dan 7:13 concerning the word "Came" "Wrong"

As stated Daniel 7:9-14 and Revelation 11:15-18 is the very same event in the future second coming and final judgement, the eternal kingdom is established "After" the final judgement and the event mentioned above takes place

Daniel 7:13-14KJV
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
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.

Revelation 11:15-18KJV
15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,
17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.
18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Are you willing to reason with me about this?

Please look at what Daniel 7:13-14 says. All of it. Not just the reference to the Son of man coming with the clouds. To who and to where does Daniel 7:13 say that the Son of man (Jesus, obviously) was coming to? It says He was coming "to the Ancient of days" and was brought before Him. Who is that? God the Father, right? Where is God the Father? In heaven, right? So, how can you conclude that Jesus coming with the clouds of heaven to God the Father can mean anything except that He was ascending to heaven rather than descending from heaven?

And then look at verse 14 which says the Son of man, Jesus, was given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him". Is that not what happened when Jesus ascended to heaven, as Paul described here:

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

Please specifically address my points here rather than just basically saying "You're wrong" and repeating your interpretation again as you typically do.

 

[Truth7t7]

Are you willing to reason with me about this?

Please look at what Daniel 7:13-14 says. All of it. Not just the reference to the Son of man coming with the clouds. To who and to where does Daniel 7:13 say that the Son of man (Jesus, obviously) was coming to? It says He was coming "to the Ancient of days" and was brought before Him. Who is that? God the Father, right? Where is God the Father? In heaven, right? So, how can you conclude that Jesus coming with the clouds of heaven to God the Father can mean anything except that He was ascending to heaven rather than descending from heaven?

And then look at verse 14 which says the Son of man, Jesus, was given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him". Is that not what happened when Jesus ascended to heaven, as Paul described here:

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

Please specifically address my points here rather than just basically saying "You're wrong" and repeating your interpretation again as you typically do.

The context of Daniel 7:9-14 shows the second coming and final judgement

Below 1 Corinthians 15:24-26 shows the very same second coming and final judgement

Your problem is you want to put God the father in a shoe box called heaven, with Jesus jumping on a space shuttle in the ascension going up to God "Wrong", the heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool, God is omnipresent

Just as Daniel 7:21-22 gives the interpretation, the Ancient Of Days "Came" repeating the same event in the second coming and final judgement from three different angles

The scripture below interprets the event of Daniel 7:13, and its the future time when Jesus delivers the kingdom up to the father, the last enemy (Death/Satan) has been destroyed, the eternal kingdom has started with the father and Jesus sitting on the eternal throne in the New Heaven, Earth, Jerusalem, forever

1 Corinthians 15:24-26KJV
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

Daniel 7:13KJV
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

Below you clearly see the future (Little Horn/Man Of Sin/The Beast) and the Ancient of Days "Coming" and the final judgement, and the eternal kingdom is possessed by the saints a "Future Event" unfulfilled

You take the context of Daniel 7 showing the second coming and final judgement, and you use your human reason to jump back thousands of years in claims it represents the Lord's ascension to the right hand of the father "Wrong"

Daniel 7:21-22KJV
21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

Revelation 13:7-8KJV
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

1 Corinthians 6:23-KJV
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The context of Daniel 7:9-14 shows the second coming and final judgement

So much for you reasoning with me. You can't even bring yourself to acknowledge the similarities between Daniel 7:13-14 and Ephesians 1:19-23. You won't even comment on that at all. Why not?

No, that is not the context of verses 13 and 14. We both believe that what is described in Daniel 7:13-14 does not follow what is described in Daniel 7:9-12 chronologically. In your view of those verses Jesus comes with the clouds of heaven from heaven (instead of to heaven) first and then shortly after that the judgment takes place. The only difference in our views is that you see Daniel 7:13-14 happening shortly before Daniel 7:9-12 occurs and I see it happening long before it occurs. So, with that being the case, why does Daniel 7:13-14 have to occur immediately before Daniel 7:9-12 when we both agree that what is described in Daniel 7:13-14 does not follow what is described in Daniel 7:9-12 chronologically?

Below 1 Corinthians 15:24-26 shows the very same second coming and final judgement

Your problem is you want to put God the father in a shoe box called heaven, with Jesus jumping on a space shuttle in the ascension going up to God "Wrong", the heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool, God is omnipresent

Was Jesus mistaken when He told us to pray like this: "Our Father, who art in heaven...."?

You do believe that Jesus literally ascended from earth to heaven, don't you? You don't think He was placed at the right hand of the Father in heaven when He ascended to heaven, as scripture teaches? Do you think the Old Testament never refers to His ascension to heaven?

I'm not going to discuss this with you any further. You just immediately dismiss any points that are made and you are incapable of having a back and forth adult discussion. I'm not wasting my time like that anymore.

 

[Randy Kluth]

True. And it is a probable corroboration of Daniel 9:27, in which the original text and many translations refer to the "wing of abominations" i.e. the wing(s) of the abominable Roman armies' idolatrous eagles.

I know the NIV and George Ladd favored viewing these as "wings of the temple," as part of the architecture of the Temple. But it could also suggest eagles' wings coming against the Temple in judgment. The Septuagint apparently has "wings" and not "Temple."

My favorite version is:

"And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

This could suggest that the Roman prince is the "one who makes desolate" and who himself suffers the pouring out of the consummation upon the "desolate." But this didn't happen to Titus that I know of?

Another legitimate way of viewing this is the Army, the People of the Prince to come, will come against Jerusalem and the Temple until the consummation is poured out upon Jerusalem and the Temple.

But I leave this to the scholars and to the language experts. Any of these ways still works for me.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What does this passage mean?...

Matt 24.Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

This happened in 70 AD, about 40 years after Jesus predicted the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. This is not Last Days prophecy--this happened in the generation of those alive in Jesus' time.

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

These "Birth Pains" took place in Jesus' own generation. They anticipated the coming fall of Jerusalem to the Romans. There were rumors of wars, warning Jesus' Disciples that this judgment was surely coming. The signs included indications God was unhappy with Israel and was soon to bring final judgment to them.

9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

Jesus' own Disciples among the Jewish People would be rejected and persecuted by apostate Israel, ie by their unbelieving Jewish brothers. This was some of the sin for which God was bringing judgment to Israel in 70 AD.

15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.

There is no question, particularly when the parallel account is read in Luke 21, that this is about a Great Tribulation spanning the entire NT age. That's what makes it the "Great Tribulation." It's the greatest punishment that Israel has ever experienced--the longest punishment in its history. And when Israel experienced punishment, they suffered the tribulation of exile and the curses that followed them in that exile. It is called the "Jewish Diaspora."

The "Abomination of Desolation" is spelled out in Daniel, and is not to be confused with another AoD mentioned in Daniel, which applied to Antiochus 4 of Syria. This particular AoD originates from Dan 9 where the "people of the prince to come," an Army, is to come to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. That's the AoD Jesus is speaking of here.

And the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD was merely the start of Israel's exile and an entire age of Jewish Diaspora. It was to last until the preaching of the Gospel is preached to the whole world as a warning of ultimate judgment for human sin.

22 “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.

As there was in that early generation so it continues throughout the age that Millennial groups attempt to state that they are the "move of Christ" to bring God's Kingdom to earth. But God is concerned about the ultimate destruction of the Jewish People before He can judge and remove the wicked from among them in order to restore the nation using the repentant. And so, Christ will in the end come from heaven to bring an end to Israel's oppression and to save the Church from their persecution.

26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28 Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.

In accordance with Dan 7, the Son of Man comes from the clouds, ie from heaven, and not before. In other words, even as false Messianic movements proliferated the Roman army would gather around Jerusalem. And Jesus would not deliver Israel at that time, but would come later with the clouds.

So Jesus warns his Disciples that the Roman "vultures" will gather against Jerusalem to destroy the Temple. The Romans carried "eagle" standards, representing gods that they worshiped. They gathered "like eagles" around Jerusalem, the "corpse." Deliverance from heaven will not come before Israel is brought under judgment in that generation.

29 “Immediately after the distress of those days
“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

It is after the Jewish Distress of the present age, while Christians are persecuted, that Christ, the Son of Man, will return from heaven, but not before.

30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory."

This is the completion of what Daniel saw in Dan 7, which is the coming of the Son of Man from heaven to destroy the persecutors of the Church and to establish God's Kingdom on their behalf. Daniel there portrays the coming of the Son of Man to destroy Antichrist, the Man of Sin, who opposes God's People and His Kingdom.

there are two different accounts. One in luke and one in Mathew, and we need to read carefully.

In Luke, he was asked 1 question.

when will these things be.

In matt 24 he was asked 3 things,

when will these things be
What will be the sign of your coming
and the end of the age.

we also see two different answers

In like, he speaks of the armies surrounding Jerusalem. Which happened in 70 AD. And answered the question. when will no stone be left on another..

In Mathew he answers the other two questions.

When you see the abomination of desolation.
Everything in Matt 24 culminated with the return of Christ.

The abomination of desolation is not yet appeared. it is the sign of the end of the age, or of his coming

This is also the end of the age,, or the end of the time of the gentile. when Christ strikes the final kingdom and destroys it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Like me, you've been posting on forums like this for a long time. You know you can rarely be certain about what someone is saying here. I was going by what you had said, which did not make it obvious that you thought He was talking about the end of the age there.

Of course. It is a legitimate concern. This is one of the main issues in interpreting this Discourse. What is future and what is present?

For me, the whole reason this gets confusing is because language does not adequately separate matters into neat little packages. A person could begin speaking of today, and then flash back to the past. Or they could speak as if the future is taking place right now.

Literary structures are sometimes difficult to examine and divine. Our best hope is to connect with the author's mind and train of thought. It's difficult to do in this Discourse because it has been tampered with by so many conflicting views, some of which predominate currently to our misfortune.

But, His coming and the end of the age is a global event, so Jesus talked about things there that would happen globally. His focus was not on Israel in those verses (4-14). He shifted His focus there starting in verse 15.

Matt 24.12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Since the introduction to this Discourse refers to the judgment against Jerusalem and its Temple I have to conclude that the initial remarks concern Israel. And the Discourse would then remain focused on the fate of Israel.

But as you say, the Discourse opens up to include the whole world and the end of the age--not just the generation of Jesus and the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Notice how it is the Gospel that is operating to warn people of their sin, the Jews of their spiritual love growing cold and the world of doing the same outside of the orbit of the Law. It is to be a universal Gospel, particularly since Jesus is saying that the Jews are failing to carry its banner, the torch being passed to a nation more worthy of it.

No, I disagree. Again, verses 4-14 have a global scope about things that would happen during the New Testament era right up until the end of the age when Jesus returns. The way you are coming across here is that you think verses 4-14 all relate to things that would lead up to 70 AD, yet verses 13 and 14 specifically refer to "the end", which refers to "the end of the age" when Jesus comes, which has not happened yet.

It's okay--we can disagree. I'm just sharing my own thoughts on this. I do agree that the "end" refers to the "end of the age," and as such, the message is elevated above national Israel at times in the Discourse.

The reason I place the beginning verses prior to 70 AD is because those things identify the reason for the direction leading to 70 AD. Persecuting Christians, false representations of God's Kingdom, moral corruption, along with God's judgments exposing His distaste for this state of affairs are all "Birth Pangs." They are literally the beginning of a movement towards the destruction of 70 AD. What should've given birth to national Christianity ended up in a miscarriage.

If you go back to the curses of disobedience under the Law you will see the cause of Israel's distress is their unfaithfulness, their idolatry, and their disregard for major requirements under the Law. The curses consisted of plagues, famines, enemy conquests, and ultimately exile from the land.

This is just what Israel was looking at in the time of their Messiah. Like Jeremiah was rejected in warning Israel about Babylon Israel rejected Jesus in his warning about the approach of Roman judgment, if disobedience persisted, which he anticipated it would. Things had reached a critical stage, and there was no turning back. The Birth Pangs had begun, and the miscarriage would take place. Just my view....

So, you think Jesus was speaking of both things that would happen before 70 AD and things that would happen before His coming at the end of the age within Matthew 24:4-14? Which would mean you kind of see a double fulfillment there?

No, I'm not big on "double fulfillments." In one section Jesus addresses Israel's tribulations. In other sections, the context would require application in a more universal situation. The Gospel being preached to "all nations" would obviously expand the context beyond Israel!

There is no individual future Antichrist. John made it clear that there would be many antichrists, and there were already many antichrists in the world in his day (1 John 2:18). And He indicated that anyone (not just one person) who denies Christ is an antichrist (1 John 2:22, 2 John 1:7).

We certainly agree that there have been many antichrists. The "Little Horn" of Dan 7 appears to be a "Man of Sin," as Paul put it--a literal individual. Those who come before Antichrist have taken advantage of God's freedom and grace throughout NT history. I believe Antichrist will just be the last one. We can disagree on this.

I completely disagree. For one things it's not an intellectual falling away, it's a spiritual falling away. Both Jesus and Paul were talking about a global falling away from the faith that would occur, but you are talking about something only on a local or regional scale. I equate the time that they were talking about with Satan's little season (Revelation 20:7-9).

I'm not sure we "completely disagree." Maybe we just disagree *in part?* I agree with you that Antichristianity is global in scale, and that this is a "spiritual thing." But an "intellectual movement" and a "spiritual movement" are not mutually exclusive, or antithetical.

A spiritual move away from traditional Christianity in Europe can result in an intellectual construct that is projected as an "Enlightenment." It is a false revelation and rationalized as "scientific" and "objective."

The whole world has bought into this European intellectual ideal called "scientific empiricism." It's a denial of anything "spiritual" unless it is subject to personal preference or matters of social unity.

Thanks for your thoughts, both agreements and disagreements. There is a reason for every disagreement, and I need to understand it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

there are two different accounts. One in luke and one in Mathew, and we need to read carefully.

In Luke, he was asked 1 question.

when will these things be.

In matt 24 he was asked 3 things,

when will these things be
What will be the sign of your coming
and the end of the age.

we also see two different answers

In like, he speaks of the armies surrounding Jerusalem. Which happened in 70 AD. And answered the question. when will no stone be left on another..

In Mathew he answers the other two questions.

When you see the abomination of desolation.
Everything in Matt 24 culminated with the return of Christ.

The abomination of desolation is not yet appeared. it is the sign of the end of the age, or of his coming

This is also the end of the age,, or the end of the time of the gentile. when Christ strikes the final kingdom and destroys it.

Respectfully, I've looked at this idea but have had to reject it for the following reasons. (It's okay--we can disagree.)

1) 3 different versions of the same Discourse would tell the same story--just from different angles. If each story told a different part of the same Discourse, they would not really be the same Discourse as a whole--they would only be different portions of the same Discourse.
2) The different versions indicate, to me, that the authors are only choosing to frame the conversation using words that they are comfortable with in conveying the same ideas. And so, synonyms are used. The few elements that are unique to any particular version are rare and do not change the tone or message in all 3 versions. If anything the unique elements in one version may help us better understand a parallel account in another version.

I've personally done an extensive study on each version, comparing every single element. So I've done my homework. For me, the critical things to understand are that the main theme of the Discourse is the destruction of the Temple in Jesus' generation, following his death, of course. And there follows a "time of Distress," defined as an age-long condition of Israel being cursed for having abandoned the morality of the Law and their own Messiah.

If we understand these things as such, I think the whole Discourse makes sense. The Birth Pains reflect Israel's poor moral condition and God's distaste for it in the time prior to the destruction of the Temple. The Abomination of Desolation is the destruction of the Temple itself.

The entire message is that God will indeed restore the nation of Israel, but will not do so until He sends the Son of Man from heaven at the end of the age. Israel will continue under judgment because the majority of Jews will reject the message of Christian repentance.

In the meantime, Christians suffer, but will also find relief when the Son of Man returns. All this is in the Discourse.

I think it's critical to understand a particular confusion that arises in Matt 24.26-28, where Jesus said that the Son of Man will *not* come before his revelation from heaven. The time he said this both believers and unbelievers were hoping for Messianic deliverance. So Jesus warned that the vultures will gather 1st, and that Israel's "great distress" must take place throughout the present age before his Return in glory.

Matt 24.26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28 Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I didn't call you a pharisee as you falsley claim, I stated your belief is like them in believing in a literal temple in Jerusalem to be destroyed

Yes you believe in a literal temple to be destroyed that took 46 years to build, just as the parishes

Yes you believe as the parishes, I didn't call you a pharisee, big difference

Sorta like calling everyone who observes the 7th day sabbath a 7th Day Adventist "Wrong"!

This is a difference of interpretation--not a matter of orthodoxy. Disagreement is fine--characterizing those who disagree with you in a derogatory way is not a good idea unless there person you're dealing with is engaging in something seriously wrong morally.

I don't think I was doing that. Calling me names is therefore a waste of time and a distraction. Please try to avoid it--this is sometimes a challenge for all of us.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

there are two different accounts. One in luke and one in Mathew, and we need to read carefully.

In Luke, he was asked 1 question.

How many Olivet Discourses are there? One or two? One, right? So, what we can discern from reading all 3 of the Olivet Discourse accounts (Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, Luke 21) is that Jesus was asked 2 or 3 questions (depending on whether you consider there to be separate questions about His coming and the end of the age). With that in mind, whether Mark and Luke recorded all 2 or 3 questions is irrelevant. We know what questions Jesus asked at that time. So, there is no reason to think that not all of the questions were answered in each Olivet Discourse account.

when will these things be.

Looks like you missed on question there.

Luke 21:7 And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?

I highlighted the first question in red and the second question in blue. How did you miss the second question? Was it on purpose?

Jesus was asked this in Matthew 24:3 "what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?". Some, like me, see that as one question, but you see it was two questions. I don't think that matters much unless someone decides that His coming doesn't happen at the end of the age. But, the point is that you turn that into two questions. So, why do you not also see "when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?" as two questions? Where is the consistency in that. It appears that you are allowing doctrinal bias to influence how you are interpreting these verses.

Now, keep in mind that the disciples asked their questions based on their perspectives at that particular time. They had not yet received the Holy Spirit and they did not yet understand at that time what was going to happen in the future. So, from their perspective at the time, they likely would have assumed that His second coming and the end of the age would occur at the same time that the temple buildings were destroyed. So, what Luke records is most likely what they actually asked while Matthew worded the questions the way he did to make it clear that the things they asked about were actually two different things altogether (even if they didn't realize it at the time) that would be fulfilled at two entirely different times.

In matt 24 he was asked 3 things,

when will these things be
What will be the sign of your coming
and the end of the age.

we also see two different answers

We see two different answers because there's only 2 different time periods involved in those questions. One is 70 AD and the other is His future coming at the end of the age. The destruction of the temple buildings is one of the things He talked about. That's what the first question relates to. And the other questions relate to the timing of His coming and the end of the age and He answers that separately.

In like, he speaks of the armies surrounding Jerusalem. Which happened in 70 AD. And answered the question. when will no stone be left on another..

There's absolutely no reason (except doctrinal bias) to think that answer isn't recorded in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 as well.

In Mathew he answers the other two questions.

Nope. We know what the questions are by reading all 3 accounts, so there's no reason to think that the answers to all of the questions can't be found in all 3 accounts.

 

[Truth7t7]

So much for you reasoning with me. You can't even bring yourself to acknowledge the similarities between Daniel 7:13-14 and Ephesians 1:19-23. You won't even comment on that at all. Why not?

I did comment several times, you just don't like my answer because it disagrees with your belief and teaching

No, that is not the context of verses 13 and 14. We both believe that what is described in Daniel 7:13-14 does not follow what is described in Daniel 7:9-12 chronologically. In your view of those verses Jesus comes with the clouds of heaven from heaven (instead of to heaven) first and then shortly after that the judgment takes place. The only difference in our views is that you see Daniel 7:13-14 happening shortly before Daniel 7:9-12 occurs and I see it happening long before it occurs. So, with that being the case, why does Daniel 7:13-14 have to occur immediately before Daniel 7:9-12 when we both agree that what is described in Daniel 7:13-14 does not follow what is described in Daniel 7:9-12 chronologically?

I stated that the verses repeat the teaching from different angles showing the second coming and final judgement

Was Jesus mistaken when He told us to pray like this: "Our Father, who art in heaven...."?

No, however your concept of God and heaven appears to be different than mine, God's omnipresent and doesn't fit into a shoe box

You do believe that Jesus literally ascended from earth to heaven, don't you? You don't think He was placed at the right hand of the Father in heaven when He ascended to heaven, as scripture teaches? Do you think the Old Testament never refers to His ascension to heaven?

I fully believe in the Lord's ascension, and he will return from the heavens in the second coming, however Daniel 7:9-14 has absolutely nothing to do with the ascension that took place thousands of years ago, its about the future second coming, final judgement, and eternal kingdom

I'm not going to discuss this with you any further. You just immediately dismiss any points that are made and you are incapable of having a back and forth adult discussion. I'm not wasting my time like that anymore.

You mean I have answered all your questions and your displeased with the answers that expose your error

 

[Truth7t7]

I don't think I was doing that. Calling me names is therefore a waste of time and a distraction. Please try to avoid it--this is sometimes a challenge for all of us.

Your claim in red above "Calling Me Names" is 100% false, you believe the temple to be destroyed was a literal temple in Jerusalem that took 46 years to build, and the Jewish Pharisees believed the same when talking to Jesus

John 2:19-22KJV
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Your claim in red above "Calling Me Names" is 100% false, you believe the temple to be destroyed was a literal temple in Jerusalem that took 46 years to build, and the Jewish Pharisees believed the same when talking to Jesus

That is false logic. You believe in Jesus. The Mormons believe in Jesus. Therefore you're a Mormon?

 

[Truth7t7]

That is false logic. You believe in Jesus. The Mormons believe in Jesus. Therefore you're a Mormon?

Your False Statement Is False

I believe in Jesus Christ, the Mormons believe in another Jesus created by Joseph Smith

Just as I believe in God the father of my Holy Bible

Mormons believe in a god named elohohim that had wives on the planet Kolob and created spiritual babies to populate the earth

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I did comment several times, you just don't like my answer because it disagrees with your belief and teaching

Do I have to spell everything out to you? I didn't say that you didn't respond at all. Agree? I did not say that. What I'm saying is that you didn't address the scripture I brought up to support my view that Daniel 7:13-14 is talking about the ascension of Christ. I'm talking about this passage:

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Now, compare that to this passage:

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 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.

Can you at least acknowledge that these passages have similarities even if you don't think they both refer to Christ's ascension?

No, however your concept of God and heaven appears to be different than mine, God's omnipresent and doesn't fit into a shoe box

I never said otherwise. Why do you have to be so immature and make assumptions about what I believe? God is not simple to describe. He is one God, yet exists as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is all powerful and omnipresent and He created heaven, yet at the same time He is present in heaven. And heaven is where Jesus ascended to at His ascension about 40 days after His resurrection. Do you agree with that? And do you agree that the Father placed Him at His right hand in power at that time, as scriptures like Ephesians 1:19-23 indicate? If you do agree with those things, then I don't know why you can't allow for Daniel 7:13-14 to be about His ascension since those things are described there.

I fully believe in the Lord's ascension, and he will return from the heavens in the second coming, however Daniel 7:9-14 has absolutely nothing to do with the ascension that took place thousands of years ago, its about the future second coming, final judgement, and eternal kingdom

How exactly can you think that it's not even possible that Daniel 7:13-14 is about His ascension when what is written there is so similar to what Paul wrote in Ephesians 1:19-23 about His ascension?

You mean I have answered all your questions and your displeased with the answers that expose your error

You didn't address Ephesians 1:19-23 and its similarities to Daniel 7:13-14 at all. Is that too much for me to ask you to do?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Your claim in red above "Calling Me Names" is 100% false, you believe the temple to be destroyed was a literal temple in Jerusalem that took 46 years to build, and the Jewish Pharisees believed the same when talking to Jesus

John 2:19-22KJV
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Do you not think that the temple buildings standing at the time Jesus was speaking were destroyed? If so, can you tell me where they are now? If you agree that they were destroyed, then wouldn't that be prophesied in scripture somewhere? Do you know how important the temple was to the Jews back then? Hugely important. Its destruction would send shockwaves across Israel. But, you think such a significant event is not prophesied anywhere in scripture? Do you really believe that?

 

[Truth7t7]

Do I have to spell everything out to you? I didn't say that you didn't respond at all. Agree? I did not say that. What I'm saying is that you didn't address the scripture I brought up to support my view that Daniel 7:13-14 is talking about the ascension of Christ. I'm talking about this passage:

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Now, compare that to this passage:

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 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.

Can you at least acknowledge that these passages have similarities even if you don't think they both refer to Christ's ascension?

I have responded to this already, and I don't see similarity whatsoever, the sister verse to Daniel 7:13 is Matthew 24:30 as I have posted several times, the explanation for Daniel 7:14 is seen in Revelation 11:15-18 when Jesus reigns in the eternal kingdom for ever and ever

I never said otherwise. Why do you have to be so immature and make assumptions about what I believe? God is not simple to describe. He is one God, yet exists as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is all powerful and omnipresent and He created heaven, yet at the same time He is present in heaven. And heaven is where Jesus ascended to at His ascension about 40 days after His resurrection. Do you agree with that?

Yes

And do you agree that the Father placed Him at His right hand in power at that time, as scriptures like Ephesians 1:19-23 indicate?

Yes

If you do agree with those things, then I don't know why you can't allow for Daniel 7:13-14 to be about His ascension since those things are described there.

We disagree, Daniel 7:13 describes the second coming of Jesus Christ, and Daniel 7:14 shows the future eternal kingdom after the second coming and final judgement as I have shown several times

How exactly can you think that it's not even possible that Daniel 7:13-14 is about His ascension when what is written there is so similar to what Paul wrote in Ephesians 1:19-23 about His ascension?

I Disagree, there is no similarity to the ascension seen, and the context of the verses doesn't allow for going from the future second coming and final judgement, then jumping back 2,000 years to the ascension

You didn't address Ephesians 1:19-23 and its similarities to Daniel 7:13-14 at all. Is that too much for me to ask you to do?

I have answered you several times, we disagree

 

[Truth7t7]

Do you not think that the temple buildings standing at the time Jesus was speaking were destroyed?

Yes in 70AD by Roman soldiers

If so, can you tell me where they are now? If you agree that they were destroyed, then wouldn't that be prophesied in scripture somewhere?

It's not prophesied in Matthew chapter 24 as many claim, tye temple to be destroyed was the Lord's body as I have shown several times

Do you know how important the temple was to the Jews back then? Hugely important. Its destruction would send shockwaves across Israel. But, you think such a significant event is not prophesied anywhere in scripture? Do you really believe that?

It's not prophesied in Matthew chapter 24 as many claim