Biblically Optimistic and Gospel-Based
"For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." (Luke 21:22)
Posted on 05/02/2011 6:51:00 PM PDT by topcat54
For nearly two centuries, prophecy writers have been predicting the near end based on certain prophetic passages. They all use the same passages! The only things that change are world events and newspaper headlines. We only have to go back to 1970 to Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth to see how popular date-setting has been. Readers were told that Israel becoming a nation again in 1948 was prophetically significant. The prophetic countdown began based on Lindsey’s claim that a “rapture” of the church would take place within 40 years (the length of a biblical generation) and the fulfillment of Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:34: “This generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” The Late Great Planet Earth has sold around 35 million copies. We are more than 23 years past the 1988 cut-off date set by Lindsey and other prophecy writers.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanvision.org ...
"For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." (Luke 21:22)
I find Hal Linsey interesting but even he can fall victim to Isaiah 44:25 “I expose the false prophets as liars and make fools of fortune-tellers. I cause the ‘wise’ to give bad advice, thus proving them to be fools.”
Did I miss something?
When liberals and muslims agree, I take some forensic comfort in that.
Likewise, when atheists and calvinists agree, I feel sorry, but vindicated.
Okay, I see what it’s saying. I will have to meditate on this, but what I know as a Christian is that the hour of the coming of the Lord is not known to any man. He will choose his time, so yeah, we should NOT be setting dates for his return. Period. Not only makes us look like fools in the eyes of others, but in the eyes of the Lord as well.
But as for Jesus saying “soon” or “shortly,” I will have to pray for guidance on that.
Thankfully, yes. The temporal judgment poured out upon ancient Jerusalem in AD70 ala Luke 21:22.
Vindicated? Why would the "sky is falling" date-setters feel vindicated?
Thanks for the clarification. I wasn’t sure what was meant. ;-)
Just like He said...birth pains increase in frequency and intensity.
I wouldn't know, because I'm not one. However, that's one of the flimsiest strawmen I've ever seen assembled. The genius of God's prophetic scriptures is that it permits EVERY generation to legitimately believe that the signs of the Lord's return are everywhere.
The difference in 2011 is that the signs that used to require figurative interpretations can now be seen more and more literally. But broad-brushing all who love His appearing as date-setters is just weak.
Which is altogeather different from the parousia, ie. Second Coming. Jesus said he will return in the future and that no one knows the day or hour. The Olivet discourse as related by Luke indicates this event would be far off and people would lose faith in the interim. Thus, there in nothing wrong in speaking of the future retun and judgment of Christ, or the great tribulations which will accompany and precede it, it is just wrong to set dates. It could be in a couple of years or it could be another 1000 years.
You and the rest of the World, including the Apostles...
That is the point. When Jesus and the other NT writers (esp. John in Revelation) spoke of things as "near" or "at hand," they were not speaking of the Second Coming, or events related to the Second Coming. They were speaking of the events related to AD70 that came upon "this generation."
Folks who fail to differentiate this fact from Scripture end up looking foolish.
No it doesn’t. That’s biblical nonsense. Jesus said there are no signs associated with the Second Coming, when we least expect Him He will return; “Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect” (Matt. 24:44). The signs were for Jesus’ first century disciples and the apostates in ancient Israel who would witness the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. Those disciples were told to flee from Judea.
The Second Coming is marked by the opposite claim from Jesus, “for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.”
Confusing the two is generally what gets folks in trouble.
Indeed, they did, just before the destruction of the temple in AD70. All these things that Jesus foretold came to pass in that day. As Jesus told those disciples, "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place" (Matt. 24:34).
Of the Second Coming we are told, "Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Matt. 24:44).
The Olivet discourse prophecies of both events, the destruction of Israel and the parousia. In Matthew it is difficult to sort them out. In Luke it is much easier. Further, the Greek word translated "generation" also means a race or people and thus "this generation" could mean this race or people referring to either the Jews or the followers of Jesus.
It’s not that hard to sort out in Matthew 24. I suggest a likely division at vv. 34-36. One obvious reason, up to v. 34 Jesus is giving detailed signs regarding the events that would transpire. He was warning His disciples in the first century to flee from Jerusalem to avoid the impending calamity that would come upon the city. The temple was destroyed so that not one stone was left upon another. Folks who disregard that application are force to adopt the utterly nonsensical idea that it is some future temple being spoken of.
From v. 36 on there are no more signs being spoken of. In fact we see just the opposite, We see a world pretty much going along as if nothing was happening (v. 38), and then suddenly He appears. V. 44 sums it all up, “Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.”
Further, the Greek word translated "generation" also means a race or people and thus "this generation" could mean this race or people referring to either the Jews or the followers of Jesus.
But it is never used that way in the gospels in an eschatological sense. It is always referring to the contemporary generation of Jewish people living at the time of Christ. E.g.,
"The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here. … Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first. So shall it also be with this wicked generation." (Matt. 12:41,46)Just do a word substitution. Do you believe the Jewish people in general constitute a “wicked race”?
There is scant exegetical reasoning to apply it the way you have suggested in Matthew 24.
Certainly, the bible makes such allusions repeatedly. A word substitution works perfectly in context. God calls the Jewish people much worse throughout the OT, particularly in the books of prophecy. Just look at the book of Hosea for a minor prophet doozie. Not that I think anyone else in the same position would have fared any better. The inherant sinfullness of the Jewish people is no different than that of everyone.
In some circles that statement would be prima facie evidence of antisemitism. Note that Jesus never called the Samaritans or Romans "a wicked race." So your interpretation doesn't really hold water.
On the other hand, if we are all wicked, why single out the Jewish people in this context? It makes no sense. We all belong to a wicked race. So Jesus effectively saying "this generation" to mean the entirety of humanity makes no exegetical sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.