Replies

However, the concept is also well based within the OT in regards to Jesus.

E.g.? There is no apostolic mention of a double/dual fulfillment.

All well and good, so the gospel was preached into all the world before AD 70?

See Col. 1:6.

How was MT 24:30-31 specifically fulfilled?

Appearance of the Sign
Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 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. (Matt. 24:29-31)
Coming in the Clouds
The third and final clause of verse 30 says, "and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." This clause has been thought to relate definitely to the second, visible, and personal coming of the Lord. But in the light of well-defined biblical language, the reference is rather to a coming in terms of the events of his providence in judgment against his enemies and in deliverance of his people.
It should be noted carefully that neither this verse nor this particular clause indicates a coming upon earth. Some have read into this clause that Jesus was actually descending to the earth for the purpose of taking up a reign in the city of Jerusalem. Nothing like that is indicated. As a matter of fact, there is not a single verse in the New Testament to indicate that Christ will reign upon a material throne in the material city of Jerusalem. This thought has been imported by a carnal interpretation of Old Testament passages. Christ is actually seated now upon his Messianic throne.
Many commentators have taken it for granted that the expression "coming in the clouds" refers to a visible coming of Christ. A careful study of the Scriptures, however, reveals that that is not a necessary interpretation. A similar expression occurs in Isaiah 19:1, "Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it." Although this passage speaks of the Lord riding upon a cloud and of his presence, nevertheless we know that the Egyptians did not see the Lord in a personal, visible way. The Lord riding upon a swift cloud indicated a coming in judgment against the Egyptians.
A similar type of expression concerning judgment is found in Psalm 97:2,3: "Clouds and darkness are round him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne. A fire goeth before him, and burneth up his enemies round about." In speaking of the mighty power of God the Psalmist uses this expression: "Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters; who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind" (Ps. 104:3). The expression "who maketh the clouds his chariot," is no different from "coming in the clouds of heaven." In the Psalms there is no thought of a personal, visible coming of the Lord, but rather references to his judgment and power.
Following the well-defined biblical sense of such expression the last clause of verse 30 may well be interpreted then to indicate a coming in judgment and power: judgment against his enemies and power to the establishment of his kingdom.
This interpretation is borne out by the words of Christ in other passages when he indicated that he was coming before the contemporary generation would pass away. He said: "Verily I say unto you, there shall be some standing here, which shall not taste death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom" (Matt. 16:28). Christ was saying that some of the people actually standing before him and listening to him would not die until they saw the Son of man coming in his kingdom. This could hardly refer to a personal and visible coming in that generation.
The same thought in conveyed in Christ's words to the High Priest: "Thou hast said: Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven" (Matt. 26:64). This High Priest was to see Christ sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven. Can this possibly refer to Christ's second coming when the description "sitting on the right hand of power" precludes such interpretation. It means rather that after the crucifixion and resurrection, Jesus would ascend into heaven and take his place on the right hand of God, the Father, as described in Daniel 7:13,14: "I saw in the night vision, 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. 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." When Christ ascended into heaven he was seated upon his Messianic throne. This is in full accord with the declaration of Christ as he was about to ascend into heaven: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." One of the first manifestation of the power and glory of Messiah was the destruction of the city that refused to accept him as King and Saviour. This act of judgment gave evidence that all power had indeed been given unto him. He did come in the clouds of heaven and rained destruction upon those who had rejected and crucified him. This caused the tribes of the earth to mourn. The sign of the reigning Christ was seen in the destruction of Jerusalem. The contemporary generation, indicated in verse 34, witnessed fulfillment of these things as Christ had prophesied.
J. Marcellus Kik
An Eschatology of Victory
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971
pp. 140-143

LOL, Jesus' citation of Noah and the ark are also a common type of the rapture. Secondly, it was directed at non-believers, not believers.

Jesus’ comments in Matthew 24 were given to believers, specifically the disciples at Olivet, not unbelievers. “Therefore you [disciples] also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you [disciples] do not expect. “ Perhaps your dispensational presups prevent you from reading the text plainly.

Such is the nature of the discussion about the rapture. If folks don’t accept the dispie presups, which most do not, then all the handwaving about history sans Church doesn’t make any sense.

However, the concept is also well based within the OT in regards to Jesus.
E.g.? There is no apostolic mention of a double/dual fulfillment.

Abraham and Isaac for starters. Try also Mt 1:23

See Col. 1:6.

States nothing about the gospel being preached to the WHOLE world before AD 70

But in the light of well-defined biblical language, the reference is rather to a coming in terms of the events of his providence in judgment against his enemies and in deliverance of his people.

So, details - how did he judge His enemies and deliver his people in AD70? You have made the claim that this portion of Mt 24 is about the destruction of Jerusalem. Are you now backing away and trying to present a spiritualization of the prophecy? If so, a 'spiritualization' cannot morph into a physical and real prophetic event.

Coming in the Clouds

Which your source spends a lot of time on. While it is an oft used metaphor, the disciples question was regarding a very real, physical return. Don't forget, when Jesus ascended to heaven in a cloud an angel told His disciples that He would return the same way (Acts 1:11). How in vs 30 do the tribes of the earth 'mourn' a metaphor?

No, the rest of the article is spiritualization, plain and simple and you've failed to show how that portion of Mt 24 was specifically fulfilled in the events of AD 70 as you claimed they were.

Interesting that you selectively choose when and when not to spiritualize your interpetation of Jesus' words and prophecies. But then what should they 'watch' for, since in your eschatological world, prophecies from Christ are spiritualized and diluted?

Such is the nature of the discussion about the rapture. If folks don’t accept the dispie presups, which most do not, then all the handwaving about history sans Church doesn’t make any sense.

As pointed out before - your theology is inconsistent in this regard. The only way you can make your theology work is to a priori dismiss NT prophecy via spiritualization or write it off as an oblique reference to a historic event. This steals away from the OT prophecy concerning Christ.