50 Reasons Why We Are Living In The End Times: Part 1

Lamb and Lion Ministries Blog ^ | 13 JULY 2009 | Dr. David R. Reagan

[JohnnyM]

I would argue that the parables in Matt 24 and 25 are directed at the Church and not at the nation of Israel. Terms like "your Lord", master, and bridegroom are used. Both slaves have the same master. All the virgins have oil. The distinction in these parables is not their position (i.e. they are all slaves, virgins, etc), but in their actions while the Lord tarries.

The nation of Israel does not currently know Christ as their Messiah, so why would they be watching and waiting for Him and why would the parables refer to Christ as their master or their Lord?

JM

[Quix]

INDEED.

I guess God didn’t get the memo from the

REPLACEMENTARIANS

telling Him that He COULD NOT do things that way on threat of . . .

wellll . . .

threat of . . .

pouty faced wailing and whining and interminable dust in the air???

Or maybe God is pretending that REPLACEMENTARIANS and all their pontificanting haughtiness are a figment of Calvin’s imagination.

[Godzilla]

The nation of Israel does not currently know Christ as their Messiah, so why would they be watching and waiting for Him and why would the parables refer to Christ as their master or their Lord?

As I summarized (and referenced) before, the reference would be to the awakened Israel during the time of the tribulation - not applicable to the current period.

The context of the discourse addresses the questions from the disciples
1. "When will these things be?" (The complete destruction of the temple)
2. "What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" (Inferring the end of the present age and beginning of the messianic age)

This is the context that Jesus' prophecies and parables are set within. In regards to #1, the AD 70 destruction did not fulfill the prophecy of 'not one stone will be left upon another' as there are quite a few stones left on top of each other.

In regards to #2, Jesus used the term "end of the age" before (MT 13:39, 40, 49; 28:20). In those prior usages, Jesus meant the end of the present age that will consummate in His second coming and a judgment of living unbelievers (cf. Jer. 29:22; 51:33; Dan. 3:6; Hos. 6:11; Joel 3:13; Zeph. 1:3). This will occur just before the messianic kingdom begins. The disciples used the phrase "the end of the age" as Jesus and the Old Testament prophets spoke of it. The disciples association of the two questions is considered by some to indicate that the two events were to be related within the same time frame.

Since Jesus is addressing Israel, and not the church, the parables can be reevaluated to indicate that the virgins/servants, etc are not Christians (for nothing can separate us from God) but another group - Israel.

[topcat54]

A little hard following your logic. Linkage of AD 70 to MT 24-25 is a stretch for nearly all dispensationalist, who hold a higher regard for early writing of the scriptures - e.g. the synoptics being written before AD 70.

Logically, that does not make any sense. If the synoptics were written before AD70 (as most conservatives/evangelicals agree), what is the issue with Matthew 24:4-34 being a predictive reference to AD70? Even if there were written after AD70, the words of Jesus recorded there are still from the AD33 timeframe, approx. 40 years (“this generation”) from the prophecy to the events.

Dispensationalists are hard-pressed to deny some relationship between Matthew 24:4-34 and AD70. So what the clever ones have done is to invent a so-called dual fulfillment, where Matthew 24:4-34 speaks of both AD70 and the Second Coming.

My position is that Matthew 24:4-34 is speaking of AD70 while vv 36 and following is a reference to the Second Coming. The change in subject and emphasis makes it pretty clear. In vv 4-34 Jesus gives very specific predictors of the event (wars and rumors of wars, famine, persecution of believers, etc). All these things preceded AD70. In vv36ff, there are no specific events as predictive. Instead we read language like “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.” “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.” “Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. “ Very non-specific.

Many who advocate a post AD 70 authorship date do so because they discount prophecy a priori. Since there cannot be a supernatural knowledge of the future, any "prophecy" written must be fulfilled by that event - no matter if the facts of the event are something completely different than described by the prophecy. Thus their paradox - they must also deny OT prophecy in a similar manner and by doing so, must rationalize away the clear prophecies regarding Jesus.

I appreciate your concern, but that is not the case here.

However, the passage cannot find fulfillment in AD 70's destruction of Israel.

That is only a truism for those who accept the dispensationalism system as the basic method for interpreting the Bible. You views on Israel are obviously tainting the way you are interpreting that passage, and others.

[topcat54]

Indeed there will be animal sacrifices during the Millennium, during the Millennial reign of Christ on Earth.

For atonement of sin? That is what Ezekiel 40-48 literally says.

[Quix]

However, the passage cannot find fulfillment in AD 70’s destruction of Israel.

That is only a truism for those who accept the dispensationalism system as the basic method for interpreting the Bible. You views on Israel are obviously tainting the way you are interpreting that passage, and others.

= = = =

WHAT UTTER NONSENSE.

Understanding that NO [much less most] END TIMES UNRUBBERIZED BIBLICAL PROPHECIES were fulfilled in 70 A.D.

is true of virtually anyone, nearly everyone

with a microgram of fair-mindedness;

some functioning synapses above the level of an inebriated slug;

AN UNRUBBERIZED BIBLE;

an

UNRUBBERIZED history book;

and maybe the

courage to face truth vs one’s off the wall egotistical fantasies.

[topcat54]

”in Dispensational Pre-trib Premillennialism, God has a different redemptive plan for racial Jews”

False, not in the Church Age.

Rut-ro! I smell a heresy.

Do you agree with this statement, that in this age of grace, "The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ"?

Yet under the Mosaic administration people were saved by obedience to the law?

[topcat54]

WHAT UTTER NONSENSE.

One knows from whence one speaks.

[Quix]

. . . .

and the compulsive, reflexive swat/jerk/rush is on to

try vainly to cram

ALMIGHTY GOD

back into the miniscule REPLACEMENTARIAN’S tiny little box.

I don’t think God got that memo.

[Quix]

Yeah, My PhD in Clinical Psychology did have a lot to do with studying UTTER NONSENSE and those who dispensed it.

[JohnnyM]

I do agree with you that Matt 24 is not talking about the AD 70 destruction.

If this refers to the awakened Israel, would they not be Christians since they accept Christ as their Messiah?

When talking end times, it is extremely difficult not to bring our own viewpoints on eschatology into the Scriptures. So if I am a pre-tribber, then I view everything through the pre-trib lens, same for post-trib, etc. Obviously we differ, but I do enjoy the discussion since it makes me go back to the Scriptures and meditate on them more.

JM

[Lee N. Field]

My PhD in Clinical Psychology

[Quix]

I wondered which one you’d use.

That’s one of my favorites.

Thanks.

Thankfully, at least 2 FREEPERS know the truth! LOL.

It’s comforting that yet again

REPLACEMENTARIANS

are on the OPPOSITE side from the truth.

[Lee N. Field]

My PhD in Clinical Psychology

Point being, anybody can claim to be anything at all on the InterWebz. Mall Ninja, Grand Wizard, Buzz Lightyear or Simon the LART Wielder. No reason to believe anyone. Even a "clinical soothsayer" or rattler of bones. Who cares?

Or possibly, as I suspect, a process gone wonky and in need of rebooting.

'ssh root@quix.someobscurecorner.cx "/etc/init.d/quixie restart"'

[topcat54]

“NONSENSE”
“RUBBER BIBLED DENIAL”
“Rubber Bible Brigade”
“utter nonsense”
“RUBBER BIBLE GROPING”
Et cetera ad nauseum

“I’m a full fledged Dispy!”

Nuff said.

[topcat54]

I do agree with you that Matt 24 is not talking about the AD 70 destruction.

Interesting. Did Jesus anywhere warn or predict the destruction of the temple that happened in AD70?

[topcat54]

“WHAT UTTER NONSENSE.”
“UNRUBBERIZED BIBLICAL PROPHECIES ”
“level of an inebriated slug ”
“AN UNRUBBERIZED BIBLE ”
“UNRUBBERIZED history book ”

Sounds like a PhD thesis for clinical psychology.

[Godzilla]

So what the clever ones have done is to invent a so-called dual fulfillment, where Matthew 24:4-34 speaks of both AD70 and the Second Coming.

Were that the only instance of 'dual fulfillment', you would have a good arguement. However, the concept is also well based within the OT in regards to Jesus. That to me is not hard pressed, but consistent application of scriptural understanding.

My position is that Matthew 24:4-34 is speaking of AD70 while vv 36 and following is a reference to the Second Coming. . . . . All these things preceded AD70.

All well and good, so the gospel was preached into all the world before AD 70? (MT 24:14) How was MT 24:30-31 specifically fulfilled? (30. 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. 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. )

There are other specific points I could make demanding fulfillment in AD70, but I would propose that you would be hard pressed to show that this prophecy was fully and completely expressed by the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem should we review your designated sections verse by verse against history. It is a much stronger arguement to infer that Jesus and his disciples were refering to the end of the tribulation period/start of the messianic reign of Christ which clearly the two versed I cited above refer to.

“For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.” “Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. “ Very non-specific.

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. You may not be looking for the rapture, but that won't stop you from being raptured :)

That is only a truism for those who accept the dispensationalism system as the basic method for interpreting the Bible. You views on Israel are obviously tainting the way you are interpreting that passage, and others.

Not really, my adherance to the dispensational view is founded in part upon the historical fulfillment of prophecy and God's dealings with Israel as documented in the Bible. Secondly, I've pointed out the contextural focus of Jesus' discourse and my understanding and interpretation fits within that context. If you insist that Mt 24:4-34 deal specifically with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, you will have to do a lot of hard documentation to prove your points verse by verse.

[topcat54]

Considering His Word will be written on their hearts and minds in the Millennium, and will occur after the Abomination of Desolation , it isn’t surprising that a cleansing is still required in that relationship.

Sounds like purgatory.

This does not mean the spiritual sacrifice more precious than the blood of bulls and goats isn’t still recognized in heaven, but a sacrificial system does appear in the Millennium.

Would you say then that there is nothing in Scripture that prevents a person from bringing a blood offering of bulls or goats today as “cleansing” for the relationship between God and men? And that such an action would be pleasing to God?

[Godzilla]

If this refers to the awakened Israel, would they not be Christians since they accept Christ as their Messiah?

Israel would be awakened after the rapture and during the tribulation - that is the setting. There are many instances in the bible of those who 'claim' to be a follower but do not have the heart change so to speak to back it up spiritually. Thus I think Jesus' is saying in reference to these parables is that just because you may be a Jew, you still have to have that encounter with Him, you can't get in on coat tails. High falluten theology LOL, but Jesus is warning for people to be real in their acceptance of Him as their Savior and Lord.

When talking end times, it is extremely difficult not to bring our own viewpoints on eschatology into the Scriptures. So if I am a pre-tribber, then I view everything through the pre-trib lens, same for post-trib, etc. Obviously we differ, but I do enjoy the discussion since it makes me go back to the Scriptures and meditate on them more.

Well, I'm glad you are enjoying this. My view comes about as a progressive elimination of the options and their validity to the whole of the bible. I some times refer to my self as a "pantrib", it'll all pan out in the end. I just think there is a better consistency within the bible for pretrib rapture - it answers the questions and scriptures better.