Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Luke's Explanation of Matt 24: 19, 21

annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 4:28:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
As of late, future "thousand-year reign" speculators have cited Matt 24: 21 as some sort of evidence that Matt 24 refers to a yet-future period.

"But woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days! ... For then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be." (Matt 24: 21)

These folks have the habit of arbitrarily capitalizing "great distress" to make it read "The Great Tribulation". They assume that the latter portion of the passage is ultra-literal which in turn leads to the wildest speculations imaginable. About 1.1 million Jews died or were captured into slavery during the 3 1/2 year seige. However, thousands upon thousands escaped, most notably the Christians.

Is not the latter portion of the passage simply an example of prophetic hyberbole? If not, Jesus simply spoke an untruth: how many people survived the flood? Eight. Yet Jesus is saying that this then-future distress will be worse?

Notice Luke's explanation of Matt 24: 21: "Woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (Luke 21: 23-24)

What is this great distress? The trodding asunder of Jerusalem, with all the attendant events. That is why Jesus was able to later say, "This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished." The very generation to whom He spoke did see the horrific event. In fact, it occurred just barely inside the 40-year time period usually assigned to the word "generation".

Nothing prior or subsequent to it will ever compare to it for this reason: Israel enjoyed a special covenantal status, and what occurred in AD 67-70 was a national punishment by God for a national sin, resulting in total destruction. Remember the statement: "His blood be on us, and on our children." Well, it was. And this is the result.

Land's sakes, the Lord never intended for these millennialist speculators to run around doing death counts 2,000 years later! Note the specificity to the region:

"Then shall they deliver you up unto tribulation". YOU, the ones to whom He was speaking.

"standing in the holy place". An immediate reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

"let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains". Needs no comment.

"let him that is on the housetop not go down". A reference to the usual construction of houses in Jerusalem.

"And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on a sabbath". Why not the Sabbath? Because the gates were closed.

Anyway, the same phraseology was employed way back in Exodus:

"And the locusts went up over all the land of Egypt, and rested in all the borders of Egypt; very grievous were they; before them there were no such locusts as they, neither after them shall be such."

It would be most interesting to hear a millennialist waffle and guess and speculate about these locusts. I bet before we know it, they'll have God creating a whole new genus and species of locust just to plague Egypt.

This explanation also coincides perfectly with Peter's admonition on Pentecost, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation." What perverse generation? The generation that crucified Christ. In what manner could a man save himself? By heeding Christ's teachings concerning the coming judgment on the city of Jerusalem!

Christians, do not let these future-kingdom millennialists rob you of one of the greatest attestations to Biblical veracity by undoing Jesus's pinpoint prophesy of the fall of Jerusalem - 40 years prior to the event. Poor MadCornish has had to redefine "this generation" for us. Then he had to reduce "soon" and "shortly" to meaningless. Then he had to claim that Paul was just ignorant. Then he had to complain that Paul and John really weren't in the kingdom. Then he had to guess that Mark 9: 1 was fulfilled six days later, but the kingdom didn't really come! All millennialists will fall into the same trap.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
biomystic
Posts: 606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 4:29:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Who cares? Pauline Christianity is toast and headed like all Abrahamic religions for its End Times. Sorry, but Armageddon has literally come and Pauline Christians do not know it because they haven't been paying attention to Israeli archeological findings at Megiddo (also named after the Canaanite Divine Assembly as is the Greek translation, "Armageddon") which is how prophesy comes true in ways believers least expect, e.g. the Jews looking for another David and getting Jesus Christ instead.
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 8:21:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/27/2013 4:29:00 PM, biomystic wrote:
Who cares? Pauline Christianity is toast and headed like all Abrahamic religions for its End Times. Sorry, but Armageddon has literally come and Pauline Christians do not know it because they haven't been paying attention to Israeli archeological findings at Megiddo (also named after the Canaanite Divine Assembly as is the Greek translation, "Armageddon") which is how prophesy comes true in ways believers least expect, e.g. the Jews looking for another David and getting Jesus Christ instead.

There is no such thing as "Pauline Christianity", any more than there is a "Petrine Christianity" or a "Johannine Christianity". The confirmation of the occurrence of the figurative battle at Armageddon is not dependent upon the archeologist's shovel. How can one confirm a battle which never literally occurred - and isn't going to occur - with a spade?

Of course Armageddon has already come - and it never was a literal battle in the first place. To the contrary, it was a spiritual conflict that was to "shortly come to pass" back in the first century because "the time was at hand" - way back then.

I'm not sure exactly what you believe. Apparently you do not fancy any "Abrahamic" religion. Thus I take it that you do not believe the Bible, or if you do, you must take bits and pieces of it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."