The "ye" principle, this generation, & Mt. 24, Mark 13, Luke 21.

[CWH]

Yes a lot of them were. But most of them recognized Matthew 24 as being fulfilled in 70AD.....even Iranaeus.

Joe

Not True, Most ECF did not recognised Jesus came back in AD 70, not to say Matthew 24. Many ECF and preachers throughoutnthe ages expect a second coming even partial preterist believe so:

http://earlychurchbelief.blogspot.com/

"I JESUS HAVE SENT MINE ANGEL TO TESTIFY UNTO YOU THESE THINGS UNTO THE CHURCHES" (REV.22:16)


SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 2008

EARLY CHURCH FATHERS
The best source of early church teaching on what they
believed and taught on the Second Coming of Christ, and the
Antichrist, comes from this line of early church fathers, for the
obvious reason that this line of disciples received their teaching
directly from John who received the Revelation from Jesus.

Below is a list of quotes from the early church fathers (and Jesus),
most of these authors lifespan overlaped each other:


Jesus Christ (O-33) said: "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 they shall see
the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and
great glory" (Matthew 24:29-30 KJV one of many).

John (6-101) a disciple of Jesus Christ, wrote: "And I saw as it
were a sea of glass...and them that had gotten the victory over the
beast (Antichrist) and over his image, and over his mark, and over
the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass.." Rev.15:2 KJV

Barnabas (40-100) knew John and all 12 of Jesus disciples, and
traveled with Saint Paul to evangelize among the gentiles, wrote:
"The final stumbling block approaches...for the whole [past] time
of your faith will profit you nothing, unless now in this wicked
time we also withstand coming sources of danger....then the evil
one [Antichrist] may find no means of entrance...."
(Epistle of Barnabas, 4).

Polycarp (70-168) Johns apostle and knew Barnabas, wrote:
"He comes as the judge of the living and the dead."
(Epistle to the Philippians, II).

Justin Myrtyr (100-167) a contemporary of Polycarp, wrote:
"The man of apostasy [Antichrist], who speaks strange things
against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the
earth against us the Christians..." (Dialogue with Trypho, 110).

Irenaeus (138-202) Polycarps apostle and knew Justin Myrtyr,
wrote: "And they [the ten kings who will arise] shall lay Babylon
waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the
beast, and put the church to flight" (Against Heresies, V,26).

Tertullian (150-220) a contemporary of Irenaeus, wrote:
"The souls of the martyrs are taught to wait [Rev.6:9,10,11]
...that the beast Antichrist with his false prophet may wage
war on the Church of God..."
(On the Resurrection of the flesh, 25).

Hyppolytus (158-240) a contemporary of Tertullian, wrote:
"The one thousand two hundred and three score days (the last
half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and
persecute the church..." (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 61).

Cyprian (200-258) a contemporary of Hyppolytus, wrote:
"The day of affliction has begun to hang over our heads, and the
end of the world and the time of the Antichrist to draw near, so
that we must all stand prepared for the battle..." (Epistle, 55, 1).

Victorinus (240-303) a contemporary of Cyprian, wrote:
"...the times of Antichrist, when all shall be injured."
(Commentary on the Appocalypse of the Blessed John, VI, 5).

Lactantius (242-330) a contemporary of Victorinus, wrote:
"And power will be given him [Antichrist] to desolate the whole
earth for forty two months..." (Divine Institutes, VII, 17).

Athanasius (293-373) a contemporary of Lactantius, wrote:
"...they have not spared Thy servants, but are preparing the
way for Antichrist." (History of the Arians, VIII, 79).

Ephrain the Syrian (306-373) a contemporary of Athanasius,
wrote: "Nothing remains then, except that the coming of our
enemy, Antichrist, appear..." (Sermo Asceticus, I).

Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386) a contemporary of Ephrain, wrote:
"The church declares to you the things concerning Antichrist
before they arrive...it is well that, knowing these things, thou
shouldest make thyself ready beforehand."
(Catechetical Lectures, 15, 9).

Jerome (340-422) a contemporary of Cyril of Jerusalem, wrote:
"I told you that Christ would not come unless Antichrist had
come before." (Epistle 21).

Chrysostom (345-407) a contemporary of Jerome, wrote:
"...the time of Antichrist...will be a sign of the coming of Christ..."
(Homilies on II Thessalonians 2:2-3)

Augustine (354-430) a contemporary of Chrysostom, wrote:
"But he who reads this passage [Daniel 12:1-13], even half asleep
can not fail to see that the kingdom of Antichrist shall fiercely, for
a short time, assail the church..." (The City of God, XX, 23).

Venerable Bede (673-735) wrote:
"The Church's triumph will follow the reign of Antichrist."
(The Explanation of the Apocalypse, II, 8).

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) wrote: "There remains only
one thing--that the demon of noonday [Antichrist] should appear,
to seduce those who still remain in Christ..."
(Sermons on the Song of Songs, 33, 16).

Roger Bacon (1214-1274) wrote: "...because of future perils [for
the Church] in the times of Antichrist..." (Opus Majus, II, p. 634).


John Wycliffe (1320-1384) wrote:
"Wherefore let us pray to God that He keep us in the hour of
temptation, which is coming on all the world, Revelation 3:10."
(Writings of the Reverend and Learned John Wycliffe, D.D. p.155)


Martin Luther (1483-1546) wrote:"[The book of Revelation] is
intended as a revelation of things that are to happen in the future,
and especially of tribulations and disasters for the Church..."
(Works of Martin Luther, VI, p. 481).

Menno Simons (1496-1561) a contemporary of Martin Luther,
wrote: "...He [Jesus] will appear as a triumphant Prince and a
victorious King to bring judgment. Then will those who persecute
us look upon Him..." (Complete Writings...p. 622).

John Calvin (1509-1564) a contemporary of Menno Simons,
wrote: "We ought not to follow in our inquiries after Antichrist,
especially where such pride proceeds to a public desolation of
the Church." (Institutes, Vol. 2, p. 411).

John Knox (1515-1572) a contemporary of John Calvin), wrote:
"...the great love of God towards His Church, whom He pleased to
forewarn of dangers to come, so many years before they come to
pass...to wit, the man of sin, the Antichrist the whore of Babylon."
(The History of the Reformation..., I, p. 76).


John Fox (1516-1587) a contemporary of John Knox, wrote:
"...that second beast prophesied to come in the later time of the
Church...to disturb the whole Church of Christ..."
(Acts and Monuments, I).


Daniel Whitby (1638-1726) wrote: "...after the fall of Antichrist,
there shall be such a glorious state of the Church...so shall this be
the Church of Martyrs, and of those who had not received the
Mark of the Beast..." (A Paraphrase and Commentary, p. 696).


Matthew Henry (1662-1714) a contemporary of Daniel Whitby,
wrote: "Those who keep the gospel in a time of peace shall be
kept by Christ in an hour of temptation [Rev. 3:10]." (Commentary, VI, p. 1134).



Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) a contemporary of Matthew
Henry, wrote: "...continuance of Antichrist's reign [when the
Church is persecuted] did not commence before the year of
Christ 479..." (A history of the Work of Redemption, p. 217).


John Newton (1725-1807) a contemporary of Jonathan Edwards,
wrote: "Fear not temptation's fiery day, for I will be thy strength
and stay. Thou hast my promise, hold it fast, the trying hour [of]
Rev 3:10, will soon be past."
(The Works of the Rev. John Newton, Vol. II, p. 152).


George Muller (1805-1898) wrote:"The scripture declares plainly
that the Lord Jesus will not come until the Apostacy shall have
taken place, and the man of sin shall have been revealed..."
("Mrs. Mueller's Missionary Tours and Labours, p. 148).


R. Trench (1807-1886) a contemporary of George Muller, wrote:
"...the Philadelphian church...to be kept in temptation, not to be
exempted from temptation..." (Seven Churches of Asia, p. 183).

Carl F. Keil (1807-1888) a contemporary of R.Trench, wrote:
"...the persecution of the last enemy Antichrist against the church
of the Lord..." (Biblical Commentary, Vol. XXXIV, p. 503).

S. P. Tregelles (1813-1875) a contemporary of Carl F. Keil,wrote: "The Scripture teaches the Church to wait for the
manifestation of Christ. The secret [pre-trib] theory bids us
to expect a coming before any such manifestation."
(The Hope of Christ's Second Coming, p. 71).

Nathaniel West (1826-1906) a contemporary of S. P. Tregelles,
wrote: "[The Pre-Trib Rapture] is built on a postulate (assume
to be true), vicious in logic... repudiated by the early Church..."
(The Apostle Paul and the "any moment" Theory, p. 30).

Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910) a contemporary of Nathaniel
West, wrote: "He will keep us in the mist of, and also from, the
hour of temptation [Revelation 3:10]."
(The Episles of John, Jude and the Book of Revelation, p. 266).


M. Vincent (1834-1922) a contemporary of Alexander Maclaren,
wrote: "The preposition 'from' implies, not a keeping from
temptation, but a keeping in temptation [Revelation 3:10].."
(Word Studies..., p. 466).

Grattan Guinness(1835-1910) a contemporary of M.Vincent,
wrote: "The Church is on earth during the action of the
Apocalypse..." (The Approaching End of the Age, p. 136).

Theodor Zahn (1838-1933) a contemporary of Grattan Guiness,
wrote: "He will preserve...at the time of the great temptation
[Revelation 3:10]." (Zahn-Kommentar, I, p. 305).


I.T. Beckwith (1843-1936) a contemporary of Theodor Zahn,
wrote: "The Philadelphians...are promised that they shall be
carried in safety through the great trial [Rev.3:10], they shall
not fall." (The Apocalypse of John, p. 484).

Robert Cameron (1845-1922) contemporary of I.Beckwith,
wrote: "The Coming for, and the Coming with, the saints, still
persists, although it involves a manifest contradiction, two
Second comings which is an absurdity." (emphasis mine)


Many Blessings.

[TheForgiven]

Not True, Most ECF did not recognised Jesus came back in AD 70, not to say Matthew 24. Many ECF and preachers throughoutnthe ages expect a second coming even partial preterist believe so:

http://earlychurchbelief.blogspot.com/

"I JESUS HAVE SENT MINE ANGEL TO TESTIFY UNTO YOU THESE THINGS UNTO THE CHURCHES" (REV.22:16)


SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 2008

EARLY CHURCH FATHERS
The best source of early church teaching on what they
believed and taught on the Second Coming of Christ, and the
Antichrist, comes from this line of early church fathers, for the
obvious reason that this line of disciples received their teaching
directly from John who received the Revelation from Jesus.

Below is a list of quotes from the early church fathers (and Jesus),
most of these authors lifespan overlaped each other:


Jesus Christ (O-33) said: "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 they shall see
the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and
great glory" (Matthew 24:29-30 KJV one of many).

John (6-101) a disciple of Jesus Christ, wrote: "And I saw as it
were a sea of glass...and them that had gotten the victory over the
beast (Antichrist) and over his image, and over his mark, and over
the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass.." Rev.15:2 KJV

Barnabas (40-100) knew John and all 12 of Jesus disciples, and
traveled with Saint Paul to evangelize among the gentiles, wrote:
"The final stumbling block approaches...for the whole [past] time
of your faith will profit you nothing, unless now in this wicked
time we also withstand coming sources of danger....then the evil
one [Antichrist] may find no means of entrance...."
(Epistle of Barnabas, 4).

Polycarp (70-168) Johns apostle and knew Barnabas, wrote:
"He comes as the judge of the living and the dead."
(Epistle to the Philippians, II).

Justin Myrtyr (100-167) a contemporary of Polycarp, wrote:
"The man of apostasy [Antichrist], who speaks strange things
against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the
earth against us the Christians..." (Dialogue with Trypho, 110).

Irenaeus (138-202) Polycarps apostle and knew Justin Myrtyr,
wrote: "And they [the ten kings who will arise] shall lay Babylon
waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the
beast, and put the church to flight" (Against Heresies, V,26).

Tertullian (150-220) a contemporary of Irenaeus, wrote:
"The souls of the martyrs are taught to wait [Rev.6:9,10,11]
...that the beast Antichrist with his false prophet may wage
war on the Church of God..."
(On the Resurrection of the flesh, 25).

Hyppolytus (158-240) a contemporary of Tertullian, wrote:
"The one thousand two hundred and three score days (the last
half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and
persecute the church..." (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 61).

Cyprian (200-258) a contemporary of Hyppolytus, wrote:
"The day of affliction has begun to hang over our heads, and the
end of the world and the time of the Antichrist to draw near, so
that we must all stand prepared for the battle..." (Epistle, 55, 1).

Victorinus (240-303) a contemporary of Cyprian, wrote:
"...the times of Antichrist, when all shall be injured."
(Commentary on the Appocalypse of the Blessed John, VI, 5).

Lactantius (242-330) a contemporary of Victorinus, wrote:
"And power will be given him [Antichrist] to desolate the whole
earth for forty two months..." (Divine Institutes, VII, 17).

Athanasius (293-373) a contemporary of Lactantius, wrote:
"...they have not spared Thy servants, but are preparing the
way for Antichrist." (History of the Arians, VIII, 79).

Ephrain the Syrian (306-373) a contemporary of Athanasius,
wrote: "Nothing remains then, except that the coming of our
enemy, Antichrist, appear..." (Sermo Asceticus, I).

Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386) a contemporary of Ephrain, wrote:
"The church declares to you the things concerning Antichrist
before they arrive...it is well that, knowing these things, thou
shouldest make thyself ready beforehand."
(Catechetical Lectures, 15, 9).

Jerome (340-422) a contemporary of Cyril of Jerusalem, wrote:
"I told you that Christ would not come unless Antichrist had
come before." (Epistle 21).

Chrysostom (345-407) a contemporary of Jerome, wrote:
"...the time of Antichrist...will be a sign of the coming of Christ..."
(Homilies on II Thessalonians 2:2-3)

Augustine (354-430) a contemporary of Chrysostom, wrote:
"But he who reads this passage [Daniel 12:1-13], even half asleep
can not fail to see that the kingdom of Antichrist shall fiercely, for
a short time, assail the church..." (The City of God, XX, 23).

Venerable Bede (673-735) wrote:
"The Church's triumph will follow the reign of Antichrist."
(The Explanation of the Apocalypse, II, 8).

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) wrote: "There remains only
one thing--that the demon of noonday [Antichrist] should appear,
to seduce those who still remain in Christ..."
(Sermons on the Song of Songs, 33, 16).

Roger Bacon (1214-1274) wrote: "...because of future perils [for
the Church] in the times of Antichrist..." (Opus Majus, II, p. 634).


John Wycliffe (1320-1384) wrote:
"Wherefore let us pray to God that He keep us in the hour of
temptation, which is coming on all the world, Revelation 3:10."
(Writings of the Reverend and Learned John Wycliffe, D.D. p.155)


Martin Luther (1483-1546) wrote:"[The book of Revelation] is
intended as a revelation of things that are to happen in the future,
and especially of tribulations and disasters for the Church..."
(Works of Martin Luther, VI, p. 481).

Menno Simons (1496-1561) a contemporary of Martin Luther,
wrote: "...He [Jesus] will appear as a triumphant Prince and a
victorious King to bring judgment. Then will those who persecute
us look upon Him..." (Complete Writings...p. 622).

John Calvin (1509-1564) a contemporary of Menno Simons,
wrote: "We ought not to follow in our inquiries after Antichrist,
especially where such pride proceeds to a public desolation of
the Church." (Institutes, Vol. 2, p. 411).

John Knox (1515-1572) a contemporary of John Calvin), wrote:
"...the great love of God towards His Church, whom He pleased to
forewarn of dangers to come, so many years before they come to
pass...to wit, the man of sin, the Antichrist the whore of Babylon."
(The History of the Reformation..., I, p. 76).


John Fox (1516-1587) a contemporary of John Knox, wrote:
"...that second beast prophesied to come in the later time of the
Church...to disturb the whole Church of Christ..."
(Acts and Monuments, I).


Daniel Whitby (1638-1726) wrote: "...after the fall of Antichrist,
there shall be such a glorious state of the Church...so shall this be
the Church of Martyrs, and of those who had not received the
Mark of the Beast..." (A Paraphrase and Commentary, p. 696).


Matthew Henry (1662-1714) a contemporary of Daniel Whitby,
wrote: "Those who keep the gospel in a time of peace shall be
kept by Christ in an hour of temptation [Rev. 3:10]." (Commentary, VI, p. 1134).



Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) a contemporary of Matthew
Henry, wrote: "...continuance of Antichrist's reign [when the
Church is persecuted] did not commence before the year of
Christ 479..." (A history of the Work of Redemption, p. 217).


John Newton (1725-1807) a contemporary of Jonathan Edwards,
wrote: "Fear not temptation's fiery day, for I will be thy strength
and stay. Thou hast my promise, hold it fast, the trying hour [of]
Rev 3:10, will soon be past."
(The Works of the Rev. John Newton, Vol. II, p. 152).


George Muller (1805-1898) wrote:"The scripture declares plainly
that the Lord Jesus will not come until the Apostacy shall have
taken place, and the man of sin shall have been revealed..."
("Mrs. Mueller's Missionary Tours and Labours, p. 148).


R. Trench (1807-1886) a contemporary of George Muller, wrote:
"...the Philadelphian church...to be kept in temptation, not to be
exempted from temptation..." (Seven Churches of Asia, p. 183).

Carl F. Keil (1807-1888) a contemporary of R.Trench, wrote:
"...the persecution of the last enemy Antichrist against the church
of the Lord..." (Biblical Commentary, Vol. XXXIV, p. 503).

S. P. Tregelles (1813-1875) a contemporary of Carl F. Keil,wrote: "The Scripture teaches the Church to wait for the
manifestation of Christ. The secret [pre-trib] theory bids us
to expect a coming before any such manifestation."
(The Hope of Christ's Second Coming, p. 71).

Nathaniel West (1826-1906) a contemporary of S. P. Tregelles,
wrote: "[The Pre-Trib Rapture] is built on a postulate (assume
to be true), vicious in logic... repudiated by the early Church..."
(The Apostle Paul and the "any moment" Theory, p. 30).

Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910) a contemporary of Nathaniel
West, wrote: "He will keep us in the mist of, and also from, the
hour of temptation [Revelation 3:10]."
(The Episles of John, Jude and the Book of Revelation, p. 266).


M. Vincent (1834-1922) a contemporary of Alexander Maclaren,
wrote: "The preposition 'from' implies, not a keeping from
temptation, but a keeping in temptation [Revelation 3:10].."
(Word Studies..., p. 466).

Grattan Guinness(1835-1910) a contemporary of M.Vincent,
wrote: "The Church is on earth during the action of the
Apocalypse..." (The Approaching End of the Age, p. 136).

Theodor Zahn (1838-1933) a contemporary of Grattan Guiness,
wrote: "He will preserve...at the time of the great temptation
[Revelation 3:10]." (Zahn-Kommentar, I, p. 305).


I.T. Beckwith (1843-1936) a contemporary of Theodor Zahn,
wrote: "The Philadelphians...are promised that they shall be
carried in safety through the great trial [Rev.3:10], they shall
not fall." (The Apocalypse of John, p. 484).

Robert Cameron (1845-1922) contemporary of I.Beckwith,
wrote: "The Coming for, and the Coming with, the saints, still
persists, although it involves a manifest contradiction, two
Second comings which is an absurdity." (emphasis mine)


Many Blessings.

Good grief, you don't pay attention much do you. I said that many of the early church fathers believe that Matthew 24, in discussing the destruction of the temple, was fulfilled in 70AD. I said nothing about an anti-christ, Christ coming as a seed, or other Dispensational stuff; those are all separate theories. Besides, much of what you "copied and pasted" had nothing to do with what I stated. I specifically mentioned that most of the ECF's all understood the destruction of Israel per Matthew 24, was fulfilled in the first century.

And next time you might want to quote the source of your post (link). Because I can post Preterist sources of the early church fathers as well.

You never cease to amaze me.

Joe

[Twospirits]

Ram wrote,

Could you cite the OT verses where Moses is clearly speaking to future generations using "ye"? That would be helpful.

Here are a few examples of the “ye principle” inherent in scripture writing and seen in prophetic passages.

The prophecies concerning Jacob's sons:

Gen. 49:1, “And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.”

Did these things befall Jacob's sons in this/their generation? No, and concerning Jacob's son Judah, this wasn't fulfilled till Christ's first Advent well over 1800 years later.


Gen. 50:24, “And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.”

Did Joseph's brothers leave Egypt and enter the promised land in this/their generation? No, this wasn't fulfilled until hundreds of years later.

Deut. 18:15, “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;---Its clear that this generation Moses is speaking to is the generation to whom Moses is saying "God will raise up unto you a prophet. Unto who? Unto the Israelites he is speaking to, those who are about to enter the Promised Land. Acts records that Moses' prophecies were fulfilled, but in a time frame, 1500 years later that only made sense if the “you," (future) "this generation" in the prophecy of Jacob, Joseph and Moses is interpreted with the “prophetic ye principle.” And it is this very same principle that Jesus and the apostles employed in his/their instructions and prophecies in the NT that the preterists ignore to deduce in their conclusions.

So when we follow this principle of God's Word and read such passages as Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 we clearly see that the “you” Jesus is speaking to is defined by whichever generation would be around when these “prophetic events come to pass.” It is not confined to the apostles and disciples of that day anymore than Moses prophecy was confined to the generation of Israelites who were his initial audience to whom his proclamation was given.

Deut. 28:36, “The Lord shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone.”

Was this fulfilled in this/their generation? No, it was hundreds of years before they had a king over them and this prophecy was fulfilled. They had long since died.

Deut. 28:45, “Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee: ---”

When God spoke to OC Israel, he was speaking to one and all as a Covenant “called out” people, not a particular individual or group; He was speaking to one body for the generations to come. The same with the NC assembly of those “called out,” the “you,” the “ye” the “we,” the disciples that make up the body of Christ that began with the disciples of Jesus and continues to this day unto the end of the age.

God bless---Twospirits

[CWH]

Good grief, you don't pay attention much do you. I said that many of the early church fathers believe that Matthew 24, in discussing the destruction of the temple, was fulfilled in 70AD. I said nothing about an anti-christ, Christ coming as a seed, or other Dispensational stuff; those are all separate theories. Besides, much of what you "copied and pasted" had nothing to do with what I stated. I specifically mentioned that most of the ECF's all understood the destruction of Israel per Matthew 24, was fulfilled in the first century.

And next time you might want to quote the source of your post (link). Because I can post Preterist sources of the early church fathers as well.

You never cease to amaze me.

Joe

Good grief, you don't pay attention much do you? The link was already pasted at the top of the post. Of course, almost everyone knows that the Temple and Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70...no doubt about it but to say ECF believed everything in Matthew 24 was fulfilled is false....that is what I am stressing.

You too never cease to amaze me.

Many Blessings.

[TheForgiven]

Good grief, you don't pay attention much do you? The link was already pasted at the top of the post. Of course, almost everyone knows that the Temple and Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70...no doubt about it but to say ECF believed everything in Matthew 24 was fulfilled is false....that is what I am stressing.

You too never cease to amaze me.

Many Blessings.

But most of them believed that Matthew 24 involved the destruction of the temple in 70AD. So if they believed 70AD temple's destruction was fulfilled, by the very words of the Messiah, then they must logically believe that all of Mathew 24 was fulfilled. Unfortunately, a few of them, particularly those of the Jewish sect, started teaching of a rebuilt Jerusalem, and then there were also a few ECF's in the 2nd and 3rd centuries who began to teach Chilliasm; a corporal reign of Christ (Millennium). You've got to keep in mind, however, that the ECF's were not perfect; they were prone to error just as we are.

Joe

[TheForgiven]

Here is what St. Barnabus of the 2nd century wrote concerning the last week of Daniel:

Barnabas writes, "For it is written, ‘And it shall come to pass, when the week is completed, the temple of God shall be built...in the name of the Lord.’ I find...that a temple does exist. Having received the forgiveness of sins…in our habitation God dwells in us….This is the spiritual temple built for the Lord." (EOB, 16:6)

Barnabus shows that the final week of Daniel was completed when Jesus began working on the temple; the spiritual temple of the Lord. Now because he believed that Daniel's final week was fulfilled, it is therefore logical that he would agree with the destruction of the temple in 70AD per Matthew 24.

Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century, writes:

Vespasian rose to the supreme power (Emperor of Rome) and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place” (STO, XXI, 142-143).

Clement believed that the end of the Jewish Age came about when Jerusalem and its temple was destroyed in 70AD.

Here's more where all of this came from:

ORIGEN (185-254 AD)

A student of Clement of Alexandrea, Origen agreed that the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70 AD marked the end of the Jewish Age and the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy regarding the 70 weeks. Origen writes, "The weeks of years up to the time of Christ the leader that Daniel the prophet predicted were fulfilled" (TPR, IV:1:5).

Like Clement, Origen also believed the Jewish Age, the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel and the great tribulation were behind the Church, not ahead of it.


TERTULLIAN

In 203 AD Tertullian wrote his famous treatise Against The Jews. This early Church father also taught that Daniel’s 70th week had been fulfilled in 70 AD: "Vespasian vanquished the Jews…and so by the date of his storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel” (AAJ, VII; CID).

Contrary to modern postponement preachers and teachers, Tertullian believed the Jewish age, the abomination of desolation, and the great tribulation was behind, not ahead of the Church.


ATHANASIUS

Athanasius was bishop of Alexandria from 326 to 373 AD. Like the early Church fathers before him, he also taught that the 70 weeks of Daniel culminated and the Jewish Age ended in 70 AD: "Jerusalem is to stand till His coming (Daniel’s reference to Messiah’s appearing in His First Advent), and thenceforth, prophet and vision cease in Israel (the end of the Old Covenant or Jewish Age). This is why Jerusalem stood till then…that they might be exercised in the types as a preparation for the reality…but from that time forth all prophecy is sealed and the city and Temple taken" (INC, XXXIX:3-XV:8).

Athanasius clearly reflects the view of the entire early Church: once the Messiah had come, the role of the Temple in Jerusalem would be ended. “Things to be done which belonged to Jerusalem beneath…were fulfilled, and those which belonged to the shadows had passed away” (FEL, IV:3-4).

This important early Church father clearly believed that the Jewish age ended in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.


IRENAEUS AND HIPPOLYTUS

Irenaeus was a contemporary of Clement of Alexandrea whose widely held view we dealt with above. Irenaeus and his pupil Hippolytus are the only two writers from the early Church period who believed in a still-future fulfillment of Daniel’s 70th week. They both placed the 70th week at the end of the gospel age and so are the first interpreters to postulate a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks (AG, V). Both predicted a specific date for the second coming that has long since come and gone.

But their belief in a future 70th week was never widely accepted! St. Jerome specifically pointed out that the number of years in their system did not coincide with the historical events they purported to cover. He wrote, "If by any chance those of future generations should not see these predictions of his (Irenaeus) fulfilled at the time he (Irenaeus) set, then they will be forced to seek for some other solution and to convict the teacher himself (Irenaeus) of erroneous interpretation” (CID)

David B. Currie points out in his scholarly work, "As a point of history, the views of Irenaeus did give seed to premillennialism. But the early fathers of the Church strongly and universally denounced this concept. The early Church understood the presumptuous-parenthesis theory that rapturists employ…but they resoundingly rejected it.” (David B. Currie, Rapture, page 425)

The prevailing view of the early Church fathers was that Daniel’s vision of the 70 weeks was fulfilled in 70 AD. The final or 70th week began with the baptism of Jesus and his presentation to Israel by John the Baptist. The Messiah was cut off in the middle of the 70th week when Jesus was crucified. The abomination of desolation and the great tribulation spoken of by Daniel were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans in 70 AD.

These events marked the end of the Jewish age and the dawning of Messiah’s Day.

Source: http://georgekouri.com/the-early-chu...the-jewish-age

Thus, as you can see, merely quoting ECF's is not always the best way to resolve a dispute. We can show their errors, based on our opinions of course, just as we have errors in our day.

Joe

[Twospirits]

Please, lets get back on topic.

I believe and submit that Matthew and Mark records what was said on the Mt. Of Olives while Luke records what was spoken of at the temple grounds. Note Matthew and Mark records that his disciples later approached Jesus 'privately' as they sat on the Mt. Of Olives. Where Luke gives a different account and the narrative continues after the disciples asked the question of when these things would come to pass. Why would Matthew and Mark record that the disciples came to him 'privately' with their question, if Jesus had not already spoken of the temple's destruction earlier? I believe this is why Matthew and Mark records 'why' the disciples later came to him 'privately,' they were confused of what he had spoken about earlier concerning the temple and his coming.

Jesus also spoke in his ministry while with his disciples of his 'going away, where they would seek him but not find him' (John 7:33-36). So being confused they asked the question again, but expanded their question to what Mt. 24:3 records, 'And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, tell us, when shall these things be? And what (shall be) the sign of thy coming, and the end of the age?' They not only asked when shall these things be, but also of the things he mentioned earlier in Luke 21: 27, 'his coming' (parousia), and Luke 21: 31-33, 'the end of the age,' Greek; tes sunteleias tou aionos. Note here, the word end is "sunteleias," not "telos.' This Greek word 'sunteleias' is to mean 'completion' of events).

More on this later.

God bless---Twospirits

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here are a few examples of the “ye principle” inherent in scripture writing and seen in prophetic passages.

The prophecies concerning Jacob's sons:

Gen. 49:1, “And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.”

Did these things befall Jacob's sons in this/their generation? No, and concerning Jacob's son Judah, this wasn't fulfilled till Christ's first Advent well over 1800 years later.

Excellent! That's exactly what I was looking for.

This exemplifies how we know if "ye" is applied to a future generation or the generation being directly addressed.

In Gen 49:1, Moses explicitly said that he was talking about the distant future which he called the "last days." Therefore, we know the "you" meant "your descendants."

In the Olivet Discourse, Christ explicitly stated that he was talking about the things that would happen during the lifetime of the current generation to whom he was speaking, which he addressed as "this generation." And the truth of his words is confirmed by history, since we know that the temple was destroyed in 70 AD.

It all seems pretty simple and clear to me.

So when we follow this principle of God's Word and read such passages as Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 we clearly see that the “you” Jesus is speaking to is defined by whichever generation would be around when these “prophetic events come to pass.” It is not confined to the apostles and disciples of that day anymore than Moses prophecy was confined to the generation of Israelites who were his initial audience to whom his proclamation was given.

No, that does not follow, because Jesus identified the "you" as "this generation" and the central event of his prophecy was the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple which happened in 70 AD. There is no way to push the Olivet Discourse into the future.

Deut. 28:36, “The Lord shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone.”

Was this fulfilled in this/their generation? No, it was hundreds of years before they had a king over them and this prophecy was fulfilled. They had long since died.

Correct. And again, it's all perfectly obvious. Moses was clearly talking about a future generation, whereas Christ was talking about the generation listening to him. It's all perfectly clear and simple. I don't see a hint of any confusion anywhere.

All the best.

[TheForgiven]

Great post Richard.

Joe

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Great post Richard.

Joe

Thanks Joe.

It really does seem to be on the level of 1 + 2 = 3. I can't find anything difficult or legitimately controversial in the interpretation of the "ye" or "this generation" in the Olivet Discourse.

All the best.