The Synoptic Apocalypse (Olivet Discourse)

[Battyus]

Dear Rose,

You bring up a very good point Joe. What is the justification of introducing the rebirth of the nation of Israel into the context of the Olivet Discourse. There is nothing in the text that in anyway suggests a destroyed Israel that needs rebuilding. The focus is on the destruction of the Temple that is standing before them.

You are right that the Olivet Discourse in itself does not suggest a destroyed Israel that needs rebuilding.

BUT if you harmonize the Olivet Discourse with other books of the Bible especially with Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel then you can not miss the relationship between their contents. And if you do your study in the context of these books together and not just in the context of the Olivet Discourse alone, then you will see the justification and need of Israel's rebirth.

Let me summarize in a nutshell:
-The Olivet Discourse in its entirety can easily be harmonized with the Book of Revelation
-Ezekiel has many chapters filled with prophecies that historically have not happened yet. (See Ezekiel 37-48)
-The yet unfulfilled prophecies in Ezekiel can also be harmonized with the Book of Revelation, and this already puts the Revelation's fulfillment in the future
-At this point read Daniel and you'll find perfect matches with your already established future prophecy timeline
-Zechariah also describes many of the same events that support the harmonization
-Joel also can be harmonized with Revelation and Ezekiel

By the time you go through the Olivet Discourse with the above mentioned books also open, I believe you'll have no doubt that the only possible way to fit EVERYTHING together is to interpret the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy that will be fulfilled in the future (and not in AD70).

I'm not sure if you've read the previous posts, so allow me to insert a link to a website that shows the above described harmonization: www.olivet-discourse-revelation.com/

May OUR Lord bless you,
Battyus

[Battyus]

Dear Joe,

Precisely sister Rose. I've read the Olivet Discourse about a thousand time (exaggeration actually ) but not a single one has led me to believe that Jesus changed the main idea/topic from the Temple's destruction, to the rebirth of Israel. This idea is based on an external belief that God will one day regather Israel (supposedly in 1948), and restore the Kingdom to them, as though that were His purpose in the first place.

Please read my reply to Rose in the previous post, in which I explain why you don't see the justification and need of Israel's rebirth. I humbly ask you to read that post and then visit the site I referred to, where I believe there is enough evidence to prove the Biblical background of the promise and need of Israel's rebirth.

I don't think some understand the seriousness of what many Futurist's are proposing. By stating that Israel has to be reborn (or was reborn in 1948) suggests that Israel has been non-existent between the first century, until 1948; almost 2000 years of "NO ISRAEL". What does this mean? It means to the Futurist's Israel and the Church are two separate things.

I think you've nailed it. I could not have explained it better.

"NO ISRAEL" means that Israel haven't existed as a country since AD70 up until 1948.
Clark Clifford writes in the "Counsel to the President: A Memoir", 1991, P 20:
"On May 14, 1948, the day before the end of the British Mandate, the Jewish Agency proclaimed independence, naming the country Israel; it was not until this day that the world knew that the new state would be called Israel."

Does it mean that there were absolutely no Jewish people living in the land of Israel between AD70 and 1948? No. I'm sure that there were descendants of all 12 tribes living in that land, but Israel as a sovereign entity have not existed.

How can they justify this? If the "NATURAL" branches were Israel, and the Gentile branches were grafted in, then that must mean that Israel never stopped existing. Yet they treat Israel as a cut-off nation for more than 2000 years (until 1948), and the Church as if it's solely Gentile. That idea is easily proven false because this presumes a non-biblical opinion that the Church is entirely Gentile, and that Israel was never part of the Church.

Joe, here you assume statements that I would never make.

I say that "Israel as a sovereign entity have not existed", there was simply not a country that was called Israel.

This of course DOES NOT mean that the chosen nation was annihilated. They were dispersed to many countries and they regathered to their promised land after the State of Israel was reborn in 1948.

Please read Romans 11:11-24 to understand the "grafted in" expression. Even the Jewish people could be "grafted back in" as verse 23-24 says, so of course nobody is implying that the non existence of the country of Israel means that the chosen nation did not exist for ~2000 years.

I would also never say that the Church is(has been) solely Gentile. I'm sure that many Jewish person was saved right from Pentecost (about 3000 of them) and many more during the following centuries.

From about the 13th century you even have some Hebrew translations of the New Testament which I'm sure lead to even more Jewish (Hebrew speaking) people's salvation.

1. Jesus said, "For salvation is of the Jews" - This means that Israel and the Church are one and the same

Once you read Romans 11:11-24 you'll see that they are separate.

2. Paul said, "A Jew is a Jew inwardly, and NOT outwardly" - This means that Israel and the Church are the same

3. Paul said, "circumcision (practiced religiously by Jews) means nothing; what matters is a new creation - This means that Israel and the Church are the same.

These mean that I'm as a non Jewish origin person (a gentile) can count myself into the chosen nation, because of the "circumcision of my heart" (read the full verse). I believe that if the Church and Israel would be the same, then Paul would not have to talk about the differences of the two, would he?

4. Jesus said, "A time is coming, and NOW IS, when you shall neither travel to this mountain or abroad to worship God; God is Spirit, and He seeks for those who worship in SPIRIT and in TRUTH - This means that Israel and the Church "worship" as one and the same, in Spirit and in Truth.

If Israel and the Church would not be separate then you would not even have to ask your question. Since you've asked it, it means they are separate.

Of course they can be justified before God only through Christ, so in that sense they are one, but in that sense all 6 billion of us are the same, yet we still distinguish ourself in many other ways. (sadly)

I could go on and on. The Futurist's seem to ignore the Biblical facts. They read the old testament and fail to realize that Israel is all about the Messiah, Jesus was born from the blood-line of David.

Again, Joe you assume something that I would never say. As Jesus explained in Luk 24:27 all the Old Testament is about Him.

God promised David that his throne would not be without a true King. And Jesus is the King, born from the lineage of David. Peter insists that God set Jesus upon His righteous throne (Davids Throne) to rule forever and ever. This can only mean that Jesus is not ruling a Gentile Church as King (or head), but as the King of all Israel. And the Church is Israel, or else Jesus is not a King. And if not a king, then who's ruling the Church? Actually, who's ruling the Gentile Church?

Good point, you bring up here! See, when Jesus WILL START His Earthly Kingdom, there will be no more separate "Church" and "Israel". By that time the "Church" will be raptured (including the saved Israelites) and they will reign with Christ over the people who survived the Tribulation as believers.

Conclusion? Those who separate the Church and Israel are not stating Biblical fact, but humanistic opinion, as though God deals with man on the basis of race, skin color, blood type, and circumcision.

So, we can now answer the question. Was Israel reborn in 1948? Absolutely not! Israel was reborn in the first century, when the wild branches were grafted in with the natural branches. The end result is what has transpired for more than 2000 years in Church History. God's kingdom would no longer be racially divided, but spiritually divided (good and bad).

I feel I've presented a fair post. But as usual, I'm certain it will go in one ear, and out the other.

God bless.

Joe

Your post was fair indeed, but not one that I would agree with. I anyways thank you for your thoughts as they made me spend a little more time with God. I wish you the same in regards of my thoughts!

Blessings,
Battyus

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Dear Rose,

You are right that the Olivet Discourse in itself does not suggest a destroyed Israel that needs rebuilding.

BUT if you harmonize the Olivet Discourse with other books of the Bible especially with Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel then you can not miss the relationship between their contents. And if you do your study in the context of these books together and not just in the context of the Olivet Discourse alone, then you will see the justification and need of Israel's rebirth.

Let me summarize in a nutshell:
-The Olivet Discourse in its entirety can easily be harmonized with the Book of Revelation
-Ezekiel has many chapters filled with prophecies that historically have not happened yet. (See Ezekiel 37-48)
-The yet unfulfilled prophecies in Ezekiel can also be harmonized with the Book of Revelation, and this already puts the Revelation's fulfillment in the future
-At this point read Daniel and you'll find perfect matches with your already established future prophecy timeline
-Zechariah also describes many of the same events that support the harmonization
-Joel also can be harmonized with Revelation and Ezekiel

By the time you go through the Olivet Discourse with the above mentioned books also open, I believe you'll have no doubt that the only possible way to fit EVERYTHING together is to interpret the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy that will be fulfilled in the future (and not in AD70).

I'm not sure if you've read the previous posts, so allow me to insert a link to a website that shows the above described harmonization: www.olivet-discourse-revelation.com/

May OUR Lord bless you,
Battyus

Hey there Battyus!

Before I comment on your post, I want to say how wonderful it is that you are so clear about our unity as Christians when you gave Rose a blessing in the name of OUR Lord. That gives me great hope that our conversation will be fruitful and full of grace and mutual respect. Thanks!



Now it is interesting that you and I have a very similar understanding that we must "harmonize the Olivet Discourse with other books of the Bible especially with Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel." I usually refer to this as the integrated prophetic complex of the Bible. It is precisely this integration that proves the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century.

Before digging into the endless mountain of details of all the prophecies in all the books of the Bible, I think we should deal with your conclusion that the Olivet Discourse was not fulfilled in 70 AD. Your conclusion appears to directly contradict the plain and explicit teaching of Scripture. The Bible declares:

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Jesus was talking about the first century Temple. He said it would be destroyed. The disciples asked "when" the first century Temple would be destroyed. Christ said "this generation shall not pass till all these things are fulfilled." History confirms Christ's prophecy - the Temple was indeed destroyed in the first century.

So my question to you is very simple. Do you deny that Jesus was talking about the destruction of the first century temple? If not, then how can you say that he was talking about things that would happen 2000 years after that Temple was destoyed?

There is much more to say, but this point must be addressed first. You believe the Olivet Discourse was not fulfilled in the first century, yet Christ declared that the first century Temple would be destroyed and history confirms this prophecy to have been fulfilled.

Many blessings in Christ, OUR Lord!

Richard

[Rose]

Dear Rose,


You are right that the Olivet Discourse in itself does not suggest a destroyed Israel that needs rebuilding.

BUT if you harmonize the Olivet Discourse with other books of the Bible especially with Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel then you can not miss the relationship between their contents. And if you do your study in the context of these books together and not just in the context of the Olivet Discourse alone, then you will see the justification and need of Israel's rebirth.

Let me summarize in a nutshell:
-The Olivet Discourse in its entirety can easily be harmonized with the Book of Revelation
-Ezekiel has many chapters filled with prophecies that historically have not happened yet. (See Ezekiel 37-48)
-The yet unfulfilled prophecies in Ezekiel can also be harmonized with the Book of Revelation, and this already puts the Revelation's fulfillment in the future
-At this point read Daniel and you'll find perfect matches with your already established future prophecy timeline
-Zechariah also describes many of the same events that support the harmonization
-Joel also can be harmonized with Revelation and Ezekiel

By the time you go through the Olivet Discourse with the above mentioned books also open, I believe you'll have no doubt that the only possible way to fit EVERYTHING together is to interpret the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy that will be fulfilled in the future (and not in AD70).

I'm not sure if you've read the previous posts, so allow me to insert a link to a website that shows the above described harmonization: www.olivet-discourse-revelation.com/

May OUR Lord bless you,
Battyus

Hi Battyus,

First off I would like to welcome you to our Forum... It's always a joy to have good folk to discuss God's Word with.

The main point I would like to address is that of altering the meaning of a text by inserting an idea. I feel there is never justification for that no matter how you feel it harmonizes other passages.

There are so many different viewpoints that people hold, the Bible would lose its integrity if everyone at will chose to insert their own ideas to harmonize their interpretations.

As for me, I see a wonderful integration of all the books you mentioned, harmonizing beautifully into a complete picture: beginning with the birth of our Messiah, and ending with the presence of His power being manifest in judgment on Jerusalem.

Many blessing to you my friend,

Rose

[CWH]

Hummm .... that seems like a very large and broad set of verses that we are not supposed to "take at face value." Are you saying that you disagree with the futurist doctrine that states we must take the Bible "literally" whenever possible?

Is there anything in the Bible that suggests that Christ was talking about the coming of "Christianity" as opposed to His Coming? It seems that there are many verses that won't make any sense if we replace the coming of Christ with the coming of Christianity. Did not Christianity "come" at Pentecost? Was not Christianity already here at the time that Peter, Paul, James and John wrote about the coming of Christ? Why then should we think they were talking about the coming of Christianity?

Now in answer to your specific questions:

Who or what is coming in the 1st century?
Christ came, died, resurrected, and ascended to His Throne in Heaven. This was confirmed when He fulfilled His prophecies in His Coming in Judgment against apostate Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Who or what is at the door?
James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh. 9 Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door.

See that? James said it was the JUDGE, Jesus Christ, standing at the door, for the "coming of the Lord draweth nigh." This is a very helpful verse because it combines both the nearness of the coming of the Lord with the statement that He was the JUDGE standing at the door.

Who or what is at hand?
Christ said the TIME was "at hand." (Rev 1.:3)
Paul said the DAY was "at hand" (Rom 13:12)
Paul said the LORD was "at hand" (Phil 4:5)
Paul said the DAY OF THE LORD" was "at hand" (2Thess 2:2)
Peter said the END OF ALL THINGS was "at hand" (1Pet 4:7)

Is there anything in these verses that suggest they were talking about the "coming of Christianity" was "at hand"?

Who or what is at the last hour? It was the Church; it was Christianity. Jesus Christ being the head of the Church, the founder of Christianity was bringing this Church and Christianity into this world and it started from AD 70 when the Jews and Christians were dispersed into Europe and other parts of the world thus launching and spreading the Good News, the Church and Christianity.

Why do you say it started in 70 AD? The Church was established at Pentecost.

And perhaps the biggest question - are you saying that all the Christians who believe those verses are talking about the "second coming of Christ" are wrong? Are you saying you do not believe in the "second coming" at all? If you translate all the "coming" passages to the "coming of Christianity" what happens to the doctrine of the "second coming?"

There is much to discuss.

Many blessings my friend,

Richard

Hi RAM,

You see the wrong futurist in me. I am not a full futurist. I believe some futurist may be right and some are obviously wrong in their interpretations of the scriptures. I am a "preterist-futurist". I believe in some of the symbols used by preterists, I also believe that there are some indications that the destruction of the Temple of AD 70 was mentioned in Matthew 24. At the same time. I also believe that Matthew 24 also mentioned of the end of creation.

What I meant by the Who (Jesus) and What(Christianity); Who or what is at the door, who or what is at hand, who or what is coming soon, is that Jesus never came in AD 70. Now if Jesus came in AD 70, historian such as Josephus would have recorded it, ECF would have mentioned it, His apostles would have written about it, the whole world would have seen it. So if the Who(Jesus) did not come then the What(Christianity) must have came. And we knew from history that the What(Christianity) came in the 1st century. Such a big event as the second coming of Jesus, and such low profile doesn't make any sense to me. Why would Jesus came spiritually when He always appeared to his apostles after the resurrection in His physical form or as a sign? So far, no one in this forum is able to answer me.

There is also a possibility that at hand, soon, at the door, last hour etc. is based on God's time which a day to the Lord is but a thousand years (I know you will respond with your reverse interpretation of a thousand years is but one day).

Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" and whoever believes in Him will have eternal life. He is not talking about Himself but of what He taught. What Jesus meant is He represents Christianity and who ever believes and follows him who taught about the Christian Way, Christian Truth and Christian Life will have eternal life. Therefore, when Jesus said He "is coming soon", He may mean that Christianity is coming soon... at the door during the 1st century.

I believe this is the plan of God. Christianity was launched in the 1st century and by 2,000 years or so later, Jesus is coming back to gather the results of what Christianity which He had launched have achieved.

Of course, I believe in the second coming of Jesus and I do sincerely hope you would follow also. But I do not at this moment have full hope as Joe have said, "But as usual, I'm certain it will go in one ear, and out the other".

Many Blessings.

[CWH]

Hey there my friend,

In my first post to you on this topic, I acknowledged that the fig tree is used in some contexts in Scripture as a symbol of Israel. So we agree up to that point.

The disagreement comes from the assertion that "putting forth of leaves" means "Israel restored as a nation." That's not what Jesus said, and it's nowhere in the text of the Bible. We all agree that Jesus used the fig tree, and all the trees, as a symbol that means something. And what does that symbol mean? Christ defined the meaning for us:

Jesus said that a tree "putting forth leaves" MEANS "summer is nigh."

But you say that a tree "putting forth leaves" MEANS "the nation represented by the tree is restored as a nation"

See that? You have introduced an idea that is not in the text. Basically, you said that the appearance of leaves was itself another sign in addition to the signs Christ already had prophesied. But that's not what He said. Christ said that the appearance of the signs are like the appearance of leaves that indicate the time/season is near. The appearance of the signs are not themselves another "sign."

And what does "summer" represent? It is the season of harvest. Christ identified it as the time when "all these things shall be fulfilled." Therefore, the meaning of the parable seems clear:

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh [everyone knows that this is true, as stated. It needs no further explanation]: 33 So likewise [Christ tells us to use the same common sense knowledge as with trees and seasons] ye, when ye shall see all these things [the signs prophesied in previous verses], know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

There is a perfect parallel between "appearance of leaves = summer is near" and "appearance of signs = the time of the end is near."

Many blessings my friend,

Richard

Hi RAM,

Let's look at the BIble definition of budding and blossoming i.e. "branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves". Budding seems to mean growth or development in stature, power, status:

Genesis 40:9 So the chief cupbearer told Joseph his dream. He said to him, "In my dream I saw a vine in front of me, 10 and on the vine were three branches. As soon as it budded, it blossomed, and its clusters ripened into grapes. 11 Pharaoh's cup was in my hand, and I took the grapes, squeezed them into Pharaoh's cup and put the cup in his hand."
*12 "This is what it means," Joseph said to him. "The three branches are three days. 13 Within three days Pharaoh will lift up your head and restore you to your position, and you will put Pharaoh's cup in his hand, just as you used to do when you were his cupbearer. 14 But when all goes well with you, remember me and show me kindness; mention me to Pharaoh and get me out of this prison. 15 For I was forcibly carried off from the land of the Hebrews, and even here I have done nothing to deserve being put in a dungeon."

Numbers 17:*1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and get twelve staffs from them, one from the leader of each of their ancestral tribes. Write the name of each man on his staff. 3 On the staff of Levi write Aaron's name, for there must be one staff for the head of each ancestral tribe. 4 Place them in the Tent of Meeting in front of the Testimony, where I meet with you. 5 The staff belonging to the man I choose will sprout, and I will rid myself of this constant grumbling against you by the Israelites."......8 The next day Moses entered the Tent of the Testimony and saw that Aaron's staff, which represented the house of Levi, had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds. 9 Then Moses brought out all the staffs from the LORD's presence to all the Israelites. They looked at them, and each man took his own staff.
*10 The LORD said to Moses, "Put back Aaron's staff in front of the Testimony, to be kept as a sign to the rebellious. This will put an end to their grumbling against me, so that they will not die." 11 Moses did just as the LORD commanded him.


Isaiah 55:10 As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,
11 so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

Isaiah 27:6 In days to come Jacob will take root, Israel will bud and blossom and fill all the world with fruit.

*Ezekiel 7:10 "The day is here! It has come! Doom has burst forth,[B] the rod has budded, arrogance has blossomed! 11 Violence has grown into a rod to punish wickedness; none of the people will be left, none of that crowd—no wealth, nothing of value.

So in Matthew 24 :32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; (means learn of Israel). When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, (When Israel is budding and blossoming in growth of status, nationhood etc.)ye know that summer is nigh (everyone will know that the harvest of the elect is near). 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things (the signs that Israel is budding and blossoming i.e. growing as a nation), know that it is near, even at the doors (know that the end of creation is near). 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation (those born during Israel's independence) shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Many Blessings.

[Rose]

So in Matthew 24 :32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; (means learn of Israel). When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, (When Israel is budding and blossoming in growth of status, nationhood etc.)ye know that summer is nigh (everyone will know that the harvest of the elect is near). 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things (the signs that Israel is budding and blossoming i.e. growing as a nation), know that it is near, even at the doors (know that the end of creation is near). 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation (those born during Israel's independence) shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Many Blessings.

Hi Cheow,

It's one thing to interpret the fig tree as Israel without violating the meaning of the parable, but to change the signs that Jesus had just spoken to be those things leading up to the Temples destruction (famines, wars, false christs, persecutions..ect.) to that of Israel's budding out is totally unjustified.

When Jesus was speaking the Temple was standing before Him, and Jerusalem was a thriving city....all of His words were about the signs leading up to its destruction, not its budding out!

God Bless,

Rose

[CWH]

Hi Cheow,

It's one thing to interpret the fig tree as Israel without violating the meaning of the parable, but to change the signs that Jesus had just spoken to be those things leading up to the Temples destruction (famines, wars, false christs, persecutions..ect.) to that of Israel's budding out is totally unjustified.

When Jesus was speaking the Temple was standing before Him, and Jerusalem was a thriving city....all of His words were about the signs leading up to its destruction, not its budding out!

God Bless,

Rose

Hi Rose,

Is Israel budding today? Look at its economy, look at its cities, look at its military, look at its infrastructure....it is certainly budding and blossoming. Compare the current Israel with the Israel 1,900 years ago, it was a low profile area then, occupied by various nations such as The Roman Empire, the Muslims, the Crusaders, The Ottomans, the British etc, It was never a nation for over 1,900 years. Only in 1948, then Israel managed to claim its independence. Even then till now the Arab League did not recognized Israel's independence and was eager to wipe Israel out of the face of the earth the moment it gained its independence. But God forbid and every attempt to do so to wipe out Israel by the Arab League always ended in defeat. Is God with Israel? YES! But I believe one day, Israel will succumb and be trampled under feet by its enemies and then God will come back again to rescue Israel. Talking about history, God is the master planner of history... He knows the beginning and end of every country.... the Alpha and the Omega.

Sounds far-fetched to you? Well, you are entitled to your belief as I am entitled to mine.

Many Blessings.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

So in Matthew 24 :32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; (means learn of Israel). When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, (When Israel is budding and blossoming in growth of status, nationhood etc.)ye know that summer is nigh (everyone will know that the harvest of the elect is near). 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things (the signs that Israel is budding and blossoming i.e. growing as a nation), know that it is near, even at the doors (know that the end of creation is near). 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation (those born during Israel's independence) shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Many Blessings.

Hey there my friend,

Do you realize that you are saying that the phrase "all these things" in the parable of the fig tree does NOT refer to "all these things" that Jesus spoke just before introducing that parable?

Have you forgotten the question that Jesus was answering? Jesus said that the first century Temple would be destroyed and the disciples asked "Tell us when will all these things be?". Jesus went on to speak of all the things that would happen before the destruction, culminating in the parable of the fig tree:

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things [Christ is now answering the original question!!!], know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled [Christ answers the original question again!!!].

Here we see that Christ has twice answered the original question in the parable of the fig tree. He doubled it to leave no doubt. Your interpretation ignores the context of the parable and how it relates to everything that was said in the immediate context.

If your interpretation is correct, then Jesus NEVER ANSWERED their question, and the parable of the fig tree has nothing to do with the rest of the Olivet Discourse and the entire chapter of Matthew 24 becomes utterly meaningless. It begins by asking a very specific question about when the Temple would be destroyed, but Christ then IGNORES that question and begins talking about Israel 2000 years AFTER the destruction that was never explained!

I hope you will work with me to clarify this issue.

Many blessings in Christ,

Richard

[CWH]

Hey there my friend,

Do you realize that you are saying that the phrase "all these things" in the parable of the fig tree does NOT refer to "all these things" that Jesus spoke just before introducing that parable?

Have you forgotten the question that Jesus was answering? Jesus said that the first century Temple would be destroyed and the disciples asked "Tell us when will all these things be?". Jesus went on to speak of all the things that would happen before the destruction, culminating in the parable of the fig tree:

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things [Christ is now answering the original question!!!], know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled [Christ answers the original question again!!!].

Here we see that Christ has twice answered the original question in the parable of the fig tree. He doubled it to leave no doubt. Your interpretation ignores the context of the parable and how it relates to everything that was said in the immediate context.

If your interpretation is correct, then Jesus NEVER ANSWERED their question, and the parable of the fig tree has nothing to do with the rest of the Olivet Discourse and the entire chapter of Matthew 24 becomes utterly meaningless. It begins by asking a very specific question about when the Temple would be destroyed, but Christ then IGNORES that question and begins talking about Israel 2000 years AFTER the destruction that was never explained!

I hope you will work with me to clarify this issue.

Many blessings in Christ,

Richard

Hi RAM,

I am not trying to be disrespectful of preterist's belief. But based on my belief, Jesus was asked about 3 things.... When will the Temple be destroyed? What is the sign of His coming and When will be the end of creation.

Looking at the flow of thoughts, the signs of His coming comes before the parables of the fig tree i.e. Israel:

Matthew 24:29"Immediately after the distress of those days
" 'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[c]

Here He was talking about the signs of His coming before the end of creation. I don't think He was talking about the signs of is coming at the destruction of the Temple because there is no historical record of such things during the destruction of the Temple.

30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Here He was talking of the signs of His coming at the end of creation and not about His coming in AD 70 during the destruction of the Temple because there is no such historical record.

32"Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[d]is near, right at the door. 34I tell you the truth, this generation[e] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

Here then He gave a hint of when to expect the signs of His coming.... the parable of the fig tree i.e. when Israel gained its independence. These things refers to the signs of His coming i.e. the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light.........the Sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky...

This is based on my own understandings. If you have your own different understandings, it's fine with me.

Many Blessings.