Can God Tell Time?

[Canuckster1127]

I think PL was asking the question rhetorically. The assumed answer is yes, and while some might disagree with the point he's drawing, I don't believe there's any intent to take G-d's name in vain.

[Gman]

I think PL was asking the question rhetorically. The assumed answer is yes, and while some might disagree with the point he's drawing, I don't believe there's any intent to take G-d's name in vain.

Yes.. Well not taking the name directly in vain, but using it in a twisted way to prove his point.. But he is using the "name" to say that his G-d's timing doesn't reflect someone elses G-d's timing.

[Canuckster1127]

He's convinced that he's coming from a Biblical and right position and as such, he's asserting it, just as you are as well. I'm not assessing your motives anymore than I am his. I just don't think he's crossed a line here and maybe it's more helpful to focus on his points than to assume he's in any way belittling God. I don't always agree with PL but I don't for a moment question his motives or his love and respect for God.

[Gman]

He's convinced that he's coming from a Biblical and right position and as such, he's asserting it, just as you are as well.

Yes.. But not by using the "name" however.

I'm not assessing your motives anymore than I am his. I just don't think he's crossed a line here and maybe it's more helpful to focus on his points than to assume he's in any way belittling God. I don't always agree with PL but I don't for a moment question his motives or his love and respect for God.

No I'm not advocating that either... To be honest with you I have no idea how G-d is going to judge another person's motives. I simply don't know.

As for PL, I still think there is some hope there...

[Gman]

ok.. I see where he dragged me into the "name" too... You got me.

But he started it...

[puritan lad]

jlay,

Your point in Deuteronomy is a fair one, though I don't think the audience in Matthew 26 would have taken "you" as a general people as much as in Deuteronomy, particularly given Matthew 21:40-45. As for Isaiah 19:1, the point I want to make is the fact that God "comes on the clouds" throughout history. The reference to coming on the clouds does not necessarily refer to the Second Advent, as Isaiah 20:1-4 suggests. Rather, such references are symbolic of His judgment.

As far as the Matthew 24 passage, yes, all these things means, all these things. Everything is the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled within that generation, both shown in history, and in the authority of Christ's own words. There is really no way around what Jesus said in Matthew 24:34.

With regards to Matthew 16:28, Jesus was not promising a vision of his kingdom, but that they would actually see this kingdom come, complete with rewards, each according to their works. We have other examples, like Matthew 10:23, where John's vision at Patmos doesn't even come close to fulfilling the prophecy.

[puritan lad]

dayage,

I am familiar with both sites, but I will need to see more of the external evidence that you suggest is there. I will grant you Victorinus, though one has to wonder what the source of his information was. He certainly wasn't an eyewitness, and almost surely referred to Irenaeus. Nonetheless, since it can't be proven one way or another, I'll give you a second source.

As for Tertullian, most people, including Jerome, have him as an early date advocate. While his statement in Exclusion of Heretics does not necessarily demand a Neronic banishment, most scholars, including Jerome, have Tertullian speaking of Peter and Paul's execution being contemporary with John's banishment, and those two were clearly executed by Nero.

There are other questionable sources (as all of these human works are). The acryphal Acts of John have Domitian banishing John to Patmos, but doing so because of the Book of Revelation (which apparently had already been written). Could it be that John was banished twice, once under Nero in which he wrote Revelation, and once under Domitian because of the book?

Eusebius, a preterist, makes statements that support banishment under both emperors, but he even questions whether or not John even wrote Revelation.

The clincher, for me, is that Revelation dates itself, and does so very effectively. John himself suggests that the temple is still standing in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1-8) and that the 6th Roman emperor (Nero) was on the throne (Revelation 17:10). Neither would have been the case in the 90s.

As for this particular subject, you did not mention that the early church almost unanimously held that the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled at the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Thus your second question regarding Christ's return (assuming you are referring to the Second Advent) is a non-sequitir. A past Great Tribulation does not necessitate that the Second Advent has already happened. But Jesus' words in Matthew 24:34 do demand a past Great Tribulation.

[puritan lad]

Yes, the question is rhetorical. The obvious answer is "yes". The point, clearly, is that God has given certain time frame references in His Word that clearly disagree with modern prophecy interpretations. No disrespect for God intended (which I guess I should not have assumed would be obvious).

[1harpazo]

Puritan Lad:

This is an earlier post by me, from a different thread, but the questions are relevant and remain unanswered.

Daniel 9 makes no mention of antichrist or a millennial kingdom. And if it hasn't been completed yet, then Daniel was a false prophet, since the 490 years have already passed. It was Christ who comfirmed the covenant with many (Matthew 26:28), identified the Abomination of Desolation as the Destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans (Compare Matthew 24:15-21 with Luke 21:20-24), and is the prince who "came shall destroy the city and the sanctuary". Therefore, since Daniel 9 has been fulfilled, then vision and prophecy has been sealed up.

1. What was the purpose of the 490 year prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27?

2. If there is no gap between the 69th and 70th week, what allows you to expand the 70th week to begin at the "Last Supper" (Matt 26:28) and end in 70AD?

3. How can Christ be the prince who "came shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" when the prophecy states that it is the "people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary"?(Dan 9:26 NASU)

4. You differentiated between Jesus coming in the clouds and His second advent.

Christ's "coming in the clouds" was not a literal Advent, and clearly happened in the First Century (see Matthew 10:23, Matthew 16:27-28, Matthew 24:30-34). In fact, God's "cloud coming" judgments happen throughout the Bible - See Isaiah's Prophecy against Egypt in 730 BC (Isaiah 19:1) and Jeremiah's Prophecy against Jerusalem in 620 BC (Jeremiah 4:13). The Second Advent is a different scenario altogether, when he comes is the same manner in which he left (Acts 1:11), and history comes to an end (2 Peter 3:10).

Christ's "coming in the clouds" non-literal Advent did not "clearly" happen in the First Century. Here's why:

1. Matthew 10:23 makes no mention of Jesus "coming in the clouds" and He knew that the twelve men to whom He was talking would die or be exiled before they finished going through the cities of Israel. That leaves an open date for the Son of Man to come.

2. Matthew 16:27-28 makes no mention of Jesus "coming in the clouds" and some of those who Jesus was talking did not taste death until they saw the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. John recorded the fulfillment in chapter 12 verses 12-16: "On the next day the large crowd who had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 13 took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, "Hosanna! BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD, even the King of Israel." 14 Jesus, finding a young donkey, sat on it; as it is written, 15 "FEAR NOT, DAUGHTER OF ZION; BEHOLD, YOUR KING IS COMING, SEATED ON A DONKEY'S COLT." 16 These things His disciples did not understand at the first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written of Him, and that they had done these things to Him. (John 12:12-16 NASU)

3. Matthew 24:30-34 (just for grins, lets throw in verses 29 and 35 too): Matt 24:29-35: "But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory. 31 "And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other. 32 "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

Finally a scripture about the Son of Man coming on the clouds, but that happens after the sign of the end of the age which happens immediately after the great tribulation which is cut short so that mankind would survive. Doesn't sound like 70AD to me. Jesus didn't throw in, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away" as an after thought. It meant something. It meant a great deal. The generation that witnessed all the things prior to verse 34 would also witness Heaven and earth passing away.

4. Of the other two "cloud coming" judgments, only Isaiah speaks of God riding a swift cloud. The Jeremiah passage refers to an invading army that will destroy Jerusalem. Other than those two references that you made, I could not find any other "cloud coming" judgments in the Bible. These judgments do not "happen throughout the Bible."

The scriptures make no distinction between "cloud coming" judgments and the Second Advent of Jesus Christ. Whether He appears, is revealed or comes, it is the Second Advent and Jesus will remove the Church, seal a remnant of Israel and pour out His vengeance on the ungodly before He sits down on His throne.

You used Acts 1:11 as a second advent scripture but it more accurately describes a "coming in the clouds" event. In the context of Acts 1:9,10,11, it sounds like Matt 24:30.

You used 2 Peter 3:10 to show that "history comes to an end." In the context of verse 3 through verse 13, Peter says that in the last days mockers will come and then tells his audience to look for the day of God and puts himself in the middle of it by saying, "(w)e are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells."

2Peter 3:3-13:
3 Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4 and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation." 5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6 through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. 7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. 8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up. 11 Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! 13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
NASU

The above passage is a very good description of Joel's prophecy that Peter quoted in Acts 2:17-21:

17 'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says,
'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND;
AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY,
AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS,
AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
18 EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN,
I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT
And they shall prophesy.
19 'AND I WILL GRANT WONDERS IN THE SKY ABOVE
AND SIGNS ON THE EARTH BELOW,
BLOOD, AND FIRE, AND VAPOR OF SMOKE.
20 'THE SUN WILL BE TURNED INTO DARKNESS
AND THE MOON INTO BLOOD,
BEFORE THE GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY OF THE LORD SHALL COME.
21 'AND IT SHALL BE THAT EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.'
NASU

But you said that Peter said that the day of the Lord was fulfilled on Pentecost.

At no point did Peter suggest that any portion of Joel's prophecy would NOT wait another 2,000 years to see it's fulfillment.

Yes he did. He clearly said that the entire prophecy was being fulfilled before their eyes on the Day of Pentecost. Read Acts 2:16 over and over a few times and then justify the above quote.

5. How many "last days" and "Days of the Lord" are there?

6. Are there any other scriptures that speak of Jesus' second advent?

7. How does the "end of the age" in Dan. 12:13 compare to the "end of the age" in Matt. 24:3?

[jlay]

With regards to Matthew 16:28, Jesus was not promising a vision of his kingdom, but that they would actually see this kingdom come, complete with rewards, each according to their works. We have other examples, like Matthew 10:23, where John's vision at Patmos doesn't even come close to fulfilling the prophecy.

PL,

I agree there is potential in that. Harp has already covered that. The fact remains, John was present when Jesus said this. And John saw all these things fulfilled when he was given the revelation.

As you said, Matt 16:27-28
For the Son of Man will come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. 28 I tell you the truth, there are some standing here who will not experience death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matt. 16 doesn't say that some standing here will see Christ rewarding. That is blending the verses to suit your presuppostions. It speaks regarding seeing the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom. Otherwise, why would there be, 'And then."

I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. (Rev. 22:8)
“Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man [g]according to what he has done. (Rev. 22:12)

[1harpazo]

@ jlay,

Sorry, it seems that I squashed another one of your conversations with Puritan Lad. I'll stay out of them from now on.

Maybe he'll pick up with your post again.

[jlay]

No apology needed. I appreciate your contributions.

[dayage]

PL,

As for Tertullian, most people, including Jerome, have him as an early date advocate. While his statement in Exclusion of Heretics does not necessarily demand a Neronic banishment, most scholars, including Jerome, have Tertullian speaking of Peter and Paul's execution being contemporary with John's banishment, and those two were clearly executed by Nero.

Please give the references as I did.

There are other questionable sources (as all of these human works are). The apocryphal Acts of John have Domitian banishing John to Patmos, but doing so because of the Book of Revelation (which apparently had already been written). Could it be that John was banished twice, once under Nero in which he wrote Revelation, and once under Domitian because of the book?

The "Acts of John" could not have gotten the name Domitian from the Book of Revelation. That likely came from the common knowledge of the early church. History shows that Domitian banished people, Nero killed them.

Eusebius, a preterist, makes statements that support banishment under both emperors, but he even questions whether or not John even wrote Revelation.

Please give the references, here also, as I did.

The clincher, for me, is that Revelation dates itself, and does so very effectively. John himself suggests that the temple is still standing in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1-8) and that the 6th Roman emperor (Nero) was on the throne (Revelation 17:10). Neither would have been the case in the 90s.

Who are you excluding, Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho or Vitellius? Augustus was the first Emperor. If you include Julius Caesar, then Nero would be the sixth. Who then, of the last three, is the seventh? They all reigned before the destruction of Jerusalem. Who is the Beast, whose heads (kings) these are, and who is itself an eighth king?

As for this particular subject, you did not mention that the early church almost unanimously held that the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled at the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Thus your second question regarding Christ's return (assuming you are referring to the Second Advent) is a non-sequitir. A past Great Tribulation does not necessitate that the Second Advent has already happened. But Jesus' words in Matthew 24:34 do demand a past Great Tribulation.

I believe that Jesus predicted the destruction of Jerusalem and I agree that that was the majority position of the early church, but they did not teach that this was connected to the Second Advent or the Book of Revelation. According to the early church, the Tribulation and anti-Christ were still future. I am glad to see that you are not a Full Preterist, but looking back at the "Revelation dating itself." "Behold I am coming quickly" is found throughout Revelation. It is mentioned three times in chapter 22, so why do you not hold to Full Preterism? Just asking, because if the phrase means that the tribulation was upon them, so should have been the Second Advent, Great White Throne and the New Heavens and New Earth. Again, the whole of the church missed this if you or Full Preterism are correct.

[seveneyes]

Here is the answer friends, they were all correct in speaking that the day was coming soon, but it is a relative "soon"

From the book of Peter:

3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.[a]

11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

[pebbleanrock]

There is something quite wrong with modern eschatology timelines...

(Jesus, to his disciples) Matthew 10:23 – “You shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.”

Matthew 16:28 – “Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 24:34 - “Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.”

(Paul, to the Roman Church) Romans 13:11-12 - "You know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed; the night is far gone, the day is at hand."

(Paul, to the Corinthian Church) 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 - "Brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the form of this world is passing away."

1 Corinthians 10:11 - "On [us] the ends of the ages have come."

(Paul, to the Philippian Church) Philippians 4:5 - "The Lord is at hand."

(James, in the 40's AD) James 5:8-9 - "The coming of the Lord is at hand. ... Behold, the Judge is standing at the door."

(Peter, to first century saints) 1 Peter 4:7 - "The end of all things is at hand."

(John, to first century saints) 1 John 2:18 - "It is the last hour ... we know that it is the last hour."

mat10;23 Israel could be spiritual Israel in which there are cities on every continent. mat24 generation means abraham till 2nd coming. all others 3000 years is a second compared to eternity or now is only just soon enough. It is a ?? but the truth must be there.