Carrie

THE PROPHECY OF MATTHEW 24 (This post is looong but it smashes the prophecy pretty well. Read it if you can. And don't worry about me, I'm not sitting around writing this stuff all day. Many of my posts are articles I wrote a while ago and I copy paste them here).

So....We all know that Matthew 24 did not come true. But oh no, you can’t convince a Christian of that! So to make sense of Matthew 24, Christians have come up with all kinds of crazy explanations for it. One explanation is to say that Jesus DID "come back," by bringing destruction on Jerusalem, in 70 AD. And of course we all know that is totally ridiculous. Steve Staten, a Biblical scholar from Chicago Church of Christ, is one of the ones who tries to defend the 70 AD idea. He came to my old church to explain Matthew 24. I now intend to smash his explanation into little pieces. The following explains what Steve Staten taught, and what I think about what he taught:

- Steve Staten taught that Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled within the generation of the apostles.
- Steve taught that Matthew 24 has nothing to do with today or our future. He said that Jesus came back in 70 AD and fulfilled Matthew 24 with the destruction of the Temple.
- He said that Jesus showed his appearance through signs in the sky and through all the destruction.
- Steve said that “all nations” of the earth mourned, but he said that “all nations” did not literally mean every nation in the world, but rather all nations in the area.
- Steve claimed that things happened like Jesus said they would Steve said there was a terrible war, the temple was destroyed, and there were earthquakes.

* (However, many believe that Matthew 24 and the rest of the gospels were written after 70 AD. But even if Matthew 24 was written before 70 AD, the prophecy still did not come true. And if some of it did come true, that’s not surpising. The fact that
Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed is not surprising. Rome was taking over half the world at that time, and they destroyed lots of cities. You could see it coming. And earthquakes and famines happen all the time).

- Steve taught that Jesus supernaturally got his disciples out of Jerusalem and out of danger, and that’s what was meant by “gathering the elect.”
- So since Steve does not think that Matthew 24 is about the end of the world, he doesn’t think that “gathering the elect” meant taking the believers to heaven.
- Right after Jesus says, “this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened,” Jesus says, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” But apparently Steve does not think that “heaven (the sky) and the earth (the world) passing away” means the end of the world.

* I think Jesus was talking about the end of the world, and at that time he was going to take his followers to heaven, and he was going to do it within their generation. My reasoning is below ......

--Matthew 24:1-50 -- Here Jesus talks about the END OF THE AGE. It sounds like that means the END OF THE WORLD. However, Steve said that the “end of the age” really meant the end of the Jewish era, and he said that era ended with the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem in 70 AD. But, I think Jesus is literally speaking of the end of the world. For example, Jesus said that the gospel would be preached in the whole world, and then the end would come. He said that the stars would fall from the sky. He said the sign of the Son of Man would appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth would mourn. All nations would see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky. And he said the angels would gather the elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. To me, and any rational person, that sounds like the end of the world.

--Jesus also said the following: He said that many would claim to be the Christ. There would be wars and rumors of wars, and earthquakes, floods, and famine. Nation would rise against nation. The disciples would be persecuted. They would see the abomination that causes desolation. Jesus said there would be
great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world and never to be equaled again. So all of this stuff describing the fall of Jerusalem was supposed to happen, and then right after the fall of Jerusalem, the following was supposed to happen ........

--Matthew 24:29 says, “IMMEDIATELY AFTER the distess of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give it’s light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken,” and “All nations will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, and 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.”

--And right after that, in vs. 34, Jesus says that “this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. So that means some of the apostles would be alive when the end came.

--So did the “end of the age” mean the end of the Jewish age, or the end of the world? When the disciples asked Jesus, “what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” would they have been expecting a certain age to end, or were they expecting the world to end when Jesus came back? I think they
were expecting the end of the world.

--Well, obviously the end of the world did not come immediately after the great distress in 70 AD. And the end of the world did not come within the generation of the apostles.

--Some denominations (like the Catholic church and the Church of Christ) try to reconcile this problem by teaching that Matthew 24:1-50 is not about the end of the world. They teach that it was a prophecy about the end of the age, in 70 AD, when the temple was destroyed and the Jews were wiped out. They teach that Jesus actually came back in 70 AD. They believe this because Jesus said he would come back within the generation of the apostles.

--These denominations do not think Jesus was speaking of a far off generation in the future. They are right about that. In Matthew 24:34, the ‘near’ demonstrative "houtos" is used. If in
fact, Jesus had meant for a generation that was far in time, space, or thought, he would have used "ekeinos".

--Therefore it is important for these denominations to show that Jesus has come back already, and to show that all those disasters happened in 70 AD. Otherwise the prophecy has not been fulfilled. (However, the prophecy has not been fulfilled anyway, since I think it’s talking about the end of the world, and the end of the world has not come).

--So what DID happen? Jesus didn’t say anything about any specific time, like 70 AD. But it was in 70 AD that a terrible thing happened. We know for sure that the Romans destroyed the temple and Jerusalem and killed all the Jews. So there was a war, and nation did rise against nation. There was also great distress. As many as 1 million Jews were killed.

--But did Jesus return at this time? It is important to show that he DID, because that’s part of the prophecy.

--If Jesus came back in 70 AD then the following must have happened: There was great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world, and never to be equaled again. The gospel was preached in the whole world. The abomination that causes desolation stood in the holy place. The stars fell from the sky. The sign of the Son of Man appeared in the sky. All the nations of the earth mourned. All the nations of the earth saw Jesus coming on the clouds. And the elect were gathered from the four winds.

--Since Jesus meant that these things would happen in their generation, did they?

--Steve Staten said that these things happened, but they happened in a FIGURATIVE sense: For example, the gospel was not preached to “ALL” nations by 70 AD, but just to “all the nations” of the area. The stars did not actually fall from the sky, but people did see weird things in the sky. And the “stars falling from the sky” really just meant that terrible things were going to happen and people were supposed to realize that God caused it. All nations saw the sign of the Son of Man, and that just means that all the local nations saw God’s wrath on Jerusalem. The gathering of the elect from the four winds just meant that Jesus got his disciples out of Jerusalem.

--But Jesus said that all the nations would see him coming on the clouds of the sky, and I don’t know how that would be figurative. Acts 1:9-11 says that Jesus was taken up to heaven before their eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. Then two angels said, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into
heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him to into heaven.” So Jesus rose to heaven in a physical body, and in a cloud. And if he were to come back, he’d come back in the same way - in a physical body in or on a cloud. So people would literally SEE Jesus in human form, on a cloud. However that did
not happen. No one has ever seen the physical body of Jesus come back from heaven on a cloud.

--And was Jesus speaking literally when he said that the distress would be so great that it would never be equaled again? Because if he was literal, then that did not come true. The terrible things that happened to the Jews in 70 AD were in fact equaled by the Holocaust. Actually the Holocaust was even worse. Six million Jews died during the Holocaust, while only 1 million died in 70 AD. So 5 million more Jews died during the Holocaust than died in 70 AD. And during the Holocaust humans were gassed alive, while naked, with their families and friends. People were burned in ovens. People starved to death. They were forced to go on death marches in the middle of winter, etc. So the Holocost was worse in numbers, and at least as bad, if not worse, in suffering.

--Also, Jesus said that the gospel would be preached “in the whole world” before the end came. But Steve Staten said that the “whole world” just meant the world around Israel. But did Jesus mean, “the whole world” or just the “local world.” If Jesus just meant the local world when he said “all nations” and the
“whole world” then that makes Matthew 28:18-20 come into question. In that scripture, didn’t Jesus literally mean for them to preach to “all nations” of the entire world? And at the end of Mark in 16:15 Jesus said, “Go into all the world and preach the good news.” So didn’t Jesus literally mean “the entire world” and not just the “local world?” So when Jesus speaks of “all nations” and “the world” doesn’t he mean the entire earth? Otherwise they’d only have to preach to the local world.

--And if Jesus WAS speaking figuratively, why would he?. Why would he speak so figuratively that people 2000 years later would have no idea what he was talking about? Churches today do not at all agree on Matthew 24. Many churches today think these things are starting to happen, and so they think the end must be near. They point to all the wars, earthquakes, floods, and famines. And that is why the Tim LaHaye books about the end of the world are so popular. Other churches think that Matthew 24 might be fullfilled soon, or maybe sometime in far distant future. But our church thinks that Matthew 24 has already been fulfilled. There is just so much disagreement about Matthew 24. Look on the Internet and you’ll see. For every article that claims Jesus did come back in 70AD, there is another that says he did not, and each side has decent arguments. There are at least 22,000 articles about this topic on the Internet.

--So was Jesus speaking figuratively, or literally? If literally, it’s obvious that all this stuff did not happen. The whole world had not been evangelized yet. The stars did not fall from the sky. We don’t have reports in secular history that says people saw Jesus coming on the clouds.

--I think Jesus was speaking literally. It’s not the kind of thing you just go and speak figuratively about, so that later people can’t understand it. Since Jesus was supposed to be able to see into the future, he would have realized all the confusion his language would cause us. An all knowing and loving God would care enough to want us to have understanding. It’s a pretty serious scripture because if people see it in a certain way (like me) they’ll think the prophecy has not been fulfilled, and therefore think the Bible is not true. The way I see it, Jesus was saying that the end of the world was going to come in the generation of the apostles. Well, the end of the world did not come. I am here in 2003, so the Bible is not true.

--If Bible-god DID write the Bible, he did not write it with people of this millennium in mind. The Bible was written for people during Biblical times, and nothing is written for us (such as Matthew 24). So it’s like we were not considered by this God. We have no further words from God, even when there is so much
confusion among churches about the Bible and how to follow it.

THE FOLLOWING SHOWS THAT WHEN JESUS CAME BACK (IN THE GENERATION OF THE APOSTLES), HE DID INTEND TO BRING ABOUT THE RAPTURE, JUDGEMENT, AND THE END OF THE WORLD:

--Continue on in Matt 24 and read verses 36-50 and then chapter 25:1-46

-- It is clear from these scriptures that Jesus meant that when he returned, he would gather all people, for judgment (vs. 31-46). Some would go on to eternal life and others to eternal punishment. Jesus was speaking to Christians and telling them that while they are alive they need to be ready because the Son of Man will come unexpectedly, and if they want to go to heaven when he comes, they’d better be good. The enti re thing is talking about the end of the world, when the righteous will go to heaven, but the wicked will be thrown out. This second part of
Matthew 24 is not separate from the first part. It’s all the same prophecy. So when Jesus said his angels would gather the elect from the four winds, he meant he’d be taking the disciples to heaven, not just getting them out of Jerusalem. Matthew 25:31 says, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels
with him....All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,” and then the sheep would go to heaven and the goats would go to hell. Compare Matthew 25:31 to Matthew 24:31 and it’s clear that Jesus was saying that when he gathered the elect, he’d be taking them to heaven to be with him, and not just getting them out of Jerusalem!

HERE IS FURTHER EVIDENCE WHICH SHOWS THAT JESUS MEANT THAT WITHIN THE GENERATION HE WAS GOING TO GATHER THE LIVING CHRISTIANS TO HEAVEN, AND THEY EXPECTED IT, AND EXPECTED JESUS TO COME BACK SOON:

--2 Thes. 2:1-11 -- Sounds like the disciples were concerned that Jesus had not come back yet. So Paul wrote, “Concerning the coming of our Lord and our being gathered to him, we ask you not to become unsettled by some prophecy or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.” The disciples were worried that Jesus had come back and they were not gathered to him. So then Paul gave reasons for why Jesus had not come back yet. Paul said that the man of lawlessness had to come first, so God was holding back so that Jesus could be revealed at the proper time. The lawless one
would come and do all kinds of fake miracles and people would be deceived, and God would send them a powerful delusion so they would believe the lie. And Jesus would overthrow the lawless one. And this “lawless one” was not even mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 24. Jesus did not mention any individual. He
just said that many false Christs would come, and Jesus never said anything about overthrowing the lawless one. So I don’t know where Paul got that extra information. You’d have to believe that Jesus spoke to Paul in a vision and gave him this information. Why Jesus wouldn’t have mentioned “the lawless one” and “overthowing him” in the first place, I don’t know.

--2 Thes. 3: 6-13 -- Some disciples were not working. The reason they were not working was because they were expecting Jesus to come back at any time, so they didn’t see any reason to work. Paul had to tell them that if a man will not work, he shall not eat.
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/2thes...salonians3.htm
This Christian website said that there was intense eschatological speculation among the believers, so some decided not to work. Eschatology, according to Webster’s Dictionary is: a belief concerning death, the end of the world, or the ultimate destiny of mankind; specifically: any of various Christian doctrines concerning the Second Coming, the resurrection of the dead, or the Last Judgment.

--James 5:8 -- Says, “Be PATIENT until the Lord’s coming” and “The Lord’s coming is NEAR!” and “The Judge is STANDING AT THE DOOR!” The disciples were told to wait patiently for Jesus to return, even though they had to suffer in the meantime. And they needed to be righteous because Jesus was coming soon.
The Judge was at the door and could open it at any time. “At the door” means “really near” and “really soon.” If you say someone is at the door, you don’t mean that they’ll be coming over to the house in 5 hours. You mean that they are about to walk in at any minute. And Jesus wasn’t going to knock and give
them any warning. The door isn’t locked for Jesus, so he can enter at any time. If Jesus is at the door, you’d better “have your house in order,” because he’s coming in.

--1 Peter 4:7 -- “The END of ALL THINGS is NEAR. Therefore be clear minded and self controlled so that you can pray. Love one another deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.” So since the end was near, they needed to be alert and pray, and try to be as good and sinless as possible.

--2 Peter 3:3 -- Peter was addressing the fact that Jesus had not come back yet, as people had been expecting him to, and they were doubting that he would. So Peter said - First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, saying “where is this coming he promised? Ever since our fathers
died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” Then Peter said, “Do not forget that with the Lord a day is like a thousand years.” So that’s Peter’s reasoning for why Jesus hadn’t come back yet. Jesus said he’d come back “SOON,” yet Peter is saying it could be THOUSANDS OF YEARS. Then Peter goes on with his reasoning, saying, “God is patient and doesn’t want anyone to perish, but wants everyone to come to repentance.” So Peter gave the disciples reasons why Jesus might not ACTUALLY be coming soon. These words of Peter’s are what got all Christians to stop expecting Jesus to come soon, and that’s why today we think that it could still be thousands of years from now before Jesus returns.

-- 2 Peter 3:10 -- “The day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar, and the elements will be destroyed by fire. The earth and everything in it will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought YOU be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as
you look forward to the day of God and SPEED IT'S COMING.” So here’s the same theme: Jesus was coming soon, so they were warned to be good while they waited for the Lord to appear. Verse 13 says, “ WE are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.” Also, Verse 14 says, “Since YOU are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless, and at peace with him.” Peter meant that THEY could look forward to the day of of God, and speed it’s coming. If Peter didn’t think it would be they (those who were alive at the time) who would see the day of God and speed it’s coming, he wouldn’t have told them to look forward to it. When you tell someone to look forward to something, you are telling them that they can expect something to happen, and you mean that they can expect it while they are alive. You don’t tell someone in 2003 to look forward to living on Venus, because that is not something they can look forward to in their own lifetime.

-- 1 Cor. 15:51-52 -- Paul said, “WE will not all sleep (die), but WE will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the TRUMPET will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and WE will all be changed.” So this shows that they were expecting that Jesus would return within their
generation, when many of them would still be alive, and would not die, but would just be changed. Also, Paul speaks of the trumpet sound, which will happen when the believers are taken to heaven. So then we know that in Matthew 24:31 when Jesus gives the TRUMPET call, and gathers his elect from the four winds, he is talking about taking them to heaven.

-- 1 Thes. 4:13-17 -- Paul said he did not want them to be ignorant about those who fall asleep. And he didn’t want them to grieve like other men grieve when someone dies, because other people have no hope when their loved ones die, because they don’t know what happens to them after death. But Paul said, “we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.” So Paul was reassuring them that all disciples would go to heaven if they died before Jesus came back. Then Paul told them that those of THEM who were STILL ALIVE, who were left until the coming of the Lord, would not go before those who had already died. He said that the Lord himself would come down from heaven with a loud command and
TRUMPET call, and the dead in Christ would rise first. And Paul said, after that, WE who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so WE will be with the Lord forever. I don’t think Paul meant that “the believers in the future” would be caught up in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

--1 John 2:18 -- John said, “This is the LAST HOUR!” So now it was not just the last days, but the last hour, meaning Jesus should be coming any second now. John also said that THE anti-christ is coming. He said he knew it was the last hour because many anti-christs had already come. Some people (the scoffers) were trying to lead the disciples astray by telling them that Jesus was not the Christ - and they were probably saying that because Jesus had not come back yet like they were expecting. So these disciples had to be reassured by John, otherwise they might have believed those who said Jesus was not the Christ. So John
reassured the disciples that Jesus would be coming SOON, and very soon, because it was the very last hour.

-- Rev. 1 -- This is the “revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to show his servants what must SOON take place.” The revelation was shown to the apostle John, and it was written down and shown to the other disciples. John and the disciples of that time were the servants, and Jesus wanted to show them what would happen SOON. The thing that was going to happen soon was Jesus’ return. Rev. 22:12 says, “Behold I am coming SOON! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done....Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city...but the evil people would go to the firey lake of burning sulfur.” The city that the righteous would enter into is heaven. Rev. 21:2 says “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.” Verse 4 says in this place “there would be no more death or mourning or crying or pain.” So clearly, Jesus said he was coming SOON, and those who were righteous would be rewarded by getting to go into heaven.

--What else could Jesus have meant my SOON? And isn’t it clear that after he came, there would be the Judgement, and some people would be sent to heaven and others sent to hell? And when Jesus separates out the righteous and the evil, and sends some to heaven and others to hell, isn’t that the end of the world? Revelation clearly talks about the end of the world and the judgement of everyone, and Jesus said it was given to show what must soon take place.

--Did the disciples have good reason to expect Jesus to come back soon? Yes, he said he would.

--No Christian should deny the fact that Jesus said, “This generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.” Matthew 24 and 25 do not apply to people today. Jesus did not mean “some distant generation thousands of years later.” If he had meant it about some distant generation, then his words would have been no big deal to the people he was talking to.

--IMAGINE IF HE HAD MEANT IT THIS WAY: “This generation 5000 years from now will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” Big deal. In some generation a long time from now the people will not all die until all this stuff happens to them. And all these things CANNOT happen to us now. Most people don’t even know what the abomination that causes desolation is. Dee, the women’s ministry leader at my old church, said that the abomination spoken of through the prophet Daniel, was a pig that was sacrificed in the Temple. So should we look for someone doing something terrible in the temple? We don’t have a Temple anymore. And if we don’t have a Temple, then also “the man of lawlessness” can’t set himself up in it (see 1 Thes. 2:4). And if some anti-christ came and started doing false miracles, we’d probably arrest him and put him in a mental hospital. And we don’t have to worry about our flight taking place in winter, because we have cars and warm coats.
And we don’t have to worry about our flight taking place on the Sabbath, since we don’t observe the Sabbath, and I don’t see why Jesus would expect that anyone would observe the Sabbath anyway if the world was ending.

--In the first part of Matt 24:1-35, Jesus explains about all the bad stuff that will happen, in the middle of Matthew 24 he talks about his coming back and the world ending, and in the end part of it he says that their generation would not pass away until all that stuff had happend. Since the “this generation” part is at the
end, Jesus did not mean that the apostles would only see all the BAD things happen. They would also see the good things. They’d see Jesus come back, and they’d see the of the world, and they’d get to be gathered up to heaven with him.

--Jesus OBVIOUSLY meant that the universe would end within the lifetime of his disciples, and he’d be taking them to heaven. It’s only when we try to explain all this some other way that it gets so complicated and does not make sense. All this DOES make sense and is simple if you read it as Jesus meant it. But Christians don’t want to read it like Jesus meant it because if they took it literally, then the end was supposed to come
a long time ago, but it hasn’t, so that shows Jesus’ prophecy was false. If they admit that what Jesus said isn’t true, then that will put an end to their belief in him, and they’ll lose their religion. If all Christians figured this out, Christianity would cease to exist. But most Christians will believe the Bible no matter what
it says. Christians have their whole identity wrapped up in being Christian, and giving up their beliefs is just too big of a cost for them, so they will keep on finding ways to try to make the Bible make sense, no matter how difficult it is. Christians have to be masters of LOGICAL GYMNASTICS, so they can flip and twist the
scriptures until they’ve forced them to mean what they want them to mean! But like I said, if you just read it as a man made book that does not make sense, it’s a lot easier to understand it all.

HERE ARE SOME OTHER WAYS THAT PEOPLE TRY TO MAKE SENSE OF MATTHEW 24:

www.ebiblefellowship.com/q_and_a/qa12.htm:
“Matthew 24 was NOT fulfilled in 70 AD. Matthew 24 is dealing with the time of the great tribulation and the end of the world. Many people would like Matthew 24 to be referring to 70 AD, because then they wouldn't have to listen to the warnings that Christ gives about the abomination of desolation (Satan) standing in the temple (corporate church). And then they wouldn't have to pay any attention to God's command for believers living during the great tribulation to depart out of the churches and congregations. It's very convenient for many to write off Matthew 24 as dealing with something that is past already-but the context of Matthew 24 will not allow for this. We must stop trying to avoid the facts that Matthew 24 faces us with--that for a little season near the end of the world Satan will be victorious over the corporate church.”

(So this guy says that the abomination that causes desolation is Satan, and the temple stands for the church, so Satan will take over the church in the future. Okay, sure, whatever).

And .....

www.freedomsring.org/coming_3.html
“Christ did come in 70 AD. When Christ came in 70 AD, He raised all the Old Testament saints. This included all who had died during the Old Covenant age, right on up to the time of His parousia in AD 70. Christ was the firstfruits who had destroyed the power of death.. Afterwards (40 years later) the sleeping Christians with those mentioned above were raised in the
"first resurrection" (Rev. 20:5). They preceded those still living: "the dead in Christ shall rise first" (1 Thes. 4:16). But the resurrection is not over. As individuals who were still living would die later, they would be raised, caught up, or "raptured." Raising the dead is a continuous process since the parousia. So, contrary
to the general understanding of a one-time event, the raising of individuals as they leave this physical body continues. "And the dead in Christ will rise first; then (which means afterwards) we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord." (1 Thes. 4:13-17)”

I have 3 points to make about what this guy said.......

First of all, this guy sounds like he might know what he’s talking about , but I can show how he’s wrong. What he’s saying is that in 70 AD, Jesus raised the O.T. saints and the Christians that died before 70 AD. The guy considers this supposed event to be the first resurrection. The dead saints were taken to heaven before those who were still alive when Jesus came. Everyone who was alive at that point, and everyone who has died since has been raised to heaven individually. But, first of all, if you read Revelation 20:5, you will clearly see that it is impossible to figure
out what Paul is talking about when he says “this is the first resurrection.” The first resurrection theory that this guy is talking about, makes no sense in the context of Rev. 4-6. In Rev. 4-6 Paul says, “I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus. They came to life and reigned with Christ for 1000 years. And the rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed are those that have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and will reign with him for 1000 years.” Okay, so since this guy believes that the Christians that died before 70 AD were raised to heaven in this first resurrection, he has to believe that they reigned with God for 1000 years. And those who would die after that could not go to heaven until the 1000 years were over. And the second death did not have power
over those that had been raised in that first resurrection. What second death? And why would a second death have power over them if they were already in heaven? What the hell? The Bible doesn’t make sense, and neither do the explanations people give about it. I don’t understand what this dude is talking about. If
people can’t understand the Bible, and we can’t even make sense of all the different explanations of the Bible, what are we to do? Why should we believe that the Bible is understandable at all when even Bible scholars have so much disagreement over it?)

And now for my second point: The guy refers to 1 Thes.4:16-27. And what he takes it to mean is that today, when believers die, they will be raised individually to meet the Lord in the air. However, vs. 16-17 say, “ The dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” So what the scripture really means is that those who died before Christ’s return would go to heaven, and they would even rise up first, since they were already dead and those that hadn’t even died yet shouldn’t cut in line. So then the rest, who were still
alive, wouldn’t have to die (1 Cor. 15:52), and they would then join the others in the air to meet the Lord. In 1 Cor. 15:52 Paul says, “we will not all sleep (die) but we will all be changed, in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.” So this says that they would not die at all, not even in a physical sense. Their bodies would just be changed and would be come supernatural bodies like Jesus' resurrection body was (see 1 Cor. 15:42 and 15:49). But this guy is claiming that after we die
physically, we then rise spiritually to meet the Lord in the air.

And my third point: If the O.T. saints had to wait until 70 AD in order to be raised to heaven, what was the deal with Moses and Elijah appearing with Jesus on the mountain? (see Matt 17:3) And remember that Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind and never even died (2 Kings 2:11).

LAST POINT
-- There are a lot of possible explanations for things in the Bible, but most of the explanations are just plain LAME!

vtran31

And right after that, in vs. 34, Jesus says that “this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. So that means some of the apostles would be alive when the end came.

Why cannot this generation be the generation that sees these signs?

vtran31

So this shows that they were expecting that Jesus would return within their
generation, when many of them would still be alive, and would not die, but would just be changed.

Why cannot we speak of the entirety of the Body of Christ.

PS. I think when God comes back is left as a mystery and eagerly awaited by every generation so beleivers can be anxious for His coming and to do the work " while it is light"

vtran31

And my third point: If the O.T. saints had to wait until 70 AD in order to be raised to heaven, what was the deal with Moses and Elijah appearing with Jesus on the mountain?

Where do you get they had to wait till 70AD?

Matthew 27:52The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

PS. if there is no proof of this this does not invalidate the passage. Would they even know they were resurrected? How many people? would those people actually record it? If they were in the common poor class, most likely no

MortalWombat

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you implying that what Jesus really meant was that "the people that see this things won't pass away until they see them?"

If that's the case, then it's a pretty silly prophecy, since it's circular.

Carrie

“That” generation WOULD be the ones to see the signs. The generation of the apostles would be alive to see the signs of Jesus’ coming. They would not all die before Jesus came back (and when he came back, they would see the signs).

The date Jesus was to come back was unknown, but it WAS supposed to be within the generation.

Vtran31 - You didn’t read the whole article. “ I ” do not think that the O.T. saints had to wait until 70 AD to be raised. That was an argument used by a Christian who was trying to support the idea that Jesus came back in 70 AD. And to knock down that claim, I used the same reasoning you did - which is that Moses and Elijah were already in heaven.

You have to be careful when reading my article to get it, because it’s so long, and you could mistake what I said some Christians believe, for what I believe. I don’t believe any of the Christian claims.

I don’t think Matt 24 WAS or EVER WILL BE fulfilled.

Abel Stable

I find this highy unlikely. If people that you knew were dead suddenly hopped from their graves and started walking around, I would take pretty careful attention and would be compelled to tell someone else. Given the prevalence of vampire legends (and similar stories which existed for centuries in all cultures) I would be very surprised if no record was made of this: a very tangible event. How could such a fantastic thing with countless eyewitnesses go unnoticed or disregarded? There isn't one single account of "the day that the dead rose and mingled around" except in the Bible. Is your disbelief suspended yet?

GarColga

"It is an easy thing to tell a lie, but it is difficult to support the lie after it is told. The writer of the book of Matthew should have told us who the saints were that came to life again, and went into the city, and what became of them afterwards, and who it was that saw them; for he is not hardy enough to say that he saw them himself;--whether they came out naked, and all in natural buff, he-saints and she-saints, or whether they came full dressed, and where they got their dresses; whether they went to their former habitations, and reclaimed their wives, their husbands, and their property, and how they were received; whether they entered ejectments for the recovery of their possessions, or brought actions of crim. con. against the rival interlopers; whether they remained on earth, and followed their former occupation of preaching or working; or whether they died again, or went back to their graves alive, and buried themselves".

Thomas Paine "Age Of Reason"

vtran31

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you implying that what Jesus really meant was that "the people that see this things won't pass away until they see them?"

No. until all is furfilled. i figure meaning Christ coming back to the earth

If that's the case, then it's a pretty silly prophecy, since it's circular.

Not really. just not saying that the generation Jesus was speaking to was the generation that was not to pass away. the generation that saw those signs would be. some of the signs are pretty nonambigious

vtran31

"I find this highy unlikely. If people that you knew were dead suddenly hopped from their graves and started walking around, I would take pretty careful attention and would be compelled to tell someone else."

The idea that the common people actually knew who they were is not actually stated and is an assumption that may or not be true

"Given the prevalence of vampire legends (and similar stories which existed for centuries in all cultures) I would be very surprised if no record was made of this: a very tangible event. How could such a fantastic thing with countless eyewitnesses go unnoticed or disregarded? There isn't one single account of "the day that the dead rose and mingled around" except in the Bible. Is your disbelief suspended yet?"

How do you know they even knew what was happening? what if they thought they were just people who never died?