The Narrow Path Ministries

Mellontes asked if I would expound on Mat 24, so here it is.

A few general questions to talk about regarding Mat 24

Who is the audience: "His disciples came to Him privately and said..." furthermore, Mark 13 specifically stated it was "Peter, James, John, and Andrew" Now whether it was ONLY those 4 or more, it makes no difference to me realy, as it was His disciples.

What is the question asked. "tell us, when will these things happen? AND, "What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" When reflecting on that, is it just one question or two? I am not sure what most of you would think, but it sounds like two different things possibly. (at least Ithink so)

Now, jump down to verse 13 "But the person who endures to the end will be saved." I ask you brothers and sisters to reflect on who is Jesus talking to and what end is He refering to here.

For you full pretersist = 70 AD ? .... think about... think hard.... hehe.... How many of Jesus' disciples endured till 70 AD? I could ellaborate on that tid bit, but I will just let it sink in.

For you futurist = a time yet to come still.... Who was Jesus talking to? His disciples at that moment and time, or some future generation 2000+ years plus which had no relevence to them specifically.

Now, jump down to verse 29 "Immediately after the suffering of those days....." I ask you again brothers and sisters, when did the suffering end for the disciples He was talking to?

full preterist = 70 AD? Are you sure brother? how many of Jesus disciples were actually physically alive in AD 70? hmmmmmm.....

To spell it out, the suffering ended when they physically died. And not only that, but continuing with that verse 29, and try to put this into context of "physical death" ..... "the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven will be shaken"....... sounds like physical death to me. (possibly)

Then in the very next verse, 30 "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man arriving on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send his angels with a load trumpet blast, and they will gather His elect..." ..... so right after the physical death comes the gathering. Each individual in his own time. (possibly)

I only put this out there because I was asked. And I sure don't expect everyone to agree with it. Heck, I wouldn't have just a couple of years ago.

Anyway, food for thought I guess. Something to ponder.

Actually Doug, wasn't my question more directed to the Parousia from Matthew 24:3 and how it pertained to your parousia coming at individual death? The Paruosia coming in Matthew 24:3 is forecast to happen after a certain series of events. It doesn't even matter whether one is preterist or futurist in eschatology. It is a surety that some believers died before those events came to pass.

Blessings!

LOL, I guess I suck at trying to explain things.

I even try to throw in some fun and humor, alas, I failed again.

I thought I had explained how one could possibly understand what Jesus was saying to His disciples in chapter 24. I am not saying it is the way it should be understood , but a possibility..... and if you don't see it like I do then neener, neener, neener.... (again, my attempt at humor)

Anyway I currently think it might be the closest to the actual reality that Jesus was telling His disciples, but then again, I have been wrong before, many, many , many times.

One thing I have learned since debating eschatology for some time now is that just when I think I have a grasp on it, the Holy Spirit gives me a little more and makes me question what I have maybe never questioned before. I have never heard of anybody else saying what I have thrown out there as a possibility... so... what kind of heretic am I? I cannot even label the dang thing, hehe....

Oh well, it is what makes the most sense to me at this time....... *shrug*

Thanks for all your input Mellontes, you are always very helpful..... Keep up the good work, (even though we don't exactly see things the same)

Douglas wrote:LOL, I guess I suck at trying to explain things.

Actually I was beginning to think for awhile that you weren't expressing your own view. I believe what you propose is pret-idealism, a view held by Todd Dennis and a few others. I have tried to examine every 2nd coming verse with what you say (months ago) and I can understand where it seems the text would say what you believe but it also says the same thing about the 2nd coming. My difficulty with your view is the general overall view of the NT concerning the 2nd appering. In the gospels it is limited to ocurring in their generation. As you move further along in time, it gets referred to as a little while and then finally at the door and at hand. It is a one-time event for those of the first century. You can be guaranteed because of the Jewish persecution many people died while the Parousia was still being expressed as a future event. The second appearing was still talked about an event happening in the future after Stephen's death. Now how can that be? This is the problem I have with the appearing at individual death theory. Add to this, the fact that certain historical things had to take place before the Parousia (second appearing) would be made manifest. I can't rectify that with a personal death. How do you? Perhaps I am missing something here.

And you are right about that Holy Spirit nudging thingy. Get used to it. Your journey is just starting... And when you think you've arrived, you had better not unpack

I just realized I never heard an answer to a question I posed above, and was wondering if it just got missed somehow. If Matt 24 is only talking about AD70 and the destruction of Jerusalem, then when it says the person who endures to the end will be saved, to be consistent, you must understand that to be AD70 as well. And therefore "the end" throughout that chapter, according to the full preterist, is refering only to AD70 and those who did not endure to "the end" did not get saved. That is if chapter 24 is only discussing one thing, AD70, which I don't think is the correct way to understand it.

Consider that Luke breaks it up into two different sections (Luke 17 & 21) and that is because I believe it is discussing two different, but related, things.

I may be horrible at explaining things, but I still did not see an explanation of verse 13 and "the end" from a full preterist that is consistent. If one does not see any need to be consistent, then thats ok also and I guess we all can agree to disagree on Matt 24 and exactly what is being said.

Douglas wrote:I just realized I never heard an answer to a question I posed above, and was wondering if it just got missed somehow. If Matt 24 is only talking about AD70 and the destruction of Jerusalem, then when it says the person who endures to the end will be saved, to be consistent, you must understand that to be AD70 as well. And therefore "the end" throughout that chapter, according to the full preterist, is refering only to AD70 and those who did not endure to "the end" did not get saved. That is if chapter 24 is only discussing one thing, AD70, which I don't think is the correct way to understand it.

Consider that Luke breaks it up into two different sections (Luke 17 & 21) and that is because I believe it is discussing two different, but related, things.

I may be horrible at explaining things, but I still did not see an explanation of verse 13 and "the end" from a full preterist that is consistent. If one does not see any need to be consistent, then thats ok also and I guess we all can agree to disagree on Matt 24 and exactly what is being said.

"Enduring to the end" and "he that overcometh" have got to be two of the most wonderful phrases. If one believes that those who did not endure to the end were not saved then one must believe one can lose ones' salvation. I am not suggesting a position just stating results of a consequence...

Mellontes wrote:Enduring to the end" and "he that overcometh" have got to be two of the most wonderful phrases

I agree brother. And I pray that we both endure to the end.

Mellontes wrote:If one believes that those who did not endure to the end were not saved then one must believe one can lose ones' salvation. I am not suggesting a position just stating results of a consequence...

I am of the opinion that there are those that did not endure to the end in the 1st century, as well as there are those today who will not endure to the end. And I believe "the end" being refered to here is physical death, in both cases. I am obviously not a calvinist.

I am still curious though about a full prets answer to "the end" stated in Matt 24:13. What "end" do you believe it is talking about?

Hey Doug, how's it going,

I think the "end" Jesus is referring to in 24:13 is the end of their lives. I would base this on verses 9-11 where He tells them that they would be delivered up to tribulation and be killed and that many would fall away. Enduring to the end of their lives (and not falling away) makes sense of the whole section. He doesn't necessarily tie their deaths to the OTHER "end" he mentions in this passage, i.e. the end of the age (Jewish age or Church age, depending on your millenial view) in verse 14.

Also, to view Christ's answer to their question as a description of His second coming seems unlikely since they didn't yet even realize that He would be going away. That didn't happen until after His resurrection (see Acts 1:6-11).

In Him,

Jess

I can not see "the end" being referred to as physical death.

Matthew 24:6 - And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

Matthew 24:14 - And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Mark 13:7 - And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet.

Luke 21:9 - But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by.



The fact that it is expressed as "the" end, tells me that it is not about physical death, but rather a historical event. Christ had a perfect chance to say "your" end or the end of your lives, but chose not to...

The disciples' question is directed specifically towards "the end" of the world (age). Why should Jesus change the question?

The disciples' original question also is inquiring about the PAROUSIA - the Lord's coming. They had just heard Jesus, in Matthew 23, talk of judgment and the destruction of the temple (as also confirmed in Matthew 24:1-2). These 4 Jews were not unfamiliar with all the other OT comings in judgment. Why should Jesus change the question? He speaks uninterrupted answering their question until, finally, in Matthew 26:3, a new topic and a new audience is brought in.

"The end of all things is at hand," said Peter about thirty years after Christ.

Heya jess,

Great to hear from you brother, I understand Matt 24 exactly as you do it appears. That there are two different, but related, ends being discussed in the passage.

Mellontes,

You suprise me brother.

At least you did stay consistent with "the end" throughout the passage. I have much love and respect for you brother and do appreciate your input as always. We will just have to agree to disagreee on this point. As always, people will make up their own minds as to how it should be understood, and I think you and I have given the readers much to ponder.

with much brotherly love to all the saints.
Douglas