SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Authentic Biblical Christianity.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Jerusalem's final desolations

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 1798


 Jerusalem's final desolations

Jerusalem's final desolations.

In response to the question, "When will these things be (the destruction of the temple), and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?" (Matthew 24:3), Jesus begins His famous Olivet Discourse and even a casual reading of His prophetic reply shows that the land of Palestine and the city of Jerusalem will play a prominent role in the events at the end of the age.

If upon seeing the abomination spoken of by Daniel the prophet the people in Judea are to flee then the land of Palestine and the city of Jerusalem in the land of Palestine will be prominent because the AOD will take place in Jerusalem (Matt 24:15-16, Mark 13:14). This is the time when Jerusalem will be surrounded by armies intent on her desolation and is when those in Judea are urged to flee (Luke 21:20-21).

The catch is that many of these things took place in or around 70 A.D yet these events didn't result and culminate in the second advent of Christ which is how the Olivet Discourse ends. So Christ's prophecies were not entirely and exhaustively fulfilled becase they didn't result in His coming at the end of the age. The age didn't end at the destruction and rout of Jerusalem by Titus and his armies. Desecrations and abominations were performed but not by the final man of sin destined to perform these things at the end of the age. And it didn't set off a chain of events that led to the Day of the Lord and the return of Christ. So in keeping with the near far fulfillment of prophecy, a more exhaustive and complete fulfillment of these prophesied things lies yet in the future.

The long interim in between the two advents of Christ was unforeseen.

24 - and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

25 - And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves,

26 - men fainting from fear and the expectation of the things which are coming upon the world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken,

27 - And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. (Luke 21:24-27)

No one knew the exile would last for almost the duration of an age but it has and yet the prophecies have not been exhaustively fulfilled because they only will be when Christ returns. The appearance of the Messiah was to be when Jerusalem was liberated from its final eschatological enemies following a final trampling by hostile Gentile world powers.

Quoting,

"Perspectives concerning Jerusalem and the temple reflected, not only in the Prophets, but also in the Dead Sea Scrolls, confirm that Jesus and the early church would not have been alone in their expectation of an imminent judgment threatening Jerusalem and the temple. It is well known that the community of Qumran (the sect that produced the scrolls) had already retreated to the desert in this expectation. And why not? It was the uniform perspective of the prophets. The eschatological desolations of Jerusalem was a persistent theme of the prophets, particularly vivid in the apocalyptic prophecy of Daniel, a book of profound influence in first century apocalypticism. The Qumran sectaries took as primary the literal interpretation of the scripture (though also recognizing a richness of spiritual type, figure, and foreshadow). Such literal interpretation convinced them then, as we remain expectant now (on much the same biblical basis), of an eschatological assembly in the wilderness (more on this later)."

"Prominent in this apocalyptic view was the concept of the pre-messianic woes, called in later times “the footsteps of the Messiah.” This theme has survived in some orthodox circles of late and modern Judaism. It is what we know in terms of Jeremiah’s prophecy as the “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer 30:7), and in Jesus’ Olivet prophecy (based primarily on the book of Daniel) as “the great tribulation” (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21). Whatever variations of detail, this essential apocalyptic perspective (of a climatic Day of the Lord preceded by a brief period of unparalleled judgment and persecution) was standard among Jews subscribing to the inerrancy of scripture and its literal interpretation."

'In Paul’s perspective, as true of all the early church, the time is short; the world cataclysm is at hand. The prophets and the “Jewish” apocalypses of Daniel and Revelation speak with one voice concerning a final world crises centered on the “controversy of Jerusalem.” (See paper: “The Significance of Jerusalem”). In all the prophets, the Day of the Lord and the preliminary birth pangs (“Jacob’s trouble;” “Zion’s travail”) are inextricably tied to an unequalled time of international distress that begins in Jerusalem."

"And from Paul’s perspective, though the coming of Messiah is not immediately “at hand” (imminent, or presently upon; 2Thes 2:3); it is, however, impending. And like the prophets and the apocalyptist, Paul is clear that apart from impending events connected with Jerusalem (the temple in “Judea”) there can be no return of Messiah."

"Let us be clear: apart from Jerusalem’s final desolations there can be no Day of the Lord and return of Jesus! . This is of greatest significance, because it underscores where we are today. We have come full circle, and like Paul and the early church, we labor under the shadow of an imminent destruction of Jerusalem, “a cup of trembling,” that is soon to plunge all nations into the final crises. Once more Jerusalem is at the crossroads of history, and this defines our role, stewardship, and task. “They that understand among the people shall instruct many” (Dan 11:33)." (END)

doc: Instead, many people have been wrongfully instructed thsat Palestine and Jerusalem and world shaking events eminating from there have nothing whatsoever to do with biblical eschatology and the return of Christ. How wrong can they be! Near far fulfillment of prophecy, the theological "sensus plenior" must be taken into account however for all the pieces of the puzzle to fit. The near far characteristic of prophecy is the nature of many prophecies to be speaking of an event in the immediate future while at the same time speaking of a complete and exhaustive fulfillment in the eschatological future. Yet here we are. What can be said to those who advocate that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was the final and total erasing of Jerusalem from having any prophetic or redemptive relevance at all? If the nation was taken onto exile and remained there so long why stop all copnversations there? That hasn't been the end of the story. Jerusalem is once again surrounded by hostile nations and powers and armies intent on her destruction and the Son of Man is yet to return. In the near far fulfillment of prophecy the far fulfillment is staring us in the face.

On the centrality and significance of Jerusalem in prophecy - http://the.mysteryofisrael.org/courses/apocalyptic-evangelism-2002/the-centrality-and-significance-of-jerusalem


_________________
David Winter

 2014/6/16 12:51Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5087
NC, USA

 Re: Jerusalem's final desolations

The destruction of the temple WAS the end of an age.

And Jesus did return to Jerusalem in a cloud of judgment.

I agree that the 2nd coming is yet future however mt 24 is about 70 AD-- all of it. It contains some apocalyptic language which is somewhat cryptic but it is clear what Jesus is talking about.


_________________
Todd

 2014/6/16 14:12Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 1798


 Re: 2nd and 3rd comings?

"The destruction of the temple WAS the end of an age."

"And Jesus did return to Jerusalem in a cloud of judgment."

'I agree that the 2nd coming is yet future however mt 24 is about 70 AD-- all of it. It contains some apocalyptic language which is somewhat cryptic but it is clear what Jesus is talking about." (END)

Which age ended with the destruction of the temple? I prefer to think that the OT age and era ended when Christ made His atonement and was resurrected not 40 or so years later.

Christ said you won't see me again until you say blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. When Jerusalem was judged in 70 A.D in face of the awful judgements I doubt many were saying, "Hallelujah, blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!"

If Christ did return to Jerusalem in a cloud of judgment then that was His second coming because the second time you go somewhere is know as the second time you go somewhere. So if this scenario and line of reasoning is true then His return to Jerusalem at the end of the age to Jerusalem would be His third coming. All of Matthew 24 being about 70 A.D. in not borne out by scripture and the near far fulfillment characteristic of biblical prophecy.

It's my opinion, and I stress my opinion, that none of these belefs, even if true, change the place and significance Jerusalem and the Jewish presence in Palestine will play in events at the end of the age. The controversy surrounding the Jewish presence and the city is going to continue to grow in intensity and scope as it continues to threaten world peace. The prophets and Jesus have told us in advance.


_________________
David Winter

 2014/6/16 16:22Profile









 Re:

Docs writes.........

"If Christ did return to Jerusalem in a cloud of judgment then that was His second coming because the second time you go somewhere is known as the second time you go somewhere."

That made me smile because of the simplicity of the statement. IT makes it hard to refute......... bro Frank

 2014/6/16 17:04
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5087
NC, USA

 Re:

Well, there is coming and then there is COMING. When Jesus wrestled with Jacob (at least I believe it was Jesus) was that a " coming?"


_________________
Todd

 2014/6/16 21:32Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 1798


 Re: Letting things be

"Well, there is coming and then there is COMING. When Jesus wrestled with Jacob (at least I believe it was Jesus) was that a " coming?"'

It wasn't a coming in the sense that the NT speaks of the second coming of Christ. Many times when someone has a doctrinal premise wrong or out of kilter then they have to come up with other innovations along the line so as to make the basic premise work. So we see a innovation that says Christ came again to Jerusalem in 70 A.D but this "coming" was not a "COMING." Where did Christ teach He would "come" again before His second "COMING?" Why not just let things be? It reminds me of the innovation the pre-tribulation rapture theory came up with to make their premise work regarding the rapture and the second coming. It is innovatingly taught that when Christ comes to rapture His church this is His "coming" for His people while His second coming will be His "appearing" for all to see. The early church nor the NT makes any such divisions between His coming and His appearing. They are speaking of the same thing so why not just let things be and dispense with the extra innovations that are any times employed to make a wrongful basic premise appear valid. Christ said Israel would not see Him again until they proclaim blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. That didn't happen in 70 A.D. so Christ couldn't have come to Israel again at that time. Matthew 24 ends with the second coming of the Son of Man and isn't about a invisible "coming" in 70 A.D. that is not the same things as His second "COMING" at ther end of the age. Why not just let things be?

Meanwhile, if 70 A.D. was the time Israel fell by the sword and was led captive into all the nations (Luke 21:24) why is it that they are back in the land and again Jerusalem is surrounded by hostile neighbors and armies intent on wresting control of it away from the present occupants?

"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that her desolation is at hand." (Luke 21:20)

If this happened once before but the parousia didn't occur why is it beginning to play out again like the first time around yet the Son of Man hasn't returned? I'm just of the opinion that it is insightful clue as to the times and seasons the church finds itself in. Things seem to be working out like the prophets said they would in the times and seasons leading to the second coming. Without a final echatological assault on Israel and Jerusalem by its enemies Jesus won't be returning. The final desolations of Jerusalem before the appearance of the Messiah was a common theme of the prophets and widely accepted by the nation. Christ said nothing to declare this as being a wrong conception of future events.


_________________
David Winter

 2014/6/17 7:34Profile
davidc
Member



Joined: 2010/8/15
Posts: 272
France

 Re: Letting things be

Three times, Docs, you have asked "Why not let things be?". Twice regarding TMK's preterist view and once regarding the pre-trib rapture view. Perhaps you've been listening to Paul McCartney sermons!!

"Why not let it be?" is an interesting question, and it seems that you are suggesting that all other views of last days should be ignored and all should agree with your interpretation. The scriptures are not so simple in interpretation, especially prophesy.

You critcise the preterist view as follows:
" Many times when someone has a doctrinal premise wrong or out of kilter then they have to come up with other innovations along the line so as to make the basic premise work. So we see a innovation that says Christ came again to Jerusalem in 70 A.D"

Yet to go along with your own view, one hs to accept another "innovation"; what you call "the near far fulfillment characteristic of biblical prophecy."
Don't get me wrong, I agree with this method of prophecy interpretation, but it is an "innovation" just the same designed, as you said, "to make the basic premise work". I personally would not go along with the Preterist view. My own views of the last days have already been expressed on this forum.

But we all have to find some way to understand prophetic scripture, and this usually results in a methodical doctrinal viewpoint, strongly or loosley held.

We are all exhorted to search the scriptures and to be good Bereans, not "to let things be".

In Him

David


_________________
david

 2014/6/17 16:09Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5087
NC, USA

 Re:

quote: "TMK's preterist view"

Well, I would say *partial* preterist view. I still believe Jesus' second coming is future. Full preterists believe the second coming/rapture occurred around 70 AD.


_________________
Todd

 2014/6/18 7:38Profile
davidc
Member



Joined: 2010/8/15
Posts: 272
France

 Re:

I do apologise to you my brother, and look forward to seeing you (and Him) in the clouds on that glorious day.


david


_________________
david

 2014/6/18 15:12Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5087
NC, USA

 Re:

Absolutely no apologies necessary and amen!!


_________________
Todd

 2014/6/18 15:23Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy