When is the Great Tribulation that Jesus and others talked about?

[EarlyActs]

Matthew 24, 25~ is nowhere speaking about first century Judea. The Olivet discourse is one "continuously discourse" speaking about one subject~the last days just before Christ's return and the end of this world as we know it. The judea of Matthew 24 is the last day churches in this world~judea being the place where God is worship, or, at least supposed to be worshipped~ but in the last days before Christ's return this temple shall be filled with false prophets, and their deluded followers, declaring themselves that they are God, and God's people by what they teach, or do not teach, etc., and the false gifts they supposedly possess.

I'll this discuss these two chapters with you if you like.

There is no dual fulfillment in these chapters, they are addressing one main subject as I have said already. 70 A.D. is doctrine brought into the churches throughout this world by latter day men not taught by the Spirit of God.

Some good men have been deceived into believing this doctrine by looking outside of the scriptures for help~ a very dangerous place to look. God's truth is in the scriptures not outside of them.


That's where we shall find TRUTH, if that's indeed what we are searching for.

It is not a dual fulfillment. The 1st cent. stuff was right on time and had to be, says Lk 23:28 (the babies then would despair being alive as adults). The question is how much delay for the worldwide stuff. That has obviously been delayed all the way to today.

There is no way to read Luke, the last of the synoptics, as anything other than about what would happen to that generation of Israel. The last and most brutal warning on this topic comes in Acts 3 when Israel is told that if they do not follow the new evangelistic Moses (Jesus), they would be horribly disinherited, which is what the destruction of 66+ was. It was horrible and it cut the inheritance.

Some similar things have happened all through church history--plagues, wars, heresies, but Mt24A was about those things in 1st cent. Judea. "This generation" meant that one.

 

[Red Baker]

Red Baker:

Okay, so I understand, then, your answer to my question is "Yes." Again, the question, "Is there any aspect of history, outside of the scriptures, that you feel coincides with scripture, especially your eschatology sentiments?"

Buff~my answer was not yes. How do you get yes out of this answer of mine is beyond me! I think you understood me, but are trying to put a spin on what I said, shame on you Mr. Democrat, you pick the wrong person to do this to. Shame on you~and shame on me if I allow you to get by doing this.

Here is what I said:

Buff, you ask the wrong question, you should have asked me: "Is there any history outside of the word of God, that God's word would support"?

You see, the word of God is MY HISTORY BOOK~ As WInston Churchill so correctly said: “History Is Written by the Victors”~or, by those who want to disprove the word of God! Take your pick, sir

So you think I said yes~ you have a reading comprehension problem much more so then I realized, or, maybe you are just being down right dishonest. Either way, you misused my words for your advantage.

That being the case, why are you rejecting Josephus's history of the Jewish/Roman War in A. D. 67-70? He lived at the time. His historical knowledge of what happened has been accepted as valid by thousands of readers and scholars.

Why? because I do not need for a infidel to fill in the missing links of Matthew 24~I can use the word of God which is its own interpreter IF one only has the gift to use God's word to rightly divide the scriptures where truth is hidden from those who look elsewhere.

He lived at the time. His historical knowledge of what happened has been accepted as valid by thousands of readers and scholars.

Buff, I care less what he wrote about, and I'm not rejecting what he may have written about, my point is this: I do not need to know in order to understand the scriptures TRUTH is contain WITHIN THE SCRIPTURES PERIOD~end of story.

I'm not saying every aspect, every word, of his historical efforts is factual, only that his overall or core historical contributions on the War coincide with many portions of Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

Of course you cannot say that since you were not there! You really do not know if his overall or core historical contributions are correct~no one knows. and really should not care.

You deny that, in spite of the fact that you DO believe some history, outside of the scriptures, synchronizes with the scriptures.

I never said that, that's you putting a spin on my words.

I think you need to clarify, brother

Buff, what I need, you need and every man need is for God to open our understanding of HIS TESTIMONY of what is truth from the scriptures of truth. I want some man/woman do this:

Daniel 10:21~"But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth:"

Amen to that wisdom.

 

[Red Baker]

Some similar things have happened all through church history--plagues, wars, heresies, but Mt24A was about those things in 1st cent. Judea. "This generation" meant that one.

SIr, you will lose this battle with me, since I have been on the battle field for many years with men with all sorts of beliefs concerning the Olivet discourse. No pun intended, but facts are facts.

I highlighted your last sentence to pick another point that I have written many pages on over the years~"THIS generation"

Sir, this generation is used several times throughout the scriptures and very seldom ever has reference to a present living generation of people living at the same time of about the same period of time. Need proof, I have tons of proof. Probably should do a few post on this one subject, but for now please consider:

This generation as used by Christ, the prince of all preachers, always almost without an exception used the phrase this generation to mean a type of people, always he used it to depict an evil generation of people, a generation of serpents, etc.

In Matthew 24:34~"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."~ Is without question dealing with the evil false prophets and their followers that shall take over the temple of God. Matthew 24:5-25 are strictly dealing with false prophets that shall flood this world in the latter days just before the coming of Jesus Christ.

Context of Matthew 24:34 drive the meaning of this generation to mean the evil wicked false prophets and their followers.

Proverbs 30:11-14~"There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother. There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness. There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up. There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men."

Generation here means a kind of person, for it lacks demonstrative pronouns or other modifiers for a period of time. It is not a prophecy of the future, when children would be rebellious, for all ages have such sinners.

The lesson here is beyond disposition: it is four kind of people with specific sins.

John the Baptist and Christ both used generation in the same way.

Matthew 3:7~"But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"

Matthew 23:33-36~"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon THIS GENERATION.

Who killed Abel?

1st John 3:12~"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous."

Cain, who was of that wicked one, he belong to the generation of vipers. Who killed Zechariah? The generation of vipers, they killed all from Abel to the prophet Zechariah. All of God's wrath will come on THAT generation or this generation, since Christ of speaking of the evil generation of vipers that are in every generation of people living at any given time in thsi world.

I have much more I can give since I do have a fifty page letter that I sent to a minister, I just need to locate it. BUt, no problem if I cannot for the scriptures has a lot to say about the TWO generation of people living in this world side by side~the generation of the righteous and the generation of evil and wicked men.

I have heard men say that Jesus' present generation was the most wicked that ever lived in this world~ I reject that saying since some of the most godly men and women that ever lived in this world lived during the days of Jesus' living here. The likes of John the Baptist, the apostles and early church Christians, thousand upon thousand of them as we read in the books of the Acts of the apostles. More wicked folks living today than there has ever been. There are not many righteous men and women living in our day, not many.

 

[EarlyActs]

SIr, you will lose this battle with me, since I have been on the battle field for many years with men with all sorts of beliefs concerning the Olivet discourse. No pun intended, but facts are facts.

I highlighted your last sentence to pick another point that I have written many pages on over the years~"THIS generation"

Sir, this generation is used several times throughout the scriptures and very seldom ever has reference to a present living generation of people living at the same time of about the same period of time. Need proof, I have tons of proof. Probably should do a few post on this one subject, but for now please consider:

This generation as used by Christ, the prince of all preachers, always almost without an exception used the phrase this generation to mean a type of people, always he used it to depict an evil generation of people, a generation of serpents, etc.

In Matthew 24:34~"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."~ Is without question dealing with the evil false prophets and their followers that shall take over the temple of God. Matthew 24:5-25 are strictly dealing with false prophets that shall flood this world in the latter days just before the coming of Jesus Christ.

Context of Matthew 24:34 drive the meaning of this generation to mean the evil wicked false prophets and their followers.


Generation here means a kind of person, for it lacks demonstrative pronouns or other modifiers for a period of time. It is not a prophecy of the future, when children would be rebellious, for all ages have such sinners.

The lesson here is beyond disposition: it is four kind of people with specific sins.

John the Baptist and Christ both used generation in the same way.



Who killed Abel?

Cain, who was of that wicked one, he belong to the generation of vipers. Who killed Zechariah? The generation of vipers, they killed all from Abel to the prophet Zechariah. All of God's wrath will come on THAT generation or this generation, since Christ of speaking of the evil generation of vipers that are in every generation of people living at any given time in thsi world.

I have much more I can give since I do have a fifty page letter that I sent to a minister, I just need to locate it. BUt, no problem if I cannot for the scriptures has a lot to say about the TWO generation of people living in this world side by side~the generation of the righteous and the generation of evil and wicked men.

I have heard men say that Jesus' present generation was the most wicked that ever lived in this world~ I reject that saying since some of the most godly men and women that ever lived in this world lived during the days of Jesus' living here. The likes of John the Baptist, the apostles and early church Christians, thousand upon thousand of them as we read in the books of the Acts of the apostles. More wicked folks living today than there has ever been. There are not many righteous men and women living in our day, not many.

Sorry but the whole reason Luke wrote what he did (Luke-Acts) was to show that Paul was not part of the zealot revolution. The intros of both tell us this; he needed defense from being one of the zealots. That means that the issues are about that generation.

Because people don't go around with the directness, intensity, the current language, the passion that Christ did without talking about the current situation.

You also can't do anything about Lk 23:28 which is where it is biologically fixed to be in that generation.

Have you ever compared Mt 24 with Mt 10? They share many of the same expressions because they are about the same thing and that generation.

The analogy of the dancing and mourning is specifically about that generation and characterizing it, because it was such a decisive generation for Israel.

The 490 years ends in the middle of it, just like vision said it would, that Messiah would succeed but Israel would be ruined. Both were true.

 

[EarlyActs]

Both Lk 21 and I Th 2 say that the full extent of the wrath of God would fall on Israel in that generation; the Thess passage even speaks of it as happening.

 

[EarlyActs]

I guess you don't know the events of the Jewish war; they did take over the temple, used it as a fort. As he said.

 

[EarlyActs]

It is best if we don't have too much invested in our fav beliefs about the future.

 

[Marilyn C]

He is now on his Davidic throne, yes, Acts 2:30,31. . As a further honor to him, based on Ps 2 and 110, God will smash all the enemies of the Son.

I don't know if take them is quite on target because this world will be changed to the NHNE. So if you meant that, fine. But it is not as though (in heaven's thinking) that there is much distance between heaven and earth. My understanding of the 'snatching' is that it simply protects them from the destruction of this creation long enough to place them on the NHNE. That could be merely a moment of divine production.

Jesus created the Davidic throne and He will certainly have the authority there, however, that is not His seat of power and authority. The Davidic throne is just one of many thrones the Lord has authority over.

Actually it is the Lord, the Son who will do the `smashing` of His enemies. (John5: 22, Rev. 19: 15)

In the millennium it is only on God`s holy mountain that has the glory, (Isa. 65: 25) for the rest of the world has to learn to walk in God`s ways. Micah 4: 1 - 3.

 

[Marilyn C]

Seems to me that He would. HE WAS THE ONE who said NO MAN KNOWS, and I believe Him.

Jesus said that while He was on earth. He is now in the Godhead and certainly does know when the Father will send Him. Also, the Lord, the Head of His Body has told us -

`But you brethren are not in darkness that this day should overtake you as a thief.` (1 Thess. 5: 4)

`...exhorting one another and so much the more as YOU SEE the Day approaching. ` (Heb. 10: 25)

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Jesus said that while He was on earth. He is now in the Godhead and certainly does know when the Father will send Him. Also, the Lord, the Head of His Body has told us -

`But you brethren are not in darkness that this day should overtake you as a thief.` (1 Thess. 5: 4)

`...exhorting one another and so much the more as YOU SEE the Day approaching. ` (Heb. 10: 25)

ANd we BOTH KNOW that "Eschatologist" have proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN that they don't really HAVE A CLUE.

I'm confident that there'll be an awareness in the real Church (probably not in the visible churches) of the time of the end.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Red Baker:

Please read my post #39 again and give me a reply.

 

[Red Baker]

Red Baker:

Please read my post #39 again and give me a reply.

Buff, I do not know what you want me to say other than what I clearly said in #42~I'm finish with this back and forth going nowhere.

 

[Red Baker]

Sorry but the whole reason Luke wrote what he did (Luke-Acts) was to show that Paul was not part of the zealot revolution. The intros of both tell us this; he needed defense from being one of the zealots. That means that the issues are about that generation.

Greetings EarlyActs,

Please provide for me scriptures to support what you are saying~you are making a statement as though it is written in the scriptures, to support your theory of this generation~ meaning the present living generation. You say it is in the introduction then show me.

I will not argue that many things written in both Luke and Acts and other gospels and epistles were about issue of the present time~ that's a given, but it proves nothing as far a interpreting the proper biblical sense concerning how the phrase this generation is used in the word of God.

You also can't do anything about Lk 23:28 which is where it is biologically fixed to be in that generation.

Really? Are you sure of that? Bare with me.

Luke 23:28

• "But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, Weep not for Me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck."

Superficial study (as much of the church does today) of this verse would lead one to believe that Jesus was talking about a time when the literal women of Israel would be happy that they don't have any children. But careful exegesis will show clearly that God was talking about something far more significant to His people than literal women being blessed because they didn't have children (an unbiblical ideal btw). By the Spirit we should know this is not what God was truly illustrating. And take careful note, Christ is speaking of Jerusalem as the Mother, and the people as "her" daughters. This is the woman. Christ is really illustrating old Jerusalem, and the New Jerusalem, as representing the Old Testament Congregation, and the New Testament Congregation. The old, who's children (in part) have been cut off, and the new, represented by the spiritual Jerusalem. The congregation in Christ's day (those who give suck) were in trouble, in apostasy and on the verge of their great fall. That is why Jesus said to them, "Behold, your House is left unto you desolate -Luke 13:32." And He told them that they were not to weep for Him, but to weep for themselves and for their children (-Luke 23:28). This is because judgment would come upon the congregation ( OT ) by the cross. Blindness in part happened to them. And the children of the congregation would be blinded until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. Again, be careful to notice that God prophesies of the paps (breasts) that never gave suck, and the wombs that never bare, who would at that time be "Blessed!" We have to humbly ask ourselves, just who is this Woman that Jesus refers to as without child, who would now be Blessed? We surely cannot ignore this, or brush it aside as spiritually insignificant. We compare scripture with scripture ( something most do not do )and search it out to find exactly what Jesus means about the womb that never bare being blessed.

Isaiah 54:1~"Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD."

This is what Christ was referring to, and it has nothing to do with literal barren women. The truth is, this prophesy is explained further in Galatians 4:27. There it "plainly" tells us that this was an "allegory" or symbolism demonstrated in Sarah (the free Woman or N.T. Congregation), verses Hagar (the bondwoman or O.T. Congregation). So while many folks today look at the terms allegory, figurative, or spiritualizing as dirty words, obviously God doesn't share in their untenable unbiblical personal opinions.

Galatians 4:22-28~"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free Woman.

• But he who was of the bond Woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise.
• Which things are an ALLEGORY: for these are the TWO COVENANTS; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to BONDAGE, which is Agar.
• For this Agar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage With Her Children.
• But Jerusalem which is above is FREE, which is the Mother of us all.
• For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the Desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
• Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the CHILDREN OF PROMISE."

Now we can better understand Isaiah chapter 54:1, and what Jesus meant when He said, "Blessed are the Barren?" Who is the desolate woman (who doesn’t give suck) in that verse, which now is blessed and can rejoice because she has many more Children? She is the very same Blessed woman Christ talked about in His prophecy. This verse explains who the desolate (barren) are that have more Children than Israel, she that was married to God (her husband). They are not literal barren mothers of Jerusalem who now are blessed with children. It is an allegory or "Spiritual Signification" of the Kingdom going to the Gentile world and they being more fruitful, while Old Jerusalem is barren. Study it carefully and it becomes very clear what is in view. And it is not the so-called "wicked spiritualizers" (as some purport), but the God inspired word of Galatians itself that declares very unambiguously that these women of prophecy are an Allegory! In other words, they were used of God as a symbol or to spiritually signify something other than mere literal Women. It is not my personal interpretation, or my words, but God's word declaring they are to be taken as a spiritual prophesy. It is God who said they, and thus the prophecy concerning these two, were for an allegory. The very literal happening of these women years ago, was to point to a spiritual fulfillment in the Church. What does Galatians tell us these two women signify spiritually? It is the two Covenant congregations. One woman, the old Covenant congregation of Israel who is in bondage with her children, and not set free by Christ. And the other woman symbolizes the new Covenant congregation, which is the free woman, blessed, and who now has more children "because she is by promise." For old Covenant Israel is blinded with her children, and the new Covenant Israel has many more Children, by the Seed, Christ.

Though we may look at these verses and see clearly what they signify, many other professors will not receive these things, no matter how many times God declares it. No matter how many different ways God illustrates these things they will continue to parrot the line about literalism. This is mainly because their premillennial and historical dispensational presuppositional doctrines preclude these truths. But God is not mocked. His Interpretation of the matter is crystal clear, though received only by those with the Spirit of God dwelling within them. Even as it is written.

Galatians 4:23~"But he who was of the Bond Woman was born after the flesh; but he of the Free Woman was by promise. The Children of promise are the Elect in the Seed, Christ. In these scriptures we see clearly who these two women signify, and just who the blessed chosen people are, and who they are not. One is in bondage with her children (that is, Israel of the flesh).

Romans 9:7-9~"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son." Not as though the word of God has no effect, but that they are not all true Israel, which are of Israel (Romans 9:6). One is of the bond woman, and one of Sara the free woman, which is the true Israel of God. These are the chosen of God and Children of the Promise, made up of Jews and Gentiles together in one body of Christ.

Much more could be said, but enough has been said to prove whom Christ was speaking about when he uttered those words.

You also can't do anything about Lk 23:28 which is where it is biologically fixed to be in that generation.

I think we just did so!

 

[Red Baker]

Have you ever compared Mt 24 with Mt 10? They share many of the same expressions because they are about the same thing and that generation.

Sorry, I truly see no connection between Matthew 10 and 24~you are more than welcome to point out what you see and I would consider it from your perspective, not saying I would agree with you, but you can see if you think there is a strong connection.

The analogy of the dancing and mourning is specifically about that generation and characterizing it, because it was such a decisive generation for Israel.

CONTEXT~ever heard of the word? It is KING! Context drives our understanding of what is meant by words being used.

Luke 7:29-34~"And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him. And the Lord said, Whereunto then shall I liken the men of THIS GENERATION? and to what are they like? They are like unto children sitting in the marketplace, and calling one to another, and saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned to you, and ye have not wept. For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!"

Jesus clearly is not speaking of all men of that present generation living while he was on the earth. Many heard him gladly and were baptized of John but a certain group of men did not receive him, and they were men who regardless of how a man came preaching they found fault with that man, because they hated what was being preached. John the Baptist came neither eating or drinking and they said he had a devil, Christ came and did eat and drink, with temperance of course, and they accused him of being a gluttonous person and a winebibber~which he was not either, even though he did both in moderation. Yes, drink wine in moderation there's nothing sinful about doing so~drunkenness is sin, not drinking~gluttony is sin, not eating.

This generation were men like the Pharisees and lawyers~who were evil and wicked men even though religious! They are in every generation of men, some generation's there are many of them~ some less. Jesus' generation had a multitude of godly men and women, some of this world's best that ever live just as Jesus said concerning John in this same chapter of Luke 7, yet there were a generation of vipers among them just as they are among us in great numbers! And they shall increase as this world comes to its end. THIS generation shall never pass until all that is mentioned in the Olivet discourse is fulfilled.

Do you have another place you want to consider?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Red Baker:

Oh, I now see your answer in #42. Somehow, I missed seeing and reading it. I apologize. Anyway, you noted in post #42, "My answer was not yes." In other words, "No" to my question, "Is there any aspect of history, outside of the scriptures, that you feel coincides with scripture, especially your eschatology sentiments?"

Yet you introduced a quote from history, "You see, the word of God is MY HISTORY BOOK~ As Winston Churchill so correctly said: 'History Is Written by the Victors'~or, by those who want to disprove the word of God!"
Do I see a contradiction here? It seems, then, you do fall back on history, whether or not it coincides with the scriptures. That's interesting.

One more remark and then I think I will discharge myself from this topic. You accused me of being a Democrat. "... shame on you Mr. Democrat." Red, you did not get that accusation from the scriptures, or from history. Never in a million years could I be a modern-day Democrat. I'm a free man in Christ, and I'm a free man politically. You may add that statement to your history book!

 

[3 Resurrections]

This generation were men like the Pharisees and lawyers~who were evil and wicked men even though religious! They are in every generation of men, some generation's there are many of them~ some less. Jesus' generation had a multitude of godly men and women,

The problem with the KJV to which you have limited yourself is that this version translated various Greek terms as all being "generation". That blurred the differences which the original Greek made between "offspring of vipers", etc.. But I know that you disregard the use of the Greek as almost being wicked for an English-speaking person to refer to, (even though the KJV translators used those resources in their translating efforts).

I know the KJV-only Tabernacle Christian College you once attended long ago made the same point in their Bible classes - and still does today. Though you have laid aside their eschatology (which I was also taught while there), you apparently have not laid aside their prejudice against using Greek and Hebrew sources for aid in interpreting scriptures. It is not a sin to familiarize oneself with other languages. God speaks all languages. Even the KJV preserves specific Greek words here and there in its translation. It cripples a person's understanding of the word "generation" if they don't realize the difference when the terms "genos", genea, gennemata, etc. are used.

 

[EarlyActs]

Jesus created the Davidic throne and He will certainly have the authority there, however, that is not His seat of power and authority. The Davidic throne is just one of many thrones the Lord has authority over.

Actually it is the Lord, the Son who will do the `smashing` of His enemies. (John5: 22, Rev. 19: 15)

In the millennium it is only on God`s holy mountain that has the glory, (Isa. 65: 25) for the rest of the world has to learn to walk in God`s ways. Micah 4: 1 - 3.

Ps 2 and 110 specifically say that the Father will honor the Son by smashing his enemies. It is very important that we follow what the apostles said about these things instead of our own vision of them.

Likewise the mountain. It is already here, Dan 2. It is mentioned in Heb 12, 13.

 

[EarlyActs]

Greetings EarlyActs,

Please provide for me scriptures to support what you are saying~you are making a statement as though it is written in the scriptures, to support your theory of this generation~ meaning the present living generation. You say it is in the introduction then show me.

I will not argue that many things written in both Luke and Acts and other gospels and epistles were about issue of the present time~ that's a given, but it proves nothing as far a interpreting the proper biblical sense concerning how the phrase this generation is used in the word of God.

Really? Are you sure of that? Bare with me.

Luke 23:28

• "But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, Weep not for Me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck."

Superficial study (as much of the church does today) of this verse would lead one to believe that Jesus was talking about a time when the literal women of Israel would be happy that they don't have any children. But careful exegesis will show clearly that God was talking about something far more significant to His people than literal women being blessed because they didn't have children (an unbiblical ideal btw). By the Spirit we should know this is not what God was truly illustrating. And take careful note, Christ is speaking of Jerusalem as the Mother, and the people as "her" daughters. This is the woman. Christ is really illustrating old Jerusalem, and the New Jerusalem, as representing the Old Testament Congregation, and the New Testament Congregation. The old, who's children (in part) have been cut off, and the new, represented by the spiritual Jerusalem. The congregation in Christ's day (those who give suck) were in trouble, in apostasy and on the verge of their great fall. That is why Jesus said to them, "Behold, your House is left unto you desolate -Luke 13:32." And He told them that they were not to weep for Him, but to weep for themselves and for their children (-Luke 23:28). This is because judgment would come upon the congregation ( OT ) by the cross. Blindness in part happened to them. And the children of the congregation would be blinded until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. Again, be careful to notice that God prophesies of the paps (breasts) that never gave suck, and the wombs that never bare, who would at that time be "Blessed!" We have to humbly ask ourselves, just who is this Woman that Jesus refers to as without child, who would now be Blessed? We surely cannot ignore this, or brush it aside as spiritually insignificant. We compare scripture with scripture ( something most do not do )and search it out to find exactly what Jesus means about the womb that never bare being blessed.

Isaiah 54:1~"Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD."

This is what Christ was referring to, and it has nothing to do with literal barren women. The truth is, this prophesy is explained further in Galatians 4:27. There it "plainly" tells us that this was an "allegory" or symbolism demonstrated in Sarah (the free Woman or N.T. Congregation), verses Hagar (the bondwoman or O.T. Congregation). So while many folks today look at the terms allegory, figurative, or spiritualizing as dirty words, obviously God doesn't share in their untenable unbiblical personal opinions.

Galatians 4:22-28~"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free Woman.

• But he who was of the bond Woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise.
• Which things are an ALLEGORY: for these are the TWO COVENANTS; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to BONDAGE, which is Agar.
• For this Agar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage With Her Children.
• But Jerusalem which is above is FREE, which is the Mother of us all.
• For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the Desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
• Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the CHILDREN OF PROMISE."

Now we can better understand Isaiah chapter 54:1, and what Jesus meant when He said, "Blessed are the Barren?" Who is the desolate woman (who doesn’t give suck) in that verse, which now is blessed and can rejoice because she has many more Children? She is the very same Blessed woman Christ talked about in His prophecy. This verse explains who the desolate (barren) are that have more Children than Israel, she that was married to God (her husband). They are not literal barren mothers of Jerusalem who now are blessed with children. It is an allegory or "Spiritual Signification" of the Kingdom going to the Gentile world and they being more fruitful, while Old Jerusalem is barren. Study it carefully and it becomes very clear what is in view. And it is not the so-called "wicked spiritualizers" (as some purport), but the God inspired word of Galatians itself that declares very unambiguously that these women of prophecy are an Allegory! In other words, they were used of God as a symbol or to spiritually signify something other than mere literal Women. It is not my personal interpretation, or my words, but God's word declaring they are to be taken as a spiritual prophesy. It is God who said they, and thus the prophecy concerning these two, were for an allegory. The very literal happening of these women years ago, was to point to a spiritual fulfillment in the Church. What does Galatians tell us these two women signify spiritually? It is the two Covenant congregations. One woman, the old Covenant congregation of Israel who is in bondage with her children, and not set free by Christ. And the other woman symbolizes the new Covenant congregation, which is the free woman, blessed, and who now has more children "because she is by promise." For old Covenant Israel is blinded with her children, and the new Covenant Israel has many more Children, by the Seed, Christ.

Though we may look at these verses and see clearly what they signify, many other professors will not receive these things, no matter how many times God declares it. No matter how many different ways God illustrates these things they will continue to parrot the line about literalism. This is mainly because their premillennial and historical dispensational presuppositional doctrines preclude these truths. But God is not mocked. His Interpretation of the matter is crystal clear, though received only by those with the Spirit of God dwelling within them. Even as it is written.

Galatians 4:23~"But he who was of the Bond Woman was born after the flesh; but he of the Free Woman was by promise. The Children of promise are the Elect in the Seed, Christ. In these scriptures we see clearly who these two women signify, and just who the blessed chosen people are, and who they are not. One is in bondage with her children (that is, Israel of the flesh).

Romans 9:7-9~"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son." Not as though the word of God has no effect, but that they are not all true Israel, which are of Israel (Romans 9:6). One is of the bond woman, and one of Sara the free woman, which is the true Israel of God. These are the chosen of God and Children of the Promise, made up of Jews and Gentiles together in one body of Christ.

Much more could be said, but enough has been said to prove whom Christ was speaking about when he uttered those words.

I think we just did so!

re the generation
Sorry I don't have time for so much verbiage on obvious things. The ADULTS who were born then would despair for the calamity coming, about 40 years later. AKA the destruction of Jerusalem AKA the fulness of God's wrath AKA the Jewish War.

 

[EarlyActs]

Sorry, I truly see no connection between Matthew 10 and 24~you are more than welcome to point out what you see and I would consider it from your perspective, not saying I would agree with you, but you can see if you think there is a strong connection.

CONTEXT~ever heard of the word? It is KING! Context drives our understanding of what is meant by words being used.

Jesus clearly is not speaking of all men of that present generation living while he was on the earth. Many heard him gladly and were baptized of John but a certain group of men did not receive him, and they were men who regardless of how a man came preaching they found fault with that man, because they hated what was being preached. John the Baptist came neither eating or drinking and they said he had a devil, Christ came and did eat and drink, with temperance of course, and they accused him of being a gluttonous person and a winebibber~which he was not either, even though he did both in moderation. Yes, drink wine in moderation there's nothing sinful about doing so~drunkenness is sin, not drinking~gluttony is sin, not eating.

This generation were men like the Pharisees and lawyers~who were evil and wicked men even though religious! They are in every generation of men, some generation's there are many of them~ some less. Jesus' generation had a multitude of godly men and women, some of this world's best that ever live just as Jesus said concerning John in this same chapter of Luke 7, yet there were a generation of vipers among them just as they are among us in great numbers! And they shall increase as this world comes to its end. THIS generation shall never pass until all that is mentioned in the Olivet discourse is fulfilled.

Do you have another place you want to consider?

You don't know the issues of the 1st cent. generation at all. It was that gen that Hebrews was written to, it was that gen that Acts 3 was spoken to saying that if they did not listen to the "Moses" speaking to them, they would horribly disinherited. They were.

I am not interested in hearing about a "Christ" who goes around with vital help--for people X000 years later. He was talking directly, passionately, vividly, earnestly.

 

[Red Baker]

Red Baker:

Yet you introduced a quote from history, "You see, the word of God is MY HISTORY BOOK~ As Winston Churchill so correctly said: 'History Is Written by the Victors'~or, by those who want to disprove the word of God!"

Do I see a contradiction here? It seems, then, you do fall back on history, whether or not it coincides with the scriptures. That's interesting.

Buff~You words remind me of what Jesus said: ~Matthew 23:24~"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

Sir, I did not quote Winston Churchill to support bible doctrine, or to interpret the scriptures~a huge difference with men who use Josephus to fill in the blank in their eschatology!

Do I see a contradiction here?

You see what you want to see, let others judge since you are blind concerning what we are discussing. Being a guide without spiritual insight is unprofitable for those following such people. Both will fall into the ditch where lies are being told. This is sad indeed.

One more remark and then I think I will discharge myself from this topic. You accused me of being a Democrat. "... shame on you Mr. Democrat." Red, you did not get that accusation from the scriptures, or from history. Never in a million years could I be a modern-day Democrat. I'm a free man in Christ, and I'm a free man politically. You may add that statement to your history book!

I owe you an apology~That was uncalled for.