Re: BG: Synoptic Apocalypse

From: Jan.Haugland@uib.no
Date: Mon Aug 28 1995 - 20:52:15 EDT


Bruce Terry (now I hoep I got it right!) said:
> >There is no alternating. The destruction of the temple and the second
> >coming would occur at the same time.
>
> The alternating blocks are as follows in Matt. 24:
> where A: destruction of temple/Jerusalem
> B: second coming of Christ

Based on the *assumption* that these are not one and the same thing. You will
have to point out arguments for putting 1900+ years between these blocks of
texts. There is nothing that I see that indicates such "alternating".

> B: vv. 4-14 Warnings about troubles that are NOT signs of Christ's advent

Since we agree that these are NOT signs of anything, but in fact non-signs that
Jesus warns against being mislead by, they can't possibly apply to this coming.
You should remove the "B" above.

> A: vv. 15-22 Troubles at the desolation of Jerusalem
> B: vv. 23-28 Advent of Christ NOT at that time; rather, it will be as
> obvious as lightning and vultures

You have a problem here. v23 starts with "then", gr "tote" which means, well,
"then". Jesus is warning against false prophets and such during the Jewish War.
Read Josephus for a confirmation that these really came!

As for vultures, these can also mean "eagles". The "carcass", the Jews, were to
be found and overpowered by the Roman army wherever they found them. The Roman
army used an eagle as it's symbol, so this would be a very obvious picture to
people in the 1st century.

> A: v. 29 Transition from the desolation of Jerusalem ("after those
> days")

"*Immediately* after the tribulation of those days", again referring to the
siege on Jerusalem.

> B: vv. 30-33 Coming of the Son of Man

This shift is not possible either. Verse 30 begins with "then" [=tote], so it
refers directly to the preceding words. These dramatic celestial events (I hope
this is an audience where I don't have to point out that these are well-used
symbols in the OT) would be *the* sign of the coming of Christ. THEN he would
come.

> A: vv. 34-35 Events of this generation

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things
be fulfilled." The world "ALL" is pretty inclusive. If ALL would happen to
*that* generation who witnessed Jesus saying these words, there's not much
left, is it?

> Note that in 23-28 Jesus is very clear that his advent will NOT be at the
> time of tribulation that would occur when the abomination of desolation stood
> on holy ground (understand with Luke "when the hated Roman armies stood on
> the holy ground of Jerusalem").

On the contrary, Jesus is simply warning the disciples against being mislead by
false prophets. These false prophets would of course say, as so many times
before, that the Jewish army would overpower the Romans and win the war, as
they had done in the Macabbean war some centuries earlier (the word
"abomination" refers to Daniel and the hated Antiochus). Following these false
prophets would mean death when Jerusalem fell. Jesus was most explicit in
saying that they had to *leave* Jerusalem and not be mislead by those who said
they should stay.

Never forget that the whole so-called eschatology in the gospels is *about* the
destruction of Jerusalem. That's the question the disciples want the answer to
in the first place. Christ's "visitation" or "parousia" as King was to bring
punishment to the fallen Israel and forever end the Mosaic dispensation. That
was the end of the age!

Cheers,

- Jan

--
       "Call on God, but row away from the rocks."
              -- Indian proverb


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:26 EDT