Ì Matthew 24: 1-4, "As Yeshua left the Temple and
was going away, his talmidim [disciples] came and called his attention to its
buildings. But he answered them, '"You see all these? Yes! I tell you,
they will be totally destroyed -- not a single stone will be left
standing!"'"
"When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the talmidim came to him privately. '"Tell us,"' they said, '"WHEN WILL THESE THINGS HAPPEN? AND WHAT WILL BE THE SIGN OF YOUR COMING, AND THIS PRESENT AGE IS ENDING?"'" "Yeshua replied: [vss. 4-51; Luke 21:22]..."'"
Jesus began to answer the three-fold question presented by the disciples: it is one question with three components. Verses 4-14 cover the time; verses 15-29 cover the “sign” of his coming (this term is only used by Matthew) or the conditions; and, verses 30-51 cover the end of the [age].
"When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the talmidim came to him privately. '"Tell us,"' they said, '"WHEN WILL THESE THINGS HAPPEN? AND WHAT WILL BE THE SIGN OF YOUR COMING, AND THIS PRESENT AGE IS ENDING?"'" "Yeshua replied: [vss. 4-51; Luke 21:22]..."'"
Jesus began to answer the three-fold question presented by the disciples: it is one question with three components. Verses 4-14 cover the time; verses 15-29 cover the “sign” of his coming (this term is only used by Matthew) or the conditions; and, verses 30-51 cover the end of the [age].
[“Parousia” versus “elthonti”
Both words
are rendered “coming” in English. “Παρουσια”, Parousia, derived from the radicle “pareimi”, means:
“presence, a
coming, arrival or advent.” (Take note of how the meanings
are worded!) “Ελθοντι”, Elthonti, derived from the radicle “erchomai”, means “to come, to go, to pass.”
What is the
significance of the two words as one analyses them? “Elthonti”
denotes a physical arrival by someone, where as “parousia” denotes an event within time.
Strong’s definition (#G3952) adds: “(by implication) physical aspect: --
coming, presence.” -- “by implication”?! An “indirect suggestion”, “logical
relation”?! The “Second Coming of Jesus Christ” that is advocated by futurists has
no evidence outside of human reasoning.
It is propagated upon conjecture!]
Observe, verses 9, 16, 21, 23, 30 and 40 begin with the
words: “then”, “when” or “that time” (Gk. “to'te”); these are Subordinate
Conjunctions. Also, verse 15 uses “When, therefore”, [(“‘'otan”) adverb of time
+ (“oun”) particle.]. These words do not diminish from the context! The words that follow the subordinate
conjunctions or adverbs are additional, descriptive information emphasizing
what has been previously spoken about them.
Moreover, Jesus continued into chapter twenty-five with two parables that qualify what he had spoken of in chapter twenty-four. Verses 1, 7, 34, 37, 38, 39, 41, 44, and 45 begin with the use of subordinate conjunctions.
Matthew speaks of the great tribulation (“θλιψις μεγαλη”, thlipsis megale cf Revelation 2:22 & 7:14: these verses use the same words) in verse twenty-one. See also: Mark 13:19 & Luke 21:23.
Likewise, in Luke 21 the disciples asked: "Rabbi, if this is so, when will these events take place? And what ‘sign’ will show that they are about to happen (vs. 7)?" Luke recorded two of the three components of their question. Jesus answered in three parts: verses 8-19; verses 20-23; and, verses 24-27. Luke proceeded with different parables than Matthew.
Luke defined the ABOMINATION THAT CAUSES DESOLATION as being the Roman armies (vs.20 cf Matthew 24:15 & Mark 13:14).
Luke used adverbs in verses 9 and 20; he used subordinate conjunctions in verses 10, 20, 21 and 27.
Mark, in chapter thirteen, recorded the three-fold question. "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what ‘sign’ will show when all these things are about to be accomplished (vs.4)?" Jesus answered in three parts: verses 5-13; verses 14-25; and verses 26, 27.
Mark used adverbs in verses 7 and 14; and, subordinate conjunctions in verses 14,21,26,27.
Mark also continued with the parable of the fig tree as Luke did.
John, in his Gospel, did not speak of the destruction of the Temple and the ascension of Jesus; however, he elaborated on them in his second volume: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ". What is the link? See, John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7.
The "second" return of Jesus Christ was in A.D. 70. It was recognized not as a physical return; but, in terms of an event: the destruction!
Moreover, Jesus continued into chapter twenty-five with two parables that qualify what he had spoken of in chapter twenty-four. Verses 1, 7, 34, 37, 38, 39, 41, 44, and 45 begin with the use of subordinate conjunctions.
Matthew speaks of the great tribulation (“θλιψις μεγαλη”, thlipsis megale cf Revelation 2:22 & 7:14: these verses use the same words) in verse twenty-one. See also: Mark 13:19 & Luke 21:23.
Likewise, in Luke 21 the disciples asked: "Rabbi, if this is so, when will these events take place? And what ‘sign’ will show that they are about to happen (vs. 7)?" Luke recorded two of the three components of their question. Jesus answered in three parts: verses 8-19; verses 20-23; and, verses 24-27. Luke proceeded with different parables than Matthew.
Luke defined the ABOMINATION THAT CAUSES DESOLATION as being the Roman armies (vs.20 cf Matthew 24:15 & Mark 13:14).
Luke used adverbs in verses 9 and 20; he used subordinate conjunctions in verses 10, 20, 21 and 27.
Mark, in chapter thirteen, recorded the three-fold question. "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what ‘sign’ will show when all these things are about to be accomplished (vs.4)?" Jesus answered in three parts: verses 5-13; verses 14-25; and verses 26, 27.
Mark used adverbs in verses 7 and 14; and, subordinate conjunctions in verses 14,21,26,27.
Mark also continued with the parable of the fig tree as Luke did.
John, in his Gospel, did not speak of the destruction of the Temple and the ascension of Jesus; however, he elaborated on them in his second volume: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ". What is the link? See, John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7.
The "second" return of Jesus Christ was in A.D. 70. It was recognized not as a physical return; but, in terms of an event: the destruction!
Undoubtedly,
“the ‘sign’…” was concerning the destruction of the temple and the consummation
of the Old Covenant age.
