Question or Comments

Well, Christmas (and the accompanying rush) is over and now maybe you are free to think.  :o)   Were you able to finish your timeline?  Do you have any questions?  You could post them here.  Maybe others have the same questions but are afraid to ask.    Maybe someone has the answer to your question.  Now, that would be nice!  I will post a question or two myself.  Maybe one of you has the answer for me.  - Linda

Frustrated?

Well, here I go again.  I’m working on Lesson 7 this week.  A little behind those of you in the morning study, but soon the evening session should be caught up with the morning group.  But that’s not why I’m frustrated.  :-]

In the lesson on Day Two and Day Three Kay says (p. 49 #1) that because Luke is a chronological account (Luke 1:1-4) Luke 21 events follow those in Luke 19.  Well……  not necessarily.  

At the beginning of chapter 20 - just after chapter 19 - Luke says, “On one of the days while He was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, [that would be "one of the days" that Luke just wrote about in Luke 19]  the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted Him, and they spoke…Jesus answered and said…..” …..”And He began to tell the people this parable….” (apparently directed against the scribes & pharisees)  Then they were attempting “to lay hands on Him” but “they feared the people.”  “There came to Him some  Sadducees…” The discussion continues to verse 45 where it says “And while all the people were listening, He said to the disciples…..” Chapter 21 follows with no break in the continuity. In the first place, there’s no justification for saying that the discourse in chapter 21 follows the events in chapter 19 when you examine the immediate context of chapter 20.  Luke is giving a detailed account in chapter 20 & 21 of what took place on one of the days mentioned in chapter 19.  

Secondly, from 20:45, it is apparent that He is speaking to the disciples.   I have not seen the video for Lesson 7 yet, but… if the thrust is that this is being spoken to the Jews, (as have the last 2 videos)  in my opinion there’s little justification for saying that based on what is written in either Matthew 24 or Luke 21.  And Mark 13 - another account of the Olivet Discourse - in verses 1-3 makes it clear again that the ones being spoken to about these future events are the disciples - not the Jews.  

 Did I say I was frustrated?

Well, maybe I’m not. Maybe I’m very glad to be doing this study because I am able to see more clearly than ever before the things that I have become convinced of.  And that’s NOT a bad thing.  This is, after all, inductive study.  We are not supposed to be relying on what “the experts” have to say but on what we can plainly see in the Word of God.   And I am thankful that there is agreement in Matthew, Mark & Luke with respect to who is being spoken to in this account of the sign of His coming and of the end of the age.    

Matthew 24 & 25: for the disciples or for the Jews?

Have you wondered about the change in tone between Matt. 24:3-42 and 24:43-51? For most of the chapter Jesus is speaking to the disciples, telling them what to watch for and what to be aware of so as not to be misled or tripped up. Then He begins speaking as if to unbelievers - i.e. “the master of that slave will come… and will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Definitely something directed to those who are NOT saved. This really puzzled me. Was He speaking to the disciples privately as verse 3 indicates, or was He speaking to the Jews (particularly the pharisees) as Wayne seems to think? I decided to check out the parallel passages to see what I could find out. I think I found the answer in Mark 13 - which is also an account of the Olivet Discourse, but one we do not study in Rev. Part 3. All of chapter 13 up until verse 37 (the last verse in the chapter) seems to parallel what is said in Matt. 24 up through perhaps verse 46. Then Jesus says in verse 37, “What I say to you, I say to all, ‘Be on the alert.’”  Was Jesus addressing the disciples only in the beginning chapter 24 but both the disciples AND the Jews at the end of Matthew 24 and throughout Matthew 25?   Did Mark simply summarize what Jesus said to ALL with verse 37 by saying “Be on the alert”? Mark is known for his brevity.  Luke also says something that, I believe, supports this idea.  Though Luke does not include what Matthew does at the end of chapter 24 and in chapter 25, he does say this in verse 37 of chapter 21:  ”Now during the day He was teaching in the temple, but at evening He would go out and spend the night on the mount that is called Olivet.”  Was Jesus speaking to the crowds during the day and the disciples at night?  If so, does what Matthew write in his gospel include some of what Jesus spoke to the Jews in the temple?   Matthew 26, Mark 14 and Luke 22 all begin the same way - with the Passover approaching (Mathew & Mark both say “in two days”) suggesting that the accounts in Matthew 24, Mark 13 & Luke 21 all end at the same time period.  It helped me to make sense of the obvious difference in language and tone used in Matthew 24 & 25.

7 seals and 6 trumpets during first 3 1/2 years?

I have some definite issues with what Wayne suggested in the video on Lesson 2. If I understood him correctly, he was suggesting that the two witnesses prophesy during the first 3 1/2 years of the 7 year period, the 7 seals and 6 of the trumpet judgments take place during that time period as does the gentile domination of the holy city. If all we had to go on is what we know from Revelation, then his explanation would be a lot more plausible. But…. we do have other Scripture, which I believe, when examined, makes what he said, impossible.

First of all, the man of lawlessness is revealed when he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God (the abomination of desolations) at the mid-point of the seven year period. 2 Thess. 2:4; Matt 24:15; Dan. 9:27

If you compare the language of Matthew 24:15-26 and Luke 21:20-24, you will see that they are referring to the same time period: after the abomination of desolations.

However, Luke includes some details that Matthew leaves out: namely that at this time Jerusalem will be surrounded by armies and that “her desolation is near.” This sounds very much like what is described by in Rev. 11:2,3 when John says he was to “leave out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it will be given to the nations; and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months. And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for twelve hundred adn sixty days.” According to both Matthew and Luke, this is the time when those in Judea are to flee to the mountains.

Daniel 9:27 also mentions a “firm covenant with the many” that is understood by many to refer to a covenant the antichrist makes with Israel, which he breaks in the middle of the “week” - when he comes into Jerusalem and “put[s] a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abomination (abomination of desolation) will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

If Israel is at “peace” until the mid-point when the antichrist breaks his covenant with them and comes and reveals himself for who he really is, and Christ says it is at this time that Israel is to flee, then is she not fleeing from that gentile domination John mentions in Rev. 11:2,3? Are not the two witnesses there in Jerusalem to witness against those who have come into the land and taken over?

Wayne cites Rev. 10:7 “but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, then the mystery of God is finished…” Also, Rev. 11:14-15 “The second woe is past; behold the third woe is coming quickly. (This is recorded just after the two witnesses are resurrected and the ensuing earthquake that kills a tenth of the city) Then the seventh angel sounded; and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever.” This places the two witnesses resurrection just prior to the sounding of the seventh trumpet. The difficulty lies in the placement of the 7th trumpet - or the seven bowl judgments. If the two witnesses have authority to speak for 3 ½ years, then placing them in the second half of the seven years seems to leave no time for the bowl judgments. If all the above takes place in the second half, then where do the bowls come in? Daniel 12:11,12 may hold the answer to that question. The two witnesses speak for 1,260 days. But Daniel writes “From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days!” Could this “extra” 30 days + 45 days be enough to accomodate the seven bowl judgments? The bowl judgments are said to happen quickly -as the contents of a bowl (rather than a pitcher) would spill out quickly. And due to the nature of the bowl judgments, a prolonged time period (years or even many months) would not be possible. If these “extra” days are when the bowl judgments occur, then that would leave the entire second half of the seven year period for the two witnesses to speak.

Check these things out and let me know what YOU think. - Linda

BTW…. I wouldn’t mind seeing somebody else’s input here! :o)