Matthew
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ต.ค. 2024
- Explains how Matthew 23:37-39 relates to both the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and a future salvation of national Israel. Also discusses "the trans-generational you" concept concerning Israel past, present, and future.
For Michael's new video course, "Biblical Eschatology," see: www.michaeljvl...
Books by Michael Vlach: www.amazon.com....
Good passage when talking to preterists since they say Jesus did come in 70ad but Jesus says in this text that He won't come until they say, "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord."is the opposite of preterism since they say Jesus came in judgment at 70 ad because Israel didn't repent.
Great stuff as always Dr. Vlach! Thanks!
Doc, I appreciate your efforts to put up videos again. Very helpful, as always.
Federal headship is an important concept to understand when discussing Israel's rejection of their Messiah. We see time and time again throughout the four gospels that, in general, the common people of Israel recognized Yeshua as their prophesied Messiah (Matt. 21:9; Mark 11:9; Luke 19:38; John 12:13). It was the members of the Jewish religiopolitical establishment - Pharisees, Sadducees, priests, scribes, Herodians, etc. - who rejected Him. Even though the common people accepted Yeshua, because their federal representatives - the religious and political leaders - rejected Him, the Israelites as a whole fell under the curse.
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
We love God
Very good! We also note a different audience transition in 24:1 from a Temple audience to believing Jews in four of his disciples in chapter 24. Then he drops many signs saying "this generation" (the ones that see the signs he gives them) that will not pass as distinctive from the generation of vipers in chapter 23. The generation is the one that sees all the events presented and not the generation to whom he is giving the signs since, obviously, he did not come in the first century. Therefore "this generation" is an as yet future generation to his audience in chapter 24.
He did come in the clouds as He said He would. He never said He would would physically come or take anyone away. He came in the clouds and received His Kingdom from the Ancient of Days, aka God. Just as Daniel foretold.
@@dalecoggin6882 if he left it at just that, you may have a point. Fortunately, he gave us more to go on. Take a look:
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days
1) the sun will be darkened,
2) and the moon will not give its light,
3) and the stars will fall from heaven,
4) and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
5) Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man,
6) and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and
7) they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
8) And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and
9) they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
@@dalecoggin6882 When did he come in the clouds? Not in the first century. Did all the nations weep as Jesus foretold? Did the angels collect the elect from four corners of the earth? There are nine specific things about his coming and not one of them happened in the first century, let alone all nine. If you think he returned in the clouds then I should very much like to see the citations in history. Not only so, that would put us in the Kingdom now for over two thousand years with none of the prophecies of peace in that time, geologic changes, none of the Israel things fulfilled. And if church is now Israel, that one is not fulfilled either because we are not in the Promised Land and whatever is happening there does not look like Christ ruling with a rod of iron from David's throne. I hope you see the many issues with that position and continue reforming.
@@HarpadzoYou’re a snob. I hope you see that you are far from humble and will continue to reform.
@@Harpadzo it's disturbing how prevalent preterism is becoming. I'm not saying they get things entirely wrong (I think the futurist reading has problems) but hyper-preterism is clearly wrong.