Questions about the second coming verses in the bible?
Questions about the second coming verses in the bible?
Which verses actually talk about the second coming? I have listened to the Steve Gregg tapes, but I am still confused about which verses are about the second coming and the signs/ needs of it. Most of the scripture I read is about the tribulation and the destruction of the Jerusalem, but Luke 17...is very different and perplexing. In part of Luke 17 it repeats again, to not come down off your roof top, same statements that were stated in the other gospels related to the tribulation. "One left on taken away" could that be related to the Jews being taken away captivity? Which did happen.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
luke 17
Blev,
Interestingly, the points you bring out about Luke 17 were the catalyst for a 10 year (plus) complete overhaul of my own eschatology. Having grown up with a pre-millenial perspective, fairly early on I became convinced that most of the Olivet discourse (all three versions) was in fact dealing with the events surrounding AD 70, with only the last couple verses referring to the Lord's eventual return (presumably separated by an unknown gap of time between AD 70 and the Lord's unkown day of return). I just couldn't buy what futurist commentaries were saying about Matthew discussing a separate "tribulation".
But then I discovered Luke 17 using the same language that elsewhere is used about the destruction of Jerusalem-- seemingly tying the two events together. Then it just got a bit confusing.
Here's my take on that now (and I'm coming from a partial-preterist perspective in most regards). Two options:
1. One could try to argue that Luke 17 is talking about a "revealing of Christ" in AD 70, which might be possible,
or, I think I prefer this way of looking at it:
2. To Luke (and Jesus), the "roof-top" language might just be a way of speaking about any sudden catastrophe (or perhaps eucatastrophe, to coin a Tolkien word), AD 70 or return of Christ. I say this because in Luke 21 Luke clearly implies a span of time between the destruction of Jerusalem and the coming of Christ, when he states that "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled". Clearly Luke was aware of the "rooftop" language that Mark used to describe the destruction of Jerusalem, but he decided to report Jesus saying that his return (a separate event) would also be like this as well.
These are the only two options I can see, or Luke is contradicting himself within 4 chapters, which is more unlikely than either of these options.
Interestingly, the points you bring out about Luke 17 were the catalyst for a 10 year (plus) complete overhaul of my own eschatology. Having grown up with a pre-millenial perspective, fairly early on I became convinced that most of the Olivet discourse (all three versions) was in fact dealing with the events surrounding AD 70, with only the last couple verses referring to the Lord's eventual return (presumably separated by an unknown gap of time between AD 70 and the Lord's unkown day of return). I just couldn't buy what futurist commentaries were saying about Matthew discussing a separate "tribulation".
But then I discovered Luke 17 using the same language that elsewhere is used about the destruction of Jerusalem-- seemingly tying the two events together. Then it just got a bit confusing.
Here's my take on that now (and I'm coming from a partial-preterist perspective in most regards). Two options:
1. One could try to argue that Luke 17 is talking about a "revealing of Christ" in AD 70, which might be possible,
or, I think I prefer this way of looking at it:
2. To Luke (and Jesus), the "roof-top" language might just be a way of speaking about any sudden catastrophe (or perhaps eucatastrophe, to coin a Tolkien word), AD 70 or return of Christ. I say this because in Luke 21 Luke clearly implies a span of time between the destruction of Jerusalem and the coming of Christ, when he states that "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled". Clearly Luke was aware of the "rooftop" language that Mark used to describe the destruction of Jerusalem, but he decided to report Jesus saying that his return (a separate event) would also be like this as well.
These are the only two options I can see, or Luke is contradicting himself within 4 chapters, which is more unlikely than either of these options.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: