Christ's Olivet Discourse: Signs of the End

I totally disagree with the above, and so does God’s written Word.

For that to be true, it would mean that generation that you claim has passed away would have seen Jesus’ 2nd coming, because His return was the final last SIGN that He gave there in His Olivet discourse.

Do you actually believe Jesus Christ’s 2nd coming has happened already?

Those on a doctrine of men called ‘Full Preterism’ actually do… wrongly believe that Jesus’ 2nd coming happened back in His Apostle’s days, because they turn it into a ‘spiritual’ coming instead of a literal bodily return like the Scriptures speak of as written (Zechariah 14; Acts 1, for example).

I don’t care to hear your answer if it also pushes the doctrines of men instead of staying with the actual written Bible Scripture.

1 Like

That is not a way to foster learning. Just saying. Let’s be nice and help those who have been misled.

While you or other Preterists see past local wars and famines in these passages, a literal reading describes events that would fundamentally alter planetary physics and human survival.

Do you believe this happened? The opening of the fourth seal alone describes the death of a quarter of the world’s population (25%) by sword, famine, and plague. Later, a trumpet judgment describes another third (33.3%) of mankind being killed. Or this? The sun turning black as sackcloth, the moon turning to blood, and “stars falling from the sky,” which many readers interpret as massive meteor bombardments.

Entire seas turning to blood, a third of all marine life dying, a third of the world’s fresh water becoming poisoned (Wormwood), and the sun scorching people with fierce heat.

The Antichrist? Revelation describes a literal, one-world political and economic system led by a figure known as the Beast. He exerts total control over “every tribe, people, language, and nation.” A universal economic restriction where no one can buy or sell anything unless they have the mark on their right hand or forehead. Historically, even under the Roman Empire, local economies functioned without this level of absolute, centralized, individual control.

The physical return of Christ or the second coming. In Revelation 19, Jesus returns not in spirit or through a quiet spiritual judgment, but visibly and physically. He descends on a white horse, leading the armies of heaven. The description is highly literal: “Every eye will see him.” He directly defeats the armies of the earth gathered against him at Armageddon.

Then you have the Millennium. The 1,000-Year Reign of Christ. Following the Second Coming, Revelation 20 establishes a specific historical era. Satan is bound and locked in a bottomless pit for exactly 1,000 years, so he can no longer deceive the nations. Christ reigns physically on earth alongside resurrected believers during this time.

Then the final judgment and the new Creation. The final chapters of the book wrap up human history entirely: The Great White Throne Judgment, where all the dead, great and small, are resurrected to stand before God, and death and Hades are thrown into the Lake of Fire. The new Jerusalem? The current earth and heavens pass away because they are corrupted by sin. God creates a literal “new heaven and a new earth,” and a massive, jewel-encrusted city. The New Jerusalem descends out of heaven. There is no more death, crying, or pain.

With all this yet to happen, how would you say? “There’s no reason to believe the Lord was speaking of some as-of-yet future generation, that’s simply not being faithful to the text.” I think it is pretty clear.
Peter

1 Like

If this is to me Bestill, my point was not that the rapture was a 19th century invention. Some think it is. I don’t and I believe there is plenty of evidence to consider why the rapture is not a Darby construct. Here is what I said…

I don’t believe the rapture is a 19th century invention. But just like it is so often shouted out as that, its not. But what is? The first seal as the AC. I challenge anyone to find an earlier 1st seal reference to the AC prior to 1800. There is none.

If this post was to me I understand mis-seeing that I am not saying the rapture is a 19th century invention because of 1) how i worded it, and 2) the controversy embroiled around that statement. So in some ways in seeing what i am not saying is kind of helpful to my point about the first seal. We tend to go with the zeitgeist views on eschatology at times. The 1st seal as AC i believe is one of them. That was my point. Blessings.

1 Like

We know there are seven seals (chapter 5). Revelation tells us all the numbers of the seals after the white horse. 2-7. So that kind of only leaves one option though, doesn’t it? I don’t believe there is room for it to be another seal since all the other numbers are noted. I believe the reason for no number mention is multi:

  • We won’t recognize it as a seal (being the first)
  • The point of moving from the scroll to a literal seal being pealed off is a significant dramatic moment in heaven. And the focus would seem to be on the act itself rather than it being the first. Instead, the focus is on it being the act of removing “a seal” at all. Me thinks
  • Another reason is it could be considered the non-seal seal…lol. This will be super controversial. But here is the logic: of the 3 signs in heaven (Rev 12 & 15) only one is non-ominous. The woman giving birth. ALSO of the 21 judgements in seals, trumpets, bowls, only 1 could be considered non ominous. It does not say what kind of ruler or rule. I believe the first seal occurs when it lines up with the import of the Rev 12 sign (but this of course is a whole different issue). However, what we might consider is the lack of seal number mention might be as much to how it functions in the age of grace. Whereas the others are not in the age of grace. The one’s numbered. This is also a controversial view. But i am giving you reasonable observations as to why it may not be numbered. And none of those is because it could be a different number. The other numbers are taken.

I like your consideration for seal 6. I have entertained similar things. I am not suggesting the 1st seal is Christ. To be clear, what i am suggesting is this: Something in the stead of Christ during the age of grace. The best this world could conjure up in all its fallen nature. In judges israel was recued by judges that were flawed and often demonstrated great flaws of that Israel age and cultural issue. Somewhat of an insulting vibe to their ego, hero. Of those judges, the incredible themes and matches of Jesus with Samson are amazing (especially his parents sacrifice). Would we say Samson represents Christ? No. But biblically he is a type. I believe we will have equal trouble accepting the 1st seal…lol.

I don’t think it is either or. Christ or not Christ. I think it is the ugliest best this world could produce approximating Christ. But when we hear that we hear blaspheme. I don’t think it is meant in that sense. I think it is meant in kindness. And the judgement against the evil world empire of globalism. I don’t think the 1st seal has anything to do with false Christs. That is us reading that onto it. Just saying. But i totally appreciate the interraction and your sharing your honest convicions.

My views on this are so far outside the norm, it would take hours of discussion i believe for my track to even make sense. Because the eschatological climate we are in is foreign to my views. For the most part. Thanks for being willing to Engauge and challenge. Blessings

1 Like

no. It wasn’t to you. Someone said it was and I was commenting to them.

1 Like

Between Pre-Mil. and A-Mil., I tend to agree with the A-Mil. interpretation of Revelation. However, I also subscribe to the Pan-Mil. position that it will all PAN OUT! :smiley:

1 Like

The problem that Preterists have is they refuse to see that Jesus is addressing (2) different events in his discourses (70 AD sack of the Temple, and a far future return to earth). One place where I see preterists fall for the devil’s teaching is when Jesus says "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Matt. 16: 28)

They say "See, everyone there in that crowd has died, so he must have been talking about what was going to happen in 70 AD. Only the people in the crowd could have seen his coming".

But what they fail to grasp (and it is actually very simple) is that YES, everyone in that crowd is now dead. But (3) of the people "standing there" DID SEE JESUS COME IN HIS GLORY. Where?

Just a few verses after Matt. 16:28 we read:

“And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light”. (Matt. 17:1,2)

Peter, John and James were the “some standing here” Jesus was referring to. They DID see Jesus coming in power and glory. Peter says this in 2 Peter:

"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you THE POWER AND COMING of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were EYEWITNESSES OF HIS MAJESTY"

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount". (2 Peter 1:16-18)

Note Peter’s wording. He, John and James SAW: “THE POWER AND COMING OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST”–they were eyewitnesses. So, they literally fulfilled what Jesus said in Matt. 16:28—they did not die UNTIL they had seen the power and coming of the Lord Jesus. But it was a foreshadowing----NOT his actual return. Jesus did not return in 70 AD.

Preterism is a very false teaching. But they will refuse to accept the above—even if it is clearly put right in front of their noses. They are WRONG, but are far too prideful to admit it.

4 Likes

Yes, @Fish153, I like that interpretation too, but when Jesus was transfigured, how was he coming in his kingdom, which is often said in connection with the church or his second coming? I still think he was referring to the church when he talks about the kingdom, but I may be wrong.

Bruce–

I think if you read how Peter describes the “Transfiguration” you can clearly see he is referring to seeing a future event revealed to him at that present moment:

"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty". (2 Peter 1:16)

Please read the verses preceding this. He is putting the saints “in remembrance” of this event so that they can trust what he is saying there----and through chapter 3 of his epistle where he says:

"This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation". (2 Peter 3: 1-4)

So, he is tying what he SAW at the Transfiguration (“The Power and Coming of the Lord Jesus”) with the FUTURE return of Jesus—and how people are mocking the PROMISE of that return. “Where is the promise of His coming?” they say. Peter is basically saying: "I will remind you of this—you can trust me—that I SAW the FUTURE return of Christ when He was Transfigured before me. It WILL happen just as sure as the vision I saw, and voice from the Father I heard".

Coming in His Kingdom” is EXACTLY what Peter saw. And both Moses and Elijah (representing the Law and the Prophets) were there too!! Preterists teach that everything was fulfilled in AD 70 but that is FAR from the truth.

3 Likes

@Fish153, I agree with you that the preterists are wrong to believe that A.D. 70 fulfilled the prophecies, that Peter teaches the historical event of the transfiguration, and that he confirms the prophecies about the future event of Jesus’ second coming. However, I don’t see your connection of the transfiguration and Jesus’ second coming, since they are separated by a whole chapter (2).

1 Like

Bruce----

It is one Epistle and he is stirring the remembrance of the believers to things he has stated before. Much of what he is addressing in this Epistle are false teachers and apostates who deny that Jesus will ever return. Chapter 1-3 are LINKED in many ways. He uses the same term in Chapter 1 that he uses at the start of chapter 3: "“This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance” (2 Peter 3:1)

Chapter 1: "Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance" (2 Peter 1:15).

He is pursuing one main point through the whole Epistle. He is reminding them that he has told them before. He SAW the RETURN OF CHRIST in a fore-shadowing at the Transfiguration. So, chapter 1 and 3 both have the same idea. Chapter 2 is in-between them much like a “false-teacher sandwich”. Jesus had said in Matthew 6:28 “Some standing here shall not taste of death until they see the son of man coming with Power in His Kingdom”.

Peter, John and James were the “some standing here” that Jesus was referring to. Peter definitely saw Jesus coming in power and great glory. If you read Revelation you will note the TWO WITNESSES who will be on the earth when Jesus returns. I believe them to be Elijah and Moses----the two who were at the Tranfiguration. I think there is a VERY CLEAR connection of the transfiguration with Jesus’ second coming. Preterists completely miss it or purposefully ignore it.

2 Likes

Concerning the SEALS, focus should be on the actual ‘events’ contained within the Seals. That is how we know Jesus was covering those same events in His Olivet discourse.

2 Likes

You have an interesting interpretation of Second Peter, @Fish153, and you might be right. Of course, it is true that the preterists’ view is wrong that it all was fulfilled in the lifetimes of the disciples, as I have said. May God bless you.

Hi Peter,

Sorry I seem to have missed your post here.

Are you saying Jesus is talking to the Body of Christ in Matt. 24 when there was no such thing at that time?

I was referring to Jesus coming in Matt. 24 with His angelic army to deliver Israel, which would be only one-third left after the world`s armies have killed the rest. (Zech. 13: 8)

The Body of Christ does not go through the trib, but is the court that judges the world system and fallen angels. (1 Cor. 6: 2 & 3)

1 Like

Jesus has many crowns, He is over many thrones not just the Davidic throne of Israel. He is king of heaven, King of the ages, king of the nations, king of kings…

However, the Lord Jesus is Head over His Body and we are certainly not the future kingdom of Israel. The 12 disciples we never told about the Body of Christ and actually never understood what Paul was teaching. Peter tried to get the Gentile believers to be Jewish. He said that Paul had some things hard to understand.. Peter had to be shown by a vision to go to the Gentiles and speak to them. Then he was shown that God gave the Gentiles the Holy Spirit. He was amazed.

And note, the 12 disciples/apostles were looking for the Lord to restore the kingdom to Israel. They knew nothing about the Body of Christ.

The 12 apostles were only given to tell Israel about Jesus as Lord and Christ. Nothing about the Body of Christ.

An important point in this discussion is the word Day. In Greek and Hebrew the word Day has two meanings - 1. a period of time, 2. a specific day.

Thus, when looking at scriptures we need to discern which meaning is presented.

It seems from the OP that only the specific day of the Lord is understood and not that it can be a period of time. Knowing that would clear a lot of confusion.

I understand that you are arguing from a viewpoint known as Dispensationalism (specifically a “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” view), which strictly separates God’s plans for Israel from His plans for the Christian Church.

Yes. The “Body of Christ” can refer specifically to the Christian Church. However, this is not exclusive. While “the Christian Church” is the standard theological shorthand, it often evokes images of buildings, institutions, or a Sunday morning headcount.

The phrase “Body of Christ” (introduced primarily by the Apostle Paul) is meant to be far more organic, intimate, and functional than just an organization. Here is a deeper, more accurate breakdown of what that metaphor actually implies. When Paul writes about this in 1 Corinthians 12, he uses literal anatomy to make his point. He argues that a body isn’t one giant eye or one massive foot; it is a complex organism where every distinct part relies on the others.

It means total interdependence. If the hand suffers, the whole body feels it. In this view, the “Body” is a living, breathing network of diverse individuals where no one is redundant, and no one can function in isolation.

With Jesus no longer physically walking the earth, the “Body of Christ” is understood as His literal hands and feet in human history. When the community feeds the hungry, comforts the grieving, or works for justice, it is quite literally Jesus continuing His earthly ministry through them.

In the ancient world, the barriers between people were massive, divided by race, social status, and gender. Paul famously used the “Body” concept to shatter these. **

“For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free”(1 Cor. 12:13).

It is a mystical union that transcends human boundaries. It implies a spiritual reality where diverse, conflicting people are knit into a single, collective identity that is deeper than their differences. In later letters like Ephesians and Colossians, the metaphor expands from a local community to a cosmic scale. Christ is described explicitly as the “Head” of this body.

The head directs, animates, and gives purpose to the body. A body severed from the head is dead. This emphasizes that the community has no ultimate authority, identity, or power of its own. It is entirely dependent on and subordinate to Jesus.

“The Church” is what people join; the “Body of Christ” is what they become. It is a shift from an institutional mindset, a club with members, to an organic reality, or a living organism powered by a single spirit.

You cite Zechariah 13:8, an Old Testament prophecy stating that two-thirds of the people in the land will perish, leaving a refined “one-third” remnant. Is it your view that Matthew 24 describes Jesus returning visibly with angels to physically rescue the surviving Jewish remnant at the absolute end of the world system? Just trying to understand. Are you pre-trib?
Peter

2 Likes

Thanks for your reply Davey :slight_smile: So by that might you have seen the first seal then to be Rome? The best candidate historically to me would have been Alexander the Great if we go by events. But looking back we know it was not him. In order for conquer to stand out it would have to be something over-the-top of norm. It may not be Trump. But the events Trump has in play (or the events that have Trump at play) are massive earth shattering paradigmatic shifts. From the looks of it, he is entirely rerouting the world economy. And conquered layers upon layers of “events” all up in our faces for years to get here. Just sayin…note to self. Blessings.

1 Like

I don’t see any of the Seals being for past history, but only for the generation that will ‘see’ Christ’s return. I was raised in a Church system that followed the seminary doctrine Preterism, which treats most of Christ’s Book of Revelation as history, but once I studied God’s Word for myself asking His help I have learned that doctrine is not written in God’s Word.

The Babylon Harlot of Rev.17 is a “great city” it says, and Rev.11:8 points it out as being Jerusalem in a false worship state at the end of this world in the generation that will experience Christ’s return. Ezekiel 16 is a major study from God on how He feels about Jerusalem when it plays the harlot in false worship. That’s where that harlot idea comes from in Rev.17, and of course from the events of the king of Babylon in the days of Daniel.

2 Likes

Pardon, because I offer the following. Christ’s literal Kingdom is not of this present world, like He said in John 18:36. And in Luke 17 when He was asked to show the Kingdom, He said it does not come with observation (naked eye, by flesh view), because the Kingdom of God is within you.

To understand Christ’s Kingdom one must then understand what He meant when He said it is within you. I find that many brethren have yet to learn how God created us with 3 parts which are independent of each other, with our spirit/soul held inside our flesh body by an invisible “silver cord”. And when that “silver cord” is severed, our flesh body goes back to the earth where it came from, but our spirit with soul goes back to God Who gave it (Hebrews 4:12; Ecclesiastes 12:5-7; Matthew 10:28).

This means the part of Christ’s Kingdom that is here on earth right now, that He brought at His 1st coming, is His Kingdom by The Spirit. It is not a physical structure, not the flesh, not a building, but the many-member body of Christ framed together as lively stones by The Holy Spirit. We still await His literal… physical Kingdom that will manifest on earth at His 2nd coming return.

1 Like