I did read this whole. I do not agree with his teaching. By the way, I am not dispensationalism. I am postrib and amill. Matt 24:29-31 is still a future event. If suppose they saying that Matt. 24:29-31 already fulfilled in 70 A.D. My question, where does the record of the world history saying that anyone did actual see Jesus appears in the clouds with the angels as visibly? Therefore, there is no record say that a person did actually see Jesus appears in the clouds, not even, a person did actual see Jesus appears in 70 A.D. Therefore, preterism doctrine is fallacy.
I wasn't able to find an email address so I thought I Would ask a question here. Your purpose seems to be winning back America. Why not use your resources to advance the kingdom of God and leave the kingdoms of darkness to themselves? Jesus did not attempt to win back Judea for the Jews, He came to preach the kingdom of God, a completely different kingdom. American can never be a Christian nation because America will "Always" be run by men and not by Christ. The only Christian nation is the kingdom of God. Butch
"...pillars of dispensationalism..." Mid-Acts dispensational interpretation: Matthew 24 being about the return of the Lord to Israel. The church is not involved in one word of Matthew 24. What exactly is it that makes it a pillar? Why not deal with the true difference between covenant theology and dispensational belief which is the mystery of Christ information given to Paul (Col 1:25-27, Eph 3:1-6, Rom 16:25). Everybody knows the date-setting end of the world junkies are loonies. Calling a child a child does not address the adults.
Sir, I'm amazed that you don't see Matthew 24 as a chapter referring to a future generation. The brunt of the chapter is completely about his second coming which includes the end of this dispensation. If the generation didn't refer to his coming he was talking about that means two things. One he's already came and the end also has taken place as well. The subject is his coming which includes the end. the surroundings were obviously mentioned there in Jerusalem because he was there at that particular time. If he would have been in another location he would have dealt with the terrain and housing accordingly. The Greek word for generation is referred here as a birth of a nation. In 1948 Israel became a nation,until then they had lost that identity. They did not witness the anti-Christ, the coming nor the end to refer to that generation. Go back to the beginning of the chapter and follow the subject. The temple in 70 a. d. being destroyed didn't bring the second coming or the end for that generation so that sinks the ship so to speak placing these things Christ spoke of from verse 4 thru 51. The coming was the reference relating as far as from the east is to the west. The sun was not darkened in 70 a. d. or any year after. The seventh trump did not sound neither were there any gathered to gather from the four winds. Those days were not shortened for the elects sake in 70 a. d. nor any year that followed. You simply cannot explain any of these truths away. Brother Burton
Amen! Our #1 goal as Christians should be the indefatigable spreading of the gospel. The Bible is clear, mankind will revert back to the ways of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the times of Noah. All this talk of 'winning back America' reminds me of what the Mormons and New Apostolic Reformation people believe, and that is we are going to make things better so Christ can return. It is heresy.
You bring up a plethora of points which Gary DeMar (and others) have answered in detail elsewhere. See Kenneth Gentry and N. T. Wright on the Matthew 24 for more on this. I am replying to you comment because I hope that you will be persuaded that the futurist view of this is hopelessly out of touch. The simple truth is that this passage does not talk about events in our future. This does not mean that the second coming is not in our future, of course it is. What it means is that this passage is not about the second coming!