Question on Matthew 24:15

[palmaceae]

I hope all this makes sense,
First of all I am a firm believer in the Pre Trib Rapture and am teaching on end times at my Church but someone brought up a point concerning Matthew 24:15, which says “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), ". His point was since Jesus said "when you see the ‘abomination of desolation" he is thinking that since He was talking to His disciples at that time, Jesus meant that we as disciples today will see it too, meaning a mid trib rapture, due to the fact that the Church will not be raptured before the desecration of the temple? I could not answer his question right then and there in an intelligent way but after studying this for a couple days I am thinking this means the Jews will see the ‘abomination of desolation' because of Jesus mentioning "spoken of by Daniel the prophet". This would have a direct correlation with Daniel 9:27 which says "He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” Also mentioned in Daniel 11:31-32 and Daniel 12:11. Would this be a correct statement?

[1angel4u]

You are correct in thinking this is written to the Jews. :thumb

http://www.gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/the-olivet-discourse

The Olivet Discourse
Ask a Bible Teacher

Q. Many scholars teach that the Olivet Discourse was written for the Church, but you say the focus is on Israel. If you're right why does the Olivet Discourse even appear in Mark and Luke when these two Gospels are mainly Gentile in their focus? Please explain.

A. This is a very important issue. 2 days before the cross 4 disciples came to Jesus with 3 questions. They were prompted by one of the disciples commenting on the beauty of the Temple and Jesus predicting its destruction.

The questions were:
1. When will this happen (the Temple's destruction)?
2. What will be the signs of your (2nd) coming?
3. What will be the signs of the end of the age?

Their mindset in asking these questions is critical to our understanding. While the Jews were in Babylon during the 70 year captivity, the angel Gabriel had told Daniel that Israel would be given 490 years from the date they received authorization to rebuild Jerusalem to wrap everything up. (Daniel 9:24-27) 483 of those years had past. The Temple had been under construction for nearly 40 years and wasn't finished yet. They were thinking they were nearing the end of the age and now Jesus tells them that everything will be torn down. There had never been any talk of a Church Age or a Rapture or of the disciples evangelizing the world. We know about all these things from hindsight, but they were probably in a state of great distress when they came to Him.

The answer to their first question is contained only in Luke 21:12-24. There you can read the Lord's prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The answers to questions 2-3 are contained in all three accounts of the event. Keep in mind that when the disciples asked these questions they thought they were only 7 years away from the End. This is confirmed by the question they asked on the Mount of Olives after the resurrection. "Lord, are you now going to restore the Kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6)

As I noted in my study on the Olivet Discourse Matthew's account is especially Jewish, warning people in Judea, invoking Jewish Sabbath Laws, and mentioning the Abomination of Desolation, an event in Jewish History. There's no mention of the Church anywhere in any of it, because at this point in time there was no Church. Later, Paul would disclose that the Church would not be present during this time.
As for why the Olivet Discourse even appears in Mark and Luke when these two Gospels are mainly Gentile in their focus, there will be many on Earth who will miss the Rapture, perhaps coming to faith because of it. Matthew, Mark and Luke all write to them, Jew and Gentile, giving them the signs of His coming and of the End of the Age to help them persevere through mankind's darkest Hour. Remember, just because the Olivet Discourse isn't written to the Church doesn't mean it isn't for gentiles.

[christ_ambassador]

Here are some scriptures that we the pre trib saints will NOT be here during the tribulation period


Romans 5:9, "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."

1 Thessalonians 1:10, "And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come."

Revelation 3:10, "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth."


The tribulation period is a period of judgement against Israel and the world

[Obadiah]

Hmm...

Not to upset the applecart, as I come from a very strong pre-trib background.

But, returning to the question in the original post, doesn't it seem at least a bit strange that Jesus, speaking to the group of disciples who were on the brink of becoming the Church, would feel compelled to prep them for going through the tribulation period which will happen only after the Church has been raptured away? And all of this without even a hint that what Jesus was prepping them for would actually happen to someone else, not to them?

Chris... are you saying that mashiach is the Hebrew equivalent of Christopher? It's actually the original Hebrew for Christ. Christopher, translated into biblical Hebrew, would be something like nose-mashiach (nose pronounced roughly like "no say").

[palmaceae]

Hmm...

Not to upset the applecart, as I come from a very strong pre-trib background.

But, returning to the question in the original post, doesn't it seem at least a bit strange that Jesus, speaking to the group of disciples who were on the brink of becoming the Church, would feel compelled to prep them for going through the tribulation period which will happen only after the Church has been raptured away? And all of this without even a hint that what Jesus was prepping them for would actually happen to someone else, not to them?

Chris... are you saying that mashiach is the Hebrew equivalent of Christopher? It's actually the original Hebrew for Christ. Christopher, translated into biblical Hebrew, would be something like nose-mashiach (nose pronounced roughly like "no say").


Thank you everyone for the answers, that makes more sense now.

Obadiah, that is exactly what one of my students asked, you stated it better then I did :)
Another question I use Logos Bible software (which is really great BTW) and using the Greek translation of Matthew 24:15 I notice there is no translation for the word "you". So how would this translate then in English, did Jesus say "you" or something else?

[Clouds]

I hope all this makes sense,
First of all I am a firm believer in the Pre Trib Rapture and am teaching on end times at my Church but someone brought up a point concerning Matthew 24:15, which says “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), ". His point was since Jesus said "when you see the ‘abomination of desolation" he is thinking that since He was talking to His disciples at that time, Jesus meant that we as disciples today will see it too, meaning a mid trib rapture, due to the fact that the Church will not be raptured before the desecration of the temple? I could not answer his question right then and there in an intelligent way but after studying this for a couple days I am thinking this means the Jews will see the ‘abomination of desolation' because of Jesus mentioning "spoken of by Daniel the prophet". This would have a direct correlation with Daniel 9:27 which says "He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” Also mentioned in Daniel 11:31-32 and Daniel 12:11. Would this be a correct statement?

Daniel 11:31-32 and Daniel 12:11 are not the same event.

[jikoklol]

Hi palmaceae,

This was discussed in depth in this thread here
http://www.rr-bb.com/showthread.php?t=18382&highlight=jikoklol&page=1

But to answer your question more specifically, the "you" of verse 15 is the same "you" of verses verses 9, 20, 25, 26. There is no indication that Matthew 24:15 and the other verses listed refers to any other audience than the one to whom Jesus is speaking. Jesus is not laying down universal principles of behavior in the Olivet Discourse; He is outlining when certain events are going to take place and to whom. If Jesus had a future generation and audience in mind , He would have said “that generation" instead of "this generation and "they" or "them" instead of "you". There is no way that "you", based on the construct of the Olivet Discourse, means "you + 2000 years". It has to be the disciples and their generation.



Here is a quote from Eusebius
But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come there from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men. (Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3)

[Wildcat81]

Another question I use Logos Bible software (which is really great BTW) and using the Greek translation of Matthew 24:15 I notice there is no translation for the word "you". So how would this translate then in English, did Jesus say "you" or something else?

The "you" is part of the verb. In Greek (and most languages, actually), a pronoun as the subject of a verb is pretty much redundant. The subject is bound up in the formation of the verb. In English, our verbs don't have person and number bound up in their inflection (or at least, only in a very limited capacity). In this case, the verb itself (idete) is a second person plural verb form, which means that the verb by itself means "you see." It would be a different verb form if it were "I see" or "we see" or "they see." You see? There doesn't need to be a separate word meaning "you" in the Greek, because the verb takes care of that all on its own.

Often, of course, one does see a pronoun as the subject of a verb, but most of the time that's emphatic - "You see," or "I say."