On today’s program I responded to the common pretribulational proof-text of Matthew 24:36, showing how the context clearly does not support their view of “imminence.”
Part 6 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 13, 2012
This is the last installment of our six-part series. The last reason why verses 36–44 refer to the immediate context of the coming in verses 30–31 is found in a helpful parallel passage in the gospel of Luke. The passage in Luke 17:22–37 parallels Matthew 24:23–41. Luke reads: (22) Then he said to the disciples, [...]
Part 5 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 12, 2012
The fourth reason why verses 36–44 refer to the immediate context of the coming in verses 30–31 is found in the use of the term parousia. The term is used only four times in the gospels and are all found in Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39. Hart argues the parousia mentioned in verses 37 and [...]
Part 4 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 11, 2012
The third reason why verses 36–44 refer to the immediate context of the coming in verses 30–31 is recognizing Jesus’ audience. Hart argues verses 4–35 are intended for a Jewish audience and verses 36–44 are for the church. However, both passages have the same audience of disciples. The second person plural “you” is found in [...]
Part 3 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 10, 2012
The second reason why verses 36–44 refer to the immediate context of the coming in verses 30–31 is found in the natural antecedent. Verse 36 reads, “But as for that day and hour no one knows it—not even the angels in heaven—except the Father alone” (Matt 24:36). The immediate and natural antecedent of “that” day [...]
Part 2 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 9, 2012
As mentioned in the first part, Hart views these two passages as incompatible because he construes verses 4–35 teaching signs before Christ’s coming, while verses 36–44 teaching no signs before his coming. Therefore, he claims verses 36–44 must not be referring back to the coming in verses 30–31, instead must refer to a pretribulational rapture [...]
Part 1 – Why the “Coming” in Matthew 24:36–44 Refers Back to Verses 30–31
October 8, 2012
This is the first part of six. In my book, Antichrist Before the Day of the Lord, I have an appendix entitled, “The ‘Big Three’ Proof Texts for Imminence.” The three proof texts I address are James 5:7–9, Titus 2:11–14, and Matthew 24:36. It is the latter proof text that I will split up in [...]
Jesus’ Beginning of Birth Pangs in Contrast to Paul’s Use of the Birthing Imagery
January 28, 2012
I have written on this subject before, but I wanted to link a recent article I wrote on this subject responding to Eric Douma. Douma puts a lot of his theological eggs into this birth pangs basket. He equates Jesus’ use of the birthing metaphor with Paul’s use of it, thereby arguing that the rapture [...]
A Critique of Eric Douma’s Eschatology
December 14, 2011
Over at the Prewrath Resource Institute’s blog, I am responding to Eric Douma’s pretribulational claims. I am doing a series challenging his teaching on the day of the Lord because it is seriously flawed. I am also responding to him because his arguments represent other pretribulational teachers. I will update the links here until my [...]
