 HOME
BIBLE
STUDIES
ONLINE
MEDIA
BOOKSTORE
MISSION CONTACT
US
LINKS
|
PROPER HERMENEUTICS AND
THE FOLLY OF THE "TWO CONVERSATION" ARGUMENT
- Part 13 Studying Grammar and the Contextual Flow of The Olivet Discourse to Disprove the Doctrine of Dispensationalism Michael F. Blume © 2010 Michael F. Blume All
Rights Reserved 
Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?Just because Luke did not mention they asked privately does not mean it was not the same question session Mark and Matthew claimed was private. That is common sense. The common sense factor also tells us that the simplest solution is likely the correct one. This means that it is more logical to conclude that Luke simply did not mention it was private, nor how many disciples asked the questions, nor that it was on the Mount of Olives they asked Jesus. Mark and Matthew simply provide us with the privacy of the session, and the location. Since Mark's questions mirror Luke's list perfectly, then Mark's other details of the privacy and the location are meant to be applied to Luke's record. Some futurists do things with these differences of details that they would never do in any other synoptic gospel account common to all three gospels. They make a big ado about Jesus publicly preaching the information He gave in answer to the disciples who asked Him about it privately. They claim Luke's version was not asked in private, since privacy was not mentioned, and that Jesus was asked publicly by all the disciples. Well, first of all, Luke did not say all the disciples asked him anything. Secondly, Luke does not say Jesus publicly preached his information either. We are not told either way who the audience was. This is the same case with Matthew and Mark. Futurists assume it was a public sermon, or that all the disciples heard Him preach it in Luke, but Luke does not say. All that we are told is that "SOME -- THEY" (Luke), "the disciples" (Matthew) and "Peter, James, John and Andrew" (Mark) asked him questions. We are not told whom Jesus responded to. Futurists conclude that a one conversation opinion requires us to think "private" means "public". But the fact is we are never told any conversation was made public. We are not told in any Gospel that Jesus spoke to anyone other than the people who asked him the questions. And the only flimsy ground any futurist has provided for saying one conversation was public and the other was private, was the lack of the reference to privacy in Luke. Luke could have merely not mentioned it, just as Mark did not mention the need to pray the flight to the mountains be not on the Sabbath whereas Matthew did mention that note. Futurists might split hairs and say all 12 disciples asked about the sign of His coming in Matthew simply because Matthew said "the disciples". That is not enough grounds to make that conclusion concretely, though. While Mark says four disciples came to Jesus and asked about "the sign" futurists claim that was a different series of questions than Matthew's list! Futurists point to another indication that Matthew's list was different from Mark's list. Matthew used the words "sign of thy coming and of the end of the world" while Mark and Luke say, "sign when these things shall come to pass." So they claim Mathew and Mark show two entirely different sets of questions. Do not forget, though, that futurist are not saying Matthew and Mark recorded two entirely different conversations on the Mount of Olives. They just believe there were two sets of questions on the Mount of Olives -- one recorded by Matthew and another by Mark. Not only that, they claim Mark's identical list of questions found in Luke was a different set than Luke's list! (How many hoops have futurists leaped through so far?) They claim Luke's set is identical to Mark's set, but yet two different sets, because... 1) Luke did not mention they were asked “on the Mount of Olives.”Anyone can clearly see that the futurist reasons listed above do not conclusively prove two conversations at all. One does not have to conclude “privately” means “publicly” since, in all three gospels, the audience was not identified as being anyone different than the people who were said to ask the questions. Also, “the disciples” does not necessarily mean all 12. So, not only do futurists claim the series of questions in Matthew was not the same list found in Mark, but that Luke’s identical wording were actually a third set of questions on top of that! Meanwhile, in all three accounts the same sequence of disciples’ comments on the temple, followed by Jesus’ remarks of its destruction, followed by the questions of the disciples is the same overall pattern showing an obvious sameness of all three accounts. In summary of the many parts of this presentation I have made about futurism’s errors of the two conversation concept, here are the reasons listed below that we discussed as to why futurists insist there were two different conversations at hand, including the four noted above. Let the unbiased reader ask if these are not indications of missing the forest for the trees, or straining at gnats that do not prove more than one conversation whatsoever while swallowing the camel of nonsense of two conversations. Count the hoops. FUTURIST VIEW: 1) Luke did not mention they were asked “on the Mount of Olives.”KINGDOM ESCHATOLOGIST VIEW: 1) All three accounts are only relating one and the same overall conversation, using different terms as per the writer’s memories, as is found in any other given common account recorded in all three gospels.That is the ONLY POINT THE READER HAS TO CONSIDER if my viewpoint is correct. Quite a difference, isn’t there? One point compared to 9 hoops to leap through. BACK | NEXT RDTW
|
|
© Copyright 2010 Rightly Dividing the Word - All Rights Reserved Please assume that all materials on this website are copyrighted by Rightly Dividing the Word. For permission and details see our terms and conditions. For problems with this website, please contact webmaster1@rightlydividingtheword.com.
|
