Completely off subject… which is okay since it will all pan out in the end, as you said.

I think Paul had a copy of Matthew’s Gospel. Thessalonians is not the only letter with connections. 1 Corinthians also has several connections to Matthew’s Gospel. Of course, if that is true, that completely changes the critical view of the dating of the Gospel.

Okay… pardon the interruption… now, someone please comment about the rapture before we all get “caught up”.

-Alan

Let me ask you the following question:

Do you take the description given in Revelation to be a literal account of the Great Tribulation?

Of course we could just ask the previous commenter, I’m sure he could tell us when the rapture will take place. (Where do these guys come from?)

[Edit: I decided to remove “the previous commenter” that Gordon referenced, because the comment was spam and linked to some very inappropriate things.]

Great topic! I’m sure we’ll have more fun.
-marty

You’ve assumed the premillennial position in asking your question about the timing of the “rapture.” Personally, I’m not sure that I can even choose between premillennial, postmillennial or amillennial.

I like the description by N. T. Wright. He says that the statements in the Bible about the end times are “signpost pointing into a fog.” We have some information, but it is very limited.

I agree with you that it is sad for Christians to divide over eschatology.

Rod

Alan, interesting hypothesis about Paul having a copy of Matthew’s gospel. Never heard that before. What are the implications of that theory?

Gordon, hope you don’t mind me picking on you, bro. I just happened to re-read a comment of yours from January where you had said something about “when Christ comes back (before the tribulation)” very tongue-in-cheek, so I figured I’d poke back

With regard to your serious question, I actually have been leaning toward a partial preterist view of Revelation, like marty mentioned in his comment. But even with a futurist view of Revelation, I still see issues with the pre-trib position.

The arguments in favor of the pre-trib in the book of Revelation are pretty weak, in my opinion. Not completely wrong out of hand, but weak. Like Rev 4:1 being symbolic of the rapture? For being the school of thought that prides itself (for some, quite literally) on being the most “literal”, I find it fascinating that they then interpret 4:1 symbolically!

We can discuss Revelation more, if you want, but I sense you have a follow-up question…

marty, I find the partial preterist view to be exactly what you said — less pieces to bend and stretch.

Rod, N T Wright is rather wise in this regard. However, I think there’s more than we sometimes realize in the Scripture about the end times. Again, I’m not willing to give my life for a particular viewpoint, but I think that perhaps Wright might be dimissing it a bit too easily.

Having said that, I’m not fully convinced of a pre-mil position. I’m not sure that the question of the rapture has to assume a pre-mil position, does it? Could I not be post-mil or a-mil and still believe in a literal second coming during which we are caught up to meet Christ in the air as he descends to judge the wicked?

This is why I reject a full preterist view. I believe that Scripture is at least quite clear about a literal return of Jesus to the earth.

Or am I missing some major element of post- or a- that would hinder that?

All of Mathew 24 is basically a question the disciples asked in vs. 3”…Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” Jesus’ response to that question is everything He said from vs. 4 to the end of chapter 24 and even through chapter 25. After He shares with the disciples what these signs are, He goes on to say 32 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.

Something else I find interesting is that Revelation chapter 6 parallels Jesus’ description of the signs of His return and the gathering of the elect very closely. Jesus’ answer in Matthew 24 deals with the earthly vantage point of what to expect prior to His return happens. Revelation 6 and 7 give us vantage point from heaven of the tribulation and the rapture.

There is also the “argument” within the pre-trib school of thought that states that we are not appointed unto God’s wrath. The idea being that we couldn’t possibly be here for the events Jesus describes in Matt 24. I agree with the fact that, as Christians, we are not appointed unto God’s wrath, (1 Thes. 1:10” and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come. And 1 Thes. 5:9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,) but I question whether or not the events in Matthew 24 are indeed God’s wrath or judgment. If the correlation between Matthew 24 and Revelation 6 can be made, then I believe that Revelation gives us an answer to that question. Revelation 6:16 and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

Alan, or anyone else who has a better understanding of the Greek, is “has come” in Rev. 6:17 used in an impending sense? From what I can see it is, but I could be mistaken.

I’m making a bigger point but I want to wait for more feedback.

Be blessed…
Brandon

Thoughts?

The main problem that I have with the conclusion that this took place in 70AD is that fact that Jesus has yet to return. Wasn’t that the question that initiated this text? “What will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?” If Jesus were speaking to a group of non-Christians I believe that He would have used the term, “that generation”…of course that is a huge supposition on my part. But it does make sense given the fact that He is speaking to the first generation of “the church age”.

Sorry, I hope this rabble on my part makes sense…I’m rushed for time this morning.

Thanks and be blessed…
Brandon

I take a literal view of Revelation. I realize of course that it does use some symbols in a prophetic sense, but I believe that the events it describes are real in a logical, consistent time frame. I think we have to ’splain away a lot of scripture to interpret it otherwise.

That position causes me to have a couple of questions/thoughts that can only be satisfied by a pre-trib position.

1. If the events in Revelation are to be taken literally, and the return of Christ is post-trib, (i.e. the rapture and the Second Coming are synonymous), then it would be possible to pinpoint the time of the rapture. We know what Jesus had to say about this, that even He didn’t know the hour of His return.

2. It seems according to Revelation, that a person who receives the mark of the beast cannot be saved. This would add an element of works to salvation that is obviously not a part of God’s plan in this dispensation.

I will stipulate that the texts to which you refer do not clearly state that the rapture is pre-trib, but neither do they preclude it. These points I have mentioned, however, lead me to accept the pre-trib position.

With regard to the two points you made:

1. The comment Jesus made was with regard to the Second Coming, or else one must twist Matthew 24 around a bit since he seems to be describing events related to what we call the tribulation. So whatever Jesus meant by not knowing the hour can’t easily be ascribed to the rapture (although it frequently is).

Additionally, Jesus definitely gives his disciples things to watch for (cf. 1 Thess 5 where Paul says that it won’t take us by surprise). I don’t think that not knowing the hour means that we won’t be fully aware of how close the time is.

2. I’m not sure I understand the connection between receiving the mark of the beast and “add[ing] an element of works to salvation”. Could you elaborate on that? Is it then your position that no one can be saved in the tribulation? Or that salvation in the tribulation includes an element of works?

I will give you points for bringing up an argument (the mark = works-based salvation) that I don’t recall ever seeing before!

After further thought, I probably did misapply Matthew 24 (I’ve probably been reading too many “Left Behind” books, hehehe). It does seem to be speaking of the Second Coming.

I do believe that people will be saved in the GT (at least 144,000 of them ). I believe they will be saved by faith in Christ just as we are. However, those who take the mark of the beast will be given “strong delusion that they might believe a lie” and will not have the capacity for faith. This seems to add an element to salvation that is not currently a factor.

How many points do I need to win?

The pre-trib position says that Jesus comes back once only to rapture the Church, and then comes again (the Third Coming?? hehe) to judge the wicked.

In II Thess 2, Paul begins by saying that he wants people to be clear about Christ’s coming “and our being gathered to Him” — is that not the rapture? And then he says that the tribulation must take place.

I’m not sure I get what you’re saying about the “strong delusion” adding any element to salvation that is not currently a factor. According to Romans 1:18-32, that same result (a rejection of Christ which God then treats as final) seems to be possible in this day, too.

I’m just not seeing how your point about the mark of the beast precludes the idea that we are still here and meet Christ in the air when He returns to judge.

You still are lacking a few points to win hehe Although I’ll give you more points still for humbly retracting your use of Matt 24!!

All I can say is, if you really want to go through the GT, be my guest!

But you can look at it this way, when it all does “pan out”, between your viewpoint and mine, I’m the only one in a position to be pleasantly surprised if I’m wrong!

I think you should finally come out of the closet and admit that you have converted to the “pan-trib” position.

By the way, I am enjoying the conversation. I’m trying to talk Lew into joining in, because he cares about this stuff much more than I do. I personally like the N.T. Wright quote…

-Alan

In the interest of cutting to the chase, someone please explain the belief that God will spare us from tribulation. This seems to be a predominantly western concept. I do see plenty of scripture that tells us that God will spare us from his wrath…but tribulation? If that’s in the Bible I’m missing it. There is also the overall “theme” in scripture of God delivering his people through trials rather than from them.

Also- Being able to interpret the signs in order to know the approximate time of Jesus’ return/the rapture is very different from knowing the day or the hour. I do agree, we cannot pinpoint the day or hour, but Jesus said in Matt 24:32 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.” What does this text mean if it doesn’t mean that this is how we can know his return is near?

Again I ask, is the tribulation the outpouring of God’s wrath on man or is it not? I believe that Revelation gives a clear picture that it is not. From Revelation 8:5 on you see the wrath of God being poured out on the earth and it’s inhabitants. (hail mixed with fire and blood, 1/3 of the earth, 1/3 of the trees, all the grass are burned…that’s the wrath of God.) The idea that being persecuted for our faith is somehow God’s wrath doesn’t compare to the description of the judgements that begin in Revelation 8.

Incidentally, these judgements or acts of wrath come right after the rapture of the church and the scene in heaven that follows which is described in Revelation 7:8-17.

Does any of this make sense to anyone besides me?

Be blessed…
Brandon

When you speak of God sparing us from tribulation, are you speaking generally or specifically of the Great Tribulation?

I believe that Christians will endure tribulation in a general sense, but I think we will be gone during the seven years of Great Tribulation.

And yes, I do believe we can understand that the coming of Christ is near even if we don’t know the exact minute. I personally believe it will happen in our lifetime. But, then, so did the writers of the NT.

“Are you talking about the destruction of the temple in 70AD or of Jesus’ return? Is it possible that Jesus is speaking metaphorically here when He says, this generation?”

I think the answer to this is actually two-fold (this is a key difference between the full-preterist view and the partial-preterist view.

The full-preterist believes the return of Christ fully occurred in AD 70, in judgment and bodily. I don’t believe this is true. Partial-preterist hold that Jesus returned in judgment in AD 70 culminating the “Jewish age.” His return bodily still is future at the final judgment of all things. He returns at this point the rapture/resurrection occurs and all are judged at the last day. This seems to me to be very plausable.

I don’t believe he’s speaking metaphorically about “this generation”, I believe that was literal and was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem.

“The main problem that I have with the conclusion that this took place in 70AD is that fact that Jesus has yet to return.”

That’s addressed above as well.

Wasn’t that the question that initiated this text? “What will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?” If Jesus were speaking to a group of non-Christians I believe that He would have used the term, “that generation”…of course that is a huge supposition on my part. But it does make sense given the fact that He is speaking to the first generation of “the church age”.

When using the simple, straight forward meaning of the words, without putting any eschatalogical twist on them, I can’t see how “this generation” means anything other than the generation to whom he was speaking. Again, that’s the meaning every other time the phrase is used in the NT.

Hope this is clear, it’s kinda late and my brain is saying “sleep…”

God bless!
-marty

So, are you espousing a mid-trib rapture position here? I am not certain how you see the rapture in Rev 7, unless you’re talking about the reference to “those who came out of the great tribulation”. Is that what you’re seeing?

marty, ditto to you as to how I am able to respond so fast sometimes!

I’m still waiting for someone to challenge the points I made about 2 Thess 1:8. I’m having trouble seeing how a literal hermeneutic would not see the rapture and the second coming as being two aspects of one event at the same time.

It may, as Gordon has said, come down to hermeneutics, but what about my hermeneutic is wrong?

Please don’t misunderstand. I don’t believe there is that much latitude in all matters of doctrine, but as I see it, this is not exactly a cardinal doctrine we are discussing here.

Hope you get to feeling better.

I think it would be really hard to read the “end times” verses with no preconcieved ideas and come up with the dichotomy of “appearings”. It’s difficult to “read out” without “reading in!”

-marty

What I find increasingly ironic is that the pre-trib position is often claimed by its adherents to be the only “literal” interpretation of Scripture. This is one of the many “straw men” that I believe the pre-trib position puts forth.

Is it your position with your reference to hermeneutics, that my interpretation of 2 Thess 1:8 is not a literal interpretation?

I guess what I’ve been trying to get you to articulate is what hermeneutic you think I’m using, and which one you’re using?

Change my previous question to, “what about my hermeneutic is different from yours?”

Marty,
I’m curious about the return of Christ that you’re talking about in 70AD when the destruction of the temple occurred. In that context I can see the literal interpretation of “this generation”. Are you saying that all of the events in Matthew 24 have already taken place? Sorry, I can be a bit slow.

Steve,
I hope you’re feeling better.
No, I don’t see the rapture and the return of Christ (which I believe are one in the same) from a mid-trib standpoint. The reason I said that I see what I believe to be the rapture of the Church in Revelation 7 starts in Revelation 6:9 When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls …11…given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer…

Contrast that with the way the people are described in Revelation 7:9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; (there’s not only a positional difference, but a physical difference as well)

I find it interesting that these are described as souls beneath the altar in chapter 6. This is prior to the events in Rev 6:12-14 where the sign of Christ’s return (Matt 24:29;Isaiah 13:10-13;Joel 2:10;Eze 32:7)is described. From what I’m seeing it would appear that they have no bodies prior to Rev 6:12-14. But in Rev. 7 they are said to be before the throne (not underneath) and described as wearing robes and holding palm branches in their hands… All of this says to me that they had no bodies but after vs 12-14 they have received bodies.

Also, Revelation 6:”How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” This also shows that everything that has happened up until this point is not God’s judgement of man and the earth…”How long will You refrain from judging…”. I would appear to me that God’s judgement doesn’t come until the opening of the seventh seal which begins the trumpet judgements in Rev 8:7 and continues from that point.

So basically my position has little to do with tribulation or the great tribulation. It has to do more with the church being raptured prior to God unleashing His wrath or judgement on man and the earth. (Romans 2:5,5:9 1Thes 1:10,5:9 Rev6:16-17)

I too tried for 2 years to make a case for the pre-trib position and failed. I also tried to prove a post and mid trib position and had the same results. It seemed that I always had to put an eschatological twist (as Marty so aptly described it) on them to make them work as well.

I have to say, this is probably the most civilized discussion I’ve been engaged in on this topic. Thanks!

Be blessed…
Brandon

Be blessed…
Brandon

Perhaps the pre-trib position claims the “literal interpretation” label because of its interpretation of Revelation. If we are to allegorize Revelation, we are in essence writing off a very large and significant portion of Scripture.

I realize of course that the Bible often employs allegory, but there is a rather weighty amount of detail in Revelation that I believe to be literal and not figurative. I say that because throughout the Bible, it is consistent that prophecy is literal. While symbolic language may be used, it is always used to describe actual events.

I guess what I am trying to say is, in answer to your question concerning the difference in our hermeneutics, I believe that a literal interpretation of Revelation will lead us to an understanding of Thessalonians that teaches a pre-trib rapture. A figurative interpretation can lead one to perhaps a mid- or post- position.

I hope this hasn’t been to muddled. I am suffering from an attack of the killer sinuses and generally when that happens I reserve the right to deny responsibility for anything I say.

Brandon

[Edit by Steve: I took care of it for you, Brandon! ]

Be blessed…
Brandon

You asked me what difference did I see between “the” tribulation and the “Great Tribulation”.

I would probably drop the “the” on the first and simply describe it as the tribulation that the world, Satan and the flesh brings against all believers.

The “Great Tribulation” is of course, the seven years of the outpouring of God’s wrath between the rapture and the Second Coming.

So I do not believe that God will spare us from tribulation in the general sense, but I do believe that He will spare us from His wrath in the Great Tribulation.

God bless.

With regard to “literal” interpretation of Revelation, let me give an example of where I think it breaks down:

Portions of the book of Daniel are parallel to events recorded in Revelation, no? They both fall into what we term “apocalyptic literature”. As such, I know of no hermeneutic, including the dispensation, pre-trib, pre-mil position, which interprets the things recorded in Daniel’s writings (the apocalyptic parts) as truly literal.

When Daniel talks about a statue, and a large rock hurtling down the mountain and crushing the statue, I know of no one who is looking for a literal statue and a literal large rock. This is the symbolic language to which you allude, right?

However, when Revelation talks about locusts, or hail storms, or stars falling to the earth, we somehow are taught that a literal interpretation means we must be looking for those literal events to happen at some point. This is the whole basis for the “Left Behind” series.

Likewise, when Daniel talks about 70 weeks, the dispensationalist turns that into 70 weeks plus however many are included in the “parenthesis” (of which Daniel makes no mention), therefore forcing an interpretation on the text.

However, even regarding a “literal” futuristic view of Revelation, since Revelation does not mention the rapture, and mentions “saints” on the earth through the tribulation, I don’t see how even that type of futuristic interpretation requires a pre-trib rapture.

The reason I say 2 Thess 1:8 refers to both is because it includes the “relief” for those who are in Christ (a “relief” that would not be necessary if we were already 7 years into our time with Christ) and the judgment of those who are not in Christ (Christ returning with fire to judge).

If 2 Thess 1:8 does not refer to both, which do you think it refers to? And how do you explain away the other aspect of His coming?

Additionally, I’m not interpreting 2 Thess 1:8 in a vacuum, but rather in conjunction with his first letter to the Thessalonians, as well as chapter 2 of the same letter.

Finally, one more point to make: God keeping us from His wrath does not require that we be removed from the earth. Noah was kept from the wrath of God, but without being removed from the earth. Would you agree?

I really would like to understand what it is about the book of Revelation that then pushes the Thessalonian passages into a pre-trib understanding.

If you don’t want to continue with it (given your current physical condition, and the potential for frustration!!), I understand completely. I never like to push beyond the point where we’re both enjoying the conversation! Like we’ve agreed already, it’s nowhere near a cardinal doctrine.

I think there is some distinction, however, between the language of Daniel and Revelation (I would agree that they are both apocalyptic in nature). Where Daniel uses symbols, it clearly indicates that the terms used are symbolic of something else (e.g. kingdoms). Revelation makes no such indication. Secondly, even if some of the language of Revelation is symbolic, certainly some of must be taken literally. How do we draw the distinction if the writer does not clarify which is which? This is why I tend to take a literal interpretation of Revelation.

Why do I believe that Revelation calls for a pre-trib interpretation of Thessalonians? Primarily because after the third chapter, the church is not mentioned again until the end of the vision. True, it does mention saints upon the earth, but I believe these to be those who are saved after the Rapture. If the church is not present during the events described in Revelation, then it must have been raptured out.

I think 2 Thess. 1:8 is probably talking about the Second Coming. Given the verses that follow describing the rise of the anti-Christ, it seems to be referring to Christ coming at the end of the tribulation. Where we would probably differ is that I see the event described in 1 Thess. 4 as being a separate event (the Rapture).

Thanks for your concern. I hope you feel better too. I think one verse in this text that we can agree upon is 1 Thess. 5:28.

As far as “saints” in Revelation being only those saved after the rapture, I think this ignores the fact that the word “saints” is frequently used throughout the NT to describe the church. Therefore, I think we need to read a huge distinction into the text of Revelation that doesn’t get justified throughout the rest of the NT.

Furthermore, even if the church isn’t being discussed during the events of the tribulation, I don’t think that necessitates a rapture out prior. It could simply mean that the church is being protected by God somewhere on earth in the midst of the tribulation.

Just trying to get you to think outside the box of what we’ve always been taught, my friend

At any rate, you are absolutely correct on our agreement regarding 1 Thess 5:28 and I appreciate you bringing that into the discussion!! You’re a good friend, Gordon.

You are assuming that I never have thought outside this box before.

Where do you see the rapture taking place in the book of Revelation? At Rev4:1 at Rev 6:12-14 or elsewhere?

Is the opening of the seals to the scroll judgement and wrath? Reading from a pre-trib perspective, I don’t see where the unredeemed left after the rapture would see the events of the first 6 seals as any kind of judgement from God against them…actually, with the exception of the first seal, I don’t see anything that we don’t already see today…War, famine and pestilence.

Like Steve said, if this is becoming more of an annoyance than a blessing we can stop. Thanks for your willingness to talk about this topic.

Be blessed…
Brandon

Regarding your question as to the timing of the rapture in Revelation, I would tend to think it is in 4:1. Perhaps, though, that is wishful thinking on my part as I certainly want to be able to witness the glorious events of chapters 4 and 5.

However, I also tend to believe that the martyrs described in chapter 6 are those who are martyred after the tribulation has begun (signified by the release of the four horsemen).

It is entirely possible that you are correct in saying that the world will not recognize the first six seals as the judgement of God. Given the current hysteria over global warming and other geo-seismological events, it may be that they blame George Bush (that was tongue-in-cheek)or mankind in general for these events.

If they fail to worship God in His manifestations of grace, it is unlikely that many of these will turn to Him in His wrath. I believe that many (not all) of those who are left behind will be those described in Rom. 1 as being “given over to a reprobate mind”.

Also, I had mentioned this before and Marty shared his understanding of it, but do you see the parallels between Matthew 24 and Rev 6-7?

Matt 24:4-5…Rev 6:1-2
Matt 24:6…..Rev 6:3-4
Matt 24:7-8…Rev 6:5-6
Matt 24:9-14..Rev 6:7-11

Matthew 24:15-28 then seems to be a reiteration of the warnings that Jesus is giving as to what the signs will be of His coming and not to be deceived by the false christ.

Matt 24:29-31…Rev 6:12-14 Both describe the coming of Christ and then after these signs comes the first mention of the wrath of God in the book of Revelation in verses 6:16-17.

Also, I think it’s interesting to note Jesus’ statement in vs.6 “…See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end.”
Or in vs.8 “But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.”

I’ll stop there as I’m about to fall asleep sitting here.

Your thoughts on those verses and possible parallels.

Thanks for continuing the conversation.
Be blessed…
Brandon

I guess that I just fail to see anything in the Bible that suggests that we will be spared from these events. I do, however, see plenty of evidence in scripture to support us not being present for the outpouring of God’s wrath. Which I believe begins at the opening of the seventh seal Rev 8:1 and Rev and the trumpet judgements that follow in Rev 8:7.

I’m not sure I’m doing a good job at making my point but there it is nonetheless…

Thanks again!

Be blessed…
Brandon

Brandon.
Sorry, I’ve been so busy I haven’t had a change to get back with you on this. Let’s see, you asked…

I’m curious about the return of Christ that you’re talking about in 70AD when the destruction of the temple occurred. In that context I can see the literal interpretation of “this generation”.

Honestly, (at this point) I believe the Great Tribulation has already occurred. I think the culmination of it took place with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70AD. That would mean we are now in the Millennial reign (this should really stir things up a bit). This leads nicely into your next question…

Are you saying that all of the events in Matthew 24 have already taken place?

Yes. I think the key is reading Matthew 24 trying NOT to have any preconceived ideas, this is not easy to do.

Matthew 24:34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Jesus tells his followers a whole bunch of stuff that is going to happen. He makes no mention that it will be in the distant future (2000 years) and culminates it by say this generation (remember no reference to the distant future which would make it “that generation”) will see all of these things fulfilled. Using this interpretation doesn’t require you to speculate that there is any time gap (Daniel’s 7th week) or anything like that. It’s a straight forward reading of the scripture.

In Him,
-marty

What does everyone think of Jesus’ reference to Daniel in Matt 24:15-16 - “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.” (ESV)

To what is Daniel referring (Dan 11:31; 12:11)? Is Jesus referring to the same thing (event), or adding another level to Daniel’s prophecy? Also, could the “then” in 24:16 and the “then” in 24:21 (”For then there will be great tribulation…”) be the same time period?

-Alan

Alan,
It would appear to me that Jesus is continuing to answer the original question the disciples asked Him. “What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” Matt 24:29 seems to indicate that this is the same period. “…after the tribulation of those days…” Did that make sense? It’s too early for my brain.

Br blessed…
Brandon