PROPER
HERMENEUTICS AND THE FOLLY OF THE "TWO CONVERSATION" ARGUMENT
Studying the Grammar and Contextual Flow of the Olivet Discourse
To Disprove the Doctrine of Dispensationalism
PART 4
Mike Blume
November 2010
Let
us summarize so far the facts that refute the ridiculous claim by
futurists that Matt 24,Mark
13andLuke
21present
two totally different conversations.
An
antecedent for any given account's pronouns (in this case, for the
pronoun "these" in the disciples' first question to Jesus in all three
accounts) must be included in the writing itself without forcing the
reader to look elsewhere in another book. When a dispensationalist whom
I know stated that the antecedent for THESE THINGS in Matt 24 andMark
13is
missing and must be found inLuke
21:27,
he showed rife violation of the rules of common reading and grammar.
Hermeneutics (manner of interpretation) requires one to not abandon the
rules of grammar. He attempted at one point to say the original
writings were in Greek so that means it is not a matter of English
grammar but Greek grammar. That is a bloating red herring. In Greek
grammar or any other language's grammar there are pronouns preceded by
antecedents as well. No language would refer you to something indicated
by a pronoun without having first stated what that pronoun actually was
by way of an antecedent. Languages would make no sense if they
presented thoughts the way he is implying the Greek does.
Since
there is no other antecedent mentioned between the first question the
disciples asked and the next one, then the next question's reference to
the SIGN must likewise be the same as for the pronoun "these" in the
first. As Matthew speaks of the SIGN of His coming, Luke and mark both
speak of the SIGN when "these things" shall come to pass. Nothing
indicates more than one conversation, but rather the same conversation
recounted by the three writers using variation of terms. I repeated
this many times, but this is the case for any given common account
found in all three gospels. If one example of ANOTHER ACCOUNT that is
SIMILAR in pattern and layout can be proved to be speaking of MORE THAN
ONE EVENT, as futurists claim is the case with this issue, then
futurists might have a case. But to say all the accounts that are
similar in layout and pattern in the three synoptic gospels (Matthew,
Mark and Luke) all are accounts of one and the same story in all casesexcept
Matt 24,Mark
13,
andLuke
21,
is suspicious to say the least!
The
pronouns "ye," "your" and "your" are indicated by futurists to refer to
the people actually hearing Jesus inLuke
21,
but not referring to the same people in Matt 24 andMark
13,
since they think Matt 24 andMark
13are
about people who would not even be born and live for another two
thousand years. No writer is that inept to refer to people who have
nothing to do with the audience to whom words are spoken such as "Ye,"
"you" and "your". A child could recognize this!
But alas, recently a dispensationalist whom I know has violated his own
argument that formerly said the statement about "Blessed is he that
cometh in the name of the Lord" was not the topic of his second
discussion on the mount of Olives, but rather the first discussion at
the temple grounds. He formerly claimed that the long distance from the
temple to the Mount of Olives brought a pause in the overall context,
and the questions the disciples asked on the Mount of Olives are
recorded inMark
13and
Matt 24, but the discussion at the temple grounds is only recorded inLuke
21.
Anything said at the temple grounds was what was asked about inLuke
21's
series of questions. And although the same series of questions are
found inMark
13,
he declared those questions were not from the same conversation, and
did not refer to anything said at the temple grounds. BecauseLuke
21did
not say they asked those questions on the Mount of Olives, he contends
this is evidence that they were not asked there. But he then argued thatLuke
21:24ends
the conversation at the temple grounds and begins the second
conversation in verse 25. But he said only the last half of the second
conversation is recounted in Luke. Meanwhile, if you look at the whole
record in Luke (where futurists claim are two conversations), the whole
record matches the overall single conversation related in Mark and
Matthew!