Jabarkan Gospels dari Ramalan Alkitab dalam bahasa melayu

In Matthew 10, when Jesus sent forth the twelve disciples, he told them:

"When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes."(Matthew 10:23)

The Christian response is varied:

Moffatt puts it “before the Son of man arrives” as if Jesus referred to this special tour of Galilee. Jesus could overtake them. Possibly so, but it is by no means clear. Some refer it to the Transfiguration, others to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, others to the Second Coming. Some hold that Matthew has put the saying in the wrong context. Others bluntly say that Jesus was mistaken, a very serious charge to make in his instructions to these preachers. The use of ἑως [heōs] with aorist subjunctive for a future event is a good Greek idiom.

Preterist scholars explain this verse as referring to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD with the phrase "before the Son of Man comes" meaning before judgment comes upon the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem for rejecting Jesus Christ as The Messiah. They reject to refer Matthew 10:23 to the second coming of Jesus because Jesus speaks to his disciples about the towns of Israel:

Such a view completely divorces the passage from its immediate and localized context, such as the fact that this was an admonition to the apostles - and not directed to a generation several millenia removed from the first century.

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary disagrees with this view:

In the similar context of Mt 24:8-31 the great tribulation and the second advent are in view. Hence, the "coming of the Son of man" is probably eschatological here also. This would have been more readily understood by the disciples, who would hardly have thought to equate this "coming" with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

In Matthew 12:40 Jesus says; "as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (See also Matthew 16:21, 20:19, Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34, Luke 11:29-30 and John 2:19) According to Mark 15:42-46, Jesus was buried in Friday night and according to Matthew 28:1-6 and John 20:1, Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday dawn.

It is customary for eastern nations to count part of a day as a whole 24 hour day.

Jesus prophesies in Matthew 16:27-28:

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

Christian responses have been varied:

Some of them that stand here (τινες των ὁδε ἑστωτων [tines tōn hode hestōtōn]). A crux interpretum in reality. Does Jesus refer to the transfiguration, the resurrection of Jesus, the great day of Pentecost, the destruction of Jerusalem, the second coming and judgment? We do not know, only that Jesus was certain of his final victory which would be typified and symbolized in various ways.

Preterists respond that Jesus did not mean his second coming but a demonstration of his might when He says "coming in his kingdom". In this view, this was accomplished by the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD when some of the Apostles were still living and thus fulfilling the word of Jesus that only some will not have died.

Others argue it refers to the transfiguration. The Wycliffe Bible Commentary states:

This coming of the Son of Man in his kingdom is explained by some as the destruction of Jerusalem and by others as the beginning of the Church. But referring it to the Transfiguration meets the requirements of the context (all Synoptists follow this statement with the Transfiguration, Mk 9:1; Lk 9:27). Furthermore, Peter, who was one of those standing here, referred to the Transfiguration in the same words (II Pet 1:16-18). Chafer calls the Transfiguration a “preview of the coming kingdom on earth” (L. S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, V, 85).

He also prophesies to Caiaphas (Matthew 26:64, KJV):

Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.

It is a misunderstanding that Jesus meant Caiphas. The word "you will see" is in Greek "ὄψεσθε" [opheste, from the infinitive optomai] which is plural. Jesus meant that the Jews, and not just the high priest, will see his coming.

Jesus declared in Matthew, Luke and John that Peter would deny him three times before cock-crow. Mark states that the cock crowed after the first denial as well as after the third denial. (First crow is not found in the NIV version)

Christians argue that the first cock-crow is simply missing from Matthew, Luke, and John. In Matthew (), Luke (), and John (), Jesus foretells three denials of Peter before cock-crow. , ,  report the fulfilment of this prophecy. In , Jesus speaks of two cock-crows, which is mentioned in  as having taken place. Christians argue that Matthew, Luke, and John removed the first cock-crow and diminished (Luke even eliminated) the partial exit by Peter after the first denial (which Mark reports). If Mark was the "interpreter of Peter", he would have gotten his information directly and thus would be considered the more reliable source.

Matthew 24:1-2 states (and Luke 21:6 mirrors):

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

Preterists claim these verses are metaphorical. Others claim that the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 fulfilled this despite the existence of the wailing wall. The IVP Bible Background Commentary states:

Some stones were left on others (e.g., part of one wall still stands), but this fact does not weaken the force of the hyperbole: the temple was almost entirely demolished in A.D. 70.

Matthew 24:7-8 is part of Jesus response to the disciples in verse 5 asking, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" It states:

Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

The famines part of this verse has often been associated with the third seal of Revelation (Rev. 6:5-6), and the pestilences and earthquakes aspect has often been associated with the fourth seal of Revelation (Rev. 6:7-8). The presence of the term birthpains could be representative of better times ahead. Scholars point out that these events have always been on earth, so the verse must refer to a significant increase in the intensity of them.

There are also several instances of erroneous or untraceable quotation of the prophets by the early Christians:

Matthew 27:9 paraphrase Zechariah 11:12 and 13 in relation to buying a field for 30 pieces of silver, but attributes it as a saying of Jeremiah. Jeremiah is described as buying a field in Jeremiah 32:6-9 for seventeen shekels of silver.

Christians have given several responses. First is that the use of Jeremiah is meant to refer to all the books of prophecy. Second is Jeremiah said this, but any recording of such have not survived to today. Third is this was the result of a scribal error because of the single letter difference in the abridged versions of the names.

Matthew 2:23 refers to a prophecy being fulfilled by Jesus living in Nazareth which is not found in the Old Testament.

Christians have given several responses. First is that this prophecy has not survived to the present day. Second is the Greek word nazaret does not mean Nazarene but is related to the Hebrew word netzer which can be translated branch. Third is that the verse is not a prophetic saying but simply reflects an Old Testament requirement for the Messiah to be held in contempt, (Psalm 22:6-8; 69:9-11, 19-21; Isaiah 53:2-4, 7-9) which they argue Nazarenes were (John 1:46; John 7:52).

quotes from both  and  but attributes to Isaiah only.

Some scholars respond that this is because the Malachi reference was just an introduction, which made it significantly less important than Isaiah 40:3, leading to the whole being attributed to the prophet Isaiah. Other reasons given are Isaiah's authority was considered higher than Malachi and the Isaiah text was better known.