|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Jesus The false prophet | |||||||||||||||||||||||
hERICtic Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 371 Joined: |
Hi PD. I was editing my last post when you responded.
I hope you do not get annoyed with some of my questions. I just need some clarification on some issues presented.
PD writes: I explained why IMO it is better. It is believed to be written closer to 70 AD than the other two. The author of Mark also presented Jesus as a mortal, not divine. Here is where you lose me. Why bring Mark into it? The stance I was taking was in response to the belief that Matthew 16 did not refer to the end times to occur during the disciples life time. Yes, Matthew "used" Mark, but I am unsure why that matters. Even though Matthew used Mark, he changed quite a bit regarding the theology and other aspects of the stories. Since we are debating if Jesus was a false prophet, we need to establish what Matthew is conveying. Primary point IMO, is if its a prediction of future events. Yes. Did it come to pass? No. Regardless of the viewpoints of Mark, its what Matthew is trying to state. Two different authors can have two different viewpoints of the same event.
PD writes: ICANT gave a very nice reasoning of what the authors have Jesus predicting. He gave a fantastic, well written response. The problem is, hes absolutely incorrect. Thats wny I addressed it.
PD writes: It is about what constitutes a false prophet, not a prophet. IMO, per Deuteronomy, Jesus doesn't qualify as a false prophet even if one feels that what he predicted didn't come to pass. As we see in the OT, God can also change his mind after he's given a prophet a message and not make it come to pass. That doesn't make one a false prophet either.So even if one does feel that the prediction was from God and it didn't come to pass, one would also need to show that God didn't change his mind. Jeremiah 14:14 Then the Lord said to me, Those prophets are prophesying lies while claiming my authority. I did not send them. I did not commission them. And I did not speak to them. They are just prophesying to these people false visions, worthless predictions, and the delusions of their own mind. I did not send those prophets, though they claim to be prophesying in my authority. This clearly states a false prohet is anyone who speaks falsely on gods account. Jesus claimed to be sent by god. He claimed to be the messiah. John 7:16 "Jesus answered them and said, 'My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me.' " John 14:24 "He who does not love me does not keep my words; and the word which you hear is not mine but The Father's who sent me." John 12:49 "For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." John 6:38 "For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of Him who sent me." John 8:31 "You are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God John 7:16 So Jesus answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but His who sent me." There are quite a few others by Paul and a few in the other gospels which clearly conveys that Jesus is the messenger, speaking the will of god. The gospels convey the idea that those words are the words Jesus spoke. Regardless of the gospel they are coming from. You asked that I show you where god didnt change his mind. negating the false prophecy aspect. No, you need to show me where it states god DID change him mind. Jesus made a prediction in Matthew 16, he was wrong. There are many instances in the gospels where Jesus makes a prediction regarding the end times and he was wrong each time. So if Jesus admits he was sent by god, is the messenger of god, that his will is not his own and predicts when the end times were to occur...how is this not the sign of a false prophet?
PD writes: Do the synoptics claim that all things spoken by Jesus were a direct message from God?The message in Matthew is different than Mark and Luke. Yes, you could argue that the synoptics do not say all things spoken by Jesus were a direct message of god. But a better argument is that when Jesus preached, yes, those were the words of god he was conveying. Also, I agree the messsage of Mark and Luke are different than Matthew. Im just not sure why you keep bringing Mark up, now with Luke. I was discussing Matthew 16. This is where you keep losing me. The point is, yes they are different in many respects, but its Matthew 16 and that prediction which I am discussing.
PD writes: Matthew 12:28 implies the kingdom isn't strictly a physical kingdom. These are all the instances Matthew uses the terminlogy. It shows that the Kingdom of Heaven is something that will arrive in the future. At hand (3:2 ; 4:17 ; 10:7 )Promised to the saved and righteous (5:3, 10, 19-20 ; 7:21 13:24-30, 36-43, 47-51 ; 22:1-14 ; 25:1-10 ) Gentiles will also be there (8:11 ) Difficult to enter (19:23 ; 23:13 ) PD writes: The book doesn't give enough information to convict the Jesus presented in the NT of being a false prophet. If you feel there is, show me. I think I did. Jesus claimed to be the messiah.Jesus claimed his words were not his own. Jesus claimed he was sent by god, he was the messenger. To get to god, one must go through him. He preached. He made predictions. Those predictions failed. So Im not sure how you can say Jesus was not a false prophet. Edited by hERICtic, : Combining previous post with updates.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Pick one that you think can be supported and start yet another thread on it, I will gladly discuss it with you there.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3457 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Jesus didn't leave any writings. Jeremiah spoke of the people in his time. If one is going to deem Jesus a false prophet because of what didn't happen in reality, then he can only be held accountable for what he actually said in reality. The earliest manuscripts of Mark end after the crucifixion. At most we can speculate that the author of Mark expected the end of the age to be upon them given the turmoil of the times. The author was wrong. We see in the later writing of Luke that the author fixed the kingdom issue by making the kingdom internal. Odds are no real person actually made that prediction. The book doesn't give enough information to convict the Jesus presented in the NT of being a false prophet. ABE:Honey, if you don't want to discuss Mark then don't. Not a biggy. I feel Matthew may have been written as a satire. Edited by purpledawn, : Original msg changed while typing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
Chuck77,
As I've advised you before, read the Forum Guidelines.
1. Follow all moderator requests. 2. Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics. Just because a comment is made, doesn't mean that responding to it is on topic. The post you responded to was off topic also. It is each individual's responsibility to not take a thread off topic.
Please direct any comments concerning this Administrative msg to the General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') thread. Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour suspension. Thank youAdminPD
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
HI Eric
Both Matthew 16 and 24 have to be read in the context of time and place. Mathhew 16 is as has been said is Jesus establishing the "Kindom of God", or as Matthew calls it "The Kingdom of Heaven" as the new Israel. It wasn't about a plot of land in the Middle East, it was now for the whole world which even goes back to the promise to Abraham. Mathhew 24 doesn't have anything to do with end times either. It has to do with Jesus' political message. He was essentially saying that if you keep on poking a stick in the eyes of the Romans that they will do what they always do. He was saying that the way you deal with the Romans is essentially to love your enemies as the war isn't against flesh and blood but against evil itself. He said that if the Jews kept on their revolutionary path that Jerusalem and the Temple itself would be destroyed. It wasn't so much a supernatural prediction as a practical one. As was we all know by the way, He was right. Both the Temple and Jerusalem were laid to waste by 70 AD. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hERICtic Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 371 Joined: |
Hi GDR,
GDR writes: Mathhew 24 doesn't have anything to do with end times either. It has to do with Jesus' political message. He was essentially saying that if you keep on poking a stick in the eyes of the Romans that they will do what they always do. He was saying that the way you deal with the Romans is essentially to love your enemies as the war isn't against flesh and blood but against evil itself. He said that if the Jews kept on their revolutionary path that Jerusalem and the Temple itself would be destroyed. It wasn't so much a supernatural prediction as a practical one. As was we all know by the way, He was right. Both the Temple and Jerusalem were laid to waste by 70 AD. In chapter 24, Jesus is asked by his disciples when is the end of the age. In chapter 13, Jesus refers to the end of the age when the angels will come and the final judgement. Chapter 25 again speaks of the final judgement, when angels will arrive and seperate those who are saved and unsaved. You claim it refers to the Romans. Did these occur: Mattew 24: 29 Immediately after the distress of those days ‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’[b] 30 Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Do you still think it has nothing to do with the end times?
GDR writes: As was we all know by the way, He was right. Both the Temple and Jerusalem were laid to waste by 70 AD. Not hard to be correct when the writings occured AFTER the event!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
The author was wrong. Isnt this some kind of heresy for members of the bible club.
from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:15-17). Or is timothy wrong too? Back on topic:
Jesus didn't leave any writings. Jeremiah spoke of the people in his time. So why believe anything written about Jesus if the authors where wrong once, could they have not been wrong more then once? Maby about the whole Jesus affair, that Jesus was not the messiahs but anti messiahs who turned the world from god and got them to worship him, and a strange fictional all loving god where just a few chapters ago all he talks about is blood and death?? Edited by frako, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3457 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:The unknown writer of Timothy was referring to the OT writings. The Christian writings weren't considered on par with the OT yet. Inspiration is not dictation. quote:The topic isn't about what to believe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
First off, The Timothy quote is not talking about the Bible. There were no Bibles then or for hundreds of years to come.
It is talking about inspired writings. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Hi Eric
Part of the problem is that you are insisting on reading these texts in the same manner that a Christian fundamentalist would. Jesus was a Jew speaking to Jews and we have to understand it in that context.
nERICtic writes: In chapter 24, Jesus is asked by his disciples when is the end of the age. Absolutely, but what age were they referring to? In the mind of most Jews they were still in exile. Sure they were back on the land but they were occupied by the Romans who had installed a brutish turncoat to do Rome's bidding and to quell dissension and rebellion. The disciples were asking; when is this age of exile going to end? When will Yahweh return in power, kick the Romans out, rebuild the Temple and be their king.
hERICtic writes: In chapter 13, Jesus refers to the end of the age when the angels will come and the final judgement. I don't know what you are referring to here. The whole chapter is Jesus explaining, mostly by parable, about the "Kingdom of Heaven" that He is inaugurating.
hERICtic writes: Chapter 25 again speaks of the final judgement, when angels will arrive and seperate those who are saved and unsaved. Fine but that isn't the same discussion he is having in Chap 24. In 25 He is essentially saying that at the end of time people will be divided into two groups: those that hold in their hearts selfish love and those that hold in their hearts unselfish love.
hERICtic writes: You claim it refers to the Romans. Did these occur: Mattew 24: 29 Immediately after the distress of those days ‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ 30 Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Do you still think it has nothing to do with the end times? It has nothing to do with what will happen at the end of time. Verse 29 which you quoted above refers back to Isaiah 13.
quote: It then goes on in Isaiah 13 with the following which makes it very clear that this is an earthly event.
quote: This has to be understood in the language of the times. When we talk about the fall of the Roman empire we don't mean that it literally fell from a great height. This language used by the people of that day refers to huge social and political unrest along with great conflict.
quoted by hERICtic writes: 30 Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. This quote is referring back to the following passage from Daniel 7.
quote: This is about the vindication of the crucified Christ. That is about a permanent kingdom that is very much rooted in this world that we live in now and that they lived in then. Jesus essentially made three claims about the future in this. Firstly He claimed that the Father would raise him up, which of course happened with His resurrection and ascension. Secondly He said that if they carried on in their rebellion, Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed which of course happened. Thirdly that the message of His victory over death and HIs message of truth, love, mercy and forgivenesswould go out to the world which also happened. In one sense though there is an end times theology that rolls along underneath all of this. Jesus inaugurated an eternal kingdom that began through his life, death, resurrection, ascension and empowered with His Holy Spirit. In that sense we have been in the end times ever since but as Jesus made clear no one knows the hour or the minute, or for that matter how it will happen. This place might go on like this for another million years or more. Personally I hope so. In the meantime we all have a job to do. As Christians we are to help people to understand the story of God as revealed through Jesus, but all of us as humans, regardless of our beliefs are assigned the job of being good stewards of our planet and all life on it, in preparation for the time when time as we know it ends and a great re-creation, whatever that looks like, begins. Jesus was anything but a false prophet. A prophet isn't one who accurately and supernaturally predicts the future, (although in some cases in the OT that was a part of it), but one who accurately reveals the nature of God and His desires for us to the world.
hERICtic writes: Not hard to be correct when the writings occured AFTER the event! That is very much an open question. Personally I think it is unlikely that is the case. If it had been written after the fact you would think they would have been more accurate. As He says in Matthew 24 :2
quote: We know that at least a small part was left standing. If it had been written after 70 AD it is unlikely that they would record something that wasn't obviously correct. Jesus was essentially using a bit of hyperbole in making the point that the Romans were thoroughly destructive. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member Posts: 3571 Joined: |
so basically what Jesus meant to say was some of you will become "super-heroes" in service of god before you die? Or the kingdom of god has already come you just dont know it yet and NONE of you will taste death before the kingdom comes because i am that kingdom, and i am already here. Would it not be simpler to take the prophecy literally, it says some of you will not die before my father comes and rules the earth. No Icant he gets an F in honesty. A simple reading of Matt 16 should make it clear to any and all that Jesus viewed the Chruch and kingdom as one and the same. Almost in the same breath he uses the terms interchangably. "I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it and to You Peter I will give the keys to the kingdom" In Acts chapter two peter used those figurative keys to show entrance into the kingdom or the church. The Apostles were instructed to go to Jeruselum and wait for Power from on high. This power was demonstrated to them in private, then in public at Pentecost. Therefore logically, if Peter were the only one to hear such a claim, he most definately fulfilled not only the promise of the kingdom, but the implimentatation of its power Further if we are going to use the same source (The gospels) for our contention as we do our answer, there is no problem involved in Jesus' words or his claims or his fulfillments I sometimes wonder if these fellas that start such threads are actually really interested in whether Jesus was a prophet or liar, or are such threads started just to stir things up Frako, are you really interested in whether he was an actual prophet, do you really care about any such kingdom In fact what do you care about of a religious nature? Dawn Bertot -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Frako, are you really interested in whether he was an actual prophet, do you really care about any such kingdom In fact what do you care about of a religious nature? I dont care much for religion or faith i care much more for facts and evidence. Well as for Jesus being a true prophet or a false one i have my doubts he even existed But i did want to find out how fare one would go to bend scripture so it supports ones wives. So fare just about every one that argued for Jesus came up with his own theory why i am wrong and provided evidence for his own theory. Hardly any consensus on the matter. And only one of you actually questioned the prophecy and set out to do more research.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hERICtic Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 371 Joined: |
GDR writes: Hi EricPart of the problem is that you are insisting on reading these texts in the same manner that a Christian fundamentalist would. Jesus was a Jew speaking to Jews and we have to understand it in that context. How dare you call me such an offensive word!!! nERICtic writes:In chapter 24, Jesus is asked by his disciples when is the end of the age. GDR writes: Absolutely, but what age were they referring to? In the mind of most Jews they were still in exile. Sure they were back on the land but they were occupied by the Romans who had installed a brutish turncoat to do Rome's bidding and to quell dissension and rebellion. The disciples were asking; when is this age of exile going to end? When will Yahweh return in power, kick the Romans out, rebuild the Temple and be their king. I agree. To a point. Its not what the disciples were expecting thats the issue, its what Jesus claims. What is to occur at the end of this age, thats the question? Before I address the rest of your post, let me ask you this. In reference to Matthew 25: 31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. What does it mean that he will come in his glory, with his angels, sitting on his throne? Does this refer to the return of Jesus?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Why are we worrying about the veracity of the words attributed to Jesus? Neither frako nor anyone else has yet demonstrated thateven if not truethey would be proof that Jesus was a false prophet.
Why argue on the premises when they wouldn't even support the conclusion anyway? Jon Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
hERICtic writes: I agree. To a point. Its not what the disciples were expecting thats the issue, its what Jesus claims. What is to occur at the end of this age, thats the question? That is "A" question but it isn't "THE" question that is being dealt with in these passages. The Christian narratives are largely all about return from exile. The disciples viewed that as being redeemed from exile under the Romans. Jesus understood that and made the point that the revolutionary route would only lead to ruin, which in the end it did.
hERICtic writes: Before I address the rest of your post, let me ask you this. In reference to Matthew 25: 31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. What does it mean that he will come in his glory, with his angels, sitting on his throne? Does this refer to the return of Jesus? I should at some point state in here that I am not a theologian and I don't want you to think, that I think that what I'm saying is absolutely the final answer to all of this. I have read a lot of literature on the subject and I am only expressing my views on what this means. I see this passage as talking about the world in exile. Sure there is so much of this world that is good and beautiful, but we are still in a world that suffers under tyranny and oppression. We live in a world that is still by and large obsessed with money and power. In the grand narrative, at the end of the age, at the end of time as we know it, there will be justice. I think that this is an example of Hebrew apocalyptic writing. Jesus will come in glory, but what does it mean by glory. Glory does not mean power as we normally think of it. Jesus' glory is His love, kindness, justice, humility, forgiveness etc. This is the Messiah, the King who insisted on washing His disciple’s feet. It is the Messiah that rode into Jerusalem on a donkey. It is the Messiah who conquered death, not by a show of power but through humble submission to His enemies. So yes, I do think that this is an end times view of things which gives the basis on which the world is to be judged. Do we love and serve our neighbour, or do we love and serve our self? Like it says in Isaiah, the lion will eat straw and the wolf will lie down with the lamb. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024