Did Jesus lie ?

you then clarified that: so your conclusion should be amended to :

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

quote:

---

"But we see Jesus, ... For it was fitting for Him for whom are all things and through whom are all things, in leading many sons into glory, to make the Author of their salvation perfect through sufferings" (Heb 2:9a,10)

---

excuse me??? all I can see in my Bible is this:9 "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man."
10 "For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings."In a nutshell: Jesus had to be made man in order to die and redeem us. In that way he 'captained' our salvation. He who is the purpose and cause of all creation preceded us into glory.I think your Bible has extra bits in it. Which edition is it? Err...how on earth did you draw that conclusion? The author of Hebrew talks about the humanity of Jesus in relation to our salvation in Chapter 2. No mention of Adam or reigning or the Kingdom! Are you sure you're reading the right passage ?The rest of your carefully selected verses are along the same lines. Maybe you need to look up the term 'prooftexting'.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

quote:

---

1.) Christ will not do all of the reigning in the kingdom over the world by Himself alone.

​

2.) Those who are cooperative with Him in the church age must accompany Him. You can be saved but not cooperative for His kingdom if you wish.

​

3.) Therefore He must select those rewarded to reign with Him from those not so rewarded.

​

4.) Such selection must take place BEFORE He establishes His kingdom over the globe.

​

5.) Such a selection is based on how faithfully these followers have lived in the reality of the kingdom about to be outwardly manifested.

​

6.) This has nothing to do with their eternal destiny. It has to do with their reward.

​

.7) The divine life within them is the hope of glory and will glorify them to be like Christ on the Mt. of Transfiguration

​

8.) Therefore that event was preview of the manifestation of the kingdom [which will be] with the overcoming victors who are to be rewarded to reign with Christ in the millennial kingdom.

---

You don't get it, do you ? The Kingdom of God is described almost exclusively in the gospels (synoptics mainly and a few verses in John). If you want to make any meaningful connection between its coming and the Transfiguration you have to show some kind of similarity between the passages describing the kingdom and the passages describing the Transfiguration.Instead, you choose to pick a number of verses from other unrelated books in the Bible, and make wild extrapolations by mis-interpreting those verses out of their original context. I already pick out one such example in my previous post to you.I suggest you read my post to Terral on prooftexting and then find yourself another theory to stand by.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

You're still not getting it!It's not that I fail to see the verbal parallelism with Psalm 8. It's just that I fail to see how you can connect a passage that talks about Jesus coming into his Kingdom (Matt 16:28) to a passage that talks about Jesus's humanity with respect to our salvation (Hebrews 2) to a song about God's glory and the position of man in creation (Psalm 8) !If you want to have any chance of validating your theory you need to start by showing me what conclusions you draw from Hebrews 2 and how they relate to Matthew 16:28.You said: Now, I don't quite agree with this. To me, the main point of Hebrews 2 is summarized in verses 16,17 which tell us why Jesus was made man. Hebrews 2 is all about the humanity of Jesus.In any case and for debate's sake I'm prepared to humour you and accept your points on Hebrews, as above.So what next ? what is the next step in your syllogism ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

unlike other people here I only bring in verses from the same book that describe the same subject (kingdom) using similar phraseology. well, I think narrowing it down to one verse and ignoring the rest of the book is even stricter! Then we agree:
"Here's what's going to happen" = "the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels" v27
"some of you here will get a taste of it before you leave this life" = "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."v28The point of contention here is whether the 'Son of man come in the glory of his Father with angels' equals 'the Son of man coming in his kingdom'.I think that the phraseology used in chapters 24/25 while describing the kingdom shows that the two phrases both refer to the same thing.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

call me crazy, but I'm going to trust Jesus (according to Matthew) :the establishment of the kingdom is imminent: sayings about the Son Of Man's coming, associated with the coming of the kingdom I mean Matt 19:28 alone sums it all up : the regeneration about to begin, the judgement, Jesus coming in glory, the disciples expected to be there, it's all right there don't you think ?Oh, but I forget. You don't trust Matthew's word. You'd rather trust Peter. Right...

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

sorry, I misunderstood your post. I thought you were taking issue with my interpretation of the synoptics and the kingdom passages.That aside, let's move on : As we don't really know what Jesus thought (not even if what he said came across as meant to) , I can't really emphatically exclude any possibilities. For the same reasons I can't claim that Jesus lied either. However, reading the text in question at face value and also within the wider context of the book in which it's presented I feel that the most plausible interpretation by far is that it's referring to the return of Jesus and the establishing of the kingdom of God.The reasons for my conclusion are:1) the context set in the preceding verse which describes the 'how' and 'what' of Jesus' return. The following verse tells us 'when'. Both verses mention the Son of Man coming. 28 refers directly to the kingdom, 27 doesn't mention the kingdom directly but uses the same terminology used in other chapters in Matthew alluding to the kingdom.2) Grammatically, verse 28 appears to be a continuation of verse 27. "Verily I say unto you," Jesus proclaims, appearing to be emphasising what he just said (Son of Man coming). He then tells them by when to expect what he told them in v27.3) Both verses 27 and 28 appear to be a summary of what is detailed in chapt 25, describing the kingdom and the judgement. Again, same phraseology is used on both occasions.4) Throughout the synoptics, and Matthew in particular, Jesus presents the establishment of the kingdom as something
imminent and physical that the disciples will live to enjoy. I summarize this in Message 255. This fits in right in with and reflects verses 27 and 28.So, overall, I think there many overwhelming reasons to believe this refers to the Coming of Jesus and the establishing of the kingdom and only a weak one (sequential verses) to support the 'Transfiguration as a Preview' theory.That doesn't mean that Jesus lied, it just means he got it wrong. He was only human after all!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

..or you could just have said "this generation". Which he did.If you see Bush on TV saying that this generation will see the end of the Iraq war, would you, or anyone else, misunderstand what he said because he said 'this generation' and not 'your generation' ? Or maybe he just meant what he said and what was written: 'This generation' shall not pass away till all these things are fulfilled.Here I go again, asking Christians to trust their Bible! I agree with all of the above apart from the 'nation' bit. Where is this definition from ? err..... Matt12:45 says "genea" and so does Luke 16:8. They're both referring to people at a specific point in time. Where do you find these quotes ?I'm not aware of any ancient Greek texts where the word is used to denote something other than I've already described or is used in any broader sense than the modern usage. Can you substantiate your claim ?

quote:

---

The confusion arises when you want to make the text fit within your pre-conceptions.

---

If you're approaching this as un-biased as possible why are you trying to make Jesus's words into something they're not ? ?? Just in the last sentence you said you're approaching this as un-biased as possible! Now you're saying you're not! based on what you've said above, I'm afraid this statement now stands stronger than ever! purpledawn has already explained this in Message 253 so I'm not going to repeat it You're saying that because these things haven't happened then the word generation doesn't mean what it means, cause if it did that would make Jesus wrong!(sigh........bangs head against wall...)and then you're expecting me to retract this : you're just making me wanting to post this in giant letters as the subject of 1000 posts in 1000 threads.Listen, I'm going to say this for the last time:- the word 'generation' means ....generation, a group of people within a specific timeframe. That's how it was used then and that's how it's used now. You can't go on changing its meaning when it suits you.
- All these things that Jesus prophesied haven't happened, as you point out.
- that doesn't mean that we have to change the meaning of the woah., never mind this is pointless.You win. The word generation means Jewish race, bunny rabbits or whatever else you want it to mean. Jesus wasn't wrong, he couldn't have been wrong.enjoy

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

The source of confusion is that two separate sub-topics are being pursued in parallel here.Riverrat and myself are debating the meaning of the "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." verse, as it appears in the Eschatological discourse( Matt 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32).At the same time, the rest of us are still on the verses that sparked the OP, namely Matt 16:28 "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."I originally brought the two passages together as I think they're referring to the one and same thing.hope this clears things up Oh, BTW, your link confirms what I've been saying all along: "genea" may mean 'race' in Christian apologetics lingo but not in the Greek language!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

I've reviewed the thread and I can't find a single reference to Greek texts or any other evidence that shows how the definition of the word "genea" had a broader meaning back then than it does now.Please point out the posts where you've substantiated this claim.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

We've been through this before. By the time that error became obvious the disciples were dead and buried and the gospels were in circulation.The easiest way to deal with the error at that stage was to do what you're doing now. Pretend that Jesus meant something else to what he said.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

I've reviewed the thread and I still can't find a single reference to Greek texts or any other evidence that shows how the definition of the word "genea" had a broader meaning back then than it does now.If you know where these posts are you'd have no difficulty in pointing them out.Where is this evidence that shows that the word "genea" had a broader meaning back then ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

thanks for the reply, I appreciate the effort you put into it.I asked you for evidence to justify your assertion that the word "genea" (generation) had a broader meaning in ancient times than it does now. Some Greek text -from the Bible or outside it- using the word "genea" to denote a whole nation or something lasting for 2000 years would have done nicely.You provided:

quote:

---

(Matthew 24:14)"And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."

---

Matt 24:14 uses the word "ethnos" (plural "ethnoi" ) which is rightly translated as 'nations'. No argument there. What's this got to do with anything ?

quote:

---

Revelation:
14Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
18This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.

---

?? John thought what he thought. Where's the word "genea" (generation) mentioned here ? How is that related to the evidence I asked you to provide?

quote:

---

(Matt 1:17) "...fourteen generations from Abraham to David".
(Matt 12:41),"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it:...."

---

I've answered this before and I agreed with you! That's exactly what I've been saying all along: 'generation' always refers to a specific timeframe! I think 100 years is pushing it a bit (people lived shorter lives then) but it's not far off the mark.That's exactly what Jesus is saying in the synoptics: "Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. " !
I'll even give you 100 years as the timeframe, heck, make it 200 (I'm in a good mood). Have these things come to pass in that period? err........NO!

quote:

---

quote:gen·er·a·tion (jn-rshn) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "generations" [P]
n.
1. All of the offspring that are at the same stage of descent from a common ancestor: Mother and daughters represent two generations.
2. Biology. A form or stage in the life cycle of an organism: asexual generation of a fern.
3. The average interval of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring.
4.
1. A group of individuals born and living about the same time.
2. A group of generally contemporaneous individuals regarded as having common cultural or social characteristics and attitudes: “They're the television generation” (Roger Enrico).
5.
1. A stage or period of sequential technological development and innovation.
2. A class of objects derived from a preceding class: a new generation of computers.
6. The formation of a line or geometric figure by the movement of a point or line.
7. The act or process of generating; origination, production, or procreation.

---

thanks for the definition - it proves my point! I fail to see any mention of "2000 years"! Or "as long as it takes"!
Instead I see: "A group of individuals born and living about the same time " and "A group of generally contemporaneous individuals regarded as having common cultural or social characteristics and attitudes". (emphasis is mine)Thank you! It just finished. It lasted about 40 years. We're now into the 'Internet generation', or haven't you noticed ?QED.P.S In summary, you haven't provided a single piece of text where the word 'generation' is used to denote a whole nation, 2000 years or something not referring to a specific period in time. On the contrary, you've provided many quotes that show the total opposite (and I thank you for that). Now would be a good time to retract your statement..

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

you're really sinking now.2+2 = 4, not 3, not 5!
'Black' means black, not red or white!
'this generation' means the set of people listening at the time, not race or tribe! cool...I'm dashing off to burn my Bible then!P.S ...............I just asked God...... He said "if you want to know what Jesus meant, then READ THE SODDIN TEXT ". Sorry!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

...and this is the crux of your argument! The words don't fit your pre-conceptions of Jesus as a faultless man (didn't lie, didn't make mistakes, didn't piss/shit/eat/scratched his balls). No problem, we'll just change the words so that they fit!So now the word 'generation' means 'unspecified time period that will end when I want it to'. the 'fire generation' went out of vogue about 10000 years ago, sorry to break it to you. I like the way you define your own reality! So, in your world we are also part of the 'electricity generation', right?Hey, I know : Jesus and us we're all part of the 'tree generation', I mean trees were around back then weren't they?Does that also mean that Shakespeare was part of the X-generation ? He was using X's in his writings and we're still using them now (here's one: X) , so Shakespeare and us are all part of the X-generation!!Oh, oh I've got a better one: Neandhertals and us we're all part of the 'cave generation'. They used to live in caves and we now use caves for...errr.. caving I suppose, so there you have it !!but my biggest question remains: If Jesus used a donkey to enter Jerusalem and donkeys still persist to this very day, does that mean we're all part of the 'Donkey Generation' ?Could it be this is what Jesus was referring to when he said "This generation shall not pass.." ?But what's going to happen when donkeys become extinct (this generation has passed) and Jesus's prophesies still haven't been fulfilled ?I think we may have to re-define the word "Donkeys" to mean "exotic cheese with just a hint of nutmeg".Then we'll be covered. Sorted!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."