Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 271 of 327 (508201)
05-11-2009 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by Peg
05-11-2009 5:39 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Taking a quick look at Wikipedia, the Julian calendar was used by much of the world from the time of Julius Caesar until supplanted by the Gregorian calendar in the 1500's, and at one time its beginning was defined as 753 BC with the founding of Rome by Romulus and Remus. Their father was the god Mars. Back in the days of the Roman Empire if you had said that Romulus and Remus never existed many would have replied, "Then it's the greatest hoax of all time."
Time passes by, but some things never change. There will always be believers of myth.
Evidence allows us to distinguish between what is possibly true and what is actually true. This thread is about fulfilled prophecy rather than the existence of Jesus, but the need for evidence is the same.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 5:39 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 12:18 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 304 by Peg, posted 05-13-2009 5:21 AM Percy has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 272 of 327 (508206)
05-11-2009 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by purpledawn
05-11-2009 8:13 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
The author has Jesus guarantee that that generation would certainly not pass away until all those things had happened. That would include the finale.
Purpledawn must be refering to Mark 13:30:
"Truly I say to you that this generation shall by no means pass away until all these things happen. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall by no means pass away."
Does "this generation" insist on the meaning of those physically composing His audience listening to that particular conversation?
Generation in Mark 13:30 there does not refer to a generation defined according to the age of a person, like the generations mentioned in Matthew 1:17. It refers to the moral condition of the people, like the generations in these passages:
"But to what shall I liken this generation? It is like little children sitting in the market place, who call to others and say, We have played the flute to you and you did not dance; we have sung a dirge, and you did not mourn." (Matt. 10:16,17)
"But He anwered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet." (Matt. 12:39)
"Ninevite men will stand up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold something more than Jonah is here. (v.41, See also verse 42)
"The last state of that man becomes worse than the first. Thus shall it be also with this evil generation." (v.45)
"There is a generation that curse their father, and do not bless their mother.
There is a generation that are pure in thier own eyes, and yet they are not washed fom their filthiness.
There is a generation - oh how lofty are their eyes, and thier eyelids are raised [arrogantly].
There is a generation whose teeth are like swords, and their jaw teeth like knives, to devour the afficted from off the earth" (See Prov. 30:11-14)
These instances of "generation" refer not to age of people but to moral condition. Such a generation would not pass away in Mark 13:30 until all that Jesus predicted should come to pass.
This is consistent with the fact that He told His disciples that it was not up to them to know the times and seasons when God would restore the kingdom to Israel when they asked for the specific "when" of such (Acts 1:7).
Had He meant that all this culmination was to occur before those immediate disciples had died, He could have easily reminded them that He told them already, that all these things were to occur in their "generation" in the sense that Purpledawn means.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 8:13 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 1:21 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 273 of 327 (508210)
05-11-2009 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Percy
05-11-2009 10:37 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Time passes by, but some things never change. There will always be believers of myth.
I view the modern "Jesus the Myth" critics to be like modern Holocaust deniers.
Deniers of an actual historical event with which they are not happy usually accumlate as time from that event extends. They are emboldened as the eyewitness generation gradually expires.
It is mostly after the generation of the Holocaust survivors die out that more vocal voices start to say that it never happened. It is harder to deny while the event is fresh in the minds of eyewitnesses. It is easier to deny as the witnesses die off.
Hence we see the bold claim from Neo Nazi groups or Iranian anti-Zionists that the Jewish Holocaust was fictional. They grow bolder as time from that event extends.
In the same way New Testamet textural higher critic's suggestion that there was no Jesus, is recent phenomenon. I think such suggestions of the mythic invention of Jesus began around the 1800s or so. This is long after the denial of the historical Jesus would not have been taken seriously. By all accounts more contemporary with the First Century this extraordinary Person lived and was noted for extraordinary words and deeds.
Where are the protests of the mythic invention of a Jesus of Nazareth in the first and second century or third century?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 05-11-2009 10:37 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 12:35 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 275 by mark24, posted 05-11-2009 12:51 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 288 by Kapyong, posted 05-11-2009 6:14 PM jaywill has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 274 of 327 (508213)
05-11-2009 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by jaywill
05-11-2009 12:18 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
quote:
Where are the protests of the mythic invention of a Jesus of Nazareth in the first and second century or third century?
Everywhere. Christianity wasn't an accepted religion in the Roman Empire until the 4th century. It did not became the dominant religion because it had some innate appeal to the masses. It became the dominant religion because it became the state religion in 380 C.E. At that time the people followed the religion of their ruler. Heck, people followed the religion of their ruler in some countries until the last century. Doesn't make any of those religions any more correct than any other. Do you need sources for the above or can you research it yourself?
There is little to know mention of Jesus Christ outside of the bible in the first couple centuries. H did not enter into the minds of most of the chroniclers of the period. Why would they discount something that hardly intruded into their lives?
Can you find documents attesting to the mythic character of King Arthur from the period he was set? No. Because he was a mythic character that was invented later? The absence you mention does not equate to affirmation. There is little to nothing about Jesus Christ at all in that time perios. Little attesting to his existence or non-existence.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 12:18 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:11 PM Theodoric has replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5194 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 275 of 327 (508214)
05-11-2009 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by jaywill
05-11-2009 12:18 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
jaywill,
I view the modern "Jesus the Myth" critics to be like modern Holocaust deniers.
Outrageously deceitful, the two are nothing like the same, theres tons of evidence for the holocaust & none for Jesus.
Where are the protests of the mythic invention of a Jesus of Nazareth in the first and second century or third century?
In the same way that there are no protests of any of the other thousands of self proclaimed mystical god-like-spiritual-I've-got-a-hotline-to-heaven figures means they must exist? The Mormon founder Joseph Smith must be telling the truth? Mohammed was the real deal?
Are you that myopic as to not be able to see what a nonsensical thing you just posted? At least we know Joseph Smith & the likes of Mohammed were real, not so for Jesus.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 12:18 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 313 by jaywill, posted 05-13-2009 7:36 AM mark24 has replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 276 of 327 (508215)
05-11-2009 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by jaywill
05-11-2009 8:30 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
quote:
So I count Josephus reference to Him as extra-biblical confirmation of His ministry.
A lot of scholarship is showing this is a very questionable source. Here is a very extensive look at the Josephus and the Testimonium Flavianum
quote:
Because the resurrection of Jesus is an article of faith, does not in and of itself, that it is not a historical fact.
In other words you have decided to fall back to the old tired christianist mantra. Faith trumps facts
As for [I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, Giesler and Turek, Crossway Books, pg.299,300] we atheist have had fun tearing it apart. This one examines it as a question and answer session between the book and the author of the piece. Literally tears the book apart. This is popular christianist book, it is not a serious work of scholarship. Its publisher is a christian publishing house that could hardly be called subjective.
Crossway and Good News Publishers
Good News Publishers is a not-for-profit Christian ministry and exists solely for the purpose of proclaiming the gospel through publishing and all other means in order, by God's grace;
1. to bring men, women and children to Christ as their Lord and Savior;
2. to help individual Christians and the church grow in knowledge and understanding of the Christian life;
3. to bear witness to God's Truth, Beauty and Holiness, and to the Lordship of Christ in every area of life; and
4. to glorify our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in every way.
I am surprised you would use such a biased source to try to back your claim.
Habermas doesn't help you very much either. He is an evangelical christian and Distinguished Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. Liberty University is hardly an unbiased source also. They teach creationism so hard to accept any scholarshipo from there. Do you think he even looked for anything that did not support his beliefs?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 8:30 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:19 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 280 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:25 PM Theodoric has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 277 of 327 (508217)
05-11-2009 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 12:35 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Everywhere. Christianity wasn't an accepted religion in the Roman Empire until the 4th century.
Emperor's Constantine made political move to make Christianity the state religion is not evidence that Rome denied that Jesus lived. Previous emporer's hated the Christian faith because of fear of sedition. They were not able to wipe it out. So it really became a case of "If you Can't Beat em, Join em."
This fact does not argue for a denial of Jesus' existence, but only of His being important as a Lord. Rome had its own gods.
It did not became the dominant religion because it had some innate appeal to the masses.
The version of Christianity that Constantine made the official religion of the Roman Empire was a degraded matter. Any time you have to threaten people to become Christians or lead them to the baptismal at the point of a sword, or promise material rewards for becoming Christians, that is a terrible perversion of what Jesus taught. It would have been unrecognizable to the 12 apostles.
I think this also was a fulfillment of a few prophecies of Jesus in parabolic form in the 13th chapter of Matthew.
Namely the mustard seed which changed in form and became a huge tree in which the evil birds lodged and the leaven mixed with three measures of meal until the whole thing became leavened.
Both parables I take as essentially negative prophecies of how the "kingdom of the heavens" would mutate in coming times after the initial preaching of the Gospel. (See Mattew 13:31,32; 13:33-35)
Leaven is clearly a corrupting symbol as Jesus said beware of the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees. It bloats up and ferments the bread so as to make it larger than normal. This was a prophecy of the development of Christiandom as a great worldly political / religous power. And the birds which lodged in the branches of the mustard seed transmuted into a tree, are also a negative symbol as they are in the same chapter in verses 4 and 19.
The emmergence of the Roman Public Church as the official empire religion should be regarded as the fulfillment of the negative prophetic parables in Matthew 13.
It became the dominant religion because it became the state religion in 380 C.E.
And the church has suffered ever since. The attack from within by being improperly joined to the world was worst than the attack from without by the world's persecution.
However, none of this argues for Rome previously believing that Jesus of Nazareth was a fiction. They just lightly regarded His importance. And they feared the "anti-social" lifestyles of the Christian faith's adherants.
Records outside the Bible prove that they knew Christians could not easily be made to renounce Jesus as their Lord. They tortured and killed Christians in order to exact such denials.
At that time the people followed the religion of their ruler. Heck, people followed the religion of their ruler in some countries until the last century. Doesn't make any of those religions any more correct than any other. Do you need sources for the above or can you research it yourself?
I read Foxe's Book of Martyrs and Miller's Church History[/b] years ago. You have not added anything previously unkown by me in your post. But I do not agree with you suggestion that any of this means that Rome did not think Jesus was a real historical Person of some unusual qualities.
Being promised gold or expensive garments for promising to become a Christian, as Constantine's government did, is not at all a statement as to the nature of the Gospel. And that thousands took up the offer is not either. Thousands probably had no experience with encountering Christ on a personal level as the typical Christian claims.
This too is kind of prophetic. For Jesus said that the way to divine life was narrow and constricted while the way to destruction was broad. Many will enter the latter and fewer would enter the former.
There is little to know mention of Jesus Christ outside of the bible in the first couple centuries.
There is more mention of Jesus than there is of Tiberius Ceasar. Do you doubt the existence of Tiberius Ceasar for that fact? Probably not.
He did not enter into the minds of most of the chroniclers of the period. Why would they discount something that hardly intruded into their lives?
Many did not regard a Jewish itenerant preacher as important. But eventually they noticed that the people who did believe in Him seemed to rather suffer and die than renounce Him.
Can you find documents attesting to the mythic character of King Arthur from the period he was set? No. Because he was a mythic character that was invented later? The absence you mention does not equate to affirmation. There is little to nothing about Jesus Christ at all in that time perios. Little attesting to his existence or non-existence.
It may not prove His existence. But it does show the hypocrisy of those who more readily accept the existence of say, Socrates or Tiberius Ceasar with less historical confirmation than there is for Jesus Christ.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 12:35 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:33 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 278 of 327 (508218)
05-11-2009 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 1:04 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I am surprised you would use such a biased source to try to back your claim.
You were expecting me to seek the assistance of atheist Jeffrey Loewder or skeptic James Still?
You were expecting me to rely on the Jesus Seminar perhaps?
You find more objectivity in Internet Infidels perhaps ?
Your own objectivity is more than just slightly underwhealming.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM Theodoric has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 279 of 327 (508219)
05-11-2009 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by jaywill
05-11-2009 11:15 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
quote:
Does "this generation" insist on the meaning of those physically composing His audience listening to that particular conversation?
Since Jesus is only talking to four people, they aren't themselves a generation. Unfortunately Jesus doesn't provide descriptive words to make it more specific than the current age or that the generation in question is in the time of the disciples. We can't infer any more than that.
quote:
Generation in Mark 13:30 there does not refer to a generation defined according to the age of a person, like the generations mentioned in Matthew 1:17. It refers to the moral condition of the people, like the generations in these passages:
Actually it is the same word. Genea
      3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
      4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years
    quote:
    These instances of "generation" refer not to age of people but to moral condition. Such a generation would not pass away in Mark 13:30 until all that Jesus predicted should come to pass.
    Generation is a noun and means nothing more than the definitions above. Another word is needed to either describe the moral condition of the generation or which generation is being referred to, as you examples did. In this verse the word "houtos" is used, which means this. As written it is speaking of a current generation.
    Yes, even the part about the men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South. Jesus is saying that the current generation (the one at the time he is speaking) will be condemned by those people when they are resurrected at the judgment.
    quote:
    Had He meant that all this culmination was to occur before those immediate disciples had died, He could have easily reminded them that He told them already, that all these things were to occur in their "generation" in the sense that Purpledawn means.
    What you're saying doesn't make sense. The author of Mark is supposedly telling us what Jesus said to his disciples. When was Jesus supposed to remind them and what does that have to do with the text?

    "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 272 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 11:15 AM jaywill has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 283 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:54 PM purpledawn has replied

    jaywill
    Member (Idle past 1940 days)
    Posts: 4519
    From: VA USA
    Joined: 12-05-2005


    Message 280 of 327 (508220)
    05-11-2009 1:25 PM
    Reply to: Message 276 by Theodoric
    05-11-2009 1:04 PM


    Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
    Literally tears the book apart. This is popular christianist book, it is not a serious work of scholarship. Its publisher is a christian publishing house that could hardly be called subjective.
    If you don't think Norm Giesler is a serious scholar on the subject, I don't think I have a polite way of telling you what I think of you. So I'll refrain.
    And argument by "fun" has never impressed me from athiests.
    I will re-read your post to see if there is any substantive reply now that these gestures have been reviewed, like patting yourself on the back and such.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM Theodoric has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 282 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:43 PM jaywill has replied

    Theodoric
    Member
    Posts: 9076
    From: Northwest, WI, USA
    Joined: 08-15-2005
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 281 of 327 (508222)
    05-11-2009 1:33 PM
    Reply to: Message 277 by jaywill
    05-11-2009 1:11 PM


    Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
    quote:
    Previous emporer's hated the Christian faith because of fear of sedition. They were not able to wipe it out. So it really became a case of "If you Can't Beat em, Join em."
    Evidence please. Just because you say it doesn't make it so. Do you see how I have references for my points? You might want to try that.
    quote:
    The version of Christianity that Constantine made the official religion of the Roman Empire was a degraded matter. Any time you have to threaten people to become Christians or lead them to the baptismal at the point of a sword, or promise material rewards for becoming Christians, that is a terrible perversion of what Jesus taught. It would have been unrecognizable to the 12 apostles.
    Christianist propaganda. Please show that there was another more "pure" form of jesus worship at that time.
    quote:
    However, none of this argues for Rome previously believing that Jesus of Nazareth was a fiction.
    But you have nothing showing he was real. What the Roman empire thought of his reality is not the issue. You have nothing contemporary to him that shows he is.
    quote:
    Records outside the Bible prove that they knew Christians could not easily be made to renounce Jesus as their Lord. They tortured and killed Christians in order to exact such denials.
    Please show that they were tortured for this.
    quote:
    There is more mention of Jesus than there is of Tiberius Ceasar. Do you doubt the existence of Tiberius Ceasar for that fact? Probably not.
    Do you really want to go there? Do you? This is nothing but a christianist PRATT(points refuted a thousand times) and you know it. I think there have been other threads that already dealt with this, but I will gladly pick up this gauntlet.
    quote:
    But eventually they noticed that the people who did believe in Him seemed to rather suffer and die than renounce Him.
    But that does not prove his existence. That people are willing to die for something dopes not affirm or deny the thing they are willing to die for. This is a logical fallacy.
    quote:
    It may not prove His existence. But it does show the hypocrisy of those who more readily accept the existence of say, Socrates or Tiberius Caesar with less historical confirmation than there is for Jesus Christ.
    I am stunned by this comment. But it shows me who I am debating with. I am going to bow out. It is futile to debate someone that will not acknowledge facts. There is many magnitudes more evidence for a historical Caesar and Socrates then there is a Jesus Christ. That you say this shows me how far down the fundamentalist road you are. I can show you historical sources all day and you will just spout your propaganda with no real sources.
    Again I want to reiterate. Just because you say it doesn't make it so. Try doing some research and come up with real sources.
    Edited by Theodoric, : As per Admin request to keep conversation civil
    Edited by Theodoric, : Spelling

    Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 277 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:11 PM jaywill has not replied

    Theodoric
    Member
    Posts: 9076
    From: Northwest, WI, USA
    Joined: 08-15-2005
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 282 of 327 (508223)
    05-11-2009 1:43 PM
    Reply to: Message 280 by jaywill
    05-11-2009 1:25 PM


    Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
    quote:
    If you don't think Norm Giesler is a serious scholar on the subject, I don't think I have a polite way of telling you what I think of you. So I'll refrain.
    I didn't say he wasn't a serious scholar. I said the book was not a work of serious scholarship. Please do not attribute things to me that I do not say.
    If you think this book is serious scholarship, you might have an issue.
    Why do you have a need to be impolite? Can't we debate without you getting personal. I am not going to believe your mumbo-jumbo. Do you want to swear at everyone that questions you and your beliefs? Pomposity does not make your arguments any more legitimate.
    Edited by Theodoric, : Add last line

    Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 280 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 1:25 PM jaywill has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 285 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 2:13 PM Theodoric has replied

    jaywill
    Member (Idle past 1940 days)
    Posts: 4519
    From: VA USA
    Joined: 12-05-2005


    Message 283 of 327 (508224)
    05-11-2009 1:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 279 by purpledawn
    05-11-2009 1:21 PM


    Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
    Since Jesus is only talking to four people, they aren't themselves a generation. Unfortunately Jesus doesn't provide descriptive words to make it more specific than the current age or that the generation in question is in the time of the disciples. We can't infer any more than that.
    How many people would constitute Purpledawn's definition of generation then? What's the number if not four?
    His usage of the word in the examples I submitted indicates that He had a concept of a moral generation. And since He was also a teacher of the Old Testament in a sense, the contribution of the Proverb's passage shows that there was concept of a moral generation as an age of culture.
    Me:
    Generation in Mark 13:30 there does not refer to a generation defined according to the age of a person, like the generations mentioned in Matthew 1:17. It refers to the moral condition of the people, like the generations in these passages:
    You:
    Actually it is the same word. Genea
    1. fathered, birth, nativity
    2. that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
    a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
    b) metaph. a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
    Since [b] is a valid definition of the word, my case is established that this is what He meant. Especially since in Acts chapter one He told them that they WOULDN'T know when all these things were to happen. Otherwise He would have been self contradictory about it.
    1) esp. in a bad sense, a perverse nation
    3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
    4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years
    Numbers 1 and 2 confirm my explanation. Such an association might last 50 or 79 or 100 or more years. It might last even 1,000.
    When Jesus said that heaven and earth would pass away before His words would, that seems to indicate that the generation could be INDEFINITELY long.
    Generation is a noun and means nothing more than the definitions above.
    Definitions you provided which allow for my interpretation.
    You have not yet explained how all such definitions make my interpretation impossible. But let me read on.
    Another word is needed to either describe the moral condition of the generation or which generation is being referred to, as you examples did. In this verse the word "houtos" is used, which means this. As written it is speaking of a current generation.
    Yes, even the part about the men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South. Jesus is saying that the current generation (the one at the time he is speaking) will be condemned by those people when they are resurrected at the judgment.
    Both in Matthew 12 and Mark 13 I see the Greek GENEA. What are you talking about? (Metzger's Greek New Testament and NIV Greek / English Interlinear).
    What verse are you saying reads HOUTOS ?
    Metzger's dictionary has for the word in Matthew 12 and Mark 13:
    "generation, contemporaries, period, age (of time); family, posterity (posterity or perhaps origin)."
    Period or age (of time) - morally characterized is the sense that I think He means and is admissible by definition.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 279 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 1:21 PM purpledawn has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 287 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 3:52 PM jaywill has not replied

    Admin
    Director
    Posts: 12995
    From: EvC Forum
    Joined: 06-14-2002
    Member Rating: 2.3


    Message 284 of 327 (508226)
    05-11-2009 2:02 PM


    Moderator Still on Board
    Sometimes you have to be careful what you ask for, because you might get it. Moderator assistance was requested and now it's here, and everyone, including the person who made the request, has to live with the consequences.
    I'm seeing much more evidence-focused discussion, and that's good. And not everything everyone says has to be focused on the evidence. Everyone should be able to express their personality, give opinions, make editorial comments, etc.
    But please keep discussion emotionally neutral and do not make the discussion personal. That means do not instigate, and do not make dismissive or insulting comments, for example, "This is christianist crap and you know it," and "It is futile to debate someone that is so delusional they can not see facts."
    This applies to all messages posted after this one. There won't be any warnings, just suspensions (short ones, a day to start). If you posted before seeing this, as before, better fix it quick.

    --Percy
    EvC Forum Director

    jaywill
    Member (Idle past 1940 days)
    Posts: 4519
    From: VA USA
    Joined: 12-05-2005


    Message 285 of 327 (508227)
    05-11-2009 2:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 282 by Theodoric
    05-11-2009 1:43 PM


    Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
    I didn't say he wasn't a serious scholar. I said the book was not a work of serious scholarship. Please do not attribute things to me that I do not say.
    I don't have to. The things you actually say are bad enough.
    I have not quoted a book that is not of serious scholarship. You might read it. But I won't hold my breath waiting.
    And I have read enough Giesler to realize that he repeats a lot of things in succesive books. "Christian Apologetics" probably includes that same arguments and it is very dense scholarship on Philosophy and the interpretation of History in general. I think it is completely serious. Giesler repeats some things from book to book.
    I am reading his book of Answering Islam which is very well documented from many Moslem scholars themselves. So I can't take seriously that he wrote a none serious book on Christian apologetics.
    The only thing about I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be An Atheist is at times it seems geared to the American political Right. I tend to vote on the Democrat side. But I don't know why you say the book is not serious.
    Deleted via moderator's request.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
    Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 282 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:43 PM Theodoric has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 286 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 3:24 PM jaywill has replied

    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024