Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   'Some still living' disproves literal truth of the bible
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 166 of 479 (560409)
05-15-2010 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by gragbarder
05-14-2010 7:37 PM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
So when Paul said, we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord he was including himself. Right.
And when Paul said, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air he was including himself. Right.
Paul was not saying " I absolutely garuantee that I Paul will be living to witness this and will not be one of those who are asleep in Christ."
He is not making that kind of garuantee about himself or the Thessalonians.
If I say "We who are alive when man lands on Mars will see something great" I am not garuanteeing that I will be there to see it, though I may be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by gragbarder, posted 05-14-2010 7:37 PM gragbarder has not replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 167 of 479 (560427)
05-15-2010 6:53 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by jaywill
05-15-2010 12:05 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, you're preaching.
Jay writes:
Oh, I am "preaching" and you are not ?? Give me a break.
Ya preachin too, Preach!
No, Jay-I am not. These are your words:
If YOU do not want to receive His teaching, that is your business. Do not say because of this "He was not talking to you."
You're wanting to not listen to Christ is not equal to Him not speaking to those today who will listen.
And Jesus foretold that He had other sheep who were not of that immediate fold of sheep (followers). He said he would bring them also.
"And I have other sheep, which ae not of this fold; I must lead them also, and they shall hear My voice, and here shall be one flock, one Shepherd." (John 10:16)
Just because you do not want to be one of those other sheep that He will lead, do not assume that He has no other sheep.
This has nothing to do with our debate on end times. You're preaching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have offered zero evidence to support your conclusions. You've ignored quite a few quesions.
Jay writes:
Evidence is there. Plenty of it. Jesus specified no number of years which had to limit when He would come again.
And the reference to " some standing here" was concerning the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. The scope of the Son of Man coming in His kingdom is larger than the second coming of Christ. It includes the second coming but is not limited to it.
Jesus specifically conveyed what would occur when he comes into his kingdom...he will reward every man. This refers then, to his return.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets try it this way. Can you provide any evidence that Jesus is to return 2000 years later?
Jay writes:
Why do I have to specify a number of years when He did not ?
Matthew 24:14 says "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole inhabted earth for a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come."
Where is the verse saying that that cannot take more than X number of years ?
The authors did not specifiy the exact number of years, true. But they did say "soon', "nearby", "around the corner", "quickly" etc
None of these words imply long periods of time. Jesus also told his followers they would witness the signs. Makes little sense to tell his disciples they would witness the signs....if the end times were thousands of years later. But if makes perfect sense if it was during their lifetime.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus may be speaking to his disciples and beyond just those standing in front of him....
But when he states to those in front of him that they will "see", they will "run"...it may refer to others besides those within hearing distance...but it CANNOT mean those thousands of years later, when refering to the calamity of the end times.
Jay writes:
The frequent usages of the word "you" in Matthew 24 cannot be insisted upon to mean ONLY the contemporary audience need take heed to the teaching.
Wow. This is scary. You are utterly destroying the context to make the obvioius problem go away. Jesus is asked point blank by his disciples "when"...and over and over Jesus states "you". He is speaking to his disciples. By stating "you" he can only be including his disciples/those in that time frame OR his disciples/those at that time frame and everyone at any time.
But once Jesus states "you' and gives the signs and the actions resulting from the signs it can ONLY refer to his disciples and those in that time frame.
The question asked of him is WHEN are the end times. Those in the time frame of Jesus and those today cannot both be witness to the signs Jesus is refering to. How can the end times occur immediately as Jesus stated, if its 2000 years later????
20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.
Jesus is speaking to his disciples. This is a sign the end times are near. This cannot refer to 2000 years later. This event occured in 70ad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 12:05 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 1:46 PM hERICtic has replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 168 of 479 (560429)
05-15-2010 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by jaywill
05-15-2010 12:05 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, I have asked you three times and finally addressed my own question since you refused to answer it...and you still ignored it.
Romans 16 and Phillipians 1 clearly lays out a time frame as to when Jesus will return. Paul gives names to whom he is writing to.
On top of that, you've ignored this verse as a whole quite a few times:
"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Fatherwith his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 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." Matt 16:27-28.
You seem to ignore the part where Jesus states he is returning to reward mankind. Thats the key, which refers to those standing there. Nothing could be clearer.
There are some standing there shall witness the return of Jesus with his angels, as Jesus rewards/punishes mankind.
Matthew 10 clearly refers to the end times.
15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
The story is that Jesus wants his disciples to go out into the land and preach.
21"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23When 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.
His disciples will not be able to go to all the towns of Israel before the end times occur! This has nothing with Jesus returning from the grave, Jesus is refering to the end times. He even goes into detail of what is going to occur during these times. CONTEXT.
Even more:
"What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away." 1 Cor 15:50-53
Again, a time frame is given......"short." Its not far. Its always "short. " His speech clarifies what "short" means! Its to occur during his lifetime! It makes no sense to tell his followers then and you today to live if you do not have a wife! Why would Paul tell his audience to live if they do not have wives, do not bother mourning, to not get comfortable with their buys if the end times were 2000 years later? He cannot be addressing those in that time frame and those today bc he states the "present" world......which cannot mean 2000 years later!
Jay, give us ONE verse which states the end times are far. Just one. EVERY single one states its "soon"! EVERY ONE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 12:05 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 3:05 PM hERICtic has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 169 of 479 (560486)
05-15-2010 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by hERICtic
05-15-2010 6:53 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, you're preaching.
So what? What's wrong with preaching ?
You do not have to sit passively in a pew and give me the floor with no comment. As you can plainly see you have every opportunity to challenge, refute, question, examine, rebut, and offer your own sermon as you have.
So don't try to play the "preaching" card on me because I have no sense of shame about it.
No, Jay-I am not. These are your words:
If YOU do not want to receive His teaching, that is your business. Do not say because of this "He was not talking to you."
You're wanting to not listen to Christ is not equal to Him not speaking to those today who will listen.
And I stand by the words. Because the more you try to insist the New Testament has nothing to do with subjective acceptance and subjective experience the more I will point out that it is not a book of purely objective trivia to tickle our curiosity.
All the exhortations of both Christ and His apostles are aimed at penetrating into our personal experience.
And Jesus foretold that He had other sheep who were not of that immediate fold of sheep (followers). He said he would bring them also.
"And I have other sheep, which ae not of this fold; I must lead them also, and they shall hear My voice, and here shall be one flock, one Shepherd." (John 10:16)
Just because you do not want to be one of those other sheep that He will lead, do not assume that He has no other sheep.
This has nothing to do with our debate on end times. You're preaching.
So what ?
You're pretending that you have no personal vested interest in believing that the Second Coming of Christ need not be taken seriously.
Playing the "preaching" card doesn't work with me. Like I said, this "preaching" gives you every opportunty to refute me. And I consider your brand of interpretation of Matthew 24 your own preaching.
You have offered zero evidence to support your conclusions. You've ignored quite a few quesions.
Somehow repeating that a second time is no more impressive then the erroneous first mention.
Jay writes:
Evidence is there. Plenty of it. Jesus specified no number of years which had to limit when He would come again.
And the reference to " some standing here" was concerning the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. The scope of the Son of Man coming in His kingdom is larger than the second coming of Christ. It includes the second coming but is not limited to it.
Jesus specifically conveyed what would occur when he comes into his kingdom...he will reward every man. This refers then, to his return.
I agree. However the kingdom of God as Jesus taught is in stages:
"And He said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man cast seed on the earth, And sleeps and rises night and day, and the seed sprouts and lengthens - how he does not know.
The earth bears fruit by itself: first a blade, then an ear, then full grain in the ear. But when the fruit is ripe, immediately he sends forth the sickle, because the harvest has come." (Mark 4:26-29)
In this parable the seed on the earth is the kingdom of God. The seed in its sprouting stage is also the kingdom of God. The sprout lengthening is also the kingdom of God. The seed bearing fruit is also the kingdom of God. The appearing of the blade is the kingdom of God. The appearing of the ear is also the kingdom of God. The full grain in the ear is also the kingdom of God. And the harvesting of the ripe fruit is also the kingdom of God.
It is not only the climax that is the kingdom of God but the growth and development also. For this reason I said the coming of the Son of Man in His kingdom is of wider scope then merely His second coming. But His coming in His kingdom certainly includes His second coming.
Lets try it this way. Can you provide any evidence that Jesus is to return 2000 years later?
The authors did not specifiy the exact number of years, true. But they did say "soon', "nearby", "around the corner", "quickly" etc
This may be true that the sense of impending climax is there in the New Testament. But it is not to the exclusion of many other passages seeming to prepare the church for the long distant run rather than the sprint.
No specific number of years is mentioned so any number you point out cannot be the wrong number of years.
Now let me ask you. Is it not true that Jesus said that some saints would reign with Him as co-kings? Yes or No?
If so, do you think it would be Christ's way that no matter what quality a Christian life one led that one would be granted such a priviledge? Do you think a backslidden Christian living in a bed of fornication will be magically endowed to be a co king with Jesus Christ when He returns?
If you do believe that you have more faith than I do.
So since Jesus is after QUALITY of disiciples to form His "cabinet" if you will, of co kings, then does He not need time? I mean no Christian really is forced to consecrate their lives to the Savior. So while it seems like He is delaying His coming He is actually accumulating a larger number of believers who volunteringly prepare themselves to reign with Jesus.
So I definite see the delay in His return to also be His gathering a group of victorious overcomers among the larger majority. If you recall Gideon's little army of 300 in the book of Judges, you can see how God often used a remnant, a minority to accomplish some divine task on His heart.
So as the years draw on, here and there are normal victorious overcoming Christians who live and fall asleep in Christ. At His second coming this remnant will be raised a corporate Manchild to reign with Him.
And if you need more evidence of this it can be provided in Scripture.
None of these words imply long periods of time. Jesus also told his followers they would witness the signs. Makes little sense to tell his disciples they would witness the signs....if the end times were thousands of years later. But if makes perfect sense if it was during their lifetime.
Your accounting of time is obviously not the same as God's accounting.
When Peter said on Pentecost that the falling of the Holy Spirit was an answer to the prophecy of Joel, he could not really say that signs in the astronimical bodies accompanied the event. Nevertheless, Peter, speaking by the Holy Spirit said:
" For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is the third hour of the day;
But this is what is spoken through the prophet Joel: And is shall be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shal prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream things in dreams;
And indeed upon My slaves, both men and women, I will pour out of My Spirit in those days, and they shall prophesy.
And I will show wonders in heaven above and signs on earth beloww, blood and fire and vapor of smoke. The sun shall beturned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord comes.
And is shall be that everyuone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Acts 2:17-21 compare Joel 2:28-32)
Certainly, at that Pentacostal event the believers had the Holy Spirit fall upon them. Certainly they prophesied and spoke in tongues the great things of God. And certainly whoever called upon the name of the Lord Jesus was saved.
But Acts says nothing about the moon turning blood red or the sun being darkened as Joel had predicted. The astronomical events seem to mirror those spoken of in the book of Revelation at the opening of the sixth seal. Now that is quite a bit of time latter. At least it is 2,000 years latter.
Now we do not believe that Peter was mistaken. We do not count that Peter wrongly applied the prophecy of Joel to the day of Pentacost. But we do regard the prophesy to be completely fulfilled over a longer period of time. Rather than jeer at this as a failure of prophecy we count it as a mercy to give more people time to repent and be saved.
So God's accounting of time is not always the same as ours. From Pentacost to the opening of the sixth seal at the end times embraces the events of Joel 2:28-32.
Jesus may be speaking to his disciples and beyond just those standing in front of him....
But when he states to those in front of him that they will "see", they will "run"...it may refer to others besides those within hearing distance...but it CANNOT mean those thousands of years later, when refering to the calamity of the end times.
I don't agree because of too many other things which are uttered in connection to the second coming.
However, I would grant you this. The failure of the church could prolong something longer than God may have desired.
The trip from Egypt to Canaan should have taken only 11 days. The Hebrews drew it out to 40 years because of their stubburness and unbelief. In God's eyes is should only take 11 days. But because of the weakness of His people it is prolonged to be much longer.
The original disciples did not spread the gospel beyond Jerusalem on their own. God had to raise up persecution to scatter them so that the gospel would be spread.
So I will grant you that the Christian church has delayed Christ's return most likely just as the Hebrews prolonged to Exodus from Egypt to Canaan. But God causes all things to work together for good to those who love Him and are called according to His purpose (Romans 8:28).
You may level some blame on us the Christian church for Christ's delay of His second coming. Some of us will accept that.
But His words indicate that He cannot fail to keep His promise.
Jay writes:
The frequent usages of the word "you" in Matthew 24 cannot be insisted upon to mean ONLY the contemporary audience need take heed to the teaching.
Wow. This is scary. You are utterly destroying the context to make the obvioius problem go away. Jesus is asked point blank by his disciples "when"...and over and over Jesus states "you". He is speaking to his disciples. By stating "you" he can only be including his disciples/those in that time frame OR his disciples/those at that time frame and everyone at any time.
But once Jesus states "you' and gives the signs and the actions resulting from the signs it can ONLY refer to his disciples and those in that time frame.
I take this to be simply erroneous interpretation.
Look at the seven letters to the churches in the book of Revelation. No doubt Jesus was speaking to specific congregations. Yet at the end of each letter He adds this word:
"He who has an ear to hear let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches" (See Rev. 2:7,11,17,29; 3:6, 13,22)
Likewise we have Him saying in Matt. 11:15 - He who has ears to hear let him hear."
Now you and I are living in 2010 A.D. And if I ask you if you have an ear to hear Jesus, you will cry out "Preaching! Preaching!" But you see, it is really quite an intrinsic part of the context of the message.
Then again after His parables in chapter 13 of Matthew He warns "He who has an ear to hear, let him hear" (Matt. 13:9)
So what He says in Matthew 24 is indeed for those original disciples. But they are also for whoever and whenever other seekers of the truth, have an ear to hear Jesus.
The question asked of him is WHEN are the end times. Those in the time frame of Jesus and those today cannot both be witness to the signs Jesus is refering to. How can the end times occur immediately as Jesus stated, if its 2000 years later????
The question MAY INDEED have been WHEN. I agree. But how the Lord ANSWERS the question is what we have to deal with. And He pointed alot to spiritual condition rather than a date on the calender.
Jesus did not always answer the question the way the disciples asked it. They asked Him if there would be few who would be saved. He did not answer them with a percentage. He did not say "Well, it would be about 46 percent."
How did He answer the question "How many will be saved"? He replied by telling them to enter the narrow gate. This was not a mathematical answer. This was a moral and spiritual answer.
So while I do agree with you that the disciples had it in their mind WHEN. And Jesus does give them some sign posts. He does not give them a certain number of years. So you cannot say that a certain number of years was incorrect.
Now if we take the alternative view that Jesus was only talking to His twelve disciples then I think we would have no New Testament at all. It would be irrelevant what Jesus taught because we were not there on the elite inner circle of His immediate audience.
Now that may be convenient for the skeptic. But for lots of us who love the Lord Jesus, it will never do. We regard Him ask speaking many many things for our benefit too.
And Jesus prayed for the benefit of the listeners of the original apostles:
"And I do not ask concerning these only, but concerning those also who believe into Me through their word, That they all may be one; even as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that You have sent Me." (John 17:20,21)
It is 2010 A.D. And the prayer of Jesus is not only for His original 12 apostles but for some of us today who believed into Christ because of their word.
They were 2000 years closer to the original speeches than you and I were. Had they understood that Matthew 24 only concerned them they would not have labored to preserve the teaching for future generations.
Don't you think Peter knew the tone and intention of his Master ? And Peter writes about his own approaching death:
"And I consider it right, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by a reminder, knowing that the putting off of my taberncale is imminent, even as also out Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me.
Moreover I will also be dilignet that you may be able, after my exodus, to bring these things to mind at all times." (2 Peter 1:13-15)
Peter's attitude here is not "It's all over. I am about to die and the second coming of Christ has not occured yet."
Now he was closer to the sayings of Jesus, including Matthew 24, that you were. So why not take your que from him? I trust Peter's insight in this over Bart Eardman or the Jesus Seminar.
And moreover in the very next passage Peter refers to the transfiguration as a preview of Christ's coming:
"For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we became eyewitnesses of that One's majesty.
For He received from God the Father honor and glory, a voice such as this being borne to Him by the magnificent glory: This is My Son, My Belived, in whom I delight.
And this voice we heard being borne out of heaven while we were with Him in the holy mountain." (2 Peter 1:16-18)
Since Peter refers here to the transfiguration of Christ in Matthew 17:1-10, as associated with "the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" , we are justified to regard that event as a part of His coming.
"Truly I say to you, There are some of those standing here who shall by no means taaste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." (Matt. 16:28)
Peter, in his epistle reminds us before he dies, that he was an eyewitness to the power of Jesus' coming. He and James and John were eyewitnesses to Christ's divine glory.
20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.
Jesus is speaking to his disciples. This is a sign the end times are near. This cannot refer to 2000 years later. This event occured in 70ad.
Titus the Roman general sacked Jerusalem. I know this.
If you want to take that event as an indication that Jesus lied or is not coming, go ahead. Not me.
You know when God told the Israelites that Moses was sent to them to deliver them from Egypt, the were happy. But after the first contest in which Moses was rebuked and their labors were made harder, they were disgusted and unbelieving. It was not until plagues 1 through 10 that they finally got convinced that God's word was true. And then they doubted again at the Red Sea and a number of times afterwards in the wilderness.
I do not count the destruction of Titus on Jerusalem as the last word in Jesus' promises in Matthew 24. Preterists do. But many of us do not. I count delay in the full fulfillment of His prophecies often to indicative of His MERCY to allow more time for people to be reconciled to God.
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 167 by hERICtic, posted 05-15-2010 6:53 AM hERICtic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by hERICtic, posted 05-15-2010 2:35 PM jaywill has replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 170 of 479 (560489)
05-15-2010 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by jaywill
05-15-2010 1:46 PM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, you're preaching.
Jay writes:
So what? What's wrong with preaching ?
You do not have to sit passively in a pew and give me the floor with no comment. As you can plainly see you have every opportunity to challenge, refute, questions, examine, rebut, and offer your own sermon as you have.
So don't try to play the "preaching" card on me because I have no shame about it.
Jay, I asked you not to preach....bc you go off on so many tangents it gets ridiculous. You're giving long winded speeches, but you're not providing any evidence for your claims. I have given a plethora of verses which have shown the end times were in that time frame. I have given words which show it was to occur rapidly. I asked question upon question. Not only do you ignore the questions, you provide no evidence to support your claims, none. You bounce around all over the Bible, without actually dealing with the issues presented.
You obviously put in a lot of hard work and your posts are well written, but I have delete 3/4 of them usually bc it has nothing to do with our debate.
Case in point: I asked you to show me in scripture where it states the end times were far off.
Your response:
Jay writes:
This may be true that the sense of impending climax is there in the New Testament. But it is not to the exclusion of many other passages seeming to prepare the church for the long distant run rather than the sprint.
So you finally admit that the Bible says its impending.....then dismiss it by stating there are verses which show otherwise-yet you do not provide one verse which states this.
Jay writes:
No specific number of years is mentioned so any number you point out cannot be the wrong number of years.
Untrue. If I said in a few years...and 100 years go by, its not a few years. A number does not have to be given to show a prediction or statement is incorrect.
Jay writes:
Now let me ask you. Is it not true that Jesus said that some saints would reign with Him as co-kings? Yes or No?
If so, do you think it would be Christ's way that no matter what quality a Christian life one led that one would be granted such a priviledge? Do you think a backslidden Christian living in a bed of fornication will be magically endowed to be a co king with Jesus Christ when He returns?
See...this is exactly my point. This has nothing to do with our topic.
You're basically stating since X didnt happen, then obviously Jesus was not returning in the time frame of his disciples. Its an absurd way of thinking.
You have to provide evidence that Jesus stated it was to occur far in the future, which is when X will happen.
Jay writes:
If you do believe that you have more faith than I do.
So since Jesus is after QUALITY of disiciples to form His "cabinet" if you will, of co kings, then does He not need time? I mean no Christian really is forced to consecrate their lives to the Savior. So while it seems like He is delaying His coming He is actually accumulating a larger number of believers who volunteringly prepare themselves to reign with Jesus.
Again its the same lack of logic which doesn't deal with the actual issue. We are not discussing if he is delaying his return, we are not discussing how much time he needs, we are not discussing how many believers he wants or needs....
We are discussing what scripture states regarding the end times. What evidence do I have or do you have to show a time frame.
You have no provided a single verse which states the end times are in the far future. None.
Jay writes:
So I definite see the delay in His return to also be His gathering a group of victorious overcomers among the larger majority. If you recall Gideon's little army of 300 in the book of Judges, you can see how God often used a remnant, a minority to accomplish some divine task on His heart.
It does not matter what you think you need to see or want to see, we are discussing what is actually stated.
Jay writes:
So as the years draw on, here and there are normal victorious overcoming Christians who live and fall asleep in Christ. At His second coming this remnant will be raised a corporate Manchild to reign with Him.
Again, this does not provide any time frame at all.
I deleted most of your post bc again, you're all over the place. You then went on to other verses which show Jesus speaking to those in his time frame and outside of it. This has NOTHING to do with our debate. I never said Jesus could not do that. I said the verses we are debating, Jesus and Paul are not doing so. You have to focus on the scripture given. You even brought in scripture by Peter. I do not thin I even mentioned Peter once. You then brought in the failure of the church, the wandering in the desert, the moon turning blood red (um..when did this occur) as predicted (really?),Moses,etc...
Jay, you're all over the place! Give one verse and debate that.
Here, lets start again.
Luke 21.
7"Teacher," they asked, "when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?"
8He replied: "Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not follow them. 9When you hear of wars and revolutions, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away."
My question to you: Is Jesus speaking to his disciples? Yes or no?
My next question: When Jesus returns, will he reward/punish mankind? Yes or no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 1:46 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 3:17 PM hERICtic has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 171 of 479 (560493)
05-15-2010 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by hERICtic
05-15-2010 7:07 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
I will try not to neglect any points of yours. But my answers will have to be brief as I have not too much time now.
Jay, I have asked you three times and finally addressed my own question since you refused to answer it...and you still ignored it.
Romans 16 and Phillipians 1 clearly lays out a time frame as to when Jesus will return. Paul gives names to whom he is writing to.
What particular verses in Romans 16 and Philippians are you refering to?
On top of that, you've ignored this verse as a whole quite a few times:
"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 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." Matt 16:27-28.
I don't see anywhere in this passage the number of years spoken of until He comes with His angels, etc.
Where do you get the idea from this passage that 2,000 years is the incorrect number of years for this event to be fulfilled ?
You seem to ignore the part where Jesus states he is returning to reward mankind. Thats the key, which refers to those standing there. Nothing could be clearer.
I am not ignoring that. I am pointing out that no specific number of years is mentioned.
There are some standing there shall witness the return of Jesus with his angels, as Jesus rewards/punishes mankind.
My way of studying eschatology involves taking into account many many more passages then just Matthew 24.
That is all I have time to remark at the moment. There is more involved in studying eschatology then only Matthew 24 and 1 thess. 4.
For example, Christ does not deal with all people at the same time. And the throne of glory in Matthew 25 is at least 1,000 years before the great white throne judgment in Revelation 20.
But that is another study. The main point here is that you cannot insist that Matthew 24 should be disregarded when the last person in that immediate crowd died.
Did the rest of the New Testament seem to take it that way?
I say no. There is no note of disappointment when Peter speaks of his soon coming death. And that he says the Lord explicitly showed him.
Matthew 10 clearly refers to the end times.
15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
Where in this passage does it say it must occur before 20 or 30 years have elapsed? Where does it say 2,000 years is too many to pass before for this judgment is to commence?
The story is that Jesus wants his disciples to go out into the land and preach.
21"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23When 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.
That may be your best argument. Its a good point.
But what if they had not gone through all the cities as they had been instructed? Suppose they are human and shirked on their responsibility somewhat ?
He had to force them to leave Jerusalem by persecution. So while I recognize the strength of the argument, it is not quite strong enough for me to conclude that Jesus decided not to come back.
And there are many other things He said which seem to be a prepared contingency for a long distance race.
His disciples will not be able to go to all the towns of Israel before the end times occur! This has nothing with Jesus returning from the grave, Jesus is refering to the end times. He even goes into detail of what is going to occur during these times. CONTEXT.
Peter was in that circle of hearers. And Peter in his epistle does not give us the impression that because Jesus had not yet come, He probably would not or that He had lied or that He was mistaken.
I think you should spend some equal time reading Peter's tone in his epistles. He was closer to the speech then you. And I don't think he needs to sit at the feet of Bart Eardhman to get a clearer interpretation of the teachings of Jesus.
Even more:
"What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away." 1 Cor 15:50-53
My time in this post is limited. But if you are going to quote Paul here, you should consider a whole plethora of other things he ALSO said.
You see we do not just learn what the Bible says. We learn what the Bible ALSO says. There is simply too many passages from Paul preparing the church for the long haul.
The giddy apostle obsessed with "Oh Boy. Jesus is coming next week I know" is a caricature. Paul is sober and preparing his audience for EVERY contigency including their having to continue long into the future with enduranace.
Of course Paul wanted to be with the Lord in that climax way as soon as possible. That is his desire. That is not his prediction.
Can you point out in any Pauline epistle the number of years to be expected before Jesus comes back on the clouds with His angels in glory ?
Again, a time frame is given......"short." Its not far. Its always "short. " His speech clarifies what "short" means! Its to occur during his lifetime! It makes no sense to tell his followers then and you today to live if you do not have a wife! Why would Paul tell his audience to live if they do not have wives, do not bother mourning, to not get comfortable with their buys if the end times were 2000 years later?
The fact of the matter is that HE DIDN'T KNOW when the end would be. We have been feeding off of his wisdom for centries. And through his epistles that Lord has continued to build His body and bring people to salvation.
You simpy err in assuming that Paul's expectation or even yearning for the soon second coming of Jesus was his prediction as to when the event would occur.
Read Second Thessalonians again. The whole tone is a balance to the irresponsible and giddy obsession that because Jesus is coming right away, we can be sloppy and loose on Christian responsibility.
He is making a contingency for the long haul because NO ONE KNOWS when the second coming will occur.
He says in effect "Hold on now brothers. The Antichrist has not even been revealed yet. Don't drop your day job."
He cannot be addressing those in that time frame and those today bc he states the "present" world......which cannot mean 2000 years later!
Jay, give us ONE verse which states the end times are far. Just one. EVERY single one states its "soon"! EVERY ONE.
Once again, Peter was in that circle of listners. What was Peter's attitude years latter about the end ? Let's check:
"Knowing this first, that in the last of days mockers will come with mocking, going on according to their own lusts and saying, Where is the promise of His coming ?" (2 Peter. 3:3,4)
Get ready for Jesus Seminar types brothers. Get ready for Bart Eardhman types coming along with mocking saying "Where is the promise of His second coming ? Its been so long. He's not coming."
Then Peter says "But do not let this one thing escape you, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand yasrs like one day.
The Lord does not delay regarding the promise, as some count delay, but is long - suffering toward you, not intending that any perish but that all advance to repentance." (2 Peter 3:8,9)
Peter was virtually the leader of the 12 disciples. If not officially, he was somewhat the one taking the lead.
Should I take my que from Peter in this regard or assume that you have the better inside story ?
Have to go now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by hERICtic, posted 05-15-2010 7:07 AM hERICtic has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 172 of 479 (560497)
05-15-2010 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by hERICtic
05-15-2010 2:35 PM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, I asked you not to preach....bc you go off on so many tangents it gets ridiculous. You're giving long winded speeches, but you're not providing any evidence for your claims. I have given a plethora of verses which have shown the end times were in that time frame. I have given words which show it was to occur rapidly. I asked question upon question. Not only do you ignore the questions, you provide no evidence to support your claims, none. You bounce around all over the Bible, without actually dealing with the issues presented.
You want to dumb down the Gospel into a simplicity that will establish your argument.
This is like me arguing with an astronomer, When he goes into some deeper explanation I say:
"Keep it simple. Twinkle, twinkle little star. That is all we really have to know."
You're frustrated because I would not dumb down the subject to a simplistic one sided biased view.
"Jesus was coming soon. That is ALL I know!"
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by hERICtic, posted 05-15-2010 2:35 PM hERICtic has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 173 of 479 (560499)
05-15-2010 3:29 PM


Let's cut to the chase directly hERICtic.
Point out the number of years Christ foretold would elapse between His ascension and His second coming ?
How many years did He teach it would be before His second coming ?
I expect a NUMBER.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by gragbarder, posted 05-15-2010 4:21 PM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 174 of 479 (560503)
05-15-2010 4:09 PM


heritic, Your nexr post should consist of number.
You say "Jesus was coming soon. Jesus was coming soon. Jesus was coming soon."
Okay heERICtic, give me the chapter and verse explicitly telling us how many years "soon" is ?
Chapter, Verse, Number of years ...

  
gragbarder
Junior Member (Idle past 4917 days)
Posts: 30
Joined: 03-19-2010


Message 175 of 479 (560505)
05-15-2010 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by jaywill
05-15-2010 3:29 PM


1. Before some of those standing there with Him would taste death. (Matthew 16:24, 27-28)
2. During the current generation He was talking to. (Matthew 24:27, 30-34)
Now show us the Bible verses where Jesus says the Son of Man will not come for some 2000 years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 3:29 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 9:00 PM gragbarder has replied

  
gragbarder
Junior Member (Idle past 4917 days)
Posts: 30
Joined: 03-19-2010


Message 176 of 479 (560506)
05-15-2010 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by jaywill
05-14-2010 11:25 PM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
You are interested only in a battle of attrition. You "reply" but don't really say anything other than the implied "I believe!!!!".
In 1 Thessalonians, Paul continually counts himself among the "we" he mentions, and he is talking to a particular group of people, LIVING IN HIS OWN TIME.
Nowhere is the rest of the passages of interest is there any indication that Paul has stopped talking about himself as part of "we", nor are there any indications that he suddenly stopped talking to only those who the letter is addressed to and to whom the entire rest of the letter addresses specifically and started talking to people some 2000 years in the future.
You are forced to try to save Paul from being an apocalypticist, which is what his own words show him to be (sorry if you don't know what an apocalypticist is: maybe you should read up on it), so you make up putative changes in time and audience. A straight reading supports me and counters you.
BOTTOM LINE:
1. We have shown passages where Jesus indicates that Son of Man will come, with His angels, etc.,
(a) before some of those standing there with Him have tasted death (Matthew 16:24, 27-28)
and
(b) during the current generation. (Matthew 24:27, 30-34)
2. You need to show us an equal number of passages where Jesus indicates that the Son of Man will NOT come, with His angels, etc. , until some 2000 years in the future. Until you do that, you lose. It's that simple.
Edited by gragbarder, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by jaywill, posted 05-14-2010 11:25 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by hERICtic, posted 05-15-2010 7:18 PM gragbarder has not replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 177 of 479 (560524)
05-15-2010 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by gragbarder
05-15-2010 4:25 PM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
Jay, I have asked you three times and finally addressed my own question since you refused to answer it...and you still ignored it.
Romans 16 and Phillipians 1 clearly lays out a time frame as to when Jesus will return. Paul gives names to whom he is writing to.
Jay writes:
What particular verses in Romans 16 and Philippians are you refering to?
The chapters are very short. (No wait, by short, I mean as many words as War and Peace Sorry, had to throw some apolgetics in there). Just read both and answer the question.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On top of that, you've ignored this verse as a whole quite a few times:
"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 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." Matt 16:27-28.
Jay writes:
I don't see anywhere in this passage the number of years spoken of until He comes with His angels, etc.
I have already covered this at least four times.
You seem to ignore the part where Jesus states he is returning to reward mankind. That's the key, which refers to those standing there. Nothing could be clearer.
Jay writes:
I am not ignoring that. I am pointing out that no specific number of years is mentioned.
A specific number does not have to be mentioned. You know this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay writes:
My way of studying eschatology involves taking into account many many more passages then just Matthew 24.
I agree. Using the entire NT, it clearly states the end times were to occur during the time frame of Jesus. NOTHING indicates otherwise.
I have debated many apologists. Eschatology seems to mean making up anything to solve a Biblical problem while completely ignoring context usually.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 10 clearly refers to the end times.
15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
Jay writes:
Where in this passage does it say it must occur before 20 or 30 years have elapsed? Where does it say 2,000 years is too many to pass before for this judgment is to commence?
I cannot tell if you're being naive or pretending not to understand. I already told you, I explained the scenario. Jesus is referring to the end times. He wants his disciples to go out and preach his message.
21"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23When 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.
Jay writes:
But what if they had not gone through all the cities as they had been instructed? Suppose they are human and shirked on their responsibility somewhat ?
I cannot believe you just stated that. The CONTEXT is that Jesus tells his disciples to go out in the land, preach his message....but they will not be able to go through all the cites before he returns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay writes:
And there are many other things He said which seem to be a prepared contingency for a long distance race.
Which you havent given. Not one verse which shows its to occur after 2000 years. Not one. I have given quite a few.
Jay writes:
Let's cut to the chase directly hERICtic.
Point out the number of years Christ foretold would elapse between His ascension and His second coming ?
How many years did He teach it would be before His second coming ?
I expect a NUMBER.
You're not going to get a number. A specific day does not have to be given. I have already showed you through numerous scriptures that its always "soon", "nearby","around the corner", that there will be some of his disciples alive when he returns, that his disciples will witness the signs and have to run for the hills, that those in the time frame of Jesus should live as though they are not married, etc.
A number does not have to be given to show that it would occur within 40 or so years. This is your entire argument. You have zero scripture to show it would occur 2000 years later, so you've fallen back on asking me for a specific number.
Whatever the exact number, some of his disciples would witness his return.
I asked, referring to Luke 21, which you did not address:
8He replied: "Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not follow them. 9When you hear of wars and revolutions, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away."
10Then he said to them: "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.
12"But before all this, they will lay hands on you and persecute you.
Who is Jesus addressing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by gragbarder, posted 05-15-2010 4:25 PM gragbarder has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 178 of 479 (560538)
05-15-2010 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by gragbarder
05-15-2010 4:21 PM


1. Before some of those standing there with Him would taste death. (Matthew 16:24, 27-28)
2. During the current generation He was talking to. (Matthew 24:27, 30-34)
Now show us the Bible verses where Jesus says the Son of Man will not come for some 2000 years.
Keep in mind that the New Testament had no chapters and verse numbers in its original writing. Those delineations were added years latter.
The point here is that Christ's word that some would not taste death until they saw the Son of Man coming in His kingdom is always followed immediately by the experience of Peter, John, and James on the mountain of transfiguration.
The writers therefore, evidentially intended this experience to follow His words previously spoken.

Matthew 16:28 - 17:8 (originally no chapter divisions)
Mark 9:1-8
Luke 9:27 - 36
Why do you suppose that all three gospels immediately follow Jesus' word about some living to see His coming in His kingdom, or the kingdom of God, etc. with the experience of His transfiguration ?
Doesn't it seem their intention that the reader understand that this event of transfiguration is closely associated with Christ's promise ?
Add to this evidence of its relevancy to Peter's word in his epistle:
"Moreover I will also be diligent that you may be able AFTER MY EXODUS, to bring these things to mind.
For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you THE POWER AND COMING OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, but we were EYEWITNESSES OF THAT ONE"S MAJESTY.
... while we were with Him in the holy mountain" (My emphasis, See 2 Peter 1:14-18)
As for me having to point out the number 2000 years, it is wholly not necessary. How do I know it will not be another 1000 years from today when Jesus touches down on the earth physically again?
It is only necessary that I point out that He stressed that no one knew the day or the hour. Since it is open ended, 2000 years is not a wrong amount of time.
It may be latter than you expected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by gragbarder, posted 05-15-2010 4:21 PM gragbarder has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by gragbarder, posted 05-16-2010 1:32 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 180 by gragbarder, posted 05-16-2010 1:38 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 182 by hERICtic, posted 05-16-2010 9:19 AM jaywill has replied

  
gragbarder
Junior Member (Idle past 4917 days)
Posts: 30
Joined: 03-19-2010


Message 179 of 479 (560561)
05-16-2010 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by jaywill
05-15-2010 9:00 PM


Sure not the Transfiguration
quote:
jay:
Why do you suppose that all three gospels immediately follow Jesus' word about some living to see His coming in His kingdom, or the kingdom of God, etc. with the experience of His transfiguration ?
Doesn't it seem their intention that the reader understand that this event of transfiguration is closely associated with Christ's promise ?
Nope, that's not reasonable at all.
You are also trying to pull Jesus' statement out of context: you are trying to change what it clearly applies to.
Farther along in Matthew Jesus tells more about the coming of the Son of Man with the angels and his rewarding people according to what they have done ...
quote:
[Jesus said,] "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 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. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' ...
Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' ...
Then they [the goats on his left] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous [the sheep on his right] to eternal life."
(Matthew 25:31-36, 41-43, 46)
That is absolutely not talking about the Transfiguration, or the Crucifixion, Ascension, Pentecost, etc.
Same with the following, which is directly connected to one of the passages where Jesus goofs by saying that the end - yes, the end - will come before the current generation passes away.
quote:
Jesus answered [the disciples in private,] ... "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert', do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms', do not believe it. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
...
At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one of the heavens to the other."
(Matthew 24:4, 26-27, 30-31)
The above verses are clearly not referring to the Transfiguration, or to the Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension, Pentecost, etc.
The coming of the Son of Man will be a major, worldwide event, clearly visible from east to west, with all the nations of the world mourning, and angels gathering the elect (as in Matthew 25:31-36, 41-43, 46).
And then there's this ...
quote:
Jesus answered [the disciples in private,] ... "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark: and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and other left.
... So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him."
(Matthew 24:4, 36-41, 44)
This is clearly talking about the Son of Man coming to earth, not about His Transfiguration, or Him being resurrected, or ascending, nor about flames coming down upon a few people during Pentecost. It is talking about Jesus' second coming.
All the material I have quoted from Matthew about the coming of the Son of Man is consistent with it referring to Jesus' second coming.
On the other hand, various parts that I have quoted directly from the Bible contradict events some Christians try to substitute for Jesus' second coming, such as Jesus' transfiguration, as well as Jesus' resurrection, Pentecost, an individual person being 'saved', and so on.
So first, let's all be honest and keep the discussion on topic. The passages of interest - where Jesus is a false prophet - deal with His second coming - the coming of the Son of Man in judgement: they do NOT deal with His miraculous birth, His transfiguration, His crucifixion, His resurrection, His ascension, or the Pentecost.
Edited by gragbarder, : No reason given.
Edited by gragbarder, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 9:00 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by jaywill, posted 05-16-2010 9:05 AM gragbarder has replied

  
gragbarder
Junior Member (Idle past 4917 days)
Posts: 30
Joined: 03-19-2010


Message 180 of 479 (560562)
05-16-2010 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by jaywill
05-15-2010 9:00 PM


Sure not the Transfiguration
You are interested only in a battle of attrition. You "reply" but don't really say anything other than the implied "I believe!!!!" and twisting scripture to try to fit your dogmatic theological view.
In 1 Thessalonians, Paul continually counts himself among the "we" he mentions, and he is talking to a particular group of people, LIVING IN HIS OWN TIME.
Nowhere is the rest of the passages of interest is there any indication that Paul has stopped talking about himself as part of "we", nor are there any indications that he suddenly stopped talking to only those who the letter is addressed to and to whom the entire rest of the letter addresses specifically and started talking to people some 2000 or more years in the future.
You are forced to try to save Paul from being an apocalypticist, which is what his own words show him to be (sorry if you don't know what an apocalypticist is: maybe you should read up on it), so you make up putative changes in time and audience. A straight reading supports me and counters you.
BOTTOM LINE:
1. We have shown passages where Jesus indicates that the Son of Man will come, with His angels, etc.,
(a) before some of those standing there with Him have tasted death (Matthew 16:24, 27-28)
and
(b) during the current generation. (Matthew 24:27, 30-34)
2. You need to show us an equal number of passages where Jesus indicates that the Son of Man will NOT come, with His angels, etc. , until some 2000 or more years in the future. Until you do that, you lose. It's that simple.
Edited by gragbarder, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by jaywill, posted 05-15-2010 9:00 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024