'Some still living' disproves literal truth of the bible

I would think it might b interesting if you started a thread on fulfilled Biblical Prophecy because as a Christian, I have never found anyone that can show any but the most trivial examples.Edited by jar, : fix suntitle

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

"This was not fulfilled in Matthew 17. Where are the angels in Matthew 17? Rewarding every man refers to the "end". When did this occur in Matthew 17? Of those standing there, who died?"hERICtic, I think there are a few ways to deal with this discrepancy. I will list off a few here. I am not claiming to be an expert on the Book of Matthew or the Transfiguration itself, but here are some thoughts.One answer would be to that "the Son of man coming in his kingdom" is not a reference to the Transfiguration or to the Second Coming of Revelation, but rather to the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost in the Book of Acts. Here is a quick snippet from Matthew Henry's commentary:

At the end of time, he shall come in his Father's glory; but now, in the fulness of time, he was to come in his own kingdom, his mediatorial kingdom. Some little specimen was given of his glory a few days after this, in his transfiguration (ch. xvii. 1); then he tried his robes. But this points at Christ's coming by the pouring out of his Spirit, the planting of the gospel church, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the taking away of the place and nation of the Jews, who were the most bitter enemies to Christianity. Here was the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Many then present lived to see it, particularly John, who lived till after the destruction of Jerusalem, and saw Christianity planted in the world.

In this view, the Transfiguration is still involved as a pointer to the Big Event still to come in the pouring out of the Spirit, although it is not the full and complete answer to it in itself.Another possibility would be that verse 28 is a transition between the eschatological prophecy in 16:27 and Chapter 17. In this view, verse 28 would not be referring to the ultimate consummation of history, as 16:27 is. Verse 27 would be the answer to a prospective disciple's quandary, "Is it all worth it?" Jesus' words in vv.24-26 would be quite hard to swallow, so verse 27 comes in to say that there will be recompense for all of the toils of discipleship. Verse 28, then, is sort of a "deposit, guaranteeing what is to come," the promise of a taste of what is to come, this being fulfilled in the Transfiguration. The angels, the reward--this stuff belongs to the Eschaton of verse 27, just like you said. But "some standing here" get a taste of what it all will be like in the Transfiguration.I think this second possibility sounds better to me. Got any thoughts?Edit: I am not a preterist, but that viewpoint would say that a good portion of what was prophesied to occur did happen in AD 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem. That is not my view.Edited by DPowell, : No reason given.

What is the handy-dandy cut/paste tool for this website? I am not sure how to quote the guy I'm responding to without pains.Anyway, hERICtic, I think that "you" is addressed to the reader. Check out verse 15. I believe Jesus was fully capable of knowing who his audience was/would be. Bear in mind that He is speaking prophetically, which means we have to be very, very careful trying to pinpoint precisely whom/what He refers to in every case.

Jar, I am completely with you on the need for a good prophecy/fulfillment thread. I myself am not knowledgeable enough in the area to speak with any authority. Maybe/hopefully there is someone in the community with expertise in this area.

Yet you claim there are fulfilled prophecies?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

I assume you are asking about what I just did there.Here it is again, but with the coding showing:[qs=DPowell]What is the handy-dandy cut/paste tool for this website? I am not sure how to quote the guy I'm responding to without pains.[/qs]

Hello again. It cannot refer to the transfirguration. No one died as per Matthew 16, nor did the angels reward mankind. From what I can gather above, it seems like a lot of twisting and really doesnt cover all the criteria of chapter 16.Lets take a look again. This time, lets back up a lil.21From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"Jesus is talking about his death. Peter then joins in and cries out that this event is not going to occur.24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?Jesus is not talking about dying and saving their soul. This can only occur after the death of Jesus. So again, Jesus is talking about events after his death.So logically, after his death....27For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. 28I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."It makes 100% perfect sense to conclude that after his death, he is going to come with gods angles (which Revelation attests to) and reward each person (saving their souls) which again Revelation attests to, as well as his entire message- that he must die in order to save mankind.Anyway, hERICtic, I think that "you" is addressed to the reader. Check out verse 15. I believe Jesus was fully capable of knowing who his audience was/would be. Bear in mind that He is speaking prophetically, which means we have to be very, very careful trying to pinpoint precisely whom/what He refers to in every case. The author is recounting a story. In this story his disciples go to him.3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"They ask when the end times are. So the scene is Jesus is asked a question directly as addresses his disciples.4Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you.So you're saying, Jesus turned away from his disciples, looked into the camera and spoke those words?No. He is addressing his disciples, those standing in front of him. You may argue, which will create other problems, that the "you" means his disciples and those in the future...but you cannot honestly suggest that as he is speaking to his disciples, answering their question and responds with "you" that he is bypassing them and going directly to the future.Now, Matthew 25 is still part of the story from chapter 24, and Jesus says:31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All 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. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.Does this refer to the Pentacaust? The Transfiguration? Or is this the end times-Jesus coming in his glory, with his angels, nations gathered before him, seperating those who are saved and unsaved?As for how to quote, when you hit reply the screen changes so you can respond. Look to your left. Click on "help" next to the dbCodes. That should help you do all sorts of nifty thing!

quote:

---

DPowell:
My point about the KJV was that it was the only translation that did what you wanted it to do.

---

And your point is invalid! It was the first time and it remains invalid even with your attempt to save it.Here are 3 other versions I listed — in that very same listing that I used the KJV in - that also supported my position ...

quote:

---

d. NRSV includes "nor the Son", but notes that "Other ancient authorities lack nor the Son".

​

e. The NIV has "nor the Son", but notes "Some manuscripts do not have nor the Son."

​

f. The ESV has "nor the Son", but notes "Some manuscriptes omit nor the Son".

​

So you don't even have solid Biblical backing for Jesus not knowing the day and hour (let alone the generation).

---

It is NOT just the KJV that notes the ambiguity/discrepancy with whether or not nor the Son was originally included. There are also notes in the NRSV, the NIV, and the ESV.That you intentionally selected just the KJV — and then continue to manipulate and distort - only shows that you are being disingenuous. Edited by gragbarder, : No reason given.

quote:

---

DPowell:
As to why Jesus said "this" generation as opposed to "that" generation in Matthew 24, I would say a couple of things: First, according to vv. 36-39, Jesus does not claim to be speaking in specifics with regard to times and dates;

---

Jesus is talking to a particular group of people, and that tells us what this generation refers to. In such a context:1. The word this would refer to the generation to whom He was directly speaking; it is they who would be this generation.2. The word that would be used to refer to some other time’s generation. If Jesus were speaking of a future generation some 2000 years or so in the future, then that would have been the correct word to use.But according to the Bible, Jesus uses this and not that — which supports my position and counters yours.I see how desperately you want to change what the Bible actually says, in order to try to save it from itself. But realize that when you try to do so, you are implicitly admitting that you reject the Bible.

quote:

---

DPowell:
[As to why Jesus said "this" generation as opposed to "that" generation in Matthew 24, I would say a couple of things:] second, Jesus says "this generation" because it is the specific generation of which He has been speaking for 20-something verses.

---

No, that doesn’t change how the words this and that are used. this would refer to the current generation (to those to whom He was speaking) and that would refer to some other generation (such as some generation existing some 2000 or so years in the future). Too bad for you that the Bible has Jesus saying this generation (supports me) instead of that generation (would support you).Further, the statement just before the verse of interest has Jesus saying this ..

quote:

---

So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.

---

Jesus is clearly talking to those to whom He is talking — YOU, and not THEY.What the Bible actually has Jesus saying:
YOU and THIS generation.What you so desperately wish the Bible had Jesus saying:
THEY and THAT generation.

quote:

---

DPowell:
Koine Greek is a little freer in its movement between cases and tenses than you and I might be if we were writing this all in 21st century English. Remember, additionally, that Jesus would not have been speaking this in either English or Greek, but Aramaic, so we are kind of getting this third-hand. This stuff aside, look at the movement between past tenses (v.32), future tenses (the majority of the verbs), and present tenses (vv.6, 8, 16) in the verbs. There are aorist (generally speaking in the past) tense verbs translated in the past, some translated in the present, but all speaking toward the future, etc.

---

Easily dismissed. The 6 various versions of the Bible I have quoted from ALL SIX OF THEM— EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, WITHOUT EXCEPTION - says This, not That.

quote:

---

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
(KJV)

​

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
(NASB)

​

Truly I tell you, this generation (the whole multitude of people living at the same time, in a definite, given period) will not pass away till all these things taken together take place.
(AMP)

​

Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
(ESV)

​

I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
(NIV)

​

Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.
(NIV)

---

Clearly the natural and best translation is this, not that.PS: Please don’t be dishonest again and try to claim that (1) I am not familiar with the problems with the KJV, or (2) that I am relying only on the KJV for this point.

hERICtic (I'm guessing real name Eric? I'm David, btw), let me start out with a question: Is the Kingdom here now or is it still to come? I think this answer is crucial to interpreting v.28.Based on my understanding of the Kingdom, I think it is fair to differentiate between the "coming" of v.27 and the "coming" of v.28 as distinct events. I see room for more than one interpretation of this passage, but the one I guess I seem to be gravitating to is that v.27 refers to the Second Coming, just as you have said, while v.28 is referring to something prior, which was accomplished in the time of "some still standing here." I think this refers either to the Transfiguration or Pentecost, or both.As to the idea of who "you" refers to, I suppose I would take it to refer to all believers of all times, including both the disciples there that day and Christians throughout the rest of history. Think of the letters of Paul. He wrote 1&2 Corinthians to the believers in Corinth of his day; he wrote Ephesians to the believers in Ephesus of his day; he wrote Philippians to the believers in Philippi of his day, etc. Are the words of those texts applicable only to the first physical audience of his letters? Surely not. What was written/spoken to them was for us as well.Matthew 25:31-33 certainly references the End Time (Second Coming), as you say.Again, I think it is very treacherous in trying to nail down specifics in relation to interpreting prophecy...it just isn't easy or obvious. You may be fully convinced of your interpretations; I urge you to hold onto them loosely--this stuff can be slippery.Sorry if I left anything unaddressed.

There are numerous Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in the events of the New Testament. A good quick link here: http://www.bprc.org/topics/fulfill.htmlThe OT prophecy of the restoration of the nation of Israel we may have seen fulfilled in 1947/1948.The promise of God to Abraham that from him a slew of nations would spring forth has proven true.The enmity between Isaac (Judaism, Christianity) and Ishmael (Islam) continues to our time.I am arguing over the duration of this thread that Matthew 16:28 may have been fulfilled by one or both of the events of the Transfiguration or Pentecost. I believe preterists says this was fulfilled in some way in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.Biblical "prophecy," in a sense, concerning the condition of the human heart/human nature has held consistently true over the passage of time from ancient times into our modern day--I think that in itself is worth something. From the Enlightenment, it has been en vogue to think of man as basically good/moral. The ultimate intrinsic wickedness/selfishness of each of our hearts is pretty clear, isn't it?There is, of course, a good deal of NT prophecy that is fulfilled within the confines of the NT itself (e.g. The Passion Week, The Giving of the Spirit at Pentecost, the Scattering of the Disciples).One example of prophecy that I think we still see in process is the gospel being preached to every nation on the planet...we're almost there. And we are told that when this goes down, there is quite a bit in store in the near future...Again, I am no expert in prophecy, so there may be a great deal more than what I have listed here, but here is at least a sampling.

Thanks much.

Pick one and we will deal with it. It is certain and obvious the the current State of Israel does not fulfill the conditions outlined in the Bible.But pick one, propose a PNT and we will look at it.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Hey David....I'll address your entire post (sorry I didnt do it sooner I didnt know you responded) in a day or so. But I want to tackle this. Ok, so you admit Matthew 25 refers to the end times. Its pretty clear:31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All 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. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.Jesus admits he will come in his glory with all his angels. Seperating the saved and unsaved.What does Matthew 16 state?27For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.He is going to come in his fathers glory with his angels, rewarding each person according to what he has done. Pretty similiar?Just in case you want to "twist" what "reward" means...Revelation 22: 12"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.Here, Jesus in heaven claiming to be coming soon (again and again its always the same, Jesus is returning soon, never is it far off) and giving to everyone to what he has done!So if we add it up, all three apply to Jesus returning, the end times.And yes, its Eric.I'll get back to the rest as soon as I can! Promise!