I don't think there's a contradiction. I believe Jesus when he said they'd see it in their lifetime.Just because we do not understand something doesn't mean there is a contradiction. FYI
Upvote
0
I don't think there's a contradiction. I believe Jesus when he said they'd see it in their lifetime.Just because we do not understand something doesn't mean there is a contradiction. FYI
Why did Jesus tell his disciples they wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mt. 10:23) Is it true they lived to see the coming of the son of man?
How is that coming in glory of his father with angels and repaying each man according to his deeds? (Mt. 16:27)Well, when Christ was resurrected(!)....and visited them, that was indeed both the Kingdom present, and with power....
So, when they saw Him, suddenly standing among them in the locked room, the Kingdom was there, with them, in power. After the crucifixion.
From a situation of death on the cross -- to full resurrected power.
When He ascended, they saw the Kingdom with power also I think.
But how is that coming in glory of his father with angels and repaying each man according to his deeds? (Mt. 16:27)Perhaps that has been commonly misunderstood. Jesus was raised from death after 3 days. Could it be that it means the moment when Son of Man comes?
Some might die within six days? That doesn't sound right. And how was the transfiguration him coming "in the glory of his father with angels"? He also connects the coming of the son of man with repaying each man according to his deeds.Mark 9:1 came true after six days, as the following scripture shows:
After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John, and brought them up onto a high mountain privately by themselves, and he was changed into another form in front of them. His clothing became glistening, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them. Elijah and Moses appeared to them, and they were talking with Jesus.
Mark. 9:2-4
How is that coming in glory of his father with angels and repaying each man according to his deeds? (Mt. 16:27)
What church or school or television personage did you learn that from , or if not, who agrees with what you believe ?I don't think there's a contradiction. I believe Jesus when he said they'd see it in their lifetime.
Yes. That still doesn't answer the question. Jesus said some would live to see the coming of the son of man. And in the passage you quote (along with Mt. 10) we see Jesus' instructions to them laced with urgency.Hmmm....when were the 72 sent out?.... Let's check....
Luke chapter 10
Yes. That still doesn't answer the question. Jesus said some would live to see the coming of the son of man. And in the passage you quote (along with Mt. 10) we see Jesus' instructions to them laced with urgency.
They shouldn't carry unnecessary items when traveling from town to town, they shouldn't waste time with those who won't listen but they should leave for the next town because the previous one has set itself up for judgment, they would be persecuted by the Sanhedrin, in synagogues, and even by governing rulers and if persecution arose in one town they needed to leave for the next, because there would not be enough time to reach all of Israel before the coming of the Son of Man.
Jesus speaks of the "coming of the son of man" event in the same context of repaying each man for their deeds.Well, that's clearly the 2nd coming in that reference. But you were asking about the earlier moment in Matthew 10.
...
Ah I see Matthew 10 is when He sends out the 12!
See? Read Matthew chapter 10 as one whole passage, every verse, together.
Where do you claim this is written ?they shouldn't waste time with those who won't listen
This is a very disturbing verse. If you plainly read it, you should understand. I have heard explanations that say he came back spiritually and others just say they don't know. I'm in the I don't know camp.
Theres another one where it said that Yeshua did so many more things that if it were written down, all the books in the world could not report on it. That also ties in to the mystery verse you quoted.
Now as I understand it, they were talking about AFTER he rose from the dead and BEFORE his ascension.
Now that was what?, just over a month? How much could he have said and done in that time? Even if every event and word spoken were written down, certainly it would be like a couple of Brittanica sets.
Not only that, but we don't have any records of what he did and what he said other than the words in the gospels.
So, does this mean that he DID come back in some way we don't understand? 2,000 years would be enough time to claim that all the books could not hold it. Did he really mean that he did return in a sense because he lives in us?
Jesus speaks of the "coming of the son of man" event in the same context of repaying each man for their deeds.
I learned it in scripture where it's written that Jesus told them that some of them would live to see the coming of the son of man. Matthew 10:23 Matthew 16:28What church or school or television personage did you learn that from , or if not, who agrees with what you believe ?
I don't think there's a contradiction. I believe Jesus when he said they'd see it in their lifetime.
So, in other words, you do honestly believe that you understand it ? Even though the english meaning does not at all convey the meaning from the original language, you somehow got understanding of that ?I learned it in scripture where it's written that Jesus told them that some of them would live to see the coming of the son of man. Matthew 10:23 Matthew 16:28
It's important also to not forget that JESUS is omnipresent that he's already everywhere watching us. When he says return in revelations he means return in a divine form that the saved can straight up see.Why did Jesus tell his disciples they wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mt. 10:23) Is it true they lived to see the coming of the son of man?
The "coming of the son of man" event is not the physical return of Christ at the resurrection. It can't be because when Jesus talks about this "coming of the son of man event" he speaks to them as if they would live to see it.You can help me, but you seem, if I understand perhaps you are referring to the Matthew 16 2nd coming verse into the context of chapter 10, the different situation? They are not one thing, but 2 different things.
Why do you say "the saved" can straight up see ?When he says return in revelations he means return in a divine form that the saved can straight up see.
It's in more than one place where Jesus tells them they'd live to see the "coming of the son of man" event.So, in other words, you do honestly believe that you understand it ? Even though the english meaning does not at all convey the meaning from the original language, you somehow got understanding of that ?
Does it completely agree with all Scripture also ?