How do Christians deal with these verses? [moved form Christian Scriptures]

[ittarter]

I just can't understand how people can read these verses (and others that I didn't throw in for sake of time) and NOT comprehend that the book is full of FATAL flaws. The greatest tool against the Christian religion is the bible. I know some Christians accept the fact that the bible isn't "perfect" but these verses in my opinion are more than a few minor unimportant mistakes. These are flaws that literally tear down the second coming of jesus. How do you Christians still believe that jesus is coming when he is almost 2000 years late? I'm sorry if I am coming off as a jerk, but this is just blatant to me.

By your own admission, you used to read these verses and believed in spite of them.

Maybe, if you really want to understand how Christians think, you should take a walk down memory lane.

 

[marktheblake]

So while your theological (Godtalk) might be quite sound there will have no resonance with an atheist.

Agreed, the atheist will not be convinced. When I choose to respond to the Atheist, it is for one of several reasons,;
1. to demonstrate that I know the answer
2. to demonstrate that I am unwavered by their illogical fallacies
3. to demonstrate the answer to others.

Sometimes I prefer to answer philosophically, thus addressing the foundation of his argument rather than the argument itself, although I am not very good at that.

 

[Staperk]

I'm a first time poster and I don't know near as much as some of the other posters, but here are some notes I've found about the topic.

"In all 3 of the synoptic gospels, this promise is made immediately prior to the Transfiguration (Mk 9:1-8; Lk 9:27-36). Futhermore the word for "kingdom" can be translated "royal splendor." Therefore, it seems most natural to interpret this promise as a reference to the Transfiguration, which "some" of the disciples would witness only 6 days later."

I'm interested in seeing what some of you think about this. The bible isn't speaking in some type of secret code that only a few can understand. It states that those who seek will find and I believe that to be true. Through study and prayer I think most scriptures can be understood by anyone who trys to understand.

 

[ittarter]

"In all 3 of the synoptic gospels, this promise is made immediately prior to the Transfiguration (Mk 9:1-8; Lk 9:27-36). Futhermore the word for "kingdom" can be translated "royal splendor." Therefore, it seems most natural to interpret this promise as a reference to the Transfiguration, which "some" of the disciples would witness only 6 days later."

Regardless of how you translate basilaeas, it's definitely a possibility to interpret the line as referring to Jesus' passion -- through suffering the kingdom of God is born, etc. However, we can also safely assume that the first generation of Christians expected him to return in their lifetime. This did not happen.

I'm interested in seeing what some of you think about this. The bible isn't speaking in some type of secret code that only a few can understand. It states that those who seek will find and I believe that to be true. Through study and prayer I think most scriptures can be understood by anyone who trys to understand.

Unfortunately the knife cuts both ways. If you need to pray to understand a book then it IS inherently esoteric, and our atheist friend will never be able to interpret the Bible correctly UNTIL he believes. I have a feeling he might be reluctant

 

[marktheblake]

I know as not so much atheist as 'can't-be-bothered-with-any-of-it-ists".

The "can't-be-bothered-with-any-of-it-ists" are very unlikely to spend a lot of time preaching on christian forums, nor preaching anywhere.

 

[Ih8s8n]

Mt 26:64 and Mk 14:62 both have Christ quoting Dan 7:13. In Dan 7, Daniel is given a vision of 4 great beasts. After the 4 beasts there arises the "Son of Man" (meaning "human being", as opposed to one of the beasts), and we're also given a vision of the "Ancient of Days". In verse 13 we read, "I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him."

In Dan 7 the Son of Man is coming to the Ancient of Days. Christ is quoting this verse, and He is NOT referring to a return to earth. Rather, it is a reference to His ascension, His coming to the Ancient of Days, not from Him.

knee-v: You may very well be right. Although Christ will ultimately return to earth "in the clouds", this specific reference may very well have related to His ascension to heaven. I found this article on the subject that certainly seems to make a lot of sense in regards to this topic. Here it is:

GOLDEN SHEAVES - Ancient of Days

Happy reading to all.

Take care.

P.S. I don't know how the author of this article comes up with 34 1/4 years in reference to Christ's time on earth, so I'm not affirming that part of the article. At the same time, however, the rest of the article certainly seems to make sense.

 

[wayseer]

If someone describes themselves as an atheist they can be anything from nearly believing to being certain there is nothing else.

Atheism, like theism, is like pregnancy - you cannot be a little bit pregnant.

 

[Criada]

Mod Hat On​

This thread has been moved from Christian Scriptures.
Some posts have been removed in clean up.
Please remember that this thread is now in a NO DEBATE area.
Thanks

Mod Hat Off​

 

[Alive_Again]

One to consider. In the new covenant, God circumcises your heart to hear Him and comes to live inside of you. It's something you tend to notice. Also, the Holy Spirit leads and guides us into all truth. We're told many things in this world that are supposed to be truth. Many origins of these philosophies are demonically inspired. If after being born again and filled with the Holy Spirit you encounter oppression, the only thing that lifts that is truth, personified by a revelation of Jesus' Word as recorded in the Bible.

Picture this: You're oppressed and clouded and you're seeking God in the Word (or through anointed teaching) for truth. Suddenly the fruits change from bondage to liberty. That's the Holy Spirit. He gives you a knowing in your 'know-er'. The Good Shepherd speaks to your heart and says, "This is the way, walk ye in it." You receive truth precept upon precept. These precepts are from the Word of God. You read in the Word where He says that Heaven and earth will pass away but My Words will be no means pass away. Then the Holy Spirit ministers life and liberty. The more you meditate on it, the stronger on the inside you become. You practice the truths He expounds and it ministers the fruit of love and peace. After time, you begin to learn the ways of God. Following them ministers the fruit of the Holy Spirit. It all comes back to God saying to your heart: "My Word is forever settled in Heaven". The fruits are always there and it's always liberty. When you base your life on these truths and you continue in them you become free indeed.

So when someone doesn't understand the context of a scripture passage, that's not a foundational crisis, that's simply a need for understanding. The way to understand the spiritual book that is the Bible is to enter into covenant with Him. Wisdom and understanding are part of your inheritance. Learn how to partake and you'll have an abundant life.

The scriptures you present speak of a time of judgment as I read them. If the Word seems to contradict itself, it's because there is a special truth in it to be understood. It involves spending time with God seeking truth. Some things remain a mystery until certain precepts are established in your life.

The foundational precept is that Jesus is Lord and He is the living Word. The Holy Spirit confirms the Word with signs following. So preaching and believing the Word causes God to manifest. It's just as real as it was in His day. And He never changes.

 

[razeontherock]

I just can't understand how people can read these verses (and others that I didn't throw in for sake of time) and NOT comprehend that

Here, let me finish that thought for you: NOT comprehend that you have ZERO comprehension of the text, yet fail to take responsibility for this, instead passing the buck onto the text itself?

Why not just recognize that you don't understand the text?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Matthew 26:64 (King James Version)
64Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Mark 14:62 (King James Version)
62And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

These two verses are taking place at the trial of jesus after the high priest asked him if he was the Christ. Then jesus prophecies that he will see him sitting on the right side of the of power, COMING in the clouds of heaven. These two verses indicate that Jesus is rather late.
----------------

Luke 9:27 (King James Version)
27But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

This verse says that some people that stood before jesus would clearly not die.
---------------------------

I just can't understand how people can read these verses (and others that I didn't throw in for sake of time) and NOT comprehend that the book is full of FATAL flaws. The greatest tool against the Christian religion is the bible. I know some Christians accept the fact that the bible isn't "perfect" but these verses in my opinion are more than a few minor unimportant mistakes. These are flaws that literally tear down the second coming of jesus. How do you Christians still believe that jesus is coming when he is almost 2000 years late? I'm sorry if I am coming off as a jerk, but this is just blatant to me.

Man...you sure don't know the taxonomy of Christian eschatology...

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Any answer to the question hinges on whether one things Jesus is pointing toward the eschaton, or something more immediate. While I agree with those who have stated that the early Christians did anticipate the Parousia to happen in their lifetime (and certain Hyper-Preterists go so far as to say that it did--a whole other set of hurdles to jump over), I'm not at all convinced that Jesus necessarily is pointing toward the eschaton in this point.

While I would argue it is an eschatological statement and is eschatologically relevant, it's not necessarily about the eschaton itself. One of the things I think we see addressed in the Gospels (as well as other places in the New Testament) is a sort of "now-and-not-yet" attributed to God's kingdom.

On the one hand the kingdom means the consummation of history, the end of this age and the birth of the Olam Ha'ba--the age to come. That which the Prophets often pointed toward, using language about turning swords into plowshares and children playing around viper dens without fear of being bitten, lambs and wolves lying together in peace.

Something consistent in the Gospels is the zeitgeist saturating everything at the time, it is a highly politically charged atmosphere. The Maccabean kingdom had been conquered by Rome, there were plenty of apocalyptic texts and a general sense of nearness of messianic liberation which entailed a political overthrow of Roman tyranny and the reestablishment of Israel to its days of glory.

Jesus preached in this atmosphere and "kingdom of God" carried profound political overtones, though Jesus also consistently uses the kingdom to subvert the concept of power and authority present in both the revolutionary voices of the day as well as the authoritarian (i.e. Roman and Roman collaborating) voices of the day. And yet we see that people were really failing to grasp at Jesus' point as late as the moments before His Ascension.

"When they had gathered together they asked him, 'Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?'" - Acts 1:6

That is, "Lord, are you NOW finally going to overthrow the Roman powers and liberate us and usher in the time promised by the Prophets?"

The kingdom which Jesus speaks of isn't "of this world", it doesn't resemble the powers and principalities of this present world, it's not the violent revolution which the Zealots strove after, and it certainly wasn't the violent tyranny of the Roman Empire.

The kingdom, instead, looks like the Cross.

The nearness of the kingdom is present in the Person of Jesus, healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, pronouncing forgiveness to sinners, in the transformed hearts of tax collectors like Zacchaeus or that of the woman caught in adultery and in the driving out of demons. Remembering that the kingdom does not "come with observation".

And, of course, by saying all this by no means robs the preaching of the kingdom of its eschatological import. But rather than looking forward to a violent revolution to usher in the age to come, Jesus presents Himself as the Victim on the Cross, crucified for the sins of the world--this is the True King of God's kingdom, this is what the greatest in the kingdom does; be a servant, to be the least. And it radically turns the world upside-down by presenting a subversive and alternative way of looking at everything. Who are the poor among us? Who is the outcast? "Whatever you do/do not to the least of these you have done/have not done it to Me."

Again, the kingdom looks like the Cross. It is cruciform.

This by no means denies the eschaton, the coming fullness of the kingdom in the age to come, God setting all things right at Christ's Parousia. But it does mean that we must understand the kingdom as being not other than the Crucified Jesus, but rather to understand the Crucified Jesus as the radical example of what the kingdom is and looks like. It isn't "power" as "power" is normally comprehended, it's the power revealed in and through the weakness of the Cross, it's grace and forgiveness, mercy and justice. Remembering what St. Paul says, that God chose the foolish and the weak things of this world, and that Christ is the wisdom and power of God.

To that end, I think it is perfectly legitimate to see Jesus as pointing toward this "hidden-ness" of the kingdom displayed on Golgotha. Pointing toward the reality of the kingdom revealed not through a mighty display of eschatological glory, but revealed through the Cross. To witness the kingdom come which puts to death the powers and principalities and dominions of this world through the suffering of Christ on the Cross and the preaching of that Gospel to all nations, beginning in Jerusalem and Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth.

Again, I'm simply trying to offer a way of looking at this within the context of Jesus' kingdom preaching which in all four Gospels culminates in the Passion and Resurrection from the dead.

-CryptoLutheran