What is Authoratative?

Status
Not open for further replies.

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind
also... why do you assume that AD 70 was the worst trial for Christians? Do you know that this last century saw more martyrs than all of the centuries before combined?

Is there a specific text you are refering to, that I am interprating as you say?

In Matt 24, Jesus is warning the apostles about what they would see come to pass, and giving them signs so they could escape.

Jesus was not warning about what you and I will see come to pass, and giving us signs so we can escape.

The text simply does not support it. Any such notion is extra-biblical in origin.

 
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Posted by parousia: "For me to even begin to embrace your assertion, you'll need to show scriptural evidence that Jesus isn't a human King of Israel, and thus is to be exempt from the kings we are discussing (Solomon, Jesus, Hezekiah, Josiah). I do not see any evidence to support such a radical distinction. Such a distinction, IMO, denies, by default, that Jesus was "Fully Human". A notion I reject."

First of all... We know that Christ is God who became flesh. So yes... He did take on the appearance of man. He had all of the temptations etc... yet... do you assume that He was a king of Israel just like the (only) human kings of its past? You based your arguement on the fact that Christ would surpass all of the others. And yes, He did surpass everything. However, there is a big difference. Was He Israel's political leader? Was he born of a man and a woman?>>> No. So there are indeed differences, or do you deny this? So, I am definitely safe in the previous assertions.

Hold on... for a reply to your other post

take care...

FOW
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
posted by parousia: "So, are you saying everything before verse 34 was completely fulfilled by the time the the last apostle died?, or are you saying the signs have been in a state of ongoing fulfillment over the last 2000 years but have not yet reached "complete and final" fulfillment? Here's How The Holy Bible,"Todays English Version" renders our Lords words in this verse: Matt 24:34 TEV "Remember that all these things will happen before the people now living have all died." I assume, from our previous conversations about the different Biblical translations, that you are in agreement with this particular rendering. If so, then you must conclude that among other things, the "Abomination of Desolation" took place in the 1st century (Vs 15), and the "great tribulation" took place in the 1st century (Vs 21), The moon not giving light, stars falling from Heaven and sun darkening took place in the 1st century(Vs 29), The "sign of the son of Man in heaven" took place in the 1st century (Vs 30), And the Gathering of the Elect took place then as well (vs 31)."


Well parousia... Christ said that "these things" were precursors to "it is near". Look at verse 34. And He said that this generation would not pass away until all "these things" have happened. So the "it" is still to come. That is also supported in the following verses. Verse 40 for example: do you think that has already occured? Also... if they knew it would happen in their lifetime... it wouldn't be such a big secret would it? They did not know... and that is the point... we do not know and that is the point. He is going to come again.

About verse 21... He is once again saying "then". How can you say
that "these things" are not the precursors to the "then" in verse 21 or the "it" in verse 34? The "then" in verse 21 is pertaining to what "these things" are signs of. The following verses are speaking about the signs. For example... look at verse 23. -- "At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it." You see these things ("these things") are signs and examples of what will happen at "that time" or "then" (21) or "it" (34). And these are the things that happen in every generation. Verse 21 is about "then"/ "that time"/ "it".

Also... you would be incorrect if you think that Christ did not know that His words were not going to be written in His word. He is also speaking to us as well. So if you accept that He knew you were going to read His words... then by your opinions "it" would have to happen in every generation... the Second coming (verse 30) would have to become a third, fourth, fifth, and so on.

posted by parousia: "Indeed, nothing that "great" had ever happened to them before or has since, nor ever will, or even can, again."

Well parousia... I believe He was speaking to all of us in verse 21... not just the jews. So "the worst" would have to pertain to us all. Besides, Christ's coming was the "greatest" thing that ever happened to any of us. Although that is not what the verse is talking about.

basically... I don't see how your opinion is backed by the word at all.

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind


First of all... We know that Christ is God who became flesh. So yes... He did take on the appearance of man.

The appearance of a man?

Jesus Christ was a man, an acutal air berathing, blood pumping Human being. He didn't Just "look" like one, as you seem to be asserting here.

Again, you seem to be denying that Jesus Christ is the King of Israel.
Do you actually believe Jesus is not a Human King of the lineage of David?

Are you sure about that?
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind



Well parousia... Christ said that "these things" were precursors to "it is near". Look at verse 34. And He said that this generation would not pass away until all "these things" have happened. So the "it" is still to come. That is also supported in the following verses. Verse 40 for example: do you think that has already occured? Also... if they knew it would happen in their lifetime... it wouldn't be such a big secret would it? They did not know... and that is the point... we do not know and that is the point. He is going to come again.

FOW,
Perhaps you could list for me which "things" you believe were indeed fulfilled before the last apostle died.

I agree with your previous statement that "all these things" referrs to everything Jesus said would come to pass prior to verse 34.
Now you seem to be waffling away from that claim.

Now you are saying that "all these things" does not refer to "all" of them, but only "some" of them, and/or you are saying that "all these things" would only "begin" to come to pass before those then alive had all died.

Neither claim is supported by the text.

As for the "Big secret", lets look at the parable of the pregnant mother.
These things" are said to be "birth pangs".

Does a pregnant woman know the "day or hour" she will give birth?
No, of course not, but she knows that sometime within 40 weeks of conception she will give birth, and the "labor pangs" are "signs" to her that "it" is indeed "Near".

Same is true of what Jesus said.
No one knew the day or hour, but Jesus knew the "Generation" would not pass and told His apostles so.

I see you employing quite a bit of gymnastics to get around the plain meaning of the text here. Thats OK, I used to do it too. I used to believe exactly as you do, but I found that scripture simply didn't support it, so I adjusted my veiw to line up with scripture.

About verse 21... He is once again saying "then". How can you say
that "these things" are not the precursors to the "then" in verse 21 or the "it" in verse 34? The "then" in verse 21 is pertaining to what "these things" are signs of. The following verses are speaking about the signs. For example... look at verse 23. -- "At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it." You see these things ("these things") are signs and examples of what will happen at "that time" or "then" (21) or "it" (34). And these are the things that happen in every generation. Verse 21 is about "then"/ "that time"/ "it".

Signs and examples of what will happen "at that time"?
Where does the text support that?

The text is clear that they are "signs given to the disciples so they could determine that "it" is "Near", not as "examples" of what would "really" occour 2000 years later. You are adding to the text that which is not there because of your presupposition that the disciples did not witness the actual events.

You say "theses things" were to happen in every generation as "signs" to each generation that "it" is "Near"?

How is that a sign at all? Sounds like "crying wolf" to me.

Again, Jesus said to his disciples:
"Therefore when (not "if" but "When") you (the apostles) see the 'abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath.

Jesus didn't say "IF you see it, but "When" you (the apostles) see it.

In his paralell account of the olivet discourse, Luke renders our lords words this way:
Luke 21:20-23
20 "But when you (the apostles) see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.


Guess what? The apostles generation saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies, and they heeded their Lords words of warning and they "Fled to the mountains" as instructed, for those indeed were the "days of vengeance in fulfillment of all things written"

Thats All things written FOW, not some, or a few, or even most, but "All".

Your claim is that Jesus didn't mean what he said. Your claim is that Jesus words had no direct application to the apostles at all.

I reject that claim outright. If it had no direct application to those who first received the message, it can have no application at all to us.

The Bible was written for us, it was not written to us.


Well parousia... I believe He was speaking to all of us in verse 21... not just the jews. So "the worst" would have to pertain to us all.

You can "believe" it all you want. The question is, is it true?
Can you support your belief from scripture?

The fact remains that the text is clear. Jesus was warning His disciples about things they would see come to pass, and I bleieve Jesus was right, and they DID see the fulfillment of "all things written".

Any interpratation that ignores the plain and direct application of this warning to the apostles themselves is extra biblical in origin, and not supported by scripture.
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Posted by parousia: "Jesus Christ was a man, an acutal air berathing, blood pumping Human being. He didn't Just "look" like one, as you seem to be asserting here."

Yes definitely... but He was not only a man... which makes Him much different, while yet... being completely man. He is God who took off His glory out of love to be able to take on the very nature of man... to become nothing for us. Yes. If you assert that He was just a man, no more no less... then you are mistaken.

Posted by parousia: "I agree with your previous statement that "all these things" referrs to everything Jesus said would come to pass prior to verse 34."

Good because that is what I was talking about. Verse 34 is speaking of all of the signs that are to precede the events in verse 21,30,31,36,37,40,41. (These things) pertain to the signs... and all of those listed did happen... and like I said earlier... Christ knew that His words (as stated in verse 35) would be read by yourself. So that verse also applies to you. If you think that Christ was not aware of the fact that I would be reading this... then you are mistaken.

Posted by parousia: "Does a pregnant woman know the "day or hour" she will give birth? No, of course not, but she knows that sometime within 40 weeks of conception she will give birth, and the "labor pangs" are "signs" to her that "it" is indeed "Near". Same is true of what Jesus said. No one knew the day or hour, but Jesus knew the "Generation" would not pass and told His apostles so."

He told them that the labor pains would be seen by their generation. He did not say that the "birth" would occur then as you seem to assert.

Posted by parousia: "I see you employing quite a bit of gymnastics to get around the plain meaning of the text here. Thats OK, I used to do it too. I used to believe exactly as you do, but I found that scripture simply didn't support it, so I adjusted my veiw to line up with scripture."

Well... you're not saying that Christ is not who He is... God come in the flesh... and you're not rejecting His salvation... so I don't see a huge problem, but I definitely don't see it saying what you say it says. Gymnastics??? nope... don't think so... just plain ole reading what it says.

Posted by parousia: "Signs and examples of what will happen "at that time"? Where does the text support that?"

Verse 33 among others.

Posted by parousia: "You are adding to the text that which is not there because of your presupposition that the disciples did not witness the actual events."

Ok... take out examples if you like and just leave signs. And you seem to be adding to what is not there because of your presupposition that the disciples did witness the second coming of the Lord as described in verse 30. If the Bible is living, (which it is), then that verse would have to occur in every generation... meaning multiple "comings"... and that is not what it says. It says that the signs of the coming will occur in this generation refering to their's at the time, and our's today.

Posted by parousia: "
"Therefore when (not "if" but "When") you (the apostles) see the 'abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath."

And if you think that this referred to them actually having to be on earth when they see the second coming, then you are mistaken again. All of us will see it... because you ignore verse 35 if you believe that He was only speaking to the disciples... and the context in which He was speaking. They will see it, as will we... the warnings in verse 9-13 refer to all of us, verse 15 says that they will see it (which they will), and verse 16 (the one you are referring to) says that "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains." He did not say that then you will flee to the mountains... because they were not going to be on earth during the second coming. (they as being the disciples right there at the time)... verses seem pretty obvious to me, no?

Posted by parousia: " Your claim is that Jesus didn't mean what he said"

Nope... as stated all above... He meant exactly what He said.

Posted by parousia: "You can "believe" it all you want. The question is, is it true? Can you support your belief from scripture?"

Yep... sure did.

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
FOW, I noticed you avoided Luke 21:20-23

Care to comment on it?

As for your comment:
"Verse 34 is speaking of all of the signs that are to precede the events in verse 21,30,31,36,37,40,41. (These things) pertain to the signs... and all of those listed did happen... and like I said earlier... Christ knew that His words (as stated in verse 35) would be read by yourself. So that verse also applies to you. If you think that Christ was not aware of the fact that I would be reading this... then you are mistaken.

I have a few points here.

Wars, earthquakes and famines (which I believe you are saying are the "Signs" that preceed the events) are not said to be Signs of the end at all.

In Contrast, the AoD, armies surrounding Jerusalem, Gospel preached to all the world, Sign of the son of man in Heaven, etc were indeed the "Signs" that Jesus gave His disciples to watch for so THEY could know the end of the age was "Near".

You claim that sice Christ knew His words would be preserved for me and you to read, that they have direct application to me & you.

Can you apply this hermeneutical pricniple across the board, or are you selective about it's application?

For example,
Phillipians 2:19
"But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you shortly, that I also may be encouraged when I know your state. "

FOW, Are you expecting Timothy's "soon" arrival to "YOU"?

The word of God says Jesus is sending Him to you shortly right?
In your stated principle, you must be expecting Timothy's soon arrival to you, since this passage was written, knowing you would read it.

Again, Luke 21.
Did "all things written" get fulfilled when the apostles saw that Jerusalem was surrounded by armies as Jesus said they would? or do "all things written" get fulfilled every time Jerusalem gets surrounded by armies in every generation?

Was Jerusalem surrounded By armies in every generation?
Did this verse apply to Christians in the 600's AD, the 1200's, 1400's, 1800's or even 1900's? or is this verse directly applicable to only one generation?

Let me know when Timothy shows up OK?
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Posted by parousia: "FOW, I noticed you avoided Luke 21:20-23"

(grin)... no parousia... I just didn't check it. But I did this time ... (another grin)

Also... I noticed you didn't comment on the point about the equivalent of Luke 21:21 in Matthew. (That thing about 'then those who are in'... sorta implying that they being the ones right there would not be there... but speaking into the future, even exaggerating that point by verse 35 in Matthew.) Which leads me to my next point!!!

You say that if I say that Christ's words were to us, then every person speaking to another in the Bible must also be speaking to us as well. This is very off the wall, becuase you know that Paul was speaking directly about timothy being sent to the Philippians in a letter sent to the Philippians. Of course, this does not meant that the words spoken are not for us as well, but the arrival of Timothy is not something that the Bible says is coming to us. He was going to the Philippians... it's quite clear about that. If you want to use that tactic... fine, but I don't think you're going to convince anyone with it.

How about another angle here... Do you think that Christ was not intending the things in Luke 21:12-18 to be applied to us as well as the disciples? If you think that, then I guess you also assume that Matthew 28:20 was only for the disciples... and how about Matthew 5:32 ... was it only for those He was directly speaking to? Heck... just take chapter five and six... Your logic on this can work if you want it to, but it is not correct.

How about John 2:19??? Was Christ referring to the physical temple??? No... but He meant what He said all the same... as He came to raise the temple inside of mankind... that had been desecrated by sin.

Taking a look at Matthew 24 only reveals what was said earlier... Christ was warning them about signs... and to be ready... as He was every generation after them. And in Luke 21:20... continue with the thoughts about Matthew 5-6... and continue reading... because there are many referrences to "they" again. If you were a disciple would you wonder who "they" were? Because He would have been talking to you directly, and yet addressing some "they". No, I don't think they wondered about it at all... after Christ ascended to heaven... they knew. And like you said... the disciples did see verse 20 anyways... it was another referrence to "it" being "near". I also believe it applies to us... like I said... read through Matthew five and six... need I go on? Speaking of Philippians... when in Chapter 2:6-11... was Paul not referring to a future event?

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
FOW,
Here's the trouble..

All of the verses you cited, and every other verse of that type, that "apply" to us as well as to them had direct, immediate application to "them".

And as you cited correctly, Paul's wish that Jesus send Timothy only had direct application to the Phillippians, and not to us.

Where we differ, is that you believe there are Biblical passages that, without explicit instruction to the contrary, did not have direct application to those who first recieved the massage, but only apply to some distant future generation (ours).

I disagree. Every verse in scripture that has direct application to "us", also had direct , immediate application to them.

In contrast, There can be only one "last days" generation.

The "YOU" in Matt 24 are the 1st century apostles Jesus was directly addressing, not you and me, just as the "YOU" in Php. 2:19 were the 1st century Phillippians Paul was addressing directly, and not you and me.

You say the disciples saw signs that indicated the 2nd coming was "near" yet you go on to insist it in fact was not "near" to them.

what you are saying is that Jesus gave them false hope.

In scripture, "Near" always means "near" in human understanding of time.

Thats why Jesus gave the signs in the first place.
FOW, perhaps you could explain the benefit of Jesus Giving the disciples a "sign" that "they" would (and as you agree DID) see, to indiacte to THEM that the 2nd coming was "near", if it was really 2000+ years away?

Again, Jesus told his disciples that when "they" saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies, that they should GET OUT, because the "days of vengeance in fulfillment of all things written" had finally arrived.

Jesus said it would happen before those he was speaking to had all died.
History proves this happened exactly when Jesus said it would.

Now, either "all things written" were fulfilled then, or Jesus lied.

As to your point:
"I noticed you didn't comment on the point about the equivalent of Luke 21:21 in Matthew. (That thing about 'then those who are in'... sorta implying that they being the ones right there would not be there... but speaking into the future,"

Of Course Jesus was speaking about the future. HIS Future, not ours.
"Then those who are in Judea" only implies that there would be Christains in Judea, and Christians NOT in Judea. Those not in Judea have no need to "Flee Judea" do they?

Luke 21:20-23 is speaking about Jerusalems Destruction in AD66-70.
You will not find a single reputable scholarly commentary that disagrees with me on that point. It can be speaking of no other event. And since It is , as you agree, PARALELL to Matt 24, then Matt 24 is also speaking about the same event.
Paralell accounts can not have different meanings.

FOW, there are only 2 options here:
Either "all things written" were fulfilled at Jerusalems destruction as Jesus said they would be, or Jesus was wrong.

Which are you more comfortable with?
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Posted by parousia: "Where we differ, is that you believe there are Biblical passages that, without explicit instruction to the contrary, did not have direct application to those who first recieved the massage, but only apply to some distant future generation (ours)."

Nope... they did have direct application to them as well... that has been discussed. All of those signs for the end occured to them, and they have been occuring ever since. For example: Matthew 24:9-14. By the way... 14 is another key verse. Although I put no restrictions on the power of God... He can (and has) revealed Himself to many who have not "heard" literally speaking... to think that God requires our witness for others to be saved is false. He demands it from us, but He seeks to draw all men unto Himself... His Spirit does the calling. Anyways... but still... that verse says that His gospel will be preached to the whole world, and then the end will come. (And it doesn't have to mean 'right then'... but then... sometime after that.)

Posted by parousia: "The "YOU" in Matt 24 are the 1st century apostles Jesus was directly addressing, not you and me"

So you don't think that Matthew 5-6... or countless other examples were meant for us?

Posted by parousia: "You say the disciples saw signs that indicated the 2nd coming was "near" yet you go on to insist it in fact was not "near" to them. what you are saying is that Jesus gave them false hope."

Nope... it was near... and it is still near. Do you think that God's timing of near is the same as our's? It is not a false hope... because they knew where they seen the truth, the light. They saw His ascention in the way that He will also return. You may think of it as a false hope... but then that would have to be true for me as well. I would have to have a false hope if Christ does not come back in my lifetime because I believe His words were to me as well. Yet... if He does not come back in my lifetime... my hope is all the same.

Posted by parousia: "Thats why Jesus gave the signs in the first place.
FOW, perhaps you could explain the benefit of Jesus Giving the disciples a "sign" that "they" would (and as you agree DID) see, to indiacte to THEM that the 2nd coming was "near", if it was really 2000+ years away?"

Parousia... come on... Read Matthew 24:43-44. If they knew it would be "near" as you say... then what would be the purpose for telling them (and us) that He would come when "you do not expect Him"? It was near... and remember... all of those signs were to indicate this "nearness". So, by your standards... all of these signs would continually indicate... the time getting "nearer and nearer"... and yet... He said He would come back at a time that they did not expect. False hope? Nope

Also... Look at verse 29... did that occur?

Posted by parousia: "Of Course Jesus was speaking about the future. HIS Future, not ours. "Then those who are in Judea" only implies that there would be Christains in Judea, and Christians NOT in Judea. Those not in Judea have no need to "Flee Judea" do they?"

You say so... but it can't be supported with scripture. He was talking directly to the disciples about an event... and was speaking to them about some "they". You say it was going to the "they" who were in Judea and so forth in the very near (40 year) future. I say it is in the future at a time that you do not expect. I have no idea when it will be.

Posted by parousia: "Again, Jesus told his disciples that when "they" saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies, that they should GET OUT, because the "days of vengeance in fulfillment of all things written" had finally arrived. Jesus said it would happen before those he was speaking to had all died. History proves this happened exactly when Jesus said it would. Now, either "all things written" were fulfilled then, or Jesus lied."

Of course what He said would happen to them happened to them. However, He never said to them that He would come again as He left in their generation. Matthew 24:34 speaks of this... and yet... all of "these things" that happened to them, and happen still today... were precursors to the actual event. If they were not... He would not have told them immediately before hand that everything they saw would be signs signifying that it was near.

Posted by parousia: "Luke 21:20-23 is speaking about Jerusalems Destruction in AD66-70.
You will not find a single reputable scholarly commentary that disagrees with me on that point. It can be speaking of no other event. And since It is , as you agree, PARALELL to Matt 24, then Matt 24 is also speaking about the same event. Paralell accounts can not have different meanings."

I have no problems with that... even though it could also be referring to a future desolation of Israel in the "end". Luke 21:6-- pertains to that, and it is another sign that the final events are "near". (Look at Luke 21:20) After that look at Luke 21:24-- and how Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times o the entiles are fulfilled. Perhaps meaning that what was seen in AD 70 was the beginning of the 'trampling' that would occur until the time of the Gentiles being fulfilled... (the end). And... that trampling has been occuring for a while, no? Relating to Matthew... one can say that verse 21 pertains to that time of the Gentiles being fulfilled as is portrayed in Luke 21:24. It may have started then... but it is not over yet. Verse 21 in Matthew 24 is still speaking of the end. Remember... their "parallel". So... once again... I do not see how you support your beliefs through scripture.

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind
All of those signs for the end occured to them, and they have been occuring ever since.

I'd be most interested in your explaination of how the "Abomination of Desolation" (one of the "signs" Jesus gave) ocourred in the apostles generation and has been "ocourring ever since".

 By the way... 14 is another key verse. That verse says that His gospel will be preached to the whole world, and then the end will come. (And it doesn't have to mean 'right then'... but then... sometime after that.)

Well, Paul infallibly claims that as of the 60's AD, the Gospel had already been preached to "all the world", indeed to "Every creature under Heaven". So that particular "Sign", according to Paul, was completely fulfilled in his lifetime, in no need of any future or ongoing fulfillment. Much the same as the prophesy of the Virgin Birth & crusifixion were, as I'm sure you agree, completely fulfilled in the 1st century and in no need of "continual, ongoing fulfillment".

(Come to think of it, maybe I'm wrong about that. Maybe you do believe that Jesus is to be born and crucified again and again and again, that would be consistant with your hermeneutic anyway)

Your comment about what "then" means is interesting. Do you apply that to the "rapture" as well?

1 Thess 4:17
"The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up....."

Does the "then" in this pasage have the same elasticity as you apply to the "then" in Matt 24?

Do you agree that the Living were to be caught up at an undetermined later time, perhaps even thousands of years after the dead had been raised?

 Posted by parousia: "The "YOU" in Matt 24 are the 1st century apostles Jesus was directly addressing, not you and me"

So you don't think that Matthew 5-6... or countless other examples were meant for us?

Heheh... already dealt with. Do you believe Php 2:19 is for you and me? your stated hermeneutic is inconsistant, mine is consistant. What was meant for them alone is meant for them alone, what was meant for all is meant for all. There are sciptures only applicable to the original receivers, there are scriptures applicable to "ALL" from the original receivers to us today and beyond, but there is no scripture given  without direct application to those who first recieved the message. (unless specifically stated)

 Salvation passages are for all and apply to all, in contrast, There is only one "Last Days" generation.

Daniel was given explicit information about what would happen in the "Last Days", but was told He wouldn't see it come to pass, that it was not for his time. In Contrast, Jesus told His apostles they would see these Last days events (all of them) unfold before their very eyes, and scripture confirms theirs, unlike Daniels, was in fact the "Last Days" Generation.

It's roughly 500 years form Daniel to Christ. God calls that "a long time", not for Him to see. 2000 years from Christ to the present and you claim God calls that "Shortly" and something the Apostles would live to see? :scratch:

Posted by parousia: "You say the disciples saw signs that indicated the 2nd coming was "near" yet you go on to insist it in fact was not "near" to them. what you are saying is that Jesus gave them false hope."

Nope... it was near... and it is still near. Do you think that God's timing of near is the same as our's?

 :( FOW, allow me to alleviate your ignorance in this area.

Contrary to your assertion, God can tell time correctly.

In fact, whenever God attaches a "time limit" to a prophesy's fulfillment, it is always given to be understood by how time relates to man, and NOT how time relates to God.

Every time, without fail, ALWAYS.

In fact, according to scripture, failure to fulfill a prophesy "on time" constitutes failure to fulfill a prophesy.

Jesus Himself assigns "human understanding" to the word "Near" in his prophesy.

FOW,  according to your rendering was "It"  "near" from the moment Jesus said it was? or I'll even give you John the Baptist as the point where "nearness" began? If it's been 2000 years "near" so far, can you explain how 500 years before John the baptist, it wasn't near?

What makes 2000 years "Near" and 2500 years "Far"?

When God says something is "far off", He can be trusted. Likewise when He says somethign is "Near", He can be trusted. 

Your contention is, by default, that neither of those terms (Near or Far) have any literal meaning in scripture, while scripture itself testifies, time after time after time after time, the exact opposite. You say that if God tells me an event is far off, and I won't live to see it, that I shouldn't believe Him, likewise if God tells me an event is "near" and that I will live to see it , that I should really not expect to see it as I was told I would, all because God, when communicating to me, is unable to "reckon" time the same way I do.
Ridiculous :D


Of course what He said would happen to them happened to them. However, He never said to them that He would come again as He left in their generation. Matthew 24:34 speaks of this... and yet... all of "these things" that happened to them, and happen still today... were precursors to the actual event. If they were not... He would not have told them immediately before hand that everything they saw would be signs signifying that it was near.

Posted by parousia: "Luke 21:20-23 is speaking about Jerusalems Destruction in AD66-70.
You will not find a single reputable scholarly commentary that disagrees with me on that point. It can be speaking of no other event. And since It is , as you agree, PARALELL to Matt 24, then Matt 24 is also speaking about the same event. Paralell accounts can not have different meanings."

I have no problems with that... even though it could also be referring to a future desolation of Israel in the "end". Luke 21:6-- pertains to that, and it is another sign that the final events are "near". (Look at Luke 21:20) After that look at Luke 21:24-- and how Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times o the entiles are fulfilled. Perhaps meaning that what was seen in AD 70 was the beginning of the 'trampling' that would occur until the time of the Gentiles being fulfilled... (the end). And... that trampling has been occuring for a while, no? Relating to Matthew... one can say that verse 21 pertains to that time of the Gentiles being fulfilled as is portrayed in Luke 21:24. It may have started then... but it is not over yet. Verse 21 in Matthew 24 is still speaking of the end. Remember... their "parallel". So... once again... I do not see how you support your beliefs through scripture.

take care

FOW

 

Again, you throw out Jesus words that "all things written" would be fulfilled when the Disciples saw "Jerusaelm surrounded by armies", opting instead for "well perhaps it means they will begin to be fulfilled then and come to completion sometime in our future".

The fact is, AD70 was hardly the beginning of the gentile domination of Israel. Israel had been under Gentle domination since the Babylonian Captivity, however, in Ad 66, the city was given ovr to them to be trampled underfoot until the times of the gentiles were fulfilled.

Revelation 11:2 Gives us an exact duration of that very "trampling". 42 Months. Exactly how long the Roman Seige lasted.

Line your views with Jesus words, don't stretch His words to fit your view.

That's "all things written" FOW, not some, not most, but ALL. that includes, but is not limited to" The resurrection, New Heavens and earth arriving, Glorious appearing of the Lord with His angels to reward every man, ect, etc, etc... were to be all fulfilled by the time the 42 months had ended (Rev 11:2) When the Power of the Holy people had been finally Broken (Dan 12:7)  What was that power? It was the greatest power ever given a specific group of Human beings. Sole relationship with the Lord God, which was manifest in the temple complex & Mosaic Law. Neither of which have existed since AD70.

It's over.

The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.
 
Upvote 0

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Posted by parousia: "I'd be most interested in your explaination of how the "Abomination of Desolation" (one of the "signs" Jesus gave) ocourred in the apostles generation and has been "ocourring ever since". "

I'd be most interested in hearing how the "abomination that causes desolation" has not been standing in the holy place.

Posted by parousia: "Well, Paul infallibly claims that as of the 60's AD, the Gospel had already been preached to "all the world", indeed to "Every creature under Heaven". So that particular "Sign", according to Paul, was completely fulfilled in his lifetime, in no need of any future or ongoing fulfillment."

Where?... Just to keep referrece

Posted by parousia: "Your comment about what "then" means is interesting. Do you apply that to the "rapture" as well? 1 Thess 4:17
"The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up....." Does the "then" in this pasage have the same elasticity as you apply to the "then" in Matt 24? Do you agree that the Living were to be caught up at an undetermined later time, perhaps even thousands of years after the dead had been raised?"

Parousia... God is not confined to the same timeframe for one "then" as another "then". Believe what you will in regards to this... but your scriptural arguement is not nearly as convincing as you would like it to be, and that is taking it word for word.

Posted by parousia: "in Ad 66, the city was given ovr to them to be trampled underfoot until the times of the gentiles were fulfilled."

And you think that that trampling is over? You think that our time, being gentiles, has been fulfilled?

Posted by parousia: "In Contrast, Jesus told His apostles they would see these Last days events (all of them) unfold before their very eyes, and scripture confirms theirs, unlike Daniels, was in fact the "Last Days" Generation."

Really?... I was sure He said:

Matthew 24:33-34--"Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this eneration will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."------> Do you notice the phrase "all these things" in verse 33, and then the promise that they they will see "all these things" again in verse 34. Notice, once again, that "all these things" are signs that the end is near... not here, but near. Christ says that He will come when they do not expect Him. Your reasoning was that He would not have said near if He did not mean "near" according to their timescale. I disagree: If they knew it was "near" according to their time... as in their lifetime... then His coming would not be unexpected, but expected.

This explains everything else in your post as well... you assert that "all these things" includes the second coming etc... However, the Bible says that "all these things" are signs.

Now then, that is what the Bible says

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind
by the way... I will be on leave for the next 10 days... so I will not be able to reply unless I get around to a computer... (which I don't think I'll be doing)

take care

FOW

Enjoy your leave FOW, I'll miss our little exchanges and look forward to your return.

My reply will be waiting for you.

Peace

P70
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally posted by fieldsofwind

I'd be most interested in hearing how the "abomination that causes desolation" has not been standing in the holy place.

First of all, Luke renders the "abomination of desolation" as "Armies surrounding Jerusalem". This has not been a continous reality for 2000 years.

Next, and foremost, Jerusalem is no more Holy today that any other patch of dirt on earth. While Jerusalem was indeed the  biblical "holy place" of biblical times, it is no longer so today, rendering a present or future fulfillment of the AoD impossible.

 

by parousia: "Well, Paul infallibly claims that as of the 60's AD, the Gospel had already been preached to "all the world", indeed to "Every creature under Heaven". So that particular "Sign", according to Paul, was completely fulfilled in his lifetime, in no need of any future or ongoing fulfillment."

Where?... Just to keep referrece

Sure thang,

Colossians 1:5-6

"because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit,"

Colossians 1:23

"if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which WAS PREACHED to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister."

Romans 1:8

"First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Romans 16:25-26

"Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to ALL NATIONS, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith--  



Parousia... God is not confined to the same timeframe for one "then" as another "then". Believe what you will in regards to this... but your scriptural arguement is not nearly as convincing as you would like it to be, and that is taking it word for word.

Again, Every single time God attaches a time limit to a prophesy's fulfillment, it is given to be understood by how time relates to man, not how time relates to God. Every time, without faill, always.

Contrary to your assertion, God knows how to tell time and can be trusted to tell time correctly.

The onus is on you to come up with even one biblical example of a "fulfilled prophesy" that was fulfilled outside of the human time parameters set for it's fulfillment. You can try, but you won't find a single one. Again, according to scripture, a prophesy failed to be fulilled "on time" is a prophesy failed to be fulfilled.

Posted by parousia: "in Ad 66, the city was given ovr to them to be trampled underfoot until the times of the gentiles were fulfilled."

And you think that that trampling is over? You think that our time, being gentiles, has been fulfilled?

Well, for starters, Christians are neither Jew or Gentile. The time of "gentile" distinction in Gods Eyes is over. There is only the saved or the lost, genetic seperation for the sake of covenant has been done away with.

Next, as I pointed out but you elected not to comment on, Revelation 11 tells us EXACTLY how long the "trampling" would last. 42 months.

Scripture says 42 months, FOW says 2000+ years...

Hmmmmm who should I believe?????? 

Posted by parousia: "In Contrast, Jesus told His apostles they would see these Last days events (all of them) unfold before their very eyes, and scripture confirms theirs, unlike Daniels, was in fact the "Last Days" Generation."

Really?... I was sure He said:

Matthew 24:33-34--"Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this eneration will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."------> Do you notice the phrase "all these things" in verse 33, and then the promise that they they will see "all these things" again in verse 34. Notice, once again, that "all these things" are signs that the end is near... not here, but near.[/b


Do you realize that Matt 24 isn't the only place Jesus promised to return in the apostles lifetime?

Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27, Matt 10:23 are but a few others, merely scratching the surface really. If you need more, I'll gladly cite them for ya.

Maybe you could show a supporting biblical example of a "Sign" given to a particular generation to show something was "Near" when it actually wasn't for their lifetime?

Your spiritualization of literal time texts has no scriptural precident or warrant, and is derrived soley from extra biblical sources.

 
Christ says that He will come when they do not expect Him. Your reasoning was that He would not have said near if He did not mean "near" according to their timescale. I disagree: If they knew it was "near" according to their time... as in their lifetime... then His coming would not be unexpected, but expected.

really?, I'm quite sure He said :

"Therefore you (the apostles) also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an HOUR you (the apostles) do not expect.

Again, Like the pregnant woman who knows the general time she will give birth, does not know the "Day or Hour".

Not knowing the Hour in no way prevents them from knowing the "Generation".

Jesus never said they could not know the general times or seasons, and even gave them signs to look for so they could know.

FOW, The apostles were told By Jesus to be ready because Jesus Knew he was returning to them. He may not have known the exact day or hour, but He knew He was coming back to them.

In fact, in every parable He used to describe His leaving and return, The return is always to the same people He left, and not their descendants. Every one.

Ignoring audience relevance, as you are, has no basis in scripture.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fieldsofwind

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2002
1,290
11
41
Visit site
✟9,595.00
Faith
Christian
Glad to hear in another thread that your thanksgiving went well. Mine was outstanding... and much thanks is always due.

Posted by parousia: "First of all, Luke renders the "abomination of desolation" as "Armies surrounding Jerusalem". This has not been a continous reality for 2000 years."

Abomination of desolation... according to a dictionary does not have to mean armies surrounding anything. However, at the same time, the armies you speak of would also qualify as fulfillment of the scripture. But!!! This does not mean that it has not continued since then... and it also does not mean that the coming of the Son on the clouds occured then. Those things were signs, as is described in the verses, warning of the actual event of what is known as the "second coming". When the Christ said: "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened"-- He was addressing the signs. Look at the verse preceeding 34 (of matthew 24)-- "these things" is addressed as being separate from the "it" that is described in verse 30. This is my point. On this point... you will disagree, but I still adhere to what the scripture says.

Posted by parousia: "Do you realize that Matt 24 isn't the only place Jesus promised to return in the apostles lifetime? Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27, Matt 10:23 are but a few others, merely scratching the surface really. If you need more, I'll gladly cite them for ya."

Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27-- You think this must mean He came in their lifetime... however... I state that the death Christ is speaking of is a spiritual one. I think that "not tasting death is described in John 11:25-26. (Could also pertain to His resurrection)

Matt 10:23-- This is your best one yet. However, could the description Christ made of Himself as the Son of Man coming before they finished going through the cities of Israel be one of a present event having future consequences? Christ was victorious at His death for us. He rose three days later being finished with His sacrifice. This was a necessity for the events described later with His glorification from the Father. So the events in Revelation were created with His death and resurrectiong; his defeat of flesh/death is the seed which becomes the plant. So, one could say they saw the His coming's beginning. That all may sound far fetched to you... however, look at chapter 11 in Revelation... now do you assume that the things described there have all happened?

Posted by parousia: "FOW, The apostles were told By Jesus to be ready because Jesus Knew he was returning to them. He may not have known the exact day or hour, but He knew He was coming back to them."

They were told they would not expect His return. If they knew it would be in their lifetime... they would always expect it... it wouldn't be unexpected as described in Matt 24:44. You say that He was coming back as described in verse 30 to them... but your verses of support are not convincing to me. They can say what you say they are saying... but they do not have to. So I take that with the events described in Revelation and ask you if they have all happened already?

I think that He is still yet to come, and that He will come when you do not expect. By the way... what do you think about the end of John?

take care

FOW
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Thanks for the bump.

Originally posted by fieldsofwind


Posted by parousia: "First of all, Luke renders the "abomination of desolation" as "Armies surrounding Jerusalem". This has not been a continous reality for 2000 years."

Abomination of desolation... according to a dictionary does not have to mean armies surrounding anything. However, at the same time, the armies you speak of would also qualify as fulfillment of the scripture. But!!! This does not mean that it has not continued since then... and it also does not mean that the coming of the Son on the clouds occured then. Those things were signs, as is described in the verses, warning of the actual event of what is known as the "second coming". When the Christ said: "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened"-- He was addressing the signs. Look at the verse preceeding 34 (of matthew 24)-- "these things" is addressed as being separate from the "it" that is described in verse 30. This is my point. On this point... you will disagree, but I still adhere to what the scripture says.

It may suprise you to learn we are in some agreement on the above.

I agree 100% that "these things" and "It" are seperate, exactly as you say they are.

Trouble with your view is that scripture teaches exactly how long after the apostles themselves saw "All these things", would "It" occour.

IMMEDIATLY (Mt. 24:29)

FOW, try as you might, "1000 years is as a Day" can not answer to the word immediatly.

If the apostles saw "all these things" come to pass, then I assure you, they saw what took place "Immediatly after".

PS, the AoD isn't just any old abomination, it is the one spoken of by Daniel the prophet. You might want to study it.



Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27-- You think this must mean He came in their lifetime... however... I state that the death Christ is speaking of is a spiritual one. I think that "not tasting death is described in John 11:25-26. (Could also pertain to His resurrection)

I suppose, when you rip it right out of it's direct context like that, it could mean whatever your imagination wants it too.

Please tell me which 2 or 3 or more apostles you are asserting have already tasted spiritual death? 

The plain text, in context, is clear. Jesus is speaking of His coming in power and glory to reward every man and He told His disciples some of them would live to see it.

Matt 10:23-- This is your best one yet. However, could the description Christ made of Himself as the Son of Man coming before they finished going through the cities of Israel be one of a present event having future consequences? Christ was victorious at His death for us. He rose three days later being finished with His sacrifice. This was a necessity for the events described later with His glorification from the Father. So the events in Revelation were created with His death and resurrectiong; his defeat of flesh/death is the seed which becomes the plant. So, one could say they saw the His coming's beginning. That all may sound far fetched to you... however, look at chapter 11 in Revelation... now do you assume that the things described there have all happened?


I don't assume they did, scripture demands it. 

The plain text, in context, is once again clear. Jesus told His apostles, "when you (the apostles) are persecuted in one city of Israel, flee to another, for you [the apostles] shall not finish going through all Israels cities before the son of man comes" (2nd coming).

One of the myriad of iron clad time indicators cementing Christ's return to the apostles generation.



They were told they would not expect His return. If they knew it would be in their lifetime... they would always expect it... it wouldn't be unexpected as described in Matt 24:44. You say that He was coming back as described in verse 30 to them... but your verses of support are not convincing to me. They can say what you say they are saying... but they do not have to. So I take that with the events described in Revelation and ask you if they have all happened already?

I think that He is still yet to come, and that He will come when you do not expect. By the way... what do you think about the end of John? 



Jesus didn't tell ME He was coming at a time I do not expect any more than Paul told ME to expect Timothy's soon arrival.

Lets save the end of John for another time


They were told He would come at an "HOUR" they did not expect, but they were given "signs" so they could know when that HOUR drew NEAR, so they could escape in time.

.....and about "time", would you care to address my previous assertions about the nature of prophetic time statements? I noticed you bypassed them completely.

When all previous scriptural prophetic time indicators are given to be understood "literally", by how time relates to man and not to God, what possible scriptural precedent could you be using to support your assertion that that Jesus' and the apostles' use of prophetic time indicators are meaningless, and not to be taken literally?



 
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.