What went wrong?

[deu58]

Hello Stateri

There are several things wrong with your analysis, and it was not too long.
1. Matt. 16 was a conversation between Christ and His disciples. It was not a theological journal article.

Being a theologian I am sure that you are aware that in the original manuscripts there is no Matthew 16, Chapters and verses were added to the bible in the 1500's,

More than a few of these additions break up the coherent flow of the original manuscripts, If there were no Matt, 16 the words where Jesus said some would not taste death would read like this,

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

Mark 9 1-10 record the whole account beginning with they shall not taste death as the first verse leading into the transfiguration account, Luke 9 Also includes all the relevant verses together,

All three of the transfiguration accounts begin with the same words,

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I am sure you will say I am wrong but I am led to believe that the reason you focus on Matt 16:28 is because it breaks up the transfiguration account continuing it in the first verses of Matt 17,

But in the original texts, all the verses are written together showing the common thought of the writers that the transfiguration fulfilled the "shall not taste death" statement of Jesus,

Not to mention that the writers made it a point to write the number of days after Jesus made the" Shall not taste death" statement that he took three of his apostles to the Mountain to witness the transfiguration,

According to Matthew and Mark, 6 days, and Luke 8 days after Jesus said the "Shall not taste death" statement,

yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[DaBronx]

But Christians have been giving the impression that He is. He made it public this time.

Don't look to The Father as by the actions of people... Look to Him as by the actions of His Son.

We are not perfect and never will be...Christians who profess to be perfect are lying to you and deceiving themselves. They will have to answer to God for that.

 

[statrei]

I am sure you will say I am wrong but I am led to believe that the reason you focus on Matt 16:28 is because it breaks up the transfiguration account continuing it in the first verses of Matt 17,

But in the original texts, all the verses are written together showing the common thought of the writers that the transfiguration fulfilled the "shall not taste death" statement of Jesus,

Not to mention that the writers made it a point to write the number of days after Jesus made the" Shall not taste death" statement that he took three of his apostles to the Mountain to witness the transfiguration,

Then why did they not say it was a fulfillment of the earlier statement? They were writing years after Jesus had returned to heaven.

 

[deu58]

Hello Stateri,

I would say for the very same reason they did not say "this is the fulfillment of" after quite a few of the things Jesus did,

Basileia is the word that has been translated as kingdom, As can be seen from below, There are several meanings to the word besides the territorial type kingdom,

1,royal power, kingship, dominion, rule

a, not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom

b, of the royal power of Jesus as the triumphant Messiah

c, of the royal power and dignity conferred on Christians in the Messiah's kingdom

a kingdom, the territory subject to the rule of a king
used in the N.T. to refer to the reign of the Messiah

It is the same for the word that was translated as come, Erchomai, It also has a metaphorical use that fits the transfiguration account,

metaph.
to come into being, arise, come forth, show itself, find place or influence
be established, become known, to come (fall) into or unto


I have only posted the metaphorical usages,

Considering that the people reading this would have been fluent in Greek the usages of the words do fit the transfiguration account,

When Jesus was transfigured, The glory of the kingdom appeared to them in the person of the glorified Christ. They saw his majesty and his glorified person,

So it is literally true they witnessed the coming of the kingdom on the mountain of the transfiguration,

yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[linssue55]

"WHETHER FOR CORRECTION OR FOR HIS LAND, OR FOR LOVE HE CAUSES IT TO HAPPEN."

 

[statrei]

Hello Stateri,

I would say for the very same reason they did not say "this is the fulfillment of" after quite a few of the things Jesus did,


So it is literally true they witnessed the coming of the kingdom on the mountain of the transfiguration,

You have not taken the time to read what Jesus actually said. He did not say they would see the glory of His kingdom. He said more than that. How can our teachings be so important that we are willing to make Jesus up to be some deluded fellow in order to defend them?

 

[good4u]

Why this disaster happened in the southern states is not a proper question or the responses posed by the OP. It is not a matter of why with God, it is a matter of what am I to learn from it? Only the aspect of time could possibly give an anwer to why, if then.

 

[statrei]

Why this disaster happened in the southern states is not a proper question or the responses posed by the OP. It is not a matter of why with God, it is a matter of what am I to learn from it? Only the aspect of time could possibly give an anwer to why, if then.

That is not always true. If I do not make an attempt to discover the lesson I could miss it altogether. At the moment the Christian community has taken the position that there is nothing wrong with them so they won't learn a thing.

 

[deu58]

hello Stateri

You have not taken the time to read what Jesus actually said. He did not say they would see the glory of His kingdom. He said more than that. How can our teachings be so important that we are willing to make Jesus up to be some deluded fellow in order to defend them?

On the contrary, I have taken the time to read it in context and look up the meanings of the original Greek, This is not the first time I have discussed these verses with some one,

I have some preterist friends in the Church of Christ who also do not believe that transfiguration is connected to the"Shall not taste death" statement,

You asked why didn't they say this was a fulfillment of what he said,


In an off hand way they did say it was fulfilled by saying that 6 days later Peter, John, and James witnessed the transfiguration,

The number of days mentioned after the shall not taste death statement shows that this verse is connected to and fulfilled by the transfiguration account, not separated from and waiting future fulfillment

It should also be noted that Jesus stated as a fact that they would see this, Not a possiblity,

 

[statrei]

[BIBLE]Matthew 16:27-28[/BIBLE]

 

[statrei]

In his kingdom. Please show us where they saw the angels and where every man received his reward.

 

[statrei]

On the contrary, I have taken the time to read it in context and look up the meanings of the original Greek, This is not the first time I have discussed these verses with some one,

Which is why you will bend all the rules of grammar and commonsense to defend your position. You read a Greek Manuscript. Do you think that provided you with insight into the mind of God? All that the Koine Greek tells you is what Matthew wanted to convey. I studied Koine Greek and I have no greater idea as to what is in God's mind than I had before I had heard the word Koine. I just wish people would stop talking about the experience with the original Greek as if it means a hill of beans.

 

[deu58]

Mt 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mt 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Two separate prophecies here as can be seen by Revelation 20

Re 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image *, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Re 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

There is no conflict here between the transfiguration and the final restoration of the kingdom, These things were seen by John the last apostle who also witnessed the transfiguration,

Matt 16:27 speaks of the final restoration, Mt 16:28 prophecies that there are those alive who will witness that what he has said will come to pass,

Up till that time they had only seen Jesus as a man who had performed miracles and made some very big claims, The transfiguration showed that Jesus was much more than just a man but was truly the one that could bring everything he promised to pass,

 

[statrei]

Why, then, did the disciples (Apostles) continue to believe that Jesus would return in their lifetime?

 

[deu58]

Hello Stateri

Why, then, did the disciples (Apostles) continue to believe that Jesus would return in their lifetime?

In Luke 24:44 when Jesus opened the understanding of the apostles to the scriptures they the understanding they recieved only dealt with messianic prophecies of the OT,

They did not know all things, Including certain information he had already given them in the parables he spoke right in their very prescence,

He never told them that he was going to restore the kingdom in their life times,

In fact he gave them abundant evidence that the opposite was true,

Consider for instance how many times he taught in parables that salvation would come to the Gentiles and they missed it,

How many times did he teach that the kingdom would be taken away from Israel and the very last question they asked him before he ascended was, " will you now restore the kingdom to Israel?" And what was his answer??

Ac 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

This is why it wasvnecessary for the Holy Spirit to come and continue to teach them and us today,

He told them plainly that the message must go out to the whole world, right there was a major clue that the second coming would not be in their life times,

Not that they understood that Indians in North America and South America needed to here this message to, Or Japan or all the pacific islands,

But Jesus understood the words he was speaking to them, The apostles did not know all things anymore than we do today,

But knowledge was revealed to them that was necessary for us today,

You are correct in that they were not infallible, They struggled to understand just like us today,

They did not understand at the ascension that the kingdom was larger than
they had ever imagined or dreamed possible,

Their error was to believe that Christ WOULD return in their life times, Which was corrected through the the Book of Revelation,

 

[linssue55]

New Orleans.....was called "SIN CITY", by people all over the world. This is not hard to figure out.........

 

[good4u]

That is not always true. If I do not make an attempt to discover the lesson I could miss it altogether. At the moment the Christian community has taken the position that there is nothing wrong with them so they won't learn a thing.

Isn't that just what I said? You didn't like the way I phrased it?

 

[deu58]

Hello Stateri

Which is why you will bend all the rules of grammar and commonsense to defend your position. You read a Greek Manuscript. Do you think that provided you with insight into the mind of God? All that the Koine Greek tells you is what Matthew wanted to convey. I studied Koine Greek and I have no greater idea as to what is in God's mind than I had before I had heard the word Koine. I just wish people would stop talking about the experience with the original Greek as if it means a hill of beans.

Does it provide insight into the mind of God? No, But it does provide insight into how the apostles interpreted the transfiguration and how they taught it to others of their day that understood and spoke Greek,