Why it's not true the Gospels teach Jesus rose on the Sabbath
Chuck
the following astonishing, to me at least, premise/sentence:
"Five times in the New Testament gospels of Mark, John, Luke, and
Matthew the translators changed the Greek word for Sabbath to "week"
and added the word "day" to make it look as if Christ rose on the
first day of the week - Sunday, rather than Saturday, the Jewish
Sabbath (in particular the first Sabbath of the Passover, Passover
being a seven-day observance, beginning and ending with a Sabbath
day).
Apparently this poster is of the opinion their research has uncovered a plot
by virtually every modern translator for any of the major English
translations of the New Testament since the early 1600's when the King James
Version was published until this posting! I started this reply as a
response to their follow up on my first reply, but then thought it might do
more good to begin a new thread with this response to that premise, as when
Jesus rose from the dead is an important part of the Resurrection account,
and we should make every effort to get that account right. As this, then,
is an edited version of a first draft of that second resonse I was going to
make "in thread", it will, or may appear to begin as a conversation in
progress (aznd will ignore a side issue that had surfaced that had nothing
to do with the above premise)...
What I don't like is you
posting ONE meaning out of a RANGE of meanings because THAT'S what's
consistent with what you think the text ought to say, when you have
absolutely no training in Greek vocabulary, grammar, or idiom that you use
to decide which meaning is the proper one. When you use ignorance to come
to a decision, only pure luck will perserve you from coming to a wrong
decision.
For example, you say "on the first day of the week" is a "mistranslation" of
Matthew 28:1. In saying that you appeal to nothing at all but your
understanding of the Greek by looking at Strong's. In other words, you pit
your ignorance of Greek (I doubt any translator of the KJV or any of the
major modern translations has to look up the words in Strong's), and
a knowledge of how to use Strong's lexicon/concordance, against the true
scholarship of hundreds of years of Christian (and not so Christian, truth
be told here) scholars sitting on committees, their doctoral expertise
ranging from archaeology through Greek and Hebrew. I mean, isn't it obvious
there's almost no chance at all you could ever disagree with the consensus
of these scholars and be correct; and that even if the nearly impossible
were to happen, you'd only be correct by sheer luck, which means that
even THEN it wouldn't constitute "knowledge" for you?
And let's just look at what the Greek in Matthew actually says when we look
at a truly academic and widely accepted source, such as the "Novum
Testamentum Graece" Interlinear Bible based on the well-regarded
Nestle-Aland textual critical text of the Greek New Testament. When we do
that we find that Matthew gives us three time indexical phrases at the start
of the passage (in the below I'll give what the Interlinear has for the
Greek in qutation marks, followed by the word for word [except where there
is no possible "word for word", in which case brackets [] will be used as
they appear in that volume] translation into English):
1. "Opse de sabbaton" (AFTER NOW [THE] SABBATH)
2.) "te epiphoskouse" (IN THE DAWNING)
3.) "eis mian sabbaton" (TOWARDS [THE] FIRST OF [THE] WEEK)
Now even for a Greek illiterate like me, Matthew's meaning here couldn't be
clearer, because he's gone to considerable effort, linguistically speaking,
to make SURE his meaning is clear. He uses "sabbaton" in his first phrase
to say after the week past is finished (see discussion below of where this
idea of 'week" comes from in it's home Jewish context), and near the
beginning of the day (or end of the night; thus locating time of day) on the
first day of the week (which would be Sunday).
Once we put a modicum of faith in the academic credentials of men and women
who actually ARE Greek scholars, and who have studied the textual critical
Greek texts, in fact made a CAREER out of their study, then we find that the
KJV clearly does NOT mistranslate Matthew 28:1:
Matthew 28:1 (King James Version)
1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the
week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
Nor do any of these modern translation:
Matthew 28:1 (Iinternational Standard Version)
1 After the Sabbath, around dawn on the first day of the week, Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary went to take a look at the tomb.
Matthew 28:1 (New American Standard Bible)
1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the
week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.
Matthew 28:1 (New English Translation)
1 Now after the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
Matthew 28:1 (New International Version)
1 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene
and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
Matthew 28:1 (New King James Version)
1 Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.
Now, I want to show you something interesting here. When I was selecting
the major modern translations of this verse, I purposely left one out where
the translation committee DID make an error. This is the American Standard
Version, and here is it's original, and faulty translation:
Matthew 28:1 (American Standard Version)
1 Now late on the sabbath day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of
the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
You can clearly see that they've translated "opse de" in the Greek as "Now
late on", instead of "Now after", and this makes absolutely NO sense within
the cultural context of Judaism, which reckons the beginning of each day at
sunset, and the end of each day at sunset. Do you see the problem here? If
"Now late on" were correct, the two Mary's would have to be coming to see
the seuplchre at DUSK, rather than dawn, and all the subsequent events
recorded would have to have taken place at night...and Jews don't visit
graves at night, nor do the Gospels say they did. The Resurrection took
place IN THE MORNING of some day, and that's attested by every Evangelist in
an indisputable fashion.
So when the American Standard Version was updated, the translation committee
fixed the error, and that's why the New American Standard Version reads as
above, and as I've given it for you again below:
Matthew 28:1 (New American Standard Bible)
1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the
week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.
We need to at all times recall that "sabbaton" literally only means "a
seven", as in some sort of grouping of objects numbering seven, and that
this concept of a grouping of seven is then used to refer to the days of a
full week in the Hebrew culture and language (and when it is translated into
Greek, as it is by the New Testament Gospel writers). Therefore, the
critical concept is conveyed by the Greek phrase "mian (or mia) sabbaton",
which means "first of the grouping of seven" on the conceptual level, and
when that concept is applied to a "week", literally mean "the first day of
the week" as ALL the major modern translations in English now have it, or
Sunday.
Once it is clear from Matthew's use of "mian sabbaton" that the correct
translation to preserve his meaning is "the first day of the week",
consistency demands we use the same translation for the same grammatical
structure when we find it in the other Gospels. So...
Mark 16:2 - "mia ton sabbaton" (ON THE FIRST [DAY] OF THE WEEK)
Luke24:1 - "mia ton sabbaton" (ON THE FIRST [DAY] OF THE WEEK)
You can see here that Mark and Luke make use of "ton", where Matthew's
sentence construction doesn't. Here is where it's IMPORTANT to know
something about Greek, because the difference between the two will
undoubtedly be caused by some Greek grammar rule or idiom that you and I are
completely unaware of, but that the translators who are experts in Greek
know and impliment in their translations. John uses the very same
construction to follow Matthew, Mark, and Luke:
John 20:1 - "mia ton sabbaton" (ON THE FIRST [DAY] OF THE WEEK)
There is one other aspect here (not to suggest only one remains, but only
that there's only one left I'm thinking about as I write this) that needs to
be considered, but since I've not done the research necessary to discuss it,
I won't do anything here but mention it; maybe you'd like to pursue that
research yourself. It's the issue of ritual purity according to the Law of
Moses concerning the touching of the dead, and what ALL the Evangelists seem
to assume everyone knows (See Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, and
John 19:14, 31, and 42) concerning the laws of purity and the Passover
feast, or indeed ANY sabbath observance for that matter.
I have not done any of the research necessary to this Jewish
traditional/legalistic aspect, and want to invite anyone who has to add it
here. That said, it seems to me, at first glance at any rate, that it would
be highly unlikely that any Jewish woman or man would enter a cemetery on a
sabbath, or could without violating the law, but again I will simply wait to
see what others may have found out in this regard in the course of their own
study of the Resurrection. Barring some astonishing new information on this
aspect of Jewish law and tradition contemporary with Jesus I conclude the
New Testament writers, taken in conjunction and interpreted by Matthew's
account, could not be clearer in their report that Jesus rose on a Sunday,
and that this fact is what explains the early practice of Christians in
gathering for publich worship and alms giving on Sundays, as Luke in Acts
and Paul in 1 Corinthians records (Acts 20:7, 1 Cor. 16:2).
Chuck
glenn
> A recent poster to this group began a thread with a post that started with
> the following astonishing, to me at least, premise/sentence:
>
> "Five times in the New Testament gospels of Mark, John, Luke, and
> Matthew the translators changed the Greek word for Sabbath to "week"
> and added the word "day" to make it look as if Christ rose on the
> first day of the week - Sunday, rather than Saturday, the Jewish
> Sabbath (in particular the first Sabbath of the Passover, Passover
> being a seven-day observance, beginning and ending with a Sabbath
> day).
>
> Apparently this poster is of the opinion their research has uncovered a plot
> by virtually every modern translator for any of the major English
> translations of the New Testament since the early 1600's when the King James
> Version was published until this posting! I started this reply as a
> response to their follow up on my first reply, but then thought it might do
> more good to begin a new thread with this response to that premise, as when
> Jesus rose from the dead is an important part of the Resurrection account,
> and we should make every effort to get that account right. As this, then,
> is an edited version of a first draft of that second resonse I was going to
> make "in thread", it will, or may appear to begin as a conversation in
> progress (aznd will ignore a side issue that had surfaced that had nothing
> to do with the above premise)...
>
> What I don't like is you posting ONE meaning out of a RANGE
But, but, BUT BUT BUT but Chuck! THAT'S WHAT YOU DO!
In fact, Chuck, YOU even _re-define_ words to fit your argument!
"Insane." NO, that's not good enough for Chuck, so Chuck redefines
"insanity" to "TRUE (TM) INSANITY"!!!!
THEN has the utter, unmitigated GALL to say that "God told me to tell
you that my definition is correct!"
==========
Quote:
Glenn:
O.K., Chuck, YOU define Reality and Insanity, and YOU ask God to accept
YOUR definition....
Chuck:
Already did. He said to tell you it was fine.
End quote.
From thread "Question to Preterists" 04 Feb 07 12:12AM
==========
OH, REALLY? God spoke to you, Chuck?
Chuck, complaining that someone else re-defines terms, or uses the
meaning that fits their argument ....
JUST EXPOSES YOU AS A GLARING HYPOCRITE!
> the text ought to say, when you have
> absolutely no training in Greek vocabulary, grammar, or idiom that you use
> to decide which meaning is the proper one. When you use ignorance to come
> to a decision, only pure luck will perserve you from coming to a wrong
> decision.
>
> For example, you say "on the first day of the week" is a "mistranslation" of
> Matthew 28:1. In saying that you appeal to nothing at all but your
> understanding of the Greek by looking at Strong's. In other words, you pit
> your ignorance of Greek (I doubt any translator of the KJV or any of the
> major modern translations has to look up the words in Strong's), and
> a knowledge of how to use Strong's lexicon/concordance, against the true
> scholarship of hundreds of years of Christian (and not so Christian, truth
> be told here) scholars sitting on committees, their doctoral expertise
> ranging from archaeology through Greek and Hebrew. I mean, isn't it obvious
> there's almost no chance at all you could ever disagree with the consensus
> of these scholars and be correct;
But, Chuck, scholars have been wrong before (or haven't you noticed that
scholars are NOT Gods?)
Personal assassination?
Ad Homin?
Why, Chuck? Why?
Is it your intent to present an argument which will win acceptance?
Or is your DEEP PERSONAL NEED to elevate your own ego by denigrating and
demeaning and insulting your opponent?
Hey, why not heap insult upon contempt, and practice a little "poisoning
the well" while your at it, sort of in passant afterthought?
Now that you've completely destroyed her intellectual credibility, what
have you won?
A friend and convert, or an enemy?
No, Chuck, you are a destroyer. You are Attila the Hun in lamb skin,
bearing flowers dipped in blood and dung, offering sweet cakes poisoned
with crushed glass.
Is this your BEST imitation of Christ?
Glenn
--
.
"Common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education."
Victor Hugo
.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
So you put all this faith is what they say there, yet you refuse
to put faith in what they say in Matthew 24:34, where Jesus
says the words, "houtos genea" and you try to make it about
today. Now why is that? And isn't that hypocritical?
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"Leftists seem to be tolerant of just about everything
except dissenting opinions." - Unknown
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<gamc...@spiritone.com> spake thusly:
You mean like all Futurists do, when it comes to Matt 24:34?
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say
you cannot do." - Chinese proverb
Ahs Believes Paster Dave!
Hmmm...I wonder what say, oh, Paster Dave has to say...Hey! I know!
Let's ask Paster Dave! Oh look!...there he is now! there he is now!
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
Dave!" <daves.so...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
> Hmmm...I wonder what say, oh, Paster Dave has
> to say... Hey! I know! Let's ask Paster Dave!
> Oh look!... there he is now! There he is now!
>
> Yeah you tell them ahs believes you paster!
>
> And checks out mahs cool profiles pic
I'm sure the African American community is really happy
with your choice of words! Especially using the handle of:
"Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
what is! Shame on you!!! (:
But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
you attack African American people, as long as you're attacking
*me* in the process. They'll only jump on those who oppose
them, even if it means putting words into their mouths that
they never said, while they applaud you for actually saying
those same disgusting things and that will be because you
were attacking me in the process.
And notice that their hatred of me is so intense (while they
claim to be loving Christians) that hardly any of them will
even take you to task for saying such things and in fact,
most of them will respond to me, jumping on me, as if
I have done something wrong, because of that hatred
that burns in their heart and if they do that, then apparently
toward the African American community as well, since no one
who isn't a racist would tolerate such comments, nor would
they tolerate someone using the language that you used!
Of course, we may see of few of these prejudiced people
try to weasel their way out of this, by either staying silent,
or by snipping most of this response and twisting my words
to make it seem like I made those disgusting comments,
but we all know what really and actually happened here!
But hey, what great Christians you all are! And I'm sure
that you can show me where Jess prescribed your tone
toward me and toward people of a different ethnicity,
right pal?
And FYI, there is no "profile pic" of me. But you do not
have, nor have you ever had, a problem with spreading
lies about me, even claiming I was some "KKK" guy called
"Pastor Dave" that you found a web page and pic for,
when you knew better! But hey, that's just you being
a "good Christian", right?!
Here's the sad part. When you make fun of me and lie
about me, because you know you'll get pats on the back
from others who like to make fun of me and lie about me,
then all that you prove, since I directly quoted God's word
and said no more than it says, is that you hate God and
His word and that you have no problem making fun of it.
And you are so wrapped up in your vain doctrine, that all
you can see, is how you get glorified by your peers who hate
as much as you do, being wrapped up in Futurism to the
point of such hatred. What "doctrine from God" involves
hating people and lying about them, instead of showing
Biblical proof for it? But hey, like I said, at least you'll get
that pat on the back for making fun of me and somehow,
for some reason, that makes you feel good! (:
And you never question why and you never have a second
thought about whether or not that's how Christ would have
treated me, nor whether or not I am well aware that you
would never treat a pastor that way in real life and it is
all because you are having too much fun attacking me!
And so, here you are, ridiculing and mocking a pastor,
when the Bible says to show respect! And that is because
none of you care about what the Bible says and you all
become "keyboard cowboys"/"paper tigers" when you
sit at your keyboards, feeling immune from the rules of
God's word! But I have news for you. God sees it, even
though you like to pretend that He doesn't!
Now I wonder if you would be willing to show your own
pastor this message of yours, to see what he might have
to say about it. If you even have one, that is. <chuckle>
Of course you wouldn't. But that isn't the really sad part.
The really sad part is that even knowing that, you will
continue on with your attacks on me and at the same time,
post other messages in which you will pretend to be a loving
Christian, seeking to benefit mankind with your supposed
"Biblical wisdom", which we both know isn't at all about
what the Bible says.
And let me answer that nagging question for you...
Yes, when you lay down in your bed at night, He is there
and yes, that is Him telling you (through His Holy Spirit)
how wrong what you have done is!
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"It is impossible to rightly govern without God and the Bible."
- George Washington
Chuck
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:kke1k5pdqfd5v46i4...@4ax.com...
"genea haute", according to my Interliner means "this generation", in
context the generation that will that will witness the Coming of the Son of
Man Jesus just described in Matt. 24:29-31, which includes the sun ceases to
give it's light, as do the rest of the stars, the sing of the Son of Man
appearing in the heavens coming in the clouds of saints departed from Heaven
in power and great glory, and all the tribes of the earth shall weep at the
sight, for the end has come.
That generation obviously has yet to live, Dave. Or perhaps it is living
now, and the Lord is at the door. The only thing I know is that your full
preterist beliefs deny the hope of the believer, the bodily resurrection to
eternal life with God we've all been promised in His Son. It is no accident
or error that Jesus here refers to Himself as coming with "the sign of the
Son of Man", for here He is referring to the Son of Man figure in Daniel's
vision:
Daniel 7:13-14 (KJV)
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came
with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought
him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all
people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an
everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which
shall not be destroyed.
Chuck
Chuck
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 09:29:23 -0800 (PST), "Ahs Believes Paster
> Dave!" <daves.so...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>
>
>> Hmmm...I wonder what say, oh, Paster Dave has
>> to say... Hey! I know! Let's ask Paster Dave!
>> Oh look!... there he is now! There he is now!
>>
>> Yeah you tell them ahs believes you paster!
>>
>> And checks out mahs cool profiles pic
>
> I'm sure the African American community is really happy
> with your choice of words! Especially using the handle of:
>
> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>
> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>
> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me, it flew right past at
least one of his "futurist buddies" unnoticed.
Chuck
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>>Once we put a modicum of faith in the academic credentials of men and
>>>women
>>>who actually ARE Greek scholars, and who have studied the textual critical
>>>Greek texts, in fact made a CAREER out of their study, then we find that
>>>the
>>>KJV clearly does NOT mistranslate Matthew 28:1:
>>
>> So you put all this faith is what they say there, yet you refuse
>> to put faith in what they say in Matthew 24:34, where Jesus
>> says the words, "houtos genea" and you try to make it about
>> today. Now why is that? And isn't that hypocritical?
>
>"genea haute", according to my Interliner means "this generation", in
>context the generation that will that will witness the Coming of the Son
> of Man Jesus just described in Matt. 24:29-31,
That's not what it says and that is not what any Interlinear says
for a definition and you know it. But you have no problem lying
about that, to try to save your doctrine.
>That generation obviously has yet to live, Dave.
You mean according to your doctrine, not according
to the Bible.
Fact: Jesus stood there, looked at THEM and said:
"THIS generation" and nothing you say will
change that.
But thanks for once again playing the hypocrite.
> Or perhaps it is living now, and the Lord is at the door.
Right, because to you, it's all about you and your time,
or the Bible is a waste of ink.
Daniel 7:13-14
...says that Jesus received His Kingdom when He ascended
and His rule over all nations. But hey, why believe the Bible,
when you have a vain doctrine to bolster?
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"The face is the mirror of the mind and eyes without speaking
confess the secrets of the heart." -Saint Jerome
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>>
>> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
>> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>>
>> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
>> you attack African American people...
>
> You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me,
> it flew right past at least one of his "futurist buddies"
> unnoticed.
Since you're not that bright, that wouldn't surprise me.
But since you're also a liar, you're probably lying, since
only an idiot wouldn't see that, or a liar.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
When Christianity becomes religion it leaves the heart hungry.
Chuck
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:57:12 -0800, "Chuck"
> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>
>
>>>>Once we put a modicum of faith in the academic credentials of men and
>>>>women
>>>>who actually ARE Greek scholars, and who have studied the textual
>>>>critical
>>>>Greek texts, in fact made a CAREER out of their study, then we find that
>>>>the
>>>>KJV clearly does NOT mistranslate Matthew 28:1:
>>>
>>> So you put all this faith is what they say there, yet you refuse
>>> to put faith in what they say in Matthew 24:34, where Jesus
>>> says the words, "houtos genea" and you try to make it about
>>> today. Now why is that? And isn't that hypocritical?
>>
>>"genea haute", according to my Interliner means "this generation", in
>>context the generation that will that will witness the Coming of the Son
>> of Man Jesus just described in Matt. 24:29-31,
>
> That's not what it says and that is not what any Interlinear says
> for a definition and you know it. But you have no problem lying
> about that, to try to save your doctrine.
Dave, I'm not a liar because you can't believe I'm looking at the Novum
Testamentum Graece Interlinear New Testament, based on the Nestle-Aland
textual critical text at Matthew 24:34, and that there it has "genea haute",
translated "generation this", which I simply transposed so that it would
appear in "normal" English syntax, rather than leaving the English
translation stuck in Greek syntax, or, as you have apparently done in asking
about it in your original response, transposed the Greek into English
syntax.
I have no idea why you're so worked up about this, but the Greek is as clear
as the English is that Christ's second coming will be with the "sign of the
Coming of the Son of Man" (24:30). There is no plauisble way to
misinterpret this, for Matthew has Jesus referring to Himself both before
and after the parable of the fig tree, firmly establishing that when Jesus
says "all these things" He means ALL THESE THINGS He's just talked about;
not just some of them as you have to have it.
Chuck
Chuck
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:59:09 -0800, "Chuck"
> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>
>
>>> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>>>
>>> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
>>> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>>>
>>> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
>>> you attack African American people...
>>
>> You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me,
>> it flew right past at least one of his "futurist buddies"
>> unnoticed.
>
> Since you're not that bright, that wouldn't surprise me.
It doesn't take a bright person; just one who easily thinks in racist terms.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>> "genea haute", according to my Interliner means
>>> "this generation", in context the generation that
>>> will that will witness the Coming of the Son of Man
>>> Jesus just described in Matt. 24:29-31,
>>
>> That's not what it says and that is not what any
>> Interlinear says for a definition and you know it.
>> But you have no problem lying about that, to try
>> to save your doctrine.
>
> Dave, I'm not a liar because you can't believe I'm looking
> at the Novum Testamentum Graece Interlinear New
> Testament, based on the Nestle-Aland textual critical text
> at Matthew 24:34, and that there it has "genea haute",
> translated "generation this", which I simply transposed
> so that it would appear in "normal" English syntax, rather
> than leaving the English translation stuck in Greek syntax,
> or, as you have apparently done in asking about it in your
> original response, transposed the Greek into English syntax.
It does not say that Chuck's doctrine that says that
it didn't happen yet is the context in which He said
"this generation" and you are now trying to obfuscate.
> I have no idea why you're so worked up about this,
> but the Greek is as clear as the English is that Christ's
> second coming will be with the "sign of the Coming
> of the Son of Man" (24:30). There is no plauisble way
> to misinterpret this,
And yet, you do, since you try to claim that Jesus
didn't say it would be that same generation, when
He clearly did.
You want to take your interpretation of what He
meant in vs29-31 and then move the generation
to suit that, instead of admitting the truth of the
fact that whatever vs29-31 meant, He said that
they would occur within that same generation.
Matthew was written by a Jew and as such is
not written in chronological order, which is
well known about Jewish writings. Luke on
the other hand, being a Gentile who was writing
the account "in order", as he said he did in 1:3,
record the "this generation" statement after
Jesus said all of these other things.
You want to pretend that "this generation"
means "some generation that will be alive",
but that is a non-sensical approach which
makes Jesus speak foolishly! But what do
you care, if you get to keep your doctrine?
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
The atheists and even many "spiritual" people wish
for "Utopia". Little do they realize that this word,
coined by Thomas Moore in a novel, was really
a kind of joke. The word comes from the Greek,
"ou-topos" and is a Greek pun and literally means,
"no place" and the thrust of the novel, is that
what it all boils down to, as it turns out, is that
"no place is a good place". This is why he used
this word! :)
And yet, of course, the atheists in their ignorance
still dream of it and so do the "spiritual" folks
and even Christians today, who have taken on the
new (invented in the early 1800's) self pleasing
and aggrandizing belief called "Dispensationalism".
And so, before the Christians laugh at the atheists,
remember that if you are one of those Christians,
then you also look for the same place. You see,
when you believe that one day Christ will leave Heaven
(think about that... LEAVE HEAVEN... you also look for
this place on Earth, that will simply never exist and so,
YOU ALSO look for this same "Utopia"! (:
Heaven is not a place that God and His Christ are going
to leave, to come and live on a planet. How do we know
that for sure? Easy! :)
God says in His word that He does not dwell in buildings
(Acts 7:48-50) and yet, you expect Him to live on a
physical plane, even though He is outside of it and is
a Spirit and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth,
as the Scriptures say (John 4:24).
God does not come to live within His creation, but rather,
is above it! And so, when you acknowledge that He is
above His creation (and Dispensationalists surely do indeed
acknowledge that) and then claim that He will come here
with His Son to live, which means they will indeed have to
be physical, human beings at that point, then you have
indeed belittled God and denied His word and have tried
to make Him as small as you are, since Him doing this
would make Him subject to this world's physical laws
if He is going to be physical and therefore, He would
also be subject to linear time, which would then have
God aging, which, when you boil it down, is the exact
claim that Dispensationalism ends up making!
Think about this! Think hard about this! Think really hard
and you will find that all you can do when shown this, is to
immediately try to make things up on the fly to try to get
around this and that should tell you something, amen?
Your only other option is to personally attack me and
pretend that means you have defended your belief.
Either way, it's really very sad!
And so, shame on anyone who believes that sort of thing!!!
Shame! Shame!! Shame!!!
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:esl2k5lme3novfr2a...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:59:09 -0800, "Chuck"
>> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>
>>
>>>> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>>>>
>>>> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
>>>> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>>>>
>>>> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
>>>> you attack African American people...
>>>
>>> You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me,
>>> it flew right past at least one of his "futurist buddies"
>>> unnoticed.
>>
>> Since you're not that bright, that wouldn't surprise me.
>
>It doesn't take a bright person; just one who easily thinks in racist terms.
Right Chuckles. I'm the racist because I don't like
people posting things like, "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!".
Yea, sure. You don't look at all like you're just trying
to attack me, regardless of how stupid you look
doing it. <chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"Knowledge and timber shouldn't be much used
till they are seasoned." -Oliver Wendell Holmes
Chuck
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 20:16:42 -0800, "Chuck"
> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>
>
>>>> "genea haute", according to my Interliner means
>>>> "this generation", in context the generation that
>>>> will that will witness the Coming of the Son of Man
>>>> Jesus just described in Matt. 24:29-31,
>>>
>>> That's not what it says and that is not what any
>>> Interlinear says for a definition and you know it.
>>> But you have no problem lying about that, to try
>>> to save your doctrine.
>>
>> Dave, I'm not a liar because you can't believe I'm looking
>> at the Novum Testamentum Graece Interlinear New
>> Testament, based on the Nestle-Aland textual critical text
>> at Matthew 24:34, and that there it has "genea haute",
>> translated "generation this", which I simply transposed
>> so that it would appear in "normal" English syntax, rather
>> than leaving the English translation stuck in Greek syntax,
>> or, as you have apparently done in asking about it in your
>> original response, transposed the Greek into English syntax.
>
> It does not say that Chuck's doctrine that says that
> it didn't happen yet is the context in which He said
> "this generation" and you are now trying to obfuscate.
It says the generation that will see "ALL THESE THINGS", Dave. "All these
things" refers to EVERY event Jesus speaks of in the chapter. You are the
one who must cut up Jesus' words to avoid that obvious truth, not me, so I'm
obfuscating about nothing here. All means all, Dave. It means what he says
before he gives us the parable of the fig tree, and what he gives us after
the parable of the fig tree. Thus it means the generation that will see the
sign of the coming of the Son of Man; a sign no generation has yet seen.
>
>
>> I have no idea why you're so worked up about this,
>> but the Greek is as clear as the English is that Christ's
>> second coming will be with the "sign of the Coming
>> of the Son of Man" (24:30). There is no plauisble way
>> to misinterpret this,
>
> And yet, you do, since you try to claim that Jesus
> didn't say it would be that same generation, when
> He clearly did.
I have never disputed it will be that same generation that sees "the sign of
the coming of the Son of Man"; a sign that includes, according to Jesus:
21 "For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the
beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 "And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for
the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do
not believe it.
24 "For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and
wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
25 "See, I have told you beforehand.
26 "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go
out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it.
27 "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so
also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
28 "For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be
darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from
heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
30 "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the
tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on
the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 "And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they
will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven
to the other. Matthew 24:21-31
And
37 "But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man
be.
38 "For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking,
marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
39 "and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also
will the coming of the Son of Man be.
40 "Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left.
41 "Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other
left.
42 "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming.
43 "But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the
thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be
broken into.
44 "Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you
do not expect. Matthew 24:37-44
No generation since Jesus spoke this prophecy concerning his return has ever
seen "all these things", Dave; ergo "this generation" has no yet appeared.
When SOME generation witnesses the sun, the moon, and the stars all go dark,
and the Son of Man come from Heaven like lightening blazing across the sky,
and when the dead in Christ all rise up to meet him in their immortal bodies
of flesh and bone, and those who believe and are still alive are transformed
"in the twinkling of an eye" and are caught up to meet their Lord in the
air, THEN we will all know the generation that was "this generation", Dave,
some of us to our great joy, some of us to our great sorrow.
>
> You want to take your interpretation of what He
> meant in vs29-31 and then move the generation
> to suit that, instead of admitting the truth of the
> fact that whatever vs29-31 meant, He said that
> they would occur within that same generation.
Not at all. I'm simply following the text as IT interprets itself:
15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by
Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him
understand),
16 "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
17 "Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his
house.
18 "And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes.
19 "But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in
those days! 20 "And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the
Sabbath.
21 "For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the
beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 "And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for
the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do
not believe it.
24 "For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and
wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
25 "See, I have told you beforehand.
26 "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go
out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it.
27 "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so
also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
28 "For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
Matthew 24:15-28
THAT is what comes before verses 29-31 and THAT is talking about events that
haven't ever occured yet. Because YOU want to have SOME basis for your
false doctrine, YOU falsely interpret the above to be talking about the
destruction of the Temple by the Romans, which is absurd on its face! We
HAVE an inspired understanding of "the abomination that makes desolate" in
Revelation, Dave, and it has NOTHING to do with Romans! Further, whether we
limit "great tribulation" to what happened to the Jews when Titus destroyed
the city and the Temple, or we expand it to all of mankind, the Roman
destruction of the city and the Temple do NOT constitute the greatest
"tribulation" ever seen on the earth to date! Wars continue claiming
greater and greater numbers of lives; bringing greater and greater levels of
suffering and destruction, just like the birth pangs Jesus talks about that
precede his Parousia. The Jews have been killed as a people and persecuted
at certain times in history SINCE the destruction of Jerusalem to a MUCH
GREATER extent than they were AT the destruction of the city and the Temple
in the first century. Therefore, there is NO WAY it can be TRUTHFULLY
alledged that 70 ad marks the fulfillment of the prophecy of the 'great
tribulation" spoken of by Jesus!
This is a FACT, Dave, NOT something opent to "interpretation", but one you
must constantly deny, because if you were to once admit it, then the
tribulation Jesus speaks of above can NO LONGER be understood in terms of
the Roman destruction of the Temple, and the falshood of your entire belief
system would begin to appear, and it would unravel like the false knot it
is.
>
> Matthew was written by a Jew and as such is
> not written in chronological order, which is
> well known about Jewish writings.
It's written in chronological order if the inspired Matthew SAYS it is, and
when he writes that Jesus says, "then if anyone says to you", after relating
the "abomination of desolation" being set up in the Temple, he means THEN,
not some other time!
> Luke on
> the other hand, being a Gentile who was writing
> the account "in order", as he said he did in 1:3,
First of all, Luke doesn't say in 1:3 that he is going to write his account
"in chronological order", but rather an "orderly" account. What he means by
"orderly" he doesn't define for us, so it's up to us to examine his gospel
and find out from IT what he means...
There is no biblical authority who would say that Luke set down in his
gospel everything in chronological order, for his gospel follows Matthew's
and Mark's the majority of the time, and you've just said Matthew's gospel
(which also follows Mark's more often than it doesn't!) isn't given
chronologically at all points, which happens to be true.
Second, you imply it's because Luke is a Gentile believer that he gives us
the account of Jesus' life in chronological order, when even if it were true
he DID give us his account chronologically, it wouldn't have anything to do
with him being a Gentile! ALL literature of the time written as "bios" was
written for more than just to keep events in chronological order. Bios was
written to present us with the person who was the reason the bios was
written, and the authors of bios would set the events of that person's life
in such a manner as to most clearly "present" that person to us as the
author percieved him/her to be. Thus bios is basically a historical work,
but without being a slave to the chronological ordering of events.
Third, whether EVENTS in Matthew's gospel are given chronologically or not,
what hold's for events in his gospel doesn't hold for speeches of Jesus!
Matthew may truthfully put event A before event B(when historically B was
chronologically prior to A) if he wants to to highlight some aspect of
Jesus' message or character or person (ie. so long as he doesn't SAY these
events happened chronologically in the order in which he gives them), but he
can't change the order of Jesus' speech so that Jesus ends up saying
something he never said! It's one thing to alter history slightly to
highlight the truth history contains, and quite another to alter a man's
speech to highlight a truth you think he articulated; especially when the
man is, as you believe, the Son of God.
Fourth, Luke doesn't change the order of events in Jesus' prophecy; he
merely gives it in two different parts; one in his chapter 17, another in
his chapter 21:
22 Then He said to the disciples, "The days will come when you will desire
to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it.
23 "And they will say to you, 'Look here!' or 'Look there!' Do not go after
them or follow them.
24 "For as the lightning that flashes out of one part under heaven shines to
the other part under heaven, so also the Son of Man will be in His day.
25 "But first He must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.
26 "And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the
Son of Man:
27 "They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage,
until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed
them all.
28 "Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they
bought, they sold, they planted, they built;
29 "but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone
from heaven and destroyed them all.
30 "Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.
31 "In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his goods are in the house,
let him not come down to take them away. And likewise the one who is in the
field, let him not turn back.
32 "Remember Lot's wife.
33 "Whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life
will preserve it.
34 "I tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed: the one will
be taken and the other will be left.
35 "Two women will be grinding together: the one will be taken and the other
left.
36 "Two men will be in the field: the one will be taken and the other left."
37 And they answered and said to Him, "Where, Lord?" So He said to them,
"Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together." Luke
17:22-37
8 And He said: "Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My
name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time has drawn near.' Therefore do not go
after them.
9 "But when you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified; for these
things must come to pass first, but the end will not come immediately."
10 Then He said to them, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom
against kingdom.
11 "And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and
pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven.
12 "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and
persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be
brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake.
13 "But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony.
14 "Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what
you will answer;
15 "for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will
not be able to contradict or resist.
16 "You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and
friends; and they will put some of you to death.
17 "And you will be hated by all for My name's sake.
18 "But not a hair of your head shall be lost.
19 "By your patience possess your souls.
20 "But when you 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.
24 "And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive
into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times
of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and
on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves
roaring;
26 "men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things
which are coming on the earth, for the powers of heaven will be shaken.
27 "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great
glory.
28 "Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads,
because your redemption draws near."
29 Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the
trees.
30 "When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that
summer is now near.
31 "So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom
of God is near.
32 "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till
all things take place.
33 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass
away. Luke 21:8-33
Now, let's go over Luke's version (more precisely, part of his version - the
major part of it) in chapter 21, thought by thought:
8 And He said: "Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My
name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time has drawn near.' Therefore do not go
after them.
(Can we say it was a fact that "many" false teachers came in Jesus' name
between the time of his death and the destruction of Jerusalem? NO! There
were obviously "some" who did, but the epistles barely mention them, and do
not make them an important part of, nor the bulk of their correction and
instruction. It isn't until the second and third centuries that we find any
great concern within the Church (as evidenced by the first appearances of
"apologies" for the Faith written by the Ante-Nicean Fathers) for false
gospels and heretical teachings.)
9 "But when you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified; for these
things must come to pass first, but the end will not come immediately."
(What "wars" were there for the Jews, much less Jesus' Jewish disciples to
"hear of" between his death and the destruction of Jerusalem? None! That
happens to be a historical fact, Dave. Jesus is saying WHEN they heard of
wars and commotions the end will not come immediately. You're telling
everyone the exact opposite! That Jesus came at the first INSTANCE of war
after his death!)
10 Then He said to them, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom
against kingdom.
11 "And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and
pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven.
(Here Jesus is obviously amplifying on what he just said in verse 9, and is
defining for us what he meant by "wars and commotions" there. The
destruction of Jerusalem was NOT "kingdom rising against kingdom", Dave, but
a previously conquered nation that was current a province of Rome having its
rebellion crushed. There was no "kingdom" of Judea. By 66 ad there wasn't
even a titular king of Judea, installed by Rome any more. By then Judea was
ENTIRELY governed by Roman officials, and it was against these officials,
led by revolutionists who acknowledged no king at all, that the Jews
rebelled.
But let's pay particular attention to the fact that it is HERE that Jesus
includes the "fearful sights and great signs from heaven" that we find him
saying are the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars elsewhere. There too
he links these signs to his coming as the Son of Man from heaven, and does
so in a way that implies these things ARE chronologically linked in an
immediate fashion.)
12 "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and
persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be
brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake.
(Pay attention, Dave, because Jesus is now changing gears, and he signals he
is to anyone listening, by saying "But before all these things". Well, what
things? Obviously the things he's just been saying; all the things having
to do with the end of the ages and his coming again as the Son of Man. And
it's clear not just from his first words, but from what he goes on to say
here and in what follows. When he says "you will be brought before kings
and rulers", who is he talking to? Obviously to his disciples. And when
were they brought before rulers and kings? Read Acts.)
13 "But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony.
14 "Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what
you will answer;
15 "for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will
not be able to contradict or resist.
16 "You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and
friends; and they will put some of you to death.
17 "And you will be hated by all for My name's sake.
18 "But not a hair of your head shall be lost.
19 "By your patience possess your souls.
(All the above we can find in Acts, with the exception of any specific
account of anyone being betrayed by a family member. However, it's not a
giant leap of faith to assume that happened on occasion even if Luke didn't
bother to record it in Acts. Now notice that immediatly after this section,
Jesus again changes gears by saying, "But when", tipping us off he's now not
talking about the same era as above; that this is something different than
the "run of the mill" hardships and opportunities for testimony he's just
finished talking about above:)
20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its
desolation is near.
(Not the end of the word; not the end of the ages; not the return of Jesus
from heaven; not the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, but simply the
desolation of the city, and now Jesus is going to elaborate on that
destruction:)
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.
24 "And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive
into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times
of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
(Jesus just told us the Jews will be persecuted, and Jerusalem will lie in
ruin "until the time of the Gentiles are fulfilled". Was the time of the
Gentiles over in 70 ad, Dave? Of course not. Gentiles have ruled the earth
from the time Jesus uttered this prophecy until the present day! Gentiles
have also continued to be saved by the Gospel of Jesus Christ until this
time, or so it would seem unless you don't consider yourself saved by his
Gospel. And here is the hypocrisy of full preterism, Dave, in full view.
You speak as if you have salvation to offer the Gentiles with your full
preteristic gospel, and yet you must interpret Jesus' prophecy of the end
times in a way that denies the "times of the Gentiles" continues beyond
70ad!
In any case, Jesus, having closed his thought about the Jews with the
pronouncement that "Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles...etc.", he now
returns to the larger view of the "end times" by focusing in on it's final
events again)
25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and
on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves
roaring; (Notice here that Jesus is talking about the "signs" that will be
seen in the sun, moon, and stars; exactly what Matthew has, "Immediately
after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon
shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the
powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of
the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn,
and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power
and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a
trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from
one end of heaven to the other." Mt 24:20-31)
26 "men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things
which are coming on the earth, for the powers of heaven will be shaken.
27 "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great
glory.
(Notice again that it is HERE that Luke places the "Son of Man coming", NOT
at the destruction of Jerusalem, just as with Matthew)
28 "Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads,
because your redemption draws near."
(Now when WHAT things begin to happen? Obviously when ALL these things
begin to happen, and all these things include, but are certainly not limited
to the destruction of Jerusalem, the subsequent persecution of the Jews
until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, the arrest of the disciples
and their ensuing opportunites to witness the Gospel before "kings and
rulers", them being given the Holy Spirit, who will then teach them what to
say, bringing to their rememberance all things that Jesus taught them, the
setting up of the abomination that makes desolate, spoken of by the prophet
Daniel, the sun, moon, and stars becoming dark and failing, the sign of the
coming of the Son of Man, and the resurrection of the saints spoken of by
the inspired author, Paul, and others. This then is the "all things" Jesus
is talking about that defines what generation "this generation" is. It is
the generation that will witness (and here the idea is more expansive than
simply "eye-witness", but extends to "see first-hand or believe on the basis
of testimony based on first hand accounts) ALL OF THESE THINGS.
29 Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the
trees.
30 "When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that
summer is now near.
31 "So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom
of God is near.
32 "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till
all things take place.
33 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass
away. Luke 21:8-33
(Notice with me that in this last section of his prophecy, as given by Luke,
Luke doesn't have Jesus say:
"So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near,
even at the doors."
As Matthew does, but instead has Jesus say:
"So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of
God is near."
Thus Matthew has "all these things" and Luke has simply "these things".
Therefore, we need not infer from Luke that by "these things" Jesus meant
"all these things", as he does in Matthew's version. Therefore here, in
Luke's version, the "this generation" who will know their "redemption" is
"even at the doors" will be the generation that sees "these things" in
Luke's version, and "all these things" in Matthew's version. But it is
clear from Matthew's version that "all these things" INCLUDES the coming of
the Son of Man from heaven, and all nations and tribes on the earth SEEING
him come, and Luke's version at least INCLUDES the same exact event!
Therefore, ANY generation that has NOT seen the Son of Man coming from
heaven amidst great signs on earth and in heaven simply cannot be the "this
generation" Jesus spoke of here. It's just that simple.)
>Jesus gave this prophecy more than once
Pure speculation; and nonsensical speculation at that! While it is true
that Jesus probably gave his SERMONS concerning true righteousness, and many
of his parables given for the same purpose more than once, it is very
unlikely that his disciples would ask him more than once to, "Tell us, when
shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the
end of the world?" Since his prophecy was given to them as an answer to
their questions AS ASKED in Matthew (and btw, it helps immensely to
understand the framework of Jesus' answer if one bears in mind he IS
answering the questions his disciples asked of him)
> record the "this generation" statement after
> Jesus said all of these other things.
Not "all of these other things", Dave, but "all of these things", which
include things that just haven't, nor could have happened yet so long as
you're here to deny the Christian hope of bodily resurrection. When that
resurrection actually does take place, there will be no one on earth to deny
it any longer.
>
> You want to pretend that "this generation"
> means "some generation that will be alive"...
No, I just want to read the text as it stands, and as it stands the
generation that will see "all these things" hasn't existed yet, because "all
these things" haven't happened yet. It's really just that simple.
Chuck
Chuck
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 20:17:29 -0800, "Chuck"
> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>
>
>>"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>news:esl2k5lme3novfr2a...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:59:09 -0800, "Chuck"
>>> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
>>>>> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>>>>>
>>>>> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
>>>>> you attack African American people...
>>>>
>>>> You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me,
>>>> it flew right past at least one of his "futurist buddies"
>>>> unnoticed.
>>>
>>> Since you're not that bright, that wouldn't surprise me.
>>
>>It doesn't take a bright person; just one who easily thinks in racist
>>terms.
>
> Right Chuckles. I'm the racist because I don't like
> people posting things like, "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!".
No, you're the racist because you're the one who thinks of it as racist.
There happen to be plenty of white people in America who talk that way.
>
> Yea, sure. You don't look at all like you're just trying
> to attack me, regardless of how stupid you look
> doing it. <chuckle>
I didn't bring it up, Dave, you did.
Chuck
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
No Chuckles, those words are not found there.
You made them up and added them.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"The important thing is this: To be able at any moment
to sacrifice what we are for what we could become."
- Charles DuBois
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:7lt3k5pl0888cpglh...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 20:17:29 -0800, "Chuck"
>> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>
>>
>>>"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>news:esl2k5lme3novfr2a...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:59:09 -0800, "Chuck"
>>>> <shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now if that isn't a throw back and racist, then I don't know
>>>>>> what is! Shame on you!!! (:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But don't worry, your Futurist buddies won't care how much
>>>>>> you attack African American people...
>>>>>
>>>>> You know, Dave, until you made the connection for me,
>>>>> it flew right past at least one of his "futurist buddies"
>>>>> unnoticed.
>>>>
>>>> Since you're not that bright, that wouldn't surprise me.
>>>
>>>It doesn't take a bright person; just one who easily thinks in racist
>>>terms.
>>
>> Right Chuckles. I'm the racist because I don't like
>> people posting things like, "Ahs Believes Paster Dave!".
>
>No, you're the racist because you're the one who thinks of it as racist.
>There happen to be plenty of white people in America who talk that way.
I'm sorry that you wish to try to excuse your racist behavior.
But I do not accept that as good behavior.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"To Follow by faith alone is to follow blindly. "
- Ben Franklin
Chuck
33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near,
even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these
things be fulfilled. Matthew 24:33-34 (King James Version)
I suggest you get yourself an UNABRIDGED New Testament, Dave.
Chuck
Chuck
I don't care.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<shells...@cox.net> spake thusly:
>>> It says the generation that will see
>>> "ALL THESE THINGS", Dave.
>>
>> No Chuckles, those words are not found there.
>> You made them up and added them.
>
> 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things,
> know that it is near, even at the doors.
> 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
> till all these things be fulfilled. Matthew 24:33-34
> (King James Version)
>
> I suggest you get yourself an UNABRIDGED
> New Testament, Dave.
And I suggest that you stop changing words around.
Apparently, the brainwashing you have received has
tanked your reading skills, or you never learned.
Might I suggest a course in remedial reading?
But at the very least, since you will claim that you have
no problem reading the texts, thank you for proving
you're a liar! :)
It doesn't say, "the generation that will see all these things"
as you claimed it does and to which I responded by saying
that those words are not found there. And they aren't.
Rather, Jesus looked AT THE DISCIPLES and said;
"When YOU see all these things..."
He then went on to say...
"THIS GENERATION shall not pass, until all these things
be fulfilled."
Like I said, what you claimed is not found there! You even
prove that by quoting the passages, but because you are
so brainwashed by your own doctrine, you can't even see
the words that are right in front of you, because you are
now so used to changing them around to read differently.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
I know God won't give me anything I can't handle.
I just wish He didn't trust me so much.