Was Jesus a false prophet?

[antitox]

The statement of "this generation" was referencing Matt 24:34. I failed to post the reference as I was in a hurry. This was to be an example of the way Jesus was speaking to those living at that time in prophecy.

Now, as to your claim in the previous post, I will repost from page 1 because you have a habit of not remembering anything I say and post the same things again:

Quote:
For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28 NIV)

(Also- Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27)[/quote]

The key part of that statement Jesus made is:

"the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." This does not refer to coming back with the holy angels. It refers to his kingdom which occurred on Pentecost. Here is a similar statement Jesus made:

(Luke 17:20-21) "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed;..nor will they say 'Lo,here it is!' or 'There!' for behold the kingdom of God is in the midst of you."

(Luke 9:27) "But I tell you truly there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."


The other scripture says:

(Mk 8:38) "And he said to them,"There are some standing here who will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power."

Pentecost is when it came with power.

(Acts 1:8) "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria and to teh end of the earth."

[/b]

 

[Solo]

LOL... yeah, let "infidels.org" do your Bible interpretation!! ... and Farrell Till in particular. He is a REAL joke.... the best case against atheism is his stupidity. How funny!

He (Farrell Till) hasn't an ounce of scholarly credit, but the minute he opens a Bible or any other book, he's an expert. Here's a year-by-year rebuttal to The Skeptical Review.

http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tsrpages.html

Enjoy!

He is worth reading IF you have run out of comics (the paper kind).

It is quite ridiculous that anyone would criticize the Bible while reading the trash at The Skeptical Review. Amazing!! :shocked!:

 

[DivineNames]

LOL... yeah, let "infidels.org" do your Bible interpretation!! ... and Farrell Till in particular. He is a REAL joke.... the best case against atheism is his stupidity. How funny!

He (Farrell Till) hasn't an ounce of scholarly credit, but the minute he opens a Bible or any other book, he's an expert. Here's a year-by-year rebuttal to The Skeptical Review.

http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tsrpages.html

Enjoy!

He is worth reading IF you have run out of comics (the paper kind).

Does this link actually answer the point in question? If so, please explain.

And Gary, can you actually answer the points being made here?

 

[DivineNames]

The key part of that statement Jesus made is:

"the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." This does not refer to coming back with the holy angels. It refers to his kingdom which occurred on Pentecost. Here is a similar statement Jesus made:

(Luke 17:20-21) "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed;..nor will they say 'Lo,here it is!' or 'There!' for behold the kingdom of God is in the midst of you."

(Luke 9:27) "But I tell you truly there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."


The other scripture says:

(Mk 8:38) "And he said to them,"There are some standing here who will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power."

Pentecost is when it came with power.

(Acts 1:8) "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria and to teh end of the earth."

Let me quote the relevant verses-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28 NIV)

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:26-27 NIV)

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels." And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power." (Mark 8:38-9:1 NIV)

So the term being used is, "Son of Man". The Son of Man is going to come "in glory". The Son of Man is going to come, "with power". He is going to come with angels. And the Son of Man is going to judge people: "and then he will reward each person according to what he has done".

Lets compare these verses with Matthew 24-

At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. (Matthew 24:30-31 NIV)

And the Son of Man will judge-

The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 24:50-51 NIV)

Also-

At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. (Mark 13:26 NIV)

At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. (Luke 21:27 NIV)

With regard to the verse that you cited, (Acts 1:8), it merely says that they would, "receive power". It doesn't have anything like, "come with power". The verses I just cited actually do have something like, "come with power".

"the Son of Man coming... with great power"

 

[DivineNames]

The key part of that statement Jesus made is:

"the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." This does not refer to coming back with the holy angels. It refers to his kingdom which occurred on Pentecost.

The verses in question-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28 NIV)

Are you trying to claim that the second part-

I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

has nothing to do with the first part-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.

???

Is that your argument? If that is what you are really saying, it is probably the most desperate maneuver I have ever seen from a Christian.

 

[antitox]

With regard to the verse that you cited, (Acts 1:8), it merely says that they would, "receive power". It doesn't have anything like, "come with power". The verses I just cited actually do have something like, "come with power".

As usual, you missed the whole thing, and so you post the same argument again as liberals do.

Jesus's reference to "come with power" was referring to Himself, NOT the disciples as he did in Matt 16;27-28 when he used the word "kingdom" which was ON PENTECOST. That's why Acts 1:8 was referenced.

You are spinning your wheels.

I doubt you'll ever understand any of this because your mind is closed to God and hostile to Him.

(Rom 8:7) "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God;"

 

[antitox]

The key part of that statement Jesus made is:

"the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." This does not refer to coming back with the holy angels. It refers to his kingdom which occurred on Pentecost.

The verses in question-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28 NIV)

Are you trying to claim that the second part-

[quote:56160]I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

has nothing to do with the first part-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.

???

Is that your argument? If that is what you are really saying, it is probably the most desperate maneuver I have ever seen from a Christian.[/quote:56160]

Yes, that is what I'm saying because he said TWO DIFFERENT THINGS in that sentence. I've studied this for 25 years.
Now listen, IF YOU CAN.......

HE SAID in the first part about COMING BACK with the holy angels. THEN in the next sentence, HE STATED, that some standing there would not die before they see him come in his kingdom. BUT because you don't listen, he says in another verse that the KINGDOM OF GOD IS IN THE MIDST OF YOU."

NOW, where's the kingdom, DN? Tell me.

Pentecost is where the Jesus's kingdom began........THE CHURCH. Duh.

Coming back with the holy angels is not coming in his kingdom, it's coming back in POWER and GLORY.

 

[Kefka]

Yes, that is what I'm saying because he said TWO DIFFERENT THINGS in that sentence. I've studied this for 25 years.
Now listen, IF YOU CAN.......

HE SAID in the first part about COMING BACK with the holy angels. THEN in the next sentence, HE STATED, that some standing there would not die before they see him come in his kingdom. BUT because you don't listen, he says in another verse that the KINGDOM OF GOD IS IN THE MIDST OF YOU."

NOW, where's the kingdom, DN? Tell me.

Pentecost is where the Jesus's kingdom began........THE CHURCH. Duh.

Coming back with the holy angels is not coming in his kingdom, it's coming back in POWER and GLORY.

Other than the slight hostility... brilliantly put antitox :-D

 

[DivineNames]

With regard to the verse that you cited, (Acts 1:8), it merely says that they would, "receive power". It doesn't have anything like, "come with power". The verses I just cited actually do have something like, "come with power".

As usual, you missed the whole thing, and so you post the same argument again as liberals do.

Jesus's reference to "come with power" was referring to Himself, NOT the disciples as he did in Matt 16;27-28 when he used the word "kingdom" which was ON PENTECOST. That's why Acts 1:8 was referenced.

You are spinning your wheels.

I doubt you'll ever understand any of this because your mind is closed to God and hostile to Him.

(Rom 8:7) "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God;"

OK. :D

What actually happened, is that I easily refuted your argument.

However long you have been studying the Bible, if you come out with that kind of thing, I'm really not sure you should be trying to explain the Bible to anyone else.

I will go through this one more time-

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28 NIV)

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels." And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power." (Mark 8:38-9:1 NIV)

What does this all fit with?

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you (Acts 1:8 NIV)

This verse? or perhaps-

At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. (Mark 13:26 NIV)

Obviously, it fits with the second verse. Your interpretation is simply absurd.

 

[DivineNames]

because you don't listen, he says in another verse that the KINGDOM OF GOD IS IN THE MIDST OF YOU."

NOW, where's the kingdom, DN? Tell me.[/color]

Pentecost is where the Jesus's kingdom began........THE CHURCH. Duh.

Coming back with the holy angels is not coming in his kingdom, it's coming back in POWER and GLORY.

You may not realize this, but the term "kindgom" is actually used in more than one way in the New Testament. So I have read, the meaning(s) of "kingdom" is an issue that gets a lot of attention in New Testament scholarship. I have a section on the subject in a book I have, I will quote it if you are interested.

But anyway, citing that verse, (Luke 17:21), doesn't help your argument.

 

[antitox]

DN,

I put it out there crystal clear, but I'm not surprised you can't see it, and honestly, I didn't expect you to because you haven't realized anything of spiritual significance on this board so far, and I really don't think that you are interested in any of it, except attempting to discredit God and prove Him invalid. :-?

 

[DivineNames]

LOL... yeah, let "infidels.org" do your Bible interpretation!! ... and Farrell Till in particular. He is a REAL joke.... the best case against atheism is his stupidity. How funny!

He (Farrell Till) hasn't an ounce of scholarly credit, but the minute he opens a Bible or any other book, he's an expert. Here's a year-by-year rebuttal to The Skeptical Review.

http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tsrpages.html

Enjoy!

He is worth reading IF you have run out of comics (the paper kind).

I can't find a response to the point in question using that link. I guess you just wanted to attack the person, not the argument?

OUTOS - according to Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, means "this one visibly present here" which 100% locks the promise of the Second Coming to occur within the lifetime of the Apostles who were "visibly present here" listening to Jesus mouth the words. The Second Coming was not to occur within any other era other than that back then.

http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/ ... _verse.htm

Unless someone can provide a response, I will presume this line of argument does actually support the claim that Jesus was talking about, "this present generation".

 

[DivineNames]

DN,

I put it out there crystal clear, but I'm not surprised you can't see it, and honestly, I didn't expect you to because you haven't realized anything of spiritual significance on this board so far, and I really don't think that you are interested in any of it, except attempting to discredit God and prove Him invalid. :-?

keep telling yourself that.

I do wish to make one more point against your "interpretation"- The two verses do not even look compatible.

I will quote different translations of Luke 17:20-

And having been questioned by the Pharisees, when the reign of God doth come, he answered them, and said, `The reign of God doth not come with observation; (Luke 17:20 YLT)

Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed (Luke 17:20 NASB)

Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation (Luke 17:20 NKJV)

One day the Pharisees asked Jesus, "When will the Kingdom of God come?" Jesus replied, "The Kingdom of God isn't ushered in with visible signs. (Luke 17:20 NLT)

Now compare that verse with-

I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:28 NIV)

The verses that you claim are connected, that you claim are talking about the "kingdom" in the same way, are actually incompatible with each other. If the kingdom doesn't come with "observation", then you aren't going to "see" the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

 

[Kefka]

"See" can mean many things. You can "see" God through his works, I have. I haven't seen an actual figure of God, but I have seen him through his works.

 

[DivineNames]

As usual, you missed the whole thing, and so you post the same argument again as liberals do.

You don't like liberals do you antitox? :D

I want to pick you up on this point, (not about liberals!), but about your claim that I, "posted the same argument". There is nothing wrong with repeating an argument sometimes, but I don't think that I actually did! I don't know what you are talking about here, I suspect that you are just talking nonsense.

(If you merely mean about using Matthew 16:27-28, I never actually noticed what you said on page 1, I didn't read your post until now)

 

[DivineNames]

"See" can mean many things. You can "see" God through his works, I have. I haven't seen an actual figure of God, but I have seen him through his works.

Perhaps, but it could very likely be about something visible right? Is that not likely what the text is talking about? Anyway, there is no real Biblical basis for the argument that antitox gave, he is fooling himself.

 

[Kefka]

The major point is that when he said "some who are standing here today will not taste death" that also can mean more than one thing. The word death itself may not have been referring to physical death, for it says that if we believe, we will have eternal life... and therefore we will not taste death. (just an example)


You are right that it would be likely that he was talking about something visible... but look at how he speaks. Death, often doesn't equal death... sight is not always sight. Nearly everything he said takes a spiritual understanding to interperet. Otherwise... well we'd be mustard seeds.

 

[DivineNames]

It couldn't be in his time because much of the prophecies spoken refer to generations ahead as well.

What? Could you explain this please.

Are you going to answer this?

 

[Kefka]

It couldn't be in his time because much of the prophecies spoken refer to generations ahead as well.

What? Could you explain this please.

Are you going to answer this?

What he means (I think) is that there were other prophecies that were supposed to happen in generations to come, right? So why would this:

"I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

happen before his other prophecies?

And about the destruction of the temple, just because it happened in the first century... doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of his prophecies need to.

 

[DivineNames]

Nearly everything he said takes a spiritual understanding to interperet.

Perhaps there are parts of theology which (in theory) would be necessarily difficult to understand, but this is certainly not the case with prophecy. We are merely talking about a prediction of the future. Predictions can (easily) be given in a way that is clear and understandable to everyone.

If Jesus didn't give a clear prophecy, then why not? He knows that he will be tested on this criteria, we are told in the Old Testament to test him on this criteria!

Look at the New Testament claims of prophecy fulfillment: In many cases the plain meaning of the Old Testament verses in question aren't even a prophecy! Christians will talk about “types†and “foreshadows†to try and solve the problem, but what you end up with is Bible prophecy that is worthless. Christians may be able to "see" that these parts of the Old Testament connect with Jesus because they have "spiritual understanding", but it is basically worthless prophecy. No independent evidence that a prophecy ever existed, and no independent evidence that the event ever occurred which fulfilled the alleged prophecy. If you look at the plain meaning of the text, there is absolutely nothing about Jesus. If God really did inspire the Bible, why can't he provide real prophecy fulfillment? Christians with their "spiritual understanding" can probably persuade themselves to "see" these "prophecies" fulfilled in Jesus, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.

If there is such a thing as "spiritual understanding", I am sure it doesn't mean you have to abandon reason, that you have to abandon an honest approach to the Bible. But Christians generally do abandon such things, all in the name of, "spiritual understanding".