Was Jesus and Paul wrong about the Second Coming?

[polonius]

Matt 24:34 Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.

Matt 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to another. Amen, I say to you, you will not finish the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

Matt 26:64 Jesus said to him in reply, “You have said so.[a] But I tell you: From now on you will see ‘the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power’ and ‘coming on the clouds of heaven.’�

1Thes 4:15-17 Indeed, we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord.

[Elijah John]

Many of us have been there done that.
Seeing that there are too many iffs, it might be wiser leaving it at
'I do not know'?
What is intereasting that the worrier God YHWH is more appealing.

The "warrior God" as you say, has that aspect yes...but YHVH is also the God of Jesus and the God of the Prophets and the God of the Psalmist. And with them, (and according to their teachings) YHVH is found to be benevolent, forgiving and loving.

Yes, admittedly I do not know if Jesus is ever coming back, but I do know he didn't come back when the NT authors said he would.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]


No. What you are concluding is incorrect....both Jesus and Paul were right about the timing of Jesus 2nd coming. Most people interpret Jesus' words wrongly and thus come to an incorrect conclusion. I have explained this topic clearly in an earlier post here . Feel free to consult the pages for details.

JW

It seem the simple truth of the matter is that the NT authors, Jesus own disciples, perhaps even Jesus himself expected his 2nd coming in the lifetime of his apostles.

No the simple truth of the matter is that neither the NT authors or Jesus himself expected expected his 2nd coming in the lifetime of his apostles.

I have provided the explanation above (see link).

JW

[polonius]

Was there an “invisible� Second Coming� although “Every eye will see him� (Rev 1:7)?

http://www.faithandreasonforum.com/inde ... icleID=456

“(Charles Taze) Russell first claimed that the "end times" started in 1799, and as mentioned, that Christ had returned in 1874. In later reprints, these dates would change when Armageddon failed to appear in 1874.�

“First, Charles Taze Russell had prophesied that Christ’s return would actually be in 1874. When that didn’t occur, he covered up that embarrassment by saying that the Lord would return in 1914 (most likely due to WWI having started). In his book, Divine Plan of the Ages (which you can find on our website). Russell projected that those who were living in 1914 would witness Armageddon and the dawn of Christ's 1,000 year rule on earth.�

“When 1914 came, and went, without the appearance of Christ, Russell’s "Bible Students" (as they were called) were quite upset and many were disillusioned. Russell cheered them up by stating that Christ did indeed return, but that His return was “invisible.�

However, an invisible return is contradicted by Revelation 1:7 thus:
Look! He is coming with the clouds; every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and on his account all the tribes of the earth will wail. So it is to be. Amen. (NRSV)

Evidently, John Patmos or whoever wrote Revelations got this prophecy wrong.

"...Bible evidence shows that in the year 1914 C.E. God's time arrived for Christ to return and begin ruling...Christ's return invisible...Christ himself gave a visible 'sign' by which we may know that he is invisibly present...'NATION WILL RISE AGAINST NATION'...Surely you have seen this part of the 'sign' being fulfilled since 1914! In that year World War I began" (You Can Live Forever In Paradise on Earth )

So "Every eye will see" an invisible sign?

[dio9]

Matt 24:34 Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.

Matt 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to another. Amen, I say to you, you will not finish the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

Matt 26:64 Jesus said to him in reply, “You have said so.[a] But I tell you: From now on you will see ‘the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power’ and ‘coming on the clouds of heaven.’�

1Thes 4:15-17 Indeed, we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Being caught up and coming on the clouds is metaphoric talk. Not to be taken literally. Indeed the prophecy means we shall all be taken up by Christ spiritually freed from sin being taken up means being forgiven, means saved . God's will shall be done in the end all who believe will be saved. Eventually God Jesus Christ will save everybody. Coming again on the clouds and taken up into the air to meet him means Christ's mission will be fulfilled and God will dwell with Men/Women , humanity . As it was meant to be. This prophecy means All the false kingdoms will eventually fall and God's kingdom will come.

[Elijah John]

“When 1914 came, and went, without the appearance of Christ, Russell’s "Bible Students" (as they were called) were quite upset and many were disillusioned. Russell cheered them up by stating that Christ did indeed return, but that His return was “invisible.�

I would like to ask any/all JW's here, what evidence can you offer that Christ has actually returned in a visible or INvisible fashion to rule since 1914, and is still ruling today?

And why should any such flimsy doctrine be given any credibility?

[marco]

The "warrior God" as you say, has that aspect yes...but YHVH is also the God of Jesus and the God of the Prophets and the God of the Psalmist. And with them, (and according to their teachings) YHVH is found to be benevolent, forgiving and loving.

In Greek and Roman mythology, the Furies who were terrifying sisters, punishers of the sinful, were euphemistically called the Eumenides or Kindly Ones. In the same way Yahweh is called the Merciful or Benign or All-loving when his actions show he's nothing of the sort. One of the greatest miracles performed by Jesus was the rehabilitation of Yahweh, making him into somebody good, just, beneficient and with a heart of gold. Given his view of Yahweh, I think when he talks of returning in the lifetime of some of his listeners, we can take his words with a pinch of salt.

[JehovahsWitness]

“When 1914 came, and went, without the appearance of Christ, Russell’s "Bible Students" (as they were called) were quite upset and many were disillusioned. Russell cheered them up by stating that Christ did indeed return, but that His return was “invisible.�

I would like to ask any/all JW's here, what evidence can you offer that Christ has actually returned in a visible or INvisible fashion to rule since 1914, and is still ruling today?

And why should any such flimsy doctrine be given any credibility?

Have you studied the subject? Have you read up on it? Do you know what words are under discussion? Do you really believe you have enough basic information on the topic to make any kind of judgement on the point? If so, what are your sources and how many hours did you spend examining this subject?

JW

[Elijah John]

“When 1914 came, and went, without the appearance of Christ, Russell’s "Bible Students" (as they were called) were quite upset and many were disillusioned. Russell cheered them up by stating that Christ did indeed return, but that His return was “invisible.�

I would like to ask any/all JW's here, what evidence can you offer that Christ has actually returned in a visible or INvisible fashion to rule since 1914, and is still ruling today?

And why should any such flimsy doctrine be given any credibility?

Have you studied the subject? Have you read up on it? Do you know what words are under discussion? Do you really believe you have enough basic information on the topic to make any kind of judgement on the point? If so, what are your sources and how many hours did you spend examining this subject?

JW

That is not an answer, nor is it an apologetic for the doctrine. If it cannot be explained in a few simple sentences, it is most likely not a Divine truth, but a theological gymnastic.

Try, if you can or if you will, to summarize the essence of your argument for the doctrine that Christ supposedly returned in 1914.
.
So far, all you are doing is attempting to make me appear ignorant or unstudied. That is not honorable debate.

You are attempting to shift the burden of proof. It is the extraordinary claim that requires the extraordinary apologetic, not the skeptical challenge.

And since only JWs claim that Christ has returned in 1914 and has begun his rule, I would say that is a pretty extraordinary claim, wouldn't you?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 18 by Elijah John]

You stated a conclusion that the doctine is {quote} "flimsy" unless that was based on nothing (ie no knowledge whatsoever), it is a legitimate request to ask upon what did you base your conclusion. I will apologise however for asking how many hours you have spent leading to that conclusion, since that is irrelevant and bad show on my part. So I'm sorry for that.

Still, correct me if I am wrong but debate involves defending ones conclusion, since you publically made one, there is nothing "dishonerable" about requesting what lead you to it.


JW

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 18 by Elijah John]

You stated a conclusion that the doctine is {quote} "flimsy" unless that was based on nothing (ie no knowledge whatsoever), it is a legitimate request to ask upon what did you base your conclusion. I will apologise however for asking how many hours you have spent leading to that conclusion, since that is irrelevant and bad show on my part. So I'm sorry for that.

Still, correct me if I am wrong but debate involves defending ones conclusion, since you publically made one, there is nothing "dishonerable" about requesting what lead you to it.


JW

I'm sorry for using that overused phrase, "dishonorable debate". There must be a more civil way to say the same thing.

Still, the claim that Jesus returned in 1914 is the extraordinary one, the one that requires extraordinary evidence. I see none.

So it seems to me you are being evasive, and attempting to shift the burden of proof here.

OK, let me rephrase for a minute, I am not making an absolute claim that Christ did not return, but I have not encountered any evidence that he has.

Can you provide some, in one paragraph or less please?