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.

[tam]

JW posted:

'...there are no biblical errors.

Some people try to argue this despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. ....

Summary: The author of Matthews's gospel tries to create a prophecy fulfillment (remember "there are no biblical errors")

But Matthew misunderstood the prophecy. Thus God allows him to create a contradiction, an error in the Bible.

There are others, but even one disproves JW's claim. Q.E.D.

We have a whole thread dedicated to Biblical errors here, launched by the line you quoted:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... hp?t=31430

I would ask JW and other advocates of Biblical infallibility, what threatening implications do you percieve if the Bible does indeed contain some errors?

-does it necessarily mean that YHVH God doesn't exist?

-that Jesus is not God?

-that God never demanded blood in order to forgive?

-that there is no life beyond the grave?

-does the whole JW organization have to disband?

Does an imperfect Bible necessitate the above conclusions? Does the whole edifice of faith necessarily collapse?

I guess I am trying to understand why JWs and Evangelicals are so wedded to the the notion of a perfect and infallible Bible, in the face of clear and contrary evidence.

Perhaps because that is what their faith is built upon?

If you take away or destroy something that a person has built their house upon, then doesn't the house fall as well?


That doesn't mean that one cannot rebuild one's house upon a sturdy foundation: the foundation stone, the rock; Christ. In fact, one should do this, if one wants their house to stand against the "winds and the storms".

But as you can see from some responses of current and former professed Christians, discovering error in the text would or did cause them to lose, abandon, or discard their professed faith.



Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[JehovahsWitness]

JW posted:

'...there are no biblical errors.

Some people try to argue this despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Let take one example and compare four different biblical accounts of the same incident.

Entrance to Jerusalem

Matt 21 1-7 1 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and came unto Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples,
2 saying unto them, Go into the village that is over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose [them], and bring [them] unto me.
3 And if any one say aught unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.
4 Now this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet, saying,
5 Tell ye the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, Meek, and riding upon an ass, And upon a colt the foal of an ass.
6 And the disciples went, and did even as Jesus appointed them,
7 and brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their garments; and he sat thereon.


Mark 11-1-9 1 And when they draw nigh unto Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth two of his disciples,
2 and saith unto them, Go your way into the village that is over against you: and straightway as ye enter into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon no man ever yet sat; loose him, and bring him.
3 And if any one say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye, The Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him back hither.
4 And they went away, and found a colt tied at the door without in the open street; and they loose him.
5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
6 And they said unto them even as Jesus had said: and they let them go.
7 And they bring the colt unto Jesus, and cast on him their garments; and he sat upon him.
8 And many spread their garments upon the way; and others branches, which they had cut from the fields.
9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, Hosanna; Blessed [is] he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

Luke 28-36 And when he had thus spoken, he went on before, going up to Jerusalem.
29 And it came to pass, when he drew nigh unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount that is called Olivet, he sent two of the disciples,
30 saying, Go your way into the village over against [you]; in which as ye enter ye shall find a colt tied, whereon no man ever yet sat: loose him, and bring him.
31 And if any one ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say, The Lord hath need of him.
32 And they that were sent went away, and found even as he had said unto them.
33 And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?
34 And they said, The Lord hath need of him.
35 And they brought him to Jesus: and they threw their garments upon the colt, and set Jesus thereon.
36 And as he went, they spread their garments in the way.

John 12:12-15 On the morrow a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,
13 took the branches of the palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried out, Hosanna: Blessed [is] he that cometh in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel.
14 And Jesus, having found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,
15 Fear not, daughter of Zion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt.

Summary: The author of Matthews's gospel tries to create a prophecy fulfillment (remember "there are no biblical errors")

But Matthew misunderstood the prophecy. Thus God allows him to create a contradiction, an error in the Bible.

There are others, but even one disproves JW's claim. Q.E.D.

If I'm not mistaken, I've already addressed this question here. Did you not read it?

[Elijah John]

JW posted:

'...there are no biblical errors.

Some people try to argue this despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. ....

Summary: The author of Matthews's gospel tries to create a prophecy fulfillment (remember "there are no biblical errors")

But Matthew misunderstood the prophecy. Thus God allows him to create a contradiction, an error in the Bible.

There are others, but even one disproves JW's claim. Q.E.D.

We have a whole thread dedicated to Biblical errors here, launched by the line you quoted:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... hp?t=31430

I would ask JW and other advocates of Biblical infallibility, what threatening implications do you percieve if the Bible does indeed contain some errors?

-does it necessarily mean that YHVH God doesn't exist?

-that Jesus is not God?

-that God never demanded blood in order to forgive?

-that there is no life beyond the grave?

-does the whole JW organization have to disband?

Does an imperfect Bible necessitate the above conclusions? Does the whole edifice of faith necessarily collapse?

I guess I am trying to understand why JWs and Evangelicals are so wedded to the the notion of a perfect and infallible Bible, in the face of clear and contrary evidence.

Perhaps because that is what their faith is built upon?

If you take away or destroy something that a person has built their house upon, then doesn't the house fall as well?


That doesn't mean that one cannot rebuild one's house upon a sturdy foundation: the foundation stone, the rock; Christ. In fact, one should do this, if one wants their house to stand against the "winds and the storms".

But as you can see from some responses of current and former professed Christians, discovering error in the text would or did cause them to lose, abandon, or discard their professed faith.



Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Christ is not the same as the Bible. And if not even Christ, why not YHVH God Himself as the foundation?

YHVH's glory is partially contained within the inspiration of the Bible, but if YHVH is God, and God is real, YHVH also transcends the Bible. No book can contain the Living God.

So a collapse of faith is by no means a necessity, even if the Bible is imperfect.

[Monta]

-does it necessarily mean that YHVH God doesn't exist?

No, but it means He's incompetent. Or stupid. Or both.

It means Jehovah inspired scripture (put his thoughts, instructions, guidance and prophecies) to be recorded for the guidance and salvation of mankind but didn't have the intelligence or the forethought to know that if it were allowed to be corrupted it would not serve its purpose. This would be rather like a mother preparing a meal for her children, and not ensuring that the dog didn't eat it; or saying "Well the dog eat some of if but there's "still some good stuff there", just pick off the bits with dog saliva on it and eat the rest...

It would mean that God sent his son to earth, to save mankind and teach them but didn't have the intelligence to know that we wouldn't have an accurate record of what would be the single most important act in the universe, if it were not accurately recorded and preserved. How can we build trust in Jesus if we don't know anything about him or even if he existed? How can we follow the teachings of Christ if they are nowhere to be read. How can we trust the book where they are to be read if they contain errors and corruptions? Why would God allow that to happen? Indifference? Incompetence? Did God not know that people would have to be ready to die in defense of what they read about this man? How can they be expected to do so if right next to the verse that is proven to be utter nonsense?


It would mean that JEHOVAH isn't actually Jehovah at all. Because the name means, "He causes to become" meaning he can become anything he wants to to achieve his purpose: author, editor, recorder, preserver, protector... and he can make anything or anyone be whatever he wants to in order to achieve his purpose.

His express purpose is that mankind have access to his written word. He sent his prophets to explicitly write down HIS words to instruct his people, not just at the time of writing, but for all future generations (compare Daniel 12:4), was He was too shortsighted, too powerless, too overcome by the imperfection of his "human secretaries", "copiests" or enemies that would want to erradicate God's Words from the face of the earth to protect it for those future generations? If so then JEHOVAH isn't who he claims to be (see Isaiah 55: 8-11).

Not only would he be a fake "Jehovah'', not only would that make him weak, stupid and shortsighted, it would make him unable to do what any author, such a JK Rowlins can do, ie ensure that what was written, is what will be read.

1 PETER 1:25
The word of the Lord endures forever

MATTHEW 4:4
It is written: Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.

JW

JW, top marks beautifully written.
For those who find 'errors' they can not envision possibility that it might be the lack in their undertstanding.

[Elijah John]

-does it necessarily mean that YHVH God doesn't exist?

No, but it means He's incompetent. Or stupid. Or both.

That implication, conclusion is a frightening (but unnecessary) conclusion/implication for the believer. If one holds that prospect in one's mind, then don't you see the possibility that would cause you to deny facts in plain evidence, so that you can avoid what you see here as your inevitable, disturbing conclusion. Facts such as obvious contradictions, major and minor.

To say that "the Bible can't have any contradictions because the Bible is perfect" is confirmation bias, and circular reasoning.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable for a believer to admit that since there are contradictions in the Bible, then maybe the Bible is not perfect? But that's OK, because it doesn't mean that God Himself does not exist, nor does it mean that God Himself is not perfect.

It means Jehovah inspired scripture (put his thoughts, instructions, guidance and prophecies) to be recorded for the guidance and salvation of mankind but didn't have the intelligence or the forethought to know that if it were allowed to be corrupted it would not serve its purpose.

Not talking about corruption here, only that it was not perfect from the very start. From the time the authors wrote it down. Why is it unreasonable to assume that the authors brought their own cultural and personal biases into the writing?

The inspiration may well have been perfect, but the human element in the Divine-human partnership in it's writing, was not.

Let's take the "plan of salvation" as an example. Jesus says it's to do the will of his Father in Heaven. Paul, adds conditions. Such as believing in your heart that God raised him form the dead. Why didn't Jesus himself preach this? So the Bible is not clear and unambiguous even on what is needed for salvation.

If it were, the "plan of salvation" would be clear and simple, contained in a few lines (as Jesus presented it) instead of needing to be pieced together from various diverging passages of Scripture.

The OT does not even mention the necessity of believing in the Messiah in order to obtain salvation...

So would a "competent wise" God have omitted this, if in fact it were true and necessary and the Bible itself was perfect?

Matthew and Luke seem to have one "plan of salvation", John, another, and Paul, yet another.

It would mean that God sent his son to earth, to save mankind and teach them but didn't have the intelligence to know that we wouldn't have an accurate record of what would be the single most important act in the universe, if it were not accurately recorded and preserved. How can we build trust in Jesus if we don't know anything about him or even if he existed? How can we follow the teachings of Christ if they are nowhere to be read. How can we trust the book where they are to be read if they contain errors and corruptions? Why would God allow that to happen? Indifference? Incompetence? Did God not know that people would have to be ready to die in defense of what they read about this man? How can they be expected to do so if right next to the verse that is proven to be utter nonsense?

How could He have allowed sin, and the imperfections of the world to begin with? Free will, that's how. And that's the consequence He takes by working with imperfect humans.

You speak as though the Bible dropped, in-tact from Heaven, from the beginning, instead of it having been compiled over the centuries by inspired, but imperfect humans.

Why goe beyond the Pentateuch? Why would a "perfect" Bible message need "revisions" over the centuries in order to have a clear picture of the message of salvation. Yet the Pentateuch was somewhat revised and clarified by the Prophets, and Jesus clarified and revised the OT (Hebrew Bible), and then Paul comes along and "revises and clarifies" Jesus himself, and adds conditions for salvation.

If the Bible was perfect from the beginning, the Prophets would not have been needed to clarify, Jesus would not have needed to preach and teach, etc.

Or are you saying that the Prophets and Jesus teachings were not needed?.

It would mean that JEHOVAH isn't actually Jehovah at all. Because the name means, "He causes to become" meaning he can become anything he wants to to achieve his purpose: author, editor, recorder, preserver, protector... and he can make anything or anyone be whatever he wants to in order to achieve his purpose.

Perhaps YHVH's purpose was progressive revelation in conjunction with the God-given gift of reason and common sense in order to interpret Scripture. Spiritual evolution...just as He uses biological evolution to create and complete His world.

His express purpose is that mankind have access to his written word. He sent his prophets to explicitly write down HIS words to instruct his people, not just at the time of writing, but for all future generations (compare Daniel 12:4), was He was too shortsighted, too powerless, too overcome by the imperfection of his "human secretaries", "copiests" or enemies that would want to erradicate God's Words from the face of the earth to protect it for those future generations? If so then JEHOVAH isn't who he claims to be (see Isaiah 55: 8-11).

Not only would he be a fake "Jehovah'', not only would that make him weak, stupid and shortsighted, it would make him unable to do what any author, such a JK Rowlins can do, ie ensure that what was written, is what will be read.

1 PETER 1:25
The word of the Lord endures forever

MATTHEW 4:4
It is written: Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.

JW

What kind of God would omit necessary teachings for His earliest followers?,"Fake", "stupid", "shortsighted" (to borrow your characterizations). Or are you saying the teachings of the prophets were not necessary to Moses audience, or the teachings of Jesus were not necessary to the audience of the Prophets, or the teachings of Paul were not necessary to Jesus audience?

If the Bible were perfect from the beginning, it would not need progressive clarification and revision. Yet that seems to happen, within the Bible itself.

Also, since you claim that the Bible is perfect, infallible and without contradiction, remember, Muslims say the same about the Qur'an. Why are they wrong, and you right?

If anything, Muslims have the greater claim, as it was written far more simultaneously than was the Bible.

Closer to have been "dropped from Heaven" as opposed to compiled.

[marco]

So a collapse of faith is by no means a necessity, even if the Bible is imperfect.

This is certainly true when we're dealing with trivial inconsistencies. We can also ignore dates that don't correspond with, say, the Roman official's time in office or when a census was ordered. These have no bearing on the underlying divine inspiration of the message.

In the case of Christ saying he will be back soon, and after 2000 years, he's not shown up, we have more than a factual error. The idea is that we take his words as emanating from God; if they are wrong then either God is wrong or the messenger isn't divine, as claimed. For people to argue a secondary meaning to Christ's words, to render them true, doesn't help. The meaning is what normal people would take it to be otherwise there is an element of deception. Whatever way you look at it, Christ's statement reduces Christ from God to man, albeit a very good and well-meaning man.

In your case, EJ, this hasn't altered your faith in Yahweh. Nor has it altered mine!

[JehovahsWitness]

It means Jehovah inspired scripture (put his thoughts, instructions, guidance and prophecies) to be recorded for the guidance and salvation of mankind but didn't have the intelligence or the forethought to know that if it were allowed to be corrupted it would not serve its purpose.

Not talking about corruption here, only that it was not perfect from the very start. From the time the authors* wrote it down.

*God is the author of the bible; the writers acted much like human "secretaries" to record his thoughts, instructions and purpose.

Okay, so let's think this through.

Everything about Jehovah is perfect: If God has a thought, it's perfect, if God says a word or sentence it's perfect "all his ways are perfect" without error, fault, deviation or mistake. If God has a message, the message it is perfect infallible, without fault of any kind.

Okay, so we have an perfect, infallible, faultless message. God then chose a method to get his message to humans. His chosen method is to use humans themselves to write down this(infallible) message. Now he has a another choice and the choice is simple: Since Jehovah can do anything, since nothing is impossible for him and anything that happens is because he chooses to ALLOW it to happen, His choice is

a) Shall I determine that my PERFECT faultless, infallible message be changed in some way to being imperfect, fallible, (albeit with good bits still in it)

or

b) Shall I determine that my perfect, faultless, infallible message be transmitted in the same condition it started in my mind (ie perfect)?

Remember we are talking about an omnipotent God. Option (A) would not be because he had no choice, because if God used imperfect humans then that perfect would HAVE to change. There is no "have to" with an omnipotent God. So the question boils down to this: "Can an omnipotent God make an imperfect person write a perfect message?" The answer is obviously: if he is omnipotent, then yes.

So there are two schools of thought:

ONE: God deliberately CHOSE to let his perfect thoughts and infallible message for mankind, be less than what it was when it was in his perfect infallible mind (to be faulty, fallible, erroneous in parts). And that from the second it was first recorded on paper (parchment or whatever)

TWO: God deliberately chose to ensure that his perfect thoughts and infallible message for mankind, be what it was when it was in his perfect infallible mind. And that from the second it was first recorded on paper (parchment or whatever).


Biblically if we glean anything from what the bible has to say on the matter, then it has to be that He chose option #2

# OBJECTIONS- God didn't really inspire the writers, the writers were embellishing or lying so people would take them seriously

reply: Then this omnipotent God not only chose embellishers and liars to write down his word but was powerless to stop them.

# OBJECTIONS- Maybe God didn't know they were liar or were going to add bits to his message

reply: Then this omnipotent God cannot read hearts or the future. Wouldn't that mean He is not omnipotent.


# OBJECTIONS- God knew humans would alter the message but he figured they would leave enough good stuff in it and he didn't think it would make a difference.

reply: Then evidently God was wrong about something because there are many people who reason if the bible has errors in it, it cannot be trusted.

[marco]

Biblically if we glean anything from what the bible has to say on the matter, then it has to be that He chose option #2

(Option 2 being that what is written in the Bible is what God intended to be written.)

So when Christ says he will return soon, God intended this simple message and yet it is wrong.

Perhaps the problem here is ascribing options to God that are human choices; God presumably has more scope than to be limited to either/ or.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 77 by JehovahsWitness]

Fact of the matter is ther are contradictions in the Bible. Parts contradict what we know of reality, parts are internally, self-contradictory.

And you cannot explain away those obvious contradictions without resorting to theological, linguistic and/or rhetorical gymnastics. (like stretching the meaning of the word "generation" for example)

So God gave us a Bible that was less than perfect, what gives? Seems to me you are the downplaying human element, and human contamination. If the recipient of revelation, the "secretaries" as you say are/were less than perfect, doesn't it follow that their (and God's) Bible would be less than perfect?


Also, why do you consider the Bible the perfect Word of God, and not the Qur'an? Muslims make the same claim about the Qur'an, why are they wrong?

[JehovahsWitness]

Seems to me you are the downplaying human element, and human contamination. If the recipient of revelation, the "secretaries" as you say are/were less than perfect, doesn't it follow that their (and God's) Bible would be less than perfect?

No it would not. This is because the above is based on a presumption that God's will (ie what he wants) is subject or OBLIGED to be subject to ANYTHING. This is contradictory to what it means to *be* an omnipotent God and it is certainly contrary to what it means to be Jehovah. Nothing, can oblige an outcome that is contrary to his will, certainly not the speck of dust that constitutes (a) human(s). In short, it presumes that God cannot totally control (contain even eliminate) "the human element" /"human contamination" if that be his will. That if you take 1 omnipotent God and combine it with 1 imperfect human both exercise an equal influence on the result.

To illustrate: Think of the human being the pen and God the miracle-working hand. How much influence does a pen have over the writer? Does the pen get to say "Well here we are working together, I think the result should be like this..." No, the pen shuts up and does whatever the hand directs it to do. And if the pen is not perfect, tends to blotch, doesn't run smoothly, well, we recall it's not just "a hand" but a "miracle-working hand" ie it is an instrument in the hand of the Almighty: while the pen is in that position, it will operate perfectly.

Under inspiration, the bible writers were pens in the hands of the Almighty, they wrote, he performed his miracles on them: the result was perfection.





JW



RELATED POSTS

Is the term "inerrancy" without MEANING?
viewtopic.php?p=1091724#p1091724

Should the term "inerrancy" be replaced?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 12#p985512