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.

[polonius]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

"RESPONSE: But God didn't. He let man write a storybook containing bits of history. And then men claimed it was divinely inspired. "

If so, and if we are happy with it,

why should it bother anybody.

RESPONSE:

Perhaps we should revise your last sentence.

Why should anybody bother?

[polonius]

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

Curious, which generation do you think he was talking about and why?

What I find curious about this is the several answers given by believers and unbelievers.

The word "generation", as used here and elsewhere by Jesus, has a meaning other than what nearly all assume.

A generation is that which has been generated by a progenitor. It can be a whole genealogy.

RESPONSE:

The word "generation", as used here and elsewhere by Jesus, has a meaning other than what nearly all assume.

No. Jesus used the plain meaning of words to say what he meant. "This generation" means "this generation."

Some fundamentalists and bible literalists try to avoid the end time prophecies of Jesus which say that:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Found in Matthew, Mark, and Luke by trying to argue when Jesus used the term this generation, he really didnt mean his generation.

But if we look at several other prophecies, it is shown that Jesus clearly meant his generation.

For example:

Matthew 26:64 Jesus said to him (to the high priest), You have said so. But I tell you,
From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.

Matthew 10:23 23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

James 5: 7 Strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.

Paul 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17
For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died.* 16For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangels call and with the sound of Gods trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever.

Thus, the high priest condemning Jesus will see the second coming, before the apostles visit all the towns in Israel, Jesus will come, etc.

All of these are within Jesus meaning of this generation.


Of course, it never happened because Jesus (or scripture) is in error!

[Elijah John]

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

Curious, which generation do you think he was talking about and why?

What I find curious about this is the several answers given by believers and unbelievers.

The word "generation", as used here and elsewhere by Jesus, has a meaning other than what nearly all assume.

A generation is that which has been generated by a progenitor. It can be a whole genealogy.

RESPONSE:

The word "generation", as used here and elsewhere by Jesus, has a meaning other than what nearly all assume.

No. Jesus used the plain meaning of words to say what he meant. "This generation" means "this generation."

Some fundamentalists and bible literalists try to avoid the end time prophecies of Jesus which say that:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Found in Matthew, Mark, and Luke by trying to argue when Jesus used the term this generation, he really didnt mean his generation.

But if we look at several other prophecies, it is shown that Jesus clearly meant his generation.

For example:

Matthew 26:64 Jesus said to him (to the high priest), You have said so. But I tell you,
From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.

Matthew 10:23 23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

James 5: 7 Strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.

Paul 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17
For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died.* 16For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangels call and with the sound of Gods trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever.

Thus, the high priest condemning Jesus will see the second coming, before the apostles visit all the towns in Israel, Jesus will come, etc.

All of these are within Jesus meaning of this generation.


Of course, it never happened because Jesus (or scripture) is in error!

Good response. And then there's this:

Matthew 16:27-28New International Version (NIV)

27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Fathers glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. 28 Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

This verse mentions the 2nd coming of Christ with no reference to"generations" at all. Only to the lifetime of his contemporary audience.

Jesus 2nd coming hasn't happened yet, so yes I agree.

-Either Jesus is (was) in error, or
-The Scriptures were in error.

If the first, Jesus cannot be God. If the second, how can we possibly know, either way?

[polonius]

Elisha John posted

Good response. And then there's this:

Matthew 16:27-28New International Version (NIV)

27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Fathers glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. 28 Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

This verse mentions the 2nd coming of Christ with no reference to"generations" at all. Only to the lifetime of his contemporary audience.

Jesus 2nd coming hasn't happened yet, so yes I agree.

-Either Jesus is (was) in error, or
-The Scriptures were in error.

If the first, Jesus cannot be God. If the second, how can we possibly know, either way?

RESPONSE: Yes. But it is always interesting to read the explanation of biblical fundamentalist who try to interpret scripture contrary to the plain meaning of words so they can defend their belief system in spite of obvious errors.

[Monta]

[Replying to polonius.advice]


"RESPONSE: Yes. But it is always interesting to read the explanation of biblical fundamentalist who try to interpret scripture contrary to the plain meaning of words so they can defend their belief system in spite of obvious errors."

Something like musical fundamentalist who can read the musc and
someone who can not and finds him in 'errors'.

There are no 'plain meaning of the words' in spirituality.
A beautiful sunset can not be seen by plain meaning of words
but by inner ability to appreciate beauty.
Neither can love, faith, compassion.
Natural mind can talk about it the apiritual mind knows it.

[polonius]

[Replying to Monta]

Monta posted:

Replying to polonius.advice]


"RESPONSE: Yes. But it is always interesting to read the explanation of biblical fundamentalist who try to interpret scripture contrary to the plain meaning of words so they can defend their belief system in spite of obvious errors."

Something like musical fundamentalist who can read the musc and
someone who can not and finds him in 'errors'.

There are no 'plain meaning of the words' in spirituality.
A beautiful sunset can not be seen by plain meaning of words
but by inner ability to appreciate beauty.
Neither can love, faith, compassion.
Natural mind can talk about it the apiritual mind knows it.

RESPONSE: Words were certainly used in the Bible from it's writing beginning in 800 -700 BC by Canaanite Hebrews.

To pretend that somehow it is "spiritual" and does not really mean what it clearly says is a attempt to avoid addressing the Bible's errors.

The explanations the fundamentalist believers that attempt to avoid admitting errors in the Bible are truly amazing.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 105 by Monta]




[center]
Spirituality is listening to music or appreciating a sunset.
Part One[/center]

There are no 'plain meaning of the words' in spirituality.
A beautiful sunset can not be seen by plain meaning of words
but by inner ability to appreciate beauty.
Neither can love, faith, compassion.
Natural mind can talk about it the apiritual mind knows it.

Wow.. what an interesting take on what spirituality means. No gods required.
Sounds like aesthetic appreciation to me.

I look at a sunset.. I can get an aesthetic response. I might say: "Wow, that looks nice".


____________

Question:

• 
  
  Are those who appreciate the aesthetics of death metal being "spiritual"?
  
  

____________

[Lioness777]

[Replying to post 2 by Elijah John]

Jesus was NOT wrong on the second coming, basically, He didn't tell anyone when, just to watch for the signs of his coming which we are doing now. The signs are massively in our face, with the uprising of the middle east, the moral decay of the US and the world. If you were to read Mat. 24...you will see this.
Paul, was not wrong per se, for he could only delve into what was happening in his day and age. The events of his day would naturally lead him to conclusions of the second coming, just as all the era's in the past 2,000 years have lead many to believe Jesus's coming.

But the key is Israel, for this is the starting of the signs we need to watch...

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 2 by Elijah John]

Jesus was NOT wrong on the second coming, basically, He didn't tell anyone when, just to watch for the signs of his coming which we are doing now. The signs are massively in our face, with the uprising of the middle east, the moral decay of the US and the world. If you were to read Mat. 24...you will see this.
Paul, was not wrong per se, for he could only delve into what was happening in his day and age. The events of his day would naturally lead him to conclusions of the second coming, just as all the era's in the past 2,000 years have lead many to believe Jesus's coming.

But the key is Israel, for this is the starting of the signs we need to watch...

Welcome to the site, Lioness.

I didn't mean to suggest that the "2nd coming" was not going to happen, just that it didn't happen in the lifetime of Jesus disciples, as he, (or the Gospel Evangelists) said it would.

Yes, the "signs of the times" are all around us, but as you rightly point out, they existed in Jesus day as well, and/or shortly thereafter.

How do you account for the verses that indicate Jesus would return in the lifetime of the NT authors, or the characters in the NT?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 2 by Elijah John]

Jesus was NOT wrong on the second coming, basically, He didn't tell anyone when, just to watch for the signs of his coming which we are doing now. The signs are massively in our face, with the uprising of the middle east, the moral decay of the US and the world. If you were to read Mat. 24...you will see this.
Paul, was not wrong per se, for he could only delve into what was happening in his day and age. The events of his day would naturally lead him to conclusions of the second coming, just as all the era's in the past 2,000 years have lead many to believe Jesus's coming.

But the key is Israel, for this is the starting of the signs we need to watch...

RESPONSE:

But as Elisha John quotes Jesus

Matthew 16:27-28New International Version (NIV)

"27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Fathers glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. 28 Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

Lioness continues

He didn't tell anyone when, just to watch for the signs of his coming which we are doing now.

Jesus was NOT wrong on the second coming, basically, He didn't tell anyone when, just to watch for the signs of his coming which we are doing now.

RESPONSE:Yet Jesus told everyone by using the plain meaning of words that those alive when he made the statement would witness the Second Coming as was quoted above.

Yet it didn't happen and thus Jesus was proven to be in error.

Perhaps we should be moderately tolerant of illusion dwelling by posters who have no real evidence. We just have to careful of what they try to tell us.