Many failed predictions of Jesus return..

[Elijah John]

Matthew 16:27-28 New 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.

There have been many failed predictions of the "2nd coming of Christ". Most notably, Charles Taze Russell who predicted Jesus would return in 1914. When he didn't return, the prediction was revised to mean an "invisible return".

For debate, in light of the quoted passage from Matthew, was Jesus the first person to mistakenly predict his return?

How is Jesus prediction different from any of the others who have mistakenly predicted the time of his return?

[hERICtic]

So your criteria for understanding Biblical context is:

1) Having the holy spirit
2) Accepting the Bible is the word of god.

Iif every single Christian on this site was in a room, separated and was asked the same specific questions regarding scripture...... in most instances we would get different answers. This is show every day on this site and every other Christian debate site.

Yet all would claim points 1 and 2.

Put non-believers in the same situation, in most instances you would get the same answers.

God is not the author of confusion, yet it would seem the believers are the ones confused.

Instead of telling me how to get context, explain to me where I erred.

Do you believe Jesus is referring to the Transfiguration is Matthew 16?

If yes..

Jesus states:

He will be killed.
He will be resurrected.
He will come into his fathers glory with angels and mankind will be rewarded.
There are some standing in front of him that will be dead before this occurs.

Matthew 25 has Jesus referring to his return.

He states, he will return by coming in to his fathers glory with angels and mankind will be rewarded.

Now, if you believe Matthew 16 is referring to the transfiguration, please show me how this is possible.

If you do not believe its referring to the transfiguration, can you explain how most Christians, filled with the holy ghost and accepting the Bible is gods word...have this incorrect.

Thanks.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

How is Jesus prediction different from any of the others who have mistakenly predicted the time of his return?

The predictions made in the Gospels differ. Mark does not have Jesus' return (or rather, the Son of Man's return) being soon. Rather, it is the calamities (persecution, pestilence, etc.) that will occur in the lifetime of the disciples. Jesus' return is, by Jesus' own witness, unknown by anyone but the father. In Greek, the distinction is more clear. In English, there are two phrases: "At that time" and "In those days", and the two are not synonymous.

Matthew and Luke, who both borrow from Mark, abbreviate the discourse. My guess is, they weren't terribly concerned with what problems might arise if Jesus didn't return within a century or two. It is we moderns who make a deal of this.

The reason we moderns make a big deal out of is that it's been two thousand years and counting. As a hypothesis, do you have a condition that, if met, would mean that this is all a false prophecy?
I for one would say that it's the complete lack of any information regarding when it's going to happen. If liam, as you say, it's unknown even to Jesus...then the prophecy is all but useless to us mortals. Of what use is a prophecy that does not have a date?

No prophecy has a date.

That's what some of us mortals try to do. And it always fails.

Yes, "it's been two thousand years and counting".

The reason for that, and why no date has been set, is given here:

2 Peter 3:

4 They will say, Where is this coming he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it always has".

9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

[Danmark]

Tam wrote:

Does that make sense? Do you understand the point we have been trying to make?

I certainly get your point. It has been made by many apologists trying to avoid the plain meaning of the words of Jesus. I understand the argument. It is just WRONG. How could Jesus have made it more clear when he said THIS generation? He could have also said, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
And that is exactly what he said.

So in addition to the ordinary meaning of "this generation" [without the convoluted mental gymnastics you suggest because the you don't like the meaning] we have Jesus making it even more clear by his words in Matthew 16:28.

Game, set, and match.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

How is Jesus prediction different from any of the others who have mistakenly predicted the time of his return?

The predictions made in the Gospels differ. Mark does not have Jesus' return (or rather, the Son of Man's return) being soon. Rather, it is the calamities (persecution, pestilence, etc.) that will occur in the lifetime of the disciples. Jesus' return is, by Jesus' own witness, unknown by anyone but the father. In Greek, the distinction is more clear. In English, there are two phrases: "At that time" and "In those days", and the two are not synonymous.

Matthew and Luke, who both borrow from Mark, abbreviate the discourse. My guess is, they weren't terribly concerned with what problems might arise if Jesus didn't return within a century or two. It is we moderns who make a deal of this.

The reason we moderns make a big deal out of is that it's been two thousand years and counting. As a hypothesis, do you have a condition that, if met, would mean that this is all a false prophecy?
I for one would say that it's the complete lack of any information regarding when it's going to happen. If liam, as you say, it's unknown even to Jesus...then the prophecy is all but useless to us mortals. Of what use is a prophecy that does not have a date?

Prophecy witout a date.

Not all prophecies have or are even about dates. But rather many are about events.


This is a prophecy that some of this generation (see previous posts for defining the word generation) will STILL BE HERE ... still be alive... when all these things happen. We will not have passed away.


Two thousand years and we are still here and have not passed away. Nor will we (despite what I am sure is the hope of some atheists, lol - not that we die, but that we give up our faith or 'curse God and die'). There may not be many of this generation on the earth at any given time, but there really only needs to be one in order for His words to be true.


And we who are alive will be caught up to meet Him in the air when He returns.

But actually, we do have a date, acribed to the prediction of Jesus. "Some standing here" is a date range for the event to happen in the liftetime of his contemporaries, not to some distant, future readership.

Some standing here is not a date range for His return (second coming).

Some standing there would not taste death before they SAW Him coming in His Kingdom.


We have evidence of at least one person having seen this before he died: John of Patmos. John testified that he was in the spirit on that day - the Lord's Day - when this happened. He DID see this before he died.

The fact that in other places Jesus is said to have said "no one knows, only the Father" is a revision of his original time spectific predicition of Matthew 16.27-28.

The fact that He said "no one knows that day or hour, not the angels or the Son, but only the Father" contradicts the idea that He would have then predicted a date for His return.




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

[tam]

Peace again to you,

Tam wrote:

Does that make sense? Do you understand the point we have been trying to make?

I certainly get your point. It has been made by many apologists trying to avoid the plain meaning of the words of Jesus. I understand the argument. It is just WRONG. How could Jesus have made it more clear when he said THIS generation? He could have also said, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
And that is exactly what he said.

One verse at a time (though that verse was fulfilled almost 2000 years ago anyway).

So in addition to the ordinary meaning of "this generation" [without the convoluted mental gymnastics you suggest because the you don't like the meaning]

I'm sorry, did you not look at the meaning of the word in the original language (I also provided a link to the source of that information)? There are no convoluted gymnastics going on, on our behalf, to come to our conclusion. How we have described the word 'generation' is in FACT supported by the evidence, which continues to be dismissed.



Peace again to you!

.

[otseng]

Americans are fed up with his racism, his lying, his anti immigrant stance, his ignorance, and his buffoonery.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid negative comments about others, including those not on the forum.

1. Personal attacks of any sort are not allowed. Comments about any person that are negative, condescending, frivolous or indicate in any way a lack of respect are not allowed.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Checkpoint]

Tam wrote:

Does that make sense? Do you understand the point we have been trying to make?

I certainly get your point. It has been made by many apologists trying to avoid the plain meaning of the words of Jesus.

That was not her point, it is yours.

I understand the argument. It is just WRONG.

As is anything presented that doesn't agree with your already decided way of reading scripture.

How could Jesus have made it more clear when he said THIS generation? He could have also said, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
And that is exactly what he said.

Yes it is, but that was not said to make more clear what he meant by "this generation"

Rather it is what you have used to make clear what you had already decided he meant by "this generation".

So in addition to the ordinary meaning of "this generation" [without the convoluted mental gymnastics you suggest because the you don't like the meaning] we have Jesus making it even more clear by his words in Matthew 16:28.

What he made clear by those words was what a few of his disciples would soon see.

Game, set, and match.

This debate is not a game to be won or lost.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

How is Jesus prediction different from any of the others who have mistakenly predicted the time of his return?

The predictions made in the Gospels differ. Mark does not have Jesus' return (or rather, the Son of Man's return) being soon. Rather, it is the calamities (persecution, pestilence, etc.) that will occur in the lifetime of the disciples. Jesus' return is, by Jesus' own witness, unknown by anyone but the father. In Greek, the distinction is more clear. In English, there are two phrases: "At that time" and "In those days", and the two are not synonymous.

Matthew and Luke, who both borrow from Mark, abbreviate the discourse. My guess is, they weren't terribly concerned with what problems might arise if Jesus didn't return within a century or two. It is we moderns who make a deal of this.

The reason we moderns make a big deal out of is that it's been two thousand years and counting. As a hypothesis, do you have a condition that, if met, would mean that this is all a false prophecy?
I for one would say that it's the complete lack of any information regarding when it's going to happen. If liam, as you say, it's unknown even to Jesus...then the prophecy is all but useless to us mortals. Of what use is a prophecy that does not have a date?

No prophecy has a date.

That's what some of us mortals try to do. And it always fails.

Yes, "it's been two thousand years and counting".

The reason for that, and why no date has been set, is given here:

2 Peter 3:

4 They will say, Where is this coming he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it always has".

9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

No prophecy has a date? Perhaps, not an exact one. But the time span, the date range given in Matthew 16.27-28 is quite specific. Within the lifetime of Jesus contemporaries. "Some standing here", in Jesus's day, not ours. Not the present readership.

Moving the goalposts.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 166 by Checkpoint]

The arguments presented that attempt to turn scripture itself on its head, substituting pure belief and opinion for genuine Biblical exegesis remind me of nothing so much as Flat Earth arguments and the denial of evolution. When the words of scripture are ignored and impossibly convoluted mental gymnastics are employed to turn 'this' and 'living right now' some future event it demonstrates that the Bible is not really the basis for such beliefs and that words do not actually matter. in this fairytale world 'life means 'death' and 'now' means 'later.'

[tam]

Peace to you EJ,

[Replying to post 157 by Elijah John]

I responded to this post above, but I had an additional question about something you said.

You said:

The fact that in other places Jesus is said to have said "no one knows, only the Father" is a revision of his original time spectific predicition of Matthew 16.27-28.

A revision by whom? Who made this revision?



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