Re: not one stone upon another

[Athetotheist]

Here's another piece I posted in Random Ramblings and thought I would bring over into a debate forum to see if any issue can be taken with it:


In Matthew 24:2 Jesus prophesies that the temple will be thrown down with "not one stone left here upon another". Apologists regard the Romans' demolition of the temple in the year 70 as a remarkably accurate fulfillment of Jesus's words.

This doesn't seem to be the case since the famous Western Wall, dating to the 1st or 2nd century BCE, is still standing stone upon stone.

Apologists may argue that Jesus was referring only to the temple buildings themselves in the Matthew passage, but in Luke 19:41-44 he makes the same prophecy for the entire city, which included the temple complex where the Western Wall stands. Between prophesying every stone at the temple thrown down and prophesying every stone in the whole city thrown down, Jesus didn't have much room to let the Western Wall slip by.

So for a question: Is there any way out of this dilemma?

[Athetotheist]

And if there's one that succeeds like the destruction of the Temple, the success of the Church and the restoration of the nation of Israel, we atheists have to field that one, too.

We've been bantering about the destruction of the temple and a whole other discussion could be had about the success of the Church, but when it comes to the restoration of the nation of Israel, here's something you and your fellow atheists might want to keep in mind and even bring up in your debates with others:

[1213]

...failures (Tyre and Babylon) quotemining the OT to fit the Jesus story (death of Judas) ...

By what I remember, Bible tells Tyre will not be rebuilt. And because we can see the ruins still, I think Bible is correct.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ruins+of+tyre ... &ia=images

...And the extent to which the gospels have been changed. To take one clue...or two, rather, the angelic message at the tomb is changed in Luke because he wants to change his story from the disciples told to go to Galilee to being told to stay in Jerusalem. And the Rejection at Nazareth is shifted to the outset of his mission and a whole speech in the Nazareth synagogue and murder attempt (which neither Mark or Matthew appear to have heard of) is added. Clearly Luke is an amendment of an original version and a very substantial rewrite, too. ..

Sorry, I disagree with that.

...But as to the prophecies, if any of those helped to persuade people into believing Christianity, they were fooled, just as Prophecy is used to fool people into believing today.

Do you mean how people are fooled by climate prophets to make coal cheap for China and to buy new electric cars?

I don't think prophesies are for to make people believers, they are warnings for people.

[brunumb]

Do you mean how people are fooled by climate prophets to make coal cheap for China and to buy new electric cars?

I don't think prophesies are for to make people believers, they are warnings for people.

Sorry, I disagree with that.

People are being fooled by false information. Climate science is providing a warning for people concerning the fate of our planet and is not part of some capitalist conspiracy.

[TRANSPONDER]

...failures (Tyre and Babylon) quotemining the OT to fit the Jesus story (death of Judas) ...

By what I remember, Bible tells Tyre will not be rebuilt. And because we can see the ruins still, I think Bible is correct.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ruins+of+tyre ... &ia=images

...And the extent to which the gospels have been changed. To take one clue...or two, rather, the angelic message at the tomb is changed in Luke because he wants to change his story from the disciples told to go to Galilee to being told to stay in Jerusalem. And the Rejection at Nazareth is shifted to the outset of his mission and a whole speech in the Nazareth synagogue and murder attempt (which neither Mark or Matthew appear to have heard of) is added. Clearly Luke is an amendment of an original version and a very substantial rewrite, too. ..

Sorry, I disagree with that.

...But as to the prophecies, if any of those helped to persuade people into believing Christianity, they were fooled, just as Prophecy is used to fool people into believing today.

Do you mean how people are fooled by climate prophets to make coal cheap for China and to buy new electric cars?

I don't think prophesies are for to make people believers, they are warnings for people.

I recall this matter of Tyre was discussed here. Tyre was rebuilt and very quickly, too and todays' Tyre ("sur") covers the entire island and mainland Tyre including the silted -up causeway. The ruins you speak of are, I believe, Roman but are on the edge of the city by the sea and the Necropolis which I'm not sure of but I'd guess was built outside the city anyway. But Ancient Tyre is discovered by archaeologists under the present city. Sorry and you disagree with whatever you like but it's there for anyone who can read to see. Luke as we now have it has changed Jesus telling the disciples they would see him in Galilee to what he told them in Gaillee. This is confirmed by Jesus telling them he would see them in Galilee in Mark and Mathew (going to Gethsemane) which is missing in Luke and may well be something missing in Luke's gospel that he really did cut out, because it would contradict his alteration. And the reason why is obvious; they do not go to Galilee as in Matthew but stay in Jerusalem to start the church and there is evidence that Luke had learned that because Paul's letters had become available. You may disagree as much as you like, but the facts In The Bible disagree with you.

Fooled rather by those who think the earth is flat, everything was made in 6 days and that evolution is 'only a theory', And you may add to that other science -denial beliefs to that, such as climate -change denial, covid -denial and the election wasn't stolen denial, if you wish.

[1213]

...Tyre was rebuilt and very quickly, too and todays' Tyre ("sur") covers the entire island and mainland Tyre including the silted -up causeway.

By what the Bible tells, Tyre was on island, and it had daughter cities on mainland. It seems to me that people are mixing the mainland cities to the tyre that is still ruins.

They shall destroy the walls of Tyre, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her a bare rock. She shall be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea; for I have spoken it, says the Lord Yahweh; and she shall become a spoil to the nations. Her daughters who are in the field shall be slain with the sword: and they shall know that I am Yahweh.
Eze. 26:4-6

...Luke as we now have it has changed Jesus telling the disciples they would see him in Galilee to what he told them in Gaillee....

Please show the scriptures that you think change something?

[TRANSPONDER]

...Tyre was rebuilt and very quickly, too and todays' Tyre ("sur") covers the entire island and mainland Tyre including the silted -up causeway.

By what the Bible tells, Tyre was on island, and it had daughter cities on mainland. It seems to me that people are mixing the mainland cities to the tyre that is still ruins.

They shall destroy the walls of Tyre, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her a bare rock. She shall be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea; for I have spoken it, says the Lord Yahweh; and she shall become a spoil to the nations. Her daughters who are in the field shall be slain with the sword: and they shall know that I am Yahweh.
Eze. 26:4-6

...Luke as we now have it has changed Jesus telling the disciples they would see him in Galilee to what he told them in Gaillee....

Please show the scriptures that you think change something?

Reread what I said. Modern Tyre (now call 'Sur') covers the mainland, island and the silted up causeway between. That is to say, All of it.

Sure. Luke 34.6/7 compared to Mark 16.8 and Matthew 28.7. See also Mark 14.28 and Matthew 26.32/3 where he tells them he will see them in Galilee and compare to luke 22 where it should be but isn't. Others? Jesus teaching his disciples to pray at the Sermon on the mount in Matthew, but in Luke when he is leaving for Jerusalem he teaches them the same prayer for the first time, to all appearances. The rejection at Nazareth iin luke is shifted to the start of his mission and attempted murder is added, plus an announcement of his messiahship that Mark and Matthew never mention though referencing the same passage. And John having no Temple cleansing at all, though a carbon copy pops up around the time of the Baptism. .And the Resurrection is full of it like the Marys running into Jesus while Luke specifically says they didn't as well as the disciples going to Galilee to see Jesus while in Luke of course they stay put in Jerusalem. Which is where we came in.

[1213]

... Luke 34.6/7 compared to Mark 16.8 and Matthew 28.7. See also Mark 14.28 and Matthew 26.32/3 where he tells them he will see them in Galilee and compare to luke 22 where it should be but isn't.

Thanks for the scriptures. Why it is a problem, if Luke 22 doesn't have "I will go before you into Galilee"? I don't think it makes them not compatible. They are written by different persons, which is why it is understandable, if they are not identical.

I think these scriptures are fully compatible.

He isn’t here, but is risen. Remember what he told you when he was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again?”… … returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest.
Luke 24:6-9

But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He goes before you into Galilee. There you will see him, as he said to you.’” They went out, [TR adds “quickly”] and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid…. … She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
Mark 16:7-10

Go quickly and tell his disciples, ‘He has risen from the dead, and behold, he goes before you into Galilee; there you will see him.’ Behold, I have told you.”
Matthew 28:7

However, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.”
Mark 14:28

But after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.”
Matthew 26:32

Others? Jesus teaching his disciples to pray at the Sermon on the mount in Matthew, but in Luke when he is leaving for Jerusalem he teaches them the same prayer for the first time, to all appearances. The rejection at Nazareth iin luke is shifted to the start of his mission and attempted murder is added, plus an announcement of his messiahship that Mark and Matthew never mention though referencing the same passage. And John having no Temple cleansing at all, though a carbon copy pops up around the time of the Baptism. .And the Resurrection is full of it like the Marys running into Jesus while Luke specifically says they didn't as well as the disciples going to Galilee to see Jesus while in Luke of course they stay put in Jerusalem. Which is where we came in.

It seems to me that you are reading in something that just isn't there, or is not really any problem. They are all part of the same bigger picture and there really is no contradiction, unless you interpret own filling to it.

[TRANSPONDER]

To repeat for any who missed it, The angel at the tomb tells the women to tell the disciples that they will see him in Galilee, just as he told them (before going to Gethsemane). Luke doesn't just leave this out - it is not a Lucan omission, of which there are many - but a deliberate alteration to what Jesus told them in Galilee. And we can see why; because they do not go to Galilee but stay in Jerusalem to found the church that Luke wants to describe in Act. And why? Because Paul's letter had become available. The Synoptic gospel was wrong and had to be updated to fit in with what (according to Paul) had actually happened.

The point about the misplacement of the Lord's prayer is just one of many that explain the way the Sermon material was inserted into the Gospels. Mark has none of it. Matthew has it all, including the Lord's prayer, in one indigestible lump on the Mount. Luke has a half of it in roughly the same place, but, starting with the Lord's prayer pretty much, has the 2nd half from the departure for Jerusalem and dropped in dribs and drabbs all along the journey to beyond the Jordan.

Not only does this tell us something about the way the gospels were written, it tells us something about the material they used. This of course sheds light on why the Temple destruction 'prophecy' is much more likely to be retrospective history.

Like they say; we can only fill the trough'; we can't make anyone drink. You may dismiss it all and say it doesn't affect core doctrines, But I reckon the evidence it quite clear and I only wonder why nobody ever seems to have noticed all this before.

[William]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #48]

- it is not a Lucan omission, of which there are many -

I noticed yesterday when reading Luke's account of Jesus telling his inner circle to sell-stuff in order to buy swords, the company assured Jesus that they had at least two swords among then, which Jesus said would be enough...so then later we have an unnamed member of the company using one of those swords to cut off some guards ear...[naughty naughty...luckily Jesus happened to be there to fix it,] but Luke's omission of the name of the one bearing the sword stood out to me, because we all know it was Peter who did the gangster-deed, and later on in life, graduated to become the first Pope.

Now I am left wondering if Luke even mentioned Peter at all...

Search "does Lukes gospel mention Peter?"

Peter's Confession begins as a dialogue between Jesus and his disciples in Matthew 16:13, Mark 8:27 and Luke 9:18.

Search "Luke 9:18"

Context:
And it came to pass, as he was alone praying, his disciples were with him: and he asked them, saying, Whom say the people that I am? They answering said, John the Baptist; but some say, Elias; and others say, that one of the old prophets is risen again. He said unto them, But whom say ye that I am? Peter answering said, The Christ of God. And he straitly charged them, and commanded them to tell no man that thing;

Hmmm.. should I suspect from all this, that Luke had a problem with Peter?

Search "did Luke have a problem with Peter?"

Scholars have long assumed that Luke’s Gospel and Acts were written in the nineties of the first century, but some have now seriously considered that they may have been written quite early in the second century. Either way, an author writing at that time is unlikely to have known an apostle who probably died three or four decades earlier.

So maybe not a personal problem with the actual Peter, but more along the lines of having a problem with the character Peter...

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to 1213 in post #47]

I think these scriptures are fully compatible.

He isn’t here, but is risen. Remember what he told you when he was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again?”… … returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest.
Luke 24:6-9

But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He goes before you into Galilee. There you will see him, as he said to you.’” They went out, [TR adds “quickly”] and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid…. … She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
Mark 16:7-10

Go quickly and tell his disciples, ‘He has risen from the dead, and behold, he goes before you into Galilee; there you will see him.’ Behold, I have told you.”
Matthew 28:7

However, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.”
Mark 14:28

But after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.”
Matthew 26:32

Are these scriptures fully compatible with John, who has no angels appear at the tomb until Mary Magdalene goes there for the second time?