mark9950

You probably all know all the verses that refer to jesus as being 2000 years late.

So I have a habit of asking a minister that question so he could give me a response.Out of curiousity.

Here it is,I would love any and all rebuttals

Thanks for the e-mail.

You are not the first to have this question. There are whole religions who believe that He somehow already returned, but does this belief fit with the facts...with logic. If He has already come back, why don't we have some history about His Worldwide 1,000-year reign? How did that slip by the History books? Where are the New Heavens and New Earth? Where is the New Jerusalem, which is 1,500 miles long, wide and high? Where they here for a while and all go away?

The Bible says...

Matt 24:22
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
KJV

He made this statement in answer to a question about what it would be like just prior to His return. If those days (of humans) were cut short, why are we still here, still committing murders, rapes, wars and torture? What was the point of His supposed return back then?

The Bible speaks to the fact that when He returns, the firstfruits will be changed to spirit beings. Where are they? Did they go away.

1 Cor 15:52-54
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
KJV

So, based on the idea He has already returned, where are these spirit beings.

We know from the Bible that the gospel will be preached and then shall the end come...

Matt 24:14
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
KJV

So, if He already came back and the gospel was preached into all the world back before that return, why is the gospel being preached today? Is He coming back again for another 1,000-year reign. Will He continue coming back every 2000 years or so.

REGARDING THE DISCIPLES THINKING HE WAS COMING BACK THEN...

Of course they thought that. God allowed them, to a point, to believe that for they needed to write with an urgency so that the text would make sense to those across the 2000 years since then. They believed He was coming within a few years of His death and resurrection. Even AFTER the resurrection, but before they had the Holy Spirit to fully understand, they said...

Acts 1:3-7
3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
KJV

Did you see that? They thought STILL thought He was coming back and ONLY to restore the Kingdom like it was under the reigns of David and Solomon. They were completely shortsighted. Read 1 Cor. 2:14 and you will read that without the Holy Spirit, spiritual things are foolishness and you are spiritually discerned (confused). They were. Now consider this: When were the gospel accounts and the letters of Paul written? Of course, they were written much later. They were written (inspired by God) after they had the Holy Spirit. They knew that Christ was not coming back anytime soon, but they still wrote that text with the thinking they had about His imminent return.

REGARDING THE STATEMENT ABOUT NOT TASTING DEATH UNTIL...

This was speaking to what is referred to as the Transfiguration...the vision SOME of them had. Notice your very quote of the scripture: It says "there will be SOME standing here which will not taste death. Those some were Peter, James and John (Matthew 17:1). Isn't it interesting that the verse you quoted was Matthew 16:28---THE VERY LAST VERSE OF CHAPTER 16. The very next chapter goes into the Transfiguration where they see a vision of Moses and Elijah. Make sense? When was this written.................later...right? The Transfiguration is also covered in Luke 22, Mark 14 and John 13 and you refer to them to in your e-mail. For Matthew 26:64, who is Jesus talking to there? Go read verses 57-64. As for 1 Cor 7:29, this is Paul writing with urgency. As for the writing in Phil 1:10: Think about it. I tell people all the time, in speaking about the Salvation Process, that they must remain in it until their death or the return of Christ. When you die, you are only dead for 1 second, as far as YOU are concerned. You die and whether you are in the grave for 6,000 years or 10 minutes, you are brought back to conciousness 1 second later, as far as you are concerned. Therefore what is the difference between dying 4,000 years prior to His return or standing there alive when He returns? Answer: 1 second. Therefore, you see the meaning of Phil 1:10. The Day of Christ comes to both the DEAD and the ALIVE. The verse says to be sincere and without offense UNTIL THE DAY OF CHRIST. Does it say that you will, of course, be alive till that day? Of course not. Paul wrote this book (letter) to the Philippians, didn't he? Well, he also wrote Hebrews and Hebrews 11. Notice what it says in the Faith chapter:

After speaking of all the faithful of God, he says:

Heb 11:39
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
KJV

They died not receiving the return of Christ or eternal life. They will receive it at His return.

Now you are free to believe anything you wish. I have no idea what the hope is for someone who believes Christ already return and somehow left the area, apparently forever.

We have told you what we know and believe and what the Bible proves. Read Revelation 20 and 21 and tell me where in history all these things happened, assuming He has already returned.

Let me know if you have further questions.



Sincerely,

Chris Cumming, minister
Personal Correspondence

sodium

That's just an argument from silence.

fried beef sandwich

I like the fact that he basically admits that God intentionally misled his own followers and believers by allowing them to believe that he was coming back soon so that they would write down everything quickly.

I guess the ends justifies the means, huh?

MortalWombat

Jesus: the first weapon of mass destruction.

mark9950

That God is satan the deceiver

Kosh

So like, why did it take them 40 years?

Godless Wonder

I'm certainly no bible scholar, by any stretch, but I just don't buy this bit about referring to the transfiguration:

Notice the response doesn't quote this, in full:

Mark 9:1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

It says quite plainly that some of them standing there won't die before kingdom come.

So, the "kingdom of god come with power" means what exactly? The transfiguration?

And I suppose when Yosemite Sam talks about blowing Bugs Bunny "to Kingdom Come", he's really talking about transfiguration, eh? Perhaps disfiguration.

This seems clearly a rationalization. If "kingdom" hasn't "come" (suddenly a couple other words ending in "ation" enter my mind) then those words must mean something else. But what? Latch onto the only thing around to latch onto.

jayh

They were. Now consider this: When were the gospel accounts and the letters of Paul written? Of course, they were written much later. They were written (inspired by God) after they had the Holy Spirit. They knew that Christ was not coming back anytime soon, but they still wrote that text with the thinking they had about His imminent return.

What you describing here is a change of interpretation, midstream when the original interpretation did not appear to work out. There is nothing in that change of heart that suggests any divine inspiration, all sorts of religious groups (as well as political and other groups) change their interpretation to match new realities. In no way does this make the second interpretation any more credible.



52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Irrelevant to the material at hand. If a person were to die and awaken, yes it would seem insantaneous, but we are discussing here what he told the LIVING disciples. [If you tell someone something with tricky wording, with the full knowledge that they are comletely misunderstanding you, that is LYING in both the legal and moral definitions.]

The highly stretched definitions to dance around this problem are essentially ad hoc explanations. The plain language interpretation doesn't work so the language is stretched until somehow it is forced to fit. There are problems with this:

1) there is NO additonal Biblical evidence to support these bizarre interpretations. If there were other scriptures which proposed these interpretations, at least there would be some justification, but apparently Yahweh left out that part.

2) Since we don't have any evidence for one stretch over another how do we know which is valid. Biblically speaking, with no explanatory scriptures, ANY interpretation of the language that covered the bases could be used. If other alternative explanations are just as credible scripturally, than the Bible has done a really poor job (left our important material) of explainging probably THE critical doctrine of Christianity.

jay

Bernard Muller

Who are they? Paul the apostles? Probably. If they knew Christ was not coming soon, why they still wrote about the imminent return. I call that lying. Or maybe I am missing something.

Actually, the first sentence of the verse is 16:28a, not part of 17:1.
But "Those some were Peter, James and John" is not part of Mat17:1 (or 16:28), which read "And after six days Jesus takes with [him] Peter, and James, and John his brother, and brings them up into a high mountain apart."
That's a detail. Let's see what comes next:

Mat16:28, as a whole read as such:
Darby "Verily I say unto you [all his disciples!], There are some of those standing here that shall not taste of death at all until **they shall have seen the Son of man coming in his kingdom**."

And in GMark, that "Matthew" copied a lot and improved, we read:
Mk9:1 "And he said to them, Verily I say unto you, There are some of those standing here that shall not taste death until **they shall have seen the kingdom of God come in power**."

I heard that before! So that's it: an (alleged) private showing of Elijah & Moses to three disciples.
Alleluhiah! That's the realized Kingdom! That's:
"the Son of man coming in his kingdom" (GMatthew)
or
"the kingdom of God come in power" (GMark)
I wonder if our minister has been preaching that all that fuss about the Kingdom of God is only that alleged incident, and it happened already, around 28AD and for a few minutes! And all the other writings about the Kingdom to come after that, by Paul and others, are just either lies or unintentional misinformations!

Nowhere in John13, or the whole of GJohn there is a transfiguration tale as in GMark or GLuke or GMatthew.

Ya, I guess so:
1 Corinthians 7 NASB
29 But this I say, brethren, **the time has been shortened**, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none;
30 and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess;
31 and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for **the form of this world is passing away**."

If the second coming, or the advent of the Kingdom, whatever, was thought by Paul to be thousands of years off, why would he advise his contemporary Christians not to have a normal conjugal life, even if they were already married?
Is that what is called urgency?

There are more "urgencies":

1Co15:51-52 "Behold, I tell you a mystery: We
[Paul and the recipients of the letter, his contemporaries]
` shall not all sleep [be dead], but we shall all be changed; in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

See also 'Romans':
Ro13:11-12a "And do this, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for **now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed**. **The night is far spent, the day is at hand**..."
Note: according to Tacitus, those Christians of Rome were destroyed by Nero less than seven years later! Likely not what Paul had in mind!

and from 'Hebrews':
Heb10:25 "... exhorting one another, and so much the more as **you [the recipients of the letter] see the Day approaching**."
Heb10:36-37 "For you [the recipients of the letter, again] have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise: "For **yet a little while**, And He who is coming will come and will not tarry.""

As I noted, these letters were meant for the contemporaries of Paul, many of those were not expected to die before the BIG event, AND not for Christians 2000 years later.

Best regards, Bernard

fried beef sandwich

Because they were using QWERTY instead of Dvorak.