John Kesler

To adequately explain this passage, you need to show how it was, or will be, fullfilled in all of its details. You have made some assertions, but I don't see any explication of the text.

Sheshbazzar

Simply quoting and repeating my question as in post # 51 above, does above not begin to address its subject, Which is;

Just where do you establish the "certain time limit" to be met for Zechariah 14.

"...and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
And beginning at Moses and the Prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." (Luke 24:25-27, 44)
But it IS very clear to everyone that "hears" and "keeps" His sayings, that we (that believe) are to understand and judge the meaning and the application of His words and sayings in the light of all that is written in The Holy Scriptures, i.e. "The Law, The Prophets, and The Writings", otherwise known as "The Tanaka" to the Jew, and as "The Old Testament" to those professing to be His disciples.

That Decypher manages to marshal a list of "scholars" who are willing to engage in "analyzing" the Masters sayings -apart- from the light of all that is written in The Holy Prophets, and other Scriptures, is not impressive to believers, and would not be impressive were it a hundred times as long.

That earlier generations, or even Paul or Peter thought, hoped or even believed that the whole matter would be finished and concluded within their own (then present) generation, does not require that their thoughts, hopes, or individual personal beliefs, would or could dictate when "ALL these things" would "come to pass" or become fully accomplished and "fulfilled".

When you continue to evade confronting the prophecy of Zechariah 14, (and others) you render yourselves unfit to give any valid analysis of the words of The One who warned that His sayings must be understood in such light.

Voluminous quotations from "scholars", attempting to interpret His sayings, while giving no consideration to the Prophets and Scriptural sayings, the very foundations on which the NT is most assuredly built, can easily fill up a lot of space, but are still only evasions.

John Kesler also has asked for your explication of the text, you still need to show how it WAS, or WILL BE fulfilled, in ALL of its details.

Decypher

Why would I want to establish that in Zechariah 14 we find any time limit? How does Zechariah 14 affect Matthew 24 etc. such that Jesus doesn't give a "certain time limit"?

Decypher

Missionary Types and Shadows

Missionaries rely heavily on very non-literal readings of the Hebrew Bible. They call these “types” and “foreshadows.” Jewish Scripture, we are told, “points to Jesus” even when the text is plainly not discussing Jesus. Is this missionary claim at all justified?

This missionary method is not surprising, as the plain meaning of Scripture (pshat) does not support the missionary agenda. Even missionaries concede prophecy fulfillment is generally not based on pshat:

Don't fall into the mistake of assuming that every time a New Testament writer cites an Old Testament text and applies it to Jesus (even if a "fulfillment" formula is followed), it must have been a direct/literal prediction coupled with a direct/literal fulfillment. In most cases by far, the New Testament takes a broader approach to the subject of messianic prophecy (e.g., typology, thematic parallels, corporate solidarity, historical correspondences/analogies, etc.).

<copyright material snipped>

© 2004 - 2006 SimplyJewish

See the original here:

http://anti-missionary.com/files/MissionaryTypes.html by Schmuel Silberman

note: the churchinfocus links appear to be dead.

or another cut and paste here:

http://p069.ezboard.com/fmessiahtrut...cID=1924.topic

Decypher

You are saying that the scholars in question aren't aware of what is written in the Old Testament?

What you happen to find impressive is not something I am really concerned with. Your own claim (which I was responding to) about what the "majority of believers" have thought with regard to "this generation" is unimpressive to me.

I did also provide an argument in support of what "this generation" (Matthew 24:34) is talking about, as I see it, involving verses in Matthew 23. Could you respond to that argument?

Decypher

If Jesus really said that, then he looks to have been seriously deluded. Jesus can't really expect people to follow him on the grounds of "prophecy" which uses a non-literal reading of scripture, as it is completely unverifiable. (As the article I provided points out.) And it isn't merely New Testament claims of prophecy fulfillment that we are talking about. The whole notion of the Jesus sacrifice also rests on a non-literal interpretation of the Old Testament. If you were to take the Torah at face value then the Jesus sacrifice would never be legitimate. Jesus would be sinning to even attempt such a sacrifice.

It simply isn't a case of people being, "slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken". It is a case of Jesus appealing to a non-literal reading of scripture without proof that the scripture was ever intended to be used in that way.

Sheshbazzar

Voluminous quotations easily fill up a lot of space, answer nothing, serving only as diversions and evasions.
You still need to show how Zechariah 14 WAS fulfilled, or WILL BE fulfilled, in ALL of its details.

The only "certain time limit" for the prophecies given in Matthew 24, Mark 13,and Luke 21, is the requirement that all of the specified events must transpire before His "coming in the clouds of heaven in great glory" (Matt 24:30, Mark 13:26 and Luke 21:27)
These things BEGAN to come to pass in that generation, but not all of these things finished coming to pass, and being so warned, henceforth every generation of believers has been watching in an earnest expectation of that time when "all of these things" should be finally and fully accomplished.
The referent of "this generation", being the generation that actually witnesses the final completion and conclusion of all of these things.
Down through the ages there have been many who have been convinced that theirs was that generation being spoken of as "this generation", (the erroneous reasonings of "Johnny-come-lately" "scholars" not withstanding) and being so convinced, repented of evil, and many also perished for withstanding that evil incarnate within apostate organized religion.

Believing the writings of Moses and of the Prophets most profoundly affects how one interprets and understands anything to be found within those books that are now popularly called the New Testament.
Rather obviously they were written by believers, for believers, that them that are believers might be forewarned and know what manner of doubtful disputations and dismissive reasonings that they that believe would ever need to be on guard against.
Your "line" did not sell to the Saints that wrote those books then, and in those generations, and will not sell to anyone today who is "mindful of the words which were spoken before by the Holy Prophets" and "keeps His words".

Decypher

And what do you mean by a time limit being "met" exactly? What argument are you trying to make here?

Decypher

If I understand you correctly, then what you are asking is completely absurd. I am not committed (obviously) to any prophecy in the Bible having been fulfilled, or that they will be fulfilled! And I am also (obviously) not committed to the New Testament making proper use of the Old Testament.

You need to show how exactly you have a reasonable argument against the position of a skeptic with this Zechariah 14 thing.

Jane H

Matthew 24- The problem is with the translation here. (Why does IIDB use KJV? Easier mockery?)
Try NIV/ NASB/ESV etc etc "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age". The phrase 'end of the age' refers to the end of the Temple/Nationalism/Torah worldview, as mentioned above Jesus is talking throughout about the answer to that question. My point is that it is irrational to suggest that Jesus/Matthew suddenly started to talk about the end of the spatio-temporal universe, without any clue that the topic had changed. Remember that the C1 Jewish approach to the "end times" always was of a period between the end of Israel's exile and the end of the spatio-temporal universe..

Sanders- One of the Third Quest approach, who has redefined much of recent understanding about C1 Judaism, although as the passage shows is hardly a full blooded evangelical apologist! The passage doesn't really add anything to the debate as such, containing no new evidence apart from the comment "We also note that Christianity survived this early discovery that Jesus had made a mistake very well." Surely a Christianity that preached the return of Jesus in the way Sanders thinks would struggle to survive and thrive. A better explanation for the success of early Christianity would be that the Church preached the destruction of the Temple etc within the "current generation", and got it! The total lack of "Why didn't the return happen?" from writers such as Ignatius, Justin Martyr and Ignatius points us to a better understanding in the Early Church of what was said, and not said, than in much contemporary writing.

1 Thess 4:15- best translated as "any of us who are left alive until the Lord's coming" (JB). Paul didn't have any more idea than Peter ("a day can mean a thousand years") as to when the spatio-temporal universe will end. There is no indication in the passage that if this is after Paul's death that this would be a problem.

Zechariah 14- You misunderstand apocalyptic writing. Space and time prohibit a good explanation, but I hope the following will help. Apocalyptic language uses representation. For example it describes historically located events with colourful language. Metaphor and literary form is the correct approach, rather than the literalism that is often employed. Nations can be represented by symbols (the England football team is at this moment playing on behalf of England, moderately well so the noises suggest, and they 'represent' England). A heavenly being or activity can represent an earthly being or activity. To criticise a lack of detail on a reading of an apocalyptic passage is rather like criticising an Impressionistic painting for a lack of detail.