Freethought & Rationalism Archive

R.J. · 11-29-2002, 10:30 AM

This is a discussion of Matt. 24 that just occured in a Christian forum -- I disagree with the explanation, but I'm not a good enough
Bible scholar to understand all of the details -- Is there anybody here that can give a detailed refutation?
==================================================
From Eddie@pronet.co.zm Thu Nov 28 14:03:13 2002
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 09:03:13 +1100
To: sdanet-send@lydia.sdanet.org
From: Eddie@pronet.co.zm
Subject: This generation

Talking to his disciples in Matt 24, Christ told them that "this
generation will not come to an end before the son of man returns". I
have always wondered exactly what these words mean seeing that we are in the 21st century and he is not here. Is our waiting for real or we are living a pipe dream?
<SNIP>
Is the advent hope actually there?

Eddie Mwiinga.
--------------------------------------------------
From Ted Noel Fri Nov 29 08:02:13 2002
From: "Ted Noel" <tednoel@cfl.rr.com>
To: Eddie@pronet.co.zm, "SDAnet" <sdanet@lydia.sdanet.org>
CC: "Ted Noel" <tednoel@cfl.rr.com>, "Ed Stevens" <preterist1@aol.com>, "Dick Noel" <DickNoel@rica.net>, "Kenneth Noel" <KenNoel@hiwaay.net>, wil8on@adelphia.net, jnoe@prophecyrefi.org
Subject: Re: This generation
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:02:13 -0500

Eddie,
You couldn't have asked this at a better time. I have just returned from the Adventist Theological Society meeting where Dick Davidson gave a paper on your question. I'll try to summarize his comments. Matthew, the tax collector/accountant, was well educated and very careful in the use of his words. So when he talks about the "end," we must ask "the end of what?" And Matthew helps us by using very different Greek words. Throughout his gospel, when Matthew was speaking of the parousia(technical language for the second coming), his word for "end" (i.e. the "end of the age," cf. Matt 28:20) is "synteleia." (He uses the word in Matt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Note that when the question is asked in 24:3, the discussion of chapter 13 was behind them, and they presumably would have understood the difference between the end of the age (parousia) and the end of the Temple. In verse 6, Jesus speaks of the "telos." The discussion here is following the first question asked, about the destruction of the temple. This continues until verse 20. Verse 21 begins the discussion of the parousia. Most translations have this as a continuation of the prior sentence, linked with "for then." This does not reflect the Greek. There is no such linkage there, but instead, verse 21 begins a new sentence with "There will be." The Greek is quite emphatic about this eventuality, using a construction that leaves no doubt as the the ultimate outcome. The discussion of the parousia continues through verse 31. In verse 32, Jesus reverts to his original discussion, and the discourse begins to show its A:B:A:B structure. Jesus completes the discussion of the destruction of Jerusalem in verse 34. This is the "this generation" statement. It implies both the generation of hearers and the generation that sees the signs. These include Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21) and the abomination of desolation in the holy place (the Zealot activities). Verse 35 can be applied to either A or B or both, in that it stands alone as an emphatic statement of the truth of Jesus' pronouncements. Verse 36, continuing through the rest of chapter 24 and all of chapter 25 is a discussion of the parousia. Supporting this structure are other key words. In Matt 24:2 Jesus says, "Do you not see all these things?" The word for "these things" is "tauta." It directs our attention to the temple and Jerusalem. In particular, in verse 3, the disciples' question clearly identifies the destruction of Jerusalem with tauta, while using parousia and syntelia to refer to Jesus' "coming" and "the end of the age." Therefore, they are clearly distinguishing two separate questions. Tauta appears in verses 8, 14, 33, and 34, clearly identifying the object of discussion as Jerusalem. A Greek grammatical construction also separates the two discussions. In verse 19, we see "en ekainais tais hemerais" (in those days) with the demonstrative adjective before its noun. In verse 21 we see "hai hemerai ekenai" (those days) with the demonstrative adjective after its noun. This implies a break in the discussion (the first A:B break) with a different subject now being discussed. Verse 29 uses another form, "ton hemeron ekeinon" to again point out that it is the same subject as in verse 21. Finally, the parallel in Luke of the discussion of verses 21-31 (Luke 21:24b) includes technical terms from the LXX that show that this discussion pertains to the time period of the little horn. (pantomeme/trampled from Dan 8:10 and kairoi/times from Dan 7:25). In summary, we may confidently say that Jesus prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem within the generation of his hearers was in fact fulfilled, exactly as stated. But his prediction of the parousia remains future, as stated by the apostles and the early church after AD70. The disciples asked a compound question, and got a compound answer. We must ask why this answer has not been understood until now. I propose that the problem came from a lack of tools. The early church spoke Greek, but did not notice the clear distinction between synteleia and telos in Matthew's usage. After all, Mark, Luke, and John were not so fastidious. Second, the early church had less interest in the details of eschatology than in the details of soteriology (salvation). They had the teaching that the future parousia was sure, and for most that was enough. The translators of the Bible in the Reformation had very limited tools, and their knowledge of Greek was developing. So it is not surprising that they missed these cues. And today's translators often accept traditional forms, not applying the detailed tools available. Of course, this research has just come to light...

Ted Noel

The Bible Only ---- If the Bible doesn't teach it, neither will we.
< <a href="http://www.bibleonly.org" target="_blank">http://www.bibleonly.org</a> >
Home of BibleOnly Press, publisher of "I Want to be Left Behind."
< <a href="http://www.bibleonly.org/press" target="_blank">http://www.bibleonly.org/press</a> >

NOGO · 11-29-2002, 11:02 AM

You do not need to be a scholar to refute this one.

First why do the disciples ask several questions in the same sentence if they have nothing to do with each other?

Also why does the author keep this confusion if he knew that the question of the destruction of the temple was unrelated to Jesus' return?

Quote:

The discussion of the parousia continues through verse 31. In verse 32, Jesus reverts to his original discussion, and the discourse begins to show its A:B:A:B structure. Jesus completes the discussion of the destruction of Jerusalem in verse 34. This is the "this generation" statement. It implies both the generation of hearers and the generation that sees the signs. These include Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21) and the abomination of desolation in the holy place (the Zealot activities).

So according to Ted Noel the discussion of Jesus' return ends in verse 31. Verse 32 to 34 is related to the destruction of the temple only and not Jesus' return ...

GMt 24:33 "He/it is near"
What is "it" or "He" ?

To find out just compare Matthew to Luke

Matthew 24
32 "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;
33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.
34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Luke 21
29 Then He told them a parable: "Behold the fig tree and all the trees;
30 as soon as they put forth leaves, you see it and know for yourselves that summer is now near.
31 "So you also, when you see these things happening, recognize that the kingdom of God is near.
32 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place.
33 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away

"It" is the Kingdom of God ie Jesus' return.

So Luke verse 31 and 32 is about Jesus' return and the Kindom of God not just the destruction of the temple.

[ November 29, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

Butters · 11-29-2002, 11:08 AM

Yes, and Christians allways complain about taking things out of context. Here is the entire chapter, through verse 34 from the NIV, which Christians tell me is the most accurate version.

Signs of the End of the Age

1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"
4Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,[1] ' and will deceive many. 6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains.
9"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
15"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,'[2] spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand-- 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. 18Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. 19How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again. 22If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible. 25See, I have told you ahead of time.
26"So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. 27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.
29"Immediately after the distress of those days
" 'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[3]
30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
32"Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[4] is near, right at the door. 34I tell you the truth, this generation[5] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

It is very clear what Jesus is saying, but since it didn't happen, Christians must try to reinterpret it some other way.

NOGO · 11-29-2002, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Ted
Verse 21 begins the discussion of the parousia.

He would have been better off starting at verse 22. Here is why?

Mt24:21 "For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.

What is this verse saying? Paraphrasing ...
The tribulations will be unique and the like of which have not been seen since the start of the world until the tribulations start and nor will any such tribulations will be seen after.

So the sentence should have been as follows:
modified_Mt24:21
"For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until then, nor ever will be after.

Remember Jesus is speaking. The sentence starts with "then there will be ..." which is clearly in the future but then the author reverts to the present "until now" ????

The author clearly believed that the Jewish/Roman war(s) which led to the destruction of the temple were the tribulations announcing the end of the world.

This is a case of writer's perspective. He starts in the future announcing a prophecy but then reverts to the present betraying his belief that the tribulations had already started.

R.J. · 11-29-2002, 01:04 PM

Here's a reply from errancy:
< <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804946338&sort=d&start=14016" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804946338&sort=d&start=14016</a> >

[ November 29, 2002: Message edited by: R.J. ]</p>

semyaza · 11-29-2002, 01:41 PM

This is a fairly typical "weasel defence". If you don't like the implications of a pasaage, chop change and re-interpret until it suits you.

As others have pointed out, reading Matthew 24 in context makes it abundantly clear that Jesus was referring to the end of all things. Since the poster metioned Daniel however, it may be instructive to consider how that book influenced Matthew.

Actually, to be accurate we need to see how Daniel influenced Mark 13, since this is actually the source of Matthew 24. Mark refers to Daniel's "abomination of desolation" in 13:14. This event seems to be connected with the destruction of the Temple (Mark 13:2). This phrase occurs a number of times in Daniel, where it also refers to the pollution of the Sanctuary (Dan 9:27). Daniel specifies a period of time between this event and the consummation of all things. In 9:27, it is half a "week", or about 3.5 years. Daniel 8:13-14 puts the period as 2,300 "evenings and mornings", that is 2,300 ocurrences of the evening and morning sacrifices (8:11), or about 3.2 years.

Let's speculate a little: if we assume that the scholars are correct in placing Mark shortly after the Jewish war and destruction of the Temple in AD 70, we can guess that the author thought (based on Daniel) that the End was to come about 3 years after this point, or about AD 73. This explains his insistence that all things would happen in "this generation" (Mark 13:30).

When matthew wrote his gospel, however, it was somewhat later than this point, and so he needed to engage in his own "weasel defence". Note that Matthew 24 is almost a verbatim copy of Mark 13 (even in the Greek, these passages are almost identical) - with one crucial difference. In Mark 13:24-37, the author includes a parable which is intended to exhort the listeners to be ready, because the end could happen at any instant. Matthew also includes a handful of parables in 24:37-51, but his stories have a subtle difference. There is an undertone of waiting and watching, even if the return seems to be delayed (see 24:48-51, 25:5, 25:19).

The bottom line is that, taken in context, Mark 13, Matthew 24 (and Luke 21) are all unanimous: the return of Jesus was to heppen very shortly after the destruction of the Temple. History has proven that Jesus was wrong. There is no room for discussion on this point.

R.J. · 11-29-2002, 06:19 PM

Here's another reply from errancy:
< <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804947641&sort=d&start=14016" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804947641&sort=d&start=14016</a> >

[ November 29, 2002: Message edited by: R.J. ]</p>

R.J. · 11-30-2002, 07:34 AM

Here's a reply from:
< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible</a> >
< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible/message/1204" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible/message/1204</a> >

R.J. · 11-30-2002, 07:43 AM

Other forums:

< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible</a> >
< <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy</a> >
< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Xianity" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Xianity</a> >
< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory</a> >
< <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BiblicalErrancy" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BiblicalErrancy</a> >

David Conklin · 11-30-2002, 10:26 AM

From an email list I'm on:

Matthew, the tax collector/accountant, was well educated and very careful in the use of his words. So when he talks about the "end," we must ask "the end of what?" And Matthew helps us by using very different Greek words. Throughout his gospel, when Matthew was speaking of the parousia (technical language for the second coming), his word for "end" (i.e., the "end of the age," cf. Matt 28:20) is "[i]synteleia[i]." (He uses the word in Matt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Note that when the question is asked in 24:3, the discussion of chapter 13 was behind them, and they presumably would have understood the difference between the end of the age (parousia) and the end of the Temple. In verse 6, Jesus speaks of the "telos." The discussion here is following the first question asked, about the destruction of the temple. This continues until verse 20. Verse 21 begins the discussion of the parousia. Most translations have this as a continuation of the prior sentence, linked with "for then." This does not reflect the Greek. There is no such linkage there, but instead, verse 21 begins a new sentence with "There will be." The Greek is quite emphatic about this eventuality, using a construction that leaves no doubt as the the ultimate outcome. The discussion of the parousia continues through verse 31. In verse 32, Jesus reverts to his original discussion, and the discourse begins to show its A:B:A:B structure. Jesus completes the discussion of the destruction of Jerusalem in verse 34. This is the "this generation" statement. It implies both the generation of hearers and the generation that sees the signs. These include Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21) and the abomination of desolation in the holy place (the Zealot activities). Verse 35 can be applied to either A or B or both, in that it stands alone as an emphatic statement of the truth of Jesus' pronouncements. Verse 36, continuing through the rest of chapter 24 and all of chapter 25 is a discussion of the parousia. Supporting this structure are other key words. In Matt 24:2 Jesus says, "Do you not see all these things?" The word for "these things" is "tauta." It directs our attention to the temple and Jerusalem. In particular, in verse 3, the disciples' question clearly identifies the destruction of Jerusalem with tauta, while using parousia and syntelia to refer to Jesus' "coming" and "the end of the age." Therefore, they are clearly distinguishing two separate questions. Tauta appears in verses 8, 14, 33, and 34, clearly identifying the object of discussion as Jerusalem. A Greek grammatical construction also separates the two discussions. In verse 19, we see "en ekainais tais hemerais" (in those days) with the demonstrative adjective before its noun. In verse 21 we see "hai hemerai ekenai" (those days) with the demonstrative adjective after its noun. This implies a break in the discussion (the first A:B break) with a different subject now being discussed. Verse 29 uses another form, "ton hemeron ekeinon" to again point out that it is the same subject as in verse 21. Finally, the parallel in Luke of the discussion of verses 21-31 (Luke 21:24b) includes technical terms from the LXX that show that this discussion pertains to the time period of the little horn. (pantomeme/trampled from Dan 8:10 and kairoi/times from Dan 7:25). In summary, we may confidently say that Jesus prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem within the generation of his hearers was in fact fulfilled, exactly as stated. But his prediction of the parousia remains future, as stated by the apostles and the early church after AD 70. The disciples asked a compound question, and got a compound answer. We must ask why this answer has not been understood until now. I propose that the problem came from a lack of tools. The early church spoke Greek, but did not notice the clear distinction between synteleia and telos in Matthew's usage. After all, Mark, Luke, and John were not so fastidious. Second, the early church had less interest in the details of eschatology than in the details of soteriology (salvation). They had the teaching that the future parousia was sure, and for most that was enough. The translators of the Bible in the Reformation had very limited tools, and their knowledge of Greek was developing. So it is not surprising that they missed these cues. And today's translators often accept traditional forms, not applying the detailed tools available. Of course, this research has just come to light.

11-29-2002, 10:30 AM	#1
R.J. Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 42	Matt. 24 This is a discussion of Matt. 24 that just occured in a Christian forum -- I disagree with the explanation, but I'm not a good enough Bible scholar to understand all of the details -- Is there anybody here that can give a detailed refutation? ================================================== From Eddie@pronet.co.zm Thu Nov 28 14:03:13 2002 Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 09:03:13 +1100 To: sdanet-send@lydia.sdanet.org From: Eddie@pronet.co.zm Subject: This generation Talking to his disciples in Matt 24, Christ told them that "this generation will not come to an end before the son of man returns". I have always wondered exactly what these words mean seeing that we are in the 21st century and he is not here. Is our waiting for real or we are living a pipe dream? <SNIP> Is the advent hope actually there? Eddie Mwiinga. -------------------------------------------------- From Ted Noel Fri Nov 29 08:02:13 2002 From: "Ted Noel" <tednoel@cfl.rr.com> To: Eddie@pronet.co.zm, "SDAnet" <sdanet@lydia.sdanet.org> CC: "Ted Noel" <tednoel@cfl.rr.com>, "Ed Stevens" <preterist1@aol.com>, "Dick Noel" <DickNoel@rica.net>, "Kenneth Noel" <KenNoel@hiwaay.net>, wil8on@adelphia.net, jnoe@prophecyrefi.org Subject: Re: This generation Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:02:13 -0500 Eddie, You couldn't have asked this at a better time. I have just returned from the Adventist Theological Society meeting where Dick Davidson gave a paper on your question. I'll try to summarize his comments. Matthew, the tax collector/accountant, was well educated and very careful in the use of his words. So when he talks about the "end," we must ask "the end of what?" And Matthew helps us by using very different Greek words. Throughout his gospel, when Matthew was speaking of the parousia(technical language for the second coming), his word for "end" (i.e. the "end of the age," cf. Matt 28:20) is "synteleia." (He uses the word in Matt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Note that when the question is asked in 24:3, the discussion of chapter 13 was behind them, and they presumably would have understood the difference between the end of the age (parousia) and the end of the Temple. In verse 6, Jesus speaks of the "telos." The discussion here is following the first question asked, about the destruction of the temple. This continues until verse 20. Verse 21 begins the discussion of the parousia. Most translations have this as a continuation of the prior sentence, linked with "for then." This does not reflect the Greek. There is no such linkage there, but instead, verse 21 begins a new sentence with "There will be." The Greek is quite emphatic about this eventuality, using a construction that leaves no doubt as the the ultimate outcome. The discussion of the parousia continues through verse 31. In verse 32, Jesus reverts to his original discussion, and the discourse begins to show its A:B:A:B structure. Jesus completes the discussion of the destruction of Jerusalem in verse 34. This is the "this generation" statement. It implies both the generation of hearers and the generation that sees the signs. These include Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21) and the abomination of desolation in the holy place (the Zealot activities). Verse 35 can be applied to either A or B or both, in that it stands alone as an emphatic statement of the truth of Jesus' pronouncements. Verse 36, continuing through the rest of chapter 24 and all of chapter 25 is a discussion of the parousia. Supporting this structure are other key words. In Matt 24:2 Jesus says, "Do you not see all these things?" The word for "these things" is "tauta." It directs our attention to the temple and Jerusalem. In particular, in verse 3, the disciples' question clearly identifies the destruction of Jerusalem with tauta, while using parousia and syntelia to refer to Jesus' "coming" and "the end of the age." Therefore, they are clearly distinguishing two separate questions. Tauta appears in verses 8, 14, 33, and 34, clearly identifying the object of discussion as Jerusalem. A Greek grammatical construction also separates the two discussions. In verse 19, we see "en ekainais tais hemerais" (in those days) with the demonstrative adjective before its noun. In verse 21 we see "hai hemerai ekenai" (those days) with the demonstrative adjective after its noun. This implies a break in the discussion (the first A:B break) with a different subject now being discussed. Verse 29 uses another form, "ton hemeron ekeinon" to again point out that it is the same subject as in verse 21. Finally, the parallel in Luke of the discussion of verses 21-31 (Luke 21:24b) includes technical terms from the LXX that show that this discussion pertains to the time period of the little horn. (pantomeme/trampled from Dan 8:10 and kairoi/times from Dan 7:25). In summary, we may confidently say that Jesus prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem within the generation of his hearers was in fact fulfilled, exactly as stated. But his prediction of the parousia remains future, as stated by the apostles and the early church after AD70. The disciples asked a compound question, and got a compound answer. We must ask why this answer has not been understood until now. I propose that the problem came from a lack of tools. The early church spoke Greek, but did not notice the clear distinction between synteleia and telos in Matthew's usage. After all, Mark, Luke, and John were not so fastidious. Second, the early church had less interest in the details of eschatology than in the details of soteriology (salvation). They had the teaching that the future parousia was sure, and for most that was enough. The translators of the Bible in the Reformation had very limited tools, and their knowledge of Greek was developing. So it is not surprising that they missed these cues. And today's translators often accept traditional forms, not applying the detailed tools available. Of course, this research has just come to light... Ted Noel The Bible Only ---- If the Bible doesn't teach it, neither will we. < <a href="http://www.bibleonly.org" target="_blank">http://www.bibleonly.org</a> > Home of BibleOnly Press, publisher of "I Want to be Left Behind." < <a href="http://www.bibleonly.org/press" target="_blank">http://www.bibleonly.org/press</a> >

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-29-2002, 11:08 AM	#3
Butters Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston Texas Posts: 444	Yes, and Christians allways complain about taking things out of context. Here is the entire chapter, through verse 34 from the NIV, which Christians tell me is the most accurate version. Signs of the End of the Age 1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." 3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" 4Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,[1] ' and will deceive many. 6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains. 9"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. 15"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,'[2] spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand-- 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. 18Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. 19How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again. 22If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible. 25See, I have told you ahead of time. 26"So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. 27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather. 29"Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[3] 30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. 32"Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[4] is near, right at the door. 34I tell you the truth, this generation[5] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. It is very clear what Jesus is saying, but since it didn't happen, Christians must try to reinterpret it some other way.

11-29-2002, 01:04 PM	#5
R.J. Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 42	Here's a reply from errancy: < <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804946338&sort=d&start=14016" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804946338&sort=d&start=14016</a> > [ November 29, 2002: Message edited by: R.J. ]</p>

11-29-2002, 01:41 PM	#6
semyaza Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Florida, USA Posts: 104	This is a fairly typical "weasel defence". If you don't like the implications of a pasaage, chop change and re-interpret until it suits you. As others have pointed out, reading Matthew 24 in context makes it abundantly clear that Jesus was referring to the end of all things. Since the poster metioned Daniel however, it may be instructive to consider how that book influenced Matthew. Actually, to be accurate we need to see how Daniel influenced Mark 13, since this is actually the source of Matthew 24. Mark refers to Daniel's "abomination of desolation" in 13:14. This event seems to be connected with the destruction of the Temple (Mark 13:2). This phrase occurs a number of times in Daniel, where it also refers to the pollution of the Sanctuary (Dan 9:27). Daniel specifies a period of time between this event and the consummation of all things. In 9:27, it is half a "week", or about 3.5 years. Daniel 8:13-14 puts the period as 2,300 "evenings and mornings", that is 2,300 ocurrences of the evening and morning sacrifices (8:11), or about 3.2 years. Let's speculate a little: if we assume that the scholars are correct in placing Mark shortly after the Jewish war and destruction of the Temple in AD 70, we can guess that the author thought (based on Daniel) that the End was to come about 3 years after this point, or about AD 73. This explains his insistence that all things would happen in "this generation" (Mark 13:30). When matthew wrote his gospel, however, it was somewhat later than this point, and so he needed to engage in his own "weasel defence". Note that Matthew 24 is almost a verbatim copy of Mark 13 (even in the Greek, these passages are almost identical) - with one crucial difference. In Mark 13:24-37, the author includes a parable which is intended to exhort the listeners to be ready, because the end could happen at any instant. Matthew also includes a handful of parables in 24:37-51, but his stories have a subtle difference. There is an undertone of waiting and watching, even if the return seems to be delayed (see 24:48-51, 25:5, 25:19). The bottom line is that, taken in context, Mark 13, Matthew 24 (and Luke 21) are all unanimous: the return of Jesus was to heppen very shortly after the destruction of the Temple. History has proven that Jesus was wrong. There is no room for discussion on this point.

11-29-2002, 06:19 PM	#7
R.J. Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 42	Here's another reply from errancy: < <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804947641&sort=d&start=14016" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=804947641&sort=d&start=14016</a> > [ November 29, 2002: Message edited by: R.J. ]</p>

11-30-2002, 07:34 AM	#8
R.J. Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 42	Here's a reply from: < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible</a> > < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible/message/1204" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible/message/1204</a> >

11-30-2002, 07:43 AM	#9
R.J. Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 42	Other forums: < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors_In_The_Christian_Bible</a> > < <a href="http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy" target="_blank">http://www.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy</a> > < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Xianity" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Xianity</a> > < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory</a> > < <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BiblicalErrancy" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BiblicalErrancy</a> >

11-30-2002, 10:26 AM	#10
David Conklin Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 85	From an email list I'm on: Matthew, the tax collector/accountant, was well educated and very careful in the use of his words. So when he talks about the "end," we must ask "the end of what?" And Matthew helps us by using very different Greek words. Throughout his gospel, when Matthew was speaking of the parousia (technical language for the second coming), his word for "end" (i.e., the "end of the age," cf. Matt 28:20) is "[i]synteleia[i]." (He uses the word in Matt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Note that when the question is asked in 24:3, the discussion of chapter 13 was behind them, and they presumably would have understood the difference between the end of the age (parousia) and the end of the Temple. In verse 6, Jesus speaks of the "telos." The discussion here is following the first question asked, about the destruction of the temple. This continues until verse 20. Verse 21 begins the discussion of the parousia. Most translations have this as a continuation of the prior sentence, linked with "for then." This does not reflect the Greek. There is no such linkage there, but instead, verse 21 begins a new sentence with "There will be." The Greek is quite emphatic about this eventuality, using a construction that leaves no doubt as the the ultimate outcome. The discussion of the parousia continues through verse 31. In verse 32, Jesus reverts to his original discussion, and the discourse begins to show its A:B:A:B structure. Jesus completes the discussion of the destruction of Jerusalem in verse 34. This is the "this generation" statement. It implies both the generation of hearers and the generation that sees the signs. These include Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21) and the abomination of desolation in the holy place (the Zealot activities). Verse 35 can be applied to either A or B or both, in that it stands alone as an emphatic statement of the truth of Jesus' pronouncements. Verse 36, continuing through the rest of chapter 24 and all of chapter 25 is a discussion of the parousia. Supporting this structure are other key words. In Matt 24:2 Jesus says, "Do you not see all these things?" The word for "these things" is "tauta." It directs our attention to the temple and Jerusalem. In particular, in verse 3, the disciples' question clearly identifies the destruction of Jerusalem with tauta, while using parousia and syntelia to refer to Jesus' "coming" and "the end of the age." Therefore, they are clearly distinguishing two separate questions. Tauta appears in verses 8, 14, 33, and 34, clearly identifying the object of discussion as Jerusalem. A Greek grammatical construction also separates the two discussions. In verse 19, we see "en ekainais tais hemerais" (in those days) with the demonstrative adjective before its noun. In verse 21 we see "hai hemerai ekenai" (those days) with the demonstrative adjective after its noun. This implies a break in the discussion (the first A:B break) with a different subject now being discussed. Verse 29 uses another form, "ton hemeron ekeinon" to again point out that it is the same subject as in verse 21. Finally, the parallel in Luke of the discussion of verses 21-31 (Luke 21:24b) includes technical terms from the LXX that show that this discussion pertains to the time period of the little horn. (pantomeme/trampled from Dan 8:10 and kairoi/times from Dan 7:25). In summary, we may confidently say that Jesus prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem within the generation of his hearers was in fact fulfilled, exactly as stated. But his prediction of the parousia remains future, as stated by the apostles and the early church after AD 70. The disciples asked a compound question, and got a compound answer. We must ask why this answer has not been understood until now. I propose that the problem came from a lack of tools. The early church spoke Greek, but did not notice the clear distinction between synteleia and telos in Matthew's usage. After all, Mark, Luke, and John were not so fastidious. Second, the early church had less interest in the details of eschatology than in the details of soteriology (salvation). They had the teaching that the future parousia was sure, and for most that was enough. The translators of the Bible in the Reformation had very limited tools, and their knowledge of Greek was developing. So it is not surprising that they missed these cues. And today's translators often accept traditional forms, not applying the detailed tools available. Of course, this research has just come to light.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.