Radorth

Well I don't know how "damning" it is. Only Matthew's reading can be interpreted to speak of his physical return in their lifetime, the only verse in the Gospels which can be interpreted that way. Mark and Luke have him saying something different. He says they would see the kingdom of God "come with power." (A contradiction if you like- hardly crippling in the scheme of things) You ought to at least quote the other witnesses when you use this I think.

This is before his transfiguration, his resurrection and Pentacost. If those occurred as reported, then I think few Christians then would be picking through Matthew to find fault. About six days after this, he takes them up on a mountain and is transfigured before their eyes. Who would deny this represents the Kingdom coming "with power" and is Jesus "in his glory"? I don't think they would have been picking nits saying "Yeah that was nice, but when are you gonna take over the world?" Is that what you think they should have said then or even later?

He also said "the Kingdom of God is in the midst of you." Is that a falsehood as well?

Thus if you don't believe the transfiguration or resurrection occured, you are going to find this one verse a problem and make much of it. Otherwise you won't.

Rad

Jack the Bodiless

Paul makes similar claims, repeatedly. And HE obviously wasn't referring to the resurrection, which (from his perspective) had already happened.

Ronin

Which is the brutal nexus of the whole reality (look around you) vs. christianity (aka yet just one more of a thousand tired mythos) debate.

Rad ~ did Moses ever write of Jesus Christ?

John 5:46

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

5:47
But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Give us chaper and verse please.

PS ~ don't just sit there like a numbskull, get to work looking it up!

HaysooChreesto!

Well, which is it? Is it Mattews interpretation that's to be believed or is it someone elses? Is the Bible God's Word or is it not?
Now I have to go look it all up again to prove the context, but I'm at work and I'll forget about this by tonight.

Radorth

Yes Paul seems to say this, although not "repeatedly." And since you don't believe anything else he says which doesn't fit your agenda, I won't take it too seriously. If you aren't careful here, Jack, you will help blow Doherty's theory into even smaller bits. Paul never believed there was a physical Jesus according to Doherty, never read the Gospels, etc. So why would he believe in anything but a metaphorical return?

Rad

Radorth

It has some minor contradictions, mostly found in Matthew. Of course Doherty thinks nothing of them and says they "slavishly copied" each other. I ask a far better question. If a disciple saw the transfiguration, would s/he give a rat's butt what Matthew wrote?

Don't put yourself out, though you called this "the trough that holds all the pigslop for me." We'll get by.

Nice dodge, don't you think Fenton? "I know the context will prove me right, but I'll forget all about it by tonight."

I'm hearing "I'd like to forget about all this by tonight. It bugs me." But you know how we hear things people never said, eh Fenton?

Rad

Jack the Bodiless

Romans 13:11-12, 1 Corinthians 1:7-8, 7:29 and 10:11, Philippians 1:10 and 4:5, 1 Thessalonians 3:13, 4:15-17 and 5:23, 2 Thessalonians 2:2, and 1 Timothy 6:14.

That's eleven times. That's "repeatedly".
Irrelevant. Jesus died and came back (physically or metaphorically), and he's gonna stage a big comeback Real Soon Now. This second comeback will involve the Rapture, in which "the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds".

It doesn't sound like he's talking metaphorically about the foundation of the Catholic Church there.

Jack the Bodiless

Your false claim that Fenton Mulley was "hearing voices in his head" has already been shot down on this thread, Radorth.

I was one of those who recalled your claim to be "pretty much" incapable of sin anymore. I'm surprised that you did not.

Stephen T-B

(Rad - Bon Chance, Mon Brave: I feel like I'm watching a Christian fighting lions in the Coliseum.)

Radorth

If you read the verses, you find that Paul did believe Jesus would come back soon, but he also allows that he might not, and begins to hedge. In 1 Tim 6:15, he says "which he will manifest in his own time." Why did he say that if he was so sure it was happening in his lifetime?

The real question here is what Jesus actually promised or thought himself, and whether the transfiguration, resurrection and Pentacost are the kingdom of God "coming with power."

All you can reasonably prove here is that Matthew and perhaps Paul had the wrong idea. Peter certainly did not, did he? In reference to the imminence of the second coming, he says that to the Lord "a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day." Right?

But I'm glad to hear you say Doherty's assertions are irrelevant. I always thought so. BTW, you have just helped prove the argument that Paul knew the Gospels. We thank you.

Rad