Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 214

Thread: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Discourse

  1. #181

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Let's get on the same page. How can the kingdom of God being nigh at hand, even at the doors, not be meaning the second coming? When summer is nigh at hand, that being determined by trees, is summer still nigh at hand once summer actually arrives? Doesn't the text indicate, in like manner, when you see these thing come to pass, know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors. It can't be nigh at hand, and even at the doors indefinitely, can it? If it can, then so can summer, which would then mean summer never arrives, which then means the kingdom of God never arrives either. If you don't see that as nonsensical, no wonder we can't get on the same page here.
    I guess the question would be do you or do you not believe Mark 1:15? Jesus says plainly at that time that the kingdom of God is near. He can't be meaning the second coming because he hasn't even gone anywhere from his first coming yet. We can never get on the same page if you won't believe plainly written text.

    No, the kingdom of God will not be near forever. It comes at Christ's second coming, but that has nothing to do with the point. The text says that 'you will know the kingdom of God is near' does it not? Does it say the kingdom of God has come? No. It says exactly what Jesus said was a present condition of the kingdom of God in Mark 1:15. That it's near.

    The kingdom of God is already near before any of the signs in the discourse. It's only the knowledge that the kingdom of God is near that is prophecied to occur in 'this generation' after certain signs are witnessed. Read more carefully.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,748

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    I guess the question would be do you or do you not believe Mark 1:15? Jesus says plainly at that time that the kingdom of God is near. He can't be meaning the second coming because he hasn't even gone anywhere from his first coming yet. We can never get on the same page if you won't believe plainly written text.

    No, the kingdom of God will not be near forever. It comes at Christ's second coming, but that has nothing to do with the point. The text says that 'you will know the kingdom of God is near' does it not? Does it say the kingdom of God has come? No. It says exactly what Jesus said was a present condition of the kingdom of God in Mark 1:15. That it's near.

    The kingdom of God is already near before any of the signs in the discourse. It's only the knowledge that the kingdom of God is near that is prophecied to occur in 'this generation' after certain signs are witnessed. Read more carefully.

    Let me try and address some of your post via the following perspective. The following is how my mind is reasoning some of these things.

    Mark 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
    29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.


    It would not be incorrect to understand verse 28 like such....Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh, even at the doors.

    So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

    Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

    In verse 28 what needs to pass away in order for summer to arrive? Would it not be spring?

    In verse 29 what needs to pass away in order for the kingdom of God to arrive? Would it not be all these things that need to come to pass?

    If the kingdom of God arriving is meaning the 2nd coming, what precedes this event? Is it not the events that occur in the end of this age that lead to the 2nd coming? One would use the same logic used for verse 28, spring is what immediately precedes summer. No one would say it was the fall that immedietely precedes summer instead. So why would anyone conclude that what immedietely precedes the 2nd coming are the the events of 70 AD rather than the events at the end of this age? I realize no one is saying it exactly like that, yet their interpretation is saying that.

    If only some of you could get inside of my mind and actually understand what I'm saying here, you would then see I'm being perfectly rational here.

  3. #183

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Let me try and address some of your post via the following perspective. The following is how my mind is reasoning some of these things.

    Mark 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
    29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.


    It would not be incorrect to understand verse 28 like such....Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh, even at the doors.

    So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

    Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

    In verse 28 what needs to pass away in order for summer to arrive? Would it not be spring?
    Summer is never shown arriving in the parable. Only the knowledge that it is near is obtained by those who see the twigs and leaves forming.

    In verse 29 what needs to pass away in order for the kingdom of God to arrive? Would it not be all these things that need to come to pass?
    You are off point again. The parable has nothing to do with the kingdom of God arriving. The endgame of those that witness the signs in the parable is knowledge that summer is near. Nothing 'passes'. Those that come to the realization that summer is near would be present in the spring when they come to this conclusion.

    If the kingdom of God arriving is meaning the 2nd coming, what precedes this event? Is it not the events that occur in the end of this age that lead to the 2nd coming?
    Yes, the AoD begins the endtime events leading to Christ's second coming IMO. I believe this to be future.

    One would use the same logic used for verse 28, spring is what immediately precedes summer. No one would say it was the fall that immedietely precedes summer instead. So why would anyone conclude that what immedietely precedes the 2nd coming are the the events of 70 AD rather than the events at the end of this age? I realize no one is saying it exactly like that, yet their interpretation is saying that.
    Summer never comes in the parable, that's what you are not getting. Yes summer comes eventually with Christ's second coming, but that's not covered in the parable. If it is, show me.

    gtg ttyl

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,748

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    100% certain huh?
    You say Mark 13:29, Matthew 24:33, and Luke 21:31 must occur AFTER all the event mentioned in the discourse have occured, including the Second Coming right?

    NIV Luke 21:31Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.

    Jesus says that the kingdom of God is near BEFORE any of the events mentioned in the discourse take place.

    NIV Mark 1:15 "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!" J

    It seems like you have things completely backwards. Jesus says the kingdom of God draws near first, before anything mentioned in the discourse. You say it is the last thing to happen in the series of events.

    The only prophetic thing that occurs in the afformentioned texts is the individual awareness that the kingdom of God is near among those that witness the signs Jesus mentioned in the previous verse in each text. If you see followers of Christ increasing in number you will then have the knowledge that the kingdom of God is near IOW. Not that the kingdom will draw near after these signs. I don't feel you are really examining the text you are defending, you seem to have just jumped to a conclusion that is impossible for you to let go of.
    The context in the Discourse involves eschatology. Why use a context via Mark 1 to try and make your point, if that context is not involving eschatology as well?

    Luke 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
    12*He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
    13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
    14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
    15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

    In this parable A certain nobleman is obviously meaning Christ. The parable indicates He leaves, then while away He receives for Himself a kingdom, then He returns at some point later on. And when He returns the text indicates He returns after having received the kingdom. How can He return without the kingdom though? How can the kingdom not be the kingdom of God, the same kingdom of God where in the Discourse it indicates is nigh at hand, even at the doors, when you see these things come to pass?

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,748

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    Summer is never shown arriving in the parable. Only the knowledge that it is near is obtained by those who see the twigs and leaves forming.

    You would then conclude that it's incorrect to deduce summer has to eventually arrive? Does it stay spring forever all year around then? It doesn't matter that the parable doesn't indicate summer arrives, it's only natural to deduce that it will. Jesus could have used fall and winter seasons instead. Fall would still have to pass away in order for winter to arrive in it's place. It's the point being made by Jesus here that matters.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,371
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    The phrase 'all these things' is part of the fig tree parable and isn't meant to be applied to all the events of the discourse. Jesus's parables are crafted to obfuscate the truth and make it hidden to some (Matthew 13:13). So when you see Jesus say 'this is a parable', like He says in verse 32, a red flag should go up and you should really be careful going forward as there is sure to be tricky language ahead.

    In the parable Jesus mentions three figurative things are to occur in verse 32. 1) twigs coming out from the branch 2) leaves shooting forth 3) summer drawing near. These things of course need to be interpreted, which they really aren't in the context, so what these things represent might be debateable, but they are in fact real things that Jesus says will happen. Let's say that the twigs coming forth from the branch might represent Christ's disciples and followers growing in number, the leaves shooting forth could be the spreading out of the gospel, and summer drawing near might be the kingdom of heaven drawing near. When you move to verse 33 Jesus says 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[He] is near, right at the door. In the context what is it that is near? He could only be referring to the figurative 'summer' He just mentioned in the previous verse. And however you interpret it, it has NOT COME after 'seeing all these things' (the branches and the leaves), it is still only near. If you apply 'all these things seen' to all the events of the discourse however, it/He is not just near, it/He HAS COME in verse 30-31.

    I see the structure of Matt 24 like this:

    The body of the discourse: There are apples, bananas, and oranges on the table.

    The fig tree parable (verse 32-34): My favorite fruits are grapes, pears, and tangerines.

    Verse 34: Go to the store and buy me all these fruits.

    If you keep verse 34 in it's context with the parable you will only buy the grapes, pears and tangerines. If you don't keep it in context you will buy everything including the apples, bananas, and oranges.

    It is not 'obvious' that Jesus meant all the things mentioned in the entire discourse when He says 'this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened'.
    I beg to disagree, Sir.

    Matt 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

    33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

    34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


    For me, the central theme of the discourse remains the Second Coming. The parable of the fig tree is an allegory Jesus purposely introduced for emphasis and clarity on what he has been saying from v2. Look at it this way, in autumn trees shed their leaves but come spring/summer, their leaves sprout again, plants develop flowers, etc. So when you walk around your neighbourhood and see the new leaves back on trees after winter, what does it remind you of?

    Jesus used this simple allegory to tell his listeners and every believer that when they see everything he has warned about from v2 (including the destruction of the temple of course) fulfilled, the faithful should understand that his Return is at hand. He concluded by saying "this generation shall not pass, till ALL these things are fulfilled".

    This generation, therefore, can easily be understood as the *stone-hearted and unbelieving* and we know that such reprobates will not cease until His Glorious return.

    Unfortunately, I am unable to relate your grape, banana and orange analogy to the prophecy.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,371
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The prophecy of "Elijah to come" was interpreted by Jesus to refer to John the Baptist. So we have it in black and white that "Elijah," in the Malachi prophecy, was intended to represent John the Baptist, as the forerunner of Christ. I'm not against the use of symbolism. I'm only against establishing something as "biblical fact" when the symbolism is not supported by black and white doctrinal statements.

    The prophecy of Elijah was not actually the use of symbolism, but rather, the use of metaphor. Malachi did not really mean to convey Elijah was literally going to be reincarnated. No, he meant that someone *like Elijah* would be coming, to herald the coming of Messiah. And so, he called him "Elijah" to indicate his prophetic office and level of importance.
    Very true. Interpretation of Malachi's reference to Elijah doesn't come any better than this.

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Dwight, IL
    Posts
    5,663
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    BTW, why not show why and how I was wrong in that post? All you seemed to want to do was find ways to criticize me personally, rather than trying to debunk my conclusions instead. There is nothing you said in this post that proves anything I said in that post was incorrect. I gave reasons why I was 100% certain Randy's interpretation was incorrect. I did that via Scripture and employing common sense.

    You say you don't care whether I change my mind or not, yet you are the one making this huge fuss about what I'm saying. That can only mean one thing then, this in your mind apparently gives you a legit accuse to attack me personally.
    David, I have addressed points. I’ve only seen where you said you need to get back to them. So let’s address some issues.

    Let me say as I begin, I am a fallible interpreter. I might be wrong. I cannot be 100% certain. I can be reasonably certain. And for your info, I’m a high school graduate. That’s my level of education.

    What about you? Are a fallible interpreter or an infallible interpreter?

    I am interpreting Matthew 24 in light of the entire book of Matthew. I am not interpeting it from a 21st century perspective, at least not intentionally.

    In Matthew 10, Jesus sends the twelve on a mission.

    Don’t read this as 21st century divaD or 21st century TrustGzus. He’s talking to the twelve. Be one of them for the moment. Matthew 24 hasn’t happened.

    In the beginning of the chapter he has pick you, a first century Jew, to be one of his apostles (sent ones). He’s sending you on a mission.

    He states in the midst of his instructions to you the following:

    Matthew 10:23 (AV): But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

    You are Peter or Phillip or James the son of Alphaeus.

    Interpret that verse in that context.

    What does “till the Son of man be come” in your ears as you stand in front of him?
    Who is “you” as you stand there and here him speak these words to you?

    In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

    Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

    If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,371
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I've argued this many times, and have supplied examples. The only thing that can hinder you from understanding my argument is a preconceived notion that forbids you from understanding it! I will try again, to see if you are even willing to look at a different position.

    I tell you that a major earthquake is coming. And you ask when that earthquake is happening. You also ask what the future of our city will be.

    And so, I tell you the earthquake is coming in our generation, and will be preceded by rumblings, minor shakes, and also indications that God is not pleased with our city. And then I say, *all these things* will take place "in this generation!"

    In context I am referring to 1) the main subject, which is the earthquake, and 2) all of the signs leading up to the earthquake. I am *not* including in "all these things" anything that was mentioned about the future of the city, following the earthquake.

    So let me apply this to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus said the temple will be taken down. And his Disciples ask him when this will happen, and how will this play into the 2nd Coming?

    So Jesus tells them about the initial signs leading up to the destruction of the temple, including false Messiahs, wars, earthquakes, and famines. Finally, the destruction of the temple itself will take place. All these things will happen in "this generation."

    However, "all these things" did not include any information Jesus had given about his 2nd Coming. Jesus indicated that whereas his Coming would take place at the end of the age, the things to take place in his own generation would *not* involve Israel's restoration. False Christs would predict Israel's immediate salvation. But the truth was, judgment would come in their generation. The drawing near of the Kingdom in their time meant that judgment would come upon the Jewish nation.

    And so, Jesus drew a clearer picture of what the 2nd Coming was really supposed to mean for the Jewish People. Instead of expecting immediate salvation for the Jewish people, they were to expect divine judgment upon a sinful people. They were to look upon the 2nd Coming as a judgment upon sinners, whether in the endtimes or in the then-present generation.

    And so, the 70 AD judgment was an indication that judgment was coming upon Israel. "All these things" to take place were the things leading up to that judgment. And Israel was to expect judgment upon sinners, rather than deliverance for a wicked people.
    Randy, I am really perplexed that you have unremittingly accused me of not "considering your viewpoint". I find this exasperating, to be honest. By countering these "other" positions with reasons why I believe them to be incorrect, isn't that sufficient that I have duly considered them? I don't have to agree with you before you accept that I've considered your position, do I?

    The way I understand the discourse (and Jesus was consistent on this throughout his ministry) is that at every opportunity, Jesus would rather focus on salvation and eternal life than the fleeting life of the flesh. Therefore, when the disciples asked him the three-barrelled questions about the temple, his Return and the end of the age, Jesus characteristically embarked on a detailed account of ALL things to come before his return and end of the age, rather than focus on the temple alone. This is because Jesus understood that preparing the faithful that there will be bumps in the road before his return and grant of immortality, is better than an emphasis on any temporal distress we will face.

    I am in a hurry but if you insist, I'm sure I can cite some examples where Jesus sometimes ignored a question he was asked but instead, went on to explain what was not asked, because he KNOWS that what he is saying is more beneficial to the listeners for the saving of their soul. His response to disciples' questions in the discourse is no different. Perhaps, it is your inability to grasp that Jesus valued warning the faithful of the impending calamitous trials that will shake their faith to the core to be more than the destruction of the temple?

    Naturally, Jesus answered the question about the temple's as elaborated in Luke 21, but it's only to be understood as just one of the climactic events that must come to pass before his coming. I understand that you see the discourse as nothing more than a narrative about the judgment of the Jews in 70 AD. But I respectfully disagree because I understand that focused on something much more important than the temple's destruction -- the need to prepare his believers to persevere to the end against untold trials to come.

    You have the right to disagree with me, but please, please, don't say that I've not considered your position.

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,371
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Let's get on the same page. How can the kingdom of God being nigh at hand, even at the doors, not be meaning the second coming? When summer is nigh at hand, that being determined by trees, is summer still nigh at hand once summer actually arrives? Doesn't the texts involved indicate, in like manner, when you see these thing come to pass, know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors? It can't be nigh at hand, and even at the doors, indefinitely, can it? If it can, then so can summer, which would then mean summer never arrives, which then means the kingdom of God never arrives either. If you don't see that as nonsensical, no wonder we can't get on the same page here.
    I am with you on this one. From verses 1-32 Jesus warned of the catastrophic events to come; destruction of the temple just happens to be one of them but not necessarily the primary focus. The parable of the fig tree just serves to reinforce what Jesus has been saying from the start.

    As trees sprouting leaves tells the observer that summer is nigh, it is the same way that the generation alive when all these things are completely fulfilled should understand that his coming if finally at hand.

  11. #191
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,748

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    I wish we were having these discussions in person with one another. I'm pretty confident I could then pretty much address everything addressed to me. All this typing though, plus having to convert one's thoughts into writing, so to speak, that's just not me. I can do it to a degree, enough to maybe get by, but not enough to where it is fair to everyone else involved. And I fully realize that. Some people excel in going back and forth addressing each others points. I don't excel in that, meaning in writing like this. I could do it if we were discussing these things in person though.

  12. #192
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,748

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by TrustGzus View Post
    David, I have addressed points. I’ve only seen where you said you need to get back to them. So let’s address some issues.

    Let me say as I begin, I am a fallible interpreter. I might be wrong. I cannot be 100% certain. I can be reasonably certain. And for your info, I’m a high school graduate. That’s my level of education.

    What about you? Are a fallible interpreter or an infallible interpreter?

    I am interpreting Matthew 24 in light of the entire book of Matthew. I am not interpeting it from a 21st century perspective, at least not intentionally.

    In Matthew 10, Jesus sends the twelve on a mission.

    Don’t read this as 21st century divaD or 21st century TrustGzus. He’s talking to the twelve. Be one of them for the moment. Matthew 24 hasn’t happened.

    In the beginning of the chapter he has pick you, a first century Jew, to be one of his apostles (sent ones). He’s sending you on a mission.

    He states in the midst of his instructions to you the following:

    Matthew 10:23 (AV): But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

    You are Peter or Phillip or James the son of Alphaeus.

    Interpret that verse in that context.

    What does “till the Son of man be come” in your ears as you stand in front of him?
    Who is “you” as you stand there and here him speak these words to you?
    I do grasp how you are interpreting it. It makes good sense on the surface, you interpreting it in that manner, yet when comparing to what Jesus said about this generation in the Discourse, as in the context He said that in, and that He said this after all of these other predictions He had already made, in my mind then, understanding this generation to be meaning the days they were living in at the time, makes Jesus out to be a false prophet. How? I have already explained that elsewhere, but I will explain it again. The texts indicate this generation can't pass way, till all of these things be done. Some of the things needing to be done didn't get accomplished within their lifetimes. So, if that generation meant has already passed away, that would make Jesus a false prophet since not everything He indicated that had to be done first, was done within their lifetimes, assuming that was what He was meaning by this generation.

  13. #193
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Dwight, IL
    Posts
    5,663
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    divaD, here’s another time where Jesus was talking to his disciples.

    Be James for a minute.

    When Jesus says “There be some standing here (look at the people around you) which shall not taste death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom,” some of those people saw it, right?

    In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

    Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

    If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

  14. #194

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    The context in the Discourse involves eschatology. Why use a context via Mark 1 to try and make your point, if that context is not involving eschatology as well?
    I have to say I'm astonished at your response here and really don't even know how to address such a question. Facts don't change in a differing context. Is Mark 1:15 a true statement by Jesus, yes or no?

    Jesus says the same thing many times. It's a common theme through His ministry to indicate that the kingdom of God was near to those receiving the gospel. When He sends out the 72 in Luke 10 He tells them to say basically the same thing.

    NIV Luke 10:9 Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’

    Can you really say that Luke 10:9 has anything to do with the second coming?

    Luke 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
    12*He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
    13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
    14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
    15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

    In this parable A certain nobleman is obviously meaning Christ. The parable indicates He leaves, then while away He receives for Himself a kingdom, then He returns at some point later on. And when He returns the text indicates He returns after having received the kingdom. How can He return without the kingdom though? How can the kingdom not be the kingdom of God, the same kingdom of God where in the Discourse it indicates is nigh at hand, even at the doors, when you see these things come to pass?
    I believe it's the same kingom that comes to earth with the return of Christ that has been 'near' this whole time since Christ's first advent. I'm not sure why you're saying this is a problem.

    I think it's been proven pretty much beyond doubt that the kingdom being 'nigh at hand, even at the doors', is not speaking of the second coming though. It's been at the door since before the discourse. Can we not agree on this? If not, show me how I'm misunderstanding Christ's plain words.

    NIV Mark 1:15 “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”

    NIV Luke 21:31 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.


    You would then conclude that it's incorrect to deduce summer has to eventually arrive? Does it stay spring forever all year around then? It doesn't matter that the parable doesn't indicate summer arrives, it's only natural to deduce that it will. Jesus could have used fall and winter seasons instead. Fall would still have to pass away in order for winter to arrive in it's place. It's the point being made by Jesus here that matters.

    The fulfillment of this prophecy only requires the realization that the kingdom of God is near by the people that witness certain signs. Can we agree on this? There is no actual return of Christ in this text. Only nearness to that event (which has been near since Christ's first advent).

    NIV Matthew 24:33 Even so, when you see all these things[When You witness certain signs], you know [you become aware ] that it [the kingdom of God] is near, right at the door.

    NIV Matthew 24:32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out [When certains signs appear], you know [you become aware] that summer [the kingdom of God] is near.

    Just read what's there without bringing all your baggage to the text. It's simple to understand if you can do it. You're trying to force the second coming into the text. It's not there. You won't suddenly become a preterist if you acknowlege this.

    Your questions are really baffling to me but I'll try....
    1) Yes summer eventually will arive. Does it arrive in the parable? No. Yes Jesus will eventually return. Does He return in the parable? No.
    2) No it does not stay spring forever all year round. It is a spring setting in the parable though.
    3) It matters quite alot to our discussion that summer doesn't come in the framework of the parable. If summer is the coming of the kingdom of God and return of Christ, then that means those witness to the signs only obtain the knowledge that this event is close at hand, and the event itself does not occur at this time.
    4) Jesus used the spring season because that's when the signs on the fig tree occur and for it's proximity to summer I would assume.

  15. #195
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,239

    Re: Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Disco

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Randy, I am really perplexed that you have unremittingly accused me of not "considering your viewpoint". I find this exasperating, to be honest. By countering these "other" positions with reasons why I believe them to be incorrect, isn't that sufficient that I have duly considered them? I don't have to agree with you before you accept that I've considered your position, do I?
    I've already answered this, brother. My point is that you prejudge my view, or view my position with prejudice, by suggesting that in your thinking it is impossible. That is closed-minded. No, I don't ask you to agree with me. I only ask you to recognize the reason behind my arguments. Can you understand the difference?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee
    The way I understand the discourse (and Jesus was consistent on this throughout his ministry) is that at every opportunity, Jesus would rather focus on salvation and eternal life than the fleeting life of the flesh. Therefore, when the disciples asked him the three-barrelled questions about the temple, his Return and the end of the age, Jesus characteristically embarked on a detailed account of ALL things to come before his return and end of the age, rather than focus on the temple alone. This is because Jesus understood that preparing the faithful that there will be bumps in the road before his return and grant of immortality, is better than an emphasis on any temporal distress we will face.
    Your assumption here is that any focus on the temple's destruction has nothing to do with preparation for eternal life. That is false. My argument is that addressing the reality of the temple's destruction is part of what prepares for the 2nd Coming. Jesus' Disciples were being asked to prepare for Christ's 2nd Coming by dealing with the fact of the temple's destruction. That event provided the backdrop, in that generation, for proper watchfulness and readiness, with respect to the Kingdom.

    Those who anticipated an immediate political coming of the Kingdom were banking on a corrupt Jewish system, which was the antithesis to Christian salvation. It was a dependency on the status quo in Israel, which was a complete rejection of Jesus. It was a replacement of Jesus' salvation with a strictly Jewish salvation, led by the zealots.

    Jesus wanted his disciples to repent of Jewish sin, and watch for a more distant coming of the Kingdom. For them, the Kingdom had to be viewed as "near," such that Jewish sin was close to being judged. And this is what happened in 70 AD. That was the lesson of 70 AD, that the Jewish way was *not* salvation, and that Jesus' righteousness, in opposition to the Jewish way, was true salvation. In other words, the way Jesus' Disciples were to view the 70 AD event had *everything* to do with their approach to the 2nd Coming and to eternal salvation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee
    I am in a hurry but if you insist, I'm sure I can cite some examples where Jesus sometimes ignored a question he was asked but instead, went on to explain what was not asked, because he KNOWS that what he is saying is more beneficial to the listeners for the saving of their soul. His response to disciples' questions in the discourse is no different. Perhaps, it is your inability to grasp that Jesus valued warning the faithful of the impending calamitous trials that will shake their faith to the core to be more than the destruction of the temple?

    Naturally, Jesus answered the question about the temple's as elaborated in Luke 21, but it's only to be understood as just one of the climactic events that must come to pass before his coming. I understand that you see the discourse as nothing more than a narrative about the judgment of the Jews in 70 AD. But I respectfully disagree because I understand that focused on something much more important than the temple's destruction -- the need to prepare his believers to persevere to the end against untold trials to come.
    There was nothing more important to the Jews of Jesus' time than for them to focus on the 70 AD event. That event was to show the inadequacy and utter failure of the Jewish way of salvation. It would lead to a 2000 year Jewish punishment for insisting on this Jewish way. To go down that path is to miss the blessings of eternal assurance through Christ, whose way was the opposite of the Jewish way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee
    You have the right to disagree with me, but please, please, don't say that I've not considered your position.
    I've not asked you to *agree* with me. I've asked you to consider my position with an open mind, weighing the arguments as reasonable arguments. If you choose not to do this, then you just aren't interested in an open discussion on the subject.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. New here Elisheba Ruth - I am new here and have newly accepted the path of Jesus
    By ElishebaRuth in forum Introductions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Nov 27th 2013, 07:17 PM
  2. Q about correction and my newly turned 3 year old
    By Misfit in forum Families in Christ
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: Jan 20th 2011, 04:28 AM
  3. prayers for a newly saved person
    By butterfly1234 in forum Prayer
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jul 6th 2009, 05:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •