The Lord's delayed return

[Joshpantera]

On 12/26/2021 at 3:41 PM, DarkBishop said:

27For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

28Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

 

On 12/26/2021 at 6:45 PM, Fish153 said:

LOL---

1. Our premise is that Jesus said "some standing here will not taste of death until they SEE the Son of Man coming in power and glory." So therefore our premise is that he meant he was returning in THEIR lifetime.

2. Our first move-- ignore the word "some" and the word "see". Our premise is that he predicted an immediate return. The word "some" does not play into our narrative. And the word "see" allows for a vision, or some other MEANS of showing His return to someone.

3.  2ND Peter destroys our premise, as Peter clearly shows that he SAW Jesus coming in Power and Glory, and was an EYEWITNESS TO IT when he was on the Holy Mount. He was one of THE THREE ("some standing here..") who SAW Jesus shine LIKE THE SUN IN POWER AND GLORY on that Mount. This a great problem. What do we do?

4. 2nd Peter is a forgery.

 

LOL.

 

Matthew 16:27-28 doesn't say what you're claiming it says. Read the verse. I've reproduced several times for context and analysis. 

 

And you keep dodging the issue. It doesn't say some will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in power and glory. You've made that up yourself by omitting the full context of the verses in question.

 

Matthew 16 reads: 

 

1) The son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels. 

 

2) Then he will reward everyone according to their works. The final judgement. 

 

3) Some of the disciples standing there will not taste death until they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.

 

It's qualified as to what exactly the kindgom he's talking about is. The Kingdom of the Father, with the angels, and the final judgement just mentioned and which qualifies the entire statement. None of that describes the transfiguration, which is something that precedes what Matthew 16:27-28 is describing. 

 

FIsh153 wrote:

"2ND Peter destroys our premise, as Peter clearly shows that he SAW Jesus coming in Power and Glory, and was an EYEWITNESS TO IT when he was on the Holy Mount. He was one of THE THREE ("some standing here..") who SAW Jesus shine LIKE THE SUN IN POWER AND GLORY on that Mount. This a great problem. What do we do?"

 

You are ignoring the obvious. And 2nd Peter can't do anything to alter the reality of Matthew 16 and 17 in plain, black and white terms. Who cares what some unknown author had to say about anything from Matthew at a later date under the guise of claiming to be Peter? It has no bearing on the issue at hand. So what if some theologians ignore the skepticism of early Christians and modern scholars about the authenticity of 2 Peter? None of that even matters. 

 

The problem you're facing involves the fact that you keep ignoring what actually is written in Matthew 16:27-28!

 

You have to show where in the transfiguration scene of chapter 17 the Kingdom of heaven, along with a host of heavenly angels coming from god the Father, came down to earth, and where each man was rewarded according their works in this judgement scenario at the transfiguration. 

 

It's clearly saying that the 2nd coming will take place at some point during the lifetime of whatever disciples survive long enough to witness it. It's clearly written with little room to misread it.

 

And yet here you are doing just that. Willfully ignorant as you press on trying to insist, you're right. You have to show where all of these points are fulfilled in chapter 17 or you have no argument. Regardless of anything written in 2 Peter which has no bearing on whether or not the prediction in chapter 16 of Matthew was fulfilled in chapter 17 of Matthew, by the same said writer. 

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Well ladies and gentlemen. I think we atleast made the gears start turning in that noggin of his. His concern compelled him to speak to his pastor. That speaks volumes. 

 

That's southeastern USA for:

 

I think we made him question something. 

 

And I have to admit it was more fun discussing his stance than the few Christian wackos before him. His was the type of discussions that make my resolve in deconverting stronger. (Edit: not that what the wackos said swayed my stance. it's just they were so far out there I couldn't even take them seriously.) The Bible makes so much more sense to me now that im looking at it from the outside. It is so easy to pick apart these fallacies. Makes me wonder why I couldn't see them all those years in the church. Indoctrination is strong is all I can say. I'm glad the little fish swam through .

 

 

 

[midniterider]

14 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Well ladies and gentlemen. I think we atleast made the gears start turning in that noggin of his. His concern compelled him to speak to his pastor. That speaks volumes. 

 

That's southeastern USA for:

 

I think we made him question something. 

 

And I have to admit it was more fun discussing his stance than the few Christian wackos before him. His was the type of discussions that make my resolve in deconverting stronger. The Bible makes so much more sense to me now that im looking at it from the outside. It is so easy to pick apart these fallacies. Makes me wonder why I couldn't see them all those years in the church. Indoctrination is strong is all I can say. I'm glad the little fish swam through .

 

 

 

 

Fish is a good guy who I assume finds comfort in structured authority and regimented social interaction (like church). That is just too robotic for me. If Jesus made me and he don't like how I am then he should have made me differently. 

 

So in the other thread I called him and his pastor christbots....christian robots. If you enjoy all being the same, then that's great. I like being a bit different. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

I was thinking about this earlier. And we already talked about how 2nd Peter was probably some persons way of kicking the 2nd coming can down the road and justifying the Lord's absence after the apostles deaths. And I can't help but think that we've seen this exact thing happen in modern history several times. 

 

I Googled end time prophecies and there have been a lot of them. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events

 

Most of them look like Christian end time dates but there are a lot of other end time predictions too. 

 

Every one of them failed. Starting with the one Jesus supposedly proclaimed himself. They don't list that in Wikipedia but it should be listed. 

 

When I read this in the Bible now I picture the same basic scenario when I was reading about William Miller and his followers that lead to the formation of the SDA church under Ellen White one of his followers. 

 

I can see either a group of men, possibly lead by someone named Jesus. That's still up for debate. But it could have just been whoever claimed to be Paul, spreading the story of this marvelous saviour and his sacrifice for man. Maybe he really was trained in the temple and knew the Jewish laws and scripture well enough to piece together a new faith based on the old one. Like Muhammed did. 

 

In this story a 2nd coming was foretold and that second coming would be the end of everything and all men would be judged by God. 

 

Oh that sounds wonderful to the people so they started a movement. The story's get bigger, gospels are written based on Paul's epistles, but slowly one by one the apostles or leaders die off. 

 

Everyone becomes confused. Why hasn't Jesus come. People start leaving the church. Some pastors or maybe just one pastor studies the word and realizes within himself that hey.... of course...... Jesus must be waiting until everyone hears the word and since he's not willing that any should perish that's why there has been a delay. But how do I explain this to the people? It would have to come from an apostle for them to believe this. But they're dead. Ah! I know. I will write another letter to the church in Peter's name explaining why the lord hasn't come. And God's people will remain strong until he does return. Maybe he did it because he thought that's what God wanted. To save the church. His bride, from falling apart before his return. Maybe he, like most Christians that come up with their own interpretations, believed God showed him the truth.

 

And so the can gets kicked. 

 

With the Millerites Ellen saw a vision that it was something else that happened on that date. I forget now. I'm sure @Joshpantera could elaborate more on that. But they kicked the can on their predictions and formed the SDA church. 

 

It happens that way, time and time again. Even John Wesley predicted the end. I didn't know that. I need to go through that list and see how many religions jump started off false prophecy..... well other than Christianity as a whole. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Interestingly enough since 1980 end time prophecies have only skipped seven years between then and now. 

 

Martin Luther predicted the end

A ton of catholics predicted the end

John Wesley

A SDA woman (not Ellen white)

Russell taze predicted the end

Many Anabaptists predicted it.

 

(Edit: just to clarify. The above six prophecies I mentioned were way before 1980. I was just noting that their have only been 7 years between 1980 and now that weren't in someone's end time prophecy.)

 

It doesn't seem that many denominations haven't predicted it at some point. 

 

It's laughable how many GREAT CHRISTIAN LEADERS prophesied the end. But here we still are. 

[◊ Krowb ◊]

The prophecy cannot simply fail but must be reinterpreted otherwise Deuteronomy18:20-22 proves their leader false.

 

All these leaders put themselves in a catch-22.  Either they are god's mouthpiece (though why he needs one is beyond me) or they are not and the OT verse makes it very clear what is to happen to false prophets.

[Joshpantera]

On 12/27/2021 at 12:31 AM, DarkBishop said:

The Bible makes so much more sense to me now that im looking at it from the outside. It is so easy to pick apart these fallacies. Makes me wonder why I couldn't see them all those years in the church. Indoctrination is strong is all I can say.

 

Yes, I've been explaining these discussions and more about the bible to my wife, who is still taking all of this in.

 

I was telling her about how the Isaiah prophecy is fulfilled just following in Isaiah. And what went into the writer of Matthew quote mining that one small section and claiming that jesus fulfilled the Emmanuel prophecy about a young woman conceiving a boy. That's an example where the context reveals that something was fulfilled in the same book. Later on, the boy in question is born. 

 

Apologists deny that and dig their heels in because of preconceived and indoctrinated 'mental blocks.' No, Matthew must be right! 

 

So, we turn to the end of Matthew and what do they do?

 

You guessed it; they claim that something IS fulfilled in the next chapter when the clear context of the writer shows otherwise. There's a pattern. It's knee jerk reactions to anything that might jeopardize their indoctrination. And preconceived notions. There's a 'mental block' keeping Fish from seeing that the transfiguration doesn't fulfill what is described in Matthew 16:27-28. 

 

My wife gets it 100% And finds it very fascinating to understand the truth about the bible after all of these years of not understanding it from a secular standpoint.

 

Fish wants to know why in the world we still concern ourselves with the bible and discussion of god?

 

Speaking for myself, it's because I was lied to and deceived by a 'demonstrably false religion' from birth. Had I have been born into some other religion and realized the same, I'd do the very same. I would concern myself with figuring out it's deceit down to the detail and then making that knowledge known to anyone else who'd bother to listen. For their own sake. On a take it or leave it basis. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

12 hours ago, Krowb said:

The prophecy cannot simply fail but must be reinterpreted otherwise Deuteronomy18:20-22 proves their leader false.

 

All these leaders put themselves in a catch-22.  Either they are god's mouthpiece (though why he needs one is beyond me) or they are not and the OT verse makes it very clear what is to happen to false prophets.

 

Yep. So any followers of the false prophets probably wouldn't fair any better. Since Jesus prophesied his own return falsely. Then all of christendom is a cult of a flase prophet. Mmmmm no wonder they have to keep kicking the can. Otherwise they are in danger of hell fire according to their own scripture. Lmao.....that kinda funny.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

14 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

Speaking for myself, it's because I was lied to and deceived by a 'demonstrably false religion' from birth. Had I have been born into some other religion and realized the same, I'd do the very same. I would concern myself with figuring out it's deceit down to the detail and then making that knowledge known to anyone else who'd bother to listen. For their own sake. On a take it or leave it basis. 

 

Same here. I've mentioned before how I prayed daily pretty much to know the truth in his word. One of the first things I noticed in my Christian walk was how much the various denominations varied in their interpretations and practices. A few of the big ones for me were. 

 

1. Baptism- starting out in a Baptist church it was taught that only full immersion baptism as a new born again adult, was the only acceptable form of baptism. 

 

As you all know. Not every Christian church interprets scripture that way. 

 

2. Once saved always saved. This was the main doctrine that lead me to leave the Baptist church in favor of the church of God of the Gospel assembly. While reading and studying the scripture I concluded that one could lose salvation if they didn't perform the works of a Christian. I believed if they turned back they would have to perform the first works over to be saved again. Repentance and baptism. So in my former church's eye. I'm a lost sinner destined for hell again. But in my Baptist mother's eyes I'm still saved. Lol. So I guess that's a good thing for my mom to believe that. 

 

3. Women preachers- I personally felt that the Bible left little room to justify a woman being a preacher. I still don't see how denominations justify it. Even now I can tell that the Bible was written by men for men. Everything I see in it puts the woman under the man. 

 

Which was one of the other difference with the church of God of the Gospel assembly. Most church of God churches accept women preachers. The gospel assembly did not. Nor did the union assembly. 

 

There were many many more differing doctrines I noticed. But those were my main three. For me all of those were the ones I felt could possibly send whole churches of people to hell. 

 

So I was very focused on wanting to know the truth in the word. 

 

Now I've found the truth. It's not at all what I thought I would find. But I found it non the less. And I still crave the knowledge of biblical truth. Now I want to know why the various authors wrote what they wrote. What did the most ancient texts say, what have they unearthed, its all so amazing now honestly. I like seeing that the Bible reflects a flat earth creation. It doesn't bother me that it does. Most people during the time believed that. So it makes sense now. I love it that the Bible is finally starting to make sense. Why are their contradictions? Because there was a back and forth campaign in the early church because of different interpretations of scripture. So those people made forgeries to promote their interpretations. It is nice knowing the truth, and discussing it with individuals who have been through similar experiences. 

[Joshpantera]

11 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

Why are their contradictions? Because there was a back and forth campaign in the early church because of different interpretations of scripture. So those people made forgeries to promote their interpretations. It is nice knowing the truth, and discussing it with individuals who have been through similar experiences. 

 

2 Peter being a primary example of such forgeries, in fact. 

 

Fast forward a couple thousand years and some yahoo is trying to use a known forgery to try and excuse the fact that 'whoever wrote the book of Matthew (which is unknown) had HIS jesus character making a prophecy or declaration that became false when all of the apostles of the story would have been dead, if they ever were real people to begin with, which, is also completely unknown. 

 

It's funny how one of the most well-known forgeries is what so many christians reach for as a way of explaining the delayed return of jesus. It's always 'a day is a like a thousand years to god!' Says the unknown author of this blatant forgery that even early christian church fathers were skeptical of....

 

See folks, problem solved!

 

Believe now!!!