LAST GENERATION......?

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Add Reply

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Author

Comment

Alesiah

LAST GENERATION......?

Lead

[-]

Posts: 717

(05/31/09 13:07:58)

Tags : None

I know MT has discussed the topic many times before concerning the prophecies of JC.. I think one problem is, perhaps they are not the prophecies of JC..but simply JC repeating what's already been expressed by the ancients.. Is it a possibility?? Ancient what you might ask???

Here's a verse that's been brought up in the past to disprove JC prophecies....but I just wanted to look at it closer..

.^{Matthew 24:34} Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.

It's been expressed the generation being discussed here in the verse is the generation in which JC lived, and if that's the case then the prophecy did not come true.. BUT....what if that was not the generation being discussed???

^{Matthew 24:} ³² "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. ³³ So you also, when you see all these things, know that it^[d] is near-at the doors! ³⁴ Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. ³⁵ Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

The generation being discussed is the generation of the budding fig tree.. believed to be the generation of the new state of Israel ..1948..
Well, if this is true or un-true, I guess we'll find out soon enough.......and "Xian's" don't expect things to play-out like you have been brainwashed to believe!!

Sophiee1

[-]

Posts: 12268

(05/31/09 14:20:58)

Moderator

You asked "what if that was not the generation being discussed???"

What if purple unicorns could fly?

The Greek text uses the word genea.

Six Bible Encylopedias: genea (from Infidels.org)

(1) Genea refers to a period of time loosely defined as the time between a parent's prime and that of his child.... Those living at a given time in history are referred to as a generation.
(2) Matt. 24:34, genea means the generation or persons then living contemporary with Chrst.
(3) Genea: It has the concept of the sum total of those born at the same time--contemporaries.
(4) Genea means the generation of persons then living contemporary with Chrst.
(5) Matt. xxix.34, genea means the generation or persons then living contemporary with Chrst.
(6) "The present generation" comprises all those who are now alive. Matt xxiv.34, some now living shall witness the event foretold. Our L-rd uses the term to express a period of about 36 or 37 years... say about A.D. 70.

GT clearly has Jsus saying that the people he is talking to (those standing here) won't die before he returns. The bit about the generation being discussed is the generation of the budding fig tree.. believed to be the generation of the new state of Israel ..1948 is just total nonsense to try to make yet another excuse for the fact that Jsus was a false prophet (if he ever lived at all) whose prophecies never came true.

READ the GT:

Quote:
Mark 9:1 . . .there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of G-d come with power."

Know of any 2000 year old men still walking around? Any discussion of Jsus as a fig tree? I've heard of "lamb of god" (ala Mithr-as) but never heard Jsus called a fig tree before! Read on, Matthew 16:28 makes it clear that no one of THAT generation will die (not fig trees, but PEOPLE):

Quote:
Matthew 16:28. . .there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. . .

Going back to the life spans of Adam is a desperate and deflecting move and nothing more. The GT is very clear that people alive in 30 CE or so would be alive when Jsus "came back."

He didn't come back if he ever lived at all.

His followers (those who supposedly knew him if THEY ever lived) are long dead.

The life expectancy circal 30 CE was 30-40 years and this isn't a generation (which is counted on birth rates not entire life spans) but the even longer life span.

Long dead. No Jsus. False prophecy. And as I've pointed out at least 3 times now (and Folah has ignored)

Some Chrstians try to tie the idea of Jsus speaking about "this generation will not die" in the GT to Genesis 5's use of the word generations. The word translated as "generations" in Genesis 5 is (toledot) . תולדת.

תולדת speaks of generations by birth cycles (not birth to death). In other words the age of the man when a child is born to the age of his son when his child is born and so forth. It has to do with the generations (children) of the MAN Adam, not all of mankind -- and if one reads Genesis 5 you'll see the children of Adam listed. . .

The root word for toledot is ילד (y'lad) - which means to give birth.

So Genesis 5 is the book about the generations (plural) from the age of their father when the child is born to the next birth and so on. Folah's theory is dead in the water from the first Hebrew word -- let alone a clear reading of the GT.

From Infidels.org:

Fifty-Two Translations: Matthew 24:34.

(1) Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
(2) This generation will not have passed before all this is accomplished.
(3) By no means may this generation be passing by until....
(4) This generation shall not pass away till all these things....
(5) Before the present generation passes away, these things will all happen.
(6) This generation will not pass away....
(7) In no wise shall this generation pass away until all these things shall happen.
(8) This generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled.
(9) This generation will not disappear till all this has taken place.
(10) This generation will certainly not pass away until all these things....
(11) ...this generation will not pass away....
(12) ...this generation will not pass away....
(13) ...this generation shall not pass away till....
(14) This generation may not pass away till all these things...
(15) ...this generation shall not pass away....
(16) ...this generation shall not pass away....
(17) ...this generation will not come to an end....
(18) This generation will not have passed away until all these things shall have taken place.
(19) This generation will not disappear until these things happen....
(20) This generation shall not pass until....
(21) In no way will this generation pass away until all these things have occurred.
(22) This generation shall not pass....
(23) This generation shall not pass away....
(24) Before this generation has passed away, all these things will have taken place.
(25) This generation will not pass away....
(26) This generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.
(27) The present generation will not pass away until all this takes place.
(28) These people will not pass away till all this happens.
(29) This generation will not pass away....
(30) This generation shall not pass away....
(31) This generation will not pass away before all these things have taken place.
(32) This generation will not come to an end till all these things are complete.
(33) This generation will by no means pass away before all these things take place.
(34) This generation will not pass away....
(35) Before this generation passes away, all these things will happen.
(36) This generation will not pass away....
(37) This generation will not pass away....
(38) Indeed, I can give you solemn assurance that this generation will not have passed away before all this has taken place.
(39) This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.
(40) I tell you, even the present generation will not pass away, till all these things have taken place.
(41) The people of this day will not pass away before all these things have happened.
(42) The present generation shall not pass away till all these things happen.
(43) This present generation shall not pass away until all these things arrive.
(44) The present generation will not pass away till all this happens.
(45) I tell you this: the present generation will live to see it all.
(46) I tell you in solemn truth that the present generation will certainly not pass away without all these things having first taken place.
(47) I assure you, all these things will take place before this present generation passes on.
(48) I swear to G-d, this generation certainly won't pass into oblivion before all these things take place!
(49) I can promise you that some of the people of this generation will still be alive when all this happens.
(50) Truly, I tell you, this generation--that is, the whole multitude of people living at the same time, in a definite, given period--will not pass away till all these things taken together take place.
(51) I tell you the truth--all these things will happen while the people of this time are still living!
(52) Remember that all these things will happen before the people now living have all died.

Five Greek Lexicons: genea.

(1) The interval of time between father & son... from thirty to forty years those living in any one period; this present generation.
(2) A generation of mankind, a step in genealogy.
(3) A generation, an interval in time.
(4) The whole multitude of men living at the same time--Mt xxiv.34... used esp. of the Jewish race living at one and the same period.
(5) The sum total of those born at the same time... all those living at the same time... contemporaries... Mt. 24:34.
Twenty-Five Bible Dictionaries: genea.
(1) Those born at the same time constitute a generation... contemporaries.
(2) Thus Herodotus says that "three generations of men make an hundred years."
(3) It is used of people living at the same time, and by extension... of the time itself... 40 years.
(4) Of the 43 references to genea in the NT... 25 (are) of its occurrences to the Jewish people in the time of Jsus.
(5) The whole multitude of men living at the same time. A period ordinarily occupied by each successive generation, say, of thirty or forty years.
(6) It mostly denotes "generation" in the sense of contemporaries... Mt. 24:34. This generation is to be understood temporally.
(7) The age or period of a body of contemporaries.... The generation lasts as long as any of the members survive.
(8) ... from thirty to forty years....
(9) ... the sum total of individuals forming a contemporary group.
(10) The period of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their children... most biblical writers seem to consider thirty to forty years a normal generation.
(11) ...the period from a man's birth to that of his son--and collectively the people who live in that period.
(12) ...the period of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their children... the term simply refers to all people living at a particular time.
(13) A body of people who live at the same time in a given period of history.
(14) ...from thirty to forty years... contemporaries.
(15) Used in the general sense of a period of time, the span of one human life, or those who live at a particular period of time.
(16) The "circle" of life, spanning from a man's birth to that of his son... forty years.
(17) Mt. 24:34--"This generation" equals the persons then living contemporary with Chrst.
(18) The age or period of a body of contemporaries....
(19) Mt. 24:34--"This generation" equals the persons then living contemporary with Chrst.
(20) ...about 25 years. A generation is all the people living at about the same period of time, Mt 24:34.
(21) In general, the word generation in the Bible refers to any contemporary group.
(22) It was fixed by some at 100 years, by others at 110, by others at 33, 25, and even at 20 years.
(23) Of all men living at any given time... Mt 24:34... a period of about 30 to 33 years.
(24) Matt xxiv.34, "This generation shall not pass...." All who are at present living shall not be dead when this shall come to pass. There are some at this day living, who shall be witnesses of the evils which I have foretold shall befall the Jews.
(25) We must adhere to the ordinary usage, according to which dor signifies an age, or the men living in a particular age.

Sixteen Bible Commentaries: genea.

(1) ...verse 34 solemnly promises that Jsus will return while some of his contemporaries are still alive (a reprise of 16:28).... The gospel testimony provides strong support for this view: Jsus did not know all things.
(2) (This generation) can only with the greatest of difficulty be made to mean anything other than the generation living when Jsus spoke.
(3) "This generation" clearly designates the contemporaries of Jsus.
(4) The statement in verse 34 is a difficult one. If generation is to be taken in this strict sense, then "all these things" must be limited to the events culminating in A.D. 70.... The majority of the best scholars today insist that generation be taken in its strictest sense.
(5) Jsus was quite certain that they would happen within the then living generation.
(6) [Matthew] probably believed, however, that the end ould come before all of Jsus' hearers had died.
(7) Further, he [Jsus] insists that his words are infallible, and that they are more certain than the material universe itself....
(8) This verse recalls 16.28, and affirms that some of the disciples would live to see the Parousia. This would presuppose a relatively early date for the event.... Was Jsus in error in his prediction of the nearness of the end?
(9) In the Old Testament a generation was reckoned as forty years. This is the natural way to take verse 34.... He plainly stated in verse 34 that those events would take place in that generation.... One may, of course, accuse Jsus of hopeless confusion.... It is impossible to escape the conclusion that Jsus, as Man, expected the end within the lifetime of his contemporaries.
(10) The hard fact still remains that if Jsus spoke the sayings of St. Mark xiii and St. Matthew xxiv... he misjudged the extent of his own knowledge and uttered a definite prediction which was not fulfilled.
(11) The Synoptists fell into the contradiction... of making Jsus declare at one moment that He did not know the time of the glorious Advent, and at another that it would infallibly happen within that generation.
(12) The affirmation that "all these things" will happen in this generation is clear, and there is no reason to alter the meaning of the word generation from its usual sense except a fear that the Scriptures may be in error if it is not so altered.
(13) Indeed, the fulfillment will take place before this present generation has passed away.
(14) Did Jsus expect the end within the lifetime of those who heard him speak? It seems quite certain that the early church so understood him.
(15) Matthew made it clear that some of the first disciples would live to see the Parousia.
(16) ... v. 34; there are those now alive, who shall see Jerusalem destroyed.

Eight Chrstian Scholars & Authors: genea & Matthew 24:34.

(1) As a rule, a generation in the Bible lasts 40 years.
(2) ...the word genea... was put to the torture....
(3) If the saying relates to the parousia, it sets the end time within the bounds of the first generation church. The phrase "this generation" should cause no difficulty for interpreters... It always signifies his [Jsus'] contemporaries.
(4) And He [Jsus] was to come, moreover, within the lifetime of the generation to which He had proclaimed the nearness of the Kingdom of G-d.
(5) No future generation of Jews is meant here.
(6) Next, our L-rd sums up with an affirmation calculated to remove every vestige of doubt or uncertainty, "Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." One would reasonably suppose that after a note of time so clear and express there could not be room for controversy. Our L-rd Himself has settled the question. Ninety-nine persons in every hundred would undoubtedly understand His words as meaning that the predicted catastrophe would fall within the lifetime of the existing generation. Not that all would live to witness it, but that most or many would. There can be no question that this would be the interpretation which the disciples would place upon the words.... His coming... would come to pass before the existing generation had wholly passed away, and within the limits of their own lifetime.
(7) [Members of the primitive church] were obliged to expect the second and glorious coming of the Son of Man in the clouds before that generation was totally extinguished which had beheld his humble condition upon the earth.
(8) The words immediately preceding them show the absurdity of applying them to another generation than that of the apostles: "When ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors." The teaching of Jsus was emphatic beyond all rational question that that generation should not pass away before all those things of which they inquired should be fulfilled.

(Mark Smith, 9766 Chapman Avenue, PMB 192, Garden Grove, CA 92821; e-mail, Jcnot4me@aol.com; WEB: http://members.aol.com/jcnot4me)

www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/2000/4/004genea.html

סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12

Last Edited By: Sophiee1 05/31/09 14:40:45. Edited 1 times.

GIDEON MAGE

olivet

[-]

Posts: 439

(06/02/09 07:53:00)

Ah, the Olivet fallacy. I have seen xians try in vain so many times to explain this one. It is right up there with the fig tree controversy, the fate of Judas, and the matzoh last supper boo-boo. Good job, Sophiee. can I quote you on another website?

ProfBenTziyyon

[-]

Posts: 2098

(06/02/09 11:27:03)

GIDEON MAGE wrote:
Ah, the Olivet fallacy.

The "Olivet" fallacy?

What is an "olivet"? There isn't such a word!

http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל

Sophiee1

[-]

Posts: 12274

(06/02/09 15:07:35)

Moderator

From Wikipedia:

The Olivet discourse is a biblical passage found in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew (24), Mark (13) and Luke (21). It is known as the "Little Apocalypse" because it includes Jsus' descriptions of future events, the use of end times language, and Jesus' warning to his followers that they will suffer tribulation and persecution before the ultimate triumph of the Kingdom of G-d.^[1] It occurred just prior to the narrative of Jsus' passion beginning with the Anointing of Jsus. In the narrative is a discourse or sermon given by Jsus on the Mount of Olives, hence the name. According to most scholars, the versions of the discourse in Matthew and Luke are based on the version in Mark.

סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12

ProfBenTziyyon

[-]

Posts: 2100

(06/02/09 16:21:32)

Sophiee1 wrote:
It occurred just prior to the narrative of Jsus' passion beginning with the Anointing of Jsus.

Here we go again − he never was "anointed"!
Also when, why, and by whom was the "S" of the word "olives" changed into a "T"?

http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל

Proteus

I'M ASTONISHED THAT ALESIAH ...

[-]

Posts: 1860

(06/02/09 22:05:15)

... even asked the question. But then, I need to keep in mind what Xtianity she came from.

At least I've found out what this "Olivet" thing is that Gid so often refers to.

IMO both texts refer inevitably to the biological generation of those living in Jsus' own time.

P.

The most persuasive case
anyone can make for one's religion
is the way one lives one's life.

Alesiah

LAST GENERATION

[-]

Posts: 718

(06/03/09 21:36:33)

No, you are not understanding what I'm getting at!
I have noticed that many many verses in the NT and even such as included in Revelation are simply a borrowing of what's been expressed "already" in the Tanach!

A good comparison is between Daniel and Revelation...but it does not stop there.... I wish I had the time to list all the comparable verses I've noticed.....When I read back and forth I see where the writers of the books of the NT came up with their ideology.

.

Here's a simple example:
Read

Revelation 13:16
He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead.

Why the HAND or the FOREHEAD for the mark of the beast???
Xian's always looks to figure out what the mark in the hand or forehead means ....I simply find it funny that perhaps the hand and forehead was simply a borrowing from the Torah...

^{Deuteronomy 6:8} You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.

NOT that the beast's mark is referring to the "Commandments of HaShem," but simply perhaps it means the mark is the false prophet's commandments....
This would identify JC as the false prophet since Xian's are the ones who follow a new set of commandments..burned into their heart, mind and hand, etc.....

What's funny to me is Xian's try to keep the 10 commandments but....worship another god as HaShem, Xian's keep Sunday instead of sun-set Friday to sunset Sat.. yet think they are keeping the Sabbath..and keeping the Commandments in Torah...

The beast is a story about a man worshipped as god and so is JC...

ProfBenTziyyon

[-]

Posts: 2105

(06/04/09 07:18:09)

Alesiah wrote:
No, you are not understanding what I'm getting at! I have noticed that many many verses in the NT and even such as included in Revelation are simply a borrowing of what's been expressed "already" in the Tanach!

Alesiah - There's an old saying that nothing "good" in the Greek Garbage is "new" and nothing "new" in the Greek Garbage is "good". Are you only just discovering this?

http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל

ProfBenTziyyon

[-]

Posts: 2112

(06/05/09 09:53:41)

Alesiah wrote:
What's funny to me is Xian's try to keep the 10 commandments but....worship another god as HaShem, Xian's keep Sunday instead of sun-set Friday to sunset Sat.. yet think they are keeping the Sabbath..and keeping the Commandments in Torah...

There are no "ten" commandments; there are the 7 that were given to No'ah and his sons, and the 613 that were given to Yisraél.

If, however, you are referring to the ten "utterances" in the first 14 verses of Sh'mot, chapter 20 (which contains many more than ten individual "commandments"), look how that passage begins:

וַיְדַבֵּר אֱלֹהִים אֵת כָּל־הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵֽלֶּה לֵאמֹר׃ אָנֹכִי יְיָ אֱלֹהֶֽיךָ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִֽיךָ מֵאֶֽרֶץ מִצְרַיִם מִבֵּית עֲבָדִים׃
Then Elohim spoke all these things, as follows: "I am Adonai, your God, that I have taken you out of the land of Mitzrayim, out of the place of slavery...."

When were any christians slaves in Egypt? When did Yisraél's God liberate them from Egypt? The wording of the passage is very explicit − God was addressing the former slaves that He had personally liberated from Egypt, and that does not include any christians no matter how much they pretend that it does!

http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל

Alesiah

[-]

Posts: 719

(06/06/09 11:12:07)

ProBen,

Alesiah - There's an old saying that nothing "good" in the Greek Garbage is "new" and nothing "new" in the Greek Garbage is "good". Are you only just discovering this?

Heaven's no!!!
I'm bringing up something old in hopes that it'll be viewed by Xian's, (light bulb ON) and they'll catch something new to them..

But most likely it probably won't happen........... for a very specific reason..

There are no "ten" commandments; there are the 7 that were given to No'ah and his sons, and the 613 that were given to Yisraél.

Yes, the seven is for Noahides...but I'm speaking of the Ten Commandments (which Xian's refer to them as) so they'll know what I'm speaking about...

If, however, you are referring to the ten "utterances" in the first 14 verses of Sh'mot, chapter 20 (which contains many more than ten individual "commandments"), look how that passage begins:

The Jewish community refers to them as utterances.... and I'm totally aware of the rest of the information you gave....so don't worry..

BUT, I'm speaking about Hebrew history/prophecy/Daniel and etc... being purposely used/mixed into the NT/pagan writings to set-forth and achieve an ultimate goal, ..... Yes, and of course it was designed to mislead Noahide/Gentiles and also uneducated Jew's....

But why, would you suppose..... would be the goal in that?????

When were any christians slaves in Egypt? When did Yisraél's God liberate them from Egypt? The wording of the passage is very explicit − God was addressing the former slaves that He had personally liberated from Egypt, and that does not include any christians no matter how much they pretend that it does!

Hebrew's were slaves in Egypt.....and HaShem liberated them.YES,..
BUT, there's something interesting that's happened through time since the birth of the NT.....The NT followers have become enslaved to a god that reflects the pagan belief's of Egypt/Rome/Greece/Asia....etc..past-present and is all under one umbrella. ....

WHY ON EARTH would you think a religion would scrammble, then roll the ancient pagan practices, plus the Hebrew's HaShem into a neat package called Xinaity under one god called JC??? Hummm

Why would HaShem even allow for it to be made possible so that this NT god, would roll on through time, through his followers..... consuming different "god form traditions" of the surrounding nations..Good examples are X-mas and Easter!!!

These Xian celebrations are consummmmmed by the ancient pagan taditions...yet why are these traditions present in Xianity??
The NT readers are given hints, signs and warnings EVEN in their own NT book yet Xian's ignore to look at the physical historical evidence that identifies thier anti-annointed as thier own god ....

Simply read this verse:

2 Thessalonians 2

The Man of Lawlessness

³^(G) Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come,^(H) unless the rebellion comes first, and^(I) the man of lawlessness^[b] is revealed,^(J) the son of destruction,^[c] ⁴who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship,

Son of distruction is a very good start......Funny that since the existance of Xianity....it's "plowed" through time.. consuming everything in it's path...including pagan practices and pagan holiday celebration season and every so called god or object of worhip....

so that he takes his seat in the temple of God,^(K) proclaiming himself to be God. ⁵Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? ⁶And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. ⁷For^(L) the mystery of lawlessness^(M) is already at work.

Lawlessness was already at work during JC's life-time....... JC was that historical figure in a nutshell which today sets-forth Judaism to the rest of the world, then tears it down through lawlessness by offically pin-pointing/targetting HaShem's law's for the Jewish community...attempting to un-ravel...yesterday and today's Jewish community...

The JC/god message has attempted to combine all that was god, and all that is god to the people.....and also, what is to come...

How can this be made possible???? Ever really wondered why a Jew can tell a Xian the TRUTH yet they DO NO HEAR a word you say??????

¹¹Therefore^(T) God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe^(U) what is false, ¹²in order that all may be condemned^(V) who did not believe the truth but^(W) had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Fifth Freedom

[-]

Posts: 4

(06/07/09 10:57:13)

Every generation has been the "Last Generation" according to Xtians ever single "event" is somehow a
"sign of the end" They have made themselves ( and Hollywood) rich with all there doom and gloom, "anti-Xists" Armeggedon, atomic blasts and kiler bees. I remember the whole "Y2K" fiasco and then Jerry Falwell was going on about how society was going to collapse, it was biblical of course and all you had to do to be prepared of course was to order his new book and video send $19.95 and it will explain it all.
then there was jack van Impe who had the whole "Israel, Russia and WWIII" video for sale because of the whole "signs of the end"
......Nothing happened. but that's ok, because if you felt you were ripped off buying that video, Operation desert Shield began and then he changed it to "Israel, Saddam Hussein and WWIII" and of course, he had biblical "proof" of all the signs, use your Visa or Mastercard and order today!
Nothing.
Don't forget the whole "Left Behind" series that has made it's authors a ton of money.
Xtianity has become a business that profits from peoples fears and ignorance. "THE END IS NIGH, PREPARE TO MEET THY DOOM!" "and order my new book." I guess they figure sooner or later they'll have been right concerning the end and then they can say they predicted it (rollseyes)

weboh

The son of perdition is one of the Herods

[-]

Posts: 8

(06/07/09 19:12:14)

Reading Acts 12:21-23, I can't notice help but notice how Herod is some sort of "man-god" and lawless one which gets smoted by an angel of (G-d), since he gave no glory to th g-d. It's difficult to say that Paul promoted dietyhood for JC on the basis of this. Should this be considered garbage? I really like these verses.

Last Edited By: Sophiee1 06/07/09 19:42:20. Edited 1 times.

Alesiah

THE LAST GENERATION

[-]

Posts: 720

(06/13/09 17:34:54)

Yes, Xian's have pin-pointed multiple...so called, one and only, final/end-time anti-anointed's throughout time......but all these so named, generation after generation have never turned out to be THE anti-anointed.... It's because he's been right under their noses all the time......Just TOO close for them to see..

Little hints spring up for them, but they see NOT...:and know NOT, what they worship..

Soooooo, what are some qualifiers for the Man of Lawlessness?

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,⁴who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship,

What happened to the Hebrew Commandments/ Laws, for those who followed JC?
Who can the Son of Destruction be?

Christ Brings Division³⁴ "Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. ³⁵ For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; ³⁶ and 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household.'^[e] ³⁷ He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. ³⁸ And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. ³⁹ He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me! WHAT??????

Who does JC think he is, G-d?

What has JC just demanded???
He demands you love him more than father or mother!!! He also stresses, if you die for him, you will find life... Is he not claiming to be G-d with these statements ???
He IS.....

Sophiee1

[-]

Posts: 12310

(06/13/09 20:20:45)

Moderator

Guess he forgot the one about "honor your mother and father."

סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12

Alesiah

THE LAST GENERATION

[-]

Posts: 721

(06/13/09 23:17:00)

Yes, that's what I'm getting at Sophiee,...
Plus, the number one command is "you shall worship no other god"..... Would'nt it be nice if Xian's even cared enough to test......just to see if they had the correct god?

weboh

[-]

Posts: 10

(06/14/09 02:27:32)

What happened to the Hebrew Commandments/ Laws, for those who followed JC?
Who can the Son of Destruction be?
³⁷ He who considers father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who considers son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.

He doesn't say anywhere not to honor thy Mother and Father according to what G-d commands. It doesn't say I have come to peace to Jerusalem, so everyone will obey their parents; it seems to say if you consider your relatives more, don't follow him yet.

Who does JC think he is, G-d?
Never.
What has JC just demanded???
He demands you love him more than father or mother!!! He also stresses, if you die for him, you will find life... Is he not claiming to be G-d with these statements ???
He IS..... not claiming to be G-d there. We say there were 144,000 Israelites which needed saving from Rome; you claim their were 8 million Jews after the first war with Rome. If there were so few Israelites, do you think the messenger would not something from to this effect? Many didn't even feel death and were translated like Enoch. I like those odds alot better than sucking up to the Persians.

Also there was no demand to consider him more than their parents, unless the person wanted to be a disciple; and it was not a permenant one.

(Please check your fonts by choosing "preview" prior to posting. Most of your fonts were black, making them invisible to the reader. I corrected. your post. S.).

Last Edited By: Sophiee1 06/14/09 08:52:50. Edited 1 times.

Sophiee1

[-]

Posts: 12311

(06/14/09 09:06:10)

Moderator

Weboh, the GT is so full of contradictions that what it says in one place it reverses in another. Thus we have Jsus telling people to follow Torah in one line and then telling them to ignore it in another. Your example on honoring parents is one.

R' Aryeh Kaplan (Z"L) put it very well when he wrote:

Jsus may have taught many beautiful ideals, but unfortunately, he never seemed to be able to live up to them himself.

Kaplan goes on to explain:

Jsus himself did not abide by (his own teachings). Chrstians like to present us with an idealized picture of Jsus the man, but a careful reading of the Gospels dispels this picture very quickly.

This is the point that Alesiah made and your post simply re-enforces what she wrote. Jsus preached one thing, but behaved in an opposite fashion. Actions speak louder than words!

In my next post I'm going to use the example where Jsus told a man to leave his dead father's corpse to BURY ITSELF ("let the dead bury the dead") which is yet another example of how Jsus' actions in the GT show a total disregard for the mitzvah of "honoring one's mother and father."

סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12

Sophiee1

[-]

Posts: 12313

(06/14/09 09:34:58)

Moderator

Matthew 8:18-8:24 (KJV) wrote:

18) Now when J-sus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side. 19) And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. 20) And J-sus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
21) And another of his disciples said unto him, L-rd, suffer me first to go and bury my father. 22) But J-sus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

23) And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him. 24) And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.

Luke 9:59-62 (KJV) wrote:

59) And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, L-rd, suffer me first to go and bury my father. 60) J-sus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of G-d. 61) And another also said, L-rd, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house. 62) And J-sus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of G-d.

What do Chrstian commentators say to "excuse" Jsus attrocious behavior that a man not even honor his father by burying him properly?

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary wrote:

Was his father actually dead - lying a corpse - having only to be buried? Impossible. As it was the practice, as noticed on Luke 7:12 to bury on the day of death, it is not very likely that this disciple would have been here at all if his father had just breathed his last; nor would HaShem, if He was there, have hindered him discharging the last duties of a son to a father.

Boy he sure is making some big assumptions not found in the text, isn't he?

Robertson's Word Pictures wrote:

The harshness of this proverb to the scribe probably is due to the fact that he was manifestly using his aged father as an excuse for not giving Christ active service.

In other words, according to some, they see that the father was dying, but not yet dead, and the son was asking permission from his teacher to remain behind for a little while so that he could attend to the mitzvah of caring for the parent and the mitzvah of burial. But J-sus told him no.

Finally, before proceding there are also other commentators that note that "dead" speaks of those who are spiritually dead, that "their" dead speaks of those who do not follow J-sus are obligated while those who do follow J-sus have a higher calling:

John Wesley's Explanatory Notes wrote:

But J-sus said - When G-d calls, leave the business of the world to them who are dead to G-d.

The People's New Testament wrote:

Let the dead bury their dead. Those spiritually dead will attend to the last rites of them who have died naturally.

Robertson's Word Pictures wrote:

The spiritually dead are always on hand to bury the physically dead, if one's real duty is with J-sus. Chrysostom says that, while it is a good deed to bury the dead, it is a better one to preach Christ.

Ok, so here is what we have:

Something takes place and the Christians have answers why it is ok, and the Jews point out that there are some Torah violations with it (that we will get to later).

The typical reasons why it is ok are:

1) J-sus is G-d and can do what ever he wants (although the GT says he is "under the law" aka the mitzvot of the Torah! And let's not forget that G-d said in the Torah (the book to which we are not to add or subtract anything) that the mitzvot are ETERNAL, aka forever -- yet this excuse is the normal final fall back position when the Chrstians debating can't come up with any other answer!

2) The father wasn't really dead (even though the GT says he WAS dead), and one must love G-d (J-sus) more than his parents (J-sus echoes this elsewhere, concerning himself).

3) This was really a parable, and it was speaking of those who will not follow Christ as being "dead".

4) The father had been dead for a year and was being reburied elsewhere.

The typical reasons why it is wrong are (the numbers are based on the Rambam's commentary of Mitzvot):

Negative Mitzvah #299 - Giving Misleading Advice
Negative Mitzvah #312 - Teaching that differs from Traditional Authorities
Negative Mitzvah #314 - Detracting from the Written or Oral Law.

Positive Commandment #8 - Walking in G-d's ways (taking care of others)
Positive Commandment #94 - All oral obligations (promises) are to be fulfilled
Positive Commandment #210 - Honoring Parents
Positive Commandment #211 - Respecting parents
Positive Commandment #231 - The law of burial

Now that we have some of the basic details and supporting information, we can begin a discussion...

For those who wonder as to the Jewish interpretation of giving honor to one's parents, the Rambam comments as follows:

Quote:

Positive Commandment #210 - Honoring Parents

By this injunction we are commanded to honor our parents. It is contained in His words (exalted be He) Honor they father and they mother (Shemot/Exodus 20:12). The provisions of this commandment are explained in many places in the Talmud, mostly in Kiddushin.

The Sifra says, 'What is honoring [one's parents]? Providing them with food and drink, raiment and warmth, and guiding their footsteps [when they are old and infirmed]'

If you wish to take the position that the father of Philip was dying, but not yet dead, then we will say that his act of leaving his sickly father to follow a teacher who is leaving town is problematic, for he is required to provide for his ailing father until he can stand on his own 2-feet or until he has fulfilled the mitzvah of burial.

If you want to say that the father had died that very day, then besides the violation of the laws of burial, Judaism teaches that the escorting and burial of the dead is the greatest act of chessed, because it is one that the deceased can never repay, for the son honors his father without ever expecting anything in return.

In short, Philip was being told that while he is reticent to follow J-sus, that honoring J-sus supercedes honoring his dying or dead father.

As we read in Matthew 10:37, which relates to this:

Matthew 10:37 wrote:

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

And as this is typically understood:

Albert Barnes' notes on the Bible wrote:

The meaning of this is clear. Chrst must be loved supremely, or he is not loved at all. If we are not willing to give up all earthly possessions, and forsake all earthly friends, and if we do not obey him rather than all others, we have no true attachment to him.

That is a problem. Now, according to what I have been able to see, the interaction between J-sus and one of his apostles (probably Philip) violates eight different Torah mitzvot.

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Negative Mitzvah #299 - Giving Misleading Advice

By this prohibition we are forbidden to give misleading advice. Thus, if one asks your advice on a matter which he does not fully understand, you are forbidden to mislead or deceive him; you must give him what you consider to be the right guidance. The prohibition is contained in His words (exalted is He), Nor shall you put a stumbling block before the blind, (Vayikra 19:14) on which the Sifra says: 'If one is "blind" in a [certain] matter, and asks you for advice, do not give him advice which is not suitable for him.' (ibid. Sifra).

According to the Sages, this Negative Commandment also applies to helping or causing another to commit a transgression, because to do this is to aid and abet in his wrongdoing a whom passion has deprived of his reasoning power and blinded, or to provide him with opportunities to sin. It is in this sense that the Sages say of a transaction involving a loan at interest, that both the lender and the borrower transgress [the negative commandment] Nor shalt thou put a stumbling block before the blind (See negative commandment #237), since each one helps the other by making the complete transgression possible. There are many cases of this kind, in this the Sages say that [the negative commandment] Nor shalt thou put a stumbling block before the blind is transgressed. The plain sense of the verse, however, is as we have stated above.

What this means is this:

If you have a student who relies upon you for direction, and you give him instructions that you know he will follow, and if you know that the instruction is not in his best interest, you have violated a negative commandment of the Torah.

When the student does sin, then both the teacher and the student are liable.

Thus, if Philip is knows that he needs to bury his father (after all, he did ask), and his teacher tells him that such things are left to those who will not follow J-sus, and that it is not required of one who is a follower of J-sus, then J-sus has transgressed a negative commandment of the Torah.

A couple of chapters after this one, J-sus will emphasize that a follower of J-sus must love J-sus more than his eartly father, which echoes a pattern of behavior.

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Negative Mitzvah #312 - Differing from Traditional Authorities

By this prohibition we are forbidden to differ from the authorized bearers of the Tradition (peace be upon them) or to deviate from whatever they ordain in matters of Torah. It is contained in His words, Thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, (Devarim 17:11)…is a negative commandment.

One who infringes on this Negative Commandment is called a "rebellious elder" and is liable to death by strangling under the conditions prescribed by Tradition, which are set out at the end of Sanhedrin, where the provisions of this Commandment are explained.

The verse in the Torah speaks of the Sanhedrin, of following their rulings where there is a question to go right or left in a decision. If they say right, you go right.

During the time of J-sus, there was a Sanhedrin in place, headed by a righteous grandson of Rabbi Hillel. The Sanhedrin sought to do what was best for the Jewish people, and were not part of the caricatures presented of the Pharisees of the Christian texts.

I bring this up only from the position if you believe that the Sanhedrin made a bad ruling about what it means to honor one's parents, and that J-sus was modifying the traditional understanding that it meant to take care of them.

In other words, the understanding was long since in place what it means to honor one's father, and what is required for the period of mourning, and J-sus, therefore, was forbidden to teach anything that would contradict that.

It was obvious that he wasn't very happy with that position (The entire chapter 23 of Matthew is the Tirade of J-sus over his frustration of being dissed by them), but that's too bad!

So to teach to another that he need not care for his ailing father as prescribed by the Sages, or to bury his father according to one's traditions is a sin.

Rambam

Quote:

Negative Mitzvah #314 - Detracting from the Written or Oral Law.

By this prohibition we are forbidden to take away from the written or oral law. It is contained in His words, Nor shalt thou diminish from it (Devarim 8:1); and the Sages frequently say: 'He transgresses the law, Nor shalt thou diminish from it', or 'You have transgressed the law, Nor shalt thou diminish from it.' (Zeb. 80a)

In other words, if the Torah says that a son is to honor his father, and that a son is to bury his father, then one cannot say, "Let the dead bury their dead" to a son with a dying father, for that is subtracting from the law.

(It is also a violation to add to it, such as saying that J-sus is to be honored more than the man's father, but that is an inferred statement, not a direct one, so I will let it slide.)

Even J-sus agreed:

Matthew 5:19 wrote:

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven...

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Positive Commandment #94 - All Oral Commitments to be fulfilled

By this injunction we are commanded to fulfill every obligation that we have taken upon ourselves by word of mouth - every oath, vow, offering, and the like. It is contained in His words (exalted be he) That which has gone out of they lips, thou shalt observe. (Devarim 23:24) Although [the Sages] have minutely analyzed the verse, and explained each word in it separately, the general purport of all that they say amounts to this: that it is a Positive Commandment to fulfill any obligation which a man has taken upon himself, and to fail to do so is to violate a Negative commandment (#157).

In other words, if the son has an obligation to take care of his dying father, and if he has already said that he would do so, after all, he is telling J-sus that he cannot come now because he needs to bury his father, which indicates that he has a commitment and an obligation to fulfill, then in violating that trust, he violates a mivtzvah. And J-sus, it giving him misleading advice, knowing what the man is obligated to do, has attached himself to this violation.

Remember, J-sus is sorrounded by a crowd, feels cramped, and wants to get out of there as soon as possible, and to hang around for any period of time would be inconvenient.

The term "suffer me first.." means "please give me leave to first do..." In other word, he has a pressing obligation, but because of his obedience to J-sus, he first is asking permission.

Compare this to Bereshit /Genesis 50:5-7 ("The Living Torah:):

Quote:

5 'My father bound me by an oath and he declared, 'I am dying. You must bury me in the grave that I prepared for myself in the land of Canaan.' Now, if you allow me, I will head north and bury my father. I will return.' ' 6 'Go bury your father,' said Pharaoh, 'just as he had you swear.'

This is one of the places where we learn various laws of burial.

Pharoah was more accommodating than J-sus when it came to allowing one to keep his word.

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Positive Commandment #8 - Walking in G-d's ways.

Be this injunction, we was commanded to be like G-d (praised be He) as far as it is in our Power. This injunction is contained in His words, And thou shalt walk in His ways, (Devarim 28:9) and also in an earlier verse in his words, [What doth HaShem they G-d require of thee, but to fear HaShem they G-d], to walk in all His Ways. (ibid. 10:12)

On this latter verse, the Sages [in the Sifra] comment as follows: 'Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is called Merciful, so shouldst thou be merciful' just as he is called Gracious, so shouldst thou be gracious; just as he is called Righteous, so shouldst thou be righteous; just as he is called Chasid [a term bespeaking kindness, goodness, etc.] so should though be a chasid. (Sotah 14a)

In other words, if your father is laying sick and dying, to be like G-d, you will honor your father and take care of him until he can take care of himself, or until you will bury him.

That is the act of a chassid.

Walking away from a dying man who participated in giving you life so that you can follow a teacher, and letting others take care of him instead and bury him instead, is not only a violation of Torah, but is certainly not being like G-d.

And what J-sus demanded of the son, to withhold honor from the father, is also a violation, who also participates with the son's violation.

It's a problem.

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Positive Commandment #211 - Respecting parents

By this injunction we are commanded to fear our parents, to regard them with the deference due to one whose punishement we fear, like the King, and to treat them as we treat those of whom we are afraid and whose displeasure we dread. It is contained in His words, praised be He, Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, (Vayikra 19:3) on which the Sifra says: 'What is fearing [one's father]? Not to sit in his seat or to speak in his place, or to contradict his words. (ibid. Sifra).'

The provisions for this commandment are explained in Kiddushin.

If the king lay dying on his bed, it is not appropriate for the servant to choose that time to go on a trip with the local preacher. No. Out of awe and respect, one will continue to serve, ene to the end.

J-sus took the place of that son's father, telling him to abandon the dying man and follow him instead. He spoke as though he were the son's father, giving him instructions to override what he was obligated to do. And he contradicted to words that the son were to follow.

The son sinned and was disrespectful of his father, and J-sus participated in this sin as well.

According to the Rambam:

Quote:

Positive Commandment #231 - The law of burial

By this injunction we are commanded to bury on the day of execution those put to death by the order of the court. It is contained in His words (exalted be He), Thou shalt surely bury him the same day (Devarim 21:23), on which the Sifra says: 'Thou shalt surely bury him is a positive commandment.

The same law is binding as regards all other dead; every Israelite must be buried on the day of his death. It is for this reason that where there is no one to attend to the burial of the corpse it is called a Corpse [whose burial is a] Religious Duty; that is to say, a corpse whose burial is obligatory upon every person [including even the High Priest] (Vayikra 21:11) in accordance with His words (exalted be He) Thou shalt surely bury him.

The provision of this Commandment is explained in the sixth chapter of Sanhedrin

And a segment of that provision says, based on the Torah:

Sanhedrin 28b says:

A person is called an Onen mid'Oraisa on the day of death of one of his seven closest relatives for whom he is required to assist in burial (i.e. father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter and wife).

The laws of burial are long, and we can cover them later on, but simply put, the son is required to bury his father, and he will then be unclean for 7 days, and will sit in his home as a mourner. If there is no relative to bury the person, then any Jew, even a high priest, is required to bury the dead person as soon as possible.

If one intentionally puts himself in a position where he cannot perform this mitzvah, such as taking a trip while the person is dying and not returning (and J-sus is clear about letting others do it instead of Philip), then he has intentionally violated a positive mitzvah and J-sus is a willing participant of the sin.

That is a problem for Chrstian apologists. Clearly yet again the GT has the "loving" Jsus say "honor your parents" but then act in a very un-Torah like fashion.

(This post is from my personal archives. I believe I wrote it some time ago, and in my notes don't credit anyone else but simply don't remember if this is my own work or that of someone else. If it is from someone else please let me know whom so I can add it to my notes)..

סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12

ProfBenTziyyon

[-]

Posts: 2136

(06/14/09 09:59:33)

weboh wrote:
He who considers father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who considers son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.

You are being thoroughly dishonest, "weboh" − trying to change the text becase you find what it actually says inconvenient. The Greek of the Textus Receptus does not say "considers"; the word it uses in both instances is φιλῶν philon, from the verb φιλέω phileō which means to love.

http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל

weboh

[-]

Posts: 11

(06/14/09 12:08:49)

You are being thoroughly dishonest, "weboh"
No, just thoroughly wrong; I thought the word was αγαπη. But Φιλων better suits what he had to say anyway now that I think about. He didn't say someone had to like him more than parents other than to follow him. Moreover, it is highly likely αξιος which means to fit or to be of weight is misrendered.

To Sophiee:
I noticed you quoted only the first version of this commandment. The second version has this phrase though, "as the L-RD your g-d has commanded thee." And certain commandments are less harsh in their GT version. "and whoso badmouths mother and father, let them complete it to a death."(Mark 7:10b)καί Ὁ κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ μητέρα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω and the same here (Matt 15:4b)καί, Ὁ κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ μητέρα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω.

Whereas the Torah has in Exodus 21:17, "And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."

But most importantly he was telling the disciple who was already with him, that his parents could get him killed in a upcoming war.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

LAST GENERATION......?

LAST GENERATION......?

2 Thessalonians 2

The Man of Lawlessness

Soooooo, what are some qualifiers for the Man of Lawlessness?

Who does JC think he is, G-d?

Quick Reply