• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus' Four Failed Prophecies About Him Returning In The Lifetimes Of His Apostles

samtonga43

Well-Known Member
LOL!! Running away. What else would I expect.
What do you think I am 'running away from'?
It does not work that way. If you disagree with something that I said and did not support to your satisfaction you can ask for evidence. You do not get to make such judgements until after the person that you are responding to failed.
You failed when you said that most Christians do not understand the verse in question. Common sense should tell you that your statement is an assumption. If you fail to see this, and if this were a debate, you are easily dismissed.
You did not do that. You made a debate error where the burden of proof was upon me and placed it on yourself.
SZ, listen carefully. Neither you nor I can prove that:
1. Most Christians do not understand the verse in question.
or
2. Most Christians understand the verse in question.
I know this; it appears that you don't. o_O
I never for one moment thought that I would have to point this very simple fact out to a member of this forum.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You still have not (cannot?) answered my question...
"Please show me where I dishonestly quote mined and edited a post". Otherwise I shall have to show you another false assumption
Sorry, I asked you to prove your "assumptions" a long time ago; People that make claims that they refuse to defend to not get to demand anything.

You have yet to show one false assumption. It appears that you do not value the Ninth Commandment.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You can make accusations all day long, SZ. You appear to be totally unable to show any evidence at all. Until you can, your accusations mean nothing.
It is still there. When you quote out of context. When you ad bolding, that is editing.

Are you really saying that you have evidence that most Christians do not understand the verse in question?
Really? SZ, surely even you can see that this is an assumption. Unless you can provide evidence. Go on - put your money where your mouth is!
Where is the evidence?

No, you made attacks. I will explain once you show that I made a "false assumption". A wise person would have asked questions first before making claims that they cannot support.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I’m afraid you didn’t, Tb. You explained why you think Jesus used the word ‘hate’. This says nothing about the context in which He used the word ‘hate’. Are you sure you know what Biblical context is? In the ancient world, the word hate did not necessarily carry the negative tone that it does today. So, the context is the word usage of people 2000 years ago.
The word usage of people 2000 years ago is not relevant to the modern age, so why would it matter to me. That message Jesus was conveying is also no longer valid today since there are no disciples of Jesus anymore.

Luke 14:26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple”
It is not valid because it is not a good translation, and is less understandable than, for example. the ESV. Which is readable and literally accurate. The language of any book is deficient if it is not as clearly understood and natural-sounding to the modern reader as the original meaning of the text was to the original readers. I work with college students and have first-hand experience of this fact. The modern reader should be able to see, as directly as possible, the structure and meaning of the original.
Whatever people prefer, I like the KJV and the NIV.
LOL! Wisdom and Love beat ‘sophistication’ any day…
But what is this ‘new information’-- do you have some examples?
Wisdom and Love are repeated in every new Revelation from God.
New information, I would not even know where to begin, because most of it is new.

The primary message of Baha’u’llah was the unity of mankind and the building of a new world order, what humanity was not ready for in the days of Jesus. The new world order is the Kingdom of God on earth that Jesus referred to.

“This is the Day in which God’s most excellent favors have been poured out upon men, the Day in which His most mighty grace hath been infused into all created things. It is incumbent upon all the peoples of the world to reconcile their differences, and, with perfect unity and peace, abide beneath the shadow of the Tree of His care and loving-kindness. It behoveth them to cleave to whatsoever will, in this Day, be conducive to the exaltation of their stations, and to the promotion of their best interests. Happy are those whom the all-glorious Pen was moved to remember, 7 and blessed are those men whose names, by virtue of Our inscrutable decree, We have preferred to conceal.

Beseech ye the one true God to grant that all men may be graciously assisted to fulfil that which is acceptable in Our sight. Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead. Verily, thy Lord speaketh the truth, and is the Knower of things unseen.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 6-7
Widely known does not mean widely read or widely understood.
I wouldn’t know since I am not a Christian and never was.
So why is the message written in 17th century English?
I already told you that all of the Writings of Baha’u’llah are NOT in King James English. Gleanings just happens to be one that is.

Tony explained why some of the Writings are in that style:

Tony said: The reason is that Shoghi Effendi went to England to study English so He could better translate the Writings of Baha'u'llah from Persian and Arabic into English.

From his studies he determined that King James English was the best form to portray Persian and Arabic to English speakers.

Apparently Persian and Arabic have a form of poetic prose that is hard to portray to English speakers. King James English must in a small way convey some of that poetic prose experienced by Persian and Arabic speakers.

Shoghi Effendi offered that the future may see different translations.

#155 Tony Bristow-Stagg,
I see. You are the interpreter. Right..
No, but I can explain what it means.
There is only One God, Tb. He is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
No, God is not three persons in One. Jesus is not God and the Holy Spirit is not God.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God, an emanation from God. God is like the sun and the Holy Spirit is like the rays of the sun. God remains in His own high place, and does not ever descend to earth.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God which became visible and evident in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ was like a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror, but God did not descend into the mirror. This is why Christ said, “The Father is in the Son,” meaning that the God was visible and manifest in this mirror.

For the complete explanation of the Baha'i Trinity belief you can read this chapter: 27: THE TRINITY
Did you know that the word ‘abrogate’ can mean ‘to avoid responsibility’. That is very telling.
That is not what it means in this context. This is what it means, in modern English written my one of the two interpreters that Baha’u’llah appointed. Sorry if you do not like the long sentences but it is the content that is important.

“In conclusion of this theme, I feel, it should be stated that the Revelation identified with Bahá’u’lláh abrogates unconditionally all the Dispensations gone before it, upholds uncompromisingly the eternal verities they enshrine, recognizes firmly and absolutely the Divine origin of their Authors, preserves inviolate the sanctity of their authentic Scriptures, disclaims any intention of lowering the status of their Founders or of abating the spiritual ideals they inculcate, clarifies and correlates their functions, reaffirms their common, their unchangeable and fundamental purpose, reconciles their seemingly divergent claims and doctrines, readily and gratefully recognizes their respective contributions to the gradual unfoldment of one Divine Revelation, unhesitatingly acknowledges itself to be but one link in the chain of continually progressive Revelations, supplements their teachings with such laws and ordinances as conform to the imperative needs, and are dictated by the growing receptivity, of a fast evolving and constantly changing society, and proclaims its readiness and ability to fuse and incorporate the contending sects and factions into which they have fallen into a universal Fellowship, functioning within the framework, and in accordance with the precepts, of a divinely conceived, a world-unifying, a world-redeeming Order.” God Passes By, p. 100
You call this ‘plain English’, Tb? I’m sorry, but this is tortured prose, dense and badly constructed. I am very surprised you can’t see this.
Who ensured that the interpreters’ writing would not be misconstrued?
Who are you to judge? No, I can’t see this, I love his writings. I guess you chose to completely ignore the content, you chose instead to focus on the way it was written… That is called deflection.

About the author: Shoghi Effendi - Wikipedia

Who ensured that the Bible would not be misconstrued?
LOL! You don’t have to ‘go hunting’ for answers, Tb. The treasure is the whole message, Genesis to Revelation, not in little bits and pieces of information. When one looks at a beautiful landscape painting one doesn’t focus on just one tree.
No, I do not need to go hunting for answers in the Bible because the answers for this age are not in the Bible. They are in the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. When one has seen the Ocean they are no longer interested in dried up lakes and ponds.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Here is something most Christians don't know:

Jesus promised no less than FOUR times in the gospels that he would return to earth and his apostles would live to see it, yet he never showed up.

Paul believed fervently that Jesus would return in his lifetime:

"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then WE who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord." 1 Thessolonians 4:16-17

Now Paul may have put this idea into the heads of the gospel writers when they started writing the gospels. They had Jesus make these four prophesies that he would return before the apostles died:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

For me, this is the one that cannot be excused away with rationalizations like "Jesus was referring to the future generation", or "Jesus was referring to God's time which could be thousands of years in the future". We have Jesus referring directly to the people listening to him when he made that failed prophecy "some of you standing here will not taste death until you see me return"

...they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (Matthew 24: 25-34)

“Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place…
(Mark 13:26-30)

Here in Chap 10 Jesus is giving his apostles instructions on how they should conduct themselves when he sends them out to do God's work

Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. (Matthew 10:23)

Naturally Jesus never showed up. Why? Because we can assume he never said he would return--this was all invention by the gospel writers probably based on Paul's belief Jesus would return and Paul would live to see it. There are five rationalizations Christians have come up with for Jesus' no-show. All are patently ridiculous but you can read them in the link below:

Jesus’ Failed Prophecy About His Return

The belief that the prophecies about the second coming of Jesus were fulfilled in AD 70 takes Bible verses out of context. Was the Lord's "Second Coming" in A.D. 70?

The theory of “realized eschatology,” better known as the A.D. 70 doctrine, alleges that all Bible prophecy, including the “Second Coming” of Christ, was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70.

A major problem with this idea is in explaining clear Bible passages which depict the Lord’s return in a visible manner, which did not occur, of course, in A.D. 70.

While it is a fact that sometimes the word “see” can be used in the sense of “to perceive” or “to enjoy” (cf. Mt. 5:8; 24:30; Jn. 3:3), that certainly is not always the case. Especially is this true in a context where visual phenomena are clearly indicated.

Consider, for example, Acts 1:9-11. There it is said that as the disciples

“were looking, he [Christ] was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they were looking steadfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand you looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven.”

Jesus was taken up visibly into a cloud as the disciples watched; and, in like manner, as they beheld him going, he will return.

This is a huge problem for the A.D. 70 theorists. An attempt to deal with this difficulty appeared in a journal that promotes this doctrine.

The position taken, in an effort to be consistent, was this: Jesus was not actually taken up at the so-called ascension scene. It was argued that the Greek word eperthe (“taken up” — 1:9) “does not denote a literal and physical elevation of the person, but rather describes in figurative terms the elevation of the person in honor and dignity.”

This notion of restricted, figurative definition of eperthe would force one to consistently translate Acts 1:11 as follows:

“Ye men of Galilee, why stand you figuratively looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was figuratively received up from you into heaven, shall figuratively so come in like manner as ye figuratively beheld him figuratively going into heaven.”

This is an absurd position, completely at variance with the context of this passage.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I don't remember him coming back then.

The Bible never teaches that Jesus will come back in 70 AD. Does the Bible teach that there would be two comings of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

It was only after the resurrection that the disciples began to understand what Jesus had been telling them (John 2:22). Even after the resurrection they did not understand about the second coming because they asked Him if now was the time that He would restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Jesus told them that they should not be concerned about the timing of the coming kingdom, but they should take the gospel to the whole world (Acts 1:8). Then He was taken up from them into heaven, and two angels came to them and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Here we finally have a clear indication that there will be a second coming after an undisclosed time period.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
That was not the failed prophecy. The prophecy would that he would be back in the lifetime of at least some of the disciples.

Jesus never said that he would return in the lifetime of the disciples-the context of Luke 9:27 is about the transfiguration. Was Jesus’ statement to the disciples in Luke 9:27 (also Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1) incorrect? | GotQuestions.org

Question: "Was Jesus’ statement to the disciples in Luke 9:27 (also Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1) incorrect?"

Answer:
Luke 9:27 says, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God." See also Matthew 16:28 and Mark 9:1 for the parallel quotes. In each of the synoptic Gospels, the next event immediately after this promise from Jesus is the transfiguration. Rather than interpreting Jesus’ promise as referring to His coming to establish His kingdom on earth, the context indicates that Jesus was referring to the transfiguration. The Greek word translated "kingdom" can also be translated "royal splendor," meaning that the three disciples standing there would see Christ as He really is—the King of heaven—which occurred in the transfiguration.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
He did, but one has to read the Bible in context. Christian sites have a terrible habit of quote mining the Bible.

To understand the bible you have to read the verses in its proper context. The context of Luke 9:27 was about the transfiguration. Was Jesus’ statement to the disciples in Luke 9:27 (also Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1) incorrect? | GotQuestions.org

Question: "Was Jesus’ statement to the disciples in Luke 9:27 (also Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1) incorrect?"

Answer:
Luke 9:27 says, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God." See also Matthew 16:28 and Mark 9:1 for the parallel quotes. In each of the synoptic Gospels, the next event immediately after this promise from Jesus is the transfiguration. Rather than interpreting Jesus’ promise as referring to His coming to establish His kingdom on earth, the context indicates that Jesus was referring to the transfiguration. The Greek word translated "kingdom" can also be translated "royal splendor," meaning that the three disciples standing there would see Christ as He really is—the King of heaven—which occurred in the transfiguration.

The devil often frames doubts in questions. He generally doesn't come at you and say, "God's Word isn't true." Rather, he says, "Does God's Word really say? or "is that really the right interpretation of that verse?" People have interpretations of the Bible that allows them to believe what they already want to believe so they can live the way they want to live-and the way they want to live is nearly always a way that holds the least amount of pain, effort, self-denial, and discomfort. They have decided that life should be easy and that no decisions should have terrible or eternal negative consequences. Therefore, anything in God's Word that calls upon them to make a difficult choice or a hard decision-and especially anything in God's Word that might spell out a decision related to eternal consequences-is given a "different interpretation."
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
To understand the bible you have to read the verses in its proper context. The context of Luke 9:27 was about the transfiguration. Was Jesus’ statement to the disciples in Luke 9:27 (also Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1) incorrect? | GotQuestions.org



The devil often frames doubts in questions. He generally doesn't come at you and say, "God's Word isn't true." Rather, he says, "Does God's Word really say? or "is that really the right interpretation of that verse?" People have interpretations of the Bible that allows them to believe what they already want to believe so they can live the way they want to live-and the way they want to live is nearly always a way that holds the least amount of pain, effort, self-denial, and discomfort. They have decided that life should be easy and that no decisions should have terrible or eternal negative consequences. Therefore, anything in God's Word that calls upon them to make a difficult choice or a hard decision-and especially anything in God's Word that might spell out a decision related to eternal consequences-is given a "different interpretation."
Sorry, you will never get the "proper context" from apologists. When you rely on a dishonest source you hurt your own arguments.
 

samtonga43

Well-Known Member
You have yet to show one false assumption. It appears that you do not value the Ninth Commandment.
You have yet to understand that you have been shown one of your false assumptions. Your inability to understand why it is a false assumption is your problem.
It may appear to you that I do not value the Ninth Commandment, but I can assure you I do. How things appear to you, SZ, may be different from how things are.
 

samtonga43

Well-Known Member
It is still there. When you quote out of context. When you ad bolding, that is editing.
Right, so here is another baseless accusation. You appear to be unable to show me where I “dishonestly quote mined and edited a post."
No, you made attacks. I will explain once you show that I made a "false assumption". A wise person would have asked questions first before making claims that they cannot support.
You have yet to understand that you have been shown that you made a false assumption. Your inability to understand why it is a false assumption is your problem.

It may appear to you that I do not value the Ninth Commandment, but I can assure you I do. You must realize that how things appear to you, SZ, may be different from how things are.
 
Top