The so-called olivet discourse (from mount of olives) is held up by atheists as an example of a Jesus prophecy that did not come true. In it Jesus seems to say that the current living generation wont pass "Most certainly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things are accomplished" (Matthew 24:34)."
He also says this will occur at the same time as the destruction of he temple. A thread where the CARM atheists argue Jesus was wrong (a false prophet in fact because his prophecy of the end times didn't come true). They quotes from five scholars to alleged "prove" this and none of them offer any real proof. All they offer is opinion. Only a couple of them are Chrsitains.
Jesus of Nazareth had expected to see the Temple destroyed, the Kingdom come, and the new Temple established in 30, at or as the climax of his own mission, and Mark’s community preserved the memory of Jesus’ proclamation of this belief. --Paula Fredriksen. [1]"Jesus, the millenarian prophet, like all millenarian prophets, was wrong: reality has taken no notice of his imagination." --Dale Allison [2]
Lookimg atthe passage upo which alll of this is prediucated,
NIV Mark 13: 1 As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!” 2 “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; everyone will be thrown down.” 3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”We can crystallize two major issues:
(1) there is no passage where Jesus says "the temple is destroyed and Messiah returns at the same time." As long as that is the case it's an open question if he was talking about that era or a future date for the return.
(2) The hypocritical way the atheists regard scholarship when it stands for their view and when it stands against it. Other scholars disagree with their scholars. Will they look for reasons or will they just insist "those are fundies so they don't count?"
.......As to the first point I would use their own ideological propaganda device against them:EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUITE EXTRAORDINARY PROOF!
There is nothing extraordinary about liberal theologians refusing to believe the Gospels. Especially when most of them are not Chrsitians. The extraordinary evidence I demand is a text that says "these two events, listed in the passage in Matt" will happen at the same time. That's the only circumstance under which this would prove that Jesus was wrong. This passeage "the Olivette discourses" is in all three synoptic gospels. So I start with Mark. I think Mark is the key because it's first written, but Math supplies the one crucial fact that there are two distinct questions. .......Of course the temple was destroyed in AD 70 and on the eve of 2013 the other part has not happened yet so therefore it was wrong. Bible wrong, Christianity not true, blah blah blah.
.......Matt 26-27 says the Messiah will return with an army of angels in the sky, and it marks the introduction of end times events and that's where it becomes clear we are talking about the end times. My answer up to this point was to compare this to the passage in Matthew where Mathew makes it clear there are two separate questions. (1) when will the temple be destroyed (2) when will the Messiah return. I have argued that the redactors got the answers to these questions cross threaded. The real answer to when the temple will be destroyed is "this generation will not pass away." The answer to the return is "you will see angels coming in the clouds." .......It's obvious this grouping is logical for three reasons:
(1) this is the way the early church understood events. They were Jews, they saw themselves not as a separate faith called "Christianity" but as Jews. they could not conceive of Judaism with no temple. so they assumed the Messiah would return (that means they had to assume he would go away) and temple be destroyed as part of the same event, the end of the age. So they mix the answers of two separate questions because they don't see them as operating.
(2) the answers go together in such a way that Messiah is part of the army in the air, if you look at the passage it links Messiah with the angles. "26 “At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens" so then if we assume those go together then by default the gee national remark is the answer to the other question.
(3) there is no reason why these can't happen at two different times. Taken that way they work. there is no contradiction no failure it just hasn't all been totally fulfilled yet because it's not time yet
The following issues are what the whole debate boils down to:
(1) the real issue was the temple and that's the question Jesus was answering (maybe there were two questions, since Mark came firs let's assume not).
(2) the redactors added the end times stuff because that's the way they thought, that's their conception of how it had to be.
(3) the temple was just destroyed the same year that this version of the Gospel was produced and began circulating so we can look upon the redactor's additions about end times as commentary spurred by recent events.
(4) in this version Jesus doesn't say "this generation will not pass away (unless I missed it but I looked and I don't see it). so in that case the cross thread idea is unnecessary. we can just assume that mark being first originally dealt with the temple the redactor added the end times stuff and Matt added the bit about the generation.
The temple had been destroyed around right around this time, it was real important to console the people tel them the ord will return soon,
Notes
[1]Paula Fredriksen. From Jesus to Christ, Second Edition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000): pg. 84
[2] Dale Allison, Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998): p. 218.
9 comments:
It makes no difference if the destruction of the temple happens at the same time as the coming of the Son of Man. What matters is the claim that "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." That generation passed away long ago.
yes that's the point off cross thread. The redactor cross thread. this generation is really the answer to destruction of the temple.
I have no idea what you mean by that.
The issue here is quite fundamental: What actually was Jesus' message?
I am pretty sure he believed the end times were fast approaching, and his message to the Jewish people was to repent before that happened so when it did, you would be judged as righteous.
The gospels do not say that because they were written later, and clearly the end times did not occur within ten years of Jesus death, but there are echoes of that original message in the there.
Hence, we see: "Most certainly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things are accomplished"
Further, this is clearly what Paul believed. He thought he would still be alive when the apocalypse arrived.
Joe: He also says this will occur at the same time as the destruction of he temple. A thread where the CARM atheists argue Jesus was wrong (a false prophet in fact because his prophecy of the end times didn't come true).
Jesus almost certainly did NOT say anything about the temple being destroyed. Those words were put in his mouth by Mark after the temple was destroyed.
Joe: .......As to the first point I would use their own ideological propaganda device against them:EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUITE EXTRAORDINARY PROOF!
There is nothing extraordinary about a man predicting in the end of the world in his own lifetime. This is a very ordinary claim.
Joe: (1) this is the way the early church understood events. They were Jews, they saw themselves not as a separate faith called "Christianity" but as Jews. they could not conceive of Judaism with no temple. so they assumed the Messiah would return (that means they had to assume he would go away) and temple be destroyed as part of the same event, the end of the age. So they mix the answers of two separate questions because they don't see them as operating.
When the temple was destroyed, they must have been sure this was the end of the world, for reasons you say. Hence, Mark wrote that Jesus said it would happens while some of the disciples were still alive.
But here is the thing; it did not happen. So later authors wrote it in that context. By the time Luke was written, 15 years had passed, and still no end times, so they must have realised the destruction of the temple was not the end times.
Joe: (3) there is no reason why these can't happen at two different times. Taken that way they work. there is no contradiction no failure it just hasn't all been totally fulfilled yet because it's not time yet
Mark has Jesus say the end times would be when some disciples were still alive; that did not happen.
Christians have been making excuses for that ever since.
Pix
I really don't understand your "cross threaded" argument
- when will the temple be destroyed? answer: this generation will not pass away.
- when will the Messiah return? answer: you will see angels coming in the clouds.
But Matthew says "all these things" will happen before the current generation passes away. All these things presumably includes both the destruction of the temple and the coming of the messiah. They don't have to be at the same time, but the prophesy says they will both happen within a lifetime. So what's cross-threaded?
The fact that the temple was destroyed is strong evidence that the prophesy was made after the after the destruction of the temple and then attributed to Jesus. The fact that the coming of the messiah didn't happen is proof that the prophesy was false. Denying these facts is just trying to spin the biblical story.
LOL! Biden is losing the election. LOL!
Medicrock could I ask you something I saw someone I heard someone saying Galatians 1:9 is an interpolation could I ask you to respond to it please but I want to ask you first before I post anything
Post a Comment