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.
35 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.
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
I don't believe Gal 9:1 is an interpolation.
Skep cross thread means Jesus really aid "in answer to when will the temple be destroyed? this generation will not pass away." and to the question when will Messiah return? you will see n army of angels. The redacter thought this was all one event so he said the generation wont pass away to the angels comig and vice versa
This video bothered me it argued that Galatians 1:9 was an interpolation could you respond to it https://youtu.be/ldTEXucN7p4
Medicrock could you make a blog post responding to this
Video
Anonymous said...
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.
My assumption is that Jesus chose limited omniscience as part of incarnation. So he probably did think it doesn't make him a false propjet because he also said HE DIDN'T KNOW.
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"
He was really answering the one about the temple when he said that.
Further, this is clearly what Paul believed. He thought he would still be alive when the apocalypse arrived.
Even he doesn't try pt make it prophesy.
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.
O BS you don't know that! your basing that on support for your theology. Science he was answerig a question about when will the temple be destroyed He had to have saidit.
Medical could you respond to that video please it really bothered me
Hey medicrock do you know any good apologetic Facebook groups I can join
Medical could you respond to this video This video bothered me it argued that Galatians 1:9 was an interpolation could you respond to it https://youtu.be/ldTEXucN7p4
I love the work you do, Pix. I thank you for standing up for Common Sense Atheism. These Christian apologist liars say things that go right over my not so bright head. Thank you for taking the time for standinf up to these fools. I am grateful for you stopping me from being indcotrinated into a cult that worthips a Jewish zombie. In other contexts, these kinds of people would be put into mental institutions. They talk to some invisible being who never talks or gives evidence for his existeicne. Religion is a playground for the insane.
one thing i admire about Px is that he never never never radicles or mocks or says any of the stupid atheist things like you must did. He's a brilliant academic. Also, he is British. so I like to think the Brits have manners that is wfy PX is well behaved.
Joe: He was really answering the one about the temple when he said that.
But he said (or the gospel writer had him say) "all these things are accomplished". That must be more than just the destruction of the temple, which is just one thing.
Joe: Even he doesn't try pt make it prophesy.
Agreed, but he is presumably reflecting the belief of all the Christians at that time.
Indeed, it is clear from texts like this that some Christians were worried that the schedule was slipping even by ca. AD 50:
1 Thessalonians 4:13 Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words.
Paul is having to reassure people that even though some Christians have died since converting, they too will get the kingdom of God. Clearly what they originally expected was for that to happen years ago, and they believed that because that is what the apostles told them, which in turn will be what Jesus told them.
Joe: O BS you don't know that! your basing that on support for your theology. Science he was answerig a question about when will the temple be destroyed He had to have saidit.
Of course I do not know it for sure, but it is the most likely explanation.
The idea that Jesus must of said it because he was answering a question is ridiculous; you are assuming the question was asked because you assume the Bible is true. Far more likely the question was made up too after the the temple was destroyed.
Joe: one thing i admire about Px is that he never never never radicles or mocks or says any of the stupid atheist things like you must did. He's a brilliant academic. Also, he is British. so I like to think the Brits have manners that is wfy PX is well behaved.
Thanks for that!
Pix
Blogger Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...
"Paul is having to reassure people that even though some Christians have died since converting, they too will get the kingdom of God. Clearly what they originally expected was for that to happen years ago, and they believed that because that is what the apostles told them, which in turn will be what Jesus told them."
Yes that is true, they expected Chrit to return soon. I don't think anyone denies that. I remember being taught that in Sunday school as a child. When I was a child I thought "except Jesus knew better, he wasn't saying it because he had more on his mind, His infinite mind. But i don't know if that was the line of our church or not. Now my view is that Jesus could have been wrong on that point, or he could have kept quite because he was aware that he didn't know. I think this is not a hindrance to my faith because he said he didn't know. He said no man knows the day or the hour not even the Son of man. I interpret "day or hour" to be a slang or figurative for the whole end times thing.
Metacroix could I ask you to refute carriers argument on brothers of the Lord please I'm really struggling with this
Metacrock I'm struggling with my face could I talk to you do you have an emaildo you have an email
Dan the whole reason even mentioning that passage is because Jesus mythers know it camages their case. it's Jesus Mythers! that in itself is reaspm t reject it. Jesus myth is Bull Shit!!!
I listed to the video. The guy says the major reason for rejecting Gal 9 as interp is because Pai; never talked about Jesus' personal stuff. He did mention his blood line in Romans 8, disproves the JM theory. But also the reason Paul speaks of James brother of Jesus is becaue he was a pillar in the church himself. He was important enough to mention it's not Jesu' personal stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldTEXucN7p4
that is the video that tries to prove Gal 1:9 is interpolating. His argument is to take all the dozens passages in entire NT that names James as the brother of Jesus and assumes they are interpolations. That is ludicrous. I wish I knew how to determine probability because I bet that is quite improbable.
Besides those verses Josephus same James was Jesus' brother. no one argues that is an interp.
I don't think that Matthew 24 is really about the end times at all. They are talking about when the temple will be destroyed and the end of the age (the Jewish Age).
Acts 6-7 seems to shed light on this. In Acts 5, Jesus tells the Apostles that they will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. In Acts 6, the Apostles ask if this is when he will restore the kingdom to Israel. Then, in Acts 7, Jesus tells them that it is not for them to know the times or seasons, which the Father hath put into his own power.
That is an indication that the Apostles knew the difference between the end of the age (in Matthew 24) and the end times. Matthew 24 is about destruction, not restoration.
Also, Pix mentioned Thessalonians. I read the book End Time Delusions by Steve Wohlberg, and it really shined the light on some things. For example, Steve discusses 2 Thessalonians 7:
"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way."
This seems like a mysterious verse, but from reading the book, it has to do with the Roman Empire {the author probably wrote it like this in case the letter fell into the wrong hands). When the Roman Empire falls, it will usher in the era of the Antichrist (a.k.a, the Papacy).
I don't think that Matthew 24 is really about the end times at all. They are talking about when the temple will be destroyed and the end of the age (the Jewish Age).
could be, I've considered that myself.
Acts 6-7 seems to shed light on this. In Acts 5, Jesus tells the Apostles that they will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. In Acts 6, the Apostles ask if this is when he will restore the kingdom to Israel. Then, in Acts 7, Jesus tells them that it is not for them to know the times or seasons, which the Father hath put into his own power.
could you give me verse numbers? I don't find Jesus in either chapter, I read 7 three times.
That is an indication that the Apostles knew the difference between the end of the age (in Matthew 24) and the end times. Matthew 24 is about destruction, not restoration.
the end times is the end of the age
Also, Pix mentioned Thessalonians. I read the book End Time Delusions by Steve Wohlberg, and it really shined the light on some things. For example, Steve discusses 2 Thessalonians 7:
"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way."
This seems like a mysterious verse, but from reading the book, it has to do with the Roman Empire {the author probably wrote it like this in case the letter fell into the wrong hands). When the Roman Empire falls, it will usher in the era of the Antichrist (a.k.a, the Papacy).
That is an interesting view I never gt attached to one eschatological view. No one really knows.
12:38 AM
Will you ever do a response to barterman's book Jesus the apocalyptic prophet or Dale Allison
My assumption is that Jesus chose limited omniscience as part of incarnation. So he probably did think it doesn't make him a false prophet because he also said HE DIDN'T KNOW.
I suppose it's ok to assume almost anything if it helps shore up your holy text? Or should that be holey text?
I thought Jesus was supposed to be FULLY God and FULLY man.
Could you respond to carrier I thought the Lord's supper was a pre-polling tradition Richard Carrier, while translating the Greek himself directly.
Mark's Use of Paul's Epistles Richard Carrier
Another example is "the last supper." This began as a vision Paul had of Jesus relating to him what he spoke mystically to all future generations of Christians, as we see in 1 Corinthians 11:23-27. As Paul there says, he received this "from the Lord."
Another example is "the last supper." This began as a vision Paul had of Jesus relating to him what he spoke mystically to all future generations of Christians, as we see in 1 Corinthians 11:23-27. As Paul there says, he received this "from the Lord."
My view is that Paul got the information from the disciples, but pretended it was divine revelation to give the impression he was the higher authority If this came to him via the disciples, that would be a tacit admission that they were the higher authority.
Pix
I does not take a great deal cleverness to doubt everything. The idea that Jesus broke bread and said that hardly requires divine revelation. It suggests what we see in the Gospels.
CB:"I thought Jesus was supposed to be FULLY God and FULLY man."
Truly God and truly man; Maybe that is the same thing. That is why he had to choose to limit his omniscience. His divine nature gave him full omniscience.
Post a Comment