So, What Happened, Jesus?

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Life expectancy all over the Middle East in those days was around 49 or 50.

The standard round number for a generation is 40 years is well attested.

The "forty-year" period occurs about a dozen times in the Bible.

Nope. 20. A generation is 20 years, not 40. Ain't it amazing how people twist actual reality, in order to "fit" some Bronze Age Book of Superstition?

 

[sooda]

Nope. 20. A generation is 20 years, not 40. Ain't it amazing how people twist actual reality, in order to "fit" some Bronze Age Book of Superstition?

In the Bible.. 40 years is repeatedly called a generation.. For example, the Israelites wandered in the desert of Sinai for 40 years. I think you have to go with what it meant to the people who wrote these stories.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Good.

Meanwhile..

Rapture promoters usually claim to have inspiration, are prophets, apostles, "the Elijah", have special illumination from the Holy Spirit and that God has revealed new doctrines not previously known by anyone, including the apostle Paul himself.

Here are some typical statements by famous premillennialists:

a. "God unconditionally promised Abraham's descendants a literal world-wide kingdom over which they would rule through their Messiah who would reign upon King David's throne...Even the animals and reptiles will lose their ferocity and no longer be carnivorous," (The Late Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsay, p 165)

b. "The nature of the blessings are earthly, territorial, and national, and have nothing to do with a spiritual church to which none of these blessings has been promised ...Christ is not now on the throne of David bringing blessings to Israel as the prophets predicted, but He is rather on His Father's throne waiting for the coming earthly kingdom and interceding for His own who form the church," (The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text in Premillennial Theology, John F. Walvoord, p 205, 1983 AD)

I used to have an original copy-- first edition (although it was paperback) of Hal Lindsay's stupid book. I kept it around as proof he was nuts, as all the promised dates in my edition, had long since come and gone-- with **nothing** he claimed coming true.

But that didn't stop the Faker, Hal-- nope-- he had the publisher scratch those "wrong" dates off the plates, re-write new ones, and reprint a "new inspiration" copy. Still sold. Still selling today, on Amazon.

Gullibility Test: Buy this Book, which Predicts The Future!

____

In a side note, Lindsey, who was raking in massively large quantities of moolah, was once asked what he was doing with his new-found Riches.

"Long term investments" was his reply (or so the story goes-- may be apocryphal. But knowing what I know about the shallow "morality" of Hal Lindsey, I can easily believe he'd say such a thing)

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

In the Bible.. 40 years is repeatedly called a generation.. For example, the Israelites wandered in the desert of Sinai for 40 years. I think you have to go with what it meant to the people who wrote these stories.

I've seen the "logic" of that claim-- but it doesn't hold up. In archaeology, 20 years is the norm, that being a Nice Round Number, and fairly typical from one generation to the next (replacement) generation.

And 40 would put the adults well past the ability to have additional children-- with the women, at least, what with an average of 1/2 of them **dead** (from childbirth). 40 would be atypical-- only those with exceptional affluence could manage such a lofty age...

 

[sooda]

I've seen the "logic" of that claim-- but it doesn't hold up. In archaeology, 20 years is the norm, that being a Nice Round Number, and fairly typical from one generation to the next (replacement) generation.

And 40 would put the adults well past the ability to have additional children-- with the women, at least, what with an average of 1/2 of them **dead** (from childbirth). 40 would be atypical-- only those with exceptional affluence could manage such a lofty age...

You have to use their definition...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Sure, but you do realize that 1 millisecond and 1,000,000 years are exactly the same to God. So if He says soon, it could be just about any amount of time. Relativity is great isn't it!

Well....that would certainly be confusing, if god cannot be bothered to Pay Attention from one measure to the next...

It's kinda amazing he managed to do as well as he did, considering that degree of a handicap!

That's SIX ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE WORSE, than the most inept global navigation, from 1500's and later!

Who knew? Mere humans, with the primitive technology of the 1500's, were better at Time-Keeping than.... God? By a lot, actually!

No Wonder Jesus is so Late... he's only been like 2 milliseconds off... right? Perhaps on the way out of Heaven, to Return, he forgot his keys or something... and had to go back in...

... so it'll be at least the year 4545 before we can expect some more Jesus.... ?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You have to use their definition...

No. I do not. I do not consider them reliable-- especially considering how many translations and edits the whole schlemiel has gone through!

40 years? That doesn't even make sense! A fertile couple will have several kids by the time they are 20-- thus 20 years is Logical--- assuming the woman lasts that long (the death rate was slightly less than 1 in 2, from childbirth complications, after all)

 

[sooda]

No. I do not. I do not consider them reliable-- especially considering how many translations and edits the whole schlemiel has gone through!

40 years? That doesn't even make sense! A fertile couple will have several kids by the time they are 20-- thus 20 years is Logical--- assuming the woman lasts that long (the death rate was slightly less than 1 in 2, from childbirth complications, after all)

I give up.. Change scripture if you like.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Re: Hal Lindsey.

To be fair, when I purchased that First Edition? I really did believe he was On To Something, and fully expected Jesus to return before I was dead.

I used to wake up every morning, thinking-- "well-- I made it through another night, and no Rapture" ... then, I'd get a bit worried if the house was Too Quiet-- what if the Rapture came, and I missed it? Many-many mornings I was grateful my mom and older sister were noisy in the morning....

I can recall becoming depressed, as I did not expect to be On Earth long enough to have children of my own-- or even get married.

So insidiously abusive is that whole Culture-- I was not alone in my depression-- several other teen-aged friends felt the same way.

Not ironically, it was <expletative> Fakes like Hal Lindsey and his fellow Con Men, that began to destroy my Faith.

Why would God permit such as the Lindseys and the Robertsons, and the Oral Roberts of the world, to Exist, and Say Such Hurtful And Damaging Things?

Indeed--- Why? To date, no True Believer has ever bothered a rational reply to that question.

Hint: Free Will? Don't make me laugh-- the bible is QUITE FULL of examples where it's God happily usurped Free Will.... on a whim... murdering children over a "baldy" insult? Murdering a poor sap who simply wanted to avoid an accident with the Ark? To name but two off the top of my head.... Yeah, I don't Think So.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I give up.. Change scripture if you like.

Why not? Other folk-- nearly every generation -- already has, to fit whatever narrative they need it to fit.

Why should this generation be any different? But 20 years comes from non-biblical sources, making it a far more reasonable metric.

 

[blü 2]

The Rapture is a false prophecy from a mentally ill woman named Margaret Macdonald. I don't subscribe to that belief.

Let me examine that:

The Rapture is a false prophecy

A. from a mentally ill
B. woman
C. I don't subscribe to that belief.

Which of those is the test for a false prophecy?

 

[sooda]

Let me examine that:

The Rapture is a false prophecy

A. from a mentally ill
B. woman
C. I don't subscribe to that belief.

Which of those is the test for a false prophecy?

I believe Margret McDonald was a teen-ager..

John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), a Church of Ireland clergyman, later with the Plymouth Brethren, also promoted Futurism and a secret rapture.

Darby attended the series of meetings on Bible Prophecy that began in 1830 at Powerscourt, Ireland, and at these conferences Darby apparently learned about the secret rapture as revealed by vision to Margaret McDonald...

FUTURISM AND DISPENSATIONALISM - CHRISTIAN ESCHATOLOGY
christianeschatology.com/futurism_dispensationalism.htm
ZIONISM. FUTURISM AND DISPENSATIONALISM The eschatology of Futurism is largely credited to the early-mid 19th century interpretation of John Nelson Darby, widely recognized as " the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism", whose eschatological scheme was popularized in the 20th century church through the annotated Scofield Reference...

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's not been fulfilled....yet.

The generation spoken of refers to the Parable of the Fig Tree. Which you posted here:



This Parable, long story short, is talking about when Israel becomes a country controlled by the Jewish people. Which happened on May 14th, 1948.

So according to this prophecy the generation that is spoken of, is who we call the baby boomers basically. Based on that. The apocalypse is set to happen sometime between 1948 and 2058 (roughly, no man shall know the exact date).

This is based on a human life span, not many humans live longer than 110 years so I'm safe with calling 110 years as good.

At least that is my understanding of it. Still got 29 years to know if I'm right or wrong though.

Biblical exegesis is an interesting topic, but I'm afraid that what you have done is actually eisegesis -- you are "reading in" rather than "leading out." The fig tree says absolutely nothing about "Israel becoming a country," controlled by anybody. Just because Hal Lindsay "read into" the parable this interpretation, it is not justified by either the text or the context.

Remember, Lindsay also "read into" the fact that the prophets never mentioned America, and from that he concludes (with zero validity) that the U.S. would not be a "great political power" by the time all this is supposed to happen. Actually, the prophets didn't mention America because they didn't have the vaguest clue of its existence, that's all.

 

[sooda]

Biblical exegesis is an interesting topic, but I'm afraid that what you have done is actually eisegesis -- you are "reading in" rather than "leading out." The fig tree says absolutely nothing about "Israel becoming a country," controlled by anybody. Just because Hal Lindsay "read into" the parable this interpretation, it is not justified by either the text or the context.

Remember, Lindsay also "read into" the fact that the prophets never mentioned America, and from that he concludes (with zero validity) that the U.S. would not be a "great political power" by the time all this is supposed to happen. Actually, the prophets didn't mention America because they didn't have the vaguest clue of its existence, that's all.

The futurists have done a lot of damage projecting ancient writings to name Russia or NYC or Rome or the EU.. Its a con game.

 

[Skwim]

Worshiping words written by men and believing they come from God can be very illusory....

after all...when I try to let Christian fundamentalists understand that I am living proof that intelligent design or other Creationist stuff is fancifulness, they still don't want to get it.

As I've found out, they can't allow themselves to get it. It doesn't matter how silly, absurd, or illogical their beliefs may be, if they oppose evolution they're acceptable and stand as valid.



.

 

[Enoch07]

Let me examine that:

The Rapture is a false prophecy

A. from a mentally ill
B. woman
C. I don't subscribe to that belief.

Which of those is the test for a false prophecy?

None of the above.

It's a false prophecy because Jesus was the final prophet. So anyone claiming new prophecy is after that, is a false prophet.

 

[Enoch07]

Biblical exegesis is an interesting topic, but I'm afraid that what you have done is actually eisegesis -- you are "reading in" rather than "leading out." The fig tree says absolutely nothing about "Israel becoming a country," controlled by anybody. Just because Hal Lindsay "read into" the parable this interpretation, it is not justified by either the text or the context.

Remember, Lindsay also "read into" the fact that the prophets never mentioned America, and from that he concludes (with zero validity) that the U.S. would not be a "great political power" by the time all this is supposed to happen. Actually, the prophets didn't mention America because they didn't have the vaguest clue of its existence, that's all.

I never said anything about the Bible mentioning America, or New York, or Rome or any of the other cities/countries that others have accused me of mentioning other than Isreal. So I have no clue why you and others, are putting those words in my mouth then expecting me to defend it. That is the literal definition of building a strawman. If your positions are so strong why resort to the same lame tactic so consistently? If you do it again I will not respond.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I never said anything about the Bible mentioning America, or New York, or Rome or any of the other cities/countries that others have accused me of mentioning other than Isreal. So I have no clue why you and others, are putting those words in my mouth then expecting me to defend it. That is the literal definition of building a strawman. If your positions are so strong why resort to the same lame tactic so consistently? If you do it again I will not respond.

I did not accuse you of mentioning any of those places. I said that you were "reading in" any notion of the fig tree representing Israel, as an example of eisegesis, rather than exegesis. I used the second part only to demonstrate another example of eisegesis, by the same fellow (Hal Lindsay) who liked to promulgate that interpretation of the fig tree parable.

 

[Enoch07]

I did not accuse you of mentioning any of those places. I said that you were "reading in" any notion of the fig tree representing Israel, as an example of eisegesis, rather than exegesis. I used the second part only to demonstrate another example of eisegesis, by the same fellow (Hal Lindsay) who liked to promulgate that interpretation of the fig tree parable.

Lame

 

[Skwim]

About the term "generation."

"In the New Testament, the Greek genea is the source of generation. It is similar to both Hebrew words. Literally, it means “fathered, birthed, nativity,” referring to a genetic line. But it can be used as both the time frame characterized by a specific cultural attitude and the people in that culture. In Matthew 1:17, the generations are marked off by significant events and people—Abraham, David, Babylonian captivity—like the Hebrew toledot. But when Jesus calls the Pharisees and scribes a “wicked and perverse generation,” He is referring to the culture that they lived in and encouraged (Matthew 12:39; see also Matthew 17:17 and Acts 2:40).

So, when we read “generation” in the Bible, we have to consider the context. Usually, a generation in the Bible is roughly thirty years long or the people living during that time, the same as what we understand a generation to be in everyday talk. But there are times when generation is used poetically to refer to a class of people demarked by something other than age."
source
​

And considering that some Bibles have translated Matthew 24:34 as::

"all these things will happen while some of the people of this time are still living."

"all these things will happen before the people now living have all died."

"The people living now will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

"’I'm not just saying this for some future generation, but for all of you. This age continues until all these things take place."

​

It's pretty clear what people, and therefore what time, Jesus is referring to when a translation uses "generation" in the verse.

.

.​