The Second Coming

[firedragon]

The proper context of the Olivet Discourse is the desolation of the temple, not the end times.

What are the flaws of eschatological interpretation you see through criticism?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Alright, in that case, how do you authenticate your belief in the Olivet Prophecies? How do you make a thesis that it is definitely the prophecies laid out by Jesus Christ himself?

The Bible as we both know is one of the most studied books in history. Debate continues endlessly between peoples about its authenticity, particularly the Gospel accounts. As I understand it the evidence for the historicity if Jesus is as good as any figure in the Greco-Roman era. Portraits of this period are often embellished with some mythology. However most historians are agreed about Jesus existed, He was baptised by John the Baptist and He was crucified at the order of Pontius Pilate.

So what is it about the final major sermon of Christ recorded in the synoptic Gospels written 30 - 45 years after His crucifixion?

I/ This period of time was perhaps the most memorable for His disciples. People tend to recall events that have profound emotional associations.

2/ It wasn’t that long after Christ’s crucifixion the Gospels were written.

3/ There’s a reasonable degree of consistency between the accounts.

4/ The themes if seen figuratively are universal and recorded in other religious texts.

5/ The relative authenticity of the Gospels is affirmed by both the Quran and Baha’i Writings.

6/ The account if properly understood is plausible. A Manifestation of God and Prophet makes predictions about the future.

 

[sooda]

What are the flaws of eschatological interpretation you see through criticism?

Two opposing interpretations
Within conservative, evangelical Christian thought, two opposite viewpoints have been expressed in a debate between theologians Kenneth L. Gentry and Thomas Ice.[10]

Tribulation as a past event

• The Great Tribulation occurred during the 1st century.
• Those events marked the end of God's focus on and exaltation of Israel.
• Jesus' prophecies marked the beginning of the Christian era in God's plan.
• The Tribulation is God's judgment on Israel for rejecting the Messiah.
• The Tribulation judgments will be centred on local events surrounding ancient Jerusalem, and also somewhat affecting other portions of the former Roman Empire.
• The Tribulation judgments are governed by Jesus as the Christ to reflect his judgment against Israel, thus showing that he is in heaven controlling those events.

Tribulation as a future event

• The Great Tribulation is still to come and is rapidly approaching prospect.
• Those events marked the beginning of God's focus on and exaltation of Israel.
• • The prophecy says the Christian era will be concluded just after the church is taken from the world.
  • Rather than being God's judgment on Israel, it is the preparation of Israel to receive her Messiah.
  • The judgments involve catastrophes that literally will affect the stellar universe and impact the entire planet.
  • The coming of Christ in the Tribulation requires his public, visible and physical presence to conclude those judgments.
• 
  
• Olivet Discourse Explained

 

[firedragon]

Two opposing interpretations
Within conservative, evangelical Christian thought, two opposite viewpoints have been expressed in a debate between theologians Kenneth L. Gentry and Thomas Ice.[10]

Tribulation as a past event

• The Great Tribulation occurred during the 1st century.
• Those events marked the end of God's focus on and exaltation of Israel.
• Jesus' prophecies marked the beginning of the Christian era in God's plan.
• The Tribulation is God's judgment on Israel for rejecting the Messiah.
• The Tribulation judgments will be centred on local events surrounding ancient Jerusalem, and also somewhat affecting other portions of the former Roman Empire.
• The Tribulation judgments are governed by Jesus as the Christ to reflect his judgment against Israel, thus showing that he is in heaven controlling those events.

Tribulation as a future event

• The Great Tribulation is still to come and is rapidly approaching prospect.
• Those events marked the beginning of God's focus on and exaltation of Israel.
• • The prophecy says the Christian era will be concluded just after the church is taken from the world.
  • Rather than being God's judgment on Israel, it is the preparation of Israel to receive her Messiah.
  • The judgments involve catastrophes that literally will affect the stellar universe and impact the entire planet.
  • The coming of Christ in the Tribulation requires his public, visible and physical presence to conclude those judgments.
• 
  
• Olivet Discourse Explained

Sis. I didnt ask for two opposing views. I asked for the flaws of eschatological interpretation you see through criticism?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Except where the text says things that Baha'i don't believe in like Satan, walking on water and rising from the dead.

That’s correct.

Have you read the arguments given by Jews as to why they don't believe Jesus fulfilled the prophecies?

Their arguments are remarkably similar to those used by Christians as to why Bahá’u’lláh can’t be the Return of Christ.

Great back and forth. But Adrian, you have used the argument that the writers were not eyewitnesses before. Now you're talking as if the gospels are accurate, but Baha'is don't believe they are necessarily accurate I thought? Oh, and who is the "Son of Man" because that is who is said to be coming back in the Olivet discourse? Christians seem to think that is Jesus. So how do Baha'is make Baha'u'llah or The Bab into not only the "Glory of God" and "The Lamb that was Slain", but now Baha'u'llah has to be shown to be the "Son of Man" too. Or, did those gospel writers get it wrong?

I think balance and perspective is needed to find a middle way when examining the Gospels. Not too literal but not entirely mythical either. Whether or not the Baha’is have the right balance is a matter of opinion.

The Son of Man is a Messianic title that Christ uses to refer to Himself throughout all four Gospels. In that generic sense Christ or Messiah could also refer to both the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh. In fact Bahá’u’lláh in the Koran-I-Iqan criticises the Muslim clergy for rejecting the Gospels and not seeing how the signs in the Olivet Discourse applied to Muhammad.

 

[firedragon]

The Bible as we both know is one of the most studied books in history. Debate continues endlessly between peoples about its authenticity, particularly the Gospel accounts. As I understand it the evidence for the historicity if Jesus is as good as any figure in the Greco-Roman era. Portraits of this period are often embellished with some mythology. However most historians are agreed about Jesus existed, He was baptised by John the Baptist and He was crucified at the order of Pontius Pilate.

So what is it about the final major sermon of Christ recorded in the synoptic Gospels written 30 - 45 years after His crucifixion?

I/ This period of time was perhaps the most memorable for His disciples. People tend to recall events that have profound emotional associations.

2/ It wasn’t that long after Christ’s crucifixion the Gospels were written.

3/ There’s a reasonable degree of consistency between the accounts.

4/ The themes if seen figuratively are universal and recorded in other religious texts.

5/ The relative authenticity of the Gospels is affirmed by both the Quran and Baha’i Writings.

6/ The account if properly understood is plausible. A Manifestation of God and Prophet makes predictions about the future.

But how would you assess that it was the disciples involved in the Gospels? There is no indication of that is there? Do you have this standard of belief for the whole Bible, the New Testament alone, the Gospels alone, or prophecies alone?

 

[sooda]

Sis. I didnt ask for two opposing views. I asked for the flaws of eschatological interpretation you see through criticism?

I have written reams answering the same question for two days,.. without any success. I don't subscribe to futurism. I have studied a lot of first century history.

I don't subscribe to Scofield or Dispensationalism either.

The tribulation was over in 70 AD and there is no rapture.

Before the Jewish War reaches and overwhelms Jerusalem, God providentially causes a brief cessation of hostilities allowing the Jewish Christians in Judea to escape (as Jesus urges in Matt. 24:16-22).

This happens when the emperor Nero commits suicide (A.D. 68), causing the Roman generals Vespasian and Titus to cease operations and withdraw for a year due to the turmoil in Rome. We know from the church fathers Eusebius and Epiphanius that Christians flee to Pella before the war overwhelms Jerusalem (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3; Epiphanius, Heresies 29:7).

 

[sooda]

That’s correct.



Their arguments are remarkably similar to those used by Christians as to why Bahá’u’lláh can’t be the Return of Christ.



I think balance and perspective is needed to find a middle way when examining the Gospels. Not too literal but not entirely mythical either. Whether or not the Baha’is have the right balance is a matter of opinion.

The Son of Man is a Messianic title that Christ uses to refer to Himself throughout all four Gospels. In that generic sense Christ or Messiah could also refer to both the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh. In fact Bahá’u’lláh in the Koran-I-Iqan criticises the Muslim clergy for rejecting the Gospels and not seeing how the signs in the Olivet Discourse applied to Muhammad.

Can the Bab stand on its own or is it dependent on Jewish and Christian writings?

 

[Dawnofhope]

But how would you assess that it was the disciples involved in the Gospels? There is no indication of that is there? Do you have this standard of belief for the whole Bible, the New Testament alone, the Gospels alone, or prophecies alone?

I’m not sure what you’re asking.

My understanding of the Gospels doesn’t necessitate any of the disciples to have written them. The New Testament has multiple authors. However its not hard too the all 27 books as being of value. They reinforce and compliment each other. I would even go as far as acknowledging the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[sooda]

The truth is that what Messiah proclaimed in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, which is referred to as the Olivet Discourse; was fulfilled in the first century.

If you reject that statement, remember that Messiah declared “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

 

[Dawnofhope]

Can the Bab stand on its own or is it dependent on Jewish and Christian writings?

The Bab emerged as an important religious figure throughout Persia in 1844. His close followers were all Muslims. His references were to the Quran and Shi’a traditions of Islam. There was no need to refer to the Christian and Jewish scriptures. However, like John the Baptist He prepared the way for Bahá’u’lláh. One of the earliest works of Bahá’u’lláh called the Kitab-i-Iqan refers to passages in the Olivet discourse.

 

[sooda]

The Bab emerged as an important religious figure throughout Persia in 1844. His close followers were all Muslims. His references were to the Quran and Shi’a traditions of Islam. There was no need to refer to the Christian and Jewish scriptures. However, like John the Baptist He prepared the way for Bahá’u’lláh. One of the earliest works of Bahá’u’lláh called the Kitab-i-Iqan refers to passages in the Olivet discourse.

I don't see anything in the Olivet discourse about Bahaullah? Do you have the verse?

 

[firedragon]

I’m not sure what you’re asking.

My understanding of the Gospels doesn’t necessitate any of the disciples to have written them. The New Testament has multiple authors. However its not hard too the all 27 books as being of value. They reinforce and compliment each other. I would even go as far as acknowledging the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

I dont think you understood my question.

You were speaking of the olivet prophecy. And you are pretty convinced that its authentic and you have your reasons for it. You believe that the Gospels were written early enough to have genuine stories in it, you see parallels in them to other scripture, you believe the Quran and Bahai writings also affirm to them, etc.

My question was very simple.

1. Do you have the same standards to the whole Bible? Or only the New Testament?
2. Since you spoke of the gospels at this time, do you maintain standards to all the gospels, all the text in the gospels, or only the olivet prophecy?
3. You say the gospels were early and were written quite soon after Jesus passed. But how do you know they were apostles or at least that apostles were involved in the Gospels? What are your evidences?

I hope you understand my questions. If not, please ask me what I mean by each specific question that you dont understand and I will try and elucidate further.

Peace.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The truth is that what Messiah proclaimed in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, which is referred to as the Olivet Discourse; was fulfilled in the first century.

If you reject that statement, remember that Messiah declared “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

Its certainly the strongest argument for a preterist interpretation. The Olivet discourse refers to two different but related events. The apocalypse that would befall the Jews along with the destruction of the Jerusalem and the temple. There is the parallel process of the growth of the Christian church and the necessary tribulations. Then there are events to occur in a far distant future. The destruction of Jerusalem occurs within a generation (40 years) of Christ’s final sermon.

 

[sooda]

Its certainly the strongest argument for a preterist interpretation. The Olivet discourse refers to two different but related events. The apocalypse that would befall the Jews along with the destruction of the Jerusalem and the temple.

There is the parallel process of the growth of the Christian church and the necessary tribulations. Then there are events to occur in a far distant future. The destruction of Jerusalem occurs within a generation (40 years) of Christ’s final sermon.

Its referred to as the Little Apocalypse.

Matthew’s question about the ‘end of the world‘, should be rendered as ‘end of the age‘.

Other literal translations like the ISR 98 and the New King James read, “and of the end of the age?”

Matthew was asking about the end of the ‘Jewish age’, as Messiah had just declared that the Jewish leaders and temple would be desolated, which would end the existence of the Jewish nation.

The ‘former days‘ of the Jewish nation ended when the Jews were taken captive by the Babylonians.

The ‘latter days‘ started when they were released from Babylonian captivity in the 5th century B.C., and ended in the 1st century A.D.

 

[firedragon]

The Bab emerged as an important religious figure throughout Persia in 1844. His close followers were all Muslims. His references were to the Quran and Shi’a traditions of Islam. There was no need to refer to the Christian and Jewish scriptures. However, like John the Baptist He prepared the way for Bahá’u’lláh. One of the earliest works of Bahá’u’lláh called the Kitab-i-Iqan refers to passages in the Olivet discourse.

Which page are you referring to ? I mean in Kithab I iqan.

 

[Dawnofhope]

1. Do you have the same standards to the whole Bible? Or only the New Testament?

The Hebrew Bible is somewhat different on account of its scriptures being much older and so the historicity can’t be authenticated before the Babylonian exile. Notwithstanding the Baha’i writings and Quran affirm the authenticity for the Torah as the Gospel. They both contain Divine Revelation, convey all the God wanted through Moses and Jesus and are protected. We can not however be certain they were the exact words God Revealed through Moses and Jesus, nor should we take it all literally. In addition the Baha’i writings and Quran make references to other characters and books in the Hebrew Bible. In that sense the Hebrew Bible appears as a cohesive whole much like the New Testament.

2. Since you spoke of the gospels at this time, do you maintain standards to all the gospels, all the text in the gospels, or only the olivet prophecy?

Good question. The whole of all four Gospels is seen as being more or less authentic. We don’t take some of it as literally as the Christians, particularly the resurrection narrative.

3. You say the gospels were early and were written quite soon after Jesus passed. But how do you know they were apostles or at least that apostles were involved in the Gospels? What are your evidences?

It would be a reasonable assumption that the disciples made concerted efforts to spread the Gospel as Christ commanded (Mark 16:15). The book of acts is an important bridging work between the Gospels and Apostolic letters. It provides an account of this teaching work. Its generally believed Peter died a Martyrs death between 64 and 68AD.

Saint Peter - Wikipedia

Peter is mentioned in Acts and one of Paul’s letters. Two Epistles are attributed to Peter. So while he may or may not have contributed directly to the writing of the Gospels, he was around to verify what was and wasn’t said. Same deal with some of the other disciples such as John.

 

[wellwisher]

Satan was in Heaven during the Old Testament. He was a council to God the father. Satan, had originally been called Lucifer, the morning star. He had a symbolic connection to consciousness and creative change. Lucifer evolved into Satan. As Satan he became the CEO in charge of humans. This position was granted at the time Adam and Eve, who ate of the Tree of Knowledge. He was the serpent in the tree and had demonstrated he had a way with humans.

In Revelations, there is a war in Heaven and Satan is thrown from heaven. This begins a new age, where Satan is no linger the CEO of humans, as had been sanctified by God. Now he becomes the Devil. The Devil is more free lance.

Because Satan is thrown from Heaven to the earth, it becomes unclear to the humans, whether anything has changed. The same spiritual principle; Satan, is still in action on earth, but now, not in any official capacity. However, this change of divine priority, is not yet clear to the humans.

It is like having a CEO who has been fired by the board of directors. But this firing has not yet been announced publicly, since he gets to finish his contract. Those in power, below him, still want to serve him, not knowing he no longer works for the company. Instead, he is secretly working for himself. He is trying to steer the ship way from the original goal of the Old Testament, toward a new place where he can regain full control. This leads to the Anti-Christ and False Prophet and the Abomination of Desolation.

The first Messiah or Jesus comes while Satan is sanctioned by God as CEO. Satan had more self control and plays his role as the CEO in God's drama. The second coming of the Messiah, occurs after Satan has gone renegade, and has brought the world to the brink of total war and destruction. The New Messiah is the new CEO called faithful and true to God.

The Saints begin to notice the distinction between Satan in Heaven and Satan gone renegade, very early. They see the signs of change. They try to help others make the right choices. However, the majority cannot make this distinction, but still believe in changes being made, in times and laws, is a continuing part of the Old Testament dispensation.

After all the Saints are sacrificed, the end comes. The second coming is an awakening where all start to see, and order is restored.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I don't see anything in the Olivet discourse about Bahaullah? Do you have the verse?

Matthew 24:27-31
Matthew 24:36-51

 

[sooda]

Satan was in Heaven during the Old Testament. He was a council to God the father. Satan, had originally been called Lucifer, the morning star. He had a symbolic connection to consciousness and creative change. Lucifer evolved into Satan. As Satan he became the CEO in charge of humans. This position was granted at the time Adam and Eve, who ate of the Tree of Knowledge. He was the serpent in the tree and had demonstrated he had a way with humans.

In Revelations, there is a war in Heaven and Satan is thrown from heaven. This begins a new age, where Satan is no linger the CEO of humans, as had been sanctified by God. Now he becomes the Devil. The Devil is more free lance.

Because Satan is thrown from Heaven to the earth, it becomes unclear to the humans, whether anything has changed. The same spiritual principle; Satan, is still in action on earth, but now, not in any official capacity. However, this change of divine priority, is not yet clear to the humans.

It is like having a CEO who has been fired by the board of directors. But his has not yet been announced publicly and he gets to finish his contract. Those in power, below him, still want to serve him, not knowing he no linger works for the company. Instead is now he secretly working for himself. He is trying to steer the ship way from the original goal of the Old Testament, toward a new place where he can regain full control. This leads to the Anti-Christ and False Prophet and the Abomination of Desolation.

The first Messiah or Jesus comes while Satan is sanctioned by God. Satan has more self control and plays his role as the CEO in God's the drama. The second coming of the Messiah, occurs after Satan has gone renegade, and has brought the world to the brink of total war and destruction. The New Messiah is the new CEO called faithful and true to God.

The Saints begin to notice the distinction between Satan in Heaven and Satan gone renegade, very early. They see the signs of change.They try to help others make the right choices. However, the majority cannot make this distinction, but still believe in the changes being made, in times and laws, is a continuing part of the Old Testament dispensation.

After all the Saints are sacrificed, the end comes. The second coming is an awakening where all start to see and order is restored.

Why don't you spend a little time researching the origins of FUTURISM?