Who are the NT epistles aimed at?

[Spud]

As I said, Spud, gloriously imprecise - hence your 'not clear who is meant', 'some think', 'a possibility' and 'if so' in your fairly brief post above: you yourself have packed quite a bit of this imprecision into just a handful of sentences!

You guys seem to accept the notion of 'prophecy' as a given when it is no more than just another unfalsifiable conjecture, and since 'prophecy' is part of the tradition you subscribe to there seems to be an underlying assumption that these prophecies must mean something - so we see these creative 'interpretations' which, as you've just demonstrated, are bereft of any precision.       

Going back to Daniel 9, Gabriel gives Daniel a summary of the events that would take place between the returning exiles rebuilding their city, and the eventual atonement made by the coming Davidic king for the forgiveness of sins. This would be followed soon after by the destruction of the temple. It's fairly clear that because of the permanence of this atonement, the sanctuary would no longer be needed for sacrifice and offering, and so its destruction is permanent. If we take the seventy sevens as 470 years, and the decree to rebuild as being one of the two (three?) issued by the Persian emperors, the time interval between that and Christ's death fits exactly.
Daniel 11 gives more detail about the Greek empire after Alexander's death, up until the coming of the Messiah (ch 12) in the time of the Herod the Great, who was king over the Jews but not himself the Davidic king, in 11: The link I gave goes into more detail.
The fact that there is differing opinion about this does not mean there isn't a correct one.
 

[Gordon]

Going back to Daniel 9, Gabriel gives Daniel a summary of the events that would take place between the returning exiles rebuilding their city, and the eventual atonement made by the coming Davidic king for the forgiveness of sins. This would be followed soon after by the destruction of the temple. It's fairly clear that because of the permanence of this atonement, the sanctuary would no longer be needed for sacrifice and offering, and so its destruction is permanent. If we take the seventy sevens as 470 years, and the decree to rebuild as being one of the two (three?) issued by the Persian emperors, the time interval between that and Christ's death fits exactly.
Daniel 11 gives more detail about the Greek empire after Alexander's death, up until the coming of the Messiah (ch 12) in the time of the Herod the Great, who was king over the Jews but not himself the Davidic king, in 11: The link I gave goes into more detail.
The fact that there is differing opinion about this does not mean there isn't a correct one.
 

The problem here Spud, and one you'll no doubt avoid addressing, is that any bits that aren't after the event reporting (the easy way to do 'prophesy') are indistinguishable from fiction and, as such, should be taken with a pinch of salt - especially since the provenance is unknown. 

[jeremyp]

If we take the seventy sevens as 470 years,

Why would we pretend that 70 x 7 = 470?

and the decree to rebuild as being one of the two (three?) issued by the Persian emperors, the time interval between that and Christ's death fits exactly.

So you don't know which of two (or possibly three) decrees to start from and you've wrongly decided that 7 x 70 is not 490. All we need now is for the Temple rebuilding (516BCE) and Christ's death (~30 - 35CE) to be more than 490 years apart and your credibility is utterly destroyed.

Oh look, your credibility is utterly destroyed.

Daniel 11 gives more detail about the Greek empire after Alexander's death, up until the coming of the Messiah (ch 12) in the time of the Herod the Great,

The Messiah didn't come in the time of Herod the Great.

[~TW~]

Well, either you are a liar, or simply someone who does not know his Bible, since the two verses at the end of Matthew 16 definitely do contain a reference to angels "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels and judge each man according to his works: 28 Truly I tell you etc."


Did you conveniently forget that?

Your problem is you cant read you quoted in your post the last verse of Matt 16 and we have no mention of Angels now that makes you wrong also note the word SOME in that verse.This verse does not refer to the second advent.when the second advent takes place ,----not SOME but EVERY eye will see him.

You must do better leave it to people like me to teach you.

The last verse is referring to the transfiguration which is history, the verse before is referring to the second coming.

 ~TW~

[jeremyp]

Your problem is you cant read you quoted in your post the last verse of Matt 16 and we have no mention of Angels now that makes you wrong also note the word SOME in that verse.This verse does not refer to the second advent.when the second advent takes place ,----not SOME but EVERY eye will see him.

You must do better leave it to people like me to teach you.

 ~TW~

Here is the relevant section (from the NRSV).

‘For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done. Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.’

I've highlighted the relevant word, because it appears you are unable to see it.

The quote first describes how Jesus will come (with angels), then it gives a time scale. Jesus and his angels haven't come back yet and everybody who heard those words is dead.

The prophecy fails.

[~TW~]

Here is the relevant section (from the NRSV).

I've highlighted the relevant word, because it appears you are unable to see it.

The quote first describes how Jesus will come (with angels), then it gives a time scale. Jesus and his angels haven't come back yet and everybody who heard those words is dead.

The prophecy fails.

 Clever but you did quote the verse cunning and sneaky but that is you.

~TW~

[jeremyp]

Clever but you did quote the verse cunning and sneaky but that is you.

~TW~

Why shouldn't I quote the Bible to show it says what it says? It definitely says "angels". You ended it for some bizarre reason. I quoted the Bible to prove you were wrong. Nothing sneaky about that.

[~TW~]

Why shouldn't I quote the Bible to show it says what it says? It definitely says "angels". You ended it for some bizarre reason. I quoted the Bible to prove you were wrong. Nothing sneaky about that.

Because as usual you quote the wrong scripture we are referring  to verse 28--------------28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

 So your lies are exposed you should get a job with the watchtower.  This was posted for the other juggler of scriptures .Your problem is you cant read you quoted in your post the last verse of Matt 16 and we have no mention of Angels in that verse, now that makes you wrong also note the word SOME in that verse.This verse does not refer to the second advent.when the second advent takes place ,----not SOME but EVERY eye will see him.

             ~TW~

[jeremyp]

Because as usual you quote the wrong scripture we are referring  to verse 28--------------28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Is this really your argument? Are you really trying to claim that Jesus' prophecy does not involve angels because he said he would bring angels in the line before the one that somebody quoted up thread?

[~TW~]

Is this really your argument? Are you really trying to claim that Jesus' prophecy does not involve angels because he said he would bring angels in the line before the one that somebody quoted up thread?

Being such a brilliant person as I am I read this,  28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
 
 And then I read the fulfilment of verse 28 here

    17 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,

2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.

7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.

8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.

9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.


   So JP your nonsense is dealt with.

               ~TW~

[floo]

There is no evidence your quotes have any validity, TW!

[jeremyp]

Being such a brilliant person as I am I read this,

Since you are not, by any stretch of the imagination, brilliant, why should I?

28

This is dishonest of you. \you should start at the beginning, not conveniently just after the angles bit.

 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
 

And then I read the fulfilment of verse 28 here

    17 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,

2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.

7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.

8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.

9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.


   So JP your nonsense is dealt with.

               ~TW~

No angels in that bit.

Also do you really think that Jesus was prophesying the very next thing that would happen to him at the end of chapter 16? Instead of saying "some of you will see this before you die", why didn't he just say "next week"?

No, I think we can safely say that your hypothesis is just desperate reaching.

[2Corrie]

Here is the relevant section (from the NRSV).

I've highlighted the relevant word, because it appears you are unable to see it.

The quote first describes how Jesus will come (with angels), then it gives a time scale. Jesus and his angels haven't come back yet and everybody who heard those words is dead.

The prophecy fails.

This prophecy was fulfilled. Read http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/70ad/sermon.php  in full, then come back if you have any questions.

[Gordon]

This prophecy was fulfilled. Read http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/70ad/sermon.php  in full, then come back if you have any questions.

I take it you jest - the language alone should tell you this is no more than fallacious religious propaganda: item 1 in the conclusion reads 'If you have not believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God, you should kiss the Son this moment.'

Not to be taken seriously!

[floo]

This prophecy was fulfilled. Read http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/70ad/sermon.php  in full, then come back if you have any questions.

Oh dear, how very sad and gullible some people are!

[jeremyp]

This prophecy was fulfilled. Read http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/70ad/sermon.php  in full, then come back if you have any questions.

Where were the angels in 70?

Also, I believe we have mentioned before that a prophecy with no evidence of having been made before the events prophesied doesn't count.

[Stranger]

http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/70ad/sermon.php

A delightfully nutty site, devoted to an evil and unjust god...

If a person never hears and/or rejects the Bible history of Adam, it does not matter - he is still guilty for Adam's sin and condemned to death and eternal judgment. If a person were not to sin himself, it does not matter - he is still guilty for Adam's sin and stands condemned before God.

http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/salvation/unconditional-salvation/sermon.php#p4

[Spud]

Where were the angels in 70?

Where were they in John I: 51?
PS, thanks for giving me a hand calculating 70 x 7.

[Spud]

Sorry about that Thrud. One problem is that if we start a new thread on AD 70 people will probably carry on discussing it on this one anyway. At least, that's what I've found happens in the past. Maybe a moderator could move the posts on AD 70 to a separate thread?

[Sassy]

People are so gullible if they think that twaddle is meaningful. You can interpret the Bible any which way to suit your POV.

You could make a statement as above had you read up about the Prophecies.
Ignorance breeds ignorance. Your ignorance is completely unjustifiable. You are not in a position to make such comments
when you KNOWINGLY have no idea what they are talking about. Grow up Floo, no one is interested in the venom of ignorance your projectile vomit all over the board.

[floo]

You could make a statement as above had you read up about the Prophecies.
Ignorance breeds ignorance. Your ignorance is completely unjustifiable. You are not in a position to make such comments
when you KNOWINGLY have no idea what they are talking about. Grow up Floo, no one is interested in the venom of ignorance your projectile vomit all over the board.

That is amusing coming from you Sass, who obviously hasn't read the not so good book with any sort of understanding or logic!

[Khatru]

A delightfully nutty site, devoted to an evil and unjust god...

If a person never hears and/or rejects the Bible history of Adam, it does not matter - he is still guilty for Adam's sin and condemned to death and eternal judgment. If a person were not to sin himself, it does not matter - he is still guilty for Adam's sin and stands condemned before God.

http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/salvation/unconditional-salvation/sermon.php#p4

Lol! - That must be the website's mission statement

Unfortunately for them, they've got it wrong as no less a source than the supreme cosmic mega-being tells us that.....

The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

Ezekiel 18:20

If they've got that bit wrong it's odds on they've got a lot more wrong too.

[floo]

Talking of prophecies I have just seen this on another forum, it is quite amusing, imo as it is so crazy!


"Prophecies of Donald Trump can be found from Isaiah 40-46. Here is an excerpt from Isaiah 45. I have replaced the word Cyrus with Donald Trump.

This is what the Lord says to Donald Trump, his anointed one,
whose right hand he will empower.
Before him, mighty kings will be paralyzed with fear.
Their fortress gates will be opened,
never to shut again.
2 This is what the Lord says:
"I will go before you, Donald Trump,
and level the mountains.[a]
I will smash down gates of bronze
and cut through bars of iron.
3 And I will give you treasures hidden in the darkness"
secret riches.
I will do this so you may know that I am the Lord,
the God of Israel, the one who calls you by name.
4 "And why have I called you for this work?
Why did I call you by name when you did not know me?
It is for the sake of Jacob my servant,
Israel my chosen one.
5 I am the Lord;
there is no other God.
I have equipped you for battle,
though you don't even know me,
6 so all the world from east to west
will know there is no other God.
I am the Lord, and there is no other.
7 I create the light and make the darkness.
I send good times and bad times.
I, the Lord, am the one who does these things.
8 "Open up, O heavens,
and pour out your righteousness.
Let the earth open wide
so salvation and righteousness can sprout up together.
I, the Lord, created them.
9 "What sorrow awaits those who argue with their Creator.
Does a clay pot argue with its maker?
Does the clay dispute with the one who shapes it, saying,
"Stop, you're doing it wrong!"
Does the pot exclaim,
"How clumsy can you be?"
10 How terrible it would be if a newborn baby said to its father,
"Why was I born?"
or if it said to its mother,
"Why did you make me this way?""
11 This is what the Lord says"
the Holy One of Israel and your Creator:
"Do you question what I do for my children?
Do you give me orders about the work of my hands?
12 I am the one who made the earth
and created people to live on it.
With my hands I stretched out the heavens.
All the stars are at my command.
13 I will raise up Donald Trump to fulfil my righteous purpose,
and I will guide his actions.
He will restore my city and free my captive people"
without seeking a reward!
I, the Lord of Heaven's Armies, have spoken!" "

[Spud]

The problem here Spud, and one you'll no doubt avoid addressing, is that any bits that aren't after the event reporting (the easy way to do 'prophesy') are indistinguishable from fiction and, as such, should be taken with a pinch of salt - especially since the provenance is unknown.

It looks suspiciously like you've assumed that some bits are retrospective prophecy here.

[Gordon]

It looks suspiciously like you've assumed that some bits are retrospective prophecy here.

Nothing suspicious about it, Spud - 'prophecy' beyond logical or lucky guesses is utter nonsense (like really dead people not staying dead): making it supposedly 'fit', so as to claim that it says what you'd like it to say, by 'interpreting' ancient and imprecise texts that are of uncertain provenance (not forgetting the issue of translation) just isn't a serious proposition.