Re: Revelations
Thor Cameron (my_colours@hotmail.com)
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 02:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Hey, Jim, buddy,
There are so many holes here that I can't beginto plug. Besides which, if I
continue this discussion any further, I'll have to break out a few of my
Bibles, and you KNOW how much I hate to read Christian Mythology.
However, I will save this post so that we can return here AFTER you've read
HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL by Baigent, Lincoln, et al. That will answer (&
give scriptural evidence) virtually all of your points here. Every believer
(& ex-believer) should read this book. The sequal ain't bad neither...
Respectfully yours,
Thor
>On Fri, 09 Jul 1999 09:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Thor Cameron
><my_colours@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > I
> >>think Matthew 24 needs to be read before anything else. Christ was
> >asked
> >>for signs indicating his return, and he gave some very specific ones.
> >>
> >>Wars, rumors of wars, earthquakes, and famines will increase in
> >frequency
> >>and intensity. These things have always happened, they will just
> >happen
> >>more and more violently than ever before.
> >>
> >
> >Yes, but most importantly, he said that those listening would still be
> >alive
> >when he returned. He was speaking of his return post-crucifiction,
> >not some
> >post-apocalyptic return. Those stories started after he died.
> >
> >
>
>Eh, where did he say that? Are you referring to the fig tree thing later
>in the chapter? What seems to me to be said there is:
>
>Just like you know summer is near when the fig tree shows its leaves, so
>you know my coming is near when you see all these signs.
>
>The following comment about "this generation not passing away," then,
>would mean that the generation that saw all the signs fulfilled would not
>pass away before he returned.
>
> >>Jesus said when you see this happen, I'm right around the corner,
> >THEN
> >>you can head for the hills :)
> >
> >He was talking about Jerusalem being rebuilt. In other words, he was
> >rallying the Jews to try to recapture Jerusalem from the jews. He
> >never
> >talked about nuclear was, just provoking anti-Roman sentiment. He was
> >a
> >political leader, a revolutionary. That's the only crime that you
> >could be
> >crucified for; being an enemy of the state. Hung between 2 thieves?
> >Romans
> >didn't cruucify thieves, it's a mistranslation. Actually they, were
> >radicals.
> >
>
>It would be a bit silly for Christ to talk about Jerusalem being rebuilt
>when it wasn't destroyed until nearly 40 years after his death :)
>
>So far as political revolution goes, I really don't see Christ as
>advocating that at all. He said his kingdom wasn't of this world (and if
>it was, THEN his disciples would fight. But since it WASN'T, then his
>disciples should not fight). He also said, when his disciples asked (in
>the beginning of Acts 1) if he was at that time going to restore the
>kingdom to Israel (now, THAT would have been a revolutionary act), that
>it wasn't their business to know times or dates.
>
>And he wasn't all too happy with Peter for pulling his sword out and
>going on the attack when the Romans came to get him.
>
>The Gospel records make it pretty clear that Pilate crucified Christ for
>the sake of pacifying Jewish leaders. Local leadership had Far more
>autonomy in Palestine than was granted in most other provinces simply
>because the whole area was a pain in the arse to manage. You see Paul in
>Acts being treated the same way -- there's no good grounds for keeping
>him imprisoned, but the governor does so anyhow to keep Palestinian
>Jewish leadership happy. It was just good politics (see Acts 19-20, I
>think).
>
> >>He also said his return would be visible
> >>to all, like standing outside and watching lightning flash across the
> >>sky.
> >
> >Surely a metaphore.
> >
>
>Why? If we want a historically based reading (an understanding of the
>text as close as possible to the reading community to which it was first
>addressed), we need to ask
>how they would have understood it. The metaphor involved in that
>particular passage involved lightning --
>
>Just like lightning flashes from east to west, so will my coming be.
>
>His physical coming was compared to a lightning flash, visible to all.
>This seems to me to be a pretty straightforward intepretation of the
>text. I guess what I have to ask you is, "If this doesn't explain the
>metaphor, then what does the metaphor signify?"
>
>In other words, it's a metaphor for what?
>
> >>
> >>Anyways, people living at the time all these signs have been
> >fulfilled
> >>would probably be able to piece everything together. We're not quite
> >to
> >>that point yet, tho.
> >
> >Or, we already got there & it's just a bad or wrong prophecy.
>
>Course :) But the signs described in my post clearly haven't been
>fulfilled yet. There's no Jewish temple, so there has been no
>Abomination that causes desolation. The persecution of the church isn't
>really worldwide yet either, and there is no antichrist figure that I can
>tell yet.
>
> >
> >>
> >>Christ specifically said, at the beginning of the book of Acts (ch.
> >1),
> >>that times and dates are NOT our business :) The two words in Greek
> >>refer to both a specific point in time and extended eras, etc. So we
> >>can't even say, Sometime in 1995. Or before the year 2000.
> >
> >Yeah, but this is Acts, where the disciples take off on their own,
> >distinctly non-Jesus paths.
> >
> >Thor
>
>And the textual evidence for this is...?
>
>Jim
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>Get the Internet just the way you want it.
>Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
>Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
>
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com