Re: Revelations

Jim Rovira (jrovira@juno.com)
Fri, 09 Jul 1999 15:25:13 -0400 

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.