"here is the Christ"

enoughisenough

I was thinking about the scriptures at Matt 24:23-26 . The time period does appear to be during Great Tribulation...Anyway, it is telling us not to believe it when people are telling us Christ is in the Wilderness or in his inner rooms. It would be false Christs and false prophets promoting this. Verse 26 ends, "do not believe it." But have most of us not at one time or another believed that Jesus is present ( parousia) but is invisible since 1914? We have in essence been told," Here is the Christ"...what do you think?

joao

That we have been told, indoctrinated! Where is the evidence? The Gentile Times Reconsidered is a very thorough work that proves that date absolutely wrong, for example.

enoughisenough

joao...exactly! but being gullible, the indoctrinated preached that Christ was/is present... even if somehow deep in our selves we knew it didn't make sense we fell in line teaching people from the "Bible study aids" and being good sheep didn't question.

Vidqun

An alternative explanation: I interpret it literally. I believe the arrival of the two witnesses lies in the future. Their public ministry is to last three and a half years. Under no circumstances should one follow them around. There are indications that that could be a dangerous pursuit. Eventually they are to be killed. Their message will make them very unpopular with the authorities. Also, they will be able to work miracles (Rev. 11:3-8). This might be confused with the return of the Christ. Matthew (24:23-27) therefore warns not to chase after such sightings. It could cost you your life (cf. Luke 17:22, 23).

Anna Marina

Enoughisenough - when I was studying I was detecting anomalies. The sister I was studying with said to me, "when you say things, I think 'no'. Then I go away and think about it and I realize you are right."

I knew the Bible quite well and the sister who was taking my study was sincere. THEREFORE out of the blue two elders attended my study, one after the other to skew things.

For whatever reason I was never taught about parousia. I studied during the early 1990s but never heard the word parousia until 2006. The immediate effect was to wake me up big time. What I did not know was whether they taught this stuff with bad intentions or because they themselves were confused but meant well.

Incidentally in the old NWT (ie not the grey one) every single mention of the word 'presence' cross ref'd to Appendix 5B which 100% contracted WT's parousia doctrine. I pointed this out in a letter I sent to HQ. I actually got a reply. Some years later as you know the RNWT (ie the grey Bible) came out. And lo and behold Appendix 5B had disappeared. So they kept the stupid teaching but removed the sensible information.

waton

A M " Appendix 5B which 100% contracted WT's parousia doctrine

explain the con tra diction please

truth_b_known

We have in essence been told," Here is the Christ"...what do you think?

I think 2 things -

You are absolutely correct.
There would be no guessing. That is why the Jews are still waiting for their Messiah. Whomever allegedly said the words that were written at Matthew 24:23-26 was not the Messiah.

Anna Marina

Read it and note THE FORCE OF THE FORMER (ie coming) ENDS IN ARRIVAL but presence STARTS WITH ARRIVAL. Jesus can't be present until he has arrived, he can't arrive until he has come for the 2nd time.

*** Rbi8 p. 1577 5B Christ’s Presence (Parousia) ***

Concerning the meaning of this word, Israel P. Warren, D.D., wrote in his work The Parousia, Portland, Maine (1879), pp. 12-15: “We often speak of the ‘second advent,’ the ‘second coming,’ etc., but the Scriptures never speak of a ‘second Parousia.’ Whatever was to be its nature, it was something peculiar, having never occurred before, and being never to occur again. It was to be a presence differing from and superior to all other manifestations of himself to men, so that its designation should properly stand by itself, without any qualifying epithet other than the article,—THE PRESENCE.

“From this view of the word it is evident, I think, that neither the English word ‘coming’ nor the Latin ‘advent’ is the best representative of the original. They do not conform to its etymology; they do not correspond to the idea of the verb from which it is derived; nor could they appropriately be substituted for the more exact word, ‘presence,’ in the cases where the translators used the latter. Nor is the radical [root] idea of them the same. ‘Coming’ and ‘advent’ give most prominently the conception of an approach to us, motion toward us; ‘parousia’ that of being with us, without reference to how it began. The force of the former ends with the arrival; that of the latter begins with it. Those are words of motion; this of rest. The space of time covered by the action of the former is limited, it may be momentary; that of the latter unlimited . . . .

BTW I am not talking about Jesus being with us all the days until the end (which did not start in 1914). But Jesus having arrived after Armageddon/end Gentile Times.

Vidqun

Παρa (alongside, next to) + ουσία (to be): So, not "presence" nor "advent/coming" give the full meaning of the word. As the article brings out, παρουσία incorporates both arrival + presence. The following is what an authoritative dictionary has to say:

Here the Greek noun is παρουσία, translit. parousia. Of Christ, and nearly always of his Messianic Advent in glory to judge the world at the end of the age: Matt. 24:3, 37, 39.
The use of παρουσία has developed in two directions. On the one hand the word served as a sacred expression for the coming of a hidden divinity, who makes his presence felt by a revelation of his power. On the other hand, παρουσία became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp. of kings and emperors visiting a province. These two technical expressions can approach each other closely in meaning, can shade off into one another, or even coincide.
Here the Greek verb is ἔρχομαι, translit. erkhomai. This multipurpose marker is not readily susceptible to precise classification. Of movement from one point to another, with focus on approach from the narrator’s perspective, come: Matt. 24:30; cf. 25:31, 32 (see BDAG).

Anna Marina

It gets even more fun when you dig deeper. They used to do these talks about the Hebrew word for presence. But the lying so and sos knew the Hebrew word was coming (ie the Hebrew equivalent of erkhomai) not the Hebrew word for presence.

So they did talks about presence using the word coming. And unless you understood Hebrew and Greek you would not see through their con trick.

"here is the Christ"

Share this