Johnathan -- " At that time the sign ofthe Son of Man will appear in thesky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory." "Josephus Wars Book 6, Chapter 5, Sections 2 and 3) War 6:286 (6.5.2.286) Now, there was then a great number of false prophets suborned by the tyrants to impose upon the people, who denounced this to them, that they should wait for deliverance from God: and this was in order to keep them from deserting, and that they might bebuoyed up above fear and care by such hopes. War 6:288 ¶ (6.5.3.288) Thus were the miserable people persuaded by these deceivers, and such as belied God himself; while they did not attend, nor give credit, to the signs that wereso evident and did so plainly foretell their future desolation; but, like men infatuated, without either eyes to see, or minds to consider, did not regard the denunciations that God made to them. War 6:289 (6.5.3.289) Thus therewas a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year. War 6:290 (6.5.3.290) Thus also, before the Jews’ rebellion, and before those commotions which preceded the war, when the people were come in great crowds to the feast of unleavened bread, on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus [Nisan], and at the ninth hour of the night, so great a light shone round the altar and the holy house, that it appeared to be bright day time; which light lasted for half an hour. War 6:291 (6.5.3.291) This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskillful, but was so interpreted by the sacred scribes, as to portend those events that followed immediately upon it. War 6:296 (6.5.3.296) So these publicly declared, that this signal foreshowed the desolation that was coming upon them. Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the twenty-first day of the month Artemisius [Jyar], War 6:297 (6.5.3.297) a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, War 6:298 (6.5.3.298) and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sunsetting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen War 6:299 (6.5.3.299) running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, War 6:300 (6.5.3.300) and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, “Let us remove hence.” " http://www.preterist.org/preteristQA.asp
The Quiet One
JoinedPosts by The Quiet One
-
100
In the LAST DAYS (mockers, scoffers) ridiculers will come saying:
by Terry in(2 peter 3:1-13) ... niv....."in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.they will say, where is this coming he promised?
ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.
waaaaay back when these words were written an embarassing awareness of delay was in the air among christians.. shortly after jesus was executed the story was circulated that he arose from the dead and was witnessed by a great many people.. but, jesus (it was said) went up to his father in heaven and would soon return.. time passed.. more time passed.. ....and still more time passed without jesus coming back.. the idea that deliverance was "near" began to make believers squirm with discomfort.. instead of standing around waiting, enduring persecution and praying constantly for reward....a new task emerged for christians to take.
-
-
-
100
In the LAST DAYS (mockers, scoffers) ridiculers will come saying:
by Terry in(2 peter 3:1-13) ... niv....."in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.they will say, where is this coming he promised?
ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.
waaaaay back when these words were written an embarassing awareness of delay was in the air among christians.. shortly after jesus was executed the story was circulated that he arose from the dead and was witnessed by a great many people.. but, jesus (it was said) went up to his father in heaven and would soon return.. time passed.. more time passed.. ....and still more time passed without jesus coming back.. the idea that deliverance was "near" began to make believers squirm with discomfort.. instead of standing around waiting, enduring persecution and praying constantly for reward....a new task emerged for christians to take.
-
-
The Quiet One
Johnathan said: " ..Zephaniah's warning, where theancient prophet transmitted the Almighty's words, "I will utterly consume all things from off the face of the ground, saith Jehovah. I will consume man andbeast; I will consume the birds of the heavens, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumbling blocks with the wicked; and I will cut off man from off the faceof the ground, saith Jehovah" (Zephaniah 1:2,3) Complete destruction of man on earth is intended. " -- You're using a translation that says 'ground', some use the word 'land', which makes the context more clear, but even so, look at the next verse.. Zephaniah 1:4 " I will also stretch out my hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place, and the name of the idolatrous and pagan priests".. When God was wiping everyone from the ground, did he miss a spot? Forgive my sarcasm.. But why would verses 2+3 be referring to the whole earth, would that not make verse 4 pointless? If God were talking about destroying the whole earth , why would he have to point out that the destruction would ALSO include Judah?
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Psac -- Why , according to what you believe, would God allow people to add to/edit/lose parts of work he inspired, especially the ending to Mark, one of the only records of his life?
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Psac-- Thanks for the link. Which parts of the Bible specifically do you see evidence of divine inspiration in?
-
-
-
The Quiet One
If you'd read the link on page 3.. "But why does not Luke name Mary, and why pass immediately from Jesus to His grandfather? Ancient sentiment did not comport with the mention of the mother as the genealogical link. Among the Greeks a man was theson of his father, not of his mother; and among the Jews the adage was: ‘Genus matris non vocatur genus [“The descendant of the mother is not called (her) descendant”]’ (‘Baba bathra,’ 110,a).”—Commentary on Luke, 1981,p. 129. "
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Cofty-- I don't understand how suggesting that S+Z were not the same people on both lists, when Z was a common name in those days, is agonising to you mentally.. but fair enough. I do actually see this as reasonable, I often use copy/paste because I have little time windows in my double life, often not enough to spare typing out long explanations. Just trying to help.. Got to go, please feel free to point out something that I've missed, might be back later..
-
-
-
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Thanks to all for comments and suggestions.. COFTY said: "The two names that do correspond in the list also rule against this idea. If the two lists are the separate genealogies of two people they don’t get to merge at random points in this way." -- Please take a look at this if you care to listen to a possible explanation: "Now the issue about Shealtiel and Zerubbabel I find intriguing. The argument Jim makes here is that THEY are descendants of the 'bad Jeconiah' and THEY show up in BOTH the legal AND the physical lineages of Jesus. And, if the prophecy in Jeremiah is taken to mean a long-range restriction (which I/many others do NOT believe is the case, see above), then we clearly have a problem in the Lukan, physical/gene-stream lineage ofJesus. But let me ask an impertinent question here. Why do we believe the S+Z (Shealtiel and Zerubbabel) of the two lineage's are THE SAME PEOPLE? Think about it: *. They have different parents *. They have different children. *. They are descended from different sons of David. *. Their chronological placements on a time line could differ by as much as a CENTURY! (depending on how the omissions in Matthew are accounted for, and on what the average age of child-bearing was.) THE ONLY THING THEY HAVE IN COMMON ARE THEIR NAMES! This single commonality can hardly be a strong argument for their identity: 1. Zerubbabel was a common name from the early Persian period (539-331bc.), as shown by cuneiform inscriptions from Babylonia (see ZPEB , V. 1057) 2. The genealogies themselves have numerous names that repeat WITHIN the genealogy (e.g. Joseph, Mattathias, Judah) without being the same individuals; These names could also be common names. 3. The names in the genealogies are standard, common, everyday names. We have NUMEROUS people named Levi, Amos, Nahum, etc. in the OT accounts. There is just NO REASON to associate the S+Z of Luke with the S+Z of Matthew. (And even the pattern of S-followed-by-Z doesn't carry much weight--families often honored prominent people this way.) What this means is that the S+Z ofMatthew are the S+Z of Jeremiah, and that the S+Z of Luke (whose genes DO reach to Jesus) could easily be a different set, descended from Nathan and not through Solomon-thru-Jeconiah. [A very careful, detailed argumentthat these are different pairs, is given by R. Larry Overstreet,"Difficulties of New Testament Genealogies", Grace Theological Journal , Fall 1981, vol 2:2, 304ff. His concluding comment on this has an interesting personal note to it: "The position then, that the Shealtiel and Zerubbabel of Matthew are the same men mentioned by Luke fails in all three of its possible explanations . This constitutes a strong argument that the two men of Matthew are indeed distinct from the two men of Luke . However, it may be argued that it seems unusual, at the least, for blood relatives in the same generation to have the same names . This is not a significant objection. This present writer has a first cousin,about the same age, with the same first and last name as his own . Therefore, the identical names need not be an obstacle to recognizing what the Scriptures indicate—that the Shealtiel and Zerubbabel of Matthew are not the same as those of Luke."] " http://christianthinktank.com/fabprof4.html
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Cofty said: " Notice by the way that they can’t even agree on the name of Joseph’s dad, typically Matthew wants to make an OT parallel and so of course Joseph has to be the son of Jacob! " -- Luke's was likely the genealogy of Mary, tracing the physical line of descent.. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Bible-Studies-1654/Joseph-Ahaziah.htm
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Johnathan-- Please see post 364. Basically, Mark says MM saw Jesus first, Matthew a group of women. I know what you'll say..