JCnot4me.com
“Am I therefore become your enemy for telling you the truth?”
The Apostle Paul Galatians 4:16
Part 1} Responses to
Jesus: False Prophet
Jennifer Kincaid 9-
To:
JCnot4me
Hello my name is Jennifer Kincaid. I was reading your website and I was bewildered.
I personnally do not have anything against you or what you believe because I am fully aware that not everyboby is christian and not everybody believes in the same things. So I respect your point of view. I am not here to curse you or to do anything of that nature I would just like to show you a different perspective. And you being the intelligent person that I believe you are I am sure you wouldn't mind debating this matter in a respectful way. Besides we both know that we are not going to change each others mind about the subject so where is the harm ? Good then , If you have agreed my e-
Mark Smith here} Her ignorance of the facts is already showing, for if she knew what she was talking about, then she would know that the New Testament was written not in Hebrew, but in Greek. Why have I, an Atheist, been cursed with having to be the one to always teach the Christians what the Christians should have already learned on their own!!!
In the King James Version, which I will use, it says in Matthew24:34"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." Now I would like to take you to 2 Peter 3:8 to explain this verse. It states " But do not let this one fact escape your notice ,beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years , and a thousand years as one day." What Im saying is many generations may pass within a thousand years to us but to Jesus time is something totally different.
Mark Smith here} I believe my essay "Mt 24-
In case she's too lazy, here are some of my thoughts on this verse:
Hermeneutics 101
Jesus was direct, Peter circumspect.
One exception doesn't negate a rule.
Don't let a single tree obscure the forest.
Jesus spoke plain true, Peter allegorical goo.
Jesus set the stage, Peter re-
One obscure passage doesn't override a hundred clear.
Jesus wrote a one-
One verse of dubious origins doesn't negate dozens from known origins.
Who are you going to believe? Jesus who made the prediction, or Peter's apocalyptic fiction?
Modern Christians ignore the LOG in 2nd Peter, to fawn over a splinter in Matthew 24:34
Those who wish to appeal to this one questionable verse, which may show Jesus due back within 100 billion years, must first confront the dozens of explicit passages, which show otherwise.
Christians can claim poetic license all they want. The fact remains that one day does NOT equal one thousand years, any more than one dollar equals one thousand dollars. Biblegod or not, anyone who borrows a dollar from you today, with the promise to pay it back tomorrow, had better pay it back tomorrow. If instead of your dollar, they hand you some cockamamie excuse about paying you back in a thousand years, they have broken their promise.
An HONEST man (or god) does NOT on his own re-
If this verse had been written by the Apostle Peter, inspired by a holy spirit from Biblegod, this verse alone is enough to prove your Biblegod an untrustworthy liar. And as a liar, he could very well promise anything, including an "eternity in heaven" yet deliver only a thousand day stay, using similar "logic" as in this verse.
From 1889 onward, the Jehovah Witnesses *predicted that Jesus would return to Earth and set up his kingdom in 1914. When 1914 came and went, it was obvious to all a mistake had been made. Rather than admit an error, they came up with the lame excuse that Jesus had indeed returned to Earth in 1914-
In similar fashion, when Jesus failed to return within the time limit he himself allotted, the early Christians came up with an excuse to "explain" the prophetic failure of their god to their pagan neighbors. What they dreamed up was almost as good as an invisible Jesus: they rewrote their dictionary. They claimed that a day no longer means a day. A day now means a thousand years. And this explains why Jesus didn't show up!!! Of course, like the JW's, nobody comes up with these lame excuses until after the fact, which is why it is called backpedaling.
*The Time Is At Hand, pp. 98, 99 (1889 edition.) p. 101 of the 1908 edition.
In the same way, if you talk to a person in some language he doesn't understand, how will he know what you mean? You might as well be talking to an empty room… God is not the author of confusion…(1 Cor 14:9&33)
An intelligent being would know that to communicate with Earthlings, one must speak the language of Earth, including using human systems of time measurement.
For example, if a year is defined as the amount of time it takes a planet to revolve around its sun, a year on Earth is not the same length of time as a year on Pluto. Two beings, born at exactly the same time: one on Pluto, the other on Earth. By the time the Plutonian has reached his first birthday (i.e. Pluto has circled once around the sun), the Earthling would have gone thru 248 birthdays, as Pluto takes 248 Earth years to circle the Sun.
If, therefore, a Plutonian were to take out a four-
According to the Bible, Biblegod is not the author of confusion. Therefore Biblegod, when speaking to humans, should be intelligent enough to use human terms of time measurement, and not "heavenly" ones. Therefore, when Biblegod says one year, he would mean one EARTH year, not a thousand. Otherwise, Biblegod would be authoring mass confusion. Biblegod (given half a brain) would be sure to use a language and time system that we understand. As Paul says,
"In the same way, if you talk to a person in some language he doesn't understand, how will he know what you mean? You might as well be talking to an empty room"
For example, no one could ever know what Biblegod meant by "Jesus will rise from the dead after three days" if, willy-
A Russian who knows how to communicate does not speak Russian to a person who only knows Spanish. Likewise, an "all-
"…the main problem of primitive dogmatics was the delay of the parousia… The author of 2nd Peter… undertakes to restore the confidence of Christendom once for all with the sophism of the thousand years which are in the sight of God as one day, ignoring the fact that in the promise the reckoning was by man's years, not by God's. 'Nevertheless it served the turn of the Apostles so well with those simple early Christians, that after the first believers had been bemused with it, and the period originally fixed had elapsed, the Christians of later generations, including Fathers of the Church, could continue even after to feed themselves with empty hopes.' The saying of Christ about the generation which should not die out before His return clearly fixes the event at no very distant date."
(The Quest of the Historical Jesus, [Albert Schweitzer], p. 22,23 )
**********************
"In light of the time texts, how should 2nd Peter 3:8 be applied? First, there is nothing in this passage or in any other passage that tells us that any time text should be filtered through 2nd Peter 3:8. Second, if time texts are fluid in relation to 2 Peter 3:8, then we could never know what God means relative to time. …Are dispensationalists willing to admit that the thousand years of Revelation 20 can be reduced to a single day? …Is Jesus still in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, since three days really means three thousand years?"
(Last Days Madness, [Gary DeMar] p. 294)
**********************
"When the New Testament writers said 'soon' they meant 'soon' in relation to their own time. If 'with the Lord one day is as a thousand years' then civilizations may continue through two million years, as well as two thousand." (The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 7, p. 153)
Therefore he looks at the entire race of man dead , living, and those yet to be born as one generation of men because to him thousands and thousands of years is only a couple of days _______________________________________________________________________Now in Matthew 26:64 it reads " you have said it yourself, nevertheless I tell you , here after you shall see the son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of Heaven . The key word is hereafter . He was speaking here after his crucifixtion, because we must remeber Jesus knew he was gonna be crucified before he was crucified and after he was crucified he did rise to his father and he is now sitting at the right hand and he will come back for us on the clouds of heaven for it states in Romans 15:8-
Mark Smith here} Huh??? Is this an example of an aborted argument? She started off dealing with Matthew 26:64, then she got lost. Too much Jesus on the brain???
______________________________________________________________________
In Revelation 1:7 it says "Behold , he is coming with the clouds , and every eye will see him , even those who pierced him him , and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over him . The ones who pierced him are still alive because they are the persecuters , persecuting the BODY of Christ which is the church for it reads in Ephesians 1: 22-
Mark Smith here} What you have here is an example of the ancient heresy of Gnosticism being dusted off and used, WHEN Christians find in in their interests. The Gnostics used to drive the orthodox Christians nuts with their continual "spiritualization" of any doctrine or verse that proved their position wrong. Her "creative theology" here won't hold water. The verse in Rev. 1: 7 says what it says, and all the fanciful "spiritualization" of it in the world won't change its meaning. Jesus is still a false prophet.
So in conclusion the ones who pierced him are stil living . And in Corinthians the word we speaks of his believers , Christians. And once again in Thess. he speaks of we as Christians who will be alive to see such events . And when people die in Christ that is believing in Christ they do not die anyway. They only leave their earthly body and ascend to the Father were they are alive and well. So any way you look at it they are still alive and they will see the returning of the Lord because they will be with him.
I would just like that this has been very fun and I commend you on being a good sport . I hope to hear from you very soon with a response. My e-
May God Truly and Richly
Bless You !
Sincerely,
Jennifer Kincaid
Rob Hill 11-
Subj:
Re: Your article ‘JESUS & His Expired Prophecies’.
Date:
11/22/02 9:19:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
To:
Jcnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Dear Sir,
Regarding your article titled ‘JESUS & His Expired Prophecies’, I would like to respond to your accusations if you will give me the same courtesy as I gave you in reading what you had to say.
You stated He: prophesied that all of the following would occur within the lifetime of people living around 33 AD. The time limit he laid down has long since expired!? The stars would fall to earth? The Great Tribulation & Rapture? Judgment Day for all mankind? The Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Listen to what the liar himself said around 33 AD to his fellow Jews gathered around him: "Remember that all these things will happen before the people now living have all died." Matt 24:34.
Lets get something straight here – you obviously read the Bible but have no understanding of what you read! In my NIV Bible that verse reads: -
Mark here} Yes sir, I am VERY much aware of what the word "genea" means. Please go to my web essay on this word: Mt 24:34 What The Scholars Say
NIV Bible Dictionary: -
Christ made many references to ‘This Generation’ and in virtually all He was referring to the seed of satan – the rulers of the heavenly realm. They have been here from the beginning and will be here to see the events you listed and the return of Christ. They will no longer be here after their judgement. Christ recognised their presence within some of the people He was addressing.
Mark here} This is mumbo-
One thing I must give you is that you are very GUTSY with your blasphemous attack on Christ but I would not want to be in your shoes at judgement time!
Mark here} Typical Christian threats. You Christaholics thing that when you can't win a debate you can brow-
Your reference to Caiaphas was due to your same problem mentioned above, Caiaphas was evil and had satan’s seed within him and that seed will be alive to see the return of Christ! The same holds true of the soldiers at the cross. However, one of them who realised that Jesus was the Son of God after witnessing what happened at His death, did become a devout Christian.
Mark here} Jesus Christ!!! You are just FULL of wacky religious cockamanie ideas. What are you, some wigged out fire-
You quoted 1Cor 15:21 "Behold! I tell you a mystery; WE SHALL NOT ALL SLEEP [i.e. die], BUT WE SHALL ALL BE CHANGED... in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet... the dead will be raised..." Although Paul thought in his early years that the Kingdom was imminent, he later realised that it would be many generations into the future and most of his teachings reflected this by being addressed to those in the endtime. Many billions of people will die in the coming events but if you are alive and one of the chosen you will be changed to spirit form in the twinkling of an eye and others will be raised from death. 1 Thes 4:15-
Mark here} Uhhh, nothing but the goddamn text and context itself-
Another reason that people have trouble in obtaining the correct meaning of some verses is that they don’t realise that Christ and the apostles were making prophetic statements mixed with statements concerning their day. Most Christians assume that the book of revelations contains the only prophecy in the New Testament and they are in error. Psalms is a book that is virtually all prophecy yet few see it this way. For instance David wrote in the personal tense, yet very little pertained to him, most was about his future seed, Christ, endtime events and even about the ‘first’ and ‘second’ creation – but then you would not be able to see that as you obviously do not have the gift of The Spirit of Prophecy!
Mark here} Thank god I don't, if it would make my brain as mushy as yours apparently is. I don't need any spirits or demons to help me think. I can read the text just like any other text, and draw conclusions based on normal linguistics. Sorry you've got to drug your brain up with HOLY GHOST juice just to be able to understand simple sentances.
And as for you chopping up prophecies into part for back then, part for the far away future, who set you up as judge and jury to slice and dice these anyway you want? This is just a tactic to try to save your savior from his false prophecies. Again, any good web site on Preterism will blow this dumb idea out of the water.
As we are now into the seventh day and are being judged for our actions and statements I cannot see a very bright future for you unless you step into the light.
Mark here} Yet again ANOTHER assertion without any evidence, something you xtians never grow tired of.
What the hell, if YOU are allowed to assert without evidence, SO CAN I. Therefore, I assert the following: you are a weird lonely man with too few friends who thinks the world is out to get him. You visit porno sites and prostitutes, and weep about it the next day. You wear pink women's thong underware and jack off to old pictures of Tammy Faye Bakker.
There, how does it feel to be on the receiving end for a change of assertions without evidence???
I do thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond to your statements and remain,
A slave to the Lord and His Christ – Rob Hill.
Mark here} By the way, your email is such a good example of how NOT to reason, I am going to put it up on my web site for all to see and laugh at. Be sure to tell all your friends to go see your letter.
Yours in Life,
Mark
Set Free
Set Free!
JCnot4me@aol.com
WWW.JCnot4me.com
***********************
John Tudor 2-
Subj:
regarding what youve said about Jesus
Date:
2/19/03 10:44:51 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
To:
Jcnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Hi there
I read your article about Jesus Christ being a liar and a False prophit
First I would like to remind you of how Jesus came to earth and what he did
and how he left it in front of thousands of witnesses.
Jesus came to earth through God and the Holy Spirit inside a Virgin lady
whom the angels appeared to her and told her not to worry she is pregnant by
the holy spirit and carrying the Son Of God.And the whole nation discovered
that and witnessed it.Moreover this what was said by the Prophet Moses who
told his people that the Messiah is coming to save them and this what
happened (He also told them that their unfaith, material love,and their
racisim will make them damned and hated by all nations and this is what
exactly is happening till today... the Jews are hated).Now going back to
Jesus,St.John was expecting Jesus and the people witnessed how Jesus Christ
was Baptised by St.John and how the bird flew over his Holy Head.
Also Jesus in His lifetime showed the people 100s of miracles he raised the
dead he cured the sick,he made food for the starved,He walked on water,He
loved us so much that he crucified himself to us in demand from His Father
to forgive us,he rised from death and moved the grave's heavy stone and came
out again to his diciples and many people saw him (The Second Coming) and
gave them a mission which is to send his message to the rest of the world
(there Jesus gave us a mission like his he saved us and we are ought to
spread his message to save our fellow humans in the rest of the world.
Jesus came again and again to the world but showed himself only to the
people who deserve to see him who were like his deciples faithfull and
loving.The ones who sacrificed their lives for him.The folks who had true
clean holy faith not for the guys like you and the other billions living in
earth.We saw Father Tardiff in the nineteen ninetees how he healed the
BELIEVERS in front of us and on tv.
About the end of the world, I think that our calculations are WRONG and
the world will come to an end through human beings' Bad
faith,Coruption,Capitalization (material lust),Polution caused by sin and
material lust,sick societies and many other causes.....
and there the Judgment day will come and the good people who held their
faith in God,his Son,and his comandments through all these years shall be
saved.
Hope that JESUS Love and Peace be on Earth
John Tudor
Mark here} This one's just too ignorant to bother responding to, but it does show the depth of most of the people who email me concerning theology. Pretty sad, eh???
JB Bennett 3-
Subj:
What The Scholars Say
Date:
3/5/03 10:41:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
CC:
robhill@optusnet.com.au, anis003@hotmail.com, funky.monk@talk21.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
I have read your article entitled, “What The Scholars Say.” You pose a very
good argument here. You use many references that would leave little or no
doubt as to what “this generation” would mean. I wouldn’t agree that all of
the 52 versions of biblical text as a whole are completely reputable, but
nevertheless, you strongly made your point. Your use of the original Greek
word “genea��� cuts to the chase as this language cannot be disputed as it is
very literal. You have obviously spent many hours looking up all of this
data to justify your argument, which is commendable.
In my search for a rebuttal to your arguments, I read the entire passage and
found that the entire text speaks of what is to come. The conversation
between Jesus and his disciples starts as,
“Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately,
saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of
Your coming, and of the end of the age?" (Matthew 24:3)
Mark here} Hey JB, thanks for bringing up the research involved in putting together something as comprehensive as "Matthew 24:34 What The Scholars Say". I believe for that one essay, I cited 115 sources. The research for that essay involved trips to the library at BIOLA (La Mirada, California), Fullerton Theological Seminary (Pasadena, California), Chapman College (Orange, California), and Moody Bible Institute (Chicago, Illinois). Many people read over such articles in a few minutes and oft times don't realize there may be months or years of thought and research invested behind what they are reading.
From here Jesus tells the disciples of what is to come. I don’t see any
reference to the generation of the disciples. You can argue “this
generation” all you want, but the fact remains, if Jesus is talking about a
“specific group of people,” He is justified in this wording, but no
application as to which generation is given. What is clear is that the
“generation” that witnesses these things is the focus group of the text.
This entire passage speaks of things yet to come, then you say that, based
on two words, the entire passage refers to the present and immediate future.
Your argument is not persuasive when compiled with the entire text.
Mark here} And such is why a study involving the entire context is needed, which I just happened to have had, but until your email prompted me to get around to it, had not gone thru the process of putting it up on the web. Well, that process has been completed, and a review of the whole chapter is now on line. Please check it out at:
Matthew 24 Verse by Verse
I think that alot of your points raised in your email will be answered by the above article.
“For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the
beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.” (Matthew
24:21)
One could write “this generation” to apply to past, present, or future.
Although you have proven that “generation” specifically applies to a given
time frame, you have not clearly proven that this particular passage clearly
refers to the present. One would have to read the entire passage to
conclude the context of this word. Clearly Jesus is talking of some time
that is not of the present. Warnings, generally speaking, don’t come after
the fact and many times not even amidst the present conflict.
Mark here} The time of which Jesus spoke was, for him and those who heard him, the next several decades. A generation is, by definition, about 30 to 40 years. If Jesus made his statements around 33 CE, the 24th chapter of Matthew would be predicting issues up to about 73 CE.
You mention warnings don't come after the fact. Neither do they come millions of years BEFORE the fact. The fact that Jesus gave these warnings exclusively, and face-
I would have to agree with you on your definition of “this generation,” but
you are clearly out of context here. You refer to this several times
throughout your articles and essays. Perhaps your argument would be
stronger if you could prove that the text specifically calls out the
generation of the disciples. Make a decisive argument not filled with
speculation and assumptions.
Mark here} Thank goodness I posted my Matthew 24 Verse by Verse for it DOES dig into the context, and shows exactly what you are asking for here. The entire chapter of Matthew 24 is filled with the pronoun "You" which, if YOU follow it back to the beginning of the chapter, clearly shows that Jesus was speaking both TO his Apostles and FOR his Apostles. He clearly is NOT speaking in broad generalities to all mankind for all time and eternity. The "address on the envelope" is addressed to the Apostles.
At first glance your argument is persuasive, but the entire text reads
otherwise. I recommend you use all of the text to gain perspective on a
segment of a verse otherwise people who are inclined to challenge your
statements will dismiss you as incompetent. You can publish all kinds of
references, scholars, and definitions to “woo” your audience, but if after
very little investigation they are proven invalid (not discredited) in
support of your argument, all of your work is for not.
Mark here} Again, I agree with you. And you, after reading my Matthew 24 Verse by Verse must agree that I've done a fair job with the context and haven't violated any major laws of reasoning or evidence.
The reason I did an analysis of the whole chapter to begin with was that I went to hear a lecture by Dr. Wayne House (who used to be with Dallas Theological Seminary) on Matthew 24. In the lecture he stated that the context showed that part of the chapter deals with issues for "back then" while other parts dealt with the future. When I asked him to please show me these transitions in the chapter itself, he admitted that he couldn't FOR THEY WERE NOT THERE. They were (and I'm paraphrasing now) more or less theoretical constructs designed to "save the savior" from being a false prophet!!! This "creative theology" surprised me, and motivated me to my own study.
The Preterists have done a fine job on this same issue, showing that the entire chapter stands or falls together-
“The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous
judgments endures forever.” (Psalm 119:160).
Look at it this way, if I told you the answer was “2” and asked you to find
the equation, what would you say? The most logical answer, or equation in
this example, would be “1+1,” but is this correct? Not necessarily because
you do not have enough information. There are an infinite amount of
equations that could equal “2” and it is highly unlikely that you could
actually discover the equation without asking me to reveal more information.
You could guess, I suppose, and have confidence that your answer is
correct and logically speaking could provide a strong argument, however, if
it isn’t the equation I asked you to find, your wrong.
Relative to this situation, you demonstrate that you don’t investigate
broadly, but only assume based on definitions and incomplete text. You
don’t ask questions in prayer (this is a whole different issue), humble
yourself, or look at the “big picture.” You present many assumptions,
based on tidbits of information and make a considerable amount of personal
statements with no material to back it up. You slipped in the statement,
Mark here} If you actual knew me, I might take what you said seriously. But since you've never met me or hung out with me, you are (excuse my French) totally speaking out of your ass here.
You ASSUME that I don't "investigate broadly". That is, sir, a most FALSE assumption, as anyone who has seen the massive amount of material I have gathered on this topic can attest to. Ten years of intensive research certainly qualifies as "investigating broadly" and if you had known me, instead of merely speculating, you'd have known better.
You ASSUME I didn't ask questions about this topic in prayer. Do you think I just woke up one morning and decided for the hell of it to throw away the previous TWENTY YEARS of my life as a Christian? Do you REALLY think such a decision is reached lightly or without hours of gut wrenching prayer? And how, pray tell, can YOU tell if I prayed about it or not? PLEASE give me YOUR source of information for this accusation-
“No future generation of Jews is meant here.”
Who said this and where? No specific reference? I’d have to assume you
said it.
Mark here} That was said by Gary DeMar in his book Last Days Madness, published by American Vision Inc., Atlanta, GA 1994, and is found on page 114.
Thank you for bringing up that some of the quotes were not documented as they should have been. (That is one reason feedback such as yours can be helpful to us Atheists!) I had originally written the essay for Farrell Till's magazine "The Skeptical Review" and he was worried about my fitting in everything, so I had to cut down the size as much as possible. A few years later, when I put it up on the web, I overlooked that some of the documentation could have been fuller.
The documentation problem has now been solved in full, and you will find complete "book, chapter and verse" for all the quotes quoted, AND, if you don't... let me know!
If you say some scholar or any man/woman for that matter, then I’d
say there is room for error. If you show me this in scripture without
interpretation and in harmony with the complete text your argument would
carry much more weight. As a matter of fact, the entire section of “Eight
Christian Scholars & Authors: genea & Matthew 24:34” contains no references.
Let me rephrase this…I’d have to read (not reference) 8 different sources
to find the actual context of the quotes (if they are actual quotes and not
paraphrased). The bottom line here is that no one should hold much stock in
the teachings of men
Mark here} (See above). But you remind me of a pet peeve of mind-
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written,
"He catches the wise in their own craftiness and again, "The Lord knows the
thoughts of the wise, that they are futile." Therefore let no one boast in
men. For all things are yours…” (1 Corinthians 3:19)
“In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father,
Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and
prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it
seemed good in thy sight.” (Luke 10:21)
I’d revisit your study in this scripture. In the end, you may be completely
justified, but as you presented it, your argument is flawed.
Randy Wood 4-
Subj:
Matt 24 Commentary
Date:
4/10/03 4:07:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mark,
I found your Matthew 24 Commentary to be very well researched in most areas.
One major weakness in the conclusion is your assertion that Jesus claimed "The end of the world." He did no such thing. Jesus proclaimed the end of the age. I think if you are serious in the pursuit of truth you should extend the same level of research to the phrase "end of the world" in verse 3 as you have to your studies of the word "generation" in verse 34. You will find that the English word "world" is actually better translated "age" and points to a reference of time. What age was Jesus referring to? When did it begin and when would it end? How would it differ from the age to come? I leave those questions to you for your own personal study.
Mark here} Yes, I know all about the Greek words for world and ages (cosmos and eon) and am also aware of the different interpretations thereof. The reason I chose to label it "The End of The World" is because that is what it would be for mankind, IF what Jesus said is going to happen WOULD really happen. According to Jesus, stars would be crashing down upon the Earth. According to astronomers, one star, even the smallest star known in the universe, would be enough to destroy our entire planet. Imagine if millions or billions all rained down upon us-
I'm sure it will come to no surprise to you that I find your claim that Jesus is a false prophet a misguided one. You yourself validate in your commentary that a number of the things that Jesus predicted in His Olivet Discourse have come to pass. Things that Jesus predicted some 25-
All of these things are evidence that Jesus is a true Prophet and who He claimed to be. If not how else could He have been so correct in these things if He was not the Messiah? What are the odds?
Mark here} Actually, seeing how the gospels were all penned AFTER the fact, the odds are quite good. Modern scholarship admits this, and even the internal evidence points to this-
And even if they were penned BEFORE the fact, how many false prophecies does it take to make someone a false prophet? Just as O.J. Simpson never murdered anyone before 1990, it only took one or two murders for him to be labeled a murderer. Likewise with being a false prophet-
Mark I also believe that you make the interpretive error so common to many futurists in not identifying correctly the type of genre used in scripture. You simply cannot interpret everything with a literalism as if it were all a narrative. You have done well in understanding the audience relevance to the time statements in the Olivet Discourse. I invite you to do the same with the language of terms such as "lightning from the east to the west, sun will be darkened, stars fall from the sky, heavens being shaken, coming on the clouds, great trumpets, four winds and heaven & earth." What did these terms mean to the Apostles and those familiar with the apocalyptic imagery? Again I leave these things for your study if you are truly interested in the truth. Hopefully you will come to the realization that Jesus was right in ALL of His predictions including the gathering of His elect (O.C. Israel), the judgment, and the Parousia.
You are obviously familiar with preterist material from your writings. At this point I don't think anyone has it all figured out but I think you might find a kindred spirit in either John Bray or Don Preston. Each of them research profusely as you have and I believe that you will find much to chew on in their writings. It is my hope that by doing so you may truly become SET FREE from your unbelief. You have some things in your research where you have become self deceived and dishonest. I think it is time for another look.
Remember the witness: He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.(1 Jn 5:12)
Hopefully much Grace to you,
Randy Wood
If you feel the need to post this on your web site I ask you to please post the comments in their entirety if they are at all posted. -
Randy Wood 4-
Subj:
interpretation
Date:
4/20/03 4:52:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mark here} Yes, I know all about the Greek words for world and ages (cosmos and eon) and am also aware of the different interpretations thereof. The reason I chose to label it "The End of The World" is because that is what it would be for mankind, IF what Jesus said is going to happen WOULD really happen. According to Jesus, stars would be crashing down upon the Earth. According to astronomers, one star, even the smallest star known in the universe, would be enough to destroy our entire planet. Imagine if millions or billions all rained down upon us-
Mark,
The point is that you have gone out on a limb and have attributed an interpretation to Jesus words that He did not convey. The reason why I chose to write you in the first place is that you understood at least partially the principle of historical interpretation. Most Christians don't even grasp that concept.
Mark Here... Round Two} This is an example of Christians not wanting to take the Bible or Jesus at his word. Not liking what Jesus plainly said, his words are "figuratized" into something that is more tasteful, more pleasing to the ears, something that tickles rather than offends or causes problems. This is something that ALL Christians do to some extent-
You ignored my argument about understanding the genre of Scripture and your hermenuetic is seriously flawed at this point. Unfortunately this has lead you down the road to unbelief and you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. You are interpreting with a 20th century mindset rather that a first century one and you assign physical meanings to concepts and phrases that would have never occurred to a first century Jew.
Mark Here... Round Two} This art of figurization has plagued Christianity from the get-
You wrote in your commentary on Matthew 24 and claimed Jesus predicted the end of the world. The only defense within Matt 24 that you offer is your thinking the phrase "stars will fall from the sky" refers to a physical event.
I think Milton Terry handles your interpretive error of Matt 24:29 better than I ever could so I will defer to him. http://www.preteristarchive.com/ChurchHistory/terry-
You also assert that Peter's use of the word elements refers to the elements of the universe. Another example of interpreting with a 20th century mindset. All of the uses of the word translated "elements" in Scripture refer to the elements of the Old Covenant. For a good study on this click here: http://preteristarchive.com/Preterism/hochner-
Mark Here... Round Two} PRETERIST ALERT
I knew from Randy's first email to me that he was a Preterist. A Preterist is someone who specializes in figurizing away anything they don't like in the Bible, and in making unfounded assumptions. Given that each Preterist is pretty much on his own, there being no set rules or logic to deciding what part of the Bible stays and what part goes out the window, or what unfounded assuption stays or goes, you end up with all sorts of wild interpretations, each group of Preterists declaring the next to be heretical, ad infinitum. It is an entire system of "smoke and mirrors" that tries to drown gullible Christians in so much theological horse shit that many just give up and accept Preterism. For my brief review of one of the best sellers on Preterism, see my article: Preterism
AT this point in my life, my main rebuttal to Preterism has to be this: I spent about three YEARS trying to get a debate with these clowns, and not ONE of their ministers wants to dare stand up in a public forum and debate Preterism with me-
Harley James, a co-
I did manage to get thru on his radio show later and after discussing another topic, blurted out something like "whatever happened to our agreement to debate..." before he cut me off via his mute button in mid-
Here is a copy of an email I sent out after all of this, to both Harley and others:
Scared To Debate?
H.L. James (aka Harley James / aka Vinnie), the current side-
Around 7:00 PM Saturday, July 8, 2000, at the Deidrich Coffee shop in Newport Beach H. L. James agreed to debate the following proposition with me in a public debate:
Resolved:
The New Testament teaches a visible, bodily 2nd coming of Jesus
Not only did he agree to debate with me, he shook hands on it with me in the presence of several witnesses. Those witnesses are:
Cary Cook (CaryCook@aol.com)
Robert Hitchcock (Roberto365@hotmail.com)
Beverley Ashley
Ever since then, he has refused to return phone call after phone call from both myself, and Robert Hitchcock. He has refused to answer email after email. And, the one time I managed to get put on the air of their radio show (July 29, 2000), Harley disconnected the phone call in the middle of me asking him why he was hiding from debating me!!!!!
Being scared to defend such a wacky position as Preterism in a public debate is understandable. But lacking simple Christian honesty to keep one’s word given in public-
Beyond The End Times…
Yes, I tried for several years to debate this issue with a Preterist minister-
*Don K. Preston issues some challenges to debate: http://www.beyondtheendtimes.com/articles/response/rsp_03.htm
and http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/preston-
Kelly Birks challenges Dr. Morey: http://www.beyondtheendtimes.com/articles/extra/kbirks.htm
Gary DeMar issues a challenge: http://www.prca.org/standard_bearer/volume75/1999jun01.html#AcceptanceChallangeDebate
The point is Mark, that Jesus never predicted the end of the world as a physical event. He was talking about a covenental shift and the transition from one age to the other. My questions from before are still valid. What age was Jesus referring to? When did it begin and when would it end? How would it differ from the age to come?
Mark here} Actually, seeing how the gospels were all penned AFTER the fact, the odds are quite good. Modern scholarship admits this, and even the internal evidence points to this-
I too can find "Modern Scholars" and some not so modern ones who admit that the gospels and even all of the New Testament was written before A.D. 70 (and consequently before the events predicted by the Lord). Some of these men are even quoted by you in your "Generation" paper. The bulk of the reliable commentators and internal evidence have Luke written before Acts (Lk 1:2, Acts 1:1) and at least two accounts written before Luke (Luke 1:1-
Mark Here... Round Two} Sorry to burst your bubble, but the VAST MAJORITY of Christian scholars date ALL the gospels to THIS SIDE of 70 AD. I notice you threw in "reliable commentators"; that's code for "those that already agree with what I believe in", isn't it? As for "agenda driven pagan's", is that what you call men who hold PhD's from CHRISTIAN universities and who call themselves CHRISTIAN??? And where, sir, is YOUR PhD from again???
Which leads me to the fact that not one New Testament writer mentions the destruction of Jerusalem as a past event. Kind of odd for JEWS don't you think? The temple is mentioned over sixty times in the gospels and yet not one reference that Oh by the way... this covenant is no longer valid because as you know the temple is no longer with us and the sacrifices have ceased.
Mark Here... Round Two} Oh REALLY??? So, not mentioning that major event, it is "fishy" to you, eh? Well then, the FACT that Paul NEVER MENTIONS A DAMN DETAIL about the life of Jesus, is THAT also fishy to you?
And even if they were penned BEFORE the fact, how many false prophecies does it take to make someone a false prophet? Just as O.J. Simpson never murdered anyone before 1990, it only took one or two murders for him to be labeled a murderer. Likewise with being a false prophet-
You are of course correct. IF Jesus was wrong on one of His prophecies then He is a false prophet. But we have already established that He was most correct with the tribulation until death, the preaching of the gospel, the destruction of Jerusalem, the wars, false messiahs, famines, and even the abomination of desolation.
Mark Here... Round Two} Just remember, it only takes ONE false prophecy to be labeled a false prophet.
So now I encourage you at this point Mark, Rethink your physical understanding of the second coming with Mr. Terry's principles of grammatical-
Mark Here... Round Two} Randy, I have studied (not just "read") over a dozen books by Preterists on Preterism. I'm not impressed. I think it is a bullshit position, a lifeboat theology for mainline Christians who can't handle the FACT that Jesus was instead a false prophet. I have tried to debate the proponents of this theory, but they all have chickened out. What more can I say???
Again I please ask that if you post this you do so in it's entirety.
Hopefully much grace will be given to you,
Randy Wood
Randy Wood 5-
Subj:
round three
Date:
5/6/03 11:55:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From:
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mark,
I've noticed something about those who are against the Preterist interpretation. They avoid exegeting a text at all costs. They use all manner of debaters tactics such as guilt by association, name calling, questioning one's education, adherence to creeds, prepositional eisegesis, and in extreme cases calling their mother's virtue into question.
Mark Here... Round Three} Now that you have more or less admitted to the crime of being a Preterist, rather than repeat what I've already written on the topic, why don't you go to my page on Preterism and see why it's such a dumb idea? If you do so, I promise to leave your mother out of the discussion :)
Preterism
I've noticed that you have employed some of these tactics. I'll do you the courtesy of ignoring them because they take away from what the Scriptures really say and what is most important.
You have stated two things that are simply wrong that you have failed to explain by exegesis. The first is that you stated that Jesus said that the stars will fall to the earth. Where exactly in Matthew 24 does it say this? Please quote the verse. You go to great lengths to give an argument from astronomers about what would happen if a star crashed to the earth. Tell me where does it say that the stars would fall to the earth? This is a classic example of your prepositional eisegesis. ( Maybe a holdover from your church going days when you learned all of that bad futurist eschatology?)
Mark Here... Round Three} Matthew 24:29 states that the "stars will fall from heaven". If they are falling FROM somewhere, then they must be falling TO somewhere as well. Seeing how JC was on the Earth when he said this, speaking to other Earthlings, it isn't a stretch to ASSUME he meant they'd be falling on EARTH, as opposed to Mars, or Jupiter, or Pluto.
Along this same line, the Apostle John wrote in Rev. 9:1
And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key of the shaft of the bottomless pit.
Yes, I am quite aware that these ancient people (the Jews also) believed that the stars in the sky were actually gods. Their misunderstanding of modern astronomy doesn't negate from what Jesus promised, and what John elaborated on: Stars falling from the sky onto the Earth.
The second statement that you have made is that Jesus claimed the end of the world. Each time that I have shown you that this is not the case you have had to come up with something different and now resort to saying that I am "figurizing" scripture. Well there is a saying among preterists and that is that you cannot "chickenize" a chicken. I pointed you to an excellent article by Milton Terry on understanding the language employed in Matt 24: 29-
Mark Here... Round Three} No, I didn't read the essay by Terry. I have read over a dozen books by Preterists (including Milton Terry), and that is quite enough. I don't need to read any more to know it's a load of shit.
I pointed out to you the last time about the word "eon" and such, no point in repeating myself. Jesus promised the end of the world, and if you can't see that from the text, one BILLION other Christians can.
So Mark please tell me if this sampling of Old Testament language looks familiar?
ISA 13:10 The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light.The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.
ISA 19:1 An oracle concerning Egypt: See, the LORD rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt.
ISA 34:4 All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree. My sword has drunk its fill in the heavens; see, it descends in judgment on Edom, the people I have totally destroyed.
EZE 32:7 When I snuff you out, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light. All the shining lights in the heavens I will darken over you; I will bring darkness over your land, declares the Sovereign LORD.
JOEL 2:10 Before them the earth shakes, the sky trembles, the sun and moon are darkened, and the stars no longer shine.
This language is the exact same language employed by Jesus in Matt 24:29-
Mark Here... Round Three} No, none of those claims have any basis in fact. Those claims are what's commonly referred to as "Bullshit" on the street. We (at least us Atheists) know these claims were a bunch of hot air meant to impress primitive people who didn't know any better. These primitive people however, unlike you, and BECAUSE they didn't know any better, DID believe that such things were possible. For examples and documentation of such, see my web page on Preterism: Preterism
Just because you, with your modern scientific education and such, know what clouds are made of, doesn't mean these ancient people did. You have made the mistake of putting YOURSELF in the place of these ancients, much like the movie makers who mistakenly have ancient men with 1990's attitudes and knowledge.
Which kind of language is it? Physical narrative or figurative apocalyptic? Do we remain consistent in our interpretation or do we pick and choose? Surely if this stuff physically happened science will have some record of it..... or at least some indication of when the stars started shining or jumped back in place again.
Mark Here... Round Three} Gee... I guess then that if Jesus really returned in 70 AD we would ALSO have some "record of it" wouldn't we??? No, none of these things took place, INCLUDING the promised Second Coming of Jesus, which is why I call him a... False Prophet.
Also contained with your faulty premise about Jesus predicting the end of the world is your pointing out about the elements. Kind of hard to "Physicalize" 2 Peter 3:10-
You stated in your commentary that Jesus proclaimed the end of the world.
* It has been shown that the term end of the world in Matt 24:3 is actually better translated the end of the age and denotes time and not the destruction of the physical earth.
* It has also been shown that the stars never fall physically to the earth thus rendering your astronomer argument useless.
* The elements that you referred to are not the physical elements as you presupposed. ( Unless you would like to refute Mr. Hockners word study and exegete 2 Peter 3 and show Scripturally why he is wrong).
*******************
Mark Here... Round Three} Yes, it would be my pleasure. 2nd Peter 3:12 promises that the very building blocks of the earth-
Elements-
Any first thing, from which the others belonging to some series or composite whole take their rise, an element, first principal
• the letters of the alphabet as the elements of speech, not however the written characters, but the spoken sounds
• the elements from which all things have come, the material causes of the universe
• the heavenly bodies, either as parts of the heavens or (as others think) because in them the elements of man, life and destiny were supposed to reside
• the elements, rudiments, primary and fundamental principles of any art, science, or discipline
The letter of the alphabet, primary body, element, "shadow," the more important denotation of the term stoicheion was "a member of a row." The earliest attested use of the term stoicheion is in Plato, Theaet. 201e, where it is obvious that Plato still feels the original connotation of "letter of the alphabet." Aristotle uses the term to refer to the basic ingredient of a composite (Meta. 1014a), or perhaps primary unit indivisible into kinds different from itself. That means that the term is basically a "formal" term that takes on its specific meaning from the "thing" of which it is primary component. Thus in the early literature stoicheia specifically means such things as letters or phonemes that make up syllables, notes on a musical scale, the components of physical bodies, the elementary principles or rules of politics, etc. It was frequently used by philosophers in the phrase, ta stoicheia tou kosmou, to refer to those primary components from which the world was made, namely, earth, water, air, and fire; but that was only one of its many specific meanings. By the time of the atomists, stoicheion compares the basic bodies of the physical world to the letters of the alphabet which have no significance of their own, but by manipulating their order (taxis) and position (thesis) one can construct them into aggregates with different meanings (Aristotle, Meta. 985b; De gen. Et corr. I, 315b). Thus stoicheion is a "formal" word which means "primary inherent component," and which takes on its specific meaning from the universe of discourse from which it is taken. In that regard it is similar to the English word "element." [Courtesy: Ian Dengler, [Basics] Stoicheion, a predecessor term to ideometry and the philosophy of taxon, 25 May 2001]
http://users.bigpond.net.au/telos/lexicon/look.html?stoicheion.html
Mark Here... Round Three} (continuing..) The last yellowed in line states that the word takes its meaning from its context. In 2nd Peter 3:12, what is under discussion is the destruction of not just the Earth, but the entire universe. That is clear from the verse AND the context, and no amount of Preterist bullshit can change that. Jesus and his minions promised that all these disasters would take place WITHIN THE FIRST CENTURY and they didn't, making Jesus a FALSE PROPHET. Note the extent of the disaster from the text itself below:
2nd Peter 3: 7-
7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist have been stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8 But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up.
11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,
12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire!
13 But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
*******************
* The language used by Jesus in Matt 24: 29-
Mark Here... Round Three} Yes, and since you've opened the Pandora's box of figuratizing any damn thing you want in the Bible, Mr. Preterist, I shall do the same.
Jesus didn't die-
No one is saved. The verses on salvation taken as literal were actually meant to be taken figuratively.
Jesus never existed. All of the gospels are metaphors, a giant parable. How ignorant of you, you common Christian, for having not known this! I am so much more superior to you for having all this "secret" knowledge.
You "physicalize" Scripture and yet you accuse me of using smoke and mirrors? So where exactly does it say in Matt 24 that Jesus predicted the end of the world? Give me the exact verse with the proper Scriptural rebuttal to why we shouldn't treat the language in 24:29-
The bottom line is Mark that Jesus is NOT a false prophet. All that He predicted came to pass as He said it would including His Parousia. The most unfortunate thing is that you have fallen short of the kingdom because you fail to recognize that the words spoken by Jesus and written by the inspired authors were not written in a vacuum. They contain meaning well understood by the original audience. I feel sorry for you because in your anger and venom you have blinded yourself to the truth. Perhaps one day you will be able to overcome the anger from your past church experience, humble yourself, and fall upon the rock of Jesus Christ.
Mark Here... Round Three} Oh yeah, I know the Preterist routine. All the promises of Jesus WERE fulfilled-
Good bye and good luck,
Randy
If you wish to actually answer any of the questions or arguments a personal reply to me is in order. I do not care if you put stuff on your site but if you have a response then have the courtesy to send it to me.
Michael Doden 5-
Subj:
Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God
Date:
5/14/03 7:15:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From:
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Hi Mark,
It's the fly that didn't buzz too much at Denny's, but had you answer some
pesky questions for a "survey." Randy has kept me up to date on your
correspondence with him and on our future meeting. As you know, we [Randy
and I] agreed that it would be pointless to discuss whether Jesus was a
false prophet if there were no Being for him to represent. Upon hearing
that you are actually still an atheist (contrary to what you said as we
walked out of Denny's when you referred to yourself more along the lines
of an agnostic who was against Christianity), it looks like our meeting is
not going to work out. So I wanted to address your question about Matthew
24:34 (cf. Mark 13:30).
Mark here} Yes, it's pointless to discuss the FACT that you are worshipping a documented (WELL documented) false prophet, since you've already got your mind made up to keep ON worshipping him come hell or high water.
As for your implication that I LIED about being an Atheist, once again as before, you need to start taking notes seeing how your memory is so poor. What I TOLD you was that I don't specialize in the Atheist controversy: Does God Exist??? I view myself as an anti-
I admit, I wasn't prepared too well for this question the first time
around, so thanks for pointing this out to me. In fact, I realized many of
my teachers could not answer the question adequately either!
Mark here} Indeed, they can't! And they won't! They can't and won't, because I happen to be correct on this issue. In my more than 10 years of INTENSE research on this topic, I have YET to see any Christian generate even a half-
But after
doing a bit of homework on the subject, I have arrived at several
possibilities (bear with me)...
1) Though not likely, it is possible lexically for "this generation" to
refer to humanity (like I said the first time it came up). Now I don't
hold to this position myself, because it doesn't have much support among
Greek scholars, but it is a possibility.
Mark here} I'll show you quickly why THAT explanation doesn't fly. IF generation = humanity, THEN what Jesus really said in Mt 24:34 was something like: There will still be some people alive when all these things I've predicted take place. Well, yeah, but so? The second coming is predicted to take place with people viewing it "live" so yes, of course there will be people "yet alive" when he returns, and thus this time indicator of Jesus tells us nothing (if that's what he meant).
2) "This generation" may be translated "this race" and refer to the Jewish
people. They have been through alot in the history of humanity (not to be
confused with lobster history), and yet they just keep coming back... It's
hard not to at least think that someone is watching out for them. This is
a lexically possible interpretation... though once again, not my view.
Mark here} Why the RACE argument falls apart is similar to my reasoning above: it doesn't tell us anything. Since Biblegod in the OT promised that there would ALWAYS be Jews around, for Jesus to say he's returning while there are still Jews around tells us NOTHING. Jesus might as well have said he'll return while his God was still alive. It could be tomorrow, it could be 50 billion years from now. Once again, this time indicator of Jesus becomes useless.
3) "This generation" might refer to the final generation, the one
witnessing all this stuff, which of course undermines any interpretation
that much of the content deals with the fall of Jerusalem. This view fails
to offer a good interpretation because it seems obvious that Jesus is
predicting the fall of Jerusalem, and persecutions under Rome... but once
again, it's possible.
Mark here} You are right. This interpretation ignores the "fall of Jerusalem" portion of the prophecy, without any good reason to, other than "saving the savior" from a false prophecy.
4) Jesus, in his humanity, got it wrong here. oops! This is, I believe,
what C.S. Lewis would have said at the time he wrote ? the citation you
showed me at Denny's. Thank God we don't look to men like him as Holy
Scripture or inerrant. He was a man, a wise and profound thinker, but a
fallible man nonetheless, and wrong on this point. Your are right Mark, if
Jesus was wrong, the best understanding would be that of the Old Testament:
Mark here} Thank you for not worshipping Lewis. The fact that Lewis IS "worshipped" by so many Fundies makes this quote by Lewis that much more effective.
5) He was a false prophet. But based on everything else we know about
Jesus, this is the least likely and should be the last resort... so let's
explore one more option...
Mark here} But once you come to realize that he WAS a false prophet, you'll start to re-
6) Are you ready for this? his genea aute refers to the contemporaries of
Jesus, those alive with him, his generation. Just as you suggested, I
agree, and so do most lexicons and Greek scholars.
Mark here} Thank you for admitting that-
However
Mark here} Damn! I KNEW there was a "but" or a "however" coming!!!
I firmly
believe you err in assuming that this necessarily entails Jesus was a
false prophet, or wrong for that matter. Grammatically, the best way to
understand the phrase panta tauta (all these things) would be to give it
the same sense as that in verse 33. The word to remember here is context.
In the preceding verse, Jesus closes the parable of the fig tree by saying
that "when you see all these things take place, you know that the end is
near." What marks the end? The return of Christ. Certainly in verse 33 at
least, "all these things" cannot reasonably be referring to verses 29-
but instead to verses 4-
soon as you see me coming, then you know that I am near."
Mark here} It would ALSO not make sense for Jesus to give his Apostles all these signs of the impending Second Coming to watch out for IF said coming was THOUSANDS of years past their deaths!! That would make Jesus a total idiot! That would make as much sense as telling them to "watch out-
Duh! Jesus was
not unintelligent, and such a saying would be silly. Rather, we have Jesus
showing the disciples two things from verse 3: the signs of the close of
the age (4-
things (the signs in 4-
final days have been ushered in;
Mark here} You are making the mistake of artificially introducing breaks in the narrative where none exist. The Preterists do a good job of tearing this "line of defense" apart (do a web search for PRETERIST and GAPS). I don't need to cover this old ground, other than to say there is NO evidence of what you are claiming: none whatsoever. It is pure speculation, contrived only to "save the savior" from being a false prophet.
In fact, several years ago I attended a lecture by Dr. Wayne House, previously of Dallas Theological Seminary. He was also a believer in this "Gap" theory. After the lecture I asked him for his EVIDENCE these gaps existed, and he told me THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE!!! It was merely a theory to explain problems in Matthew 24. I was shocked, but at least he was honest. You be too.
note, he never specifies how long this
will be (which led to different beliefs in the early church of course, but
that's another story). In fact, the following verses (namely 36)
specifically reveal that Jesus admitted he did not know the time of his
return! So why would he claim he did just a couple verses earlier!? This
view makes the best sense of the immediate, preceding, and following
context grammatically.
Mark here} What Jesus SAID is that he didn't know the DAY or the HOUR, but that doesn't rule out knowing the WEEK or YEAR of his return. It would all depend on the "tolerance" , the "plus or minus" of the prediction he was making. The fact that Jesus DID say just two verses earlier that he knew the GENERATION he would return in-
An aside: this view also agrees with everything else we know about Jesus.
I'm sure you have many more supposed false prophet sayings of Jesus, which
given enough time could be addressed, but there is something more
fundamental underlying all this: the character of Jesus. He was a miracle
worker, a compassionate man who stood for the rights of the afflicted, he
spoke with authority, and he made audacious claims that eventually got him
executed by the Romans because of the outcry of the religious leaders of
his own people. And yet with all the shame that goes along with being a
friend of tax collectors, sinners, and women... with being crucified..
being physically buried in a tomb, dead... his disciples believed he
arose, they believe they saw him, and they were willing to die for their
belief. It didn't stop there though as thousands were converted because of
the power of the Holy Spirit. All these things testify to the validity of
Jesus' claim. He is certainly not a false prophet: he is Jesus the Christ,
the Son of God, and through him alone comes Truth.
Mark here} Yes yes, and O.J. Simpson was the most beloved sports figure in history. He was a nice guy, someone anybody in the country would be happy and proud to have over for dinner. As one sign said in Hermosa Beach after O.J. was arrested: "O.J. didn't do it!!! (And if he did, the bitch deserved it)" You are just like this defender of O.J., but the fact remains: regardless of how much of a "nice guy" you may think O.J. was, HE IS STILL A MURDERER, and Jesus (regardless of how much of a "nice guy" he was) is STILL A FALSE PROPHET. Sorry, but MURDER and FALSE PROPHECY over-
Thanks for bearing with my long email. If you have any other questions,
please write me. I know you have spent a lot of time on this, and that's
why I gave you such a long response, and not just a quip answer. God is
real Mark, and nothing you believe to the contrary will change the fact.
You will know the truth someday. Thank you for encouraging my faith by
challenging me to doubt and find answers to those doubts. I know you hate
Christianity, but you also said life is only about what we find enjoyable,
and I find nothing more enjoyable in life than knowing Jesus, and knowing
him for all eternity future.
Mark here} And drug addicts find "nothing more enjoyable in life" than their drugs. Religion is a drug to ease the pain of living in reality-
Christ's in life and beyond,
and prayerfully yours now,
Mike
Michael Fenemore 5-
-
From: JCnot4me@aol.com [mailto:JCnot4me@aol.com]
Sent: 2003 May 18 10:01 PM
To:
Cc: robertus365@hotmail.com
Subject: [ok] Re: Jesus & His "Predictions"
In a message dated 5/16/03 11:44:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time, michael.fenemore@telus.net writes:
Hi Mark,
I've looked over your site a little.
One thing about Jesus I have trouble explaining away is how in approximately
A.D. 30 he could predict the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple to
occur within one generation (Matthew 24:34) and then, even after being
crucified, was able to pull it off by A.D. 70 (40 years). Do you have an
explanation for this?
Sincerely,
Michael
Hey Michael;
Sure do-
You see, the gospels were not even written until AFTER 70 AD. In fact, the earliest tiny fragment of any gospel in existence is dated to about 140 AD, more than one HUNDRED years after the death of Jesus, and 70 years after AD 70.
Writing predictions AFTER the thing "predicted" has already happened is not difficult.
Now that I've answered your question, how about you answer one of mine:
Jesus also predicted his Second Coming and Judgment Day would take place within one generation of 33 AD. Neither happened, making Jesus a false prophet. Why are you still worshipping a man who made false prophecies???
Yours in Life,
Mark
Subj:
RE: Jesus & His "Predictions"
Date:
5/20/03 1:26:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From:
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your reply.
It's been my experience that what people finally believe is not always based on what someone might prove or disprove, but sometimes just based on what they are willing to buy into.
Since the New Testament writings were already spreading throughout the Roman Empire in the first century, the argument that someone reworked them around A.D. 140 and managed to stamp out all the copies of the originals that proliferated over a span of 100 years is just not something I can believe.
Mark Smith here} I don't know why you think that was what I wrote. What I wrote was the following:
You see, the gospels were not even written until AFTER 70 AD. In fact, the earliest tiny fragment of any gospel in existence is dated to about 140 AD, more than one HUNDRED years after the death of Jesus, and 70 years after AD 70
I didn't say anybody reworked them in 140 AD. I said the earliest manuscript (actually a fragment the size of a book of matches) dates from around 140 AD. I also didn't say anything about anyone stamping out copies. You need to read more carefully. Slow down-
Also, I can't believe that any of the gospels was written after A.D. 70. It's very suspicious to me that none of them mentions the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. If they were written afterward, one would expect to find them covering that event profusely since it would be the very proof of so many predictions. Instead, there is silence on the issue.
Mark Smith here} If they had mentioned the fall of Jerusalem as a past occurance, they would have proven conclusively that they were indeed written after the fact, making their prophecies "predicting" such facts obviously bogus. However, if they were written in such a way as to give the APPEARANCE of having been written decades BEFORE the "predictions" were fulfilled, the "predictions" would carry more credibility. If you are going to write what's called an Historical Novel, then yes, you have to "pretend" that you're writing it back in the time period being described. Why this point escapes you, escapes me.
Secondly, it doesn't really matter what YOU think when they were written. The VAST majority of Christian scholars, who can probably quote the Greek New Testament backwards from memory, after years of research, have dated ALL of the gospels as having been written after 70 AD.
In John 5:2, John writes as though Jerusalem was still standing:
JN 5:2 Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades.
The same thing in Revelation 11:1:
REV 11:1 I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, "Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there.
Mark Smith here} Gee, you mean they read like an HISTORICAL NOVEL, eh? Or do you mean to say that since the Book of Mormon (another religious book) purports to date from the 600's that therefore, it MUST be from that era? Gee, then I guess if the New Testament pretends to be written at a certain time, golly gee, it must be so-
I believe Revelation was written in the mid 60s, not the mid 90s.
Mark Smith here} Like I said then, you are in the minority in your wild guess of a date.
RE: Jesus also predicted his Second Coming and Judgment Day would take place within one generation of 33 AD. Neither happened, making Jesus a false prophet.
I believe the second coming and judgment did occur in the period around A.D. 70. I believe it was experienced in two ways:
1. Non-
2. Believers witnessed the destruction of the old and the inauguration of the new.
Jesus told his opponents that they should not expect to see the arrival of the Kingdom as some literal earthly kingdom they were hoping for:
LK 17:20 Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed;
LK 17:21 nor will they say, `Look, here it is!' or, `There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."
Mark Smith here} Well my oh my, I smell the likes of a... Preterist! For details on this bullshit, read my essays on it. In short, you guys claim that ALL got fulfilled... invisibly!!! Yes, Jesus came back, but he was INVISIBLE! Yes, and I have some invisible real estate I can sell you.. ha ha ha. Preterists are pathetic. Why not just get one of your dumbass Preterist big wigs to debate me in public, instead of running and hiding every time I try to get a debate going, so I can bury this stupid theory once and for all??? You want to learn more about this bullshit? Read what I've already written:
Preterism
He said the arrival would take place like a thief in the night. Therefore, one might expect it arrived at night.
In Revelation 3:3, Jesus indicated some would be asleep and not even know the time of the arrival.
Mark Smith here} Yeah, and Rev 1:7 says every eye will see him when he returns. Sounds like a contradiction to me, unless people sleep with their eyes open. Also, as for Jesus arriving at night: WE live on a ROUND world where one half is night, the other day. Jesus lived on a FLAT world, where it was ALL either day or night, as your "thief in the night" statement indicates. I guess your Jesus just didn't know any better, eh?
RE: Why are you still worshipping a man who made false prophecies???
As I said, I don't believe they were false prophecies.
The one I worship changed me inside profoundly when I received the Holy Spirit. Of course, that's something only I can know and you would have to take my word for it, which, I expect, you're not about to do. I've known lots of other Christians who have described the same experience.
Mark Smith here} You're right. I would no more take your word for your religious experience than you would take the word of a Mormon about his. Neither did the National Academy of Science take the word of that guy a few years back who claimed to have developed cold fusion-
Also, a few times in my life I have been spared tremendous calamity because of extremely strange circumstances, the most recent being the prevention of our house burning down (on Christmas day at that). This is, again, a matter of what a person is willing to buy into. I'm simply not able to buy the notion that these occurrences were just blind chance. I just can't believe it.
I know these are personal experiences and I can't expect to persuade anyone with them or prove anything.
However, Mark, it has been a pleasure at least to correspond with someone who actually knows something about the Bible and reads it honestly. I find the biblical illiteracy among Christians rather shameful I have to admit.
Mark Smith here} I agree, and I get tired at times-
Mark, what's your opinion on what happens to us when we die?
Sincerely,
Michael
Michael Fenemore 5-
Subj:
Resend: Jesus & His "Predictions"
Date:
5/31/03 10:34:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
-
From: Michael Fenemore [mailto:michael_fenemore@telus.net]
Sent: 2003 May 24 7:30 PM
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Subject: Re: Jesus & His "Predictions"
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your answers.
I find just as many holes in your answers as you find in mine.
First of all, it's another case of "I just can't believe that." What I mean is, it is beyond me to believe that the New Testament writers supposedly writing around A.D. 140 were writing elaborate "historical novels" to support a religion they knew to be a failure and then managed to turn it into a big success.
Mark Smith here} It really doesn't matter what your feelings are-
You're making just as much of an assumption as anyone on the Christian side of the fence by suggesting none was written before 140 just because the first fragment available is dated to that time.
Mark Smith here} Michael-
I understood your remarks on the dating of the gospels as "reworked" because it really didn't sink in that anyone would suggest we believe such speculation.
You wrote:
If they had mentioned the fall of Jerusalem as a past
You wrote:
If they had mentioned the fall of Jerusalem as a past occurrence, they would have proven conclusively that they were indeed written after the fact, making their prophecies "predicting" such facts obviously bogus. However, if they were written in such a way as to give the APPEARANCE of having been written decades BEFORE the "predictions" were fulfilled, the "predictions" would carry more credibility. If you are going to write what's called an Historical Novel, then yes, you have to "pretend" that you're writing it back in the time period being described. Why this point escapes you, escapes me.
Mark, if they had the luxury of writing after the fact (A.D. 140) and were trying to lend credibility to the predictions, why would they include the numerous references to them all coming to fulfillment before the end of the generation in which Jesus lived?
Mark Smith here} I don't know WHY they did what they did-
I do know that even Christians themselves were starting to question the no-
Why would they include information, that would to some, destroy credibility? If written in 140,
Mark Smith here} I NEVER SAID IT WAS WRITTEN IN 140 AD!!!!!
Below is EXACTLY what I wrote in my last response to you:
Mark Smith here} I don't know why you think that was what I wrote. What I wrote was the following:
You see, the gospels were not even written until AFTER 70 AD. In fact, the earliest tiny fragment of any gospel in existence is dated to about 140 AD, more than one HUNDRED years after the death of Jesus, and 70 years after AD 70
I didn't say anybody reworked them in 140 AD. I said the earliest manuscript (actually a fragment the size of a book of matches) dates from around 140 AD. I also didn't say anything about anyone stamping out copies. You need to read more carefully. Slow down-
If you'd like to learn more about the early manuscripts, go to the web site below. It has a lot of good links.
http://www.muslim-
PLEASE stop acting so damn STUPID on this simplest of issues. And if it isn't an act, I apologize. But damn! You religionists are so brainless at times!!!
we would expect these many references to have been deleted for sure, but they weren't. To me, this supports early dating, not late. "Why this point escapes you, escapes me."
Mark Smith here} Maybe the reason they were left in is because they were so blinded in their religious fanaticism that they couldn't SEE the false prophecies as being false prophecies, just as you Fundies nowadays blind yourself to the same thing. Blindness and Fundyism go hand in hand, then AND now.
The dating of the New Testament can be argued back and forth. You say:
The VAST majority of Christian scholars, who can probably quote the Greek New Testament backwards from memory, after years of research, have dated ALL of the gospels as having been written after 70 AD...
I have lots of books questioning the late dating of Scripture including some that date ALL of it to before A.D. 70.
I have no problem with the gathering of the elect taking place at night because a round earth would not affect the darkness over the event. At that moment in approximately A.D. 70 there would have been no eligible Christians on the other side of the planet anyway. You knew that, right? ;)
Mark Smith here} If that's the case, then your Bible lied-
I believe the event was visible to all involved, the resurrected and "caught up" elect and the resurrected wicked. That would have amounted to millions. I have no problem with it not being visible in the physical realm because it was predicted that some would miss it and not know when it occurred, including the Jews (Luke 17:20-
Mark Smith here} Then I guess once again the Bible lies, for Rev 1:7 clearly says that EVERY eye will see his return. It appears you are more ignorant of your own damn Bible than me (a common occurrence). Christians are oft times ignorant of their own religion.
Mark, I find this all very interesting, however, I'm in poor health and can't carry this on very long. I will continue to look over your website.
Here's the one question that is important to me, but it's the one you didn't answer:
What's your opinion on what happens to us when we die?
Mark Smith here} As far as the evidence goes, nothing happens to us "supernaturally". What happen to us in REALITY is we usually get boxed and tossed in a hole and buried so our odor of decay doesn't make others puke. This is true for Atheists and Christians alike. However, if you'd rather go on believing in your fantasy, that's your right. Knock yourself out.
Sincerely,
Michael Fenemore
Jeff Durbin 6-
>Wanted to drop you a line. My name is Jeff and I am the President of One Christian Ministries. I was on the web and noticed your article about Jesus Christ being a false prophet. If you are willing I would be interested in further discussing this with you. Unfortunately, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Jesus meant about His coming in judgement on first century Israel for rejecting Him. The fact is, Jesus did return in that generation upon Israel like He said He would. This is demonstrated by the destruction of Jerusalem and the removal of the Old Testament economy (temple, rituals, Priests, etc.). The challenge I perceive for you is this. You seem to have a misunderstanding of Biblical prophetic language. I only bring this to your attention because you seem very zealous about your attacks on Jesus Christ, and yet quite ignorant of the context of scripture as well as biblical language and symbolism. This is something I would love to further discuss with you. If anything, you will at least begin to understand what Jesus actually said.
>Jeff
Mark Smith responds}
Hey Jeff;
Thanks for writing.
As you are a Preterist, please go read my articles I've already written on your doctrine. They are in the same section as my JC False Prophet ones.
Preterism holds no more water than futurism-
-
Jeff Durbin 6-
Subj:
Re: your JC-
Date:
6/12/03 9:03:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From:
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
From Mark's SET FREE website}:
But the problem remains, as they can not cite even one Biblical reference to back up their goof-
Hey Mark,
Just wanted to let you know that I received your e-
An oracle concerning Egypt. Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud and comes to Egypt; and the idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence, and heart of the Egyptians will melt within them. Isaiah 19:1
Now, this is "judgement talk" against Egypt, Mark. Did this mean that God (who is Spirit) literally came and was "riding" on a physical cloud to judge Egypt. Did "all" of the Egyptians hearts literally "melt" inside of them. No. But, was Egypt judged. Yes. Were they "freaked-
Mark Smith here} Jeff, I've already dealt with clouds in my Preterist web page ( Preterism ) Why are you making me repeat myself?
First of all, you are on the receiving end of centuries of science. Hundreds of years before you were born, hot air balloons went up and touched the clouds. Airplanes (The Wright brothers flew in 1903) have gone up to clouds, on top of clouds, and thru clouds. If you've ever flown across this country, you yourself have probably passed right thru the middle of hundreds of clouds. Clouds have been produced artificially within the laboratory, and science knows exactly what makes up a cloud.
How easy it is for you, with your 21st century glasses on, to think that ancient people knew as much as you do about clouds. How easy is it for you-
I showed several examples of where the ancients DID, yes DID, think that riding on clouds was a perfectly natural way for their gods to get around. For Christ's sake, I even pointed out that the very name "Baal" (Baal was a major god back then), the name "Baal" MEANS "Cloud Rider". If THAT is not a hint, what the hell is??? I showed several example from the Jewish book of Enoch where Jehovah, and even his prophets, are riding all over the place on CLOUDS.
Did you show me even ONE, just one little tiny fragment of evidence, that shows ANY ancients knew that riding on clouds was physically impossible? No, you didn't. Like most Christians, you just IGNORED all the documented evidence I gave you, and presented hot air as your only "documentation."
Like I said, why are you making me repeat myself???
Another thing should be noted. You don't seem to be familiar with Daniel 7 either. Why do you think Caiphas had Jesus struck when Jesus told him that he would "see" Him at the right hand of power, coming on the clouds of heaven. It is because a jew, who knows their bible and understands biblical imagery, immediately remembers the Daniel 7 passage in reference to God's kingdom...
I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.
You see Mark, the high priest had him struck because he knew what Jesus was saying. This is something that happened first century. The Old Testament Kingdom was destroyed and the only kingdom (that God was concerned with) was Christ's kingdom, namely the church.
Mark Smith here} What the hell does all THAT have to do with them thinking riding on clouds was physically possible??? Must you Christians ALWAYS get lost in the mumbo-
Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you."
Christ, always referred to His kingdom as a spiritual one. You must interpret Christ in His own context and the Bible in it's own context. Looking forward to speaking again.
Jeff
Mark Smith here} But you contradict yourself now, Mr. Preterist, for your position DOES say that the kingdom came with signs. Preterists even quote Josephus where he claims that there were all SORTS of visible SIGNS in the sky-
Dennis Campbell 6-
RE: My Commentary on Matthew 24
Subj:
Re: Craig
Date:
6/22/03 9:34:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mark, when I first read your reply I simply deleted it because I have been down this road before and have never been convinced of the case that you espouse. Then I became curious and went back to your writings to see what you actually are saying.
At the risk of stimulating an immediate scornful response, I will say that I believe you have failed to properly parse this discourse by Jesus.
Mark Smith here} Well then, I'm in good company, for the one HUNDRED and fifty Christian scholars that I quote from to establish my point seem to agree with my "parsing" and not yours.
We first must understand that Jesus is talking to all who will believe in him, including future believers and not just those around him at that moment. I believe that is clear in 24:15 when he says "let the reader understand." His disciples were not reading, they were listening. Clearly, the reader is someone in the future.
Mark Smith here} Sorry, but the opening verses of Matthew 24 make it crystal clear exactly WHO Jesus was talking to, as I pointed out in my essay verse by verse, he was talking to his living Apostles. Your saying "Mark is wrong..." doesn't refute a close verse by verse analysis. And as for the "let the reader understand" obviously that was for the benefit of whoever would read Matthew's story, and NOT for who Jesus was talking to face to face at the moment. As I pointed out, follow the pronouns throughout the chapter-
Then he says that the gospel will be preached to the entire world and the end will come. This has not happened even today.
Mark Smith here} Then your Bible is a liar. As I already pointed out in my commentary on verse 14, the New Testament in TWO LOCATIONS claims that preaching to the entire world to be a feat already (past tense) accomplished. Maybe if you'd actually READ what I wrote, I wouldn't have to be pointing out the obvious to you here.
In 24:24 I believe that "this generation" refers to those who will witness the physical signs of the end as described earlier. It does not refer to those who were listening to Jesus preach. Jesus was talking about a future event that did not necessarily include them.
Mark Smith here} And... your reasons for this??? Or are you Biblegod-
Another passage that some use to say that Jesus falsely predicted his second coming was his statement in Matthew 16:28: "...some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." That was fulfilled in 17:2 on the Mount of Transfiguration when several disciples witnessed him in his glory.
Mark Smith here} Well, that's really not covered in my Mt 24 section, so I don't know why you're dragging it in, and once again you're just making empty claims without one shred of reason or evidence. Fine, that's how you want to play it: Jesus was a talking donkey with six legs. Try that unfounded claim on for size. As for Matthew 16: 27, 28, the main predicted event did NOT take place in the subsequent chapter, #17. Jesus predicted Judgment Day: did THAT happen on the Mount of Transfiguration? No, I don't think so either. So why don't you go back and do your damn homework before you mouth off on things you know nothing about???
It is very difficult to make a case against the historicity of Jesus. When I consider his life, his deeds and his resurrection, I must come to the conclusion that he was who he said he was: God incarnate.
Mark Smith here} And what Fundy book or tract are you ripping THIS quote from? You, sir, sound alot like an intellectual THIEF. If you are going to use other people's material, at least have the common courtesy of citing the source, lest people think you a plagiarist.
As to your statement that the biblical story of creation is a fairy tale, it is completely in line with our scientific understanding of the universe and how it must have begun. In fact, Darwinism is a descent into true irrationalism and it, not the creation story, is much more in line with your cosmic turtle analogy. The notion that nothing plus chance plus time equals something is ludicrous. A single human cell is more complicated than anything else in the universe and contains as much data as thirty volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica. When probability theorists calculate the odds against the chance appearance of the cosmos, they arrive at numbers that are larger than all of the atoms in the known universe. Mathmatically, it could not have happened.
Mark Smith here} What I had ASKED you in my email to you, which you totally IGNORED (what else in new???) is why is it that Creationists NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER AND NEVER defend Genesis in their debates against Evolutionists??? Instead, they do nothing but nit-
RESOLVED: THE BOOK OF GENESIS IS AN ACCURATE RECORD OF HOW THE UNIVERSE CAME TO BE.
I will tell you why (since you'll ignore whatever I write anyway). They don't because they can't. The Book of Genesis is a contradictory load of primitive CRAP. You know that, I know that, and the American people know that. And if YOU want to debate ME on that in public, let's have at it. I used to BE a damn Creationist and I know all your stupid arguements. Why don't you go check out just exactly WHAT the Bible teaches for cosmology-
The Universe According To The Bible
Regarding the question of your (I believe) daughter as to who created God, it is not relevant. Whether one believes in a designed universe or a mechanistic universe, he must believe in pre-
Mark Smith here} Since WHEN do people who believe in talking snakes and talking donkeys worry about what is "far more rational"??? You are no more rational than a booga booga witch doctor, so please don't put on airs of rationality. You wouldn't know rationality if it hit you upside the face. Go find a god to grovel to-
Michael Behe, in his book Darwin's Black Box, has clearly enunciated the principle of irreducible complexity (which powerfully refutes Darwinism) in which he shows that even the simplest of organisms could not function if a single element were missing, just as a mouse trap would not function if you removed any of its elements.
Mark Smith here} And your entire religion could not function unless a whole lot of brain cells were missing in you Christians-
Mark, our world and universe cry out for intelligent design, and even Darwinists admit that the theory proves nothing and is full of more holes than cheap Swiss Cheese. They simply keep a united front in public because to admit the obvious would force them to confront that which they are unable to do: A creator God. Thus Darwinism is not a matter of science but of religion.
A prominent Darwinist, whose name I cannot remember, said that Darwinism is an indefensible theory, but here we are, so it must be true. Brilliant.
Mark Smith here} At least Evolutionists are TRYING to discover what REALLY happened, and aren't sitting on their asses in a comfortable living room chair nit-
Regards,
Dennis Campbell
Brandi 9-
Subj:
about your website
Date:
9/16/03 7:05:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
Jcnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
to the web master,
I recently came across your web site about Jesus being a fraud and a liar. I'm sure that you have received numerous e-
Mark Smith here} Well now, I guess I just can't win no matter what I do!!! My essay on "Matthew 24:34: What The Scholars Say" cites around 150 or more sources, all fully referenced so that anyone that wants to, can double check my scholarship. Alot of time and trouble went into documenting all that-
It seems to me that your scripture references are grossly taken of context and misunderstood. I will proceed to give a few examples, though I could do all of them easily.
Eample 1: Matthew 16:28-
Proper exegesis of this passage and the parallel passages in the other gospels show the meaning behind this scripture. "Kingdom" in this verse, and as the paralell passages (confimed by Greek lexicon and concordance) means this: greek word basileiva,
royal power, kingship, dominion, rule , not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom, of the royal power of Jesus as the triumphant Messiah, of the royal power and dignity conferred on Christians in the Messiah's kingdom, used in the N.T. to refer to the reign of the Messiah
In proper context and exegesis, one can see that this "kingdom" of the Son of man was refearing to after the acsenion of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit coming with power to those in the kingdom of God. Jesus ascended to the right hand of God the Father and confirmed his authority as Messiah. The term "power" is again confirmed in Mark 8:34. Obviously most of the disciples and others were alive at this time. Also, this explains Matthew 26:64.
Mark Smith here} HUH???? How does this incoherent "explanation" explain anything??? How does this explain away the FACT that in Matthew 16: 27 and 28 (note how she "innocently left out verse 27, and SHE thinks that I take things out of context!!!) Jesus promises that JUDGMENT DAY will happen within the lifetime of his apostles??? Kingdom this, kingdom that; whatever the nit-
Example 2: Romans 13:11 "Besides this, you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from your sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now then when we first believed;..."
I think this verse is obviously talking about salvation, which ultimatley comes when a person dies...that is when the person receives redemption from hell-
Mark Smith here} Contrary to Brandi's creative theology, Paul was NOT speaking here about "being saved" from sins, but about being saved from the upcoming world destruction due at the Second Coming. IF Brandi's theory were correct, these Roman Christians weren't even Christians yet-
Paul is telling the Romans to be ready for we never know when we are going to die and face eternity in one place or the other. I also believe that this passage is a timeless one that says be ready for Christs return for his people could happen when least expected. The writings of the Bible were not only for that time, but for all eternity. Matthew 24:35
i will give a proper exegesis of each scripture you gave if thats what u want. I just hope this helps to clarify somethings. As with any book, we all have a responsibility to properly interpret what we are reading and to give accurate information, regardless of what we want the words to say, and regardless of what book it is. Thank you for listening and I await your reply.
Brandi
Brandi 9-
Subj:
Re: about your website
Date:
9/21/03 3:03:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time
To:
JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mark Smith,
I think you are over stepping your bounds by publishing my words with out my permission.
Mark Smith here} Brandi, maybe you should have noticed the little statement written on my homepage before you emailed me. It says:
NOTICE: Any and all emails sent to SET FREE become the property of SET FREE to be used or displayed upon the web site of SET FREE however SET FREE decides.
I noticed that in your latest email you totally ignored my comment about documenting my writings-
Besides that, I would like to know how you can assume I just believe every word my pastor says? You also can't assume that my pastor doesn't give references.
Mark Smith here} Having spent 20 years sitting in pews, I think I'm not going out on a limb by assuming your pastor doesn't give references for MOST of what he blathers about on Sunday morning.
Not all Christians are brainless folk who walk around like puppets and believe all that they hear. I am curious as to why you resorted to a personal attack when I was just responding to your web site. I don't know you personally nor do you know me. I have no reason to attack you personally, I don't see why you should with me.
Mark Smith here} How is saying you trust Pastors a "personal attack"??? Huh???
Also, in reference to the priests who raped the children comment: Thats going way to far in your assumptions. My pastor is not a Catholic. You can no more put him in the same category with those priests, then you can put yourself in that category. And I have never listened to any Catholic priests. I am not Catholic! I never claimed to be. Do you listen to all athiests and agree with everything they say? Well, maybe you do..I can't know for sure...but I would think that would be crazy. I'm sure you don't just trust what someone is saying becuase they are athiests..but then again maybe you do. As it is, my congregation is encouraged to study the Bible intellectually and not believe what ever we are told. You may have expereinced another kind, but you can not lump them all together.
It seems that you miss the point of Christianity. Its not about a Christian being perfect because they become a Christian per say (Christians won't be made perfect until we die). The point is that no one can fullfil the law perfectly, not even a priest or a Chrstian can. So all of man kind needs someone who can be the ultimate sacrifice, once and for all, for their not being able to full fill the law. If one doesnt accept Jesus' sacrifice to cover up their sins, then that person must follow every law perfectly and never sin in order to spend an enternity with God and not be judged for thier sins. But no one can do every law perfectly all the time on their own. Thats why we all need Jesus. If one does not accept the sacrifice of Jesus, then that person will be punished for thier sin and condemned to hell becuase God is Just and must judge sin. Thankfully God is gracious and gives a way to heaven so no one has to be punished for thier sins if they believe.
Mark Smith here} Thanks for the commercial for Jesus, but WHAT does all that religious rambling have to do with Jesus being a false prophet, when he falsely predicted he'd return within the lifetime of people alive in 33 AD??? You say "we all need Jesus" but don't explain why ANY body would need such a false prophet.
The Bible never says, "Now you're perfect, go out and rub it in peoples faces." In fact, if a person really believes God's Word, then that person should be very humbled in knowing that God does not have to give that person a pardon for thier sins or any kind of mercy and grace; yet he chooses to anyway. The Bible is not about condemnation, but about grace and mercy to all who will believe. Christians aren't trying to push thier beliefs down someones throat, they are just trying to share what they know out how to avoid hell and receive true freedom from sin and death. If you had a "cure" for eternal death and punishment, wouldn't you want to share it with others? Atleast I would think any one would. Obviously there is much more to that, but that would take awhile to go in to. Finally, you can choose to disagree with what I have said, thats your choice. I am only called to share what I know..the rest is up to you.
Thank you,
Brandi
oh yeah, a reply to one of your comments: Just for your information, I use Strongs(KJV) concordanance with The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon unless otherwise stated
Example 2: Romans 13:11 "Besides this, you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from your sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now then when we first believed;..."
I think this verse is obviously talking about salvation, which ultimatley comes when a person dies...that is when the person receives redemption from hell-
Mark Smith here} Contrary to Brandi's creative theology, Paul was NOT speaking here about "being saved" from sins, but about being saved from the upcoming world destruction due at the Second Coming. IF Brandi's theory were correct, these Roman Christians weren't even Christians yet-
Its not creative theology. Paul is talking about being saved from our sins and our present struggle against sin. That salvation ultimatly comes when a person dies, goes to be present with the Lord, then is made perfect and like Christ. If we look at the Greek word for salvation (swthriva) see that this word is also found in many other places in the Bible. Here are a few from the New testament (48 in all)..you can look these up.
Luke 1:77, Acts 4:12, Romans, 1:16, Romans 10:10, Romans 11:11, several places in 1 Peter 1 and the list goes on. All of these verses are speaking of salvation from sin. Paul even goes on a few verses later in Romans 13 to talk about some of the sins.
another confirming scripture: Matthew 24:13:
"becuase of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, But, he who stands firm to the end will be saved."
End in this verse means
end: termination, the limit at which a thing ceases to be (always of the end of some act or state, but not of the end of a period of time
saved: to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction, one (from injury or peril)
a.
1. to save a suffering one (from perishing)
2. to preserve one who is in danger of destruction, to save or rescue
Mark Smith here} Yes, and what was to cease to be was the world as they knew it, when Jesus was supposed to return. But he didn't. He lied. What about that???
Tom Aldridge 4-
Subj: (no subject)
Date: 4/5/2004 1:30:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: TomAldridge
To: JCnot4me
Where does Jesus say obviously that these things will happen within a certain date, (or within this generation??) you have made some big mistakes, the references you have noted show no evidence that these prophecies would come in their lifetime. You take words out of context and you take them to literally. Sentances can have many meanings hidden within them, the ones we come up with may not be the whole truth. I have read your website and have come to the conclusion that what you say has no "undeniable" evidence, and therefore think what you are saying is complete bollocks.
Mark Smith here} Tom writes as if he didn't read a damn thing I wrote. He makes accusations without one trace of evidence or example. Tom is one more example of Christian invincible ignorance. He is his own refutation.
Jenn 4-
Subj: (no subject)
Date: 4/6/2004 2:26:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From:
To: JCnot4me
Jesus was a false prophet? so, you believe in prophets then, do you know what a prophet it is? "a person called by God to speak on God's behalf" why are you talking about false prophets, you don't even believe in God so why do you care about true prophets or false prophets. you never were a true christian and know nothing about our Faith. you contridict yourself many times. i will pray for you and won't visit your site again. Luke 21.15-
have a nice day,
jenn
Mark Smith here} So... if Jesus "spoke on God's behalf" and Jesus clearly lied, therefore your God must be a liar too??? How does that get God Jr. off the hook? All you've done is condemn both!
As for not being a "true Christian" what would YOU know about that? You yourself are a FALSE Christian-
PS: You might want to see my essay on this: He Wasn't a REAL Christian
PPS: You want everyone to see how fake a Christian you really are? Here goes: in the name of Matthew 5:42, I ask you to send me one hundred dollars.
When someone asks you for something, give it to him.
(Matthew 5:42)
We'll see how fake YOUR Christianity is when you send me excuses instead of the money that Jesus himself commands you to give me, you FAKE Christian!!!
omegalast2000@yahoo.com 3-
Subj: False Prophet
Date: 3/19/2004 3:22:40 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: alpha omega <To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Where did Jesus in those verses that you had wrote, did He ever say that He will come in their generation.
On the Mount of Olives He was speaking prophetically of the future not to those who were living at the time.
It is written: Matthew 16:28 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.
This is referring to the next verses in the chapter 17 regarding the transfiguration on the mount. When Jesus appeared in a glorius body to James and John.
Before you blaspheme against the Lord you should read carefully and discern by the spirit and not your own logic.
Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is never forgiven, but they who do is condemned forever.
God Bless!
Mark Smith here} WHERE in "those verses" that I wrote did Jesus say he was coming in their generation? Are you fucking BLIND, you moron??? How about you go back and this time rather than pretend you read the essays, actually READ them. Jeeesh-
"not to those who were living at the time". Oh really? As I pointed out and you ignored, I showed in my verse by verse analysis of Mt 24 time and again Jesus is promising directly, eye to eye, his living apostles back then that THEY would see the second coming. Again, try reading the essays BEFORE mouthing off, you jackass.
Mt 16:28: Need I AGAIN remind you that your "point" is already more than answered IN MY ESSAYS. All you have to do is R-
John Spencer 8-
From: <
To: <JCnot4me@aol.com>
Subject: Jesus kept His promise
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004
You have an interesting site. Eschatology is a difficult area to grasp, especially if one doesn't understand the Old Testament.
Unfortunately you make the same mistake the "fundies" make. You take apocalyptic/figurative language and try to make it literal.
? The stars would fall to earth
Isaiah 13
1 The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.
17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.
9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
This event occured in 539BC. Yet is described in this manner. Clearly not in a literal sense. World does not always mean Cosmos nor does earth. Context. see Luke 2:1
Mark Smith here} Translated, what you're admitting to is that your Biblegod screwed up in what he REALLY predicted, and now you holy ass kissers have to rush in with your spin control and try to salvage his reputation. Trust me, if Rev. Sun Yun Moon or any other "prophet" had made such a prediction that didn't turn out as advertised, you'd have him by the balls, but since it's YOUR prophet that messed up, "well, clearly that was all meant to be figurative, yeah, that's the ticket!"
The OT is full of this type of language concerning judgement. Notice how the judgement of Egypt is described in Ez. 32:7-
Jesus in the Olivet Discourse uses the same language as the Prophets did. Not suprising is it? How would the jews of the 1st century intepret the words of Jesus? With a Jewish OT mind or a 21st century American/western mind?
Mark Smith here} Good question, and luckily it's already been answered, for within the New Testament itself time and again we see how an actual front-
Of course, you being a good Preterist, you'll just wave your magic wand over any text you can't answer and presto-
? The Great Tribulation & Rapture
The tribulation occured at the fall of Jerusalem in AD70. Read Josephus for an eyewitness account.
The rapture is a new doctrine dreamed up by JN Darby. CI Scofield helped spread it through his notes in his Scofield Bible. Read the theologians pre-
Mark Smith here} I see a CLAIM, but I see no evidence FOR the claim. Uhhhh, I have read Josephus, and it doesn't say shit about the tribulation that Jesus talks about. Maybe you should provide EVIDENCE when you make a CLAIM, or are you like all the other Preterists out there, who mouth off but seldom back it up???
One thing you'll notice in my essay on Preterism: I backed up every damn point I had with evidence all fully documented for any and all to look up. You Preterists don't have evidence, so what you do is make a claim (like the one about clouds) and then hope no one checks it out further. Too bad! I did, and you guys LIED.
? Judgment Day for all mankind
Not sure where you get the "all mankind" reference, but the judgement did occur at Christ's parousia in 70AD.
Mark Smith here} I again see a CLAIM, and again, no evidence FOR the claim.
? The Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
Christ did return in 70AD. Again your thinking physical instead of spiritually. Let the OT guide your interpretation as it did the Jews in the 1st century.
Mark Smith here} I again see a CLAIM, and again, no evidence FOR the claim. Any idiot can spout off claims about this and that. Are you just any idiot, or are you someone special???
Isaiah 19
1 The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.
Did the Lord physically come? No.
Mark Smith here} AGAIN I see a CLAIM, and again, no evidence FOR the claim. I think I use your same tactic. I claim to be God. I command you to slit your throat.
Ps. 18:9 He parted the heavens and came down;
dark clouds were under his feet.
Again is this literal? No. The 1st century Jews understood His meaning. They read the OT daily and understood the figurative/metaphoric language used.
Mark Smith here} AGAIN I see a CLAIM, and again, no evidence FOR the claim. And THIS has turned into a routine for you. I'm not going to waste any more time going thru you claims, which consist of nothing more than hot air. Any fool could sit down and type any claims he wanted to. That doesn't mean I have to waste my time responding to them. IF and WHEN you'd like to actually BACK UP your claims with PROOF and EVIDENCE, I shall be happy to respond. As for now, I terminate wasting any more time on your stupid email.
During his trial in front of Caiaphas Jesus the liar falsely prophesied that his Second Coming would happen within the lifetime of Caiaphas, i.e. while Caiaphas the high priest was still alive
Before the Sanhedrin
57Those who had arrested Jesus took him to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of the law and the elders had assembled. 58But Peter followed him at a distance, right up to the courtyard of the high priest. He entered and sat down with the guards to see the outcome.
It was not just Caiaphus Jesus was addressing. Notice verses 64 and 65:
64"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
65Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have
They accused Him of blasphemy. Why? Because those Jews knew their OT and knew only Jehovah God "comes in the clouds".
Ps 68:4Sing to God, sing praises to His name;
Extol Him who rides on the clouds,
Ps 104:3 and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.
He makes the clouds his chariot
and rides on the wings of the wind.
Exodus 34:5 -
What makes these prophecies unique is that they come with a built in TIME LIMIT. Just like a gallon of milk from the store, these prophecies come attached to an EXPIRATION DATE. That date was one generation from the time Jesus made these prophecies, to the time it would be obvious they were false. One generation is defined by Bible scholars as about 30 to 40 years
We couldn't agree more. Too bad most Christians don't see this obvious teaching. Too much LaHaye and Lindsey and not enough study.
While Jesus was dying on the cross for being a false prophet, some Roman soldiers stuck him with their spears. These soldiers who stuck him-
Actually this is a reference to the Jews, not the Romans. The Romans were the instrument God used but the NT writers lay the blame on the Jews.
Acts 2:22"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
"Behold! I tell you a mystery; WE SHALL NOT ALL SLEEP [i.e. die], BUT WE SHALL ALL BE CHANGED... in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet... the dead will be raised..." (1Corinthians 15:51,52 NASB)
"...we WHO ARE ALIVE and REMAIN until the coming of the Lord... Then we who ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN shall be caught up together with them in the clouds..." (1Thessalonians 4:15-
At Christ's parousia those living were changed. They went from mortal to immortal. They were dead and raised to life. Jesus talked of this happening in John 5.
24"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. 25I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.
Salvation is going from death to life. Spiritually not physically.
Those who had already died were raised, in the spiritual realm, not physically:
28"Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29and come out-
There are differing views on this which would take volumes to write.
The bottom line? When Christians say to you "Jesus never fails!"
now you can respond with confidence,
"Jesus DOES fail, and I can show you how."
Nope, I can say Jesus didn't fail. He did exactly what He said He would do and when He would do it. Sadly your views are valid concerning what most churches teach today. But once you understand eschatology deals with Old Covenant Israel and her last days the statements and prophecies made by Jesus begin to make sense.
If you would truly like to study more on a system of eschatology that honors the time-
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/index.html
I read some of you objections to the preterist position. I believe you called it a "last ditch" effort. What you will find, with a little study, is that many of the preterist positions were commonly held pre-
And then shall appear
((Only something that is visible may "appear"))
the sign
((A sign that is invisible is no sign))
of the Son of man in heaven:
((This means the sky, obviously visible))
and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see
((They shall WHAT???? THEY SHALL SEE! With this, their invisible Jesus just "disappeared"))
the Son of man
The Fall of Jerusalem was the sign.
coming in the clouds
((Are clouds visible? Of course! Clouds are some of the MOST visible items of planet Earth, even visible from outer space))
Again you ignore the OT, why? Look up "clouds" and "coming with clouds" and see if they are literal. Again, you sound just like the people you critize. You ignore the "type" of language used and force it into physical/literal interpretation. The New Covenant is a spiritual covenant, circumcison of the heart is spiritual, writing the law on a man's heart is spiritual. Or do you also force these to be literal further proving Jesus as false?
eye
shall see him
((Gee! Just as clouds are very visible due to their being way up in the sky, so will Jesus also be visible, as he will be SEEN, by EYES, amongst the CLOUDS. It can't get much more specific than that! SEEN, by EYES, among CLOUDS-
Romans 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
According to your method of intepretation there were alot of physically deaf and blind Jews in the 1st century. See how foolish your rigid/literal method is?
You make many valid points, but you refuse to let the Bible interpret itself. Yes it is difficult and sometimes confusing but that is no reason to throw up your hands(figure of speech) and reject God's Word.
John
Carlos 9-
In a message dated 9/14/2004 5:36:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, juanct@swbell.net writes:
This verse:
"Remember that all these things will happen before the people now living
have all died." (Matthew 24:34 TEV)
Is referring to a generation that will witness what he discribed in the
previous verses, not meaning the generation alive during when Jesus Christ
was on earth. So for example, if you and I see these first symptoms happen
during our life time more than likely we will see all this discribed by
Jesus fullfilled.
Regards,
Carlos
Mark Smith here}
Hey Carlos;
I understand what you wrote, but that is NOT what the verse says. IF that had been the intent of the verse, Jesus had the brains to say it just like you said it. But he didn't. He did NOT say it is the generation that happens to be living when all these things commence.
What he DID promise was that all those things he just mentioned in the preceding verses would take place before the people then listening to him in the flesh had died off.
You are trying to "save the savior" by putting the words in his mouth that he SHOULD HAVE said. Problem is, he DIDN'T say that. Any false prophet, if his followers are allowed to put new and different words in his mouth, can cease to be a false prophet.
kooldude00countrystars.com 9-
Subject: Re: What Happened?
Date: 9/26/2004 10:06:56 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Is that really the whole story or are you just using that as an excuse to get away from the "rules" of Christianity? But just to give you some examples of prophesy, Jesus said to the Jews that he would gather them from all nations and bring them back to their own land (it's in Ezekiel 36, I don't know what verse though) and in 1948 Isreal became a nation again and a bunch of Jews moved back there. That's an example of Jesus's fulfilled prophesies that still has eyewitnesses. One last thing, you call Christians uneducated, and nobody knows everything, but please don't. Let's just say that you know half of everything in the universe, do you think that there might be an explaination to those "false prophesies" in the half that you don't know? Maybe the reason those prophesies seem so false to you is because you haven't studied hard enough. I talked to a pastor and he told me that he had studied the text of Matt. 24:34 and it is a legitimate prophesy. I can't remember what he said but I'll find out and tell you when I do. Jesus is NOT a liar.
Mark Smith here} Yes, that really IS the whole story-
False Prophet-
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/jesus-
If Anybody Else But Jesus...
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/Jesus-
Jesus and His Expired Prophecies
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/Jesus_and_his_expired_prophecies.htm
Matthew 24 Verse by Verse
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/matthew_24_verse_by_verse.htm
Matthew 24:34 What The Scholars Say
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/Mt%2024-
Significance of Jesus Being a False Prophet
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/significance_of_JC_false.htm
Preterism
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/preterism.htm
Nathan Parker 10-
Subject: Re: william craig question...
Date: 10/14/2004 7:11:48 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Hey Mark-
finished reading those articles a moment ago...
As to your last comment -
digging" -
ended about 8 years ago for me. After completely
rejecting Christianity which I was raised with -
I came back after quite a few years of wandering.
After seeing the absolute pristine character of
Jesus, and not only what He said, but who He
promises to be for each of us -
Mark Smith here} Those are VERY debatable points! As to his character, he was an unemployed vagabond mooching off of several women friends for at least the last three years of his life, if not more. Hardly a role model for capitalistic American youth.
As for what he SAID, most of it had been said by others way before he said it. Plagiarism is not something to brag about. As for his truly original sayings, things like "hate your family" and his racist rhetoric of calling non-
On the
flip side, every single alternative to Jesus as
the Savior completely failed. I have quite
thoroughly searched the religions of the world-
and have even been called to lecture on some of
them.
Mark Smith here} You know there's another alternative: they are all full of crap and hot air. Just because due to your cultural upbringing Jesus appears the most attractive doesn't make him right. There are plenty of Muslims who used to be Christians and say the same thing you do.
Jesus is truly different. A friend of
mine who was a critical atheist for his whole
life gave his life to Christ this past January.
After several weeks of walking with Him
Mark Smith here} You know what? My having been a Christian for 20 years, maybe my bullshit detector is better than others. I am starting to smell the distinct odor of verbal horseshit here. "After several weeks of walking with him..." If THAT's not a line lifted directly out of a sermon, what is? OK, let's say you did. Where did you walk? When did you walk? What is this man's email address so I can contact him directly? I'm sorry, I just can't picture two guys spending "several weeks" walking around.
He told
me: "Nathan, for the first time in my life, I now
know what it means to truly love another person,
I know what true compassion is."
Mark Smith here} I hate to break it to you Nathan, but LOVE existed LONG before your Jesus ever wet his first diaper. You Christians may think that you invented love, that without your religion there'd be no love, but you are both arrogant and wrong in your thinking. Believe it or not, people knew how to love 10,000 years ago, even 100,000 years ago. Muslims know how to love, Jews know how to love, and even us Atheists know how to love-
As for so-
A transformed
life, in the blink of an eye. The very same
story as mine... A delusion? Maybe. But maybe
not. At the very least a "delusion" everyone in
the world should have! As Paul wrote: "The love
of Christ constrains us."
As embarrassing as it is for me, (and though I
have given myself to much intensive study of the
Bible over the past 5 years or so), I do get a
little bit nervous at first when I read titles
like: "prophecies that Jesus was wrong about",
etc! However, when I read these articles Mark, I
was really surprised at how poor the exegesis
was.
Mark Smith here} Well, maybe since the exegesis was so piss-
Tell you what-
You can't.
To me, the one verse which totally refutes
the idea that Jesus prophecied that He would
return in that generation is Matthew 24:36. He
is clearly specifying that these are 2 events.
He says that He doesn't know the date.
Mark Smith here} And I covered that verse, didn't I??? Did not I say that Jesus is only claiming to not know the exact "day or time" of his return. He DID know the era-
Within Certain Limits Exact "Day & Time"
Some have quibbled in the best Clintonian tradition that Jesus' no-
Jesus didn't give the exact year, or month, or day, or hour, or minute-
Also, do you believe the Bible has been
accurately and faithfully transmitted over these
20 centuries? If you do then you are probably at
odds with other liberal scholars alive today....
Anyway-
on a misreading of these passages.
Mark Smith here} To the contrary, I have laid these verses out as clear as they could be. My exegesis has been spotless. I have delved into the original languages and bent over backwards to be honest and upfront about all the texts. I have tried my best to open up these verses to the masses. It is your Christian preachers who have, time and again, done their best to obfuscate and hide the meanings of these verses behind a load of bullshit and doubletalk. As German theologian David Strauss wrote back in the 1800's, certain verses that showed Jesus had made false prophecies have been "put to the torture" by Christian theologians to try to make them say something-
Lastly, is there ANY possibility whatsoever, that
your reading of the verses is incorrect and that
Jesus truly did not make any false predictions?
However slight?
Mark Smith here} I have studied this issue UP and down. I have read just about every book ever written on the subject in the past few hundred years. I have spent time doing research at Fuller Theological Seminary here in California, and traveled to Chicago to do research at Moody Bible Institute, as well as doing time in just about every theological library within 50 miles of Anaheim, California. I could go on and on, but I think this is the main point: I CAME TO MY CONCLUSION KICKING AND SCREAMING. I was a CHRISTIAN when I started to study this topic. I wasn't some sort of "evil atheist" out to disprove Jesus. Rather, I was trying to PROVE Jesus, and the more I studied it, the worse Jesus looked. Eventually it got to the point where I reached this conclusion: to the best of my intellectual abilities Jesus had been a false prophet, and I can't continue to worship a man who made false prophecies.
Is there a possibility I'm wrong? Tell you what-
If you say there is no
possibility, then you sound very much like the
Christians who accuse who dismiss and exclude
contrary evidence and are blind, deceived,
etc....
Just some thoughts-
you. I have found Jesus trustworthy, not only in
the things He said but in the things He has
undeniably done in my life.
Hope to hear from you.
In Him,
Nathan
Romans 5:8
Nathan Parker 10-
Subject: Re: william craig question...
Date: 10/15/2004 12:44:19 PM Pacific Standard Time
From
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Hey Mark -
the candor. You seem like a different person
when you respond and publish it on your web site!
First of all, you didn't even respond to the main
challenges I offered to your position, you just
selectively responded to the things you thought
were weak and wanted to jump on.
Mark Smith here} First of all, you as a Christian should learn not to lie. Your email and my response is located immediately above this email. I just read and re-
God Is Not The Author (this shows what the title says-
How Firm A Foundation-
You see, unlike you Christians, when I make a CLAIM, I back it up with something called E-
when I read these articles Mark, I
was really surprised at how poor the exegesis
was
You offered ZERO documentation to back it up. Par for the course for you Christians-
Secondly, your
response was filled with any number of fallacies.
For example, how exactly did you come to the
conclusion that reasoning and evidence are the
only way to come to truth? You have a major
epistemological dilema on your hands.
Mark Smith here} Geeeeee, this being about the billioneth time I've heard this Bonsonite bullshit, I've already prepared beforehand some responses. Go see these following essays on my website:
Geek Speak 101
Robert Hitchcock
Without A Leg To Stand On (A Message For Freethinkers)
And please, don't bring up that presup bullshit again. You want to talk philosophy, you're in the wrong web site. I run an ANTI-
Also, if
NONE of these various worldviews are true (which
it sounded like you said) why should I believe
what you posit? What justification is there for
believing atheism? (or whatever worldview you
hold to)
Mark Smith here} See my response above.
Lastly a question, if I take the time to
formulate a proper response to what you
published, will you have the guts to respond to
the questions I ask AND publish it on your site?
Mark Smith here} When have I NOT "had the guts" to do so??? Go ahead and give it your best shot-
I hope so, especially since we are all trying to
find out what is the truth, right?
Take care Mark, hope to hear from you soon.
In Him,
Nathan
Lauren 10-
Subject: editorial rebuttal
Date: 10/18/2004 4:59:24 PM Pacific Standard Time :
To: JCnot4me
Mark, I first of all want to thank you for having a site available for use on my English paper. I was thoroughly to find a site that I could easily do a rebuttal with. I wanted to share with you some scriptures that might help you to see that Jesus isn't a liar at all, and that you were unfortunately misunderstanding the context of the source you received the information from.
Mark Smith here} Once again, regardless of how much of the context I put it, always and forever until time ceases to exist the Christians will complain that I took things out of context. In my essay on Matthew chapter 24, I put in the WHOLE DAMN CHAPTER, all 51 verses, but to these rocket scientists I'm still "taking things out of context".
If I were to do a paper on Mt 24:34, and only had that verse in the essay, they'd complain I should have included the verse before and after.
If I were to do a paper on Mt 24:34, and included those THREE verses, they'd complain I should have included the verse before and after those three.
If I were to do a paper on Mt. 24:34, and included the whole damn chapter, they'd complain I took the verse out of context.
If I were to do a paper on Mt. 24:34, and typed in the whole Gospel of Matthew-
If I were to do a paper on Mt 24:34, and typed in the entire Old Testament, the entire New Testament, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and all the volumes of Encyclopedia Britannia, THEY'D STILL COMPLAIN!!!!
Why? I'll tell you why: because they don't have the slightest idea of what "taking out of context" means!!! And frankly, I'm tired of telling them what it means-
So Lauren, YOU find out what it means. Ask your English teacher, do a Google search on the term, whatever. But please, in the future, if and when you don't have a clue as to what a term means, DON'T USE IT-
Please know that I am not sending you these scriptures for any other reason that I don't want you to have to view Jesus in such a way without having all of the evidence needed for such a HUGE decision.
2 Peter 3:3-
Mark Smith here} If people around 100 AD were complaining that the Second Coming was already overdue, HOW MUCH MORE OVERDUE IS IT ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED YEARS LATER??? How many CENTURIES have to pass before even you yourself join in the complaint??? If, 100 billion years from now, as the entire universe grinds to a halt from heat death, if at that time Jesus STILL has not returned, would it be ok THEN, at least, just before the final star flickers out, would it be ok with you THEN for the last surviving human to complain that Jesus seems to have LIED about his Second Coming happening quickly, soon, any minute now, within the lifetime of the first century generation that heard him???
GIVE ME A NUMBER!!!! IF Jesus to you is not YET a FALSE PROPHET, tell me exactly how many more years have to pass before to you at least his IS a FALSE PROPHET??? Number of Years: __________________
I won't hold my breath waiting for your answer to my specific question, for like ALL Christians, you never deal with the arguments I've already raised. Rather, and IF you answer at all, you'll throw a whole bunch of other shit at the wall, just hoping that some of it sticks, like a crazed chimp at the zoo throwing shit at the humans.
Matthew 24:36 " No one knows about the day or the hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
Matthew 24:42&44 " Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come." "So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him."
Also, in Matthew Chapter 24 and Mark Chapter 13 there is a list of things that will need to take place before the coming.
i hope that this is of help to you and that you will respond
lauren
Mark Smith here} I dealt with ALL of that crap in my essays. What? Were you ASLEEP when you read them, or did you not read them but needed to mouth off to the Atheist anyway??? Which is it, Christian????
Pastor Randall 1-
Subject: Take another look at context and language
Date: 1/6/2005 10:42:36 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Dear Mark,
I would challenge you to take another look at the context of the passage
you discuss on your site.
Mark Smith here} I don't know why you would ask such a thing as I have already done that in infinite detail in my Matthew 24 Verse by Verse
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/matthew_24_verse_by_verse.htm The only reason I can think of that would have you make your request is if you haven't read what I've already put on my site. Maybe you should try to actually R-
The context is often referred to as the Olivet discourse. Jesus was
responding to the questions of His disciples concerning the end of times. He
did not ever tell them when but what to expect the end to look like.
Mark Smith here} He most certainly DID tell them "when". In Mt 24:34 he told them it would happen within their lifetime, and not only that, but it would happen soon. Again, try to actually R-
The rapture is not in the picture in verse 31 as you said on your site. This is
a different time. This will take place 7 years later than the rapture. This
is the 2nd coming of Jesus. This is much different than the rapture as
described in I Thessalonians 4.
Mark Smith here} Let's see... you are making a claim that there is a gap of seven years between one part of the promise and the other. And your evidence for this is...??? Ah! I forgot! You are a PASTOR, and you are used to making pronouncements WITHOUT the benefit of evidence. Tell you what-
The meaning of the word "genea" found in verse 34 is much different than
you are portraying on your site. It has the meaning of a group of people
with certain characteristics.
Mark Smith here} Once again, I get the feeling that you REALLY haven't read what's on my website. Why would someone mouth off with empty criticisms before reading what he's criticizing??? Let's see... you claim the definition of "genea" is that of a group of people with certain characteristics, and offer ZERO documentation to back up your claim. I, the Atheist, on the other hand, claim it means people all born around the same time, and offer over ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY reference sources to back it up. But, of course, I forgot-
Matthew 24:34 What The Scholars Say
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/Mt%2024-
He was simply saying to a group of His
disciples that they would not be able to count on things getting better and
better, "bringing in the kingdom." Some of His followers were hoping that
Jesus would set up His kingdom immediately. He was letting them know that
unrepentent evildoers would continue in the world until He comes to judge.
This word for generation is better understood in it's historic meaning
instead of forcing a 2005 meaning on it. To get a feel for what is being
said check out these other uses of the similar words. Matthew 12:39, 41, 42,
16:4, 17:17; 23:34-
I will pray that God will give you clarity of thought and understanding as
you seek to know the truth.
because of Calvary,
Randall
Pastor Randall 1-
Subject: Re: Take another look at context and language
Date: 1/9/2005 6:22:05 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Dear Mark,
There are still a few problems with your interpretation. First all of your
interpretation is focused on the visible second coming and no mention of the
rapture of believers. I believe you have some interpretive errors in not
separating these two very different events. You also did not respond to the
reality that the same author used the word genea in a totally different way
than you would have your readers believe. Look again at what Matthew wrote
when he used the word. Matthew 12:39, 41, 42, 16:4, 17:17; 23:34-
Randall
Mark Smith here} Randall, this is how I see it:
You ignored my statement regarding your ignoring my verse-
You ignored my statement showing Jesus did indeed tell them WHEN he'd return, contrary to your claim.
You ignored my request to show me your EVIDENCE that there is a time gap within that one verse.
You ignored my pointing out that your claim I had mishandled the meaning of the word "genea" ignored my article (which took several years to research, by the way) which cites 150 reputable Bible scholars and sources.
You ignored my pointing out that you provided ZERO evidence as to what "genea" means which would rule out the 150 SCHOLARS that I cited.
So seeing how you totally and completely IGNORED every single point I made, I see no point in making any further points to be ignored also. You obviously don't want a two-
-
Gordo 1-
Subject: regarding your web site
Date: 1/9/2005 2:14:06 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: Jcnot4me@aol.com
“For the Son of Man [i.e. Jesus] is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will reward each one according to his deeds. I assure you [i.e. swear to you] that there are some here who will not die until they have seen the Son of Man [Jesus] come as King.” (Matthew 16: 27, 28 TEV)
Jesus did not return within their lifetime as promised, nor did Judgment Day occur. Therefore, these false prophecies by Jesus make Jesus a false prophet, just as certainly as committing a murder makes one a murderer. But just because Jesus set the goal of his return being within the First Century hasn't stopped modern Christians from trying to "fix" the problem and thus save the savior-
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is what U typed. I think it’s about time you put down that bible and get a NLT. You don’t even know how to translate scripture properly let alone publish what you think it means. The first part of the verse applies to his second coming when judgement is given. And the come as King actually translates to coming in my Kingdom. The apostles saw him after his resurrection which means the second here who will not die until they have seen the Son of Man
Mark Smith here} Sorry to inform you, Gordo, that YOU are the one that needs to learn how to translate properly. I have researched that verse in over FIFTY different translations to be able to conclude that the TEV was indeed proper in its translation. As for the interpretation of the verse, the verse follows a familiar pattern in the New Testament. The author says something, and then immediately repeats the same idea a little different. Notice how key words are repeated: "Son of Man" // "about to come" -
Nowhere does the author mention a time gap of thousands or millions of years as your interpretation would require, nor have any theologians been able to produce or show that one exists. Maybe you'd like to give it a try? You claim there is a time gap (even though Jesus said elsewhere there would be NO DELAY). Show me this time gap-
Religion and the many different branches of Christianity are not important. Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus. Instead of reading a kiddie version which TOTALLY pulls apart the each verse and looses its true meaning, try for onc eto read them and ask God to open your heart and your eyes. If you do that he will show you and help you realize what is going on here in this remain time we have left. Do what u want but don’t leave it until it is too late. You put your email on your site for a reason, that’s why I decided to write. You should seriously consider pulling down that site you have and do a little more research with true knowledge before outright trying to corrupt other peoples minds. For those that He has chosen it won’t make a difference anyways. It doesn’t bother me that other people read it, it bothers me that you have no problem publishing it. I have studied prophecy before I even found Jesus, even went to church my whole life. Didn’t matter. I never understood any of it and followed like a sheep. Until I asked Him to open my eyes and ask Him for help when I read his words did he shed any light on scripture and what it meant. All you have to do is ask pal. Maybe you will see something you did not before. Good luck,
Gordo
Mark Smith here} So what you're saying is that I should amputate my brain from my head and just rely on some supernatural mumbo-
Nick Edwards the Christian Liar 1-
Subject: Website: Liar False Prophet
Date: 1/31/2005 4:51:49 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
I came across your website while searching for specific information on CS Lewis. I must say the interpretation of the information you present shows a prolific misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the bible. What is particularly discrediting and embarassing to your website is that anyone who knows anything about CS Lewis is that the aforementioned quote is taken from when he was an atheist, which he later rejected and became one of the greatest proponents of faith in the 20th Century. In your best interest for the sake of argument, find a source to buttress your beliefs who didn't later reject that very world view.
Mark Smith here} Clive Staples Lewis was born in Belfast on November 29, 1898. In his late 20's, 1931 to be exact, he became a Christian. 29 years later in 1960 the book entitled "The World's Last Night and Other Essays" was published by Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York. Lewis Died on November 22, 1963. The quote on my web site is from Lewis' book published in 1960-
Your bold face LIE that this was written while Lewis was an Atheist is typical of many of the responses I get from lying scumbag Christians. Too many Christians, when they can't win by using the TRUTH, do not hesitate to throw in a few LIES. Anything to "save the savior", eh? When I was a Christian, and even more so now that I am an Atheist, I didn't and don't resort to telling LIES to win arguments. As far as I'm concerned, ANY system of thought that can only survive via lies and deception and repression of free speech is more likely false than true. Real truth doesn't need lies to defend itself with.
www.AntiQbook.com
C. S. LEWIS (CLIVE STAPLES). The World's Last Night and Other Essays.
New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960.. First edition. Very good octavo hardcover in very good dust jacket. Some light wear and rubbing to the edges of the boards with bumping to the head and heel of the spine. Dj has some minor wear along the edges with inconsequencial scuffing to the covers. Light browning to page edges and dj. Tiny bit of foxing on page edges also. Name of the previous owner written on the front free endpaper in ink. Previous owner was the noted economist Wolfgang Stolper. Smoky smell to the book. 113 pages. The essays featured in this work are: 1. The Efficacy of Prayer, 2. On the Obstinacy in Belief, 3. Lilies That Fester, 4. Screwtape Proposes a Toast, 5. Good Work and Good Works, 6. Religion and Rocketry, 7. The World's Last Night. .
USD 30.00 Offered by: Motte & Bailey, Booksellers -
Phil 2-
Subject: this generation shall not pass
Date: 2/8/2005 12:55:58 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
I appreciate your honesty Mark. I wonder though if you're turning away from Christ wasn't influenced by all of the legalism that you were brought up with. Maybe then, when you saw an element of doubt concerning Christ being who he claimed .. you felt that gave you a valid excuse to leave the faith that for so long had bound you.
I might be wrong. We are all products of many influences and our own inner spirit at work. What motivates us and drives us is often complex to sort out. I am not convinced, as you seem to be, that Jesus' prophecy concerning his generation not passing away .. gives grounds for saying he was wrong. Here is one possibility ..and I'm sure there are others.
http://www.godstruthfortoday.org/Library/knoch/ThisGenerationShallNotPassAway.htm
Mark Smith here} Hey Phil. Thanks for this email, and the link. The link is to an article by A.E. Knoch, the "founder" of a group I actually used to fellowship with back when I was a Christian. Their "headquarters" are located about two hours north of where I live in Orange County, California.
Anyway, please notice that Knoch does not deal with the passage of Matthew 24:34, which I've supplied over 50 different translations ( Mt 24:34 What The Scholars Say ). Knoch's own translation is #3 in my list, and says: "By no means may this generation be passing by until..." What is to be noted is the "By NO means..." which eliminates any doubt or ambiguity as to WHEN these things were predicted to occur. Knoch is trying to find "a means" to get around this verse, yet within the verse is Jesus HIMSELF saying there is NO means. So, nice try Phil, but no cigar.
I became a Christian as a boy of 8 .. and now I'm 50. My faith has grown through the years, not diminished. This really amazes me, because I don't have that childlike attitude which I wish I still had. But I have seen that what the Scriptures teach is true. I see it again and again.
I did make a big mistake a few years ago and got involved with a mormon lady. I call it sin .. you might not. However, after I broke my relationship with this woman, I had visitations from evil spirits the likes of which I never even believed existed. It was a horrible ordeal and its still not over. Evil spirits (demons) exist (with wickedness unimaginable), and satan exists .. and God exists. I know it for a fact. And if Jesus isn't the Christ, (and the OT prophecies and types of Christ that have been studied and written about for centuries by myriad Truth seekers are wrong) then we are all doomed because the world out there is a lot worse than it looks. As for me I don't plan to leave this life without him.
I hope your anchor holds when you say goodbye to planet earth. I am really in your corner. I don't want you to make a serious mistake. I know that satan blinds our eyes so that he can bring us to ruin. I don't want that to happen to you. You seem like a very sincere and earnest man. (Remember that we only find him when we seek him with all our heart.)
Thanks again for responding.
Phil
Jim Coram CONCORDANT PUBLISHING CONCERN ~1999
Note from Mark Smith, SET FREE: This article was sent in by a reader who thought I'd get a kick out of it. I have. It is an excellent example of how some Christians will, instead of trying to make things clearer, rather try very hard to do the opposite. I read this, and re-
By Jim Coram
The original may be found at: http://www.concordant.org/expohtml/CorrectPartitioning/thisgen.html
Concordant Studies: "This Generation"
"UNDER no circumstances should you be finishing the cities of Israel till the Son of Mankind may be coming" (Matt.10:23b). "Verily I am saying to you that there are some of those standing here who under no circumstances should be tasting death till they should be perceiving the Son of Mankind coming in His kingdom" (Matt.16:28; cp Luke 9:27). "Verily I am saying to you that by no means may this generation be passing by till all these things should be occurring" (Matt.24:34; cp Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). "For still how very little, He Who is coming will be arriving and not delaying" (Heb.10:37). "Little children, it is the last hour, and, according as you hear that the antichrist is coming, now also there have come to be many antichrists, whence we know that it is the last hour" (1 John 2:18).
These and similar passages are often appealed to by unbelievers to show the exceedingly unreliable nature-
After all, they reason, the sun was not darkened and the moon did not fail to give her beams, and the stars did not fall from heaven, nor were the powers of the heavens shaken; the sign of the Son of Mankind in heaven did not appear, all the tribes of the land did not grieve, nor did they see the Son of Mankind coming on the clouds of heaven with power and much glory (Matt.24:29,30). Every eye did not see Him (Rev.1:7), much less did the kingdoms of this world become those of the Lord God and His Christ (Rev.11:15); decidedly, the nations did not beat their swords into plowshares, nor their spears into pruninghooks, so as not to learn war any more (Isa.2:4).
Mark Smith here} Yes, you are correct, people without a vested interest in Christianity have clearly seen that Jesus screwed up in his prophecies. We see this as clearly as mainline Christians can see where non-
Remarkably, however, certain believers, termed "Preterists" since they claim a fulfilled or past second coming of Christ, have appealed to these very same passages in order to show the exceedingly reliable nature-
Preterists, however, must explain all prophecy concerning Christ's advent and kingdom in highly allegorical or even mystical terms, contrary to the plain sense of the passages themselves. Nonetheless, these believers have convinced themselves of the legitimacy of their interpretations, since, according to them, either Christ's second coming did occur within a generation of the time in which He made these prophecies, or He is a deceiver and a false prophet. Since no believer will affirm that Christ is either of these, and since, according to Preterists, the only alternative is to accept their claims as to a first-
GOD'S HIDDEN INTENTION
A recognition of the hidden intention of God as distinct from His revealed will, is vital to our subject at hand. The revealed will of God is well illustrated by our Lord's reproach upon the cities of Israel in which most of His powerful deeds occurred, "for they do not repent" (Matt.11:20). Since the people had failed to repent, Jesus reproached them for their failure to heed God's revealed will which had called for their repentance (cf Matt.3:2; 4:17).
Yet the hidden intention of God is equally well illustrated in Jesus' words in reference and as a complement to His preceding words of reproach upon the people: "At that season, answering, Jesus said, `I am acclaiming Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for Thou hidest these things from the wise and intelligent and Thou dost reveal them to minors. Yea, Father, seeing that thus it became a delight in front of Thee'" (Matt.11:25,26).
Mark Smith here} "Hidden intentions"??? Well, if they were truly "hidden" how the hell do YOU know them so well? Or does your Biblegod not only mess up prophecies, but also messes up keeping secrets as well??? And not to be rude, but you are starting to sound alot like the airhead xtians who plead "special knowledge" that is only available to "special people", i.e. themselves, and since you aren't them therefore you can't know these things. Jim-
If a recognition of the significance of Christ's powerful deeds is vital to repentance, and yet if God should hide this significance from some, those from whom it is hidden will be unable to repent. Yet even so, if this is what God has done, we too may well acclaim the Father, Lord of heaven and earth, seeing that thus it became a delight in front of Him.
Mark Smith here} Let me translate the above short paragraph for any and all outside of the Concordant Publishing Concern: Mumbo jumbo blah blah blah.
It is important to understand that the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined in relation to its purpose, according to the motive which sponsors it. Whatever God does is right; and, it is also good, with respect to His purpose. That which men devise for evil is that which God designs for good (cp Gen.50:20). If it should be that God's revealed will is not fulfilled, it is only that His hidden intention might be realized. Similarly, if God's present intention should entail a measure of evil, it is only that His consummate intention should be comprised of a superfluity of good (cp Rom.8:18-
Mark Smith here} So Jim, what you are doing is giving your Jesus a blank check for lying. What you are saying is that Jesus could have made 10,000 false prophecies and it doesn't prove Jesus a false prophet. What you are saying is that any evidence that Jesus was a false prophet is to be discarded. I wonder if you are as generous with false prophecies made by religions you disagree with? Of course not. You know, it's no wonder you can reach the conclusions you do when you stack the deck in favor of your own chosen gods. You are no better than a judge in a trial that disallows any evidence which would prove a criminal guilty. It is a wonder that the intellectual DISHONESTY that you are demonstrating here hasn't hit you like a ton of bricks! If "God's revealed will is not fulfilled" i.e. if Biblegod turns out to have made FALSE PROPHECIES, well, that's just fine with you-
PROVISIONAL DECLARATIONS OF TRUTH
It is indeed important to believe what the Scriptures say. Yet the deeper question still remains: In what sense is what the Scriptures say to be understood. As we approach this question of the time of Christ's appearing, whether it is past or future, it should first of all be noted that in the Original, each of these statements of Jesus concerning His appearing (e.g.,Matt.10:23b; 16:28; 24:34) is expressed in the subjunctive mood, sometimes with the conditional particle an (EVER) included. These grammatical features are reflected in the Concordant Version by the auxiliaries "should" and "may."
Mark Smith here} It should ALSO be noted, regarding the original, THAT YOU AND NOBODY ELSE HAS THE ORIGINAL!!! Given that FACT, how would you or anybody else know just what the hell WAS in the original??? And seeing that you do NOT have the original and that you are basing an argument upon what you don't have, therefore your entire argument is based upon non-
As to "in what sense is what the Scriptures say to be understood", I have this to say. Jesus was crystal clear in Matthew 24:34, and let me paste in Matthew 24:34 directly from Jim's favorite Bible, the Concordant Literal New Testament, which his organization specializes in, to show you:
"Verily, I am saying to you that by no means may this generation be passing by till all these things should be occurring.
As to Jesus being wishy-
The subjunctive mood calls attention to the contingent (i.e., dependent) nature of what is being affirmed. It speaks of the connection which obtains between what is affirmed and that upon which the affirmation depends for its fulfillment.
In the nature of things, if that upon which a declaration expressed in the subjunctive mood depends, is unrevisably certain, the declaration itself is unrevisable and is certain to occur.
Mark Smith here} Excuse me, I consider myself somewhat intelligent, but I have no clue whatsoever what the fuck Jim was trying to say here. Is this English? Is this Concordant FromKind English? Is there ANY body on THIS planet besides Jim himself that clearly knows what Jim means here??? What IS clear here is that Jim is NOT writing to make things clear to people, but rather to confuse and obfiscate the issue. WHY would he want to do this, unless he was trying to hide the FACT that he really has no argument to defend Jesus' false prophecies.
But if that upon which a declaration expressed in the subjunctive mood depends, is not unrevisably certain, the declaration itself is revisable and is not certain to occur.
Of course that upon which the first-
Mark Smith here} Soooo let me see here. According to this reasoning, I could borrow money from you and PROMISE to pay you back, even like Jesus, reinforce the promise with a "verily verily" as in "verily verily I will pay you back within this generation" but if, deep down inside, I don't really MEAN to pay you back, if it's not really "my will", then somehow I never LIED when I made that false promise in the first place. Jim, maybe I've been out of Christianity too long, but could you please explain the difference between pure unadulterated HORSESHIT, and what you wrote in the paragraph above? I'm sorry-
It should be noted that the prophecies of the establishment of the kingdom within that present generation of Israelites to whom Christ came, were necessarily provisional. They were contingent upon Israel's national repentance and acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah and Saviour. It is true that it was the revealed will of God that the kingdom should then come. This is reflected in the various passages such as Matthew 24:4-
Mark Smith here} Jim, you've made an assertion. You've said the promise of Matthew 24:34 was contingent upon other events happening first. Excuse me, this is FALSE. Nowhere in Matthew 24 does Jesus say "IF these other things happen THEN I will return" and if you think it does, quote me the verse. Rather, the ONLY contingency upon the prophecies of Matthew 24 is that it would ALL take place BEFORE that generation then living passed away (Mt 24:34). Period. That is what the chapter says, and I challenge you to debate me in public if you are harebrained enough to think it says otherwise. Another thing-
"IN HIS OWN JURISDICTION"
It is certainly correct that Matthew 24:34 and similar prophetic declarations must be understood provisionally; this is because certain provisional considerations were entailed in their fulfillment (cf Acts 3:19,20). Ultimately, however, it is not their provisional nature that raises the question as to whether they were unrevisably certain to occur. If, in the counsels of God, they were unrevisably certain to occur, doubtlessly their provisional element would be entirely fulfilled. The only ultimate question is whether such a prophecy is an expression of the actual intention of God and is therefore a peremptory declaration. This can only be decided by a consideration of all relevant issues.
Mark Smith here} You know, the above paragraph is SUCH a, excuse my French, crock of shit, I'm not even going to touch it. I leave it to the intelligent reader to see and "enjoy" it for himself. I would be insulting the intelligence of the readers were I to point out the flaws and convoluted logic. This crap even makes WatchTower publications look good. It comes across as convoluted nonsense offered by an obfuscating windbag.
But to claim that because the future tense is used, such declarations are therefore peremptory and may not be understood provisionally either in relation to Israel's obedience or even in relation to God's hidden intention, is wholly unwarranted. This is especially true when it is noted that these texts are expressed in the subjunctive mood, which calls attention to their dependent nature. Their ultimate dependency is upon the actual intention of the Father, Who has placed the decisive times and eras for restoring the kingdom to Israel in His own jurisdiction (Acts 1:7). Very simply, until the word of God was completed (Col.1:25), one could not say to a certainty that a particular declaration of God's revealed will concerning things to come was also a declaration of His actual intention concerning things to come.
Mark Smith here} So your Biblegod has a "get out of jail free" card then, and is free to lie and deceive people all he wants! He can promise them ANYTHING and go back on every single promise, and according to your "reasoning" he's somehow not a friggin' liar. With a god like this, tell me again why you think we people of Earth should kiss his ass??? Oh, I forgot-
That this provisional yet prophetic declaration in Matthew 24:34 of the revealed will of God, was not a peremptory expression of the actual intention of God concerning that very generation, is made evident not only from history but from further revelation. The millennial kingdom did not commence in the first century and run its course until some time after 1000 A.D. Satan was not bound during this period, being cast into the submerged chaos, locked and sealed therein. Surely, during the Middle Ages, the rest of the dead of all past generations were not resurrected for judging and then cast into the lake of fire. Nor, during that same period, was the earth destroyed by fire, nor was a new earth created, one in which there was no more death, nor mourning, nor clamor, nor misery.
Mark Smith here} Wow! That paragraph REALLY blows! Let me translate it for everyone: "Biblegod is not a false prophet because... all of Biblegod's prophecies turned out false." Jim! Wake up! How in the HELL can you write such CRAP with a straight face??? ANY false prophet could be whitewashed using this kind of reasoning! "Well, we know that Joseph Smith's prophecies really weren't meant to be fulfilled within the 1800's because... they weren't fulfilled within the 1800's." I know that Christians have blind spots, but THIS qualifies you for a seeing eye dog!!!
Therefore, the words of Christ in Matthew 24:34 and similar passages are to be understood within the compass of the will of God, then revealed. It is foolish to insist on taking such passages in a peremptory sense, as if no other sense but the peremptory existed, or as if this were the only possible sense in which these passages could be understood.
NOT UNREVISABLY CERTAIN
It is incorrect to claim that if the kingdom was not then established, Jesus was "wrong." His words cannot be taken beyond the bounds of an implicit "God willing-
It is neither dishonest, mistaken, or even inappropriate to make provisionally correct statements concerning future events. Indeed, nearly all of our own predictions concerning events of ordinary human affairs can be no more than provisionally correct. They are not unrevisably certain, since that upon which they depend has not been disclosed to us, certainly not in a peremptory sense ("if the Lord should be willing"; cp James 4:13-
Mark Smith here} So Jesus, were he to actually be existing now somewhere on Kolab or wherever, would be telling everyone on Earth "NA na NA na naaaa.... I had my fingers crossed!" And thus Jim Coram has nulled and voided any and all promises made by Biblegod in the Bible, because, as Jim says, "the proviso 'God willing' is always to be understood". Will Christians make it thru the pearly gates? Will those that call upon the name of Jesus be saved? Will the blood of Jesus actually wash away anyone's sin? It all depends... on if Biblegod really meant what he said, for he may have just been bullshitting like Jim said he was about the Second Coming.
In this respect, the predictions of Christ, the Son of God, are quite like our own. Whatever He declares shall occur (and this is especially emphasized where He uses the subjunctive and speaks of that which "should be occurring"), is only that which shall occur, "God willing." In light, then, of Matthew 24:34 and related passages, surely it is correct to say that the then-
Mark Smith here} Must be nice to be able to put words into the mouth of Jesus. Yup, Jim has created himself a little Jesus puppet that says whatever Jim wants him to say. Doesn't matter what's written in the New Testament, THIS (coming from Jim's puppet Jesus) is what Jesus REALLY meant. Well, yeah, that's nice, but the problem is that ANY false prophet can instantly be saved from being a false prophet IF his followers are allowed to "re-
GOD'S ACTUAL INTENTION
It is mistaken to take Christ's words as somehow transcending the implicit proviso, "God willing," or to assume that God's revealed will concerning that generation, was also necessarily His actual intention concerning that generation.
Mark Smith here} This is just TOO precious to let pass. Let me translate, for any that might have missed it. What Jim is saying is this: It is a mistake to actually take Jesus at his word. When Jesus said he'd do his Second Coming before that generation living back then died out, he might have been lying, for while he was saying one thing, he actually meant another.
The case of the Pharaoh of the exodus is a good example. God's revealed will unto Pharaoh was declared by Moses. Moses said, "Thus says Yahweh....Dismiss My people that they may serve Me!" (Ex.10:3). Pharaoh said, "Go!" (Ex.10:8). "Yet Yahweh made the heart of Pharaoh steadfast, so that he did not dismiss the sons of Israel" (Ex.10:20). This was God's actual intention.
The principle is the same with the nation of Israel of our Lord's day. Then, God's revealed will was that Israel should repent and enter the kingdom. But that it was His hidden intention that they should not do so, is evident, seeing that He has blinded their eyes and calloused their heart lest they may perceive with their eyes and apprehend with their heart (cf John 12:40; cit. Isa.6:10). God's intention concerning them, His revealed will notwithstanding, was that "[they] must not be understanding....[and they] must not be knowing" (Isa.6:9). Certainly, that which God wills should come to pass, shall come to pass (i.e., what He wants to occur will occur). Whatever is His actual intention, shall occur.
In Christ's personal ministry to the nation of Israel, He came to His own simply as "the Servant of the Circumcision, for the sake of the truth of God, to confirm the patriarchal promises" (Rom.15:8). The truth of God for the sake of which He testified was the truth of God revealed by Israel's prophets concerning God's glorious kingdom, under Messiah (or, "Christ"), to be established on the earth. Thus He confirmed the original promises which God had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to bring blessing to their "seed."
Accordingly, then, in relation to the revealed will of God concerning the kingdom, Jesus could truly say, "Verily, verily, I am saying to you that by no means may this generation be passing by till all these things should be occurring" (Matt.24:34). It is altogether a separate question-
Mark Smith here} Yup, that darn Jesus! Ya'll can't trust a darn tootin thang he says! What a joker!
THE INTEGRITY OF CHRIST'S WORDS
It must ever be kept in mind that Matthew 24:34 and other similar "imminency" passages concerning the Messianic kingdom, are made in relation to the will of God, then revealed. That other considerations and further revelation have made evident that Christ's words, then spoken, were not a declaration of God's actual intention concerning that very generation, is no dishonor upon Christ, nor does it follow that He was a false prophet.
Mark Smith here} Naawww, just because Biblegod promises ONE thing and then delivers ANOTHER, that's no dishonor. Just like the man that borrowed money from you-
If God's revealed will is not also His hidden intention, and if Christ's testimony here is only in relation to the former and not the latter, we should rather say that Christ's testimony as to "this generation" was altogether true and correct within the province with which it was concerned. If other considerations and further revelation should make evident that His testimony here was not true and correct concerning some other theme with which it did not deal, is no opprobrium upon the name of Christ with respect to any question of the veracity of His testimony.
Mark Smith here} In other words, any prophecy within the Bible should come with this warning:
CAUTION: Prophecies are subject to change without notice.
Many true and correct statements are only true and correct concerning the subject with which they deal, and are incorrect with reference to other subjects. It is simply unintelligent, however, to characterize a statement as false if it is only true in connection with its own subject. To the contrary, such a statement is only to be characterized as true, it being a matter of the intelligent use of idiom that a "true statement" is one which is true insofar as its own subject is concerned, or insofar as it is contemplated within its own province.
Mark Smith here} What? Huh??? Has Jim been smoking some weed? Has Jim been taking logic lessons from President "is-
How unreasonable it would be to require, in order to meet our approval, even as to gain our appraisal as a "true statement," that a statement must be true and correct not only concerning its own subject but concerning a different and incompatible subject as well. Similarly, it is absurd to ridicule or doubt the integrity of the words of Christ concerning "this generation" for only being correct in relation to that with which they are concerned. It is not Christ, or His words, that are mistaken, but we ourselves if we would expect His words within a certain sphere also to be true within a different and incompatible sphere, one which does not come under the purview of His words.
Mark Smith here} Yes, how evil we must be to actually expect that when a prophet makes a prophecy, that that prophecy turn out true. Evil, very evil of us. Please forgive us! WE are the mistaken ones, NOT Jesus!!! Praise be to from-
Mark Smith here} What follows here out is the obligatory commercial for Jesus, in which a plug for Jesus is inserted that has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand. Many Christians feel obliged to do this-
RICHES TO THE WORLD THROUGH ISRAEL'S OFFENSE
The question remains, Since God could have turned the hearts of those first-
God does all unto the end of salvation, and with a view toward mercy. God is the Saviour of all mankind, especially of believers (1 Tim.4:10). God locks up all together in stubbornness, that He should be merciful to all. O the depth of the riches and the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How inscrutable are His judgments and untraceable His ways! (Rom.11:32,33).
On behalf of the conciliation of the world, God has temporarily "cast away" Israel (Rom.11:15). Even so, He has not "thrust" them away (Rom.11:1); He has not "thrown them out," never to be recovered. Callousness, in part, has come on Israel, only until the complement of that which God is achieving through the nations has been realized (Rom.11:25). Then, according as it is written, "Arriving out of Zion shall be the Rescuer. He will be turning away irreverence from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when ever I should be eliminating their sins" (Rom.11:26,27; cp Isa.59:20,21; Psa.14:7; Jer.31:34).
It was needful that Israel should "trip" not that they should "fall," but that in their offense "salvation to the nations" might become a reality. Yet the nations' own salvation itself, in turn, is to provoke Israel to "jealousy," that they too might be saved (Rom.11:11; cp 11:25-
"[Israel's] offense is the world's riches" (Rom.11:12a). That men, through unbelief, should be ignorant of their riches, does not remove ignorant of his possessions, though he fails to enjoy them, does not forfeit their ownership. Accordingly, through the blood of Christ, even now, the world possesses vast spiritual riches.
That which constitutes the world's riches is declared in the word of the conciliation, "how that God was in Christ, conciliating the world to Himself, not reckoning their offenses to them" (2 Cor.5:19). Though men continue to offend, through the Lamb of God, God nonetheless has taken away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Through Christ, God has united the world to Himself, and is no longer reckoning their offenses to them. Though God will judge all according to each one's need and according to His own purpose, nevertheless, the judgment, ultimately speaking, will be that of those whose sins have been taken away and whose offenses are not being reckoned.
THE POWER OF THE CONCILIATION
Whatever loss is incurred to man through eonian judging, is needful on behalf of God's own purpose. It will not continue beyond the eons. At the consummation, death will be abolished and all will be subjected, that God may be All in all (1 Cor.15:28). This is the ultimate fruit of the conciliation. At present, while Israel is not God's people, until the times of the restoration of all which God speaks through the mouth of His holy prophets concerning them (Acts 3:21), when they will then become sons of the living God (Rom.9:26), God has granted to the apostle Paul this grace: "to bring the evangel of the untraceable riches of Christ to the nations" (Eph.3:8b).
These "untraceable" riches of Christ, revealed only through Paul, are those revelations concerning the Christ, which Israel's prophets did not seek out and could not search out, the scope of their ministry being confined to the grace which God had appointed for Israel (cf 1Pet.1:10). In contrast to this, it is the privilege of Paul and those who imitate him, "to enlighten all as to what is the administration of the secret, which has been concealed from the eons in God, Who creates all, that now may be made known to the sovereignties and authorities among the celestials the multifarious wisdom of God, in accord with the purpose of the eons, which He makes in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph.3:9-
These glorious Pauline revelations, even as God's purpose concerning that company of believers (cf Eph.1:22,23) who would be blessed according to Paul's evangel, could not be revealed at the time of Christ's personal ministry to Israel. It was necessary, for the sake of the conciliation of the world, that Israel not encounter that for which she was seeking (cp Rom.10:3; 11:7). Hence the revealed yet provisional will of God concerning first-
J.R.C.
******
-
15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91350, U.S.A.
This information is made available for private use only on home computer systems. In its original form, it may be shared with others,
including by transmission to computer bulletin boards. Please write us for permission before using this material for any other purpose.
Thank you.
Russell Schloemer 4-
Subj: I noticed a slight oversight on the part of your website
Date: 4/2/2005 5:57:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: (Russell Schloemer)
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
Sir,
My name is Russell Schloemer, and while working on a presentation I am doing for a speech class I am taking on the authenticity of the gospel, I came upon your website.
Typically people do not declare Jesus to be a false prophet, so I was intrigued and read the page that you devoted to the subject. Having read the Bible more than once and having attended church more than a couple times, I can tell you that your page will not realistically convince anyone other than those who already choose not to believe. Contemporary Christians will inform you (as I am now) that Jesus was not referring to the death of the apostles in the material sense (funeral, autopsy and burial, etc.) but rather to spiritual life and death. As his audience was saved, a Christian would claim that this was in reference to their immortal soul that could not pass away and is in no way contradictory of the obvious fate of the original disciples of Jesus.
Mark Smith here} As with most xtians, you are long on claims and short on facts. For example, I cited over 150 scholars and reference sources, the vast majority of them authored by good Christians, to back up my claims. You, on the other hand, cited a total of 0 (zero) scholars or sources. I delve into intricate detail on the Greek word “Genea���. You don’t even mention the word, much less provide documentation for your claims.
Seeing then how your claims are just that-
Now, as for your totally unfounded and unproven hot-
I write all of this under the premise that you want to present a non-
Best wishes,
-
Mike 7-
Subject: here Mark
Date: 7/30/2005 8:21:44 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me
What would it take to convince you that Jesus will return to earth during your lifetime? Would three fulfilled prophecies do it? Would five? Seven? Nine? How many? Please indulge me for a few minutes while I briefly explain why I am absolutely convinced that Jesus will return to this earth during our generation.
Mark Smith here} I guess you didn't catch my essay which showed that Jesus already proved himself a false prophet? I got into intricate detail regarding the word "generation" which you yourself use. Why don't you go check it out, then after you're convinced Jesus was a false prophet, maybe what you wrote below won't matter much anymore.
Matthew 24:34 What The Scholars Say
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/Second%20Coming%20stuff/Mt%2024-
Rebirth of Israel
There is no greater prophetic fulfillment. The nation of Israel was driven from her land in 70 AD. For almost 2,000 years, the Jewish people existed without a homeland; yet, while being sifted through the nations, they retained their identity.
The low point came between 1940 and 1944. Hitler was determined to implement his ìfinal solution.î When Allied soldiers entered the Nazi concentration camps, they were horrified by what they discovered. Six million Jews had been gassed, shot, tortured and cremated.
In 1944, if you would have told the soldiers that opened these camps that the Jewish people would have their own nation and would become the premier military power in the Middle East by 1967, they would have thought you were crazy. But that is exactly what happened.
The most amazing thing about all of this is that it was prophesied over 2,500 years ago. The prophecy of Ezekiel 37 is called Ezekielís bone yard. Verse 12 states: ìThus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.î
The last part of this prophecy states that it will come to pass in the latter days, just before the Battle of Armageddon. It is at Armageddon that Jesus returns to earth.
Mark Smith here} You know, I might bother to respond to some of what you put here, except that you didn't write it. You lifted it from a Christian site, didn't you? Did you know that plagiarism is dishonest? Did you hope to convert me by showing how dishonest you are???
Drying up of Euphrates
The prophecy of Revelation 16:12 has lain quietly for almost 2,000 years, virtually defying fulfillment. It declares that the mighty Euphrates River will be dried up at the time of the Battle of Armageddon. But who is kidding whom? The Euphrates is the principal water source of the entire Middle East. This is like prophesying that the Mississippi River will be dried up! This Euphrates prophecy just appeared to be impossible.
At least it did until the shocking headline appeared on the front page of the Indianapolis Star, January 13, 1990. It read, ìFlow of Euphrates To Be Stopped for 30 Days.î
The article explained that Turkey had built the huge Ataturk Dam. Thirty days would be required to fill up the newly constructed reservoir. So the Euphrates was temporarily stopped.
The river is flowing again now. However, as of 1990, the mechanism is in place that can stop the flow of the Euphrates at will. The prophecy states that, at the time of Armageddon, the flow of the Euphrates will be dried up to facilitate the invasion of Israel. It will really be very simple. Just push the button, raise the dam, and the Euphrates stops. But remember, itís only been possible since 1990!
Mark Smith here} Gee, I guess living here in California, the idea of rivers drying up doesn't seem so weird, seeing how almost ALL the rivers here dry up. I guess you never heard of a draught, have you??? And once again, you're lifting content that you didn't write. Shame on you.
An economy run by numbers
Revelation 13:17: ìAnd that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.î
The prophecy simply states that, during the endtime, everyone will need a mark or a number in order to participate in the economy. How could such a system possibly be implemented?
Until recently, it couldnít. Only since the invention of the computer and the advent of the Internet, has the fulfillment of this ancient prophecy been remotely possible. Now it is becoming commonplace to see articles proposing a cashless society. Who hasnít been prevented from using a credit card because of forgetting a PIN number (personal identification number)? Experiments are already being conducted with using eye scans, face scans and fingerprints for proof of identity. Positive ID has become so necessary in a world that increasingly does business ìonline.î
The new money of Europe, the euro, has been in use for over two years. Millions of euros are traded every day. And yet to this point, physical euros do not exist. All transactions have been electronic ñ cashless! Euro notes and coins will be introduced in January 2002. Can a cashless society work? Europe has proven that it can.
Between online transactions and the use of smart cards, the technology presently exists to set up a cashless society. The only blockade is public acceptance. How long will it be before society is able to get used to it?
The Bible is crystal clear that the prophesied economic system will be implemented during the final three and one-
Most of the prophecies of the Bible are written in symbols. Only four or five give the literal name of a person or a place. Two of these special prophecies appear to have come to pass during the last fifteen years.
Mark Smith here} Oh yes, and ALL of us will have the same PIN number: 666 Maybe you'd like to give this one a little more thought, ok???
Chernobyl
In Revelation 8:10-
On April 26, 1986, the worldís worst ever nuclear explosion occurred. The Chernobyl nuclear power plant located in the Ukraine malfunctioned, releasing ten times as much radioactivity into the air as was released at the bombing of Hiroshima in World War II. So far, 125,000 have died as a result of the accident.
The nuclear cloud created by the Chernobyl explosion was carried by the winds into Europe. The resulting nuclear rains filled the rivers of Europe with the nuclide Cesium 137. People who drank the water or ate food touched by the water ingested the deadly nuclide. Doctors and scientists estimate that over 2 million people are presently infected by Cesium 137, which ultimately results in cancer.
The Ukrainian word for wormwood is chernobyl. If we were reading a Ukrainian Bible, the passage would say, ìthe name of the star is called Chernobyl.î
Mark Smith here} You know, today (August 6, 2005) is the 60th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, Japan. Over 200,000 died. I think that qualifies as "the world's worst ever nuclear explosion". What you had at Chernobly was NOT an explosion, but rather a melt down-
Saddam Hussein
Revelation 9:1-
When Saddam Hussein was forced to withdraw from Kuwait in 1991, he wreaked his vengeance by setting 700 of the worldís richest oil wells on fire. As a result, the sun was not seen in the area for the next three months. At noon, it was as dark as at midnight.
In this apocalyptic vision, John saw what he described as locusts coming out of the smoke. Only these were not ordinary locusts. He said that the locusts had breastplates of iron, the faces of men, and their stings were in their tails. John heard the sound of these ìlocusts.î He said, ìthe sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.î
Does this sound like a description of the modern helicopter to you? It does to me! Remember that John had never seen a helicopter. He was merely attempting to record what he saw in his vision.
The most incredible part of this prophecy is verse 11, ìAnd they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon. Both Abaddon and Apollyon mean ìthe destroyer.î Many translations of the Bible literally sayóThey had a king over them whose name is the destroyer.
Why is this so important? When Saddam Hussein was born, his mother decided to name him Saddam because the name means ìthe destroyer.î She did this because her pregnancy had been so terribly painful.
The one who was over the darkening of the sun and the helicopters participating in that war, is called ìthe destroyer.î
Coincidence? You really think so?!
China Waró200 million man army
In summary, the prophecy says that an army of 200 million will trigger a war that will kill one-
Of all the prophecies, this one is by far the most ominous! No matter how we twist and turn its message, it still states that one-
But who will ignite this horrible prophesied holocaust? The Bible describes an army of 200 million. Has there ever been an army of 200 million on the face of the earth? Most nations donít even have a population of 200 millionólet alone an army!
The alarming news is that a nation has made the boast that it can field an army of 200 million. The late leader of China, Mao Tse Tung, bragged that he could field an army of 200 million soldiers. The 1999 Fact Book, put out by the CIA, stated that China had 198 million men of military age (15-
A prophecy that could never before have been fulfilled can now come to pass at any time. Since the Saddam Hussein prophecy happened at the sounding of the 5th Trumpet and the China War will occur at the 6th Trumpet, it is obvious that this terrible event is the next major item on Godís prophetic calendar.
Knowing this, we realize how very dangerous the present conflict between China and the United States actually is!
World army to invade Israel
Zechariah 14:2 states that all nations will come against Jerusalem to battle at the time of Armageddon. Throughout the 2,000 years since this prophecy was given, people have wondered how all nations would be able to gather at Jerusalem.
Only in recent times has it become apparent how this prophecy will be fulfilled. Beginning with the Gulf War in 1990-
Within the last month, the UN Security Council voted on a resolution to send soldiers into Israel to deal with the Israeli-
This failed vote was a precursor to one that will succeed. Whether the United States will decide to allow international intervention in the Middle East or whether UN reforms result in abolishment of the veto power, we donít yet know. But somehow a UN resolution against Israel will be allowed to pass. ResultóArmageddon and the Second Coming.
Great tribulation in Judea
As Judy and I stepped onto the bulletproof bus at Jerusalemís Central Bus Station a few weeks ago, the prophecy of Matthew 24:15-
During the one-
I came away from this unique experience, knowing that I had glimpsed a preview of the Great Tribulation, and it wasnít pretty!
Another compelling sign that we are living in the endtime! Taken alone, most of these prophetic fulfillments might be able to be explained away as coincidental. However, there is a question that sincere, thinking people must ask themselvesÖAt what point does coincidence end and divine providence begin?
Mark Smith here} Once again, you lifted verbatim from a source you failed to cite. You stole this whole thing from "Endtime Ministries", didn't you??? I just did a google search for the sentence in the yellow, and guess what? Endtime ministries not only had THAT sentence, but the one that follows too! Is basic honesty really too much to expect from modern Christians????
From an Instant Message session with the same gentleman} Monday, August 8, 2005 @ 9:45 AM
As The Angels: hi Mark
JCnot4me: hey
As The Angels: whats up
JCnot4me: Looking at your email
As The Angels: by the way ys i did copy the article but it snot anything i had to write. i have studied revelation and the end times. the point of the article i sent to you was that you cannot deny prophecy and its fulfillments. your article on jesus being a fals eprophet is hilarious
As The Angels: you really twisted it
JCnot4me: I think the reason the link didn't work is you need to click "allow links" etc. at the top of the AOL email window.
As The Angels: remember and they knew not (believe dnot) until the flood came
Mark Smith here} So as I suspected, he did plagiarize. But of course, he sees nothing wrong with lifting someone else's words verbatim and pretending they are his own. Why should he? After all, with a simple "I'm sorry Jesus!" he can get instant forgiveness for anything!!! So why be honest, when being dishonest might win the argument, eh???
Continued on
“Part 2} Responses to
Jesus-
