Paul, a false prophet?

Yes. EDIT: The coming of the kingdom of God,if that counts.

They didn't come true because you said so ?

It wasn't just a mistranslation there guy, I mean, he was talking to the crowd of the time and he said "this generation" more than once as he prophesied after the signs of the times,tribulation,destruction of the temple,etc.. came to pass, 'it was near'.

 

It didn't come true because all those people are dead and the world didn't end.

 

The cross reference to that passage in Matt reads slightly different. very similar meaning but different words.

This is a good example of how things in the Bible often need to be taken with a grain of salt because these were stories written about stories.

Regardless of which passage we take .. It did not happen.

Here are some of thee things that must occur:

Was the Gospel preached to the whole world in the lifetimes of those Jesus was talking to ? Clearly not.

And one of my favorite passages.

“

Was the abomination of desolation set up in Jerusalem ? Possibly ..

This never happened

Nor did this.

Do not confuse the destruction of the temple with the comming of the end.

The end did not come.

You can claim that Jesus was referring to the destruction of the Temple but this passage then has nothing to do with anyone seeing the kingdom of heaven which was your original premise.

No one sees the kingdom of heaven while still alive until the end times come .. when Jesus comes back to earth with a big commotion and so forth.

No one is "born of the spirit" until the first die .. no one see's the kingdom of heaven, until they die or until the kingdom is brought to earth.

The "born again" stuff promoted by Pentacostals is not Biblical.

 

Is your 'word' not good enough for some people? Are things that you would relate to others so questionable?

Well, I remember in this short span of my life (62 years now) that there was a time when people used to live by the old saying "my word is my bond". Even the court system relies upon the 'word' of eye-witnesses. So, if you were a witness to this event, your word is supposed to be acceptable. Is your 'word' no good anymore? Has the 'word' of man become so tarnished with the multitude of lies and fabrications that the word of man is no longer to be his 'bond'? If society has reached that point where the word of a man is no longer acceptable as his/her "bond", then it is equally important that we all question, with the same degree of intensity, the word of a scientist. His/her word is no better than that of the next man... filled with dubiety.

 

Existence based on faith is non-existence. If all you have is faith to support your belief in god then there is no god. If there is NOT ONE fact to support your faith, then your faith is foolish for it is not based on fact.

 

Charles Manson had visions that he was Jesus, as did Jim Jones. Believing in visions and dreams instead of facts and evidence is beyond foolish, it is idiocy.

 

A hopeful statement is NOT a prophecy, lol. In fact, there may not be answers to all questions people ask and if someone says there are, then they are wrong. People can ask some awful stupid and ignorant questions, such as the immovable object, irresistible force idiocy.

 

...Or statements such as .. science will end the need for religion.

 

I'm not talking about "The cross reference," I'm talking about Jesus telling his disciples the kingdom being near after the signs happened.

Says you again ?

Sure.. Clearly you think they meant the whole 'globe' ... They didn't ..

(Col. 1:5b-6) ~5 the gospel, 6which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing

The abomination of desolation (Daniel) is refers to armies surrounding Jerusalem in the first century. This happened in the fall of a.d. 66 under Cestius Gallus.

Too much to write about this tonight and I have been busy but I will return and answer to this.

You are in a futuristic mindset and there is much you are missing.

John the baptist baptized with water,a ritual cleansing to mark the Spiritual Baptism that Jesus baptizes with.

 

Talk with any lawyer or judge, they will confirm this as stats do. Eyewitness reports are one of the easiest ways to get a conviction. But, eyewitness reports are more often wrong than any other form of evidence. OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, what people say happened, never did, people identified by multiple witnesses proven to have not been within a hundred miles at the time of the event. An eyewitness report immediately after the event is one of the most unreliable forms of information. By the way, we have NOT one known eyewitness report to any of the events in the NT. The books of the NT were written mostly by unknown authors and only attributed by tradition to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and the others. So, we have words written by unknown authors, many many years after the fact, hmmm, by people with unknown reasons for doing said writing, hmmmmm.

 

Yep, that statement is indeed hopeful and totally foolish, as long as mankind remains ignorant, foolish, superstitious and fearful.

 

Then you admit that atheists and other non-theists who would make such remarks are in fact "foolish"? Cool.

 

No Sir .. the abomination of desolation in Daniel refers to Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiochus_IV_Epiphanes

See page 40 below:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=9PH...ge&q=awful horror in daniel antiochus&f=false

and page 73 here

http://books.google.ca/books?id=-sT...nepage&q=awful horror in daniel titus&f=false

 

Yes, anyone that thinks that the 90 percent of human kind that is ignorant, stupid, superstitious and fearful will ever drop religion is quite foolish.

 

So which percentile group do you belong to?

 

A wiki link, really ? I could just have offered up this to argue against your re-birth (Born again) case. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_again_(Christianity)

Still looking through the futuristic interpretation I see.

Look:

 

First off .. I agree with you that wiki links often prove nothing.

In this case it was not intended to, nor does it, claim that the abomination of desolation relates to Antiochus IV.

It was for you to read about this fellow and decide for yourself whether it fits the prediction. The link is not "contraversial" because it has no reason to be.

It is giving the simple history of Antiochus. Debate the message not the messenger.

The two other references I gave you do claim that Antiochus was the Awfull horror described in Daniel.

I would hope that you would not just discount a book titled "Christ Will Come Again: Hope for the Second Coming of Jesus"

The Abomination in Daniel is thought to be Antiochus by Biblical Scholars of Today.

That Jesus was predicting a similar type of Abomination that could be related to the events of 66 AD is quite possible as well.

What is clear is that the ,end of the world, so to speak, did not happen.

Another possibility that needs to be considered is that the writer of Matt was writing of events that had already happened.

 

My mistake. I saw "Sacking of Jerusalem and persecution of Jews," and in no way do I find that to be the prophesy.

It's not that I discount it but I have reason to believe otherwise as I have laid out in my previous post.

I am aware.

Please be more specific when you say "the end of the world."

Very doubtful to me because he didn't mention the destruction of the temple. None of the Gospels did.

 

Yes, and many of the the rabbis think this, and they associated the OT verses with setting up Pagan images in the Temple.

Did you look at 1Maccabees?

I can post it if anyone wants to read it.

 

I did .. thx.

I think one of the important ideas is that Antiochus set himself up as someone who speaks for God.

Constantine also did this as did the Church after. The abomination (an institution that claims to speak for God). The Jews were persecuted and killed just as Antiochus did.

The difference between Antiochus is that the institution set up by Constantine has lasted for over 1600 years.

 

Check out 1 Maccabees - it gives a detailed description of the abomination.

This still leaves the question of what Jesus was talking about.

All the things mentioned after in Ch 24, some of these listed in a earlier post are the did not happen. The world did not end.

This is why I think the metaphor refers to abomination set up by Constantine.

What I have read of Titus does not seem to fit the bill . Some accounts claim that he did not even want to the temple destroyed but that it caught on fire accidentally.

The main thing is that I did not find any reference to Titus claiming to be God and setting up the abomination in the Temple.

I have not found anything myself but would be interested to read anything that you have found.

 

Have you read the Catholic Encyclopedia article which discusses the different opinions on this?

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046a.htm

 

Unfortunately the Catholic Encyclopedia does not discuss my theory that "The Catholic Church" is the Abomination of Desolation.

Go figure !

 

LOL! I get a kick out of it everytime I hear this idea, as it would have been earlier when Paul added pagan ideas into the Hebrew teachings.

This means ALL Christian Churches fit the title.

 

Hmmm .. perhaps I need to move my timeline back further.

Paul really did not have much power though.

I was never a big fan of his writings or the writings by others that were attributed to him in any case.

Also . .Paul did not kill and torture folks, and persecute and kill jews in the name of God for over 1000 years.