Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - lapwing

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 279
1531
Quote
You couldn't know that anyway -- how can you know who is still alive out of lots and lots of people?
But there will be a time when the generation has passed away and after long enough (100+ years) you would know it was the case. So one would then know that the parousia should happen or should have happened. But this knowledge is reserved for the Father according to Jesus in this passage.

Explanation: "these things" refer to the nearer green shoots of the fig tree i.e. the ongoing signs for the second coming. "That day" refers to the more remote second coming. Otherwise why does Jesus use the example of the fig tree?

1532
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:50:37 AM »
Worship/Obeisance
The same word is used for the worship of God at Mt 4:10; Jn 4:21-24; 12:20; 1 Cor 14:25; Rev 4:10;5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 14:7; 19:4, 10; 22:9

Quote
It was not worship that the magi offered to Jesus. It was obeisance. The Greek pro·sky·ne′o corresponds closely to the Hebrew hish·ta·chawah′ as to conveying the thought of both obeisance to creatures and worship to God or a deity. The context dictates the rendering.
Your mistake here Jem is to first assume that Jesus is not God and then to interpret proskyneo according to your presupposition.

This word ( proskyneo) can be used for worship of God: true or false?

You cannot deny Jesus is God just from this word.

Quote
They never thought Jesus was God.
We don't know what they thought.

1533
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Was Jesus born in Bethlehem?
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:32:13 AM »
idunno provided this link previously:

http://www.orlutheran.com/html/census.html

Quoting:
Quote
But what of the census that Luke 2:1 speaks of? Is there any record outside of the Bible that Augustus ever issued such a decree? Yes. As a matter of fact he authorized three censuses during this reign. How do we know this? The three censuses are listed in the Acts of Augustus, a list of what Augustus thought were the 35 greatest achievements of his reign. He was so proud of the censuses that he ranked them eighth on the list. The Acts of Augustus were placed on two bronze plaques outside of Augustus's mausoleum after he died.

The three empire-wide censuses were in 28 B.C., 8 B.C., and 14 A.D. In all probability the one in 8 B.C. is the one the Luke mentions in the Christmas story. Even though scholarship normally dates Christ's birth between 4 and 7 B.C., the 8 B.C. census fits because in all likelihood it would have taken several years for the bureaucracy of the census to reach Palestine.

The key to solving this alleged puzzle, is in the phrase "first census" in the sentence, "This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governing Syria." What does Luke mean by a first census? One theory offered is that the Greek word for "first" (prote) is sometimes translated "prior to" or "before." This is a viable solution because the Greek text of Luke 2:2 can indeed be translated, "This census was before Quirinius was governing Syria."

A second theory holds that by saying "first census" Luke is telling his readers that there was another census that Quirinius oversaw. Was there a second one? Yes, and Luke mentions it in the Acts 5:37! The second census mentioned in Acts would have taken place in 6 A.D. Since it is well known that the Romans often held provincial censuses every fourteen years, it would follow that the "first census," the one at the time of Christ's birth, would have been held in approximately 8 B.C. -- if the fourteen year census cycle was in place at this time. The problem with this second solution is that Luke is specifically saying that the first census (the 8 B.C. one) took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria; and from all available extrabiblical sources, he wasn't. According to E.M. Blaiklock, however, evidence has been found that shows that Quirinius was in Syria for an earlier tour of duty, right around the time that Christ was born. He wasn't there as governor but in some other leadership capacity.4 Therefore, it is possible that Luke is alluding to this in 2:2.

Some scholars have scoffed at the notion that people in faraway Palestine (such as Joseph and Mary) would have had to travel to their ancestral birth place for a census. But we have evidence to show that such traveling was indeed done with a Roman census, in Egypt at least. A Roman census document, dated 104 A.D., has been discovered in Egypt, in which citizens were specifically commanded to return to their original homes for the census.6 Another census document from 119 A.D. has been found in which an Egyptian man identifies himself by giving (1) his name and the names of his father, mother, and grandfather; (2) his original village; (3) his age and profession; (4) a scar above his left eyebrow; (5) his wife's name and age, his wife's father's name; (6) his son's name and age; (6) the names of other relatives living with him. The document is signed by the village registrar and three official witnesses.7 This latter document is of special interest, because it gives us an idea of the kind of information that Joseph and Mary would have had to provide for the census.
#census
#Quirinius

1534
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:17:40 AM »
Snoochies,

It was the humble tax collector that went home justified not the proud Pharisee. Your last post was similar to what the tax collector prayed.

1535
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:10:58 AM »
Jem

Quote
It moved and came to a stop where Jesus was living in a "house" (not the stable) with his parents.
Literally this reads "stood over where the child was". the word for where can refer to a mountain, a town (e.g. Nazareth) or village (Emmaus), the upper room, the land of Midian etc. So it could have stood over Bethlehem as a whole rather than the dwelling where Jesus was. You may be right but the Bible is not as precise about how the star led them to Jesus as you make out.

Quote
There were "treasures" given as gifts to Jesus as a royal heir, so when Jesus was presented at the temple by his parents, they would have broken God's law by offering two turtle doves....the sacrifice of the poor.
This is a mistake. We are told in Luke's gospel that Jesus was presented in the temple on the eighth day to be circumcised. From Matthew we can work out that Jesus was approaching two years old when the Magi came. Your attack on Mary and Joseph is wrong and distasteful.

Remember that astronomy is literally regulation of the stars whereas astrology is words of (from) the stars or theory of the stars. The astrology of this story is the correct prediction from the observation that a king of Israel has been born. Matthew includes the story since it shows Gentiles paying homage to Jesus and shows Jesus to be the rightful king of Israel not Herod. There is precedent for God to use Gentiles to achieve his purpose e.g. Cyrus. It is virtually certain that Cyrus would have consulted the Magi. The responsibility for the death of the infants lays with Herod.

Quote
Jesus and his apostles foretold that Christianity would be corrupted
Are you sure about this Jem? What scripture says this explicitly?

1536
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 20, 2014, 04:15:56 PM »
jdschoone,

Quote
having discovered from prophecy
I admit this was ambiguous. The acount tells us that the chief priests and scribes worked it out from prophecy, they informed Herod who told the Magi. I omitted those intervening steps, not because I didn't think they were in the account as they clearly are, but just for brevity.

It was logical for them to go to Jerusalem as that was the capital where the ruler would live: Bethlehem was just a village near Jerusalem.

Quote
Second, it doesn't say that the star appeared, then disappeared,
The Magi saw the star in the east (v10). This is aorist tense: a single completed action in the past.
The Magi saw the star again on the way to Bethlehem. This is aorist tense: a single completed action in the past.
The star then led the magi to Bethlehem. This is imperfect tense - the star leads them to Bethlehem and to Jesus: only now do we have an ongoing leading.
Given that Herod had all the children up to the age of two killed, it's likely that the star first appeared to the Magi two years before they came to Jerusalem. (Herod asked them when the star had first appeared - why do you think he did that?)

Quote
So yes, it was visible all the time, probably hanging above Jerusalem
The text and the verb tenses do not support this view

Quote
What matters is that the star led them to Jerusalem first
The text does not say this.

Quote
I don't know what you are trying to say here.
Num 24:17 may be Messianic although Luther doubted it with the source being Balaam. Yes the star here is metaphorical of authority but there is an allusive connection between Num 24:17 and the Star of Bethlehem.

1537
I agree with that lapwing.

That's good to hear ericbwonder. Note that the disagreements we've had in the past and may have in the future are not personal.

1538
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:20:00 PM »
Quote from: jdschoone
So the Magi followed the star to Jerusalem ... So the star moved away from Jerusalem and went to Bethlehem
The Bible doesn't say this. The Magi saw the star in the east and came to Jerusalem. It doesn't say they followed the star to Jerusalem. It was logical the Magi would go to Jerusalem (the capital) to find out about the birth of the king of Israel.

Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, 2“Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him ... Then Herod secretly called the magi and determined from them the exact time the star appeared. 8And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him.” 9After hearing the king, they went their way; and the star, which they had seen in the east, went on before them until it came and stood over the place where the Child was. 10When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 11After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him.

The star guided the Magi to Bethlehem after they had left Jerusalem having discovered from prophecy (edit: being informed by the chief priests via Herod) that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. If the star was always visible to the Magi, leading them to Jerusalem and while they were in Jerusalem, then why did the Magi rejoice when they saw it on the way to Bethlehem (v10). The obvious deduction is that the star only appeared to them at this time after they had first seen it in the east (v1). The tense of the verb to see the star in v10 is aorist i.e. a single action in the past.

There's no report of anyone else seeing the star in Jerusalem. Would this not have affected what Herod and the chief priests said?

The account shows that Jesus is the rightful king of Israel and implies Jesus' future mission to the Gentiles. There is an allusion to Num 24:17.

A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel. He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the people of Sheth.

The person who bears the responsibility for the death of the infants in Bethlehem is Herod, and the soldiers who carried out his orders.

1539
I don't think one can read too much from the idea of delay in the parable of the ten virgins to how long the Parousia will be delayed. The bridegroom would lead the bride in procession from her parents' home to his parents' home - and would be accompanied by people carrying torches (wooden staves tied together). The delay could be due to extended haggling over what would be paid to the bride if the bride was divorced or the husband died. This idea of a delay is introduced so that the bridegroom's coming would be unexpected. The point of the parable is to enjoin readiness in Christ's followers. It's not about when the Parousia will happen.

1540
Fiction - Anna Karenina
Christian - How to Read the Bible for all its Worth
Other non fiction - The Diary of Anne Frank
Comedy - P G Wodehouse
Poetry/Drama - Samson Agonistes by Milton

1541
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: The Bethlehem Star
« on: July 20, 2014, 08:30:56 AM »
The Bible doesn't say the star led the Magi to Herod. The Magi saw the star in the east and went to the local authorities to find out what they knew - apparently unwitting of how murderous Herod was. The star led the Magi to Jesus in Bethlehem. According to your thesis, Jem,  the Magi should not have travelled to Palestine at all. Is that what you think?

1542

He also said he didn't "know about the day or hour" yet he is supposed to be saying it will all happen within a generation.
Which is entirely logically compatible.
If I say, "I'm getting a delivery today, but I don't know the exact time", then that is perfectly logical right?
But then one could wait until the generation is about to pass away (or midnight in your example) and say it must be now. Jesus is saying that the knowledge of when "the day" will come is reserved to the Father until it happens, independent of when it will happen.

In Mt 24:33 & 34 "these things" uses the demonstrative pronoun of proximity (οὗτος Strong 3778 see http://biblehub.com/greek/3778.htm )

In Mt 24:36 in "that day" that is the demonstrative pronoun of remoteness (ἐκεῖνος Strong 1565 see http://biblehub.com/greek/1565.htm. )

That day is the remote second coming whereas these things are the nearer green shoot indications of the second coming.

1543
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Was Jesus born in Bethlehem?
« on: July 20, 2014, 04:09:29 AM »
Thank you very much for your efforts! This helped me alot! I've read your post several times and it makes really sense for me, but one thing i still don´t understand. If the census was taken 6/7 CE and Jesus was born 7-2 BC then there is a gap of almost 10 years. How do you explain this gap?

Thank you very much!

It says "first" census implying there was more than one. The later one would be the second census.

1544
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Prophecy, Typology etc.
« on: July 19, 2014, 05:47:41 PM »
One passage that is often discussed here is:

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.”39He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here. 42The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here. from Mt 12

It is clear this is indirect typology rather than direct verbal prophecy. The book of Jonah does not prophecy about a future Messiah who will be 3 days in the earth. As Beale says we are moving from the lesser to the greater: big fish/earth; Nineveh/whole world; not resurrection/resurrection. Jesus draws an uncomplimentary comparison between the Pharisees and the Ninevites. The latter knew nothing of Jonah's rescue from the fish but only heard his preaching. "3 days" is Jewish idiom for any part of 3 consecutive 24 hour periods but the time period is not the only or even main comparison. So doesn't this mean that endless discussions about the time period is straining at a gnat and missing the camel.

#prophecy
#typology
#signofJonah

1545
Yet, there is indication that Jesus referred to his coming as being "delayed" or a "long time"

Matthew 25
The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

He also said he didn't "know about the day or hour" yet he is supposed to be saying it will all happen within a generation. Conclusion "these things" of 24:34 does not mean everything Jesus said and certainly does not include the second coming.

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 279
anything