Can God Tell Time? (hell, scrutiny, myth, punishment)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Title taken from Don K. Preston's booklet, "Can God Tell Time?")
In Bible study and interpretation nothing is more ignored or redefined than the over 100 hundred time terms or time statements in the NT.
Why is this so important? Because if Jesus said He was coming back soon to those of His generation but He did not, His entire character and nature is brought into question. If His apostles and inspired writers of the NT taught that He was coming back in their lifetimes but He did not, the trustworthiness of everything they taught is called into question. If the Bible teaches that Christ was coming back in that generation but He did not, then the entire foundation of Christian is justifiably brought under scrutiny and suspicion.
This is the substance of the modern-day assaults on Christianity by those who hate everything Christianity stands for and by those who would love nothing more than to expose it as false and unworthy of following. Since Jesus did not come back as He promised He would, they say, He is a false prophet. Since Jesus did not come back in that generation as the Apostles taught He would, they are false teachers. Since Jesus did not come back in that generation as the Bible predicts He would, the Bible is full of errors and can't be trusted--Christianity is a false religion.
These are serious allegations which are not satisfactorily defended by the futurist teachings of dual fulfillments and postponements theories. In light of the ferocious and persistent attacks on Christianity regarding the time statements in the NT, what is the best defense? Do we stubbornly hold onto our preconceived ideas and eschatological positions and sweep the time references away by a desperate appeal to 2 Peter 3:8? Or do we take Jesus at His Word and the inspired writers at their word and the Bible at its word and look for first-century fulfillments of the things predicted that do justice to and are honest with the numerous time statements found in God's Word?
Comparing Scripture with Scripture, we see that "at hand" means soon. Do we make it mean one thing in one place and another thing in another place? Is that a solid hermeneutical principle? Do we have strong and irrefutable evidence and justification for doing so? For example:
When John wrote that the passover was "at hand," (John 2:13), did he not mean that it was soon to occur? Why, then, does not Revelation 1:3--"the time is at hand"--mean the same thing? When Jesus said in the garden, "Behold, the hour is "at hand," and the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners," (Matt. 26:45) did He not mean near? If it means near or soon in time there, why does it not, then, mean near when James uses it? (James 5:8--"The COMING of the Lord is 'at hand'?").
We must take the words as they are written and within their context, paying close attention to audience relevance. We must not redefine words to fit our preconceived ideas. As a teacher of God's Word, I used this erroneous approach for many years. I now regret the number of people I have led astray and can only hope and pray that the Holy Spirit has helped them overcome my false teachings.
I will never again be overtaken by the teachings of men but seek to take the words of Scripture as they are written regardless of how many long-held and precious beliefs I might have to toss out the window. What saith the Scriptures? Are we willing to be good Bereans and always look at the Word of God afresh lest perhaps we find ourselves partakers of an error? We can become, as I did, so used to seeing a passage in a certain way that we do not always really see it at all! By looking at words and verses openly and honestly each time we see them, we will either further confirm our interpretation or see something we did not see before and perhaps re-evaluate or original assessment.
Who is willing to do that with me? I am not asking that anyone throw out his eschatological views. I am merely asking that we be open to the POSSIBILITY that those many time statements found in the NT actually mean what they appear on the surface to mean? Can we lay aside all of our preconceived ideas and our eschatological perspectives (myself included) and simply look at the words to see what they are saying? Who is willing to do that?
pertaining to time..I still havent had my question about the endtimes and what is happening in the middle east compared with bible prophecy answered. Let me ask this question..does one believe that Jesus could look into the future?
and does one believe the following has already happened?
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: (30) And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (31) And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, AND THEY SHALL GATHER TOGETHER HIS ELECT FROM THE FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF HEAVEN TO THE OTHER." Were the elect gathered together at that time?
I dunno if this helps but according to Einstein time is relative, and I know that God is far smarter than Einstein.
Tell that to your boss when he tells you to be at work at 8:00 a.m.!
Sorry, boss, time is relative!
I meant that in a light-hearted way! But seriously, Tricky D, if we can't trust words to mean what they normally mean, how can we trust anything? If YOU tell a friend you are coming to visit him soon, would he not expect you within a reasonable amount of time that would still qualify it as soon?
We live in a world controlled by time. God communicates with us with our terms of language. If He is going to use words with us that dont' mean what we should normally understand them to mean, is He not, then, becoming a God of confusion? God said He loves us. Does He really hate us? God said that with Him all things are possible. Did He really mean that all things are impossible? Do you see where this leads?
pertaining to time..I still havent had my question about the endtimes and what is happening in the middle east compared with bible prophecy answered. Let me ask this question..does one believe that Jesus could look into the future?
and does one believe the following has already happened?
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: (30) And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (31) And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, AND THEY SHALL GATHER TOGETHER HIS ELECT FROM THE FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF HEAVEN TO THE OTHER." Were the elect gathered together at that time?
I did answer your question, arguy. It does not matter what is happening in the middle east if we are not living in the last days. Furthermore, Matthew 24 contains one of those time references that I wanted to have us look at objectively. But I can see that this is going the way it always goes--people bringing up their preconceived ideas instead of looking at the time references. I am not angry here; I am simply frustrated as I want to get beyond the normal arguments and look at the context and words themselves--just being open to the possibility that they could mean something other than what we have perceived them to mean.
I did not want to get into copying and pasting from others. I wanted to find just someone who was willing to look at the Scriptures. I can find someone who refutes your refutation of Don Preston and then you will find someone who refutes his refutation of the one who refuted Don Preston who refuted . . . . . and on and on and on. What do you tbink about God's time references? I only mentioned Don Preston because I borrowed his title. That's all.
Are we going to look at God's time words?
I can sense that you are already getting defensive about your positions. I didn't want that here. I asked whether we could simply put aside temporarily what we have been taught and simply look ANEW and AFRESH at the words themselves, studying the context, studying the terminology and attempting to take words at their face value.
I am sorry that you misunderstood my intentions here. You have zeroed in on Matthew 24:29-31 without reconciling it with Matthew 24:34--in a logical, reasonable way taking "this generation" in a way in which it is ALWAYS used in the NT. Have you ever truly attempted to take "this generation" literally and sought out other Scripture that would allow vss 29-31 to be fulfilled within that time frame? Is it not possible that there is another way of looking at these verses that would be consistent with "this generation?" Is it not POSSIBLE that these verses are being used in a figurative, metaphorical way?
I am not asking you to change your beliefs--I am merely encouraging you to fully consider all possibilities, for we must take either verses 29-30 literally and redefine "this generation" in a way in which it is never used elsewhere, or we must take "this generation" in its most normal, usual and consistent way and rethink our understanding of the nature of Christ's coming. And it is not just this verse which presents problems. There are, as I said, over 100 hundred time statements that must be looked at seriously and in context. I understand your dilemma because on the surface it appears that Jesus has not yet returned IF we understand it to be in literal clouds and with literal trumpets. Is there some other meaning that is metaphorical or spiritual in Jesus' words concerning the gathering together of the elect? Are there other passages that might shed some light on all of this? Should our first impression of a passage be our final? Does not something within you want to take those time statements in their normal, everyday way but your eschatological viewpoint prevents you from doing so? As I said before, looking of these things seriously and respectfully from another's point of view should only serve to confirm your beliefs if they are solidly founded on God's Word.
Again, I simply wanted to look seriously at these time references and find a way to honestly reconcile them with our beliefs. But another response I just received was to negate the time statements in the Scriptures by Einstein's theory of relativity!
What saith the Scriptures?
Preterist
Last edited by Preterist; 11-30-2007 at 11:27 AM..
Okay..I will indulge this without any websites..just two questions first. Do you believe that Jesus has already came back? and do you believe that the devil is seeking whom he may destroy in todays world?
Okay..I will indulge this without any websites..just two questions first. Do you believe that Jesus has already came back? and do you believe that the devil is seeking whom he may destroy in todays world?
arguy: The answer to your first question: Yes The answer to your second question: No.
I believe that the Scriptures teach (through Jesus' own words and through the words of the inspired writer that He was comiing back in that generation--not in a way in which you suppose, but a coming in judgment similar to the comings of God in the OT during which He used the instrumentality of other nations to exact His punishment. These are often portrayed as "cloud" comings--they are shrouded in prophetic, apocalyptic, metaphorical language. In other words, there is often the use of symbols such as clouds and trumpets, and upheavals in the heavens to picture this judgment coming of God. Jesus' disciples clearly understood that type of prophetic language and would have understood His meaning in Matthew 24:29-31. This type of coming of God in judgment was nothing new to them.
When the temple and the city were destroyed in A.D. 70 "every" eye of those first-century Jews guilty of all the righteous blood shed on the earth (Matthew 23) "saw" it. Even those who pierced Him saw it--not in some resurrection bodies but in their own earthly bodies. Jesus told Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that they would "see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and COMING on the CLOUDS of heaven."
Is it not POSSIBLE, arguy, that such an interpretation is consistent with the teachings of Scripture? Based on Jesus' warning to those apostate Jews of His day ("Behold your house is being left onto you desolate"), His predictions to Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that they themselves would see His "coming", and His predictions to the Twelve in Matthew 10:23 that the Son of Man would "come" before they themselves had finished going through the cities of Israel, is it not at least within the realm of REASONABLENESS for some to take these words at their face value? Is there not a REASONABLE way of viewing Jesus' return in another way than that which you take it? Could you not at least concede that your way of looking at Christ's return gives you some difficulty with the time texts as we must concede that there are apparent problems with literal fulfillments when the time texts are taken at face value?
"Come, let us reason together."
Preterist
Last edited by Preterist; 11-30-2007 at 12:04 PM..
I meant that in a light-hearted way! But seriously, Tricky D, if we can't trust words to mean what they normally mean, how can we trust anything?
Compare a kiss of a minute and sticking your hand in a fire for a minute.
See which minute you think seems longer.
I know for sure that a minute of bliss is fleeting and a minute of agony seems forever.
Anyway, since people did not have watches or another exact time measure instrument, claiming that a day has 24 hours is a stretch. I mean in Norway, and other countries close to the North Pole, a day (being light or dark) can be far longer than just 24 hours.
I don't care either way tho, because I do not take Genesis and Revelations literal. Of the two I find Genesis more important because I classify it as a creation myth. Not that a creation myth is unimportant, because they are. They give me a valuable psychological insight of how the people at the time that Genesis was written down viewed themselves, much like a message in a time bottle.
arguy: The answer to your first question: Yes The answer to your second question: No.
I believe that the Scriptures teach (through Jesus' own words and through the words of the inspired writer that He was comiing back in that generation--not in a way in which you suppose, but a coming in judgment similar to the comings of God in the OT during which He used the instrumentality of other nations to exact His punishment. These are often portrayed as "cloud" comings--they are shrouded in prophetic, apocalyptic, metaphorical language. In other words, there is often the use of symbols such as clouds and trumpets, and upheavals in the heavens to picture this judgment coming of God. Jesus' disciples clearly understood that type of prophetic language and would have understood His meaning in Matthew 24:29-31. This type of coming of God in judgment was nothing new to them.
When the temple and the city were destroyed in A.D. 70 "every" eye of those first-century Jews guilty of all the righteous blood shed on the earth (Matthew 23) "saw" it. Even those who pierced Him saw it--not in some resurrection bodies but in their own earthly bodies. Jesus told Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that they would "see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and COMING on the CLOUDS of heaven."
Is it not POSSIBLE, arguy, that such an interpretation is consistent with the teachings of Scripture? Based on Jesus' warning to those apostate Jews of His day ("Behold your house is being left onto you desolate"), His predictions to Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that they themselves would see His "coming", and His predictions to the Twelve in Matthew 10:23 that the Son of Man would "come" before they themselves had finished going through the cities of Israel, is it not at least within the realm of REASONABLENESS for some to take these words at their face value? Is there not a REASONABLE way of viewing Jesus' return in another way than that which you take it? Could you not at least concede that your way of looking at Christ's return gives you some difficulty with the time texts as we must concede that there are apparent problems with literal fulfillments when the time texts are taken at face value?
"Come, let us reason together."
Preterist
okay let us reason..I have no difficulty with the time text as Jesus was both man and God, thus having the ability to see into the future.
If the Rapture "has already taken place", then the resurrection has already taken place. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15 writes of the day when the final "trumpet" for believers will be blown and mortality will put on immortality. In this passage, he links the Rapture with the resurrection of believers. In other words, when the Rapture takes place, the resurrection occurs.
If Matthew 24 are history and say that the "generation that sees these things" was that generation with Jesus nearly 2,000 years ago, it must show that the resurrection has also taken place. The only way that is possible is to spiritualize the text by saying that the resurrection was a spiritual one and not a physical one. Is that what you believe as well?
Last edited by arguy1973; 11-30-2007 at 12:59 PM..
Reason: misspelled words..lots of them
If these things have come to pass, why is it then that the final war has not been waged, satan vanquished to the firey pit of hell, and what happened to the reigning of our King, Jesus for a 1000 years, and why is there still death and still lost souls? Why is there still the war for good and evil?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I dunno if this helps but according to Einstein time is relative, and I know that God is far smarter than Einstein.
I mean in Norway, and other countries close to the North Pole, a day (being light or dark) can be far longer than just 24 hours.
