Adam and Eve? Not really, and here is the real story... (Holy Spirit, gospels)

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by Matadora View Post
Most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet who expected an imminent end to the world (see Matthew 24:34).

Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Then most New Testament scholars are wrong.

Originally Posted by Matadora

Sorry Euse this is just more evidence that you can't handle reality. Your mind goes to the "they are wrong" mode whenever you are presented with facts that fly in the face of your personal narrative.

No most modern day scholars are not wrong. It's you who is wrong...fact it.

I realize you are sorry. It is hard for me to be humble when I am right all the time but I manage.

Now then you made a statement that **Most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet.**

That is a totally bogus statement. Most New Testament scholars today do not see Jesus as a failed apocalyptic prophet.

I have a plethora of Bible scholars who do not agree with you.

Just for one, here is Adam Clarke's Commentary on the New Testament on Matthew 24:34:

Matthew 24:34
This generation shall not pass - Η γενεα αυτη, this race; i.e. the Jews shall not cease from being a distinct people, till all the counsels of God relative to them and the Gentiles be fulfilled. Some translate η γενεα αυτη, this generation, meaning the persons who were then living, that they should not die before these signs, etc., took place: but though this was true, as to the calamities that fell upon the Jews, and the destruction of their government, temple, etc., yet as our Lord mentions Jerusalem’s continuing to be under the power of the Gentiles till the fullness of the Gentiles should come in, i.e. till all the nations of the world should receive the Gospel of Christ, after which the Jews themselves should be converted unto God, Rom_11:25, etc., I think it more proper not to restrain its meaning to the few years which preceded the destruction of Jerusalem; but to understand it of the care taken by Divine providence to preserve them as a distinct people, and yet to keep them out of their own land, and from their temple service. See on Mar_13:30 (note). But still it is literally true in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem. John probably lived to see these things come to pass; compare Mat_16:28, with Joh_21:22; and there were some rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these words who lived till the city was destroyed,

See? I am right again and, once again, as usual, you are wrong.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by Eusebius
The enemies are anything that keeps mankind from God being All in all such as death being one of the enemies.

Yes, we are assured it is Jesus at the right hand of God.

Originally Posted by 303Guy

That seems like a little interpretation gymnastics to make a poem say what you want it to mean. In my opinion, a bible literalist should read the bible as written. The verse mentions two lords, not the son of God or Jesus or even the son of man. I'm not accepting your interpretation that one of the lords refers to Jesus.

No, the verse, properly translated, has "Yahweh" and then "Lord." "Yahweh said to my Lord . . . ."

"Interpretation gymnastics"? No, not at all:
1 Corinthians 15:25-26 For He must be reigning until He should be placing all His enemies under His feet. (26) The last enemy is being abolished: death.

See? I was right after all. Now eateth thine humble pie, knave.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

I have a plethora of Bible scholars who do not agree with you.
Just for one, here is Adam Clarke's Commentary on the New Testament on Matthew 24:34:

Really but you only list one who was around in the 1700's HAHAHA

You don't read very well do you? I said most most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet who expected an imminent end to the world.

Today is the 21st Century. Your guy was from the 18th Century.

[TroutDude]

Originally Posted by Matadora

Really but you only list one who was around in the 1700's HAHAHA

You don't read very well do you? I said most most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet who expected an imminent end to the world.

Today is the 21st Century. Your guy was from the 18th Century.

Which is actually much more current than most of Eusie's citations.

[303Guy]

Originally Posted by eusebius

see? I was right after all. Now eateth thine humble pie, knave. :d

:d

Does anyone else have problems with the green smiley face? When I post I often get the "D" changed to "d" which obviously doesn't work. Even those inside of quotes, as above.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by Matadora

Really but you only list one who was around in the 1700's HAHAHA

You don't read very well do you? I said most most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet who expected an imminent end to the world.

Today is the 21st Century. Your guy was from the 18th Century.

Oh whipty do. Even if every last human on earth believed Jesus was a failed prophet, that does not prove so. Your building a premise around "most modern scholars today believe Jesus was a failed prophet" is to employ the fallacy of "argumentum ad populum."

What you need to do is to create a verifiable poll and ask 10,000 scholars today if they believe Jesus is a failed prophet. But even then, should the majority believe He was, that still does not establish truth.

[Snowball7]

Eusebius, Matadora is not even listening to or attempting to understand
the point here. For example this discussion has moved into a note on
Matthew 24:34 which in the modern connotation of the English language
(two points of lingualist separation) appears to say "this generation" akin
to "the hippie generation", or "the greatest generation", or "millenials".
This modern definition of the word is not projectable into the New Testament
meaning which was "this race of humanity", "this begetting and reproducing",
which essentially refers to all men, humanity itself, as it was created.
That is what Christ meant in his Olivet Discourse, which was a portmanteau
of events to come shortly and events to come in the more distant future.

Once a point has been made that is irrefeutable such as this, we must refrain
from useless, unproductive bantering with non-believers; Saint Paul said to
argue back at them TWICE, but not three times. Titus 3:9-11

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Oh whipty do. Even if every last human on earth believed Jesus was a failed prophet, that does not prove so. Your building a premise around "most modern scholars today believe Jesus was a failed prophet" is to employ the fallacy of "argumentum ad populum."

Jesus was certainly a failed apocalyptic prophet and the bible has plenty of evidence to prove it. It's just that you can't handle reality.

Originally Posted by Eusebius

What you need to do is to create a verifiable poll and ask 10,000 scholars today if they believe Jesus is a failed prophet. But even then, should the majority believe He was, that still does not establish truth.

No I don't. All it takes is paying attention to what was written and reading what the modern scholars consensus says which I can verify on my own by reading what's written. It's not rocket science Euse.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by Matadora

Jesus was certainly a failed apocalyptic prophet and the bible has plenty of evidence to prove it. It's just that you can't handle reality.

Actually He wasn't as you say.

No I don't.

Yes, in fact, you do.

All it takes is paying attention to what was written and reading what the modern scholars consensus says which I can verify on my own by reading what's written. It's not rocket science Euse.

Sure, I'm sure you read a hundred or so Bible scholars every day just to keep up with what they are doing. I'm not inclined to believe you. You have no proof to back up your statement.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Actually He wasn't as you say.
Yes, in fact, you do.
Sure, I'm sure you read a hundred or so Bible scholars every day just to keep up with what they are doing. I'm not inclined to believe you. You have no proof to back up your statement.

You respond just as a child would. I have posted all of my evidence. I can't make you read it. Go right ahead and whine and throw your usually childish behavior around in these posts as demonstrated here.