You're dodging again, King Phy. It's very weird and telling that you can't bring yourself to comment on the veracity and/or truthfulness of the 12 Mormon witnesses, Joseph Smith and the Angel Moroni.
You and Father Fuentes and 55 YO have already been corrected on Matthew 24:34.
As El Rey Del Fisica, I don’t dodge nothing! I enter all things and speak as much truth as I can muster from the depths of my soul. There is nothing to account for. There is not angel moroni or Joseph Smith mentioned in La Biblia. It’s true.
if you want a real explanation I would say Joseph is schizophrenic and hears voices and saw visions and that’s how to account for his story!
As La Raza Cosmica, I'm here to tell you that you are dodging again. It needs to stop.
We're talking about the 12 Mormon witnesses and Angel Moroni. You're claiming they were all somehow suffering schizophrenia at the same time, with the same imaginary voices and visions? That's highly unlikely.
And how does it matter that the Bible doesn't mention the Angel Moroni? The Bible never purports to be a comprehensive list of all the angels. There are thousands of unmentioned angels. This Angel Moroni took it upon itself to lead Joseph Smith to golden plates that had text in reformed Egyptian on them -- which at least 12 non-schizophrenic people saw as well -- and have Joseph Smith transcribe them. As it turns out, the golden plates -- which were drafted hundreds of years before the New Testament -- were actually the text of the third Book of the current Bible. The Mormons have the witness testimony for this.
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them."
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them."
I wonder what his definition of a "good" life was?
I'm pretty sure he married off his young daughter to her uncle or something. The notion of "good" tends to change with the times.
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
added
Anyway, getting back to the OP's question: "Why do Christian's believe you go to hell if you don't accept Jesus?"
The reason is because this is a very effective tool to manipulate the masses.
Nobody really wants to go to hell. Better to say that you believe in Jesus (whether you really do, or whether you even know what it means to 'believe in Jesus', or not.
Apparently you don't. Best of luck to you sir as the Trumpets will sound and you'll be too late.
As El Rey Del Fisica, I don’t dodge nothing! I enter all things and speak as much truth as I can muster from the depths of my soul. There is nothing to account for. There is not angel moroni or Joseph Smith mentioned in La Biblia. It’s true.
if you want a real explanation I would say Joseph is schizophrenic and hears voices and saw visions and that’s how to account for his story!
As La Raza Cosmica, I'm here to tell you that you are dodging again. It needs to stop.
We're talking about the 12 Mormon witnesses and Angel Moroni. You're claiming they were all somehow suffering schizophrenia at the same time, with the same imaginary voices and visions? That's highly unlikely.
And how does it matter that the Bible doesn't mention the Angel Moroni? The Bible never purports to be a comprehensive list of all the angels. There are thousands of unmentioned angels. This Angel Moroni took it upon itself to lead Joseph Smith to golden plates that had text in reformed Egyptian on them -- which at least 12 non-schizophrenic people saw as well -- and have Joseph Smith transcribe them. As it turns out, the golden plates -- which were drafted hundreds of years before the New Testament -- were actually the text of the third Book of the current Bible. The Mormons have the witness testimony for this.
One reason you shouldn't believe the Book of Mormon is because scientific evidence doesn't support the wild claims about race wars with horses. Moreover, Smith never imagined that the Egyptian writings he purchased and "interpreted" would some day become readable. Today's Egyptologists have established that Smith fabricated his translations. There is a great podcast available ("Mormon Stories") that details the process of Mormon faith when it becomes unraveled as its practitioners encounter aspects of the religions origins and learn about Joseph Smith's true character (e.g., treasure digging, multiple wives some of which were recruited when quite young). The Mormon Church does not want its parishioners to listen to this podcast! I remember those claimed witnesses you mention being discussed. That, too, was fraudulent, but I can't remember how that was specifically sorted out. If you're happy with your faith and situation and want to stay, don't listen to Mormon Stories. If you're a curious, progressive sort, like myself, you cannot help it because how that church started and grew within the US is fascinating.
It's something you choose to believe. Probably because your father and mother had the same convictions.
All these (often conflicting) stories have been written by people long after Jesus' death.
If your parents were Mormons you'd be a Mormon.
False. I have many atheists in the Family. My parents did not have any convictions that I believe in because they are my parents. At 22 years old I can make my own decisions based on my life up to this point and what I've learned.
If your parents were Mormons, then yes, "you'd" be a Mormon. Not me.
Jesus is about Faith. It is not a false equivalency as another poster said. Truly, you haven't read the Bible nor have you most likely even been to Church.
God sent is son to suffer on the cross for my sins, your sins and the sins of the World. There has never been anyone like Jesus, ever. The crowds who witnessed him being crucified were estimated to be between 60-80,000. Jesus brought 2 people back from the dead with many, many witnesses.
You choose not to believe and that's fine as it's your choice. When the trumpets sound, you will not be rising into Heaven.
According to the Bible, when Jesus returns, many things will happen, including: The Rapture: Jesus will come for his church, and the living and dead in Christ will be taken to heaven. The resurrection: The dead in Christ will be raised with bodies similar to Christ's. The judgment: Jesus will judge the nations and separate the righteous from the wicked. The Millennium: Jesus will reign on earth for 1,000 years. The destruction of the wicked: The wicked will be destroyed. The establishment of a new government: Jesus will establish his government on earth. The reward: Jesus will bring his reward with him, with eternal life for those who obeyed him. The Bible also says that Jesus will come to liberate and bring peace, but he will have to fight against nations first. The armies of the earth will join forces against Jesus, but they will fail. While the exact timing of Jesus' return is unknown, Christians are encouraged to be ready at all times.
The problem here is that you are using the word "generation" as a specific age range, when the Bible uses it to also mean another thing: a group of people who are alike, whether it be a mindset, or a trait of heritage. In the Psalms, it is used to describe people who have a wicked mindset (not a specific time period), whereas other places use that term to speak of the Jewish nation as a whole.
The problems here for you are Father Fuentes are many.
1. You say Psalms has a particular definition or use for the term “this generation” but you have not cited to any verse in Psalms that supports your theory. When people make a statement without citation, they are usually wrong, exaggerating, lying and/or trying to mislead. I suspect you are no exception to that rule.
2. I did your work for you and checked Psalms and was unable to find ever one occurrence of “generation” or “this generation” that supports your claimed construction of “this generation” as “people with a wicked mindset” or the “Jewish nation as a whole.”
3. The typical usage in Psalm had a temporal aspect. See Psalm 78:4 (“we will tell the next generation the praiseworthy deeds of the Lord”); Psalm 78:8 (“They would not be like their ancestors— a stubborn and rebellious generation”); Psalm 79:13 (“from generation to generation we will proclaim your praise. “); Psalm 109:13 (“May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation”); Psalm 145:13 (“One generation commends your works to another”).
4. Also note that even your two unsupported and inconsistent constructions – “people with a wicked mindset” and “Jewish nation as a whole” don’t preclude in any way a temporal aspect to the term “generation” depending on the context. We are analyzing the verse “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” which is loaded with temporal context (“this” “pass away” “until” “have happened”) no matter what strained and unsupported construction you attribute to "generation."
5. To the extent you are suggesting something was lost in translation to English, I find that very hard to believe. There has probably been more analysis and scholarship of the Bible than all other books on earth combined. Surely one of the Bible publishers would have corrected “this generation” before. The Gideons? They were no slouches and a very detailed bunch. King James' guys? They were experts. They wouldn't blow an easy one like this.
5. “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” Plain English. Impossible for a literate person to misunderstand. It is clear as day that “THIS generation” is indeed the generation at hand that Jesus was speaking to. Not some other generation or some unbounded “generation” that includes some unidentified collection of endless generations of people of wicked mindset or a collection of Jews living from 0 AD to the present date (and beyond). Jesus was allegedly speaking to the generation then at hand. Not dozens of other future generations throughout time until today (and beyond).
6. Even C.S. Lewis said Matthew 24:34 was “the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” He believed Jesus was just flat out wrong. He was correct. Those words by Jesus were wrong. He was either mistaken, misguided, exaggerating or lying. He was wrong. Only a hopelessly biased zealot can hold out on that conclusion for very long. You and Father Fuentes have a lot of recalibrating to do.
Sorry, but I had to be away for a few days. Here is my rebuttal:
First, the scripture you are referring to: 32 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. 36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 37 For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then there will be two men in the field; one [will be taken and one will be left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left.
Now, check out verse 36. It speaks saying, "But of that day", which I take to mean that Jesus was speaking about all these things will take place before that generation passes away. What things? Well, Jesus spoke about "that day", which was the day of His return. This means that was not to occur before that generation passes away. So, what are these things? I say they were the destruction of the Temple, and the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD. (Note: I am not a premillennialist, so I do not agree with their teaching. They claim that all of this passage is about the Second Coming, which I claim they are wrong about.)
So, I will not spend time giving you passages about the use of the word "generation". as it is not necessary.
The problem here is that you are using the word "generation" as a specific age range, when the Bible uses it to also mean another thing: a group of people who are alike, whether it be a mindset, or a trait of heritage. In the Psalms, it is used to describe people who have a wicked mindset (not a specific time period), whereas other places use that term to speak of the Jewish nation as a whole.
The problems here for you are Father Fuentes are many.
1. You say Psalms has a particular definition or use for the term “this generation” but you have not cited to any verse in Psalms that supports your theory. When people make a statement without citation, they are usually wrong, exaggerating, lying and/or trying to mislead. I suspect you are no exception to that rule.
2. I did your work for you and checked Psalms and was unable to find ever one occurrence of “generation” or “this generation” that supports your claimed construction of “this generation” as “people with a wicked mindset” or the “Jewish nation as a whole.”
3. The typical usage in Psalm had a temporal aspect. See Psalm 78:4 (“we will tell the next generation the praiseworthy deeds of the Lord”); Psalm 78:8 (“They would not be like their ancestors— a stubborn and rebellious generation”); Psalm 79:13 (“from generation to generation we will proclaim your praise. “); Psalm 109:13 (“May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation”); Psalm 145:13 (“One generation commends your works to another”).
Furthermore, you misunderstand basic English in this post you wrote yourself. Psalm 78:8 clearly mentions "ancestors" as a "generation", which quite obviously would contain multiple generations as you use the word. Here, though, it is used to call their ancestors one generation, meaning a group of a mindset, and not of a time period.
I can’t believe you are so delusional about the Book of Mormon. It’s simple, the Lord God had spoken from Genesis to Revelation that the holy bibe is the first and last masterpiece supernatural living story ever created in space and time. At no point in this holy book was the name Joseph smith and angel moroni mentioned! Please repent of your delusion asap. Do you wanna go to heaven or Sheol?
You're dodging again, King Phy. It's very weird and telling that you can't bring yourself to comment on the veracity and/or truthfulness of the 12 Mormon witnesses, Joseph Smith and the Angel Moroni.
You and Father Fuentes and 55 YO have already been corrected on Matthew 24:34.
See my reply above. I have not been corrected, because YOU misspoke about what Jesus had said. You took a sentence out of the middle, and applied it to words spoken afterwards, which stated that His Second Coming was not included.
So when is soul formed? How can you kill a soul? When the Lord says I know you before you are born, does he refer to a spiritual life or physical body? What is happening to a soul when an abortion is performed?
I’ll explain in electromagnetic terms because all life, space, time, existence and El Soul has electromagnetic basis, so it’s easier to cache everything in terms of electromagnetic terminology.
El Soul was formed when God himself was formed because human souls are carved out of God’s!! But the bible says God had no beginning in space and time so that’s taken to mean mathematically as an infinite time ago. Thus your soul has existed an infinite time before and will continue to exist an infinite time more! Get it?!
thus you also can’t kill a soul because you can never kill God or kill the laws of Physics.
when an abortion is performed the soul of the fetus is active and forfeited back to God. Soul of the fetus is automatically commissioned the moment the male spermatoza inseminates a female egg. Both the sperm and egg respectively represents the respective souls of the man and woman!
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
I’ll explain in electromagnetic terms because all life, space, time, existence and El Soul has electromagnetic basis, so it’s easier to cache everything in terms of electromagnetic terminology.
El Soul was formed when God himself was formed because human souls are carved out of God’s!! But the bible says God had no beginning in space and time so that’s taken to mean mathematically as an infinite time ago. Thus your soul has existed an infinite time before and will continue to exist an infinite time more! Get it?!
thus you also can’t kill a soul because you can never kill God or kill the laws of Physics.
when an abortion is performed the soul of the fetus is active and forfeited back to God. Soul of the fetus is automatically commissioned the moment the male spermatoza inseminates a female egg. Both the sperm and egg respectively represents the respective souls of the man and woman!
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
No the Churches are not doing that. More lies. The Ten Commandments are the Ten Commandments, they are expected and already known. You made that up and make zero sense.
The majority of earth's population is not Christian and is going to hell according to Christian logic.
It’s simple fear mongering to make people stay faithful to Christianity. Basically back in the day a groups of Christian religious leaders got together and thought hmmmm what can we threaten people with to make sure they don’t stray and keep funding the church….ahhhumm! Let’s tell them they won’t just die but will spend eternity in a pit full of lava beneath the Earth.
It’s simple fear mongering to make people stay faithful to Christianity. Basically back in the day a groups of Christian religious leaders got together and thought hmmmm what can we threaten people with to make sure they don’t stray and keep funding the church….ahhhumm! Let’s tell them they won’t just die but will spend eternity in a pit full of lava beneath the Earth.
I find it interesting how the powerful can often manipulate a trend to their own ends. During Roman times the state religion was superstition based and required the populace to appease the gods through group rituals, sacrifices etc. So if the whole town attends the festival then the gods of the harvest will be happy and we will have a good harvest. If some don't attend then the gods may be angry and we will have a famine. Those who fail to take part are therefore betraying their fellow citizens.
Christianity was a major disruptor to this system of group control as it preached individual salvation. It doesn't matter what your neighbours do, if you worship god, take the sacraments and don't sin you will be saved, they may not. So Christianity was persecuted as a destabilising influence to the status quo.
As Christianity grew and the Roman Empire collapsed many Roman aristocrats moved into church positions as a way of maintaining their power and wealth. Secular power now lay in the hands of the Germanic kingdoms but religious power was up for grabs.
My feeling is that a shift in the Christian message also stems from this. While individual salvation was still central, the idea of reward and punishment in the afterlife became more prevalent. You will get your reward in the kingdom of heaven, you will burn in the fires of hell, god works in mysterious ways and the eye of a needle quote.
So for the peasants toiling in the fields and living in dirt and squalor, well it's all part of god's plan and you will get your reward in the afterlife, remember, patience is a virtue. As for the fat elite living in their palaces and feasting on venison with the wine flowing like a river, well they will realise the error of their ways once they are dead.
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
No the Churches are not doing that. More lies. The Ten Commandments are the Ten Commandments, they are expected and already known. You made that up and make zero sense.
I’ll explain in electromagnetic terms because all life, space, time, existence and El Soul has electromagnetic basis, so it’s easier to cache everything in terms of electromagnetic terminology.
El Soul was formed when God himself was formed because human souls are carved out of God’s!! But the bible says God had no beginning in space and time so that’s taken to mean mathematically as an infinite time ago. Thus your soul has existed an infinite time before and will continue to exist an infinite time more! Get it?!
thus you also can’t kill a soul because you can never kill God or kill the laws of Physics.
when an abortion is performed the soul of the fetus is active and forfeited back to God. Soul of the fetus is automatically commissioned the moment the male spermatoza inseminates a female egg. Both the sperm and egg respectively represents the respective souls of the man and woman!
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
You've never read the Bible and you don't remember a single mention?? NO WAY!!
Jeremiah 1:5 ~ "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Psalm 139:13-16 ~ For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
You've never read the Bible and you don't remember a single mention?? NO WAY!!
Jeremiah 1:5 ~ "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Psalm 139:13-16 ~ For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.
Exodus 20:13 ~ “You shall not murder."
Welcome back. You need to read the previous back and forth posts to see what we are really arguing about.
Hold down a minute. If we cannot kill a soul, why are Christians against abortion? If we are talking about medical definition of human beings, why are churches inserting themselves in the middle? I don’t remember a single mention of “abortion” in the Bible, but American churches are making anti abortion their central teaching, even more important than the Ten Commandments. Why is that?
You've never read the Bible and you don't remember a single mention?? NO WAY!!
Jeremiah 1:5 ~ "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Psalm 139:13-16 ~ For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.
Exodus 20:13 ~ “You shall not murder."
The Book of Numbers, chapter five, advises giving a woman suspect of adultery an abortifacient drink. If she miscarries, then she’s guilty. If nothing happens, then you know she’s innocent.
Exodus 21 also details a lesser penalty for causing injury that induces miscarriage in a woman as opposed to grievously injuring or killing the woman herself.
The problems here for you are Father Fuentes are many.
1. You say Psalms has a particular definition or use for the term “this generation” but you have not cited to any verse in Psalms that supports your theory. When people make a statement without citation, they are usually wrong, exaggerating, lying and/or trying to mislead. I suspect you are no exception to that rule.
2. I did your work for you and checked Psalms and was unable to find ever one occurrence of “generation” or “this generation” that supports your claimed construction of “this generation” as “people with a wicked mindset” or the “Jewish nation as a whole.”
3. The typical usage in Psalm had a temporal aspect. See Psalm 78:4 (“we will tell the next generation the praiseworthy deeds of the Lord”); Psalm 78:8 (“They would not be like their ancestors— a stubborn and rebellious generation”); Psalm 79:13 (“from generation to generation we will proclaim your praise. “); Psalm 109:13 (“May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation”); Psalm 145:13 (“One generation commends your works to another”).
4. Also note that even your two unsupported and inconsistent constructions – “people with a wicked mindset” and “Jewish nation as a whole” don’t preclude in any way a temporal aspect to the term “generation” depending on the context. We are analyzing the verse “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” which is loaded with temporal context (“this” “pass away” “until” “have happened”) no matter what strained and unsupported construction you attribute to "generation."
5. To the extent you are suggesting something was lost in translation to English, I find that very hard to believe. There has probably been more analysis and scholarship of the Bible than all other books on earth combined. Surely one of the Bible publishers would have corrected “this generation” before. The Gideons? They were no slouches and a very detailed bunch. King James' guys? They were experts. They wouldn't blow an easy one like this.
5. “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” Plain English. Impossible for a literate person to misunderstand. It is clear as day that “THIS generation” is indeed the generation at hand that Jesus was speaking to. Not some other generation or some unbounded “generation” that includes some unidentified collection of endless generations of people of wicked mindset or a collection of Jews living from 0 AD to the present date (and beyond). Jesus was allegedly speaking to the generation then at hand. Not dozens of other future generations throughout time until today (and beyond).
6. Even C.S. Lewis said Matthew 24:34 was “the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” He believed Jesus was just flat out wrong. He was correct. Those words by Jesus were wrong. He was either mistaken, misguided, exaggerating or lying. He was wrong. Only a hopelessly biased zealot can hold out on that conclusion for very long. You and Father Fuentes have a lot of recalibrating to do.
Sorry, but I had to be away for a few days. Here is my rebuttal:
First, the scripture you are referring to: 32 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. 36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 37 For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then there will be two men in the field; one [will be taken and one will be left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left.
Verses at issue bolded.
Now, check out verse 36. It speaks saying, "But of that day", which I take to mean that Jesus was speaking about all these things will take place before that generation passes away.
It's plain English. But to the extent I understand your rewording of it, I agree.
ALL of certain "things" will happen before "this generation" passes away. The day and hour are unknown except to "the Father" (Matthew 24:36) -- all we are told is that "this generation will certainly not pass away UNTIL all these things have happened." Matthew 24:34.
What things? Well, Jesus spoke about "that day", which was the day of His return. This means that was not to occur before that generation passes away.
To the extent you can be understood, NO, it does not mean that (bolded above) at all. It means the exact opposite. You are either deliberately or unwittingly playing around with double negatives and tenses, and have completely turned the entire passage and verse upside down. You really read Matthew 24:34 to mean that all these "things" happen AFTER "this generation" passes away? It's hard to take you seriously. This is all basic English grammar and sentence construction, and you somehow inverted it. You make no sense.
AGAIN: "Things will take place/happen" BEFORE "this generation passes away." One of those things that will happen BEFORE "this generation passes away" is "the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven." Matthew 24:30. "Son of Man coming" is one of the "things that take place" BEFORE (not after) "THIS generation" passes away.
So, what are these things? I say they were the destruction of the Temple, and the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD. (Note: I am not a premillennialist, so I do not agree with their teaching. They claim that all of this passage is about the Second Coming, which I claim they are wrong about.)
The point isn't to make a comprehensive list of the "things," but they are recited in the verses before Matthew 24:34 and at least one of them is "the Son of Man coming on the clouds." Matthew 24:30.
The point is that the "things" undeniably did NOT happen before "this generation" to whom Jesus was speaking passed away, as He promised. Jesus was wrong.
So, I will not spend time giving you passages about the use of the word "generation". as it is not necessary.
Suit yourself. But in Post #245 on Page #13 of this thread, you argued I was using an incorrect definition of "this generation" and you claimed you had occurrences of the term in Psalms that supported your definition of "this generation" as a group of people with alike mindset or genetic traits. So I did what you never did and looked at Psalms to see if you were correct. I did not find anything supporting your argument and I informed you of that. See Paragraphs 2-3 in Post #277 on Page #14. You seem to have now abandoned that Psalms argument regarding definitions and usages of "this generation."
The problems here for you are Father Fuentes are many.
1. You say Psalms has a particular definition or use for the term “this generation” but you have not cited to any verse in Psalms that supports your theory. When people make a statement without citation, they are usually wrong, exaggerating, lying and/or trying to mislead. I suspect you are no exception to that rule.
2. I did your work for you and checked Psalms and was unable to find ever one occurrence of “generation” or “this generation” that supports your claimed construction of “this generation” as “people with a wicked mindset” or the “Jewish nation as a whole.”
3. The typical usage in Psalm had a temporal aspect. See Psalm 78:4 (“we will tell the next generation the praiseworthy deeds of the Lord”); Psalm 78:8 (“They would not be like their ancestors— a stubborn and rebellious generation”); Psalm 79:13 (“from generation to generation we will proclaim your praise. “); Psalm 109:13 (“May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation”); Psalm 145:13 (“One generation commends your works to another”).
Furthermore, you misunderstand basic English in this post you wrote yourself. Psalm 78:8 clearly mentions "ancestors" as a "generation", which quite obviously would contain multiple generations as you use the word. Here, though, it is used to call their ancestors one generation, meaning a group of a mindset, and not of a time period.
"Ancestor" is someone from a past time. It is a temporal term. There is no definition or usage of the word "ancestor" that does not include a temporal aspect to it.
Your ancestors are of a different generation than yours. See Psalm 78:8 (“They would not be like their ancestors— a stubborn and rebellious generation”).
An ancestor is not defined anywhere as a group of a mindset.
You're really straining credulity at this point. As I said in Post #222 on Page #12: "If one is interested in observing the wildest circular logic, tautologies, and mental gymnastics that Christians will go through to defend their holy book, engage them in discussion of Matthew 24:34."
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.