/lit/ - Literature

>>22316192
>So you have no response to the plain meaning of Jesus' words
No, it's you who don't have a response to the plain meaning of Jesus' words: You have nothing to say to Matthew 24:33.
>instead making a vague appeal to "context"
Yes, read the previous verse. Read the previous post as well if you don't understand that. >>22316022 >>22316074
>when you didn't even attempt to explain what "context"
I did mention the explanation here, just read Matthew 24:33; it is obvious. But since the poster I was responding to earlier only wanted to imagine up contradictions to the obvious meaning of the Bible - it can be explained by telling them to read it for just a minute - and take verses out of context by looking at them in isolation (by the way, a malicious person can do that to anyone's words) in order to imagine up contradictions, then they will do it and ignore the real meaning which is obvious. And it's so obvious here, I don't even have to explain it. And I'm sure that if someone did spell out the obvious connection to verse 33, that anyone can see, which is the context in which the sentence in verse 34 exists (and similar in intent to 1 Thess. 4:17 as already pointed out, but so far ignored), you or the other poster would then pretend that it's complicated merely because they did you the unwarranted favor of spoonfeeding you something that's obvious and spelling out the obvious for you. I've seen this runaround before. You and the other poster just want to say there's a contradiction, so you take things out of context by looking at them in isolation. The other poster doesn't care about the real context of anything, they literally only care about trying to create a false idea that they can portray as a contradiction, "wresting the scriptures" in other words as Peter puts it in 2 Peter 3:16.

>"the plain meaning of Jesus' words are false, so I'm going to make up what they *really* must mean".
Nope, in this case I didn't even need to explain it, in this case because it's so obvious how Matthew 24:33 explains verse 34, I'm not adding anything. If I did explain it though, I'm sure you or the other person would start to complain about this exact very thing, I'm sure of it. You wouldn't care about any effort to provide any kind of explanatory benefit to you. Even now, you're hallucinating that I did this, and then complaining about it before it's even happened. Anyways, if the whole point of this conversation from now on is just going to be me dealing with people who are clearly arguing in bad faith, who want nothing other than argument and confrontation and aren't even interested in ascertaining or finding out the truth, not wanting to see the obvious, and if there continues not to be any kind of intellectual honesty, but simply anti-Christian bias combined with radical skepticism (which for some reason, you guys never turn on yourselves) and sheer ungratefulness for the effort made to add context to things then I may not say anything further.