/lit/ - Literature

>>18273217
> Mark 13:30
If you read it at face value it's obvious that there are two prophesies, and the one you quote is about the genocide of the Hebrews by the Romans in the first century A.D.

> Jesus was a failed apocalyptic preacher
His prophesies about the Roman-Jewish wars were spot on; if anything, this is an argument for Christ's authenticity.

>>18273217
Are you ignoring the war of the Jews that happened when the people he talks to would be old, in the 60s (0060s)?

>>18273245
>>18273248
OK chill, so partial preterism then. Like I said, this is the most convincing interpretation to me. I don't know if it gets you all the way there though. I mean, 1 Thessalonians sticks out like a sore thumb.

Just came across this online:
>Since there are unsolvable difficulties with both the Futurist and Preterist approaches to this conundrum, we shall have to seek a solution in a third approach. What if when Jesus used the word "generation'' (Greek genea), He didn't mean the same thing that we mean? What if He wasn't using "generation'' to refer to a group of people all living at the same period of history?
>According to Archer, sometimes genea ("generation'') was used as a synonym of genos ("race,'' "stock,'' "nation,'' "people''). Archer writes, ... Thus, Jesus' words might be rendered, "This people shall not pass away until all these things are fulfilled.'' In that rendering, He could have been referring to the Jewish people (which is the most likely given the context) or to the Church - for both Israel and the Church are given divine promises that they would remain in existence until the end of time (Jeremiah 31:35-37; Matthew 16:18).
https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/4309/what-does-jesus-mean-by-this-generation-and-all-these-things-in-mark-1330

Thoughts? Is this linguistically accurate or a cope

Christianity is cringe and a failure

>>18273252
>so partial preterism then
No. Get your prophesies straight, there's more than one there.

>1 Thessalonians
There is no prophesy in 1 Thessalonians.

Did you even read the New Testament? Your quotes are completely mismatched.

>>18273256
>Is this linguistically accurate or a cope
It's just Protestant retards being retarded. This is what you get when you read a book as a collection of quotes without regard to the larger context.

>>18273256
This is plausible as well because we know how full of linguistic subtleties the New Testament is.

>>18273256
That's an extreme cope. It is totally untenable in terms of Greek and is universally laughed at by any professional scholar, including Christian ones.

>>18273217
>Mark 13:30: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
The gospels first written down in the early 100s BC, weren't they? It doesn't make sense for people to have been copying down this scripture if the on-the-surface interpetation of Mark 13:30 were something blatantly false. It has to mean something else, and has to mean so obviously, or else the people writing it down were copying something that they knew was incorrect

>>18273279
fuck off dumb faggot. 1 thess talks about the parousia but don't reply to me again fucking faggot

>>18273299
ok well what would that be? the generation = race thing is a retarded cope, so what are the better options? so far i'm getting partial preterism and nothing else.

>>18273301
You mean by explicitly saying that the days are not known and will come like a thief in the night.

imagine if all this energy spent on discerning the meaning of some jewsih schizoid ramblings would be spent into philosophy or actually good literature

>>18273317
Paul literally and explicitly says HE will be alive when Jesus returns and nothing he describes is the parousia associated with the destruction of the temple

>>18273319
>imagine if all this energy spent on discerning the meaning of some jewsih schizoid ramblings would be spent into philosophy or actually good literature
philosophy and good literature are literally just as, if not more, worthless. religion may be dumb but this is an even more embarrassing cope. when you're fucking dead and no one cares about your gay book collection and incel life, this will be apparent.

>>18273321
Paul distinguishes those that will be dead and the living. If you can't understand that "we" means Christians not necessarily including Paul, you are not fit to have a discussion.

>>18273289
>>18273308
>>18273295
Even if you deny the term having a different acceptation (which is very common in Greek and specially in the NT) the meaning as generation can obviously also imply the generation of Christians.

>>18273301
>1 thess talks about the parousia
What does parousia have to do with prophesies, you absolute mongoloid?

>so far i'm getting partial preterism and nothing else
Are you dense? Do you have an IQ of a potato? You've been literally answered in the first post.

Mark 13:33 immediately says: "Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is."

A mental deficient like you might think that this quote directly contradicts the preceding quote in Mark 13:30, except that it's two different prophesies overlaid one on top the other.

This is a common theme in Christian symbolism: time is linear but historical events also repeat as analogies through history.

Christ's first prophesy was about the Roman-Jewish wars, and he was speaking to his disciples; his second prophesy is for posterity and speaks about the Rapture.

The Roman-Jewish wars will be a template for the events of the Rapture.

>>18273350
>If you can't understand that "we" means Christians not necessarily including Paul, you are not fit to have a discussion.
I can understand that, but a majority of academic scholars do not see it that way. Coupled with the Olivet Discourse and "this generation", and you have multiple attestations that more probably than not depict imminence, so the burden is on you to show why a long term reading is now more probable.

>>18273357
Fuck off, last reply tranny. Dilate.

>>18273356
>he meaning as generation can obviously also imply the generation of Christians
No it can't, and it does not. Jesus was speaking to a group of Judeans. He was not speaking to YOU, a Bible reader. At least not in a literal interpretation. Jesus was telling that group of people that the prophesy would come to pass before THEY died. And the word did not mean race, nation, Christians, or any other dumb shit. So you need a better defense. Even the average redditor would tear your view apart and embarrass you, and they're retarded.

>>18273329
philosophy and fictional literature are superior than your cope fuel lullaby stories before the night to help you sleep better. No amount of tears and appeal to authority of tradition will change that.

>>18273363
>a group of Judeans
What Judeans? Why was Christ addressing specifically them?

>>18273367
I hate to have to shatter your worldview anon but you know there is no philosophy, no fiction without religion, right?

>>18273373
I'm not here to argue with you. I am a partial preterist. But your "rebuttal" just isn't good. Do you have anything more interesting? I'm not growing from this exchange. I think you need to read more about this topic first.

>>18273367
wow you sure are mad! almost like you're coping at your irrelevance. this isn't about your fag books being "better" than religion. maybe they are, who cares? either way you're still just as big of a coper with nothing to show for yourself when you die.

i have a wife and daughter btw so i'm good. enjoy your neighbor who hates you throwing away your epic philosophy collection when you die.

>>18273363
You are confusing everything. This generation refers to things that will happen thirty years later. There is no reason to assume imminence for anything else (as if that term had any significance in that context).
Gospels were compiled after "that generation" had gone out. They'd have been a bit more subtle about missing that.

>>18273382
I mean the fact that you can’t retort anything substantial to such “innocent” readings of mine is quite telling, don’t you think?

>>18273363
>Fuck off, last reply tranny. Dilate.
So your only reply to the correct answer is "fuck off"?

Are you really asking your question in good faith?

As a trolling attempt this is 1/10, hombre. Real trolls don't fly into a seething rage when they feel defeat.

> He was not speaking to YOU, a Bible reader.
Of course he was, you smoothbrain ape.

> Jesus was telling that group of people that the prophesy would come to pass before THEY died.
And that too.

Like I said, there are two prophesies overlaid on each other, for two different target audiences.

>>18273404
ok well the things described as happening 30 years later include a cataclysmic apocalypse and final judgment. paul also describes the same thing as happening before he dies. you can explain each of these away, potentially, but taken together it doesn't look good.

and then i can throw another 100 passages from the NT using similarly imminent language for the coming of the kingdom, final judgment, etc.

so again, WHAT IS the reading of that verse that explains it.

>>18273409
picking out a random alternate definition of a word and calling it a day is not how that works. the gospels and greek don't agree with you.

>>18273412
>Like I said, there are two prophesies overlaid on each other, for two different target audiences.
well gee it sure is weird then that after those "two prophecies", jesus says that ALL THESE THINGS (everything described including those "two") will take place in that generation.

>>18273416
Each post of yours confirms more and more what I stand for, you are not even aware of it. I explain: you affirm the greek word genea cannot have any other meaning when this is blatantly false. Genea and genus imply a specific kind, race just as it does imply offspring, descendants. These are not in conflict at all. Now why Christ addressing to some particular Judeans would affirm the specificity of the generation/kind? Why would he not say, what you want him to be saying, addressing to pan, all of the people implying all the people of the time?
You simply cannot go that way and this already puts your belief as incoherent.

>>18273416
I can't grasp the level of bad faith needed.
Jesus himself asks whether he will find faith when he comes back. And yes, this is a rhetorical question, implying most likely no.
Had his apostles and people that witnessed the resurrections, or people like Paul, be around, he wouldn't doubt their faith at that point.
The use of present tenses and description as already present for things intemporal or quasi-intemporal eschatological is ubiquitous through antiquity, and sometimes beyond.

>>18273444
The word can mean this, but here it clearly doesn’t. “These things will happen at some point between now and the indefinite future” is an odd way to follow up a verse which stresses the swiftness with which these events will take place. This interpretation deprives the passage of all meaning. What even is the prediction if Jesus is just saying that one day all Jews will be dead?

>>18273470
I really don't get your argument. What is the rebuttal for "Repent the kingdom of heaven is at hand!" By at hand, did Jesus mean, in 6000 years?

>>18273329
You don't even have faith in your religion but consume it cynically as a cope. Nothing is more pathetic or meaningless than you.

>>18273553
>You don't even have faith in your religion but consume it cynically as a cope. Nothing is more pathetic or meaningless than you.
i wonder who you possibly think you could be talking to? boys, i think we've got a schizo on our hands...

>>18273217
I favor the Philip K Dick view: We are actually living in the early first century, some of us even met Jesus in person, but the Evil One has created the last 2000 years as an illusion to lead us astray

>>18273527
My argument is that Jesus (and the apostles, and early church fathers) implied eons to pass, enough for Christ to be even forgotten.
>By at hand, did Jesus mean, in 6000 years?
The kingdom of heaven is within us. Even interpreted as an external phenomenon, there is no length of time not "imminent" here.

apocalypse is a personal process

>>18273217
That generation witnessed Christ die and resurrect within that week you retard.

Bart Ehrman and Paula Fredriksen should be shot for pushing their cherry picked edgey ideas as actual academic work. (Fredriksen wrote first snd she was Jewish btw)

GENERATION MEANS GENERATION AND NOT RACE OR SOME BULLSHIT

it's particularly in the New Testament in which γενεά has this virtually exclusive temporal meaning of "generation."

To be sure, there are instances throughout Greek literature where γενεά does suggest "nation, race, class," etc., as the Liddell-Scott lexicon indeed attests to.

What's also true, however, is that among ἔθνος, φυλή, λαός and γενεά (the four words that I mentioned in my first comment), it's only γενεά -- the word used in Mark 13:30 and elsewhere -- that attained a meaning of "(temporal) generation." In fact, off-hand, I can't even think of any Greek word that you could use to denote that other than γενεά. (Maybe the etymologically-related-but-rare γονή.) here's only a single New Testament text cited for the denotation of γενεά as unambiguously denoting "those exhibiting common characteristics or interests, race, kind."

All together, in light of this and the fact that Mark 13:30 forges a clear link back to the opening words of the narrative at the beginning of the chapter (13:4) -- as well as the intertextual connection here to Daniel 12:6-13, where the remaining events leading up to the end are said to take place only over a few years -- this is what's led the overwhelming majority of modern commentators to interpret γενεά here in Mark 13:30 as "(temporal) generation."

Now, I'm sure you can find plenty of, say, pre-1900 commentaries that differ from this; but if you look at the premiere commentaries on Mark from the past couple of decades -- those of Collins, Marcus, Gundry, France, Guelich, and so on -- I'd be highly surprised if any of them even entertain the idea of γενεά as "race, group" as a viable possibility in Mark 13:30. (Looks like the Bauer-Danker lexicon cites Beasley-Murray's 1957 commentary on Mark for this; but again, a lot's happened even in the 60 years since then.)

>>18273618
>That generation witnessed Christ die and resurrect within that week you retard.
too bad jesus was talking about final judgment and the end of the world though, huh?

>>18273641
>>18273612

>>18273653
>apocalypse is a personal process
not according to literally anything in mark

>>18273217
Also you have failed to realize Mark WROTE his gospel BECUASE he thought 30 years later Christ prophecy was fulfilled regarding the Roman Jewish situation.

The whole apocalyptic prophet meme is so weak when you actual read the gospels or even just any of the ones individually. Just edgey bs pushing book sales to the masses and of course an anti Christian Polemic from certain agitating political demographics.

If you actually look at the criteria these hacks use for their hypothesis they apply them at choice by very very loosely in such a way that conveniently strengthens their hypothesis. And if you apply them to non Christ related antiquity you realize that they would render Caesar’s assassination as unhistorical.

The methods they use are trash and their conclusions are no more historically useful than reading the book at face value.

For example: the criteria of embarrassment

They use this to eliminate any verse or statement that doesn’t embarrass the author (of the gospel). It’s entrant is to strengthen ideas where it woudlnt line up with Christian dogma or Jewish thought of the period. But it’s abused rhetorically by these ‘academics’ to essentially knock down inconvenient verses and statements to their pop ‘apocalyptic prophet of the new Millenium’ ‘FORGED’ or whatever edgey shit they are willing that years hypothesis.

It’s a joke.

>>18273661
everything about religion is a personal process. I find this focus on specific historicity very odd. Your heart is your heart, God is God, neither of these hinge upon anything material.

>>18273527
Now you are changing the subjects addressed to the temporality of what is being pointed to the addressed ones. The fact is that the determination of the subjects define the temporal extension.
Also
>6000 years
>>18273612 is right. The apocalypse will come to everyone in less than a century and, for you, in a little more than half a century at most.

>>18273683
this

>>18273683
>The whole apocalyptic prophet meme is so weak when you actual read the gospels or even just any of the ones individually
It's one big cope. They don't understand the manner in which ancients talked about time. They also conveniently ignore all passages that imply long stretches of time pass.
The theory was largely promoted by Ernest Renan in the 19th century who was so btfo that he ended up retracting it. Of course recent promoters don't go that far because Renan was antisemitic but it's been the same non-arguments since then.

>>18273717
I agree, AND so do a lot of the scholars. Again, You only see these stupid theories being pushed in layperson books for the masses and I know the authors typically know better too. It’s an old theory, and I’ll admit, I enjoyed reading it and learning its methods, but it’s just amusing trash at the end of the day. But the authors have an agenda and they have book deals to sell it.

Combine that with the fact that the non-academic reviewers happily ignore anything from a Christian or Church scholarly source becuase they assume it’s biased means these types of things just sell and go unchallenged.

Reza Aslan (nice enough guy, I had an email exchange with him about his book) was one of those guys who sold one of these old and very dead theories of Christ as some hot new take that BTFOs Christianity once and for all. His was even sadder, but it’s been a couple years so I don’t recall the specifics of his take but it’s long long dead even in the academic (aka Jewish academic) community even.

Unfortunately with Christ it’s hard to find an objective source. The church has a religion to strengthen and most academics have a religion to take down and they all put on a mask of ‘academic objectivity’ to hide their agenda.

Id personally recommend Tolstoy’s notes on the gospels and steer clear of the cesspool that is modern New Testamant scholarship

Damn, OP got absolutely mogged

>>18273217
Mazdak the Younger was similar to Jesus but without the schizophrenia.
I like how Mazdak also placed a lot of emphasis on the natural world unlike Jesus; he promoted protecting the trees and plants and also vegetarianism.
Also, the stuff about Mazdak promoting the sharing of wives is bullshit as most scholars agree.

>>18273855
He’s just some fedora who bought an Ehrman book and didn’t realize /lit/ naturally has a lot of philosophy / religious studies hanging around. Prob should return to atheism and get his pat on the back from the other retards

>>18273892
peak dunning kruger on display. nothing on here that you can't find immediately on a google search for christian apologetics.

Throughout the New Testament we can see the Parousia being delayed. Luke mutes/alters Jesus' imminent predictions from Mark and by the time of John they are almost completely non-existent. I agree with the other commentator that "these things" refer to the signs of the end times that is separate from the destruction of the Temple.

Luke rewrites Mark 14:62 in Lk. 22.69. Mark says "You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven" to the High Priest while Luke alters this to "From now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of God."

So the prediction of a witnessed parousia in the near future has been replaced by a statement about the present state of Jesus.

Luke also has to explain the delay by adding to the verse 19:11 that the parable was told because the disciples "thought that the kingdom of God was about to appear immediately."

Mk. 9:1 And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

Lk. 9:27 "But truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”

By omitting "come with power" Luke alters the meaning of the prediction of a witnessed cosmic event to something more ambiguous that is open to alternative interpretations.

Luke 21:8 adds the warning "And he said, “Beware that you are not led astray; for many will come in my name and say, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is near!’ Do not go after them."

which is an addition to Mark 13:5-6 which does not have the warning of some claiming "the time is near!

>>18273693
>Your heart is your heart, God is God, neither of these hinge upon anything material.
start with the Thomists

>>18273717
>They don't understand the manner in which ancients talked about time.
Is this true or one of those completely made up Christian copes like "umm the ancients actually didn't care about historical accuracy"

>>18273892
>>18273906
the real dunning kruger is being a convert convinced by apologetics sites. wait until the intoxication fades...

>>18274033
Yeah, or "it was ok that someone pretended to be Paul and forged letters in his name" because Romans didn't care about who the real author was!

It's "trust the plan" level horseshit

>>18273935
AND THE CHRISTIANS IGNORE FAST

I've read about this topic a lot and have always been interested in it, but isn't the issue here the fact that Jesus mentions "this generation" AFTER he mentions both the prophecy of the first Roman-Jewish war and destruction of the temple AS WELL AS the blowing of the trumpets and the clouds parting and the angels coming down and all that apocalyptic imagery?
The former can be explained as a successful prophecy as it did happen within the generation alive then. But the latter definitely seems to be referencing the second coming, no?
>24 But in those days, following that distress, ''the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; 25 the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'
>26 At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

>>18273289
>muhuhumuhunuhuum muh CCCCCONTEXT UOHUHUIHIUIJHFN FC

listen here you little shit the gospels are a compilation of an oral tradition of the sayings of jesus and root back into earlier “sayings gospels” in all likelihood the context of the sayings of jesus actually REDUCES your understanding of them because they originally were contextless reports of his sayings that were later woven into a quasi-historical narrative. The “context” of these sayings is already cope and dumbass apologia.

>>18273892
Damn right

>Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” Because of this, the rumor spread among the believers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?”
You assume the entire generation died. Embarrassing thread. Read the Bible better.

>>18274133
>Embarrassing thread
This

>>18274133
>>18274168
True schizo posting

>>18274211
If you don’t believe it that’s one thing, but it’s well implied in the text that one or more of the disciples were given life until the second coming. This is a thread about interpreting the Bible, if you don’t want to hear it then don’t click on it.

>>18274234
Thats not what your quote says. Your quote is a cope, explaining why John died even though everyone thought he wouldn't. Its more proof that the second coming was thought to happen but then didnt.

>>18274234
yeah my reading of it is that that sounds like apologetics inserted into the story later by embarrassed followers LMAO the absolute state of christcucks

>>18274263
>>18274270
Not an argument

>>18274273
I accept your concession

>>18274273
>GRRRRR THE NATURAL WAY OF READING A PASSAGE????
>THATS KEKED!

>>18274275
Yeah, your interpretation has no backing. It’s a longer form of “cope,” being that your brain is so fried by 4chan conversation you can’t think or speak in any other way. If you’d like to make more of an argument for that you can.

>>18274280
Definitely not the natural way

>>18274273
actually my post is an argument, i’m arguing that such a weird and nonsensical coda to a story that renders the obvious meaning of the previous story perplexing and the story itself almost unnecessary sounds like a later redaction by embarrassed disciples. such a coda would not even be there if the obvious reading was not so embarrassing.

>>18274294
I don’t even understand what your interpretation of it is

>>18274294
its actually a low point in the new testament, borderline Quran tier. You know, where Muhammad changes his mind on things or covers up mistakes with some silly bullshit God said.

>>18274299
that the story about the disciple living until the things come to past is obviously something invented for apologetic purposes and later inserted into the text

>>18274299
that's because you're extremely stupid and not well read. you should be familiar with it on a basic level because its entry tier nt studies

>>18273319
This seems childish to me. You’re not going to arrive at our understanding of literature of our forebears did not spend their time contemplating on “some Jewish schozoid.” Like it or not Jesus is a central figure of western literature, and he always will be.

I can appreciate it if you are trying express frustration that people still argue about his divinity, but even in that you are misguided. Is not the death of religion and faith on of the most defining aspects of our age? And you’re going to create great literature by ignoring that?

It sounds like you are letting your cynicism towards religion get the better of you.

>>18274358
Eat my ass, n-word

>>18273217
>this generation
the actual greek is much more akin to "this race (the human race :) )

>>18273935
>>18274099
No responses to these?

>>18274372
>scared to say nigger
lol what a faggot

>>18274303
Peak heresy right here

>>18274320
>>18274326
Youve provided no proof of that. You really can’t argue a point, and since you say it’s basic, it should be all the more easy to, but you still cannot.

>>18274211
>Agree with someone
>schizo
Nigga you are insane

>>18274438
Check a bible commentary

>>18274326
Sounds more like a cheap excuse from your part

>>18274372
Refute my point, nigger

>>18274469
Wow, great response

>>18274414
Nope!

>>18274464
What are you talking about? It makes no sense in terms of placement or context in the larger literary framework. It is clearly a later addition

>>18274612
I'm not trying to answer your question. But if you actually want an answer from the Christian perspective that's what you should do.

>>18274469
/lit/.... i can't handle what fucking retards you all are... help...

>>18274627
The problem is, and this is the foundational problem in this thread that the OP himself goes over, is that there isn't a very satisfactory response.
I've read Christian apologists, I've read Bible commentaries that barely go over it, I've read quite a lot and never got a satisfactory answer either. Some people in here seem quite heated arguing with each other but they dodge those posts for some reason.

>>18274644
Unironically, it's fine and it doesn't matter.

>>18274644
(Note I am not a Christian). One thing I can tell you is that a Christian is not going to accept the hypothesis that the texts were manipulated or modified in order to change something that was undesirable. So rather than explain that, they're going to find a way to harmonize the two apparently different things so that they don't contradict each other. I imagine you've seen that sort of response, and it's the only one you're ever going to get. Perhaps that's not satisfactory to you, but ultimately you and the Christian do not have common epistemological ground from which to discuss the issue. Your framing of the question, to them, is unacceptable on an axiomatic level.

>>18274644
This is why I still go to church and stuff but mostly read academic sources for edification. Christians are just fucking ignorant. Its also why their traditions and theology and canon mean little to me

>>18274683
I mean, I'm coming from the position of a Christian that doubts due to this sort of stuff. When people completely ignore the foundational issue of those posts I quoted and instead handwave things off, it makes me think everybody engaged in this is dishonest and doesn't even believe it themselves.

When you read the Epistles it becomes very clear that the apostles interpreted it exactly like Op did. Which is to say: something immediate, noticeable, big. And it’s soon. The end is soon. Jesus said so after all. Let’s take some samples
> “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.” (1 Corinthians 10:11)
> “Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.” (1 John 2:18)
>” The end of all things is near…” (1 Peter 4:7)
> “…the coming of the Lord is near. …the Judge is standing right at the door.” (James 5:8, 9)
It’s soon baby! Day of the Lord, woot! Christ said, before the last of us died. Well I’m getting old, it’s happening!
Back in real life: all the apostles are dead, and Christians are confused as all hell. Don’t worry though! A guy pretending to be Peter will put your mind at ease.
> 2 Peter 3:4, ESV: "They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.”"
>2 Peter 3:8-9: 8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
Love that last one. L Ron Hubbard would be proud.

Shit like that appears all over the NT. I seriously don’t know how you can read it and think in your head: yup this makes sense. I believe in it
Sermon on the Mount has spectacular ethics but frankly if you are a believing Christian you are happily self deluded

>>18274713
If you've accepted the idea that these are purely human texts that are subject to authorial manipulation and contradiction you've already surrendered any possibility you had of quelling your doubts.

>>18273217

That "this generation" does not mean what you think it does.

>>18274744

This rationalization is nothing more than interpreting the Bible by a doctrine you want to be true. If you’re going to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, shouldn’t you base your doctrines on what the Bible actually says? It is self-deceit to look at Jesus’ “prophecy” detailing his return in the lifetime of his disciples and rationalize why it didn’t happen. Only a mind interested in maintaining the illusion of faith could twist and mangle the plain words of the Bible the way Christians have in an attempt to make the incredible credible. An honest mind looking at the facts would have no choice but to admit that Jesus’ prophecy of the end of days has failed to come true.

>>18273935
>>18274083
>>18274438

The abstraction of "generation" or any other temporal unit is as integral to Christianity as the immanence of Jesus.

>>18274713
Hi, don't listen to the retards in this thread. The answer to your issue is partial preterism. Learn about this from the Reformation Study Bible notes on these passages or RC Sproul's lectures on the topic. You can also watch Pastor Jeff Durbin's entire sermon series on YT about the defense of this position. NT Wright has an academic article called "Hope Deferred?" giving an academic defense of it.

I might also point you to this article here: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/692316, which gives some additional possible context for the term "this generation." The retards in this thread are wrong that it could mean "race" in context, but in a sociological reconstruction using textual criticism, it is very plausible that Mark used a term that had very little to do with time given the context of early Christianity. Of course, this reading entails recognizing the gospels as composite writings.

I find in general that in Reformed circles (I'm PCA), there is more space to engage with this stuff. Not much, but it's much better than being a Catholic or something.

>>18274822
The only thing its “abstraction” is integral to is maintaining Christianity beyond the first century.

>>18273935
>>18274083
>>18274438
>>18274719
>>18274683
>>18274644
I would like to remind you guys that these are still unanswered:
>>18273698
>>18273444
>>18273356

>>18274775
I don't really care, but that's what the issue is. For example, from the Westminster Confession of Faith:
>1.4. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.
>1.5. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scripture. ... it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.
If you believe that then your understanding of what the text says will be modified to something that is not reconcilable with the view of a non-Christian.
>1 Cor. 2:4 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

>>18274838
So it’s authorial manipulation and spiritually misinformed when It’s cited by me but it’s fair game when cited by you? And also some random fucking church’s guidelines? Give me a fucking break. Your logic might have worked at Sunday school but not here

>>18273393
Is having daughters the ultimate cuckoldry?
I cannot think or comprehend of anything more cucked than having a daughter. Honestly, think about it rationally. You are feeding, clothing, raising and rearing a girl for at least 18 years solely so she can go and get ravaged by another man. All the hard work you put into your beautiful little girl - reading her stories at bedtime, making her go to sports practice, making sure she had a healthy diet, educating her, playing with her. All of it has one simple result: her body is more enjoyable for the men that will eventually fuck her in every hole.
Raised the perfect girl? Great. Who benefits? If you're lucky, a random man who had nothing to do with the way she grew up, who marries her. He gets to fuck her tight pussy every night. He gets the benefits of her kind and sweet personality that came from the way you raised her.
As a man who has a daughter, you are LITERALLY dedicating at least 20 years of your life simply to raise a girl for another man to enjoy. It is the ULTIMATE AND FINAL cuck. Think about it logically.

>>18274857
I already told you I'm not a Christian. I don't care what you believe about it.

>>18274866
>she gets fucked
>your genes get passed on and you live forever

>you jack off to tranime
>die forever

Hmm...

>>18274878
Sure. You’ll transform into whatever allows you to slither away from answering a question using human logic.

>>18274889
I used to be a Christian, and I believe the presupposionalist position is an accurate description of the epistemological nature of the religion. I find this sort of discussion interesting. But that's the ultimate point at which the problem arises. You and the Christian approach the text from mutually exclusive assumptions. Your view of authorial manipulation is meaningless for them. Their view of divine inspiration is meaningless for you.

>>18274885
we live forever through Jesus Christ, not our daughters

>>18274866
>>18274885
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8-cjd5cdIU

>>18274913
>jack off to tranime for 70 years
>in jesus christ
haha no

>>18274917
I don't masturbate nor watch anime

>>18274910
It appears we are at an impasse on this specific topic, but I’d like to thank you for being a gentleman about it.
Otherwise, do you mind telling me why you stopped being a Christian?

>>18274932
No, go suck a fat dick you piece of shit. Fucking christcuck faggots.

>>18274827
>can't have an abstraction in a partially abstract text
>can invent "dark matter" to maintain random equations you made up

So THIS is the power of /r/atheism?

>>18274955
oh wow you're going full retard

>>18274885
You don't see this as untenable, cucking is a way of life for you. It is in your heart and soul. Wife or another's daughter, it does not matter, it is you taking it in your holes. Live dammit, not vicariously through the women who tolerate your support. If it must start, fine you have permission to vicariously live through me, whatever me you need to see yourself in these hard times. It is not you craving troons, it is me. I do not care. You must start. Wank like you were me, like you were free.

Reminder, the NT writers believed Jesus would return in his generation

> “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.” (1 Corinthians 10:11)
> “Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.” (1 John 2:18)
>” The end of all things is near…” (1 Peter 4:7)
> “…the coming of the Lord is near. …the Judge is standing right at the door.” (James 5:8, 9)

>>18274932
>It appears we are at an impasse on this specific topic
This where I think all discussion of this nature ends if you look at its most fundamental layer.
>Otherwise, do you mind telling me why you stopped being a Christian?
I don't think that I ever believed it. I wanted to, and I accepted it on an intellectual level. I and adopted its outward form and I learned quite a bit; I think I understand their mindset very well. I was (and am) a determinist, so I did not think that faith was the result of human choice. As such I suppose I haven't actually done anything contradictory in the end.

>>18274982
>I was (and am) a determinist
I'll add that I still think that Calvinism is the only theological school that is fully defensible.

ummm christianbros.... how did we allow ourselves to get so btfo itt?

>>18275016
All it takes to realize it’s BS is to read it. No wonder the church didn’t want people reading it for so long

>>18274969
What does he mean when say 'troon'?

>>18275027
maybe if youre a retard taking everything at face value

>>18275027
As the aforementioned Calvinist Christian who is well read in mainstream scholarship, I think being a Christian is possible, but it doesn't look like what you see ITT. It involves recognizing that NT writings are a product of a diverse set of Christian communities utilizing initially oral and fluid traditions, and that in many ways the historical Jesus is difficult to reach.

I admit if he were a straight apocalyptic preacher that would still be a deal breaker, but I don't think that's the case. I cited some reasons why above. The Jesus Seminar after 30 years didn't believe he was an apocalypticist either

>>18275042
I guess The apostles were retards too?
See
>>18274974

>>18275058
>>18274974
>The end of all things is near…” (1 Peter 4:7)
and after peter said this the temple was destroyed.

>>18275087
Cope. Second coming is any day now!

>>18275087
Actually 1 and 2 Peter are fake letters so no. Partial preterism is true, but those letters are total fucking fakes

>>18275016
Its because they're so up their ass with surface tier apologetics that they have never actually done any real thinking

>>18275052
The best position on a practical level is probably Orthodoxy since you actually get to hand-wave all of these problems.

>>18274823
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDFWNE6ut7o
Is this part of the series you mentioned? Thanks for the resources, I'll check these out.
And yeah, I'm not sure what the Catholic position on these verses are. I don't think I've ever read anything out of Augustine or Aquinas about them.

>>18275140
At the expense of disconnecting from reality entirely. No, Reformed theology still allows one to get to know the real history of Christianity without needing to retreat into magical thinking to avoid the problems.

>>18275149
That is fine too, but this https://youtu.be/eqARZfFZMMo is better because its an actual sermon. If you like it, scroll through their videos... this is one of a long series and its only organized chronologically, so you have to find the above video and then find the next in the series, etc. Still worth it.

>>18275172
Great sermon, totally btfos everyone on ignorant end times views

>>18275172
Thanks for that, another thing, I can't find the paper by NT Wright online. The original PDF the site was uploaded to 404s. But I have found some articles referencing it so I will read those.

>>18275269
Found it

https://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/handle/10023/17178

>>18273319
Schizoid and schizophrenic are not interchangeable terms you fucking retard.

>>18275281
Great thanks, I wasn't looking very hard I guess.

>>18275172
This should end this thread and make everyone a rationalist Calvinist. Everyone else get out

>>18275172
Bros wtf my faith in Christianity just got restored... and my faith in lit Christians dropped to zero... damn

>>18275301
>>18275335
you didn't watch it

>>18275351
No, you didnt.

>>18275351
I'm 30 minutes in. I'll pray for you for lying.

>>18275140
>>18275252
>>18275269
>>18275296
>>18275301
My language partner future wife talks a lot with an old American, he wants to teach her lessons with video chats. She tells me she wants to adopt an old man and take care of him. I’m trying not to feel jealous or imagine that this senior citizen gets off on talking with teenage girls, or that there is something wrong with her. But I guess it could be worse. At least she talks a lot with me

>>18275172
This is really helpful, thanks

>>18275360
>>18275403
May Allah save your soul

>>18275172
Gonna make a new thread later with this sermon leading in case this gets buried here. This is too good.

>>18275507
Can you give an overview of the video? Im not at home and I’ll watch as soon as I get there.

>>18275617
Haha there's a lot. Goes through a lot of stuff from this thread
>generation means generation
>the time frame is THAT generation
>all the predictions in the passage did come true, he cites external sources
>connects it to its referent text in Daniel... apparently Jesus quotes directly from it
>in Daniel the same exact language predicted the destruction of a city by a foreign army... so that's what happens with Jesus too
>therefore partial preterism is true and Jesus was a true prophet and Reformed Calvinism is based and intelligent pilled

>>18275685
oh also talks about how this passage is abused by cults and certain Christians like the evangelical left behind retards

>>18275685
Interesting but still nothing excludes the partiality of what has been fulfilled, that is why I think partial preterism reasonable, to still occur. Another anon in the thread pointed out the cyclical nature of history (this notion of cycles, especially the anthropological ouroboros with the sacred and religion, is the reason Christ came, or the proof of his Divinity), so there are still prophecies to be fulfilled and Revelations still reveal what is in the future.
Besides that, the acceptation of the word genea/genus as kind and generation as the Christians remains untouchable.

>Calvinism
Since you allowed irrational postulations you give me the opportunity to dismiss it with a simple statement on its nature: false teaching leading many astray.

>>18273245
>His prophesies about the Roman-Jewish wars were spot on
They were written after they had already occurred, like a hundred years after. This is common knowledge
Do you think that the Book of Revelation was written before Nero's reign?

>>18275087
It's really not hard to predict catastrophe when the romans are literally knocking at doors and sending people to be executed. But the question is did the world end, and it didn't and hasn't.

>>18275749
You really think Mark was written after the first half of the second century but early christians quoted from it before it being composed?

>>18275172
>hour and a half video
>within minutes, bunch of replies pour in “wow thanks so useful”
holy samefag christshilling

>>18275772
by world he meant the jewish world

>>18273217
Christ was obviously a fraud. Which is why the Jews had him killed.

>>18275685
Does he not go over the whole "son of man coming down from the heavens" and whatnot? That seems like something he goes over based on your post. I'll watch the video.

>>18275935
Wrong, Christ is the most loyal and truthful person you'll ever meet, no one else on this earth loves you as much as he does.

>>18276130
Sounds like a cult to me

>>18273906
>it’s Christian apologetics therefore it’s trash
>it’s Jewish polemics therefore it’s correct

Who’s the dunning Kruger here? I already explained why the apocalyptic prophet christology is a an old dead theory.

You’re just mad becuase some Christian sources say so too? Back 2 Reddit you go

>>18276130
Cope

>>18273935
What if the traditional Interpretation that Christ would defeat the devil within the week and ascended into heaven and sat at the right hand of god within 40 days or whatever it was.

Woah, just ignore that. Woah, these two guys wrote the sentence Different 30-40 years after the fact, could it mean that we can discard all the messiah stuff and cherry pick apocalyptic stuff only! Christ fags btfo!

>disciples followed him and died for him for years after he died
>Baptised
>exorcisms
>pissed off Sanhedrin
>romans killed him Using a relatively severe public method

These are the historically accepted facts about Jesus. You’re stupid theory doesn’t fit. Jews didn’t murder Honi the circle Drawer. Why did they murder a random 1st century Q tard? If Mark was a ‘two more weeks’ fag and Luke wasn’t why does that mean Luke was wrong?

It’s a bullshit theory anon just move on, the academic community has.

>>18274719
>if I ignore the mainstream and extremely common and traditional interpretation and make up my own then Christianity is btfo

Just stop dude

>>18275982
yes

>>18275727
Partial preterism doesn't claim that there aren't prophecies left to be fulfilled btw

>>18275749
Well your timing is far outside if mainstream academic thought

>>18274974

>he was using it as a tool for ethics
>he thought it was near and was wrong
>he was speaking of some event near and you are misunderstanding
>he was speaking in metaphor

Doesn’t really matter at all what he thought on the matter actuslly does it

>>18276364
>Partial preterism doesn't claim that there aren't prophecies left to be fulfilled btw
Yes, but a few adherents claim that some were already fulfilled like the Antichrist and that it could not happen again since it already happened.

>>18273245
Hebrews started.it tho

>>18276201
>>18276160
>>18275935
To be honest the real fraud is anyone not understanding Christ and that is why He is the greatest, He knew even truth would be rejected and because of that He showed, and still shows, how Christianity is the greatest tragedian poetry ever conceived and thus the poetry par excellence of reality.

>>18276379
Thats called full preterism or hyper preterism. Its not orthodox Christianity. But thay has nothing to do with partial preterism despite the name. Church fathers had partial preterist views

Based video

>>18273217
Why is it embarassing, you posted this on /his/ too. You're not even using the KJV either

Mark 13:30
“Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.”

>>18276514
>You're not even using the KJV either
Fuck off retard

>>18276529
Top quality post, satan. You antichristian shills are a joke, you spam so many boards on this site. Get a fucking life, loser.
>>>/his/11155548

>>18276539
Hey schizo,

>>18276539
OP's a fucking retard, apparently ran away from the other thread he made on /his/
>>>/his/11156022
>>>/his/11155984
>>>/his/11158212
>>>/his/11158220

>>18276576
Getting a little schizo bud

I’m honestly seething he’s ignored my posts. Granted I see why, becuase they make him look like an ignorant faggot (which he is)

Time in the NT is both linear and nonlinear. Knowing the traditional catholic "modes" of interpretation helps here:

literal: I do not know enough koine greek to comment accurately on it but to me the question would definitely hinge on what "generation" and "pass away" means. does he mean "pass away" as in the temple will get raped by the Romans? in that sense he was right.

allegorical: however, as others have also noted, in some sense with the crowning of Christ the King the apocalypse both is a future event and, importantly, ALREADY HAPPENING (see particular v. general judgement). also could mean the "genea" of the hebrews is in fact "passed away" with the new covenant.

moral: the "old laws" of this generation have passed away.

anagogical: the "passing away" of this generation is an event from now until the last judgement (the "children of Adam").

There's many ways to view every verse. The verse only presents problems if you take it out of context and do not consider the multiple possible meanings (parallel, topological, literal, historical, prophetical, apocalyptic, etc.). This is why NT interpretation is much more complex than nonchristians view it to be.

>>18277180
this is a good book about why christianity is very much a paradoxical "both/and" religion. God and man, now and yet eternity, virgin and yet giving birth, etc.

>>18273217
No, Full Preterism is the best there is.

>>18277180
Why is everyone so hasty to frame Jesus as a Marcionite? He never discredited the Old Laws.

>>18277198
>Marcionite
the moral laws remain but the ritual laws do not ("I come not to abolish but to fulfill). you're right, it's mainly from Paul and the early Councils that we get the details

>>18277213
The ritual laws were never discarded though. Jesus either corrected the interpretation (His actions on Sabbath); revealed "new" laws, which are perennial in nature (love one another); or Christians later realized or succeeded the context of the more minute ritual laws (e.g. Christians can eat pork and shellfish because those laws were targeted to priests and we can cleanly manage pigs/devein shellfish). The Pericope Adulterae is one of the earliest interpolations and I'm surprised this passage doesn't come under more scrutiny given what it suggests.

>>18277320
you are probably right, actually we are basically agreeing - from my understanding the ritual laws "don't apply" *in the same way* as they did (ie they were fulfilled). I am not an expert in this area so I couldn't From my understanding the ritual/purity laws were meant to 1. set apart the jews 2. avoid things associated with death. These are no longer needed because death no longer exists and all people now fall under the new covenant.

>>18276539
>>18276576
You speak the truth brother

>>18277348
What do you consider a ritual law? That listed in Leviticus and Deuteronomy? That seems like too much to unapply; the only laws to look at in new context, as far as I know, are the ones Jesus explicitly expounded upon. I can agree with you mostly, but I think they should still be lived by as they were unless more has been fulfilled and said. I also agree with you in a way knowing that a central tenet of what Jesus preached was that your actions should beyond mere austerity in the following of laws (more righteous than the Pharisees...).

>>18273217
How would Titus' campaign not fulfilled this?

>>18277418
The pharisees point you say is correct, keep in mind of course it was impossible to observe the laws more strictly than the pharisees since they religiously held to all 613 torah commandments. the view of "not applying" depends on your understand of covenant theology (which of course is massively complex). arguably, as the catholic church teachers, and this is a bit of a radical point: the old covenant is still in effect. this is why since Nostra Aetate the catholic church understands the jews, in a mysterious way, can still be saved thru the old covenant BY the power of Jesus' redemptive activity. however, the old covenant, since it is with the jewish people, by definition only applies to the jews still. thus it is not "abolished" - but for all gentiles salvation has reached "fulfillment" ("but fulfilled"). This is not commonly talked about but is an interpretation that actually makes sense.

>>18273217
>look at this thread
>know OP is retarded thanks to my knowledge of the Bible, not that I'd change my beliefs anyway
>don't argue with him since that's throwing pearls before swine
>skim his counterarguments while making a strawman of OP in my head to mock for the next few weeks
>boost my ego
who else /winning/?

>>18277865
(Part 1)
>Mark 13:30: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."

Jesus says you (the people of the generation his talking about) will never get into heaven until the Jews. You will stay here as ghosts, unaccepted into the kingdom of heaven, until the commandment of God to exterminate the Canaanites has been fulfilled.

This is because the intent of Christianity is to "Make it on Earth as it is in Heaven". Heaven is the sky, ruled by El, father of Yahweh (Biblical God, a warrior God), and other Gods. The earthen part has traditionally been the realm of Dagan, god of fertility, crops, and storms that obscure the sky.

This means you need to exterminate the followers of Dagan and his son Hadad (Canaanites/Jews) in order to make it "On Earth as it is in Heaven (sky)" at which point El, the God of the Sky, the creator God, father of Yahweh, can come down to rein on Earth because Dagan and Hadad have been conquered, vanquished, and ideally killed.

That was the entire point of the Old Testament. Originally, El, god of the sky, has a son Yam, god of the sea, who El wants to be chief of the Gods of Canaan. Dagan is a rival creator God and God of grain, fertility, storms, the animal and land-bound parts of the world.

Dagan has a son, Hadad, who is God of Storms and Rain. Hadad kills Yam when El asserts that Yam is chief of the Gods, and Hadad asserts himself as Chief God of Canaan. El creates Yahweh, a warrior God, to wage war on the pantheon of Dagan, including the Canaanites because the Canaanites worship Dagan and Hadad.

This was the entire reason why 90% of the old testament is "Don't do Canaanite shit, kill all the Canaanites, and if you tolerate the Canaanites or perform their rituals, I, Yahweh, will personally fucking kill you."

That is the entire "realm" of Yahweh, instead of the ocean or crops, Christian God is legit just a warrior God. This is why he is so militant with his laws, spartan with his allowances, and uses public communal execution as the basic form of team building for his followers.


Jesus says "Make it on Earth as it is in Heaven", meaning your only hope for salvation, for 'passing into heaven' provided that you fail to uphold the commandment of exterminating the Canaanites yourself, comes from the perpetuation of the Holy Book to ensure the probability that the commandment is upheld. Jesus says "You will forever be a ghost on this planet until the Canaanites have been vanquished"

The basic message of Jesus was "Become a domestic terrorist, attack synagogues, and be willing to die for this War."

>>18277882
(Part 2)

Remember that Jesus was born snake-tongued Jew, literally born of the blood of Lucifer, born in Israel of the conquered Jews, bastard children of the Canaanites who conquered the Hebrews and raped them for hundreds of years. The Jews are those that betrayed God, rebelled against God, and mutilated the faith in order to please their Canaanite masters because of their hatred for the God that scorned them for their apostasy.

All real Hebrews die fighting their mortal enemy before they submit to slavery or Canaanite rituals, the Jews who survived are compelled to join this rebellion against God and entertain the evil of the Canaanites because they are born of the blood of Lucifer, the fallen angel which attempted to assert his supremacy above God.

Jesus is a Jew. His words are pure deception, manipulation, and exploitation. His goal is to prey upon the ignorance, gullibility, and temptation of the simple-minded people in order to ensure they serve as a means to his desired end.

It is only from the actions of a Jew can you understand their position upon an argument, the words of a Jew are pure trickery, double-think, and manipulation.

Despite having the blood of demon Jews (Canaanites) within him, Jesus becomes a good person because, likely unknown to him initially, he still has some residual Hebrew blood which is loyal to God. He wanders around the desert for 20 years, meeting people who actually know the true history of the Jews, unadulterated by the Jews snake-tongued deceit and manipulation. They teach this to Jesus. Jesus learns that the Jews are the Canaanites who God commands the Hebrews to exterminate.


Jesus, still a Jew, is torn in many ways by this revelation. The evil of his Jewish blood, loyal to Lucifer, conflicts with the residual Hebrew blood in his veins which is loyal to God.

He overpowers this paradox because the Jew blood in his veins compels him to backstab, lie, betray, exploit, and manipulate people, and he makes peace with this evil because his Hebrew blood allows him to do this in the name of God. This is because the Jews were accepted as petty servants/slaves in the kingdom of the Canaanites, the lowest tier of people, much like angels in heaven are the lowest level of angels.

>>18277882
(Part 3)

Jesus, finding himself in the position that Lucifer was in heaven, the lowest rung of the pantheon, and is compelled by his Luciferian blood to backstab and betray those above him. He rebels against the Canaanite pantheon just as Lucifer did the Kingdom of God. Jesus’ wrath, hatred, and condemnation of those above him spurs him to wage war against them.

He returns to Israel with the instinctive demonic intent of waging war on the Canaanites, and he does this using the Jewish tactics of infiltrating, manipulating, backstabbing and betraying the Jews. He does this because he seeks to bring slaughter and ultimate destruction upon the Canaanite pantheon and those who worship it, just as Lucifer sought to destroy the Kingdom of Heaven

This is the basal motivation of Jesus, still a Jew, still a demon, remember? Jesus is a man born of an adulterer whore-child, a bride who consummated her marriage with adultery. He is a man born thick with the blood of the demon Jews. The irony of Jesus repeating the rebellion of Lucifer within the Jewish-Canaanite pantheon is that by doing so, he is upholding the commandment of God. The Luciferian blood in Jesus causes him to instinctively rebel against the pantheon which God himself opposes.

The entire lesson of the Old Testament is that God commands the Hebrews to exterminate the Canaanites, the Hebrews forsook God, God abandoned the Hebrews for this and allowed the Canaanites to conquer and rape the Hebrews.

Despite being compelled to rebel against the pantheon of his people by the blood of Lucifer in his veins, it is God's will that Jesus betrays the Jews and seeks to wage war on them, and this reveals Jesus as the son of God, child of Yahweh, a warrior God whose sole "realm" of divinity is waging war on the Canaanites and the Gods of the Canaanites.

Jesus, empowered by the snake-tongue and treachery of his Jew blood, is able to manipulate Jewish peasants into following them, offering them "a steal of a deal" on Heaven. Jesus says "Abandon the commandments, worship me, and you get into heaven for free. 100% nice guy Jesus, all the time, no bad vibes." People love it. This is the hook. This is basically the "Nigerian Prince scam" of religions offered to people by Jesus, and they eat it up.

>>18277882
>Jesus says you (the people of the generation his talking about) will never get into heaven until the Jews [are dead]

typo

(Part 4)

Once Jesus has amassed a following, knowing that this seed of an army, capable of spreading, capable of growing and eventually capable of creating massive armies whose sole intent will be to wage war against the Canaanites and exterminate them as God commands. Jesus knows that so long as the Old Testament is perpetuated with his “Free Ticket to Heaven” that God’s commandments to exterminate the Canaanites will be perpetuated.

At this point, Jesus knows that nothing more can be gained by selling this "Free Ticket to Heaven" scam. This is why Jesus changes gear and allows his Luciferian blood to take control of him, enacting his rebellion against the Canaanite-Jewish pantheon, attacking the synagogue as a domestic terrorist, declaring the Jews enemies of God, declaring them Children of the Devil, and subsequently being executed for this.

Jesus knows that he is setting the precedent for his followers by doing this. He knows that his enemies, the Jews, will forever be to blame for his murder, and they will forever be attacked by those tempted by the comically tempting and logically invalid religious promises he makes.

His scam religion is like crack for people living under constant religious fear and forced to make constant sacrifices to the Gods. Jesus knows that the religious rituals are worthless so long as the Jews exist, because the Jews are Canaanites who will always corrupt any passive religious rite through Canaanite ritual mixing. The rituals were meant as a form of team building, but doing the rituals while the moral code is corrupted means you’re team building in a way that only furthers moral corruption, as is seen in the Jews.

Jesus sets the one precedent of Christianity, which is to fight the Jewish-Canaanites, even as a domestic terrorist, even knowing that you will face certain death, and this is how the world shall be ushered back into the hands of God.

Jesus knows that the extermination of the Canaanites is the commandment which the Jews forsook, and in turn caused God to forsake the Jews. He leads the charge into the battle, resurrecting the War on Canaanites which is Commanded to the Hebrews by Yahweh, and his martyrdom fertilizes the seeds given to his followers.
His followers then spread the message of Jesus, despite any ignorance they may have to the reality of the purpose of Jesus' life and despite any faith they may have in the snake-tongued deception of Jesus.

>>18277904
(Part 5)
Jesus knows that his disciples don't need to understand why he said what he said or did what he did in order to spread his message. He knows that sometimes, the believers are best left in their ignorance because they are more willing to spread the "Nigerian prince scam of religions" than they are to wage war, and this is Jesus using his Jewish manipulation to ensure they serve as a means to his desired end by exploiting their ignorance. His desired end is spreading the Old Testament to ensure that future generations are aware of the necessary War on Canaanites which must be waged.

Jesus needed to steal the Old Testament from the Jews and spread it, hide it from the Jews, give it to gentiles to protect, in order to get people to wage this war once the armies have become strong enough. The Old Testament is the initial proclamation of War against the Canaanites and God's condemnation of the Jews who forsook God.

Clearly the Old Testament is a fucking brutal, unappealing, and unforgiving religion, and people would never have listened to “Spread the Old Testament” if Jesus hadn’t sugar coated the fuck out of it with his “Free tickets to heaven” in the New Testament. Jesus basically gets you to buy the “Bible Variety Pack” because he knows you would never buy only “original flavor”. Still, to this day, people don’t understand or respect the Old Testament, but this doesn’t stop them from perpetuating the book right alongside the sugarcoating of Jesus, and this was one of the major intents behind “Nice Guy Jesus”

Jesus is the Son of God. God is Yahweh, a pure-warrior God, created and sent by El with the sole purpose of waging war on the Canaanite pantheon and exterminating the Canaanites in order to avenge the death of Yam, God’s brother.

Mot, God of Death, is also a child of El and Yahweh’s brother. When God says “O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.” Hos 13:14. This is because Yahweh, warrior God, is pledging allegiance to Mot, stating that he will personally wage war against the Hebrews because the Hebrews have betrayed him. Mot (Death) is literally God’s brother, and this is why God hails Death as if it were a person.

This was the general secular intent of Jesus.

As for a raw-dog interpretation of the actual Chapter, doesn't that Church say "When God returns to judge the living and the dead" every fucking day? Like the ghosts just hang out until God comes to judge them on judgement day? That just strictly affirms the initial "You will be ghosts, you will not pass into heaven, until judgement day" interpretation, that’s affirmed by your daily chants.

The"spooky" parts of the Bible are always symbolic.

You are the Children of God. You are the ones who are supposed to make it "On Earth as it is in Heaven", you are the ones who are supposed to cause this "spooky shit" to happen, physically, with your body.

>>18277512
I don't understand the thing about the Old Covenant staying only with the Jews only, though—shouldn't Christians claim the Old Covenant and all its laws as well? And retroactively claim Moses, et al as Christians, even going so far as to say that Jews today are not the same Jews as yesterday, who were claimed and saved by Jesus. (I think we would agree that the "new Jews" of today, who ignored Christ, also abideth by the Old Covenant, and can be saved by those laws too; I believe this has a precedent in St. Augustine too).

I don't understand the point on gentiles as well. I believe the Old Covenant is given to them as well, and that St. Paul erred similarly by not extending circumcision to gentiles. I understand his need for urgency and converts, as he felt an imminence to Christ's return, and nor do I think salvation is contingent on foreskin, but I cannot help but see it erroneous to discard that line.

>>18277865
Yeah, don't argue with people with bad axioms; but similarly don't boost your ego.

>>18277882
>>18277888
>>18277898
>>18277904
>>18277919
Didn't read :)

>>18277939
the reason paul discarded circumcision is the same reason the other "set apart" ritual laws were discarded, as I said. this is not my opinion: this is the position of Paul and the Catholic church. probably if you have further questions it's a good idea to read the catechism. the old covenant applies to all believers but it is still only IN FORCE for jews (because it was never binding for non jews to begin with - except with regard to laws the coincide with natural law)

the position you're advocating for btw is called messianic judiasm (even though its a christian denomination). the very question you are asking was decided at the first Jerusalem council before the year AD 100, so it's not a new question: the position of the apostles was that the jewish ritual laws are abolished. ultimately this is a large factor in what led to hostility between jews and "jesus-followers".

>>18278017
Catholic church is a pedo fag cult with a false theology full of heresy nice try

>>18278017
>some faggot catholic typed out a wall of text no one will read and no one asked for
Honestly why are these freaks like this? Why don't they just get a life?

>>18278025
nice ad hom. the church has always been full of pedos and gays and evil people - just like the rest of society. yet "you are peter and upon this rock I build my church". the church is full of sinners but we don't have to be holy - only God is holy, after all. plus if you understood the depth of Eucharistic theology/theology of the body/catholic social teaching you'd understand why it has survived 2000 years. read this and come back, the we can talk if you still disagree.

>>18278025
>>18278046
seething. when they resort to insults you know it's over. enjoy your messianic jew "christianity"

>>18278062
ah yes, the catholic version of "trust the plan"

Yeah keep those donations and free shilling going things will work out lol

You're pathetic kys. Don't reply to me again peasant

>>18278067
t. Nick Fuentes cultist

>>18273217
The best interpretation of the lines is that of Philip K. Dick is that "this generation" has NOT passed away. In fact this is still the Roman era, circa 33-60 or so AD, the time of the apostles, and 'the modern world' is all a entirely fake simulated reality set up by Satan/the Demiurge. Christ has just died, you are in Rome dreaming that you are here. You're not. This generation has not passed away; you are part of it.

>>18278088
Check'd, I might add.

>>18278025
>>18278046
He's replying to me, samefag.

>>18278017
>>18278062
I've never had this elucidated for me before. I'll read the Catechism to trace the development then, thank you—you're helping me fill some glaring lacunae in my theological understanding. I do have to deny that I fall in line with Messianic Judaism, though; I consider myself a Christian outright (I do know the origin of the term) and forgo the semantics they seem to be involved with.

Something I have to inquire about: If God has given gentiles leniencies that are contingent specifically to them, and account for their original cultures and other transient things, would this suggest a kind of "eventual" cooperation of God with the expanding of Christianity, even if it appears differently than how it is previously? To me, if this cooperation is true, explains the long-standing of Catholicism in spite of its errancies, and also suggests a need to maintain it against protestantism too.

>>18278088
>>18278094
Why did you post this twice?

>>18278161
you are a cringe try hard loser. Get a life. You've been at your shilling all fucking day

>>18277939
Old Covenant doesn't stay with Jews: it's gone entirely. They do not benefit from keeping it. The big transition is seen in Acts 15 at the Jerusalem council, and Paul expounds upon it in his epistles. I highlight Acts 15 because some people insist it was exclusively Paul that pushed for rejecting Judaism when instead we see other Apostles involved as well. I'd recommend reading from Acts 10 as well though to see the first Gentile converted.

Pope Francis invited known satanist hilary Clinton to speak at vatican about covid.

Catholic is evil

>>18273256
Very plausible, but not definite. Same with the idea of a race war in the end times. IE ethnos vs ethnos doesn't likely translate into nation vs nation, but race vs race, however, to assert that it we KNOW that it is fact would also be intellectually dishonest.
Sometimes we just have to admit that there is no consensus.

>>18273289
Not only is it well supported by the context and that is the best argument for it, but this has nothing to do with different sects of Christianity.
Also, most preterists are protestants and most catholics are futurists.

>>18273363
>he was talking to Judeans
>therefore his message wasn't meant for anyone else

Guess the whole of the Bible isn't addressed to you then, huh.

>>18278174
Huh? I've made like four posts attributable to me in this thread and no more.

>>18278197
I'll read soon, thank you. I can't shake the fact that it seemed overbearing of the Apostles to decide that independently though.

>>18278209
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55409693.. Don't denounce the Catholic while you're denouncing the Catholic church.

>>18278251
>Guess the whole of the Bible isn't addressed to you then, huh.
what a retarded take. imagine being so braindead that you think this is a zinger.

>>18278161
I am not this guy >>18278197
Actually there are catholic strains of thought that believe the old covenant is still in force but only for jews. anyway that is a different topic

the answer to your second question is yes. you would be interested in reading Teilhard de Chardin - he addresses the "expansion" of christianity specifically. jesus says: I have sheep of which you do not know. this is not univeralism because it believes all other religions (and non religions) exist in order to save a certain people in a certain place and context. here is a scenario: aliens are discovered and they are conscious. how would they be saved if they are not in the "image and likeness" of god as previously understood? what if they had an alien jesus? this would radically change the idea of christianity and yet catholic dogma already allows for this possibility. this is why church teaching on salvation is very attractive to me, because it is nuanced. In fact univeralism is not even a teaching rejected by the church. it is only taught they separation from god does exist - what does this separation look like? is it just annihilation? the Church allows for multiple intrepretations

>>18278266
Unlike your post, it's an argument.
Revelation was specifically written to 7 churches of Asia Minor.
Romans was written by Paul to the Christens in Rome. As were most of the books Paul wrote, they were specifically written to a specific audience.
They still apply universally as God's word.

>>18278312
you are such a pseud damn

>>18278312
I could tell you weren't him because of the capitalization, don't worry lol. I have a comment I wrote a while ago saying, "Through the Axial Age it is known that intimations towards a Christian truth have been spread, like panspermia"—would you agree with this as being part of this "expansion"?

Is the de Chardin book I should read "The Phenomenon of Man"? or is there another text you recommend.

>>18278318
why am I a pseud bro
>>18278351
actually if you can get your hands on it I'd recommend Hymn to the Universe. its really hard to find though. phenomenon of man is good, its a bit of a slog but its short - look up illa delio (think that's how you spell it) if youre interested in a modern expansion of his thought to include a lot more cosmology. chardin was more interested in transhumanist evolution but it also applies to religious diversity.

ultimately the question is to enquire about the nature of salvation; read juliana of norwich in Revelations of Divine Love. great book, it's one of my favorites. basically her showings from Christ say 1, not to enquire about salvation of others at all as we can't comprehend it; 2, there will be a "great reconciliation" "even more spectacular than the resurrection (!)" at some point in the end times. Jesus says he will "do a new thing". Juliana of course is going to be approved as a doc of the church and given a equivalent canonization eventually so I think that ties into why other "seeds" of religions are allowed to exist - ultimately it's not of our concern and it will be addressed.

>>18278431
Which Ilia Delio book do you recommend? I found Hymn of the Universe on ZLibrary. I similarly have a copy of Revelations of Divine Love, but I haven't read it—I'm intrigued now, though. People underestimate the mystique of Christ.

>>18278482
nice. I've never read Delio but I believe she's an expert in his thought, i've heard her name mentioned a lot. maybe her book called like "the evolving universe" or something. I know she has a talk at Georgetown on a panel about an intro to chardin's thought, they might be worth a view on youtube

>>18278252
What do you mean decide independently? Paul was a well educated Pharisee of Pharisees, one of the top Jewish theologians [educated under Gamaliel] turned Christian. Peter was also someone who leaned toward Messianic Judaism and yet the two "super Jews" supported divorcing Judaism and Christianity. Furthermore, if you believe they were Apostles, then you believe they had Apostolic authority. In Acts 2:42 is shows that the believers were devoted to the Apostles' teachings and in 2 Peter 3, Peter even refers to Paul's letters as Scripture [using the same word to describe Old Testament Scripture in Koine Greek], demonstrating that the Apostles had authority.
>>18278312
can confirm this guy is not me, I'm >>18278197 only

>>18278502
I'll check the book out. Thanks a lot for the help and discussion in an otherwise embarrassing thread.

>>18278508
The Apostles endorsed each other? Is this what you mean? To me it seems there was a feedback loop going on. I don't doubt their precedence, I just don't think that they necessarily have to be the final word on all things.

By the way, while you're both still here, do you have any commentary on why Revelation is part of the Canon? I would like to hear about it from people with more knowledge on this than me.

>>18278551
Revelation was added to the Canon so that James would be iirc. There was controversy between the Eastern Church and Western Church [before the Schism] since either book disagreed with the other's theology. As an aside, it's not so much that "they had a feedback loop" but specifically Paul [since a lot of /pol/tards try to claim Paul doesn't have Apostolic authority even though he's equated with OT Scriptures by Peter himself. It's not that they had "final word" but that they were literally divinely inspired. This sort of connects back to your Canonicity question: what got put into the Canon had several heuristics and one was that the writer needed to be an Apostle or associated with an Apostle [Luke was associated with Peter/Paul].
Revelation is in the Canon, ignoring political reasons, because it provides an important message. That Christ is coming back. A lot of people get deep into interpreting it but that's a bit of a meme. At its core, Christ's second coming is a reminder that we're victorious at the end of it all. Also, the first three chapters are letters to churches that are valuable reads since some of the audiences were written to earlier in the New Testament, giving us the ability to see what happened to certain churches over time.

>>18278583
>>18278551
I'm not diving for deeper sources but this seems to be a functional overview of the issue of Canonicity. I'd find a better/scholarly source if it wasn't midnight.
> https://www.michaeljkruger.com/the-book-of-revelation-how-difficult-was-its-journey-into-the-canon/

Preterism is Post Hoc incarnate.
>It's 100 hyperbolic and allegorical when it necessarily has to be, but all other verses are literal AND allegorical simultaneously, but not these sentences, no no, they're pure hyperbole.
Origenism is heresy they say, except when it isn't.

>>18278583
>>18278596
Thank you! I feel a lot more confident in the coherence of the church now, why things are done in the manner they are, etc. God bless.

>>18278609
Of course. I enjoy apologetics and intend to study it once I'm in grad school.

OP, when Jesus says

>Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

What major figure was born in that generation? Did He ever leave?

Literally the next verse gives it away:

>Heaven and earth will pass away, but my Words will never pass away.

(emphasis mine)

>>18278609
Just realized I said it was James that was controversial when it was Hebrews. James wasn't controversial until the Protestant Reformation. Sorry.

>>18278732
Well, now I'm interested. What were the issues with those two?

>>18278745
Hebrews has no specific author which is where it remains controversial even today. More learned Greek scholars tell me that it could not have been Paul that wrote Hebrews due to the significant difference in style from his other letters. Since a core aspect of Canonicity is its connection to an Apostle, it throws Hebrews into question. The assumption is that it was written by a different Apostle, especially since it doesn't fail the other criteria of "not disagreeing with established theology" and "being divinely inspired" (although this second criteria depends on Apostolic authorship, or at the very least, some sort of authority figure, although the usage of OT Scripture could demonstrate the merits of the author anyway). Hebrews is critical because it helps establish Christianity as the "proper successor" to Judaism since it regularly connects the Old Testament to the New Testament as well as to Christ.

Revelation was controversial for theological reasons primarily. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/13997/what-historical-reasons-resulted-in-revelation-being-included-in-most-christian
I find the first response here to be well written and more in-depth than my last link, and it properly cites its sources for you.

>>18278769
Thank you again!

What do Christians say about the salvation of schizos like >>18277882

>>18273270
This. It's a religion so defective that it destroyed the entire category of religion for the European peoples, a feat unheard of in all of history.

>>18278745
>not by faith alone
Prots have seethed ever since.

>>18278088

Or that a "generation" in the vulgar sense simply does not exist. Eternal present with non-communicating past and future, all souls spontaneously generated from God, Demiurgic catastrophe/torture whereby temporal "generation" fractally or fugally comprise the Roman-Pharisaic generation, stretching the abomination of the crucifixion across the whole the whole "reality" to make it as Evil as possible, etc. etc. etc.

>>18278088

Or that a "generation" in the vulgar sense simply does not exist. Eternal present with non-communicating past and future, all souls spontaneously generated from God, Demiurgic catastrophe/torture whereby temporal "generations" fractally or fugally comprise the Roman-Pharisaic generation, stretching the abomination of the crucifixion across the whole the whole "reality" to make it as Evil as possible, etc. etc. etc.

>>18273422
"All these things" meaning all the things of the first prophecy. You sure are dumb for somebody so arrogant.

>>18273217
Generation of Christianity that will go away when the Rapture happens

>>18279508
let it go. 2 faggot catholic butt buddies hijacked the thread to have some totally unnecessary and boring conversation about recommending books to each other.

why that doesn't count as a bannable offense i have no idea. literally 100 posts of walls of text between two fags flirting with each other and having nothing to do with the thread

>>18279508
Why would he say "all these things" after saying both? All these things will happen, ie all the things I just said. Bit of mental gymnastics there.

>>18280121
Read the original text, you mouthbreathing ape.

The translation is stilted but it should still be pretty clear even for somebody as dumb as you. (Provided you're reading in good faith, of course.)

>>18280121
Rightly divide, pedant.

>>18280174
The insults do you absolutely no good here. It makes you seem incredibly dishonest and uninterested in the subject. I'm not the other guy you've been responding to, but even if I was, it really makes you look bad if you're genuinely trying to argue your point.
The verses don't read like that to me. Jesus predicts the destruction of the second temple, then immediately after, describes the end times. They don't read like disconnected prophecies. "But in those days, following that distress" followed with the apocalyptic language referencing Daniel, then he says this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.
For you to say that is a reference exclusively to the first prophecy and when asked you simply with respond "uhhh read it duhhhh". Some nuance or substance would help. Why would he say "in those days" if the second prophecy is disconnected and wouldn't happen within that generation?

I find it very strange how people will develop negative views of Scripture and the Christian faith on the basis of these kinds of theological and textual issues. A confusing passage or two is really enough to move you to reject the totality of divine revelation? To blind you to the overarching beauty and unity of the Word? It's a pedantic fixation on parts at the expense of the blissful perception of the whole.

>>18273217
>>18273270
>>18279100
Zoroastrianism was better than Christianity. Also, Mazdakism, while not perfect, was a movement in the right direction due to promoting animal welfare and vegetarianism. I do not believe the lies from orthodox mobad that Mazdak the Younger supported sharing wives.
Ideally, Westerners should have embraced Mazdak the Younger over Jewsus. Also, this would have led to promoting preservation of old-growth forests, which Christianity does not care about. For example, Christian Byzantines burned many Celtic and Zoroastrian ancient, holy trees.

>>18278600
allegory is not condemned by the church

>>18273270
>>18279100
>>18281414
if you couldn't tell
a bunch of /pol/ nick fuetes fans are setting up shop here in lit. they love Christianity because their favourite e-celeb told them to.

>>18281414
>Christian Byzantines burned many Celtic and Zoroastrian ancient, holy trees.

>Sacred associations of oaks survived Christianization, so that St Brigit's monastic foundation was at Cill Dara, 'church of (the) oak', i.e. Kildare, and St Colum Cille favoured Doire Calgaich 'Calgach's oak grove', i.e. Derry; see also Durrow, darú, from dair magh, 'oak plain'.
Satanic liar, begone. You are that Zoroastrian guy I talked to, seemed reasonable for a while just to go deeper into falsity. You are completely lost.

>>18281807
I forgot where, but I remember reading a lot of druidic trees were chopped down kind of like what happened to Donar's Oak.

>>18281838
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donar%27s_Oak

Socialism by von Mises. The calculation problem is a felling blow. /thread

>>18273217
I think that Jesus wanted to persuade Father to end the world, but Father did not accepted that.

Or maybe events in the war with bad angels crossed Jesus' plans. Further existing of the world could become a better (or the possible one) option.

>>18275785

What are your sources for 1900 year old quotations?

>>18273217
Mark 13 is talking about end times. i believe that verse is talking about this generation (this earthy world that exists before the second coming of Christ) not passing away until the end time events happen. check out the documentary called "after the tribulation" on youtube if you want to learn more about non-dispensational eschatology. i believe dispensationalism to be false btw.

>>18273217
That generation still exists in the astral plane. And it'll see all the things unfold.

The bible is proof people need to read Mortimer J. Adler