Matthew 24:34 I Don't Understand?

[Guest kingdombrat]

But if we want to get a closer look at Joshepus, the TRAITORS account, we can see how he [DESCRIBED Jesus the Messiah] as being the focal point of the {much later myth} "Unibrowed" Hunchback of Notre Dame:

 

“At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet who is supposed to have raised dead persons and to have cured all diseases. Both his nature and his form were human, for he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose, that the spectators could take fright, with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard. (*Halōsis, ii.174).”[4]  

Edited May 8, 2021 by kingdombrat

[Guest kingdombrat]

9 minutes ago, Whyme said:

Who says Polycarp was Johns disciple? 

Multiple accounts by at least 20 Church Fathers claim such.

[Whyme]

1 minute ago, kingdombrat said:

Multiple accounts by at least 20 Church Fathers claim such.

Church fathers, never really believed in them. 

[Guest kingdombrat]

Just now, Whyme said:

Church fathers, never really believed in them. 

Theoretically speaking here, John the Apostle would have been the first Church Father since his Disciples carried on the work of Spreading the Gospel of Christ!

[Dennis1209]

7 hours ago, Alive said:

But-----it is almost entirely because of Irenaeus that folks accept the late date of Revelation. This is a fact that needs to be considered. And as has been pointed out, Irenaeus was wrong on other points and not inspired as we commonly understand that term. So logic says, you can't have it both ways. Why do you believe Irenaeus?

He is "outside" scripture.

Hello Alive, here's thoughts I ponder. Daniel had no idea about the meanings of what he was inspired to write, it was not for him to know all the meanings. As a general rule accepted by scholars, the closer one gets to an origional source or text, the more accurate and reliable the information. Josephus is a good historical example.

As you know, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp. Polycarp was a personal friend and disciple of the Apostle John. Irenaeus apparently at least knew and met John. All that is very close source information. Based on my studies, I hold a late date view [A.D. 90] of the book of Revelation.

Something that's always puzzled me. Polycarp and Irenaeus would have been much like me, in regard to wanting to learn more and be a student of the very last appointed apostle. It appears the only thing I can learn about reading the writings of them; is there interpretations and opinions of what the apostle John told them, nothing new, and a small portion of their views conflicts with my own hermeneutics of some scripture. 

Had I the opportunity to personally talk to the apostle John, I would be asking so many questions, wanting more explanations, more details that that recorded. There's no indication these two early church fathers tried to glean additional information from John. No doubt John would not have given any other details or information than what he was inspired and directed to write and record. I've wondered how and why they developed their own hermeneutics and opinions with John as their mentor? Apparently John would not stray from what he was directed to do, and didn't share his personal thoughts, opinions and any insight he may have had?

Your thoughts on the preceding?

[R. Hartono]

On 5/7/2021 at 11:03 PM, LadyKay said:

Matthew 24:34 reads:   Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Jesus is talking about the end of the world and his returning. But the generation he is talking about did pass away before his return. So I do not understand this passage.  Can someone explain what I am missing? 

Its abt the generation who witness the destruction of the 2nd Temple as first issue in Matt 24. The rest of Matt 24 is abt end times situation n re-bossom of the fig tree/modern Israel in 1948 unrelated to Temple destruction.

Edited May 9, 2021 by R. Hartono

[luigi]

On 5/7/2021 at 12:03 PM, LadyKay said:

Matthew 24:34 reads:   Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Jesus is talking about the end of the world and his returning. But the generation he is talking about did pass away before his return. So I do not understand this passage.  Can someone explain what I am missing? 

The generation who witness the events the Lord describes in the Olivet discourse in Mark 13, Luke 21, and Matthew 24 shall not pass away before the end of them. Those are therefore not first century AD events as many believe them to be. Nor are they a combination of first century AD events and end time events, as it would mean some 2,000 year old people among us. The events described all therefore elapse within a single generation during the end times, which is now.

[Alive]

16 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Hello Alive, here's thoughts I ponder. Daniel had no idea about the meanings of what he was inspired to write, it was not for him to know all the meanings. As a general rule accepted by scholars, the closer one gets to an origional source or text, the more accurate and reliable the information. Josephus is a good historical example.

As you know, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp. Polycarp was a personal friend and disciple of the Apostle John. Irenaeus apparently at least knew and met John. All that is very close source information. Based on my studies, I hold a late date view [A.D. 90] of the book of Revelation.

Something that's always puzzled me. Polycarp and Irenaeus would have been much like me, in regard to wanting to learn more and be a student of the very last appointed apostle. It appears the only thing I can learn about reading the writings of them; is there interpretations and opinions of what the apostle John told them, nothing new, and a small portion of their views conflicts with my own hermeneutics of some scripture. 

Had I the opportunity to personally talk to the apostle John, I would be asking so many questions, wanting more explanations, more details that that recorded. There's no indication these two early church fathers tried to glean additional information from John. No doubt John would not have given any other details or information than what he was inspired and directed to write and record. I've wondered how and why they developed their own hermeneutics and opinions with John as their mentor? Apparently John would not stray from what he was directed to do, and didn't share his personal thoughts, opinions and any insight he may have had?

Your thoughts on the preceding?

Interesting subject to be sure. Bottom line---I just don't know.

Here is what I do know. Human beings are funny and inconsistent critters. Being a friend or associate of John doesn't change humanity and all of its vagaries.

The canon didn't yet exist and other than the circulating epistles and I am sure a great deal more, folks were figuring things out, just as we do now. Most was communicated verbally and we know how that goes. Ten individuals can be in the same room listening and come away with ten versions.

Today--we have honest well meaning brethren convinced that the HS has taught them this or that and interpret scripture this---and yet there is disagreement. The same was true then.

Another thought--what we have in the various historical records regarding these men, is a tiny fraction of who they were, what they experienced and their respective reactions to what they were exposed to.

We simply can't know for a certainty--we weren't there and even if we were--we would each come away with a different POV.

This is why the Lord has preserved the canon. These things also point to what is most important. Those things related to our common salvation In Christ Jesus by the Father. One of the greatest miracles for humanity is the Hebrew Bible and how the Lord allowed the NT epistles to expand on the light of Christ shown in the OT. The fact that these things are so preserved is amazing and a proof of His love and His desire for us to understand.

[Dennis1209]

5 hours ago, Alive said:

Interesting subject to be sure. Bottom line---I just don't know.

Here is what I do know. Human beings are funny and inconsistent critters. Being a friend or associate of John doesn't change humanity and all of its vagaries.

The canon didn't yet exist and other than the circulating epistles and I am sure a great deal more, folks were figuring things out, just as we do now. Most was communicated verbally and we know how that goes. Ten individuals can be in the same room listening and come away with ten versions.

Today--we have honest well meaning brethren convinced that the HS has taught them this or that and interpret scripture this---and yet there is disagreement. The same was true then.

Another thought--what we have in the various historical records regarding these men, is a tiny fraction of who they were, what they experienced and their respective reactions to what they were exposed to.

We simply can't know for a certainty--we weren't there and even if we were--we would each come away with a different POV.

This is why the Lord has preserved the canon. These things also point to what is most important. Those things related to our common salvation In Christ Jesus by the Father. One of the greatest miracles for humanity is the Hebrew Bible and how the Lord allowed the NT epistles to expand on the light of Christ shown in the OT. The fact that these things are so preserved is amazing and a proof of His love and His desire for us to understand.

No debate on my part, I agree. I probably take more liberties than I should with the following two verses?

Acts 17:11 (KJV) These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Proverbs 25:2 (KJV) It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

[Dennis1209]

8 hours ago, luigi said:

The generation who witness the events the Lord describes in the Olivet discourse in Mark 13, Luke 21, and Matthew 24 shall not pass away before the end of them. Those are therefore not first century AD events as many believe them to be. Nor are they a combination of first century AD events and end time events, as it would mean some 2,000 year old people among us. The events described all therefore elapse within a single generation during the end times, which is now.

What's interesting is, the generation that is alive when the fig tree [Israel] becomes a nation once again, shall not pass. As we all know, that happened on May 14, 1948, in one day by the decree of the United Nation. Israel will be 73 years old in just a few days now.

It begs the question everyone wants to know; exactly how long is a biblical generation that witnesses Israel's rebirth? I think our modern statistics of current life spans in general, is bared out in Psalm 90:10. I suspect from May 14, 1948, this may point to the season? 2018 - 2028, we shall see?

Psalm 90:10 (KJV) The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.