What did Jesus really mean when he spoke on the mount of olives?
by apocalypse 20 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Rob Crompton
There are huge difficulties in tryingto answer this one. Before we can say anything about what Jesus meant we need to know what he actually said. And this is not at all striaghtforward. The discourse as it appears in the gospels dates from a long time after Jesus so there is no way of knowing how the gospel version compare with Jesus own words. To what extent did the gospel writer interpret or elaborate Jesus' words? There's no way of knowing.
Even trying to say what believers around the time of the writing of the gospels might have understood is difficult. Was this before the fall of Jerusalem or after? So were they looking to something that was to happen in the future or something which had already happened? The most likely situation seems to be that they thought the prophecy (if that was, indeed, what Jesus intended to give) was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and that Christians were then awaiting the imminent return of Jesus.
So the question has to be: is this a case of the perennial problem for believers of having to find a way of reinterpreting things in order to continue believing and avoid admitting that they got it wrong?
-
apocalypse
Yes, the "scriptures" have endured crusades and dusty monastaries and thousands of years. As well as the 'keepers' (the chrurch) who have interjected. Did you have a read of the link I posted? Perhaps something new.
-
Londo111
I couldn't open the link. But I believe EVERYTHING in the Olivet discourse was fulfilled by 70AD. Once one understands the Old Testement metaphors that are used, the picture is pretty clear. That generation Jesus was speaking to DID NOT pass away until ALL this things occured.
-
Leolaia
The linked paper seems to rewrite the three versions of the Olivet discourse into a single harmonized text -- I see passages that come from Luke, others that come from Matthew, etc. This does not explain why the versions differ the way they do and what they could tell us about the development of the Olivet discourse as it was reinterpreted and rewritten by each evangelist. Paying attention to the differences sheds light on the how each author had a different perspective and reveals what aspects of the original discourse were problematic for later interpreters.
I believe EVERYTHING in the Olivet discourse was fulfilled by 70AD.
The problem with preterism (especially full preterism) is that adopts an interpretation of the universal eschatological aspects of the apocalypse (specifically, pertaining the Judgment Day) that does not square with the text itself (when taken exegetically) or the interpretive traditions presupposed elsewhere in the NT. It seems to take a similar approach as early gnosticism in rationalizing failed prophecy by shifting the orientation to realized eschatology; see April DeConick's analysis of the Gospel of Thomas as undergoing a similar shift. It is a very common approach to salvage prophecy by interpreting it as fulfilled allegorically or invisibly.
-
John Kesler
Leolaia:The problem with preterism (especially full preterism) is that adopts an interpretation of the universal eschatological aspects of the apocalypse (specifically, pertaining the Judgment Day) that does not square with the text itself (when taken exegetically) or the interpretive traditions presupposed elsewhere in the NT.
What do you consider examples of "the interpretive traditions presupposed elsewhere in the NT"?
-
apocalypse
The preterist has a problem. For example.
Luke 21:34,35
34 “Be careful, or your hearts will be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness and the anxieties of life, and that day will close on you suddenly like a trap. 35 For it will come on all those who live on the face of the whole earth. Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”
If it was all 'said and done' in 70, then one has to explain the "whole Earth" part, and the 'standing before the Son of Man'. All done?
The 'dual fulfiller' like Watchtower has a problem. Matthew 24:21 shows that there can be no "next time".
21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.
Them what believe at all have a problem. Matthew 24:1 “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
There's still lot's of stones on top of other stones there in Jerusalem. In fact, there's a whole tower itact. You can visit.
And, Jesus said Luke 21:31
" 31 so [also] ye, when ye see these things to be done, know ye, that the kingdom of God is nigh."
Perhaps any believer can explain how it was that the kingdom of God 'came' in 70CE. I know that the Romans came. But kingdom of God???
The link I placed above is the only document I've read that answers all the questions for me.
-
Londo111
In Luke 21:35, the word translated "earth" is ges which means land. Judgement was coming upon the land of Judea, so they had to prove ready.
Work blocks the website...I will take a look at the link when I have a chance.
-
apocalypse
Luke 21:35 doesn't just say "Earth" as though one could relegate the events to a portion according to one's needs. It clearly says more.
Strong's and Vine
For [G1063] as [G5613] a snare [G3803] shall it come [G1904] (5695) on [G1909] all [G3956] them that dwell [G2521] (5740) on [G1909] the face [G4383] of the whole [G3956] earth [G1093].
Clearly it's much bigger than 70CE.
Not sure why the link fails for some. Here is a URL that goes to the page. The doc is there.
-
apocalypse
You can cut and paste. But this link should work.