When will Jesus return, according to the NT?

a reply to: intrptr

Maybe to a galaxy far far away.

When he does return you better be ready to bend your knee and give him glory.

a reply to: polyath

Perhaps it means that Jesus will appear to people upon their deaths.

Part of the problem is that different New Testament authors had different ideas. One guy writes soon. Then 20 years later a different author writes soon, then 20 years later another writes soon.

This passage has already been referenced. John 14. But if you look before that:

33Little children, I will be with you a little while longer. You will seek me, and as I said to the Jews, 'Where I am going, you can't come,' so now I tell you. 34A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, just like I have loved you; that you also love one another.
...
36Simon Peter said to him, "Lord, where are you going?" Jesus answered, "Where I am going, you can't follow now, but you will follow afterwards." 37Peter said to him, "Lord, why can't I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you."
Chapter 14
1"Don't let your heart be troubled. Believe in God. Believe also in me. 2In my Father's house are many homes. If it weren't so, I would have told you. I am going to prepare a place for you. 3If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will receive you to myself; that where I am, you may be there also. 4Where I go, you know, and you know the way."

If someone were to take the Gospel of John by itself, it would certainly seem that he comes again at death. He went away and died. He appeared to some for a short time, then he was gone forever. Where he went seems to be the realm of the dead, the way there is death, "I will come again, and will receive you to myself". By saying that he is claiming to be a Psychopomp(guide to the after life). But more than a guide, a sort of host in the afterlife who has prepared a place.

Any Judgment (according to John) is as a result of belief or disbelief.

a reply to: polyath

a reply to: Seede Could those who pierced him be not simply those roman soldiers who poked him with spears, but anyone who has denied him? Perhaps it is saying that I - as an atheist - will see Jesus at the time of my death.

There was only one who actually pierced him on the cross but the scriptures seem to infer that there are many who pierced His flesh. Or at least that is the way I read the account. By this I have always assumed that this means those who hated and let that hatred be shown in His trial as well as rioting for his death. This includes the entire temple authorities who instigated His death. I also include all of those down through history who deny Him and His deity. That adds up to most all of the human race since His death as I see it. I am not dogmatic about that but that is my understanding. I base that on John 3:16 --- I would not argue the intent but it is simply the way I believe.

a reply to: polyath

Why are you asking a question about the Bible that you could just read for yourself?

Anyway, even Jesus pbuh says he himself doesn't know when.

What makes you think anyone can answer what he couldn't?

a reply to: polyath


"Only the Father knows" regarding this matter and others, according to Jesus pbuh himself.

Try reading from the beginning instead of the end and next time you won't miss things that were already asked and answered in it.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Josephus

How you get the modern interpretation of the "Rapture" from that?

No where does it say it will occur all over the planet all at once.


Edit: Quit reading more into it than it says. By that I mean quit reading into it what men have added onto it.

Because it refers to people being 'raptured' in bed at night and also out working in the fields during the day. They are both referred to in a way that implies it is the same day. This makes sense if there are people 'raptured' simultaneously on different sides of the planet.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Josephus

How you get the modern interpretation of the "Rapture" from that?

No where does it say it will occur all over the planet all at once.


Edit: Quit reading more into it than it says. By that I mean quit reading into it what men have added onto it.

Because it refers to people being 'raptured' in bed at night and also out working in the fields during the day. They are both referred to in a way that implies it is the same day. This makes sense if there are people 'raptured' simultaneously on different sides of the planet.

The rapture is a failed prophecy that was supposed to happen in the era in which it was written.

Give up already you are going to die like everyone and nobody is flying up to Heaven like a bunch of Enochs.

It's probably the silliest belief in all of religion that has been predicted and failed to come true since Paul first 'predicted' it, it didn't happen and Christians had to go to plan b and reserve it for the future.

2,000 years ago.

According to the false prophet test, that they come true, their prophecies, Paul is a false prophet who can't be rescued.

He was writing to someone and not us 2,000 years later.

He never even met Jesus pbuh, who said no such thing.

a reply to: chr0naut


Simply put, if Jesus pbuh said nothing about a rapture to his 12 personally chosen Apostles, he didn't posthumously reveal it to Paul, a nobody he never knew.

That's just common sense.

Show me a REAL Apostle of the circumcision faction saying "rapture."

Not a self proclaimed apostle to the pagans, later translated "Gentiles."

Acts says, according to Luke quoting Peter, that Peter was chosen by God to be the Apostle to the nations (Gentile wasn't a word).

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: chr0naut

Simply put, if Jesus pbuh said nothing about a rapture to his 12 personally chosen Apostles, he didn't posthumously reveal it to Paul, a nobody he never knew.

You sure of that?

I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also. John 14:3.

That's just common sense.

Show me a REAL Apostle of the circumcision faction saying "rapture."

Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he[a] is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. 1 John 3:2.

Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. Revelation 3:2.

Not a self proclaimed apostle to the pagans, later translated "Gentiles."

Acts says, according to Luke quoting Peter, that Peter was chosen by God to be the Apostle to the nations (Gentile wasn't a word).

The Hebrew word for 'nations', going back to Abraham's time was 'goyim' (גּוֹיִם). The writers of the New Testament translated the Hebrew word into the written Koine Greek word 'ethnei' (ἔθνη). This was translated into Latin as 'Gentilis' and, as the Vulgate was the earliest complete manuscript, and just so happened to be in Latin, the translation was carried into English translations. A more accurate translation would have been 'nations'.

So, the word actually DID exist and was in common use at the time of Christ's incarnation, just not by those who wrote the original New Testament texts, who spoke Aramaic and wrote in Greek.

Since the Bible explicitly states from the mouth of the Messiah that neither the angels nor the 'son' know the time of his second coming and this thread bunk, I am going to go ahead and prove that what I said earlier, that Paul believed he and his followers would be raptured in their time

Don't worry cronots, I will read and respond to your message, if it merits one, when I am done.

First: 1 Thess. 4: 17-18

' Then WE WHO ARE ALIVE will be caught up in the air; and so WE will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words. '

Now Paul uses WE, so the reader isn't allowed to disassociate HIM and whoever the other people he is writing to in Thessalonians ARE from the failed prophecy.

Tradition holds Paul was killed by Nero, NOT "Carried up" with or without the Thessalonians.

Since he prophecied he would be with them in the ONLY verse clearly saying such a thing will occur...

1. Paul is, according to Bible standards, a false prophet.

2. There is no rapture prophecied by Jesus pbuh, no rapture.


I just read the 23 'top rapture verses' and only one even mentioned it.

The rest had nothing to do with a failed prophecy called today ''Rapture."

Why Christians even believe that Paul was talking about the future is anyone's guess, mine is they don't care about the facts or read the Bible and just believe what the pastor says the Bible says.

Even as a Christian I never believed in a Rapture or vicarious atonement.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: chr0naut

Simply put, if Jesus pbuh said nothing about a rapture to his 12 personally chosen Apostles, he didn't posthumously reveal it to Paul, a nobody he never knew.

You sure of that?

I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also. John 14:3.

Is this place called Rapture or something?

Does he says "caught up in the air?"

Come on now!

That's just common sense.

Show me a REAL Apostle of the circumcision faction saying "rapture."

Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he[a] is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. 1 John 3:2.

Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. Revelation 3:2.

Ok. But you do realize I was asking for proof of the RAPTURE, of which you gave none, right?

I would hope so. Apparently you actually think somewhere in these words it says "Rapture" or even "caught up in the air."

Nope.

Not a self proclaimed apostle to the pagans, later translated "Gentiles."

Acts says, according to Luke quoting Peter, that Peter was chosen by God to be the Apostle to the nations (Gentile wasn't a word).

The Hebrew word for 'nations', going back to Abraham's time was 'goyim' (גּוֹיִם). The writers of the New Testament translated the Hebrew word into the written Koine Greek word 'ethnei' (ἔθνη). This was translated into Latin as 'Gentilis' and, as the Vulgate was the earliest complete manuscript, and just so happened to be in Latin, the translation was carried into English translations. A more accurate translation would have been 'nations'.

Ok, what's your point? I am just saying that Paul called himself Apostle to the pagans, which is true, and that Peter was called BY GOD, according to Luke, Apostle to the nations, which I already knew in Greek is ethos, as you looked up ethoi is plural.

It is not what "Gentile" means.

Gentile means "Not a Jew." Gentiles isn't synonymous with "nations." As you are about to try telling me the word did exist as I see below me, let me repeat, no, it didn't.

Gentiles is a politically correct version of goyim which doesn't mean nations but cattle.

So, the word actually DID exist and was in common use at the time of Christ's incarnation, just not by those who wrote the original New Testament texts, who spoke Aramaic and wrote in Greek.

a reply to: chr0naut



John 14 doesn't say anything about a rapture and using faulty arguments about Greek and English aren't going to change that.

He doesn't say how he will do what he says he will do, so you can't assume he's talking about the Rapture and not some parable. It isn't a "Rapture" if it doesn't say so, even "caught up..." would suffice.

I know what a goyim is, did you need to tell me that so you could feel like you told me a new fact? You didn't.

You should have realized if I know the Greek text actually says pagan, chances are I know what a common word like goy or goyim (plural) means.

It actually means cattle, btw. Not nations.

It's a derogatory term Jews use for non Jews.

I find it humorous you claim to know what was the common expression in Abraham's time and think it a fact that you "know" that Abraham's generation used the word "goy" for nations.

Because it doesn't mean that and you don't know anything about Abraham's time, not even what language he spoke.

He lived when cuneiform script was the common and the Phonetic alphabet hadn't been invented yet.

Which is the Phoenician AlephBet, copied by the Aramaic speaking Judahites who married Canaanite women and spoke the same language. Probably the Semitic cuneiform language of Ugarit, Canaan, as the 1200 bc Ras Shamra tablets prove the Judahites had the same God and gods as Canaan. Baal, Asherah, Yam, Mot, Shachar all made it into the Bible as words and idols.

a reply to: chr0naut


I am curious how you "know" what went on in Abraham's time since we don't actually know exactly when he lived or the language he spoke, if "goy" was or wasn't in use then you would not know either way.

Eminent scholars and theologians are well aware that the Torah wasn't written by Moses but in the time of Ezra when Hebrew hadn't been spoken yet, if it had it was just a dialect of and written in Aramaic-Phoenician script.

Modern Hebrew is only 1,000 years old, that includes the first Hebrew script which is the only Hebrew script no matter how many people call Aramaic "proto-Hebrew" it is not proto-Hebrew, it's Aramaic.

Ezra wouldn't have known what was the common term for nations in a language not yet invented or one that existed, either way, he didn't have any way to know and neither do you.

Let that be a lesson in trying to pretend knowing the unknowable just to win a debate, you lost because you assume goy means "nations" but it means cattle and is derogatory, you have been given the apologetic definition, lied to.

And Jesus pbuh didn't talk about a Rapture, which you would realize if you examined the quotes you chose. You tried forcing it to nean what you WANT it to and pay no mind or expend no energy trying to figure out what he meant.

If you think he was saying people will magically fly to Heaven as did Enoch you are a poor exegete.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: chr0naut

Simply put, if Jesus pbuh said nothing about a rapture to his 12 personally chosen Apostles, he didn't posthumously reveal it to Paul, a nobody he never knew.

You sure of that?

I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also. John 14:3.

That's just common sense.

Show me a REAL Apostle of the circumcision faction saying "rapture."

Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he[a] is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. 1 John 3:2.

Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. Revelation 3:2.

Not a self proclaimed apostle to the pagans, later translated "Gentiles."

Acts says, according to Luke quoting Peter, that Peter was chosen by God to be the Apostle to the nations (Gentile wasn't a word).

The Hebrew word for 'nations', going back to Abraham's time was 'goyim' (גּוֹיִם). The writers of the New Testament translated the Hebrew word into the written Koine Greek word 'ethnei' (ἔθνη). This was translated into Latin as 'Gentilis' and, as the Vulgate was the earliest complete manuscript, and just so happened to be in Latin, the translation was carried into English translations. A more accurate translation would have been 'nations'.

So, the word actually DID exist and was in common use at the time of Christ's incarnation, just not by those who wrote the original New Testament texts, who spoke Aramaic and wrote in Greek.

I didn't see anything about the Rapture in ANY of your quotes, don't know why you used them as proof of the Rapture in the first place.

Why do, did YOU?

The word "Rapture" does not occur in the New Testament but was used later to describe an event where the faithful are "caught up" to heaven. The word 'harpazo" meaning 'caught up' or 'snatched up'. The word is used in the Bible for seven separate instances of being caught up to Heaven: Enoch, Elijah, Philip, Paul, John, Jesus and the Church.

The event where the believers are gathered up to Christ and saved from the the hour of trial (which has later been described as "the rapture") is clearly described by Christ Himself.

a reply to: chr0naut


The word rapture doesn't exist in the New Testament because Jesus pbuh didn't teach it, and because the failed prophecy of Paul wasn't called that by him.

Do you just lose one argument and proceed to debate obscurities?

I don't care what you call it. IT wasn't taught by Jesus pbuh.

Paul predicted it would happen to him, "We", not 2,000 years + later, as is clear.

And there exist no more verses supporting it.

a reply to: chr0naut


What I am talking about isn't the history of the English term commonly used today to describe Paul's failed prediction.

But that Jesus pbuh didn't teach it.

And you know he didn't. If you thought your quotes actually had "rapture" content you'd have a plausible argument for how he means what he doesn't say.

Did he SAY people would be magically flown to heaven like Enoch was?

No. But like anyone who can't admit the truth does you cling to the obscure. Because it's obscure and you can say it means almost anything.

Were I as poor an exegete as people who think Jesus pbuh taught the Rapture it might work, but no such luck.

a reply to: chr0naut



If you say "Jesus teaches the Rapture here" and quote a section that hasn't the slightest thing to do with flying alive into Heaven to escape the "tribulation"?

What good is talking about the modern term used to describe said non-existent teaching going to accomplish?

You couldn't prove what you claimed was true, two times.

Two times you end up talking about a single word.

2 times erroneously at that as it doesn't matter what term you use, Rapture wasn't taught by Jesus pbuh.

And you don't know what language Abraham spoke to know that a word you don't know the definition of was in use.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Losing debates because you pretend to know more than you have the energy to learn?

Would it not be easier to learn the religion you are talking about first, debate it second? If you did that you would know already everything I am saying is backed up by your Christian Bible.

That Paul predicted the Rapture and it failed to happen, which you obviously had no idea was a fact, IS a fact.

So is that Jesus pbuh never taught the Rapture, again, if you were a student of the Bible you would know this.

You are obviously just believing what theology espouses without looking too see if Jesus pbuh actually even taught it. Only an ameteur would even attempt to justify Rapture theology, or a liar who tells others it is, don't worry, like your pastor probably did.

Yet here you are, arguing for it's being a true teaching of Jesus pbuh and you aren't even aware that your quotes, supplied by you, have literally nothing to do with flying alive into Heaven.

Like the OP was never told "Only the Father knows."

And most Christians with the whole "Trinity", Nicene Creed nonsense that they can't explain because Jesus pbuh HAS a God so can't BE God too.

As 3 can't be 1.

Typically Christian. Belief without knowledge is a virtue to you guys, which isn't to say faith is bad, just that it is symbiotic with knowledge and not opposed to it or you learning what the Bible actually teaches.

Which is two religions. Nazarene Judaism and Pauline Christianity.

Paul fits the description of Mt. 24:23 to a T., is obviously a false prophet, with a failed prophecy as proof.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: chr0naut


I am curious how you "know" what went on in Abraham's time since we don't actually know exactly when he lived or the language he spoke, if "goy" was or wasn't in use then you would not know either way.

It was used in Job, which many believe was written even before the time of Abraham. The vocabulary in Job indicates that the writer was likely a Hebraic Canaanite but had obviously travelled extensively.

Eminent scholars and theologians are well aware that the Torah wasn't written by Moses but in the time of Ezra when Hebrew hadn't been spoken yet, if it had it was just a dialect of and written in Aramaic-Phoenician script.

That was a theory based upon the textual criticism of the Documentary Hypothesis which has fallen from grace somewhat in the last 100 years ago. It is hard to argue against the attributions contained in the texts themselves without any actual evidential support.

Modern Hebrew is only 1,000 years old, that includes the first Hebrew script which is the only Hebrew script no matter how many people call Aramaic "proto-Hebrew" it is not proto-Hebrew, it's Aramaic.

Um, of course modern Hebrew isn't ancient. The clue is in the name.

Proto-Hebrew, Canaanite and Aramaic all have common roots with influences from Proto-Phonecian, Akkadian and even Egyptian.

The specific symbology does not somehow invalidate the meaning of the texts.

Ezra wouldn't have known what was the common term for nations in a language not yet invented or one that existed, either way, he didn't have any way to know and neither do you.

Let that be a lesson in trying to pretend knowing the unknowable just to win a debate, you lost because you assume goy means "nations" but it means cattle and is derogatory, you have been given the apologetic definition, lied to.

The pottery shards uncovered at Khirbet Qeiyafa by Yossi Garfinkel in 2008, written in Proto-Hebrew/Proto-Canaanite would indicate that an ancient variant of Hebrew was in use 3,000 years ago, so I think Ezra was well aware of a specifically Hebrew language. Both written and spoken.

And Jesus pbuh didn't talk about a Rapture, which you would realize if you examined the quotes you chose. You tried forcing it to mean what you WANT it to and pay no mind or expend no energy trying to figure out what he meant.

Please examine what Jesus said there and ask yourself what else could he have meant.

If you think he was saying people will magically fly to Heaven as did Enoch you are a poor exegete.

Well, there is an example. If it happened once...

Also, didn't "the Prophet" fly through the skies on a winged beast like a donkey, to Jerusalem?

pbuh

a reply to: Disturbinatti

Jesus loves you.

I bless you with a revelation of the spirit of God and His love, in Jesus name.