So was early Christianity apocalyptic? The evidence from the New Testament seems pretty strong, especially Mark 13:24-27, which says
"the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And then he will send out the angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven."
And Mark 13:30 goes on to say "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
Which really strongly suggests God's final judgement during Jesus' generation.
There are several other passages that support it as well, I can't find it now but I remember one section of Paul that seemed to be consoling Christians who had relatives pass away and were worried what that meant for the imminent judgement.
What are some scholarly opinions on it?
Jews started with the apocalyptic shit when they became a roman province, many of the apostles surely were into it
>>1383285
>What are some scholarly opinions on it?
I like chocolate milk.
>>1383285
Its a pretty popular interpretation
>>1383285
Then and now.
>>1383285
>So was early Christianity apocalyptic?
Not "early" Christianity. The whole thing.
Read this:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1642-apocalypse
Then read "Jesus, Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium", particularly chapters 9 and 10 for more on Jesus himself.
Jesus, Paul, and most obviously the John of the book of Revelation are apocalyptic preachers, presenting the idea of a final battle between G(o)od and Evil coming soon to a world near you.
>The idea of a final triumph of God and His heavenly hosts over evil spirits also followed naturally, and kept pace with the development of the Jewish angelology. The "guardian angels" of Dan. ix.-xii., and the punishment of the "fallen stars," which occupies so much space in the Enoch literature, are only elaborations of beliefs which had already received distinct expression; compare Isa. xxiv. 21 et seq. (a most important passage), xxvii. 1; Ps. lxxxii.; Deut. xxxii. 8 (Greek); Job, xxxviii. 7, etc. The appearance of the evil spirit "Azazel" in Lev. xvi. 8 et seq. is proof that the names of angels and demons were in common use before the days of Daniel and Enoch.
Daniel 7-12 is a huge influence on Revelation and the whole New Testament.
*sigh*
"Generation" in Greek then meant what it meant in Hebrew and what is used to mean in early English. A generation was a family line, everyone whose generation traces back to one source. For instance, Saint John of the Ladder says (parentheticals are translator glosses), "And let your beloved children be the sighs of your heart. Make your body your slave; and your friends, the Holy Powers (Angels) who can help you at the hour of your death, if they become your friends. This is the generation (family) of those who seek the Lord."
The generation is Christ's assembly (translated often as Church), his family. This sense of generation is exclusively how the term is used in the Bible, the modernist use as "the present iteration of humanity" is extremely anachronistic to impose on the Bible. Even as close to our time as Johnson's dictionary, "current year" is only the fourth definition of "generation", the first three are,
The act of begetting or producing
A family; a race
Progeny; offspring
Only on the fourth definition do we find, "A single succession; one gradation on the scale of genealogical descent."
You'll notice that the Church Fathers wrote very long tracts of apologetics addressing all sorts of things, from inconsistency in Scripture, to reconciling YHWH which Christ; but this is not the subject of any of that until the 19th Century, when "generation" starts to take on a different primary definition, and so Christ's words start to be seen as having a different meaning.
>>1383360
early *modern English
>>1383360
Daily Reminder that Constantine's place is in the kitchen making sammiches, not pontificating on religious matters of which she knows nothing.
>>1383360
Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.
What did he mean by this?
>>1383374
You can tell if you keep reading. Suddenly John gets this reputation for never dying. I infer that Jesus looked at John when He said this; it is a fact that John saw Jesus coming in glory before he died.
He wrote about it in the Revelation.
(Remember: some does not preclude one, or all)
>>1383374
The Transfiguration, it follows right on the heels of that.
>>1383285
>Which really strongly suggests God's final judgement during Jesus' generation.
You're inferring that "this generation" refers to the hearers of that speech.
Put it back into context.
Jesus is telling them the signs of the end; literally when Israel is reconstituted as a nation back in 1948. THAT generation, the generation that sees the rebirth of Israel, that sees the beginning of sorrows, will also see the rapture, tribulation, and Armageddon. Not the listeners back then; the people who witness the end time events.
In other words, from the beginning of God's prophetic clock starting back up to the Tribulation is one generation of people.
Generation is a slippery term. Most likely is 70 years, 80 with strength.
1948 + 70 = 2018
1948 + 80 = 2028
Expect things to change very rapidly.
>>1383399
It's like you intentionally attempt to be wrong about everything. Literally everything.
>>1383389
John doesn't have such a reputation. He is uniquely long lived (dying at about a hundred by Church tradition), but that is because he is both very holy (Saint Jerome says that Christ would have made John the leader of the Apostles, but gave Peter the position instead to avoid causing envy among the other Apostles as John was just a teenager) and was the only Apostle who wasn't martyred
>>1383409
Yup. Literally wrong about everything, intentionally.
John 21
Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” 23 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?”
>>1383413
Literally wrong about everything.
>>1383372
>she
>>1383419
Oh, I thought you were talking about in Church tradition.
>>1383426
She's very touchy about it. Wants to be treated like one of the boys. Which is why I do not hesitate to expose how wrong she is about everything she posts.
Literally everything.
>>1383430
Literally wrong about everything, and cannot admit it.
>>1383426
Hey, some chicks have dicks. It's not their fault.
>>1383430
Your church traditions are as vile as the Roman Catholic church traditions, and practically indistinguishable.
>>1383438
You sound like Peter Griffin's doctor.
>>1383430
Constantine, what's the Orthodox position on using honey cakes made with wine and comingled sexual fluids for a recension of mass which uses sexual congress as a celebration of the Holy Spirit?
>>1383413
If your interpretation of these passages was so obvious why do so many scholars disagree with them?
>>1383399
No that's not what he was referring to you nigger. A moment before that he talks about returning 'with his angels to reward each man according to what he has done'. Then he drops the 'some standing here will not taste death' line. It's obvious he was talking about the second coming unless you want to do some serious mental gymnastics.
>>1383455
They have an agenda to make Christianity look bad.
>>1383404
Back in the 80s yall said that a generation was 40 years and the end times would come in the 1980s.
Just stop being wrong please.
>>1383440
>Protestants
>>1383458
You're retarded.
>>1383285
In general the four canonical gospels are considered apocalyptic in their message. Some of are supernaturally apocalyptic, others are overtly political with their apocalytpic message.
Some of the non-canonical gospels are non-apocalyptic, most famously the Gospel of Thomas, which is merely a collection of Jesus's supposed sayings. These sayings aren't as urgent or apocalyptic as is depicted in in the canonical gospels, which might be why they were done away with. Gospel of Thomas just wasn't hardline enough.
>>1383459
40 is a time of trial, like rain for 40 days and nights, 40 days in the wilderness, 40 years wandering. 40 is not a generation.
I don't understand your logic.
Because other people were wrong before, nobody can now be right?
>>1383464
They're not Jesus' sayings, either.
>>1383464
All of those dates are wrong, just so you know.
Why does Constance turn off her trip and get hostile when she's losing a debate?
>>1383485
It's not really a prediction, then. You're just systematically working through every possible date and eventually hoping you will be right. Sure, eventually some calamity will happen, but you aren't predicting anything specific. Not much of a prophecy.
>>1383456
In general the standard get-out-of-jail-free card people use in their interpretation is to make the "death" refer to spiritual death rather than physical death. That way, it's true that some of the listeners did not taste spiritual death before the second coming (because they were Christian), only physical death which doesn't really count. It's the same justification Catholic and Orthodox use to get around the prohibition against contacting the dead when they want to pray to saints, by redefining which "death" was being referred to.
>>1383496
Bitchy.
>>1383497
I'm not making a prediction, no.
I'm saying that Israel sprang into existence in one day, May 14, 1948, and that her children were instantly citizens.
This is the fulfillment of the Dry Bones prophecy, where the Lord raised the dry bones from the valley in the desert and brought them back to life. A prophecy made more than 2000 years prior.
This event started God's prophetic clock that stopped at the Crucifixion.
So Jesus said that the same generation who sees these end times event will see the end. So what is a generation?
It's not an easily answered question. It cannot be more than 120 years, as that is the maximum lifespan of a human being.
I'm not predicting anything. 70 years from 1948 is 2018. 80 years from 1948 is 2028.
I'm still not predicting anything. I will note, however, that things change quickly.
>>1383512
They were all born spiritually dead, and nobody was not spiritually dead until Pentecost 32 AD, so no. Doesn't work that way.
>>1383529
>muh stopped clock
There is literally no reason to believe Daniel's seventh week was indefinitely postponed.
>>1383537
Just keep telling yourself that you're always wrong, until it sinks in that you're always wrong.
And then instead of apologizing for always being wrong, you can ask questions and receive information, instead of peddling false information from your cult, 9 times out of 10 you still can't get straight.
>>1383537
This commentary is shit, by the way.
>>1383529
>This is the fulfillment of the Dry Bones prophecy, where the Lord raised the dry bones from the valley in the desert and brought them back to life
That's not really what happened though, not even metaphorically.
>>1383456
I dunno, here's Saint John Chrysostom's commentary
>Verily, verily, I say unto you, There are some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.
>Thus, inasmuch as He had discoursed much of dangers and death, and of His own passion, and of the slaughter of the disciples, and had laid on them those severe injunctions; and these were in the present life and at hand, but the good things in hope and expectation:— for example, They save their life who lose it; He is coming in the glory of His Father; He renders His rewards:— He willing to assure their very sight, and to show what kind of glory that is wherewith He is to come, so far as it was possible for them to learn it; even in their present life He shows and reveals this; that they should not grieve any more, either over their own death, or over that of their Lord, and especially Peter in His sorrow.
>And see what He does. Having discoursed of hell, and of the kingdom (for as well by saying, He that finds his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose it for my sake, shall find it; Matthew 16:25 as by saying, He shall reward every man according to his works, He had manifested both of these): having, I say, spoken of both, the kingdom indeed He shows in the vision, but hell not yet.
>Why so? Because had they been another kind of people, of a grosser sort, this too would have been necessary; but since they are approved and considerate, He leads them on the gentler way. But not therefore only does He make this disclosure, but because to Himself also it was far more suitable.
>Not however that He passes over this subject either, but in some places He almost brings even before our eyes the very realities of hell; as when He introduces the picture of Lazarus, and mentions him that exacted the hundred pence, and him that was clad in the filthy garments, and others not a few.
>>1383538
Except that it was, as none of the things mentioned in the 70 week prophecy have been finished since the messiah was cut off.
>>1383545
What's wrong with it?
>>1383546
Says who? You?
kek
>Nations destroyed 1900 years prior spring back into existence in one day all the time!
t. idiot
>>1383547
Despite your erasing your prior wrong post, you continue to post this shit commentary, but without the previous admission that you were wrong.
So again, literally wrong again on all counts.
>>1383549
>things didn't play out when they were supposed to therefore instead of concluding the prophecy was WRONG I'll say it was postponed
Stop.
>>1383455
Because they are intellectual dishonest. Ask any Greek scholar what "generation" was primarily used to mean in ancient Greek.
>>1383554
>Says who?
The bible? It doesn't refer with any specificity to the actual details of the establishment of the state.
>>1383554
Every nation is recreated in 'one day', when its declaration of sovereignty is signed or whatever. Israel, like every other state, was the result of a long and tumultuous political process.
>>1383558
Reviewing the commentary again, I'm not sure I was wrong.
>>1383551
It literally meant that John would see the Second Coming before he died.
Where in that mess of a commentary does it even mention that?
>>1383559
No prophecy of God is wrong. Ever. Not once.
>>1383458
No, it's an honest mistake by 19th Century German scholars. It's just unfortunately also something that became taken for granted rather than more critically examined.
>>1383573
You don't see how this is poor reasoning?
>biblical prophecies are never wrong
>what about this one that was wrong?
>no that one wasn't wrong because biblical prophecies are never wrong
>>1383565
Ezekiel 37
Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They indeed say, ‘Our bones are dry, our hope is lost, and we ourselves are cut off!’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, O My people, I will open your graves and cause you to come up from your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. 13 Then you shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O My people, and brought you up from your graves. 14 I will put My Spirit in you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I, the Lord, have spoken it and performed it,” says the Lord.’”
Isaiah 66:8 Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things? Shall the earth be made to give birth in one day? Or shall a nation be born at once? For as soon as Zion was in labor, She gave birth to her children.
>>1383570
Why should a saint's exegesis have to agree with the inference of someone who can't even read Greek? Are your inferences some sort of authority?
>>1383580
I think those prophecies are probably about the return from Babylon and not the creation of Israel in 1948.
>>1383579
Your poor reasoning, yes.
>biblical prophecies are never wrong
>this biblical prophecy has not yet taken place
>therefore this biblical prophecy must be wrong
See how you assume no prophecy will ever take place in the future?
>>1383577
Actually I believe its still a point of contention between Christian scholars and more secular ones, so its debated, not taken for granted
>>1383588
Why should some asshole who had something to do with your cult be assumed a saint?
>>1383589
If you read Ezra and Nehemiah, there was not a 1 day return/re-establishment, at all.
>>1383590
Most prophecies don't have a specific timescale like Daniel's seventy weeks. If you count them everything should have been concluded millennia ago because the seventieth week ends just a few years after Christ's crucifixion.
That doesn't happen so you postpone the seventieth week indefinitely with no justification instead of maybe considering the prophecy was wrong.
>>1383589
Exactly. If there were specific details like a year or something, that would be one thing, but all it says is that they will eventually reconvene.
The "one day" thing is also suspect, since by that logic all new nations do not exist one day and do not exist the next, and the Isreal that exists today continues to expand into Palestinian land, rather than existing all at once in one day.
>>1383597
It's not a point of contention between linguistic scholars.
>>1383599
Because he was a very spiritual man who gave away all his wealth and lived in strict poverty, fasting and praying for forgiveness, and because he was harshly persecuted by the emperor for his sermons but refused to budge, because he lived and breathed Scripture and read it constantly a thousand times and exhorted his congregation to do likewise, even if they could only buy one part of Scripture, even if they needed to ask others to read it to them.
>>1383603
Neither was there in 1948.
>>1383610
It didn't end.
The clock stopped ticking on the Jews, and the time of the gentiles began. When the time of the gentiles is over, the clock will start ticking on the Jews, and they will suffer the Troubles of Jacob.
Read the prophecy. Note everything that is to be done by the end of that 70 weeks.
It's not done yet.
It's all prophesied to be done in the Tribulation. The constant references to the Tribulation being 7 years long should ring a bell for anyone who is interested in Daniel/Revelation.
>>1383616
Still wrong. None of that makes a man a saint.
I shouldn't blame you; I should blame your idiotic "teachers" and "priests", but they're not here. And you're parroting their ideas because you have none of your own.
Which is why you are always wrong about everything.
>>1383619
The theory that the rebirth of Israel happened in the end of the captivity, @526 BC, is bogus. Debunked. lrn2read
>>1383644
>is bogus. Debunked.
Explain.
>>1383652
It took years to rebuild the temple, years to build that wall, and a slow trickle of exiles to accomplish it.
May 13, 1948. Israel does not exist. At all.
May 14, 1948. Israel exists.
>>1383360
>Generation" in Greek then meant what it meant in Hebrew and what is used to mean in early English. A generation was a family line, everyone whose generation traces back to one source
Completely wrong, like pretty much every other time you attempt to discuss Hebrew
Go read Deuteronomy 1:35, and try to reconcile the passage with your inane view of what "generation" means.
>>1383674
>New Testament
>Hebrew
>>1383678
>Generation" in Greek then meant what it meant in Hebrew
Those are Constantine's exact words.
If Generation in Greek is equivalent to Hebrew, than it means pretty much what it does in modern English.
>>1383661
There was a steady trickle of Jewish immigrants into Israel before 1948. After 1948, too.
Israel wasn't magically formed in a day, just because it was declared independent in one. EVERY sovereign state has to be declared independent on some particular day.
By that definition the US was formed 'in a day'. So was the USSR, Poland, Mexico, Norway, Cuba, etc.
It's nothing special, and ignores the lengthy political processes which brought modern Israel (like every other state) to be.
>>1383492
I made that image myself in a thread from about a week ago. I did my research. The dates aren't necessarily correct but I doubt you know enough to say they're wrong.
Those are proposed ranges from all sorts of scholars, which is why there are multiple ranges, multiple dates, etc.
We don't know the actual date of composition for any of the gospels. The oldest fragments are dated based on historical estimates. So are oldest complete copies.
Please, I'm sure your pastor told you they were all written exactly after Jesus died by exactly the apostles they were named after, but the historical evidence suggests otherwise.
Parts of Mark were added to the end long after it was initially written, for instance. Those parts written later were canonized.
Please tell me what the 'real' dates are and cite your sources.
>>1383487
We don't know that and neither did the council of Nicea when they arbitrarily decided what was canon based on popular preference.
Most gnostic traditions do come from the second century and are newer than some of the older writings, but at the same time, we don't know when the Gospel of Thomas was first compiled. The current idea is that it started with a base of actual quotations which got modified or added to over time. Authorship of the gospel of John is thought to be over a long time and by multiple people too.
>>1383674
"Evil generation" is used all the time when God is angry with the Jews. Christ uses it as well You can see God's original intent here is to cut off all the Jews except for the ones he makes an exception to in the next verse, because he mentions them along with their decedents.
>>1383734
*descendants
>>1383734
Doublethink should actually solve the problem at hand
>this evil generation shall not see the land!
Then what happens? The Jews wander in the wilderness for about 38 years, and that generation dies off in the meantime, their children are the ones who enter the land.
Yes, there are exceptions like Caleb and Joshua, but that doesn't change the idea that your interpretation of the word "generation" is completely nonsensical in actual usage.
>>1383751
Contantshill BTFO as usual.
>>1383734
>God's original intent here is
Good thing we have Constantine to tell us what that is.
>>1383751
>Then what happens?
God relents, as he does all the time in the OT. You can already see him doing it in 1:39
Your reading is also plausible though, since generations were subsets. The generation are those who follow from a founder. The generation of Adam, for instance, is all humanity, but the generation of Abraham is only a subset of that.
Regardless, however, generation is never used to mean the current iteration of humanity (except the generation of Adam, which would mean all of humanity). It's always used in a tribal context.
Guys, guys! According to this very peculiar translation, black is white, night is day and the truth is a lie, so according to this, the meaning of the text is not what is clearly stated but, lol and behold, the real meaning actually matches exactly what my dogmatic religious tradition of choice happens to preach.
t. Constrannyfaggot
Yes, Christianity was and is a death cult. Also
>taking seriously words attributed to a man ~100 years after he died
You're retarded if you think Jesus spoke any of the words attributed to him.
>>1383804
The gospels were written a lot closer to Jesus lifetime than that, to be fair. That said, it's still nigh impossible to know what words attributed to him he did or did not say.
>>1383787
1:39 talks about how their children, AKA the NEXT generation, will not be prey like the first coward generation said, but would move in and take over.
No relenting involved
>Regardless, however, generation is never used to mean the current iteration of humanity (except the generation of Adam, which would mean all of humanity). It's always used in a tribal context.
You are incredibly stupid.
דור
And
תלדת
Are completely different words. Go look up Deuteronomy 1:35 and say Genesis 5:1 IN HEBREW before you say something else to reveal your profound ignorance.
This is a place of rational discussion. There should be a containment board for people who want to LARP as Christians, specially as Greek Orthodox Christians.
>>1383808
The absolute earliest I've seen is 60 AD, and that was for a single page. You're right though, we have no clue if anything in the Bible Jesus actually said. Just look at how the Republicans have mythologised Reagan, even though he's pretty much the opposite of what they are now, and that was 28 years ago.
>>1383836
Mark was written in 50 with Peter's input, though Mark took other eye-witness testimony too. Matthew was based on a Hebrew/Aramaic gospel written by the actual apostle in the late 40's, which has since been lost. Luke, as a companion of Paul and a member of the original messianic community in Jerusalem, wrote his gospel in the mid to late 60's along with Acts. John was written later by the apostle and a few of his close companions after much prayer and fasting. We know a pre-70 date is likely for the whole NT as the writers all scramble to show any prophecy which Jesus fulfilled. Therefore, when they tell us that Jesus prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem it is extremely likely they would link this to the Roman siege if it had happened. Furthermore, John talks about Jerusalem with startling detail, and always in the present tense. There also existed a 'gospel of the Hebrews' which was also a product of the original Jeruslam community, and has also been lost.
>>1383697
Name another country that was reborn in a day, dozens of centuries after its complete destruction.
>>1383896
Egypt.
>>1383732
I'll tell you why I know them to be wrong.
There is no way to know if they are right. There is only a way to know if they are not provably wrong.
In other words, to say that the Gospel of Matthew was written before 100 AD is right; to say it was written in 33 AD is unknowable and therefore a false statement.
Most of the dating of the gospels is based on the most insane logic possible; things like "Well, if Q wasn't written until 62 AD, then Mark, then Matthew, then Luke, then John were all written after that."
But there's no Q.
The only semi-non-insane "logic" is to state that the books of the NT were almost universally finished prior to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, as they do not mention the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
>>1383896
Poland.
And would you knock it off with the 'born in a day' thing? It's meaningless.
>>1383889
>Mark was written in 50 with Peter's input, though Mark took other eye-witness testimony too.
No. Mark was written later by an anonymous Jew in a high class Greek dialect. There exists no Hebrew translations. The author of Mark likely new none of the apostles. This is the scholarly historical consensus, which is more well researched and less biased than the church consensus.
>>1383889
>Matthew written in the late 40s
Mark is thought by scholars to be the earliest. Not matthew. They were all written way later than the 40s, and they were all likely translated/edited at least once before ever becoming what was passed down to us through the earliest surviving manuscripts.
Early mark manuscripts for instance end earlier than later versions.
>>1383926
This is unlikely since Luke and Matthew base their texts on it. We must ask why two writers, independently of each other, would choose Mark as one of their main sources if it was not even slightly apostolic. The earliest traditions are unanimous in assigning Mark as a companion of Peter. Also I never said that Mark was written in Hebrew. Clement of Rome, writing in around 95 AD also makes reference to much of the synoptic material. He was in a position to know who wrote what since he was the second bishop after Peter. Also your view is far from the 'historical consensus' (which changes all the time btw).
>>1383932
I said there existed an original gospel, written by the apostle himself in the 40s. The Matthew we have now is later, but takes some material from the original apostolic eyewitness. (re-reading I do admit I was a bit ambiguous).
>>1383889
>Matthew was based on a Hebrew/Aramaic gospel written by the actual apostle in the late 40's
[CITATION NEEDED]
To my knowledge there's not a single shred of evidence that the actual apostles wrote the gospels, or texts that the gospels we know are based off of.
>>1383732
How many times do you have to be told Nicea didn't make a canon before it sinks in that Nicea didn't make a canon?
And how many times do you have to be reminded that the books of the bible were already finished and written centuries before anyone made a canon?
Do you know what a canon is?
>>1383787
Always wrong. Always.
>>1383901
Nope.
Care to try again?
>>1383915
Nope.
Care to play again?
>>1383926
While John Mark was not an apostle, Peter was.
And John Mark's gospel is what Peter told John Mark.
>>1383932
>thought by scholars
Anything with this moniker can almost immediately be tossed in the garbage.
>>1383957
There are existing copies of Matthew's gospel written in Hebrew; there is no need to postulate another Matthew.
>>1383998
Nope what?
Care to not be a snippy dick?
>>1384001
>scholars
>Garbage
/his/ - History & Humanities
>112 posts
>17 posters
>a few who are just here to criticize
Fuck religiousposting. Autistics, out please.
>>1383968
Really, there isn't much evidence either way (as it is for many texts). Much of it is based on textual criticism, which isn't always reliable. Events like the destruction of Jerusalem, the death of Paul etc which can be solidly dated are often used as markers. St Jerome (4th century) is my source for the Matthew idea, in chapter 3 of De Viris Illustribus. Combining this idea with the early tradition that Matthew was written first provides a good view of what actually happened IMO. Although Jerome writes later, he quotes from the original Matthew and does not seem to care that the 'Matthew' we have now is not the original.
>>1384023
If you don't have any evidence for a claim (or tertiary at best), don't make the claim.
>>1383360
Btw people if you by accident ever take Constantine seriously, open archives and laugh at her posts:
>atheistic capitalism teaches that hedonism is the meaning and end all of life and constantly bombards us with it
>white people slow down their reproduction rate because it gets in the way of their pursuit of hedonism
>white people start getting outbred by immigrants who either see a higher value to life than hedonism, or are simply too lazy to use birth control
>libertarians say the problem is that hedonism is too regulated
She lives in a deluded, fictional world and believes she's a Christian saint - preaching the good news to virgins on 4chan.
>>1384006
How are self evident things not evident to you?
Poland did not spring forth in one day after dozens of centuries of non-existence.
>>1384014
Exactly.
>>1384023
Because it is the original. The original Hebrew Gospel of Matthew written by a Hebrew to the Hebrews to show that Hebrew Jesus is the King of the Hebrews.
Are you not aware that Papias commented that Matthew's Hebrew was awful, when they went to translate the original Hebrew version?
>>1384035
I'm thinking she's a cutter. And fat.
>>1384035
>I love my enemies, that doesn't mean I'm going to invite and urge heretics to come to my Christian world, take over, and impose their heathenism. That has never, ever been the Christian way.
>my Christian world
>my safe space.
>>1384054
Love carries a sharp two edged sword, and Love rules with a rod of iron.
You should maybe consider that.
>>1384060
Love is a chemical reaction that doesn't carry any sword.
It's just maybe that you talk about conjuncture in which this process made you suffer and now you say shit.
>>1384068
Love is a person, and that person created the universe.
I say what I say because I know what you do not.
>>1384032
I just provided you with evidence. It is undisputed that these were written before or on the beginning of the second century (because we get references by authors who we can date very reliably). Beyond that you have to turn to traditions, which insist that the works are all apostolic. Textual criticism can also help, so you can look at the language used, how developed the theology is, if there are any artifacts/peculiar details which betray recollection of an eye-witness. was Mark written in 50, 60, 70, or later? It's very hard to 'find' those years. Ultimately everyone brings a bias to these things, as if you accept them as reliable you basically have to convert. I reckon if these texts were about anyone other than Jesus an early date would be the consensus and everyone would move on.
>>1384071
God love would be untreated energies - that probably would trigger that chemical reaction to make our bodies experience it.
God never stops to show love, but He isn't a personal energy that emanates some poetic love and that's about it.
We are souls in biomachines - and here you experience the biomachine point of view until death will separate you from it.
If it wasn't like that brain damage would've not damaged us at all.
>>1384083
Uncreated energies*
>>1384083
Er, it would actually mean your death. You cannot exist in the face of the holy God, as He lives in unapproachable light.
Nor will you feel love towards Him, if you do not love Him now, without seeing Him.
We are people who are being offered a deal beyond our wildest dreams, with consequences for refusal beyond our deepest nightmares.
The odd part is that it's not a trick question, yet most people fail to answer it properly.
Yes, Jesus is Lord.
Yes, God did raise Jesus from the dead.
It's almost as though there were some sort of evil supernatural force stopping you from believing those two truths.
>>1384083
God is beyond our comprehension, beyond words and definitions, beyond emotions.
God communicates with us in time like a Person and show great love, care, intelligence and so on.. but we don't know and we'll never know what God is.
What would mean your death, wtf do you talk about - you can't keep one subject up without starting others?
You cannot see God - only Jesus saw God in eternity - because Jesus was with God in eternity - and there was not a moment in eternity when God was not with Jesus and Jesus was not with God - there was not a moment in eternity when Jesus was God.
Moses had a dialogue with God like we do now - yet it was not God directly, it was a material presence - a material voice - it was the manifestation of will of God as much as it could've been bestowed upon Moses, as much as a human could comprehend and use.
You cannot see God - you can see His image, you can see Jesus talk to Him - even if you don't see God - you see His image and you know that it is God - God hears you, loves you back.
But don't be heretical and claim to see God or know what God thinks or how He thinks.
>We are people
No shit?
>offered a deal
We usually do deals with Satan - God gave us a gift.
>our wildest dreams
Imagination is a characteristic of fall - before that we experienced everything trough revelation as reality.
Jesus is God and put His plan in simple words that are comprehensible - for the most part we just need patience to wait and die, without being too heretical.
>>1384122
Likewise he is beyond your compression as well.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
>>1384127
I did not claim I comprehend God - the only logical way to deduce that was if in my comment I claimed to be extra human or God myself, which I didn't.
I am also a human hence I am ruled by the same laws and limitations as you are.
>>1384127
You're not even clear that God is a person, and that person is Jesus, so your position is the far more untenable.
>>1384132
>I did not claim I comprehend God
>claims to comprehend many of gods natures and characteristics
i thought lying was a sin, you facetious morally bankrupt soulless shell.
>>1384135
and now you claim to know my position when you're replying to my first post in this thread? how pathetic can one subhuman animal be?
>>1384180
I even said that even giving God characteristics is wrong, I did not claim any of that - you just got emotional and start to see what I say in a distorted way.
You can tho get some of the God traits, or deduce them from what God Himself told Moses - also from what God himself said as Jesus. That's where we can say God is loving, generous and so on - because that's how God behaved when He walked as one of us.
>>1384051
She's obviously a transsexual and cross dresser that struggles with her sexuality and feelings of guilt by talking to an imaginary fairy.
>>1384198
so then you directly admit that your entire position up until this very post is an explicit lie made by someone without a clue, and that you are directly telling everyone here to ignore every word you have to say upon the matter. thats good, but you didnt need to tell us, we already knew that.
>I even said that even giving God characteristics is wrong
>You can tho get some of the God traits, or deduce them
>>1383814
You're right, I don't know Hebrew, and I was clearly wrong here, the word has a lot more nuance than in Greek (as it clear from the Septuagint rendering of Deuteronomy 1:35, which has no mention of "generation" at all, but simply says, "not one of these men").
>>1384226
Put more effort into your posts where you try to prove I said something I haven't.
Right now you believe what you want to believe tho.
How pathetic does your god have to be that you actually have to hide it outside the framework of logic in order to be able to defend it from any criticism -at all-?
>>1384254
You believed in a lie for all these years. Congratulations for being as dumb as a first century Palestinian fisherman, actually even dumber for continuing to believe even though all the predictions have failed and the dates expired. In short, kys.
I believe it's mentioned in Acts as well that the first generation of Christians will see the end of the world.
At best, the Armageddon is allegory. At worst, it's the rantings of madmen being repeated to scare every generation into thinking they'd be the last on Earth. See Revelations, Book of.
>>1384257
>resorting the most imbecilic lies when i can directly post your own contradictions that anyone can instantly verify for themselves
talkin' about fucking delusional, holy shit
>>1383995
Yep. It sprang into existance on 2/28/1922, when the last time it had existed as a nation being 343 B.C
So we have one day, and an interregnum of over 2,000 years.
>>1384254
What next, man?
A life of atheistic degeneracy?
Start popping the 'mones and turn full tranny?
>>1383447
Not Constantine but...
>>1385017
>OMG Constantine and Ape of Thoth in the same thread!
>nothing happened
I'm disappointed.
>>1385029
>keeping track of tripcode users
>>1385017
*sacrilege
>>1385044
>>1385017
Pic related.
>>1383285
>apocalyptic
You do know what that word means right? Not the modern parlance, but the base meaning of it?
>>1383447
What the fuck is wrong with you dude?
>>1384035
That is exactly correct.
Some of the people on this board are based but half are scum like you
>>1384254
So does this new information change your view on Mark 13:30 or the Orthodox Churches interpretation at all?
>>1385370
Why would the meaning of a Hebrew word affect one's interpretation of a Greek word?
>>1385405
Because that challenges the main point in his argument
""Generation" in Greek then meant what it meant in Hebrew and what is used to mean in early English. A generation was a family line, everyone whose generation traces back to one source. For instance, Saint John of the Ladder says (parentheticals are translator glosses), "And let your beloved children be the sighs of your heart. Make your body your slave; and your friends, the Holy Powers (Angels) who can help you at the hour of your death, if they become your friends. This is the generation (family) of those who seek the Lord."
>>1385405
No, not really, since according to Saint John Chrysostom, the generation Christ is speaking of is the one of Psalm 24:3-6
>>1385440
So why did you you bring up that point at all if it doesn't matter?
Why didnt you just tell the OP that its all good because a guy born 300 years after the ministry of Jesus said so?
>>1385420
He admitted that the Hebrew meaning was more nuanced but one can still understand γενεὰ to mean what St. John spoke of.
>>1384224
There are pics of Constantine floating around and she doesn't appear to be a tranny. Just some random asian-looking broad that won't put out.
>>1385405
>>1385440
Haha this is what you get for arguing with a fanatic.
>I lost the debate concerning the text itself?
>Pulls philology card
>Buys time
>Gets taken to school
>What I lost the debate on the meaning of the word too?
>Pulls muh tradition card.
See? It actually means the same as this other, random, cherry-picked passage. Check-mate XD.
>>1384035
>She lives in a deluded, fictional world and believes she's a Christian saint - preaching the good news to virgins on 4chan.
Well """""she""""" uses trips for no reason, I'm not surprised that a tripfag is mentally ill.
>>1385469
Is she qt?
>>1385479
The text itself is Greek. The tripfag was ignorant of Hebrew. . .
>>1385452
I told the OP that the primary Biblical definition of "generation" is pretty much obsolete in how we use the word today, which is true.
>>1385469
I'm not Asian, and I would never, ever post pictures of myself on 4chan. If anyone posts a picture purporting to be me, you can be sure it's fraudulent.
>>1385490
I mean, I'd hit it, but that's not saying much.
>>1383404
I thought the Protestants believed the temple had to be rebuilt first.
>>1385529
We are the temple anon.
>>1385494
you know you could still help people without using your trip and it would cut down on the animosity and make people more informed when it comes to your posts as they would be less likley to reject it offhand or less likley to accept it just because you said it .
Is pride a factor?
>>1385494
>I told the OP that the primary Biblical definition of "generation" is pretty much obsolete in how we use the word today, which is true.
Not according to the discussion on the meaning of the word in the biblical sense that happened.
>>1385551
Ah, no. That verse does not convey the primary definition even in Hebrew, let alone the entire Bible.
>>1385625
Neither did you, you first said that the "modernist" definition was false and how your definition was the general one used in the bible. That person demonstrated you were incorrect and you just dropped that argument and relied on on tradition to define it.
>>1385652
every word relies on "tradition" to establish its meaning...
>>1385625
https://www.reddit.com/r/badphilosophy/comments/4rn5z4/4chans_his_board_talks_about_philosophy_here_are/
look what i found
>>1385681
What's your favorite verse?
>>1385670
So... Did you get all of the information from incorrect secondary sources?
>>1385695
nah, he reads the prefaces and guesses
>>1385546
bumping for a response on this
>>1385681
which post?
>>1385708
Constantine has literally zero reputation as a thinker, religious or otherwise, and ignores all criticism. Just ignore them/mock them, do not engage seriously because there's nothing serious to engage.
>>1385711
how many other reputations of tripcode users do you keep track of?
>>1385708
Mainly I had the trip so people could easily ask questions about Orthodoxy whenever they saw me, which it has served sometimes, but overall it's been more trouble than it's worth I will probably drop it.
>>1385670
Don't post here or on this site's other boards ever again.
>>1385741
That's not me.
>>1384001
Okay.
I'll trust Sunday School Bible Study group #3458 over fucking people who actually read Greek papyri documents and sheit.
>>1384035
They may else quit using that name TRIPFAG BTFO
>>1385736
>I will probably drop it.
You should. As it stands, your trip either makes your posts become arguments from authority or completely irrelevant depending on the reader. You can always put it back on for specific questions if you feel the need, but you'll realize that your identity is seldom needed for these topics.
>>1385743
I know.
>>1384071
Given enough abstraction and redefinition and symbolic reinterpretation of basic words I suppose you're always right.
>>1385736
>Mainly I had the trip so people could easily ask questions about Orthodoxy whenever they saw me,
Wouldnt it be better to just post in the christian or orthodox generals? That way even the well meaning people could ask questions without damaging the flow of a regular threads which is where a lot of the ire stems from.
Why did you change from posting anonymously? I remember you went anon for awhile and people didn't seem to suffer too much.
Also as a side question have you ever changed your opinion based on a discussion youve had on 4chan? Ive seen you admit fault occasionally but never to the extent that it changes your viewpoint in anything other than a "yes-but" way
>>1385743
The screenshot on reddit has your tripcode and writes in your style. Are you saying that they photoshopped it?
>>1385752
Alright, I'll drop it.
>>1385756
I used to post generals, but they've gotten deleted here several times.
I reevaluated the pagan conception of remorse from a discussion here. Before I had in mind that paganism did not really have remorse and guilt in the same sense Christianity did (mainly due to taking Nietzsche too much for gospel), but someone cited Heracles, who certainly was driven by remorse.
>>1385758
I don't know, I don't visit reddit.
>>1385761
Well done, I'm sure it'll make your life easier.
>>1385761
Thanks
>>1385764
*tips fedora*
>>1385761
ding dong the witch is dead
>>1385761
>I used to post generals, but they've gotten deleted here several times.
Don't post such low quality shit.
>>1385800
>e-gloating
>>1385800
rude desu
Identity is fallacy. Presuming that your body (which includes your brain/mind; let's not get caught up that Cartesian fallacy of duality) being physically distinct from others grants you any special privilege is the very essence of hubris.
You already know where this is going, don't you?
Close your eyes and let go. See your entire life flash as a continuous stream of memory; a simulacrum of empirical data retrieved as needed to remind you of *just* enough about your physical presence to allow you to function in a material world dependent on people being different from each other.
It's getting harder to do, isn't it?
Since this is a thread about the apocalypse, it's fitting to talk about the eschatology of self that is approaching.
Fast.
The reader here might be too deeply entrenched in an ego-tube to comprehend this message, but the reader that is not will find comfort. Otherwise, there is only death.
Can you comprehend how insignificant your specific experience as an observer in the universe is? Probably not. Even more difficult to understand is how extremely significant your observation is. It's a paradox.
Your cat, patiently licking its paw on your nightstand, your neighbor's goldfish, your aunt visiting because she broke up with her third boyfriend this year and she literally can't even right now... all of these are living, and all have an equally important role in the universe as an observer. All sustain consciousness, which is an awareness capable of collapsing the superposition of wave functions present all around them.
Each pair of eyes is an end-point for the universe, and the entire thing was made for it.
The universe is 100% for your besotted uncle.
The universe is 100% for your sister.
The universe is 100% for your friend's gangsta cousin.
The universe is 100% for your turtle.
The universe is 100% for you.
All perspectives are valid. And they will all be known in the end.
There's your apocalypse: take it.
>>1385885
>The universe is 100% for your besotted uncle.
>The universe is 100% for your sister.
>The universe is 100% for your friend's gangsta cousin.
>The universe is 100% for your turtle.
>The universe is 100% for you.
>All perspectives are valid. And they will all be known in the end.
>There's your apocalypse: take it.
Hi Yeshua
>>1384003
Although there are Hebrew copies of all gospels, there are no known copies from before the earliest Greek manuscripts we have found, which are the earliest manuscripts in general. While this might be owing to the socioeconomic circumstances of Jews at the time, and their political difficulty in preserving their own culture, many think that the Gospels weren't written by a Hebrew-speaking underclass but by the earliest Christian gentry, who were Greek. This is a sensible hypothesis, although unproven. Sensible in that most literate people back then were highly educated and upper class. Jesus's apostles were decidedly not upper class, though they may have given interviews to such people in their old age.
>>1383285
Because at the end of the world - the time will end, and the universe will be purged with fire - from earth people will see the sky burning then suddenly all objects in it disappearing.
Time will stop and the judgement will happen in eternity - with God as the judge.
>>1387364
Alternative outcome:
>The armies of Yeshuah and the Opposer square off in Megiddo.
>The Opposer manages to take the Throne at the last second, overthrowing the pretender.
>Unlike the petty and vindictive God that was recently cast down, we, as bearers of Lumiel's torch, shall open the gates of the golden cube of New Jerusalem to ALL peoples, including those who fought for the Lamb, instead of condemning those not found in the Book of Life to second death.
>All will have access to the fruits of the Tree.
>All will have access to the waters of life everlasting.
>All will know the jeweled resplendence of Paradise on Earth.
>With his Scarlet Consort, the Opposer shall rule over all things for the rest of eternity in peace, justice, and wisdom.
Sounds like a better deal to me, friend.
See you in the Valley of Armageddon!
>>1387419
>>>/x/
>>1387452
>>1387464
>>1387489
>>1387495
>>>/r9k/
>>1387503
>/r9k/
In any case, what's inherently wrong with that sort of narrative revision? Eschatological outcomes are often points of doctrinal difference inside traditions, and if we're going to roleplay "end times", why can't the other side get in on the fun?
>>1383360
you have a lot of patience, kosta
people are threatened by you
>>1387515
chu think this is a game ese? where chu can jus change the rules like that?
>>1387539
She's literally wrong about everything Christian, and hasn't displayed any knowledge about anything non-Christian either.
People are not threatened by lies.
They're killed by lies.
>>1387350
My point, which remains, is that Matthew originally wrote his gospel in Hebrew, as he was writing to the Hebrews to show Jesus as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the King of the Jews.
As Matthew was a tax collector and therefore practical traitor to the nation of Israel, his opportunities to use written Hebrew were apparently quite limited, as his Hebrew was apparently awful.
The remainder of the NT was written in Greek, as that was the predominant language of the region. Jesus and His followers doubtless spoke Greek and Aramaic, and Jesus doubtless spoke Hebrew as well, as Jesus taught in the Temple.
The sensible people don't question the authorship of the gospels 2000 years after the first gospels were written, when their authorship was never under any doubt.
Sensible people realize that the bible is uniquely positioned as the only holy text on the planet.
>>1385761
That's because you're an idiot.
>>1387547
If St. John the Mushroomhead can fuck off to Patmos and claim divine vision, then so can St. Therion in Algeria or St. Ape at the Stone of Elder Worship.
I don't even think that battle will come, I just think it's a fun "what if" scenario to consider a loss for Yeshuah. That said, if I'm ever sitting at the crossroads or river-fork at midnight with my bone garland and oracular herb, and the Known Intercessor pays a visit to tell me to get to Megiddo fast, I'd be lying if I said I'd not consider it.
>>1385754
I'm always right to the extent I agree with God, and I'm always wrong to the extent I do not.
>>1385746
It's a good place to start. The things of God are not for the children of the devil, even if the children of the devil wasted decades studying it in vain and have had multiple degrees conferred upon them.
The Lord loves watching them twist in the wind.
>>1387550
No, Constantine is pretty good when it comes to basic Christian spirituality but he does struggle in other areas such as Hebrew for instance.
>>1385529
It can be assembled in months. The Jews have literally everything they need, right now, except the will.
The temple only has to be in operations 3 1/2 years after the rapture, at a minimum.
>>1387562
>treating all claims as equally valid
>>1383360
>"Generation" in Greek then meant what it meant in Hebrew and what is used to mean in early English.
*sigh*
You are yet again completely wrong when it comes to basic fact. Holy fucking shit just kill yourself.
>>1385209
If you can't see the similarities between the pagan eucharists and the roman/orthodox eucharists, you're blind.
>>1387573
When it comes to speculatory prophesy, I will until they come to pass (or not). I've no reason to privilege John the Revelator over Nostradamus or under John Dee.
>>1384688
What in the world are you babbling about? Egypt has been in continuous existence for thousands of years!
>>1387584
Wow it's almost like lies seek to imitate the truth.
>>1384688
The Unilateral Declaration of Egyptian Independence was issued by the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland on 28 February 1922. Through this declaration, the British government unilaterally ended its protectorate over Egypt and granted it nominal independence with the exception of four "reserved" areas: foreign relations, communications, the military and the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan.[1]
kek
What a joke. Egypt was still Egypt.
>>1387584
The entire script of the Thelemic Gnostic Mass is inherently rooted in the Orthodox rite as opposed to the Catholic.
Crowley liked Orthodoxy. I like Oriental Orthodoxy if we're talking about lineal churches.
>>1387585
John the Revelator: 100% accurate.
Nostradamus: 8% accurate, and admittedly in league with demons.
You might not, but normal people do.
>>1387570
She hasn't a clue what basic Christianity is. She hasn't a clue how to be saved. She hasn't a clue about developing a relationship with the living God.
Not one clue.
Don't argue with the crazy person, people. Arguing with crazy people is not a productive use of your time.
>>1387588
Indeed, which is why the roman/orthodox lies attempt to ape the truth, but fail miserably.
Neither one of them is "the church". Neither one of them can save anybody. Neither one of them was started by Jesus. Neither one of them enjoys any "apostolic succession". Neither one of them are full of people full of the Holy Spirit.
Both are cults.
>>1387591
>normal people
I know relatively few "normal people" who talk to me about Rev. in any capacity, let alone to the depth ascribing total and complete accuracy.
>>1387590
No, I'm going back in time to pagan practices prior to Christ. much less prior to the roman/orthodox church's origins.
They're just as much Eat God, Be God as the pagans before them.
>>1387591
>John the Revelator: 100% accurate.
Proofs? Oh, you have none? Okay.
>>1383285
Plenty of the Early Christians in Greece thought the Second Coming was imminent, at least according to Paul's letters.
The Thessalonians, rather than preparing for this event by living like good Christians, lived as if there was "no tomorrow", so to speak. In particular Paul found the sexual behaviour of the community to be lacking.
>tfw you will never be in Thessaloniki circa 50 AD and get in on this weird doom cult just to bang sluts
>>1387598
Agreed, but I have a different problem.
I have people who think the crazy person has answers for them, and they don't know she's crazy.
>>1387608
Yeah no I agree, the old Eucharist persists, my only point is that the iteration I was referencing and use has the Orthodox architecture as a convenient model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpKachYTr-4
Hell, about half of Tantric lines deal explicitly on operations of the red and white essence. Vajrayana, Saivist, etc.
>>1387585
>evangelist whose words have shaped countless generations of believers and whose message has gone over all the earth and weathered the rise and fall of empires yet remains the largest and most influential movement on the planet
>literal basement dwellers
you do lack reason it seems
>>1387607
Fair point. We're all on a spectrum, and you and I are not normal in completely different ways.
In a different venue, say sports betting, if I told you my guy predicts games right 100% of the time, and this other guy only predicts games right 8% of the time, you wouldn't waste your time with the 8%er.
>>1387609
Are you the math student that thinks life is full of proofs? Because you get very old, very fast.
Life is full of making decisions on the best information you have at the time, not on "proofs?".
>>1387611
That's how we live, with the expectation that any day could be our last here on earth. And it's come true 100% of the time, for everybody who's gone before us.
They all took their last breath here on earth, died, and saw Jesus.
>>1387612
Protip: I wasn't talking about her. Hint hint.
>>1387630
People don't always respond to who they're responding to.
Hint hint.
>>1387624
The best information is built on proof.
>>1387617
The problem here is that this isn't a matter of statistics but rather of hermenuetics, because it's not like any of the above are giving us precision, they're giving us revealed allegory probably of shit they couldn't comprehend in the first place, be it far flung visions of the future or high-state interaction with the supernal realm.
If you told me that someone was predicting sufficiently complex games 100% of the time I'd ask you who solved Kolmogorov Complexity.
>>1387627
I feel like you kind of missed the point of my post, or what I was saying about the scripture.
I'm Catholic myself but I still have a sense of humour
>>1387645
Nope.
The best information comes from God directly. What you call "proof" is usually garbage.
>>1387648
judge
t
h
e
tree
b
y
its
f
r
u
i
t
>>1387656
But God told me proofs are actually cool, and that science is fun. And neat.
What now?
