• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

What the Bible says about: The End of the World

Dust514.jpg

A Response To The Skeptic's Annotated Bible: What The Bible Says About The End Of The World

The SAB indicates that, according to the Bible, the end would come within the lifetime of Jesus' listeners. I will demonstrate why this is not the case by explaining the verses they use to conclude this. They mistake the transfiguration, the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus being at the right hand of power, and John's Revelation at Patmos.

Matthew 16:28 - Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. (Also see Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27)

The Interpreter's Bible says: "The prediction was not fulfilled, and later Christians found it necessary to explain that it was metaphorical."

What believers and skeptics alike seem to have glossed over is the fact that in the very next verse Matthew reveals that just 6 days later this prophecy was fulfilled. Peter, James and John witnessed the transfiguration. (Matthew 17:1-2; Luke 9:27-36; 2 Peter 1:16-18)

Matthew 23:36 - Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (Also see Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32)

All of the above verses differ from the verses given in consideration of Matthew 16:28. British scholar G. R. Beasley-Murray: "The phrase 'this generation' should cause no difficulty for interpreters. While admittedly genea in earlier Greek meant birth, progeny, and so race, . . . in the [Greek Septuagint] it most frequently translated the Hebrew term dor, meaning age, age of humankind, or generation in the sense of contemporaries. . . . In sayings attributed to Jesus the term appears to have a twofold connotation: on the one hand it always signifies his contemporaries, and on the other hand it always carries an implicit criticism."

So Jesus could have been directing that statement to the Jewish opposition there around him at that time, who, within a generation would see the destruction of Jerusalem in 66 - 70 CE by Titus, the son of Emperor Vespasian where 1,100,000 Jews died and 97,000 were taken captive, most of whom died horrible deaths and the Christians who knew it would come were saved. (Matthew 24:16, 22) And Jesus may have been applying the same to those in opposition in the future as well.

Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62 are parallel accounts to one another and you won't have to wait or look far to see them fulfilled. Acts 7:55-56: "But he, being full of holy spirit gazed into heaven and caught sight of God's glory and of Jesus standing at God's right hand, and he said: "Look! I behold the heavens opened up and the Son of man standing at God's right hand." Also see Psalm 110:1; Luke 22:69; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1.

John 21:20-23 is somewhat interesting. Jesus may have been telling Peter that John would live longer than him, and in fact John would live 70 years, but also he might have been referring to the prophetic vision that John was given at the end of his life while in exile on the island of Patmos. As recorded in the book of Revelation John was transported to "the Lords day." (Revelation 1:1, 10; Revelation 22:20)

[SAB] - The end will come within the lifetime of the New Testament authors.

Response: Jesus taught his followers that no one, not even Jesus himself, knew the time of the end of the world. (Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7) It's important to note that Jehovah God doesn't see into the future like a crystal ball simply because the future doesn't exist. When God foretells something that means that either it is obvious to him, with a great deal more experience and resources than us, that something is going to happen or he is going to make sure it happens. What Jesus meant is that God will know when the time is right and act accordingly.

Also at this point some clarification should be made as to what exactly is the "end of the world." The Bible says that Earth was given to man for him to fill and subdue it, that the meek will inherit the earth and live forever upon it, and that it will last forever. (Genesis 1:28; Psalm 37:29; 115:16; Ecclesiastes 1:4) The end of the world is the end of the present system of things and all that involves. Of Satan's influence and sin, which, when concluding brings much destruction, but when ended, allows peace. Pretty much government, religion and commerce. Sin, death, sickness, greed, etc.

1 Corinthians 1:7-8; 7:29; Philippians 1:10 all convey the importance of the missionary work in the early stages of Christianity. They all had important work to do before the end of their lives. Nowhere in any of these passages is it conveyed that they expected the end of the system of things to occur during that time.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 is often used to support the rapture, but actually it is referring to some who were mourning the death of their fellow Christians. Paul was reminding them as well as faithful Christians in the future of the resurrection hope, some to heaven immediately upon death and some to paradise earth upon resurrection.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 refers to the presence of Jesus Christ. The Greek noun parousia is used. It means "being alongside." In his work on The Parousia, Israel P. Warren, D.D., wrote: "Had our translators done with this technical word 'parousia' as they did with 'baptisma,' - transferring it unchanged, - or if translated using its exact etymological equivalent, presence, and had it been well understood, as it then would have been, that there is no such thing as a 'Second Presence,' I believe that the entire doctrine would have been different from what it now is. The phrases, 'second advent,' and 'second coming,' would never have been heard of. The church would have been taught to speak of The Presence Of The Lord, as that from which its hopes were to be realized, whether in the near future or at the remotest period, - that under which the world was to be made new, a resurrection both spiritual and corporeal should be attained, and justice and everlasting awards administered."

The word occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6, 7; 10:10; Philippians 1:26; 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 8, 9; James 5:7, 8; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28.

Pareimi is a related verb with the similar meaning of being present. It also occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 26:50; Luke 13:1; John 7:6; 11:28; Acts 10:21, 33; 12:20; 17:6; 24:19; Acts 12:20; 1 Corinthians 5:3, 3; 2 Corinthians 10:2, 11; 2 Corinthians 11:9; 13:2, 10; Galatians 4:18, 20; Colossians 1:6; Hebrews 12:11; 13:5; 2 Peter 1:9, 12; Revelation 17:8.

The Greek word, eleusis (Latin adventu), which conveys the physical act of coming is different and only occurs once in the Christian Greek scripture, at Acts 7:52. Paul was encouraging those with a heavenly hope to remain blameless until their death, or the conclusion of the system of things and the presence, not the physical presence, of Jesus Christ.

In discussing Hebrews 1:2; 9:26; 1 Peter 1:20; 4:7 it is somewhat difficult to stay on topic of the so called end of the world because the last days that Paul was referring to were not the last days of the present system of things, but rather the last days of the Jewish system of things. Jehovah had given the prophecy of those days 850 years earlier. (Joel 2:28-32; Acts 2:16-21; Hebrews 1:1-2) It was the end of God's favor upon the Jewish congregation and the beginning of his favor for the new Christian congregation.

1 John 2:18 refers to the end of the apostolic period. The work mentioned as important in the scriptures at the beginning of this article were near completion and would conclude upon the death of John shortly after he completed the writing of Revelation.

[SAB] - The end will come soon. (Within a couple thousand years or so)

Response: It is interesting that, as with the case of Philippians 4:5, the Lord that is being referred to isn't Jesus Christ but rather, Jehovah. Codex Sinaiticus, Greek, fourth century C.E., Codex Alexandrinus, Greek, fifth century C.E., Vatican ms 1209, Greek, fourth century C.E., Christian Greek Scriptures in 12 languages, including Hebrew, by Elias Hutter, Nuremberg, 1599, Christian Greek Scriptures, Hebrew, by William Robertson, London, 1661, and the Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem) all read Jehovah.

James 5:7-8 is talking about the presence (parousia) mentioned earlier in this article.

At Hebrews 10:37 Paul quotes Habakkuk 2:2-3 from the Greek Septuagint, which reads "And the Lord answered [me] and said: Write a vision; write it distinctly in a book that the reader may trace these things [may run]; for the vision is for a time yet to come. But it will spring up at last and will not be vain. Though he may tarry, wait for him; for he will assuredly come and will not fail [and will not tarry]."

Revelation 1:1, 3; 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20 may undoubtedly amuse the skeptic, who, of course, is familiar with the Biblical fact that a thousand years are as a watch in the night to God (Psalm 90:4), but to the writers of the Bible, especially John when writing Revelation and who would die shortly afterward, the resurrection hope would follow sleep in death which would seem, upon that resurrection, as the same day as they died, though it actually had been thousands of years.​
 
But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Matthew 24:36
That verse is, of course, a very strong argument against Trinitarianism.

JWs aren’t trinitarians.
But I also wonder about the wisdom of placing oneself under the aegis of a mad god who offers no transparency to his followers. Michael is supposed to lead the armies of heaven in furious battle against Satan and all his minions …

That happened in 1914, according to JWs. Satan was evicted from heaven and I guess he got so pissed he started World War I that year.
 
That happened in 1914, according to JWs. Satan was evicted from heaven and I guess he got so pissed he started World War I that year.
Well, that rather goes to my point, doesn't it? There's fucking demons all over the place, so things clearly did not go well with the campaign. As one would expect of a military campaign who central planning was idiotically kept secret from its generals. Jehovah God signs big checks, but that don't matter if your bank account is empty.
 
That happened in 1914, according to JWs. Satan was evicted from heaven and I guess he got so pissed he started World War I that year.
Well, that rather goes to my point, doesn't it? There's fucking demons all over the place, so things clearly did not go well with the campaign. As one would expect of a military campaign who central planning was idiotically kept secret from its generals.
It’s all such a bunch of silly nonsense that it boggles the mind that anyone could believe old myths are literally true, but they do
 
I got no problems with old myths, as long as you understand that they are old myths. I love a good story as much as the next guy. But it's a bad idea to mistake them for policy documents.
 
I got no problems with old myths, as long as you understand that they are old myths. I love a good story as much as the next guy. But it's a bad idea to mistake them for policy documents.
Exactly. I love a lot of bible stories. As a kid I had an illustrated bible — I think mom, a devout catholic, was trying to give me religion. I thought the Samson story was way cool, especially the illustration of him with his eyes gouged out felling the temple. I loved and still love the Noah story — it makes God out to be the greatest villain of all time, far worse than all the Steven King villains put together.

Then dad, who wasn’t religious at all, started giving me books about astronomy and dinosaurs, and finally when I read while still very young One, Two, Three … Infinity, by George Gamow, that was the end of religion.
 
I got no problems with old myths, as long as you understand that they are old myths. I love a good story as much as the next guy. But it's a bad idea to mistake them for policy documents.
Exactly. I love a lot of bible stories. As a kid I had an illustrated bible — I think mom, a devout catholic, was trying to give me religion. I thought the Samson story was way cool, especially the illustration of him with his eyes gouged out felling the temple. I loved and still love the Noah story — it makes God out to be the greatest villain of all time, far worse than all the Steven King villains put together.

Then dad, who wasn’t religious at all, started giving me books about astronomy and dinosaurs, and finally when I read while still very young One, Two, Three … Infinity, by George Gamow, that was the end of religion.
Ma was a sunday school teacher and Da was a geology professor, so I got a pretty good review of both types of kid books. They do all look the same once reduced to four year old language, "brightly colored stories about stuff". But you get some nagging doubts once you reach the age where you can compare one thing to another, ask whether one makes sense in the light of the other...
 
But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Matthew 24:36
That verse is, of course, a very strong argument against Trinitarianism.

But I also wonder about the wisdom of placing oneself under the aegis of a mad god who offers no transparency whatsoever, even to his closest followers and lieutenants. Michael is supposed to lead the armies of heaven in furious battle against Satan and all his minions, and his God won't even tell him whether the invasion of Earth is on Tuesday or Thursday? How's he supposed to plan or win any kind of battle without being "allowed" to see a single battle plan? Who's to say Putin isn't going to wipe the floor with this powerful but ill-coordinated angelic host the second they try to establish beachhead?

So dumb. Not you, your criticism there. God doesn't know. God will know when that time is right. God didn't know then, he probably doesn't know now. God doesn't see into the future because the future doesn't exist. God will let Michael and his angels know when the time is here. Like in the book of Revelation. God knows it will happen that way. Like me saying I'm going to post on a religious forum and be mocked by idiots. That isn't a divine revelation.

Try and think of it in practical terms. In fact, that's how I describe my spirituality. Practical.
 
Then dad, who wasn’t religious at all, started giving me books about astronomy and dinosaurs, and finally when I read while still very young One, Two, Three … Infinity, by George Gamow, that was the end of religion.

Not really though, the end of religion. Just the evolution of religion.
 
Ma was a sunday school teacher and Da was a geology professor, so I got a pretty good review of both types of kid books. They do all look the same once reduced to four year old language, "brightly colored stories about stuff". But you get some nagging doubts once you reach the age where you can compare one thing to another, ask whether one makes sense in the light of the other...

There ya' go. See? Simple. Just do that here.

The Bible says (fill in the blank)

Science says (fill in the blank)

Just no bullshit. Simple. I could go on for days in the complexities of theology in the creation case. The thought fills me with the urge to regurgitate.
 
That verse is, of course, a very strong argument against Trinitarianism.

But I also wonder about the wisdom of placing oneself under the aegis of a mad god who offers no transparency whatsoever, even to his closest followers and lieutenants. Michael is supposed to lead the armies of heaven in furious battle against Satan and all his minions, and his God won't even tell him whether the invasion of Earth is on Tuesday or Thursday? How's he supposed to plan or win any kind of battle without being "allowed" to see a single battle plan? Who's to say Putin isn't going to wipe the floor with this powerful but ill-coordinated angelic host the second they try to establish beachhead?

Trinitarianism is pagan nonsense.
 
That verse is, of course, a very strong argument against Trinitarianism.

But I also wonder about the wisdom of placing oneself under the aegis of a mad god who offers no transparency whatsoever, even to his closest followers and lieutenants. Michael is supposed to lead the armies of heaven in furious battle against Satan and all his minions, and his God won't even tell him whether the invasion of Earth is on Tuesday or Thursday? How's he supposed to plan or win any kind of battle without being "allowed" to see a single battle plan? Who's to say Putin isn't going to wipe the floor with this powerful but ill-coordinated angelic host the second they try to establish beachhead?

Trinitarianism is pagan nonsense.
But battles that only a figurehead politician knows the details of make perfect sense?
 
Ma was a sunday school teacher and Da was a geology professor, so I got a pretty good review of both types of kid books. They do all look the same once reduced to four year old language, "brightly colored stories about stuff". But you get some nagging doubts once you reach the age where you can compare one thing to another, ask whether one makes sense in the light of the other...

There ya' go. See? Simple. Just do that here.

The Bible says (fill in the blank)

Science says (fill in the blank)

Just no bullshit. Simple. I could go on for days in the complexities of theology in the creation case. The thought fills me with the urge to regurgitate.
You're skipping the "growing up and learning to think about things like a not-toddler" part.
 
But battles that only a figurehead politician knows the details of make perfect sense?

I don't know what the hell you're talking about. And I don't care. The trinity is pagan nonsense.
The idea that only God, seemingly incapable action, has an absolute monopoly on knowledge. There are a lot of gods one could worship, and you seem to have chosen one who's a few crayons short of a full box. Why not Athene? Badass battle god and well capable of solving her own problems without the help of prophets or generals, but also well-versed in the arts of knowledge, and patron of all libraries. Vain and cantankerous, but not a hoarder, and generally good on her oaths. If she were to try and end the world, she wouldn't bungle it like Jehovah apparently did in 1914.
 
I can never remember whether I’m supposed to be worshipping Yahweh or Yahoo! I think only one of them is a browser of some sort.
 
Back
Top Bottom