Is Jesus's "this generation will certainly not pass" valid grounds for scepticism?

Poem said:
What would you say is / was the motive for lying?
Click to expand...
I would think that would be obvious. It's for credibility. Some of their audience is a attached to a previous story. By linking the two together they sell their own story better.
 
Poem said:
How are you defining 'blind faith'?
Click to expand...
I agree with hose who say that “blind” can be superfluous in connection with faith, but also those who say that it can mean unearned trust.
In biblical times, God constantly proved His existence with miracles like flaming bushes, or the killing of innocent first-born Egyptians. The Israelites did not need blind faith to have faith in their god. In modern times, the only miracles that happen are indistinguishable from fraud, so modern Christians need to have blind faith to believe in their god.

Jesus criticised Thomas who had to check Jesus’ wounds before he believed Jesus had been resurrected from the dead (I always wondered about this: obviously the resurrected Jesus looked nothing like the Jesus who was executed. But he had the correct wounds. Then again, why touch them?). Jesus would have preferred Thomas to have had blind faith.
 
Poem said:
How are you defining 'blind faith'?
Click to expand...
Believing in something that could never ever be proven with evidence, is blind faith. I would also call it ignorant faith.

Believing Jesus was the son of God and the Jewish Messiah, is such.
 
According to the bible, faith is "the evidence of things unseen, the substance of things hoped for" (I could get them switched around)

So blind wishful thinking. I don't know why Christians work so hard to avoid using the biblical definition. Actually, I do.

Nothing about "trust" in there (earned or unearned). Trying to pass it off as trust ("you have faith in your wife" or "you have faith in the chair") is just a bait-and-switch attempt ("Atheist have faith, too, just like Christians").

Matt Dillahunty says that faith is the excuse people use to believe in something when they don't have a good reason to. If you actually had a reason, you wouldn't resort to faith.
 
pgwenthold said:
According to the bible, faith is "the evidence of things unseen, the substance of things hoped for" (I could get them switched around)

So blind wishful thinking. I don't know why Christians work so hard to avoid using the biblical definition. Actually, I do.
Click to expand...
Having grown up Christian, I have no idea why you think Christians work hard to avoid this definition. Do you have examples we can evaluate?
 
Poem said:
Before I respond, could you clarify the highlighted - that is, you mean this is what you were told? You don't believe that now, surely?
Click to expand...
I believe I have made that clear previously.
Poem said:
How are you defining 'blind faith'?
Click to expand...
Nor are you asking me, but I'd go further than others in my definition. Blind faith is faith that you maintain despite evidence. You are willingly "blind" to anything that contradicts your faith. Doubt and uncertainty are tools of the Devil. Any "evidence" you are given is just Satan trying to tempt you away from faith, no matter how logical or obvious it seems. Maintaining your faith through everything that the world throws at you, like Job, is your guarantee of salvation.
 
arthwollipot said:
I believe I have made that clear previously.
Click to expand...
You have: you clearly stated that you are no longer a Christian - but you have also been prepared to challenge those whom you consider to be making unfounded arguments.

I think you would agree with me that whoever made the argument you posted (#1,101), has made no attempt to address the specifics of Jesus's prophecies. Quoting from Luke 21:

20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. 29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; 30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. 31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. 32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Even if some elements might have been fulfilled at his trial and crucifixion, we cannot ignore that which I have emboldened.

What is interesting is the KJV (which I quoted above) renders verse 32 as: Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

It's interesting because the translation makes it seem possible for 'this generation' to mean the generation that sees what Jesus previously described. Verse 31 says:
So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.

Most translation have 'until all these things' which seems to be suggesting the generation Jesus is speaking to.

If it were true that Jesus really was God's son and was speaking prophetically, then it would necessarily be the case that his warning could be for a future generation rather than being restricted to the current one (ie the one to whom he spoke the words of the Olivet discourse).

However, we might also ask - could Jesus have been clearer? Couldn't he have explicitly said: Verily I say unto you, The generation that sees these things shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

If Jesus really was genuinely concerned to warn his followers about the tribulations to come then one would assume he would be totally transparent.
 
Regarding the topic of 'faith' or 'blind faith' -Jesus has no hesitation in linking non-belief with 'evil deeds' (John 3:18-19):
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Clearly, Jesus is affirming that those that love darkness won't (maybe can't) have faith.
 
acbytesla said:
I would think that would be obvious. It's for credibility. Some of their audience is a attached to a previous story. By linking the two together they sell their own story better.
Click to expand...
If they were (in your words) 'trying to make it fit in with Old Testament writings', then it would be surprising if they were willing to die for it.
 
In what context do you think you would find yourself having to make that decision?
What people do you think were reading the scriptures and making that decision?

Do you think people contemporary with the writing of the scriptures were questioning the validity of OT prophecies as fulfilled in the NT?

Who do you think had access to NT writings as they emerged over the decades?
 
Skeptical Greg said:
In what context do you think you would find yourself having to make that decision?
What people do you think were reading the scriptures and making that decision?

Do you think people contemporary with the writing of the scriptures were questioning the validity of OT prophecies as fulfilled in the NT?

Who do you think had access to NT writings as they emerged over the decades?
Click to expand...
I think the tenor of what you are alluding to is - do we even need to bother with questions about this obscure Jesus fellow...there just isn't enough evidence to go on?
 
Poem said:
That don't stand up to the naysayer's scrutiny....
Click to expand...
Exactly. Obviously the people fitting Jesus' story to the OT continuity weren't naysayers. If they believed they had made a good fit, that gave transcendent meaning to their lives, it's not at all surprising that they'd die for their belief, regardless of what nays the naysayers say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom