Some Specific Biblical Prophecies

quote:

---

It has also been considered as 25 years.

---

I think the Jews considered it 40 due to the fact that 40 years were required by God for Israel to wander in the wilderness so as the younger generation emerging would be the ones to go into the land of Caanan, the promised land.

quote:

---

Yes a lifetime, however, a lifetime and a generation is two entirely different things. A generation is ?the average interval of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring?. You can see for yourself that this theory of yours is invalid. Also, given that people lived for a much shorter time in Jesus? day, a generation is likely to be much shorter than 40 years, probably closer to 20 years.

---

Actually, stats were not taken as to average length of life then, but the diet was far more healty and natural. With all the factors considered I'd say 70 years of average life is reasonable. Neither you nor I are going to prove that to be either true or false. True, a generation and a life are not one and the same. Likely it will be less than a lifetime. Granted. However in the Matthew account of this prophecy, the Greek text puts it this way: "Truly I tell you that by no means passes away this generation until all these things happens." Note, "passes away," implying before the generation seeing these things die off.

quote:

---

Yes, so where is Jesus? More than 40 years has passed, are we moving the goalposts yet again?

---

40 years passed?? 1967 + 40 = 2007 doesn't it?
My goalposts have a few decades leeway to go, if you read them and it could be sooner than we think.

quote:

---

Ambiguity, in the Bible, surely not? Enough ambiguity to allow the believer a few get out clauses, it seems that this prophecy really isn?t that impressive, given the ambiguity of course.

---

You're honing in on this bit of ambiguity as to length of generation when overall, nothing is ambiguous but this, which renders little for you skeptics to crow about.

quote:

---

You do see what you are doing here Buz? Once the prophecy fails you change the criteria so as to give it another chance. Why not simply accept that Jesus was wrong?

---

But the prophecy has not failed atol. You're desperately wishfully thinking, for if you're wrong about the whole Bible debate, you face the almighty in the end without the sin atonement and that is scary.

quote:

---

And come 2037 when this doesn?t happen you will move the goalposts again.

---

"Again??" I've not moved them in the first place. You've tried to do it for me with your 'spin' and failed.
Hopefully Percy won't tire of his fine forum or end up in the poor house over the cost of all this badwith and if all's intact and I'm wrong in three decades, I'll be the first to admit it. I'm inclined to think it'l be much sooner than 2037 at the pace things are moving on the world scene. [This message has been edited by buzsaw, 10-22-2003]

quote:

---

I have already said the generation was from the greek word GENEA which does not mean generation so much it could but more NATION. so in other words he was saying this nation shalt not pass away it would only take you stop stop being a philosopher and have a little faith and you would see that jesus is the savior your savior not just mine.

---

But... the nation DID pass away...------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Percy's reply (as with you) ignores the next two sentences:

quote:

---

There was a military buildup and harsh rhetoric, but so? There was a military buildup and harsh rhetoric before WWI, but did that justify Kaiser Wilhelm II's invasion of France?

---

------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 10-22-2003]

quote:

---

SOoif I sum up your arguments you assert that Jesus was talking about events immeidatley preceding his return (which means that Jesus did NOT "nail" short term events, since the exile and return are separated by 1900 years).

---

Wrong, my stand point is that when the savior spoke the words in Luke or Mark or Matt those words where prophecies that would happen between his time and the time he comes again, so from whatever time it was he spoke those words in luke, Matt, and Mark those words could have started the very next day and then also any of the days all the way up untill his 2nd coming. so the prophecies stretch over a time of 0-whenever he decides to come, if that makes since to you.

quote:

---

Secondly you are asserting that "awsome" doesn't mean "impressive". I think that this is so obivously a silly wordgame as to deserve no further comment.

---

I will say that you are good but not that good you have alot of work to do you should not be so picky but here Ill reword my sentance it was neat not awsome not impressive but just neat, ok?eh?? My argument is that I agree with buzsaw on luke 21:24 and when the savior spoke "GENEA" the translation over years has gotten corrupted and became generation instead of nation or people or race as those are 3 different translations along with generation so what we really have is those generations rather then this generation but at any rate we are not going anywhere because you wont accept my translation where as I am going to accept GENERATION,RACE, as a translation.let me point this out, over time from about the begining there have been different dispensations I am not sure how many but when the savior spoke and tought and came about from his time on was a NEW dispensation a new time a new teaching so when he prophecied he was speaking about the despensation so take for example this translationVerily I say unto you, This generation(dispensation) shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

only as the prophecy set forth, they will be exiled that was part of the prophecy-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

quote:

---

I have already said the generation was from the greek word GENEA which does not mean generation so much it could but more NATION.

---

Rei, you're totally spinning and missapplying the Greek gene/gena. It is generally used to denote birth, to be begotten, the root for generation, geneology. The word, nearly always used for nations in the NT is ethnos, from which "ethnic" comes, including in our text of the thread, Luke 21:24 which has been translated, "gentiles". The Greek textual word here is ethnos meaning "nations".The literal of the word in the generation text, Luke 21:32, "genea" is "generation." That is accepted by all Greek scholars and thus translated by all literal Biblical translators.You're really desperately trying to grab for some thin branch as your case plummets into the abiss.

No, no. It said that all of these things shall occur before GENEA passes away, after describing a bunch of things that never occured (including the return of the son of man). If you're taking GENEA to mean "nation", you still have a problem, because the nation did pass away - Israel ceased to be. Whether you use generation, or nation, you still have a problem.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Nice context reading skills, Buz. It was your ally Quiz who said that perhaps they're using it to mean nation instead. I was telling him how that wouldn't work, either. You're absolutely right - it means generation. And the generation passed away.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Hi Buz, So despite this explicit support for a 40 year generation, you still insist on making it 70 years? For what reason Buz other than the 40 years have passed and Jesus has failed again.If nothing else, can you anwer this question: Why, when the Bible says a generation is 40 years do you then ignore this and make up a figure unmentioned in the Bible for a generation of 70 years? By examining the human remains it is possible to work out the average lifespan of an era. 2000 years ago in Palestine you would be lucky to reach 50. As for the diets, many people couldnt' afford a decent diet then and begging was the order of the day, add to this that we have far better medical services and it is obvious that we live longer. Well it has to be doesn't it or we die out! Well since more than one generation will be alive when any event occurs I take it you are talking about the latest generation contemporary with the 1967 fulfillment, this has passed away now, it is over 40 years Buz, get over it. Jesus may have been a fairly decent guy, but he was no messiah. It is no big deal, there is more to life than living inside a fairytale, no matter how comfortable it is. I disagree, the forty years, that is the 40 years the bible gives for a generation has gone. You are joking aren't, you? You have stated yourself that a generation may be forty years of it may be 70 years, surely the time factor is the most important thing here, the end of the world as we know it is a pretty imortant thing to know the timing of! You explcitly state that the time for a generation is ambiguous, one piece of ambiguity renders your entire 'prophecy' useless, it allows get out clauses and this is what you are resorting to. I am afraid it has Buz, sorry to be the bearer of bad news , but Jesus fails yet again, the generation has passed, of course you could prove me wrong by showing me that there has never been another generation born in Israel since 1967! I am not wrong about it, I know exactly what the Bible is and why it was written, you have the wrong idea about the Book I have nothing to be afraid of, I have done nothing to be punished for What is it you are scared of exactly?Brian.

Ok, I have been attempting to explain that when the savior said "this generation" he didn't mean that specific generation but I have failed to show you because you wont accept that he is not talkng about the apostles generation. Eatherway there is no real way to say he was or was not talking about that specific generation because as stated earlier the prophecy is vague, probably because of corruption to the record because it has been along time since the record was originally written and the record was hand copied for a 1000 years or so.So I am stating that we need to move to another prophecy since the prophecy Buzsaw stated did pass and there are no other claims stating otherwise. If Buzsaw wants he can start from the first prophecy and first question in the book of luke so that we may go over them all from begining to end but that is up to him.-Quiz

quote:

---

So despite this explicit support for a 40 year generation, you still insist on making it 70 years? For what reason Buz other than the 40 years have passed and Jesus has failed again.

---

40 years has not passed, 2007 would be 40 years.

quote:

---

I am afraid it has Buz, sorry to be the bearer of bad news , but Jesus fails yet again, the generation has passed, of course you could prove me wrong by showing me that there has never been another generation born in Israel since 1967!

---

ROFLOL, if this was true a generation could be 10 years. You could prove me wrong by showing me 75% of the israel nation born in 1967 dead.

quote:

---

and that is scary

---

I dont think he is scared but thankful, people dont believe because they are scared they believe because they are thankful, atleast thats part of my faith if it takes someone to be scared in order to believe then thats lame. besides I would think it is more scary to believe that there is no life after death then to believe that there is and not believe in jesus.-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

Quiz, are you telling me that a part of the bible may not have been handed down to today correctly? If so what other parts may have not been handed down exactly correctly?I don't have arguments with non-literalists (well, none that matter) so I guess you're on the side of those who understand that the bible is not a science text.[This message has been edited by NosyNed, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by NosyNed, 10-22-2003]

Correct. Only a prophet would know which is incorrect and which is correct, and what we have is that exactly!-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

Huh?

Maybe somebody can answer the question posed by the Greeks centuries ago in regards to prophecy: How are we to distinguish between accurate, precient, "authentic" prophecy; and "fake" or erroneous prophecy interpreted in such a way as to appear authentic, after the fact?Furthermore, given a prophecy that's open-ended, what would it take to convince you that it was false prophecy, and not simply a prophecy that hasn't happened yet?[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 10-22-2003]