Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

End Times
User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by TheEditor » Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:37 pm

Wow Steven,

What a great resource! Thanks for that!

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by Homer » Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:51 pm

Looking through Wigram's it is obvious that mello is used in reference to events not in the near future. For example:

Galatians 3:23, New American Standard Bible (NASB)

23. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later (mello) to be revealed.

So in this case "about to" was "about to" for well over a thousand years? As the old saying goes, I think some folks need to lick that calf all over again.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by TheEditor » Thu Jun 19, 2014 11:53 pm

Homer,

That phrase gives us a hint to where you live. I have never heard that one before and had to look it up to see what it meant. :D

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by dwilkins » Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:50 am

On the mello issue, I'd ask that everyone try to take a step back and look at this from a wider grammatical angle as well as a logical one. Though I think the verse I quoted is more likely than not properly translated as "about to be" (and though most translations don't do so, the highly regarded YLT does, so it's not an absurd on incompetent suggestion), it wouldn't weaken the general mello argument to say that it means "certainly will". The reason is that the primary meaning of mello generically is to indicate something that is "about to be". Below are the Strongs and the Thayers entries for the word,


μέλλω
mellō
mel'-lo
A strengthened form of G3199 (through the idea of expectation); to intend, that is, be about to be, do, or suffer something (of persons or things, especially events; in the sense of purpose, duty, necessity, probability, possibility, or hesitation): - about, after that, be (almost), (that which is, things, + which was for) to come, intend, was to (be), mean, mind, be at the point, (be) ready, + return, shall (begin), (which, that) should (after, afterwards, hereafter) tarry, which was for, will, would, be yet.

G3195
μέλλω
mellō
Thayer Definition:
1) to be about
1a) to be on the point of doing or suffering something
1b) to intend, have in mind, think to
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a strengthened form of G3199 (through the idea of expectation)


Now, there are about 110 uses of mello in the NT, with more than 80 by my count being eschatologically important (that's 80 among a total of more than 130 time statements of various constructions, the rest of which don't use mello, that I've found so far that demand a first century 2nd Coming).

It only takes one.

In order for those who discount the option of mello (or the other time statements) translated as "about to be" to be correct, not a single one of the 80 eschatological references of mello can be translated that way. Take a second to consider the power of this. If a single use of mello in reference to the 2nd Coming is translated "about to be", with the rest of them generically translated "sure to eventually be" (or something similar), my point stands. But, just looking at the definition it seems to me that we should expect that at least 1/2 would be translated such.

On the other hand, though I have searched, I have not found a single reference (or anyone advocating one) to a time statement that can be translated to claim that the 2nd Coming is a distant time in the future. In other words, we have more than 130 instances where there is a claim that it's either about to happen or will happen at some point, but not a single instance where there is a specific claim that it will be a distant time in the future. The closest we get with that are verses that claim we can't know the day or hour, but even these are mitigated by people like Paul who flatly says in places like 1 Thess. 5 that true believers will see it coming.

I might be wrong about any individual example I give (though I tried to use a credible translation to make the point), but the power of the overall theme in scripture is too much to resist in my opinion.

Doug

User avatar
Douglas
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Corvallis, OR

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by Douglas » Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:42 am

Really good discussion. I have been reading this forum for some time now, and was fairly active initially, but realized I needed to learn a lot more before my opinion on a topic could be of value to others.

I am still learning...

I noticed this as well a few posts earlier, and also was hoping to listen to this debate.
"By the way, :idea: is the debate between Don Preston and Brother Gregg yet available?"

Dwilkins, you have ideas very similar to an old poster that made a lot of sense to me, but you have a spirit much kinder and loving towards others. Thanks for your posts, I enjoy reading them and learning. As well as most other posters on this forum.

Douglas

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by steve » Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:36 pm

Hi Douglas,

The debate videos between Don Preston and I belong to him. Before the debate, I thought the videos would be available to both, and I said I would post them. I am not accustomed to the idea of selling recorded information, which I would wish for all people to have for free. However, I later was informed that, since Don actually made the videos at his own expense, they are his property, and he has them for sale from his ministry. Last I checked, I think you can get them for about $30. If I were to post them, I would be stealing his property. Sorry!

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by robbyyoung » Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:45 pm

steve wrote:robby,

I am not seeing how any of the verses you reference can be said to make your point. The fact that Jesus was speaking to someone (as all speeches are made to someone) tells us little or nothing about the application of His words beyond His immediate audience.

When Jesus says "All who are in the graves" (not, like Daniel 12, "many of them that sleep in the dust") it sounds like He is speaking of a universal experience of all dead bodies.

The sense in which His statement applies in the present (the "and now is" reference) seems to be in the spiritual regeneration of the spiritually dead. Verse 28, however, speaks those who are in the graves, which would seem to mean dead bodies.
Hi Steve, I must revisit this post concerning your statement, "The sense in which His statement applies in the present (the "and now is" reference) seems to be in the spiritual regeneration of the spiritually dead. Verse 28, however, speaks those who are in the graves, which would seem to mean dead bodies."

I'm sorry, you cannot dichotomize "The Nature" of the resurrection taught by Yeshua here. Let's review this again, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."

1. Verily, verily, as you know, denotes a strong emphasis of a thing.
2. That "thing" is The Nature of the Resurrection.
3. That resurrection which is to come "is happening now".
4. Dead physical bodies WERE NOT coming out of the ground at PRESENT.
5. WHY? Because "The Dead" denotes a condition, therefore, those who were physically alive could experience this resurrection and if you were physically dead, during Yeshua's teaching, you were in sheol, and the hour was coming when those in sheol would be raised to everlasting life.
6. Vs. 28-29 IS NOT a witness to physical bodies coming out of the grave. How do I know this? Because "The Now Is" doesn't have bodies coming out of the grave and it's the same nature of the future resurrection.
7. When those souls were brought out of sheol, it was visible only in the spiritual realm. But Josephus has an awesome audio account during this time.
8. "The hour is coming and now is" stands as ONE in the SAME event and NATURE!

Additionally, "Grave" denotes dead, in a place known as "Sheol". ALL people, unfortunately, DO NOT have a physical grave site or tomb in which to, so-called, rise from. For example, we know of some christians who were eaten by lions! Physical bodies coming out of tombs IS NOT in view. Souls are being raised up to everlasting life NOT bodies. That is what was happening, currently, this side of sheol and to take place, later, for those in sheol.

God Bless!
Last edited by robbyyoung on Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Singalphile
Posts: 897
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by Singalphile » Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:51 pm

Steve wrote:Hi Douglas,

The debate videos between Don Preston and I belong to him. Last I checked, I think you can get them for about $30. If I were to post them, I would be stealing his property. Sorry!
It looks like one needs to "Call for price" (http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?op ... Itemid=310).

I might pay $5-10 for just the audio (no nice packaging necessary) depending on the length and some reviews, but $30 is a little steep for me. If anybody gets more info on that, let me/us know, please!

:)
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by dwilkins » Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:49 pm

The following would be another example of a time statement that implies a near fulfillment of the final judgement, in the first century (and, again, my count is so far 181 of similar statements; since no one I know of claims that there is a sing verse that proposes that the fulfillment is 2,000 years or more into the future, if a single one of them can be proven to be unambiguous then my point is made):

1 Peter 4:1-6 (ESV)
1 Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same way of thinking, for whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin,
2 so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God.
3 The time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry.
4 With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you;
5 but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.
6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does.

The key here would be the term "ready". The following is the definition of, and the other two uses of, the term hetoimos:

G2093
ἑτοίμως
hetoimōs
het-toy'-moce
Adverb from G2092; in readiness: - ready.


Act 21:13 Then Paul answered, "What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus."

2Co 12:14 Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you. For children are not obligated to save up for their parents, but parents for their children.

This term, in a sense, is even more powerful than mello. Though it only occurs three times in the New Testament, the two unambiguous uses seem to clearly refer to something that is ready to happen at that moment, or at least in that generation. I suppose that one might argue that the person is in a condition or readiness that might last indefinitely. But, I don't think anyone honestly looking at the non-disputed verses would honestly say that the point of the author was that he expected the readiness to last more than 2,000 years.

Doug

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Did Christ teach that we should watch for the end times?

Post by steve » Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:10 am

I don't think these verses make your point very well.
Act 21:13 Then Paul answered, "What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus."
This speaks of a willingness of mind. It is not a prediction of something about to happen. If Paul was indeed expressing a conviction that his dying in Jerusalem was about to happen, then he was wrong on two points: 1) he didn't die in Jerusalem, and 2) he didn't die, probably, for nearly another decade.

If Paul's language expressed a prediction or expectation of something that would soon happen—and he was mistaken—might he have been equally mistaken about how soon the final judgment might be? The verse you give actually damages your position. Either the Greek words do not carry the idea of proximity (either here or in passages about the final judgment) or else they do mean this and Paul (and Peter) were wrong in their expectations (as Paul certainly was in his expectation of passing quickly through Jerusalem and Rome en route to Spain in Romans 15).
2Co 12:14 Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you. For children are not obligated to save up for their parents, but parents for their children.
Did Paul make it to Corinth again shortly after writing 2 Corinthians from Ephesus? I don't think so, according to Acts. Same issues attach as those I described above.

Post Reply

Return to “Eschatology”