Why Caiaphas must have seen Christ's coming

[TheForgiven]

Some people just love to tap-dance. Why can't "at hand" simply be what it means? Jesus said,

Matthew 26:45
Then He came to His disciples and said to them, 'Are you still sleeping and resting? Behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners.

Futurists will acknowledge this as something that happens immediately. But in other passage, such as from Paul, James, John, or Peter, we're told by the Futurists that their statements were merely a "certainty of fulfillment", or by traditional Futurists, that at hand spans the entire Futurist definition of end-times; thus far, 2000+ years.

As I indicated, this kind of garbage deserves to be tossed right into the trash can. This interpretation is quite discussant amongst the Futurist dogma. Funny how no early church father ever came to their conclusions about "at hand".

Sometimes I think Protestants obtaining Bibles was not necessarily a good thing. Their liberal interpretations only add to the hundreds of confusion...huh, I mean Denominations within their circles.

Joe

[TheForgiven]

James joins the chorus of John, Paul, and Peter in his admonition that ‘you too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near’ (James 5:8). Were believers only supposed to be patient towards those who wronged them until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70? Of course not! This passage is speaking about a still-future return of our Lord. Therefore an ongoing patience is required by believers in our day as well.

Another example of externally based, and preconceived interpretations from a self-defined Futurists. Who was James writing to? Was he not condemning the rich Jews? And on the same hand, encouraging His flock; Jewish flock?

James wrote this prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. It was the false rich Jews He was condemning; Jews who had fattened themselves for the day of the slaughter; Jews who denied fair wages to those who did not fight against them; Jews who wore rich persons clothing and yet moth eaten. The Judge standing at the door was obviously Jesus judgment getting set to take place. And after James condemned them, what happened to him? Eventually, the false Jews threw him off the temple-top, resulting in the breaking of both legs. And when he failed to die, they clubbed him to death.

Has anyone ever taught you the who, what, where, when, why, and how understanding of interpretation? When you read the New Testament "letters", not books, you are reading answers or responses to a phone call, but not the questions or circumstances.

There is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing, that even accidentally give any indication of James simply saying that the coming of Jesus was off into the distant future. The language is very plain, for he says, "see the judge is at the door..." and again, "establish yourselves for the coming of the Lord is at hand..."

None of these sentences could offer you the opportunity to shrug these time-statements off into their distant future.

Honestly, I fail to see how some Futurists can call themselves a Christian with this kind of liberal interpretation of scripture. Everyone about Futurism requires oversight and personal interpretation. Based on your methods of understanding, nothing in the Bible can be self explanatory, even when logically demanded.

In the New Testament, at-hand simply means at hand, or near, etc, as those phrases were not spoken in Prophetic deliverance. When Jesus said that his betrayal was at hand, it was as He stated. When John the Baptist stated that the Kingdom of heaven/God was at hand, then it most certainly was. If John said that the events spoken of in Revelation were not be sealed BECAUSE the time was at hand, then why not let the words speak for itself. Why do we always need Henry, or some other Futurist, to go beyond what the text says, to explain it to us? The answer is simple. You have a heart of disbelief, and therefore must do what darkness always does; blind people from seeing the truth; ESPECIALLY where it is obvious.

Joe

[CWH]

[QUOTE]

Another example of externally based, and preconceived interpretations from a self-defined Futurists. Who was James writing to? Was he not condemning the rich Jews? And on the same hand, encouraging His flock; Jewish flock?

James died in AD 42, 30 years before AD70, what "at hand" was he talking about?

James wrote this prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. It was the false rich Jews He was condemning; Jews who had fattened themselves for the day of the slaughter; Jews who denied fair wages to those who did not fight against them; Jews who wore rich persons clothing and yet moth eaten. The Judge standing at the door was obviously Jesus judgment getting set to take place. And after James condemned them, what happened to him? Eventually, the false Jews threw him off the temple-top, resulting in the breaking of both legs. And when he failed to die, they clubbed him to death.

That was in AD 42 not prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The judge standing at the door does not mean the time is near. I can stand at the door for years and will not enter in.

Has anyone ever taught you the who, what, where, when, why, and how understanding of interpretation? When you read the New Testament "letters", not books, you are reading answers or responses to a phone call, but not the questions or circumstances.

I use who, what, where, when, why, and how understanding and come to a future conclusion that the end did not occurred in AD 70.

There is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing, that even accidentally give any indication of James simply saying that the coming of Jesus was off into the distant future. The language is very plain, for he says, "see the judge is at the door..." and again, "establish yourselves for the coming of the Lord is at hand..."

At hand does not necessary means near:

Joel 2:1
[ An Army of Locusts ] Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy hill. Let all who live in the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming. It is close at hand. That was at least 500 years away if the day of the Lord was AD70 from the time of Joel.

None of these sentences could offer you the opportunity to shrug these time-statements off into their distant future.

I also see none of these sentences could offer you the opportunity to shrug these time-statements off as happened in AD 70.

Honestly, I fail to see how some Futurists can call themselves a Christian with this kind of liberal interpretation of scripture. Everyone about Futurism requires oversight and personal interpretation. Based on your methods of understanding, nothing in the Bible can be self explanatory, even when logically demanded.

Preterists are no better with their different preterisms...covenent, fulfilled, partial, mild preterisms etc. The millennium can be interpreted in 10 different ways by preterists...40 years to AD 70, thousands and thousands of years, one thousand years after AD 70 etc.

Many Blessings.

[Twospirits]

TheForgiven wrote,

In the New Testament, at-hand simply means at hand, or near, etc, as those phrases were not spoken in Prophetic deliverance. When Jesus said that his betrayal was at hand, it was as He stated. When John the Baptist stated that the Kingdom of heaven/God was at hand, then it most certainly was. If John said that the events spoken of in Revelation were not be sealed BECAUSE the time was at hand, then why not let the words speak for itself.

Oh? So the words and meaning of 'at hand' differs from the Old Testament? How? Cheow posted some OT passages that show you are wrong, as well as the Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated those words and meanings. Also God himself said He doesn't change. Did he send the prophets a 'different' Holy Spirit who spoke a different language? Another thing, any utterance that is 'to come' is prophetic, such as 'at hand,' so you are wrong there also.

It would be foolish to deny that "mello" is used as a time indicator in many texts. But it is an exegetical fallacy to think that a word MUST mean the EXACT same thing in EVERY place it is found. Are there other options for "mello" besides an imminent ("on the point of") meaning? The vast consensus of lexical authorities show there are. To name just a few, Thayers, Perschbacher, Gingrich, etc.. The one thing they all have in common is that there is more than one option with regard to "mello".

Besides the passages Cheow posted here's a few more:

Jer. 36:10, uses "mello" to refer to something that would happen after 70 years (almost two generations).

Is. 47:13 uses "mello" to refer to an event more than 142 years. Isaiah lived until about 681 BC. Babylon was destroyed in 539 by the Assyrians. This text is predicting that event. So at LEAST 142 years stood between Isaiah's words and their fulfillment. (Almost 4 generations cannot be understood as imminent by full preterist standards. "Imminent" is understood by most to refer to something within a generation).

Job 19:25 "mello" refers to Job seeing his Redeemer "in the end". Even if this end is referring to AD 70 then this obviously is not referring to something immediate from Job's perspective. Nearly a thousands years stood between Job and Jesus.

Why do we always need Henry, or some other Futurist, to go beyond what the text says, to explain it to us? The answer is simple. You have a heart of disbelief, and therefore must do what darkness always does; blind people from seeing the truth; ESPECIALLY where it is obvious.

I'll answer that for you. You need me to correct your bad exegesis of word meanings and prophetic scripture given by the Holy Spirit, in order that you may see the truth of what the prophetic words actually mean.

God bless---Twospirits

[TheForgiven]

James died in AD 42, 30 years before AD70, what "at hand" was he talking about?

You may want to recheck your data on this. According to most sources, St. James died approximately 62 AD, during the time frame of procurator Porcius Festus, yet before Lucceius Albinus; this from Josephus.

That was in AD 42 not prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The judge standing at the door does not mean the time is near. I can stand at the door for years and will not enter in.

This is coming from someone who got the death of James wrong by almost 20 years. Great information there Cheow.

I use who, what, where, when, why, and how understanding and come to a future conclusion that the end did not occurred in AD 70.

Then that's your problem. You automatically assume that "the end" did not come in 70AD, and thus explains your continued error in Biblical interpretation.

At hand does not necessary means near:

Joel 2:1
[ An Army of Locusts ] Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy hill. Let all who live in the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming. It is close at hand. That was at least 500 years away if the day of the Lord was AD70 from the time of Joel.

Once again, I have to remind you that Prophesy and personal statements written on a letter is not the same thing. You cannot interpret the New Testament writings as Prophetic, EXCEPT the Revelation of Jesus Christ. But James, Paul, and Peter were not wrting Prophetically.

I also see none of these sentences could offer you the opportunity to shrug these time-statements off as happened in AD 70.

To you, and since it's already established that you don't know what you're talking about, none of your statements make any sense at all Cheow. You continue to ignore the obvious plain statements of text identified in the New Testament "LETTERS", and then quote scripture out of its intended context.

Preterists are no better with their different preterisms...covenent, fulfilled, partial, mild preterisms etc. The millennium can be interpreted in 10 different ways by preterists...40 years to AD 70, thousands and thousands of years, one thousand years after AD 70 etc.

Many Blessings.

Your statement applies to the Full Preterist position, and is at least considered. However, it does not impact the Partial Preterist position. Besides, sooner or later you've got to come up with more than one ideal opposition against Preterism besides the 1000 years teaching. Remember, a 1000 years could also be a day; that's something you Futurists never consider. To you, the only factor of a equating to a 1000 years must always be a literal 1000 years. You guys never consider the opposite; 1000 years equating to a single day. Now why is that? Why do you Futurists always look at one side of the Millinnial theory, but never the other side? I know, it's because you're stuck on the Left Behin novels, and are constantly dreaming for a fantasy and a miracle.

Now, seeing that you were wrong about when James died, how much validity to you even have left? I'd say your pockets are getting empty Cheow, and your ideas are running on fumes.

Keep trying.

Joe

[CWH]

You may want to recheck your data on this. According to most sources, St. James died approximately 62 AD, during the time frame of procurator Porcius Festus, yet before Lucceius Albinus; this from Josephus.

This is coming from someone who got the death of James wrong by almost 20 years. Great information there Cheow.

Joe

I knew you will say that and my answer is at hand. There were 2 apostles of Jesus with the name of James...James the son of Alphaeus who died in AD 62 or James the son of Zebedee who died AD 42 or AD 44. Most commentaries point to neither James the son of Alphaeus or James the son of Zebedee who wrote the epistle of James but James the brother of Jesus. Even if James the son of Alphaeus wrote the epistle of James and he died in Ad 62 and the end came in AD 70, then "at hand" was 8 years away. 8 years is too long to be termed as at hand. If I said my answer is at hand, you don't need to wait 8 years for the answer..... do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_James

Many Blessings.

[TheForgiven]

I knew you will say that and my answer is at hand. There were 2 apostles of Jesus with the name of James...James the son of Alphaeus who died in AD 62 or James the son of Zebedee who died AD 42 or AD 44. Most commentaries point to neither James the son of Alphaeus or James the son of Zebedee who wrote the epistle of James but James the brother of Jesus. Even if James the son of Alphaeus wrote the epistle of James and he died in Ad 62 and the end came in AD 70, then "at hand" was 8 years away. 8 years is too long to be termed as at hand. If I said my answer is at hand, you don't need to wait 8 years for the answer..... do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_James

Many Blessings.

It doesn't matter Cheow. Most believe that the James who wrote His epistile died in 62AD; that's even in the Greek Orthodox Study Bible, and other commentaries.

This argument is absurd because now you're expecting us to define exactly what "near" or "at hand" means. Jesus used this expression as something that happened almost immediately. In other places, it's used as a warning to get ready because the crap was about to hit the fan; that's how James used it, as well as John.

Honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of having to explain simple statements such as "at hand" or "near". You guys needs to stop trying to twist the Bible into something that cannot be understand unless a Futurist explains it to them.

Joe

[Kangaroo Jack]

It doesn't matter Cheow. Most believe that the James who wrote His epistile died in 62AD; that's even in the Greek Orthodox Study Bible, and other commentaries.

This argument is absurd because now you're expecting us to define exactly what "near" or "at hand" means. Jesus used this expression as something that happened almost immediately. In other places, it's used as a warning to get ready because the crap was about to hit the fan; that's how James used it, as well as John.

Honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of having to explain simple statements such as "at hand" or "near". You guys needs to stop trying to twist the Bible into something that cannot be understand unless a Futurist explains it to them.

Joe

Hi Joe,

Cheow is indeed being absurd. Jesus said, "He who betrays me is at hand." The meaning is CLEAR!

James also said that the judge is "AT THE DOOR." The Futurists have created a very looooong hallway.

KJ

[TheForgiven]

Hi Joe,

Cheow is indeed being absurd. Jesus said, "He who betrays me is at hand." The meaning is CLEAR!

James also said that the judge is "AT THE DOOR." The Futurists have created a very looooong hallway.

KJ

I know what you mean. It's like every single Prophetic utterance has to be given an undefined determination of fulfillment; it can be instant, or it can be a very very very very very very long time.

Joe

[CWH]

Hi Joe,

Cheow is indeed being absurd. Jesus said, "He who betrays me is at hand." The meaning is CLEAR!

James also said that the judge is "AT THE DOOR." The Futurists have created a very looooong hallway.

KJ

Neither can you sweep all these passages of "at hand" to mean several hundred years under the carpet assuming it was never written:

Isaiah 56:1
[/U][ Salvation for Others ] This is what the LORD says: "Maintain justice and do what is right, for my salvation is close at hand and my righteousness will soon be revealed. The coming of the salvation of the Lord in AD 70 was at least 600 years away fri=om the time of Isaiah.

Jeremiah 48:16
"The fall of Moab is at hand; her calamity will come quickly.
At least a few hundred years away before Moab was destroyed after Jeremiah's time

Hosea 9:7
The days of punishment are coming, the days of reckoning are at hand. Let Israel know this. Because your sins are so many and your hostility so great, the prophet is considered a fool, the inspired man a maniac.The day of reckoning was at least 500 years away from AD 70

Joel 2:1
[ An Army of Locusts ] Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy hill. Let all who live in the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming. It is close at hand. That was at least 500 years away if the day of the Lord was AD70 from the time of Joel.

Many Blessings.