Second Coming

[_Jersey Girl]

Hello All,

I had an idea about something after reading a thread on MAD and I'm trying it out on a few different communities. It doesn't matter if you personally believe the Bible to answer this...but theologically speaking...


If we look at the Revelation as a "near" prophecy and only a near prophecy, not the "shadow" of some future event...

And if we look at the words of Christ about his return...let's say Matthew 24...

And place it all in the same time frame...

Can't we not rightly say that the Second Coming took place after Christ was resurrected?


Jersey Girl

[_Zoidberg]

Hello All,

I had an idea about something after reading a thread on MAD and I'm trying it out on a few different communities. It doesn't matter if you personally believe the Bible to answer this...but theologically speaking...


If we look at the Revelation as a "near" prophecy and only a near prophecy, not the "shadow" of some future event...

And if we look at the words of Christ about his return...let's say Matthew 24...

And place it all in the same time frame...

Can't we not rightly say that the Second Coming took place after Christ was resurrected?


Jersey Girl

The apostles didn't think so, did they?

[_Dr. Shades]

Very interesting prospect, Jersey Girl! That's one interpretation I'd never considered.

Of course, I'd have to see scriptural verification of what Zoidberg describes before I can draw a firm conclusion either way.

[_Inconceivable]

Hi, Jersey Girl.

The answer is, no.

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world
to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for
the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and
wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold,
he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall
also the coming of the Son of man be.

(New Testament | Matthew 24:21 - 27)

This could not have possibly occurred yet.

Although there are a few warnings I have witnessed:

24) False Christs and false prophets (Joseph Smith's Jesus, Joseph Smith and those that took his place) showing great signs and wonders (translating the book of Abraham, draining a swamp, healing etc.) deceiving the very elect (a handfull of Mormons).
26)
a) He is in the desert (Brigham Young in reference to the Utah viewed in the 1840's: "this is the place"), go not forth
b) He is in the secret chambers (the principles of poligamy and the conception of temple ordanances to hide them from the view of the public) believe it not

Does this help??

[_Jersey Girl]

Hello All,

I had an idea about something after reading a thread on MAD and I'm trying it out on a few different communities. It doesn't matter if you personally believe the Bible to answer this...but theologically speaking...


If we look at the Revelation as a "near" prophecy and only a near prophecy, not the "shadow" of some future event...

And if we look at the words of Christ about his return...let's say Matthew 24...

And place it all in the same time frame...

Can't we not rightly say that the Second Coming took place after Christ was resurrected?


Jersey Girl

The apostles didn't think so, did they?

I don't understand what you mean when you ask "the apostles didn't think so, did they?" Could you be a little more specific?

[_Jersey Girl]

Very interesting prospect, Jersey Girl! That's one interpretation I'd never considered.

Of course, I'd have to see scriptural verification of what Zoidberg describes before I can draw a firm conclusion either way.

The Revelation is very definitely a "near" prophecy that was written for the time period in which it was revealed. I say that without doubt or question. Matthew 24 contains a near prophecy of the Temple destruction.

[_Jersey Girl]

Hi, Jersey Girl.

The answer is, no.

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world
to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for
the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and
wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold,
he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall
also the coming of the Son of man be.

(New Testament | Matthew 24:21 - 27)

This could not have possibly occurred yet.

Although there are a few warnings I have witnessed:

24) False Christs and false prophets (Joseph Smith's Jesus, Joseph Smith and those that took his place) showing great signs and wonders (translating the book of Abraham, draining a swamp, healing etc.) deceiving the very elect (a handfull of Mormons).
26)
a) He is in the desert (Brigham Young in reference to the Utah viewed in the 1840's: "this is the place"), go not forth
b) He is in the secret chambers (the principles of poligamy and the conception of temple ordanances to hide them from the view of the public) believe it not

Does this help??

You are taking the excerpt of Matthew 24 out of context. You are ignoring the obvious prediction of the Temple destruction made by Christ himself in the beginning of the chapter. You are likewise ignoring the correlation to Revelation in which the author himself gives clear indications that the Revelation is a "near" prophecy and that the historical record shows that a great tribulation did occur.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hello All,

I had an idea about something after reading a thread on MAD and I'm trying it out on a few different communities. It doesn't matter if you personally believe the Bible to answer this...but theologically speaking...


If we look at the Revelation as a "near" prophecy and only a near prophecy, not the "shadow" of some future event...

And if we look at the words of Christ about his return...let's say Matthew 24...

And place it all in the same time frame...

Can't we not rightly say that the Second Coming took place after Christ was resurrected?


Jersey Girl

I am not sure why you would think this. It certainly does not fit with any interpretation of second coming scripture in Christianity that I am aware of. Plus Revelation was not written till at least 60 years after Jesus' death.

[_Jason Bourne]

Please clarify. It seems the Revelation you are referring to is Matthew 24 and not Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation.

[_Inconceivable]

You are taking the excerpt of Matthew 24 out of context. You are ignoring the obvious prediction of the Temple destruction made by Christ himself in the beginning of the chapter. You are likewise ignoring the correlation to Revelation in which the author himself gives clear indications that the Revelation is a "near" prophecy and that the historical record shows that a great tribulation did occur.

First of all Jersey, I don't think I believe this stuff anyway.

Regardless, the words "end of the world" mean just that. Taken literally, it just hasn't happened yet. Neither has the gospel been preached throughout the world. Not a big deal. When it happens, it happens. It will have nothing to do with me, and quite frankly, I hope I'm not around if/when it does happen.

Who wants to witness a kind and loving ("forgive them for they know not what they do..") savior drenched in the blood of His enemies? I just don't have that kind of heart or stomach to desire to see that fulfilled. He can have it.

Anyway, why wait? Why be so nuclear about the whole thing? Wouldn't it be nice if he showed up on a regular basis rather than come during the chaos and throw all the chess peices all over the floor?