Patrick uses 100+ words trying to show that I didn’t answer his question; this demonstrates he doesn’t comprehend what he reads! I answered his question specifically just before the paragraph, “The biblical test of a prophet...”
Patrick uses 198 words building his Straw-Man “Error-is-not-truth” deflection of my question regarding Hymenaeus-Philetus (H&P) and the false apostles writing letters purporting that the day of the Lord had already arrived, completely skirting my point.
If the apostles were teaching Patrick-eschatology, i.e, biological reconstituted bodies emerging from graves synchronous with the Lord returning in a literal-physical-visible body on literal cumulus clouds when the literal-material kosmos being dissolved/consumed by fire when time ends:
IF this was Paul's eschatology, then how did they do it?
"Men who have deviated concerning the truth, →saying←..."
They were currently making this claim;
"...that the resurrection has happened →already←..."
Which would mean time had already ended (twinkling-of-an-eye);
"...and →are← perverting the faith of some."
Please explain how H&P were convincing Christians that the resurrection had already occurred with all graves occupied and the literal-material earth had already been consumed by fire, and time had ended?HOW did they do that?
Here's the point you’re avoiding: If Paul’s eschatology was Patrick-eschatology, then it would have been impossible for H&P to convince anyone that this event had already occurred, since all the graves were still occupied!
What does this tell us about Paul’s teaching regarding the nature-timing of the resurrection? The unavoidable conclusion via basic-deductive reasoning is, Paul was not teaching Patrick-eschatology! It is a gross insult to the least-intelligent among us to suggest H&P were convincing Christians that the space-time continuum had already ended!
“For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of the Father...” (Mat.16:27 KJ3);
“...THIS GENERATION shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled,” (Mat.24:34);
“...He did set a day in which He is about to judge the world in righteousness...” (Act.17:31);
“having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that there is about to be a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous,” (Act.24:15);
“...and he reasoning concerning righteousness, and temperance, and the judgment that is about to be...” (Acts 24:25);
“Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand,” (Phil.4:5);
“The night is far spent, the day is at hand,” (Rom.13:12);
“for the coming of the Lord is at hand...Behold, the Judge is standing at the door!” (Jas.5:8-9).
Why did God use all of this imminence-language Patrick? Remember from my previous Negative the example I showed you of Israel’s false prophets changing God’s statements of imminence? Jehovah said that they “devise mischief/give wicked counsel”? Isn’t this exactly what you are doing by changing these explicit time statements of 1st century imminence? Your dodge of my third question demonstrates your flat denial of the fact that Jesus identified both the CENTURY and the GENERATION which would see the Son of man coming in the clouds. Why do you deny the very words of Jesus?
Patrick still has not answered my first Affirmative’s third question!
He only made a Straw Man assertion that I said Peter wrote ONLY to Jews. Since Patrick has demonstrated for me that Peter runs to the OT, as did Patrick, and crowbars/sledgehammers OT context into his predictions of the dissolution of the heavens-&-earth, then show us where the OT predicted the end of time. Please don’t dodge this question again!
Patrick asserts “the children/sons of the kingdom” have not yet been cast out of the kingdom, which leaves me in absolute stunned disbelief!
Jesus said, “...That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But THE children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” (Mat.8:11f). Since the children of the kingdom must be IN the kingdom in order to be cast OUT, if this is yet in our future, then Patrick’s assertion means that Christians will be cast out of the kingdom; OR, that Old Covenant Israel (Judah) remains as God’s chosen people with His covenant (the law of Moses) with them still fully binding! Please do NOT avoid your serious dilemma here. (Perhaps you would just like a do-over on this question.)
Patrick admitted (correctly) that the first century baptized-believers (Christians) were called and considered “sons of God.”
(Text: Luke 20:27-38)
“Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him, Saying, Master, MOSES wrote unto US...” (vs.27f), to which Jesus responded, “The sons of THIS AGE marry and are given in marriage. But those who are counted worthy to attain THAT AGE, and THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and ARE sons of God, BEING sons of the resurrection,” (vs.34-36).
Brother, do you see the audience relevance (AR) of what this text says, untouched, unaltered, nor redefined? What “Moses WROTE” would be the LOM, right? The “WHO” of “Moses wrote unto →US←” contextually would be the Jewish Sadducees (Israel), right? Therefore, “The sons of THIS AGE” would be the Jewish Sadducees (Israel) during the Mosaic age, right?
Notice how Jesus contrasts the sons of the Mosaic age with those who are counted worthy to attain THAT AGE. Which age was to follow the Mosaic age? See that? Therefore, “those who...attain THAT AGE” would be Christians in the Christian age! But, here’s the literal contextual problem which impales your Futurist paradigm, based on your own admission:
Jesus marries “those who...attain that age” to “AND the resurrection from the dead,” AND, those who would attain that age and the resurrection from the dead is married to, “ ARE sons of God, BEING sons of the resurrection”; again, based on your own admission that Christians in the first century were called and considered to be sons of God, then they, as sons of God were also, “BEING sons of the resurrection,” and based on your own admission, I have proven my proposition because you can’t have the resurrection without the second coming of the Son of man; and likewise, you have defeated your proposition by the same admission.
Now, don’t expend your response on corny platitudes; dig into this and study what this text actually says, literally, in context, and respecting AR.
Patrick says, “I ask my worthy opponent how many hours, days, weeks or years is required to pass for an event to be imminent in the eyes of God? We want you to give us an answer.”
What I have already demonstrated in my previous Negative refutes your Straw Man, in that when Jehovah said the end IS come, the day is NEAR, and that He would pour out His fury SHORTLY, Jehovah’s response to the false prophets who changed His time statements of imminence was that it would occur “in your days” i.e., in the generation to which the prediction was given.
Patrick, show us one—JUST ONE—example of Jehovah predicting an event to be “far off” and “many days away” but the predicted event actually occurred SOON thereafter, and in reality, was actually “at hand” when God said it would not occur for many days.
1) What did John Baptist really literally mean when he predicted that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand”? (Mat.3:2)
2) What did James really literally mean when he said, “You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand”? (Jas.5:8)
3) What did apostle Peter really literally mean when he said, “But the end of all things is at hand”? (1Pet.4:7)
“is at hand” in these three examples is eggizō perfect-active-indicative, 3rd-person-singular.
What is your lexical/linguistic/contextual/exegetical/hermeneutical basis for not assigning the same meaning to the latter two examples as you do the first? I respectfully suggest that Patrick and his collaborators are twisting/redefining/reconstructing these passages to make them not mean what they clearly say.
(Please read Deuteronomy 28-32)
From the Song of Moses (SOM) in referring to the evil nature of Israel, Moses said, "Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps," (Deu.32:33).
When John-Baptist saw "the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his immersion, he said to them, O generation of vipers, who has indicated to you to flee from the wrath about to come," (Mat 3:7). Jesus also identified the obstinate scribes and Pharisees as the "generation of vipers" (Mat.12:34; 23:33), as did Paul when he said, "Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips," (Rom.3:13).
In the SOM, Jehovah said, "I will hide My face from them; I will see what their end will be; for they are a perverse generation, sons in whom is no faithfulness," (Deu.32:20). Peter preached the gospel on Pentecost day, and with many "words he earnestly testified and exhorted, saying, Be saved from this perverse generation" (Acts 2:40); Paul exhorted Christians to "be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation," (Php.2:15).
Jehovah said Israel had moved Him "to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation," (Deu 32:21); and, He reiterates His remorse, wishing that "they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end," (Deu 32:29).
Paul applies this context of the SOM to his kinsmen after the flesh (Rom.9:3-5) when he says, "Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you" (Rom.10:19). Since John Baptist, Jesus, and the apostles routinely quoted from, and applied the SOM to that first century generation, then there can be no debate against Holy Spirit's interpretation and application of this Song's predictions as applying to Old Covenant Israel (OCI), and coming to fruition in Israel's last days during the first century.
Consider the beginning of this Song of Moses, where it says of OCI, "They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation. Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?"
Just as Peter crowbars/sledgehammers the context of the SOM into his Pentecost sermon, likewise, he draws heavily upon its context in his epistles, particularly in the second-third chapters of his second epistle.
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction," (2Pet.2:1; cf. Deu.28:20).
Peter draws from the SOM (Deu 32:6) as he implicates the false teachers as the crooked-perverse generation of vipers, and says many would follow them in the destruction (2Pet.2:2), and for whom the judgment of old would no longer be delayed, nor would their destruction continue in slumber (2Pet.2:3). Glancing back to the context of the Song, we find that in Israel's last days, Jehovah says, "Vengeance is Mine, and recompense; Their foot shall slip in due time; For the day of their destruction [LXX] is at hand, And the things to come hasten upon them. For the LORD will judge His people And have compassion on His servants..." (Deu.32:35-36).
Peter again calls upon the SOM and says the false teachers, "shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you," (2Pet.2:12-13), which he draws from Deuteronomy 32:5. Peter's introduction of the SOM-context in verse one of this chapter, then again in verse 13 creates the common Hebraic literary device known as inclusio.
In biblical studies, inclusio is a literary device based on a concentric principle, also known as bracketing or an envelope structure, which consists of creating a frame by placing similar material at the beginning and end of a section. Having already stated that God was ready to judge the living and the dead, and, the end of all things has drawn near (1Pet.4:5,7), Peter, here, creates an envelope from verses 1—13, which indicates the damnation which no longer slumbers, and, his analogous judgments of the fallen angels/antediluvians/Sodomites depict the impending judgment on OCI posited in Israel's last days.
Peter is applying the SOM-context to those Jewish false teachers, i.e., OCI, the generation of vipers as identified by John and Jesus. Noting that he states in verse thirteen that they are spots and blemishes, he reiterates this same statement after predicting the dissolution of the then-present heavens and earth; in eager anticipation of the new heavens and earth, he admonishes his readers to "be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless," (2Pet.3:14), thus, we find Peter using another inclusio, encapsulating his reminder of what the holy prophets predicted (2Pet.3:1-2) regarding the parousia/day of the Lord, all within the contextual judgment against OCI in Israel's last days.
Since Peter prologues his predictions of the day of the Lord in chapter 3 with the analogy of Noah's kosmos being destroyed by water (which left the space/time-continuum intact); and, of Sodom and Gomorrah being destroyed by fire (which also left the literal-material universe unharmed), all in a bracketed paragraph based on the Song's contextual judgment of OCI in Israel's last days; then the conclusion is unavoidable, i.e., Peter posits not only his analogies of destruction-judgment by both water and fire in this first inclusio, but marries a second inclusio based on the identical contextual foundation of the SOM. This reinforces the inescapable fact that, contextually, there is not the slightest hint of a history-ending conflagration of the literal-material-creation thousands of years in Peter's future as we have been misled to believe; especially, when the Bible student will acknowledge that Peter reiterates the same pattern of destruction-judgment by both water and fire in both chapters; and, since his analogies in the first inclusio left the material universe intact, then the same analogies, based on the same context (from the SOM), must have the same application, i.e., the destruction-judgment predicted to come upon OCI, in Israel's last days.
As Peter says "the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up" (2Pet.3:10), looking back to the SOM we find Jehovah saying, "For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains," (Deu.32:22); we also recall that Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees, "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Mat.23:33).
Looking again at Peter's statement in his first inclusio referent to obstinate Israel whose judgment of old would no longer be delayed, nor would their destruction continue in slumber (2Pet.2:3), looking ahead to his reiterative inclusio we see him saying, "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men," (2Pet.3:5-7), unequivocally demonstrating that the content of 2 Peter 3 is a reiteration of the patternistic inclusio established in chapter two which is based on the SOM-context; and that context was a forecast of judgment-destruction to come against OCI in Israel's last days for violating Torah (cf. Deu.29:1; 31:16).
Again, we find Peter saying "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men," (2Pet.3:7). Now that we know that Peter is predicating his forecast upon the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, particularly in this inclusio, taken from the SOM where Jehovah said, "For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter: Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps. Is not this laid up in store with me, and sealed up among my treasures? To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste. For the LORD shall judge his people…" (Deu 32:32-36).
Considering what we have demonstrated from this exegesis, it makes perfect sense why Holy Spirit would state, in the present tense, "Now since all things are in the process of dissolution, what kind of men ought you to be, in all holy living and piety," (v.11 MNT; cf. YLT).
Jesus came to fulfill the law of Moses (Mat 5:17-18). I know of no one in the churches of Christ who denies that Jesus fulfilled the law of Moses; therefore, since the Song of Moses is part of Torah, then its predictions were fulfilled in the first century by Futurist's own admission. The exegesis presented above refutes beyond question two of the most coveted doctrines in Main-line Christendom: 1) that the law of Moses was fulfilled at the cross; and, 2) that 2 Peter 3 predicts the dissolution of the material universe in a history-ending cataclysm at the mythological end of time.