When Doctrine Corrects Christ
- Thread starter The Gospel of Christ
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
For what? Trying to save people's eternal souls?
Still waiting btw...
Where did Jesus identify another generation as “this generation”?
Book. Chapter. Verse. >
^ I hope you can produce it soon, otherwise Christ is a fallible teacher and not the Son of God.
And that is a very serious charge for your theology to be making.
Last edited:
Well?
So should we go with:
Christ did not mislead His followers as they saw the prophecy fulfilled in AD 70 within "THIS GENERATION".
Christ was not mistaken about the timing of His own prophecy.
Christ's prophetic authority remains intact.
Christ is the Son of God, infallible.
Or
B:
Christ was really talking about people 1900 years later on the other side of the planet.
Christ must have misled His own followers and/or been mistaken about the timing of His own prophecy.
Being mistaken, Christ is therefore fallible, so arguably not the Son of God.
Christ's prophetic authority is destroyed, and His word becomes untrustworthy.
Christ gave you special permission (found nowhere in the text) to take a prophetic system popularized in the early twentieth century and dangerously transfer His prophecy to every generation forever and ever and ever and ever thereafter, until somebody finally writes enough crazy prophecy charts to end the earth in a thermonuclear hellfire while NOT FOLLOWING GOD'S WORD. (As inarguably demonstrated in post #90 of this thread.)
I've thought about it and I've got to tell ya… I'm leaning towards A.
I think A makes more sense.
I know you think B is better, naturally, but I really think you should reconsider.
So should we go with:
A:
Christ was really talking to His own disciples and meant what He said read plainly.Christ did not mislead His followers as they saw the prophecy fulfilled in AD 70 within "THIS GENERATION".
Christ was not mistaken about the timing of His own prophecy.
Christ's prophetic authority remains intact.
Christ is the Son of God, infallible.
Or
B:
Christ was really talking about people 1900 years later on the other side of the planet.
Christ must have misled His own followers and/or been mistaken about the timing of His own prophecy.
Being mistaken, Christ is therefore fallible, so arguably not the Son of God.
Christ's prophetic authority is destroyed, and His word becomes untrustworthy.
Christ gave you special permission (found nowhere in the text) to take a prophetic system popularized in the early twentieth century and dangerously transfer His prophecy to every generation forever and ever and ever and ever thereafter, until somebody finally writes enough crazy prophecy charts to end the earth in a thermonuclear hellfire while NOT FOLLOWING GOD'S WORD. (As inarguably demonstrated in post #90 of this thread.)
I've thought about it and I've got to tell ya… I'm leaning towards A.
I think A makes more sense.
I know you think B is better, naturally, but I really think you should reconsider.
Last edited:
Your question has been answered numerous times. How many times will you ignore it? Jesus said he will return on the clouds with glory and great power in the generation that see the signs of the Son of Man. He has not yet returned on the clouds in glory and great power, therefor, "this generation" cannot refer to the one of 70ad. It's simple logic.
You were already completely turned-out in post #176 in this thread absolutely unrecoverable..
Anyone with a molecule of critical thinking reading that post and then reading your comments won't even be able to sleep tonight because the Christological 5 alarm fire should be obvious to anyone.
You hurl insults and duck the real issue. Jesus said he would return in the clouds with power and great glory in this generation. When did he do that? He wasn't referring to some metaphorical return of judgement but the actual second coming. That has not yet happened.
Can't answer a question then the ego/pride resorts to insults, attacks etc instead of calm discussion/questioning.
When repeated attempts at keeping a discussion civil fail I too am often guilty of firing back.
..
""" Jesus said he would return in the clouds with power and great glory in this generation"""
second coming << Agreed, hasn't happened yet
You're denying that Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecy He gave His own disciples, even if you don't realize that's what your theology is doing.
This alone is absolutely staggering.
The early Church recognized the destruction of Jerusalem as a fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy while continuing to affirm His future return.
They did not need to deny His first-century fulfillment in order to believe He would come again.
Jesus warned His disciples.
He identified their generation.
Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70, just as He foretold.
And yet, nearly two thousand years later, your modern system insists that the decisive fulfillment must still be waiting for another generation now in an ocean of endless generations.
Affirming Christ’s future return does not require denying His first-century fulfillment.
Christ can fulfill the prophecy He gave His disciples and still return in the future.
There's no contradiction there.
There's no Christological crisis there.
There's no need to make His words mean something other than what He said plainly.
Your system creates that problem. Not God’s Word.
Why are you making Christ’s future return cancel the fulfillment of His own words?
We know why; to preserve a particular modern, man-made end-times framework by relocating His prophecy to another generation -
a transfer you have yet to demonstrate from the text itself.
And worse, your interpretation dangerously leaves the prophecy open to being transferred from generation to generation indefinitely. Every generation can become the one Jesus supposedly meant. Every failed expectation can be handed to the next. The time marker becomes perpetually movable, while the system remains self-sealing and untouchable. This is maximally reckless & dangerous on its face.
Where did Jesus authorize that dangerous transfer? Where did He say “this generation” could be reassigned to another generation, and then another, until the prophecy is finally fulfilled?
NOWHERE is that found in God's Word.
And the danger is no longer merely theological. When people are taught that a particular war, catastrophe, or global conflict must happen because their prophetic system says so, that belief can influence real-world decisions with consequences far beyond the Church.
A prophecy that Christ gave to His own disciples should not be turned into a dangerous, endlessly transferable countdown for the destruction of the world. As if you can control God Almighty's return!
Where did Jesus authorize that?!?
Nowhere in the text have you demonstrated that Jesus authorized such a dangerous transfer.
You're asking Christians to accept a prophetic framework that makes Christ’s own stated timing subordinate to a system developed long after the apostles.
That's not a minor interpretive disagreement. That's a question of Christ’s prophetic authority.
Jesus warned them.
Jesus identified their generation.
Jerusalem fell.
The Temple came down.
And Christ is still coming again.
Those truths do not need to compete.
Your theology makes them compete in order for your system to work.
So before you tell another Christian that Christ’s prophecy remains unfulfilled, show us where Christ Himself authorized you to move His words away from the people He was addressing.
Where did Jesus identify another generation as “this generation”?
Book. Chapter. Verse. Please. >
This alone is absolutely staggering.
The early Church recognized the destruction of Jerusalem as a fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy while continuing to affirm His future return.
They did not need to deny His first-century fulfillment in order to believe He would come again.
Jesus warned His disciples.
He identified their generation.
Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70, just as He foretold.
And yet, nearly two thousand years later, your modern system insists that the decisive fulfillment must still be waiting for another generation now in an ocean of endless generations.
Affirming Christ’s future return does not require denying His first-century fulfillment.
Christ can fulfill the prophecy He gave His disciples and still return in the future.
There's no contradiction there.
There's no Christological crisis there.
There's no need to make His words mean something other than what He said plainly.
Your system creates that problem. Not God’s Word.
Why are you making Christ’s future return cancel the fulfillment of His own words?
We know why; to preserve a particular modern, man-made end-times framework by relocating His prophecy to another generation -
a transfer you have yet to demonstrate from the text itself.
And worse, your interpretation dangerously leaves the prophecy open to being transferred from generation to generation indefinitely. Every generation can become the one Jesus supposedly meant. Every failed expectation can be handed to the next. The time marker becomes perpetually movable, while the system remains self-sealing and untouchable. This is maximally reckless & dangerous on its face.
Where did Jesus authorize that dangerous transfer? Where did He say “this generation” could be reassigned to another generation, and then another, until the prophecy is finally fulfilled?
NOWHERE is that found in God's Word.
And the danger is no longer merely theological. When people are taught that a particular war, catastrophe, or global conflict must happen because their prophetic system says so, that belief can influence real-world decisions with consequences far beyond the Church.
A prophecy that Christ gave to His own disciples should not be turned into a dangerous, endlessly transferable countdown for the destruction of the world. As if you can control God Almighty's return!
Where did Jesus authorize that?!?
Nowhere in the text have you demonstrated that Jesus authorized such a dangerous transfer.
You're asking Christians to accept a prophetic framework that makes Christ’s own stated timing subordinate to a system developed long after the apostles.
That's not a minor interpretive disagreement. That's a question of Christ’s prophetic authority.
Jesus warned them.
Jesus identified their generation.
Jerusalem fell.
The Temple came down.
And Christ is still coming again.
Those truths do not need to compete.
Your theology makes them compete in order for your system to work.
So before you tell another Christian that Christ’s prophecy remains unfulfilled, show us where Christ Himself authorized you to move His words away from the people He was addressing.
Where did Jesus identify another generation as “this generation”?
Book. Chapter. Verse. Please. >
Last edited:
Similar threads
