The KJV is not a problem, rather the problem comes from those who read these passages with a particular doctrine to prove.
WAS JESUS WRONG?
- Thread starter Doug
- 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!
The KJV is not a problem, rather the problem comes from those who read these passages with a particular doctrine to prove.
Try focusing on the Greek word "see" and both those who are or those who shall be standing there makes no difference. Because the passage is NOT focused on the coming of the Kingdom of God in the distant future, it is focused on knowing that all who shall be saved will know/understand/perceive the Son of God has come with power with the Kingdom of God before they physically die.
You are right
I looked up there be in Strongs and it can be translated as are, however there may be a use of that word that can still in some verses speak of it as being descriptive
[Mat 22:30 KJV] 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are[G1526] as the angels of God in heaven.
The resurrection hasnt happened yet
[Luk 12:38 KJV] 38 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find [them] so, blessed are[G1526] those servants.
A future event but they are spoken of as being in the present tense
[Luk 13:30 KJV] 30 And, behold, there are[G1526] last which shall be first, and there are[G1526] first which shall be last.
Again are used as present but in context of a future event
Not being argumentative or dogmatic,, just something to consider
I think that the difference is in the context.
Saying "in the resurrection people are like angels" does not have the same tense meaning as "there are some standing here who will not taste death until etc".
One issue is the word itself, another issue is the whole sentence. I think there is no doubt that Jesus was talking directly to the people who were around Him while He was speaking.
So, we must find when Jesus came in his kingdom, while some of those people were still alive. And because other verses make it clear His coming was also related to judgement over Jerusalem and over the Jewish nation...:
when the owner of the vineyard comes, He will crush the wicked tenants and will give the kingom of God to another nation
Mt 21:23
"...When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near....when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
Lk 21:20, 31-32
Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world,
from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.
Lk 11:50-51
Behold, the Judge is standing right at the door."
Jm 5:9
...I think there is only one historical candidate - 70 AD.
Last edited:
It is the same Greek word and tense in Strong's 1526
Yes he was talking to those present, but possibly not about them
I can see why you would want those present to be those who would not see death. They would be alive in accord with the 70AD view
The context and the word "eisin" together do not make it possible... it would break all the logic of the language.
We must also take into consideration that this is not the only place saying it will happen in their life time. We would need to break the rules of the language in like 20 independent places.
The reverse. Because I do not want to twist the teachings of the New Testament, the 70 AD view is the only one I can think of.
I just want to comment on this part. The scripture of the Gospels uses two different words for "rise" when Jesus tells his disciples that he would "rise" from the dead. They are egeiro and anistemi. It is ONLY,ONLY, ONLY when the word anistemi is used [cf. Mark 9:9-10; Mark 9:31-32; and Luke 18:33-34] that the scriptures confer that the disciples did not understand this word anistemi. The scriptures use but words to say that Jesus would rise(egeiro) on the third day and that Jesus would [also] rise(anistemi) on the third day. When we look at the specific accounts of Jesus's resurrection day, we find that the two angels who met the women early that morning, that they (the 2 angels) said that Jesus was already risen (egeiro) from the dead. But this was before Mary Magdalene met and talked with Jesus a short time later. It was here that Jesus told her that he had not yet ascended to the Father. Now, in Mark 16:9ff we find this:
Mar 16:9-12 KJV 9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
He appears FIRST to Mary Magdalene and afterward he appears in another form to the two Emmaus disciples. This was after he had thus "ascended" to the Father. Luke gives completion to this idea of opening their understanding:
Luk 24:44-46 KJV 44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and TO RISE from the dead THE THIRD DAY:
Of course, this is when they understood the anistemi. Heb 5 (et al) confirms that Christ received the authority of being our high priest on the day of his ascension. Christ was both resurrected and ascended to the Father at different times on the third day. His ascension (the anistemi) occurred after daybreak, but still on the third day!
Luk 24:21 KJV But we [the 2 Emmaus disciples] trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the THIRD day since these things were done.
So your view is that Christ returned in 70AD
So all of this occurred............................[Mat 24:29-30 KJV] 29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
I just want to comment on this part. The scripture of the Gospels uses two different words for "rise" when Jesus tells his disciples that he would "rise" from the dead. They are egeiro and anistemi. It is when the word anistemi is used [cf. Mark 9:9-10; Mark 9:31-32; and Luke 18:33-34] that the scriptures confer that the disciples did not understand this word anistemi. The scriptures use but words to say that Jesus would rise(egeiro) on the third day and that Jesus would [also] rise(anistemi) on the third day. When we look at the specific accounts of Jesus's resurrection day, we find that the two angels who met the women early that morning, that they (the 2 angels) said that Jesus was already risen (egeiro) from the dead. But this was before Mary Magdalene met and talked with Jesus a short time later. It was here that Jesus told her that he had not yet ascended to the Father. Now, in Mark 16:9ff we find this:
Mar 16:9-12 KJV 9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
He appears FIRST to Mary Magdalene and afterward he appears in another form to the two Emmaus disciples. This was after he had thus "ascended" to the Father. Luke gives completion to this idea of opening their understanding:
Luk 24:44-46 KJV 44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and TO RISE from the dead THE THIRD DAY:
Of course, this is when they understood the anistemi. Heb 5 (et al) confirms that Christ received the authority of being our high priest on the day of his ascension. Christ was both resurrected and ascended to the Father at different times on the third day. His ascension (the anistemi) occurred after daybreak, but still on the third day!
Luk 24:21 KJV But we [the 2 Emmaus disciples] trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
What the disciples did not understand was the seemingly indiscreet use of the word anistemi, translated as the word rise(n). When the word egeiro is used (Jesus telling them that he would "rise" from the dead), there are no statements saying the disciples did not understand. The gospel writers thus qualified that two events were in view... the resurrection and the ascension, both taking place on the same day but at different times during that day.
The PuP
So are you saying when Christ said he would rise from the dead he meant his ascension
The problem I see is that when he ascended he was alive, when Christ rose again he was dead.
There seems to be a lot of scriptural criticism of the translators of the KJV
Well, that is what the New Testament says - His coming was related to the judgement over Jerusalem, over Pharisees and chief priests and it was supposed to happen in the time frame of "this generation will not pass away".
"Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. "
Lk 21:31
I was not there personally, so I can only speculate about details. The sign of the Son of man in heavens did appear and both Josephus and Eusebius wrote about it.
I do not know about the eclipse of the Sun and of the Moon or if it was meant literally or symbolically. It was a common biblical image of profound changes and of judgement, throughout the Old Testament, so maybe Jesus meant it in the same way, not as a literal astronomical event.
Last edited:
Is it possible to quote them about this.......it has to be about all the celestial events of Matthew 24:29-30 and the appearing of Christ
The sign of the Son of Man (the cross):
"There were also many prodigies seen in the heavens; among which were these - there was a very great light seen in the heavens, and as it were the figure of a sword; and there were the voices of men sounded in the air."
The Antiquities of the Jews, Book 17, Chapter 10
At one time a star, in form like a sword, stood over the city, and a comet, which lasted for a whole year.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 8, Section 2
---
Other signs:
"A most strange and prodigious thing appeared; for upon the first day of the siege, there appeared to many men in the city, as they were looking upwards, something like a light of a continuing flame, and of a great and bright blaze;
and this they say, continued for an entire day, and shone exceedingly; yet it was not near them, but distant; and it was in the air, and of a round compass: and some saw it to be of a small compass, and in manner of a round circle, but others that were at a distance, say it was of a long length; and some say it made a noise in the air, as of a trumpet; and some say it moved up and down, and some say they saw it to be in the southern quarter."
From The Jewish War, Book 6, Chapter 5, Section 3
"A certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I imagine some would have termed the account a fable, were it not related by eyewitnesses, and the events that followed so considerable as to deserve such a signal.
For before sunset there appeared in the air a great multitude of armed men, in proportion as they thought; and as they maintained, these were seen to fight one another; and the noise of them was as of trumpets, and there were also heard a great noise as of a multitude. And they were so plainly seen by many, that the report of it went abroad through the city."
Book 6, Chapter 5, section 4
There had been seen hosts joining battle in the skies, the fiery gleam of arms, the temple illuminated by a sudden radiance from the clouds.
The doors of the inner shrine were suddenly thrown open, and a voice of more than mortal tone was heard to cry that the Gods were departing. At the same instant there was a mighty stir as of departure.
Tacitus, The Histories, book 5
- so, we have historical account of the cross in the sky, of trumpets, of angelic armies (and/or resurrected saints?) in the skies and other extraordinary signs from independent sources
Last edited:
Look at Matthew 24 again please and look at the events...........................[Mat 24:29-30 KJV] 29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.........................the accounts you gave don't match the events in Matthew....................they dont record the coming of the Lord either
That is not how it works. These historians were not Christians (except of Eusebius) and their goal was not to map complete Mt 24 verse by verse to the events or to explain possible symbolism in the chapter. That is your work you need to do, if you wish.
For me, their accounts are a great support for the 70 AD view. No other view has a similar level of independent historical support.
Last edited:
Pup will have to answer for himself, but if I am rightly understanding he is saying the kingdom of God came with power when Christ resurrected from the grave. Certainly, the majority of those standing there would not have physically died before coming to see and understand this and to know it meant the Kingdom of God has come with power even over death.
Where's @Bible Highlighter when ya need him?!! Lol...good post and points!
Bible Highlighter
Well-Known Member
Thanks Nancy.
Very kind of you.
In my PDF write-up, my "Changed Doctrine #5,"
I reference how Modern Bibles make it appear as though Jesus sins in four different ways.
Here’s the breakdown:
Four Places Where Modern Bibles Make It Appear That Jesus Sins:
- Matthew 5:22 → Jesus Appears to be Angry Without A Cause (Thereby Violating God's Word)
→ Modern Versions remove “without a cause”, which makes any anger seem sinful.
→ But Jesus was righteously angry in Mark 3:5, meaning this change falsely implies that Jesus sinned by showing anger.
→ The KJV clarifies: anger without a cause is the sin. - Titus 3:10 → Jesus Appears Divisive (by Which the Modern Bible Says We are to Reject a Divisive Man)
→ Modern Bibles say “reject a divisive man” or “have nothing to do with such a person.”
→ Yet Jesus Himself said, “I came not to bring peace, but division” (Luke 12:51).
→ This creates the appearance that Jesus violated His own command, while the KJV’s “heretick” refers to a false teacher, not someone who causes division for truth’s sake. - John 7:8 → Jesus Appears to Lie
→ By removing “yet”, Modern Translations make it sound like Jesus said He wouldn’t go to the feast but then went anyway.
→ The KJV preserves “yet”, showing He meant He would go later — maintaining His honesty and divine integrity. - Zechariah 13:6 (Living Bible) → Jesus Appears to Brawl
→ The TLB says, “Oh, these I got when I was in a brawl at my friend’s house.”
→ This corrupt paraphrase portrays the prophecy of Christ’s wounds as the result of a fight, mocking the suffering He endured for humanity.
→ The KJV rightly shows these are the wounds received in the house of His friends — a prophecy fulfilled at Calvary.
I just released yesterday the update to bring the number of changed doctrines in Modern Bibles to 77.
If anyone is interested here, they can check out that free PDF at my new website, www.affectionsabove.com
Praise God for His perfect Word.
The Lord is so good to us.
....
