| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Ananias917" |
| Date: |
05 Mar 2006 06:50:16 PM |
| Object: |
Can God Tell Time? |
Everyone admits there are numerous New Testament
passages that say "The coming of the Lord is at hand";
or in other ways indicate Christ's return was imminent.
And that was almost two thousand years ago! One of
the ways men have dealt with the problem is to say,
"Yes, the Bible said the coming of the Lord was
'at hand' in the first century, but time doesn't mean
anything to God therefore 'at hand' didn't really mean
it was imminent".
Do you see the problem? The problem is real and has
troubled honest Bible students for centuries. The
question is "Can God tell time?" As we have seen, when
God uses time words He does not have a special hidden
meaning unknowable to man! Prophetic time statements
are not so "elastic" that the words "near" and
"at hand" can encompass hundreds, or even thousands
of years! At hand means at hand whether it referred to
the coming of the kingdom or the coming of the Lord!
There is no question that "time" is nothing to God.
A thousand years are like yesterday to Him (Psa. 90:4).
In II Peter 3:8, we find the statement about "one day
being as a thousand years," etc. [By the way, please
note the verse does not say one day IS a thousand years
with the Lord]. In verse 9 we find a forgotten
statement: "The Lord is not slack concerning his
promise, as some men count slackness;" The word
"slack" means "slow" [Greek "braduno"]. Peter's point
is that if God sets a time for fulfillment, God
fulfills on time! He is not slow; God can tell time
and knows how to keep his promises on time! This verse
asserts in no uncertain terms that God is a God who
keeps his promises!
But time is nothing only to God. When God communicates
time to man, He reasons with His creation in a way that
man can understand Him. But in the scripture, God
spoke to MAN! The time statements about the kingdom's
establishment were made to MAN! The time statements
in the Bible were spoken to man to encourage or to warn
man. If God did not mean TIME when He used time words,
what did he mean? Since man thinks in time when
"a long time" or "at hand" is used, would it not have
been misleading on God's part to say something was
not going to happen for a long time when in fact it
was imminent? Conversely, would it not have been
misleading for God to say something was at hand when
it was really not to happen for centuries?
The question here is one of communication. Can God
communicate with his creation in an understandable way;
or does God speak in purposely ambiguous ways? Does
the Lord hold out a carrot stick of imminent blessings
to His hurting creation while knowing all the time He
is not really going to bring the promises soon? Did
God constantly threaten nations with imminent judgment
and not punish them for centuries? Where then is
the reality of the threat to the wicked? Does God's
transcendence over time prevent him from speaking
to man in words that convey genuine nearness?
Here is a question to consider: if God is in the
practice of saying something is imminent when in
reality it may not transpire for centuries, why is
there not one single Old Covenant prophecy of the
kingdom that said it was "at hand"? Daniel said the
kingdom would be established in the days of the Roman
empire; he called it "the last days" (Dan.2:28). From
Daniel's perspective, it was several hundred years
away. From God's perspective of course, it was only
a moment; but that is not the issue. God was speaking
to Daniel about things to happen in man's world--not in
timeless eternity. This is why God did not cause
Daniel to say the kingdom was "near," "at hand,"
"right at the door," or coming "very, very soon."
It was not until John the Baptist came that the message
"the kingdom of heaven is at hand" was preached; and
the kingdom was established in the very generation that
heard John say it was at hand! In other words, God did
not allow his prophets to say the kingdom was at hand
until it was REALLY AT HAND! It would have been
something less than honest if God had said the kingdom
was imminent when it was really hundreds of years away!
Why did Isaiah, who wrote over 600 years before the
birth of the Messiah, never say his coming was at hand?
Would it not have been terribly distressing for the
Jews to have heard a constant message of the imminence
of the kingdom and their savior yet hundreds of years
roll on and on without fulfillment? The writer of
Proverbs correctly noted mankind's attitude toward
waiting for fulfillment of promises "Hope that is
deferred makes the heart sick" (Prov.13:12).
It is one thing for God to promise something and not
give any indication as to when he would fulfill the
promise, for then man has no indication of when to
expect fulfillment. It is an entirely different thing
for God to indicate a time frame for fulfillment and
not bring the promise to fulfillment in that indicated
time frame! This involves a basic attribute of the
nature of God.
We are told that prophetic time may INDICATE imminence,
when in fact hundreds of years are involved. In order
to demonstrate the utter falsity of this concept let us
see how God has dealt with time statements in
scripture.
In Numbers 24:17-18, Balaam the prophet made a
prediction of Christ's coming: "I see him but not now,
I behold him but not near." Notice he said Christ's
coming was NOT NEAR; IT WAS NOT AT HAND.
Why did he say this? Because Christ's coming was over
1400 years away, and 1400 years really is a long time!
Here is a concrete example where God referred to a long
time as just that.
In Daniel 10-12 is a vision encompassing a period of
time from 536 BC to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD;
about 600 years. Two times in this text Daniel was
told "the appointed time is long" and "the vision
refers to many days to come" (Dan.10:1,14). Remember,
this vision was relayed to Daniel from God. While God
is not bound by time, he was communicating to man who
is bound to time. God called this 600 year period of
time "long;" he said it involved "many days." God can
most assuredly tell time and read a calendar!
Daniel contains another important example of how God
used time words. Chapter 8 contains a prophecy that
extends from 530 BC to about 165-164 BC and the death
of Antiochus Epiphanes. The time covered is about 365
years. How did God express the prophecy? Did he say it
was at hand? Did he say SOME of it was at hand while
some of it was for a long time off? No! God viewed the
prophecy as a whole. He said the vision "refers to many
days in the future" (Dan.8:26). Here is a prophecy that
covers 365 years and God called it "a long time."
Friends, if God called 365 years a long time, how can
man say that time, when God is speaking to man, means
nothing?
This is an important question in light of the
traditional interpretations of Revelation. Daniel was
told to seal up his vision because the time for its
fulfillment was a long time away--365 years. John was
specifically told not to seal up his vision because
what he saw was at hand (Revelation 22:10)! John is
told his vision, not part of his vision, was "at hand"
and "must shortly come to pass!" Reader, did God call
the 365 years for the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy
a "long time" and call the fulfillment of Revelation,
which most say has not been fulfilled after 2000 years
so far, "at hand?" To say the least, this would hardly
be consistent!
In Jeremiah 29:10, Jehovah told his prophet the
Babylonian captivity would last for seventy years. In
verse 28, the people complained that Jeremiah had told
them "The exile will be long...." Here is an example of
a prophet specifying a period of time, seventy years,
and the people said the prophet, and remember the
prophet was inspired of God, said the captivity would
be "long." Why was seventy years called a long time by
Jeremiah? Because to man seventy years IS A LONG TIME!
Thus, God used time words as man would normally
understand them. God can tell time when speaking to
man!
Many do not realize the Bible gives an example of man
attempting to change the meaning of time words used by
God; and God's response. In Ezekiel 7, God said the Day
of the Lord was at hand. The Day of the Lord in this
context was when God used Babylon to punish Israel for
her sin. This is the concept of the Day of the Lord; it
is not an "end of time" idea. It is when God used a
nation to punish another as it related to his chosen
people.
In chapter 11, Israel responded to the threat of coming
judgment. They insisted that although Ezekiel said it
was at hand it was really not. It was time to build
houses, not worry about judgment. One can almost hear
some of those people: "Well, yes, Ezekiel has said the
Day of the Lord is at hand, but after all, 'one day is
with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years
is as a day,' (Psalms 90:4)."
When Israel "elasticized" God's words of imminence into
relativity, ambiguity and meaning-less-ness, God
responded. In Ezekiel 12:21ff, [Please, take the time
to get your Bible and read it for yourself!] God told
Ezekiel to tell Israel that her days of changing the
time for his predictions were over. He had said
judgment was at hand; Israel said it was not at hand.
God would not tolerate it.
Ezekiel was instructed to tell Israel that in that
generation judgment would fall just as God had
indicated when he said it was at hand. [Have you read
those verses for yourself yet? If not, why not do it
right now and see for yourself that what we are saying
is true?] What we have, then, is an example of man
saying that while God had said something was imminent
it really was not; it was for a long time off. We have
God's response; when God said "at hand" he meant "at
hand!" He did not mean hundreds or thousands of years;
he meant "soon!"
Another example of man changing the meaning of God's
time words is in Amos 6:3. God warned Israel the time
had come for her to be judged (Amos 8:2). In spite of
the warnings, Israel "put far off the evil day." Isaiah
56:12 shows they were saying "tomorrow shall be as
today." In spite of God's warning that judgment was at
hand they insisted "All things continue as they were,"
II Peter 3:3-4! They refused to believe God meant
"near" when he said "at hand!" As a result God said
"Woe" to them!
Reader, what is the practical difference between Israel
of Old denying "at hand" meant "soon," and Bible
students today who read the New Testament time
statements and say they did not mean "soon?" What is
the difference between those in Isaiah's day who denied
the warnings of imminent judgment, saying life was
going to go on as usual, and those today who read the
time statements made in the first century and say the
predicted events were not truly imminent? Those who
deny the first century application of the at hand time
statements of the New Testament are doing the same
thing as the Israelites of Old--denying that "at hand"
meant "soon!"
Has God changed his vocabulary? Is it true that "at
hand" once DID mean "at hand" but now it can mean "a
long time?" If so, where is the evidence for the
change? Surely, the honest student can clearly see
there has been no such change in God's vocabulary. God
can tell time; God can read a calendar. When God says
something is at hand it is near. For man to argue
otherwise is to reject the inspiration of the
scriptures; it is to impugn the faithfulness of God; it
is to impugn the ability of God to communicate; it is
to do the very thing Israel of old did and for which
they were condemned!
Think about this: certain Christians say "Well, you
can't take "generation" and "at hand" literally because
God's time is not our time." Then what do they do? They
go and interpret the thousand years in Revelation as
literal! Do you see the problem here?
If, as the amillennialist insists, it is dangerous to
deny the time for the coming of the kingdom, why is it
not equally dangerous to deny the time-frame for the
coming of the Lord? It is clear to us that to deny
either the fact or the time for the coming of the Lord
is to deny the inspiration of the scriptures. This is a
serious matter indeed.
This one fact remains. Jesus promised to return in the
generation of his disciples. Language could not be
clearer. We have demonstrated above that when God used
time words he meant what the words suggest. "At hand"
means "at hand;" a "long time" means a "long time."
This being true one must acknowledge
1. Jesus lied
2. He failed
3. He was mistaken
4. or He came!
The scripture is either inspired or it is not--we
believe it is inspired. I believe Jesus also did not
lie, fail, or make a mistake. This is why we have
changed our mind about the nature of the coming of the
Lord. God truly can tell time; he can read a calendar.
In the clearest language possible he predicted the
time, not the day or hour, but the generation of
Christ's return. That was the first century generation.
The only way to maintain a belief in the inspiration of
the scriptures and Jesus is to be willing to believe he
kept his words; this means a change in your beliefs
about the nature of the coming. Are you willing to
change?
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/time.html
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
The Last Days were in the first century:
"For then must he often have suffered since
the foundation of the world: but NOW once
in THE END OF THE AGE hath He appeared
to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."
- Hebrews 9:26
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Can God Tell Time? |
06 Mar 2006 03:08:52 PM |
|
|
As one wit remarked
Here is my record card where I grade God. The beauty, power
and diversity manifested throughout creation prompts me to insert an
A++ for Creativity. For Communication I give him an F-, a failing
grade.
Sure, God has a clear grasp of time and all its ramifications.
But from the human perspective, he sadly lacking in communicating his
will and intentions to humans with any clarity or coherence. Just
consider for a moment the Jesus projected with the gospel of John with
that envisioned by Mark. Of course, part of this is God's very sorry
lack of updates on scripture. Yes, conserative Protestant clergy
vociferously assure us the age of revelation is over, kaput and
terminated. I wonder why? Such timely updates would have been handy
especially in modern times when poor believers have wasted much time
and mental strain in defending Gensis 1 creation ie. God as Magician
which is a throwback to primitive religion. And God being all powerful
is surely not lacking in the energy to get a email down here. And God
knows we are sorry in need of such guidance in modern times. Why then
and not now?
Re the church's perennial stock in trade teaching of "the second
coming", is it not time this escapist bit of ecclesiastical shell
gaming be consigned to file 13? In all truth, if Jesus should show in
glory that every eye on earth behold him tomorrow, why would we not say
"What took you so long?" ,or "Who cares,?" or "Is this the best the
author and upholder of the universe can manage?". Or, to the point of
the thread, "Doesn't time mean anything to you?" 1900 hundred years
later and counting.
Actually, the whole Second Coming thing is only a problem to those
for whom scripture is inerrant from beginning to end. Those informed
by the modern rational analysis of the gospels (and Church doctrine)
has no problem with any
particular anomaly of scripture such as instant creation, blood
atonement and Virgin Birth. Simply jettison each with a hearty
hallelujah and Praise the Lord.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Can God Tell Time? |
05 Mar 2006 09:50:58 PM |
|
|
Ananias917 wrote:
Everyone admits there are numerous New Testament
passages that say "The coming of the Lord is at hand";
or in other ways indicate Christ's return was imminent.
And that was almost two thousand years ago! One of
the ways men have dealt with the problem is to say,
"Yes, the Bible said the coming of the Lord was
'at hand' in the first century, but time doesn't mean
anything to God therefore 'at hand' didn't really mean
it was imminent".
===>Times and time-like references are simply words of MEN.
They fantasized that their dreams would come true in their lifetime, and
had sometimes even had the nerve to put words in the mouth of "God"
to confirm their expectations and false promises.
When in Revelation the writer has Jesus say "I COME QUICKLY", it
was to boost the morale of defeated Jews who expected their defeated
would-be "messiah" to come and destroy the Roman Empire.
When Saul/Paul wrote that "we who are alive" would be taken up
into the air, he was simply trying to encourage his followers to go out
and get more converts to his new-fangled mystery cult.
Do you see the problem? The problem is real and has
troubled honest Bible students for centuries. The
question is "Can God tell time?"
===>The answer is: no "God" was involved in that "time telling".
It was the authors of those passages who were both confused and confusing
their readers to this day. -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
