Biblically viable or false prophecy?

[TheDivineWatermark]

Mark 14:13
And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him.

Mark 14:17
And in the evening he cometh with the twelve.

In other words, they'll try to convince you that these two disciples were separate from the twelve, but the Bible actually identifies these two disciples as Peter and John.

Luke 22:8
And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

Nope, that's NOT the argument... sorry.

It is fully acknowledged that Peter and John were sent to prepare the passover... and that "in the evening HE COMETH WITH THE TWELVE" (including Peter and John), per the Scriptures saying so.

But that's not the argument (as you suggest it is, in the part of your post I enlarged, above).

At this point, we've narrowed down the possible author who leaned upon Jesus' breast at the last supper to 12 candidates,

I don't see at all as to where this has been done, convincingly.

All you've done (sorry to say) is to incorrectly presume that those arguing for a "non-John-written" gospel ( ) were ignorant of and thus incorrectly claiming that those He sent to prepare the passover were not 2 of the 12... but that is a completely wrong assumption (about what the argument actually is).

but we can narrow that list down even further.

Again, you've not convinced me, as you've already presented an incorrect notion above (about what the argument actually consists of)... so ditto here on this point. = )



Nice talking with you though... thank you very much for the interaction. Much appreciated!! = )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Paul warned the saints at Thessalonica to not be deceived into believing that the day of Christ was at hand, near, or imminent.

The word in question means that ^ (in the bold) only in the "INtransitive," but in this sentence it is a "transitive" verb -

-- https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm

-- https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm [G1764]


So, instead of meaning, "is AT HAND, NEAR, or IMMINENT," it actually means (in THIS sentence), "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT indicative]"




Additionally, it's in the "PERFECT indicative"... where the "PERFECT tense" means "ACTION COMPLETED at a SPECIFIC POINT of TIME in PAST (.) with results CONTINUING into the PRESENT (-->)."




So, the false claim was that it had ALREADY ARRIVED (at some point in the PAST)... thus that they were IN IT presently.



Also, in past posts I've listed out something like 27 versions that have it (v.2) as "[that] the DAY OF THE LORD..." (is what the false claim pertained to) which is an earthly-located time-period of lengthy duration (and consists in part also of JUDGMENTS unfolding over SOME TIME--which would be an EASILY "BELIEVEABLE" thing for them to have been persuaded was true, given the fact of the "tribulations and persecutions YE ENDURE" per 1:4), rather than "the day of Christ" (which is when WE will be UP THERE "WITH HIM"--the false claim did not pertain to that Subject). Not only do the majority of them state this ("DOTL" in v.2), it makes the best sense of the text, as well.
Paul's Subject (v.1) was vertical; whereas the false claim (v.2) was horizontal. lol... They are not identical items, see.

 

[notonmywatch]

Nope, that's NOT the argument... sorry.

It is fully acknowledged that Peter and John were sent to prepare the passover... and that "in the evening HE COMETH WITH THE TWELVE" (including Peter and John), per the Scriptures saying so.

But that's not the argument (as you suggest it is, in the part of your post I enlarged, above).


I don't see at all as to where this has been done, convincingly.

All you've done (sorry to say) is to incorrectly presume that those arguing for a "non-John-written" gospel ( ) were ignorant of and thus incorrectly claiming that those He sent to prepare the passover were not 2 of the 12... but that is a completely wrong assumption (about what the argument actually is).


Again, you've not convinced me, as you've already presented an incorrect notion above (about what the argument actually consists of)... so ditto here on this point. = )



Nice talking with you though... thank you very much for the interaction. Much appreciated!! = )

Merely as an FYI, this isn't my first rodeo, and I've been involved in a discussion on this topic many times over the years. It is the people, and the websites, that I've encountered which were the basis for my comments, and my comments were spot on. In other words, that has always been part of their argument.

 

[Runningman]

Sticking solely with the internal witness of the Bible, we can narrow down the author to 1 of only 5 possible candidates.

John 13:25
He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

John 21:20
Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

Whoever this disciple whom Jesus loved is, he was leaning on Jesus' breast at the last supper, and the Bible tells us that the only people present at the last supper were Jesus and his twelve disciples or apostles.

Matthew 26:20
Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.

Mark 14:17
And in the evening he cometh with the twelve.

Luke 22:14
And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.

There are those who insist that there were actually 15 people at the last supper, with the additional two attendees being those whom Jesus had sent to prepare for the meal. They'll go here in a failed attempt to prove their assertion:

Mark 14:13
And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him.

Mark 14:14
And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?

Mark 14:15
And he will shew you a large upper room furnished and prepared: there make ready for us.

Mark 14:16
And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.

Mark 14:17
And in the evening he cometh with the twelve.

In other words, they'll try to convince you that these two disciples were separate from the twelve, but the Bible actually identifies these two disciples as Peter and John.

Luke 22:7
Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed.

Luke 22:8
And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

At this point, we've narrowed down the possible author who leaned upon Jesus' breast at the last supper to 12 candidates, but we can narrow that list down even further.

John 21:20
Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

When Peter saw this disciple whom Jesus loved, there were only 8 people present at that time, and those eight people were Jesus and 7 of his disciples or apostles.

John 21:1
After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed he himself.

John 21:2
There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples.

John 21:3
Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately; and that night they caught nothing.

John 21:4
But when the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore: but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus.

John 21:5
Then Jesus saith unto them, Children, have ye any meat? They answered him, No.

John 21:6
And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes.

John 21:7
Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.

Out of these 7 possible candidates, which includes the sons of Zebedee or John and James, we can definitely discount Peter because the disciple whom Jesus loved is seen speaking to Peter. That brings our list of possible candidates for authorship down to 6. Depending upon when one believes the gospel in question was written, we can also rightly exclude James, John's brother, from the list of possible candidates because he was killed with the sword before the traditional timeframe of this gospel's writing.

Acts 12:1
Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.

Acts 12:2
And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.

That would leave only John, Thomas, Nathanael, and two other unnamed disciples as possible candidates for authorship.

There is external witness in the writings of the early church fathers which plainly identifies John as the author of the 4th gospel as well.

It's kind of interesting that this particular disciple is the "one who Jesus loved" and identifies himself as such, but never in name. In a sense Jesus loved all of them, true, but is this to say that Jesus had a favorite disciple?

I was looking around a little bit, and this Got Questions article claims it was certainly John. Perhaps you would like to read it.

https://www.gotquestions.org/disciple-whom-Jesus-loved.html

 

[Komentaja]

Again, this works both ways

Can you explain what you mean by goes both ways? I just wanna clarify, im not saying God cant talk to people! Hope you didnt understand me to mean thatt

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

That would leave only John, Thomas, Nathanael, and two other unnamed disciples as possible candidates for authorship.

Bingo.




It seems you assume these two "unnamed" disciples were numbered among "the 12" (whose names we are all familiar with);

but this is to disregard that there were MANY "disciples" beyond "the 12" who also believed and followed Jesus (aside from the ones who DID NOT believe, and thus ultimately went away from following Him), per John 6.

Obviously the writer of this gospel is not among those who went away, whom [Jesus was aware] did NOT believe (lol), but the "two unnamed disciples" could certainly be any of the disciples who were not among "the 12" in particular. (Later, in Acts 1, Matthias takes the place of Judas, FOR EXAMPLE... I'm not saying he was this person!! )


The text which says Jesus "came / arrived WITH THE TWELVE" is not limiting the amount of those present at the event itself. It is an assumption. Other "disciples" could have easily been present at the event, besides "the 12" whom He ARRIVED with.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

ETA:

Acts 1 -

21Therefore it behooves the men having accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, 22having begun from the baptism of John until the day in which He was taken up from us, one of these, to become a witness with us of His resurrection.”

23And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was called Justus, and Matthias. 24And having prayed, they said, “You Lord, knower of the hearts of all, show which one of these two You have chosen 25to take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas turned aside to go to the own place.” 26And they gave lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.




[Again... NOT saying Matthias was the writer... just pointing out that there were "disciples" beyond "the 12" (the 12 being named "apostles")]

 

[ZNP]

Can you explain what you mean by goes both ways? I just wanna clarify, im not saying God cant talk to people! Hope you didnt understand me to mean thatt

Sure, if you claim to be speaking for God falsely there will be a judgement on that. Now that could refer to someone claiming God told them He said something to them when He didn't and it can also refer to someone claiming God didn't speak to someone when He did. There are many examples in the Bible of both.

 

[notonmywatch]

Bingo.




It seems you assume these two "unnamed" disciples were numbered among "the 12" (whose names we are all familiar with);

but this is to disregard that there were MANY "disciples" beyond "the 12" who also believed and followed Jesus (aside from the ones who DID NOT believe, and thus ultimately went away from following Him), per John 6.

Obviously the writer of this gospel is not among those who went away, whom [Jesus was aware] did NOT believe (lol), but the "two unnamed disciples" could certainly be any of the disciples who were not among "the 12" in particular. (Later, in Acts 1, Matthias takes the place of Judas, FOR EXAMPLE... I'm not saying he was this person!! )


The text which says Jesus "came / arrived WITH THE TWELVE" is not limiting the amount of those present at the event itself. It is an assumption. Other "disciples" could have easily been present at the event, besides "the 12" whom He ARRIVED with.

It doesn't matter who the two unnamed disciples were because the disciple whom Jesus loved was at the last supper. If the two unnamed disciples were numbered among the original twelve apostles, then we're still only left with 9 possible candidates for authorship of the fourth gospel. In other words, Peter has already been ruled out because he was with the disciple whom Jesus loved. James, John's brother, has similarly been ruled out because he had already been martyred by the time that the fourth gospel was written. Judas is obviously ruled out because he hung himself. At best, then we only have 9 possible candidates, with John being one of them.

If the two unnamed disciples were not numbered among the original 12 disciples, then we only have 3 possible candidates because the disciple whom Jesus loved was leaning upon his breast at the last supper, and scripture only reveals that Jesus and the 12 apostles were present at that meal. That would mean that our 3 possible candidates for authorship are John, Thomas, and Nathanael.

If you want to believe that other disciples "could have easily been present at the event", without any scriptural support for the same, then that's your prerogative to do so. Me? I'll stick with what the scriptures actually teach and not insert or force something upon the text that isn't really there.

For those who might not be aware of this alleged controversy, there have been many who, for many years, have insisted that Lazarus is the disciple whom Jesus loved. Their problem, of course, is getting him seated at the table at the last supper, and they have no scriptural support to that end.

 

[notonmywatch]

It's kind of interesting that this particular disciple is the "one who Jesus loved" and identifies himself as such, but never in name. In a sense Jesus loved all of them, true, but is this to say that Jesus had a favorite disciple?

I was looking around a little bit, and this Got Questions article claims it was certainly John. Perhaps you would like to read it.

https://www.gotquestions.org/disciple-whom-Jesus-loved.html

I did read it. Thank you. Personally, I'm convinced, by both internal witnesses and external witnesses, that John was the author of the 4th gospel.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

and scripture only reveals that Jesus and the 12 apostles were present at that meal.

No, Scripture STATES that Jesus "ARRIVED WITH THE TWELVE"... which you are carrying forward to have it state (in effect) "ONLY the 12 apostles WERE PRESENT AT THE MEAL" which the text does NOT state.




Let the readers also consider, that if ONLY "the 12" were present, then why does Jesus feel the need to say, "And He said to them, "It is one of the Twelve, the one dipping in the bowl with Me." ...?

 

[notonmywatch]

No, Scripture STATES that Jesus "ARRIVED WITH THE TWELVE"... which you are carrying forward to have it state (in effect) "ONLY the 12 apostles WERE PRESENT AT THE MEAL" which the text does NOT state.

I've proven, from scripture, that Jesus and the twelve apostles were present at the last supper.

Now, it's your turn.

Prove, from scripture, that anybody else was present at the last supper.

If you cannot, and you cannot, then you're employing eisegesis or reading something into a text that simply isn't there.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ @notonmywatch , just as soon as you prove to me, via scripture alone, that the "two unnamed disciples" who went on that fishing trip with Peter were definitely part of "the 12" apostles.




____________

BTW, in all my years of examining and discussion (with tons of ppl) on this particular Subject, I've NEVER come across the "argument" that the TWO Jesus sent ahead to prepare the passover were separate from "the 12" (one would have to be ignorant of the other scripture naming these two... and I've not read any IGNORANT "argumenters" in my time / in all that time...).

No, instead... the "TWO unnamed disciples" on the FISHING trip... a completely distinct event... is part of the argument

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I've proven, from scripture, that Jesus and the twelve apostles were present at the last supper.

Everyone KNOWS they were... no one is or has ever argued against this ^ fact of Scripture [/in Scripture].

 

[notonmywatch]

^ @notonmywatch , just as soon as you prove to me, via scripture alone, that the "two unnamed disciples" who went on that fishing trip with Peter were definitely part of "the 12" apostles.

So, you admit that you have no answer. That wasn't too difficult, was it? This isn't a competition. I'm only interested in the truth, and the truth is that neither you nor anybody else on this planet can prove, from scripture, that anybody other than Jesus and the twelve apostles were present at the last supper.

Regarding the two unnamed disciples, that does nothing to help your case. Again, whoever the disciple was whom Jesus loved, he was present at the last supper. If these two unnamed disciples were part of the original twelve apostles, then this does nothing to help your case in relation to other disciples possibly being present at the last supper. If these two unnamed disciples were part of the original twelve apostles, then we're still only left with nine of the original apostles as candidates for authorship of the gospel in question. Sorry, but you simply cannot sneak Lazarus or anybody else under the table without employing eisegesis. At the same time, if these two unnamed disciples were not numbered among the original twelve apostles, then we're left with only three possible candidates for authorship of the fourth gospel.

In closing, I'm not into beating dead horses, strife, or rehashing the same things over and over again. If you or anybody else believes that they can show, from scripture, that anybody other than Jesus and the twelve apostles were present at the last supper, then simply post your scriptural proof. I won't be waiting for any because none exists.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It's kind of interesting that this particular disciple is the "one who Jesus loved" and identifies himself as such, but never in name.

... which would be consistent with the (2) "nameless disciples" present on the FISHING trip... (also written of in this book we call the gospel of John, which uses the "nameless" expressions of: "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and "that other disciple"... which NO other of the gospels accounts uses of this person, by the way.)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

... which would be consistent with the (2) "nameless disciples" present on the FISHING trip... (also written of in this book we call the gospel of John, which uses the "nameless" expressions of: "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and "that other disciple"... which NO other of the gospels accounts uses of this person, by the way.)

.... and which expressions only begin to be used from chpt 13 on...

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It doesn't matter who the two unnamed disciples were because the disciple whom Jesus loved was at the last supper.

... which could certainly have been one of the "two unnamed disciples" on the FISHING trip (which you seem to want to definitively declare were part of "the 12" despite Scripture never claiming such)

If these two unnamed disciples were part of the original twelve apostles

Which you cannot prove via scripture...

If these two unnamed disciples were part of the original twelve apostles

which you cannot prove via scripture...

At the same time, if these two unnamed disciples were not numbered among the original twelve apostles

which you cannot prove via scripture...


...though you seem to want to believe it to definitely be the case, by your insistence of saying (in effect) Jesus and "the 12" were the ONLY ONES present at the passover event (rather than what scripture itself states, that Jesus "ARRIVED WITH the twelve").




Let the readers consider WHY Jesus said (in answer to Peter's question to Him at the table), "It is ONE OF THE TWELVE...," if ONLY 12 were PRESENT in the room.




____________

Later, when it is stated that He "upbraided the eleven..." those words were necessary to include in order to have us understand that His words were zeroed in on those "eleven" in particular (and not everyone else also present at that time... and doesn't that only make sense?)

 

[Blade]

Where? Chapter and verse please. Also, how are you defining the word "imminent"? To my knowledge, it means something that is about to happen at any given moment in time. This is not what Paul taught.

2Thessalonians 2:1
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2Thessalonians 2:2
That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

2Thessalonians 2:3
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

2Thessalonians 2:5
Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

2Thessalonians 2:6
And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Paul warned the saints at Thessalonica to not be deceived into believing that the day of Christ was at hand, near, or imminent. He told them that two things much precede Christ's coming, and those two things are a falling away or apostasy and the revealing of the man of sin or the antichrist.

Hi I've read as I am sure all here have 2nd Thess countless times and you seem to have added something that is not there "near, or imminent.". He was as he said talking about the "day of the lord" not caught up. We do see today many believers talking exactly like the world "where is He? Hes not coming soon" on and on. Yeah believers saying " no He's not coming soon or any moment". Not what Christ aka God said. Now if we choose to quote Him we should as some have say "behold I am coming soon" and no man knows when. Christ said when they asked Him are you going to rule now He said "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. " So if what He said is true if we don't know the times or seasons.. maybe it would be wise to be ready for Him now.

See for me coming soon is "caught up". The day of the lord.. Christ coming sets foot on the earth.. I don't know when. Yes I can say I believe more has to happen yet He said I come quickly/soon. I toss out man the flesh and I just take Him at His word and I am watching ready now. We can't count how many have been saved only by hearing reading "JESUS IS COMING SOON". AMEN

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I've read as I am sure all here have 2nd Thess countless times and you seem to have added something that is not there "near, or imminent.".

Right.

The word in this text is not any of the following: "at hand, near, imminent," or "impend, threaten" (as those would ONLY be used in the INtransitive tenses, which in this sentence IT IS NOT. - Quoting from BibleHub: "only in the intrans tenses: I impend, am at hand, am present, threaten" - https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm )

Rather, the word is "is present [or, is already here; PERFECT indicative; TRANSITIVE verb... in this Grk sentence (v.2) - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]"