(Chris Morton is an Orthodox Christian, and his reflections here are not an endorsement of unorthodox beliefs.)
Do you ever just read the words of Jesus and think "seriously, what does that mean??? what am I supposed to do with that?"
Today I'm reading Mark 13, which I'm no stranger to. I get it-Jesus' condemnation of Jerusalem and his predictive prophecy of the fall of that same city that would come 40 years later. Now, I'm (more or less...) a literalist when it comes to the Bible, especially the synoptic gospels. I believe that they were written far before the fall of Jerusalem, and that they record Jesus' actual words.
I guess the struggle I felt tonight had to do with the question, "why are these words in the Bible?" Why include this prophecy at all? Sure, it may have had a powerful meaning to the original audience, but what about today?
Then there's the real rub: There's a way to read the text, that makes it sound like the second coming of Jesus was going to be literally and immediately after the fall of Jerusalem. The preterists say it was. The liberals say Jesus made a mistake.
The best explanation I've heard is that it all ties back to Daniel and the "son of man" reference in Mark 13, in a reference a prophetic day of judgment. Not to be confused with the final judgment, but more the very common OT prophet "God's comin' to getcha" judgment. And that's where I'm willing to land.
All I'm saying is, it's a hard text, I don't get it, and I can sympathize with the preterists.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment