Do you believe in zombies?

[rogue06]

Yeah, we won't want to be deathophobes. Check your life privilege, bigots.

Next those Nazis will try to take away their right to vote

[Cow Poke]

Next those Nazis will try to take away their right to vote

Not in Chicago!

[JimL]

I see that Cow Poke has already exposed your inability to read in context. You aren't good at this, Jim.

No, CP, and apparently you, just don't get it. Jesus says here, "Elijah has already come." See if you can figure it out.

[Cow Poke]

No, CP, and apparently you, just don't get it. Jesus says here, "Elijah has already come." See if you can figure it out.

I have. So, apparently, has everybody but you.

Jim, if you didn't have such a big wooden head, you might could understand that Jesus often speaks in metaphors and hyperbole and parables. It's like when Jesus said to the disciples that Lazarus was sleeping (John 11:11). They thought, "oh, good, that means he's getting better". So Jesus had to be more clear (John 11:14 - Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.)

After reporting that Jesus said Elijah had come, Matthew clears it up by explaining that the disciples figured out that Jesus was talking about John the Baptist.

Here it is in the ESV:

It's right there as plain as the booger in your nose!

[Teallaura]

No, CP, and apparently you, just don't get it. Jesus says here, "Elijah has already come." See if you can figure it out.

Jim, OBP and CP are correct - the passage is very clear that Jesus is speaking about John the Baptist figuratively, not Elijah literally. (I answered this earlier but it's buried a few pages back). It's similar to when Jesus cautions the disciples to beware the yeast of the Sadduces and Pharisees - He wasn't literally warning them to avoid yeast from those political/religious groups.

In the passage we're debating, the important part is that Jesus is establishing why His listeners should listen to Him - His credentials. He's not engaged in a dissertation of life after death or how exactly Heaven is for those who have passed before. What matters is that He has come from Heaven with that knowledge - and that nuance is somewhat hard to see in the English translation. Taken as a whole, in context, there is no contradiction. I understand you see it differently, but you're now trying to assert an entirely different exegesis - without sufficient support.

Insisting it cannot mean anything but what is literally written - especially in translation - is hyper-literalism. It's an extremely poor way to understand any documentary evidence. It's also not accepted by most of orthodoxy so the accusation that people only believe it's literal when it suits them is unfounded. In the old Tweb we had hundreds of threads in Christianity refuting hyper-literalism and fundementalism based on literal only reading - it's nothing new that Christians reject hyper-literalism and it's not unique to debate with atheists.

[JimL]

I have. So, apparently, has everybody but you.

Jim, if you didn't have such a big wooden head, you might could understand that Jesus often speaks in metaphors and hyperbole and parables. It's like when Jesus said to the disciples that Lazarus was sleeping (John 11:11). They thought, "oh, good, that means he's getting better". So Jesus had to be more clear (John 11:14 - Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.)

After reporting that Jesus said Elijah had come, Matthew clears it up by explaining that the disciples figured out that Jesus was talking about John the Baptist.

Here it is in the ESV:

It's right there as plain as the booger in your nose!

Tell me CP, what do you think was meant by Jesus when he said, Elijah has already come?

[Cow Poke]

Tell me CP, what do you think was meant by Jesus when he said, Elijah has already come?

He was quite obviously referring to John the Baptist. Why is this so hard for you to understand? You're doing exactly what you do so much - you take a verse of scripture (for which you almost NEVER give a reference) then hyper-literalize it, completely ignoring the context.

I would like to believe you're smarter than that.

[JimL]

He was quite obviously referring to John the Baptist. Why is this so hard for you to understand? You're doing exactly what you do so much - you take a verse of scripture (for which you almost NEVER give a reference) then hyper-literalize it, completely ignoring the context.

I would like to believe you're smarter than that.

Yes, he was refering to John the Baptist, so why did he refer to him as Elijah?

[Cow Poke]

Yes, he was refering to John the Baptist

Wow, about time you admitted you were wrong!

[rogue06]

Yes, he was refering to John the Baptist, so why did he refer to him as Elijah?

Turn to the first chapter of Luke which provides the account of Gabriel talking to John's soon to be father, Zecharias (1:11-24), specifically where John is called "Elijah" on account that he came in the "spirit and power of Elijah" (1:17) -- not because John was literally Elijah.

[Cow Poke]

Turn to the first chapter of Luke which provides the account of Gabriel talking to John's soon to be father, Zecharias (1:11-24), specifically where John is called "Elijah" on account that he came in the "spirit and power of Elijah" (1:17) -- not because John was literally Elijah.

I bet it would really blow JimL's mind if he knew that Paul called Jesus the "second (or last) Adam".

[rogue06]

I bet it would really blow JimL's mind if he knew that Paul called Jesus the "second (or last) Adam".

Or the references to Jesus as being the Son of David

[JimL]

Wow, about time you admitted you were wrong!

Evading the question I see.

[One Bad Pig]

Jesus says "but I tell you that Elijah has already come". Past tense OBP. Dang, that was tough.

Sorry, missed this. I was referring to a different pericope in the gospels, where Elijah actually did come down (during the transfiguration on the mountain). This here passage is you deliberately ignoring context to make a point (deliberate because it has already been pointed out to you numerous times, so it's not like you haven't seen it).

[JimL]

Turn to the first chapter of Luke which provides the account of Gabriel talking to John's soon to be father, Zecharias (1:11-24), specifically where John is called "Elijah" on account that he came in the "spirit and power of Elijah" (1:17) -- not because John was literally Elijah.

Right, and according to christianity, whose spirit and power is in you. But it is clear through other passages that Elijah and John the Baptist are meant to be one and the same person. For one thing the author dresses him, and makes a point of it, that he's dressed in clothes exactly like that which Elijah wore, and his mission is exactly the same mission which was fortold by Malachi of Elijah. Not only that, but in Matthew 11:14, speaking of John the Baptist Jesus says; "and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah. Who ever has ears ought to hear it." Apparently, you have ears, but can't hear.