Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
readyforchange
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:06 pm

Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by readyforchange »

Hi. This is my first post on this forum, and if there is a previous discussion similar to this topic, please let me know. I am wondering what the interpretation is for Romans 13:11, in particular the second part of the verse: Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers (NRSV).

This verse is interesting in that it appears that Paul may have given a specific timeframe for the return of Jesus. Strong’s Concordance provides the Greek word for salvation as soteria (G4991). One of the definitions for soteria in Strong’s is “future salvation, the sum of benefits and blessings which the Christians, redeemed from all earthly ills, will enjoy after the visible return of Christ from heaven in the consummated and eternal kingdom of God”. There are other places in the New Testament that refer to salvation as a present state, such as in Luke 19:9 in the story of Jesus and Zacchaeus. But Romans 13:11 refers to a future salvation. When Paul says "salvation is nearer...", that suggests to me that whatever Paul meant by salvation had not occurred yet. Paul's command to the reader to clothe or put on the Lord Jesus in Romans 13:14 seems to be a command made as to what the reader needed to do in order to be properly prepared for the soteria/salvation event - as in what the reader needs to do in the meantime, before the soteria/salvation occurs. Paul also includes himself as one whose salvation is near (...For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers...). If Paul was describing a present salvation here, then this would be a salvation that he already had at the time he composed the letter. If Paul was describing a salvation that he already had, then he would have written to the reader, "...For salvation is nearer to you now than when you became believers...".

If Paul is describing a future salvation with the return of Jesus, then Romans 13:11 seems problematic. Paul sets a time for this future salvation as being nearer to now (the time that he composes this letter to Romans) than to the time “when we became believers”. If “when we became believers” refers to the post-resurrection appearances by Jesus after he was crucified, then this would be somewhere around 30 CE. The dating I usually see for when Paul would have composed Romans is somewhere around 60 CE. If using these dates, Paul seems to imply that Jesus would return in less than 30 years, or before 90 CE. Or is there something I am missing in what Paul means by “salvation” here? Thanks.
Garon
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:33 am

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by Garon »

Hi, the return is about Christ, Christ means anointed. So are we all anointed, only preachers, bishops, popes or one man Jesus of Nazareth? The Bible reports a man named Jesus said The Kingdom of God was near. How near? In the midst of the people (the Bible writer uses "at hand.") The man Jesus really didn't talk about any future salvation. To him it, the kingdom or council of God was with, among and for the people to Demonstrate. Demonstrate, Love, Healing, Forgiveness, Truth.

Paul and todays teachers and preachers miss, but really deny the words of Jesus for the Future words of Paul. I have heard it said that Paul's teachings were written before the gospels and the gospels are made up from Paul to make a human fulfill his letters.

Jesus taught about a world wide Monarchy with his understanding of God as a Near Eastern Potentate sitting on a throne. Paul's teachings are about him being that Potentate and that is what the Christian Church sees itself as. Ruling over the people until some future return of something that is already here to help Humankind.

Salvation is to not stand on a busy freeway. BTW if the Monarchy of God is the Universal Government, why are the So-Called Christian Nations Democracies?
readyforchange
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by readyforchange »

Thanks. I also see Paul's statement as referring to the return of Jesus. Right, Christ in Greek means anointed and the term messiah in Hebrew also means the annointed, or anointed one. The term messiah was given to the high priests and the kings of Israel, who would be anointed with oil. Cyrus of Persia is identified as Yahweh's annointed in Isaiah 45:1. So I believe Jesus was probably the last man to be identified as annointed from a Christian perspective. Paul's letters are generally considered to have been written before the all the gospels, although conservative Christians date at least Mark to the mid-50s CE, while Paul was still alive. Yes, there are times when the teachings attributed to Jesus in the gospels are seemingly at odds with Paul's teachings or with the other epistles of the New Testament. If you are referring to countries typically identified as Christian nations as inclusive of the U.S. and other western countries, I think the democratic form of government has its origins and influence from ancient Greek and Roman governing practices.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by Bernard Muller »

Romans 13:11: Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers. (NRSV).
It looks Paul did not take in account the massacre of the Christians of Rome in 64 CE, as described in Tacitus' Annals.
And if Paul really meant "For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers", he was stating the obvious: of course, at the time of the writing of the letter, the hoped salvation would be nearer compared as when his Christian audience & himself converted.
Anyway, the awaited Day of the Lord did not occur during the lifetime of these Christians, not even almost 2000 years later, and counting.
I would say another failed prophecy, and failed in several ways.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
readyforchange
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by readyforchange »

Bernard Muller wrote:Romans 13:11: Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers. (NRSV).
It looks Paul did not take in account the massacre of the Christians of Rome in 64 CE, as described in Tacitus' Annals.
And if Paul really meant "For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers", he was stating the obvious: of course, at the time of the writing of the letter, the hoped salvation would be nearer compared as when his Christian audience & himself converted.
Anyway, the awaited Day of the Lord did not occur during the lifetime of these Christians, not even almost 2000 years later, and counting.
I would say another failed prophecy, and failed in several ways.

Cordially, Bernard
Yes, Paul expected that the day of the Lord would arrive soon. I think this is a failed prophecy or prediction that is difficult to explain away, because instead of a vague reference to a future time, this statement from Paul set a specific timeframe for the return of Jesus. I am curious if there are any apologetics responses about it - have not seen any yet.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by GakuseiDon »

Readyforchange, I doubt you'll find anyone on this board dispute that this is probably a failed prophecy. You want to try the Apologetics website on the Theologyweb forum here for apologetic responses: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/forum ... getics-301
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by MrMacSon »

readyforchange wrote: Paul's letters are generally considered to have been written before the all the gospels, although conservative Christians date at least Mark to the mid-50s CE, while Paul was still alive.
What if Paul's letters and the gospels were written in the 140s-150s AD/CE ??
Yes, there are times when the teachings attributed to Jesus in the gospels are seemingly at odds with Paul's teachings or with the other epistles of the New Testament.
Many think they were from different 'traditions' (from different and possibly competing sects).
readyforchange
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by readyforchange »

GakuseiDon wrote:Readyforchange, I doubt you'll find anyone on this board dispute that this is probably a failed prophecy. You want to try the Apologetics website on the Theologyweb forum here for apologetic responses: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/forum ... getics-301
Thanks for the link GakuseiDon. Was not familiar with this website, and I'll plan to review it soon.
readyforchange
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by readyforchange »

MrMacSon wrote:
readyforchange wrote: Paul's letters are generally considered to have been written before the all the gospels, although conservative Christians date at least Mark to the mid-50s CE, while Paul was still alive.
What if Paul's letters and the gospels were written in the 140s-150s AD/CE ??
Yes, there are times when the teachings attributed to Jesus in the gospels are seemingly at odds with Paul's teachings or with the other epistles of the New Testament.
Many think they were from different 'traditions' (from different and possibly competing sects).
Thanks. I have recently seen some comments on another forum that suggest Paul's letters were not written until the 2nd century CE, but I have not explored this theory much further. If there are any resources online that go into detail on reasons for why Paul's letters and gospels may have been written during that timeframe and you can pass along, that would be great.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Is Romans 13:11 a Failed Prediction?

Post by MrMacSon »

readyforchange wrote:
Thanks. I have recently seen some comments on another forum that suggest Paul's letters were not written until the 2nd century CE, but I have not explored this theory much further. If there are any resources online that go into detail on reasons for why Paul's letters and gospels may have been written during that time-frame and you can pass along, that would be great.
I did a quick search. A lot of the discussion/s & articles center around Marcion being the first collator of Pauline epistles: and 'genuine' Pauline epistles at that.

There have always been two Pauls: the Paul of Marcion's "genuine" letters; and the Paul of Acts. The stories are similar, but the Paul of Acts agrees with the writers of the Christian Gospels, not the Paul of the reconstructed Marcion texts.

Robert M Price may be the person who has discussed this most -

"In 'The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul' [2012; Signature Books, Salt Lake City; 580 pages], Price suggests that Paul is a composite of several historical figures, including Marcion of Pontos, Stephen the Martyr, Simon the Sorcerer, and the iconoclastic evangelist who was named Paul. [Price claims that Paul's] letters were actually written and edited by other people, including Marcion, and an early Church Father, Polycarp of Smyrna ...

"The story of Paul in the Book of Acts is not evident in Paul’s epistles. Acts contains fanciful “miracle-mongering” motifs, including a resurrected Jesus who walks through walls and people who can make earthquakes happen through prayer. In fact, only in the Book of Acts do we have twelve apostles. Paul’s letters mention more apostles, some of them female. In the early Christian church, there were other sources of information about Paul which were for a time canonical, including Acts of Paul and Acts of Paul and Thecla ...

"Some of the early Church Fathers, such as Justin Martyr, never even mentioned Paul in their extensive writings, so it is debatable whether or not Christians in Justin’s day had heard of Paul ...

"In the final analysis, according to Price, the canonical writings are not only infused with the hand of Marcion and Polycarp, as many scholars would acknowledge*, but are an amalgam of biographical details derived from the other Christian martyrs’ lives ..."

http://signaturebooks.com/new-testament ... y-existed/
  • * eg. Joseph B Tyson, Matthias Klinghardt, & Markus Vinzent
Last edited by MrMacSon on Sun Sep 18, 2016 2:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply