Phil

Blimey. Here's a blast from the past. Back to the good old days when Fort and I (and Ev and I) didn't speak to each other except to have a ripsnorter of an argument.

This looks fantastic. Ordered my copy earlier this evening, although i won't get to read it til late November

I just tried to report Unbound68's post above, but the board won't let me. I'm tired of people thinking it's acceptable to be nasty, just because they're hiding behind a computer screen.

Excellent stuff. And very timely. I'm giving a talk on "Did Jesus make all things?" this sunday...

Incidently i notice that an article in the recent eJournal dabbled a little bit in this, albeit with fancier language and more sources

I am not especially tied to the need for the fig tree to represent Israel, though I think there is a case, not totally convincing, that could be made (The "naughty figs", the similarity to the undisputed symbol of the vine, the use of the cursed fig tree by Jesus). However I do think that things that go on "behind the scenes" in scripture are a very powerful argument, perhaps the most powerful argument.

Well if people want the fig tree in this context to be Israel, then it's probably the only argument

But it still doesn't make it a good one, especially when Jesus actually gives us the answer. If he had stopped at "you know that summer is nigh", it might be completely reasonable to start on about trees representing nations, the fig tree Israel, etc etc... because then we actually have to look for a meaning, but he does follow it up with a definition. "so also, when you see these things taking place, you know..."

So Jesus tells us exactly what he means. And i appreciate that people like Matthew and Paul drew much longer bows than this one (Hagar comes to mind). But they were inspired; they've got the right. Many of the passages used to prove the prophecy of the death of Christ came directly from Christ himself (road to Emmaeus style) I just can't see that we, 2000 years after the fact, have got the right to use passages for purposes that contradict the self-defined meaning, and pretend that it's anything other than fantasy. Otherwise it really is up for grabs, and the post-modernists had it right all along.

And i strongly suspect you agree with me, so i'll stop there