Life after the eclipse (sign of Jonah)

[One Bad Pig]

Jonah was the primary sign, but the sky going dark during midday probably helped him make an entrance, don't you think? Wait, didn't the sky go dark during midday for Jesus, too? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Yes, for three HOURS. Thus, not an eclipse.

And your argument from Jonah is a gossamer web spun largely from imagination. The dude who ran from the Lord and whined about a plant would hardly have been motivated to use something likely to move the Assyrians to repent as a prop. He would have been far happier had they ignored his message.

[Darfius]

Yes, for three HOURS. Thus, not an eclipse.

Well it had to be an eclipse, just not by the moon. Wormwood?

And your argument from Jonah is a gossamer web spun largely from imagination. The dude who ran from the Lord and whined about a plant would hardly have been motivated to use something likely to move the Assyrians to repent as a prop. He would have been far happier had they ignored his message.

He was freshly regurgitated from the giant sea creature and was ready to do as the Lord wished. He didn't control when he showed up, God did. And God used the eclipse, civil strife in Nineveh and plagues to provide "context" for Jonah's message.

[One Bad Pig]

Well it had to be an eclipse, just not by the moon. Wormwood?

Anything natural which would cause an eclipse for three hours would seriously mess up the dynamics of the solar system. Astronomically speaking, it's highly unlikely.

He was freshly regurgitated from the giant sea creature and was ready to do as the Lord wished.

...but not willingly, as the aftermath makes clear.

He didn't control when he showed up, God did. And God used the eclipse, civil strife in Nineveh and plagues to provide "context" for Jonah's message.

Funny how none of that is mentioned in the actual account of him providing the message. Looks rather more like speculation than context from here.

[Rayado]

You disagree because you're ignorant. Quit waiting for people to explain things to you and seek the Lord's face for yourself. "There shall be signs in the sun, moon and stars."

What if I believe without the need for signs? What if I believe that the Revelation 12 signs were symbolic and not literal?

What Pharisees (Bible scholars) agreed that Jesus was the Messiah? Experts can be wrong. It's one thing to speak Hebrew. It's quite another to speak righteousness.

It does not follow that because the Pharisees were mostly wrong that therefore most Bible scholars are wrong. You have completely dodged the issue of why they might be wrong. Why should I trust you over them? Why is it just a bunch of crackpots on the internet?

http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/solar-ecl...sign-from-god/

I do not care that the August eclipse was called a sign from God. Signs can be a great many things--natural, unnatural, but this one was, like most others, devoid of theological content. It confirmed no message or messenger that wasn't already divinely authenticated during the time of the Bible. Why should I consider your interpretation if Wikipedia is your expert?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_eclipse

Scripture Verse: 2 Kings 14

25 He [Jeroboam II]was the one who restored the boundaries of Israel from Lebo Hamath to the Dead Sea, in accordance with the word of the Lord, the God of Israel, spoken through his servant Jonah son of Amittai, the prophet from Gath Hepher.

© Copyright Original Source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeroboam_II

Jonah was the primary sign, but the sky going dark during midday probably helped him make an entrance, don't you think? Wait, didn't the sky go dark during midday for Jesus, too?

If there was a Biblical record of it, you might have a case; but you're reading your own beliefs onto the Biblical text and mangling the whole meaning of the Sign of Jonah...all in the service of a theologically dubious interpretation that is utterly novel in the entire history of the church.

Wrong

Oh come on, everybody steps on a rake from time to time. Even me.

Really? You thought the dude who ran from the Lord and whined about a plant was such a powerful orator that he convinced a nation renowned in the ancient world for its cruelty to repent with a sense of urgency? There were a lot of "prophets" preaching a lot of stuff back then, just like today. What set Jonah apart? Maybe the sky going dark during midday helped?

If that got mentioned in Scripture you might have a case. Without it, not so much. I have no reason to suspect that it was anything other than what Scripture recorded: that Jonah preached, and the people were convicted of their sin, repented, and the city was saved at the end of the forty days. Attempting to base their repentance on extrabiblical speculation is...speculation.

[cite]Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time: “Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.”

Jonah obeyed the word of the Lord and went to Nineveh. Now Nineveh was a very large city; it took three days to go through it. Jonah began by going a day’s journey into the city, proclaiming, “Forty more days and Nineveh will be overthrown.” The Ninevites believed God. A fast was proclaimed, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth. --Jonah 3:1-5, NIV[/cite]

"there shall be signs in the sun, moon and stars" I'm trying to think if Jesus could have been more explicit. Nope. Pay attention.

But it does not necessarily follow that every sign in the sun, moon, and stars is theologically significant. Nor is every chronological symmetry theologically significant. Literally nothing is lost by rejecting the September 23 event as a posssible Biblical sign and attributing it to flights of fancy and presumption.

And how could God have foreseen modern technology or that it would play a role in our lives?

The point of Scripture is to be edifying the church throughout all time since its writing. Not to those at an indeterminate point at a later date. We are not that special.

I don't think that word means what you think it means. A sign is not the event itself, but something pointing symbolically towards it. A "wake up call."

Then why not stick with the original understanding of the text? Why stake everything on a misinterpretation of the Sign of Jonah

"There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars" means what to you, exactly?

Again: That there will be signs in the heavens does not mean that a specific alignment is necessarily theologically or eschatologically relevant, especially when it rests on an already dubious extra-Scriptural foundation. Jonah didn't bother to mention an eclipse, nor did God expressly promise him one.

[cite]He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. --Matthew 12:38-39[/cite]

Jesus himself said the Sign of Jonah was not an eclipse. It is expressly against the unequivocal teaching of Jesus Christ himself and rests on an argument from the silence of Scripture.

You're welcome for doing your homework for you.

I wouldn't be turning it in.

[Obsidian]

The sign referenced in Revelation 12 referred to Jesus's birth. (I've heard that it actually happened on Sept. 11, 3 B.C., which may have been his birthday.) The sign doesn't have any additional significance for future events.

[KingsGambit]

(I've heard that it actually happened on Sept. 11, 3 B.C., which may have been his birthday.)

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

So clearly, 9/11 was a double fulfillment!

[Faber]

The sign referenced in Revelation 12 referred to Jesus's birth. (I've heard that it actually happened on Sept. 11, 3 B.C., which may have been his birthday.) The sign doesn't have any additional significance for future events.

Herod was already dead by then.

[Obsidian]

Debatable

[RumTumTugger]

Nicodemus.

And Joseph of Arimethia(sp)

[One Bad Pig]

Yes, and Joseph of Arimathea. The point is, most didn't. Don't be contrary just to be contrary, Bill

As well as an unspecified number (Acts 15:5) and, according to tradition, Gamaliel.

[eschaton]

I'm a little late on the discussion, but I think it's always valuable to see what the church fathers thought. I'm not saying they were always right, but they were close to the tradition of apostolic teaching. Here is what Hippolytus (170-235 AD) said about Rev 12 in his Treatise on Christ and Antichrist.

60. Now, concerning the tribulation of the persecution which is to fall upon the Church from the adversary, John also speaks thus: “And I saw a great and wondrous sign in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars. And she, being with child, cries, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man-child, who is to rule all the nations: and the child was caught up unto God and to His throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath the place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. And then when the dragon saw it, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man-child. And to the woman were given two wings of the great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And the serpent cast (out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast) out of his mouth. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the saints of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus.” Rev. xii. 1–6, etc. Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist

[eschaton]

I'm a little late on the discussion, but I think it's always valuable to see what the church fathers thought. I'm not saying they were always right, but they were close to the tradition of apostolic teaching. Here is what Hippolytus (170-235 AD) said about Rev 12 in his Treatise on Christ and Antichrist.

I left out the interpretation.
61. By the woman then clothed with the sun,” he meant most manifestly the Church, endued with the Father’s word, whose brightness is above the sun. And by the “moon under her feet” he referred to her being adorned, like the moon, with heavenly glory. And the words, “upon her head a crown of twelve stars,” refer to the twelve apostles by whom the Church was founded. And those, “she, being with child, cries, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered,” mean that the Church will not cease to bear from her heart the Word that is persecuted by the unbelieving in the world. “And she brought forth,” he says, “a man-child, who is to rule all the nations;” by which is meant that the Church, always bringing forth Christ, the perfect man-child of God, who is declared to be God and man, becomes the instructor of all the nations. And the words, “her child was caught up unto God and to His throne,” signify that he who is always born of her is a heavenly king, and not an earthly; even as David also declared of old when he said, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.” “And the dragon,” he says, “saw and persecuted the woman which brought forth the man-child. And to the woman were given two wings of the great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.” That refers to the one thousand two hundred and threescore days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and persecute the Church, which flees from city to city, and seeks concealment in the wilderness among the mountains, possessed of no other defence than the two wings of the great eagle, that is to say, the faith of Jesus Christ, who, in stretching forth His holy hands on the holy tree, unfolded two wings, the right and the left, and called to Him all who believed upon Him, and covered them as a hen her chickens. For by the mouth of Malachi also He speaks thus: “And unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in His wings.”

[Sparko]

AUGUST 21st & SEPTEMBER 23rd - The Connection between SOLAR ECLIPSE vs END TIMES SIGN [WARNING]

Admit I'm wrong about what?

OMG! Darfius was right!!! The video is gone!! It was raptured!!

[Sparko]

The end-times. You expect it to happen this year right?

If I'm wrong, I say "my bad." If you're wrong, your cowardice leads you and everyone who relies upon you to damnation.

So? are you going to say, "My bad?"

[Darfius]

So? are you going to say, "My bad?"

You said "the end times", not Sept 23. If the end times don't happen, I'll say my bad.