This generation

[Hammster]

Matthew 24 is partially about His second coming.

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

If this isn't about His second coming then do you think the following passage which also mention His coming and the gathering of His people is not about His second coming, either?

1 Thessalonians 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

You are making an argument that those passages are talking of the same thing. Why should I believe that?

 

[DavidPT]

It wasn’t written post 70 AD.

The fact you say that as if it is a 100% fact should mean you can prove it is a fact, otherwise it's just an opinion, not necessarily a fact. I don't care when it was written but apparently you must care and that it is crucial to your position that it was written prior to 70 AD.

 

[DavidPT]

You are making an argument that those passages are talking of the same thing. Why should I believe that?

Why should you believe that? Because, for one thing, that's usually how thing generally work, Scripture interprets Scripture.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

But you remember that Revelation 22:14-15 describes the state of the world after the New Jerusalem has come down from God out of heaven, subsequent to Christ's return. That New Heaven and New Earth with the New Jerusalem present still has ongoing wickedness occurring in the world, and its results.

How are you coming to that conclusion?

Revelation 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

This verse is talking about people who will have been cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:15, Rev 21:8) at that point. It doesn't make any sense to think that this verse is talking about people who are still in the world being wicked. No, they will have been judged by then.

How does the following verse read in the Bible translation you use?

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Does the translation you use translate the verse something like this instead:

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness...and wickedness.

 

[Hammster]

The fact you say that as if it is a 100% fact should mean you can prove it is a fact, otherwise it's just an opinion, not necessarily a fact. I don't care when it was written but apparently you must care and that it is crucial to your position that it was written prior to 70 AD.

If you don’t care, then okay.

 

[Hammster]

Why should you believe that? Because, for one thing, that's usually how thing generally work, Scripture interprets Scripture.

I agree. But you can’t take unrelated verses and say “hey, this one interprets that one”. I’m asking what’s the basis for saying they are related.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Bad things happened to unbelieving Jews in the first century, especially involving what happened in 70 AD. Except the Son of man is meaning Jesus and unbelieving Jews rejected Him. Therefore, nothing pertaining to this verse above involves unbelieving Jews in the first century. In the Discourse it is the NT church being addressed, not unbelieving Jews. There were no unbelieving Jews sitting among them asking questions nor listening to what Jesus was saying privately to His disciples at the time. Unbelieving Jews, if they rejected Jesus, and they did, they certainly wouldn't be heeding any of His warnings for certain.

But Jesus absolutely DID warn the unbelieving Jews of His generation of coming disasters. That is why He called them "hypocrites", because they could discern the weather patterns predicting bad weather, but could not discern the approaching signs of "this time" which He was describing. (Matthew 16:1-3 and Luke 12:54-56).

Jesus also gave a timely warning to the unbelieving Jews that were accusing Him of using Beelzebub's power to cast out devils. He foretold that those same devils would each return along with 7 more devils more wicked than themselves, which would make "THIS wicked generation" during its "last state" to be worse that its "first state" when He was among them (Matthew 12:43-45).

Hint: that limits "THIS wicked generation" and its "last state" to a single generation which Christ had personally ministered among.

Also, there was only a single "THIS generation" which was given the sign of the prophet Jonah, and it was the single generation among whom Jesus had His earthly ministry. The unbelieving Pharisees and Sadducees came tempting Jesus and asking for a sign. Jesus told those men directly that "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto IT, but the sign of the prophet Jonas." That singular sign of the prophet Jonah was given directly to the unbelieving Jews of Christ's day, and they failed to recognize how Jesus fulfilled that sign of Jonah in His death, burial, and resurrection. No other generations since that first-century generation have been given that test of being able to recognize the sign of the prophet Jonas being fulfilled in their sight.

 

[DavidPT]

Matthew 24 is partially about His second coming.

The way I tend to interpret Matthew 24 over all is like such. It is pertaining to events during His ascension, which include events involving the first century through the end of this age, and that it then involves His coming in the end of this age and what all happens because of that. IMO, this is the correct way to interpret the Discourse, since this doesn't make one a Preterist nor a Futurist, it just makes one that is on the same page with Jesus, in regards to what He said in the Discourse.

 

[JulieB67]

Not quite accurate. A better translation...

How is it a better translation, what translation are you referring to?

"Watch therefore at every season praying, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things which are about to come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."

And Christ included His own return in that list of "all these things", as well as all the other disasters which were soon about to happen for that generation.

That's the point, Christ did not return, so Matthew 24 does not refer to to just that generation. Again, it's the generation that sees "all" the things come to pass -that's the generation.

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:34

He also said this,

Matthew 23:35 "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the Temple and the altar."

And we know they themselves didn't slew Abel or Zechariah.

 

[Hammster]

The way I tend to interpret Matthew 24 over all is like such. It is pertaining to events during His ascension, which include events involving the first century through the end of this age, and that it then involves His coming in the end of this age and what all happens because of that. IMO, this is the correct way to interpret the Discourse, since this doesn't make one a Preterist nor a Futurist, it just makes one that is on the same page with Jesus, in regards to what He said in the Discourse.

Except that you don’t believe Him when He said that those things would take place in that generation.

 

[Hammster]

He also said this,

Matthew 23:35 "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the Temple and the altar."

And we know they themselves didn't slew Abel or Zechariah.

The Pharisees and their like did. Which is what He’s talking about. Context, context, context.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

“Tribes” never describes people other than Israel.

That is not true.

And actually, “earth” is a poor translation. It should be “land”.

How convenient for you to think that. For what reason, other than doctrinal bias, do you think that is a poor translation?

The more you know.

You're not showing that you know what these words mean and how they should be translated. Did you do any actual research on this before you said it? The Greek word translated as "tribe" in Matthew 24:30 is phylē (Strong's G5443) and is used in this verse as well:

Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred (Greek: phylē), and tongue, and people, and nation;

Do you think the verse above is just talking about the tribes of Israel?

The word is also used here:

Revelation 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds (Greek: phylē);, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Do you think this verse is only talking about the tribes of Israel when it refers to the "great multitude, which no man could number" that John saw?

Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred (Greek: phylē), and tongue, and people,

Do you think this verse is talking about the everlasting gospel only being preached to the tribes of Israel?

 

[DavidPT]

But Jesus absolutely DID warn the unbelieving Jews of His generation of coming disasters. That is why He called them "hypocrites", because they could discern the weather patterns predicting bad weather, but could not discern the approaching signs of "this time" which He was describing. (Matthew 16:1-3 and Luke 12:54-56).

Jesus also gave a timely warning to the unbelieving Jews that were accusing Him of using Beelzebub's power to cast out devils. He foretold that those same devils would each return along with 7 more devils more wicked than themselves, which would make "THIS wicked generation" during its "last state" to be worse that its "first state" when He was among them (Matthew 12:43-45).

Hint: that limits "THIS wicked generation" and its "last state" to a single generation which Christ had personally ministered among.

Also, there was only a single "THIS generation" which was given the sign of the prophet Jonah, and it was the single generation among whom Jesus had His earthly ministry. The unbelieving Pharisees and Sadducees came tempting Jesus and asking for a sign. Jesus told those men directly that "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto IT, but the sign of the prophet Jonas." That singular sign of the prophet Jonah was given directly to the unbelieving Jews of Christ's day, and they failed to recognize how Jesus fulfilled that sign of Jonah in His death, burial, and resurrection. No other generations since that first-century generation have been given that test of being able to recognize the sign of the prophet Jonas being fulfilled in their sight.

I tend to interpret Matthew 23 a bit different than most. Though some of it might be involving what was to take place in 70 AD, Jesus was more concerned with their spiritual condition at the time than anything else. After all, He did ask them how did they think they can escape the damnation of hell, where the damnation of hell couldn't possibly mean what happened in 70 AD. Look at what all He says to them in the beginning of that chapter. What does any of that have to do with what was to happen in 70 AD?

 

[Hammster]

That is not true.

Sure it is. You prove it below.

How convenient for you to think that. For what reason, other than doctrinal bias, do you think that is a poor translation?

Because when most folks see earth, they don’t think land. They think globe.

The Greek word translated as "tribe" in Matthew 24:30 is phylē (Strong's G5443) and is used in this verse as well:

Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred (Greek: phylē), and tongue, and people, and nation;

Do you think the verse above is just talking about the tribes of Israel?

No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.

The word is also used here:

Revelation 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds (Greek: phylē);, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Do you think this verse is only talking about the tribes of Israel when it refers to the "great multitude, which no man could number" that John saw?

No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.

Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred (Greek: phylē), and tongue, and people,

Do you think this verse is talking about the everlasting gospel only being preached to the tribes of Israel?

No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.

 

[3 Resurrections]

How is it a better translation, what translation are you referring to?

All the literal translations (and a few others) recognize the use of the Greek "mello" term as it is found in this text. This is in agreement with all the other time-relevant texts which describe those disasters and Christ's bodily return coming in that first-century generation, before it had passed away, and before the disciples had finished going through all the cities in Israel prior to that return of Christ.

That's the point, Christ did not return, so Matthew 24 does not refer to to just that generation. Again, it's the generation that sees "all" the things come to pass -that's the generation.

It was the disciples standing in front of Him who were given the warning so that THEY could escape "all these thing" by fleeing from Judea when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies. If they died in martyrdom before those disasters hit their own generation, they would still have "escaped" from the beginning of those imminent disasters that were about to begin in their generation. And their reward was to "stand before the Son of Man" in a resurrected, glorified body at His bodily return.

He also said this,

Matthew 23:35 "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the Temple and the altar."

And we know they themselves didn't slew Abel or Zechariah.

That wasn't necessary that their own hands physically killed Abel and those righteous slain ones following him. Christ was the representative of all those righteous who had been slain. Anyone who is accounted as being "IN CHRIST" are the children of faith. When the disobedient Jews of that day became the "betrayers and murderers" of Christ our representative, then in essence they were responsible for slaying everyone who was "IN CHRIST".

It's like the example of a diplomat coming from another country. If that diplomat is murdered while acting as an ambassador for his own country, that is the equivalent of an offense against the entire nation that diplomat represented. Just so with the Jews who murdered Christ in that single generation. The blood guilt of all the slain righteous ones from Abel until then was then laid at their feet, and on no other generation since then.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Same challenge to you. Can you find in scripture where tribes ever refers to a people other than Israel? Even in Revelation, it’s a separate category.


And they sang a new song, saying,
“Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
— Revelation 5:9

This post baffles me to no end. You're trying to claim that there's no scripture where tribes ever refers to a people other than Israel and then you proceeded to post a verse where the word is clearly not used in reference to Israel but rather to all people groups. You answered your own challenge without even realizing it.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Sure it is. You prove it below.

Because when most folks see earth, they don’t think land. They think globe.

No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.

No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.
No, it is talking about the tribes of Israel, plus other groups. It’s right in the text.

No, it is not. Your doctrinal bias is really shining through here. The context of all those verses is in relation to all people groups/nations/tribes, etc. in the world, not just Israel. That's obvious to anyone who is unbiased.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If this is true, then why didn't Jesus tell His disciples that He had no idea when these things would happen rather than say they would happen in their generation? Why didn't He tell just them it could be in a year or maybe 2000+ years rather than give them a false hope of His imminent return?

Why would a loving God allow generation after generation to pass looking for signs and with the hope of seeing Jesus' return in their lifetime only to have each generation for thousands of years die without ever experiencing it?

I don't understand this line of reasoning. If He came back in 70 AD (which He didn't) then would that mean He gave false hope to all those who died between about 33 AD to 69 AD since He wouldn't have come back in their lifetimes?

 

[3 Resurrections]

I tend to interpret Matthew 23 a bit different than most. Though some of it might be involving what was to take place in 70 AD, Jesus was more concerned with their spiritual condition at the time than anything else. After all, He did ask them how did they think they can escape the damnation of hell, where the damnation of hell couldn't possibly mean what happened in 70 AD. Look at what all He says to them in the beginning of that chapter. What does any of that have to do with what was to happen in 70 AD?

That chapter ends with Jesus weeping over Jerusalem who had slain the prophets, and speaking of its desolation. That single generation of unbelieving Jews would "fill up the measure of their fathers", who had slain the prophets and the righteous. That "full cup" represented the Jewish leadership's completed number of offenses against God. The generation after that one would not have been adding to that "full cup", which had hit its limit.

AD 70 was the fulfillment of the ancient law of blood-guilt in Mosaic law, which the Jewish leadership called down upon their own heads at Christ's crucifixion. "So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it." That generation which murdered Christ was the only generation which had incurred this particular blood-guilt.

In the AD 66-70 era, God was only fulfilling the curse which the Jews had imposed on themselves and their children - but not on any generation following that one. And "Hell" (Hades) along with "Death" actually was thrown into Jerusalem's Lake of Fire for the people to experience at that time during the city's "second death", as Revelation 20:14 tells us.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Jesus also said:

Mat 24:16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

If the entire earth were to be utterly destroyed it would do little good for someone to "flee to the mountains". So obviously it has some other meaning.

You're not recognizing that Jesus talked about two different events in the Olivet Discourse. One centered around Judea and that occurred around 70 AD. The other centered around His second coming at the end of this temporal age. That is a global event rather than a local event like what happened in 70 AD.

When preterists and futurists want to insist that the Olivet Discourse is all about one period of time either in the past or in the future then they end up making the Olivet Discourse into a bunch of nonsense. Preterists try to say that heaven and earth already passed away and the elect have already been gathered and other nonsense like that. Many futurists basically ignore that Jesus clearly talked about the fact that the temple buildings would be destroyed and that the disciples asked Him when that would occur. And we know they were destroyed in 70 AD, so to think that He never answered that question isn't reasonable. But, it wasn't the only question He was asked.

Matthew 24:3 indicates that His coming would occur at the end of the age. The end of the age has not yet come. Jesus Himself indicated that this age is temporal and is when people get married and they die. The end of the age refers to the end of this temporal age and the age to come will be marked by no more marriage and no more death (Luke 20:34-36). So, the end of the age has clearly not yet come as preterists like yourself imagine.