This generation

[Timtofly]

hebrews 3:10 τῇ (the) γενεᾷ (generation) ἐκείνῃ (that)

10Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.

this quotation from Hebrews is from psalm 95

psalm 95:10 (LXX) : τῇ (the) γενεᾷ (generation) ἐκείνῃ (that)

versus

Mathew 24:34 ἡ(the) γενεὰ(Generation) αὕτη(this)

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say to you, this generation may not pass away till all these may come to pass.

The Greek text does not have the word "that" in Hebrews 3:10. What text are you using? Even the verse (translation) that comes up with the hyperlink in this forum says "this".

The only generation that sees all is linked just to the parable. So if the generation in the first century experienced that parable, it would have been solved. Yet no preterist today want to even touch the parable with a ten foot pole. They want it to be only a literal science statement of fact, and not prophetic. Even though all the other events are prophetic. Why single out this one point as not prophetic, when the whole OD was a prophecy? It was an explanation of things to come, not things happening that week. Bible hub for Hebrews 3:10 is "genea taute".

 

[Zao is life]

The generation of Christ, according to Scripture is 14 generations from Abraham to Christ. Yet the Bible likens these 14 to the native/natural generation of Christ.

The context of Matthew's list of generations is not the same as the context of Jesus' Olivet Discourse where He is talking about specific events to come that will obviously be experienced by a specific generation of people, and He is warning a specific generation only when He says what He is saying in Matthew 24:32-42.

 

[claninja]

The Greek text does not have the word "that" in Hebrews 3:10. What text are you using? Even the verse (translation) that comes up with the hyperlink in this forum says "this".

The only generation that sees all is linked just to the parable. So if the generation in the first century experienced that parable, it would have been solved. Yet no preterist today want to even touch the parable with a ten foot pole. They want it to be only a literal science statement of fact, and not prophetic. Even though all the other events are prophetic. Why single out this one point as not prophetic, when the whole OD was a prophecy? It was an explanation of things to come, not things happening that week. Bible hub for Hebrews 3:10 is "genea taute".

textus receptus, not the mGNT. The textus receptus quotes the LXX of psalm 95:10 correctly.

 

[claninja]

That's not true. You've completely ignored the context of the word tribulation - which begins in Matthew 24:9 but is also found in Mark 13 and Luke.

The only place in all 3 gospels that Jerusalem and the wrath to come upon it is mentioned is in Luke 21:20-24. The rest of Luke as well as Mark and Matthew talk about the tribulation of the saints, not of the Jews in Jerusalem.

maybe I’m misunderstanding standing. Where does the olivet discourse mention that the great tribulation occurs against the saints?

 

[DavidPT]

He started off by telling the church what was to befall the temple though, and He also told the church what was to befall Jerusalem.

That is true, except He didn't stop there. He went beyond that. The only correct way to interpret the Discourse that I can see, it is involving events while He is away, and is involving events when He returns. That means one can't interpret the OD in a vacuum and expect to be interpreting it correctly throughout.

 

[Zao is life]

maybe I’m misunderstanding standing. Where does the olivet discourse mention that the great tribulation occurs against the saints?

Starting with Matthew 24:9, the entire passage is joined together by the words "and"; "therefore"; "but"; "for" and "because", and from then on, the elect are mentioned throughout. Matthew 24:22, 24 and 31.

Luke speaks far more about the persecution of the saints than the little he says about Jerusalem, and Mark is virtually the same as Matthew's account.

You ignore the obvious for the sake of an eschatological premise.

 

[Zao is life]

That is true, except He didn't stop there. He went beyond that. The only correct way to interpret the Discourse that I can see, it is involving events while He is away, and is involving events when He returns. That means one can't interpret the OD in a vacuum and expect to be interpreting it correctly throughout.

This is exactly why I brought up the fact that the Greek word naos stops being used in reference to the temple at Jerusalem when the veil was torn, and from then onward is used only in reference to the church and the temple in heaven. So the word naos in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 11:1-2 is referring to a different temple (not the one in Jerusalem that was destroyed in 70 A.D, and not a newly built temple in Jerusalem either).

 

[Zao is life]

addresses nothing in my post.

Because you ignore the rest of scripture so that you can interpret scripture according to your interpretation of Matthew 24.

 

[Timtofly]

Starting with Matthew 24:9, the entire passage is joined together by the words "and"; "therefore"; "but"; "for" and "because", and from then on, the elect are mentioned throughout. Matthew 24:22, 24 and 31.

Luke speaks far more about the persecution of the saints than the little he says about Jerusalem, and Mark is virtually the same as Matthew's account.

You ignore the obvious for the sake of an eschatological premise.

The tribulation is not against the temple. The tribulation was directed at Jacob.

Claiming the tribulation is now against the church, because there is no longer a physical temple, is not in the OD at all, not even implied.

Jesus was literally telling his own disciples, they, because of Him, Jesus, would suffer many persecutions. That is why the church has had trouble non stop since 30AD.

Jesus did not define the setting aside of Israel for the fulness of the Gentiles within the written text of the Olivet Discourse. Perhaps He actually did explain it all, but we are not given the full body, as each Gospel itself has some detail the other Gospels did not include. So any one trying to force fit Paul's teachings on the subject are going to fail, because they literally could be injected at any point by various different personal opinions. Posters here cannot even agree on the historical facts, much less attempting to re-write the Bible itself.

 

[JosephZ]

Mark 13:37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.


Wonder why Preterists disregard this verse? Are they going to argue that 'all' can't include anyone beyond the generation they were living in at the time?

Good point. Who is is "all" and "you" in that verse?

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew were questioning Him privately, (Mark 13:3)

What I say to you (Peter, James, John, and Andrew) I say to all: ‘Stay alert!’ (Mark 13:37)

"All" would mean the rest of His disciples and His followers in Jerusalem.

 

[rwb]

genea is never used to mean throughout history or time. Its used for contemporaries. You can’t just change the definition of a word to fit your presupposition.

What I am saying is that the generations (genea) of Christ consist of 14 generations (genea) from Abraham to Christ. The contemporaries or natural/native seed of Abraham does not end with Christ, only the genealogical record does. Christ is speaking to His contemporaries, the generation living the same time He lived. But it is clear that many more contemporaries of the generation alive in the days of Christ have not ended! That cannot be argued against because Israel still exist from the time of Christ to today.

 

[DavidPT]

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew were questioning Him privately, (Mark 13:3)

What I say to you (Peter, James, John, and Andrew) I say to all: ‘Stay alert!’ (Mark 13:37)

"All" would mean the rest of His disciples and His followers in Jerusalem.

'All' would mean those, no doubt, but to insist it can't mean anyone beyond that generation, is ludicrous, the fact we are still watching for His return as we speak. Maybe Preterists aren't. Maybe Preterists think He has already returned, but the rest of us don't.

Mark 13:33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
34 For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.
35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning:
36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.
37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

It is silly to apply any of this to 70 AD, as if this part is somehow relevant to what took place during those events---Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. It is obviously not meaning that in the literal sense, and even so, it still has no relevance to events pertaining to 70 AD. Then there is verse 34 as well. [Staff Edit]

 

[rwb]

The context of Matthew's list of generations is not the same as the context of Jesus' Olivet Discourse where He is talking about specific events to come that will obviously be experienced by a specific generation of people, and He is warning a specific generation only when He says what He is saying in Matthew 24:32-42.

Christ is speaking of things that would not only come upon His people Israel, living at the same time He lived, but He is also speaking of things that would come upon the whole earth, such as:

Matthew 24:14 (KJV) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

 

[BPPLEE]

“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places, who call out to the other children,
— Matthew 11:16


“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places, who call out to the other children,
— Matthew 11:16

The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.
— Matthew 12:41-42


Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. That is the way it will also be with this evil generation.”
— Matthew 12:45


Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. That is the way it will also be with this evil generation.”
— Matthew 12:45

And Jesus answered and said, “You unbelieving and perverted generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring him here to Me.”
— Matthew 17:17


Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
— Matthew 23:36


Sighing deeply in His spirit, He said, “Why does this generation seek for a sign? Truly I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.”
— Mark 8:12


For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”
— Mark 8:38


And He answered them and said, “O unbelieving generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring him to Me!”
— Mark 9:19


Etc.

What do these all have in common? They are all taking about the generation that Jesus is speaking. However, there are eschatological views that expect us to ignore this language in Matthew 24.


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

Ideas and words must be added or read into this to make it fit a particular view. However, taken at face value, like the other instances, simply means that the generation that Jesus was speaking to were those in view, not some eisegesical generation in the future.

Preterism makes a pretty good case until you get to Revelation. When was the world under the control of one leader? Who were the beast and the false prophet? When did a world leader get killed and come back to life? What was the mark of the beast and when were people killed who didn't accept it? Who were the two witnesses who had miraculous powers? Revelation 20 makes it clear a millennial kingdom will exist on the earth for 1,000 years.

 

[claninja]

What I am saying is that the generations (genea) of Christ consist of 14 generations (genea) from Abraham to Christ. The contemporaries or natural/native seed of Abraham does not end with Christ, only the genealogical record does. Christ is speaking to His contemporaries, the generation living the same time He lived. But it is clear that many more contemporaries of the generation alive in the days of Christ have not ended! That cannot be argued against because Israel still exist from the time of Christ to today.

this doesn’t make sense. Genea means contemporaries. Contemporaries mean people who live at the same time. Abraham’s generation was not contemporary to David’s generation nor Jesus’ generation.

 

[claninja]

Starting with Matthew 24:9, the entire passage is joined together by the words "and"; "therefore"; "but"; "for" and "because", and from then on, the elect are mentioned throughout. Matthew 24:22, 24 and 31.

Luke speaks far more about the persecution of the saints than the little he says about Jerusalem, and Mark is virtually the same as Matthew's account.

You ignore the obvious for the sake of an eschatological premise.

You’re conflating the general tribulation of the saints, with the great tribulation of Jerusalem.

 

[claninja]

Because you ignore the rest of scripture so that you can interpret scripture according to your interpretation of Matthew 24.

This is a generic response. I could say about you. Please address which specific parts of my post you disagree, not only for my benefit, but for the benefit of the readers.

(I was once a futurist. I found Christian forums through google searches. I was a silent reader for a long time. It was always so disappointing when posters would post generic non responses without addressing the content.)

 

[Zao is life]

Posters here cannot even agree on the historical facts, much less attempting to re-write the Bible itself.

Well at least the above poster is right about something. Not that he is the only poster who is right about something but not about everything that he believes is the truth about anything.

 

[rwb]

this doesn’t make sense. Genea means contemporaries. Contemporaries mean people who live at the same time. Abraham’s generation was not contemporary to David’s generation nor Jesus’ generation.

I don't deny this! However a contemporary is also those marked by certain characteristics of those living at a certain period. In this instance that would be Israel of the native/natural seed of Abraham.

 

[Zao is life]

Christ is speaking of things that would not only come upon His people Israel, living at the same time He lived, but He is also speaking of things that would come upon the whole earth, such as:

Matthew 24:14 (KJV) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Right, and the generation that would experience the tribulation He was talking about was the specific generation He was giving the warnings and information to, no matter what century or millennium the events were to occur.