This generation

[Hammster]

The explanation you gave before was not reasonable at all. You mean you actually have a reasonable explanation for the gathering of the elect that you didn't share with me?

No, I won’t bother.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Actually, He was talking about everyone who was born on that very day. No death from that group until 70 AD.

I thought you've said before that "this generation" referred to those who He was talking to at the time? Now, you're saying it only applied to "everyone who was born on that very day" up until 70 AD?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It’s not mentioned prior to v 24.

Agree. But, it's mentioned before verse 34 which is where He said "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened". Is His coming that He mentioned in verse 30 not included among "all these things"?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

How does it serve no purpose? The OP is on “this generation”. Are you unable to tell us how it means in the passage I provided? If you can tell us what it means in that passage, how can you tell us what it means in regards to the OP?

I don't need to answer that because it's obvious. I never said the word can't be used to refer to a chronologic generation of 40 years. What purpose does it serve to show what the word means in that one verse? Does it mean it has to mean the same thing in every verse the word is used? No. So, there is no purpose to your question. Once again, nice try. I'm not going to respond to you about this again, so stop wasting your time.

Maybe you can try actually doing something useful and tell me how the elect were all gathered from heaven and earth before this generation passed away. Can you do that?

 

[Hammster]

I thought you've said before that "this generation" referred to those who He was talking to at the time? Now, you're saying it only applied to "everyone who was born on that very day" up until 70 AD?

I did. But since you have decided that deconstruction is the way to go, I’d just go this way.

 

[Hammster]

Agree. But, it's mentioned before verse 34 which is where He said "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened". Is His coming that He mentioned in verse 30 not included among "all these things"?

If you mean His coming in the clouds, then yes, that’s included.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I did. But since you have decided that deconstruction is the way to go, I’d just go this way.

I have no idea of what you're saying here. Looks like you changed your mind on what it means.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If you mean His coming in the clouds, then yes, that’s included.

Is that somehow a different coming than what He referenced in the following passage and several more times in the rest of Matthew 24?

Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

He comes across here as though He had already previously mentioned the coming of the Son of Man before this. Seems clear to me that He was referencing the same coming of the Son of Man here that He mentioned in verse 30.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The following is some of my reasoning, thus might not be what you are seeking, yet it's the best I can do for the time being.

In Daniel 12 I assume day 1335 is pertaining to the very last day of this age since it mentions no more days following that one, then considering what it says in the very last verse of that chapter.

Daniel 12:13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

Therefore, how can the preceding verse not be meaning this very end of the days in verse 13?

Daniel 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

According to Daniel 11, when verse 10 above is meaning, it is meaning during the time Daniel 11:31 is meaning, which then is meaning when Jesus is meaning in Matthew 24:15.

What I am ultimately getting at here is this. If I am correct to connect Daniel 12:12 with that of Daniel 12:13 and the end of days, this alone proves that Daniel 12:11 and the time period involving 1290 days, that this 1290 days lead to the 1335th day in the end of this age. That means I am interpreting Matthew 24:15 correctly by placing those events in the end of this age rather than in the first century, because, clearly the end of days meant in Daniel 12:13 did not happen in the first century and is still unfulfilled as we speak.

In Daniel 12, verse 10 and 11 involve the time of trouble recorded in verse 1 in this same chapter. And in Matthew 24 Jesus places this same time of trouble in a context involving an AOD. And sure enough, in Daniel 12, verse 10 and 11 are also involving an AOD. To chalk these these things up us mere coincidences, thus no relation, is ludicrous, IMO. Nothing recorded in Daniel 12 could remotely be involving events pertaining to 70 AD, as in zero. Even verse 11 doesn't fit that time period since that would mean we have to apply verse 12 to that same time period. As if that makes some kind of good sense, that one was blessed in the first century by waiting and coming to the 1335th day.


Note: EDITED to add some things in order to try and make some points clearer, plus in order to try and fix some typos as well, of course..

Yeah, this is not at all what I had in mind, but thanks for taking the time to explain some of your reasoning, anyway. I'm not really expecting you to put the text from Matthew 24 and Luke 21 together in a timeline. I know that would take a lot of work.

I'm just saying it would be nice to see that so that I can see exactly when you think Jesus said what He did in Matthew 24:15-22 and when He said what He did in Luke 21:20-24, assuming He said those things at different times (which I obviously disagree with) during His Olivet Discourse.

Which do you think He said first, what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-22 or what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24?

What about Matthew 24:29-35 and Luke 21:25-33? Do you think those are parallel passages or do you think He said what is recorded in those two passages at two different times during the Olivet Discourse? If you agree that those are parallel passages then I don't understand why you can't recognize that Matthew 24:15-22 and Luke 21:20-24 are parallel passages as well.

 

[Hammster]

I have no idea of what you're saying here. Looks like you changed your mind on what it means.

No, but you want it to mean that it can’t be that generation in view, since not everyone would be alive in 40 years. This can also be said about any generation. It’s a silly argument, so I gave a silly response.

 

[Hammster]

Is that somehow a different coming than what He referenced in the following passage and several more times in the rest of Matthew 24?

Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

He comes across here as though He had already previously mentioned the coming of the Son of Man before this. Seems clear to me that He was referencing the same coming of the Son of Man here that He mentioned in verse 30.

Sounds good.

 

[claninja]

I don't need to answer that because it's obvious. I never said the word can't be used to refer to a chronologic generation of 40 years. What purpose does it serve to show what the word means in that one verse? Does it mean it has to mean the same thing in every verse the word is used? No. So, there is no purpose to your question. Once again, nice try. I'm not going to respond to you about this again, so stop wasting your time.

great, so you agree that genea, in that case, means generation. Can you give me any instance, outside of Matthew 24, where genea does not mean generation?

Maybe you can try actually doing something useful and tell me how the elect were all gathered from heaven and earth before this generation passed away. Can you do that?

The parable of the wedding feast tells. The good and bad are gathered into the wedding feast. (Gathered from the ends of the heavens and earth is a hebrew idiom).

 

[DavidPT]

the LXX uses genea, in this passage. What does generation mean in this passage?
numbers 32:13 And the Lord was very angry with Israel; and for forty years he caused them to wander in the wilderness, until all the generation which did evil in the sight of the Lord was extinct.

One problem with this reasoning, at least IMO. In the 40 years leading up to 70 AD, there's all kinds of things that could have happened prior to that day arriving 40 years later. For one, though some of them may have been unbelievers when Jesus walked the earth, some of them could have changed their mind after that, thus became believers as well. IOW, there was still an opportunity for a 2nd chance, unlike the passage you provided. Their fate was already sealed, there were no 2nd chances after that once that 40 years initially started. IMO, this 40 years leading up to 70 AD was giving them space to repent. In the account you brought up, repenting would have done none of them any good once God decided their fate for them. In the first century leading up to 70 AD, had any of the unbelieving Jews decided to repent and believe before 70 AD arrived, would that have been in vain on their part or would that mean they are no longer cursed with that fate?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

great, so you agree that genea, in that case, means generation. Can you give me any instance, outside of Matthew 24, where genea does not mean generation?

Yes, Matthew 23:36 for one. He was not referring to a chronological generation there, He was referencing a type of people (genea) that even included Cain, who would experience God's wrath. And the scribes and Pharisees were that type of people (genea) who were evil and adulterous. Jesus referred to them as an evil and adulterous generation that went all the way back to Cain. I say that because they were even responsible for the death of Abel.

The idea that "this generation" referred specifically to Jews living during that chronological generation is not accurate. Yes, the scribes and Pharisees were Jews and were alive at the time, but when Jesus used the word "generation" He was referring to an evil, adulterous type of people. Like Cain. And like the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees that Jesus was railing against. Yes, God's wrath came against Jews like the scribes and Pharisees in 70 AD, but those type of people were still around even after 70 AD. Surely, there are evil and spiritually adulterous people still today. Jesus will make this type of people pass away from the entire earth when He comes in the future.

What you don't seem to recognize is that when Jesus said "heaven and earth will pass away" in the very next verse after He referenced this generation passing away, He was implying that this generation would pass away when heaven and earth pass away, which will happen at His future second coming, just as Peter taught as well in 2 Peter 3.

The parable of the wedding feast tells. The good and bad are gathered into the wedding feast. (Gathered from the ends of the heavens and earth is a hebrew idiom).

Do you think that happened already in 70 AD? If so, how?

 

[sovereigngrace]

great, so you agree that genea, in that case, means generation. Can you give me any instance, outside of Matthew 24, where genea does not mean generation?



The parable of the wedding feast tells. The good and bad are gathered into the wedding feast. (Gathered from the ends of the heavens and earth is a hebrew idiom).

I have already shown you that the word interpreted "generation" is broader than you will acknowledge. Both the Greek words genos and genea refer to race - in this case the Jewish race. It means "this race" - as in "the successive members of a particular genealogy."

Many speculate on what genea is Jesus speaking of, and impose their own opinion of how long they think a generation is to fit theur theology.

Because you are so sold on Preterism and the coming of Titus in AD70 you cannot accept genea as anything other than 40 years back in Jesus day. To others, the meaning and context suggests that we are looking at an age or race, all depending on the context.

The detail re generation speaks of that genea alive when He returns in power and glory. The subject in view continues until the end of each respective chapter.

 

[sovereigngrace]

great, so you agree that genea, in that case, means generation. Can you give me any instance, outside of Matthew 24, where genea does not mean generation?



The parable of the wedding feast tells. The good and bad are gathered into the wedding feast. (Gathered from the ends of the heavens and earth is a hebrew idiom).

You need to read the NT account again. Christ's audience was told that. Ethnic Israel actually rejected Him. Jesus frequently encountered the hostility of the Christ-rejecting apostate Jews many times during His earthly ministry. Many times, He presented them with the simple Gospel, and many times they rejected it. They refused to receive their own Messiah. Jesus declared to “the Jews” in John 10:26-27, after they questioned His deity, “ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.”

These religious zealots were not part of God’s old covenant flock. They were not true Israel. They belonged to the natural seed of Abraham, not the spiritual seed. The belief that God has one plan of salvation for the ethnic relatives of Abraham and another for the Gentile people of the world is both mistaken and in conflict with clear and repeated Scripture. There is only one life-changing Gospel, containing one set of standards and requirements – it is open equally to both Jew and Gentile.

The Lord confirms this in Matthew 22:1-14 with the parable of the wedding feast. Through the imaginary of a king and his subjects, He spoke of the invitation He extended to the Jewish people – His intended guests. He showed how “they would not come” and how they made many pitiful excuses. In fact, “they made light” of the invitation “took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.” John 1:11 records, “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” In fact, not only did they reject Him, they cruelly nailed Him to a tree.

Since the cross natural Israel has largely continued to rebel against God’s gracious provision for sin, Jesus Christ. The king being angry at this “sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city” (Matthew 22:7). The Lord was here speaking of AD70 and the destruction of the Israeli nation. Having rejected his offer, the king’s servants were instructed to go “into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage” (Matthew 22:9). This was a picture of the Gospel going out to the nations – those that had previously been aliens to the favor of God and salvation. Through the Jews willful rejection of Christ, the Gentiles entered into God’s wonderful grace in their millions.

The Gospel of God would no longer be restricted to one individual earthly nation but rather to a broad spiritual nation that was birthed from above. John 1:12 goes on to declare, “But as many as received him (both Jew and Gentile), to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.”

 

[sovereigngrace]

great, so you agree that genea, in that case, means generation. Can you give me any instance, outside of Matthew 24, where genea does not mean generation?



The parable of the wedding feast tells. The good and bad are gathered into the wedding feast. (Gathered from the ends of the heavens and earth is a hebrew idiom).

The Jewish nation is no longer God's chosen vehicle. The Lord confirms this in Matthew 22:1-14 with the parable of the wedding feast. Through the imaginary of a king and his subjects, He spoke of the invitation He extended to the Jewish nation – His intended guests. He showed how “they would not come” and how they made many pitiful excuses. In fact, “they made light” of the invitation “took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.” John 1:11 records, “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” In fact, not only did they reject Him, they cruelly nailed Him to a tree. Since the cross the natural Jew has continued largely to rebel against God’s gracious provision for sin, Jesus Christ. The king being angry at this “sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.” The Lord was here speaking of AD70 and the destruction of the Israeli nation.

Having rejected his offer, the king’s servants were instructed to go “into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.” This was a picture of the Gospel going out to the nations – those that had previously been aliens to the favor of God and salvation. Through the Jews willful rejection of Christ, the Gentiles entered into God’s wonderful grace in their millions.

The Gospel of Christ would no longer be restricted to one individual earthly nation but rather to a broad spiritual nation that was birthed from above. Verse 12 of our previous reading, in John 1:11, goes on to declare, “But as many as received him (both Jew and Gentile), to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.”

 

[JosephZ]

Where are you getting this from that they never taught that Christ died for their sins?

There's no record of the Apostles ever teaching that Christ died for their sins in the New Testament, but there is support from scripture of the Apostles keeping the traditions of the Law, teaching the Law, telling the Jews they had to believe that Jesus was their Messiah, and to repent and be baptized so they could be forgiven. They taught that works were necessary for salvation rather than salvation being a gift of God, by His grace alone.

 

[St. Helens]

There's no record of the Apostles ever teaching that Christ died for their sins in the New Testament, but there is support from scripture of the Apostles keeping the traditions of the Law, teaching the Law, telling the Jews they had to believe that Jesus was their Messiah, and to repent and be baptized so they could be forgiven. They taught that works were necessary for salvation rather than salvation being a gift of God, by His grace alone.

I will just let the scripture speak for itself on this topic. I make no claim of being an expert.

Romans 5:6-11
6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

 

[Timtofly]

That’s what He said.

Yes He did. “These things”.

These things. Like He said. And He never said harvest.

Actually, I am saying what Jesus is saying.


so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:33-34

"Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors."

These things learned from the parable. What is near? The end. Not the Second Coming. What one learns from the parable is the prerequisite of the start of all the things leading up to the end. The parable teaches us who that generation will be.

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

This generation is only learned and understood from the parable. Learn the parable and all else falls into place.