This generation

[Hammster]

Who were you talking to here? Was this intended to be a response to what I said in post #915? If so, can you elaborate on what you're trying to say here?

It’s where He changes focus from His coming in judgement of Israel to His coming in glory to judge the earth.

 

[DavidPT]

You mean it makes no sense to you.

I'm assuming it makes no sense to Jesus either, and if anyone should know what He was meaning, I would think it would be Him.

Why does this generation in the OD have to be applicable only to the age they were living in at the time? Does it somehow mean 70 AD never actually happened if that is not what this generation is pertaining to?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It’s where He changes focus from His coming in judgement of Israel to His coming in glory to judge the earth.

I completely disagree. I see no basis for coming to that conclusion. He only spoke of one coming of the Son of man.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It’s where He changes focus from His coming in judgement of Israel to His coming in glory to judge the earth.

Do you believe He was asked about His coming in glory to judge the earth? If so, where? If not, then why did He bring it up?

 

[Hammster]

I'm assuming it makes no sense to Jesus either, and if anyone should know what He was meaning, I would think it would be Him.

Why does this generation in the OD have to be applicable only to the age they were living in at the time? Does it somehow mean 70 AD never actually happened if that is not what this generation is pertaining to?

I don’t understand your question.

 

[Hammster]

I completely disagree. I see no basis for coming to that conclusion. He only spoke of one coming of the Son of man.

Okay.

 

[Hammster]

Do you believe He was asked about His coming in glory to judge the earth? If so, where? If not, then why did He bring it up?

I’m going out on a limb here, but as God, I don’t think He needed to be asked.

 

[DavidPT]

I don’t understand your question.

What I'm getting at, if Jesus wasn't applying this generation to what would ultimately happen in 70 AD, this doesn't take away from the fact that 70 AD happened, regardless. What happened in 70 AD is not dependent on what this generation is pertaining to.

What if Jesus would have left that out of the OD altogether, any mention of this generation, would that have changed things and mean 70 AD would have never happened in that case? He already predicted it in the beginning of the OD.

And not one time in the OD, and let's use Luke 21 here, did He ever predict that this generation shall not pass away until what He said in verse 20 was fulfilled first. He said that much later in the text, not early on. He said it after He said until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. What is recorded in verse 24, still meaning Luke 21 here, it was what happened in verse 20 that led to them being led away captive into all nations. That captivity began in the first century, it didn't end in the first century. That means this is also something that has to be fulfilled before this generation passes away. The captivity has to end first.

 

[Hammster]

What I'm getting at, if Jesus wasn't applying this generation to what would ultimately happen in 70 AD, this doesn't take away from the fact that 70 AD happened, regardless. What happened in 70 AD is not dependent on what this generation is pertaining to.

What if Jesus would have left that out of the OD altogether, any mention of this generation, would that have changed things and mean 70 AD would have never happened in that case? He already predicted it in the beginning of the OD.

And not one time in the OD, and let's use Luke 21 here, did He ever predict that this generation shall not pass away until what He said in verse 20 was fulfilled first. He said that much later in the text, not early on. He said it after He said until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. What is recorded in verse 24, still meaning Luke 21 here, it was what happened in verse 20 that led to them being led away captive into all nations. That captivity began in the first century, it didn't end in the first century. That means this is also something that has to be fulfilled before this generation passes away. The captivity has to end first.

All nations surrounded me;
In the name of the Lord I will surely cut them off.
— Psalm 118:10
Was that really all nations, or was this hyperbole?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I’m going out on a limb here, but as God, I don’t think He needed to be asked.

And here's yet another unconvincing response from you.

No, He was asked about it earlier when He was asked about His second coming and the end of the age. He obviously talks about His second coming in Matthew 25:1-13, so there's no reason besides doctrinal bias to think that what He said in Matthew 25 was not part of His answer to that question asked in Matthew 24:3.

And Matthew 24:27-31 is clearly part of His answer to that question as well. He only spoke of one coming of the Son of man, not two as you imagine.

 

[Hammster]

And here's yet another unconvincing response from you.

No, He was asked about it earlier when He was asked about His second coming and the end of the age. He obviously talks about His second coming in Matthew 25:1-13, so there's no reason besides doctrinal bias to think that what He said in Matthew 25 was not part of His answer to that question asked in Matthew 24:3.

And Matthew 24:27-31 is clearly part of His answer to that question as well. He only spoke of one coming of the Son of man, not two as you imagine.

That’s unconvincing since it’s obvious that He was speaking of coming in judgment during that generation.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

All nations surrounded me;
In the name of the Lord I will surely cut them off.
— Psalm 118:10
Was that really all nations, or was this hyperbole?

I'm pretty sure them being led away captive into literally all nations or not was not the point DavidPT was making there. They were led captive into a bunch of other nations, but not literally all nations. Great. But, the point is that it took time for that to happen and it didn't all happen before 70 AD. Wasn't them being led captive into other nations part of "all these things" that Jesus said had to be fulfilled before this generation passed away? That is what I believe David was trying to get at and I believe it's a good point to raise.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That’s unconvincing since it’s obvious that He was speaking of coming in judgment during that generation.

No, it's unconvincing because there's no indication anywhere in the text of Matthew 24-25 that He was speaking of two different comings of the Son of man. He was asked about His one second coming and He only talked about one coming of the Son of man, not two.

Only doctrinal bias can lead to someone trying to claim He spoke of two different comings of the Son of man in the Olivet Discourse.

Jesus did not come in any way, shape or form in 70 AD. Yes, the Jews were punished and Jesus said that would happen, but that was not His coming at the end of the age. The end of the age has not yet occurred. You are seemingly ignoring the other things Jesus said about the end of the age and what He said about this age and the age to come. You need to learn to interpret scripture with scripture.

 

[Hammster]

I'm pretty sure them being led away captive into literally all nations or not was not the point DavidPT was making there. They were led captive into a bunch of other nations, but not literally all nations. Great. But, the point is that it took time for that to happen and it didn't all happen before 70 AD. Wasn't them being led captive into other nations part of "all these things" that Jesus said had to be fulfilled before this generation passed away? That is what I believe David was trying to get at and I believe it's a good point to raise.

How many nations must I show to satisfy you?

 

[Hammster]

No, it's unconvincing because there's no indication anywhere in the text of Matthew 24-25 that He was speaking of two different comings of the Son of man. He was asked about His one second coming and He only talked about one coming of the Son of man, not two.

Only doctrinal bias can lead to someone trying to claim He spoke of two different comings of the Son of man in the Olivet Discourse.

Jesus did not come in any way, shape or form in 70 AD. Yes, the Jews were punished and Jesus said that would happen, but that was not His coming at the end of the age. The end of the age has not yet occurred. You are seemingly ignoring the other things Jesus said about the end of the age and what He said about this age and the age to come. You need to learn to interpret scripture with scripture.

This is unconvincing because He addressed their question. He obviously addressed their question about the His coming in judgement on Israel because they remembered all He just said. The end of the age is obviously the end of the OT practices. This was obviously done by the destruction of the temple. In that generation.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

How many nations must I show to satisfy you?

Wow, are you purposely missing the point or just not reading what I said carefully? The number of nations they were led captive into is not part of the point I was making and I don't believe it was part of the point DavidPT was making, either. Try to read more carefully.

 

[Hammster]

Wow, are you purposely missing the point or just not reading what I said carefully? The number of nations they were led captive into is not part of the point I was making and I don't believe it was part of the point DavidPT was making, either. Try to read more carefully.

Did you know that during the Jewish Wars, over 90000 were led captive, mostly to Egypt, but also to other nations?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

This is unconvincing because He addressed their question. He obviously addressed their question about the His coming in judgement on Israel because they remembered all He just said. The end of the age is obviously the end of the OT practices. This was obviously done by the destruction of the temple. In that generation.

You're obviously wrong. You're not taking into account what Jesus said about how the end of the age would be identified.

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

You say "the end of the age is obviously the end of the OT practices" and, yet, that is not how Jesus said the end of the age would be identified. Why do you seemingly ignore other things He said about the end of the age and about this age and the age to come? Based on what Jesus said in Luke 20:34-36 the end of the age would occur when the resurrection of the dead occurs and it will be marked by no more marriage and no more death. That has clearly not yet occurred. Please address this.

Also, the following makes it clear that the judgment of all people will occur at the end of the age.

Matthew 13:47 “Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

What Jesus said has not yet occurred because the day of judgment has not yet occurred, so that means the end of the age has not yet occurred. Please address this. You should not interpret what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse about the end of the age without taking everything else He said about the end of the age into account.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Did you know that during the Jewish Wars, over 90000 were led captive, mostly to Egypt, but also to other nations?

No, I didn't know that exact number. But, what does this have to do with what I was talking about? Were the Jews being led captive into other nations not part of "all these things" that had to occur before this generation passed away (which you say occurred in 70 AD)?

 

[Hammster]

You're obviously wrong. You're not taking into account what Jesus said about how the end of the age would be identified.

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

You say "the end of the age is obviously the end of the OT practices" and, yet, that is not how Jesus said the end of the age would be identified. Why do you seemingly ignore other things He said about the end of the age and about this age and the age to come? Based on what Jesus said in Luke 20:34-36 the end of the age would occur when the resurrection of the dead occurs and it will be marked by no more marriage and no more death. That has clearly not yet occurred. Please address this.

Also, the following makes it clear that the judgment of all people will occur at the end of the age.

Matthew 13:47 “Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

What Jesus said has not yet occurred because the day of judgment has not yet occurred, so that means the end of the age has not yet occurred. Please address this. You should not interpret what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse about the end of the age without taking everything else He said about the end of the age into account.

Are you aware of the various ages throughout scripture? We know that He’s obviously talking about the end of the end of the old covenant. The glory of the Lord departed the temple when He walked out. The religious leaders were condemned for their murder of previous prophets. They certain were to be judged for murdering Him. And let’s not forget a big one. He said all those things (vv 4-34) would happen in that generation.