This or That

[claninja]

Why didn’t the authors of the gospels use “that” generation instead of “this” generation, if Jesus didn’t mean the generation standing in front of him?

Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this (αὕτη) generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Original Word: οὗτος, αὕτη, τοῦτο
Part of Speech: Demonstrative Pronoun
Transliteration: houtos, hauté, touto
Phonetic Spelling: (hoo'-tos)
Definition: this

Exodus 1:6 (LXX) And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that (ἐκεῖνος) generation.

Judges 2:10 (LXX) And also all that (ἐκεῖνος) generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there aroseanother generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.

Psalm 95:10 (LXX) Forty years long was I grieved with that ( ἐκεῖνος) generation, and said, It is a people that do errin their heart, and they have not known my ways:

Original Word: ἐκεῖνος, η, ο
Part of Speech: Demonstrative Pronoun
Transliteration: ekeinos
Phonetic Spelling: (ek-i'-nos)
Definition: that one (or neut. that thing), often intensified by the article preceding
Usage: that, that one there, yonder.

 

[keras]

Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this (αὕτη) generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Jesus meant a future generation. Proved by how all these things didn't happen in the first century.
Specifically, in verse 32, Jesus Prophesied the return of Judah, the fig tree; back into the holy Land. This happened in 1948 and so now we know the end is near, at the very door.
Obviously, the end is yet to come.

 

[Marilyn C]

`This generation, ` is in context with the parable. It is in the present tense of the fig tree putting forth its leaves: becoming a nation.

 

[Douggg]

Jesus meant a future generation. Proved by how all these things didn't happen in the first century.
Specifically, in verse 32, Jesus Prophesied the return of Judah, the fig tree; back into the holy Land. This happened in 1948 and so now we know the end is near, at the very door.
Obviously, the end is yet to come.

Actually 1967, because the fig tree is Jerusalem, and also Daniel 9's 70 weeks are determined up the Holy City of Jerusalem.

In 1967, the Jews, Daniel's people, regained control of Jerusalem and made it their capital of modern day Israel.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The 1948 rebirth of Israel in the land though is also prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-8 about a nation being born all once, in a day.

 

[tonychanyt]

Why didn’t the authors of the gospels use “that” generation instead of “this” generation, if Jesus didn’t mean the generation standing in front of him?

Jesus wanted every generation to be ready for his second coming. See This GENERATION will not pass away until all these things take place and follow up there

 

[claninja]

Jesus meant a future generation. Proved by how all these things didn't happen in the first century.
Specifically, in verse 32, Jesus Prophesied the return of Judah, the fig tree; back into the holy Land. This happened in 1948 and so now we know the end is near, at the very door.
Obviously, the end is yet to come.

Well, wars, famines, earthquakes, pestilence, persecution, false prophets, lawlessness, the gospel going to whole oikoumene, and the destruction of the temple and city did occur in Jesus’ generation.

so if Jesus didn’t mean his generation, why didn’t the gospels use that (ἐκεῖνος) generation, instead of this (αὕτη) generation?

 

[tonychanyt]

Jesus meant a future generation.

I agree. See This GENERATION will not pass away until all these things take place and follow up there

 

[DavidPT]

I don't know why it would matter one way or the other as to if He had said 'that' rather than 'this', since this generation could simply be meaning the following---2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

That this heavens and the earth, which are now, shall not pass until these things be fulfilled. Meaning what Jesus prophesied in the Discourse, and that His Apostles said elsewhere, such as 2 Peter 3 here, so on and so on.

Why can't Preterists see that when Jesus said what He did about this generation not passing until all is fulfilled, that the next thing He said is Heaven and earth shall pass away, undeniably involving some of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3, for one thing, and how it connects with that in the end of this current age?

The verse I already brought up, 2 Peter 3:7, what is the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men involving? Is it not involving the day of the Lord that comes as a thief in the night? Maybe that's why Jesus next said---But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. And what is at the end of the day of the Lord? Is it not the new heavens and new earth?

The following below, meaning the passages I submitted, is the context we should be reading 'this generation' in since it is obviously involving all these other things as well. What I have underlined in particular, if Preterists are going to persist in insisting, and surely they are, no doubt, that 'this generation' can only be meaning the generation they were living in the time, thus involves 70 AD, Preterists then need to show how the things I have underlined below are also relevant to 70 AD.

Unless Preterists can convincingly show how all these other things relate to 70 AD, in the meantime, don't be telling some of the rest of us that it is Preterists that are interpreting what is meant by this generation correctly, if Preterists can't even reasonably show how what I have underlined fits that interpretation as well. For example. Matthew 24:48-49, which is clearly involving the same coming of the Son of man verse 39 is involving, as to how verse 48 and 49 possibly fits what Preterists allege verse 39 fits.

I didn't bother underlining the parts involving the comparing to Noah's flood since I already know Preterists think that fits 70 AD. But do all these other things fit 70 AD as well, since they too are obviously connected with the example pertaining to Noah's flood and the coming of the Son of man? Pretty much everything I have underlined involves the coming of the Son of Man, the same coming Preterists apply to the events involving 70 AD.

Luke 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man


Mark 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
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

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh
45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing
47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods
48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

 

[Zao is life]

Because whether this generation or that generation, Jesus is speaking about the generation that fits the context of what He is saying, and since He had just spoken about the condition of the world and of the church in the days immediately preceding His return, and then spoke about His return, the context is this generation that He was speaking about in the above context.

 

[claninja]

I don't know why it would matter one way or the other as to if He had said 'that' rather than 'this', since this generation could simply be meaning the following---2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

That this heavens and the earth, which are now, shall not pass until these things be fulfilled. Meaning what Jesus prophesied in the Discourse, and that His Apostles said elsewhere, such as 2 Peter 3 here, so on and so on.

Why can't Preterists see that when Jesus said what He did about this generation not passing until all is fulfilled, that the next thing He said is Heaven and earth shall pass away, undeniably involving some of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3, for one thing, and how it connects with that in the end of this current age?

The verse I already brought up, 2 Peter 3:7, what is the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men involving? Is it not involving the day of the Lord that comes as a thief in the night? Maybe that's why Jesus next said---But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. And what is at the end of the day of the Lord? Is it not the new heavens and new earth?

The following below, meaning the passages I submitted, is the context we should be reading 'this generation' in since it is obviously involving all these other things as well. What I have underlined in particular, if Preterists are going to persist in insisting, and surely they are, no doubt, that 'this generation' can only be meaning the generation they were living in the time, thus involves 70 AD, Preterists then need to show how the things I have underlined below are also relevant to 70 AD.

Unless Preterists can convincingly show how all these other things relate to 70 AD, in the meantime, don't be telling some of the rest of us that it is Preterists that are interpreting what is meant by this generation correctly, if Preterists can't even reasonably show how what I have underlined fits that interpretation as well. For example. Matthew 24:48-49, which is clearly involving the same coming of the Son of man verse 39 is involving, as to how verse 48 and 49 possibly fits what Preterists allege verse 39 fits.

I didn't bother underlining the parts involving the comparing to Noah's flood since I already know Preterists think that fits 70 AD. But do all these other things fit 70 AD as well, since they too are obviously connected with the example pertaining to Noah's flood and the coming of the Son of man? Pretty much everything I have underlined involves the coming of the Son of Man, the same coming Preterists apply to the events involving 70 AD.

Luke 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man


Mark 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
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

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh
45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing
47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods
48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

There is a big grammatical difference between the words “this” and “that”. They do not mean the same thing.

“that” generation would indicate a different generation then the one contemporary with Jesus’ time. The LXX OT always uses “that” to indicate a different generation than the one contemporary with the author. Here are some examples.

Exodus 1:6 (LXX) And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that (ἐκεῖνος) generation.

Judges 2:10 (LXX) And also all that (ἐκεῖνος)generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there aroseanother generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.

Psalm 95:10 (LXX) Forty years long was I grieved with that ( ἐκεῖνος) generation, and said, It is a people that do….

I’m not sure why you are appealing to 2 peter 3? Heaven and earth passing away was used by ANE people to describe the terrifying fall of kingdoms.

As to the “day nor hour”, that was a Galilean wedding expression. While the guests, bride, and son, knew the general time frame. They did know the exact day nor hour that the father would send his son for the bride.

Jesus said heaven and earth would pass away but never his words. Jesus also said that not one iota of the Law would pass away until heaven and earth passed away - so was Jesus being literal or was he using a Hebrew idiom?

 

[daq]

Why didn’t the authors of the gospels use “that” generation instead of “this” generation, if Jesus didn’t mean the generation standing in front of him?

Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this (αὕτη) generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Original Word: οὗτος, αὕτη, τοῦτο
Part of Speech: Demonstrative Pronoun
Transliteration: houtos, hauté, touto
Phonetic Spelling: (hoo'-tos)
Definition: this

Exodus 1:6 (LXX) And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that (ἐκεῖνος) generation.

Judges 2:10 (LXX) And also all that (ἐκεῖνος) generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there aroseanother generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.

Psalm 95:10 (LXX) Forty years long was I grieved with that ( ἐκεῖνος) generation, and said, It is a people that do errin their heart, and they have not known my ways:

Original Word: ἐκεῖνος, η, ο
Part of Speech: Demonstrative Pronoun
Transliteration: ekeinos
Phonetic Spelling: (ek-i'-nos)
Definition: that one (or neut. that thing), often intensified by the article preceding
Usage: that, that one there, yonder.

Jesus said heaven and earth would pass away but never his words. Jesus also said that not one iota of the Law would pass away until heaven and earth passed away - so was Jesus being literal or was he using a Hebrew idiom?

If you understand that there are four generations to the first age of the man, like the four seasons in a full year, then it makes perfect sense: "this generation" in the context of Matthew 24 is speaking of the fourth generation. That's why he says that his words shall not pass away: for they apply to every disciple or believer in any age or era. Say you are describing the tribulations and troubles of these four generations, with each different generation you might start with, this generation will be, etc., etc.

The first teaching regarding these four generations may be found in the Torah but it's not easy to explain so I will jump way ahead to Proverbs and the Testimony of the Meshiah just for a few examples.

Proverbs 30:11-14 KJV
11 There is a generation [1] that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.
12 There is a generation [2] that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.
13 There is a generation [3], O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up.
14 There is a generation [4], whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, [great teeth of iron, Dan 7:7] to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.

Matthew 12:38-45 KJV
38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation [1] seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation [2], and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation [3], and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, [Rev 17:9-11] and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation [4].

If indeed these things apply to every believer then they have happened and they continue to happen since that time: that is why these words cannot and shall not pass away. Neither Preterism nor hyper-literal Futurism have it fully correct because even if these things were global one-time events, as according to the Futurist view, they cannot pass away: they are not one-time events because if they were then these words would become of no more effect once they were fulfilled. Likewise the Preterist view, which places so much in the first century, accomplishes the same error: effectively nullifying the efficacy of these words by claiming they have already been fulfilled as one-time events when they are not so. This is why the Apostolic authors including Paul write about the immanency of the coming and appearance of Meshiah. It was immanent to those to whom they wrote in their own times just as it remains immanent now to all the faithful: to each in his or her own appointed times, times appoint of the Father, and no one knows the day or the hour.

 

[claninja]

If you understand that there are four generations to the first age of the man, like the four seasons in a full year, then it makes perfect sense: "this generation" in the context of Matthew 24 is speaking of the fourth generation. That's why he says that his words shall not pass away: for they apply to every disciple or believer in any age or era. Say you are describing the tribulations and troubles of these four generations, with each different generation you might start with, this generation will be, etc., etc.

The first teaching regarding these four generations may be found in the Torah but it's not easy to explain so I will jump way ahead to Proverbs and the Testimony of the Meshiah just for a few examples.

Proverbs 30:11-14 KJV
11 There is a generation [1] that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.
12 There is a generation [2] that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.
13 There is a generation [3], O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up.
14 There is a generation [4], whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, [great teeth of iron, Dan 7:7] to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.

Matthew 12:38-45 KJV
38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation [1] seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation [2], and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation [3], and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, [Rev 17:9-11] and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation [4].

If indeed these things apply to every believer then they have happened and they continue to happen since that time: that is why these words cannot and shall not pass away. Neither Preterism nor hyper-literal Futurism have it fully correct because even if these things were global one-time events, as according to the Futurist view, they cannot pass away: they are not one-time events because if they were then these words would become of no more effect once they were fulfilled. Likewise the Preterist view, which places so much in the first century, accomplishes the same error: effectively nullifying the efficacy of these words by claiming they have already been fulfilled as one-time events when they are not so. This is why the Apostolic authors including Paul write about the immanency of the coming and appearance of Meshiah. It was immanent to those to whom they wrote in their own times just as it remains immanent now to all the faithful: to each in his or her own appointed times, times appoint of the Father, and no one knows the day or the hour.

Since genea is a Greek word, I always check the Old Testament Greek Septuagint to verify.

Genea is not found in the proverbs 30:11-14, so that passage would be irrelevant to the OP.

Genea refers to a group of people living around the same time.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Actually 1967, because the fig tree is Jerusalem, and also Daniel 9's 70 weeks are determined up the Holy City of Jerusalem.

In 1967, the Jews, Daniel's people, regained control of Jerusalem and made it their capital of modern day Israel.

Speculation.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The 1948 rebirth of Israel in the land though is also prophesied in Isaiah 66:7-8 about a nation being born all once, in a day.

Incorrect!

Daniel 9:24-27 is all about God and HIS people, the congregation of Israel. The "thy people" is the congregation of Israel, not only the Jews in the Middle East. The "holy city" is spiritual Jerusalem, not a physical city. She is because her sin ended, reconciled for iniquity, brought in everlasting righteousness, and anoint the most Holy (Christ). Christ was cut off from the living not for Himself, but the transgressions of His people!

Isaiah 53:8

• "He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare His generation? for He was CUT OFF out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was He stricken."

"My people" is not only strictly the Jews but also the Gentiles in Christ.

She is the Bride of Christ, made up of the congregation of Israel from the Old and New Testament. Nothing is about the Physical city of Jerusalem, the physical temple, etc. This explains why the doctrine of premillennialism, preterism, and Dispensationalism, and yes some amillennialism are all wrong about Daniel's 70th week.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I found this funny with Preterism doctrine where they believe the generation should be 40 years to fit their 70AD theory. But really, who told them that a generation was 40 years? Did they think they mean that a single 40 year "generation of evil" was responsible for all the blood shed from Abel to Zechariah? After that, the generation passed, was the slate clean and there no more generation of evil responsible for shedding the blood of God's prophets? That is the untenable conclusion we would have to come to if we understood this generation as they suppose we should. But that is an unbiblical conclusion. Rather, we should define a generation by scripture and let God tell us what generation He was referring to. Was it not the generation (family or children) of evil, who shall not pass away from this earth until all is fulfilled? That generation in contrast to the chosen and holy generation whom God has called out of darkness into His marvelous light (1st Peter 2:9)? Again, only if we allow Scripture to interpret Scripture and not Josephus, church tradition, or the vaunted authors. Selah!

This generation in Matthew 24 is the generation of evil that people in Christ's day were just part of? It did not end with them! The generation continued through the wicked people until Christ's second coming when all wicked people (generation of evil) will be thrown into lake of fire. Simple as that! Nothing to do with the silly 70AD theory.

 

[claninja]

Because whether this generation or that generation, Jesus is speaking about the generation that fits the context of what He is saying, and since He had just spoken about the condition of the world and of the church in the days immediately preceding His return, and then spoke about His return, the context is this generation that He was speaking about in the above context.

The context was set by Jesus - not one stone set upon another - temple destruction.

Was the temple destroyed within Jesus’ generation? Yes.

 

[TribulationSigns]

The context was set by Jesus - not one stone set upon another - temple destruction.

Wrong temple.

Was the temple destroyed within Jesus’ generation? Yes.

Yes but what temple did Christ actually talk about? That is why there are different understandings between you and me.
For example:

Matthew 24:1-2

• "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
• And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple building, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact. And as far as the prophecy, and despite suppositions to the contrary, our Lord was very specific saying not only that "not one stone would be left standing one upon another of it, but further amplified it by saying they (the stones one upon another) would all (BAR NONE) be thrown down! Even by using the vaunted secular history books we know of a certainty that more than one stone was left standing one upon another AFTER AD 70. In point of fact, to this very day there are foundation stones left standing "one upon another" of the physical Temple. Moreover, there were (and let's not forget this) many stones of the physical city Jerusalem left standing one upon another. Again, the qualifying prophecy was that "not one stone would be left standing one upon another. Too many people want to "ignore" this qualification because it doesn't fit or conform to their personal/private interpretations of this prophecy taking place in AD 70.

Luke 19:41-46

• "And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
• Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
• For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
• And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.
• And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought;
• Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves."

Many Christians refuse to "hear" the part where Christ unambiguously says the city shall be laid even with the ground and her children within her. It's very willfully convenient to leave that part out. Who TRULY were the enemies of Jerusalem and how were they compassed round about her? Who truly brought the city to desolation? Was it the Romans, or was it those who would smite the Shepherd? Only by comparing scripture with scripture will we ever know the "TRUE" answer to that. No, it's not the Romans! Christ said that the city Jerusalem itself and all its children within would be laid even with the ground so that Not one stone would be left standing one upon another. Again, Christ's specific qualification for fulfillment, not mine. Of course, the physical city remained with many stones left standing one upon another, which means that the physical city in AD 70 was NOT what Christ was speaking about in the prophecy. Only their spiritual city, the Old Testament congregation qualifies for having been completely laid even with the ground and brought to desolation. YOU need to UNDERSTAND that Christ did NOT weep for literal stones or for a physical city Jerusalem, he wept FOR the congregation Jerusalem, the people who were the stones, and the city proper!!! It is "THEY" who would be brought to desolation or total ruin by their abominations, and it is they who were laid even with the ground. That is why the Apostle Paul also wept for his kinsmen according to the flesh. Because He understood that at that moment, they were no longer the people of God. That is the ruin that came upon Jerusalem because of her abominations.

Romans 9:8

• "That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

Something has already taken place where the Old Testament congregation has been brought to ruin. They have been thrown down and would never be the representation of the holy city of God ever again! This is why the veil of the Holy Temple being torn in two signified.

Matthew 27:50-51

• "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
• And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;"

This TRUE destruction of Jerusalem, the holy city, didn't occur in AD 70, but when Christ was crucified on the cross. Hello?! When the Temple veil was torn in two and the rocks rent that symbolized there was instituted a new way, a New Temple (a rebuilding or as Biblically put, "Build again"). And in order for the building again in THREE DAYS, there would have to he been ruin before. Selah! For how do you rebuild up something that has not been previously brought down to ruin. Not one stone was left one upon another in that city because by their abominations, it was laid waste--the Kingdom was taken from them and given to another. Where all stones were thrown down, Christ came to start the rebuilding, being the beginning, the cornrstone of that rebuilding. Not rebuilding a physical Temple as so many modern Christians suppose, but as God had always intended.

Matthew 21:42-43

• "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
• Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

The Holy city representation of the congregation of God, the kingdom of God on earth, was taken from them and was instituted in the New Testament Church! This is a biblical fact! Christ is the beginning, the cornerstone of that rebuilding of what was brought to ruin. The people of the congregation built upon Him are the stones of that rebuilding of city and Temple. Thrown down, rebuilt, it's not rocket science, it's simply understanding Scripture spiritually, the way our Lord fully intended. Do you not realize that Christians are spiritual beings? We don't understand things in the way the world does, but in the Spirit of truth. Comparing scripture with scripture is the only sound hermeneutic whereby we may understand righteously God's view of things like I have said many times! Will anyone hear?
1st Corinthians 2:13

• "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

Not by comparing the carnal, natural and physical with the carnal, but by spiritual with spiritual. These are things that man's natural wisdom will miss as he looks to worldly or carnal interpretations through history books, Jospheus, nations, and political rulers.

It is only in searching the word of God where we will find how Jerusalem was brought to desolation and ruin, and when.

Matthew 12:25-27

• "And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
• And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
• And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges."

Jerusalem was brought to ruin because it was a city that was divided against itself, no longer holy and couldn't stand. That's not talking about an inanimate object such as a physical city or physical stones, but people. Thus they were destroyed every last stone laid level with the ground. And a rebuilding commenced in Christ as the first stone. This is the "TRUE" restoration of Israel, which secular history cannot dream of comprehending.

Acts 15:16-17

• "After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
• That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things."

The Tabernacle was indeed fallen, and it had to be rebuilt, and the ruins restored, and this is all talking about Christ and the New Testament congregation after the Cross! Look deeper into the prophecy and know that it is true. What many people don't understand is the spiritual nature of the Bible. A literal Temple or rebuilding is NOT in view. These people were the stones that were laid level in ruin, and Christ was the beginning of a new building, with new stones. God is not interested in your physical bricks falling except in seeing what they may not see.

Matthew 21:41-43

• "They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
• Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
• Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

The Old Jerusalem was laid ruin at the cross by their rejection of Christ, the New Testament Jerusalem is built on their ruins, and we are the stones of that "building again" of the ruins. One laid one upon another. These are spiritual truths, not truths anyone will find in a secular history book, but ONLY in the word of God diligently searched out! And in searching it out we find that the Temple was destroyed at His death. But you need to understand that the responsibility for that destruction rests upon the head of those who rejected Christ. Not Titus and Romans. They, the Jews, the old testament congregation (according to scripture) destroyed the sanctuary, they are the very people, not Romans, who Jesus said (according to scripture) "destroy this temple," and in three days the Lord raised it up. Sure, you can wax poetic about how no one really destroyed the Temple until AD 70, but according to prophecy, they not only did destroy the holy temple by their abominations but it was left desolate (totally in ruins) by its abominations, not by men from Rome!

Look, Claninja, anyone can study history. There is no Biblical law against the study of History. The problem comes in when Christians attempt to use secular history to prove fulfilled scripture. History doesn't prove scripture, scripture proves History. The scriptures are not in error, it is YOUR UNDERSTANDING of them is in error. That can be very easily proven, IF we take Christ at His word when He says that not one stone will be left standing one upon another. For example, there were many stones left standing one upon another after the Romans attack of the city, and anyone can prove that for themselves by going to Jerusalem today and seeing the ruins and walls and stones left standing one upon another. Unless Jesus made a mistake in claiming they wouldn't be left that way, then obviously your understanding of what He truly was saying is flawed.

@sovereigngrace
@Spiritual Jew

 

[Matt5]

The Bible is not trying to lead you to the light concerning end-times events. There is a reason for all that confusing language.

The Bible is trying to hide bad news.

If you knew the truth you wouldn't believe it anyway, so what little you could have gotten has been withheld.

This is all in Matthew 13:10-17.

In the parable of the figure tree, the truth is being hidden. IMO, it seems to say end-time events will complete within about 100 years after they start. If Israel is the start then wrap-up is probably before 2050. The entire planet is going to unravel within about 27 years. I think even sooner, like 20 years.

That's bad news. And you don't believe me.

 

[claninja]

Wrong temple.


Yes but what temple did Christ actually talk about? That is why there are different understanding between you and me. For example:

Matthew 24:1-2

• "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
• And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple building, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact. And as far as the prophecy, and despite suppositions to the contrary, our Lord was very specific saying not only that "not one stone would be left standing one upon another of it, but further amplified it by saying they (the stones one upon another) would all (BAR NONE) be thrown down! Even by using the vaunted secular history books we know of a certainty that more than one stone was left standing one upon another AFTER AD 70. In point of fact, to this very day there are foundation stones left standing "one upon another" of the physical Temple. Moreover, there were (and let's not forget this) many stones of the physical city Jerusalem left standing one upon another. Again, the qualifying prophecy was that "not one stone would be left standing one upon another. Too many people want to "ignore" this qualification because it doesn't fit or conform to their personal/private interpretations of this prophecy taking place in AD 70.

Luke 19:41-46

• "And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
• Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
• For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
• And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.
• And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought;
• Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves."

Many Christians refuse to "hear" the part where Christ unambiguously says the city shall be laid even with the ground and her children within her. It's very willfully convenient to leave that part out. Who TRULY were the enemies of Jerusalem and how were they compassed round about her? Who truly brought the city to desolation? Was it the Romans, or was it those who would smite the Shepherd? Only by comparing scripture with scripture will we ever know the "TRUE" answer to that. No, it's not the Romans! Christ said that the city Jerusalem itself and all its children within would be laid even with the ground so that Not one stone would be left standing one upon another. Again, Christ's specific qualification for fulfillment, not mine. Of course, the physical city remained with many stones left standing one upon another, which means that the physical city in AD 70 was NOT what Christ was speaking about in the prophecy. Only their spiritual city, the Old Testament congregation qualifies for having been completely laid even with the ground and brought to desolation. YOU need to UNDERSTAND that Christ did NOT weep for literal stones or for a physical city Jerusalem, he wept FOR the congregation Jerusalem, the people who were the stones, and the city proper!!! It is "THEY" who would be brought to desolation or total ruin by their abominations, and it is they who were laid even with the ground. That is why the Apostle Paul also wept for his kinsmen according to the flesh. Because He understood that at that moment, they were no longer the people of God. That is the ruin that came upon Jerusalem because of her abominations.

Romans 9:8

• "That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

Something has already taken place where the Old Testament congregation has been brought to ruin. They have been thrown down and would never be the representation of the holy city of God ever again! This is why the veil of the Holy Temple being torn in two signified.

Matthew 27:50-51

• "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
• And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;"

This TRUE destruction of Jerusalem, the holy city, didn't occur in AD 70, but when Christ was crucified on the cross. Hello?! When the Temple veil was torn in two and the rocks rent that symbolized there was instituted a new way, a New Temple (a rebuilding or as Biblically put, "Build again"). And in order for the building again in THREE DAYS, there would have to he been ruin before. Selah! For how do you rebuild up something that has not been previously brought down to ruin. Not one stone was left one upon another in that city because by their abominations, it was laid waste--the Kingdom was taken from them and given to another. Where all stones were thrown down, Christ came to start the rebuilding, being the beginning, the cornrstone of that rebuilding. Not rebuilding a physical Temple as so many modern Christians suppose, but as God had always intended.

Matthew 21:42-43

• "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
• Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

The Holy city representation of the congregation of God, the kingdom of God on earth, was taken from them and was instituted in the New Testament Church! This is a biblical fact! Christ is the beginning, the cornerstone of that rebuilding of what was brought to ruin. The people of the congregation built upon Him are the stones of that rebuilding of city and Temple. Thrown down, rebuilt, it's not rocket science, it's simply understanding Scripture spiritually, the way our Lord fully intended. Do you not realize that Christians are spiritual beings? We don't understand things in the way the world does, but in the Spirit of truth. Comparing scripture with scripture is the only sound hermeneutic whereby we may understand righteously God's view of things like I have said many times! Will anyone hear?
1st Corinthians 2:13

• "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

Not by comparing the carnal, natural and physical with the carnal, but by spiritual with spiritual. These are things that man's natural wisdom will miss as he looks to worldly or carnal interpretations through history books, Jospheus, nations, and political rulers.

It is only in searching the word of God where we will find how Jerusalem was brought to desolation and ruin, and when.

Matthew 12:25-27

• "And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
• And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
• And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges."

Jerusalem was brought to ruin because it was a city that was divided against itself, no longer holy and couldn't stand. That's not talking about an inanimate object such as a physical city or physical stones, but people. Thus they were destroyed every last stone laid level with the ground. And a rebuilding commenced in Christ as the first stone. This is the "TRUE" restoration of Israel, which secular history cannot dream of comprehending.

Acts 15:16-17

• "After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
• That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things."

The Tabernacle was indeed fallen, and it had to be rebuilt, and the ruins restored, and this is all talking about Christ and the New Testament congregation after the Cross! Look deeper into the prophecy and know that it is true. What many people don't understand is the spiritual nature of the Bible. A literal Temple or rebuilding is NOT in view. These people were the stones that were laid level in ruin, and Christ was the beginning of a new building, with new stones. God is not interested in your physical bricks falling except in seeing what they may not see.

Matthew 21:41-43

• "They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
• Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
• Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

The Old Jerusalem was laid ruin at the cross by their rejection of Christ, the New Testament Jerusalem is built on their ruins, and we are the stones of that "building again" of the ruins. One laid one upon another. These are spiritual truths, not truths anyone will find in a secular history book, but ONLY in the word of God diligently searched out! And in searching it out we find that the Temple was destroyed at His death. But you need to understand that the responsibility for that destruction rests upon the head of those who rejected Christ. Not Titus and Romans. They, the Jews, the old testament congregation (according to scripture) destroyed the sanctuary, they are the very people, not Romans, who Jesus said (according to scripture) "destroy this temple," and in three days the Lord raised it up. Sure, you can wax poetic about how no one really destroyed the Temple until AD 70, but according to prophecy, they not only did destroy the holy temple by their abominations but it was left desolate (totally in ruins) by its abominations, not by men from Rome!

Look, Claninja, anyone can study history. There is no Biblical law against the study of History. The problem comes in when Christians attempt to use secular history to prove fulfilled scripture. History doesn't prove scripture, scripture proves History. The scriptures are not in error, it is YOUR UNDERSTANDING of them is in error. That can be very easily proven, IF we take Christ at His word when He says that not one stone will be left standing one upon another. For example, there were many stones left standing one upon another after the Romans attack of the city, and anyone can prove that for themselves by going to Jerusalem today and seeing the ruins and walls and stones left standing one upon another. Unless Jesus made a mistake in claiming they wouldn't be left that way, then obviously your understanding of what He truly was saying is flawed.

Matthew 24 is about the destruction of the “hieron”

The body of Christ is never referred to as the “hieron” in any clear teaching by Jesus nor the apostles.


The temple complex “hieron” was completely destroyed with Jesus’ generation (genea) . That’s an objective fact, regardless of how you attempt to change the definition of words to fit your theology.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Matthew 24 is about the destruction of the “hieron”

The body of Christ is never referred to as the “hieron” in any clear teaching by Jesus nor the apostles.


The temple complex “hieron” was completely destroyed with Jesus’ generation (genea) . That’s an objective fact, regardless of how you attempt to change the definition of words to fit your theology.

Not really. It has to do with spiritual discernment and understanding what Christ actually talk about despite strong numbers. For example:

Joh 6:51-56
(51) I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
(52) The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
(53) Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
(54) Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
(55) For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
(56) He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Christ clearly and literally said to eat his flesh (G4561) and drink his blood (G129). Do you know how the Jews response to this?

Indeed it was and is a hard (tough) saying, indeed it did offend many, and indeed who can hear or believe it? Those led by the Spirit of truth can. But these spiritualized truths about eating His flesh offended them, even as it offends many calling themselves disciples of Christ today. Because the Spirit alone makes us alive whereby we can receive this spiritual truth. It is only God who can draw men to understand the spiritual that they "receive" His word by the Spirit. The rest are driven off by such spiritualizing "because" they were not truly spiritual in the first place, but carnal. Christ continues:

John 6:65-66

• "And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
• From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him."

Jesus Christ took the time to preach a Blessed truth "spiritualizing" in speaking of Salvation as first requiring us to eat His flesh and drink His blood in order to obtain it. These professed disciples stumbled at that "spiritualizing" and were ultimately driven off by it. From that time, many walked no more with him. The congregation of Israel is our example, but unfortunately very "few" are taking note of history repeating itself. Let us therefore not stumble after the way of Israel, looking to carnal flesh, for earthly kingdoms, earthly temples, earthly rules, governments and peace, shunning the Spiritual nature of Christ's true Kingdom. Same thing with the temple in Matthew 24:1-2.

So then, despite your wrought up with strong's number instead of actually listening to Christ spiritually, it's not in me to reveal to anyone the spiritual nature of God's words, our Lord Himself will either reveal it or He won't reveal it, as is His sovereign will to do to whomever He chooses. Selah.

 

[claninja]

Not really. It has to do with spiritual discernment and understanding what Christ actually talk about despite strong numbers. For example:

Joh 6:51-56
(51) I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
(52) The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
(53) Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
(54) Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
(55) For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
(56) He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Christ clearly and literally said to eat his flesh (G4561) and drink his blood (G129). Do you know how the Jews response to this?

Indeed it was and is a hard (tough) saying, indeed it did offend many, and indeed who can hear or believe it? Those led by the Spirit of truth can. But these spiritualized truths about eating His flesh offended them, even as it offends many calling themselves disciples of Christ today. Because the Spirit alone makes us alive whereby we can receive this spiritual truth. It is only God who can draw men to understand the spiritual that they "receive" His word by the Spirit. The rest are driven off by such spiritualizing "because" they were not truly spiritual in the first place, but carnal. Christ continues:

John 6:65-66

• "And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
• From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him."

Jesus Christ took the time to preach a Blessed truth "spiritualizing" in speaking of Salvation as first requiring us to eat His flesh and drink His blood in order to obtain it. These professed disciples stumbled at that "spiritualizing" and were ultimately driven off by it. From that time, many walked no more with him. The congregation of Israel is our example, but unfortunately very "few" are taking note of history repeating itself. Let us therefore not stumble after the way of Israel, looking to carnal flesh, for earthly kingdoms, earthly temples, earthly rules, governments and peace, shunning the Spiritual nature of Christ's true Kingdom. Same thing with the temple in Matthew 24:1-2.

So then, despite your wrought up with strong's number instead of actually listening to Christ spiritually, it's not in me to reveal to anyone the spiritual nature of God's words, our Lord Himself will either reveal it or He won't reveal it, as is His sovereign will to do to whomever He chooses. Selah.

I understand this is your own personal interpretation which requires the definitions of words to be changed and spiritualized into oblivion.

That being said, everything you provided is irrelevant. Christ said “I am the bread of life” that’s obviously a spiritual statement. Unfortunately, you have provided ZERO passages where Christ said “I am the hieron”, or where the apostles said “we are the hieron of God”……if you could, that really help your personal opinion.

“Hieron” is never used to describe the church. This would be a new, made up, spiritual teaching, not taught by the apostles nor Christ.

the temple complex “hieron”, was destroyed within Jesus’ generation (genea) - that’s objective, fact.