Times of the Gentiles

[John146]

OK. But does it mean "all people alive today"?

If "this generation" referred only to people alive at the time then I would say yes. If that was the context of what He meant by "this generation" then He would have been speaking about all of them who were alive at the time and not just some of them. But we know that not all of them were even still around in 70 AD. So, I can't see "this generation" as only referring to people alive at the time. Instead, I believe He was referring to a certain type of people (unbelieving Jews) who had already been around for a long time. It was that people group who would suffer God's vengeance at some point. The timing of that event was not in view in Matt 23. All Jesus was saying is that "this generation" (unbelieving Jews in particular) were going to be punished at some point for their long time rebellion. It could have been very soon after that time or it could have been hundreds of years from then, but the point was that it was going to happen to that people group.

Or could it refer to an event within the lifetime of some of the people alive at the time?

No. I don't see how something He said would happen to "this generation" would happen only to some of those who were alive at that time rather than to all of them if He was speaking only of people alive at the time (which I don't believe was the case). To see it as only referring to some of them seems like a very convenient way of interpreting "this generation". What about people who weren't alive at the time and were killed in Jerusalem in 70 AD? Are they not included in "this generation"?

How about the use of the phrase "this generation" in Matt 24:34? If "this generation" referred only to people who were alive at the time then do you think He was saying "all these things" would "be fulfilled" before all of those who are alive at the time passed away or before some of them who were alive at the time passed away?

I'll go for the latter as all the NT scholars I am aware of appear to conclude.

When it comes to interpreting scripture majority opinion does not rule. You should know better than that. In Christ's day the majority opinion was that He was not the Messiah, the Son of God. Good thing the disciples were not willing to go along with the majority opinion, eh?

[John146]

Who killed him?

If you're asking who actually physically drove the nails into His hands and feet then that was the Romans. If you are asking who was responsible for killing him then it was the Jews and the Romans. Not all Jews and all Romans, obviously. But certain Jews and certain Romans were responsible for killing Him.

26:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, 2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified. 3 Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,4 And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.

This makes it quite clear that "the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people" wanted to kill him. Later, they brought him to Pontius Pilate and ordered for Him to be killed.

27:1 When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:2 And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor...20 But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.21 The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas.22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.

So, is it reasonable to try to say that "the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people" were innocent of His death? How about those who said "Let him be crucified"? It should be obvious that one can be guilty of murder without actually laying hands on the person who was murdered. For example, who is responsible for a murder when it is done by a hit man? Both the hit man and the person who hired the hit man to do it, right? The chief priests, scribes and elders could have prevented His murder but instead ordered for Him to be killed. Does that not make them partly responsible for His death? Of course it does.

[Fenris]

So, is it reasonable to try to say that "the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people" were innocent of His death? How about those who said "Let him be crucified"? It should be obvious that one can be guilty of murder without actually laying hands on the person who was murdered. For example, who is responsible for a murder when it is done by a hit man? Both the hit man and the person who hired the hit man to do it, right? The chief priests, scribes and elders could have prevented His murder but instead ordered for Him to be killed. Does that not make them partly responsible for His death? Of course it does.

Jesus ran afoul of the High Priest, who was a Saducee and a Roman toady. He saw Jesus as someone who would rebel against the existing order and threaten the priest's position. Of this I have no doubt. When the Jews did rebel against Rome in 66, the first thing they did was remove to (Rome-appointed) High Priest from power.

Blaming the "scribes" and "elders" (Pharisees?) or the regular people, who disliked the Roman presence and their appointed High Priest? That kinda flies in the face of history.

[John146]

Let me help out here...

Joh 19:11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

Jesus laid the greater guilt on the Father.

You can't be serious here. You think that "he that delivered" Jesus unto Pilate was the Father and that the Father was guilty of "the greater sin"? How could you think such a thing? The Father is sinless. All you have to do is read John 18 to see who delivered Jesus unto Pontius Pilate and it sure wasn't the Father.

[John146]

Jesus ran afoul of the High Priest, who was a Saducee and a Roman toady. He saw Jesus as someone who would rebel against the existing order and threaten the priest's position. Of this I have no doubt. When the Jews did rebel against Rome in 66, the first thing they did was remove to (Rome-appointed) High Priest from power.

Blaming the "scribes" and "elders" (Pharisees?) or the regular people, who disliked the Roman presence and their appointed High Priest? That kinda flies in the face of history.

If you don't want to accept what the NT scripture says about who was guilty of Christ's death then that's your choice.

[Fenris]

If you don't want to accept what the NT scripture says about who was guilty of Christ's death then that's your choice.

I'm tempted to go with the "historical scenario", thanks.

[HoboTone]

I'm tempted to go with the "historical scenario", thanks.

Me too. Blaming the Jews for Jesus' death is a blanket statement, and it's been the source of lots of anti- semitism over the centuries.

"Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. -John 12:27

[jeffweeder]

If you don't want to accept what the NT scripture says about who was guilty of Christ's death then that's your choice.

Act 2:22-
“Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know— 23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”




Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; 22 because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. 23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.


Thoughts/ scriptures, regarding the underlined and bolded above?

[HoboTone]

Jesus was our Passover lamb, slain for the sins of us all. That makes all of us just as guilty of his death as the Jews or the Romans.

[John 8:32]

You can't be serious here. You think that "he that delivered" Jesus unto Pilate was the Father and that the Father was guilty of "the greater sin"? How could you think such a thing? The Father is sinless. All you have to do is read John 18 to see who delivered Jesus unto Pontius Pilate and it sure wasn't the Father.

I don't write 'em, I just read 'em.

[John 8:32]

Jesus was our Passover lamb, slain for the sins of us all. That makes all of us just as guilty of his death as the Jews or the Romans.

Absolutely, His crucifixion was determined before ever a man walked the earth...

1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

[Fenris]

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”

K, let's think this through.

Some corrupt Jewish leadership with Roman help have a rebel put to death. A small mob on scene supports this action.

This incriminates the millions of Jews alive at the time, including ones who lived far away and were not even aware of the events in question?

Either you're reading this wrong or it's falsely incriminating innocent people.

[claybevan]

Jesus was our Passover lamb, slain for the sins of us all. That makes all of us just as guilty of his death as the Jews or the Romans.

Yes indeed, humanity killed Our Lord, we all had our hands on the hammer that drove those nails in.

[John 8:32]

You can't be serious here. You think that "he that delivered" Jesus unto Pilate was the Father and that the Father was guilty of "the greater sin"? How could you think such a thing? The Father is sinless. All you have to do is read John 18 to see who delivered Jesus unto Pontius Pilate and it sure wasn't the Father.

*sarcasm warning* No, I think Jesus and the Father were trying everything they could think of to save Christ from an unfair execution... *end sarcasm warning*

Luk 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Now, anybody here believe that the Father did not hear this prayer? Jesus asked that the Father's will be done. It was and Christ died.

There was no other way, as we have seen in 1 Pet 1:20 and Rev 13:8 His death was predetermined by the Father and Him. Christ knew this and willingly submitted...

Joh 18:11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

To blame a particular race is to try to excuse ourselves from causing His death by sinning. We sinned and He paid for it, it really is that simple.

[John 8:32]

But then again, it is human nature to point the finger and say it was his fault not mine. It is not a trait of human nature to say "I am responsible".