Some of my newly rethinking on what this generation might be meaning in the Discourse

[Trivalee]

Matthew 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Obviously, till all these things be fulfilled, also includes...when ye shall see all these things.

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

Obviously as well, when ye shall see all these things, that includes every single thing mentioned in verse 29. Obviously, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken, did not happen in the lifetimes of His contemporaries. Therefore logic demands that verse 34 couldn't possibly be meaning the first century.

The way I tend to look at things in general, if the interpretation is not logical, that's a pretty good indication the interpretation couldn't possibly be correct.

There are two ways to look at it:

1. If you want to make the Olivet discourse all about 70 AD, then "this generation" must be those that witnessed the destruction of the temple.
2. But if you believe that Christ' primary focus was his Second Coming and the events that must come to pass before his return, then you will understand that 70 AD is just one of many calamitous events that will precede his glorious return. With this understanding, this generation cannot be anything else but the generation that will witness his return at which time "all these things" would have been fulfilled.

[Soldier_of_Faith]

My philosophy is quite simple. If the Holy Spirit wants to tell us something He will not do it through riddles, shadows, and obscure hints. Rather, He will tell us in black and white doctrine. This approach has served me well for many years, and has helped me to avoid presumptive approaches that will later have the bottom fall out of them.

I've never had a problem believing in the Antichrist taking his seat in the temple of God. I've only had a trouble understanding *what temple* Paul is talking about, and what he based this belief on?

I reject Pretrib Doctrine because...
1) It wasn't taught in the Church for 1800 years.
2) It isn't explicitly taught in the Scriptures--it is based on logical deductions and on symbolic interpretations.
3) Postrib Doctrine is explicitly taught in 2 Thes 2, and is a theme beginning in Dan 7, in which the Son of Man comes to destroy the Antichrist.

So I ask you, Why not follow your own advice, and ignore presumptive doctrines so that the Holy Spirit can reveal the truth by His word? Why not believe 2 Thes 2, which explicitly teaches Postrib? I *must* believe the word of God!

Yes, Believe the Word of God... If Jesus can take a clearly Future prophecy (which Jesus Himself admitted) like the one about Elijah and apply it to current events in His earthly lifetime, why can't we about Daniel, or Matthew 24:1-2? If I do, I'm still believing the Word, just as Jesus did, am I not? I mean, we both know that Elias himself has not come yet...

[crush]

Since you acknowledged that Jesus spoke about his second coming and then said "ALL these things" in this generation. How can it logical to argue that all these things were fulfilled in 70 AD given that Jesus has not returned?

The phrase 'all these things' is part of the fig tree parable and isn't meant to be applied to all the events of the discourse. Jesus's parables are crafted to obfuscate the truth and make it hidden to some (Matthew 13:13). So when you see Jesus say 'this is a parable', like He says in verse 32, a red flag should go up and you should really be careful going forward as there is sure to be tricky language ahead.

In the parable Jesus mentions three figurative things are to occur in verse 32. 1) twigs coming out from the branch 2) leaves shooting forth 3) summer drawing near. These things of course need to be interpreted, which they really aren't in the context, so what these things represent might be debateable, but they are in fact real things that Jesus says will happen. Let's say that the twigs coming forth from the branch might represent Christ's disciples and followers growing in number, the leaves shooting forth could be the spreading out of the gospel, and summer drawing near might be the kingdom of heaven drawing near. When you move to verse 33 Jesus says 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[He] is near, right at the door. In the context what is it that is near? He could only be referring to the figurative 'summer' He just mentioned in the previous verse. And however you interpret it, it has NOT COME after 'seeing all these things' (the branches and the leaves), it is still only near. If you apply 'all these things seen' to all the events of the discourse however, it/He is not just near, it/He HAS COME in verse 30-31.

I see the structure of Matt 24 like this:

The body of the discourse: There are apples, bananas, and oranges on the table.

The fig tree parable (verse 32-34): My favorite fruits are grapes, pears, and tangerines.

Verse 34: Go to the store and buy me all these fruits.

If you keep verse 34 in it's context with the parable you will only buy the grapes, pears and tangerines. If you don't keep it in context you will buy everything including the apples, bananas, and oranges.

It is not 'obvious' that Jesus meant all the things mentioned in the entire discourse when He says 'this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened'.

[divaD]

The phrase 'all these things' is part of the fig tree parable and isn't meant to be applied to all the events of the discourse. Jesus's parables are crafted to obfuscate the truth and make it hidden to some (Matthew 13:13). So when you see Jesus say 'this is a parable', like He says in verse 32, a red flag should go up and you should really be careful going forward as there is sure to be tricky language ahead.

In the parable Jesus mentions three figurative things are to occur in verse 32. 1) twigs coming out from the branch 2) leaves shooting forth 3) summer drawing near. These things of course need to be interpreted, which they really aren't in the context, so what these things represent might be debateable, but they are in fact real things that Jesus says will happen. Let's say that the twigs coming forth from the branch might represent Christ's disciples and followers growing in number, the leaves shooting forth could be the spreading out of the gospel, and summer drawing near might be the kingdom of heaven drawing near. When you move to verse 33 Jesus says 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[He] is near, right at the door. In the context what is it that is near? He could only be referring to the figurative 'summer' He just mentioned in the previous verse. And however you interpret it, it has NOT COME after 'seeing all these things' (the branches and the leaves), it is still only near. If you apply 'all these things seen' to all the events of the discourse however, it/He is not just near, it/He HAS COME in verse 30-31.

I see the structure of Matt 24 like this:

The body of the discourse: There are apples, bananas, and oranges on the table.

The fig tree parable (verse 32-34): My favorite fruits are grapes, pears, and tangerines.

Verse 34: Go to the store and buy me all these fruits.

If you keep verse 34 in it's context with the parable you will only buy the grapes, pears and tangerines. If you don't keep it in context you will buy everything including the apples, bananas, and oranges.

It is not 'obvious' that Jesus meant all the things mentioned in the entire discourse when He says 'this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened'.

Why make something so simple so complicated like that?


Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


Mark 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Luke 21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.



When we combine these all into one conversation, it might sound like such.



And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


How you are coming to the conclusions you are, seems to be based on forcing this generation to mean ONLY what you have already predetermined it to mean, thus ignoring context in order to do so, rather than simply letting the texts speak for themselves, and in context.

When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand...obviously that is a sign to know that summer is near.

So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass....obviously that is a sign to know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Till what all things be done? How about the things one is seeing come to pass that are indicating the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors? Was that the case in the first century leading up to 70 AD? The more I think about it then, it does seem like this generation per this context is meaning the generation that witnesses the 2nd coming, thus the same generation that sees these things having to do with the end come to pass, thus a sign that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors.

[randyk]

Yes, Believe the Word of God... If Jesus can take a clearly Future prophecy (which Jesus Himself admitted) like the one about Elijah and apply it to current events in His earthly lifetime, why can't we about Daniel, or Matthew 24:1-2? If I do, I'm still believing the Word, just as Jesus did, am I not? I mean, we both know that Elias himself has not come yet...

The prophecy of "Elijah to come" was interpreted by Jesus to refer to John the Baptist. So we have it in black and white that "Elijah," in the Malachi prophecy, was intended to represent John the Baptist, as the forerunner of Christ. I'm not against the use of symbolism. I'm only against establishing something as "biblical fact" when the symbolism is not supported by black and white doctrinal statements.

The prophecy of Elijah was not actually the use of symbolism, but rather, the use of metaphor. Malachi did not really mean to convey Elijah was literally going to be reincarnated. No, he meant that someone *like Elijah* would be coming, to herald the coming of Messiah. And so, he called him "Elijah" to indicate his prophetic office and level of importance.

[randyk]

Since you acknowledged that Jesus spoke about his second coming and then said "ALL these things" in this generation. How can it logical to argue that all these things were fulfilled in 70 AD given that Jesus has not returned?

I've argued this many times, and have supplied examples. The only thing that can hinder you from understanding my argument is a preconceived notion that forbids you from understanding it! I will try again, to see if you are even willing to look at a different position.

I tell you that a major earthquake is coming. And you ask when that earthquake is happening. You also ask what the future of our city will be.

And so, I tell you the earthquake is coming in our generation, and will be preceded by rumblings, minor shakes, and also indications that God is not pleased with our city. And then I say, *all these things* will take place "in this generation!"

In context I am referring to 1) the main subject, which is the earthquake, and 2) all of the signs leading up to the earthquake. I am *not* including in "all these things" anything that was mentioned about the future of the city, following the earthquake.

So let me apply this to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus said the temple will be taken down. And his Disciples ask him when this will happen, and how will this play into the 2nd Coming?

So Jesus tells them about the initial signs leading up to the destruction of the temple, including false Messiahs, wars, earthquakes, and famines. Finally, the destruction of the temple itself will take place. All these things will happen in "this generation."

However, "all these things" did not include any information Jesus had given about his 2nd Coming. Jesus indicated that whereas his Coming would take place at the end of the age, the things to take place in his own generation would *not* involve Israel's restoration. False Christs would predict Israel's immediate salvation. But the truth was, judgment would come in their generation. The drawing near of the Kingdom in their time meant that judgment would come upon the Jewish nation.

And so, Jesus drew a clearer picture of what the 2nd Coming was really supposed to mean for the Jewish People. Instead of expecting immediate salvation for the Jewish people, they were to expect divine judgment upon a sinful people. They were to look upon the 2nd Coming as a judgment upon sinners, whether in the endtimes or in the then-present generation.

And so, the 70 AD judgment was an indication that judgment was coming upon Israel. "All these things" to take place were the things leading up to that judgment. And Israel was to expect judgment upon sinners, rather than deliverance for a wicked people.

[randyk]

Matthew 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Obviously, till all these things be fulfilled, also includes...when ye shall see all these things.

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:


Obviously as well, when ye shall see all these things, that includes every single thing mentioned in verse 29. Obviously, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken, did not happen in the lifetimes of His contemporaries. Therefore logic demands that verse 34 couldn't possibly be meaning the first century.

The way I tend to look at things in general, if the interpretation is not logical, that's a pretty good indication the interpretation couldn't possibly be correct.

Of course you're not going to accept a position when you don't paint it in its proper light. I have a hard time understanding how, after I've explained my position, you continue to paint it using strange colors? Since I believe you're an honest person, and a genuine believer, I have to ask myself, "Why can't he get it right? Why can't he present the argument right?"

"All these things" are qualified by the subject being discussed. And the thing being discussed was the *destruction of the temple.*

So when Jesus said "all these things" will take place in this generation, he is talking about all the things that have to do with the destruction of the temple! Simple argument. You may not agree with it, but that's the argument.

Discussion of the "end," or the "2nd Coming," are peripheral to the main idea. And this was asked in conjunction with Jesus' statement about the destruction of the temple. The fact of the temple's destruction made questions about the 2nd Coming necessary, if only peripheral.

Jesus answer was that "all these things," having to do with the temple's destruction, would take place in "this generation." But it would give an idea of what the 2nd Coming is really all about. It is not about the salvation of sinful Jews, but rather, about the salvation of a nation from sin.

And so, the Disciples were not to see the events of their generation as the salvation of national Israel, because they were in sin. Rather, they were to see the drawing near of the Kingdom in their time as a judgment upon sinful Israel. It would be like the Flood of Noah. They were to immediately prepare for the 2nd Coming, as if it was bringing judgment instead of salvation.

The stars would fall from the sky *at* the 2nd Coming, and not before. The events of Jesus' generation, involving the destruction of the temple, would lead to an age-long Jewish Diaspora. It is only *after this* that the stars will fall.

[crush]

Why make something so simple so complicated like that?


Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


Mark 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Luke 21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.



When we combine these all into one conversation, it might sound like such.



And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


How you are coming to the conclusions you are, seems to be based on forcing this generation to mean ONLY what you have already predetermined it to mean, thus ignoring context in order to do so, rather than simply letting the texts speak for themselves, and in context.

When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand...obviously that is a sign to know that summer is near.

So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass....obviously that is a sign to know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Till what all things be done? How about the things one is seeing come to pass that are indicating the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors? Was that the case in the first century leading up to 70 AD? The more I think about it then, it does seem like this generation per this context is meaning the generation that witnesses the 2nd coming, thus the same generation that sees these things having to do with the end come to pass, thus a sign that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors.

It's not complicating things, it's uncomplicating them. Things get complicated, as you should be able to see now, when you try to apply verse 34 universally to the entire discourse. And I'm certainly not forcing anything into the text at all or being biased in my interpretation. You are. Jesus's two statements that include 'all these things' directly reference the parable. Summer being near is compared to the kingdom of God being near in verse 33, it's a direct reference. 'All these these' in verse 34 is a direct reference to verse 33 'all these things'. Where are you seeing instructions to universally apply 'all these things' to the entire body of the discourse? There are instructions to apply 'all these things' in verse 34 to the parable though.

Where is the 'kingdom of God being near' directly referenced in the discourse? 'All these things' occuring are the evidence for the kingdom of God being near. The kingdom of God was near in the first century (Matt 3:2 and 4:17, Mark 1:15). The evidence of this is whatever the twigs and leaves refer to in the parable. Those in the first century saw all these things (the twigs and leaves) happening.

The parable would not be true if you apply verse 34 to verse 30. In verse 30 the kingdom has come. So if you saw verse 30 occuring you would see the kingdom of God having come, not being near. The kingdom of God has been near though since Christ's first advent, as Christ's words show.

The discourse crescendos with the second coming of Christ. The parable crescendos with the kingdom of God being near. These are not the same things.

[divaD]

I've argued this many times, and have supplied examples. The only thing that can hinder you from understanding my argument is a preconceived notion that forbids you from understanding it! I will try again, to see if you are even willing to look at a different position.

I tell you that a major earthquake is coming. And you ask when that earthquake is happening. You also ask what the future of our city will be.

And so, I tell you the earthquake is coming in our generation, and will be preceded by rumblings, minor shakes, and also indications that God is not pleased with our city. And then I say, *all these things* will take place "in this generation!"

In context I am referring to 1) the main subject, which is the earthquake, and 2) all of the signs leading up to the earthquake. I am *not* including in "all these things" anything that was mentioned about the future of the city, following the earthquake.

So let me apply this to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus said the temple will be taken down. And his Disciples ask him when this will happen, and how will this play into the 2nd Coming?

So Jesus tells them about the initial signs leading up to the destruction of the temple, including false Messiahs, wars, earthquakes, and famines. Finally, the destruction of the temple itself will take place. All these things will happen in "this generation."

However, "all these things" did not include any information Jesus had given about his 2nd Coming. Jesus indicated that whereas his Coming would take place at the end of the age, the things to take place in his own generation would *not* involve Israel's restoration. False Christs would predict Israel's immediate salvation. But the truth was, judgment would come in their generation. The drawing near of the Kingdom in their time meant that judgment would come upon the Jewish nation.

And so, Jesus drew a clearer picture of what the 2nd Coming was really supposed to mean for the Jewish People. Instead of expecting immediate salvation for the Jewish people, they were to expect divine judgment upon a sinful people. They were to look upon the 2nd Coming as a judgment upon sinners, whether in the endtimes or in the then-present generation.

And so, the 70 AD judgment was an indication that judgment was coming upon Israel. "All these things" to take place were the things leading up to that judgment. And Israel was to expect judgment upon sinners, rather than deliverance for a wicked people.

Perhaps you missed the post where I already addressed your analogy here? Don't recall what post is was though. Shouldn't be hard to find.

What you don't seem to get though, is the manner in which I go about things. I test ppl's theories against what the texts state, in order to try and determine if the theories can work or not. Some of your theories are not working when comparing to the texts involved. Since the Discourse obviously involves a chronology of events, it matters where in the text Jesus says certain things, such as He said about this generation. He said that after all of the events He predicted are to come to pass. He said that after He said the part about until the times of te Gentiles be fulfilled. He said that after the part about the powers of the heavens shall be shaken, where we know from te text that is meaning after the GT.


Your interpretation of this generation in the Discourse disregards those things altogether. Your interpretation falsely claims Jesus only meant some of the things have to come to pass before this generation passes away, rather than everything He predicted has to come to pass before this generation passes away. I have a choice here then. I can either believe you about this, or I can believe the Bible about this. Guess which one I choose to believe about this?


Mark 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done

And this clearly includes the following having to be done before this generation meant here can pass. Yet your interpretation claims all means some rather than all. In some contexts all can mean some rather than all, so no dispute there. In this context it can't though. That being based on the context He said this in and when He said it in relation to other things He said, as I have already shown above.

Mark 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.

[divaD]

I've argued this many times, and have supplied examples. The only thing that can hinder you from understanding my argument is a preconceived notion that forbids you from understanding it! I will try again, to see if you are even willing to look at a different position.

I tell you that a major earthquake is coming. And you ask when that earthquake is happening. You also ask what the future of our city will be.

And so, I tell you the earthquake is coming in our generation, and will be preceded by rumblings, minor shakes, and also indications that God is not pleased with our city. And then I say, *all these things* will take place "in this generation!"

In context I am referring to 1) the main subject, which is the earthquake, and 2) all of the signs leading up to the earthquake. I am *not* including in "all these things" anything that was mentioned about the future of the city, following the earthquake.

So let me apply this to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus said the temple will be taken down. And his Disciples ask him when this will happen, and how will this play into the 2nd Coming?

So Jesus tells them about the initial signs leading up to the destruction of the temple, including false Messiahs, wars, earthquakes, and famines. Finally, the destruction of the temple itself will take place. All these things will happen in "this generation."

However, "all these things" did not include any information Jesus had given about his 2nd Coming. Jesus indicated that whereas his Coming would take place at the end of the age, the things to take place in his own generation would *not* involve Israel's restoration. False Christs would predict Israel's immediate salvation. But the truth was, judgment would come in their generation. The drawing near of the Kingdom in their time meant that judgment would come upon the Jewish nation.

And so, Jesus drew a clearer picture of what the 2nd Coming was really supposed to mean for the Jewish People. Instead of expecting immediate salvation for the Jewish people, they were to expect divine judgment upon a sinful people. They were to look upon the 2nd Coming as a judgment upon sinners, whether in the endtimes or in the then-present generation.

And so, the 70 AD judgment was an indication that judgment was coming upon Israel. "All these things" to take place were the things leading up to that judgment. And Israel was to expect judgment upon sinners, rather than deliverance for a wicked people.

Randy, it only makes sense to remain indefinitely stubborn about something if one is 100% certain that they are correct about what they are alleging. Anything short of that would seem to be in vain. I am 100% certain your interpretation of this generation is not correct. How can I be 100% certain? Easy. By checking what you are alleging with that of the texts involved, then employing a little common sense which shows your conclusions to be incorrect.

Mark 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.

Mark 13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


Jesus said in verse 30...this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. When did He say that? Before or after He said what He said in verse 24 and 25? In verse 30, did He say till some of these things be done, or did He say till all these things be done? If you agree it's the latter, that means you have to agree, that assuming you are able to be reasonable here, that all these things needing to be done have to also include the events He predicted in verse 24 and 25. And this is where common sense comes into play. Common sense says verse 25 was never fulfilled in the lifetimes of those living at the time. Common sense then says this generation in verse 30 couldn't possibly be meaning the generation alive at the time when Jesus spoke these words. You try and get around all these things by twisting what till all these things be done is including and not including. It obviously includes everything He has previously predicted before making this prediction. Your interpretation denies that.

[TrustGzus]

Thou dost protest too much, methinks.

You’re only 100% because you will not read godly, Spirit-filled pastors and commentators that disagree with you. And you boast of that! You need more Proverbs 18:17 in your life.

There are very good objections to your view. I’m not saying you’ll change your mind, and frankly, I don’t care if you do. However, when I see your 100% certainty on a subject with much diversity among godly scholars, it’s just a fact that you are have over confidence where it is not warranted.

You might maintain your view and if you do you’ll do more humbly, with hat in hand and more authority and credibility with those who disagree. Hitting the metaphorical pulpit hard doesn’t do much to convince those who disagree.

[divaD]

Thou dost protest too much, methinks.

You’re only 100% because you will not read godly, Spirit-filled pastors and commentators that disagree with you. And you boast of that! You need more Proverbs 18:17 in your life.

There are very good objections to your view. I’m not saying you’ll change your mind, and frankly, I don’t care if you do. However, when I see your 100% certainty on a subject with much diversity among godly scholars, it’s just a fact that you are have over confidence where it is not warranted.

You might maintain your view and if you do you’ll do more humbly, with hat in hand and more authority and credibility with those who disagree. Hitting the metaphorical pulpit hard doesn’t do much to convince those who disagree.

You want me to believe that every single scholar that has studied this subject, every last one of them have come to the exact same conclusions about what this generation is meaning in the Discourse? I think your problem in particular, in regards to me, is that you see yourself far more educated that I am, which is likely true, so no disputes there, so therefore means I'm not intelligent enough to arrive at any correct conclusions regarding some of these things myself, because that only belongs to folks of your caliber and all the scholars you treat as infallible and somewhat godlike. I think I need to get back to what I already proposed earlier on. You and I refraining from discussing these things with one another. Doesn't mean we can't discuss other subjects in other threads with one another, but clearly this subject is not a good idea for me to be discussing with you in particular. You don't understand me or how my mind works at all. Because if you did you wouldn't be coming to 90% of the conclusions you are coming about me.

[crush]

Randy, it only makes sense to remain indefinitely stubborn about something if one is 100% certain that they are correct about what they are alleging. Anything short of that would seem to be in vain. I am 100% certain your interpretation of this generation is not correct. How can I be 100% certain? Easy. By checking what you are alleging with that of the texts involved, then employing a little common sense which shows your conclusions to be incorrect.

Mark 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.

Mark 13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.


Jesus said in verse 30...this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. When did He say that? Before or after He said what He said in verse 24 and 25? In verse 30, did He say till some of these things be done, or did He say till all these things be done? If you agree it's the latter, that means you have to agree, that assuming you are able to be reasonable here, that all these things needing to be done have to also include the events He predicted in verse 24 and 25. And this is where common sense comes into play. Common sense says verse 25 was never fulfilled in the lifetimes of those living at the time. Common sense then says this generation in verse 30 couldn't possibly be meaning the generation alive at the time when Jesus spoke these words. You try and get around all these things by twisting what till all these things be done is including and not including. It obviously includes everything He has previously predicted before making this prediction. Your interpretation denies that.

100% certain huh?
You say Mark 13:29, Matthew 24:33, and Luke 21:31 must occur AFTER all the event mentioned in the discourse have occured, including the Second Coming right?

NIV Luke 21:31Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.

Jesus says that the kingdom of God is near BEFORE any of the events mentioned in the discourse take place.

NIV Mark 1:15 "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!" J

It seems like you have things completely backwards. Jesus says the kingdom of God draws near first, before anything mentioned in the discourse. You say it is the last thing to happen in the series of events.

The only prophetic thing that occurs in the afformentioned texts is the individual awareness that the kingdom of God is near among those that witness the signs Jesus mentioned in the previous verse in each text. If you see followers of Christ increasing in number you will then have the knowledge that the kingdom of God is near IOW. Not that the kingdom will draw near after these signs. I don't feel you are really examining the text you are defending, you seem to have just jumped to a conclusion that is impossible for you to let go of.

[divaD]

Thou dost protest too much, methinks.

You’re only 100% because you will not read godly, Spirit-filled pastors and commentators that disagree with you. And you boast of that! You need more Proverbs 18:17 in your life.

There are very good objections to your view. I’m not saying you’ll change your mind, and frankly, I don’t care if you do. However, when I see your 100% certainty on a subject with much diversity among godly scholars, it’s just a fact that you are have over confidence where it is not warranted.

You might maintain your view and if you do you’ll do more humbly, with hat in hand and more authority and credibility with those who disagree. Hitting the metaphorical pulpit hard doesn’t do much to convince those who disagree.

BTW, why not show why and how I was wrong in that post? All you seemed to want to do was find ways to criticize me personally, rather than trying to debunk my conclusions instead. There is nothing you said in this post that proves anything I said in that post was incorrect. I gave reasons why I was 100% certain Randy's interpretation was incorrect. I did that via Scripture and employing common sense.

You say you don't care whether I change my mind or not, yet you are the one making this huge fuss about what I'm saying. That can only mean one thing then, this in your mind apparently gives you a legit accuse to attack me personally.

[divaD]

100% certain huh?
You say Mark 13:29, Matthew 24:33, and Luke 21:31 must occur AFTER all the event mentioned in the discourse have occured, including the Second Coming right?

NIV Luke 21:31Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.

Jesus says that the kingdom of God is near BEFORE any of the events mentioned in the discourse take place.

NIV Mark 1:15 "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!" J

It seems like you have things completely backwards. Jesus says the kingdom of God draws near first, before anything mentioned in the discourse. You say it is the last thing to happen in the series of events.

The only prophetic thing that occurs in the afformentioned texts is the individual awareness that the kingdom of God is near among those that witness the signs Jesus mentioned in the previous verse in each text. If you see followers of Christ increasing in number you will then have the knowledge that the kingdom of God is near IOW. Not that the kingdom will draw near after these signs. I don't feel you are really examining the text you are defending, you seem to have just jumped to a conclusion that is impossible for you to let go of.

Let's get on the same page. How can the kingdom of God being nigh at hand, even at the doors, not be meaning the second coming? When summer is nigh at hand, that being determined by trees, is summer still nigh at hand once summer actually arrives? Doesn't the texts involved indicate, in like manner, when you see these thing come to pass, know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand, even at the doors? It can't be nigh at hand, and even at the doors, indefinitely, can it? If it can, then so can summer, which would then mean summer never arrives, which then means the kingdom of God never arrives either. If you don't see that as nonsensical, no wonder we can't get on the same page here.