quote: DPowell: Citing the KJV is not a good way to promote your Biblical scholarship.
And? I already know of the problems with the KJV, so don’t for a minute delude yourself into thinking that you have taught me something. But hey, if you have distort things so that you can feel good about yourself ...
I rarely quote from the KJV, and only did so here as part of quoting from 6 different version of the Bible. But hey, nice of someone as "honest" as you to leave out that little fact!
I suppose that if you cannot address the real issues, and have to stoop to implicit distortion, I should be glad: it’s a sure sign you know you have already lost to me.
quote: DPowell: When he speaks of "this generation" not passing away, he is speaking of the generation in which all of the signs begin to take place.
Wrong, for two reasons.
1. To paraphrase ringo:
If Jesus meant THAT generation, then why did He say THIS generation?
Here we see that once again the Christians have to avoid what is actually written in the Bible and substitute for that reality some fabrication.
2. Let an atheist school you on the Bible …
quote: “Then Jesus said to his disciples, … ‘For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with the angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.’” (Matthew 16:24, 27-28)
Jesus was clearly talking about the generation to which He was speaking, not some indeterminate generation some 2000 or so years in the future.
I addressed Matthew 24 elsewhere. It speaks of the Second Coming, which will occur at a time unknown even to angels and the Son of God Himself (Matthew 24:36). Jesus describes the times of that generation, but He does not actually name pinpoint the generation in history. That information belongs only to the Father.
Yes, the specifics are only known by the father. But a general outline is given as to when. Nowhere in the entire NT does it state the end times are in the far future. Every single instance refers to near event. Quite a few times its "near", "nearby" "at the door", "soon" etc... There are quite a few specific passages where those being addressed are directly told they would be witness to his return.
Who is Jesus speaking to in chapter 23? Those in front of him or you?
Who is Jesus speaking to in chapter 24? Is it his disciples?
Nah, he's breaking the fourth wall. 'Cause of his omniscience and knowing everything that will happen in the future, he can tell who will be reading it when, so to act accordingly and have the message recorded. He left those verses especially for the elite few today; he is speaking to "me!".
Your point is taken for what it does actually address, but I think it is fair to maintain Matthew 16 as a special case, specifically because in the literary sense it is followed by immediate fulfillment in Matthew 17 of what was spoken in Matthew 16. Jesus said that there were those who would see the coming of His glory before they tasted death...they certainly did on Mount Horeb (Sinai). The OT giants (Moses and Elijah) that joined them there had had similar meetings with God on Horeb/Sinai in the Old Testament. Go check into the meetings of God with Moses on that same mountain in Exodus 34 and Elijah in 1 Kings 19. This time on the mountain it is Peter's, James', and John's turns to experience the coming of the glory of God.
My point about the KJV was that it was the only translation that did what you wanted it to do. The modern translations do not go that route. Sorry, I should not have slighted you there--clearly, you're an analytical guy.
As to why Jesus said "this" generation as opposed to "that" generation in Matthew 24, I would say a couple of things: First, according to vv. 36-39, Jesus does not claim to be speaking in specifics with regard to times and dates; second, Jesus says "this generation" because it is the specific generation of which He has been speaking for 20-something verses. Koine Greek is a little freer in its movement between cases and tenses than you and I might be if we were writing this all in 21st century English. Remember, additionally, that Jesus would not have been speaking this in either English or Greek, but Aramaic, so we are kind of getting this third-hand. This stuff aside, look at the movement between past tenses (v.32), future tenses (the majority of the verbs), and present tenses (vv.6, 8, 16) in the verbs. There are aorist (generally speaking in the past) tense verbs translated in the past, some translated in the present, but all speaking toward the future, etc.
All of this must bear in mind one very important disclaimer: This is one of Jesus' cryptic sayings. Any reading/interpretation must be taken with a grain of salt. I would not bet my salvation on my interpretation of very many prophetic passages, hah. If things like a "this" where you think it should be a "that" are enough to drive you to call Jesus a false prophet, then I guess there is little else for me to say. Sorry, that is about the best I can do for you.
On Matthew 16, you are right. Jesus absolutely was speaking to His present generation; the fulfillment of that comes in the subsequent chapter, Matthew 17 at the Transfiguration.
On the issue of "this" generation versus "that" generation, go with me for just a bit. Picture yourself talking to your best friend about a crazy thing that happened to you the other day. Some guy rear-ends your car; it was her fault, but gets out of her car hopping mad at you. You proceed to tell your friend, "And I mean this guy was ticked off!" You (a guy) are talking to a friend (a guy) about a third guy. When you say "this guy," are you talking about the guy to whom you are speaking or the one from the story? Clearly the one from the story you are telling.
I don't know. Does this all make sense for you, or are you still hung up on an issue of "this" generation and "that" generation?
You're missing it, because you are projecting onto Jesus' words who you think "this generation" is.
Edit: I understand that from your vantage point you will be saying the same thing about me, but I would encourage you to go look at fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy...it is not always what seems most obvious on the surface. Prophetic literature is very, very tricky ground to till.
You're missing it, because you are projecting onto Jesus' words who you think "this generation" is. Edit: I understand that from your vantage point you will be saying the same thing about me....
That's exactly what I was going to do.
The difference is that I have no axe to grind. As I've mentioned before on these forums, my favorite pastor ever was a real prophecy nut and I would have given anything to be able to believe in fulfilled prophecy. If I'm biased, it's toward your position, not against it. Unfortunately, there just isn't anything in it.
If you want to discuss prophecy, there are several threads available.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
On the issue of "this" generation versus "that" generation, go with me for just a bit. Picture yourself talking to your best friend about a crazy thing that happened to you the other day. Some guy rear-ends your car; it was her fault, but gets out of her car hopping mad at you. You proceed to tell your friend, "And I mean this guy was ticked off!" You (a guy) are talking to a friend (a guy) about a third guy. When you say "this guy," are you talking about the guy to whom you are speaking or the one from the story? Clearly the one from the story you are telling. I don't know. Does this all make sense for you, or are you still hung up on an issue of "this" generation and "that" generation?
But you're ignoring the context.
Matthew 24 has Jesus speaking to his disciples, while stating quite a few times "you" (refering back to his disciples) then adds "this generation". It can only mean that time period.