Thursday, October 11, 2018

This Generation

Till has to correct a biblicist's thinking on the Bible's teaching concerning when Jesus said he would return. From the Alt Bible Errancy discussion list, 31 May 1998:

Harry Staiti:

Mk 13.28-30, Mt 24.32-34 and Lk 21.29-32 all predict that
Jesus would return in a unspecified time and that time was to be 
within the first century.

>> 

All the authors state that Jesus would return in ~their~
generation.

>
TREVOR
I'm assuming you've recently joined the list, since this issue has 

been under discussion on other threads. The three passages you
cite above are from three authors, but they all record the same 
speech by Jesus. I just want to clarify that for anyone who has 
not taken the time to look them up. There are no significant 
differences between the three, so essentially we have but one 
statement to deal with:

>

"But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun
will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the 
stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will 
be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in 
the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and 
they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky 
with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels 
with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect

from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.
Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has 
already become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know 
that summer is near; even so you too, when you see all these 
things, recognize that He is near, {right} at the door. Truly I 
say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these 
things take place." (Matt 24:29-34, NAS)

>

Although there are some variations in the preceding discourse
between what each writer includes, these verses culminate in 
all three, to end up with the statement in question. Having thus 
identified the signs of His coming (in response to the disciples' 
questions at the opening of the chapter), Jesus illustrates a point 
with the fig tree. Just as it gives certain indications of the coming 
of summer, these signs will show that Christ's coming is quite near. 
In fact, He goes on to explain that the generation which sees "all 
these things" will not pass away. In the context, there is every 
reason to believe that "this generation" refers to those who see 
the signs. It is only the bias of those who want to see an 
implication of a first century return that requires it to refer to 
the generation alive at the time Jesus was speaking.

>

TILL

As I said in another posting, when an inerrantist has to resort to 
verbal gymnastics in order to show that the Bible doesn't mean 
what it plainly says, you can know that his position is weak. Prior 
to the passage that Trevor quoted, Jesus had made the 
statement that there would not be one stone of the temple left 
upon another but that all would be thrown down (Matt. 24:2). 
In verse 3, the apostles reacted with three questions: (1) When 
shall "these things" be? (2) What shall be the sign of your coming?
(3) [What shall be the sign] of the end of the world? It is therefore
reasonable to assume that these questions were answered in the 
speech that followed.

THESE THINGS: So what did Jesus say about when "these 
things" would be? Verses 4-14 speak about signs that should 
not be interpreted as the approaching fulfillment of "these 
things," but verses 15-28 speak about signs that did signal 
the approach of "these things." When the "abomination of 
desolation" spoken of by Daniel was seen standing in the 
holy place, a "great tribulation" would follow "such as had 
not been from the beginning of the world until now" or ever 
after would be (v:21). Luke's account of this little yarn has 
Jesus saying that when "you see Jerusalem compassed with 
armies, then know that her desolation is at hand" (21:2). 
The fact that the passage contains many statements parallel 
to the versions in Matthew and Mark is a clear indication that 
at least Luke thought this great tribulation would be associated 
with the destruction of Jerusalem.

THE SIGNS of his coming: Matthew had Jesus saying that 
"IMMEDIATELY after the tribulation of those days," the sun 
would be darkened, the moon would not give its light, the 
stars would fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens 
would be shaken (v:29). Thus, Matthew had Jesus promising 
that the signs of his coming would be seen IMMEDIATELY after 
the tribulation of those days. That he was clearly talking about 
the signs of his coming is very evident in the next verse: "And 
then shall appear the SIGN of the Son of man in heaven." At 
this time, so Jesus said, all the tribes of the earth would mourn 
as they saw the Son of man coming on the clouds. He would 
send forth his angels with the sound of a great trumpet, and 
they would gather together his elect from one end of heaven 
to the other (vs:30-31).

THE FIG TREE ANALOGY: Trevor has tried to make the fig tree 
analogy mean that whatever generation sees "all these things" 
will be the generation that will not pass away until all "these 
things" be accomplished. This view requires a verbal contortion 
of the text, because the disciples had asked when "these things" 
would be, and the answer of Jesus was that the "great tribulation," 
which Luke identified as the destruction of Jerusalem, would 
happen first, and then IMMEDIATELY after "the tribulation of 
those days" the signs of his coming would follow. Thus, Jesus 
was actually saying that his coming was as sure as the coming 
of summer when a fig tree is seen putting forth its leaves. Notice 
that this statement was obviously directed to the people he was 
talking to: "Even so [or in the same way as in the fig tree 
example] when YE [plural] see all THESE THINGS, know YE that 
he is nigh, even at the doors" (v:33). To say that "ye" in this 
statement referred to people who would be living thousands of 
years later strains every principle of literary interpretation. The 
apostles had asked Jesus three questions, and he answered them. 
In so doing, he used "ye" throughout his speech to indicate that 
he was talking about things that those men he was speaking to 
would see themselves.

1. YE shall hear of wars and rumors of wars (v:6).

2. See that YE be not troubled (v:6).

3. Then shall they deliver YOU (plural) up unto tribulation and 
shall kill YOU (plural), v. 9.

4. YE shall be hated of all the nations for my name's sake (v:9).

5. When therefore YE see the abomination of desolation, which 
was spoken of by Daniel... (v:15).

6. Pray YE that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the 
sabbath (v:19).

There are various places in this chapter where Jesus did not use 
the plural "you" to indicate that he was speaking only to his apostles.

1. Woe to them that are with child and to them that give suck in 
those days (v:19).

2. Let him that is on the housetop not go down to take out the 
things are in his house (v:17).

3. Let them that are in Judea flee unto the mountains (v:16).

Hence, the text contains examples that show that if Jesus were 
addressing the statement about the signs of his coming NOT 
to the group he was talking to (his apostles) but to third parties 
who would live long afterwards, he would have used the third-
person references. However, in using YE in reference to "these 
things" that YE shall see (v:33), it was evident that he was 
speaking to the apostles. Therefore, when he said, "Verily I say 
unto YOU (plural), THIS GENERATION will not pass away till all 
THESE THINGS be accomplished," he obviously meant that THESE 
THINGS would be accomplished within the lifetime of that 
generation. To argue otherwise is to stretch principles of literary 
interpretation beyond the limits of credibility. Furthermore, since 
Luke identified the "tribulation" as the destruction of Jerusalem 
and since Jesus said that the signs of his coming would be seen 
IMMEDIATELY AFTER the tribulation of those days, to make "this 
generation" people who would live thousands of years later would 
make the word "immediately" meaningless. After all, if words don't 
mean what they mean, literary interpretation is impossible.

The only sensible conclusion is that people of that time thought 
that they were living in the "end times," and there are various NT 
scriptures that clearly show that this was a commonly held belief. 
They were wrong. Hence, the Bible is far from inerrant.

Farrell Till

No comments:

Post a Comment