This "Generation"

[postroad]

Looking over the text and no internal evidence of anything other than a prophecy addressed to the Disciples and their generation. He even promises they will survive unscathed.

Luke 21:10-32New International Version (NIV)

10 Then he said to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.

12 “But before all this, they will seize you and persecute you. They will hand you over to synagogues and put you in prison, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name. 13 And so you will bear testimony to me. 14 But make up your mind not to worry beforehand how you will defend yourselves. 15 For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict. 16 You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers and sisters, relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death. 17 Everyone will hate you because of me. 18 But not a hair of your head will perish. 19 Stand firm, and you will win life.

20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

25 “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. 26 People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.�

29 He told them this parable: “Look at the fig tree and all the trees. 30 When they sprout leaves, you can see for yourselves and know that summer is near. 31 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.

32 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 1 by postroad]
This must indicate that Jesus returned shortly after the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. Otherwise the whole thing is a false prophecy.

[theophile]

[Replying to postroad]

I feel like we've had this conversation before. Your reading is a bit narrow. i.e., "generation" does not necessarily mean those born in the same, narrow geographical-historical "zone" as Jesus (as we tend to use the word today to indicate Baby Boomers, Millennials, etc). It can mean all the people of an age. In fact, when Jesus speaks elsewhere of the present and future age, or the age to come (which is the kingdom), this validates a broader usage.

The present age, and the generation tied to it, is what Jesus is saying will pass away. But again, this can't be related to a narrow group of humans born around the same time and place as Jesus, as I believe you are doing.

Likewise, this is an address to his disciples. But we have no reason to insist on it being an address to just the current batch of them. Rather, it is to his disciples in general. As much to those living today as 2000 years ago.

So sure, if you take a very narrow reading, you're quickly going to run into the absurd. But taking such a narrow reading proves nothing other than the narrow reading is absurd. (So great, let's move on from it.)

[postroad]

[Replying to post 3 by theophile]
Really? Why is my reading absurd? Did I miss something in the context?

Matthew 16:28
“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.�

Mark 9:1
And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.�


Luke 9:27
“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.�

.
Or is it absurd simply because it didn't happen and therefore he couldn't have meant it that way?

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to postroad]

I feel like we've had this conversation before. Your reading is a bit narrow. i.e., "generation" does not necessarily mean those born in the same, narrow geographical-historical "zone" as Jesus (as we tend to use the word today to indicate Baby Boomers, Millennials, etc). It can mean all the people of an age. In fact, when Jesus speaks elsewhere of the present and future age, or the age to come (which is the kingdom), this validates a broader usage.

The present age, and the generation tied to it, is what Jesus is saying will pass away. But again, this can't be related to a narrow group of humans born around the same time and place as Jesus, as I believe you are doing.

Likewise, this is an address to his disciples. But we have no reason to insist on it being an address to just the current batch of them. Rather, it is to his disciples in general. As much to those living today as 2000 years ago.

So sure, if you take a very narrow reading, you're quickly going to run into the absurd. But taking such a narrow reading proves nothing other than the narrow reading is absurd. (So great, let's move on from it.)

The meaning of the word generation can be anything you like. That is irrelevant. The fact is it says "THIS" generation. It doesn't say "THAT" generation. It would be terribly bad grammar to use "THIS" generation if you were meaning "THAT" generation. Quite a major error in grammar, which I doubt any professional translator... or even the son of God would have made.

Taken in context, when he said "this" he meant the people he was talking to right there right then.

Quite clearly he was referring to the people he was speaking to at the time. Even Paul was convinced of this, which was why he was so paranoid about Jesus's eminent return. Why do you think there is so much urgency in Paul's writing and so much about how Jesus's return was on the verge of taking place if he didn't take Jesus's words as being in the life time of those he was speaking to.

Also why was Paul so convinced that the end times where there right at that moment and that he was seeing the signs come to pass. He even believed that the gospel had been preached to the entire world, which was one of the final signs.

I think your reading is way too broad. but I can understand why that would be. You want Jesus's prophecy to be one that is yet to be fulfilled, even 2000 years later.

[theophile]

[Replying to postroad]

Or is it absurd simply because it didn't happen and therefore he couldn't have meant it that way?

Yes, this.

I'm inclined to think that if there are other viable readings that do not lead to absurd conclusions, they are to be preferred. We should give the text the benefit of the doubt.

It's like a maze. If you try a path and hit a dead end, you don't conclude the maze is insolvable / a failure as a maze, but rather you back up and try a new path until all options are exhausted.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 5 by OnceConvinced]

The meaning of the word generation can be anything you like. That is irrelevant. The fact is it says "THIS" generation. It doesn't say "THAT" generation. It would be terribly bad grammar to use "THIS" generation if you were meaning "THAT" generation. Quite a major error in grammar, which I doubt any professional translator... or even the son of God would have made.

Umm, I think the meaning of generation is relevant. To my point, if THIS generation is everyone in the CURRENT age, by which I mean the age of sin, then Jesus is referring to everyone from Adam to people living today.

This is a perfectly valid understanding of Jesus' teaching here, and fits the grammar.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 5 by OnceConvinced]

The meaning of the word generation can be anything you like. That is irrelevant. The fact is it says "THIS" generation. It doesn't say "THAT" generation. It would be terribly bad grammar to use "THIS" generation if you were meaning "THAT" generation. Quite a major error in grammar, which I doubt any professional translator... or even the son of God would have made.

Umm, I think the meaning of generation is relevant. To my point, if THIS generation is everyone in the CURRENT age, by which I mean the age of sin, then Jesus is referring to everyone from Adam to people living today.

This is a perfectly valid understanding of Jesus' teaching here, and fits the grammar.

Do you really think the people who were standing there believed he was talking about an age of sin? That it would have been obvious that was what he was talking about?

I still think that defining "generation" as a an age of sin is looking at things way too broadly.

If you take Paul into consideration he clearly didn't see it as an age of sin. He saw it as something that was eminent. Something that would take place in his life time. Do you take Paul seriously?

[theophile]

[Replying to post 5 by OnceConvinced]

Also why was Paul so convinced that the end times where there right at that moment and that he was seeing the signs come to pass. He even believed that the gospel had been preached to the entire world, which was one of the final signs.

Citations?

There was probably an over-zealous hope that the present age was coming to an end, and to be honest, I don't think there is a clear line in history where one age ends and another begins. Rather, the coming age is always breaking through into the present. That's what Jesus was, right? The firstborn of the new generation... The one of many to come... Not necessarily in a linear fashion...

But being over-zealous (and I'm not convinced Paul was - some followers yes, but not Paul) is not the same as Jesus meaning that there was going to be a stark line in history coming in the next 20-40 years that would demarcate two ages of humankind.

I really don't think Jesus was that specific. He was talking in the broad strokes of biblical philosophy. Figuratively.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 6 by theophile]
Is a sceptic not justified in believing that Jesus simply wasn't what he claimed to be? Do you extend this suspension of critical interpretation to other religions holy books?