"this Generation Shall Not Pass..."

[SkepticalDaniel]

Hate to ask this, but is there any possible way to defend the fact that Matthew 24:34 has failed?

 

 

Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

 

This was one of the reasons that made me start to doubt the Bible, which I will do a post on later, but I really need help understanding why it failed, and why the Apologetics arguments like this one don't work

 

 

While atheists respectfully dismiss C.S. Lewis's explanation of this conundrum, they patently scoff at this newer popularised explanation. Most recently, former Wheaton graduate, Bart Ehrman has used this apparent dilemma to promote his attack on Christianity, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. Atheist websites are now picking up on this as well and troubling the faith of perhaps thousands of Christ-followers. For a long time, critics of the Bible have had a huge mountain to get over to justify their criticism of the Bible when it came to Bible prophecy. Afterall, some Bible prophecy, written centuries before the events described, give such precise detail that it is simply impossible to deny their fulfilment. For example, in Isaiah 53 the prophet writing around 700BC gives over 40 predictive details about the coming Jewish Messiah. The standard write-offs for such prophecies by atheists is to claim that they were written after the events and dressed up to sound predictive. But this doesn't wash with Isaiah's prophecy. Desperate liberals who go to great lengths to deny the supernatural, even tried to devise a theory about there being two Isaiah's to explain his predictive success (it's called the Deutero-Isaiah Theory). But not even that failed theory can possibly accommodate Isaiah 53 since the events fulfilling it happened some 700 years later! Vainly, some liberal critics asserted that Isaiah 53 must have been written after Christ. But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls - where exact copies of Isaiah's prophecies dating back to centuries BC were discovered - completely destroyed that theory. Fulfilled Bible prophecy stands as one of the most naturally inexplicable phenomena ever. It therefore stands as one of the greatest evidences for the supernatural and the authority of God to not only intervene in human affairs but to announce such interventions before He does it!

 

SORRY MR RUSSELL, MR LEWIS, MR EHRMAN, MATTHEW 24
IS FULFILLED!

Let's return specifically to the verses used by Bertrand Russell, CS Lewis and lately, Bart Ehrman. Matthew 24:30 and 34. It is presumed by all three gentlemen that verse 30 is Christ referring to His "return", commonly called "The Second Coming of Christ" (although that exact expression occurs no-where in the New Testament!). But is it? The verse doesn't actually say it. It refers to Christ "appearing"  (Greek word is - eltho) which means to appear (Strong's Concordance #G2064). It is rendered in English as "coming" but this is generally another Greek word parousia - and this word conveys a different meaning than the word "return". Secondly, notice where Christ said this would take place: "then will appear in heaven..." This verse is an allusion to Daniel 7:13-

I saw in the night visions,
and behold, with the clouds of heaven
there came one like a son of man,
and he came to the Ancient of Days
and was presented before him.
Daniel 7:13

Jesus seems to citing this verse. In this verse, the Son of Man is ascending not descending. Jesus calls this a "sign" - a shadow - not the full deal. This verse does not refer to what has become known as the Second Coming of Christ, but to the appearing of Christ before the Father (the "Ancient of Days") to bring to an end the Temple (Old Covenant) Age. A Covenant always ends with accountabilty, that is: judgment. This is the point of Matthew 24. Christ is telling His disciples that within their lifetimes He would "appear" (Greek words, eltho and parousia) - not on earth -  but before the Father to receive the decree to judge those who had rejected Him and His Covenant of Grace. Daniel goes on to describe this time (nearly 400 years before it occured) by saying that after this time Christ would commence His rule over all peoples, not just Israel. This is what "the Kingdom on earth" means-

And to him was given dominion
and glory and a kingdom,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him;
his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away,
and his kingdom one
that shall not be destroyed.
Daniel 7:14

And thus Jesus tells the Disciples after the events to come in Jerusalem's judgment that His Kingdom (inaugurated at the Cross) would commence on earth-

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be..."
Matthew 25:1

He had already told His Disciples prior to this that some of them would be alive when they would see His Kingdom commence-

"Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 16:28

The events that Jesus described in Matthew 24 were indeed all fulfilled prior to the expiration of that generation- by 70AD, the prophecies of Jesus in Matthew 24 had been fulfilled. The Jewsh historian, Josephus, unwittingly gives us ample evidence that everything Christ predicted would happen within 40 or so years of His utterance did happen. Readers of Matthew 24 should keep in mind that the Disciples did not ask Christ about the end of the "world" (Greek word= "cosmos") but rather, about the end of the Age (Greek word= "aion"). Readers should note that Matthew 24:14 also does not refer to the Gospel going to the whole world (it is not "cosmos" in this verse either) but to the whole of the "known world" or "empire" (Greek word= "oichoumene"), and that Paul records this being fufilled in Colossians 1:5-6, 23.

I have written in more detail about this in my eBook on Matthew 24 where I pick up on CS Lewis's description of Matthew 24:34 as the most embarrassing verse in the Bible, and explained how each of these verses was indeed fulfilled in the lifetime of Christ's generation. [view a sample chapter] I have also revised and updated this into a newly published paperback book: The Most Embarrassing Verse In The Bible available in the Shop section.

So, sorry Messers Russell, Lewis, and Ehrman, Jesus was right afterall.

SOURCE: http://www.andrewcorbett.net/articles/atheist-failed-prophecy/index.html

 

How can this be refuted?

[Jeff]

You don't beleive and yet you need to understand why it failed?

 

Because it's made up.

[Blood]

I think the writer's interpretation is basically correct, though not for the apologetic reasons he couches it in. Matthew 24:34 is an allusion to the Roman-Jewish War in 66-70. The "Son of Man" comes with the clouds -- and the Roman Legions -- to destroy "this wicked and adulterous generation" γενεᾷ (genea), meaning the Jews. Matthew 12:39, 12:45, 16:4, 17:17 all use "genea" in this sense -- the Jews are wicked, evil, perverted, adulterous, so God must punish them, which he does with the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. 

 

This is in keeping with Josephus who wrote that God was on the Romans' side during the war. Not the Jews' side. 

 

Also note that the evangelists writing this nonsense are not Jews, but are in fact anti-Jewish, so by "generation" they don't mean just the current generation but actually all Jews from the beginning of time, whose "father is the Devil" as the Jesus character tells them in the Gospel of Adolf, I mean John. 

 

Matthew was written long after 70, and it used Josephus as a source. The Jesus character didn't "prophesy" anything, Matthew instead wrote a fictional story based on Mark and pretended he knew what the characters in his fictional story said 100 years earlier. 

[rjn]

You seem to have very good grasp of Scripture Blood. I'm quite impressed.

[readyforchange]

SkepticalDaniel, in the introductory paragraph before the author discusses Matthew 24:34, the author gives Isaiah 53 as an example of a fulfilled prophecy about the Messiah. Isaiah 53 contains statements that seem to allude to Jesus, such as a servant giving his life as an offering for sin. When the author states, "Desperate liberals who go to great lengths to deny the supernatural, even tried to devise a theory about there being two Isaiah's to explain his predictive success (it's called the Deutero-Isaiah Theory)", that is not the reason why many Biblical scholars believe Isaiah 40 - 55 (also called "Second Isaiah") was written by a different author from the one who wrote the earlier part of Isaiah. One reason is that the Second Isaiah speaks to the Israelite situation during the Babylonian exile, while the earlier chapters of Isaiah are set in an earlier historical time in the 8th century. You can find more commentary about this online. I did a search, and here is a website that may give you more background - http://thecenterforbiblicalstudies.org/resources/introductions-to-the-books-of-the-bible/isaiah/

 

Also, the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel personified. Isaiah 53 is commonly cited by many Christians as predicting Jesus' death as an atonement for sins, and it is often referenced by Christian missionaries. On the surface, Isaiah 53 seems to be about Jesus, as it describes a man giving his life for the atonement of sins. But Isaiah 53 has to be read in the context of the rest of Second Isaiah, and it is one of four servant songs, or poems, in Second Isaiah, and this one actually begins at Isaiah 52:13. At multiple points in "Second Isaiah", the author specifically states that Israel, or Jacob, is Yahweh's servant. There are also some Christian mistranslations in Isaiah 53. Christians would need to appeal to a midrash interpretation of Isaiah 53 in order to attempt to claim it is about Jesus. The Jews have the proper interpretation of Isaiah 53. This website might be useful - http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/prooftext10is53.html

[readyforchange]

There are other prophecies in the New Testament that could be difficult to explain. I have not reviewed apologetic responses about these but would be interested in what your source states, if these are described:

 

Romans 13:11 - In Romans 13:11, Paul states, "Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers;" (NRSV). Paul wrote Romans well after Jesus would have died, been resurrected, and ascended to heaven. When he states salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers, is he is referring to Jesus' return? If so, this event should have occurred within a timeframe that is shorter than the time between Jesus' resurrection (or Paul's conversion) and the time that Paul wrote Romans, which I think has to be no more than 25 - 30 years, if that.

 

1 John 2:18 - In 1 John 2:18, the author states, "Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour."(NRSV). The author states that it is the last hour, which suggests that the end is imminent for the audience the author is addressing this letter to. Psalm 90:4 is often used to declare that God's time is different than human's time (a thousand years is like a day to the Lord). But 1,000 years (1 day) / 24 (hours in a day) = 41.667 years?

[Blood]

I'd guess that the entire New Testament, though written in the second century, is back-dated to prior to the Roman-Jewish war, so all this stuff about "the end is nigh!" was meant to convey to the reader that "the apostles" knew about the impending Roman destruction of Jerusalem before it happened. Nowhere is this explicitly spelled out, but it follows the biblical pattern of "prophesying" events before they happened through the trick of writing the books ex post facto. 

 

The entire Bible is a hoax and a fraud. 

[quinntar]

Hate to ask this, but is there any possible way to defend the fact that Matthew 24:34 has failed?

 

Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

This was one of the reasons that made me start to doubt the Bible, which I will do a post on later, but I really need help understanding why it failed, and why the Apologetics arguments like this one don't work

While atheists respectfully dismiss C.S. Lewis's explanation of this conundrum, they patently scoff at this newer popularised explanation. Most recently, former Wheaton graduate, Bart Ehrman has used this apparent dilemma to promote his attack on Christianity, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. Atheist websites are now picking up on this as well and troubling the faith of perhaps thousands of Christ-followers. For a long time, critics of the Bible have had a huge mountain to get over to justify their criticism of the Bible when it came to Bible prophecy. Afterall, some Bible prophecy, written centuries before the events described, give such precise detail that it is simply impossible to deny their fulfilment. For example, in Isaiah 53 the prophet writing around 700BC gives over 40 predictive details about the coming Jewish Messiah. The standard write-offs for such prophecies by atheists is to claim that they were written after the events and dressed up to sound predictive. But this doesn't wash with Isaiah's prophecy. Desperate liberals who go to great lengths to deny the supernatural, even tried to devise a theory about there being two Isaiah's to explain his predictive success (it's called the Deutero-Isaiah Theory). But not even that failed theory can possibly accommodate Isaiah 53 since the events fulfilling it happened some 700 years later! Vainly, some liberal critics asserted that Isaiah 53 must have been written after Christ. But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls - where exact copies of Isaiah's prophecies dating back to centuries BC were discovered - completely destroyed that theory. Fulfilled Bible prophecy stands as one of the most naturally inexplicable phenomena ever. It therefore stands as one of the greatest evidences for the supernatural and the authority of God to not only intervene in human affairs but to announce such interventions before He does it!

SORRY MR RUSSELL, MR LEWIS, MR EHRMAN, MATTHEW 24

IS FULFILLED!

Let's return specifically to the verses used by Bertrand Russell, CS Lewis and lately, Bart Ehrman. Matthew 24:30 and 34. It is presumed by all three gentlemen that verse 30 is Christ referring to His "return", commonly called "The Second Coming of Christ" (although that exact expression occurs no-where in the New Testament!). But is it? The verse doesn't actually say it. It refers to Christ "appearing" (Greek word is - eltho) which means to appear (Strong's Concordance #G2064). It is rendered in English as "coming" but this is generally another Greek word parousia - and this word conveys a different meaning than the word "return". Secondly, notice where Christ said this would take place: "then will appear in heaven..." This verse is an allusion to Daniel 7:13-

 

I saw in the night visions,

and behold, with the clouds of heaven

there came one like a son of man,

and he came to the Ancient of Days

and was presented before him.

Daniel 7:13

Jesus seems to citing this verse. In this verse, the Son of Man is ascending not descending. Jesus calls this a "sign" - a shadow - not the full deal. This verse does not refer to what has become known as the Second Coming of Christ, but to the appearing of Christ before the Father (the "Ancient of Days") to bring to an end the Temple (Old Covenant) Age. A Covenant always ends with accountabilty, that is: judgment. This is the point of Matthew 24. Christ is telling His disciples that within their lifetimes He would "appear" (Greek words, eltho and parousia) - not on earth - but before the Father to receive the decree to judge those who had rejected Him and His Covenant of Grace. Daniel goes on to describe this time (nearly 400 years before it occured) by saying that after this time Christ would commence His rule over all peoples, not just Israel. This is what "the Kingdom on earth" means-

And to him was given dominion

and glory and a kingdom,

that all peoples, nations, and languages

should serve him;

his dominion is an everlasting dominion,

which shall not pass away,

and his kingdom one

that shall not be destroyed.

Daniel 7:14

And thus Jesus tells the Disciples after the events to come in Jerusalem's judgment that His Kingdom (inaugurated at the Cross) would commence on earth-

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be..."

Matthew 25:1

He had already told His Disciples prior to this that some of them would be alive when they would see His Kingdom commence-

"Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 16:28

The events that Jesus described in Matthew 24 were indeed all fulfilled prior to the expiration of that generation- by 70AD, the prophecies of Jesus in Matthew 24 had been fulfilled. The Jewsh historian, Josephus, unwittingly gives us ample evidence that everything Christ predicted would happen within 40 or so years of His utterance did happen. Readers of Matthew 24 should keep in mind that the Disciples did not ask Christ about the end of the "world" (Greek word= "cosmos") but rather, about the end of the Age (Greek word= "aion"). Readers should note that Matthew 24:14 also does not refer to the Gospel going to the whole world (it is not "cosmos" in this verse either) but to the whole of the "known world" or "empire" (Greek word= "oichoumene"), and that Paul records this being fufilled in Colossians 1:5-6, 23.

I have written in more detail about this in my eBook on Matthew 24 where I pick up on CS Lewis's description of Matthew 24:34 as the most embarrassing verse in the Bible, and explained how each of these verses was indeed fulfilled in the lifetime of Christ's generation. [view a sample chapter] I have also revised and updated this into a newly published paperback book: The Most Embarrassing Verse In The Bible available in the Shop section.

So, sorry Messers Russell, Lewis, and Ehrman, Jesus was right afterall.

SOURCE: http://www.andrewcorbett.net/articles/atheist-failed-prophecy/index.html

 

How can this be refuted?

The thing is somethings can't be refuted, since much Bible teaching clouded in obscurity. They kinda make up the evidence as they go along.

[Jeff]

They can be refuted when you realize that the bible is one big mess

[SkepticalDaniel]

They can be refuted when you realize that the bible is one big mess

Oh, trust me, I know it's a mess. In fact, not only are there contradictions in scriptures, but theology as well!

[quinntar]

They can be refuted when you realize that the bible is one big mess

As for the human race altogether.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Hate to ask this, but is there any possible way to defend the fact that Matthew 24:34 has failed?

 

 

Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

 

This was one of the reasons that made me start to doubt the Bible, which I will do a post on later, but I really need help understanding why it failed, and why the Apologetics arguments like this one don't work

 

 

While atheists respectfully dismiss C.S. Lewis's explanation of this conundrum, they patently scoff at this newer popularised explanation. Most recently, former Wheaton graduate, Bart Ehrman has used this apparent dilemma to promote his attack on Christianity, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. Atheist websites are now picking up on this as well and troubling the faith of perhaps thousands of Christ-followers. For a long time, critics of the Bible have had a huge mountain to get over to justify their criticism of the Bible when it came to Bible prophecy. Afterall, some Bible prophecy, written centuries before the events described, give such precise detail that it is simply impossible to deny their fulfilment. For example, in Isaiah 53 the prophet writing around 700BC gives over 40 predictive details about the coming Jewish Messiah. The standard write-offs for such prophecies by atheists is to claim that they were written after the events and dressed up to sound predictive. But this doesn't wash with Isaiah's prophecy. Desperate liberals who go to great lengths to deny the supernatural, even tried to devise a theory about there being two Isaiah's to explain his predictive success (it's called the Deutero-Isaiah Theory). But not even that failed theory can possibly accommodate Isaiah 53 since the events fulfilling it happened some 700 years later! Vainly, some liberal critics asserted that Isaiah 53 must have been written after Christ. But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls - where exact copies of Isaiah's prophecies dating back to centuries BC were discovered - completely destroyed that theory. Fulfilled Bible prophecy stands as one of the most naturally inexplicable phenomena ever. It therefore stands as one of the greatest evidences for the supernatural and the authority of God to not only intervene in human affairs but to announce such interventions before He does it!

 

SORRY MR RUSSELL, MR LEWIS, MR EHRMAN, MATTHEW 24

IS FULFILLED!

Let's return specifically to the verses used by Bertrand Russell, CS Lewis and lately, Bart Ehrman. Matthew 24:30 and 34. It is presumed by all three gentlemen that verse 30 is Christ referring to His "return", commonly called "The Second Coming of Christ" (although that exact expression occurs no-where in the New Testament!). But is it? The verse doesn't actually say it. It refers to Christ "appearing"  (Greek word is - eltho) which means to appear (Strong's Concordance #G2064). It is rendered in English as "coming" but this is generally another Greek word parousia - and this word conveys a different meaning than the word "return". Secondly, notice where Christ said this would take place: "then will appear in heaven..." This verse is an allusion to Daniel 7:13-

I saw in the night visions,

and behold, with the clouds of heaven

there came one like a son of man,

and he came to the Ancient of Days

and was presented before him.

Daniel 7:13

Jesus seems to citing this verse. In this verse, the Son of Man is ascending not descending. Jesus calls this a "sign" - a shadow - not the full deal. This verse does not refer to what has become known as the Second Coming of Christ, but to the appearing of Christ before the Father (the "Ancient of Days") to bring to an end the Temple (Old Covenant) Age. A Covenant always ends with accountabilty, that is: judgment. This is the point of Matthew 24. Christ is telling His disciples that within their lifetimes He would "appear" (Greek words, eltho and parousia) - not on earth -  but before the Father to receive the decree to judge those who had rejected Him and His Covenant of Grace. Daniel goes on to describe this time (nearly 400 years before it occured) by saying that after this time Christ would commence His rule over all peoples, not just Israel. This is what "the Kingdom on earth" means-

And to him was given dominion

and glory and a kingdom,

that all peoples, nations, and languages

should serve him;

his dominion is an everlasting dominion,

which shall not pass away,

and his kingdom one

that shall not be destroyed.

Daniel 7:14

And thus Jesus tells the Disciples after the events to come in Jerusalem's judgment that His Kingdom (inaugurated at the Cross) would commence on earth-

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be..."

Matthew 25:1

He had already told His Disciples prior to this that some of them would be alive when they would see His Kingdom commence-

The events that Jesus described in Matthew 24 were indeed all fulfilled prior to the expiration of that generation- by 70AD, the prophecies of Jesus in Matthew 24 had been fulfilled. The Jewsh historian, Josephus, unwittingly gives us ample evidence that everything Christ predicted would happen within 40 or so years of His utterance did happen. Readers of Matthew 24 should keep in mind that the Disciples did not ask Christ about the end of the "world" (Greek word= "cosmos") but rather, about the end of the Age (Greek word= "aion"). Readers should note that Matthew 24:14 also does not refer to the Gospel going to the whole world (it is not "cosmos" in this verse either) but to the whole of the "known world" or "empire" (Greek word= "oichoumene"), and that Paul records this being fufilled in Colossians 1:5-6, 23.

"Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 16:28

I have written in more detail about this in my eBook on Matthew 24 where I pick up on CS Lewis's description of Matthew 24:34 as the most embarrassing verse in the Bible, and explained how each of these verses was indeed fulfilled in the lifetime of Christ's generation. [view a sample chapter] I have also revised and updated this into a newly published paperback book: The Most Embarrassing Verse In The Bible available in the Shop section.

So, sorry Messers Russell, Lewis, and Ehrman, Jesus was right afterall.

SOURCE: http://www.andrewcorbett.net/articles/atheist-failed-prophecy/index.html

How can this be refuted?

 

It's actually quite easily refuted. Just look again at the verse you quoted at the top, and take note of what the apologist ignored:

 

Matthew 24:34 - "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till ALL THESE THINGS be fulfilled."

 

So, you see, it's NOT just about "appearing in heaven," but it's about ALL the things that Jesus had allegedly been discussing. If you read through the progression of discussion in the chapter leading up to that quote, it's quite obvious that the apologist is full of crap. For example, take a look at this verse:

 

Matthew 24:31 - "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

 

That is part of the "all these things" that were supposed to happen before that generation passed. Yet, it still has not happened. Now look at this verse:

 

Matthew 24:30 - "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

 

Clearly, this is not about an appearance in heaven that was out of view of people. It specifically says that the tribes of the earth will mourn when seeing him coming. If people of earth see him, then it is in view of earth, and if he's coming, then that is not him ascending, but rather descending. This is also part of the "all these things" that were supposed to happen before that generation passed, and it still has not happened. The apologists ignore stuff like this because they have to spin things to get them to be what they want them to be in their desperate attempts to make the Bible seem believable.

 

A few years ago I wrote a lengthy letter about problems with the Bible, and I hope you find helpful the following excerpt in which I discussed this very topic:

 

The Generation That Passed Away

 

When discussing end-times prophecy, Jesus allegedly said, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matthew 24:34; ref Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). Yet here we are, a couple millennia after the generation that Jesus was speaking to, and the end has not come! Did Jesus not know what he was talking about?

 

One response Christians give is that "this generation" is not referring to the generation in which Jesus lived, but instead refers to the generation in which the end-times scenario begins to unfold. In other words, all the end-times events will happen within one generation. However, this argument is flawed, because Jesus specifically stated, "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matt 24:34). What are "all these things" that Jesus had been talking about? The end-times teaching (Matt 24:4-44) was given in response to the disciples asking about "these things" (Matt 24:3) that Jesus had just mentioned regarding the temple, "Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" (Matt 24:1-2). The temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and the generation that lived then has long since passed. Therefore, this explanation does not work.

 

Another response is that "generation" could also be translated "race," and therefore Jesus was just saying that the Jewish race would not pass away until everything was fulfilled. However, if this was really true, then surely we would see modern translations reflecting that. Yet we don't see that; modern translations still use the word "generation" (NKJV, NIV, NASB, NLT, AMP, CEV) or an equivalent such as "the people of this time" (NCV). While some Bibles do contain a footnote saying that the word for "generation" could also mean "race," if the context really warranted that translation, we would be seeing "race" used in the actual text. But we don't see that. In fact, The Amplified Bible (which attempts to amplify the meanings of the original words) specifies that it refers to "the whole multitude of people living at the same time, in a definite, given period." That correlates to a generation, not race. Clearly then, the text has Jesus specifying that the end-times would happen before his generation all passed away! But that didn't happen, did it?

 

And what do other Biblical authors have to say? The author of Hebrews wrote, "For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry" (Hebrews 10:37), indicating that he expected Jesus' return to happen soon and not be delayed. In writings attributed to Paul we read, "We shall not all sleep (die), but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump" (I Corinthians 15:51-52), where "we" clearly indicates Paul and the people he was writing to. Similarly, "And they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come" (I Cor 10:11), where "our" clearly indicates Paul and the people he was writing to. We also read that "the time is short" (I Cor 7:29), "The Lord is at hand" (Philippians 4:5), "we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" (I Thesselonians 4:15) and "the day of Christ is at hand" (II Thes 2:2), all of which clearly indicate the thought that the end was near at the time he wrote.

 

From other authors we also read, "But the end of all things is at hand" (I Peter 4:7), "it is the last time" (I John 2:18), "the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3; 22:10), and the end-times events are "things which must shortly be done" (Rev 22:6).

 

In addition, Jesus reportedly also said, "I come quickly" (Rev 3:11; 22:7,12,20). Some argue that this particular saying merely means that when Jesus returns, it will happen really fast. However, the Greek word used is "tachy," which means "quickly" in the sense of without delay. This is also easily understood from the context in which it was used in Revelation 22, because, as noted in the previous paragraph, that very chapter specifies that it is talking about "things which must shortly be done" (Rev 22:6), that "the time is at hand" (Rev 22:10). Indeed, some newer translations even clarify "I come quickly" by translating it as "I am coming soon" (NIV).

 

Can there be any doubt that the authors of the New Testament were saying that the end would happen in their generation, just as Jesus himself supposedly said?

 

In response, some point to Peter saying, "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering" (II Peter 3:8-9). The argument is that Peter knew it could be a long time. However, keep in mind that the previous letter attributed to Peter said that "the end of all things is at hand" (I Pet 4:7), clearly indicating an imminent event. It appears that after time passed and the end did not come, the author realized that they had been wrong, and thus altered his approach to the subject. Yet, if the Bible was divinely inspired, as many Christians insist, then would there be such flip-flopping? Would there have ever been an erroneous claim that the end would happen in their generation?

 

As such, what are we to make of this? The Bible has Jesus and New Testament authors saying that the end would happen in their generation. Yet that did not happen. Clearly, then, we have failed prophecies, thus undermining Biblical authority.

[★ Citsonga ★]

SkepticalDaniel, did you get a chance to read my post above? I hope it's helpful for you.

[TABA]

Good work, Citsonga! Reading Matthew 24 in its entirety is an eye-opener, if you still need your eyes opened...

[SkepticalDaniel]

SkepticalDaniel, did you get a chance to read my post above? I hope it's helpful for you.

Yes, I did. In fact, Matthew 24 is actually something that played a part in my de-conversion.

[Guest Furball]

 

Hate to ask this, but is there any possible way to defend the fact that Matthew 24:34 has failed?

 

 

Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

 

This was one of the reasons that made me start to doubt the Bible, which I will do a post on later, but I really need help understanding why it failed, and why the Apologetics arguments like this one don't work

 

 

While atheists respectfully dismiss C.S. Lewis's explanation of this conundrum, they patently scoff at this newer popularised explanation. Most recently, former Wheaton graduate, Bart Ehrman has used this apparent dilemma to promote his attack on Christianity, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. Atheist websites are now picking up on this as well and troubling the faith of perhaps thousands of Christ-followers. For a long time, critics of the Bible have had a huge mountain to get over to justify their criticism of the Bible when it came to Bible prophecy. Afterall, some Bible prophecy, written centuries before the events described, give such precise detail that it is simply impossible to deny their fulfilment. For example, in Isaiah 53 the prophet writing around 700BC gives over 40 predictive details about the coming Jewish Messiah. The standard write-offs for such prophecies by atheists is to claim that they were written after the events and dressed up to sound predictive. But this doesn't wash with Isaiah's prophecy. Desperate liberals who go to great lengths to deny the supernatural, even tried to devise a theory about there being two Isaiah's to explain his predictive success (it's called the Deutero-Isaiah Theory). But not even that failed theory can possibly accommodate Isaiah 53 since the events fulfilling it happened some 700 years later! Vainly, some liberal critics asserted that Isaiah 53 must have been written after Christ. But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls - where exact copies of Isaiah's prophecies dating back to centuries BC were discovered - completely destroyed that theory. Fulfilled Bible prophecy stands as one of the most naturally inexplicable phenomena ever. It therefore stands as one of the greatest evidences for the supernatural and the authority of God to not only intervene in human affairs but to announce such interventions before He does it!

 

SORRY MR RUSSELL, MR LEWIS, MR EHRMAN, MATTHEW 24

IS FULFILLED!

Let's return specifically to the verses used by Bertrand Russell, CS Lewis and lately, Bart Ehrman. Matthew 24:30 and 34. It is presumed by all three gentlemen that verse 30 is Christ referring to His "return", commonly called "The Second Coming of Christ" (although that exact expression occurs no-where in the New Testament!). But is it? The verse doesn't actually say it. It refers to Christ "appearing"  (Greek word is - eltho) which means to appear (Strong's Concordance #G2064). It is rendered in English as "coming" but this is generally another Greek word parousia - and this word conveys a different meaning than the word "return". Secondly, notice where Christ said this would take place: "then will appear in heaven..." This verse is an allusion to Daniel 7:13-

I saw in the night visions,

and behold, with the clouds of heaven

there came one like a son of man,

and he came to the Ancient of Days

and was presented before him.

Daniel 7:13

Jesus seems to citing this verse. In this verse, the Son of Man is ascending not descending. Jesus calls this a "sign" - a shadow - not the full deal. This verse does not refer to what has become known as the Second Coming of Christ, but to the appearing of Christ before the Father (the "Ancient of Days") to bring to an end the Temple (Old Covenant) Age. A Covenant always ends with accountabilty, that is: judgment. This is the point of Matthew 24. Christ is telling His disciples that within their lifetimes He would "appear" (Greek words, eltho and parousia) - not on earth -  but before the Father to receive the decree to judge those who had rejected Him and His Covenant of Grace. Daniel goes on to describe this time (nearly 400 years before it occured) by saying that after this time Christ would commence His rule over all peoples, not just Israel. This is what "the Kingdom on earth" means-

And to him was given dominion

and glory and a kingdom,

that all peoples, nations, and languages

should serve him;

his dominion is an everlasting dominion,

which shall not pass away,

and his kingdom one

that shall not be destroyed.

Daniel 7:14

And thus Jesus tells the Disciples after the events to come in Jerusalem's judgment that His Kingdom (inaugurated at the Cross) would commence on earth-

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be..."

Matthew 25:1

He had already told His Disciples prior to this that some of them would be alive when they would see His Kingdom commence-

The events that Jesus described in Matthew 24 were indeed all fulfilled prior to the expiration of that generation- by 70AD, the prophecies of Jesus in Matthew 24 had been fulfilled. The Jewsh historian, Josephus, unwittingly gives us ample evidence that everything Christ predicted would happen within 40 or so years of His utterance did happen. Readers of Matthew 24 should keep in mind that the Disciples did not ask Christ about the end of the "world" (Greek word= "cosmos") but rather, about the end of the Age (Greek word= "aion"). Readers should note that Matthew 24:14 also does not refer to the Gospel going to the whole world (it is not "cosmos" in this verse either) but to the whole of the "known world" or "empire" (Greek word= "oichoumene"), and that Paul records this being fufilled in Colossians 1:5-6, 23.

"Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Matthew 16:28

I have written in more detail about this in my eBook on Matthew 24 where I pick up on CS Lewis's description of Matthew 24:34 as the most embarrassing verse in the Bible, and explained how each of these verses was indeed fulfilled in the lifetime of Christ's generation. [view a sample chapter] I have also revised and updated this into a newly published paperback book: The Most Embarrassing Verse In The Bible available in the Shop section.

So, sorry Messers Russell, Lewis, and Ehrman, Jesus was right afterall.

SOURCE: http://www.andrewcorbett.net/articles/atheist-failed-prophecy/index.html

How can this be refuted?

 

It's actually quite easily refuted. Just look again at the verse you quoted at the top, and take note of what the apologist ignored:

 

Matthew 24:34 - "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till ALL THESE THINGS be fulfilled."

 

So, you see, it's NOT just about "appearing in heaven," but it's about ALL the things that Jesus had allegedly been discussing. If you read through the progression of discussion in the chapter leading up to that quote, it's quite obvious that the apologist is full of crap. For example, take a look at this verse:

 

Matthew 24:31 - "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

 

That is part of the "all these things" that were supposed to happen before that generation passed. Yet, it still has not happened. Now look at this verse:

 

Matthew 24:30 - "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

 

Clearly, this is not about an appearance in heaven that was out of view of people. It specifically says that the tribes of the earth will mourn when seeing him coming. If people of earth see him, then it is in view of earth, and if he's coming, then that is not him ascending, but rather descending. This is also part of the "all these things" that were supposed to happen before that generation passed, and it still has not happened. The apologists ignore stuff like this because they have to spin things to get them to be what they want them to be in their desperate attempts to make the Bible seem believable.

 

A few years ago I wrote a lengthy letter about problems with the Bible, and I hope you find helpful the following excerpt in which I discussed this very topic:

 

The Generation That Passed Away

 

When discussing end-times prophecy, Jesus allegedly said, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matthew 24:34; ref Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). Yet here we are, a couple millennia after the generation that Jesus was speaking to, and the end has not come! Did Jesus not know what he was talking about?

 

One response Christians give is that "this generation" is not referring to the generation in which Jesus lived, but instead refers to the generation in which the end-times scenario begins to unfold. In other words, all the end-times events will happen within one generation. However, this argument is flawed, because Jesus specifically stated, "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matt 24:34). What are "all these things" that Jesus had been talking about? The end-times teaching (Matt 24:4-44) was given in response to the disciples asking about "these things" (Matt 24:3) that Jesus had just mentioned regarding the temple, "Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" (Matt 24:1-2). The temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and the generation that lived then has long since passed. Therefore, this explanation does not work.

 

Another response is that "generation" could also be translated "race," and therefore Jesus was just saying that the Jewish race would not pass away until everything was fulfilled. However, if this was really true, then surely we would see modern translations reflecting that. Yet we don't see that; modern translations still use the word "generation" (NKJV, NIV, NASB, NLT, AMP, CEV) or an equivalent such as "the people of this time" (NCV). While some Bibles do contain a footnote saying that the word for "generation" could also mean "race," if the context really warranted that translation, we would be seeing "race" used in the actual text. But we don't see that. In fact, The Amplified Bible (which attempts to amplify the meanings of the original words) specifies that it refers to "the whole multitude of people living at the same time, in a definite, given period." That correlates to a generation, not race. Clearly then, the text has Jesus specifying that the end-times would happen before his generation all passed away! But that didn't happen, did it?

 

And what do other Biblical authors have to say? The author of Hebrews wrote, "For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry" (Hebrews 10:37), indicating that he expected Jesus' return to happen soon and not be delayed. In writings attributed to Paul we read, "We shall not all sleep (die), but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump" (I Corinthians 15:51-52), where "we" clearly indicates Paul and the people he was writing to. Similarly, "And they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come" (I Cor 10:11), where "our" clearly indicates Paul and the people he was writing to. We also read that "the time is short" (I Cor 7:29), "The Lord is at hand" (Philippians 4:5), "we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" (I Thesselonians 4:15) and "the day of Christ is at hand" (II Thes 2:2), all of which clearly indicate the thought that the end was near at the time he wrote.

 

From other authors we also read, "But the end of all things is at hand" (I Peter 4:7), "it is the last time" (I John 2:18), "the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3; 22:10), and the end-times events are "things which must shortly be done" (Rev 22:6).

 

In addition, Jesus reportedly also said, "I come quickly" (Rev 3:11; 22:7,12,20). Some argue that this particular saying merely means that when Jesus returns, it will happen really fast. However, the Greek word used is "tachy," which means "quickly" in the sense of without delay. This is also easily understood from the context in which it was used in Revelation 22, because, as noted in the previous paragraph, that very chapter specifies that it is talking about "things which must shortly be done" (Rev 22:6), that "the time is at hand" (Rev 22:10). Indeed, some newer translations even clarify "I come quickly" by translating it as "I am coming soon" (NIV).

 

Can there be any doubt that the authors of the New Testament were saying that the end would happen in their generation, just as Jesus himself supposedly said?

 

In response, some point to Peter saying, "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering" (II Peter 3:8-9). The argument is that Peter knew it could be a long time. However, keep in mind that the previous letter attributed to Peter said that "the end of all things is at hand" (I Pet 4:7), clearly indicating an imminent event. It appears that after time passed and the end did not come, the author realized that they had been wrong, and thus altered his approach to the subject. Yet, if the Bible was divinely inspired, as many Christians insist, then would there be such flip-flopping? Would there have ever been an erroneous claim that the end would happen in their generation?

 

As such, what are we to make of this? The Bible has Jesus and New Testament authors saying that the end would happen in their generation. Yet that did not happen. Clearly, then, we have failed prophecies, thus undermining Biblical authority.

 

 

 

Outstanding post Citsonga. Very informative and well thought out. Thank you for taking the time to type all that out, I appreciate it as I'm sure others do as well. 

 

[SkepticalDaniel]

SkepticalDaniel, did you get a chance to read my post above? I hope it's helpful for you.

I did, very well put.

[Shinzon]

I dunno seems like a odd choice of words to forshadow the end of the story about 6 chapters in advance or to talk about some not discussed in the gospels writting after ad70.

[PurpleStarGirl]

I thought Jesus was speaking to the generation in which he had been born in. At least that's my understanding of it.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Outstanding post Citsonga. Very informative and well thought out. Thank you for taking the time to type all that out, I appreciate it as I'm sure others do as well.

 

 

 

SkepticalDaniel, did you get a chance to read my post above? I hope it's helpful for you.

 

I did, very well put.

 

Thanks. It still blows my mind that so many people fall for the ridiculous spins that apologists put on it when it's so blatantly clear what's being said in the chapter.

[rjn]

It doesn't really matter WHAT the Bible says, apologists will always find a way to defend it or twist into something else no matter what because they HAVE TO because otherwise, the foundation of their belief would crumble. That's the reason for the multitude of divergent interpretations and the farfetched mental acrobatics.

[Tsathoggua]

It doesn't really matter WHAT the Bible says, apologists will always find a way to defend it or twist into something else no matter what because they HAVE TO because otherwise, the foundation of their belief would crumble. That's the reason for the multitude of divergent interpretations and the farfetched mental acrobatics.

 

Excellent point!

[FlowerDemon]

You would think that if the Bible really was the inspired word of God, a gift to all humanity to go to heaven with God and avoid going to hell...you would think his holy book would be more clear about things like this. You would think God would want you to understand the oh-so-holy book so you would repent and believe. You would think his book of holiness would not cause thousands of denominations of the same belief to produce.

[★ Citsonga ★]

It doesn't really matter WHAT the Bible says, apologists will always find a way to defend it or twist into something else no matter what because they HAVE TO because otherwise, the foundation of their belief would crumble. That's the reason for the multitude of divergent interpretations and the farfetched mental acrobatics.

 

In that sense, I agree 100% that it doesn't matter what it says. It also doesn't matter with regard to us just living our lives the best we can.

 

On the other hand, in a culture rampant with Bible-thumpers, what the Bible really says really does matter to those of us who actually care about truth.

[♦ ficino ♦]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^

 

And it's important as those Bible-thumpers keep trying to control politics so that they can control other people's lives. And cry Persecution when the other people resist their control.