Mark 8:38-9:1 (New International Version)
38If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."Mark 9
1And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power."And
Matthew 24:34 (New International Version)
34I tell you the truth, this generation[a] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.Footnotes:
Shane believes that both scriptures are talking about Jesus' second coming and would say that it shows that Jesus could not be a prophet or what we claim because Jesus did not return during the lifetime of those who heard Jesus make the prophecy in person. It's interesting to me that Shane thinks that Jesus is talking about the same thing in both passages although they are two different contexts at two different times.
I appreciate District Superintendent Harvey Burnett chiming in on the text for Mark. I agree with him. His answer is in the comments section for the post on my blog again found here. The only thing I would add to what his said is don't use the New Living Translation for exegesis. It's a paraphrase not a real translation. "generation" in Mark 9:1 does not mean the same things as Matthew 24:34. Elder Burnett did such a great job I see no reason to add to his explanation for why Jesus was not saying that the the Kingdom would be manifested physically in the lifetime of his first disciples.
Instead, let's turn our focus to the the context of Matthew 24. Verse 34 is in context of Jesus answering a question of his disciples. Jesus issued a prophecy in verse 2. Look at verses 1 and 2.
1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
In verse 3, the disciples wanted to know two things: when would the temple be destroyed and when would his coming be and the end of the age?
3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"
Verse 4-34 is Jesus answering the question. Here is where things get interesting. Historically there has been 3 interpretations and one of them is Shane's that Jesus is talking about the end of the world. The other ones make more sense,.Either Jesus is talking about a real historical event - the destruction of the temple - that would happen in the lifetime of those present, or the disciples were asking about the end of the world and the temple destruction. It is my opinion that verse 34 is talking about the destruction of the temple when Jesus says "these things". So here is the question. Was Herod's temple destroyed during the the lifetime of those present when this prophecy was given? Yes. This prophecy cold be dated towards the end of Jesus' earthly ministry just before he was crucified and resurrected. - say 30 AD. The Jews rebelled against Rome and the Romans didn't take kindly to that in 70 AD. They destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. The Jews ceased to exist as a political nation until 1948 AD! This fact is well attested in history - Roman history and in Josephus. Because the destruction was never mentioned anywhere else other than in this context (Olivet Discourse), some people think that the entire New Testament should be dated before 70 AD.
I already know what the counter argument is so let me raise it myself. How can we say that Jesus is right about no stone being left one on top of another if the "Wailing Wall" is still here today? Simple. The Wailing Wall is part of the huge platform that was built to give the builders a level surface on which to build the temple in a remarkable, almost unreproducible feat of ancient engineering. When Jesus spoke this prophecy he wasn't referring to the platform, he was talking to the buildings that had stood on top of the platform. Jesus was probably standing on that platform when he said this. Therefore Jesus was right....validating Himself as prophet, king, and Lord because had He been wrong than everything else He ever said is suspect. It's just following the evidence where it leads. Jesus was not saying that there were those listening to him at that moment who would see his second coming, he was saying that they would live to see the destruction of the temple.
Now the thing to remember is that not everyone agrees with me that Matthew 24 points to any future fulfillment as well as to 70 AD. I was in an online written debate with my friend Mike Felker who believes that all of Matthew 24 was fulfilled in 70 AD and is not talking about the second coming at all. I disagree, but there are many people who would agree with them. I believe Jesus was talking about 60 AD and events beyond the time we now live. You can read that debate by going to the last post at http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/02/apologetic-front-my-last-response-to.html and in that post is links to all the other posts. The interesting thing is that the answer to this question is not essential doctrine. What I mean by that is you can either endorse my interpretation or Mike's and still be orthodox. It's not a salvation issue. That's not saying that it's not important. I mean I would like to know which viewpoint is right but that is how I see it now. The truth is all we have to do is wait and we will see which one is right when Jesus returns. If Mike is right, Shane is wrong while Mike and I still go to heaven and live lives used of God.. If I'm right, Shane is wrong while Mike and I still go to heaven and live lives used of God.With Elder Burnett's assist on the texts form Mark, it is obvious to see that Shane misinterpreted the scripture. Either way the Bible is right.
- Matthew 24:34 Or race
Shane believes that both scriptures are talking about Jesus' second coming and would say that it shows that Jesus could not be a prophet or what we claim because Jesus did not return during the lifetime of those who heard Jesus make the prophecy in person. It's interesting to me that Shane thinks that Jesus is talking about the same thing in both passages although they are two different contexts at two different times.
I appreciate District Superintendent Harvey Burnett chiming in on the text for Mark. I agree with him. His answer is in the comments section for the post on my blog again found here. The only thing I would add to what his said is don't use the New Living Translation for exegesis. It's a paraphrase not a real translation. "generation" in Mark 9:1 does not mean the same things as Matthew 24:34. Elder Burnett did such a great job I see no reason to add to his explanation for why Jesus was not saying that the the Kingdom would be manifested physically in the lifetime of his first disciples.
Instead, let's turn our focus to the the context of Matthew 24. Verse 34 is in context of Jesus answering a question of his disciples. Jesus issued a prophecy in verse 2. Look at verses 1 and 2.
1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
In verse 3, the disciples wanted to know two things: when would the temple be destroyed and when would his coming be and the end of the age?
Verse 4-34 is Jesus answering the question. Here is where things get interesting. Historically there has been 3 interpretations and one of them is Shane's that Jesus is talking about the end of the world. The other ones make more sense,.Either Jesus is talking about a real historical event - the destruction of the temple - that would happen in the lifetime of those present, or the disciples were asking about the end of the world and the temple destruction. It is my opinion that verse 34 is talking about the destruction of the temple when Jesus says "these things". So here is the question. Was Herod's temple destroyed during the the lifetime of those present when this prophecy was given? Yes. This prophecy cold be dated towards the end of Jesus' earthly ministry just before he was crucified and resurrected. - say 30 AD. The Jews rebelled against Rome and the Romans didn't take kindly to that in 70 AD. They destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. The Jews ceased to exist as a political nation until 1948 AD! This fact is well attested in history - Roman history and in Josephus. Because the destruction was never mentioned anywhere else other than in this context (Olivet Discourse), some people think that the entire New Testament should be dated before 70 AD.
I already know what the counter argument is so let me raise it myself. How can we say that Jesus is right about no stone being left one on top of another if the "Wailing Wall" is still here today? Simple. The Wailing Wall is part of the huge platform that was built to give the builders a level surface on which to build the temple in a remarkable, almost unreproducible feat of ancient engineering. When Jesus spoke this prophecy he wasn't referring to the platform, he was talking to the buildings that had stood on top of the platform. Jesus was probably standing on that platform when he said this. Therefore Jesus was right....validating Himself as prophet, king, and Lord because had He been wrong than everything else He ever said is suspect. It's just following the evidence where it leads. Jesus was not saying that there were those listening to him at that moment who would see his second coming, he was saying that they would live to see the destruction of the temple.
Now the thing to remember is that not everyone agrees with me that Matthew 24 points to any future fulfillment as well as to 70 AD. I was in an online written debate with my friend Mike Felker who believes that all of Matthew 24 was fulfilled in 70 AD and is not talking about the second coming at all. I disagree, but there are many people who would agree with them. I believe Jesus was talking about 60 AD and events beyond the time we now live. You can read that debate by going to the last post at http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/02/apologetic-front-my-last-response-to.html and in that post is links to all the other posts. The interesting thing is that the answer to this question is not essential doctrine. What I mean by that is you can either endorse my interpretation or Mike's and still be orthodox. It's not a salvation issue. That's not saying that it's not important. I mean I would like to know which viewpoint is right but that is how I see it now. The truth is all we have to do is wait and we will see which one is right when Jesus returns. If Mike is right, Shane is wrong while Mike and I still go to heaven and live lives used of God.. If I'm right, Shane is wrong while Mike and I still go to heaven and live lives used of God.With Elder Burnett's assist on the texts form Mark, it is obvious to see that Shane misinterpreted the scripture. Either way the Bible is right.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=7ad07a9f-1e78-47b1-ab14-53a28db62fbc)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=33fe873c-316f-4bdb-98b9-96c514c8e9c1)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9628a136-3ec9-4868-9252-bfbfc6baac66)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4c03fd36-c755-420a-8de1-2e8913c2afb5)
