This Generation

[Blue Canary]

Studying Mark 13 with the New International Biblical Commentary has helped me greatly, pp 222,223:

It is important to note carefully the wording of verses 29-30, or one might easily misinterpret Jesus' saying. The these things of verse 29 clearly refers to the "these things" of verse 4 and verse 8, and the "everything" (Greek, "all things") of verse 23, that is, the troubles that his disciples are to expect, including the destruction of Jerusalem. Logically, if verses 24-27 describe the end, then these verses cannot be the "these things" that assure one that an end will come! Thus, the these things of verse 30 must also refer, not to the end itself, but to the tribulations described in verses 5-23. These things will happen in the lifetime of the Twelve (v. 30), but that does not mean that the end will happen in so short a period of time.

Also, in verse 29, we are told that the events of verses 5-23 signal that the time is near, right at the door. The Greek reads literally, "it [or he] is near, at the doors," and what is referred to is probably the consummation described in verses 24-27. That is the distresses of verses 5-23 are to be taken as evidence that the consummation is surely coming. But this does not mean that the troubles are to be taken as indications that the end will happen immediately, for the whole point of verses 5-23 has been to debunk any attempt to calculate the date of the end by the occurrence of these events. . . .

I am so happy! It's like a key just unlocked this for me. I was really perplexed that "this generation" was supposed to have seen the end (Mark 13:24-27) because I thought the end was included in "these things". But, it sounds very reasonable to me that "these things" did not include the end, but the things that would happen before then end, to assure that the end would indeed come--and this offered hope, as it still does.

So, another question: what does "immediately" mean in Matthew 24:29?

Thanks so much

[John Reece]

I am so happy! It's like a key just unlocked this for me. I was really perplexed that "this generation" was supposed to have seen the end (Mark 13:24-27) because I thought the end was included in "these things". But, it sounds very reasonable to me that "these things" did not include the end, but the things that would happen before then end, to assure that the end would indeed come--and this offered hope, as it still does.

So, another question: what does "immediately" mean in Matthew 24:29?

It means exactly what it says: immediately (εὐθέως [eutheōs]).

It ("immediately" in Matthew 24:29) corresponds to "in those days" in Mark 13:24; that is, in the initial clause of Mark 13:24 "in those days" (ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις [en ekeinais tais hēmerais]) refers to the days of the "tribulation" described in the immediately preceding context (Mark 13:14-23).

It also means that the rationalization in which you have found comfort is just that: a rationalization that misconstrues ― rather that explicates ― the meaning of the biblical text.

[Blue Canary]

Thanks for the warning, I will continue to examine these things.

I was happy that "this generation" could be kept in the generation to which Jesus spoke, while at the same time keeping what sounds like the final judgment at a time in the future when no one knows the day or hour. I've been perplexed wondering how "all nations" mourned at the judgment in that generation, how that was already fulfilled, even given hyperbole. But if Jesus is answering two different questions concerning the end, the signs of and then the actual end, I have an answer from the commentary I quoted above. But, I am willing to put this aside in order to hear the answer in keeping with a more sound understanding.

In Mark it looks like there could be a difference between the things that happen *before the end* and *the end*, as Jesus is answering the two different questions. Perhaps "Immediately" in Matthew could indicate that the time before the end is not yet complete, even though the generation that heard Jesus did indeed fully experience all the things completely that Jesus predicted before the end. Perhaps we are still experiencing all the things that Jesus said would happen before the end? "Immediately" has not happened yet because these days before the end are not yet finished, even though Jesus' generation did indeed historically and fully experienced all the signs of the end. Because we still experience these things does not mean the generation to which Jesus spoke didn't fully experience all the things Jesus said would happen in that generation. I want to stay true to the text so I truly believe "this generation" must be kept as the generation to which Jesus spoke. So, I am not arguing that, I think we need to keep that.

But, perhaps this is a question best for the other department. But I don't find the same level of thought there... People get rude about this subject, I wish they wouldn't. I just want to find out truth, I don't care about what stakes I've put in this, etc, because I have none. I have Christ and with Him I have all I need. I don't even need to know the answers to my questions, all I need is Christ. But He has given me a desire to know His word. And I want to be faithful and do diligence as Christ has been faithful and diligent for me.

[John Reece]

Thanks for the warning, I will continue to examine these things.

Very well, let's continue to carefully examine what the text actually says.

The Greek text of Mark 13:24 contains a verbatim quote from the LXX/Greek text of Isaiah 13:10.

Isaiah 13 is a prophecy referring to God's judgment pronounced against Babylon that was fulfilled in ancient history, not a prophecy referring to a yet-for-us future "end" of the world.

Likewise, Mark 13:1-30 is a prophetic teaching referring to God's judgment pronounced against Jerusalem that was fulfilled circa AD 70, not a prophecy referring to a yet-for-us future "end" of the world.

The very same symbolic language that in Isaiah 13 referred to a judgment on Babylon that was fulfilled in ancient history likewise in Mark 13:24 referred to a judgment on Jerusalem that was fulfilled ― just as Jesus clearly, expressly, and emphatically predicted in Mark 13:30 and Matthew 24:34 ― within the lifespan/generation of Jesus' contemporaries in the middle of the first century.

Let's keep our posts short and focused on a single point and/or text at time; in that way, we may eventually come to a clear understanding of the bigger picture.

[Blue Canary]

Very well, let's continue to carefully examine what the text actually says.

The Greek text of Mark 13:24 contains a verbatim quote from the LXX/Greek text of Isaiah 13:10.

Isaiah 13 is a prophecy referring to God's judgment pronounced against Babylon that was fulfilled in ancient history, not a prophecy referring to a yet-for-us future "end" of the world.

Likewise, Mark 13:1-30 is a prophetic teaching referring to God's judgment pronounced against Jerusalem that was fulfilled circa AD 70, not a prophecy referring to a yet-for-us future "end" of the world.

The very same symbolic language that in Isaiah 13 referred to a judgment on Babylon that was fulfilled in ancient history likewise in Mark 13:24 referred to a judgment on Jerusalem that was fulfilled ― just as Jesus clearly, expressly, and emphatically predicted in Mark 13:30 and Matthew 24:34 ― within the lifespan/generation of Jesus' contemporaries in the middle of the first century.

Let's keep our posts short and focused on a single point and/or text at time; in that way, we may eventually come to a clear understanding of the bigger picture.

Thanks.

Here is the big question for me: How was Matt. 24: 30 fulfilled in that generation, how did "all the nations of the earth mourn" how did all the nations "see the Son of Man"? Even given hyperbole for "all nations" what truth about the nations is signified in this statement of judgment?

Edited to add: Just looking this over, I think I may see it a possible answer. Is it because in that generation the Gentile nations were given Christ and they will be accountable and judged accordingly?

[John Reece]

Is it because in that generation the Gentile nations were given Christ and they will be accountable and judged accordingly?

No.

Here is the big question for me: How was Matt. 24:30 fulfilled in that generation, how did "all the nations of the earth mourn" how did all the nations "see the Son of Man"? Even given hyperbole for "all nations" what truth about the nations is signified in this statement of judgment?

The English word "nations" is a misleading translation of the plural of φυλή (phylē), and (in this context) "earth" is a misleading translation of γῆ (gē).

A φυλή (phylē) is properly (according to BDAG, the definitive lexicon for NT Greek) "a subgroup of a nation characterized by a distinctive blood line, tribe, of the 12 tribes of Israel."

The word γῆ (gē) has a broad semantic range that includes 'earth', 'region', 'country', and 'land', as in "the land of Israel" ― a term that occurs quite frequently in the Bible.

So, πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς (pasai hai phylai tēs gēs) in Matthew 24:30 is more accurately translated "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel)

The "mourning" of "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel) is an allusion to Zechariah 12:10-14, wherein the text says "they will look on the one they have pierced, and will mourn for him." The mourners in Zechariah are identified as "the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (verse 10), who are listed by families (of David, Nathan, Levi, Shimei, etc.); this is a specific Jewish mourning focused on the tribes of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.

The tribes of the land (of Israel) ... seeing "the Son of Man coming coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" is symbolic language that alludes to Daniel 7:13-14, the Greek text of which contains words that occur in Matthew 24:30: τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ (ton huion tou anthrōpou erchomenon epi tōn nephelōn tou ouranou ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven’) ― which refers not to a coming to earth but rather to a coming of the Son of Man (= Jesus) to the Ancient of Days (= the Father in heaven) to be 'given dominion and glory and 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'.

That's enthronement language that was fulfilled in the first century, not second-coming language to be fulfilled in our future.

[Blue Canary]

Wow, that is so helpful.

I will think further on this, thank you.

[Blue Canary]

So, will you write a book about it? Can you recommend a book that explains the translations and the context as you have done here?

[John Reece]

So, will you write a book about it? Can you recommend a book that explains the translations and the context as you have done here?

For the all the relevant texts in the best Bible commentaries on Matthew and Mark, see the series of links that start here.

[theblueprint_Ni]

Respect what JR says but don't be so quick to readily accept his interpretation either. Like all of us, he isn't without a predetermined theology that influences the interpretation of the text. As he already made clear, that verse required an interpretive decision which was informed by his particular theology. I would encourage you to keep that in mind when under the tutelage of anyone.

[John Reece]

Respect what JR says but don't be so quick to readily accept his interpretation either. Like all of us, he isn't without a predetermined theology that influences the interpretation of the text. As he already made clear, that verse required an interpretive decision which was informed by his particular theology. I would encourage you to keep that in mind when under the tutelage of anyone.

Au contraire, I have no 'predetermined theology that influences the interpretation of the text'.

If you have textual evidence to the contrary, challenge me with regard to the text vis-à-vis what I say about it, rather than accusing me sans evidence of imposing 'a predetermined theology' on the text.

Nothing other than exegesis of the Greek text has determined my interpretation; a preterist perspective is a consequence of my exegesis, not vice versa.

[Scrawly]

No.



The English word "nations" is a misleading translation of the plural of φυλή (phylē), and (in this context) "earth" is a misleading translation of γῆ (gē).

A φυλή (phylē) is properly (according to BDAG, the definitive lexicon for NT Greek) "a subgroup of a nation characterized by a distinctive blood line, tribe, of the 12 tribes of Israel."

The word γῆ (gē) has a broad semantic range that includes 'earth', 'region', 'country', and 'land', as in "the land of Israel" ― a term that occurs quite frequently in the Bible.

So, πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς (pasai hai phylai tēs gēs) in Matthew 24:30 is more accurately translated "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel)

The "mourning" of "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel) is an allusion to Zechariah 12:10-14, wherein the text says "they will look on the one they have pierced, and will mourn for him." The mourners in Zechariah are identified as "the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (verse 10), who are listed by families (of David, Nathan, Levi, Shimei, etc.); this is a specific Jewish mourning focused on the tribes of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.

The tribes of the land (of Israel) ... seeing "the Son of Man coming coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" is symbolic language that alludes to Daniel 7:13-14, the Greek text of which contains words that occur in Matthew 24:30: τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ (ton huion tou anthrōpou erchomenon epi tōn nephelōn tou ouranou ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven’) ― which refers not to a coming to earth but rather to a coming of the Son of Man (= Jesus) to the Ancient of Days (= the Father in heaven) to be 'given dominion and glory and 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'.

That's enthronement language that was fulfilled in the first century, not second-coming language to be fulfilled in our future.

Hi Jr,

You state that Matthew 24:30 is best translated as "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel). Do you know of any English translations that use this rendering? If not, why do you think that is?

[John Reece]

You state that Matthew 24:30 is best translated as "all the tribes of the land" (of Israel). Do you know of any English translations that use this rendering? If not, why do you think that is?

The TNIV has a footnote with the rendering 'the tribes of the land'; the allusion to Zechariah 12:10-14 makes plain the fact that the reference is to the tribes of the land of Israel.

Zechariah 12:10-14

10 And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. 11 On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12 The land will mourn, each clan by itself, with their wives by themselves: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, 13 the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, 14 and all the rest of the clans and their wives.

[Scrawly]

The TNIV has a footnote with the rendering 'the tribes of the land'; the allusion to Zechariah 12:10-14 makes plain the fact that the reference is to the tribes of the land of Israel.

Zechariah 12:10-14

10 And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. 11 On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12 The land will mourn, each clan by itself, with their wives by themselves: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, 13 the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, 14 and all the rest of the clans and their wives.

Ok thanks, and how do you see Zechariah 14?

[Scrawly]

Also, I don't think I am quite getting this:

Are you saying that Matthew 24:30 is in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D 70? If that is so, do you then see verse 31 just switch to speaking about the second coming? Because clearly verse 31 is speaking about Christ's second coming, or did somehow the gathering of the elect also happen in A.D 70...?

Also, if we just look at the parallel in Mark 13, I can see how verses 5-23 precede the destruction of Jerusalem. However, it really seems that the following verses speak of Christ's second coming. So, the problem is when we look at the parallel in Matthew 24:29 that speak of Christ coming immediately after the events described in Mark 13:5-23. So, if the events of 5-23 already happened in A.D 70, then it seems that Christ should've returned immediately/shortly after those events with power and glory to gathering His elect, etc.