M
markeverett49
Guest
I find these answers unsatisfactory because Matthew refers to “generations” earlier in the normal sense.
- Status
G
garysibio
Guest
Note that Jesus is answering two different questions. He had just said that the temple would be destroyed to the point that there would not be a single stone on top of another. In other words, to the point where the only greater destruction would be to smash all the stones. They wanted to know when this would happen. The second question was when are Yo u going to establish your kingdom?
The quote you are asking about was an answer to the first question.
In biblical times a generation was 40 years. Jesus was speaking between 30 and 33 AD so He is prophesying that the temple would be destroyed by 70 to 73 AD at the latest. It happened in 70 AD.
M
markeverett49
Guest
I’m familiar with that reading. It makes more sense to me than some others I’ve seen, but I think the inauguration of the kingdom came with the crucifixion and resurrection, not the destruction of the Temple. Heck, Paul was dead before the Temple was destroyed and he thought Christ already reigned.
People give odd readings to this because they think it didn’t happen, but it did happen.
G
garysibio
Guest
I wasn’t connecting the establishment of the Kingdom of God with the destruction of the temple. I agree with you that it was established long before the temple was destroyed. However the Kingdom has not been established in its fullness. That will happen when Jesus returns.
A lot of people jump through all kinds of hoops because they think that Jesus was saying He would return in one generation. He wasn’t saying that. The generation referred to when the temple would be destroyed, not when He would return.
F
fred_conty
Guest
“This generation” would most likely refer to those who were listening to Jesus which would be the Jewish people. There was no christian church as yet, tho there were followers of Jesus.
So he was saying that those Jews who were alive and listening to him would not pass away until it came to pass. What had to come to pass? The end. The end of what? The end of THEIR world, the destruction of the city of Jerusalem.
The city of Jerusalem is referred to figuratively as an image of the new Jerusalem, the church. At the end of the world, the anti-Christ will work wonders and signs to deceive people away from the church. So at the end of the world, false prophecies and miracles will lead many people away from the church to destroy Jerusalem, the church. Jesus elsewhere even says something like “will there be anyone left who believes?” It will be very severe, but in the end the church will survive tho many will leave. At the end of the world, everything will end, including the church,similiar to the old city of Jerusalem, but the faithful in the Jerusalem of the church, will survive in the new Jerusalem of heaven. Zion is the name of this new heavenly Jerusalem.
In the early church, the christians were confused about when the end would come. Some were convinced that it would come in their lifetime. St. Paul in his letters sees some christians selling off their property and just sitting around waiting for the end to happen. And he tells them they should not do this, but to live for Christ and not be idle. So there was some confusion about the end even in their days.
Just a few thoughts.
M
markeverett49
Guest
Right,but Christ is king NOW. He BECAME king through the passion and resurrection----every knee must bend, as Paul said. I think that is what Jesus is talking about there. (N.T. Wright, an Anglican bishop and NT scholar, writes about this in his book “How God Became King.” It’s worth reading, if only because the usual treatment of this verse ASSUMES that Jesus COULDN’T have meant what he seemed to be saying because, well, these things didn’t happen. But what if, you know, Jesus was RIGHT???)
G
garysibio
Guest
Absolutely 100% correct. But don’t forget this:
1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. The universe itself will be renewed:
The Church . . . will receive her perfection only in the glory of heaven, when will come the time of the renewal of all things. At that time, together with the human race, the universe itself, which is so closely related to man and which attains its destiny through him, will be perfectly re-established in Christ.
Every time we pray the Our Father we pray “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.” That hasn’t happened yet.
M
markeverett49
Guest
I get that but also this: we ALREADY call Christ LORD. He’s not like Prince Charles----biding his time until he attains the throne!
G
garysibio
Guest
I’m not saying you’re wrong, you’re just not giving the whole truth.
M
markeverett49
Guest
I never claimed to be doing that! It always troubled me—as a Protestant before I became a Catholic—that that verse explained by saying that Jesus meant “this generation” in an unusual sense and that always smacked of special pleading, of thinking that, “well, it can’t mean wait it seems to say so what else could we say it means?” I prefer the approach of Jesus meaning what he said. The world is DIFFERENT since the passion and resurrection and I think that is what he was talking about. Sure, the work is not completed, but it is begun. We have no king but Christ, and that was something no one could say BEFORE the resurrection!
G
garysibio
Guest
How am I saying that this passage is saying something other than what it really says? It’s pretty clear to me. Jesus was asked two questions: (1) When will the temple be destroyed? and (2) When are you going to establish Your reign? Jesus’ answer about this generation not passing away until this happens is His answer to question #1. The temple will be destroyed within the next 40 years and it was.
No one is denying that the Kingdom of God has been established. That is very clear from Jesus’ teaching. However, it is also very clear that when Jesus returns it will be established completely. That’s what we pray for when we pray the Our Father, which is also the words of Jesus.
And, as I pointed out in my quote from the CCC, that is what the Catholic Church teaches.
M
markeverett49
Guest
I see it the other way around. Jesus answered question number two, not number one. I don’t think he was talking about the destruction of the Temple at all.
G
garysibio
Guest
Matt 24
1 Jesus left the Temple, and as he was going away his disciples came up to draw his attention to the Temple buildings.
2 He said to them in reply, ‘You see all these? In truth I tell you, not a single stone here will be left on another: everything will be pulled down.’
3 And while he was sitting on the Mount of Olives the disciples came and asked him when they were by themselves, ‘Tell us, when is this going to happen, and what sign will there be of your coming and of the end of the world?’
This passage makes it quite clear that Jesus is answering the question of when the temple will be destroyed. Deny it if you want but it is very clear that you are wrong on that.
M
markeverett49
Guest
How is the destruction of the Temple more of a “sign of your coming and the end of the world” than the crucifixion and resurrection??? The Temple had been destroyed before. No one rose from the dead before.
G
garysibio
Guest
Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I said they were two separate questions.
S
Sam_777
Guest
(Matthew 24:34):
“I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”
If your assumption is right, then the passage should have read until “that thing” not “these things”, since the temple incident is a single one?
Also if someone reads the full Matthew 24, it really does not fit your assumption!
M
markeverett49
Guest
S
Sam_777
Guest
I agree with you, but what that has to do with the many incidents mentioned in Matthew 24 that must happen to “this generation” beside the Temple destruction prior to JESUS second coming
M
markeverett49
Guest
I don’t think it’s talking about the second coming (-unless you count the resurrection as the second coming, which I don’t think you do and I’m not suggesting you should.) You can’t say this is about the second coming AND the destruction of the Temple because ‘generation’ would mean forty years in the latter case but certainly not the former.I agree with you, but what that has to do with the many incidents mentioned in Matthew 24 that must happen to “this generation” beside the Temple destruction prior to JESUS second coming
Paul seems clear in stating that through his crucifixion and resurrection, Christ became king and reigns over his disciples. Compared to that, the destruction of the Temple would be anti-climactic to say the least. (A big deal, to be sure, but not on the level of the resurrection.)
- Status