When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

[covenantee]

That's good. That's how it should be. But, you also should not have too much confidence in James Strong.

His Greek, which he has used to the vast benefit of the Church, is better than yours and mine.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

"the whole multitude of men living at the same time" is the applicable definition in the greatest number of NT verses.

In Matthew 23:36, Jesus indicated that "this generation" would be destroyed.

Matthew 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Were "the whole multitude" of those who Jesus was talking about that were alive at that time destroyed in 70 AD? No. Jesus said this about 37 years or so before 70 AD, so many of the people Jesus was talking about who were alive at that time died before then. What does that tell you about what "this generation" really refers to? Does it really refer to "the whole multitude of men living at the same time" in Matthew 23:36 when you consider that many of those living at that same time died before 70 AD? No, that's not possible. And, as I pointed out in another post, "this generation" existed as far back as Cain. Also, "this generation" that was destroyed in 70 AD even included people who were not even alive yet at the time Jesus was speaking. So, that is even more evidence to show that you are using the wrong definition of the word "genea".

In the case of those who were alive at the time Jesus was speaking, they would have all needed to still be alive in 70 AD in order for your definition of the word "genea" to be the one that should be used in Matthew 23:36 or Matthew 24:34. So, with this in mind, you should think about whether or not the definition for the word "genea" in Matthew 24:34 that you are choosing to use is the right one. I don't believe so for the reasons I've stated.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Depends on the definition. If we define the old covenant age to include its physical trappings and vestiges, then it does extend to 70 AD.

Why would we define it that way? That's how preterists come to the conclusion that "the end of the age" Jesus talked about was the end of the supposed old covenant age. But, Jesus only spoke of "this age" and "the age to come" in relation to this temporal age that we are living in now when people get married and they die and the eternal age to come when people will no longer get married or die (Luke 20:34-36).

He never spoke of this old covenant age and the new covenant age to come. So, "the end of the age" He referred to is the future end of this temporal age. If we give in to the preterist lie that there was an old covenant age that ended in 70 AD, then we are giving credibility to their belief that Jesus returned at the end of the old covenant age in 70 AD. But, I refuse to give that view any credibility.

 

[covenantee]

What do you mean exactly? Don't be vague with me, please. If you're asking what that word refers back to, I already addressed this in detail with you. Do you not remember that?

Here are some of Strong's definitions of "therefore":

1. οὖν a conjunction indicating that something follows from another necessarily;

2. Hence, it is used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically, then, therefore, accordingly, consequently, these things being so

3. with other conjunction οὖν, so then, Latinhincigitur, in Paul; see ἄρα, 5. εἰ οὖν, if then (where what has just been said and proved is carried over to prove something else)

4. HELPS Word-studies
3767 oún (a conjunction) – therefore, now then, accordingly so. 3767 (oún) occurs 526 times in the NT and is typically translated "therefore" which means, "By extension, here's how the dots connect."

If verse 14 is the Second Coming, but verse 15 is the DoJ (Destruction of Jerusalem), then verse 14 fails to satisfy any of these definitions of "therefore":

1. οὖν a conjunction indicating that something follows from another necessarily;
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ cannot and does not follow from verse 14.

2. Hence, it is used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically, then, therefore, accordingly, consequently, these things being so
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ is not a conclusion that can be drawn from verse 14.

3. with other conjunction οὖν, so then, Latinhincigitur, in Paul; see ἄρα, 5. εἰ οὖν, if then (where what has just been said and proved is carried over to prove something else)
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ is not proven by verse 14.

4. HELPS Word-studies
3767 oún (a conjunction) – therefore, now then, accordingly so. 3767 (oún) occurs 526 times in the NT and is typically translated "therefore" which means, "By extension, here's how the dots connect."
If verse 14 is the Second Coming and verse 15 is the DoJ, then there are no dots to connect because they refer to two different events.

Conversely, if both verse 14 and verse 15 are the DoJ, they are connectable dots.

Thus, the significance of a "therefore".

 

[covenantee]

In Matthew 23:36, Jesus indicated that "this generation" would be destroyed.

Matthew 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Were "the whole multitude" of those who Jesus was talking about that were alive at that time destroyed in 70 AD? No. Jesus said this about 37 years or so before 70 AD, so many of the people Jesus was talking about who were alive at that time died before then. What does that tell you about what "this generation" really refers to? Does it really refer to "the whole multitude of men living at the same time" in Matthew 23:36 when you consider that many of those living at that same time died before 70 AD? No, that's not possible. And, as I pointed out in another post, "this generation" existed as far back as Cain.

In the case of those who were alive at the time Jesus was speaking, they would have all needed to still be alive in 70 AD in order for your definition of the word "genea" to be the one that should be used in Matthew 23:36 or Matthew 24:34. So, with this in mind, you should think about whether or not the definition for the word "genea" in Matthew 24:34 that you are choosing to use is the right one. I don't believe so for the reasons I've stated.

Today the Jewish race is ubiquitous across humanity, because after more than three millennia of natural genetic dispersion and diffusion, the Abrahamic genome is present in the entire population.

Thus, all of us are Jews, just as all of us are Gentiles.

So to define "generation" racially means that it includes all humanity, and Matthew 24:34 effectively reads "all humanity shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled".

Would you agree with that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Here are some of Strong's definitions of "therefore":

1. οὖν a conjunction indicating that something follows from another necessarily;

2. Hence, it is used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically, then, therefore, accordingly, consequently, these things being so

3. with other conjunction οὖν, so then, Latinhincigitur, in Paul; see ἄρα, 5. εἰ οὖν, if then (where what has just been said and proved is carried over to prove something else)

4. HELPS Word-studies
3767 oún (a conjunction) – therefore, now then, accordingly so. 3767 (oún) occurs 526 times in the NT and is typically translated "therefore" which means, "By extension, here's how the dots connect."

If verse 14 is the Second Coming, but verse 15 is the DoJ (Destruction of Jerusalem), then verse 14 fails to satisfy any of these definitions of "therefore":

1. οὖν a conjunction indicating that something follows from another necessarily;
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ cannot and does not follow from verse 14.

2. Hence, it is used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically, then, therefore, accordingly, consequently, these things being so
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ is not a conclusion that can be drawn from verse 14.

3. with other conjunction οὖν, so then, Latinhincigitur, in Paul; see ἄρα, 5. εἰ οὖν, if then (where what has just been said and proved is carried over to prove something else)
If verse 14 is the Second Coming, then verse 15 as the DoJ is not proven by verse 14.

4. HELPS Word-studies
3767 oún (a conjunction) – therefore, now then, accordingly so. 3767 (oún) occurs 526 times in the NT and is typically translated "therefore" which means, "By extension, here's how the dots connect."
If verse 14 is the Second Coming and verse 15 is the DoJ, then there are no dots to connect because they refer to two different events.

Conversely, if both verse 14 and verse 15 are the DoJ, they are connectable dots.

Thus, the significance of a "therefore".

Do you not recall that I showed you examples of that word being used to refer to something that was last talked about several verses earlier, such as in Romans 12:1, which uses the word "therefore" to refer back to what was being talked about up until Romans 11:32? So, I am not denying that the word refers back to something, but I believe in Matthew 24:15 it is referring back to verse 3 where the question regarding when the temple would be destroyed was asked.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm confident in Strong's mastery of the Greek.

Can you explain why you are not even willing to address anything I said in post 869? It doesn't really make me feel like wanting to continue the discussion if you don't want to address my points. If that's how you want it to be, then let's just agree to disagree at this point.

 

[claninja]

You totally overlooked your 1st meaning.

Sure didn’t -

men of same family usage is found in 2a
Men of same stock usage is found in 2b

You only mentioned usage 2a, which you used incorrectly based on the example provided in Matthew 1:17.

 

[covenantee]

Can you explain why you are not even willing to address anything I said in post 869? It doesn't really make me feel like wanting to continue the discussion if you don't want to address my points. If that's how you want it to be, then let's just agree to disagree at this point.

Post 885. Applicable as well to Matthew 23.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Today the Jewish race is ubiquitous across humanity, because after more than three millennia of natural genetic dispersion and diffusion, the Abrahamic genome is present in the entire population.

Thus, all of us are Jews, just as all of us are Gentiles.

So to define "generation" racially means that it includes all humanity, and Matthew 24:34 effectively reads "all humanity shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled".

Would you agree with that?

Yes, I could allow that Jesus was talking about people in general there rather than just the Jewish race. The word "genea" can be used to refer to people in general. The fact that it has several definitions requires us to take a closer look at all of this to see what exactly Jesus was saying.

Now, let me ask you a question. I touched on this already, but let me first quote the passage...

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. 35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

What is your understanding of verses 32 and 33 here? What was Jesus talking about that people would know was near when seeing certain things come to pass? Well, what was the last thing He talked about just before that? His second coming and the gathering of the elect, right? So, it's clear to me that He was talking in verses 32 and 33 about things that would indicate that His coming and the gathering of the elect was near.

This means that what He said in verse 34 must be related to His second coming. Which means that "this generation" will pass when He comes. But, then, notice what He says right after that. He said "heaven and earth will pass away". Many people miss this or overlook it. But, He is talking about the time when heaven and earth will pass away there. And we know heaven and earth will pass away when He comes (2 Peter 3:7,10-12). And He was relating that directly to when "this generation" will pass away.

And then in verse 36 He indicates that no one knows the day or hour when that will happen (when this generation and heaven and earth will pass away). He says the same thing about His second coming in Matthew 25:13 that no one knows the day or hour it will occur. So, it's very clear to me that the verses in Matthew 24:32-36 all relate to His second coming. And He proceeds to describe His second coming for the rest of the chapter.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Post 885. Applicable as well to Matthew 23.

Okay, I didn't see that post before I made my post. But, you didn't really address my point about Matthew 23:36, though. I pointed out that "this generation" Jesus referenced there existed since the time of Cain and Abel because it talks about "this generation" even being responsible for the death of Abel. Please give me your thoughts about that and what the word "genea" means in that verse.

Anyway, I just addressed post 885 in post 890.

 

[covenantee]

Do you not recall that I showed you examples of that word being used to refer to something that was last talked about several verses earlier, such as in Romans 12:1, which uses the word "therefore" to refer back to what was being talked about up until Romans 11:32? So, I am not denying that the word refers back to something, but I believe in Matthew 24:15 it is referring back to verse 3 where the question regarding when the temple would be destroyed was asked.

There is no justification for performing such a "clawback" that I can see in Matthew 24. "Therefore" Scripturally, logically, and reasonably connects verse 14 to verse 15.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The word genea means:

1) fathered, birth, nativity
2) that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
2a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
2b) metaphorically a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
2b1) especially in a bad sense, a perverse nation
3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years

Different translations and Bible scholars interpret it in different ways. Many good Bible students see it my way, many your way. I do not limit its meaning to a 40-year generation as Preterism must to sustain its school of thought. It can equally and fairly broadly describe time-periods (a literal generation or age) or natural descendants (a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits or men of the same stock).

The root word for genea is genos (Strong’s 1085), which means race, kindred, offspring, family, stock, tribe, nation, i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people.

Acts 13:26 talks about “children of the stock [Gr. genos] of Abraham” and Philippians 3:5 those “of the stock [Gr. genos] of Israel.” The Bible is here speaking in a natural sense.

The root word of genos is ginomai (Strong’s 1096), which literally means to gen-erate.

Matthew 24:34 is telling us that the Jewish race would not pass away until all things are fulfilled. Israel is an ongoing generation.

As I've pointed out a couple times already, in Matthew 23:36, this generation (genea) refers to a type of people going all the way back to Cain. So, I believe that definition 2b that you showed there is being used for the word "genea" in that verse. And, like you, I believe definition 2 of the word "genea" is being used in Matthew 24:34, but allow that it could be referring to people or the human race in general there as well.

When people try to act as if definition 3 is the only viable definition for that word in Matthew 24:34, I find that to be very dishonest and based on doctrinal bias.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is no justification for performing such a "clawback" that I can see in Matthew 24. "Therefore" Scripturally, logically, and reasonably connects verse 14 to verse 15.

I could see someone trying to claim the same thing about the use of that word in Romans 12:1 referring back to Romans 11:32, in Philippians 4:1 referring back to Philippians 3:13 and in Ephesians 4:1 referring back to Ephesians 3:13. So, I disagree with your claim.

The disciples asked "WHEN shall these things be?" in relation to when the temple buildings would be destroyed and Jesus said that would be WHEN they saw the abomination of desolation stand where it ought not (Mark 13:14), WHEN they saw the abomination of desolation stand and in the holy place (Matt 24:15), and WHEN the armies surrounded Jerusalem (Luke 21:20).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Are you asking what happened during the tribulation? Josephus is the primary source for that.

I went back to see if there were any posts I've missed in this discussion and found this one.

No, I'm not asking that. Do you understand that the times of the Gentiles follow 70 AD? The times of the Gentiles refer to the times after which Jerusalem and its temple was destroyed and the Gentiles have been trampling on the templeless (yes, that's an actual word) Jerusalem ever since.

Christ returns right after "the tribulation of those days" (Matt 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27), so "the tribulation of those days" can't be referring to 70 AD. But, that's why most preterists see Matthew 24:30-31 as occurring in 70 AD because they think "the tribulation of those days" refers to what happened in 70 AD. But, it does not. They miss that "the times of the Gentiles" continue following 70 AD and lead up to Christ's future second coming.

We're not told. Could begin circa 66 AD with the Roman advance on Jerusalem, ending circa 70 AD with Jerusalem's destruction.

How could that be "the tribulation of those days" when it says Jesus returns immediately after the tribulation of those days? At least, that's what Matthew 24:29-31 seems to indicate. And, you do believe that verses 30 and 31 relate to His second coming. So, can you elaborate more on how you interpret verse 29 exactly? I couldn't really understand what you were trying to say about that before.

No. "Then" can mean either "at that time" or "at a future time".

"c. of things future; then (at length) when the thing under discussion takes place (or shall have taken place):"

Hmmm. So, you are saying "Then" in verse 30 refers to a future time from what is described in verse 29? If you can interpret that verse that way, then I don't see why you have such a problem with me interpreting the word "therefore" in verse 15 to be referring to something before the previous verse.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I can totally get behind that καὶ τότε in vs 30 could mean something that takes place in the future, and not immediately within the same time frame as vs 29.

I'm having a lot of trouble seeing how that can be the case. Can you explain that? I've asked covenantee to explain that as well.

But then I always run into what comes next:

• Matthew 24:32-34 Now learn this lessone from the fig tree: As soon as its branches become tender and sprout leaves, you know that summer is near. 33So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near,f right at the door. 34Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.

Are the events that signal that He is near/the kingdom is near, the very events of the olivet discourse vs 4-29?

No, that's referring to His coming and the end of the age being near. You only quoted up to verse 34 there, but the next verse indicates the time when that passage will occur, which will be when heaven and earth pass away (Matt 24:35), which occurs when Jesus comes. No one knows the day or hour that day will come (Matt 24:36) because it will come unexpectedly as a thief in the night (2 Peter 3:10-12).

Does "all these things" in "this generation will not pass away until all these things happen", not include vs 30-31?

Of course it does. It's not reasonable at all to think otherwise.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Jesus states in Matthew 24:34: “Verily I say unto you, This generation [Gr. genea] shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

Both the Greek words genos and genea refer to race – in this case the Jewish race. I believe it means “this race” - as in "the successive members of a particular genealogy." Notwithstanding, the detail before the references to “this generation” in the parallel passages describe the second coming of Jesus in the future, not the coming of Titus in AD70. So, even if a limited physical generation was required of the text, it would be one preceding Christ’s return.

I believe He was talking about the Jewish race. They still continue, and will do until they say of that final day: "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" (Mat 23:39).

Because it was the generation of evil that were/are/will be responsible for the blood of God's prophets. It was this generation, the fruit or offspring of Satan, who killed them. Who's responsible for the blood of the Prophets. Satan, and all those ruled over by him! Not only the first century Jews but also enemies of the endtime Church is that same generation or family of Satan, and thus the same family that killed Abel, Jesus, Stephen, and the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11. Again, see the context of the verse:

Matthew 23:30-32

• "And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
• Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
• Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers."

Those people were not literally alive when their family killed the prophets, but God makes it perfectly clear that though they (like many today) protest that they are the good God fearing congregation in 32AD or 2025AD, but in reality they are the children of Satan, the spiritual family! They are the same spiritual offspring of those who killed the prophets, and are measured the same as those who killed them. Who killed them? The generation of Evil, the same generation they are. Selah.

Matthew 23:35-36

• " That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
• Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation."

What Generation? Ceratinly not the generation of Matthew, Mark Luke and John of that Physical/literal Generation like you think. But the Generation of evil, of which these in unbelief were. They were of that same kindred or family that killed the prophets, and thus will be judged the same for killing the prophets. Not only the Jewish but also all the Gentiles! That word translated generation is [genea] from the root [genos] meaning kindred or family. The text is used to designate nations as belonging to one family or having a common ancestry. The spiritual family of Satan began with Cain and persisted through the first century and the Crucifixion. This lineage continues until "all things are fulfilled" with the return of Christ, not in 70 AD. Selah!

However, you will insist on the "race" to support your false 70AD doctrine, which undermines your amillennial belief. So be it.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Do you understand that the times of the Gentiles follow 70 AD? The times of the Gentiles refer to the times after which Jerusalem and its temple was destroyed and the Gentiles have been trampling on the templeless (yes, that's an actual word) Jerusalem ever since.

The "times of the Gentiles" as nothing to do with 70AD or the physical temple, etc. You got the timing wrong. The "times of the Gentiles" have to do with the New Testament congregation after their testimony is finished, when Satan is loosed where he works through the false prophets and christs in the congregations all over the world.

Christ returns right after "the tribulation of those days" (Matt 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27), so "the tribulation of those days" can't be referring to 70 AD.

Correct.

But, that's why most preterists see Matthew 24:30-31 as occurring in 70 AD because they think "the tribulation of those days" refers to what happened in 70 AD. But, it does not.

Correct.

They miss that "the times of the Gentiles" continue following 70 AD and lead up to Christ's future second coming.

Disagree. This has NOTHING to do with physical city of Jersulaem, Roman Soliders, or 70AD stuff. This is the Holy City, the heavenly or spiritual Jerusalem which the external Church merely represents, both in the Old and New Testament. We are a part of this Holy City and Christ is the light.

Understanding these spiritual truths, we can better understand why God speaks of a falling away in 2nd Thessalonians chapter two. Where we see the figure of lawless man ruling in the Holy Temple 'as if' he were God Himself, we know it represents sinful man ruling in the external covenant or corporate Church, the representation of the true. This is how the Gentiles will tread down the Holy City. This city was meant to be the light of the World, but men led by the spirit of Satan, the spirit of antichrist, trampled it under foot. When the Gentiles trample the Holy City under foot, it is a figure of an assault on the spiritual city, first the Jews, and then the Gentiles Church, by the unsaved (Gentiles, the world) who cast the truth of God's Word down. They are those who have no fear of God (Psalms 36:1; Romans 3:8 and dare to usurp His Word by sitting to rule in the Church by their own word, 'as if' they were God.

Today, we see this great forsaking of God's Word in the Churches. Many in the Church are of the world, are rebellious, and have no root or strength in Christ, wherein they would endure this onslaught. The treading down is indeed a time of great tribulation for the 'true believers' in the end time. It is declared in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 as a time of great distress, and wrath upon these people, more specifically the court part of the Holy City, make of professed external believers, and it will last till the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled and Christ returns. Selah!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

ok, so it looks like you've chosen usage 2a - successive member of a genealogy - as how genea ought to be used in matthew 24:34

• 2. passively, that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family;
  
  a. properly, as early as Homer; equivalent to מִשְׁפָּחַה, Genesis 31:3, etc. σῴζειν Ρ᾽αχαβην καί τήν γενεάν αὐτῆς, Josephus, Antiquities 5, 1, 5. the several ranks in a natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy: Matthew 1:17 (ἑβδόμῃ γενεά οὗτος ἐστιν ἀπό τοῦ πρώτου, Philo, vit. Moys. i. § 2).

The problem is that genea, in matthew 24:34, is not plural nor is it being used in the context of a genealogy. Matthew 1:17 is the prime example of this usage/definition - "14 generationS (plural: geneai) from Abraham to David" - In this setting, genea still means generation: a contemporaneous group of people. Matthew 24:34 does not say "all of the generations (plural) will not pass away......"

You're not understanding what you're seeing there.

Here is what WPM posted:

The word genea means:

1) fathered, birth, nativity
2) that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
2a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
2b) metaphorically a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
2b1) especially in a bad sense, a perverse nation
3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years

You are acting as if number 2 on its own isn't a definition for the word, but it is. So, 2a and 2b are separate definitions of the word "genea", that relate to the number 2 definition, but are more specific in terms of referring to particular chronological generations of the "race" or "stock" or "family" that is general described by definition 2. So, the number 2 definition is one definition of "genea" and then 2a and 2b show variations of that definition that are have more detail and are more narrow definitions of the word than that broad definition of the word given in number 2 there. So, there's no reason why the #2 definition of the word on its own can't be the one that was used in Matthew 24:34.

So, with that in mind, definition 2a refers to "men of the same stock" or people of the same race, but only refers to a particular generation of that race who are alive during a particular period of time. That's what you think the word means in Matthew 24:34, but I believe definition 2 applies instead.

And definition 2b again relates to the broader definition of the word shown in #2, but refers specifically to a certain type of people of the same stock rather than all of the people of that stock. That's how the word is used in Matthew 23:36 because that isn't referring to all Jewish people or all people in general, but rather refers specifically to a type of people like the Pharisees and scribes who were vipers, hypocrites and murderers of innocent servants of God. Jesus related the word in that verse to all such people going all the way back to Cain, since He said "this generation" was even responsible for Abel's death. But, even though that type of people going back to Cain were of "this generation", His focus was on those who were of "this generation" at that time in Jerusalem and He was referring to their destruction in particular. However, it can't be said that "this generation" only referred to those who were alive at that time He was speaking because many died before 70 AD and some who were killed in 70 AD were born or became Jews after the time when Jesus said those things. That shows that He had a particular type of people in mind there and not just those who were alive at that particular time when He was speaking.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

His Greek, which he has used to the vast benefit of the Church, is better than yours and mine.

There are other Greek experts who disagree with him, so this means nothing to me. When you look at the various English translations, they occasionally translate verses quite differently, which shows that even the Greek experts who translated our English Bibles sometimes disagreed on the meaning of some verses in the original manuscripts.

Again, put your trust in the Holy Spirit, not James Strong. He did a great service by showing all the definitions of Greek words mean, but we don't need to rely on him to interpret scripture for us.