When Doctrine Corrects Christ

[Wrangler]

I did not ask what “all these things” means.

I asked what Jesus meant by:

“THIS generation.”

“No, Lord. Not really.
‘This generation’ wasn't really this generation.
What You warned them about wasn't really fulfilled in them.
You were secretly talking about somebody thousands of years later on the other side of the world; our congregation.”

A little too confident in your interpretation, it seems to me.

I was always taught "this generation" does not refer to the generation listening to Jesus but the generation to witness "all these things."

 

[Wrangler]

Luke 9:27 But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”

Jesus spoke in the present tense.

Regarding seeing the kingdom of God - not the signs referred to in the OP.

 

[Jay Ross]

Is God not invisible? Does He not speak in parables and even literally beat around a burning bush, rather than just show Himself and get to the point instead of only revealing here a little there a little?

There is no explanation in your response that can apply to my thinking to correct maybe what I believe.

What is coming out very clearly for me and others to see is your arrogance.

And those He truly sends and speaks through--if they were any different--would you believe them, or consider them false for speaking different than Him?

Sadly Scott, if the others that God would send act and present God's message as you do, then I am sure that they would be no more effective than you are.

You scramble your message to the point where it becomes pointless for the person you are attempting to speak with, to even be able to understand your presented point/message.

Do you not see that what you expect to hear, is just the opposite of what should be--that the very things that identify His voice as true, you consider false?

Is this not an attack on my character. Should I report you for your putting down what I believe.

All that I am hearing and reading is that only you are right and that my meditation on God's scripture is always false because you say so.

I am afraid for you. How will you defend such behavior when you see Him face to face?

Scott why are you afraid for me. Should you not just worry about your own responses to God's drawing of you to Himself and how your own responses will affect your final destiny. How you respond to God's drawing is God's responsibility and not mine, just as how I respond to God is my own personal responsibility.

In my part of the globe, the sun is setting so it is Goodbye to you and Goodbye to me.

 

[Wrangler]

There is no explanation in your response that can apply to my thinking to correct maybe what I believe.

What is coming out very clearly for me and others to see is your arrogance.

You scramble your message to the point where it becomes pointless for the person you are attempting to speak with, to even be able to understand your presented point/message.

All that I am hearing and reading is that only you are right and that my meditation on God's scripture is always false because you say so.

This too is my observation of @ScottA. So much so that I put him on ignore. No sense banging my head against the wall.

 

[ProDeo]

Regarding seeing the kingdom of God - not the signs referred to in the OP.

What about context, the verse before.

Luke 9:26 For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.
Luke 9:27 But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”

It will be hard (at least for me) there is no connection between the 2 verses.

 

[Lizbeth]

Christ warned them.
Christ literally named their generation.
Jerusalem fell.
The Temple came down in AD 70 just as He foretold.

And now your system walks into the ruins 2,000 years later and tells Christ:

“No, Lord. Not really.
‘This generation’ wasn't really this generation.
What You warned them about wasn't really fulfilled in them.
You were secretly talking about somebody thousands of years later on the other side of the world; our congregation.”

Please test this the following, but, is it possible there is a kind of dual aspect to Jesus' prophecy? There's not a doubt in my mind that as a prophet of Israel He was prophesying to Israel about them and faithfully warning them of the soon coming 70AD judgment. But remember Jacob and his two brides, Leah and Rebecca? I believe that is a parable/allegory of the Jew and Gentile.......there is only one bride really, but in another way there are two....one is Jewish the other is Gentile. God having the two witnesses needed to establish the truth, according to His word which says to let every truth be established on the strength of two or three witnesses (third witness being the Holy Spirit).

And Jesus said His words will never pass away...He said heaven and earth will pass away but not his words. I believe the heaven and earth that passed away in 70AD was the new covenant......the beggardly elements (earth) so to speak, that had become obsolete and burned with fervent heat and the firmament (heaven) between the cherubim on the ark where God used to be present. But it remains that His words still stand to be fulfilled (again).

So could it be that all these things are to the Jew first, then the Gentile? Because not only was the gospel to the Jew first then the Gentile, but also tribulation (judgment):

Rom 2:8-9
But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

Solomon wrote that there is nothing new under the sun, what has been WILL BE AGAIN.

Israel was judged in 70AD, but the world (nations - Gentiles) has not been judged yet. Now we are awaiting Him to come and judge the world (particularly the Gentiles)......as we know the times of the Gentiles have an end too. (Also wonder if Israel will be judged a second time........speaking of Mystery Babylon it says "double unto her double", and in the OT it says that Israel has "received double for her sins". (Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots having both a Jewish arm and Gentile arm so to speak....both Jewish and Gentile brides fallen into spiritual harlotry.....the mostly Gentile church is unfortunately following the same pattern as her example Israel.)

Anyway, I believe this is what the Lord has shown me, but I'll leave it with the thread here and maybe others can weigh it with scripture to see if it lines up with everything, etc.

 

[Wrangler]

What about context, the verse before.

Luke 9:26 For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.
Luke 9:27 But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”

It will be hard (at least for me) there is no connection between the 2 verses.

There is no contextual problem. Luke 9 is NOT talking about end times. The OP is.

 

[ScottA]

What is coming out very clearly for me and others to see is your arrogance.

So, being tasked by God...you think one should not be forthright?

Wow! Well, that's impressive, good luck with that.

 

[ScottA]

Sadly Scott, if the others that God would send act and present God's message as you do, then I am sure that they would be no more effective than you are.

You scramble your message to the point where it becomes pointless for the person you are attempting to speak with, to even be able to understand your presented point/message.

You just described many of the legitimate prophets and Jesus.

That says a lot...not about me, but about YOU.

 

[ScottA]

Is this not an attack on my character. Should I report you for your putting down what I believe.

Not at all, but a warning based upon the character of God. Because your points of defining how God communicates, are completely opposite of how He has communicated all throughout the scriptures.

 

[ScottA]

You scramble your message to the point where it becomes pointless for the person you are attempting to speak with, to even be able to understand your presented point/message.

Your accessment is wrong, but it is a good observation.

Think about it. If "all language" were "confused" but used as is...in order to understand what is really true, the words would have to be UNtwisted.

Yes...and in order to receive "all truth" you should EXPECT it. Meaning you are really close!

 

[ScottA]

This too is my observation of @ScottA. So much so that I put him on ignore. No sense banging my head against the wall.

Yeah, that's not going to go well!

Imagine, someone putting the prophets of God or Jesus--or even a donkey--on "Ignore." --Oh yeah, that's what many did with them too!

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Please test this the following, but, is it possible there is a kind of dual aspect to Jesus' prophecy? There's not a doubt in my mind that as a prophet of Israel He was prophesying to Israel about them and faithfully warning them of the soon coming 70AD judgment. But remember Jacob and his two brides, Leah and Rebecca? I believe that is a parable/allegory of the Jew and Gentile.......there is only one bride really, but in another way there are two....one is Jewish the other is Gentile. God having the two witnesses needed to establish the truth, according to His word which says to let every truth be established on the strength of two or three witnesses (third witness being the Holy Spirit).

And Jesus said His words will never pass away...He said heaven and earth will pass away but not his words. I believe the heaven and earth that passed away in 70AD was the new covenant......the beggardly elements (earth) so to speak, that had become obsolete and burned with fervent heat and the firmament (heaven) between the cherubim on the ark where God used to be present. But it remains that His words still stand to be fulfilled (again).

So could it be that all these things are to the Jew first, then the Gentile? Because not only was the gospel to the Jew first then the Gentile, but also tribulation (judgment):

Rom 2:8-9
But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

Solomon wrote that there is nothing new under the sun, what has been WILL BE AGAIN.

Israel was judged in 70AD, but the world (nations - Gentiles) has not been judged yet. Now we are awaiting Him to come and judge the world (particularly the Gentiles)......as we know the times of the Gentiles have an end too. (Also wonder if Israel will be judged a second time........speaking of Mystery Babylon it says "double unto her double", and in the OT it says that Israel has "received double for her sins". (Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots having both a Jewish arm and Gentile arm so to speak....both Jewish and Gentile brides fallen into spiritual harlotry.....the mostly Gentile church is unfortunately following the same pattern as her example Israel.)

Anyway, I believe this is what the Lord has shown me, but I'll leave it with the thread here and maybe others can weigh it with scripture to see if it lines up with everything, etc.

You already conceded the point:

Christ warned THEM.
“This generation” meant THEM.
Jerusalem fell.
The Temple came down in AD 70.

Now you're trying to resurrect the prophecy after it was fulfilled.

Where did Jesus say: “And then I will fulfill all of this AGAIN, thousands of years later, upon Gentiles”?

He didn't.

“MY WORDS WILL NOT PASS AWAY” means His words do not fail.

It does not mean fulfilled prophecies endlessly recycle and become theological zombies, dragged back out of the grave because somebody's manmade system still needs them alive.

Romans 2 doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

Ecclesiastes doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

Jacob's wives don't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

The two-witness law doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

You're stacking allegory on top of allegory to manufacture a second fulfillment Jesus never mentioned.

So strip away the charts, patterns, brides, witnesses and speculation and answer the text:

Where did Christ say His prophecy belongs to TWO generations separated by thousands of years?

Please cite the Book. Chapter and Verse.

Otherwise, AD 70 stands exactly where Christ put it.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

I was always taught "this generation" does not refer to the generation listening to Jesus but the generation to witness "all these things."

Yeah, I know, I've been saying that for 2 pages..

You were taught that “this generation” means “the future generation that sees all these things.”

Problem is, Jesus never says that.

He says:

“When YE shall see…”

“When YE shall see all these things…”

“THIS generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

The disciples were asking about the Temple standing right in front of them, and Jerusalem and that Temple were destroyed within their generation.

So show me where Jesus says:

“By ‘this generation,’ I actually mean a different generation thousands of years from now.”

Book. Chapter. Verse.

Because if you need an outside theological system to make “this generation” mean “not this generation,” then the system isn’t explaining God’s Word.

It’s overriding it.

And if your system has to rewrite Jesus before Jesus can agree with your system, then your system has already replaced His words with its own.

 

[Wrangler]

Yeah, I know, I've been saying that for 2 pages..

You were taught that “this generation” means “the future generation that sees all these things.”

Problem is, Jesus never says that.

Never explicit says it. it’s called an inference.

 

[Lizbeth]

You already conceded the point:

Christ warned THEM.
“This generation” meant THEM.
Jerusalem fell.
The Temple came down in AD 70.

Now you're trying to resurrect the prophecy after it was fulfilled.

Where did Jesus say: “And then I will fulfill all of this AGAIN, thousands of years later, upon Gentiles”?

He didn't.

“MY WORDS WILL NOT PASS AWAY” means His words do not fail.

It does not mean fulfilled prophecies endlessly recycle and become theological zombies, dragged back out of the grave because somebody's manmade system still needs them alive.

Romans 2 doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

Ecclesiastes doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

Jacob's wives don't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

The two-witness law doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

You're stacking allegory on top of allegory to manufacture a second fulfillment Jesus never mentioned.

So strip away the charts, patterns, brides, witnesses and speculation and answer the text:

Where did Christ say His prophecy belongs to TWO generations separated by thousands of years?

Please cite the Book. Chapter and Verse.

Otherwise, AD 70 stands exactly where Christ put it.

Israel is our ensample. First the natural, then the spiritual.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Israel is our ensample. First the natural, then the spiritual.

Never explicit says it. it’s called an inference.

Wrangler just conceded my entire point:

“Never explicitly says it. It’s called an inference.”

Exactly.

Jesus explicitly says:

THIS generation.

The future generation is your inference.

And Lizbeth, “first the natural, then the spiritual” still doesn't say Matthew 24 happens twice.

You're both doing the same thing:

Jesus gives a direct time statement, and then an outside theological inference is brought in to alter it.

So we're back to the original question:

Where did JESUS say this prophecy belongs to another generation thousands of years later?

Nowhere in the discourse. Nowhere in God’s Word.

And that’s the problem.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

If you're an atheist, lukewarm Christian, or lurker who isn't familiar with the word “inference,” it simply means a conclusion someone claims they're "drawing from the evidence"; it does not mean the conclusion is true AT ALL. That's how the dispensationalist shell game begins; one unsupported inference gets stacked on another until the Bible becomes a choose-your-own-adventure novel, and suddenly Jesus saying “THIS generation” gets relocated thousands of years into the future because the system needs it there.

It's like someone walking into a Star Wars convention and announcing that "Princess Leia divorced Master Yoda after they had a few kids together and then she married Chewbacca." When the entire convention screams, “THAT NEVER HAPPENED! SHOW US WHERE IT'S IN THE SCRIPT!”, they stare everyone dead in the eye and answer, “Well, that's my inference.”

No, that’s not "evidence". That’s a made-up story dressed up as theology.

It would be like taking all six original Star Wars movies, chopping them into thousands of random 20-second clips, splicing those clips into a two-hour monstrosity, and then insisting this mangled abomination reveals what George Lucas really meant all along, before proudly announcing that you’re merely “drawing from the evidence” contained in the very thing you just manufactured out of thin air.

And when you point out that the monstrosity isn’t George Lucas’s story at all, they answer, “Of course it is! Every single clip came from George Lucas!”

 

[Wrangler]

If you're an atheist, lukewarm Christian, or lurker who isn't familiar with the word “inference,” it simply means a conclusion someone claims they're "drawing from the evidence"; it does not mean the conclusion is true AT ALL.

Like inferring from Christ's words that "this generation" refers to those who were listening to him speak.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Like inferring from Christ's words that "this generation" refers to those who were listening to him speak.

Correct. Now compare the two inferences. One says “this generation” means the generation Jesus is actually speaking to in the discourse. The other says “this generation” means some completely different generation thousands of years later, in a galaxy far, far away on the other side of the planet. Which one requires the text to do more gymnastics?

Not to mention that in order to believe Christ meant people thousands of years in the future, He would’ve had to be either deceiving the people standing before Him or simply mistaken about His own prophecy and therefore not the Son of God.

You would be openly saying that Jesus Christ has no prophetic reliability. That is antichristic.

Or you could simply read the Word of God as written and trust Christ instead of your manmade system.